Why would people who you have declared anathema aginst on many occasions permit you to define the terms of their goodness?
I don't think it would require a deeply detailed, stringent investigation to provide the reconciliation I speak of.
There is a test of reasonableness, and that is what the left has yet to pass.
I have asked some specific questions that have not been answered in any credible way.
If the policy of regime change was good enough in 1998, and if the world became provably more dangerous in 2001, then when did Saddam and his baathists stop being worthy of long standing American policy goals?
The same evidence and threat assesment was used in 1998 as in 2001-2003. Until this spring, no one around the world doubted these. If there is a big, Bush accuontable, evil failure here, then so far the explanations of the left are completely non-credible.
Again, as I have stated here and elsewhere, if there is a real deliberate fraud or gross dereliction of responsibility, then Bush should be held accountable.
The contrast to what clinton has gotten away with for his provable derelictions regarding National Security would be dramatic, but then as you have pointed out, conservatives are more ethical.
Ed
Ed