We have the democrats knocking themselves out to demonize Bush for the Iraq war and yet the Iraq war is the single most significant foreign policy achievement the US has made in the Middle East in over 30 years.

What is it that limits folks perspective? Casualties? Don quotes casualties and references to WMD that didn't exist ad infinitum as if this diminishes this foreign policy success. Iraq has a new government and the US has a new ally in the heart of the Middle East. The tactical significance of this can't be overestimated. It is comparable to having had Rumania and Hungary turn Democratic at the height of the cold war.

The sanctimonious posing about moral indignation over Bush's invasion and deposing of Saddam Hussein is even more preposterous. Here is a man who had people fed feet first into a shredder and yet his regime is defended on the basis that he had gotten rid of his WMD five years after he was supposed to be WMD free? That the UN who has been surreptitiously supporting Saddam's purchasing banned materials through the oil for food program should have been left to play footsie with a dictatoer who ordered his men to shoot at US and British no-fly zone planes every single day for over ten years? Was this the sane behavior that Bush was supposed to see that Saddam had great intentions for the US? Excuse me but does anyone on the left have any intelligence 'left' whatsoever?

Sure we can watch the left get itself into a tizzy about the occupation and 1000 US casualties or the Middle Eastern tactics used at Abu Ghraib, but this just again emphasizes this antediluvian liberal tendency to portray everyone as a victim, even terrorists and suicidal barbarians.

Now Tom knocks himself out emphasizing the fact that Bush and company did not tell people to conjure up evidence or produce anti-Iraq reports, and his efforts are largely wasted here. The left is largely hysterical right now and folks like Michael Moore see a large profit in exploiting the angry, irrational and hate-filled leftists.

This is amusing and fascinating. Fascinating because it makes it painfully clear that many folks on the left speak out of both sides of their mouth in ignorance - they want 9/11s prevented and blame Bush for sitting for several minutes and finishing his time at an elementary school reading session and then go ahead and blame Bush when he goes proactively after the bad guys of the world.

What sort of perverse logic is that? The answer is - it's not logic, it is pure hatred speaking.

And what is so hate-inspiring about George Bush? What drives people to raise their blood pressure ten points systolic when they think about him? He's a liar? And he lied about WMD? Iraq did have WMD. They had them back in 1996, creating them up to five years after they were supposed to have stopped. If Bush is a "stupid smirking chimp" how in hell could he have known that Saddam was really a "good guy" now when he was in violation of UN resolutions and shoting at US planes? How could a man who is so amazingly stupid be expected to discern Saddam's wonderful intentions? Can anyone on the left explain that to me...please?

And what about Halliburton? What is it that so creates this irrational obsession with any oil related company? General Electric has been fifty times as corrupt to get where it is and I see few folks here getting all riled about GE? GM bought up and destroyed all the street cars so that folks would be required to buy cars. Is it bad when a corporation makes money? Is it bad when folks pass business to their friends and folks they know? Isn't complaining about Halliburton really just some half-baked anticapitalist fixation? Is Halliburton the only company that has overcharged the government for goods and services? I don't think so. To believe that you have to live in a bubble and be completely ignorant of government contracting.

Halliburton has only received attention because of Dick Cheney. He invokes massive hatred as well. And why? Because he worked for a company when he left Washington? Because he is an unrepentant pro-business capitalist? It certainly can't be because he has a lesbian daughter can it? No. It can't be because he has heart problems can it? No. Those are just things to ridicule the man. No, the reasons are quite clear to everyone on the left. It is because he is an evil, scheming mastermind who pulls the strings of the Bush administration, naturally.

Yes, I find it all quite fascinating. It really illustrates a psychological need for a large part of the population to hate someone, they need the escape mechanism of pointing the finger at Bush and Cheney to justify the own inequities of their lives and circumstances and to relieve the stresses of their daily lives. Unfortunately these folks don't yet have the ability to ascertain that hate never relieves stress and that pointing the finger at others for your own problems or that of the world in general wont cut it.

That's why I don't hate the left. I really feel for their predicament. It is a series of poor assumptions and decisions that get them to the position in which they can join in the anti-Bush tirades. It's the same sort of compassion I have for those who shouted curses at blacks as they were integrated into schools - they really didn't see the benefits and only felt hate.

Bush and Cheney are not the manifestation of the antichrist, instead they are two average men who have done an excellent job during a very tough and stressful period in US history.

SDAI-Tech1