This is mostly out of curiosity, since I spotted this in passing by the author of a movie website:

It is embarrassing and a crime just how impotent George Bush has been in dealing with Darfur. But it's ok - his immortal soul will do the penance.

This isn't the first time I've seen this, but is this viewpoint widespread among liberals? What was expected? An invasion? We saw what happened with Burma when all the help in the world was stopped flat at the border. I even heard liberals saying we should have invaded Burma.

Bush has probably done more for AIDS in Africa than almost any other president, but that entire effort was dropped down the media well without a ripple. Okay, that's pretty much par for the course, but on the other side of the scales is Darfur really going to go down in the annals as some sort of Bush failure?

Again, this is more in the nature of a survey than an invitation to a debate.