>It sure doesn't seem so. A couple of questions --
>
>Who are the two legislators? And what did they say?
One was a Republican and the other a democrat. They basically said, things appear to be much better over there and the country is moving in the right direction. They also said we need to stabilize the country, then pull out.

>
>Who is Charles Dulfer? Do you have a link to his credible evidence?
>

Duelfer was a part of the wmd report. He did an investigation for the CIA and his report was posted.
http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/
Pay particular attention to the addenda report of March 2005

http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/addenda.pdf

Here's an interesting quote:
"There was evidence of a discussion of possible WMD collaboration initi-ated
by a Syrian security offi cer, and ISG received
information about movement of material out of Iraq,
including the possibility that WMD was involved. In
the judgment of the working group, these reports were
suffi ciently credible to merit further investigation.
ISG was unable to complete its investigation and
is unable to rule out the possibility that WMD was
evacuated to Syria before the war."



>This sounds so much like talk radio, the committed waving back and forth to the committed. That's nothing personal because I really do think you're a good guy, despite your deplorable political views ;-) But both sides are so hardened at this point, so dug in, I don't know what sense it makes to even try to discuss it. George Washington or Abraham Lincoln could spring back from the dead onto the 2008 ballot and half of us would automatically vote for them and half of us would vote against them simply based on which side of the ballot their names appeared. Unless and until we as a country can get past this, we will remain hogtied and suboptimized.
>

Yeah, it seems this is an accurate assessment. HOWEVER, I worked for, supported and did everything I could for a democrat candidate for Sheriff here in 2002. So, this gives me the right to say I'm open to other points of view.<g>

>I had a nice blind date last night and the woman turned out to be a dyed in the wool liberal. That has somehow become an epithet but she presented her opinions well. (She brought up politics. And despite what you may think, I am not a knee-jerk liberal; it just seems so in this political climate). One in particular caught my attention. She suggested and I agreed that the perfect ticket in 2008 would be John McCain and Colin Powell. We agreed Gen. Powell would not run as VP at this point, is tired of the whole thing, but on a politically inspirational level that ticket would resonate. And I would vote for McCain in a heartbeat, way ahead of Hillary or whatever other ticket the Demos seem prepared to offer up at this point. Too bad there's not a chance.
>
>PS -- When it comes to dating I am a complete democrat ;-). Sometimes a dummycrat, as you would put it. But we probably all have that in common, men and women alike.

When I was dating, I found out something very strange. It seems I have lesbian tendencies. I liked women - a lot!<vbg> My wife has informed me that I can have a girlfriend, but they will need to be wealth enough to afford two families. Oh well, I guess if she leaves me, I'll go with her.