First of all, the term "defeatocrats" not kindergarten playground debating techniques. It is a term that is wholly accurate since the overwhelming vast majority of democrats have wholeheartedly embraced defeat in Iraq and ultimately the war on terror. Thus, I'm not using a pejorative label. I'm merely calling it like it is. There is absolutely nothing wrong with using accurate terminology.

Second, you hypocritically accuse me of engaging in "kindergarten playground debating techniques" after "labeling" me as having a -25 intelligence.

Third, I fully believe that the listener in ANY situation has the responsibility to investigate the situation as fully as possible before reaching a conclusion. The defeatocrats claim that Bush lied yet if that's the case, they spewed the same "lies" themselves only a short time before the war. If he did lie and they swallowed that lie then they are a bunch of gullible idiots.

Fourth, I never said that our country should not expect our leaders to be truthful. We should. However, as a general rule, I never swallow what I'm told. I investigate to the best of my ability and draw only such conclusions as are warranted by the evidence. I fully believe our leaders have that responsibility as well. After all, they are making the critical decisions. I would hope they're not so gullible and lazy that they can't investigate situations fully before acting.

Fifth, I never said that if someone duped our leaders it was the fault of the duped and not the duper. I believe both share equal blame. The duper for duping and the duped for being too gullible and lazy to investigate the situation fully.

You're missing my overall point here: The defeatocrats make themselves look terrible in so many ways when they oppose the war on terror. When they say their tired old cliché, "Bush lied" they make themselves look like gullible idiots who went along with a liar.

CK>> defeatocrats

Why is it important when debating a situation to use perjorative labels? Frankly, when I see that I immediately assume about -25 intelligence points. Why would you give yourself such discredit? Are your arguments so unpowerful as to need to leverage kindergarten playground debating techniques?

CK>> The “liar” or the “leader” who didn’t take the time to investigate the situation clearly before acting? At best they share equal blame.

Are you REALLY, HONESTLY saying that our country should NOT be able to expect our President and those whom he commands to be truthful when presenting a case to our people, our congress, the world? Are you REALLY saying they need to analyze evidence that OUR PRESIDENT gives to us?

Are you REALLY saying that if someone if power IN OUR COUNTRY can dupe others in our government, that it is the fault of those that are duped, not the fault of the duper?

Are you REALLY SURE you want to set that precedent? Be careful what you wish for...

Assuming that it's possible for you to be correct, Orion, let me ask you this: If a government "leader" (must use that term loosely when dealing with defeatocrats) is lied to and takes action based upon that lie, who is to blame? The "liar" or the "leader" who didn't take the time to investigate the situation clearly before acting? At best they share equal blame. Now, all this is assuming you are correct, which, of course, you're not.

If the defeatocrats can be so easily duped, are they really qualified to be leaders?

Like I said Max, the Dems were lied to like the rest of the country.

regarding "cherry picked" information, and Democrats never having supported the war????

check this series of quotes and video clips...

http://www.bercasio.com/movies/dems-wmd-before-...

ORION:

no response to actual factual rebuttals to your previous claims and statements?, you just want to post a whiny response about namecalling and insults? Is that your considered, thoughtful response?

Typical wingnut responses. When in doubt, or when you can't justify the obvious, start calling names and throw out insults.

and as for MR Penn. As far as his expertise and credentials as an international diplomat, legal scholar, and military strategist,... he is a mediocre actor with bad hair.
Nothing more. Bad movies and poor choices regarding recreational drugs are NOT adequate training for insightful analysis of world condition and events.

Hey Orion!! and Gee Larry:

in the world we really live in, the "war" was indeed authorized by congress. They voted in support of the invasion. There are THOUSANDS of video clips of Hilliary/Kerry/Pelosi et al speaking up in solidarity and support...

THE WAR was indeed approved. Legality of warfare is a complex topic for discussion best by well educated adults. Come back when you have taken the time to at least do SOME basic historical research. The international law of armed conflict, international treaties and conventions, and hundreds of years of tradition and case law is rather complex, especially if your understanding is based upon soundbites from democratic campaign speeches, Rosie clips, YouTube "documentaries", and SNL skits.

Only an idiot (orionic!) would assert that the invasion of Iraq was illegal. And unless I missed your credentials somewhere Orion, you havent a clue what intelligence was gathered, shared, factual, or reviewed. Or did you forget to tell us about your background at the CIA or in military receiving classified briefings?

CK---war is not illegal? it was NOT authorized by Congress!!! Get your head out of your ASS! Sean Penn is right!

Ah, you forget the Bush gave Congress cherry picked and incorrect intelligence before they voted. Nice try.

It's amazing to me that people like Penn will make comments such as those when a fourth grader can see that the war is not illegal. Amazing... You know, for all the belly aching that the defeatocrats do, most if not all of them voted for the war. If Bush is a war criminal then they are too. Funny how they love to forget that vote.

HOW, LAMEBRAIN?! HIS OLD MAN WAS A COMMIE--LIKE FATHER, LIKE SON!

Sean is right.