Hey! At least he can still use his proficiency in the French language there!

Genius. Pure Genius.

Okay, this is controversial, but I like it so much I just can't hold it in anymore. Recall Negroponte and appoint Kerry to be the Ambassador to Iraq.

Heh heh heh heh.

I don't think it would be wise to send kerry out of the country, think of all the airline alarms he would set off with all the sharapnel in his body. It would be way to much of a distraction. Maybe he should just go to jail for treason. By the way, now maybe some enterprizing MSM reporter can find out the true story on his discharge. He never did release his medical records. If he was a republican he would have had to.

Damn you for beating me to that!

The senate could investigate Kerry's post war activities and subpoena his military records. All we have to do is raise a lot of hell to make it happen.

Good idea, Joey.
(I think the whole AWOL attack on Bush was a smokescreen intended to hide Kerry's own discharge matter.)

Also, I believe per the Constitution, one cannot hold office (he is still being a senator) if one has aided and abetted the enemy. So, it's a current concern. Unbelievable that such a person could have been privy to intelligence briefings in the past 20 years and will continue to be if he remains a senator.

Why not just make it France? It has as much of a relationship with us as the Ivory Coast AND he'd be more likely to take it.

- Actually the Ketchup slut could stop by Mozambique and revitalize the Frelimo communist party her daddy started back in the 60's....Then her boytoy could run for Comrade Premier....

And how about Jimmy Carter for Ambassador to the fictional state of Palestine? Fitting, eh?

The US election is over and the Christian evangelicals in this country are crowing that they were instrumental in securing another four years for Bush. It is probably surprising to many Europeans, as it is to nearly half of the American voters, how these moral people can so easily dismiss 100,000 Iraqi deaths to favor a President who would advance their social war against homosexuality and abortion rights.
But, for those who know American history, this ability to exercise selective morality is hardly novel. Whenever America has needed land or resources, we have always found the means and forged the excuse for a war that would spread liberty to peoples reluctant to welcome our uninformed forces of freedom. And always we have claimed the sanction of the Almighty in our objectives.
In this, of course, America is no different from former imperial powers. And now, with the help of Great Britain, we will have another four years to establish democracy over the second largest oil reserves in the world.

How about giving vouchers for one-way transportation to Canada for Kerry voters?

Also... only send Dhimmi Carter to Ramallah if he is required to have permanent residency for himself and Roslyn there and insist that she dress like she usually does and have Amy be for Marwan Barghouti was Suha was to Arafat.

Buck-head, your 100,000 deaths claim is fiction. Even left-wing Slate says so. But lefties like you and Michael Moore learn your Streicher well... tell a big enough lie and some people (typical Kerry voters) begin to believe it. A more accurate estimate is approximately 15,000

292,000 US soldiers died in WWII to stop Nazi fascism. Stopping Islamofascism is no less critical. The difference is that now we have the chance to replay the 1930's, a time when we mistakenly allowed fascism to thrive while leftwing and rightwing isolationists and appeasers said we shouldn't get involved in Europe's problems.

We also lost 38,000 in Korea. That war was right, too, notwithstanding South Korea's current reprehensible ingratitude.

Unfortunately for the planet, diplomats and appeasement tendencies thwart the best outcome of conflict, causing the bad guys to utter the words "unconditional surrender" and then imposing terms as we did, quite benignly, on Germany and Japan. If fascists are EVER allowed to win, the deaths of innocents are increased.

A war postponed ALWAYS benefits the forces of evil.

In retrospect, given the choice between re-colonizing the Muslim world or allowing Islamofascism to grow, the clearly lesser evil would be to reinstitute old-style colonialism, over-run the Muslim world, impose democracy over their woman-and-dhimmi-hating mullahcracies and completely take over oil production to prevent OPEC from behaving in ways that have created Europe's sphincter-spreading foreign policy.

Nice? No. But applying a utilitarian calculus, re-colonialization and erasing the post-WWI fictitious borders hallucinated by the League of Nations is a lesser evil for them and the rest of the world than allowing the Religion of Peace to self-police and obtain the weapons they'd rapidly use to dhimmify the rest of the world.