[DoughtyOne]

I think your comments are reasoned. In that context I'll respond that although I do think Pat's policies are misguided at times, I do not see him as I see democrats. They seek to take down our system by any means possible.

I don't think Pat wishes to do that. While I disagree stridently with his middle-east views, I do think he speaks reasoned logic on other issues.

It was never my intent to have his complete platform adopted. It would have been fine with me if nothing more than his demands that our nation's security be considered above political correctness and the citizens of a foreign nation, had been implemented.

I voted for him in 2000. As such I realized the congress would moderate his desires. Many of his advisors would have been republican.

For all his talk about avoiding incumberances in the middle-east, I don't see how he could have avoided military action there post 09/11.

Had our leaders implemented reasoned border control policies, we would have avoided 09/11. There was no excuse for what took place.

We still don't have adequate border control and all folks can think to say about Pat, is that he inconsequential.

Is homeland security inconsequential? Nope.

Thanks for the comments.

[glennherman]

I believe the ironic response waould be "NO PAT NO!"

[bayourod]

"I voted for him in 2000. As such I realized the congress would moderate his desires. Many of his advisors would have been republican. "

I can't believe anyone actually thought on election day that Pat could win. He got less than 1/4th of one percent of the vote. Pat's supporters are delusional.