Okay, I reread what he said. He concedes that the Bush Administration lied about Iraq having WMD's and that there never was an Iraq-Al Qaeda connection. I am saying he is incorrect and it is easily proven so. How does this make me superficial? And yeah, where's the punchline? He is not saying he knows there were WMD's in Iraq, he is saying he is conceding that we were lied to about them. He is not saying there was an obvious Iraq-Al-Qaeda connection since the early 90's, he is saying it never existed. This does not make me superficial, this makes Barry Farber wrong. We need FULL SUPPORT in re-electing out couragous President, not the concession to propaganda by the domestic enemy, yes I said enemy. Now, how does it affect you for him to be so wrong, what do you have in it?
He conceded no such thing and you could not believe he did unless you are quite unfamiliar with Barry Farber and do not handle implications and inferences very well. He was saying that even if such things were so....
He is saying that the leftists cannot do a damned thing about their goals and beliefs if we don't win this war so they had better hope Bush wins the election.