I think apologizing for the socialist commies as so many people posting on this forum represent, would be what should be apologized for ANYTHING were legitimate to apologize for.

__________________
2001 SLK 320 six speed manual
2014 Porsche Cayenne six speed manual

Annoy a Liberal, Read the Constitution

Admitting that your country's former government made a mistake and giving "aid and comfort" to its enemies are two VASTLY different things. Thank G-d that the writers of the Constitution made the definition of treason very narrow.

Again, how the f*** is admitting to a mistake "un-American" unless you're talking about the HUAC's definition of "un-Americanism?"

You are the person that would walk across the football field and offer a copy of your playbook to the opposing team.

__________________
2001 SLK 320 six speed manual
2014 Porsche Cayenne six speed manual

Annoy a Liberal, Read the Constitution

Ever heard of "sportsmanship?" A coach apologizing for a player's foul is not a sin, it's a requirement in some cases.

Oh Larry, you're such a liberal when it comes to dispensing with the insults. Did you learn that from the bible?

__________________
CENSORED due to not family friendly words

I'm really surprised that you have to ask that question. I REALLY thought you were smarter than this. It is quite obvious that I learned it from folks like YOU!

__________________
2001 SLK 320 six speed manual
2014 Porsche Cayenne six speed manual

Annoy a Liberal, Read the Constitution

__________________
CENSORED due to not family friendly words

I don't think Obama apologized so much as he acknowledged some of our past failings, which is probably a minor difference. Whatever label we apply to Obama's statements, I am grateful for what he said. It is one of many things he has done to improve our image around the world.

What I don't appreciate, just to take one example, is for our Secretary of State to go before the UN and give a long speech about Saddam's supposed WMD and then have that speech shown to be almost entirely false. Probably the worst part of that speech was when Secretary Powell read false translations of intercepted cell phone conversations between Saddam's officers. The audio was played in a language familiar to many in the UN audience, so the falsity of Powell's translations was immediately obvious to them. I don't appreciate his doing that in my name.

So, tell us all exactly why we murdered hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq.

Because Congress authorized it by majority vote in both houses prior to hostilities.

Something Mr. Obama might wish to explore.

Maybe I spoke too soon when I said that line was worn out.

Andrew Sullivan posted this:

Actually I seem to remember that the vote gave the president the authority to act under certain circumstances. It was not a declaration of war. I believe the president did not act in good faith according to what was authorized by congress.

__________________
[SIGPIC] Diesel loving autocrossing grandpa Architect. 08 Dodge 3/4 ton with Cummins & six speed; I have had about 35 benzes. I have a 39 Studebaker Coupe Express pickup in which I have had installed a 617 turbo and a five speed manual.[SIGPIC]

..I also have a 427 Cobra replica with an aluminum chassis.

Socialist commies? So 1951...

We will never know what was in those legislators' minds when they voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq, but their claims that W mislead them ring hollow to me. They knew that Saddam was not an imminent threat. I believe that they knew that W was lying, but they were afraid for their post-9/11 political lives and supported him anyway. History with not treat them well, I predict.

What you believe is not really what the act of congress was dependent on. Until proven otherwise in court, he fulfilled his legal and constitutional duty.

I wish Mr Obama would have taken the time to do the same.