Okay I am tired of this stuff

Okay, I am tired of the blather, so tired that if I were not Christian I would use another term other than blather. We have lived through a crisis of attacking Iraq, and what do we know as fact:
1) We know that President Bill Clinton told us not to disregard the intelligence of Bush with regard to Iraq, that it was good, and that we needed to act upon it. This comment is on national television and not disputable, despite later gainsaying of Mr. Clinton.
2) We know that Dems lie totally when they say that Bush lied and soldiers died; Bush acted responsibly on the available intelligence.
3) We know that we have a very strong economy, compared to the last thirty years it is better, and we know that the MSM is not reporting this as they should.
4) Iraq is disappointing, having been heralded as a democratic future in the vision of Bush. William Buckley says it is never to be, and with that I totally agree, though I do not think they have a condition of civil war as yet; rather I think they suffer from a violent minority which they never may be able to control. It is the chief reason that I had for opposing the original imposition of troops in Iraq. I simply thought that a people who herald from old had the government that they deserve, and that no matter how we tried to improve them they would fall from that improvement. I welcomed Bush’s vision because it was more than mine, and I would rejoice if I found it true.
5) We know that Hussain refused UN admission into his sites even as trucks lined up in the back gates of the inspected sites. We know that Israel has satellite pictures of truck convoys leading into Syria. I always dismissed the reports of Iraq having weapons of mass destruction because I correctly discerned the only weapons that mattered were those that were nuclear. He did have other weapons which evidently he diverted to Syria, and I do allow that they fit the definition of weapons of mass destruction. But he was never a national threat in my opinion except in the singular sense, dismissed by Dems, that he did indeed sponsor terrorism. How is it that a country can decide to assassinate a president and send terrorists to do the diabolical act, and this not be seen as an act of terrorism?

So let me sum it up succinctly. We do know the President Bush has acted responsibly (though I would never have gone into Iraq, thinking it a loss from the beginning). We know that President Clinton praised his intelligence in acting thus. We know that Hussain did have weapons that would destroy masses, and evidently he trucked these out to Syria. Unfortunately I think no one will bother to check these facts: and therefore I fear the next election. I do not trust the electorate. Churchill said that the best argument against democracy was to talk to the average citizen for five minutes. Let us hope that he is not right.