You should probably use quotes around “peace” activists throughout your piece.

There are, in fact, very few people in the “peace” movement with a genuine belief in peace-as-opposed-to-war.

They are anti-war, but only those wars fought by liberal-democratic countries such as the United States against vicious dictators like Saddam Hussein.

As with Hayden, the advent of actual peace, or the diminution of war, is painful to them because they want the United States (and Western civilization as a whole) to lose.

thanks

The Nation thrives on doom and gloom, as does the Dem party in general.

Good post.

Later, a teacher of English said that the captain of the squad told him “next time if students throw stones, we will use our machine guns not the boots”. I really hated myself hearing that news as I am a teacher myself. What shall I do if I were there? What shall I tell my students? How can I behave? What excuses will I give for that incident? My brain stops thinking from now on .
False Sovereignty

Second story from Syria about Iraqi refugees whom received expired food from Refugee agency in Damascus

http://www.almalafpress.net/?d=143&id=46764
اتهم اللاجئون العراقيون المقيمون في العاصمة السورية دمشق المفوضية السامية لشؤون اللاجئين بتوزيع حصة تموينية أغلبها مواد تالفة وغير صالحة للاستهلاك البشري خاصة المواد الغذائية المعلبة كالاجبان وغيرها

The fuel driving the “peace” movement - in fact, its sole reason for existence - is BDS. Were Gore or Kerry in office right now, opportunists like Hayden would be either cheering those fellows’ geopolitical genius, or staying silent so as not to give the enemy GOP any ammunition. And, should the Crone of Chappaqua, the Silky Pony or B. Hussein Obama inherit “Bush’s War,” Hayden and his ilk will turn on a dime to embrace a peaceful, stable Iraq as the fruit of Democrat pressure on the evil, incompentent neocon stooge Dubya.

Bush hatred, pure and simple. Take GWB away and the “peace” movement collapses like a deflated balloon.

I’m 40. Tom Hayden is just another dopey old man to me–I missed the whole part where he was a Big Deal.

A huge segment hit 1968, decided it was the zenith of All that is Good, and went into stasis. I was born in 1968. Do you know how stooopid ‘peace activists’ look to me?

They’ve never had the cachet of moral authority in my lifetime.

It is a strange, strange experience to change, learn, and grow into an adult in a cultural and political stasis: the world changed, I grew, and Tom Hayden didn’t.

Gray, I fully sympathize with you, despite being of that benighted generation. I’m sick of the 60s and all the rubbish associated with it (e.g., Hayden), and Ilived it the first time. The difference is that I grew up.

These aging Aquarians don’t seem to realize how ridiculous they look, still pushing the political equivalent of bellbottoms and eight-track tapes.

You can’t have peace… or justice (you have an exploitive, of workers, women, et cetera, imperialistic war machine)… unless you have socialism (which means… them in power to save us). Anything less is just not peace.

Once you have the definition of peace firmly in mind it makes sense.

It’s the same kind of wordplay, and doublethink, you get with words like ‘racist’…

Im no fan of Hayden’s of course. I understand he’s trying to relive the glory days of Chicago, but the Chicago PD greatly over re-acted, goaded by a strong rebuke by Mayor Daley to what he felt was a weak CPD response to a neighborhood riot some months earlier.

It was always about elections, only a little bit about Iraq. That’s one reason Tom Hayden is not too relevant even on the “Left”.

That said:

He has spent his entire life waging war on democracy, liberty, and the people of America.

Hmmm…a peace activist “waging war” on America. This rings a bell….oh yes, here:

It’s the same kind of wordplay, and doublethink, you get with words like ‘racist’…

Wordplay, indeed.

And along comes OB to do precisely that.

Doesn’t this shtick get old?

Happy Chanukkah to all. A bad day for X!

Oh, it will be considerably better when Neo gets around to writing about this Iran stuff. While I expect her to certainly sound more reasonable than her esteemed colleagues at noteworthy blogs such as “Gateway Pundit” and “The Jawa Report” (Neo is nothing if not reasonable-sounding) I expect there to be at least a hint of the obligatory conclusion that our invasion of Iraq at least got rid of somebody’s WMDs.

Also, the comment thread will be simply delightful to take part in.

Could we agree to just the tiniest scintilla of suspicion regarding the patriotism of John Walker Lindh and Adam Gadahn? Just a hint? A whiff? Anything? Or is trying to kill Americans just another form of “dissent?”

Well, Libya’s for one…and…

“Doesn’t this shtick get old?”

Turnabout’s fair play, no?

Funny that Iran “stops” its nuclear weapons program the same year we invade Iraq…

(though of course they’re still enriching uranium)

…and of course, this “intel” is from the very same people who brought you WMDs in Iraq!

So…whom do you trust?

Speaking of shtick, how about that — the predictable (however feeble) attempt to sneer your way out of a debate you can’t win? Well, he’s right about one thing, at least — the comment thread will be fun.

I have an inclination to agree with a prior post to the extent that the theatrics witnessed in today’s newspapers are all about politics. Surely behind closed doors our elected officials are more responsible with respect to foreign policy.

Maybe.

But it points to the unserious nature of this entire debate. We don’t take our sworn enemies at their word, and they continue to wage asymmetric warfare on us, unconstrained by any humanitarian thought or deed.

And one day we will pay the price for our position.

Here is the meat that I take from it.

“The coming war is a political one, to be fought at home. There will be a yearlong showdown that will determine the presidency and the climate of opinion. If the Republicans succeed in electing the next President, the Iraq War will continue and probably expand. If they lose the presidency, they are already positioning themselves to charge the Democrats with “losing” Iraq and ride that theme to a comeback in 2012. ”

What I take from the article is the “message” that will be used by the left to sell the importance of the vote for a dem. GOP, more of the same and probably more for a long time. DNC, a chance to get out.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gux49SwqMftPpk_0bpuCSPnhzd2QD8TAQ9200

“stay the course….as long as it takes…..no matter how hard…..cause they volunteered”

What’s the alternative?

Hey, I got off active duty in ‘96. Clinton could not get rid of us fast enough….

Ooh yes the old guys just come back from your back door as Condoleezza Rice has offered the former World Bank president Wolfowitz a new public service position.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389×2388950

Even now..now that there has been substantial evidence that the President, the Vice President, and other high-ranking members of the Bush administration misled Congress and the American people regarding the decision to go to war with Iraq… and misstated and manipulated intelligence information regarding the justification for said war…

…that there were no WMD’s…no poison gas…no ties to Al Qaeda and to 9-11…

….the burning question … that everybody, including you!, seems to be deliberately avoiding… remains: Why?!

WHY?!

Why did the Bush Administration lie to us?!

Why did the Bush Administration invade Iraq?!

Why did we sacrifice all of those innocent lives?!

Wait, what was wrong with the NIE? I think it’s going to come out that we got some evidence or information about their program.

What is wrong with refining Intell based on new and current information?

Besides, it’s an Estimate. It’s not evidence in a court, it’s a best guess. The previous best guess, along with Amadinejad’s rhetoric, said that Iran was building nukes.

New info will show that he’s bluffing. That is the way the system is supposed to work.

It didn’t work with Iraq

And they prepared you for the future for a newStatement of Principles

Cheney wants his war.

Also, see what Sy Hersch> New Yorker says about the NIE.

Occam?

“”In Washington, on the other hand, the consensus against a strike is firmer than most people realize. The Pentagon worries that another war will break America’s already overstretched military, while the intelligence community believes Iran is not yet on the verge of a nuclear breakthrough.”

That said, as Ephron and Hosenball note: “There are still voices pushing for firmer action against Tehran, most notably within Vice President Dick Cheney’s office. But the steady departure of administration neocons over the past two years has also helped tilt the balance away from war. One official who pushed a particularly hawkish line on Iran was David Wurmser, who had served since 2003 as Cheney’s Middle East adviser. A spokeswoman at Cheney’s office confirmed to Newsweek that Wurmser left his position last month to ’spend more time with his family.’ A few months before he quit, according to two knowledgeable sources, Wurmser told a small group of people that Cheney had been mulling the idea of pushing for limited Israeli missile strikes against the Iranian nuclear site at Natanz–and perhaps other sites–in order to provoke Tehran into lashing out. The Iranian reaction would then give Washington a pretext to launch strikes against military and nuclear targets in Iran.”

and

Via Andrew Sullivan, I find Dan Friedman writing for the American Thinker: “All the damaging consequences of all the blunders the President has committed to date in Iraq are reversible in 48- to 72-hours - the time it will take to destroy Iran’s fragile nuclear supply chain from the air. And since the job gets done using mostly stand-off weapons and stealth bombers, not one American soldier, sailor or airman need suffer as much as a bruised foot.”

But wouldn’t that backfire at least as badly as Iraq? Wouldn’t the Iranians strike back?

Not at all, Friedman insists: “They would stand before mankind with their pants around their ankles, dazed, bleeding, crying, reduced to bloviating from mosques in Teheran and pounding their fists on desks at the UN. . . .

“Miracles would be seen here at home. Democratic politicians are dumbstruck, silent for a week. With one swing of his mighty bat, the President has hit a dramatic walk-off homerun. He goes from goat to national hero overnight. The elections in November are a formality. Republicans keep the White House and recapture both houses of Congress.”

delusional, really.

Of course if one believes that there is no WoT, it is all just a Bushitler/neo-con fabrication, no thinking about consequences or actions to thwart the enemy is necessary. The useful idiots with those beliefs can then later line up in front of their graves, with the Islamist firing squad at ready, believing it is all a dream and they will soon wake up. I prefer not to join the national suicide pact eagerly being written by so many of our so called elites. As Winston Churchill said, “”If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”

Well, Neo? Did I call it or didn’t I?

Cause that is what the people fighting want, as opposed to people like you, Laura, that want things to end for nothing.

Everyone values truth. It just happens to be that our truth, Laura, is not everyone else’s truth. Or do you think that what you find true is also what others should find true?

I don’t know why anyone gives any of this any credence whatsoever.

http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?IAD=/20071205/FOREIGN/112050069/1001

(apologies for not knowing how to embed a link)

But. . since the “Times” is a Moonie rag and the Israelis filthy, perfidious Jew bastards, I’m sure the usual suspects will have plenty of reasons to ignore the story and continue with their Bush hatred.

“Hmmm…a peace activist “waging war” on America. This rings a bell….oh yes, here:

It’s the same kind of wordplay, and doublethink, you get with words like ‘racist’…

Wordplay, indeed.”

Its wordplay… indeed. But not the same as claiming to be in favor of peace even if you support the use of war whenever it is in the service of your progressive socialist side and/or the right side is winning any given war. One is wordplay with a common expression while the other is Orwellian.

Maybe the Iranians have stopped, maybe they haven’t. In the former case, continuing to sweat them annoys the present Iranian government.

Conversely, in the latter case, if we desist from sweating them further, we risk annihilation.

A simple risk/benefit calculation, I believe.

The difference between a ‘peace activist’ and a traitor is that a traitor may not also be a coward.

Back to Iraq intelligence work about WMD and with all childish work of ‘former UN chief weapons inspector’ and ’senior fellow at the Potomac Institute for Policy Research David Kay with all his funny work inside Iraq from Jumping over the fences of Iraqi ministry to searching Saddam Castles (Now American’s Castles looks Saddam built these castle for his future guest) finally David Kay nuclear hero nuclear haunter he got to say:
For “Weapons of mass destruction do not exist in Iraq and it is “delusional” to think they will be found.

So now whatever this NIE report with all intelligence support and work as some references mentioned here, there is no grantee and confidence in it because this was loosed as same intelligence fabricates Iraq case.

What is the difference now we need to convincing acts from these guys working for the truth and full truth? Nothing unless they prove it by themselves.

Gray, there’s an inner city Quaker mission several blocks from my house–the people running it move throughout a neighborhood that’s a free fire zone everyday after 4PM. They have nothing but their faith for protection–they’re peace activists. Cowards?

And imbeciles: feeding the same social pathologies that are shooting at them instead of shooting back.

“Free Fire Zone” indeed. Such hyperbole.

If it were a ‘free fire zone’ it would be a nice place to live now after a couple of rough nights, but it’s theses good-hearted, softly racist, cowardly nitwits who perpetuate this situation to create their own hero/victim mythology.

Sick.

from Horse’s Mouth

“When you do an NIE it is incumbent on the writers to clearly state whether there is consensus or dissent. And if there is disagreement then that should be reflected in the text. In the case of the October 2002 abortion, the NIC editors should have noted that there was disagreement in the intelligence community about Iraq’s efforts to rebuild its nuclear program. They should have written something like, “analysts at the CIA and DIA believe Saddam is trying but analysts at INR and DOE believe the evidence points to non-nuclear activity”. Instead, the NIC editors let stand the misleading notion that Iraq was rebuilding a nuclear weapons program even though all agreed that Iraq was not trying to acquire yellowcake uranium from Niger. The senior NIC officials failed to do their duty in 2002.

Not the case today. The NIC stepped up and refused to budge despite repeated efforts by Dick Cheney and his minions to gut the effort. This happened thanks to the convergence of several factors. First, most of the Bush neocon ideologues are gone–Wolfowitz, Feith, Bolton, Wurmser, Libby, etc. Second, the Democrats control the House and Senate Intelligence committee and were receiving reports from analysts about the bullying by Cheney and others who were trying to sandbag the conclusions. Third, senior intelligence officers learned the lesson of 2002 and returned to the tradition of telling the President the truth, no matter how unpopular or unpalatable. And finally, this Administration’s days are numbered and the analysts can read the tea leaves. They know there is no percentage in pandering to power by serving up half-truths and wishful thinking.”

What action do you think they should have taken based on that general warning?

And what civil liberties would that action impact?

Intell Estimates at the National Level or at the small unit level are like weather forecasts: if it rains on your picnic do you say the weatherman ‘lied’?

Hmmmm…. What if the current NIE on Iran turns out to be wrong?

It’s a guess….

Now why would he (or anyone else in the Administration) want war? Historically US Presidents have fared badly from war. Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, Truman, LBJ, and GHWB all doubtless wished to God they hadn’t had wars on their watch, but felt they had no choice. GWB doubtless feels the same.

Respect his decision, even if you don’t agree with it. And make room for the possibility that he may have been right.

Now why would he (or anyone else in the Administration) want war?

Because Cheney’s a warmonger, doncha know!? I mean, really — I thought everyone knew that! He doesn’t need a reason! He’s a neocon! Neocons just LIKE TO SEE KIDS DIE IN WARS!! How many times do I have to tell you that!!!

Honestly, I don’t know why I waste my time….

I’m glad I’m talking to a real neocon so I can experience the real neocon mentality, thank you. BTW, if you think it’s hyperbole, I’ll gladly take you on a tour, if you make it to STL, especially on Halloween or New Year’s–the Quakers, among others, have done a lot of good over 3 years, not perfect, not bad either. Again, they’re hardly imbeciles or cowards.

Why would Cheney want a war with Iran? Oh, I don’t know, maybe something like the Iraq invasion might be a little, tiny clue–maybe not.

You know, we keep hearing this meme over and over again, but there’s no logic behind it. What possible benefit to members of the Administration did the invasion of Iraq obtain? Political advancement? Poll numbers would say no. Glory? Likewise. Universal human admiration? Um, not so much. Monetary gain (Halliburton, et. al.)? Cheney divested himself of any association with Halliburton, and if anyone’s gained from the invasion, it’s everyone who’s invested in defense stocks and otherwise, which would be a sizeable chunk of America, as most Mutual Funds include defense stocks as part of the package.

It seems to me that invading Iraq was a net personal loss as far as members of the Administration were concerned. It’s certainly not helping them get re-elected to anything, is it?

Perhaps the other reason might be that, in principle, they thought it was the right thing to do? Disagree with them on policy if you will, but don’t ascribe the most base of motives to them. It doesn’t wash, and it tends to negate any reasonable argument that you might have.

I don’t think you actually know what a ‘neocon’ is. You just think it’s a cool-sounding word for somebody you disagree with. I’ve never been liberal, I’m only 40 and I’m not Jewish….

BTW, if you think it’s hyperbole, I’ll gladly take you on a tour, if you make it to STL, especially on Halloween or New Year’s

So I guess the problem isn’t poverty….

–the Quakers, among others, have done a lot of good over 3 years

Apparently not (see above).

We should provide the inner cities ‘humanitarian aid’ and keep the problems ‘contained’ by patrolling, neighborhood policing and diplomacy. Hmmm, sounds just like the lefties plan for Iraq–y’know, anything to avoid confronting a problem.

“Why you can’t arrest, deport and imprison inner city criminals! You’ll just create more criminals. Besides, that’s their culture, it’s a sovereign ‘hood and you’ll be caught in a ‘civil war’ between Crips and Bloods! It’s a quagmire!”

Where have I heard that before?

” not perfect, not bad either. Again, they’re hardly imbeciles or cowards.”

Imbeciles. Cowards. Self-congratulating moral narcissists.

A: Well, for starters, a general warning to the airline industry for example might have been a good start. Not one peep, hear that? So, you have intel that says that “AQ determined to attack using domestic airlines”, and you don’t DO anything. That’s a start.

Additionally Gray, cherry picking the intel and removing dissenting intel opinions from the NIE on Iraq made the “case” for war more credible.

Second, Occam:
“Now why would he (or anyone else in the Administration) want war?”

A: simple in terms of what PNAC’s agenda and Cheney himself saying “US Vice President Dick Cheney has confirmed that Iran is “right at the top of the list” of global trouble spots and worried that Israel might strike to shut down Tehran’s nuclear programs. “One of the concerns people have is that Israel might do it without being asked,”…

PNAC’s mission:

The PNAC outlines a roadmap of conquest.

It calls for “the direct imposition of U.S. “forward bases” throughout Central Asia and the Middle East:

“with a view to ensuring economic domination of the world, while strangling any potential “rival” or any viable alternative to America’s vision of a ‘free market’ economy”

Distinct from theater wars, the so-called “constabulary functions” imply a form of global military policing using various instruments of military intervention including punitive bombings and the sending in of US Special Forces, etc. Constabulary functions are contemplated in the first phase of US actions against Iran.

from 2005

worth $241,498 a year ago — are now valued at more than $8 million.

“Cheney continues to hold 433,333 Halliburton stock options. The company has been criticized by auditors for its handling of a no-bid contact in Iraq. Auditors found the firm marked up meal prices for troops and inflated gas prices in a deal with a Kuwaiti supplier. The company built the American prison at Guantanamo Bay.

The Vice President has sought to stem criticism by signing an agreement to donate the after-tax profits from these stock options to charities of his choice, and his lawyer has said he will not take any tax deduction for the donations.

However, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) concluded in Sept. 2003 that holding stock options while in elective office does constitute a “financial interest” regardless of whether the holder of the options will donate proceeds to charities. CRS also found that receiving deferred compensation is a financial interest.

Cheney told “Meet the Press” in 2003 that he didn’t have any financial ties to the firm.

“Since I left Halliburton to become George Bush’s vice president, I’ve severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interest,” the Vice President said. “I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven’t had, now, for over three years.”

and on Halliburton according to the GAO 10/07

‘The Government Accountability Office (GAO) ruled the Army didn’t give enough weight to Pentagon auditors’ concerns about the past performance of KBR, which has been the only company providing troop support for six years under the current contract. It was one of three companies selected to share the new contract, which was awarded in June and was supposed to take effect this month.

The GAO said the Army also gave Fluor Corp. “unequal treatment” when awarding the new contract. The Army approved Fluor’s proposal even though the proposal relied on different assumptions than those listed in the contract solicitation — a shortcoming that hurt other bidders’ proposals, the GAO said.’

Actually, warnings did go out to civil aviation just like they do all the time. Does that mean we whould have started strip-searching grannies like we do now?

Arm airline pilots?

Or more importantly, should the airlines have changed their policy on hijacking and told pilots to stop cooperating with hijacker demands like in the past?

Your ‘warning’ accomplishes nothing. Your understanding of policy, threats and responses is child-like….

Additionally Gray, cherry picking the intel and removing dissenting intel opinions from the NIE on Iraq made the “case” for war more credible.

Mmmmm…. More ‘cherry-picking’…

The dissenting opinions were available to Clinton when he bombed Iraq as President as well as Congress when they authorized military action in Iraq. Those dissenting opinions were available to Colin Powell before his speech to the UN–don’t you think a former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs knows how to read and interpret an Intell Estimate?

Your focusing on the ‘dissenting opinions’ which no one gave any credence is, itself, cherry-picking.

An NIE is a best guess, not a certainty. The dissenters didn’t make a good case for their views….

The GAO is full of crap and has been for a long time. It has no credibility: It’s a partisan congressional agency and the Comptroller is a Clinton appointee. They will say anything to crap on Bush and the military–especially the Army….

Whatever reasons from OIL to be a Sheik like this US Sheik Twitty al Ameriki he like to be Sheik Cheney al Ameriki in Iraq and in Parisia

Hahahaha! The no-bid thing again!

There is one other logistics company in the world that could have bid against Halliburton for that contract.

Can you give the name and nationality of the other company on the planet that could have bid against Halliburton for a job that gigantic?

“I believe there are some bloody days yet ahead in Ninevah, but that the conditions are set: 2008 might be the Year of Iraq. If fortune favors that prediction, it will be largely because of men like Twitty, and all those corporals and sergeants out there whose stories never will be told individually, but whose sacrifices are setting Iraq free at last. ”

Amen, “Truth”… Amen….

“Mr. Walker had extensive executive level experience in both government and private industry. Between 1989 and 1998, he was a partner with Arthur Andersen LLP, where he was global managing director of the human capital services practice based in Atlanta, Georgia. He was also a member of the board of Arthur Andersen Financial Advisors, a registered investment advisor. While at Arthur Andersen, Mr. Walker served as a Public Trustee for Social Security and Medicare from 1990 to 1995″

Hahahaha! Oh, yeah….

Where to start?

First, most of them have a lot of money to begin with, and could make a lot more by staying in the private sector. Only a nitwit would go into public service to make money; it’s kind of like going into academia, the military, or social work, to get the big bucks.

Second, going into public service entails intense public scrutiny of every aspect of the person’s life, practically down to his most recent prostate exam appearing on YouTube. Hardly the place to be for someone intending to pull some shenanigans.

Third, if money were even a remote consideration, anyone with serious name recognition can make a fortune later as a lobbyist or lecturer. (Bill Clinton now knocks down ca. $150,000 per speech, and has amassed ca. $40 million in speaking fees since leaving the White House, and without the public scrutiny.)

Fourth, to get down to specifics. The present CEO of Halliburton, David Lesar, makes ca. $8 MM/yr, not counting options (which were worth ca. $13 MM to him last year). That’s a measure of what Cheney walked away from, since that’s presumably what he would have gotten had he stayed.

As Vice President, Cheney currently makes $208,100, or approximately 1% of what he would be making had he stayed at Halliburton, not counting the commission he gets per dead Iraqi or American soldier.

So you can see how @#$%^&* stupid your point about Cheney and money truly is. I realize my time would be better spent explaining this to my golden retriever, but for some reason I feel compelled to cloud the issue with facts.

(While you’re at the Halliburton link above, look at the stock chart. Notice that the chart is considerably below the trend line from 1990-2000, i.e., the agitprop about “windfall profits” is just that - agitprop. Compare HAL with, e.g., DJIA to see this.)

That’s an interesting question, what did they have to gain? Why, in the wake of 9/11, did they go there, especially with Afghanistan unfinished, and now unraveling?

I think a lot of it has to do with Bush’s and Rummy’s incompetence, and a heavy dose, sorry Stumbley, of flawed neocon orthodoxy about the ME. Pat Buchanan stated today that the Axis of Evil speech, where Bush called out and threatened 3 countries who had not attacked us, was the manifestation of the flawed thinking that led them into disaster.

I think what they were angling for was a ME with a bunch of easily led pro-American democracies that secured our oil supply and provided added security to Israel, if you go by what many of them had written before Bush’s election. Cheney meeting with the oil whores in January 2001 comes off as ominous in hindsight. What in the world were they looking at detailed maps of the Iraqi oil fields months before 9/11? Though they wouldn’t put it this way, I think they saw an American quasi-empire in the ME, or certainly a sphere of influence that would, in their view, secure our interests.

Note to Gray, you might be surprised about my views on inner city pathology and problems, we may actually agree on much–but the problems are so vast I would never put down people who are trying to make a difference–don’t see many conservatives in the neighborhoods pitching in. Some of the good guys in these hoods are incredibly courageous people. John McWhorter’s “Winning the Race” is a great starting point, in terms of understanding where I come from on this.

Bush and Cheney were ‘trying to make a difference’ in the ME, but you put them down….

I don’t see many lefties over there pitching in.

(Actually, I’m not so dimwitted as to think Bush and Cheney attacked Iraq unilaterally “to make a difference” in some kind of secret cabal for Israel and Oil.

After all, Bill Clinton bombed iraq in ‘98 and we’d been enforcing the UN resolution by force since 1991….)

It just amuses me to see your inner city view juxtaposed against your views in Iraq:

The dopey Quakers are doing harm and no good, but you ascribe noble motives to them (making a difference), so they are ‘OK’.

vs

The ‘neocons’ in Iraq ‘making a difference’ in Iraq, but you ascribe ignoble motives to them (Israel and oil), so they are bad.

It’s not about outcome, it’s about your perceptions of their motives…..

Second, reward the spoils of war to the loyalists, and boosting the economy; a far cry from WWII “no profiteering” on war.

Third, establish a basis of power (executive) to boost the unilateral decision making of the future GOP dominated government. Of course, we see just how damaging that little experiment was now that we actually have oversight.

Need I go on?

I mean, even my labrador retriever gets it. Geeze

jim, do you fly? Do you eat produce? Do you drive anywhere, or just ride your bike? Do you consume anything or just subsist on your organic veggies and sleep on that tatami mat in your yurt? St. Louis gets pretty cold in the winter and pretty d**n hot in the summer; I suppose you tough it out with no A/C?

Face it, we are all “oil whores”, and your posting from a computer isn’t lessening our dependence on fossil fuels by any stretch of the imagination. So, unless you want to go back to a purely agrarian, 16th century economy and forego all of the above, you’re just as much a part of the problem as anyone else, and can’t rightly complain about the necessity for a policy that “secured our oil supply”.

“don’t see many conservatives in the neighborhoods pitching in”

Read this http://www.amazon.com/Who-Really-Cares-Compassionate-Conservatism/dp/B000WCTRPA/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1196894724&sr=8-1 and then make that asinine statement again.

Fifth, make secret deals with terrorists to make sure they accomplish their mission, which will allow the cabal to control the government forever.

Sixth, make sure all fellow ethnics are away from the designated target on the fateful day.

Seventh, report back to the mother ship, which is currently out of sight behind a comet.

How simple does it have to be for you!? A bird-brain could understand that!

Laura again feverously hoping and wishing for that Battleship Potemkin moment. Thirty years of telling service members that they’re a collection of baby-killing losers who could’nt find a job in the “real-life” and now we want to claim solidarity with the same people who enlisted voluntarily to be where they are and do what they’re doing. You can bet I’m not buying it.