Dear Mainstream Media

Please stop saying that the Democrats in Congress “had to” drop timetables from the Iraq funding bill.

They did not “have to.” They chose to, because they are cowards. Please make a note of it.

* * *

50 comments.

  1. Democrats are cowards. Check.

  2. Correctamundo, Matthew. “Dropped the ball” would be a too-kind take on what happened. They turtled. And they have made their supporters (IE — me!) more cynical by doing it.

  3. Is there a specific word that accurately conveys that the Democrats aren’t just cowards, but the cowards who wet their pants when challenged by really cowardly cowards?

  4. Yes, but my mother reads this website.

  5. To be fair though…the Dems didn’t take the majority on the “pull out of Iraq” ticket…nor the “open our borders and give the country away” ticket…they ran on the “Bush is a dink” ticket…for which they totally have the mandate…but on the other stuff…not so much.

  6. That’s bad marketing, and bad marketing is why the Republicans have been so much more successful in the media than the Democrats. A statement like “Faced with the realization that President Bush would rather let troops die than alter his stance, and getting no cooperation from Republicans who sought to use the safety of American troops as a political tool, the Democrats chose a strategy that will reveal the continued costs of such blind repetition.” sells much better than either “forced to” OR “cowardly caved”.

    Of course, it doesn’t say anything different, but it sells better.

  7. Take a pill, people. The funding is only good through September, so you can enjoy Memorial day and re-schedule your calls to cut and run for Labor Day.

    Maybe Bush will try to distract you with an education bill just in time for school, but you won’t be fooled!

  8. These weak-willed little snivellers are going to bend over and take it because they’re afraid people will think they “don’t support the troops?” I don’t know what most 20-year-old soldiers would say if asked how they could be best supported but I don’t think they would say it would be by bankrolling the escalating chaos that is blowing their friends and comrades off the face of the earth for no clear reason. Have you seen the pictures of injured soldiers on the front page of Wednesday’s NY Times? (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/23/world/middleeast/23search.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) They’re heartbreaking and sickening and horrific, and I don’t know how Bush can get up in the morning knowing this is all happening because he needs to save face.

    But it’s all okay because the Democrats are standing tall and demanding that the Iraqi government show progress toward greater security and political stability. Well. That makes it all better.

  9. Actually just look at this: http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/world/20070523_SEARCH_FEATURE/blocker.html

  10. Lisa says that she doesn’t think the 20-year olds would agree with bankrolling the current conflict, but I’d beg to differ. For starters, the military is a volunteer organization chock full of people who WANT to go. No one forces them, anc contrary to Democratic talking points, it’s not a bunch of low-income minorities being forced to fight a war.

    And since you make the statement, I’d challenge you to follow up and actually go ask these 20 year olds that have been there. See what they think and how they feel. You may get a surprisingly different answer than the explanation that you offer for them.

  11. C’mon guys…at least we’re making progress. I mean hey…we elected a new majority to the senate and so the number of nay votes is going up. You know the old saying 14 out of 51 ain’t bad…unless you’re not completely retarded…in which case it is…very much…with the being pathetic and cowardly and incredibly demoralizing in every sense of the word. Not only that but I’m from Oregon where all the democrats voted no so I don’t even have someone to protest vote against in 2008. I really really expected better of Reid. I thought the man that singlehandedly filibustered like he did would never bend over. Mr. Olbermann’s words sting all the more on this issue because I believed in Senator Reid so much. He better pull one heck of a rabbit out of his hat in September.

  12. okay, DanT, I took the liberty of asking my 22 year old friend how he thought about this war. He voluntarily joined the war effort after high school as a marine and has served THREE TOURS now in Iraq. Before he went, he would argue with me all the time about how the president was doing the right thing, that the war was justified, so on and so on… in short, he fully supported the war effort. Now, he thinks the president is a moron and that he’s wasted his time, and he’s stuck, abosulutely STUCK in this situation that he wants desperately to get out of but can’t. He wants to go to school now for political science, and though he’s now a liberal he was asking me about my school and trying to make sure he’d get a nonbiased education. But, he’s back there again. That’s one person’s view.

  13. Our mistakes in going into Iraq were the constraints we put on ourselves. “Our fight is not with the Iraqi people, but with the Iraqi regime.” The precondition that we placed on ourselves that we would rebuild the country after the war. Our decision to fight the war on the cheap and without an overwhelming number of troops. The list goes on.

    War is nasty, but this isn’t war. This is a guerrilla action. War would have been rolling the tanks over every square inch of that country until we either found Saddam and all of his cronies or the Iraqi people found him and trotted him over to us. War is destroying your enemy and then leaving. We only rebuild because of the Marshall Plan, which was for economic reasons. There was only one Europe and we needed it to be viable. The only thing Iraq has that we need is oil, and there are plenty of other sources of oil in the world. We should have either taken care of business and left them to their own devices or occupy and claim their resources for ourselves as the spoils of war.

    I know this is harsh, and we don’t like to think of ourselves as being this brutal. In truth, we’re not this brutal, and so we shouldn’t have gone to war. Hard for me to admit, because at the time I thought it was the right thing to do, but that doesn’t mean that we should pull out just because one 22 year old Marine now thinks Bush is a moron. We’re in there, we gotta finish what we started and we need to finish it decisively because if we don’t, then the next Saddam or Osama will have been given the blueprint for how to beat us. And in warfare, when you know how to beat an enemy, you carry the fight to them and press your advantage. Osama said as much when he decided that blowing up the Twin Towers would be a good idea.

    Damn, I didn’t want to go all Joe Serious on a beautiful Saturday morning.

  14. The ‘have to’ means they were politically outmaneuvered. As usual. Their cowardice comes in because they cannot take the flack of being so outmaneuvered.

  15. Thank you, Matt. The perceptions and the language have more to do with why the mess won’t end that anything else at this point.

    For a couple others: You/they are not making progress. Exactly the opposite in fact. B/c now Bush has a chance to be the one to start bringing (some) troops home on his timetable, which looks like it will coincide with the next election (what a surprise). The Republicans will end up looking good and they’ll get the Congress back and maybe the White House again. All the main Dem candidates have already said they will leave troops in Iraq if they’re elected so it might not make a damn bit of difference anyway.

    Also, there was no Osama before the US and Russia made him. There was no 9/11 flight crew before the US riled up radical Islam by putting bases anywhere near Mecca. World-wide terrorism has risen at least 600% since we started the Iraq mess. Continuing it does not make anyone safer and it serves to prove to the world the US *is* the main problem in the equation.

  16. I really, really don’t get why they caved. The should have held a million press conferences saying that they passed a bill to give the troops all they need, but that the President wouldn’t accept the benchmarks and timetables that the majority of Americans want. “As the elected representatives of the American people, we cannot conscientiously remove the timetables that our constituents want. Our military deserves to know that an end is insight, and we, their Congress, will not allow them to be bogged down in an interminable quagmire. President Bush can either accept this bill, or go without funding whatsoever and bring the troops home immediately. Those are his options.”

    I guess I can dream.

  17. I really, really don’t get why they caved. They should have held a million press conferences saying that they passed a bill to give the troops all they need, but that the President wouldn’t accept the benchmarks and timetables that the majority of Americans want.

    “As the elected representatives of the American people, we cannot conscientiously remove the timetables that our constituents want. Our military deserves to know that an end is insight, and we, their Congress, will not allow them to be bogged down in an interminable quagmire. President Bush can either accept this bill, or go without any funding whatsoever and bring the troops home immediately. Those are his options.”

    I guess I can dream.

  18. Oops. In my dreams I don’t double-post either.

  19. I don’t feel invested in this war. I’m not doing anything to contribute to the war effort, I’m not being asked to sacrifice anything.

  20. “I don’t feel invested in this war. I’m not doing anything to contribute to the war effort, I’m not being asked to sacrifice anything.”

    You will, you will. When our taxes are high but there can be zero government spending or else the country goes bankrupt. The sacrifices come later.

    Oh, and the chaos spawned and the increase in terrorism. And a few other things.

    I guess you can call that investment. Happens way after the lost war. All we have to do is wait.

  21. “I don’t feel invested in this war. I’m not doing anything to contribute to the war effort, I’m not being asked to sacrifice anything.”

    You will, you will. When our taxes are high but there can be zero government spending or else the country goes bankrupt. The sacrifices come later.

    Oh, and the chaos spawned and the increase in terrorism. And a few other things.

    I guess you can call that investment. Happens way after the lost war. All we have to do is wait.

  22. Ya’ll will appreciate this:

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3954858769441262005

  23. Dear Blogosphere Pundits: Please stop pretending there is a difference between Democrats and Republicans. Nobody “chooses” to do anything in politics unless he/she is paid to do it. Perpetuating this myth only empowers them to continue to be bought by the same interests. Thanks for sure, Reality

  24. I thank god we have republicans to beat down those dem’s..

    I wouldn’t so much as say they were cowards so much as they figured out you can’t put a time table on conflict…

    If you think you can, then your a bigger idiot then a democrate, and that’s pretty big.

  25. What Digby said:
    http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2007/05/politics-under-water-by-digby-im-just.html

    This Republican administration is completely incompetent at exactly everything they touch, with the shining exceptions of controlling the media narrative, and keeping the cash flowing to their corporate military-industrial-complex friends. Other than that, they are total screw ups, but that’s what keeps ‘em in power.
    -J

  26. DanT-
    You’re right that we do have an all-volunteer army, and right, too, when you say most embarked on their tours with enthusiasm and commitment to what they thought was a just and noble cause. But as it became increasing obvious that we were mired in a mess of our own devising and making it worse every day we stayed, many of the most dedicated troops – those who are closest to the tragedy – are losing hope. I didn’t go over there, and I didn’t ask, but the NY Times yesterday ran a piece about just how bad it’s become. Entitled “As Allies Turn Foe, Disillusion Rises in Some G.I.’s,” and you can read it at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/28/world/middleeast/28delta.html?_r=1&oref=slogin. I won’t quote extensively, but one soldier, Sargeant Keven O’Flarity, tells the reporter, “I don’t believe we should be here in the middle of a civil war. We’ve all lost friends over here. Most of us don’t know what we’re fighting for anymore. We’re serving our country and friends, but the only reason we go out every day is for each other. I don’t want any more of my gys to hurt or die…If it was something I felt righteous about, maybe. But for this country and this conflict, no, it’s not worth it.”

  27. The reason they caved is very simple. Both parties are owned and operated by the same cabal of oil companies, defense contractors, pharmaceutical companies, and mercenary companies who are making a fortune off of the war. Like all politicians, the Dems will say anything that they think will help get them elected and then go right on doing what their billionaire donors tell them to do. The people don’t figure into the American political equation at all anymore except as easily manipulated dupes.

  28. I have to agree with Lisa. My brother is in the military, has just come back from his first tour over there in Iraq, is already scheduled for another, and will probably have to do a third before he gets out. And he will get out, as so many others are choosing to – the Army is hemorrhaging both officers and enlisted soldiers, to the extent that our tax dollars? Are being thrown at anyone who’ll reup their committment. You can make an extra $20,000 a year if you promise to stay in the military that much longer. How is that anything but an indication that this volunteer Army of ours didn’t sign up for this mess, and that our administration knows this, and has become desperate?
    My brother, needless to say, does not agree with Bush about the war.

  29. I’m always tickled when I hear people say there is a conservative control on the media:

    “This Republican administration is completely incompetent at exactly everything they touch, with the shining exceptions of controlling the media narrative…”

    With the few exceptions (most notably) Fox News, who’s collective lips are stained pink from all the Kool-Aid the’ve drank, the media is so far left that from their vantage point Ted “One for the road” Kennedy is a moderate.

  30. Quoth Davey above:

    We’re in there, we gotta finish what we started

    You know, I somewhat agree with this (I struggle between ‘we broke it, we need to fix it no matter how much it sucks’ and ‘but all we’re doing is breaking it further so maybe we should stop that’) and yet, even though I’m not 100% behind the troop withdrawal plan, I think the Democrats are being stupid wimps and I’m mad at them for it. If you’re going to make a big damn deal about how you’re going to bring the troops home, you should probably do that. Especially when you hold all the leverage (either Bush passes the bill you want, or he gets nothing and has to leave Iraq anyway. funny how that works.).

  31. Ryan, your claim that the media has a bias to the left is based on the fact that American political discourse has drifted so far to the right that no one, including you, even knows what the left is any more. The most left-leaning members of Congress are slightly to the right of center by the standards of the rest of the world. So when the American media tries to be centrist, the skewed reference point most Americans now have leaves the impression that it is biased to the left.

  32. Leroy,

    Political discourse has drifted right? When you have a Senate and President (Republican I might add) wanting to give amnesty, citizenship and a blank check to 12 million illegal immigrants, and the MSM won’t call them illegal immigrants instead opts for Undocumented Workers.

    So you’re saying Kennedy, Pelosi, Boxer, Feinstein, Clinton, Byrd, Dodd, Kerry and Schumer (and that’s just the senate) are right of center?

    I’d strongly ask that you take a moment to think if it’s possible that you are so far left that these characters look to be centrists.

    Don’t get me wrong…there are tons of righties out there that are so far right they think Cheney is a soft pinko.

  33. I guess you all are too short of memory to remember that big pile of rubble that was once the World Trade Center. Hope you’re not in college this fall. Al Quaeda might be gunning for YOU, if today’s news is to be believed:

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,276252,00.html

    And don’t tell me GWB is egging these nut cases on to it. Osama bin Laden was a nut case when Bill Clinton was president.

  34. Damn Democratics. Can’t even surrender right. Have they rented the Versailles train car yet? Or maybe the deck of the USS Missouri? Which Democratic representative is going to sign the articles of surrender?

  35. That is exactly what I am saying, Ryan. All those people you name constantly vote in ways that favor the desires of the rich and the corporations over the needs of the rest of us. Apparently you don’t even understand that the amnesty thing is of more benefit to corporations than it is to anyone else as it helps them keep wages at rock bottom. Why do you think our uber-conservative President is pushing it so hard?

  36. But that’s your definition of “right”. (At least where it comes to domestic issues) I don’t see conservatism as being particularly pro-corporations/pro-rich america. I see it as being less wasteful on public spending/welfare. Not saying the elimnation of public spending/welfare, just a more tempered spending approach. Whereas conversly I see liberalism as being more agressive in public spending/welfare.

    And on amnesty, there may be some corporations that think it will help them, however keeping wages at rock bottom is NOT good for America. Lower skilled labor while initially having a benefit of lower prices, ultimately costs more as historically lower income wage earners use a disproportionally higher amount of social services while contributing a smaller amount of tax revenue. It’s estimated about 3-1 in costs to income. Which means everyone else shoulders the burden, which in turn lowers their disposable income, which drives down consumer spending resulting in lower corporate revenues.

    We’ve been using illegal labor as a crutch for so long to artificially lower market prices so we can have a “rose colored glasses” view of our own economic prosperity, that we’ve forgotten that according to natural price increases etc… a head of lettuce should actually cost about $4. Had that been allowed to naturally occur farming would have remained a viable profession for many Americans, and being a viable profession they would have earned a living wage…our taxes would have been more proportional…burden on public support systems lowered…etc…

    Bush is pushing for it because he’s an idiot…he’s being hand fed it by someone in the GOP…and probably doesn’t even know what it means. At best he’s doing it because he feels bad for how NAFTA has messed up Mexico, or because it was part of the NAFTA agreement in the first place.

    Also on amnesty…the Dems are pushing for it because they think that by importing a ton of lower income eventual voters, they will reap a political benefit from it in the future.

  37. I apologize, Ryan. I didn’t realize your were still using an antique American definition of right vs. left. I’ll shut up now since we’re not even talking the same language.

  38. I want to understand your POV.

    You define “right/conservatism” as pro corporation/rich america”

    And you define “left” as ….

  39. The Right is:

    *creationist yahoos
    *gun toting 2nd amendment loving school shooters
    *gay evangelicals against gay marriage
    *a muscular Aryan Christ
    *pro-war uber-patriots who are for the Iraq War / Quagmire / Reality TV show / sitcom, wave the flag like soldiers, yet are too goddamn cowardly to enlist (probably because they are gay)
    *people who write “Two and A Half Men” erotic fan fiction
    *not really “readers”

    The Left is:

    *liberal evolution-believin’ latte-drinkin’ big-word-writin’ tree-hugger nancy boys
    *people who think NPR is interesting
    *probably not Teamsters
    *Michael Moore, Nancy Sheehan, and Barack Obama
    *lesbian abortionist gays who were responsible for letting 911 happen, not, like, bad intelligence and neocons who regularly teabag members of the House of Saud
    *unmarried minorities with, like, 10 kids and junk
    *Jews, you can’t forget the Jews
    *And the Spaniards

  40. Ya know Gun Totin’ Jesus Bot makes a very strong case.

  41. Hey, I don’t like the fact that they caved to the schmuck any more than anyone else does, but the fact remains, they didn’t have the votes to override the nitwit in chief’s veto. The gops who have publically broken with shrub on Iraq but still vote with the punk are the real gutless ones. If they had the courage of their convictions, the Dems would be able to put it right back in shrub’s face.

    As for the funding and the bench marks, the gops need to see results by September or they’re toast in ’08 and the gop congressional leadership will be meeting at the Watergate just as soon as the Bin Laden Bar Mitzvah is done with their half of the elevator.

    The troops weren’t going to leave before September anyhow and the surge is a sham. That said, when shrub asks for another 6 months, the gops will have to break with him and the Dems will be able to say “Hey, don’t look at us. We gave you one more chance and you blew it. Ya wanna blame somebody, try the schmuck in the mirror.”

    We Dems and Progs have to remember we bear some of the blame for this situation. Too many people copped the ridiculous “both parties are the same, there’s no real difference between them” number and voted for Nadar or didn’t vote at all.

    Aside from making rovesputin’s day, how’s that workin’ out for ya? You really showed ‘em, alright. You showed ‘em you were saps and made it close enough for shrub to steal it.

    As for the there’s no difference nonsense, grow up.

    Ya gonna tell me there’s no difference between shrub and Gore on the environment?

    Ya gonna tell me Edwards would be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court for the next 30 years if Gore had been in the White House? We sure as hell wouldn’t be stuck with Alito while Bush packed the Appeals Courts with wing-nuts to weaken every Civil Rights and Worker Protection Law that’s ever been written with Gore in the White House.

    I’ll tell ya where else we wouldn’t be – Iraq. We wouldn’t be there, we wouldn’t be in debt to China and there’s a good chance the WTC would still be standing, too.

    There’d be no Abu Ghraib, no gitmo, no black sites and no exxon’s rippin’ us off while they’re still trying to slither out from under their responsibilites for the Exxon-Valdez spill almost 20 years after the fact.

    No Condi, no Rove, no Cheney, no Gonzo, no Harriet Miers and no rummy the dummy gummin’ up the works, either.

    Call me crazy, but those sure look and sound like substantial differences to me.

    Ya can’t hit a three-run homer unless two guys get on base for ya. It was a lot easier to get into this fix than it’s gonna be to get out of it, but with no bush and no gop congress, there’s at least a chance to get out of it.

    Again, I don’t like the Dems caving to the Clown, either, but Iraq is shrub’s mess, not theirs. It’s gonna take a while to get out of this mess. Let the gops hang themselves with their own rope.

    Now that’s entertainment.

  42. Hey, I don’t like the fact that they caved to the schmuck any more than anyone else does, but the fact remains, they didn’t have the votes to override the nitwit in chief’s veto. The gops who have publically broken with shrub on Iraq but still vote with the punk are the real gutless ones. If they had the courage of their convictions, the Dems would be able to put it right back in shrub’s face.

    As for the funding and the bench marks, the gops need to see results by September or they’re toast in ’08 and the gop congressional leadership will be meeting at the Watergate just as soon as the Bin Laden Bar Mitzvah is done with their half of the elevator.

    The troops weren’t going to leave before September anyhow and the surge is a sham. That said, when shrub asks for another 6 months, the gops will have to break with him and the Dems will be able to say “Hey, don’t look at us. We gave you one more chance and you blew it. Ya wanna blame somebody, try the schmuck in the mirror.”

    We Dems and Progs have to remember we bear some of the blame for this situation. Too many people copped the ridiculous “both parties are the same, there’s no real difference between them” number and voted for Nadar or didn’t vote at all.

    Aside from making rovesputin’s day, how’s that workin’ out for ya? You really showed ‘em, alright. You showed ‘em you were saps and made it close enough for shrub to steal it.

    As for the there’s no difference nonsense, grow up.

    Ya gonna tell me there’s no difference between shrub and Gore on the environment?

    Ya gonna tell me Edwards would be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court for the next 30 years if Gore had been in the White House? We sure as hell wouldn’t be stuck with Alito while Bush packed the Appeals Courts with wing-nuts to weaken every Civil Rights and Worker Protection Law that’s ever been written with Gore in the White House.

    I’ll tell ya where else we wouldn’t be – Iraq. We wouldn’t be there, we wouldn’t be in debt to China and there’s a good chance the WTC would still be standing, too.

    There’d be no Abu Ghraib, no gitmo, no black sites and no exxon’s rippin’ us off while they’re still trying to slither out from under their responsibilites for the Exxon-Valdez spill almost 20 years after the fact.

    No Condi, no Rove, no Cheney, no Gonzo, no Harriet Miers and no rummy the dummy gummin’ up the works, either.

    Call me crazy, but those sure look and sound like substantial differences to me.

    Ya can’t hit a three-run homer unless two guys get on base for ya. It was a lot easier to get into this fix than it’s gonna be to get out of it, but with no bush and no gop congress, there’s at least a chance to get out of it.

    Again, I don’t like the Dems caving to the Clown, either, but Iraq is shrub’s mess, not theirs. It’s gonna take a while to get out of this mess. Let the gops hang themselves with their own rope.

    Now that’s entertainment.

  43. You’re unmarried girlfriend is pregnant. Through cutting edge technology and Jerry Falwell’s “Electo-Magic Jesus Soda”, we found the fetus will become a homosexual.

    If you are Republican, what do you do?

    If you are Democrat, what do you do?

    PS: Shooting the mother in the head is not an option. Sorry, Justice Alito.

  44. Coop:

    The only difference between Gore and Bush on the environment is which special interest group is feeding them their info and money.

    oh GAWD…so you are telling me it’s because Bush was in the White House that the WTC was attacked? Cuz he was also in the White House when they first tried to take it down…no wait that was Clinton. Or maybe it was the embassy bombings that killed 213 people…that was Bush too…oh wait no again…that was Clinton.

    And you say we wouldn’t be in Iraq…well wasn’t it Clintons administration that first made the connection between Sadam and Al Qaeda…why yes it was. And wasn’t it because of this connection that we bombed a Sudanese “Pharmaceutical plant” because they were providing chemical weapons components to al qaeda…why yes it was. So your statement is at best dubious and worst, just plain wrong.

    “Call me crazy” — Coop

    Ok. You’re crazy.

  45. Wait a minute, bot, Obama is a pro-war uber-patriot. How can he be on the left?

    As for Nader, he had nothing to do with Gore losing. Many people have done a thorough analysis of the vote and come to the same conclusions:

    1) Nader took more votes away from Bush than he took from Gore
    2) A big chunk of Nader voter’s wouldn’t have voted at all in preference to voting for Gore.

  46. Coop 10
    Ryan zip

  47. If Gore would have had a landslide election a la Reagan in 1980, we wouldn’t be having this stupid conversation in the first place. The fact that we are so evenly divided between, let’s be honest, two monumentally mediocre WASP patrician androids, it’s any wonder 20% of the population even bothered to vote.

    Voting seems like an incredible waste of time. If it was so important, make it a federal holiday! We have Flag Day and Arbor Day! Trees and patterned fabric for Cthulhu’s sake!

    At least people who don’t vote aren’t morally culpable. They aren’t the complaining, rationalizing, idiot enablers. Enough with the “Every count matters” bullshit. Please, it’s tiresome and morally hypocritical.

    Who is more morally correct?

    1. The “Good Germans” who helped elect Hitler?

    2. The traitors who wanted to assassinate Hitler?

    (I know bringing up Hitler is sensationalistic, but given our pitiful record in education — #54, right after Morocco — I needed to pick an example most of our knuckle-draggin’, creationist believin’ pro-life sub-retards could recognize.)

    Not satisfied with this batch of spineless Democrats and authoritarian, closeted homosexual, evangelical neocon neofascist Republican scum? There’s an election in 2008, vote their bottom-feeding pedophile defending terrorist-loving asses out of office! Or not, not like it’ll make a bit of difference. (The lobbyists still control the town like an occupying army.)

    Merry Fucking Christmas!

  48. Of course we’d be having this conversation. Only it’d be flopped. As we as human are never content.

    Not only are we never content, we refuse to grasp the concept that bad stuff happens and their ARE things that are out of our control. It’s easier to point the finger at ourselves and because we think we can control it.

    “The terrorist aren’t bad people…they are just mad at us because of the things this administration has done. So as long as we take our ball and go home life will turn into a gian green M&M.” When in fact they’ve hated us and everything we stand for since we “stole” the center of civilization from them in the crusades.

    “All of global warming is created by man. And since *I* don’t have an SUV it’s my neighbor’s fault and he should be taxed and punished and that will fix everything.” When in reality man’s contribution to “global warming” pales in comparison to the solar constant…which we are coming to learn is not so constant. Anyone else notice that the MSM has quietly switched to “global climate change” from “global warming”?

    Damn Matthew see what happens when you don’t have a comments section for a while?

  49. Damn, the Gun Totin’ Jesus Bot family is strong! Got sumpin’ for ever’body in here! Das what I’m talkin’ ’bout!

  50. Gun Totin’-
    It’s Cindy Sheehan, not Nancy Sheehan.