Tim, you think calling people birdbrains, dimwits, half-wits, stupid, or America-haters isn't "slander," just being accurate? Give me a break. I don't care if those quotes are just fine "in context," as you put it. It does not add anything to do the debate to call people names in this way.
Unless Ann Coulter has proof that Katie Couric is, indeed, the "Eva Braun of morning television," then comparing a person to Hitler's mistress can't be anything
but slander.
drisley, I don't think that pessimist=lefty, unless you are willing to venture that the many military folks at the Pentagon who also worried about going into Iraq with a lower number of troops than they wanted are hard-core, dope-smoking hippies. I have friends who are as left as me and are optimists. I have conservative friends who don't think humans are much more than dumb brutes. I don't think there is much correlation.
Besides, while I don't have hard numbers in front of me, it seems that before the war less than a majority of people thought the country was "heading in the right direction." Unless the majority of people suddenly became liberals in this country (sorry to give you heart palpitations, dris
), I don't think the correlation would work too well. I think people are more pessimistic these days because things aren't going well. Compared to a few years ago, the economy is worse, there are fewer jobs, people feel less safe, and civil liberties are disappearing. Kinda hard to remain cheery.
As for the media, we all know that doom and gloom sells, not happiness, so looking there is pointless.
Edit: yeah, I was more pessimistic than reality when it came to the war. First, I don't think there's anything wrong with that; I'm happy that things went better than I thought. Second, we got off
way too easy. I don't think the Iraqis blew up one single bridge. Their defense of Baghdad wasn't a defense at all, and ill-equipped as the Iraqi army is, when you defend a large urban area in a hostile climate, you are going to inflict some damage if you try at all. I also thought that things would be worse because I thought that if Iraq actually had chemical and biological weapons, Saddam would use them; that also didn't happen. What happened in Iraq was, by far, the best-case scenario that was possible, probably second only to Saddam and his army disappearing outright the day before the war started. Iraq folded with a vengeance, and if that hadn't happened, then things would have gone on a bit longer.
In any case, my objection to the war had nothing to do with losing it militarily, but everything to do with the aftermath. That is just beginning.