Then, you didn't know many leftists in the 1960s. The left, at least the hundreds of people I knew, was very supportive of environmental protection.

BTW, I had malaria in 1965 and still cannot give blood. Got it in Colombia which was using DDT. The problem today is not lack of DDT, it is lack of adequate medical care.

My wife has been struggling with Stage 4 ovarian cancer for more than two years now. She achieved full remission for a time, but is now experiencing her first recurrence and is back on chemo. She and I are both thankful that we live in Oregon where, when the end time is close, she will have options to consider. She may never avail herself of that option, but she will have a choice. The law is quite specific, however, in that only she can make the choice and only if physicians certify her as of sound mental capacity to make the decision. All people with terminal illness should have the choice.

A couple of things:

1- I visited France for extended periods in 1964, 65, 66, 67 and 69. I was not spit upon nor was I treated poorly with two minor exceptions in restaurants. It probably helped that I was young and spoke decent French, but your observation is just hyperbole. I was treated far, far worse during spring break in 1968 while playing golf at Calloway Gardens in Pine Mountain, Georgia.

2- You are certainly correct that racism and bigotry are ubiquitous in the U.S., but, just for the record, I have never enocuntered a more racist and bigoted group of people in the U.S. than the Chassidim, and I'm Jewish.

I was, perhaps, too quick to pull the trigger, as it were, but much of the popular reading of Nietzsche is based on the posthumous editing and publication by his sister of selected portions of his journals to support her anti-semitic causes. Nietzsche was vehemently opposed to anti-semitism and terminated his friendship with Wagner and others over that issue.

Nietzsche did believe in noble moralities but also believed that all people were capable of achieving them. He did believe that the greatest evil hid behind populist versions of these noble moralities, but he also believed that the populist versions were anything but noble. I can't remember the exact quotation (i'd have to look it up), but something like: Take care that when we search for monsters we don't become monsters ourselves. Not quite the Nietzsche that the popular reading seems to indicate.

The Chicago Manual of Style has, unfortunately, been 'out of vogue' for some time now, both here and most everywhere else.

I have to take issue with your implication that Nietzsche espoused the idea of transcending morality and doing as one pleased. In fact, much of his writing was quite specifically in opposition to that view.

Exactly correct. And it doesn't matter if they are from other countries either. More than 1500 Americans fought with the British during WWII, and even Hitler treated the few who were captured as POWs - treated them poorly but didn't treat them this poorly.

First, Iraq invaded Iran in 1980, not the other way around. Second, who cares about who supplied weapons after 1981. Iraq was using weapons against Iran acquired before 1981. Third, Iran did engage in mass attacks in that war, because the Iraquis were using Phosgene, mustard gas and Sarin on Iranian troops. Absent extreme measures, Iran would have been defeated and millions more would have died. You really should get your facts straight.

BTW, Israel would lie, cheat, steal, murder, anything to get the U.S. to attack Iran, including lying about the status of Iranian nucleur weapons making, if such activity is even occurring. Show me the evidence.

Without necessarily disagreeing with the remainder of your post, your statement about the NAACP being a money-making enterprise is just dead wrong. It has been a money-losing enterprise for decades.

It might be a Portland beer geek kind of thing. I almost always have a church key available. But, then, most people don't know of Portland as Beervana in the forest nation of Cascadia.

One more thing - and I'm definitely not trying to bait you - is that people do vote against their own personal interests on a regular basis, and that can be good. I'm very affluent - top 1% - so Bush's tax cuts definitely gave me more money, but I have never voted for a Republican in my life. I vote against my personal economic interest every single time I vote. I do it because I believe that there are many more important things than my personal finances

The problem with your post is that most progressives are not socialists. We do support some socialist ideas and programs, especially social insurance programs like single payer national health care financing, social security, etc., but we don't want the state owning any of the means of production or deciding what will be produced or interfering in our personal freedom for the so-called common good, whatever that actually is.

Also, when you say to vote socialist, who do you mean? Not the idiots of the Socialist Workers Party, I hope. Trotskyite bozos will advance this country not one bit. So, who do you mean?

The Salon censors are out in force today. The trolls post hate, and those posts remain, but counterposts are deleted. Some weird standards here.

You have now proven yourselves to be the disgusting Nazi scum that we always thought you were.

I'm 60 years old, and I love music from the 60s. BUT, there was also Tommy James and the Shondells and a host of other garbage bands. Nirvana or Green Day or the Clash or many others stack up quite nicely against 60s music.