This piece is actually interesting because Greenwald doesn't carp on Bush, for once. He is speaking through a third person account but is actually speaking for himself, and he will not come out and admit it. The quote from the article frames the issue clearly and unambiguously:

"I call on my friends on the Left –- straight or gay -– to help defend that real source of liberalism the Enlightenment, because if we lose and fall under religious law, there not only will be no gay marriage, there will be no women's rights, no freedom of the press, no basic human rights, not even – as in the case of Iran – any music."

What Greenwald is sort of saying is that if one "reads between the lines" there is merit to the conservative view that Islamofascism is (1) toxic to liberalism (2) is spreading faster than most of us think and (3) what will the next (likely Democratic) president do about it?

These revelations are not exactly the talking points of a John Edwards, or even HRC, so as not to give any more prominence to the GWOT. The official Dems position on the GWOT is that it is an imaginary wedge issue contrived by the Repugs to steal elections.

It is a difficult position for a leftist like Greenwald to contemplate because he knows intellectually that once the Dems takes power, he or she will have to deal forcefully with al-Qaida and their Islamofascists allies and lefty secular pacifists like Greenwald will have to get real, for once.

Roe v. Wade came about in 1973 because of concern over illegal abortions being performed and deathly consequences that resulted. What started out as a narrowly defined public health issue conflated over the past 30 years to mean 1.5-2.0 million largely healthy babies being lost every year. The numbers over 30 years are truly staggering and here we are in 2007 with (1) a labor shortage in this country to the point where we cannot agree on immigration reform (2) declining birthrates along with other Western societies (3) social security going broke for the lack of a sustaining workforce (4) an incredibly polarized politicial climate that traces its roots to the years following Roe v. Wade. And this is because a whole culture has bought wholesale into the notion that I (or me) is more important than my intended offspring. Nobody disputes the difficulties of child-bearing even in "advanced" societies such as ours, but the thoughtless culture that actively promotes unlimited abortion rights as some God-given right does not understand the "arrow of time" and unintended consequences.

Your rants about the catholic church are totally without merit. Your cherrypicking of historical facts are amusing and, of course, predictable considering your post is part of Broadsheet, and I cannot believe you actually spent so much time typing it. I am being kind by hoping that you really don't believe what you wrote.

First, let me say that the moron who is hiding behind "anonymous" and hopes for a return to suicide bombers on Israeli civilian buses should be kicked off this website, for good.

Joan Walsh-are you paying attention?

Second, the statements made by Hutman are standard fare for lefties who are also borderline anti-semites. Your rant is typical of someone who probably thinks they are well-read with a sophisticated worldview but has probably never read a book of non-fiction cover to cover. You are famously cherry-picking historical information that matches your anti-semitic worldview. YOU are probably one of those types who thinks al-Qaida is a police problem and that the GWOT is "a bumper sticker" or a campaign slogan to steal elections. You hang out on Salon because Salon tells you this everyday and you believe it.

Third, Israel does what it does because it really has no choice. All of its neighbors are committed to its destruction, one way of another. Genuine negotiations are pointless because some religious cleric will make them null and void, the next day. Also, radical elements believe that they have the US and Israel on the run with upgraded terror tactics so there is no real incentive on any side to negotiate faithfully. Examples: Iraq, Lebanon and Gaza. Even Iran is saying kiss-off because they know that the US really cannot do anything, but Israel can.

By judging the behavior of Israel on let's say the US or a western European country at this point in history says nothing. Our everyday reality is totally different from that of an Israeli.

What will guys like Greenwald do for a living when the Dems take over next year and all of the so-called extremist and radical measures undertaken by Bush remain in effect permanently? I can name them:

1. Patriot Act

2. Racial profiling

3. bribes are paid to get intelligence

4. Renderings to fun places like Egypt

5. Waterboarding

6. Wiretapping of private citizens

7. Guantanamo stays in business

There will be no change in these policies or practices because taken collectively, they work. Liberals go berserk over Guantanamo because it seems a little untidy to the outside world but it does keep bad guys off the streets.

If the Dems take actions to change these policies and something bad happens, there will be all hell to pay politically. This part of the equation Hillary understands very well even if Greenwald doesn't.