That must be the unspoken assumption that Gingrich, O'Reilly, Scalia ,Ingraham, et al, are operating under. Or at least that there's insufficient evidence to hold them. They seem to assume that if given a hearing , the detainees will be released . Sooooooooo...... I have some questions for them (in my best Colbert voice)

) You assume all the evil-doers in Guantanamo are innocent . What proof do you have? Why do you believe the terrorists? Why do you hate America?

) You say that once they're released, we'll start losing cities . They were innocent evil-doers, so what'd we do to make 'em so crazy ? Drink directly out of the milk carton? Leave the toilet seat up? Not take out the garbage? What was it?

) Ok, so if rounding up innocent people , or buying them from militias, and Musharraf, putting them in prison , torturing them, and killing a few, makes us safer , shouldn't we round up everybody ? Except the government ( the patriotic part) and the criminals ( same thing, right?;) ) Let's get everybody that hasn't committed some heinous crime in prison , start abusing them (us), then we'll all be really,really safe ! .

lol

I haven't gotten back to the inspiration for that, & not sure I want to. :)

Cats & catnip? Assembling voles ? :) You're on tonight Pedinska . In my experience, when the cats get nipped enough , they skip the 'nip & attack the hand . :)

RIP bucky1 . Despite the sometimes tedious tenacity of his arguments, he'll be missed , and it just won't be the same without him .

Paying attention? Yep , but how many really do that? A sizeable number (most?)get everything from the local paper , and the evening "news" .Maybe . Sometimes . Even now, internet penetration in the US isn't much past 50% , and among older people, (i.e , reliable voters) less so .

Re mutual enemies : That's why the WH didn't want the bin Laden tapes broadcast. They often contained gratuitous insults of Saddam & his government . If that had become common knowledge , the Iraq war would've been a tougher sell .

& he is us?

joshzzz, & doubting john , your impressions of pro-war/anti-war proportionality may be dependent on geography , as much as anything . I seem to remember the actual #s being about 25% definitely for, 15-25% against(depending on who's polling) and the rest ambivalent/apathetic (~same as the Revolution ;) . Where I worked it was 3 against ( myself included) , 5 for, 2 ambivalent, and 7 apathetic, or at least no-comments . That was in the (small) city . Out here where I live , a rural to sparsely suburban area (& heavily Republican), it was more decidedly pro-war , at least among those that I heard talk of it .

Paul , don't forget Steve Earle either . ( although the country music-industrial complex tried :)

http://new.music.yahoo.com/videos/--2158673

http://new.music.yahoo.com/videos/--9271314

Using Iraq population = 30 million:

pre-war : ~25M , with 19-20M in and around Baghdad .

now: 22-23M (guessing, given the # of refugees in Syria, Jordan, etc.)

Don't know if that changes anything with your point, but those are the #s

Willingness to support war once that inspection record was revealed to be imperfect: incorrect, given how poor the Bush administration's preparation for the post-Saddam period turned out to be. It was very hard to realize how shoddy this preparation was, looking from the outside, but I wish I had dug deeper and pressed harder.

Two obvious things(besides being a war/occupation) told me that any Iraq (mis)adventure was screwed , before it was even started . As of September 11, 2002 , we had spent ~ 12 billon on the war in Afghanistan , and ~ 5 Million(!) on reconstruction. About 6 weeks before the Iraq war started, there was a one-day conference to discuss the future of post-Saddam Iraq. Seems as though that should have been the the first thing discussed .

How does a supposedly professional scholar/pundit/thinktanker, whose full-time job is to study such matters miss that? Or see it, and ignore/dismiss it?

It's a sign from God....

In the Kentucky Derby, Big Brown comes in first, Eight Belles comes in second but breaks both fore ankles and has to be put down.

It doesn't come much clearer than that.

-shooter242

So.......God likes UPS?

Obama over Clinton?

Hillary's going to be "put down"?

"It" may not come much clearer, but "it" should, so we know wtf you're talking about shooter. ;)

Hostages

http://arabwomanblues.blogspot.com/

Your post wasn't up yet , when I started mine.;)

Tina,Rose,TXGirl, MCE, et al , can you please give a quote(& the whole quote) or two that bothers you, so I know wtf you are criticizing? Unmask911 seems to be the only one of thre most recent commenters that took the time to read/isten to Wright . I keep asking, here & there, and nobody's got anything; just a vague reiteration of what the MSM blatherers( who seem unaware also) have put out .

I'm from it . ( There's a reason Hillary came to NY. A lot of it is more like Arkansas than Arkansas :)

WT is right , and a little wrong. I grew up with uncles, and a couple other relatives that raced . We'd sometimes get together on Sunday at my grandparents, or my uncle's and watch the race , among other things .

I do think WT is essentially right .The majority of the NASCAR audience is a good target audience for simplified RWNM spiel . However , this time around, BushCo policies have beaten people over the head often enough, that they aren't buyin' it . Among people I know , Obama & circumstance has turned many around, at least enough to consider alternatives .