Ms. Walsh is prattling the same tired "lesser of two evils" crap that has left the democrats pathetic capons in the face of Bush criminality. The bastard admitted on TV that he broke the law when he refused to bring on board the FISA Court--but we she be thankful to Pelosi for being better than the Republicans and not bringing this up every freakin' day until Bush is impeached or the whole rotten system shown to be a fraud. Walsh seems to want to protect the sham "democracy" more than she wants to challenge a corrupt system. Therefore, the "radicals" who call a spade a spade are somehow the bad guys, not the conplicitous Democratic Party. Walsh wants the Democrats to be elected so they can do, what? Pull all the troops out of Iraq? Admit it was a crime? Dismantle the Imperial Presidency? Foreswear preventative war? They won't do any of those things. Walsh wants to change the face on the American Empire from a sneer to a smile. That's about it.

Why would people, who make their living selling information, be so gung-ho to support an administration that stifles and chokes information at every turn? It doesn't seem to make any sense. But we forget that these people are much more interested in the selling side of things than the quality of the information they sell. In short, they will sell any shit that the market will bear. It doesn't need to be balanced, or complete, or even accurate. As long as they can sell and people will buy, they could give a rat's ass for the content. If they can wrap this cynicism and greed in the flag, apple pie, and keeping Americans (and their own rich insider asses) safe from "islamofascism" or some such rot, they have NO insentive to dig or to contradict. All the carrots are for the good boys and girls who peddle this "the government is there to protect us, let's leave them to it and not peer behind the curtain to the unviel torutre holes, the death squads, and the illegal wiretaps." Watch how this Marine's story of beatings and killings gets disappreaed down the media rabbit hole, just as all previous reports have about Bagram, Abu Graib, and the CIA's secret prisons have--no pattern here folks, just a few rogues and unfortunate incidents.

This article is a classic example of the "don't piss in the fingerbowl" school of nicely, nicely explaining to all you rational folks out there that things are amiss and we should reconsider our actions. It is about three years too late. It is largely inoffensive and even more ineffective. It pretends that we have some kind of Platonic dialogue going on here in America and that a sagacious rejoinder will clarify the issue and put the politicos back on the straight and narrow. Nonsense. Bush and the neocons do not argue rationally. The Republicans do not play fair. The Democrats are a party of mostly cosmetic change. I'm not saying that Mr. Galbraith is a loser or wrong to say what he does, but, frankly, at this stage of the game doesn't his essay sound terribly anemic?

The war was illegal, unethical, and wrong. We should never have gone there. We should not be there. The Republicans are always screaming about how people have to be responsible for themselves and can't expect the government to solve their problems for them. Fine. Let's leave the Iraqis to solve their own damn problems. This is the message that must be iterated and reiterated if we are to have any chance of getting the troops home.

I'm constantly shocked at the bizzare defeatism that overpowers people when this issue gets raised. If the legislation is written properly, these folks will have to pay or go to jail. Loopholes don't materialize from another dimention--they are written into the code. Therefore, they can be written out. And where are these rich folks going to run? Last time I looked, their global investments were not backed up by the armies of Dubai or The Caymen Islands. No, they need the vote and the lobbyists and the media machine here in the good old US of A to make the world safe for their globalized sales and investments. Why would Joe Blow want to pay 450+ billion a year for vast intervention forces when he could pay half that and be immune from attack by foreign powers? He wouldn't. Those forces exist to keep the Third World in its place and our huge international direct investments protected against local yokels who would otherwise appropriate them or tax them silly or re-write old or corrupt leasing agreements that pay them pennies on the dollar of their own natural resource assets. The rich will stick it out here, even if they have to cough up some extra taxes, if only to keep Uncle Sam's cudgel safely in their own hands.

And I quote from the Bill of Rights:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

What amazes me is that either people don't know these are their rights, or don't care. Too many Americans would gladly trade thier freedoms for protection against the literally one in a million chance of being killed by a terrorist. We disgrace oursleves in the eyes of those who came before us, and betray those that follow us, if we let this shit continue.