Ricky: "we tradtionalist Americans see him (Bush) as a gift to you (liberals)"

Why?

"He's selling out this great country to corrupt Arabs and Mexicans"

What liberal would ever want that to happen?

" like Clinton could have only dreamed of."

Ricky, you're no traditionalist American, you're a right-wing moonbat!

Don't bother trying to muddy up Salon, buster. Salon readers are far better critical thinkers then the freep crowd, which is where you will feel right at home.

If you're really upset that Bush is screwing up my country, ( and I doubt you really are, ) then you're a fool as well, because you probably voted for him.

The problem with debating right wingers is that they're so angry and delusional, yet they deny their real feelings and pretend to be rational and calm.

"The problem with debating lefties is that they're so angry"

Test your partisan bias: listen to Bill OReilly, Rush Limbaugh or Mike Savage for a while then compare the tone to Al Franken or Ed Schultz. If you're not pre-biased, you will notice the right wingers are much angrier and more derisive and insulting. The left *is* angry, about real things that are being done by The Republican Federal Government. The right is angry about fantasy strawmen like "activist judges," "man hating feminists," and "liberal elites" who mostly seem to be movie actors and college professors.

"Since the '50s, it's been the Left that hiked taxes on middle and working-class Americans"

The Republican Eisenhower administration hiked taxes the most, and the rich were appropriately taxed at high rates. The result was a prosperous economy and a strong middle class.

Eisenhower would be a far-left president today.

Tax the rich and spend on public infrastructure, and the money spreads unencumbered throughout the economy. Republican trickle-down tax theories don't work, unless your goal is to kill the middle class and create an American royalty.

The result of Reagan/Bush I&II tax cutting and deficit spending is a 9 trillion dollar debt and a cash-strapped middle class.

Tax cuts are easy to sell to selfish rubes who don't understand hidden costs. These rubes get all hot and bothered over "welfare queens" and "social redistribution" but don't care about corporate handouts and the structural advantages of the real elites: the lazy, rich "conservative" oligarchs who suck up wealth while the middle class work harder for less.

Finally Ricky, complaining about the problems of other cultures is pointless and a distraction. If you want to change Islam, move to an Islamic nation, learn it's language and preach on the streets there.

America can't bomb Islam into the 21 century.

They "pulled off a much more sophisticated job: a bureaucratic coup d'état. "

What's so sophisticated about drowning out opposing voices with the bully pulpit of the Presidency? What's so intricate about intimidation?

"Without firing a shot, they silenced critics, squelched unwanted facts, and created their own false but salable reality."

Critics weren't silenced, they were ignored. Contradictory facts weren't squelched, they were buried by a larger number of lies.

Corporate T.V. was critical, they deserve a bigger slice of Follman's praise.

There was real opposition. Millions of Americans marched, some Democratic politicians loudly opposed, but none of that really mattered since it wasn't on T.V.

And the rest of the world opposed too, but they weren't on T.V.

Americans won't vote for politicians who don't flatter us, so we deserve the spineless wimps in Congress. Those wimps rolled over in fear and voted for the invasion knowing full well it was a folly. Nearly half of the Democrats in Congress voted for it.

American and world history are full of examples of ginned up wars. For Follman to be so impressed by Bush's ability to "launch a war justified by lies" that he gushes "It is, truly, the heist of the century," is pretty silly.

In the broader view, Bush and Co were quite obvious, clumsy and ham-handed in ginning up the Iraq invasion.

A danger of tabbed browsers.

The best place to get an education as to how a big conspiracy can work is to work in any big organization and observe. The lowest level people have no idea what the plans at the top are, they recieve instructions which they carry out becuase it's thier job. They may have their own ideas and theories, and may whisper about it with co-workers, but to talk loudly about your opinions is to eventually lose your job.

Everyone in big organizations wants to keep their job, and they know better. Those who don't know better don't last.

In a big conspiracy, only a few people need know the "true intention." Everyone else involved will only know what they need to know to do their job, and they know better then to ask too many questions. The military raises "not asking too many questions" to the highest ethic, and most people in air traffic control are ex-military.

For anyone not at the highest level to "come out" with what little they know is suicidal. They don't have all the facts, so they won't be able to answer inevitable questions from skeptics. They will be ridiculed and marginalized.

There have been quite a number of involved people who have spoken of their role in 9/11 and stated their doubts, but they don't have a media megaphone and they don't want to ruin their lives with the ridicule they would face, like the ridicule offered here by Mr Manjoo.

Besides, they can't really be sure either, because they don't know everything.

"I'm sorry to see Salon willing to star letters opposed to even questioning the Bush account while not starring thoughtful questions surrounding 9/11 "

If you care about the topic, turn the meta-moderation off.

For nonslashdotters, that means: ignore the stars.