Why, because of voters like bluecanary, who are so easily swayed to not vote.

All the Republicans have to do is slander enough to make the Democratic candidate seem pro-war, corporate backed and anti-choice and these people stay home, guarenting the election of a Republican who will support Constitutional amendments outlawing abortion, start stuipid foreign wars, and after leaving office make millions working for companies that made billions during his term.

-----------------------------------------------------------

bluecanary: I love how the Democrats now say they were "fooled" into voting for war in Iraq. So basically what they're saying is they don't do any independent research themselves, they simply swallow the Bush party line and vote accordingly to avoid being labeled 'soft on terrorism.' Sorry if I'm not going to interrupt my day to vote for this "lesser of two evils."

===========================================================

Not voting for the "lesser of two evils" ensures the election of the greater evil. Not exactly a moral stance.

Perhaps you also do not understand that the intelligence services report to the executive branch and a minority party doesn't really have the means to do any indpendent research. All the reports the house receive have to be approved by the Executive branch, which didn't even allow upper levels of the Executive to see reports that conflicted with the official version of facts, much less let such reports in the hands of the opposition party.

------------------------------------------------------

bluecanary: If you want me to vote democrat, give me a democratic candidate. If Democrat candidates insist on trying to move as far to the right as possible in a craven and misguided attempt to woo red state voters, then they deserve what they get: more losses at the polling booth.

=======================================================

Exactly how does a Democrat get elected without winning more of the Red States? New Math?

Seriously, unless a big red state such as Florida or Ohio flips, and every blue states stays with the Democrats, we have to win a few red states in order to win the election.

That's a simple fact.

That's right, people who claim there is no difference between Democrats and Republicans are closet Republicans.

Why, because they help elect Republicans just as much as any Republican does.

So, thank you BlueCanary for 8 years of Bush and for the destruction of the country because you can't be bothered to vote against such interests, because if the candidate isn't your prefect date, why bother going out.

The Flag burning admendment is stupid. I pulled my endorsement of Feinstein over it, and I don't contribute to her campaign because of it, but she's still better than having someone like Randy Cunningham as a senator, and if because you and your ilk can't understand the difference our country is getting screwed, and it's just as much your fault as anyone elses.

At least I can say I tried to defeat Bush, you just threw up your hands and quit.

People constantly rationalize about food, saying broken cookies have no calories for example.

People don't really believe this, it's just food tastes good and people want to eat more than they should, so the trick themselves into believing it's ok.

That's why books such as this one don't change dietary habits, because the author makes the mistake of thinking Americans are really stupid when in fact the problem is Americans can convince themselves into believing something they know to be untrue.

Plus, the book doesn't account for the fact that food is viewed as a status symbol. Good decent food is dirt cheap, but unfortunately, cooking from scratch is often viewed as something poor people do, and even those who are poor don't want to be associated with it.

The good thing about the elitest aspect of this food argument, is maybe scratch cooking will become associated with middle class success and then far more people will in fact cook from scratch.