Sarah Richard's column made me think of this friend of mine. The guy drives me nuts with his habit of stepping out into crosswalks, without so much as a glance, no matter how busy the street. When I chide him, he explains "I have the right of way."

And indeed he does -- I've checked the Vehicle Code and it says so. Hopefully, that thought will sustain him when he's hit by a truck.

I suppose Bush is dumb enough that he could launch military action against Iran, but I don't think he's going to able to sell an Iranian adventure to the American people after the disaster in Iraq, no matter what the spin. And it's too bad. Unlike Iraq, Iran really is dangerous. It's sad to think Iran's mullahs will probably someday get the bomb because that moron in the White House went off half-cocked. Is it 2008 yet?

And here's the final verse:

"He's the Universal Soldier

But he's really not to blame

His orders come from far away no more

They come from here and there

And you and me

And brother, can't you see?

This is not the way to put the end to war."

In our country, civilians, and only civilians, make military decisions. You and I may not like the decision that was made in Iraq, but blaming the soldier, amateur or professional, is passing the buck.

I was wondering if your post about soldiers would work with other pathetic sterotypes.

"Americans raised on Hollywood have a ridiculously starry-eyed image of the average (insert racial group here): honorable, noble, ethical, heroic, self-sacrificing etc. There's some good people in (that racial group) I'm sure, but let's face it the majority of the (that racial group) are(sic) not exactly intellectual powerhouses or sensitive souls."<>

Yup -- works like charm. If lack of intelligence is the hallmark of a soldier, there ought to be a recruiter at your door right now.

Doctors are arrogant with a God complex ...

Police officers are trigger-happy authoritarians ...

College professors are leftist liberals ...

Social workers are apathetic bureaucrats ...

Defense lawyers are unethical ambulance-chasers ...

I'll leave it you fill out the list.

Man, your last post is just an elaboration of your pathetic bumper-sticker thinking.

The sad part is that you can't see that you're guilty of very ignorance and narrow-mindedness you detect so readily in others.

Instead I'll thank NoNameGiven for the support. It really was nothing at all. Which is why it's so easy for right-wingers to portray liberals as soft-headed, spoon-fed, elitist, holier-than-thou, cushy-living hypocrites. The next time Rakhia looks up from his term paper, and, teary-eyed, asks why George Bush is president, he need look no further than the mirror.

"We can expect the terrorists and insurgents to carry on without him. We can expect the sectarian violence to continue." George W. Bush.

Doesn't sound like your guy thinks it's a real big thing, either. I'm sure Bush is pleased like everyone else that Zarqawi's gone, but even he's not so brain-dead as to think there aren't plenty of other Zarqawis around to pick up the mantle.

Although, of course, if he wants to declare "Mission Accomplished" and bring our boys and girls home, it's OK by me.

For the record, I'm not crazy about some of the U.S.'s military or political interventions either. But I always get a little annoyed when our European critics bemoan the U.S.'s interventionist streak. They conveniently fail to remember their own nations' role in those adventures. European leaders were more than happy to let the U.S. bear the brunt of the Free World's defense when they felt threatened by the Soviets, or take the lead in dealing with geopolitical headaches -- most them caused by centuries of European colonialism -- and didn't worry too much how we did it. If the guy on the street was unhappy, well ... don't look at us: It's those arrogant Americans again. Meanwhile, they're building ever-more elaborate safety nets for their people -- safety nets that are not available to Americans today but that might be if Europe had carried its share of the mud.

The Afghan plan, which I think most Americans support, was to go after the people who levelled the World Trade center and attacked the Pentagon when afghanistan's former rulers refused to help bring them to justice. Of course, it would be nice if Afghans took to the opportunity to create a better society for themselves with the help of the U.S. (and it would have been better for the U.S. kept all its nation-building eggs in one basket instead of heading over to Iraq in midstream), but that was a secondary motivation.

While seeing Bartlett crap his pants more than he appears to be already on the short flight from the airport to the Green Zone might be good for a laugh, combat is serious business. The last thing our troops need is that guy watching their backs. Perhaps he could be trusted to patrol the skies over Alabama, like his boss 35 years ago.

Stop fighting and face facts: Clinton and Bush and millions of other people their age dodged combat during the Vietnam War. Most of these people are still around, either as Democrats or Republicans. It's just the way it is, and all the tortured explanations in the world will not change that fact.

Stop fighting and face facts: Clinton and Bush and millions of other people their age dodged combat during the Vietnam War. Most of these people are still around, either as Democrats or Republicans. It's just the way it is, and all the tortured explanations in the world will not change that fact.