I said 'support' not vote. I would never participate in this country's political system. It would be like participating in organized crime. If I ever voted I wouldn't be able to wash the filth away. For me politics is purely a matter of intellectual entertainment.

Mind you I wish I could vote, I WANT to vote, but my ethics won't let me.

My motto is: If you vote, you can't complain.

At one point in my adult life my mom asked me flat out (in front of other people) how I managed to avoid drugs and police trouble when I was a kid. I shrugged my shoulders, never having thought about it before and said "D&D" Course didn't lose my cherry til I was 19, but thats a different story boys and girls.

I think thats what Jay-Z was doing, no?

I'm not a cynic. A cynic sees no hope at all. I'm a realist in that I do see hope, I just don't see it in the context of our political system. And in the context that I do see hope, I'm actually quite active.

That can't take anything at face value. This leads them to accept repub BS with a nod and a wink. They feel good, cause they 'get it', they see the 'angle' and report it straight. But get a politician to speak honestly and earnestly about helping people and political reporters go into their "Not gonna pull the wool over my eyes" routine and begin to dig and deride, as if to prove to each other that even if its not obvious, there is an angle, and thats how they report it. That is why in an environment where most reporters are probably personally liberal, they always end up digging deep into Democratic candidates while for the most part giving Republican candidates a free ride.

A. A person who believes all people (politicians) are motivated by selfishness.

Nope, don't believe that.

B. A person whose outlook is scornfully and often habitually negative.

Nope not that. I told you I had hope.

C. A member of a sect of ancient Greek philosophers who believed virtue to be the only good and self-control to be the only means of achieving virtue.

Sounds way cool but definitely not me. I'm a firm believer in the raw positives and negatives of human behavior.

For me the key is that I don't believe the system we have in place for resolving problems on a large scale (our political system) is not viable. My belief is not based on grumpiness, but rather a firm understanding of systems logic. Just because I don't believe in the commonly accepted method of our current system of politics as an answer or successful system of human organization, it would be wrong to assume I'm a cynic. The mistake I think you're making, is to assume the current political system is the best or only way for humans to organize or govern themselves. I do not.

Actually the Dems were responsible for the vote, but only because Bush & Co's original plan was to go into Iraq with no congressional approval. Senior Dem leadership let the Whitehouse know there would be a stink if they did. Cheney didn't want to go to congress because just doing so, was to be ceding Executive authority which he did not want to do at all. So in that twisted logic the Dems were responsible for the vote, but its a mischaracterization and intellectual dishonesty to equate that with Dems being responsible for the war, cause they were going to war no matter what anyway. Fucked up eh?

By the way, although I do agree that no one who voted for the AUMF in any way intended what then transpired, as congresspeople they are responsible for their votes. They gave Bush authority to use force, he used force, they can't say, "I'm not to blame"

Quite clearly it would seem that the American press is reporting FOR the establishment, rather than the public.

On the other hand, can we blame them? Isn't it the American way to approach work by the easiest way possible? Yes they could take an antagonistic approach to those they cover but then they'd have to do the hard work of digging up information rather than calling a friend for a quote. I submit that the state of the American press is less a reflection of the press, than it is of America.

1. As should now be abundantly clear, Talking-Heads, Pundits and other Opinionators are not judged on the value of their predictions and/or knowledge but merely on their presumed stature or perhaps telegenicness.

2. Though Morris does accurately name the Clinton presidency as a time of bitter politics, lumping him in with Bush administrations, he conveniently fails to point out that the bitterness all came from the republican/conservative side of the political spectrum.

I think the law enforcement thing is that his bank notified the police as per procedure when they noticed strange charges on the governor's credit card. That is what started the investigation, not a general hooker sting. Which I agree is a silly thing to be wasting resources on.

Glenn says: "...and there might even be real political benefit."

I hate to sound too cynical but I'd venture it is the ONLY consideration the House Dems took before they acted, and why its taken them so long to act.