Um, Colin?In order to take this column seriously, one must: 1. Accept a blase and completely unsubstantiated analogy between Vietnam era hippie protesters and "enraged bloggers." 2. Accept that it is somehow appropriate, nay, noble, for a defeated incumbent to endanger his own party's control of his Senate seat by running as an independent. 3. Overlook the strange gaffe-like revelation of privilige and just plain wrong assertion: "The primary was held in August, when many voters are away on vacation." 4. Believe that Iraq - which, as has been established over and over and over again, was not in league with Al Qaeda, and which was functioning nicely as a secular dictatorship that it turns out really wasn't much of a threat to America - even related, before we invaded to the "larger conflict with totalitarianism that America had no choice but to pursue."5. That supporting a disastrous war with no end that ties up American resources and is a public relations nightmare is somehow being "strong" on national security. Really?
Post a Comment