I know that there has been much discussion about DLC lately, but this Neocon war-preacher Peter Ross Range writes in this rant
Liberal's war, advocating essentially that democrats should embrace (or should've embraced) Bush's Iraq war. He is entitled to his opinion, but what I found incredibly offensive is below the fold.
The inveterate NeoCon writes:
My liberal friends are quick to point out that the left's chief grievance is with the war in Iraq, not the war on terror. But what does it do for the image of the Democratic Party -- not to mention the thinking of rank and file Democrats -- when some of our most skilled commentators use a moment of unambiguous terror to first find fault with an American policy (unseating Saddam Hussein) rather than first condemning the terrorists? It's both morally wrong and politically dumb. These musings in the left-wing blogosphere may be read regularly by only a few thousand people, but they seep into the intellectual bloodstream of the Democratic Party. They once again place Democrats on the wrong side of the ultimate issue of our time: winning the war on terror.
So, let me get this straight. This gentleman wants us to support (or pretend to support) an unwarranted war that cost 1750+ American lives (1779 as of 7/26/05 Link) and countless Iraqi lives (not to mention a thoroughly tarnished international image and standing of the US, and not in the least to mention the $400-500 Billion bill to taxpayer before all is said and done), for the fscking IMAGE of a party?? WHAT INSOLENCE AND WHAT AUDACITY (sufficient to qualify him for an A*Hole rating)!! He should be ASHAMED of himself, and we should disown this guy whenever he speaks on behalf of the democratic party.
Neo