Zo Re,...There are a host of others. None of them in itself could bring us to any kind of major civil conflict, but lumped together,
What would possibly make you think they will get lumped together? The religious right has a minority position in the rep. party itself, just as extremist heathens like Ted are the minority in the Dem. party. 60% of Americans or better believe in religion. The only one on your list is National security, and you can bet when the chips are down, most if not all will vote for, rather than against. It is a minority position that believes like Ted, that we can sit back and take it.
I've never seen the country so polarized (and growing moreso), but then again, I wasn't alive during Vietnam
It wasn't a happy time in America, and I believe the Dems hopes to turn Iraq into another Nam for political gains are a big mistake. They are different wars fought at a different times, with different methods, for different purposes, against different enemies. The Dems wishful thinking, of drawing parallels, which don't necessarily exist, to try and bring the US back to a time, nobody wants to exist again, is stupidity at its worst.
I giggled when Bush and Daschle on the night of the SOU talked about how strong the Union is. It's never been weaker in my (short) lifetime.
The SOU is always a cheer leading session, for the president; and usually the congress, despite their differences, ceremoniously goes along. Why Ted Kennedy, and some dems. decided to disrespect the president, at that time, is strange to me. Ted leading the anger crowd, is a bigger mistake to me, than his walking away from that bridge in Mas. 30 yrs ago. But then, how much sense did he exhibit then either. While it wasn't a great speech, I don't think it was the speech, or its contents, the Dems were against. |
