farenheit 9/11 (the "liberal media", other things relating to film maker Michael Moore)

For some posters here, hatred of Bush is the defining tic of their lives. It is what gives their lives meaning, and everything, even reason, is subordinated to it.And no, I am not a Bush sycophant. I think he has made many mistakes. Could Gore have done better ? No. He would have had a complete nervous breakdown after 9/11. Could Lieberman have done better after taking over for Gore? Very possibly. We'll never know.

Give the sanctimony a rest.Some posters (not yourself) have made statements that can only reasonably be interpreted as Bush-hatred.What are you going to do if Bush wins a second term (as, I argue , he likely will) ? Emigrate ?I didn't like Clinton, but neither did I bitch about every seven minutes of his life. I can recognize he had a few positive accomplishments.As to Gore, my assessment is one of likelihood, not certainlty, given the signs of (IMO) serious personality decompensation he has displayed of late. Rebut it if you like, but again, spare the sanctimony.

Yeah, and Kent Hovind has a similar backup for his YEC "theories". And this proves...what ?It dismays me that so many on this board, who rightly insist on independent corroboration of evidence on scientific matters, throw all that critical thinking to the wind with Moore.

In the case of Zinni and Clark, the criticisms come from a professionally qualified individual, offer alternative strategies, and do not question that terrorism must be fought, but take issue with how it is being done.I have no problem with that. The 9/11 commission report does as much.With Moore on the other hand we have opposition to the very idea that the US has the right to defend itself, along with conspiracy theory and guilt by association worthy of Joe McCarthy.Intellectual junk food, IOW.