Man, you guys are falling into the trap again. Somehow, because a few liberal people have as their platform leaving the Iraq occupation, we're letting the Rovites label liberal or progressive thought with mindless pacifism?

I'm sorry, but the term liberal has nothing to do with feelings toward ending military conflict just as conservative values have nothing to do with starting wars. It just so happens that's where the two sides fell during this recent crisis. A look back at history will show extremely tough, cagy, and highly effective warriors in the Democratic Party during decisive world-wide conflicts.

I don't know where everyone was at the beginning of the Afghanistan conflict but it sure seemed that both sides supported going in and kicking the Taliban's ass.

We're seeing this backlash from the neo-cons accusing the Democrats with tilting to the radical left because of the defeat of Lieberman. Did you morons ever think that people might just be a bit pieved at the guy because his religious fundamentalism might be showing through? Sure he supported Bush's war but he also fell in line with other moronic ideals and it became a chore to listen to interviews with the brain-deal old jealot.

And just what the hell is the radical left? If the radical right is defined as militant fascism, one would assume the radical left would be some type of militant communism, not the tree huggers and anti-war activists that seem to be the target of the labels. Last I looked there doesn't seem to be much remnant of the once thriving Communist Party left in the good ole USA. The true extreme of the left pretty much faded out when communism fell flat on its face around the world and the few remaining governments started creating hybrids of Leninism and capitalism.

Is Cindy Sheehan now what's considered to be the radical left? Oh boy, there's a scary one. I guess Jesse Jackson, a man I can't personally stand, might be in that bracket but he's hardly threatening. Now let's look at the other side. Ralph Reed - who'd be pleased if he could get laws passed to disembowl gay people. George Bush and his crew who are hacking away the consitution, have brought back torture as a first-line military strategy, and seem to be intent on establishing fundamentalist Christianity as the national religion. I could go on and on about the real radicalism of the right and no matter how I search my mind, the most I can come up with on the other side are some wimpy people and some blow-hard politicians. There seem to be no budding Pol Pots or Fidel Castros in the American Democratic party or at least if there are, they certainly have no power or clout.

So here's the challenge to these bozos claiming the Democrats are giving power to their radical side. Let's start naming those radicals and laying out just what huge threat they pose to our security and our Constitutional ideals. Let me begin the list for you. Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Michael Moore, Cindy Sheahan, Dr. Michael Newdow, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, college professors, Randi Rhodes. Wow, I'm scaring myself here. What a threatening group. Shit, if they get their way no telling how long our great and greedy country will stand. Hell, they'll be giving away our nuclear arsenal to known terrorists to placate them and our lives will be filled with mushroom clouds. (a note here to the rabid capitalists - There'll be huge investment opportunities in bomb shelters and survival gear). So sheep, give it your best shot. Tell me what the world under these people and the ones you can add to list is going to look like and why we should fear it more than the alternative the current bozos are offering. Go ahead. Make my day.

Art