That video makes me sad.

Even the interpretive dance?

I fucking hate those kids.

I feel bad for the poor kid who is in obvious denial of his homosexuality. It's going to suck even worse for the wife and children he will leave in 10 years.

OTOH, it's funny to watch how the weakest challenge to the script they've been parroting for years now completely disarms them.

Max is an equal opportunity embarraser, although to be fair, the Dems come out relatively unscathed.

I feel bad for the poor kid who is in obvious denial of his homosexuality. It's going to suck even worse for the wife and children he will leave in 10 years.

I don't. In this day and age? In college? Being closeted is one thing, embracing bigotry is another.

6: I agree, it just seems more like a case of ignorance than embracing bigotry for the kid in the pink shirt. Eventually he'll realize that praying to Jesus didn't make him stop craving penis like he thought it would.

Ever notice how the biggest chickenhawks are the most whisker-free effeminate, lisping, limp-wristed people you'd ever meet?

Not that there is anything wrong with being limp-wristed and lisping.

Chickenhawk I have problem with, though.

I just find that fact ironic, that's all.

7: The sad part is that when his life falls apart, not a single one of his friends is going to actually be supportive.

"faux-manly pounding of chests, followed by a million excuses for not putting their money where their mouths are."

Okay, but on the same note why did all of the Dem senators just recently go along with Joe Lieberman (97-0 vote) in essentially establishing causus belli against Iran - even Jim Webb?

Ya got me. But then I don't have any Democratic senators, so I've got nobody to complain to.

I would like to hear an explanation of 'fight them there so we don't have to fight them here.' How is that supposed to work?

12: I've been thinking that same thing for years now. It's not a joke, I sincerely don't understand why a implies b. I really really want someone to explain this to me because I feel like there is something I'm missing.

How is that supposed to work?

Like a mantra. You just keep repeating it until your political opponents assume you're retarded and walk away.

How is that supposed to work?

Agree or not; believe it or not: it's a response to an asymmetric warfare situation. How to fight an entity that wears no uniforms, has no national boundaries, does not fight in any "conventional" sense. Create a "magnet" that draws the enemy to your strengths so you can better engage and defeat them. Or at least attrit them to the point of inconsequence.

Given that, one can argue 'til the cows come home about the wisdom, credibility, etc. of the strategy.

I would suggest as a starting point for consideration: the number of attacks on US interests around the world pre-9/11 and the number since. Almost all within Iraq.

I'm offering an explanation (good, bad, indifferent), not necessarily a defense.

Ah the "Flypaper" argument of defence against an asymetric enemy.

Worked great for the French at Dien Bien Phu, diddin it?

Militarily, nothing has worked for the French, post-Waterloo..........

I would suggest as a starting point for consideration: the number of attacks on US interests around the world pre-9/11 and the number since. Almost all within Iraq

If you replace "9/11" with "Arizona Diamondbacks World Series Victory" the result is the same. I just don't see why this should be the case. It doesn't seem to be any harder to get into this country than it was on that dark day in Phoenix.