Sites Holmquist trys, and often fails, to go no more than a couple of days without visiting (some of which Holmquist regularly swipes links from without attribution)
What the hell's so wrong with "pessimism" and "rage"? If you watch a new Bush campaign commercial, you get the idea that not believing Bush's policies are going to work out is "pessimistic" while being angry about Team Bush's deceptions is "rage." Both of those things are true, but so what?
Bush may want you to believe otherwise, but everybody's pessimistic about some matters, while people have a right to be angry about being lied and manipulated. Instead of confronting even the mildest forms of these charges, Team Bush just ridicules them and plays off people's reluctance to thinking of themselves as having been manipulated. And in the process they manipulate the public one more time.
Just so it is clear, Mr. Bush, an avid reader of this blog, if you want to see real rage, get in a room with me for five minutes. The offer is also extended to Democrats.
Beyond the politics, I don't mind anger and rage. In fact the Bush Administration's "war on terror" should make people angry.
By the way, it's not insurgency. An insurgency implies something that rose up afterwards. This is the same enemy that butchered Iraqis for 35 years, that fought us up until the fall of Baghdad and continues to fight afterwards. It was led by Saddam Hussein up until his capture in December. It's been led, in part, by his No. 2 or 3, Izzat Ibrahim al Douri, since then. It's been led by Zarqawi, who was a terrorist working for bin Laden in Afghanistan, who fled to Iraq in 2002. It's not an insurgency, in the sense of an uprising. It is a continuation of the war by people who never quit.