Liberals are so disingenuous with their arguments. They want sacrifice only because that would make the war more unpopular. They are so idiotic in their logic. WWII was shared sacrifice because almost everyone had a family member in the war and hundreds of thousands were dying.

Liberals like to tie the high gas prices to the war (incorrectly) but they complain and moan about that. Many of us are sharing by sending care packages, money and support to the troops. We would love it if they could join in the sacrifice.

Talk about selective recall.  I can't count the number of times the President made it clear we were in for some very tough times in the coming years, to combat terrorism.  Yet, no matter how many times he's said it, no matter how many times he's introduced legislation trying to martial our resources to combat terrorism, what has he received in return?  Wholesale personal attacks.  You love hearing liberals whine about not be asked to sacrifice.  How about asking them what have they been willing to sacrifice, and when?  The silence is deafening. 

"Now we're all free agents. We don't give up nothin'

Don't give up nothin? Tell that to the soldiers in Iraq and their families. I am from a military family and have friends who are also and their courage, flexibility and sacrifices impress me every day.

I've been watching The War. It's incredibly put together. A story told not by historians but by the ordinary people (as Burns wanted) who lived through and survived it. It's poignant and amazing thus far and I don't expect that to change. Were it to become required viewing or at the least recommended viewing in our schools everywhere, I would be pleased. It's a striking record of what others before us have been through to secure our freedom. So many did not survive, suffering a long time well before they persished.

As for Burns: funny, I was wondering about his political views while watching him comment on his work the other night. Surely he realizes that WWII and the cost paid by our country is not something we would want to repeat just so we can "give up" something. Pity he couldn't have directed a comment or two towards those present day folks in uniform who suffer so that he can stay home and be creative.

I wonder how Ken Burns the free agent would feel about giving that up. Nothing is ever so simple as we might want it to be.  

Tim.. Burns, sometime last week expounded on that "let's go shopping" line," saying (and I paraphrase), ..In the last 6 years, had it not been for Bush, the US would have become energy independent, completely upgraded and modernized our crumbling infrastructrue, stopped global warming, and provided health care for for everyone.

I wonder what we could have done during the Clinton era of peace and prosperity, had it not been for Bush?

gag me. (;~>

While I've liked the show so far, the biggest question I would like to ask Burns is "what happened to the Soviet Non-Agression Pact with the Nazis?" Not once during the first night did he ever mention that the Soviets were initially allies with the Nazis. Burns is critical of the Germans, Italians, and Japanese, but never mentions a peep about the Soviets until after Hitler attacked them. Burns mentions the fall of Denmark and Norway to the Nazis, but never mentions the fall of Finland to the Soviets.

Burns is both making and missing the same point.

His program is demonstrating that the problem today is that Americans, other than those in the service or their families, have no clue about sacrificing and national unity in a time when our existence is in danger.

Obviously Liberals don't think we are in danger...which is exactly the same attitude they had until 12/07/1941.  The difference is that even after 9/11/01 the Libs still think we can be complacent.

Bush did not say flippantly "let's go shopping" - that's the attitude of the Left.  Burns misses this because he's steeped in Leftism at PBS.  Either that or he's just such an idiot that he can't even see  that his own work condemns the pacifism of his own ideology.

  Burns and other liberals aren't worried one bit about 'shared sacrifice'.  They just want people to have a reason to be against the war. 

  Even during the Viet Nam War we didn't sacrifice.  In fact we had been under a democrat congress for so long we wouldn't have noticed another increase in taxes.

The absence of living veterans and WWII civilians due to natural attrition serves Burns well, lest anyone recognize the defeatist tint of the first two episodes of his historical invention.  So far we have learned that Japanese-Americans were drug off to internment camps, Americans took heavy casualties in the first year of the war (35,000 dead), Japanese-Americans were drug off to internment camps, Rommel was driven out of North Africa, Japanese-Americans were drug off to internment camps, Americans took back Guadalcanal with heavy looses and it was very dangerous to be a member of a B17 bomber crew.  And on and on it goes with the real pain and suffering that was WWII with very little of the American spirit of WWII.

First, I'd like to say that Ken Burns could be the next Robin of "Batman and Robin" : Now, there's a film I'd pay cash money to see!

Secondly, how much money has PBS given him?  How much of that was taxpayer money?  How much has this gnat made personally?  Is it in the Bill Moyer stratosphere of personal profit?

I like much of what Ken Burns puts out on film, but he should shut up, just like the rest of the Lefty Loon Maroon Patrol.

Anyone who says they support the troops but not the mission is a liar. 

From the White House web site:

"A recent report on retail sales shows a strong beginning to the holiday shopping season across the country -- and I encourage you all to go shopping more." -George W. Bush

What again was it he didn't say? 

Well there goes my very favorite show, "Civil War".  This comment by Burns is such crap.  We suffered and made a sacrifice during Korea and Vietnam and it didn't "bring us together".    It is just another liberal myth that sounds good until you really think about the logic of it.  Raise your hand, how many want to get gas rationaing cards and pay an Iraq war fee?  You would get the response liberals want.  "NO WAY". 

Looking at this picture makes me sad.  George Stephanopoulos has let himself go. 

/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-

With Democrat revisionist history and liberals guaranteeing the future (global warming, nuclear destruction, etc.) only the future is certain; the past is always changing.

Poniewozik wrote "Today the government is loath to lay out a price, or ask one." Well, is he right?

It certainly bothers me that this whole war is entirely off-budget. Why can't "conservatives" be fiscally conservative? We are essentially passing on the monetary costs of this war to our children.

Of course the "endless war" is also imposing real costs on our domestic liberty, as the respected Cato Institute has documented very well:

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6654
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6330
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3159
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=1302

The Americna Freedom Agenda, founded by staunch conservatives Bruce Fein, former DOJ official under Reagan and prominent legal scholar, David Keene of the American Conservative Union, Bob Barr, former Georgia Congressman, and Richard Viguerie, is another place to look:
http://www.americanfreedomagenda.org/

Of course I am happy to see a Court that cares more about applying a stricter construction of the Constitution, so your criticism of the NYT is right on. I am hoping the Court will start to draw greater limits on the commerce clause, which has been interpreted extremely loosely to let the federal government to meddle in all manner of state and issues, contrary to the Founder's idea of a "federal" system of government with strong states.

20/20

"I do not know what is true. ... But in the midst of doubt ... I do not doubt that the faith is true and adorable which leads a soldier to throw away his life in obedience to a blindly accepted duty."
- Oliver Wendel Holmes, Jr.