In a scene right out of Stanley Kubrick's classic film "Dr. Strangelove," and a clear sign of the insanity of the times, liberal blogger Arianna Huffington and liberal Time reporter Joe Klein are actually fighting about which one is more anti-war.
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!
With that in mind, our story began on Sunday when Klein innocently wrote a post at Time’s “Swampland” blog concerning what was said by leading Democrats and Republicans on the various talk shows that morning. Here's what seems to be the passage which really got Arianna's dander up:
McCain, whether you agree with him or not, has been entirely consistent about the war. I disagreed with him about going to war in 2003, agreed with him about the need for more troops until last summer, when it became plain that we had no reliable ally in Iraq, and I disagree with him now.
Seems innocuous, no? Well, not to Huffington who wrote the following at her own blog Monday:
While offering his Time blog take on the Sunday show appearances of John McCain, Chuck Hagel, and John Edwards, Joe Klein once again made the claim that he opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning…But here is Klein on Meet the Press in February 2003: "This is a really tough decision. War may well be the right decision at this point. In fact, I think it--it's--it-it probably is."
Does that sound like someone opposing the war?
Isn’t this great? Not only do we have a group of Democrat candidates for president trying to out-bid each other concerning how quickly America should pull its troops out of Iraq, now columnists on the same side of the aisle are fighting in public about their real or imagined level of pacificity.
Gives you hope as a conservative, doesn’t it?
Yet, that was just the beginning of the slide into the abyss, for as extraordinary as it might seem, not only did Klein respond, but he did so rather quickly in a blog post hypocritically titled to apparently mock his foe even as it clearly belittled them both. In “Slow News Day?” Klein began:
Arianna Huffington, the doyenne of the Hollywood left, has taken time from her busy schedule to attack me for something I said on Meet the Press three years ago. Since this lone quote has become an article of faith among the take-no-prisoners left, let me respond.
After presenting his side, Klein raised some salient questions ridiculing the absurdity of the debate he was engaging in:
So why is Arianna so upset? Could she be trying a bit too hard to strut her lefty credentials after a lifetime as a conservative? Or is it a deeper problem than that, a structural problem the left has had ever since before the days when Irving Kristol and Norman Podhoretz were socialists: a need, born of intellecual [sic] myopia and insecurity, to burn heretics? Don't they have anything better to do than attack poor old me, especially since I pretty much agree with them about the war?
Klein hit the nail squarely on the head, didn’t he? Isn’t this indeed what we have been seeing from the extreme left in this country since the Florida recount debacle: a need, born of intellectual myopia and insecurity, to burn heretics?
There’s no coalition building or bipartisanship with these folks. It’s my way or the highway with the overwhelming majority of these Michael Moore/George Soros devotees, so much so that they’re willing to kill those currently in their good graces if they even so much as dare reach a hand across the aisle.
In fact, this was so close to the mark that Huffington fired back on Tuesday:
While I'm more than willing to accept your claim that, in October 2002, in the privacy of his Senate office, you told John Kerry that you wouldn't vote to give the president the authority to invade Iraq, this only makes your unwillingness to say the same thing publicly all the more cowardly, and your attempt to, in hindsight, make it seem like you did, all the more pathetic. You had the platform, you just lacked the spine.
Dontcha love it? Of course, this raises a potentially pivotal question: if the folks on the left hold each other in such disdain, how did they possibly win the elections in November?
While you ponder that, consider the point made by a Time reader cleverly named Binthar Dundat in response to Klein’s piece at “Swampland”: “We'll let you in on a little secret, Joe (and Hoofie): NOBODY really gives a crap what either of you say, do, eat, s**t, or shave.”
Anybody have anything they’d like to add?
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Which one is the biggest Liberal 'victim'.
February 6, 2007 - 21:34 ET by acaiguanaWhich one is the biggest Liberal 'victim'.
'Don't they have anything better to do than attack poor old me, ...'
They are soooo boring.
ACA
...
Hillary Clinton says: "I want to take those profits."
Their parents must be proud
February 6, 2007 - 21:37 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveTheir parents must be proud.
Gun Safety Tip #8: No matter how responsible he seems, never give your gun to a monkey. (www.imao.us)
Liberal
February 6, 2007 - 21:48 ET by iveseenitallWhat a hoot! Two liberals arguing which one of them is more of an ass than the other. "I am more of an ass than you are." " No you're not." "Yes I am." " No, you're not." " Yes I am, Yes I am, Yes I am!" La La La.
NEVER,NEVER trust a liberal
Kinda like when you guys get
February 6, 2007 - 21:45 ET by balboaKinda like when you guys get into it with tumbler, no?
Are you asking for a trip t
February 6, 2007 - 21:46 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveAre you asking for a trip to the woodshed?
Gun Safety Tip #8: No matter how responsible he seems, never give your gun to a monkey. (www.imao.us)
Quite so, Mean Gene.Neither b
February 6, 2007 - 21:49 ET by BlondeQuite so, Mean Gene.
Neither bal nor Tumbler can help themselves.
It's a liberal tendency.
Self-flaggelation, or somesuch.
Balboa
February 6, 2007 - 21:47 ET by Noel SheppardNo.
Noel
February 6, 2007 - 21:59 ET by balboa:-)
Just had to ask.
B
February 6, 2007 - 22:02 ET by Noel Sheppard:-)
Just had to answer.
you mustn't object
February 6, 2007 - 22:01 ET by tumbler_2007Bal; don't hang your head, Lad. (They love to see a man down. They want him to cry.)
When they do it to tumbler they don't get any satisfaction. What good does it do these guys? All their temperatures rise. So what?
Well, Tumbler.I laugh.I notic
February 6, 2007 - 22:04 ET by BlondeWell, Tumbler.
I laugh.
I notice how many people no longer respond to you.
So hang with Bal.
Nice. You two deserve each other.
(Sorry, bal!).
her smugness responds
February 6, 2007 - 22:06 ET by tumbler_2007Now her smug ass will say she was being stalked. Ho-hum.
Nice, Tumbler.Now your smug s
February 6, 2007 - 22:07 ET by BlondeNice, Tumbler.
Now your smug self will be revealed. Yet again.
You are such a vulgar person.
Took a nap
February 6, 2007 - 23:58 ET by tumbler_2007Ho-hum. Say, where am I ?
Oh, yeah. The crudest poster ever to appear on NewsBusters in a tizzy about my vugarity. Go figure, Signori. Ho-hum . . .
That is a bad deal for Bal.
February 7, 2007 - 10:09 ET by florida_chadThat is a bad deal for Bal.
Another classic line from &
February 6, 2007 - 22:12 ET by kevcadAnother classic line from "Dr. Strangelove" could be used here to describe the cannibalistic dems. I'm not quite sure of the accuracy of words, but it's one of my favorites.
"I think the self-destruct mechanism blew itself up!"
kev
February 6, 2007 - 22:22 ET by Noel SheppardK,
How 'bout this one: "Well, I've been to one worlds fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I ever heard come over a set of earphones." ns
Better strange love of our Am
February 6, 2007 - 22:20 ET by ucBetter strange love of our American history of nation of US starting with scrup a dub dub washboard "Washing ton" and a sidekick for all time gogreenmeant (government) eden and apples representation Adams. Which one was more anti-war: Washington or Adams? There is also poetry in State capital names and their broader state.
Think Washington was more ant
February 6, 2007 - 22:39 ET by ucThink Washington was more anti-war. Separation of Church and State doubting Tom Jefferson is not in the above question. Remember the Tea Party, and name of Washington's homestead. On state names should we start with Marry land and A nap pole is? How do we get the leaders needed to carry our rare history forward? How about Virgin yah and rich mond. Do we have a patch yet for the Hillary dumb dumb virus? Woops, I was hoping I wouldn't find reason to think of her.
"New York is vhere I'd r
February 6, 2007 - 22:25 ET by Del Dolemonte"New York is vhere I'd rather stay,
I get ALLERGIC smelling hay
I just adore a penthouse view,
Dahlink I love you but give me Park Avenue!"
Noel:As a liberal, please all
February 6, 2007 - 22:42 ET by Dave HighNoel:
As a liberal, please allow me to explain what is going on in our circles. There are those among us who knew that Bush’s war on Iraq was based on falsehoods from the very beginning. I am among those people. My brother and father, both liberals, were on a retreat with me while Bush & Co. were making the case for war. Both my father and brother had been scared and shocked by the events of 9/11 and Bush & Company’s subsequent linking of those events to Saddam Hussein. Here then in a nutshell is the schism, you see. Good people differed on whether Bush & Co. were telling the truth at the time. My father’s and brother’s attitudes were, since he is president, he must know more than he is telling us and we must follow his lead. My attitude was, if he had real proof he would put it forward. All his bluster is a smokescreen for a lack of proof and concrete evidence. As it turns out, I was right.
Fast forward to the present. The war, by all accountings, is an unmitigated disaster. It was clearly based on falsehoods, exaggerations, and cherry-picked intelligence. If you opposed the war, or even Bush’s execution of the war, you were (and still are) at best unpatriotic and at worst a terrorist by Bush Administration and other right wing proclamations.
So here’s the paradox. We were lied to, yet with current knowledge, how can a self-respecting liberal admit that he was cowed by all of this? It makes you seem stupid. If you are a liberal media critic or politician, the damage of being an easily deceived buffoon is even worse. Now, if you are a conservative all is well because you still believe the world is flat and Bush is the greatest King since sliced cheese. That perspective really makes me wonder!
Side note: I swear, all of this liberal posturing makes Karl Rove do the happy dance, even without his bud Jeff Gannon/Guckert stroking his toes. Karl is just thrilled that he could help create such political instability through his crafty lies.
Regards, Dave High
Dave
February 6, 2007 - 22:53 ET by Noel SheppardDave,
Well, as a conservative, it's difficult to ascertain how much of the above you wrote with your tongue in your cheek, and how you could have done it with both of your hands patting yourself on the back?
Regardless, in the midst of your certainty concerning how terribly this war is going, do you have any disregard for all of the Democrats that voted for it in October 2002?
After all, either they were stupid enough to be misled by a president that you feel is a moron, or they voted in favor of the war for their own personal political reasons. Whichever, do they also draw your ire and deserve responsibility for the position we're currently in, or like most of your ilk, have you given them all a pass except for Joe Lieberman?
FYI: 29 Democrats in the Senate and 95 in the House voted for the war resolution. In fact, if the Democrats had all voted against it in both chambers, we wouldn't be at war today. ns
Noel,Doesn't this continual r
February 6, 2007 - 22:59 ET by BlondeNoel,
Doesn't this continual replying to the lib left leave you terribly tired?
It is so absolutely boring. Same old same old...."Bush lied"...blah blah blah.
BTW...I still don't get "Caddyshack".
But that's just me.
Blonde
February 6, 2007 - 23:07 ET by Noel SheppardB,
No, discourse is good. However, you really have to wonder why every one of these folks hasn't demanded a recall of the 124 Democrats that voted for the war resolution. Period.
As for Caddyshack, I didn't ask if you liked playing and watching golf? ns
Libs
February 6, 2007 - 23:19 ET by iveseenitallOh, the left. Bush lied--- libs have absolutely no proof of that. No WMD's--- where did the ones used on the Kurds and others go, pray tell? The war is a mess---duh, every war is a mess. And the nonsense about mean old Karl Rove ---right, and he leaked the name Valerie Plame too. Libs make this stuff up as they go along.
NEVER,NEVER trust a liberal
Noel:When did I ever say Bush
February 6, 2007 - 23:08 ET by Dave HighNoel:
When did I ever say Bush was a moron? When he lost his first election in Texas, it was because his opponent labeled him as a carpetbagger from up North, which of course Bush was. After the defeat, Bush vowed "never to be out Texaned again." He then adopted his now famous simple speak, Texas drawl. Moron, no. Deceiver, yes. And undoubtedly from birth and heritage.
Regards, Dave High
Dave
February 6, 2007 - 23:14 ET by Noel SheppardDave,
And the rest of my questions concerning the responsibility of the 124 Congressional Democrats that voted for the war resolution? ns
" ... questions concerni
February 6, 2007 - 23:27 ET by Dave High" ... questions concerning the responsibility of the 124 Congressional Democrats that voted for the war resolution?"
Forgive me, I thought I covered that in my first post. Like my father and brother, they were deceived. As politicians, it is suicide to admit a monumental mistake, even though it was based on multple deceptions from the current administration. For this reason, Karl Rove is doing the happy dance. He has done lasting damage, as your position proves. How could I have been more clear?
Regards, Dave High
Dave H...just because it's la
February 6, 2007 - 23:34 ET by bigtimerDave H...just because it's late, I was just wondering...are you and JMSU related?
Your rhetoric sounds so elitist....so above everyone...(in your dreams by the way)
This inquiring mind wants to know.
BT - He reminds me of the g
February 6, 2007 - 23:38 ET by Free StinkerBT - He reminds me of the guy who goes to the 3rd rate college . . . ;-)
Well now I don't know how to
February 6, 2007 - 23:43 ET by bigtimerWell now I don't know how to quite take that third rate college remark FS....
Something wrong with that?
Rated by elitists themselves IMHO...and it is always the quality of the one that is teaching, no matter what institution it is...
Right?
Not trying to get too serious on ya there FS....:)
LOL!
February 6, 2007 - 23:46 ET by Free StinkerLOL!
Dave
February 6, 2007 - 23:37 ET by Noel SheppardDave,
They were deceived? By whom? They had access to all the same information the president did. All of it. And, if you've listened or read statements by Pete Hoekstra who was responsible for such information in the House, only a handful of Representatives bothered to look at all the information that was available to them.
However, if that's your position, I have no interest in discussing this matter with you further. You posture yourself as someone who knew more than the overwhelming majority of our population, our elected officials, and all espionage agencies around the world while throwing that crap out about Dems being deceived. What a crock.
Adios. ns
Now I don't have to ask...I
February 6, 2007 - 23:54 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveNow I don't have to ask...I'm certain you're high.
Was it suicide when Clinton finally acknowledged he had an affair with Monica Lewinsky after he lied about it for several weeks? Not by a long-shot.
And Karl Rove is responsible for 'fooling' everyone? If he is that powerful why did the Democrats take control again? How did they break his spell?
As for your earlier comment about Bush should've given us concrete proof. That's rich! A lot of information is classified for good reasons. If certain information is made public, it could compromise an entire investigation or operation even before it gets off the ground. A couple months after 9/11, when I was stationed in Germany, we were called in to work on a Saturday to generate our F-16s. No one knew where we were going. We had pretty good ideas of the possible locations but, we were strenuously reminded that we couldn't even tell our spouses what was going on. There is a reason for that. Perhaps you have heard the old WWII saying: "Loose lips sink ships"? Once the wrong person gets a hold of the information, everyone knows. The President couldn't tell us everything he knew (which at the same time was pretty much the same information Congress had). So to say we were deceived by President Bush is pretty tough to sell around here, because the members of congress had the same information available to them as the President had.
Gun Safety Tip #8: No matter how responsible he seems, never give your gun to a monkey. (www.imao.us)
Seems to me Dave High
February 7, 2007 - 07:50 ET by SportPoliticsSeems to me Dave High, you're the one that is still decieved. The democrats cried aloud they shouldn't have to make a decision before an election. Then a total of 6 people from congress who remain unnamed showed up to go over the freely available evidence, since they had all been denouncing Saddam under slick willie's tenure, and had their minds made up since Gulf War 1. WE HAVE THE PUBLIC STATEMENTS, and all the little histrionics from the canaries, and the newscast footages. ( Suddenly we are supposed to believe, Bush had the exact opposite information slick willie and his crew propagated for 8 years solid. Not only that, but Bush removed everyone's memory, then hid his secret intel, then reinstalled their same memory with his lies. ) I guess you're the dupe, Dave High, unfortunately. So now, it's a matter of convenience for those who wish to hate, and not face the facts, and instead put a new false face on them. In closing, one should be aware what the consequences may be if you are of the "hated by the left dictators propped up by the USA ever since Woodstock gathered for sex and drugs", and fail to comply with the UN's direction for looking good to the world. I see the consequences are, some people still love dictators, and somehow know that dictators never have wmd and would never start wars nor would they take 8 months to get rid of incriminating evidence. LOL - Man, you've got to be one slow, lowdown idiot to buy your cookbook.
SP
February 7, 2007 - 10:00 ET by Noel SheppardSP, Exactly. I like Dave, but he is either lying or stupid. Period. It really does come down to that in my view: Any American that actually believes that members of Congress were deceived by the president is an idiot, and isn't worthy of anyone's debate time. You want to impeach the president because of this war? OK. Then, I want a recall for every current member of Congress who authorized the war resolution. And, I want all of the staffs of said legislators to be permanently barred from government. And all of the President's staff as well. And the Vice President's. And the Cabinet. And the State Department. And we should take away everybody's retirement benefits. All of them. Excuse me, but we have Congressional oversight concerning war for a reason. If these people abdicated their responsibility because there was an election coming up in three weeks, then every one who did so should be held responsible. And anybody on the left that doesn't see it this way isn't worth any of our time, for they are just as bad as anti-war people like John Kerry who voted for this resolution because they thought it would help them politically. ns
Noel, Captain Ed over at Capt
February 7, 2007 - 11:21 ET by Del DolemonteNoel, Captain Ed over at Captain's Quarters had an interesting observation Tuesday. John Edwards was on "Meet the Press" this past Sunday, and had this to say:
"So I accept my responsibility. I’m not defending what I did. Because what happened was the information that we got on the intelligence committee was, was relatively consistent with what I was getting from former Clinton administration officials. "
In other words, Edwards is saying that he based his vote not just on what Bush's people were telling him, but what his predecessor's people were telling him as well. So according to Mr. High's "logic", Bill Clinton lied us into the war as well.
Del
February 7, 2007 - 11:40 ET by Noel SheppardDel,
I saw it on Sunday, and thank you for reminding me. This just furthers my point that anyone who believes that 124 Democrats were misled by a Republican president and, as a result, voted for a war that their natural proclivities would make them opposed to is an idiot deserving of absolutely no respect or consideration! Period. ns
Dave, are you high? Gun Sa
February 6, 2007 - 23:10 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveDave, are you high?
Gun Safety Tip #8: No matter how responsible he seems, never give your gun to a monkey. (www.imao.us)
Dr. Love:When I was in Junior
February 6, 2007 - 23:19 ET by Dave HighDr. Love:
When I was in Junior High, I ran for Student Council President. In a field of 6 candidates, including some of the most popular kids in school, I took 60 percent of the vote. A very conservative supporter of mine made a bunch of hallway posters for me, including one that stated "Let's All Get High!" I thought that was pretty funny at the time, but again, it was in Junior High School.
Regards, Dave High
Dave
February 6, 2007 - 23:23 ET by Noel SheppardDave,
Actually, I have it on good information that poster was created by one of your opponents. :-) ns
Bad move on their part, then.
February 6, 2007 - 23:30 ET by Dave HighBad move on their part, then. :-)
Dave High
Dave,I'm not just making a
February 6, 2007 - 23:34 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveDave,
I'm not just making a play on your name...both times I have reponded to you with that same comment, I really meant it. The crap you come up with really has me wondering if you are under the influence of mind altering substances. If you were able to back up your claims with any shreds of evidence (which you obviously don't have) I (and I'm sure others) would be less apt to wonder if you're doing drugs.
Take a page out of Balboa's book. He is Liberal, he makes some outrageous comments but, he works hard to provide supporting evidence. He is one of the few Liberals I have some respect for. He also doesn't take himself so seriously that he can't enjoy a little sophomoric humor.
Gun Safety Tip #8: No matter how responsible he seems, never give your gun to a monkey. (www.imao.us)
Dave High Says: There are t
February 7, 2007 - 10:24 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsDave High Says: There are those among us who knew that Bush’s war on Iraq was based on
falsehoods from the very beginning. I am among those people.
So, you are saying the intelligence, which was the same as from the Clinton administration, was false, and probably falsified by Clinton, and you (and other elites) knew this before the Bush administration posited it.
If true, Bush was deceived by false intelligence from the Clinton administration, with your (among others) complicity.
Seems like you make the case that Bush was purposely deceived by the left to go to war.
Thanks Dave.
D
Want your elected reps to know what you think? Go to http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/, it's real easy.
Exactly right. Here's (Democr
February 7, 2007 - 11:23 ET by Del DolemonteExactly right. Here's (Democrat) John Edwards on "Meet the Press" Sunday:
"So I accept my responsibility. I’m not defending what I did. Because what happened was the information that we got on the intelligence committee was, was relatively consistent with what I was getting from former Clinton administration officials. "
Dave High - you are a glutton for punishment, no?
February 7, 2007 - 10:42 ET by acaiguanaDave High - you are a glutton for punishment, no?
I really think you need to work on that personality disorder. There are great mental health breakthroughs that might assist in your overcoming the 'check my brain' problem you seem to have when confronted with anything outside the closed system of Democrat talking points.
Just a bit of advice.
ACA
...
Hillary Clinton says: "I want to take those profits."
As a lib***l, please allow
February 7, 2007 - 10:50 ET by Jack BauerAs a lib***l, please allow me to explain what is going on in our circles.
As a conservative, please allow me to explain: don't frackin' bother. We DON'T CARE how or why lib***l's brains are miswired.
PS
As this is a family friendly site, I shall no longer be using the expletive deleted in full, and shall instead refer to lib***l's.
Why is the comment quality
February 6, 2007 - 23:10 ET by FairlightWhy is the comment quality on PuffHo always so atrocious... wonder if there's any correlation with its lo-fi content.
Binthar Dundat!
February 6, 2007 - 23:17 ET by bigtimerWhile you ponder that, consider the point made by a Time reader cleverly named Binthar Dundat in response to Klein’s piece at “Swampland”: “We'll let you in on a little secret, Joe (and Hoofie): NOBODY really gives a crap what either of you say, do, eat, s**t, or shave.”
Noel, I wasn't going to post again, really I wasn't, but I saw this and have not stopped laughing....the whole post is a hoot...but Binthar Dundat did it for me....
Still laughing so hard, just want to thank you.
I think...don't know when I'll check out now....uh-oh!
BT
February 6, 2007 - 23:25 ET by Noel SheppardBT,
Glad to make you giggle. That's my goal in life. :-) ns
Right
February 6, 2007 - 23:43 ET by iveseenitallRight on, Bigtimer. Neither Huffington nor Klein know any more about what's happening in Iraq than anyone else ( including me). Only those directly involved know because they are living it every day. So why should we give a damn what these clowns are saying? I sure don't. But I do know that we are in a war for our very existence and sickos like these two aren't helping the cause one bit.
NEVER,NEVER trust a liberal
magnificent, bigtimer
February 7, 2007 - 10:59 ET by tumbler_2007You cop the prize for most A Propos Name on the 'Net
HOOFIE . . . ! ! ! ha ha ! Good one !
and mot ah add:
February 7, 2007 - 11:08 ET by tumbler_2007Let me add that's a cloven hoofie Arianna cavorts around on. --Lol!
Mutual of Omaha presents Dems eating Dems
February 7, 2007 - 07:28 ET by blackrain4xmasAs we watch from the safety of the truck-err, monitors-we can see clearly how the Moonbattus Denialus are confronted with the reality of having been successfully pandered by their own leaders. The Moonbattus Denialus are instinctually prevented from recognizing harsh and unpleasant realities such as having been pandered. Another example is their death's-embrace of global warming claims presented in the coldest January and February the nation has seen in almost 10yrs. There are innumerable other examples, but the cold reality of having chosen leaders without backbone, who will not impeach, end a war, or even end the culture of corruption on The Hill is simply too much reality for the average moonbattus to accept. When faced with such conflicts between reality and interests, the lemming-like herds break their follow-the-leader bonds and lash out at any and all. This is demonstrated in WaPo opeds from "military analysts", non-binding resolutions that fail to bind a single voter's support, and on a larger scale the refusal to even vote on whether or not to cut funding and end the war in Iraq. On the micro level, pack leaders who cannot bear the concept of having been pandered, misled, or wrong will often lash out at each other. Take for example the Michael Moore pack which on election night demanded of their leaders to either put up or shut up. Another example would the simplest ravings on DU or KOS. In today's case, we can see what is effectively two Moonbattus Denialus bitches in heat, flusterd and pumped up by years of promises but abandoned by those mates that had made the promises to get into office. Now, they must turn on each other in their Black Widow-like display of mating dances. Notice how-
-WAIT! Oh no! The leaders are back, and they're making promises again. What will the moonbats do? Will they follow them over the cliff again, or will they seek out their religious messiah:
Ralph Nader