TK,

First let me apologize for responding once again to your moronic diatribe, but some days I just get a bit anxious and cannot help myself.

It might be interesting if you ever posted something original instead of your continual cut-and-paste jobs, but then you'd have to have an original thought, and that hasn't been forthcoming. Although I normally refrain from taking pokes at individuals here, man, you just seem to scream for it.

Actually, I agree slightly with the writer of your cut-and-paste article. The Democratic party has been positively insipid in its leadership for more years than I care to recount. I almost hate being associated with it, having voted for so many of its candidates, particularly these past 20 years. I support those candidates as often as not simply because they are the only viable alternative to the way-too-often reprehensible GOP candidate. So often, it comes down to the lesser evil. What a way to run a country - we have the best government PAC and corporate money can buy.

So again this year, I'll go forth to vote, and encourage others to vote, not so much for, but particularly to vote against Bush and the Republican party.

Here's why:

1. Religious zelotry. The Christian Right is neither. I've no use for whackos of any religion (Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Pagan, you name it), and am personally offended by their attempts to take over government, just as I'm offended to see some Republicans candidates pander to them.

2. The national interest includes everyone, not just the rich. Playing to the crowd with $ certainly makes cents (pun intended), but it doesn't represent the national interest, the public interest, or statesmanship.

3. Abandonment of fiscal conservatism by simultaneously embracing tax cuts and federal deficits.

4. Degrading and destroying the environment for profit and pleasure. It's almost understandable to destroy it for profit, but when there's no profit, like logging the Tongass, squeezing a non-strategic amount of oil out of ANWR, etc. makes it look like Bush and the Republicans gleefully destroy the planet for kicks. Not to mention the anti-salmon stuff he's responsible for here on the home front.

5. The screwed up response to 9/11. Invading Afghanistan was warranted to deal with the Taliban and OBL, but he was 2 months late and one prime suspect short after 2 years and 10 months. Iraq was only one of dozens of brutal dictators that might be dealt with, but Bush should have remained focused on higher priorities. And I've more respect for leaders who put their blood on the line than I do for chickenhawks. To this day, Bush avoids any interest in the root cause of terrorism intent toward the U.S. Consequently, I can only assume he's more interested in killing non-combatant Iraqis than finding and killing actual terrorists. That's the behavior of a moron, not a world leader.

6. The goofy sh!t, like supporting constitutional amendments prohibiting abortion, flag burning, and gay marriage. These aren't issues that even rise to the level of national interest, just contradict the constitution and founders' intent to protect personal freedoms, and finally, are just pandering to knotheads who hardly seem worthy of being in a conservative constituency.

I'm sure there are others, but this is a sampling. I'd like to see a conservative candidate who supports the Constitution, providing for the common defense (not the campaign donating military/industrial complex), and the essential national infrastructure of transportation, communications, education, and managing public land, natural resources, water, and air. But that would be wishful thinking, wouldn't it, kind of like finding that Democrat with a brain, huh?

BTW - in order to list a species under the ESA, there has to be a population. If they are already extinct, they are not elegible for listing.

less sincerely than usual,

Salmo g.