For those of you who read this blog and don't read Pharyngula, (there must be a few!), I found this video to be too compelling to stop wathcing, and very powerful and moving in its message.
There really is a lot at stake in the coming election, but I have less and less hope as each week goes by.
Wow! And here all I've been worrying about is that McCain would lead us into a climate catastrophe. I don't get it. Democrats have allowed the Republicans to define them for years and years. Democrats are for tax and spend. Soft on defense. Soft on terrorism. Soft on family values. Republicans tell us so over and over. Elect a Democrat and you will have empty pockets; Iraqi terrorists will be abducting your children on their way to soccer practice. Any idiot can compare the the Clinton years to those of Bush. During which administration did the American people enjoy the highest degree of peace and prosperity? If the Democratic party does not dispell the myths, we are all doomed. Literally.
That what happens to democracy when there is no responsible mainstream media to inform the voter.
For the rest of us, there is DemocracyNow!
Awesome video... accept for the part where Ritter says that the Bush administration has "built a new generation of nuclear weapons..." This isn't even close to being true. There have been no new nuclear weapons designs put into the stock-pile since the Reagan administration. However, the sentiment in the video is right on. I bring this up because it is important to fight these idiots with clear facts. You can't fight misinformation and lies with more of the same.
I don't know if it is not true, but I do know that "not even close" is not really fair. Bush requested and received the funding for new nukes a couple of years ago, and I recall reports of nuclear "bunker busters" being considered for use in Iran, which I think are post-cold war devices.
Scott Ritter is a very knowledgable person in these issues, and comes from a very conservative RW background, I would take what he says very seriously.
I'm sure we could verify this statement at GlobalSecurity.org or a similar research organization's site, but I don't have the time to dig for it...
Since I agree with the sentiment I really hate to disagree on semantics, but it is certainly fair to say that he is "not even close". There hasn't been a newly designed nuclear weapon placed in the stockpile since the W88. Several years ago there was some political hubbub about "usable" nuclear weapons, but it was just talk--a nonsensical discussion really. Smart or not, his statement is wrong, and my point is that we can't afford to be imprecise when the stakes are this high. All he would have to do is change his statement to "The Bush administration and the neocons would like to have..." in place of "The Bush administration has built..."