Part of the conditioning process practiced on citizens starts with false debates. "Against the war, for the troops" is one of the slogans adapted by the left thru conditioning by conditioning them to support the killing of brown people while at the same time you're saying you are against the way the war was waged. It's idiotic. The war is wrong. The troops are wrong for going. The left and the right are supporting imperialism. And I'm much more concerned about the women and children in Iraq than the troops who are killing and terrorizing them.

Oh yeah, for real news got to:

http://mysite.verizon.net/res7dhyg/

When Kerry was beginning that sentence, I thought for sure what he was going to say was "the global SMELL test," because he said the word twice:
"But if and when you do it, Jim, you have to do it in a way that passes the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons."

It doesn't make sense the way he works the phrase -- why would "your countrymen" be involved in a "global test"?

The GOP must have a hundred right-wing English majors down there picking apart every phrase and then torturing them.

Our country is part of the globe. But you're right, it came out funny, he should have just said something like "you have to be able to prove to your countrymen, your people, and the rest of the world that...." Too bad they twist such an honest and good idea he was trying to get across (honesty/transparency/making good judgments). DW said it though, stupid logic, but somehow understandable. Wouldn't it be so nice if in Bush's closing statements tomorrow night he says "John...America, I woke up this morning and looked myself in the mirror and realized something, John Kerry should be the next president of the United States. He's got the vision and the fortitude to take this country and the world in the right direction. It's been a fun ride, but this is my stop. I'm dropping out of the race for presidency." Not that I'm the hugest John Kerry fan ever, but I definitly think he's the man for the job (and yes, I would probalby be saying that about just about anyone who had a reasonable chance against Bush at this point).

"Global" was a bad choice of words that took the emphasis off Kerry's chief talking point: You have to be honest and transparent in justifying your actions in order to get both domestic and world opinion on your side. I agree: "Smell test" would have been much more effective! Senators tend to use a lot of MBA-speak these days, like "global" when they mean something like "comprehensive"--which I thought was what Kerry meant. You have to be honest with everybody. But the GOP jumped on another meaning of the word--"worldwide"--and tried to make Kerry out to be a namby-pamby foreign policy globalist who will wake the black helicopters in to start dragging our brave soldiers off to the World Court. There's a name for this kind of equivocation in argument: acyrologia. The classic example: "My opponent's wife is an admitted thespian!" It plays to a sense that the public is unsophisticated and will confuse "thespian" with "lesbian." Really, the global GOP strategy is based on this notion that the American electorate is stoopid. It invites the public to congratulate itself on its own lack of sophistication by attacking Kerry's passion for "nuance" and contrasting it with the President's devotion to "principle" and "steadfastness." These are all red herrings, of course.