This has to be one of the more passionately fought over web sites I have found. In light of that fact I was thinking we could gain a consensus on one issue at least, the history of this country as it pertains to debate. This is a country that thrives on debate. You all have made that clear on multiple levels. You have argued at great length both for and against our ongoing Iraqi war or war on terra as the President calls it. This has been the case with most of the wars this country has engaged in over the centuries.

If our forefathers were to return today they might be surprised to find that we are entwined in a war that was of our own making, at least of our governments own making. However, I wonder what they would think of the ongoing debate. There is little that can be said in support of this or any other military action in which the people are so overwhelmingly opposed. But, would they still be warmed to the heart that even through the divisiveness there is debate. That is the real history of this country. The freedoms left behind for the generations of Americans to come are being well served here today. If my history serves me correctly, only a small portion of those alive at the time of the signing of the Declaration of Independence wanted it signed. A good deal of the debate then was done in private, under the camouflage of darkness, inside churches and in the homes of those involved, hidden away from prying eyes if their contemporaries. Perhaps it was with this memory fresh in mind that Freedom of the Press was primary on the list of freedoms in the Bill of Rights, itself a hotly contested and debated feature of our U.S. Constitution. Could they have envisioned the internet? Could they have even speculated about the ability to transfer large bits of information anywhere on the planet with the freedom and stealth that we enjoy today? I assert that this was not their intention, but would they ever be proud that we have taken advantage of such an incredible machine for the use of expanding our once rural habitations into a colossal nationwide community. Would you hear George Washington exclaim, "I can not email a lie" or would Franklin find it as exhilarating as electricity? Surely they would stand in awe of the way in which we give support and criticism to our elected officials.

During WWII there existed a contingent of Senators and Congressmen who believed Hitler was a threat, but did not desire the trappings of war. Were they unpatriotic? No, they were officials who held tight the view that the seas would forever protect America. Once involved in the war did the opposition stop? Not really, it just became more directed at the day to day running of the war. However without the ability to braodcast realtime events to the American people it was not given the weight it should have been given. Had they the ability to receive daily and hourly reports from the field they may well have jumped up as Harry Reed and others have to protest the handling of particularly embarrassing segments of the war as we do today in the aftermath of Abu Grab and the Guantanamo fiasco. During Vietnam the people had a more united position about that war. Today we might be headed toward just such a uniting of heart, but without the ability to debate, we could never gain the support for our ideas, regardless of which side of the issue you fall, or want to stand.

Ease and Grace in the line of fire. (If Insane American can have a tag line, why can't I)