Reply #74: Actually I have blood on my hands for failing to stop George W. Bush.

[NNadir]

The question is not one of platitudes but of results.

I have failed in my opposition to the war, because I have failed to counter the prominent misrepresentations of certain politicians.

Kucinich would not have defeated George W. Bush. It would have been the real first cakewalk of the Bush presidency - and thus the effect would have been to have made George W. Bush stronger and therefore peace work weaker.

One of these politicians - the right wing Repuke apologist - Ralph Nader, was also very popular in so called "progressive" circles. He gave lip service to being against war, but the war came, after which he faded out of view. In the meantime he offered continuous Republican propaganda, spending most of his time bashing Democrats.

My congressman is a member of the House of Representatives and he is not prominent, though he is competent and a Democrat. He is Rush Holt. I note that there are 435 members of congress and the number of people who can name them all is rather small, maybe smaller than the congress itself.

I regret that you have failed to understand the nature of a logical fallacy and what constitutes a red herring and/or a straw man argument. I really didn't expect that you would be able to do so. I don't think I can really help you with this, since the confusion persists.

You are, of course, entirely free to go on making representations about the merits of Dennis Kucinich. He has, apparently, been successful in marrying a physically attractive woman. This is some success, I guess, although it is as irrelevant to the ultimate success of our country in maintaining respectable world citizenry as Kevin Federline's marriage to Brittany Spears..

I would have rather Kucinich had success in stopping the war than with finding yet another wife, but he, like you and like I, was ineffective at doing so. I find, however, your claim that anyone who doesn't support Dennis Kucinich has "blood on his hands" morally and intellectually appalling. I was at the two large anti-war demonstrations in New York with hundreds of thousands of other people, not many of whom were Dennis Kucinich. In fact, in the first demonstration, in freezing weather, the only Presidential candidate who had people working the crowd that I recall was Howard Dean. At that point, few people in the world had heard of Dr. Dean. All I knew about him at the time was that he was against the war in Iraq.

I don't recall lots of speeches at either protest about Dennis Kucinich; in fact I don't recall seeing a single thing about Dennis Kucinich at either protest. Dennis Kucinich is NOT god; nor is he the center or focus of the anti-war movement, though he may wish to represent himself as much. The claim that support for Dennis Kucinich = anti-war sentiment is muddled thinking of the type I associate with Kucinich and his supporters.