>>But why would you argue that Bush is turning us into what he's combating, Islamic Jihadists, if you didn't believe it?
>
>In the definitions discussed here, I guess I can be called a liberal.
>
>What I see in the world today, and then compare it to the world I saw, say, thirty years ago, I see more social violence now. Then, I saw world that praised the US, now I see a world that downs the US. Then, opportunity was a description of the US, now the term is out-sourcing and off-shoring. Yes, it does disturb me.
>
>But, enough of my ranting. All-in-all, I am a gentle guy. I do not hate the government, or anyone for the matter. As you may or may not have observed, I rarely evolve myself in any of these debates. And, generally, when I do, it usually has a comical point. I am sorry if I offend you, or anyone else.

Again, all very touching.

But that doesn't answer my question, does it?

I asked why you would put forward an argument that you didn't agree with.

You note that you're a liberal and that all sorts of things about America today disturb you.

Is that an excuse to make things up?

Is it possible that you're too emotionally involved in these topics to think rationally?