No. At least I don't think so. It was a serious movie

Someone throws trash on the ground and the camera pans over to the Indian who has a tear going down his cheek. "The Simpsons" made fun of it in one of their episodes.

Regardless, I'm going OT.

While I'm here I want to share an opion piece that was in the NYT yesterday that really struck me as profound.


THE REST... if you're interested.

I just think he does a good job of not asserting any opinion, but rather asks legitmate questions about the future... and kinda exposes how we're all working "without a net".

Probably because it was before you were born.

It wasn't a movie, it was a public service ad on littering. 

Iron Eyes Cody is the "crying indian"......

http://www.aef.com/exhibits/social_responsibility/ad_council/2278

Well, I don't see how the public can be informed about why we are really in Iraq and at the same time be kept in the dark about how we got there. I don't think we lack the "resources" to do both, and I also think it is critically important to hold our elected leaders accountable if we want our representative democracy to function as intended.

I don't buy the argument that we CAN'T leave Iraq because of the oil. Oil is a commodity. Oil-producing nations need to sell their commodity and we are a big customer. It's a matter of who controls the oil and profits the most from it. IMO our people in uniform are dying in Iraq not for our vital national interests but for the interests of BIG OIL and for the grandiose ambitions of PNAC neocons who belive we can and should remake the political landscape of the Middle East through the application of unchallengable US military power.

If we spent as many taxpayer dollars on energy conservation and alternative fuels as we're spending in Iraq we'd be well on our way to ending our dependence on Middle East oil.

Dennis Kucinich has been saying it for years. So has Ron Paul, but the political and mainstream media establishments have marginalized them to such a degree that they may as well be talking to a brick wall. These questions asked by Ron Paul before we invaded Iraq should have been the subject of vigorous debate on the House floor, but were essentially ignored.

Patton, I'm not sure exactly where you stand on the issues of staying in Iraq and publicly acknowledging why. You state that we CAN'T leave (implying we SHOULDN'T leave) because of national security interests related to oil, while expressing disgust at our government officials for not admitting it's about the oil. What do you think such an admission would do for what little support remains for continuing to sacrifice lives and treasure in Iraq? What would be the diplomatic impact of an official policy of war for oil? If you really think we NEED to stay in Iraq for the oil, then you also need to recognize the political reality that the current official rationale (defeating terrorism and spreading democracy) have to be maintained.

It would be interesting to see what would happen if our government leaders officially stated we are in Iraq for the oil. My guess is it would hasten our departure.

Couldn't agree more. I guess I should pay attention and find out what you and C4P are arguing about.

And thanks for that other info. About the commercial.


Since the blame game only creates further confusion and division here at home, and asking for ANYONE to actually hold accountability is a pipe dream, in my opinion. No, they'll never win any argument about blame, but they don't have to. They just have to keep us all VER confused for 15 years and then quetly die... or let us forget.

I'm with Patton. I'm more concerned with the guy that gets stuck with the check at the end of the dinner and how they're going to pay it... not the guy that set up the invitations.


I'd like to continue, but I have to go. Tomorrow I'll finish.

Nothing would make me happier then to imprison ANYYONE responcible for what's happened... but there simply isn't enough support among the public, too many influential charecters in Congress to prevent action and simply not enough knowledge among the people involved.

Again, it's a pipe dream, at it hurts me to say this and realize how disgusting our government has become... but it's true. Any attempt at acton will be stalled for decades and all we'll have done is wasted time, money and credibility.


Don't play me to be the villain here. I'm not.

I'm just a realist... or a pessimist.

But nowadays it's hard to know the difference anymore.

I disagree with your assessment, especially the part about credibility. I believe our government has lost credibility with a large percentage of Americans and also with most of the world. As long as our foreign policy is based on a false premise we cannot regain our credibility OR hope to formulate a foreign policy that serves our national interests and achieves the best possible outcome in Iraq.

We are not faced with a choice of exposing past misdeeds or working on the problems of the present. The two are inextricably linked. Our system of government is damaged. It needs repair. Making a conscious decision to ignore how the damage was done is not the way to solve the resultant problems or to ensure a more functional government going forward. Quite the opposite. Failure to expose the machinations that took us into Iraq is tacit approval that solidifies the damage.

I am less interested in punishing the perpetrators than fixing the damage. The latter is imperative, while the former is a natural consequence of doing what is necessary. You say there isn't enough public support. I think you're putting the cart before the horse. Shed light on the situation, and a public that has been kept in the dark will be supportive.

I didn't intend to play you as the villain. The villains (in the context of our dysfunctional government) are in Washington DC. I apologize for the sarcasm I directed at you, but I really think there is some truth in the concept that we get the government we deserve. When most citizens don't make an effort to inform themselves or participate and when intelligent, informed citizens tacitly approve gross misconduct and/or incompetence in their government, they have abdicated their civic duties much as Congress abdicated their Constitutional mandate in matters of war.

America became the greatest country in the world because of Founders who prevailed against great odds and because of a can-do attitude and hard work by people who never lost sight of our highest ideals. As a nation we have overcome problems much greater than the ones we now face. We must not let our own pessimism be a major obstacle to doing what is required of our generation.

The only solution is to elect a government that doesn't espouse foreign intervention at every turn. Aside from Ron Paul, and among the leading candidates, Obama is the closest I can see to a truely decent foreign policy strategy. If I can't have Ron Paul, I'll vote for Obama.

But more and more this election is between Clinton and Guiliani. Obama just overtook Clinton in a recent poll, and THAT'S reassuring... but it's a pitance.

My point is that while we (partly) deserve the government we elect, the guy we choose usually isn't the best candidate... just not the worst.


Again, the otherside just has to confuse everyone enough to make them not care. Just look at the Valery Plame thing. The ex-White House Press Secretary is coming out with a book that exposes some very dirty things that went on during that period in time... but no one cares anymore. The MSM destroyed that story by over-reporting on it and basically confusing everyone.

I agree that FIXING the problem is more important than FINDING OUT who did what wrong, hence my (admittidly poor) metaphor about who has to take care of the "bill" after the dinner.

I want to fix things and I want to elect a person who will fix it... but this gets harder and harder each year. Plus, I don't discuss politics except here because NO ONE my age could care less, so again... I'm at an impasse.


I completely agree that a more educated, or at the least, a more involved public could change the face of this country... but if you have ideas on how to motivate the public to care, I'd love to hear them... cause I'm out.


This isn't the 40's anymore.

This country has an angry, resentful and lazy public who would sooner complain about what's wrong than do anything to change it. I'm glad I found IAP a few years ago cause it's really opened up my eyes to all the issues in this country and has motivated me to act.

I registered to vote, I'm motivated to elect a certain candidate and I want to actually use my vote to change things.

Cogratulations, that's 1 down.

Only 300,000,000+ to go.

Let me be clear about what I meant when I wrote "If you really think we NEED to stay in Iraq for the oil, then you also need to recognize the political reality that the current official rationale (defeating terrorism and spreading democracy) have to be maintained."

I do not for one moment favor perpetuating the false rationale.

I fully agree with you that our nation needs the truth and that our soldiers deserve the truth.

I've been advocating shedding light on the truth throughout this thread -- the WHOLE truth. My thought was that the TRUTH would hasten our departure rather than keep us there.

Who knows -- maybe if the American people could agree on what the truth IS we can find sufficient common ground and national will to do what is necessary to achieve the best possible result in Iraq AND extricate our soldiers from that "most inhospitable region to a democratic western Christian superpower."