Political discussion and ranting, premised upon the fact that even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
Aaron,Very good question. Alas, I haven't a clue as to the answer.
Sorry, premature submittal there.That was from me (Paul Craddick)
A fair response.Here's a bit of the obvious from an editorial in today's Washington Post:Darfur shows that dedicated advocacy can move democracies to denounce atrocities and provide generous humanitarian help. What the earnest advocacy rarely does is propel the powerful to stop the killing. For that to happen, righteous clamor must reach a high enough pitch that politicians in democratic states are persuaded to do a difficult thing: take domestic political risks in pursuit of polices that do not serve their immediate interests, that can be financially costly and that provide no clear-cut exit strategies.In today's America, we apparently only engage in discretionary, costly overseas military adventures with no apparent exit strategy if the President thinks it will help his chances for reelection.