Left this out of my last post - but also from that dinner discussion last night:
We also discussed covered the anti-war protests up in New York. The anti-war people in the group repeated the mantra that it was a unilateral war, and when I pointed out that it wasn't unilateral, their response was that the only countries that supported us were small countries that didn't really merit being called full partners. If my memory serves me right, I seem to remember that Glenn Reynolds debunked that claim last year. They also repeated the claim that our partners were coerced and forced into fighting with us. When I pointed out that evidence was found recently which implicated government officials from anti-war countries (such as France) with receiving bribes from Iraq's oil-for-food program, they hadn't even heard of it, and asked where I had heard it (The Wall Street Journal). These people all read and swear by The New York Times. Is the New York Times so irresponsible that they would not have covered this major story? No wonder I don't miss reading it.