"Nate Perkins" wrote in message

Yes, there are limits on free speech, especially involving public safety
and libel. Of course that's not what we are talking about.

Of course, that is EXACTY what I was talking about.

We are
talking about whether or not the political opposition has the right (or
duty) to point out the failings of the current leadership.

Right on ...

I believe
they do. We are talking about whether the process of democratic dissent
provides aid to the enemy. I believe it does not.

Do you not think that "will" can also be gauged from the amount of
ostensible dissent, particularly when the dissent is trumpeted as an agenda
by some in the news media"?

What do you think of Tedddy boy calling for a firm pullout date, even
knowing that the terroist would benefit immensely from that knowledge? While
it is no more than political posturing in his case, it shows a reckless
disregard for those in harm's way, IMO. Ask the surviving POW's from RVN
what effects the likes of Jane Fonda had on their existence as prisoners.

But for all its many faults, it's still part
of the system of (what used to be and ought to be) essential checks and
balances.

While I can't disagree, and that is the ideal However, I am afraid that may
be rapidly disappearing. What makes me say that is my perspective of
approximately 50 year of seeing how narrow the field has become in all forms
of media here where I live. From a three newspaper town one newspaper in a
city of 4 million, from numerous radio stations to most being owned by one
company.