<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for Daniel DiRito</title><link>http://disqus.com/people/2096e701cd6c3bb218169ec144f44998/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2008 00:49:50 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Iowa Caucus: The Democrats</title><link>http://captainsquarters.disqus.com/iowa_caucus_the_democrats/#comment-58579</link><description>To see a tongue-in-cheek review of the Iowa primary in pictures...link here:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.thoughttheater.com/2008/01/presidential_politics_picture_prognostications.php" rel="nofollow"&gt;www.thoughttheater.com&lt;/a&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Daniel DiRito</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2008 00:49:50 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Bloggers Code Of Conduct: Thanks, But No Thanks</title><link>http://webomatica.disqus.com/bloggers_code_of_conduct_thanks_but_no_thanks/#comment-1751182</link><description>Where is my Easter Bonnet?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;While some may see the blogosphere and the behavior of its participants as a new phenomenon, it isn't difficult to find an appropriate predecessor model. That model is found on the streets of any metropolitan area and it is called traffic and the prevalence of road rudeness...or in its extreme...road rage.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Granted, personal attacks and snark on the internet are not likely to lead to fatalities, but if computers had wheels, it certainly would.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The problem on the highway or the internet isn't going to be resolved through a badge system. Did anyone attend Easter mass yesterday and witness the value of symbols...no not the crucifix behind the altar or the statue at the entrance; I'm talking about the pretty new Easter outfits...complete with bonnets and bow ties. These are the outfits worn by the same people who also attend Christmas mass every year without fail...and then get into their shiny clean vehicle and race out of the parking lot without ever yielding to the old woman walking to her car that is parked in the back row because she forgot that it was Easter Sunday and foolishly arrived at the same time she does each and every Sunday.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Read more on the relationship between blog civility and Easter Bonnets...here:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.thoughttheater.com/2007/04/web_civility_and_easter_bonnets.php" rel="nofollow"&gt;www.thoughttheater.com&lt;/a&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Daniel DiRito</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2007 19:32:17 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Head-in-the-Sand Liberals</title><link>http://bennettblog.disqus.com/head_in_the_sand_liberals/#comment-2134705</link><description>Harris is correct to identify the threat posed by religious extremism. He did so with his book and he does so again in this article. The outstanding question is how to address these threats. Racial prejudice may not be perfectly analogous, but I think it offers some insight into the perils of unbridled extremist ideologies on both sides of a conflict. Our own Civil War points out the potential for ideology to lead to violent conflict. How we address religious extremism may well demonstrate what we did or didnt learn from our own experience. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;However, identifying the threat and crafting the solution are two distinct endeavors. Harris clearly identifies the threat but seems more inclined to then pivot and blame liberalism for our inability to confront the issue rather that offer any reasoned solutions. By acknowledging that liberalism is "generally reasonable and tolerant of diversity" and at the same time blaming it for not combating religious literalism is incongruent logic. In reality, liberalism clearly understands the dangers of religious literalism which is exactly why it promotes reasonability and tolerance. Further, that understanding is why liberals believe that the war in Iraq and the war on terror will ultimately require political solutions rather than an ever expanding military strategy.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;As world population and a world economy continue to expand, our abilities to prevent the inherent racial, cultural, and religious clashes that come with proximity will become more challenging. Succumbing to the absolutism that accompanies any us/them equation is certain to trigger accelerated conflict. It is essential we refrain from adopting a broad brush strokes mentality. A reactionary strategy is nothing more than the fuel for escalation. In the end, it is individuals who define the differences upon which conflict is predicatedwhether they be Islamist, Liberal, or otherwise. It will be the politics of leadership that will eventually bridge the divide.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Read more here:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.thoughttheater.com/2006/09/sam_harris_on_liberalism_relig.php" rel="nofollow"&gt;www.thoughttheater.com&lt;/a&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Daniel DiRito</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2006 21:52:05 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Bush Job Approval At 44%</title><link>http://sayanything.disqus.com/bush_job_approval_at_44/#comment-18930192</link><description>This recent polling data tells me that voters have a clear perspective on the war in Iraq...perhaps more cogent than either Party. They feel it is being handled poorly, they know what a civil war looks like, they believe Congress has failed to do its part in guiding and overseeing the executive branch, and they realize that the notion of exporting democracy to the Middle East is a Bush Doctrine that fails to recognize the realities in the region. Finally, they believe that Middle East stability is important and that a withdrawal that leaves Iraq in chaos may well be detrimental to the United States.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;That, my friends, is one spot on analysis and suggests that voters have discerned fact from fiction with an impressive demonstration of acuity. Perhaps both parties will someday learn that the truth is, in the final analysis, the most powerful campaign strategy available. Don't hold your breath.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Read more here:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&amp;quot;http://www.thoughttheater.com/2006/09/both_parties_miss_mark_poll_sh.php&amp;quot; rel=&amp;quot;nofollow&amp;quot; rel="nofollow"&gt;www.thoughttheater.com&lt;/a&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Daniel DiRito</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2006 11:34:22 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: House Passes Voter ID Law</title><link>http://sayanything.disqus.com/house_passes_voter_id_law/#comment-18930887</link><description>The primary problem I have with this voter ID legislation is the fact that it purports to be intended to prevent voter fraud, yet it completely ignores the voter paper trail issue. Unfortunately, that leads me to conclude that those supporting this voter ID bill are simply pushing legislation that they feel would be beneficial to Republican candidates on two fronts. One, it may suppress Democratic voter turnout and it is also being spun as a means to &amp;quot;strengthen border security and crack down on illegal immigration&amp;quot;...a position the GOP feels will benefit them in November.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Here's my problem. There is little doubt that the GOP has not been motivated to provide effective border security or the means to prevent employers from hiring illegal immigrants. The failure to enact and enforce measures and methods to combat illegal immigration has been a concession to the business community, which has been the beneficiary of hard working, low wage employees. The system in place for employers to verify employee eligibility to work in the U.S. is a virtual joke and it is so by choice...which makes the current voter ID legislation all the more disingenuous and wholly political.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Sadly, it appears that the GOP doesn't see any advantage to including these paper trail provisions. It is situations of this nature that lead to voter cynicism in their elected officials as well as the entire political process. Ironically, while we are in the process of exporting democracy to other regions of the world, we have U.S. politicians that prefer to manipulate our democracy for partisan advantage. This and other inconsistencies in the application of democracy simply undermine the potential for other nations to believe that the United States is actually an agent for democratic principles.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Read more here:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&amp;quot;http://www.thoughttheater.com/2006/09/house_takes_up_voter_ids_not_v.php&amp;quot; rel=&amp;quot;nofollow&amp;quot; rel="nofollow"&gt;www.thoughttheater.com&lt;/a&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Daniel DiRito</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 21 Sep 2006 13:39:39 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: More Evidence of a GOP Comeback</title><link>http://sayanything.disqus.com/more_evidence_of_a_gop_comeback/#comment-18942279</link><description>This recent polling data tells me that voters have a clear perspective on the war in Iraq...perhaps more cogent than either Party. They feel it is being handled poorly, they know what a civil war looks like, they believe Congress has failed to do its part in guiding and overseeing the executive branch, and they realize that the notion of exporting democracy to the Middle East is a Bush Doctrine that fails to recognize the realities in the region. Finally, they believe that Middle East stability is important and that a withdrawal that leaves Iraq in chaos may well be detrimental to the United States.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;That, my friends, is one spot on analysis and suggests that voters have discerned fact from fiction with an impressive demonstration of acuity. Perhaps both parties will someday learn that the truth is, in the final analysis, the most powerful campaign strategy available. Don't hold your breath.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Read more here:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&amp;quot;http://www.thoughttheater.com/2006/09/both_parties_miss_mark_poll_sh.php&amp;quot; rel=&amp;quot;nofollow&amp;quot; rel="nofollow"&gt;www.thoughttheater.com&lt;/a&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Daniel DiRito</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2006 10:17:40 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>