Worried By Obama's Picks? Support Anti-War Groups

posted by John Nichols on 11/28/2008 @ 2:35pm

Email
Print
Share
- Buzzflash
- del.icio.us
- Digg
- Facebook
- Mixx it!
- Reddit
What is this?
Take Action
Comments (43)

Subscribe Now

Tens of millions of Americans will prayed for peace as they celebrated Thanksgiving Day, and they will do so many more times during the coming Holiday Season.

Even non-believers will acknowledge that prayer can be powerful – providing measures of solace, insight and inspiration.

But prayer is made meaningful when it is linked to action.

So how do we act upon a prayer for peace?

By acknowledging that, despite all the spin from the Bush administration and its Republican allies and the acquiescence of too many of members of the Democratic opposition, America remains mired in a pair of undeclared wars that continue to cost previous lives of young Americans soldiers and innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Fantasists will claim that the occupation of Iraq has become less horrific, yet the truth is that the death and destruction is merely less reported. Fifteen American soldiers have been killed so far this month. Thirty-three American soldiers have been severely wounded in recent weeks. For Iraqis, the toll is much higher: Hundreds dead, thousands of wounded each and every month. No wonder polling suggests that the one thing uniting Iraqis is a desire for the U.S. to withdraw its troops from that country.

It is now just as bad in Afghanistan, where circumstances have grown dramatically worse. The American death for the year has risen to more than 150 – three times the number for the entire first year of the occupation. Soldiers are being wounded at a rate that is becoming competitive with Iraq. And civilians are being killed and maimed in such numbers by U.S. bombing raids that Afghan President Hamid Karzai, Washington's man in Kabul, warns that battle for the hearts and minds of the Afghan people is being lost. This week, Karzai met with a United Nations Security Council to demand a timeline for the end of the foreign military intervention in his country.

The occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan are not "good wars."

They are neither moral nor responsible.

And they are certainly not necessary.

These military misadventures are in conflict with any sincere prayer for peace.

So how do we act upon a prayer for peace?

By supporting efforts to end the occupations.

The biggest lie of the last few years has been the claim that there is not a viable peace movement in this country. In fact, every state and many communities across the country have peace and justice networks that are doing great work. (You'll find a great master list of organizations on the United for Peace and Justice website.)

From Washington state's Port Townsend Peace Movement to Veteran for Peace Chapter 1 in Walpole, Maine, there are dozens of local, regional and state groups that need support. The Wisconsin Network for Peace and Justice is one worthy recipient of Holiday season donations. The group has been highlighting and supporting nonviolent activism for peace by groups in Iraq, educating Wisconsinites about the fact that the Iraqi people want foreign military forces withdrawn from their country. Online donations can be made at www.wnpj.org.

Nationally, consider Peace Action, which says: "At Peace Action we take concrete steps to promote and more peaceful and just world by building a community of engaged and active citizens. We never forget that it's not the policy, but the people whose lives are at stake that matter most.

"Your money will be use to press for an end to the US occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. We're reaching out to the millions of Obama supporters who voted for real progressive change to push for reductions in runaway military spending and direct that money to fund human needs."

It is easy to donate online to Peace Action at: www.peace-action.org.

Comments (43)

I'm all for peace, let's start by getting our troops out of Iraq, seeing as they shouldn't have been there in the first place. All this talk about victory in Iraq, there will never be victory in Iraq, like there was no victory in Vietnam....it's just a word that Bush and McCain have used for so long, it is just a word with no meaning anymore!!! Why do we have to be so 'victorious" in everything related to war, we don't have to "win" everything, and in Iraq even when we do leave we will not have won. We were not asked for help in that country, Bush took it upon himself to just go in there against most Americans and the rest of the world. Every excuse was made...Saddam was a bad man...Saddam gassed his own people and the infamous WMD's...and not a thing to do with 911 and to this day Bush and the rest of the administration will still not admit it was a mistake. Now, there is a President who has shown little regard for human life...our own brave soldiers or innocent Iraq's...as long as he got Saddam he was just fine with it. So, I say yes to peace with our new President, who at least will be sure a war of any kind is warranted and good by and good riddance to this war mongering President and hs hencemen.

Posted by Caj at 11/28/2008 @ 3:18pm
It's an insane lead, Pray to whom an alien, G.W.Bush, a god, whose god,the god that destroyed the financial system of the world, Childish,juvenile and insane lead..........

Posted by ehross at 11/28/2008 @ 6:14pm
Posted by HAPPYLonghorn at 11/28/2008 @ 10:46pm

You think HAPP had any problems with Bush not winning the popular vote in 2000??? Was Bush a "uniter" as he claimed, HAPP?

Posted by Mask at 11/28/2008 @ 10:53pm
*You think HAPP had any problems with Bush not winning the popular vote in 2000??? Was Bush a "uniter" as he claimed, HAPP?

Posted by Mask at 11/28/2008 @ 10:53pm*

I think that's called feeding the troll there Mask. But wow he seems to be slipping deeper and deeper. I'm guessing the collapse of the stock market is affecting his intellectual capacity as well. That and, well, Obama actually isn't in charge yet, so he needs to flail at SOMETHING.

BTW LVL's response is rather telling. I didn't know "turn the other cheek" had any caveats written in with it!

Posted by yutsano at 11/28/2008 @ 11:10pm
I would like an explanation of why those majorities of Iraqis wanting withdrawal somehow morphed into the Iraqi Parliament's approval of troops for three more years. Why did that happen?

Posted by mimsky at 11/28/2008 @ 11:27pm
In the unbalanced situation in which one is not a whole person we may also have some aspects of the difficulty with the 'institutional church'. When churchmen are 'manly' the results are soon manifest not only in authoritarianism and excessive arbitrary control, but perhaps also in a lack of heart that makes religious cult cold, turn's Christ's teachings into formal theology and moralism, kills the contemplative and mystic spirit....The greater the reliance on authority, the more frequent the call to obedience, the more certain we can be that we are dealing with people whose hearts are not alive. And in this day can there be a greater sin than to be dead in the heart, for where is the Spirit more active? - Matthew Kelty

I'm just as much against authoritarian calls for donating to peace movements. While these comments are directed at clergy and others claiming to follow the teachings of Christs - yet remarkably claim they'll only put down their weapons when the other guy does, I think they are just as applicable to liberal orthodoxy that disempowers people by disengaging their head while engaging their checkbook. Checks aren't going to solve the world's problems. As Kelty writes in another homily:

"Just as the redemption is not finished and must be completed by people strong and love who are able and willing to take up a cross, carry it to the end, and then be nailed to it and die on it, so too the world is not finished. It must be completed by those who will take the world as they know it and somehow make it better, holier, happier, and more beautiful than when they found it, who measure happiness not by what they can get but by what they can give, who are not ashamed to be wounded in the service of love..."

Posted by srjenkins at 11/29/2008 @ 12:09am
Read more of Matthew Kelty's Homilies here:

http://www.bardstown.com/~brchrys/homilies/

Posted by srjenkins at 11/29/2008 @ 12:10am
Posted by HAPPYLonghorn at 11/28/2008 @ 11:40pm

So conservatism isn't really compassionate, HAPP?

Posted by Mask at 11/29/2008 @ 10:16am
Well, you should know by now that I've explained that the passage deals with individuals and not govts.

Posted by lvliberty1 at 11/28/2008 @ 11:36pm

LOL!

Would that be the Muslim government? Are you even SORT of concerned about the continuity of your insanity?

Is that like the GRAND HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA you're always talking about?

Conspiracy theories abound!

Posted by TexasFlood at 11/29/2008 @ 2:33pm
Also, I wonder who gave LVLIBERTY the "liberty" to make such biblical distinctions...

gOd must have told him during one of their "discussions"!

LOL

Posted by TexasFlood at 11/29/2008 @ 2:38pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 11/28/2008 @ 11:36pm

Who applies the will of governments, if not individuals?

Posted by srjenkins at 11/29/2008 @ 5:11pm
Posted by srjenkins at 11/29/2008 @ 5:11pm

On reflection, governments don't have wills, but the individuals that comprise them do.

Posted by srjenkins at 11/29/2008 @ 5:20pm
*On reflection, governments don't have wills, but the individuals that comprise them do.

Posted by srjenkins at 11/29/2008 @ 5:20pm*

Oh stop throwing truthiness at our dear Reverend!

Posted by yutsano at 11/29/2008 @ 7:30pm
Posted by ehross at 11/28/2008 @ 6:14pm

Someone suggests prayers for peace here and what we get from you is the diseased anti-religion of some transparently narciscistic, college dorm-room "intellectual" who almost certainly has no trouble findinf a way to worship himself? Some advise, you bigoted little worm: Stick all you can get of you head and your faith hating into a suitably large toilet and flush repeatedly until you've somehow managed to dissolve yourself.

Posted by john lowell at 11/29/2008 @ 9:34pm
Posted by ehross at 11/28/2008 @ 6:14pm

You'll have to excuse john.

He is sensitive about his delusions.

(And fond of potty talk).

Posted by Malcontent at 11/29/2008 @ 10:52pm
Yes lets all pray for peace, peace between the catholics and the protestants of Northern Ireland, Peace between the Jews and the Muslims of Palestine, Peace between the Sikhs,Hindus and Muslims of Kashmir, Peace between the Christian right and normal people,etc,etc,etc,

Religion, The Worlds Cancer............

Posted by ehross at 11/29/2008 @ 11:44pm
How can the U.S. pull out of Iraq before the lucrative oil contracts secured by Exxon, Chevron et al... pay off?

The surge of American cash into the pockets of the Sunni resistance has paid off. Why not let the oil companies pay them off whith their own money?

The puppets in the Iraqi Govt. need to get the deal in writing before Bush leaves office.

How else can it be explained? The people of Iraq want the U.S. to leave as well as the the majority of Americans want the U.S. to end the occupation.

Posted by koroviev at 11/29/2008 @ 11:53pm
Oh I get it now Mal. He's feeding that fake left-wing troll. That explains much.

Posted by yutsano at 11/29/2008 @ 11:55pm
Posted by john lowell at 11/29/2008 @ 9:34pm

Titus 3:2....ever heard of it?

Posted by Mask at 11/30/2008 @ 07:17am
Like core conditioning in exercise, there's no 'revolution' of the periphery. What one finds in Venezuela and Cuba are personalized cults masking as something noble. You need the heart of capitalism, best and brightest, competition to lead on best practices -- from PDAs to safety net solutions alike. Need creativity, desperate hunger to perfect, out perform, to break out with elegant, empirically valid improvements - from 'welfare to work' / AIDS / to Malaria... Bill Gates exemplifies this. It's not sexy and grandiose. Cheney-Bush don't know how to release this, look at how desimated the locals are whereever they wield power, blinded as they are with love for the super-person which is not human at all, the corporation, has no heart only an addiction to power and money. Of course these need delicate, incisive 'regulation'. This is not a pompous Greek oratory or debate like so much of the trash talk here. And that includes me half the time. Thank all the Gods for the prospect of a reality-based administration. I am so fortunate not to be poor in New Orleans, Caracas, or Havana.

Posted by winyahn at 11/30/2008 @ 11:36am
Posted by Mask at 11/30/2008 @ 07:17am

Laughingboy, and actually pretending to know something about religion? That's entertaining. Stick to LOL and tee-hee, that's more you're speed, touch-hole.

Speaking of mirth, I have to chuckle about the kind of "change" you and your fellow DNC hirelings have given us with the appointments your dear savior brings. Isn't it time for you to disappear from this forum? If not, I'll keep working on it.

Posted by john lowell at 11/30/2008 @ 12:23pm
Posted by Malcontent at 11/29/2008 @ 10:52pm

Sensitive enough about religion and faith to know when simple disbelief turns into hate, and you're well over that line, pig. So know that every time I see evidence of your poison here, I'll be calling you what you just what you are: A bigot. Count on it.

Posted by john lowell at 11/30/2008 @ 12:54pm
Posted by ehross at 11/29/2008 @ 11:44pm

I know, you couldn't find a toilet accomodative enough for both your head and all of that hatred, eh, filth? I'd suggest trying your tukus - that'd sure be roomy enough - but then again, how would that make you look on Stone Mountain when in your bedsheet.

Posted by john lowell at 11/30/2008 @ 1:08pm
Posted by john lowell at 11/30/2008 @ 12:54pm

"pig"

"when in your bedsheet."

"shove your head up your ass"

"flush til you dissolve"

"filth", etc.

Can you say 'projection'?

"Sensitive enough about religion and faith to know when simple disbelief turns into hate"

But, apparently oblivious when simple belief turns into hate. All others merely asked WTF god has to do with politics/policy.

You keep dragging your god through the mud, then whining about others perceived lack of respect, for your imaginary friend.

You might notice there are many other 'believers' on this site (SRjenkins, etc.) who don't attract any negative comments, due to their respect for non-believers and relevant/interesting subject matter.

Your complete intolerance of differing ideas, masquerading as righteousness is amusing, to say the least. Even LL comes off as gracious, compared to you.

Oh yea....have a nice day.

Posted by Malcontent at 11/30/2008 @ 3:44pm
"Such stock-taking might begin with a truthful re-examination of the self-serving and adolescent presuppositions governing their vision of human life and its intrinsic worth"

Posted by JOHN LOWELL 04/20/2008 @ 02:13am

Heal thyself, john.

Posted by Malcontent at 11/30/2008 @ 3:56pm
Ah yes, lets all pray for the redemption of the soul OF"[Lowell the "Christian"]who castigates and vilifies people because they don't believe in his fairy tales.............

Posted by ehross at 11/30/2008 @ 4:16pm
Great idea, John.

Now that we have all hoped and voted for peace and change, we can now pray and donate for the peace and change that Obama's new 'team' of ex-Bush neocon and ex-Clinton neolib centrists certanly won't give us.

Seems like 'Groundhog Day' 2006 all over again, eh?

Not only can Karl Rove, in his Friday WSJ op-ed, be 'thankful' about Obama's pragmatic continuity of Bush's policies in both a foreign policy of ‘continuing' imperialist wars ‘abroad' and a domestic policy of ‘continuing' economic tyranny and oppression ‘at home' (which would turn Hannah Arendt over in her grave), but the "best news" is that Obama's continued support for the ruling-elite ‘corporate financial Empire' that controls our government and hides behind the facade of its two-party, ‘Vichy' sham of faux democracy, brings continued great joy this Sunday to our talking head ‘Vichy' MSM media shills on TV and the major newspapers.

What pure joy to see Brit Hume on FOX NEWS, George Will on ABC, and Tom Friedman on NYT all declaring together that the Iraq war has been won, at the end of the glorious Bush neo-con regime, and will be successfully mopped-up with full continuity of the Obama ‘progressive sounding', but actually pragmatic neo-liberal regime, which they all clearly inform us is absolutely PROVEN by Obama's FULL CAPITULATION of naming ALL his ‘war cabinet' (Brit's actual quote), AND ALL his financial bailout (a k a ‘looting') cabinet with right-centrists --- an undeniable FACT that no liberal, left, anti-war, anti-corporate, and anti-Empire progressives ANYWHERE dare to publicly dispute; for the simple and obvious reason that it is absolutely TRUE.

Le neocon Roi est mort, vive le neolib Roi!

L'Empire va survivre!

Posted by amacd at 11/30/2008 @ 4:47pm
Aw, poor baby, and all along you were just looking for love. If only I'd have been just like everyone else here and tolerated your noxious religion hating, then I'd have managed to enjoy your very self-centered approval. What ought to be abundantly clear to you by this time, slug, is that I care neither about having your approval nor reading your opinions. I care simply that you're a religion hating bigot, and not even a very good one at that, just a common, garden variety hater and people like you need to be identified for precisely what they are. Count on my doing that here every time your raise your ugly head. Capiche?

Posted by john lowell at 11/30/2008 @ 5:25pm
My comment above is a reply to Posted by Malcontent at 11/30/2008 @ 3:44pm

Posted by john lowell at 11/30/2008 @ 5:26pm
it is difficult to see how the country will be better served by Emanuel a person who has pledged allegiance to a foreign country, therefore having at least dual loyalties and Clinton who must have swallowed more than here pride in 'standing by her man'

Posted by ehross at 11/30/2008 @ 5:26pm
Posted by ehross at 11/30/2008 @ 4:16pm

Aw, now I've gone and offended your exquisitely delicate sensibilities, haven't I, little fella? But you ain't seen nothin' yet should you choose to continue to belittle people of religion and faith here. There's a name for bacteria like you: Bigot. And there will be no end to your hearing that from me every time you make that choice.

Posted by john lowell at 11/30/2008 @ 5:40pm
For "John the Christian" Do you best to stay away from little children.............

Posted by ehross at 11/30/2008 @ 5:56pm
Posted by john lowell at 11/30/2008 @ 5:40pm

"Bigot"

Talk about the pot and the kettle.

Pray tell john, how does trying to keep religion out of politics, constitute bigotry?

As far as I'm concerned, your vile narcissism renders your posts irrelevant.

Rant on john. I'm done cluttering up this blog, responding to you. But feel free to spew at a later date. It always makes me feel good, not to be you.

Eric

Posted by Malcontent at 11/30/2008 @ 6:35pm
*Rant on john. I'm done cluttering up this blog, responding to you. But feel free to spew at a later date. It always makes me feel good, not to be you.

Eric

Posted by Malcontent at 11/30/2008 @ 6:35pm*

Ignore is your friend Eric. No really. Don't let the emo kid who learned new words in class today take up any more of your time. STOP FEEDING THE TROLLS!!!

Posted by yutsano at 11/30/2008 @ 7:35pm
Posted by ehross at 11/30/2008 @ 4:16pm

Your post makes me think of an interview of Larry Wall, inventor of the scripted programming language Perl, on Slashdot. The whole thing is worth a read, but here is the relevant part:

Question: "I remember reading at some point that you are a Christian...I am not religious, and have no desire to be...Please tell us how in the world a scientific or at least technical mind can believe in God..."

Answer: "Well, hmm, that's a topic for an entire essay, or a book, or a life. But I'll try to keep it short...

I expect a good deal of the problem is that you are busy disbelieving a different God than the one I am busy believing in. In theological discussions more than any other kind, it's easy to talk at right angles and never even realize it...

So let me try to clarify what I mean, and reduce it to as few information bits as possible. A lot of people have a vested interest in making this a lot tougher to swallow than it needs to be, but it's supposed to be simple enough that a child can understand it...So just how big is that, in information theory terms? I think it's just two bits big. Please allow me to quote a couple "bits" from Hebrews, slightly paraphrased:

You can't please God the way Enoch did without some faith, because those who come to God must (minimally) believe that: A) God exists, and B) God is good to people who really look for him. That's it. The "good news" is so simple that a child can understand it, and so deep that a philosopher can't.

http://interviews.slashdot.org/ article.pl?no_d2=1&sid=02/09/06/1343222

Posted by srjenkins at 11/30/2008 @ 9:32pm
This is perhaps my favorite part of Larry Wall's response:

"'Systematic theology' is an oxymoron. God is not a system. Christians are fond of asking: "What would Jesus do in this situation?" Unfortunately, they very rarely come up with the correct answer, which is: "Something unexpected!" If the Creator really did write himself into his own story, that's what we ought to expect to see. Creative solutions."

Don't let the weaknesses and mistakes of God's followers discourage you from looking for God yourself. Every criticism you have about religion is true, but it is also true that no of it applies to God.

Posted by srjenkins at 11/30/2008 @ 9:44pm
I'm certain there were many Jews who fervently believed in God during the 1930's and 40's, to what end? There were 15 million Ukrainians looking to their God during essentially the same period.

The list is endless of believers looking for God only to be run over by the truck.

No one can explain the animosity, hatred and depravity generated by one religion against other religion.

Try and justify 2000 years of preaching hatred of the Jews by the Catholics.

It's truly sick and the believers should give their heads a shake and open up their minds, but then where would we get people to buy houses with no money,no job or people to invest in Lehman Broths, and elect G.W>Bush etc.etc. etc.etc.etc.

Posted by ehross at 11/30/2008 @ 9:56pm
Posted by ehross at 11/30/2008 @ 9:56pm

It is equally obvious that reducing an individual's faith in God to "religion" and citing the worst examples of people inflicting harm on the world or each other in the name of God to condemn it is a fallacy of composition.

Your calculus doesn't account for anything positive. How does the role of Quakers in abolishing slavery in the United States fit in? Or the religious based non-violence of Gandhi? Or the impact of the liberation theology of Gustavo Gutiérrez on the thinking of the Catholic church that has changed the face of Catholicism in many communities in South America?

It's no different than claiming that the violence of jihadis is inherent in Islam. It's the very bigotry you are decrying. For how does condemning all religions differ from condemning one of them? It's one and the same.

Posted by srjenkins at 11/30/2008 @ 10:18pm
Good!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is irrefutable evidence concerning all the major religions in the world testifying to their depravity.

To suggest that the actions of Gandhi and people like the Quakers were/are Dependant on religion to motivate them is nonexistent and self serving

There is a list as long as can be compiled of non religious people who have changed the world for the better.

Enough with the philosophy, look at the hard evidence, It is those that ignore reality that are the cancer in the World to day.

Posted by ehross at 12/01/2008 @ 09:47am
Posted by ehross at 12/01/2008 @ 09:47am

The "cancer" is fundamentalism and bigotry - whether of a major religion or of atheists.

To suggest that Quakers were not motivated by their belief of God in everyone, which gives rise to the Testimony of Equality, is to not know history. Further, you fail to account for counter-examples to your argument, such as Buddhism or the atrocities of atheists. This inability to recognize those kinds of problems in your argument bears all the hallmarks of fundamentalism.

Posted by srjenkins at 12/01/2008 @ 11:52am
"The "cancer" is fundamentalism and bigotry - whether of a major religion or of atheists."

Posted by srjenkins at 12/01/2008 @ 11:52am

While I essentially agree with that statement, I beleive ehross's point was that, as long as your world view is dogmatic, with pre-defined 'truths' and an infailable leader, it is much easier to rationalize your fear/hate.

Sure all types of people rationalze their behavior, but with god, I don't need actual reasons, just a way to link my view with god or scripture.

You guys used slavery and religion as an example.

For instatnce, let's say you are black and I want to think I am better than you. As an athiest, I cannot beleive I am better than you without reason. I can try to seek (non-exsistant)reasons... genetics etc.

But, if I beleive I am special and made different by god, then I have all the rationalization I need.

You may later prove my genetic theory was wrong. But, you'll never convince me my god is.

My point is, regardless of my behavior, you are more likely to get me to change, if my motovations are rational, not emotional.

Athieist can be all the things you claim. (And plenty of them batshit insane too.) But, at least you don't have that filter to reality, in your way, when attempting to reason with them.

I have always wondered; Why is it ok to say I am evil and going to hell... But, not ok for me to say you're delusional? Other than your imaginary friend will back you up and I don't have an imaginary friend. (Probably a question better suited for lowell types, than you).

Eric

Posted by Malcontent at 12/01/2008 @ 12:30pm
Posted by Malcontent at 12/01/2008 @ 12:30pm

You're being charitable. I think ehross is making a much larger claim that religion is essentially evil, and the world would be better without it. I think this argument is weak - a few of the reasons are outlined above.

I think the argument you are offering on his behalf is stronger, but I think it is also weak. The most obvious flaws are that the argument relies on situations where some sort of objective scientific truth is possible and it assumes that people are, can be and/or should be rational.

As counter-examples, I might point to the rationalizations used by atheists on left and right in political dialogue. No objective truth is possible, and I am not sure that "political truth" is essentially rational.

I also think qualities like altruism raise the question of whether rationality is the end all to be all. Suffering on behalf of others is not rational, but it is exactly what the world needs.

I don't think religion has an special ability to help people rationalize. You can see people follow other non-religious ideologies and you have the same outcomes. The only thing special about religiom is the fact that it exists in every culture in a way that other ideologies such as communism do not - suggesting it is necessary to human culture (which also undermines ehross's argument).

I think your last question is a fair one. Personally, I think anyone that claims to know the mind of God - which is what you are essentially saying when you say someone is evil or not saved - has lost their way, and it causes much of the resentment people feel toward religion and God. The story is so much more interesting than mere delusion or hell. It is a shame that religious conversations don't reflect that more.

Posted by srjenkins at 12/01/2008 @ 6:20pm
Posted by ehross at 11/30/2008 @ 5:56pm

What's the next gem to emerge out of your oh-so-superior moral development, filth, the desecration of hosts or the beating of Muslim women at prayer? I'd say with confidence that you're more than just a good candidate for violence of that kind. I have a another path for you to consider. Can we convince you instead to turn it all of that religion-hating inward, to make yourself its object instead of others, and then to explore the good sense of your finding a tub of warm water and packet of razor blades?

Posted by john lowell at 12/02/2008 @ 12:50am