And Atlas shrugged ...

I absolutely CRINGED when I saw Jambo's quasi chastisement of badboy for not having visited the D-Day museum. What little I know of him is that he's been in the military for quite some time and I KNEW a huge world wide list of historical sites was soon to follow. He has done via his service what I always wanted the Bund members to eventually do - take a pre-planned "historical vacation" throughout Europe, perhaps starting in Normandy. They have official tours set up that take you say, on a European WWII tour, or Napoleon's campaigns, etc. But within 2 minutes of the guide's voice cranking up we'd have our own map out and be marching in our own direction anyway, so we might as well pick 12 sites over 2 weeks and do it ourselves. I understand coordinating the money, time and schedules is a monumental task, but something that should be doable AT SOME POINT in the years to come.

Oh, and that .50 cal machine gun fire DOES get your attention. But then again, it's sort of surreal to suggest that badboy needs to go to a museum to claim he's heard one .. he,he. But if you guys wait and go on June 6th I'm sure they'll have the same treatment, including those very well presented regular briefings. A (presumably once a real officer) CO addressed the crowd as if he was giving instructions to the invasion force, in a WWII uniform, and delivered with all the vigor of a real pre action briefing. A good time.

****

Ok, I'll take your math on the average age of the WWII soldier, although the 26 years of age number still strikes me as awfully high. At any rate you write: "My contention" is very simple... that the experiences that these "young adults" had from 1930 to 1941 shaped them into the MEN that beat Germany and Japan back into the Bronze Age in four years." While the "bronze age" comment was a nice touch, this statement is HIGHLY subjective to say the least. I think it is fair to say that they were more "hardened" if you will, due to facing extremely tough economic times, meaning they "grew up" in a hurry compared to their roaring 20's counterparts; but that was a result of The Depression itself, and not any aspects of the New Deal. My contention has always been that what made them so exceptional was that they were just "normal" guys prior to Pearl Harbor. "Average Joes" that in a time of crisis and calls for tremendous sacrifice they rose to the challenge and quite literally saved the world. But again, this is all subjective - bottom line: they ARE the Greatest Generation (although it occurs to me that the "founders" or "Revolutionary" generation weren't too shabby themselves).

And look, I don't have any patience for Hannity throwing around those, previously unknown to him, phrases either. I think Limbaugh & Beck have a bit of a better grasp, all the way up to Hugh Hewitt, Medved whom have an absolute understanding. The point is, regardless of their (or my, or these historical economists I listed) disagreeing with you (Titus) or even Jambo, on the recovery aspects of the New Deal, we ALL seem to agree that Obama's so called recovery plan is the worst of both worlds, and doomed to sink us into a sharper recession, or dare I say, a depression.