Last Sunday I found myself standing in the middle of thousands of anti-war protesters on the Embarcadero in San Francisco. I'm usually not the type of person who goes to protests, but this one was taking place right outside my hotel and as an Iraq war agnostic I was curious to check it out. For months I've been teetering on the fence between being for and against invasion, seemingly the only person in the world who doesn't have a definite opinion on the issue. I figured this would be the perfect opportunity to hear a summary of the anti-war position to help me make up my mind once and for all.

About 20 yards and 10 minutes into the protest I realized that it wasn't going to happen. I wasn't going to be able to consider the merits of the anti-war arguments because none were being made. The few people who came with something thought-provoking to say were drowned out in a cacophony of unfocused, off-topic whining.

"Queers for Palestine! Palestine, the gay and lesbian community of San Francisco supports you!" shouted the woman to my left. She was beaming in her Queers for Palestine shirt, a fashionable black t-shirt with a sleek logo in the colors of the Palestinian flag (see photo). Her constant use of the word "queer" and statements about the feelings of gay and lesbian community gave the impression that her being there had a lot more to do with her personal cause than any military conflict that might be brewing, but, regardless, I'm sure Arafat & co. would be delighted to know that they have the support of gay infidels.

The woman was eventually drowned out by the shouting of some environmentalists, vegans, and hybrid drivers, all waving signs with pithy slogans denouncing war in the name of their respective pet issues. Each group seemed to be trying to out-do the others in terms of cleverness, usually at the expense of making any sort of point. Some socialists were grinning while posing for pictures with their "Don't get amBUSHed" sign; a woman's group flaunted their "Asses of Evil" poster featuring caricatures of Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and the President; a bicyclists club was pretty proud of the "Stop Mad Cowboy Disease" poster they'd gotten a hold of. I half expected to find out that there was going to be an award ceremony at the end of the protest with cash prizes for Most Clever Sign That Has No Point.

All the slogan shouting eventually died down when the speakers took the stage. At this point I was still hopeful: surely the much-heralded speakers would be able to go through the compelling reasons not to invade Iraq. But, alas, that hope was dashed as soon as the first speaker opened her mouth.

She introduced herself in a normal American accent, but as soon as she said that she was from "Puerrrrrrto Rico" she adopted a thick Puerto Rican accent. As she spoke of the oppression in her home land and how similar it is to the oppression she sees here in the United States her Puerto Rican accent waxed and waned, usually triggered by the words "Puerto Rico." Applause and shouts of agreement trickled through the crowd as she stood on stage and spoke freely to 60,000 people about how oppressive the U.S. government is. But the crowd really got excited when she yelled a rallying cry in Spanish. I'm sure the vast majority of people had no idea what she said - I speak Spanish fairly well and couldn't catch it - but she was clearly angry and emotional, so therefore everyone else wanted to be angry an emotional too.

The next speaker was a black woman from the East Bay. She was very indignant about something but I have no idea what it was. She spoke in a rhythmic, poetic manner reminiscent of Jesse Jackson's that really got the crowd going. After denouncing President Bush's "habitual necessity to start war" she explained that "suicide bombers have to have protection from the men on top with the uniforms getting orders from behind!" As with the Puerto Rican woman's Spanish speech I don't think anyone had any idea what she was talking about - but that certainly didn't keep them from applauding!

Next were the real headliners, the most oppressed of all the oppressed women on stage: Muslim students from Iran. (To clarify, the oppression they were speaking of was that imposed on them by George W. Bush - their roles as women in Islamic culture and the good 'ol Ayatollah were not mentioned.) A favorite topic for these women was the increased discrimination they've faced since 9/11 while students at the University of California at Berkeley. Of all the ridiculous statements made at the rally that day, this one topped them all. I could believe that Muslims have had to deal with an increase in discrimination in some - even most - places in the U.S. since the terrorist attacks. But not at Berkeley. No way. They're women, they're minorities, they're not Christian, they're from a liberal-approved country - if they were only handicapped and gay Berkeley would be building shrines to them. (If Harvard didn't recruit them away first, that is.)

The crowd was still roaring with indignation at the suffering of the students when the black woman got back on the mic and started on a "no blood for oil" speech. This was a huge relief as it was the first thing that resembled a fact-based argument I'd heard all day. I disagree that invading Iraq is all about oil (see Peter Ferrara's "It's Not About The Oil, Already") but at least this argument has something to do with the issue at hand and indicates two or three solid minutes of serious critical thought about it. I was hopeful that this was just the beginning of a long series of well-reasoned attacks on the pro-war position, but instead she turned to the old tried and true favorite of the liberal political arsenal: name calling. The crowd had responded enthusiastically when she was railing against the oil industry's alleged influence on U.S. foreign policy, but they went absolutely wild when she said, "The only thing funny about this situation is Dubya's face!" That statement garnered the loudest applause I'd heard all day.

As I pushed my way through the crowd back to the hotel it was like reliving my recent disillusionment with the Democratic party. The party and the protest alike are founded on good ideas and better intentions (many of which I agree with). But the same thing happened that afternoon that has happened with the Democrats and liberals as a whole: a gathering around some good ideas degenerated into a whine session for everyone to wallow in their own pet issues at the expense of any sort of clear vision for the group. When I got back to my hotel room I resolved to just continue researching the war debate on my own. The last place I was going to find good anti-war arguments was at an anti-war rally.