you can talk all you want about Democrats agreeing that there were WMDs, but who gave them that information. the same administration that may have cooked the information to bring about the result the administration wanted.
Name them and provide reliable Intel to back up your claim. I guess Suicide bombers (Hello???? $25k per bomb?) is just good practical joking. the 9/11 commission. the suicide bombers are there after the war. there are now probably ties to Al Quaida, there were, according to the commission, only tenu
nope was just pointing out how inconsistant WE BOTH CAN BE on any given day. As for terrorist I say nuke-em all let allah sort the innocents out. Which is why the whole world should be happy you are not in power. As far as the policeman of the world statement, it is not the job of the US milita
I'm sorry, we can only discuss moral issues that Republicans favor.
the other main reason for going to war was terrorism. the 9/11 commission concluded that Iraq's ties to terrorism were tenuous at best. There are far more countries that have a more direct role in sponsoring international terror. If all these other countries thought that Iraq had WMDs, why did they not join us. Perhaps they saw the arguments they had them are not the slam dunk all the neocons be
aint choo da same guy complaining bout the u.s. being world cops? so should we end the war on terror then in your opinion?
BTW while you may have provided a link I believe that you are the one who is a) lazy or b) forgetful. The link is to the 9/11 commision' findings. And no where do they talk about anything after 9/11 that I could find. Guess you missed that big graph right in the middle about the reach of Al Quaida showi
Would it be smug of me to say "Thank God"? No, but it would be ironic.
And what plots did we fail at? And please don't use use plots from other countries. That is not Bushs jurisdiction. Plots in other countries aren't ours to let suceed or to foil! Even against American interests? Dubyah promised us a worldwide war on terror,
and this takes away from the present adminastrations foiling plots today how? This administration has a poor record of foiling plots, especially compared to the Clinton administration. Bush Sr: 1992 1 successful plot, 0 foiled Clinton: 1993: 3 successful plots, 5 foiled plots (interesti
Unlike the Mason character, she probably has no real world equivelent. I think its ridiculous that the game had to stoop to using first ladies as candidates. Then again, if I'm not mistaken, there's never been a female who has even won a primary for President.
Guy's an egomaniac. We have another one here who has run for mayor several times and not even gotten past the primaries, but he's going to outlaw cigarettes in this town. He goes to all the city council meetings and they had to change the rules about the public giving a brief statement beforehand because he abused the privilege. Like the energizer bunny, he keeps on going despite the fact that the only thing he has convinced anyone of is that to a m
There is no statute of limitations for such a request? I am not sure what she means by legal conditions have changed. This is not the first time she had tried to get the case overturned.
Not for want of trying. Several were foiled, and others that were planned did not come off. Mostly due to the fact of the response to 9-11. ANd it is apparent after Somalia in 93, that OBL was emboldened. And now just a craven coward. You can deny all the empirical evidence you want, but MM's statement has more truth than
Not hardly! Try it with 4 kids (2 in college 2 on the way). Macaroni and Cheese are still staples around here! But then I am not on welfare so I cant buy the Tbones with food stamps! And I get tax cuts, not welfare handouts. Let me cry for you because you are in the top 20% of income earners. </f
There I will disagree. WHile I will not contend the intent was religious, the sticker was not. And there fore, while I would not want it posted, as long as it did not violate any laws, and it did not, the judge did not have any right or precedence to veto it. When it comes down to it, you can associate almost any law as re
In order to change the EC, it would require a change to the Constitution, which would take the choice away from the States. I believe the Federal Government already dictates too much to the States as it is. No change IMO is needed. If a States wants to water down its vote, let it (I personally wish CA would), that is their choice
ummmmmmm to coin a phrase ...BOOLDUKEY! I and my wife are middleclass. with her salery and my iras and investments we make about 100,000 a year.. before taxes, and we find we have plenty voice.. and I amma jew which last time I looked falls into the minority catagory. <
You get an insightful. And I think Sandy has taken this off in a new direction. I beleive as you do, however, I do not believe that judges should MAKE law. As the sticker was not religious, and completely within the rights of the Citizens to decide for themselves, then I have a problem. it was religi
IMO the right wing is just trying to coast and the left wing has to do all the flapping or we dont get anywhere. the right wing has been preening for quite a while. the right wing has shown that it only stands up for the powerful interests, that if you are a member of a minority or not at the top of the pay scale, you have no voice in this country.
If required... YES! So when is it required? Would that be when it somehow comes into conflict with religious dogma? I believe in God in no way believe that the theory of evolution or even the big bang theory lessen my faith. The bible is a guide not to be taken literally. We should take its teaching
Interesting, I just read that Tilden-Hayes thread before coming back here and seeing your comment. I must say, you know your history very well. I would have had to go back and look to remember all of those facts. <img src="../images/sm
Benjamin Harrison won in 1888 despite his oppenent having a majority of the votes. For accuracy in my previous post I should ammend that to say that Harrison won in 1888 despite his opponent having more votes by about 90K out of just over 11 million votes. Cleveland lost because he won big amongst sout
We talked about Tilden-Hayes on another thread. So that's a coincidence. Link There is an advantage in the electoral college for smaller states, just the same as there is an advantage for smaller states in the Senate. Without those built in advatages, those states would be totally ignored in the electorate. Going by a popular vote, who is going to pay o
WRONG answer! We've had this discussion before! All he did was parrot what was told him. Now that's not to bright, but them's the facts. And BTW we *were* TALKING about Moore NOT Bush. The information has come out that the parroting was done by the intelligence community who brought the desired result t