MichFan

It's pretty apalling to see the attitudes of some libs around here who think the American Government invited such beheadings by going into Iraq. It is not Iraqi insurgents who are going around planning and executing the beheadings. It is al Quaeda. I know the suggestion that al Quaeda was actually operating in Iraq pains you libs, but it is a fact. I guess the Australians who died in Bali had it coming to them? The families who were executed in Chechnya? The Turks whose government didn't even participate in the coalition? You libs still don't fathom the nature of the threat we are facing. I don't know if your opposition to Iraq clouds your ability to think clearly about the war on terror, or if your clouded ability to comprehend the war on terror results in your opposition to Iraq.

Congrats, Tenny! May fortune bestow on you a proud conservative grandchild .

Tipping a few too many already, eh? Not even 5:00 yet...

I saw it and I LOVE IT!!!! This is the true Democrat party, not the one we saw in Boston. Let it all hang out, libs, this is the time to show your a$$ to the voters across this country. Keep it up .

Active service in 'Nam > National Guard service >>>>>>>>> draft dodging Don't even try to compare draft dodging as a moral equivalent with having strings pulled to get into the National Guard. It is an insult to the many people who have served in the guard.

May as well add Democrat and John Kerry to that list if you're going to outlaw the above terms...

Bush's agenda is available at www.agendaforamerica.com. Canada's health care system sucks compared to ours. Ask Canadiens how they feel about hypochondriacs -- they jam up the system, cause serious inefficiences and there is no PC way of getting rid of them. They have tried instituting a per visit fee, but they risk making healthcare inaccessible to the poor if they ever make this fee substantial enough to truly discourage middle or upper class hypochondriacs.

Suicide bombings have an impact in Israel because it is such a geographically small area that citizens fear they might actually be affected. A suicide bombing campaign in the U.S. just wouldn't have the same impact. They would need literally hundreds if not thousands of suicide bombers to produce any widespread fear across the nation. Arabs also can't blend in within America the way they can in Israel or the way Chechnyans can in Chechnya. Initiation of a suicide bombing campaign in America would probably be countered by regional internment of Arabs. America is going to get much more catastrophic hits because that is the only way for terrorists to achieve their goals in this country.

You're not suggesting we legalize RPGs and mortars as well, are you? Those are the weapons they are having the most success with, not assault rifles. The U.S. military has nuclear weapons at their disposal... I have absolutely no problem with people owning guns for purposes such as sports, recreation, or self-defense. I just don't understand the need for people to have assault rifles. Then again, I don't understand why people need to have Pit Bulls or Rottweilers in neighborhoods populated by little kids. Our neighbor just got a Rott mix that likes coming around when the kids are out. The puppy is bigger than most dogs and it is supposed to get 150-200 pounds when fully grown. I guess it's the feeling of imminent danger with catastrophic consequences that bugs me. Not sure these are the types of freedoms we should be so freely granting.

Sorry, but Bush never yelled "Go Buckeyes" at a crowd in Michigan country. And trust me, those are two words he could pronounce were he so inclined.

If someone were to use God to refute your empirical data on placement of a Stop sign, I would be very scared of them. If someone invokes God when talking about issues such as abortion or gay marriage, it is a legitimate consideration to many in this country. If it didn't come out in a public debate where civility is expected, I'd hate to see the scene at the bar when these people were drinking together and really opened up. Some people just aren't meant to be drinking buddies. Kerry and Bush both talk about God, and both express very similar religious beliefs. Bush stands by his convictions. Kerry is either pandering for votes from the religious community or he routinely sacrifices his personal beliefs for the "advancement of society". Being a Boston Catholic, I guess the idea that his actions may contradict his personal beliefs isn't much of a stretch. (Note: I'm Catholic so please no remarks about religious intolerance.)

Holy stevestojan, Mickey, something we finally agree on. Since I'm a big enough man to cross the aisle on this issue, why don't you reciprocate by voting for Bush? The idea that the 2nd Amendment protects people's rights to have assault rifles sounds good on paper. But the defensive mechanism provided in that Amendmant is basically outdated. A bunch of Americans with assault rifles would fair poorly against our modern military should a coup occur.

Doesn't Kerry have the power to do this? Why not finally figure out how to draft a bill and introduce it? Kerry charging that Bush let it drop, when he has effectively done the same, is a bit disingenuine.

Per the Drudge Report, the latest Dem assault on Bush's National Guard service has backfired as well. They have plans to claim Bush lied in a 1978 campaign about serving in the Air Force. Turns out he actually was active duty for the Air Force for 120 days in 1968. Yayyy! Keep the conversation on Vietnam, Dems. It is working so well for you guys. Anything to divert the public from Kerry's Senate record and lack of any details for going forward (after slamming Bush's policies, when asked what he would do about N. Korea he said he wouldn't engage in hyptheticals ).

IUBillsFan brings up the practical. Mickey brings up the theoretical. The idea that Killian not only had an IBM Selectric Composer, but also had the technical competency/patience to type the memos with perfect centering on the header and to swap out typing heads to superscript the "th", seems ridiculous given the commentary from his family, friends, and coworkers. The debate has quickly shifted from people charging that they could be forgeries to people defending that they could still be authentic. Seems pretty clear where this issue is heading.

If our approach is so bad, then why has Russia finally signed on to the same approach as Bush? Why do they now refer to U.S. as the leader in the war on terror? Why are they suddenly interested in working with Israel? Why are they now complaining of the same weak-kneed European leadership that Bush is running into?

Yet another issue that I can't understand why the Dems want debated at this point. The idea of Bush being fundamentalist is not going to gain any inertia. Using biblical references of personal compassion to imply that government should tax more and provide more for it's people is not either. The Dems have already differentiated Kerry from Bush's moral guidance on issues such as abortion, gay marriage, and embryonic stem cell research. Funny thing is that they both have the same values basically on these issues, but Kerry takes opposite positions for sake of public policy while Bush sticks by his moral convictions. That is what voters are going to assess. Liberals hate the idea that Bush uses morality to curb increased liberalization of society. Conservatives hate that Kerry will let the morality of society to continue a perceived decline. Perhaps the Dems sense they are losing on social issues and hope to cloud voters' judgement of Bush by making his convictions something to be scared of rather than admired. I can't wait for CBS to provide documentation of a Bush fatwah...

3rd and Goal from the 1 -- should have taken two shots with our RB's and showed that they meant what was said about being a running team. It would have set up bigger plays against better teams in the future, and it would have secured this game as a win.

Diplomacy is being attempted with these nations. Would you have preferred Bush just went to war with them instead? All the crying about Iraq -- even after 12 years of failed dipomacy. If Bush would have been militarily aggressive toward NK or Iran the libs would have gone off the wall. We probably could not have found a coalition of the willing, because not even England would have signed on for either of those wars.

I don't know that Bush has lied about anything. Being vague does not equal lying, it just leads one to believe there is something more than what has been revealed. I think Bush is handling it rather well by staying above the fray.

Let me also add that it has been revealed that Ben Barnes, who is the key figure in Rather's story, is a Kerry insider and fund-raiser. Astonishingly enough, Dan Rather's daughter works with Ben Barnes and the Democratic fund-raiser that Rather got in hot water for attending a few years ago was in Ben Barnes' district. This just has stink all over it.

It's pretty hard to prove they are fake when CBS is holding on to them and doesn't feel an investigation is needed, when their handwriting expert is the final authority as to whether this typed document is authentic, and when there appears to be no availability of an original is for age-testing. To me, this suggests they are fake unless proven authentic. The fact that any testing that has done from copies of the document readily shows clear problems with authenticity, and that CBS' defense of the documents contains factual problems, just furthers the liklihood that they are indeed fake. Funny thing is I don't care if they are authentic or not when it comes to Bush's candidacy. There was nothing earth-shattering in that 60 Minutes story. Bush has already conceded that Kerry's service was more honorable than his. All this line of attack does is make the public at-large feel like the Kerry campaign is trying to pile-on to an advantage readily forfeited by their opponent. It looks tacky and desparate.

Interesting interpretation of Wacka's comments. Defensive about something? Republicans seem to have a monopoly not on patriots, but on leaders who understand the nature of our enemy and are willing to fight this war instead of cowering behind the weakest of our allies. The Democrats who do have the stomach for this war are not really welcome in the party anymore (Lieberman, Miller). Name one candidate in the Democrat primaries who would be seen as strong or intimidating to terrorists. And please don't offer Kerry or Clark, these guys are pacifists at best. The Dems just don't have the resolve right now to make the terrorists fear them. Must be nice to know that your guy is the one terrorist nations want to win.

BRH's dream world: - CBS documents are real - SBVT have no credibility Mainstream America's reality: - it's looking pretty embarrasing for CBS and the DNC right now - 250 Swifties can't be wrong about everything, Kerry's retreating and changing stories mean something's up

You can live in your make believe world of letter authenticity, but the real world is coming to the realization that where there's smoke there's fire. For some reason you want to save the sinking ship on an issue that hasn't had any impact to begin with. It's time to bail, you're starting to look desparate... Funny thing is, if they turn out to be real it has no impact. If they turn out to be forgeries, it is another devastating event for the Dems. You guys are now in a no-win situation on an issue that was supposed to revive Kerry's campaign.