Shady

Exactly what military plans are you referring to?"The Sept. 11 commission, though, found no plans for an invasion of Afghanistan or for an operation to topple the Taliban" Washington Post

Looks like your guy's still losing, although the Zogby poll shows a closer race. Poll: Lieberman Leads Lamont in Conn. HAMDEN, Conn. (AP) - Sen. Joe Lieberman has a 10-point advantage over Democrat Ned Lamont among likely Connecticut voters, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Thursday AP

So you're praising him for lying well? From the Washington Post today: Some of Clinton's statements on Fox have drawn scrutiny. He said that after the bombing of the USS Cole in 2000, "I had battle plans drawn to go into Afghanistan, overthrow the Taliban and launch a full-scale attack search for bin Laden. But we needed basing rights in Uzbekistan." The Sept. 11 commission, though, found no plans for an invasion of Afghanistan or for an operation to topple the Taliban, just more limited options such as plans for attacks with cruise missiles or Special Forces. And nothing in the panel's report indicated that a lack of basing rights in Uzbekistan prevented a military response. Clinton also asserted that the Bush administration "didn't have a single meeting about bin Laden for the nine months after I left office." In fact, the Bush team held several meetings on terrorism through the interagency group known as the deputies committee and one on Sept. 4, 2001, through the principals committee composed of Cabinet officers. What Clinton may have been referring to was counterterrorism chief Richard A. Clarke's frustration that the principals disregarded his urgent calls to meet sooner because of a months-long policy review. Washington Post

Complete nonsense. Republicans never said there was no threat. You're either ignorant or lying.Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (R-Georgia) said the following on August 20, 1998: "Well, I think the United States did exactly the right thing. We cannot allow a terrorist group to attack American embassies and do nothing. And I think we have to recognize that we are now committed to engaging this organization and breaking it apart and doing whatever we have to to suppress it, because we cannot afford to have people who think that they can kill Americans without any consequence. So this was the right thing to do." Or Senate majority leader Trent Lott, August 21, 1998: “Despite the current controversy, this Congress will vigorously support the president in full defense of America’s interests throughout the world.” Or “Our nation has taken action against very deadly terrorists opposed to the most basic principles of American freedom,” said Sen. Paul Coverdell, a Republican member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “This action should serve as a reminder that no one is beyond the reach of American justice.” Or Dan Quayle was quoted by CNN on August 23, 1998: "I don’t have a problem with the timing. You need to focus on the act itself. It was a correct act. Bill Clinton took—made a decisive decision to hit these terrorist camps. It’s probably long overdue." Now, of course there were Republicans who had a definite problem with the timing, but how could you not? The two days he picked to bomb. The day he confessed about Monica, and the day he was impeached. Hmmm, how coincidental. LOL, he had a funny way of showing it.Bill Clinton, February 15, 2002: "Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1991, then he went to Sudan. And we'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start meeting with them again. They released him. At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America. So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have. But they thought it was a hot potato . . ." LOL, just like he had a plan for middle-class tax cuts. Never happened.

I disagree with your premise, so I'm unable to vote.

Actually, I think the ability to criticize one's government comes first. Unfortunately, these people aren't "so-called" repressed, they are repressed. Thanks to the Korean War, South Korea is a vibrant, prosperous country, opposite that of North Korea. Things may have been similar had the communists not prevailed during the Vietnam conflict.

Be realistic. We all know that Zogby is a well-respected poll, that's been very accurate for many years. You're just attacking the messenger. Don't worry, your guy Lamont may be down a little right now, but I'm sure it'll tighten up again soon.

Still more fallout from Plamegate. "Nevertheless, it now appears that the person most responsible for the end of Ms. Plame's CIA career is Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson chose to go public with an explosive charge, claiming -- falsely, as it turned out -- that he had debunked reports of Iraqi uranium-shopping in Niger and that his report had circulated to senior administration officials. He ought to have expected that both those officials and journalists such as Mr. Novak would ask why a retired ambassador would have been sent on such a mission and that the answer would point to his wife. He diverted responsibility from himself and his false charges by claiming that President Bush's closest aides had engaged in an illegal conspiracy. It's unfortunate that so many people took him seriously". Washington Post

Really?Zogby poll: Lieberman still ahead by 10 points Zogby found U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, a New Haven Democrat running without his party's endorsement, leads Democratic nominee Ned Lamont of Greenwich 49.4 percent to 39.4 percent, with 2.1 percent going to the Republican nominee, former Derby Mayor Alan Schlesinger. Lieberman held a 12-point edge over Lamont in an Aug. 17 Quinnipiac poll Link Now, obviously, polls can change, but you might not wanna speak too soon.

Another day of violence in Iraq. At least 47 dead, 100 injured in Iraqi bombings

Don't forget, there's also "white niggers", according to Democrat Senator Robert Byrd.Anyways, stating that Allen's use of a racial slur is on par with "nigger" is ridiculous. And one would have to believe, that Allen, would knowingly use a racial slur, while knowingly being video taped by a member of the opponent's campaign. That's truely ridiculous.

Yes, everything's out of context to you isn't it. Whether it's economics or liberal racism.

Unfortunately for her vanity lawsuit, the “leaker” in the Valerie Plame “scandal” is the one Bush administration official she didn’t sue. According to an article written by Newsweek’s Michael Isikoff’s entitled “The Man Who Said Too Much,” the first person to tell the press that Valerie Plame sent her husband, Ambassador Joe Wilson, on his preposterous trip to Niger was then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage. FrontPage Armitage, a well-known gossip who loves to dish and receive juicy tidbits about Washington characters, apparently hadn't thought through the possible implications of telling Novak about Plame's identity. "I'm afraid I may be the guy that caused this whole thing," he later told Carl Ford Jr., State's intelligence chief. Ford says Armitage admitted to him that he had "slipped up" and told Novak more than he should have. The disclosures about Armitage, gleaned from interviews with colleagues, friends and lawyers directly involved in the case, underscore one of the ironies of the Plame investigation: that the initial leak, seized on by administration critics as evidence of how far the White House was willing to go to smear an opponent, came from a man who had no apparent intention of harming anyone. Newsweek

Yes, when it's a liberal, it's an "out-of-context gaffe", when it's a conservative, it's a racial slur. I couldn't have said it better myself. Again, see my thread on liberal racial hypocrisy, although, you've already illustrated it perfectly.

You're saying as long as it doesn't cause MASS destruction its OK. Multiple sites of indiscriminate MODEST destruction are something to be proud of? Strawman. When did he say or even come close to implying that ridiculous premise? Unexploded shells and bombs are still being discovered from WWII. Should those countries be ashamed?

See my thread on liberal racism, and the hypocrisy associated with it.http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=4852 "You CANNOT go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent ... I'm not joking." - Sen. Joe Biden (D) YouTube "He (Gandhi) ran a gas station down in St. Louis." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D) CNN "You think the Republican National Committee could get this many people of color in a single room? Only if they had the hotel staff in here." - Howard Dean (D Chairman)

Actually, your comparison is more apt for my argument. In both situations, innocent human life is being terminated. So what? A new born baby can't survive on it's own either. And it's sad that you had to bring up religion. I didn't reference religion once in my argument. I'm not religious, I don't go to church. My opposition to abortion is based on science. Don't continue to live in the darkages. Stop ignoring scientific facts (ie. Day 22: heart begins to beat with the child’s own blood, Week 6: Brain waves are detectable).

Absolutely not. My views on abortion are purely scientific. These days, only a neanderthal ignores the facts of fetal development.Day 6: embryo begins implantation in the uterus. Day 22: heart begins to beat with the child’s own blood, often a different type than the mothers’. Week 3: By the end of third week the child’s backbone spinal column and nervous system are forming. The liver, kidneys and intestines begin to take shape. Week 5: Eyes, legs, and hands begin to develop. Week 6: Brain waves are detectable; mouth and lips are present; fingernails are forming. Week 7: Eyelids, and toes form, nose distinct. The baby is kicking and swimming. Week 8: Every organ is in place, bones begin to replace cartilage, and fingerprints begin to form. By the 8th week the baby can begin to hear. Weeks 9 and 10: Teeth begin to form, fingernails develop. The baby can turn his head, and frown. The baby can hiccup. Weeks 10 and 11: The baby can “breathe” amniotic fluid and urinate. Week 11 the baby can grasp objects placed in its hand; all organ systems are functioning. The baby has a skeletal structure, nerves, and circulation. To not see abortion as the destruction of human life, out of 99% convenience rather then necessity is appalling. It's my opinion that history will look back on the abortion years similar to that of the period of slavery in America, when African-American's were said to be two-thirds of a human being. This is not just a "clump of cells". It's a living, breathing, human being, in early development.

Because he doesn't. Anyone who follows politics knows this. I hope he runs in '08, and I hope he wins. McCain/Giuliani 2008 = unbeatable.

Uh oh, looks like she wasn't exactly an impartial arbiter of the law. Looks like this judgement has more then one reason to be appealed. Looks like there was a reason the ACLU shopped this case to this specific judge. A Matter of Appearances So it would have been prudent for her to disclose any activity that might conceivably raise questions about her ability to be impartial. Regrettably, it was left to a conservative group, Judicial Watch, to point out her role as a trustee to a foundation that had given grants to a branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, a plaintiff in the case. New York Times

I disagree. My argument of judge shopping is accurate. The ACLU has shopped this lawsuit around. That's fact. Yes, anyone standing up for the Constitution is a good thing. I agree. And yes, you cannot overturn the Constitution, but you CAN overturn flawed judicial decisions.

Well said. Venezuala is definitely a different animal. However, to do the topic justice, a new thread should probably be created. That being said, I'm not sure Venezuela is as democractic as you may think. Chavez is the first Venezuelan President to seek a third consecutive term. Chavez has also recently "considered" an end to Presidential term limits, and he's insisted on continuing his weekly "Presidential" broadcasts during the campaign, broadcasts that can last up to five hours. Actually, I heard it's closer to 400, but that's irrelevant. It's far fewer then what France had brokered the cease-fire over. I would put most of the blame on the terrorist organization Hezbollah, existing within a state against international law, who started the conflict in the first place. Resolution 1559, land for peace. Israel leaves Lebanon, Hezbollah disarms. One happened, and one didn't. Your referernce to "both parties" is incorrect. There's actually three parties. Israel, Lebanon and Hezbollah. Two states, and one terrorist organization within a state. Israel and Lebanon have been at peace for many years. Israel and Hezbollah have not.

Strawman.

I disagree. Middle Eastern and Islamic regressiveness has little to do with Western "promotion" of regional stability. It's a weak correlation at best.

This point cannot be understated nor refuted. It's tantamount to Lucy pulling the football away from Charlie Brown.