RuntheDamnBall

Nobody is on to something.

I am speaking of the UN as a forum, not as an organization. Where else can we have the ear of the world? Sneer in derision if you like, but this hasn't even been tried. And in general the UN is good about helping foster fairer elections. They know a thing or two about that. It'd be a good idea to have their help.

Your fallacy is in assuming that it's going to be any different under the Republicans, who have already had four years controlling EVERYTHING to prove themselves (and longer than that in the Congress). Less government for rich, white, straight Christians, maybe. But doubtful even then. PS if you want a strong military and good intelligence, you have to pay for it. It is where the majority of your hard-earned tax dollars go.

Tony Gonzalez, Jonathan Ogden, John Abraham.

Flash back to FDR, 1941: "This war is going to require a lot of sacrifice. That's why I'll be cutting your taxes, increasing spending at record levels and saddling your grandkids with the debt. Who's along for the ride?" That would have worked. I am consistently amazed by people who are for this war and for cutting taxes. Would ye have your cake and eat it too?

Yet if we went after Bin Laden you would have decried it as a diversionary tactic from the blowjob at hand. Do I think Clinton !@#$ed up? I sure do. Did he admit it, after much prodding? Yes. He handcuffed the country with his antics. But again, we're where we are now. The past is not nearly as important as the present and the future.

How about more troops? How about getting down on our hands and knees to NATO or the UN and saying, "look, we went about this too hastily, and now we really need your help. A lot is at stake for all of us here. A stable Iraq is in everyone's best interests, and we can all share in the benefits..." But that kind of humility is beneath this administration.

Are you talking about "No Child Left Behind" or the prescription drug benefit? Or perhaps you mean the Department of Homeland Security ("I was against it before I was for it")? Or are you talking about funding to encourage marriage? Or increased funding for abstinence-only education? Surely these are not big-government programs aimed at making everyone feel better?

I think an administration that is not willing to adjust its course to fit the reality of a situation is a far greater problem, but we are both afforded the right to disagree.

For the puzzling idea that there were only two ways to go about this, appeasement or "my way or the highway?" Iraqis must feel like they're living in some high stakes board game.

Well, I would feel a lot more comfortable with the President if he agreed with you there and put the truth before politics on this one. I'm not saying I'd vote for him, but I wouldn't be as worried about the prospect of his re-election. The point is, the administration discounts any reported mistakes with exactly the kind of rhetoric you've displayed here. The problem becomes the "left wing media," not the mistake, which is generally far more life and death.

So, Vote Bush because... He isn't as tall as Kerry? He is subject to better camera angles? His photos don't show thousands of vetted, confirmed, blind supporters? Great points, all... [/sarcasm]

No thanks. No more USC QBs with all the physique and skills. I've had enough of those, thank you. Even if Carson Palmer succeeds.

Rod could seriously have done the music-loving public a favor and died right after Every Picture Tells a Story was released.

The search continues on that one.

Pretty interesting... Link

This stevestojan worked for the NY Rangers, right? I have heard Vazquez is out of there, too (though they would be foolish to part ways with him). Seriously, how many No. 1-2 starters from other teams can the Yankees turn into No. 6 guys?

Man, I'm happy for the Sox, but Christ, get over the !@#$ing Yankees. When the Bills win the Super Bowl I sure as hell am not going to be thinking about the Pats or the Dolphins or the Cowboys or Redskins or even the Giants. Enjoy the fact that your team won and shut up about the Yankees or you just might have to wait another 86 years. Karma's a B word.

Think of the costs of new flags alone. Our beaureaucracy would go haywire.

I think his point is that the right has become easily sickened by the truth. Everytime something is reported now the Bush campaign has to go to lengths to discredit it, and they are running out of excuses. Now all Cheney has to say is that he doesn't consider a publication "friendly," thus the story is not valid. It appears you are just sorry that the media is not giving this administration a free pass anymore. It got one for a long time. The tide is turning. The WSJ, whose praises you were singing a few days ago, reported one of the stories Krugman cites. Obviously this administration has made mistakes; you cannot be so blind to not admit that they haven't. All the mouthpieces of this administration have clearly drank the Kool-Aid and are buying into the President's rhetoric. And the media is right to take him to task for it. If Bush hasn't made any mistakes, then clearly all of these so-called attacks shouldn't be a problem for him.

Keep the faith in winning money by chance?

I really don't buy that it will be that much different, but time will tell. It's not as if the oil prices have exactly gone down under Bush, and perhaps that would be the kick in the ass we need to start seriously developing alternatives. Regardless, if a lot of the conservatives on this board had their way we'd be in a very "hot" war with nuclear weapons. I can't think of how many "nuke all the Muslims" posts I've seen on this board.

That's right. After my celebratory escargot dinner, I'm gonna hit up Arafat on speed-dial after the Kerry victory just so I can get him the message before it's too late. Say Hi to Timothy McVeigh for me.

man, you beat me to that one.

"Howard Johnson is right!"