PastaJoe

You've never heard of the Pew Research Center, where have you been? My point is that you can't really trust any of the polls to be accurate since they fluctuate weekly, but if the Bush supporters want to be overconfident, that's great.

I've always liked Biden, and he has been mentioned as a candidate for Secretary of State or Defense in the Kerry administration.

In the latest national survey of 1,972 registered voters by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted in two waves over a seven-day period Sept. 8-14, finds that the president's 52%-40% advantage in the initial period dissipated in the polling conducted Sept. 11-14. The second wave of interviewing shows the race even among registered voters, at 46%-46%. When the sample is narrowed to likely voters, Bush holds a statistically insignificant lead of 47%-46% in the second wave, down from the huge 54%-39% advantage he held in the first wave of interviews. But feel free to be overconfident and complacent. If Bush supporters perceive they have the election wrapped up, perhaps some won't show up to vote.

You haven't seen the ad, yet you're trying to tell us what it depicts. I saw the ad yesterday, it doesn't show a soldier with his hands in the air like he's surrendering, it ends with a soldier holding his rifle over his head as he starts to sink into the sand up to his waist, overlayed with the word "Quagmire". A painful but truthful ad with a symbolic visual that really hits home.

Not for long if he stays with Drew.

I'd go with McNair, it will be a close game with Indy and he'll need to throw more than he did against Miami. Plus he can scramble, unlike Drew. And I'd play Griffin, he'll get more carries than Dillon.

No, but our defense is often used as a political tool. One needs only look at all the porkbarrel defense projects that get approved. The building of ships in Mississippi in Trent Lott's district that were not needed by the Navy, and the fights that go on over the recommendations of the Base Closing commission come to mind. It would not be a stretch to think that assets being moved to a state that's in play from one that's not has political considerations in mind.

You say it's a simple task, and then you accuse me of simplifying the issue? Please. Yes the gov't takes in money, but right now is spending more than it takes in, with no call to reduce spending. Therefore the only alternative to paying for what we spend is to raise taxes. And where the money is appropriated makes a difference. I'd rather spend a small portion of the $200+ billion going to Iraq on our Child Welfare services.

Well Bush does have Georgia wrapped up, so why not try to win Washington by creating some military support jobs before the election. I just hope that in the next 4 years we won't be again saying, 'Remember the Maine'.

You mean the tax cut plan that would increase funding for children's services and education by reversing some of the Bush tax cuts? I'm all for it. In fact why stop at $200k, I say roll them all back to what they were under Clinton. We did quite well with them.

Probably because someone in the administration who is tired of listening to Bush paint a rosey picture of Iraq has a conscience and leaked it. And don't look for any names anytime soon, we're still waiting for the name of who leaked Joe Wilson's wife's identity to Novak.

Child welfare is a simple task? I find it hard to believe that you don't value children's welfare. There are more important things in life than tax cuts.

If you think that one country should "control" an organization of all countries, then you don't understand its purpose.

I assume then that you support more funding for Child Welfare services so that they have enough qualified workers to run proper background checks and make sufficient checks after placement to reduce the chance of this happening in the future. Just like teaching, when it comes to children everyone wants the best but too many people don't want to pay for the best.

Yeah, we all know how well things went after the League of Nations dissolved.

I wouldn't say they're stupid, but they are too overconfident, self-righteous, stubborn, and obsessed to consider the facts when they differ with their perceptions, and unwilling to correct their course based on the facts. They are very clever, but they are also very wrong in their conclusions.

Gannon torches the Bills D with play-action pass, Janikowski kicks two field goals from over 40 yards, Lindell misses two from under 40 yards, and we are left with plenty of issues to discuss for the next two weeks. Oakland 27 Buffalo 17

Unfortunately he's carried that same philosophy through his term as president. Why learn and study when you can take vacation and clear brush. Of course everything in the Kelly book will be discredited because she didn't get quotes from the Swift Boat veterans.

They are obviously letting Kerry take the lead, as in "leadership", on the important issues being discussed before the election.

True, but with new leadership we'd at least have a chance to "rent it out" to other countries.

But a majority of Democrats support the changes, while a majority of Republicans and Bush don't support them, so unless there's a change in leadership the changes won't pass. OK, I tried to be reasonable and find a common ground for compromise, but you are among the extremists who want everything your way without regard for others viewpoints. Keep hugging your guns and listening for the helicopters at night.

Given a choice I'd start Bruce and trade Jackson. Any chance of dropping Morris and picking up someone off waivers for the bye week? If Henry gets hurt you're gonna be sunk, but if you keep Dillon and he gets hurt you at least have Faulk to carry on with as his replacement. I wouldn't do it.

Forget Terrell, somebody ahead of me in the waivers requested him. What about Gabriel or Whitted from the Raiders, do you think these guys will be regular contributors?

I hope you meant the kind you sit on in a bar.

Ditto to you. Democrats want to review the Patriot Act and keep the sunset clause so it can be reviewed, Republicans want to make it permanent as is. Kerry is against a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage and thinks it's a states-right issue, Bush wants a constitutional amendment to ban it. Conservatives want to prevent abortion even if the life of the mother is endangered, and oppose funding stem-cell research on embryos that will otherwise be thrown away. Back to the topic, so I am left to conclude that you and others are not willing to work towards a compromise on guns as I am, and once again you demonstrate why this country is so divided, because so many are stuck in their extremist positions.