Purest balderdash, each and every word. You're wrong. Taking out Saddam at the time we did was like taking Hitler out during Sudetenland -- much less trouble than it was later, no? We were wise enough to time taking down a tyrant when it was easier, you purblind dupe! Your opinion shouldn't even count with you, so ill-informed and baseless is it. Why can you not accept that destroying tyrants liberates people?! Shame on you ten billion times for your myopia and your inability at foreign policy.


Sucker. And you claim a superior intellect??? Ha ha. Trouble with Obama is he's in the party that has sought nothing but substitutes for victory, which means it's a party of tyrant-loving, therefore honor-challenged, morons with no capacity for strategy. Such associations cannot nurture integrity, wisdom, or national success. The original Carter was unsuccessful enough -- where's any necessity for a repeat?

Class and eloquence Obama is gifted in. We shall see what transpires with this in the future.

First resort? The historical record that you are ignoring top to bottom, radar (again, your beyond stupid irrational antiRepublican prejudices, carefully and with malice cultivated to floridity, are plain), says otherwise. You are wrong, and you won't make yourself right. You haven't even enough integrity or character to read and digest Gerson's Heroic Conservatism, which sets the record convincingly straight on the Bush Presidency. I challenge you to do this, considering it 80 percent likely you will fail the challenge, because a closed irrational mind can't be anything but a stupid one. Your failure is grotesque, your opinion valueless.

I agree with Mercenary here. We tend not to make Presidents out of Senators -- the present election bucks that trend. We tend to make them out of state Governors. So why not Veeps?

because Kos thinks so? That's your citation?

Wow.

Close enough. ;)

i'm not sure i buy that.

I wouldn't smack a dog on the evidence given there.
A nasty little conspiracy theory which - as most conspiracy theories do - ignores the obvious. If the "cover story" sounds suspicious it's probably true. Truth has discrepancies and inconveniences in it.

I'd be more interested if people were questioning her family values because she gave a speech and took an 11 hour plane flight while leaking amniotic fluid from a known Downs Syndrome pregnancy in her eighth month. Also she went back to work after 3 days leaving her premature special needs baby.

Normally I'd say - how dare you question a politician about a baby, just because she's a woman. But in America, politicians make decisions about contraception, sex education and abortion which affect other women, their bodies and their babies, so I think if a politician - male OR female - makes a pro-life stand they open themselves up to questions about their own personal family life.

All very interesting, but as I say I think the teenage daughter pregnancy is a nasty smear and not worth following up.

Archaeologists found a 10,000 year old body near to Cheddar (the so-called Cheddar Man). They were able (I know not how) to do some kind of chromosomal analysis against which they compared the local male population. They found descendants. !0,000 years and still livin' in Cheddar :P

I've been to Cheddar - I don't think they've changed much ;)

Dan Quayle never lived in the White House, the VP residence is in the Naval Observatory.

non-sequitur much?

(you have no idea how hard it is to spell non-sequitur drunk off your ass. if its still wrong, sorry.)

(whoops, brian posted while i was typing. my comment was to dana. whats the cheddar man got to do with how bad palin is?)

Apparently the speculation about the kid actually being a grandkid, is all based on this photo of her on Super Tuesday, a month before she announced she was 7 months pregnant. Pretty scant, as some women, especially very fit ones, don't show much at 6 months.

She wasn't especially fit, and I've heard of obese women that didn't know they were pregnant until they went into labor.

Here's an interesting thought someone had on a blog...

August 30, 2008...8:50 pm
Food for Thought on the Palin-Baby Story
Jump to Comments

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC): “I don’t know where she’s traveled to…But it’s not meeting people that matters. You know, President Bush met President Putin. And I don’t think it matters just meeting people. You look at people’s judgment.”

If the “official story” about Palin and her baby is true, then I question her judgment.

Her water breaks while she is in Texas. She chooses not to get medical attention, but to stay and give a speech. (Did anyone mop up after her?)

Then she gets on a commercial aircraft for a several-hour flight, without telling the flight attendants that her water had broken earlier that day. (How did she keep her seat dry?)

This was a premature delivery, and she did not seek medical attention for several hours, and endangered her baby by getting on board an aircraft where there would be no emergency facilities available for hours (or she would have forced an emergency landing enroute).

For someone “pro-life” she certainly showed a callous disregard for the health and safety of her baby.

There's also family photos with mommy not showing, but her daughter clearly has a baby bump.

http://media.adn.com/smedia/2008/03/...ffiliate.7.jpg

http://gov.state.ak.us/photos/PalinF...utside_v01.jpg