"On the poll situation....as I said earlier, I dont really pay attention to polls because polls can be manipulated by political groups that either pay, or lobby people to call in to manipulate the numbers. So go ahead and quote all the poll numbers you want."

Do you have any facts that the current President "Lied to us" to get us into war? No talking points mind you, I want to know what affiliation you have with the intelligence community that solidifies your statement that the President lied. You dont have any affiliations do you? I didnt think so......So, your statement is not credible"

So by that logic, I suppose you must have proof that most polls out there (especially the ones where Bush is in the 20's for approval), are PAID FOR by some group? Do you know someone, or have proof of, someone that actually called one of these polls on purpose (if that's even possible) to skew the results?

I'm just sayin....

AtticusinPa, I agree with every single word....well said!

Actually, your wrong about me. If you read my earlier posts, I fit right along with a middle of the road American (Even though I'm a Republican), and, I absolutely believe that a woman has the right to chose what she wants done with her own body.

Eric, looks like you're the one with "NO answers" You can't even tell me what makes you Reupublican.

This has been obvious for a while. Edwards has been splitting the anti-Hillary sentiment. One on one with Obama would be a contest.

Well, I know that I can definately call you out on your failure to pay attention to detail. Go look back at what I said - I am CONSERVATIVE. I am against majority of gun control and believe that if the police force can have it, so can a citizen. I believe in dismantling the federal government, piece by piece. We are talking about Department of Homeland Secuirty, Departments of Education, Transportation, Energy, Commerce, Agriculture, all of it. The income tax (alson known as the 16th amendment) was never ratified and is against the constitution, as it is an unapportioned tax on the labor of Americans. I believe that government is the problem, not the solution. The only things that I believe government should be involved in is making sure the playing field is even, that there is regulation, that the government and not a PRIVATE BANK is in control of an actual and not a fiat currency, and defense, but not in the sense that you are probably talking. The only other thing that I believe there should be, in terms of government run departments, is health care. I think it should be a single payer non-profit system. Aggression is not the answer. Our problem with the middle east is our occupation of it, not our western values and lifestyle. You know why I think Osama Bin Laden attacked us? Because of our support for israel, our bases in holy lands, and our aggression in the middle east. You know why I think that? BECAUSE THATS WHAT HE SAID! Diplomacy is far superior to military, especially pre-emtive, aggression. I do believe in responding to attacks and threats on our actual security, but not to defend our trade markets or corporate interests. You cannot force people to be democratic - you have to make them want to emulate it. And all you are doing is falling for tired fear-mongering rhetoric. I honestly believe there will be a false flag terror attack in the next year or less and all the marshall law provision written into law through the PAtriot Act and The Military Commissions Act will be enacted and there will be no elections. And that's a point that, if you disagree with, I hope you are right about. I'm just not shocked any more. YOu are probably right about Rudy simply because Rove has sought to make a permanent republican majority and I don't trust the electoral process. But I'm fighting for Ron Paul to the bitter end. Paul/Gravel - the American ticket!

President Giulinani? Creepy, creepy, creepy thought. That happens, I'm moving to France. Eight years of this nightmare is all I can stand.

I'm an arch conservative Republican but let's face it, the Dems are surely going to win. As much as i loathe Hillary, I have to admit that if she wins the Democrat's candidacy, the best thign she cna do is soften her candidacy from all those who hate her by choosing someone like Obama. Obama and Hillary can carry the black and women's vote. that, with the media fed "outrage" over the Iraq war is enough for them to win I'm afriad. I'm not too proud to admit we're going to get licked but take some sore console in knowing that in another 4 years, when the terrorists have been tragically emboldened by our Iraq withdrawel and are now better financed (thanks to the Iraqi oil fields they'll own too), only then will people wake up and realize how we should not have withdrawn from the middle east and Iraq, regardless of whether we shoudl ahve gone there in first palce or not. It's going to get a lot worse (for us here) before it gets better. Hillary and gang will put a nail in liberalism for a decade (at least) to come--maybe tehre's some confort in that--if we aren't all nuked by then or overun.

No, I most assuradly paid attention to your post. You can be a conservative and still be a Democrat. And with what you further expounded upon in that earlier post, you exemplify Liberal thought processes.

I dont know you personally, I can only respond to what you write on here.

Anyone can say they are Liberal/Conservative/Dem/Repub.... One may never know.

But in response to what you wrote, I'm in agreeance with what you wrote about the role that the govt should be taking here at the homeland. But, I disagree with your assessment on health care (Govt Controlled, as you put it)

"The only other thing that I believe there should be, in terms of government run departments, is health care". Your words, not mine....

And, I seriously dont believe you are looking at the overall "Global" picture of terrorism.

Let's take the health-care issue first.

The US Govt is here for one reason. That's to provide for the "Common Defense" and to enforce the "Laws" of this country. And that's according to the constitution.

I've been a participant of the socialized medicine practices of the US Military. It's not fun. You dont have a choice in the matter. You go where the govt says you go and then your stuck with the healthcare you have. Ask Canandians how they view their care. It's not a pretty scenario.

Now privatized medicine, on the other hand, has allowed these companies to charge a fair price to citizens, not only to make a profit, but to expend money, as well as resources, to advance research for modern cures that are above and beyond any other country in the world.

You cant do that with government controlled health care because the govt doesnt know how to control anything.

As far as Bin Laden goes, what would you say if the US just pulled out of the middle east, pulled out of Europe, hell, pulled out of everywhere. Would you think the world would be a safer place?

Surely you cant be serious.

Oh please, PLEASE choose haircut Edwards for your running mate Hillary. That is assuming you get the nomination. We all remember what happened to frontrunner Dean in '04 (losing the primary to Kerry BEFORE the scream). I'd love to see Hil' fall to somrthing like 3rd come the Iowa caucus.

I think he's saying he doesn't want people like representing his party. Just like I don't like the hippie conspiracy theorists representing mine.

Hillary and Edwards. Why don't we just rename the party the "New Democratic Party". Or the "DLC Party". The Republican party is at its weakest in three decades, and we're about to nominate institutional centrists?

Good lord. Maybe the Republicans deserve to win.

Well, let's observe. First of all, Saddam was given the key to the city of Detroit in 1981 for his Humanitarian work in the middle east. He asked for permission to attack Kuwait in return for protecting our oil tankers crossing his country and that set up the pretext to us invading in the early 90's. You want to use violations of UN resolutions as a basis for war? Fine, no disagreement. But if you're gonna play that card why are we funding Israel who is in violation of more UN resolutions than any other nation? Why aren't we attacking them? Oh right - Jesus, or Armageddon, or some crap like that. How about the "drone that could attack the united states" that was made of duct tape and a lawn mower engine? How about that "chemical weapons lab" that was nothing more than a traveling weather balloon station? And how about the mother of all lies, that Saddam and bin Laden were connected, later to be proven false by our own CIA? Not a shread of evidence - just more political posturing. Yes - he lied us into a war. Today he referred to all the insurgents in Iraq as al qaida - which again is patently false. Some may be, but alot are the iraqi's. As for the situation with Valerie Plame, it's pretty cut and dry. The law passed the House by a vote of 315–32, with all opposing votes coming from Democrats. The law passed the Senate 81–4, with the opponents being Democratic Senators Joseph Biden, Gary Hart, and Daniel Patrick Moynihan, and Republican Senator Charles Mathias. So it was YOUR party that supported and enacted the legislation. And it's YOUR party that has strayed from it's principles. Her identity was disclosed as retaliation for Joseph Wilson's op-ed that completely shattered one of Bush's baseless lies to go to war. It was planned, it was dirty, and it was unamerican. If this was a war of neccessity, why did they try to discredit anyone who showed the flawed logic they were using? You remember that whole democracy thing? Why was there not a reasoned debate and evaluation of ALL of the facts and not just the convenient ones? So yeah, I hate this administration. I hate this administration for spending my tax dollars needlessly, for sending my military somewhere they didn't need to be, for not going after al qaida and destroying them, for having no respect for the laws and traditions of this country. I would hate any administration for these crimes - it's not a team sport and I don't really pick sides. I expect both sides to uphold the constitution. And yeah, I hated Clinton's administration too. Now what does that make me? But there you go again rationalizing poor actions off of prior actions, not defending the rationality (or lack thereof) of the basis of the decision. I'm not supporting Clinton's pardon's either. There you go with your broad assumptions again. I do know that Libby LIED to protect someone or everyone in this administration and it completely removes any sort of accountability from the judicial process when a president pardons an aide that lied for him. That alone is extremely suspicious. I supported the impeachment of Clinton, not because I disagreed with his conduct (bj's from a young girl), but because he committed a crime while in office(perjury). The same way I support the impeachment of the current president for his crimes in office as well as his refusal to carry out the will of the American people. Perjury is perjury, a crime is a crime, and the law is the law. It's about country before party, about accountability, honor, and integrity. And we as a people, regardless of affiliation or our differences, should uphold those principles to the death.

Ummmm...George Tennet said that there was no credible intelligence, but that the administration went ahead with it anyway. Read Bob Woodward's book - he'll point out that the administration was planning the war before they were even in office, and twisted the facts to justify the ends. And Valerie Wilson (Plame, her maiden name, was her cover surname) was a CIA officer with NOC status (non-official cover) for several years which means that she had a non-governmental "cover" identity, a cover which is protected by law (see: Intelligence Identities and Protection Act of 1982).

And why is it that, after 1998, obstruction of justice is no longer a crime that deserves punishment? Your guys considered it an impeachable offense, though constitutional scholars and a vast majority of the American people clearly disagreed, and yet, in Libby's case, this was just "covering for a friend," and the law-proscribed punishment was overly severe.

I'm a Democrat. I disagree that the Dems have a walk in the park, we still have a lot of work to do, but I will say that Rudy is never, in a thousand years, going to convince the very-right-wing republican primary electorate that he deserves the nomination. PLEASE NOMINATE FLIP-FLOP ROMNEY AND FRED THOMPSON AS A TICKET - now THAT would be a walk in the park.

"The US Govt is here for one reason. That's to provide for the "Common Defense" and to enforce the "Laws" of this country."

Right. Exactly right. THIS country. Not other soverign nations, not people who have not attacked us on our own land, not people defending their land from our meddling. OUR country. I say tighten the borders, work on security. But if you look at our history majority of our wars have been to either protect or open up foreign markets(see "liberation of cuba and the platt amendment), not because of a direct imminent threat to our safety or soverignty.

Our laws are not other countries laws. And we have no business forcing our life onto other culture's. You agree the jihadists have an agenda to force the western culture's to be Islamic, no? Then what's any different about us forcing Western beliefs onto other culture's? And why do we have a right to fight back but they don't?

Hillary has Bill now she is after John hmmmmmmmmm. Story is she lost her first debate and she wants cover. Experience maybe wisdom lacking. She believes she's the one.

As for Democrats being "weak", who were the presidents during World War I and II, the last wars we actually declared and the last wars we won? And who had the wearwithall to stand up to them and end the wars? The republicans. And the country was grateful. And the country would be grateful if they continued a plicy of non-intervention.

Hell, look at what Bush campaigned with - a policy of no nation building, to stay out of other countries entanglements, and to worry about our own problems.

Either you're with us or against us, right?

Right at the end of the tape I hear Hillary saying something about how "they'll just keep throwing out the BS."

It's pretty clear that comments made about NAFTA and the war votes set her off.

I think the last seven years that we need more experience in a President. Obama, despite his political philosophy, reminds me of Bush in 2000, an empty slate. Can you name one thing of importance he has done in the Senate? I will never vote Republican in my lifetime and I used to be an independent, voting my concious. Never again. Not for anybody, ever from that party.

I voted for Al Gore and I appreciate what he's doing to educate the world about climate change, but has everyone forgotten he picked JOE LIBERMAN as his running mate? His judgment isn't always spot on!