Liberal Forum

Then let's see where I stand on the issues. Fire away.Would you prefer to be called a 'non-Liberal'?

Would you prefer to be called a 'non-Liberal'?I'm a liberal, in the classical sense. Not a progressive. Most self-proclaimed liberals are progressives.

Then let's see where I stand on the issues. Fire away.I read your posts, cappy. Already know.I'm a liberal, in the classical sense. Not a progressive. Most self-proclaimed liberals are progressives.Classic liberals are pretty conservative - especially economically. They're like classic motorcycles from 1912 -- good for their day, but not too efficient or practical in today's world.

I read your posts, cappy. Already know.Classic liberals are pretty conservative - especially economically. They're like classic motorcycles from 1912 -- good for their day, but not too efficient or practical in today's world.I like to follow the Non-Aggression Principle. I'm not perfect, but I damn sure try. Economically speaking, classical liberals advocate for free markets, not meddling in the markets nor colluding with corporations, such as Democrats and Republicans do. It's pretty much a hands off stance until someone gets hurt. Than that issue is addressed.

Mitt Romney's misperception of President Obama's 'gifts'.Turns out, Mitt Romney didnt really mean it when he apologized and said he had been just completely wrong about the 47%.Those who didnt buy Romneys October mea culpa for his biggest campaign stumble got confirmation Wednesday that the Republican presidential candidate really did, and does, believe that half of Americans are waiting for a handout.The first time Romney held forth on Americas moocher class, video captured the moment. This time, on Wednesday, it was the L.A. Timess Maeve Reston and a New York Times reporter listening in as the Republican presidential nominee again delivered his version of the truth. And again, the audience consisted of the candidate's fat-cat donors.[...]The Obama campaign was following the old playbook of giving a lot of stuff to groups that they hoped they could get to vote for them and be motivated to go out to the polls, specifically the African American community, the Hispanic community and young people, Romney told hundreds of donors during a telephone town hall. In each case they were very generous in what they gave to those groups.[...]Romney couldnt be expected to acknowledge that he offered up gifts of his own: extended tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans, a shredding of the regulations that would keep big investors from running amok, unfettered access for big energy companies to Americas wildlands.What Romney also failed to mention is that seniors, who one could argue get the most of what he would call government 'gifts' in the form of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, voted for him.

What Susan Rice Actually Said On Face The NationSo we'll want to see the results of that investigation to draw any definitive conclusions. But based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what it began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo, where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy sparked by this hateful video. But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals, joined in that effort with heavy weapons of the sort that are, unfortunately, readily now available in Libya post-revolution. And that it spun from there into something much, much more violent.Susan Rice had no involvement in what happened in Benghazi, and was merely presenting the intelligence that she had been briefed on that morning.What John McCain is saying now:Susan Rice should have known better and if she didnt know better, she is not qualified. She should have known better. I will do everything in my power to block her from being the United States secretary of state. She has proven that she either doesnt understand or she is not willing to accept evidence on its face. There is no doubt five days later what this attack was and for look, I was on "Face the Nation" that Sunday. Right after her came the president of the Libyan National Assembly who said this was al-Qaeda. Everybody knew that. So she went out and told the American people something that was patently false and defied common sense.Here's what Condi Rice said in 2002:We know that he [Saddam Hussein] has the infrastructure, nuclear scientists to make a nuclear weapon. The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly he can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.But in 2005, (when Condi Rice was nominated for Secretary of State) John McCain and Lindsey Graham fiercely defended Condi Rice from Democratic attacks of lying, arguing she had been misled by intelligence. I can only conclude we're doing this for no other reason than because of lingering bitterness at the outcome of the elections, McCain complained when Condi Rices nomination came to a vote. Lets not forget that Condi Rice was also central to the Bush administrations policy on Iraq, whereas Susan Rice, as U.N. ambassador, appears to be on the periphery on Libya.John McCain has become a bitter old man with a severe case of sour grapes.And Lindsey Graham is his Sancho Panza.

What Romney also failed to mention is that seniors, who one could argue get the most of what he would call government 'gifts' in the form of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, voted for him.Seniors get Medicare, not Medicaid, right? Social Security and Medicare are not the gifts everyone is talking about, never has been. Social Security and Medicare have been paid into by the people that receive it, for the most part. Disability aside. No one has ever said jack about "gettin rid" of Social Security and Medicare.You know this. Nice to see you throwing out crap and see what sticks like shintao, Cantdecide, dano bivins, wharfat, eclectic...do.Please to show me where Mitt ever called Social Security and Medicare "gifts." Or any Republican for that matter. So, as you say, the seniors ain't "gettin gifts" and they weren't the ones who voted for Slow to get said gifts. Welcome to the friggin fray, senior mod.

What Susan Rice Actually Said On Face The NationI know what she said.Slowbama, the half-breed stuttering muslim said in the foreign policy debate that he said in the Rose Garden that the Benghazi attack was a terrorist attack. This was Sept. 12.Slow said in his press conference the other day that Susan Rice was under his direction to go onto the Sunday shows where she definitively, unequivocally stated that the Benghazi attack was a protest over the internet video. This was Sept. 16.I know you are a liberal and will excuse any behavior by your guys, and I know for a fact that in a case like this, where your guys a dead caught lying that you will point to someone else, Bush and his, usually, with "the other guy did it too" defence, but you know, Misty, this ain't Karl Rove and Scooter Libby, in this one there is dead people and Slow is lying about it.But that ain't what pizzes me off about Benghazi.The men on the ground requested help and Slow, or Paneta, or some general somewhere DENIED backup.Slow is truely and Shirley well fu(ked on this one and that fact that people like you are making excuses is frankly, disgusting.If one of mine had done this I'd tar and feather him before tying a rope around his neck and sending him on a short drop with an jerk at the end of it.And I don't mean dano is standing there.

Seniors get Medicare, not Medicaid, right?Seniors get Medicaid for long term care in nursing facilities.Two out of every three Medicaid dollars is spent on the elderly and disabled.One of the 'gifts' that Romney talked about was free health care.But he neglected to mention that seniors who get the lions share of Medicaid dollars voted for him.I guess their vote couldn't be bought like those pesky brown people. No one has ever said jack about "gettin rid" of Social Security and Medicare.You must not be listening very well.

MistyBlue, on 15 November 2012 - 09:53 PM, said:What Susan Rice Actually Said On Face The NationI know what she said.Slowbama, the half-breed stuttering muslim said in the foreign policy debate that he said in the Rose Garden that the Benghazi attack was a terrorist attack. This was Sept. 12.Slow said in his press conference the other day that Susan Rice was under his direction to go onto the Sunday shows where she definitively, unequivocally stated that the Benghazi attack was a protest over the internet video. This was Sept. 16.Wrong. She said it was a group of 'extremists'.Here's what Rice said on another Sunday show on ABC: But our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous not a premeditated response to what had transpired in Cairo. In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, there was a violent protest that was undertaken in reaction to this very offensive video that was disseminated.We believe that folks in Benghazi, a small number of people came to the embassy to or to the consulate, rather, to replicate the sort of challenge that was posed in Cairo. And then as that unfolded, it seems to have been hijacked, let us say, by some individual clusters of extremists who came with heavier weapons, weapons that as you know in in the wake of the revolution in Libya are are quite common and accessible. And it then evolved from there.http://www.slate.com...i_take_two.htmlI know you are a liberal and will excuse any behavior by your guys, and I know for a fact that in a case like this, where your guys a dead caught lying that you will point to someone else, Bush and his, usually, with "the other guy did it too" defence, but you know, Misty, this ain't Karl Rove and Scooter Libby, in this one there is dead people and Slow is lying about it.Who is lying? Obama called it an act of terror the next day, and Susan Rice (who was only relaying the intelligence she was given that morning) said it was a group of 'extremists'. Not protesters.The question I keep coming back to, which no one seems to be able to answer is, what would have been the motivation to lie about whether or not this was a terrorist attack? For what reason?What do you think Obama was trying to cover up?

Fox News Conspiracy On Sandy And Jobs Report-VIDEOMSNBCs Lawrence ODonnell called out the conspiracy theorists at Fox News for pushing job trutherism to a new level. The Labor Department released its latest jobless claims report showing a rise in those filing for unemployment insurance in the wake of Hurricane Sandy. But instead of looking at the facts, said ODonnell, FOX hosts wondered why these numbers came after the election. Already suspicious of the Labor Department, the Fox News hosts went after Labor Secretary Hilda Solis and her department and questioned the Labor Departments findings. After a six-minute debate over whether or not the numbers presented by the Bureau of Labor Statistics were accurate (something these hosts didnt question under a Republican president) the Fox hosts concluded that the Department of Labor is getting sketchier and sketchier with each one of these numbers. The Fox morning show attempted to explain to their viewers why the number of first-time jobless claims increased the week after the election, despite the widely reported stories and todays numbers attributing those claims to the devastating damage from the storm. Eric Bolling, a Fox News and FOX Business Network anchor, presented his analysis under one thesis:Eric Bolling: Theres gonna be something. Theres gonna be an adjustment, theyre saying this has something to do with Sandy. Im sure, because the number is so much higher than expected. Steve Doocy: You have been suspicious of the numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics before.The hosts continued to debate these numbers:Eric Bolling: This is the first week after the election. Gretchen Carlson: Thats the first thing everyones going to think about. Eric Bolling: Does anyone find it odd that the weeks leading into the election, the number went down Brian Kilmeade: Everyone finds it odd Brian Kilmeade: Now, Sandy. How could you possibly say that that has anything to do with first-time jobless claims? When a storm hits you get fired? Eric Bolling: The Dept. of Labor is getting sketchier and sketchier with each one of these numbersTwice in its own report the Labor Department cited an increase in claims due to Hurricane Sandy. The very first sentence from the Associated Presss wire story at 8:33 a.m. this morning read, Superstorm Sandy drives US weekly unemployment aid applications up to 439,000. And a later story from the AP quotes:The Labor Department stating that weekly applications increased by 78,000 mostly because a large number of applications were filed in states damaged by the storm. People can claim unemployment benefitsand if their workplaces close they dont get paid. The storm has affected the claims data for the past two weeks and may distort reports for another two weeks, the department has said.Lawrence ODonnell pointed out the reason the Fox News hosts cannot fathom the increase of jobless claims:As Ive told you before, most people who live and work in New York City have never been to Staten Island. The conspiracy theorists at FOX News who cant figure out why the jobless claims suddenly went up have obviously never been to Staten Island. Certainly none of them could have been there since Hurricane Sandy.ODonnell witnessed the tragedy in Staten Island, seeing hat those statistics in the report were not just numbers, but actual human beings who now do not have homes or jobs:None of them could have walked those streets of death and destruction out there the way I did a few days the hurricane and the way President Obama did today, and then wonder: Why did jobless claims go up after the election? which also happens to be after the hurricane. These same people who have never had an occasion to doubt the Bureau of Labor Statistics work under a Republican President, these same people who have no idea how the Bureau of Labor Statistics arrives at any of its statistics about anythingincluding jobless claimsthese same people suddenly believe that they are better estimators of jobless claims than the career professionals who work the numbers in the Bureau of Labor Statistics under both Democrat and Republican presidents.Superstorm Sandy has left millions of residents and businesses in the dark, some still without electricity. New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo estimated the storm caused $50 billion in damage and economic loss, $33 billion of that in New York alone. Still, Fox News kept busy questioning the numbers, even though the AP story is posted on their own website.ODonnell asked the Fox News hosts in the Rewrite:Nothing in the devastation brought by Hurricane Sandy could explain an increase in jobless claims in FOX News world where they were so quick to try to rewrite the Bureau of Labor Statistics with their own wild imaginations. How sealed off from reality can you be? How sealed off from New York City can you be in the FOX News studio in the middle of Manhattan? How sealed off from human suffering can you be?No Jackhole, you don't get fired.But when the place you worked at has no power, or is flooded, or just isn't there any more, you're still out of a job.

Chris Christie Disagrees With Mitt Romney's 'Gifts' Comment New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie [R] said Friday that he agreed that former GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney's recent comment on a conference call with donors that President Barack Obama won reelection because of "gifts" to minority and young voters was wrong.Christie was asked if he concurred with Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal [R], who called Romney's remark "wrong.""Yeah, sure," he said on MSNBC's Morning Joe.Doesn't take much courage for them to say this stuff after the election.

Six Affairs, Two Abortions and Another Term in CongressThe anti-abortion, pro-family Tennessee congressman who pushed his patient and mistress to get an abortion also agreed that his wife should have two, according to court transcripts released Thursday.Those documents, from GOP Rep. Scott DesJarlais' 2000 divorce proceedings, paint a lurid picture of a doctor who had multiple affairs with coworkers and patients -- at least one of whom he prescribed pain pills for -- while he was chief of staff at a local hospital.The Huffington Post first reported that DesJarlais pressured one of his patients to abort a pregnancy that she said came from their flings. The doctor calls the 24-year-old a "psycho" in the transcript of his testimony. DesJarlais won reelection last week, even after reports surfaced that he had sex with other patients, and that he prescribed them pills. DesJarlais admitted the HuffPost report, but challenged the credibility of the later case.It turns out it was all true, as well as reports that he denied during his 2010 campaign that he stuck a gun in his mouth for more than two hours, and threatened suicide after it became apparent he could not repair his marriage with his then-wife, Susan.Although DesJarlais called the 2010 reports "all false", he testified under oath they were true. "It's very embarrassing to talk about. I know better than this," DesJarlais said at the time. His wife also accused him of dry-firing the gun outside her bedroom, although DesJarlais testified he had only been spinning the empty chamber of a revolver. "I deal with people in the hospital that do this," DesJarlais said. "Suicide threats is [sic] probably the most immature form of attention-seeking behavior that there is and I resorted to that on this evening and I regret it, I regret that she felt threatened by it, and I'm very ashamed of it."[...]Whether or not he should resign is likely to become a pressing question. House Speaker John Boehner's did not answer a request for comment. Aside from the new details, which DesJarlais has said are merely part of his messy breakup -- the congressman is facing a probe by the Tennessee Board of Medical Examiners, and some of his explanations and denials are apparently lies, based on his own testimony.Aside from denying the gun incident, DesJarlais also argued that the tape recording was made without his knowledge.And his admissions that he had sex with other patients, including the woman who got Darvocet from him, are likely to raise the stakes in the medical board's probe. Tennessee law deems any sex between doctors and patients to be serious medical misconduct. Penalties range from reprimands to license suspension.It's not clear what the fallout from sex with workers at the hospital would be, but DesJarlais admits to that as well. In one case, he hooked up with a technician at the hospital Christmas party in 1999, then took her home with him. Among other details, Desjarlais kept photos of himself with one of his patient-sex partners, which his wife later found during their reconciliation.She also acknowledges she strayed in the relationship. DesJarlais has since remarried, and used his family man, doctor image in most of his campaign literature.Read MoreCongratulations to the people of Tennessee for reelecting this POS.

So this is why John McCain has been running around to every TV camera he can find to say that we need to convene a 'Watergate' type select committee on Benghazi.John McCain's Benghazi Committee Plan Would Give Senator New RelevanceWASHINGTON -- Just four years ago, John McCain was the leader of the GOP. Today, he's the highest-ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, a perch from which the former fighter pilot is deeply engaged in the national conversation over war, terrorism and intelligence gathering.But in January, the Arizona senator will lose his top-ranking committee seat due to term limits. The only ranking Republican spot available to him next session will be on the Indian Affairs Committee.Unless, that is, the Senate creates a brand-new select committee. On Wednesday, McCain, flanked by Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), proposed just that: a select committee with extensive authority to investigate the Benghazi, Libya, attack and the U.S. government's response. The Republican most likely to hold the ranking spot on such a panel would be, of course, John McCain, giving the Arizona senator a new burst of relevance.

Impeach Obama Robocall Campaign Launched By Conservative Group - Listen WASHINGTON -- The movement to impeach President Barack Obama has been launched, just days after he won a second term in the White House.The Conservative Majority Fund, a conservative group known primarily for its birther conspiracy spreading, has launched a robocall campaign to gin up support for the president's impeachment. The call, emailed to The Huffington Post by Shaun Dakin of StopPoliticalCalls.org, reads in part as follows:Our only recourse now is to move forward with the full impeachment of President Obama. We suspect that Obama is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors and that there may be grounds for impeachment as is laid out in the constitution. Further, he may not even be a U.S. citizen because nobody, I mean no one, has seen an actual physical copy of his birth certificate. Impeachment is our only option. And Republicans are already considering Obama investigations. As the nation's most effective conservative group we are launching the official impeach Obama campaign.Conservative Majority Fund is on the fringe of the conservative fringe. And their outlandish drives are often done with an eye towards exploiting people's dark political fears as a way to raise money. So it's not terribly surprising that they moved this quickly to start the drumbeats for the president's impeachment. Among the "misdemeanors" they cite are the president's proposals to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay -- an idea supported by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) -- and to give "full amnesty" to undocumented immigrants. Indeed, a pathway to citizenship has, in recent days, been endorsed by McCain and other Republicans. The group is casting a wide net with the calls. According to Dakin, people in Washington, Colorado, New Jersey and Virginia have so far reported receiving the call.About the Conservative Majority Fund:Racist Reagan Operatives Behind New Robocall Calling for Obama's Impeachment

Uncovered at Last: Lee Atwater's Infamous 'Southern Strategy' ColloquyOver the years, we've written a lot at this site (Crooks and Liars) about Lee Atwater, the erstwhile godfather of Republican dog-whistle attack politics -- Amato in particular has often discussed Atwater's central role in transforming the GOP into the Party of the Old South it has become today. In our book Over the Cliff,, we cited an infamous interview with Atwater in which he explained how the Southern Strategy worked: You start out in 1954 by saying, ***, ***, ***. By 1968 you cant say *** hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states rights, and all that stuff, and youre getting so abstract. Now, youre talking about cutting taxes, and all these things youre talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites. We want to cut this, is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than ***, ***.However, a number of conservatives have over the years disputed the veracity of that interview and that quote, or have claimed it wasn't really Atwater. You know, the denial thing. Now James Carter IV -- the same researcher who dug up Mitt Romney's "47 percent" remarks on video has unearthed the entire 42-minute interview. Rick Perlstein has the entire thing over at The Nation:In the lead-up to the infamous remarks, it is fascinating to witness the confidence with which Atwater believes himself to be establishing the racial innocence of latter-day Republican campaigning: My generation, he insists, will be the first generation of Southerners that wont be prejudiced. He proceeds to develop the argument that by dropping talk about civil rights gains like the Voting Rights Act and sticking to the now-mainstream tropes of fiscal conservatism and national defense, consultants like him were proving people in the South are just like any people in the history of the world. It is only upon Professor Lamiss gently Socratic follow-ups, and those of a co-interviewer named Saul (Carter hasn't been able to confirm his identity, but suspects it was the late White House correspondent Saul Friedman), that Atwater begins to loosen upprefacing his reflections, with a plainly guilty conscience, Now, yall aren't quoting me on this? (Apparently , this is the reason why Atwaters name wasnt published in 1984 but was in 1999, after his death). He then utters his infamous words. The interlocutors go on to kibitz about Huey Long and barbecue. Then Atwater, apparently satisfied that he'd absolved the Southern Republican Party of racism once and for all, follows up with a prediction based on a study he claims demonstrates that Strom Thurmond won 38 percent of South Carolinas middle-class black vote in his 1978 Senate campaign (run by Atwater). That voter, in my judgment, he claims, will be more likely to vote his economic interests than he will anything else. And that is the voter that I think through a fairly slow but very steady process, will go Republican. Because race no longer matters: In my judgment Karl Marx [is right]... the real issues ultimately will be the economic issues. He continues, in words that uncannily echo the 47 percent tape (nothing new under the wingnut sun), that statistically, as the number of non-producers in the system moves toward fifty percent, the conservative coalition cannot but expand. Voila: a new Republican majority. Racism won't have anything to do with it.So they claim, to this very day.

Maine GOP Chairman Charlie Webster...I See Black PeopleMaine GOP Chairman Charlie Webster has apologized for alleging widespread voter fraud by mysterious groups of black people in rural parts of the state.Earlier this week, Webster told a local television station that In some parts of rural Maine, there were dozens, dozens of black people who came in and voted on Election Day. Everybody has a right to vote, but nobody in town knows anyone whos black. Maines Democratic Party chairman called the comments racist, and the states NAACP chapters called them offensive and insulting.Websters apology amounted to a sudden reversal. As late as Thursday afternoon, he was still defending his comments in an interview with Talking Points Memo. Theres nothing about me that would be discriminatory, he said. I know black people. I play basketball every Sunday with a black guy. Hes a great friend of mine. Nobody would ever accuse me of suggesting anything.Some of my best friends........ROFL

Wrong. She said it was a group of 'extremists'.Here's what Rice said on another Sunday show on ABC:I don't need all that, I watched them Sunday shows my damn self. Susan Rice stated unequivocally that the Benghazi attack was a protest over the internet video.1:55 in for about a minute...Who is lying?Slow is lying Obama called it an act of terror the next day, Show me where. I watched that $h!t and you can't do it. Not unless you take out a couple minutes of video of Slow in the Rose Garden and splice that crap together.and Susan Rice (who was only relaying the intelligence she was given that morning) Show me where I've said Susan Rice was not only repeating the information she was given. She was lied to. By Slow.Her word at 2:27 into that youtube... "spontaneous."said it was a group of 'extremists'. Not protesters.She can call it a ham sandwich for all I care. This was a planned, well coordinated terrorist attack. Don't insult my intelligence, which is vast, by trying to play words games here.The narrative of the left, until they were caught red handed, was that this was a reaction to the video. Would you like me to go find Jay Carney saying it? Would you like me to go find Slow saying it six(6) times in his speech to the UN? Would you like me to go find Slow saying it on the view? Would you like me to go find Slow saying this to Univision?He's a lying fu(kin azzhole. End of story.The question I keep coming back to, which no one seems to be able to answer is,Really? No one? Seems to me you didn't try that hard to find someone to answer that when the friggin horse thread is just around the corner.what would have been the motivation to lie about whether or not this was a terrorist attack? For what reason?What do you think Obama was trying to cover up?Because Slow has been going around saying that Al Qaeda is about finished. That he has a handle on this terror deal. He, personally, the way Slow tells it, killed Bin Laden. And on and on and on... It's all a bunch of crap and this Benghazi attack puts the lie to it. And then you start this thread?C I A Approved Susan Rice's Talking Points On Libya According to GOP Rep Peter King by MistyI JUST watched Peter King on this not a couple of hours ago. Did you?He said exactly the opposite.Patreaus testified today that the CIA's position was that the Benghazi attack WAS a terrorist attack. He said that this language was taken out of the brief somewhere between the CIA and Susan Rice's appearance on the Sunday talks shows. Even more distressing is that the committee that Peter King was on could not get an answer to exactly who took that language out of the brief. He said that the folks before the committee were explicitly asked that today and no one would give an answer. So the administration is STILL playing the shell game. How the fu(k can they not know who it was that said, "yea, don't say that?" There's only so many people here, Misty. And remember, Slow himself said in his press conference that HE was the one who sent Susan Rice out to the Sunday talks shows.Wiggle outta that $h!t.

Wow! That's a lot to take in.what would have been the motivation to lie about whether or not this was a terrorist attack? For what reason?What do you think Obama was trying to cover up?Because Slow has been going around saying that Al Qaeda is about finished. That he has a handle on this terror deal. He never said Al Qaeda was finished. That would be a ridiculous statement.He, personally, the way Slow tells it, killed Bin Laden. And on and on and on...Yeah, except when he gives credit to the Navy Seals and our intelligence agencies.And remember, Slow himself said in his press conference that HE was the one who sent Susan Rice out to the Sunday talks shows.Wiggle outta that $h!t.I never thought she went out there on her own.I'm sure he picked her because it was close to the election, and he wanted to send someone out there who was not really seen as a political figure.That worked out well for him.

Wow! That's a lot to take in.You running a political debate thread or a puppet show here, girlie? Suck it up.He never said Al Qaeda was finished. That would be a ridiculous statement.about finished.On the run, on the ropes, on their last legs, lookin at it... take your pick. Do you want me to go find where he says this?And don't be takin words outta my mouth to try it make it look like I said sumpin I never said, or half said, you know what I mean. Yeah, except when he gives credit to the Navy Seals and our intelligence agencies.Every now and then, but most of the time it's "I,I,I." Giving the go ahead on the Bin Laden mission was a no brainer. If hadn't of given the go ahead then one of the military folks standing around would have shot him dead on the spot.