Excerpts from Obama to AIPAC, 3/2/07:

"...my plan includes a robust regional diplomatic strategy that includes talking to Syria and Iran..."

"...The world must work to stop Iran’s uranium enrichment program and prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. It is far too dangerous to have nuclear weapons in the hands of a radical theocracy. And while we should take no option, including military action, off the table, sustained and aggressive diplomacy combined with tough sanctions should be our primary means to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons."

Excerpts from Hillary to AIPAC 2/1/07:

" ...There are many, including our President who rejects any kind of process of any sort of engagement with countries like Syria and Iran. I do believe that that is certainly a good faith position to take, but I am not sure it is the smartest strategy that will take us to the goals that we share..."

"...And what do I mean by engagement or some kind of a process? Well I'm not sure anything positive would come out of it, I have no expectations whatsoever. But there are a number of factors that I think argue for some attempt to do what I am suggesting: number one I don't think we know enough about how Iranian society and their government really functions."

"...And I also want to send a message if we ever do have to take war, drastic action to the rest of the world that we exhausted all possibilities because we need friends and allies to stand with us as we stand with Israel in this long war against terrorism and extremism."

Will the words and actions of Hillary, Obama, Pelosi, or Reid be supportive of an attack on Iran or against an attack? The Bush administration gets their point across in the media. Can any of these four get a front-page article about Iran in the NYT (or Sunday morning national talk show) to directly address where the Bush administration stands? Is that a fair question?

These media reach a far greater audience than the number of people searching the internet for viewpoints, and searching the internet is not going to prevent this war.

The time to stop the rush to war is running out.

Especially the two most likely nominees: Hillary and Obama?

Are they for war with Iran, or do they fear being attacked for their views? We should be hearing more from the Dem leadership in Congress, too.

Also, if enough Americans favor more wars against people not like them, or just don't give a damn about anything but themselves, little will be done to stop this madness by those mentioned above. The only hope then to prevent war would be true heroic action from people in positions of power.

America is not Germany in the 1930's, at least not yet.

The fake smile is what you do when you get photographed. I was never good at it, so people think I'm "unhappy."

Politicians have to be seen smiling all the time, or all the children will think something is wrong. You're not smiley! I can't vote for you!

But how stupid are you to think you should smile when you are giving/receiving a report about Virginia Tech? The smiles are much more disturbing than the AG's place in the picture. He ain't going nowhere until January, 2009.

Wilson's article missed it. We want her ass in jail. Too bad if it's overcrowded. Jail sucks.

That's why we want her to sit in jail instead of her home. It appears she has very little regard for something as basic as motor-vehicle laws, and for all of us on the road every day, how else to keep her off the road, but put her in jail? Teach her a hard lesson that she can't buy her way out of.

I am sorry that our mammal brains and sex drives have evolved over millions of years. My brain tells me what is sexually attractive, but it isn't easy to explain. I'm sorry that animals were having sex before they invented language.

But for your own sake, it is a good idea to eat a healthy diet.

And you are probably more sexually attractive when you are healthy instead of sick.

Who is Romney trying to impress?

non sequitur

1. Logic. an inference or a conclusion that does not follow from the premises.

2. a statement containing an illogical conclusion.

[Origin: < L: it does not follow]

Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

A thought that does not logically follow what has just been said: “We had been discussing plumbing, so her remark about astrology was a real non sequitur.”

The American Heritage® New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition

Copyright © 2005 by Houghton Mifflin Company.

Romney's premise is a big fat lie.

And the way these candidates pander to the base-- the null set describes their lack of a set of real balls (except for maybe Paul).

Most of them wouldn't even give a straight answer to the Libby pardon question. "Let's wait for the appeal process!" B.S. Libby won't win his appeal. Just answer the question.

It will be even more fun when Fred Thompson's character and maybe Newt join in the debates. Watch them tell us that everyone should obey the rule of law but them.