Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:
Published Letters: 870
Editor's Choice: 116
In part because "That's how we got into Iraq in the first place," as webcelt wrote.
But also because McCain has admitted he knows nothing about the economy. He offers no domestic agenda. McCain is Mr. Foreign Affairs, General War Dude. And if you put all your eggs in the foreign affairs basket, you'd better be spot on all the time.
No, don't do it!
Obama has not refused to appear on Fox News Channel. He was on last week!
He boycotted a debate co-sponsored by Fox News Channel. And he currently won't go on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace.
Who would want to participate in a debate moderated by a biased Fox News Channel? And Chris Wallace is a douchebag.
A First Lady going to Bosnia (under quite dangerous circumstances) meeting with the Acting President, having roundtable discussions and meetings with NGOs is impressive.
It's ONE example of how Hillary Clinton wasn't a mere trophy First Lady and was an active participant in the White House.
Were you expecting her to do some sort of "study abroad" program in Bosnia as First Lady? Nine hours isn't nine days, but it's not nothing.
I feel nauseated when people say "I'm nauseous."
Damn skippy.
Or, at least, people feel more free in admitting their sexism than they do their racism.
Libby's law license in DC had already been suspended in DC on more than one occasion for failure to pay his $180 annual dues. He let it lapse completely from December 2001 to November 2005 when he worked for Cheney (coincidence?). I doubt Libby's too concerned about it.
Kudos to you for a genuine mea culpa.
Richardson is the only one of the original gaggle of Democratic candidates that actively seemed to be running for Vice -President. Obama's ahead with a likely unbeatable lead, so of course Richardson will endorse Obama. He's hoping for an Obama-Richardson ticket. It won't happen, though, because Richardson won't bring Obama any votes and doesn't really add much to the ticket.
It's absolutely correct that Lieberman's betrayal began long before The Day's 2006 endorsement of him. However, upon reading the complete editorial, I get the impression that The Day believes Lieberman finally crossed a point of no return in backing John McCain for president.
Lieberman was no longer simply disagreeing with the Democratic Party in some matters. He'd turned his back altogether.
I don't think Harry Potter is a fair dig. Hermione is essential to the story
Hermione is an important character. That point is that the "Hermione Granger" stories probably wouldn't have been purchased by as wide an audience. Which sucks.
Meanwhile, I'd like to give a shout-out to The Dead White Men. Because a lot of them are classics for good reason. We don't need to dismiss the DWMs to appreciate other diverse points of view.
Does suspending the drawdown mean he's calling the troops failures? Why do you hate the troops, President Bush? Why do you hate America?
And the surge is revealed for what it was all along--a stall tactic to dump responsibility for the Iraq War off onto the next president.
Newsflash: we have to withdraw major combat troops from Iraq sometime. It's long past time to get serious about how we're going to do this with minimum damage and some measure of success.
"I am proud to endorse [HIM] for president," Mrs. Reagan said. "He is doing a fine job of carrying on Ronnie's legacy. His agenda of tax cuts, smaller government, and a strong national defense will build pride in America just as it did when my husband was president."
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/05/17/reagan.bush/index.html
Of course, that quote is from May 2000 when she endorsed George W. Bush. She endorsed him again in 2004, despite Bush's opposition to embryonic stem cell research.
CParis1 is right: "Who else was she going to endorse?"
The Surge is likely part of the reason Sadr allowed a ceasefire. With more American soldiers on the ground to fight back, it was probably the smart thing to do. With the Surge coming to an end, there's less incentive to maintain the cease fire.
What an intertwined mess.
The question seems to have come from a British reporter.
The follow-up question:
Q Did we get out too early?
THE PRESIDENT: No, you didn't. The British commitment was -- first of all, you were there from day one, and you were there during the very heavy fighting. And the British commitment was to move to the airbase based upon success. And I'm very grateful for the British friendship and alliance, and the contributions.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/03/20080327-3.html
If the British didn't get out too early (supposedly causing chaos in Basra which is spreading to other regions), why is any American talk of American troop withdrawals tantamount to conceding defeat?
You know what else can trigger mental illness/depression?
Any life change, whether you wanted the change or not.
I suppose the implication is "as opposed to Barack Hussein Obama, foreign Muslim terrorist plant."
Hey, I just realized the inspiration for McCain's new slogan:
Stephen Colbert's book: I Am America (And So Can You!)
An absolute dealbreaker? Maybe, maybe not. But these things are included on dating sites because they matter to some people. Like race, religion, prior marital status, having kids and even one's picture.
If you've been automatically rejected for what you would consider a petty reason, then good for you. Saved you wasting time on someone you'd deem petty.
And if you're the one automatically rejecting people online for "petty" reasons, then good for you. You've got to pare down the possibilities somehow. Unless you plan on corresponding with every person on the site and meeting them for coffee. And most people who pare down "too far" end up expanding their possibilities when "round one" doesn't work out. That's just a part of dating, maturing and realizing what's really important to you.*
*Or a sign of desperation.