There can be no doubt that there are a number of conspiracy buffs out there, many on the outer edge. These fanatics certainly get their fair share of press. However, as long as the press gives priority to their outrageous theories, and ignores real questions (such as what happened to the men cheering on the rooftop as the WTC burned), the nit-wits will continue to manufacture fantasies. Why the outrageous theories always get the press while tough, hard questions remain un-asked, is the real issue.

It is bothersome that John McCain can make such a "slip of the tongue". We are looking at a possible future President. Does he realistically have the right stuff? One might gather that he is a zealot leading a Holy War against the infidel. At best,

one wonders about his knowlege of Middle East fundamentals. Do we want a leader that paints the entire Muslim world with the same brush? That display of naivete is hardly what we need in a very complicated and senstive Middle East dynamic. I am proud and repectful of his service to our country. I am also extremely concerned of his ability to be Commander in Chief.

Is it not a coincidence that all four of these fellows

have similar religious backgrounds? "Both sides"???

Give me a break.

Joan,

The issue should not be whether we want a woman President. The real issue is the election of the best PERSON for the job. Hillary presents a very polarizing persona, not because of her gender, but by her actions (past and present)

Lieberman continues his questionable interpretations of this debacle. For the life of me, I can't fathom why he escapes real scrutiny by the press in general. Methinks his intentions are less than honorable, as far as the American people are concerned.

How can anyone feel comfortable having this man as Commander in Chief? This war is killing our country economically. Does anyone with an IQ above room temperature really think we can sustain our Armed Forces numbers with this kind of leadership?

I smell DRAFT if McCain gets elected, and he can then complete his unfinished Viet Nam legacy. (Honor amidst an unjust war)

Good old Joe once again shows his true colors. I am afraid his true allegiance is not to the voters of his native state, or to the United States. His loyalties are expended elsewhere.

"Today, we face an enemy that is not only expansionist in its aims, but has actually attacked our homeland -- and intends to do so again........"

Here we go with the Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith, and Cheney neo-con

rhetoric again !!!!!!

McCain can't support this bill and at the same time prepare for another war in IRAN. We are running out of troops......

perhaps another draft???

I think we may be giving Mr. Cheney too much credit. What the American people and the press really need to do is carefully examine the real architects of the neocon dogma. The movers and shakers of this mentality must pay allegiance to interests other than the people of America. To whom is this allegiance directed? Where do Perle, Feith, Wolfowitz, and the Rumsfelds

get there income from? Are they still employed by the U.S.?

I hope not.

If the Dem's lose, they will continue to kiss up to the man. He could then continue his representation of foreign interests in lieu of his Congressional responsibilities.

McCain seems to display a one track mind when it comes to the "War on Terrorism".....

Keep fighting until we win, at ALL costs.

When we run out of competent soldiers, then what?

"In most states, Ralph Nader will probably be there, too, though his influence is likely to be limited."

I would not be so quick to negate Nader's appeal. He gets virtually NO PRESS from the media, but is still running significant poll numbers. Many view him as the ONLY candidate that looks at the unending Israeli/Palestinian conflict in an objective manner.

McCain and his neo-con buddies make it so easy to undertand the entire Middle East situation. There are only three sides..

1. The Good - Israel and her supporters

2. The Bad - Al Qaeda

3. The Ugly - The rest of the World

I am thankful for lexicons like Saban; they can always be counted on to direct one to the Truth.

I sincerely hope that this type of bias is not universal in the Main Stream Media. When the American People only hear one side of a particular issue, the possibilities are devastating.

WHY does there seem to be such a one sided approach to reporting all issues related to the entire Middle East?

Thanks for pointing out that not all Jews support Kristol's drivel. It turns my stomach when his ilk, (Christian, Jew, Muslim alike) preach Dogma to support criminal agendas. Has America denigrated itself to the point that neither American foreign policy or Israel's role in the Middle East can be fairly discussed and analysed?

Glenn, thanks for addressing the issue. In today's MSM, there seems to be far too little examination of these topics.