Anyone claiming to come from a moral perspective shouldn't be using the term "murderer" in the abortion debate. There may be women present who have gone through that intense and emotional decision. Some who felt they had no outs. Some who went through it in absolute turmoil.

They really don't need or deserve some gorilla calling them a murderer.

I'd suggest taking a gander of the doctrine of pre-emptive war, which the anti-abortion crowd seems to embrace.

Is Falwell endorsing?

"The fact of the matter is, most abortion opponents view abortion as the immoral taking of life which is usually described as murder."

No. The fact of the matter is that most abortion opponents are insufferable blowhards who spend their lives finding reasons why they are morally superior to others. And then hollering it out just about full time, much to the chagrin of the overwhelming majority.....And the politicians that pander to them don't want abortion to be illegal or murder either. They just want the permanent issue in order to instigate the loyal voting block of insufferable moral blow hards to come to the polls each election cycle and vote "R".

But God approves and that's all that matters.

The rigid stand against abortion by right wingers would suddenly become very flexible if their 15 year old daughter came home pregnant by Tyrone of the high school basketball team.

We were waiting for you to show up with your expertise in impotence.

DON'T GO TO SLEEP.........Keep trying.

Don't be the typical conservative belligerent.......You should thank us. If it weren't for liberal blogs you'd have no social life at all.

That's all folks.

Things are going well. The surge is working. When can we leave?

Is sunk on this one. No matter how many minions appear and no matter what they say.

They have lost the overwhelming majority on Iraq for good. The bullshit has been too deep for too long.

They are going to claim victory in Iraq? LMAO. Is someone going to land on an air-craft carrier to announce it?

Have been steady bad for a long time. The neocons don't even give a shit about that anymore, if they ever did.

I'm certain the number they are focused on now is over 50 percent would approve of strikes against Iran to prevent them from going nuke.

Bush lectured Musharraf that he can't be the President and the Military chief...........If only we were so lucky.

That even some of the most loyal Bush Davidians are getting tired of bull-shitting about Iraq on a day to day basis. Sean Hannity is now talking about "the prism of history" will prove Bush victorious.

About Glenn's name was when Tucker Carlson couldn't pronounce it correctly. Is it that tough?

What can I do to convince you that I'm worthy of that trust? How be I become a proponent of waterboarding? Would that suffice, or would that just be my first baby step?

Congress just over-rided a veto. What balls.

Water can be used for all kinds of stuff. Like torture.

Didn't get his way. Christ, the flag at FOX News is probably at half-mast.

About liberals and national security.

If I wear a flag lapel pin, and put a bumper sticker on my car do my national security credentials rise?

Kneeling down and bending over.

Don't want to offend, or do anything that might possibly offend that 10 or 15 percent of non-partisan swing voter-independents. Or do anything too aggressive that the republicans can use with the middle ground. There's still a lot of people out there, not just the far right, that look at the torture issue as--"who cares what they do to a terrorist." They don't see it in the light of a bedrock principle.

The dems look damn good for the 2008 elections and will even look better as the economy stumbles over the next year.

Using the sports analogy, the democrats see themselves as being ahead late in the game. Don't do anything risky or confrontational on the national security front, their perceived weakness. Bitch and make the point but don't push it. Punt and let the clock run out.

It's a legitimate strategy.

Anything that happens on the democratic side now is coming from the Clintons. They are cautious and strategic. They know what they are doing.

To govern.

Had to vote in favor of giving Bush war authority at that time. The possible downside of opposing was too great.

We live in a curious country. Anytime any President blows the trumpet of war and sends in the troops for any reason anywhere, if you have future political plans the smart play is to not criticize or oppose at that moment.

Look, I know it's cynical, but you have to "support the troops" at the start.

On labeling the Iranian Revolutionary guard as terrorists is similar. If the national tide swings hard against Iran, which can easily happen at any time, then she is properly positioned.

Now this tide may well occur because of large numbers of voters swallowing bullshit and lies again, but you have to anticipate that as a strong possibility.

The paradox is we liberals have been branded as weak and cowardly and that sinking in with a lot of people. The question is how to combat or change that. Maybe if the democrats and their leadership charged the republicans like a Rhinoceros at every turn, that in and of itself could change the perception.

But it's risky. I think Hillary is more of a tactician, a counter-puncher and jabbing when there is an opening. I don't think she's a coward and if she wins we'll find out about her leadership capabilities.

If it wasn't for the Clintons our party would have one 4 year Presidency since LBJ--and that one failed..........The party needs to unite behind the Clintons, and trust them to win for us. Hopefully, and realistically, this time they will have 58 democratic Senators with them. Then we can demand serious change or revolt.