http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/...y_adviser_said_hed_torture_in_a_heartbeat.php Great read on the staff Romney is building...
The funny thing is, Romney just lost a straw poll that he spoke at in LV, and tonight he spoke to a large Republican Conference, and none of the other front runners except Ron Paul showed up. At $1000 a plate, a lot of people probably showed to see Fred, McCain and Judy. But someone forgot to tell Mitt that they will give him their $17 million in funds for the PAC only if he wins the nomination, not the hearts and minds of the big ticket dinner crowd. Paul on the other hand is looking for each and every pulpit to climb in order to raise name recognition.
Good job, Mitt! One of the main reasons I like him. Not necessarily good news for those who sympathize with terrorists though. I suppose it could be worse. He could have serious issues with Jews and Blacks and have a foreign policy of curling up in a ball and asking terrorists to "please stop."
I'd say so too. I don't know why American's would vote for a candidate with the best polices for terrorists, no wait a minute i do
There appear to be many here who have nothing but terrorist's best interests at heart. It's very touching and I'm sure there is a Hallmark card out there "somewhere" for such an occasion. Thank goodness one particular candidate is going to be "Howard Deaned" come time for primaries I suspect the candidate will probably "blame it on the Jews" though, given his unsavory positions and comments about them.
Polices was a misspelling right? How about the best American on Human Rights? How about the best President on Rule of Law? How about the best President who respects international law and treaties? A rogue who acts like a thug doesn't represent the best in the American people.
Perhaps someone that would vote for terrorist's best interests will come along and explain why? Gee, I wonder when such a person might arrive? Just sayin'
You mean Reagan for radicalizing the Afghans against Russia? Or do you mean Eisenhower for helping remove a democratically elected Iranian leader to install the Shah of Iran, a dictator and a violent tyrant? Happens all of the time, but people are waking up to the unintended consequences of blowback.
Obviously, i'm not perfect. I'm all for it, the right to live & not get blown up in towers, the right to not get blown up at work. Are you talking about something else though?
Sure, you don't want to get blown up. 500,000 Iraqi children starving to death under food for oil is the cost. Or is it? Do you think the Iraqis view America favorably for starving them for nearly a decade? Or bombing civilians? What about the levelling of Falluja? Is that the cost of freedom? Not eye for an eye, but 1,000 eyes for your eyes. I'm not criticizing, I just want to know if you will own up the number of deaths it takes to keep you safe. Civilians deaths and terrorist deaths. How many people should die so that you should live? If it's your morality that 1,000 people should die so you should not live with the threat of violence, so be it. I'm not your judge. I just would like you to own up to it.
This was saddam's fault, not Americas. That's even if the numbers are even remotely not made up and exaggerated, like *some* here do. Investigations clearly showed that saddam let his people starve, in some areas, intentionally, while he and his family lived high off the hog and exploited a great deal of "our" "allies" (both terms used very loosely here) for massive wealth while doing so. It was truly a bad thing to liberate Falluja from terrorists. American soldiers should be brought up on charges as war criminals for not letting muslim terrorists have their way with innocent Iraqis. How many men and women have died for your right to sit comfortably at home in a safe environment, so you can chastise them and their service? Likewise, own up to how many have died so you can sit day in and day out and ceaselessly attack the country that others have defended for you. Some people are just not grateful for what they have.
You didn't answer the question. Is your life worth the life of 1,000 innocent civilians? Just answer the question, yes or no. The numbers are from the UN and were stated by Madeleine Albright as "worthwhile". Do you believe they were worthwhile? I've recently posted a report from an unembedded journalist who was in Falluja at the time of the attack. A lot of innocent people died. Just like at the WTC, but the difference is, we were killing them. Same question to you that I have proposed to Toopac. Is your life worth the life of 1,000 civilians? Let's not go down this road again, ok? It never ends pleasantly. I'm attacking policy. And I'm for standing up for the Constitution. Another question for you. If you had to choose between George Bush and the Constitution, which would you choose? And please spare me the cheapshots about hiding behind the Constitution, we've read your disdain and blatant disrespect for this document several times already.
That's a loaded question but i will answer after you answer this; Is your privacy (to not be listened to on the phone if your a suspected terrorist) worth hundreds if not thousands of American deaths?
Ill be on here for another 15 minutes. If you have any character, please respond. I have guaranteed a response in return. And you can hold that over my head forever on this forum if I do not. Now please proceed and answer the question. I asked first, and I am willing to meet the terms of replying in kind.