the war monger?
hmmm both kerry and edwards saw the same intelligence reports the 'war monger' did-- they voted for it too
why is he just considered the war monger?
why are they not being held to the same standards? because they are democrats??
really i dont get it--
Because bush knew the documents were a streach at best. he lied his ass off so just he could go after saddam. if you want to remove a tyrant, by all means do so. But don't fill my ass with smoke, tell me the truth. WOMD my ass. Innocent lives lost. that is the truth.
still doesnt answer my question--but i see your bud is throwing the 'faggot' word around again---(you might want to remind him of the secret service too and his wish)
seems i am not alone with that wonderment--
john gibson on it using the LA Time editorial today...
While he tries a Clinton-like pivot (remember the end of welfare and big government), he's got the Left loading its big guns and preparing to open fire on him.
An editorial in Tuesday's Los Angeles Times not only cements that paper's reputation as America's most far-Left news organization, but tees up the notion that the paper might end up endorsing Ralph Nader (search).
It is titled "The Kerry-Edwards Stonewall," and it attacks to the two senators for attacking President Bush on the war. If they voted for it, why won't they explain if their votes for the war were a mistake?
Were Kerry and Edwards wrong, the paper asks? "If they won't answer that question, they have no moral standing to criticize Bush."
The Times goes on, "The great pity will be if this [Kerry-Edwards] bind leads the Democratic candidates to back off from their harsh, and largely justified, criticism of Bush. The Democrats could lose a valuable issue, and possibly even the election, because the Democratic candidates were too clever for their own good."
Let's see.....four president's get law degrees or study law in college, become a state attorney general (Clinton), work as a law clerk (FDR)
Twenty presidents were attorneys. Taft later become a Supreme Court justice.
Why is the party of Lincoln dissing lawyers? Abe was one himself.
So were most of those who wrote the Constitution.
I believe Bush wouldn't meet with the 9/11 commission without his attorney present.
(btw, Mike, congrats on making the NoAmerCon's trivia finals)
joe wife and dog+
These other presidents may have been honorable lawyers, but Edwards is a genuine ambulance chaser.
Unfortunately American law is less about justice and more about lawyers winning a case at any cost. link
< i thought this might intrique a few people> IE
Now that Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry has selected North Carolina Sen. John Edwards as his running mate, and rumors that Vice President Dick Cheney would be replaced on the Republican ticket have been quashed, here are some questions I'd like to see both American voters and the political press ask the Republican and Democratic nominees for vice president.
For Sen. John Edwards, Democratic nominee for vice president:
—As is well-known by now, you made your fortune representing plaintiffs in tort cases, mostly in medical malpractice cases. One of the consequences of huge rewards like those you have won has been skyrocketing malpractice insurance premiums for doctors and the exodus of doctors from certain medical specialties, such as OB-GYNs, heart surgeons and emergency room attendants. The resultant crisis in health care availability has hit particularly hard in the South, as medical insurers and doctors have abandoned much of the region. As someone who has presented himself as an advocate for the little guy, how do you reconcile the verdicts you've won with the effects those verdicts had on health care in the South?
—You specialized in seeking judgments for parents in cases of botched childbirth deliveries, which you argued resulted in cases of cerebral palsy. Two new studies released in 2003 show strong evidence that cerebral palsy is not likely caused by delivery room errors, but by genetics or prenatal infections. If medical science continues to exonerate delivery doctors from cerebral palsy cases, do you think the verdicts against the doctors you successfully sued should be reversed, or that your clients should return the money?
—You oppose a ban on late-term abortions, yet have sued doctors for errors made in delivering premature babies near or at the same age of gestation as a fetus would be during a late-term termination. Is it inconsistent to sue a doctor for millions of dollars for botching the delivery of a baby, but also vote to keep legal the termination of a fetus the same age?
—You said in a campaign speech that we have “One America that pays the taxes, another America that gets the tax breaks,” and that in your administration, we’d have “no more tax breaks for CEOs who give themselves millions in top-hat pensions while giving no pensions at all to ordinary workers.” Yet, two years before you were elected to the Senate, you established a tax shelter to avoid paying $290,000 in Medicare taxes. Medicare is federally-funded healthcare for the poor. How do you explain your shirking of this duty to the poor you claim other wealthy people should observe?
—You’ve said that Miguel Estrada, the man President Bush nominated for the D.C. District Court of Appeals, was an unqualified candidate who merely “had the right last name.” Estrada has argued 15 cases before the Supreme Court. He edited the Harvard Law Review, worked with Solicitors General from both parties, and received the highest possible rating from the American Bar Association. Do you believe that blacks and Hispanics with conservative beliefs are inherently unqualified for judicial positions? Can't a black or Hispanic disagree with Democratic Party principles and still retain his/her racial or ethnic bona fides?
John Kerry has strong beliefs that never flip-flop. And of course he is not betrothed to special interests like India, China and spyware companies ... no-sir-ee Bob ... oh wait maybe the special interests are the reasons for his flip-flops: link link link link