- From: katycren <Katycren@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 06:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
On Sep 21, 2:10 am, Deborah <debo...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 17:18:38 -0700 (PDT), chatnoir
On Sep 16, 12:51 pm, "Bill Kawalec" <billkawa...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Brady" <watercl...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
Dave Sikula wrote:
On Sep 15, 12:00 pm, "Bill Kawalec" <billkawa...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Survey US governors the day before the interview, and I'll bet at least
would be cluless. It's not like it's a LAW. It's merely a stance that
evolves over the course of an administration.
and, the answer is, if there is *reliable* evidence that we were about
attacked, it is the **duty** of our leader to defend.
Well, there it is. But Bush didn't have "reliable" evidence that Iraq
was about to attack, and his invasion wasn't exactly a defense. On the
other hand, when he -did- have reliable evidence on August 8 that "Bin
Laden was poised to attack," he did nothing but tell the briefer he'd
"covered his ass."
I agree, though, that the whole "Bush Doctrine" thing will strike many
voters as inside baseball.
In related news: SarahPalin'snext big sit-down will be with Sean
Hannity. There'll probably be a lot of questions like the following.
'So, how old were you when you realized you were destined for greatness?'
you got a point? no one listens to Hannity for hard news.
I do believe then that we must consult America's Best Christian, Betty
Bowers, on this!:
So American's Best Christian, Betty Bowers, is known to this ng also?
Not to me, but I'm very happy to make her acquaintance. I think Betty
is my new BFF.
- Re: McCain-Palin
- From: Sally
- Re: McCain-Palin
- Prev by Date: Re: Dark Week Time Wasting Thread: Week of 9/15/08
- Next by Date: Re: OT: The long blackout of my discontent is over
- Previous by thread: Re: McCain-Palin
- Next by thread: Re: McCain-Palin