Contact Us

.

« Phill Kline sends an invite | Main | This weekend in The Star's Ed pages »

September 15, 2006

Comments

Ed Friedemann

What channel?

Ed Friedemann

A vote for Talent is a vote for Bush, and if you just can't vote Democratic, then just don't vote.

Tommy

Surely I'm not the only one growing tired of Ed's "a vote for..." line. Come on, Ed. You once told me I was an annoyance to you with one of my postings. This is getting old.

CRD

I agree with Ed's sentiment, but it really doesn't add much to the online discussions.

Chris

Don't think it is televised, Ed. But I might have missed it on the Missouri Press Association's site. Here is a link.

http://www.mopress.com/

BeProudAmerica

A vote for Democrat is a vote for Ed. So if you what to vote Democrat and identify your self as foolish, fine. But if you want to show you have common sense, vote Repbulican.

CRD

"But if you want to show you have common sense, vote Repbulican."

That may win the award for the dumbest post yet today. I like how you misspelled "Republican."

Chris

Any guesses on how many times Claire has put her foot in her mouth already? They have been debating for about 1/2 an hour.

I say... 3.

BeProudAmerica

Sorry I don't have spell check on today,ooops. Good Grief

CRD

It wasn't the spell check that made it dumb -- it was the equating of "common sense" with "Republican." I can't see anything less common sensical than what's come out of DC the past 5 years, and that's largely due to Congressional Republicans like Talent refusing to provide a check on the Executive Branch's excesses and distortions. I applaud the likes of McCain, Warner, and Graham for their willingness to resist the party line rubber-stamping, but Talent? When has he shown any true independence in putting the needs of the American people over the needs of his party?

Tommy

Southerngirl, where have you gone...I always appreciate reading your opinions and haven't seen them for several days.

Ed Friedemann

I've been watching Bush on TV {CBS and NBC }.

He appears angry, frustrated, and is drawing blatantly illogical premise after premise.

His answers to reporters ramble, then fall back to the pat answers he's been coached.

Even Republicans in congress won't cooperate with his nonsense on his torture bill.

BeProudAmerica

CRD

To me it is common sense to you it is not that is just the difference of opinion.

To come out and say anything say is dumb, I may say that I think it is wrong or incorrect.

Who is not to say that he is voting in what he believes in which may happen to be the party line, I don't know.

I will consider the Democratic party position once they show a plan instead of just complaining about the Republican party and to vote for them because they aren't Bush(See ED's constant comment).

Yes, that statment sounds like Republican talking point but it is not, it has been my feeling for a long time and it is true.

BeProudAmerica

Thank you Ed for what we know is an unbiased account.

Ed Friedemann

A vote for Talent is a vote for Bush, so if you just can't vote Democratic, the just don't vote.

Listen when Warner (sec'ty Navy), McCain (Annapolis,POW), Graham (JAG), and Powell (Joint Chiefs, Sec'ty of State) speak. They are the adults of the Republican party. They have the best interests of the troops, and the American people at heart. I expect Bush I to come out against this also.
Bush II, Cheney, and the rest of their cabal-including Talent-are just plain dangerous for our troops and for all of us.
Lets be clear here, Jim Talent voted AGAINST Warner, McCain, Graham, and Powell, and FOR Bush yesterday in the Senate Armed Services Committee vote. TALENT IS A RUBBER STAMP, a tool for Bush. Nothing more, nothing less.
And Tommy, Southerngirl's life is now complete, since her boy Talent has proposed to name a courthouse in the Cape after Linbaugh. Or maybe she enlisted, like you should, and is now in basic training.

CRD

"A vote for Talent is a vote for Bush, so if you just can't vote Democratic, the just don't vote."

Unless, of course, you approve of how Bush is running the country. Or, if you believe that Talent will bring something to the table other than a rubber stamp for Bush.

I do agree that the "a vote for Talent is a vote for Bush" re-postings are wearing thin and don't really add anything to the discussion.

CRD

"Lets be clear here, Jim Talent voted AGAINST Warner, McCain, Graham, and Powell, and FOR Bush yesterday in the Senate Armed Services Committee vote."

Now that added something substantive to the discussion.

Ed Friedemann

Bush's press conference was about asking congress to amend the provision for torture in the Geneva Conventions.

Any change to the Geneva Conventions would signal the world to interpret them anyway they wish.

The fact that they can't be changed assures other countries not to violate either the letter of the intent of those provisions.

In effect, Bush is asking congress to void the Geneva Conventions.

Bush is not right-minded and seemed to appear that way when questioned.

Ed Friedemann

The term: "suspected terrorist" can not be defined.

That's enables Bush's war to continue endlessly.

Ed Friedemann

"Links to al-Qaida" also can not be defined and serves to keep the "war" endless.

CRD

Military lawyers are quite vocal in opposition to Bush's proposed changes:

Brig, Gen. James C. Walker, the top uniformed lawyer for the Marines, said that no civilized country should deny a defendant the right to see the evidence against him and that the United States “should not be the first.”

Maj. Gen. Scott C. Black, the judge advocate general of the Army, made the same point, and Rear Adm. Bruce E. MacDonald, the judge advocate general of the Navy, said military law provided rules for using classified evidence, whereby a judge could prepare an unclassified version of the evidence to share with the jury and the accused and his lawyer.

Senate Republicans said the proposal to deny the accused the right to see classified evidence was one of the main points of contention remaining between them and the administration.

“It would be unacceptable, legally, in my opinion, to give someone the death penalty in a trial where they never heard the evidence against them,” said Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who has played a key role in the drafting of alternative legislation as a member of the Armed Services Committee and a military judge. “ ‘Trust us, you’re guilty, we’re going to execute you, but we can’t tell you why’? That’s not going to pass muster; that’s not necessary.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/08/washington/08detain.html?hp&ex=1157774400&en=fa1da1053abb2a24&ei=5094&partner=homepage

CRD

Bush's position took a blow with a letter released yesterday from his former secretary of State (and former National Security Advisor and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff), Colin Powell. Powell wrote: "The world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism. To redefine Common Article 3 would add to those doubts. Furthermore, it would put our own troops at risk."

see letter here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2006/09/14/GR2006091400728.html

Wondering

Ed Freidemann

Don't you think it is about time you get back on your meds? Just wondering.

Ed Friedemann

Wondering, It's time to change your tinfoil, it's quit working.

The comments to this entry are closed.