Comments on: Independents in Play

By: Jim_Satterfield

Jim_Satterfield — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 01:04:28 +0000

Pointing out that it's an opinion piece from a publication that is hard core ideologically Republican is not stooping low. As far as the quotes are concerned the only thing they prove is that some very bright people think that the approach of the Bush administration isn't working and is in fact largely counterproductive. Given the facts on the ground I think that's just the facts.

By: DLS

DLS — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 22:02:02 +0000

“the road ahead for national security”

Speaking of which, I have yet to encounter anyone accuse the Justice Department and the GOP and Bush of politically timing the charging of six 9-11 terrorists and seeking the death penalty for them (to help McCain's prospects in November). I suspect that such accusations may be hurled by the more rabid anti-Bush people eventually.

By: DLS

DLS — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 18:26:26 +0000

Disprove the quotes rather than stoop low again.

By: pacatrue

pacatrue — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 04:55:23 +0000

I don't think a teary eye this way or that tells one much of anything about someone's strength. I agree with the larger point that perhaps with the current campaigns, a true discussion about the road ahead for national security might genuinely occur, and that's well overdue.

By: Jim_Satterfield

Jim_Satterfield — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 04:48:24 +0000

Investor's Business Daily is hard core Republican. Predictable as Fox News. Anything in their OpEd section is as honest as the opinion pages of the WSJ or an RNC newsletter.

By: StockBoySF

StockBoySF — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:11:41 +0000

Hillary claims she's tough? How so when she gets weepy on national TV every time the primary vote doesn't look god for her. I hope this isn't a tactic she's going to use when talking with Putin, Ahmedinejad, or anyone else.

Paul, I agree with you- this is a great time to have a long debate about our nominees' abilities and strengths. The path to a better America will inevitably result in some discontent (and if a Dem is Pres, the Reps will be unforgiving).

By: Don Quijote

Don Quijote — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 00:26:42 +0000

What I am saying is that we cannot afford the Iraq Occupation.

As for losing the war, it was lost five minutes after we crossed the border. We lack the ability to control the population, we are infidels in the center of the Muslim world.

By: PaulSilver

PaulSilver — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 23:43:26 +0000

Don_Quijote,
I don't understand your point. Are you saying all is lost so why try?

By: Don Quijote

Don Quijote — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 23:27:29 +0000

The Iraq & Afghan occupation are expected to cost us over 170 Billion next year, not counting a half a trillion defense budget, where does anyone think the money is going to come from? We can barely afford either occupations and we have a recession coming on.

This discussion is totally irrelevant in that we can't afford the financial cost of these occupations.

By: DLS

DLS — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 22:55:55 +0000

Right, stick to the lib-Dem game plan, as always. Nothing “independent” there.

Insofar as our enemies are concerned, hopefully both Obama and Clinton are wiser than their current people have been quoted to have said.

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcon...