Question for the group. (im probably making a mistake by even posting lol)
Would you approve waterboarding as a intergoation tactic used by your local police?
Hooch,
What we are seeing now is reflective of the values of an overly materialistic population with the scarcity mentality. The value of a life is now readily measured in dollars/euros and valued by that lives’ current or potential future economic output. In other words, the viability of life is based on the convenience of the living. Maybe someday people transcend the divisiveness of gender, race, religion etc. and consider the costs of this mentality to humanity.
JP
jcarr,
If the standards were the same as they used paramedic present,trained person doing it,proof that this person knows something of value,etc.Also if was in effort to save lives,yes I would.How can waterboarding be compared to what some of these people have done and still will do to americans?Why would anyone think that a person who blows theirself up just to kill you would now not do that since we don’t waterboard?So who’s really safer by stopping it?Mr smooth(aka obama)will still have this done it’s called rendition,clinton done it during his years.He is a good actor though,he must be a power grabber cause he could make more$$ in hollywood.
Jcarr,
The CIA imposed very tight restrictions on the use of waterboarding, which is why it was done on only three of the terrorists…
From the article posted above (in Reply #37)… “It may be used on a High Value Detainee only if the CIA has ‘credible intelligence that a terrorist attack is imminent’; ‘substantial and credible indicators that the subject has actionable intelligence that can prevent, disrupt or deny this attack’; and ‘(o)ther interrogation methods have failed to elicit this information within the perceived time limit for preventing the attack.”
I don’t think I would support civilians being waterboarded, as citizens of the US are innocent until proven guilty and that right is protected under law. That being said, sleep deprivation, isolation (i.e. - the hole), submission with battons or tazers, rubber bullets, strip searches, nutra-loaf, straight-jackets, etc. are all used on inmates, and I guess according to the UN’s definition of torture these would ALSO be considered torture and the penal system is guilty of war crimes… :rolleyes
Terrorists, another matter altogether… no US citizen rights, no country affiliation, no Geneva coverage (they don’t follow or subscribe to it), etc…
So kinda not really applicable…
Even though OBAMA has maintained FOR HIMSELF the right to use it, along with Military Tribunals, CONTINUING the Bush policy… let’s hope he hasn’t hamstrung himself by politicizing it which could lead to him to avoid using it in the appropriate scenerio like another KSM, making us ALL, dem, rep, lib, conervative, moderate less safe…
These are very good points JP!
Positive,
Regarding the terrorists, I can not believe that we have such tight restrictions on the use of waterboarding to the degree that we have only used it on 3 of the dirty bastards. I wish waterboarding on all Confirmed terrorists. Each and every single one of them.
However I do not wish that waterboarding is used on our own civilians. With absolute confirmation of a hanus crime like forced sodomy of a child, murder with malice, etc I would prefer that we leave out any and all torture and just kill them with a 10¢ bullet. Much less money than Mr. Sparky or lethal injection and way better than paying 50K a year to house and feed them.
Well, I don’t know. Maybe a child molester would be better off getting gang raped prior to murder so they can experience the whole thing the exact way the innocent child did before he killed them.
Maybe if one of these dirty politicians get caught taking bribe money to vote for something that is against the will of the people we could chop a hand or two off instead of the death penalty for treason.
Just thoughts.
Couldnt have said it better Hooch… 100% agreed.
Hooch, Hoosier, et al,
Aren’t the people being interrogated PRESUMED INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY IN A COURT OF LAW? Are we turning into a vigilante society that tortures first or shoots first?
Could it just be that a supposed terrorist is not one; just an innocent person in the wrong place at the wrong time? That could be the person given amnesty for divulging any information they had to clear themselves, couldn’t they?
Your ideas or torturing or shooting people first would go down well in a primitive society. Thank God we mostly still have the rule of law here.
The idea is NOT to sink to the level of barbaric terrorists. NOT to cut off heads or do suicide bombings. Captives don’t need to subscribe to the Geneva Convention; it’s the captors (us) who do.
Hooch, I never said anything about killing some poor little baby from a botched abortion. Don’t put words in my mouth.
Now think about this dilemnna: What would you and your spouse do if you learned early in your pregnancy that your fetus was anencephalic (had no brain, just a flat head but a brain stem so could still breathe). Now if you carry the pregnancy through, you have a vegetable-like child who will need intensive care his entire lifespan and yet has no brain activity except the most basic. There is no hope for improvement. None. Would you enslave yourselves to round-the-clock tube feedings and diaper changes in perpetuity? Or would you give this grevously impaired child of yours over to one of our under-staffed institutions for sub-standard life-long care?
If you say all life has the same value, then you have to say that that life has value too. As for my spouse and me, we would choose to have that fetus aborted. I would not sacrifice my entire family’s well-being on a baby that has NO hope of any feelings or life. It could only exist and perhaps suffer for years and years. We would abort, grieve, and carry on.
A case like this is not uncommon. This is why I say that the abortion issue can not be black-and-white. There are many shades of gray. It takes Solomonic decisions by parents, doctors and judges. None of those decisions are taken lightly.
If you form your opinion from some 30-second YouTube video, you are being manipulated. You don’t know the whole story behind what is being presented. You can’t even be sure it is true. Don’t believe everything people present to you.
And the case of aborted babies dying in a linen closet sounds very bogus to me. I used to work in a hospital where sometimes necessary abortions were performed. I never personally witnessed anything like that. Any medical person who saw something that made them that uncomfortable would be immediately speaking with the ethics committee at that facility, or the medical/nursing director. That story just doesn’t sound right to me. If it were, someone was probably about to lose their job.
I am trying to debate you hard-liners into thinking about your choices.
Life is not so simplistic. It is messy and complicated. Sometimes parents need to make choices (like abortion) because that is the only choice they can make.
Furnishedowner
“”“Aren’t the people being interrogated PRESUMED INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY IN A COURT OF LAW?..Could it just be that a supposed terrorist is not one; just an innocent person in the wrong place at the wrong time?”“”
YES and that is why I said CONFIRMED terrorist. And there is not need for a court date. A military tribunal on the spot will do just fine.
“”“The idea is NOT to sink to the level of barbaric terrorists. NOT to cut off heads or do suicide bombings. Captives don’t need to subscribe to the Geneva Convention; it’s the captors (us) who do.”“”
Interesting that you say the idea is NOT to sink to the level of the terrorists. So we should just talk to a proven terrorist and plea to them to tell us the truth of their next planned mass killing of American civilians. Only a fool would think that police style interrogation will get a terrorist to spill the beans. NOW NOW, make sure you give them a full nights sleep during interrogation. Also give this terrorist 3 square meals and it would be downright mean to not give them a decent bed to sleep on. However it can be a little uncomfy. We will get hard on them though because not one single terrorist will be allowed more than a toothbrush. Absolutely NO Toothpaste! That will show those buggers.
I’m sure you feel the exact same warm and fuzzy feelings for child molesters in our country. Or would you treat them in higher regard?
“”“Hooch, I never said anything about killing some poor little baby from a botched abortion. Don’t put words in my mouth.”“”
Now now, lets not be telling fibs. I asked you a question but don’t recall you answering it. I wanted to find out if you were “evil” as Obama is for wanting to kill babies that ended up surviving a botched abortion. You responded that we shall not be calling anyone “evil” for doing this and my jaw dropped to the floor.
“”“Now think about this dilemnna: What would you and your spouse do if you learned early in your pregnancy that your fetus was anencephalic (had no brain, just a flat head but a brain stem so could still breathe). “””
I didn’t personally say that I am pro life in every single situation. I also question a female being forced to have a baby of a rapist. I am pretty much with you on the baby with no brain as I see that for the child as being a horrible way for it to live. I draw the line somewhere around here though. Kids with downs syndrome live great lives and are happy people and I would strongly reject abortion for this reason. I am torn on the baby of a rapist thing. This one is a difficult decision as the baby could be perfectly normal without genetic internal rage or whatever goes through a rapists mind.
However, you seem to be missing the most COMMON type of abortion. The girl who made a “mistake”. We all make mistakes in life. If the girl didn’t want the child than she can put it up for adoption. But murder it? Come on. And to take it even further as Obama does, try to murder it, the little sucker manages to survive outside of the womb, kill it anyways. Wow, that’s pretty intense.
“”“If you form your opinion from some 30-second YouTube video, you are being manipulated. “””
Obviously I didn’t form my opinion from the movie trailer. I watched the movie. I sent you a link to the trailer so you can see if you want to rent it. The movie is well balanced on both sides. When you see the aborted fetus and how it really is a little baby and not some little sea monkey you too will agree that there has got to be some lines drawn on the whole abortion thing. Just rent the movie at Hollywood Video or Blockbuster and see for yourself.
“”“And the case of aborted babies dying in a linen closet sounds very bogus to me. “””
Just watch the documentary and you can see for yourself on some of these things. You shouldn’t say that it isn’t true when there is actual video footage of a bunch of this stuff. I don’t recall video footage of babies in a linen closet though.
“”“I am trying to debate you hard-liners into thinking about your choices.
Life is not so simplistic. It is messy and complicated. Sometimes parents need to make choices (like abortion) because that is the only choice they can make.”“”
I am glad you are doing so. It gives us the oportunity to show you the other side of the story. We have confirmed that you are too wrapped up in the radical left side of topics and don’t ever get the oportunity to see the other side and the justification behind our beliefs. And… you are right that parents need to make choices but aborting a perfectly healthy child because you don’t want it is not the only choice. The other choice is adoption. The choices were kill or adopt.
Furnishedowner,
"Aren’t the people being interrogated PRESUMED INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY IN A COURT OF LAW? "
No, terrorists are not citizens of the United States and ARE NOT afforded the rights of citizens. Add to that, it is a national security issue, which may contain classified evidence, and that is where military tribunals (you know, the ones OBAMA is CONTINUING after Bush) kick-in.
To explain it further, even though illegal immigrants are provided the same rights under the Bill of Rights, the Supreme Court has long held that immigration law is largely immune from judicial review. Congress can make rules for immigrants that would be unacceptable if applied to citizens.
Illegal immigrants can be deported with “clear and convincing” evidence, which is a lower standard than “beyond a reasonable doubt” applied to citizens.
“Captives don’t need to subscribe to the Geneva Convention; it’s the captors (us) who do.”
This is incorrect… The argument that the Geneva Convention does not apply to terrorists is because of Article 4, where it defines POW…
b That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; [/b] - they are individually operating cells, and are not
b That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;[/b] - this is obviously not the case…
b That of carrying arms openly; [/b] - suicide bombers, there preferred method of killing, along with planes, are not done openly…
b That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. [/b] - They obviously do not do this… This is where you point of “Captives don’t need to subscribe to the Geneva Convention; it’s the captors (us) who do” is incorrect, Furnishedowner…
Furnishedowner,
“anencephalic” - this is admittedly, a tough one… there is so much we do not know about the brain… being that anencephalic babies who go to term live hours or days (and some longer), you provide a false narrative in saying that you would have to take care of your baby in purpituity being “enslaved” (if you have kids, do you consider yourself “enslaved”)… The oldest anencephalic baby that I could find was Stephanie Keene (aka - Baby K) and she was 2 1/2 years old, which is rare… But again, life IS life and deserves dignity to the end, whether it is an hour, a day or 2 1/2 years or born still-born…
No matter how you look at it, an abortion is walking away from a life… which is why so many women deal (not to mention the men who had no “choice”) with emotional issues throughout life…
take a look at this site…
http://babyfaithhope.blogspot.com/
It is a web-journal of a mother with a baby that had anencephalic… What struck me was this young woman’s maturity… when the doctors kept asking he about her decision, she explains - “For some reason I had to give the doctors my decision over and over again, which was frustrating. One doctor asked, ‘Can I ask why you want to continue this pregnancy?’ I guess some people are baffled by unconditional love.”
Unconditional love…
I would like to respectively suggest that the love that young woman showed her baby, and the positive effect the baby had on their lives while with them and the dignity the baby was provided in death will provide a much more stable emotional life for her than having to deal with the emotions of just giving up on it and aborting it…
The sad thing is, many doctors (just like with abortion) do NOT provide all the information regarding this RARE condition (1/1000)…
There are so many NEGATIVE things linked to abortion in study after study, I think it is horrible NOT to give woman ALL this information… None of our children were “planned” but they ALL were welcome, whether we were “ready” or not…
On top of that, it is a ridiculous argument that woman alone should have the right to make this decision, based on the argument that it is her body, and she should not be “enslaved” if she does not want to… what about the man being “enslaved” if HE doesn’t want to…
“I am trying to debate you hard-liners into thinking about your choices.” - We are trying to get you to do the same, “hard-liner” or not (you are thought of as a hard-liner also)… I will say this Furnishedowner… whether we agree or not, at least you have the courage to actually make and argue your point on abortion…
Hooch and Positive Outlook:
What bothers me about the “Adopt, don’t abort” philosophy is that it ignores the woman’s rights and needs completely. The women I have known and talked to over many years (legal abortion wasn’t always around) were emotionally scarred by giving up infants to adoption. They never got over it. That baby birthdate was seared in their minds. They had great years-long feelings of guilt and loss.
The women who had early term abortions also felt some of the same emotions, but to a much, much lesser degree. They didn’t feel like they had lost a portion of themselves. Most of them healed pretty well and then went on to have very welcome infants later.
Pregnancy is a huge burden on a woman’s body, health, finances, emotional status, and family. It is NEVER, “Oh, I’ll just adopt out this baby because I don’t want it.” The physical cost is huge. The mental cost is huge. Pregnancy is life-altering. Only a woman can make a decision about what she can bear and what she can’t. That is why women, more than men, vote for the right to abortion. It should stay their choice.
As for the terrorist debate, I think we have tortured that enough. It seems we may be in different camps. There is the:
Rabid Conservatives to the Right of Attila The Hun Group.
Their Philosophy: KEEP GOVERNMENT OFF OUR BACKS!
Oh, EXCEPT let’s have the government regulate the heck out of women’s (very private) wombs and OB-GYN clinics. Regulate Wedding Chapels; let’s have no Gay Marriage. If in doubt–could be a terrorist–hey, it could be Obama, water-board now! If still in doubt, buy more guns.
Signed,
Furnishedowner,
A member of the KEEP GOVERNMENT OUT of our wombs and bedrooms, let’s ban all torture, Marry anyone you want-Congratulations!-- and don’t get me started about guns, Pinko-Commie Terrorist-Loving (you think) Liberal Group.
Maybe this is a REI group of one, but I’ve (sort of) enjoyed the dialogue. Now you all know there ARE other opinions out there. I’m signing out.
“What bothers me about the “Adopt, don’t abort” philosophy is that it ignores the woman’s rights and needs completely.”
Welcome to the club, the man in the equation (it takes two) needs are COMPLETELY removed AND ignored, but if a woman decides to have the baby, the MAN HAS NO CHOICE… So, you can argue about the woman’s body and about being “enslaved” for nine MONTHS before adopting the baby out as opposed to a LIFETIME of being “enslaved” to the woman’s decision… explain how this is even remotely fair… Why should the man NOT have the option of parenting the baby the woman doesn’t want? Let’s call it right of first refusal before adopting out… I’m sure a good portion of these babies would be spared…
The problem with the “abort, don’t adopt” is that ignores the BABY’s rights and needs completely, the defenseless party. At least the woman gets to continue to LIVE after nine months if she adopts out… the BABY, not so much with abortion…
The woman had a CHOICE to sleep with someone, the CHOICE to use birth control, the CHOICE to take the chance KNOWING the potential outcome inlcuding the “huge burden on a woman’s body, health, finances, emotional status, and family”, and mind you these CHOICES are taken KNOWING their current financial status, goals, etc… you want all the “rights” exclusively for yourself, just NONE of the responsibilities, like carrying the baby to term…
You are placing all the responsibility AND the fatal consequences on the INNOCENT party… the baby… If I screw up, abort the baby, if I engage in activity that I KNOW can result in pregnancy, abort the baby… what kind of CHOICE is this really?
There are three parties involved in the birth of the baby… the mother, the father and the baby, and you only want to give the “rights” to one of the three WITHOUT consideration of the other parties…
If you take on the responsibility of adult activity, you should be prepared to deal with adult outcomes… There’s a REASON we don’t encourage KIDS to get pregnant, becuase they lack the MATURITY to be a parent… This maturity factor does NOT change just because you turn 18…
And we’re the “rabid” ones… :rolleyes
“The women who had early term abortions also felt some of the same emotions, but to a much, much lesser degree”.
This is not the case… there are study after study regarding this, and you are not takling into account the physioligical aspects either, which can be permanent memorial to this decision…
“Marry anyone you want” - Heck, then let’s let teens marry 50-60 year olds and call it something different than child abuse or statutory rape… then I guess the freaks won’t have to go overseas to get their jollies… you did after all say “anyone you want”… maybe some clarification would be in order, yes?..
“and don’t get me started about guns” - me neither… the arguments against them are weak at best, and gun deaths (and that’s addding ALL gun deaths including accidental) were less than 1/10th of 1 percent of the amount of abortions… just a thought on which does more damage to our society…
Just think, if we had some of those 45 MILLION aborted babies since Roe v. Wade (who the orignal “Roe” has disavowed it), we’d only need 4-5% of them to adopt (and that’s taking into account the additional 45 MILLION)…
Pro-choice - If it were really a “choice” why would the supporters want it to be “safe, legal and RARE”… that automatically denotes that the “choice” (aka - abortion) is a bad one… you just don’t want to be responsible for it…
Furnishedowner, the only “chioice” I see you arguing for is for abortion, not programs to make them “rare” or programs to support adoption… all the emphasis you are providing is on giving the woman the right for an abortion, ignoring both the baby and the father…
… or more accurately, Pro-Abortion.,…
Look, Pos. Outlook, I thought I was done with this. You are right about it not being always fair to the man, but that is nature. Life will out. Sex happens. It is hardly ever just one person’s fault.
I know men who have indiscriminately fathered babies with 3-4 women, all in the same year. That is not fair to women or babies.
The woman has no choice on whether it is her pregnancy or not. She can not say to her partner, “Your turn, you carry this baby.” Therefore I will always vote for the rights of the women.
Pregnancy can also be not only dangerous–some healthy women die every year from complications–but potentially fatal. A woman’s chance of murder or assault by her spouse/partner REALLY goes up with a pregnancy. Remember the Scott/Lacey Peterson case? The recent pregnant Marine killed by her boyfriend? Yet I have never heard of men being put at greater risk of murder or assault because of their impending fatherhood. There was a very interesting study done recently showing the much higher risk of death of pregnant women, I would like to read the whole study.
Men’s rights, women’s rights, babies’ rights–this is why we have our higher courts. These are not easy decisions. But I will continue to vote for the right of a woman to terminate an early term pregnancy. It is her body, after all.
And no one has yet addressed all those UNWANTED babies and children up for adoption. Once again, all that misplaced energy of right-to-lifers should go to those sad cases, not in pushing for more unwanted children. If you want to save a baby, go adopt one. They are available. They need you.
Furnishedowner
“”“What bothers me about the “Adopt, don’t abort” philosophy is that it ignores the woman’s rights and needs completely. The women …were emotionally scarred by giving up infants to adoption. They never got over it. That baby birthdate was seared in their minds. They had great years-long feelings of guilt and loss.”“”
Wow, can you get more “Rabid” than this? So the answer is to murder the little buggar so they won’t feel bad. Did you ever think that there is a difference between the two. A different kind of person who is more caring would adopt. A female with limited motherly instincts and care for the child would kill it so no wonder why she got over it easier.
“”“The women who had early term abortions also felt some of the same emotions, but to a much, much lesser degree.”“”
“”“Pregnancy is a huge burden on a woman’s body, health, finances, emotional status, and family. It is NEVER, “Oh, I’ll just adopt out this baby because I don’t want it.” The physical cost is huge. “””
The physical cost to the dead baby that they accidentally had was much larger than the physical cost to the woman who got stretch marks.
“”“The mental cost is huge. Pregnancy is life-altering.”“”
Killing the little one is much more life-altering. Man you are really digging hard to justify the death of children. It’s like you are trying to act like the baby is useless anyways since it hasn’t yet learned to speak so it should not have a right to live and it should be the mothers right to kill it. Do you also think this when the baby is 3 or 4 days old? When it is a few days old and the mother decides to murder it is that OK? Or is it only OK when it is murdered by a doctor who is a professional at murdering it without a coat hanger but with a “special” vacuum that will suck it out.
Or when is too big for the vacuum they inject salt into the womb and poison the baby as it breathes it in. It also suffers severe skin burns and dies a very painful death.
Wow, I can’t believe that you support this. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=75194762152257421&ei=x8QdSvClD5H6rAKk58zGCw&q=abortion&hl=en&client=firefox-a
Here is your linen closet information. So you are saying that this lady lied when she testified in front of the Us House committee and various state committees and when all of the other abortion clinics got caught that this was not true either?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYRpIf2F9NA
This is one of the girls that Obama wished was just killed. She survived a botched abortion. She is a fighter. She got a little brain damage from it but she is a trooper. I love this girl.
http://www.tangle.com/view_video.php?viewkey=5062223d42b07ab68d62
Man, you really are digging deap with irrelevant excuses for the woman as if she should have the right to murder the baby if she feels like it.
Also, you are the one who should look more into adoption. The babies are gone like hotcakes. The children that are “unadoptable” are the ones that are in their teens and have serious behavioral issues.
“I know men who have indiscriminately fathered babies with 3-4 women, all in the same year. That is not fair to women or babies.”
All the women has to do is to have a paternity test ordered, bingo, man “enslaved” as you put it… and you act as if the woman who LET themselves be “indiscriminately” impregnated and participated don’t have the GREATER responsibility ro CHOOSE NOT to be a party to it, being that THEY have all the rights, as you see it…
"The woman has no choice on whether it is her pregnancy or not. "
Of course she can… she can choose NOT to get pregnant…
“There was a very interesting study done recently showing the much higher risk of death of pregnant women, I would like to read the whole study.”
Never heard of it… when you find it, post a link… There are much more studies on the negative effects of abortions, but this crucial information is generally NOT shared with those seekig abortion. Malpratice IMHO…
“But I will continue to vote for the right of a woman to terminate an early term pregnancy. It is her body, after all.”
And here is where I cannot understand your reasoning… it is the womans body and her right to terminate ONLY in the first trimester (even though during this time, the baby is already formed with a beating heart, eyelids, hands and feet with fingerprints that also allow him.her to swim, rhetina formed along with eyelids, seperate DNA and blood type, vocal chords and a brain that is formed with measurable brain waves, IOW, ALL the things we biometrically use to identify humans - they are their OWN being)… after that, going into the second and then the third trimester, the baby just continues to get to be a bigger version of what is already formed, and systems mature…
So I don’t quite understand how you can support the death of the baby during the first trimester, when alot of women are not even sure they ARE pregnant, but you feel YOU have the right to all of a sudden arbitrarily REMOVE the womans “rights” for the second and third trimester, when all that is happening is the baby is growing to a larger version of what it already is?.. And then you criticize others for wanting the same “right”… It’s just inconsistent…
“And no one has yet addressed all those UNWANTED babies and children up for adoption.” -
Actually, I did… first off, let the men have the right of first refusal for the newborns heading to adoption, second, imagine if the 45 MILLION aborted people since Roe v. Wade were available… we’d only need about 1-2% of them to adopt.
As you can see by the chart below, the active placement of adoption waiting list is about 25%…
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/images/ban08/hhsacftext.jpg
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/trends02-07.gif
BTW, TPR means “Terminated Parental Rights”…
The MAJORITY of foster kids (59%) return to their biological parents…
Hooch, your passion is obvious, but you can argue the points without the profanity, especially a term women don’t take too kindly… it muddies the message and just sets up a straw man… let’s try to keep it civil…
I understand your point on muddling the message. Watching those abortion videos really got me stirred up. Those 1st trimester kids are highly developed and the 2nd trimester kid was absolutely shocking. I am really surprised that there are doctors in this country that really love killing these babies in trade for boatloads of cash.
I had a friend way back in high school, who’s step dad was an anesthesiologist. He worked in the hospital all week and an abortion clinic on the weekends. He told me he made more money in the abortion clinic in one weekend than he did in the hospital all month.
ubbens,
One of the major problems with our system is that you only have two real candidates and by the time you get to the point where you have a shot at being President you are already bought and sold. So at election time what you really have is “Bad Choice” and “Worst Choice”. The people who would be best at the job are like “F**K this” because of the scrutiny that you are under. They would rather work in the private secto and get rich or in the non-profit sector and help people without have reporters questioning what your children have for lunch.
That’s why I voted for Obama. While I have tremendous respect for the ordeal that John McCain went through in the prison camp, it seems like he had no ideas for the country. I can’t even think of one thing he proposed during that campaign. Say what you will about Hillary and Obama, they both definitely have a vision.
As for Palin, I wasn’t impressed with her interviews with Couric. Having said that I don’t think she deserves all the bile directed at her (the Letterman joke is the latest example). I don’t think she’s ready to be VP, but I don’t get why people fear and hate her so much.