No worse?
No worse? Good to know you've got such high standards for your country. It seems to me that 30% of this country is bound and determined to vote republican even if Bush was doing congressional pages... or worse... starting wars over lies.
Like i said... I'm not a Pelosi fan even though she was my representative for a couple years... that said... Hastert is proving to be amazingly ineffective as a leader of the house. And amazingly ineffective at covering up republican sex scandals. Much the same can be said for Frist leadership in the Senate. Reid is worthless... My hope is that the left somehow gets a spine transplant and makes Feingold Senate Majority Leader after the right implodes in this election. But that won't likely happen. I can only hope that Reid gets slammed on this real estate thing.
What I am curious about is that would you support Hillary, Kerry, Edwards, Clark, Kennedy, or whatever nameless Democrat having the same powers under the Military Commissions Act of 2006 that Bush has... in being able to name anyone the please a enemy of the state and strip them of all their rights?
My question on the quote was to BigG... He seems to have that in his signature for a reason, it certainly does not imply that all men are created equal. I reminds me of the civil war (or the Iraq war) when both sides said they had God on their side... But being a liberal, ACLU, NRA, atheist (even in foxholes)... I'm guessing that BigG's god is not on my side...
BTW: BigFatKen... it seems rather hypocritical of you to call me a troll and then argue that I've only posted on this narrow subject. I'm assuming that since you have 483 posts that you at somepoint had a first post. Does the lower number of posts make one a troll? I am simply trying to provide
what I see as a different point of view than most on this thread.
FYI- I'm very much into slow fire target shooting. I'm a gun convert from my other hobby, archery. I shoot a Ruger MkII, Browning Buckmark, a Clark's 10/22 (my favorite), Beretta 92FS (self defense), and a remmington 12 gauge (very rarely).
Ken: I am relatively new to shooting... If you like to judge me based on whether is know what a the military should be using then I guess you could consider me an idiot. But frankly I think that the miltary in combat situations would be better served carrying the lighter 5.56 ammo (because they can carry more than the heavier stuff). If it was me fighting...I'd like to know that I had a bigger supply of ammo... than something that would work against body armor that my enemy is unlikely to have. Given that we're likely faced with battling more islamic fundamentalists they are not generally in possesion of the type of body armor that would make a 5.56 ineffective. I guess I could add... that if we were facing an enemy that did have that armor it might be wise to have at least a couple guys outfitted with the 7.62 M14s. On a related note... the other enemy that we may be likely facing is the NK's given their strategy of quanity over quality I would assume that thy would not be giving the bulk of their troops the latest body armor. Additionally
you might want to ask yourself why even after we'd been in Iraq for over a year all OUR troops did not have this armor? just my thoughts...
I don't understand. I'll be pulling the R lever, again. 
They have spent almost 7 years lamblasting BC for having consensual sex with an adult female while codling their own pedophile, bent over backwards to violate work done in the past to lend credibility to America(Geneva convention), protected traitors who revealed identities of American spies and have had high ranking party members, one aftere the other, leaving with disgrace from top to bottome for about 5 years.
