Scott Brown clearly out detbaed Coakley, Kennedy, & The moderator. Within the first five minutes of this debate it seemed to me that Brown clearly had Coakley frustrated. I must say, as a registered Democrat I will be voting against Coakley because of her inability to answer questions & her ability to dodge the important questions.

by Diana 02:06:45 AM 2013.06.28

Not having cable or satiellte tv, I'd love a list of sponsors to write and boycott associated with Schultz and MSNBC. If we don't make tilted media pay in the pocketbook, they'll just continue. The FCC probably has regulations against using the public airwaves to encourage violation of (federal?) election law. Not that it will be enforced.

by Christl 06:35:26 AM 2013.06.30

Bush Lied? Think AgainBut dive into Rockefeller's report, in seacrh of where exactly President Bush lied about what his intelligence agencies were telling him about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein, and you may be surprised by what you find. On Iraq's nuclear weapons program? The president's statements "were generally substantiated by intelligence community estimates." On biological weapons, production capability and those infamous mobile laboratories? The president's statements "were substantiated by intelligence information." On chemical weapons, then? "Substantiated by intelligence information." On weapons of mass destruction overall (a separate section of the intelligence committee report)? "Generally substantiated by intelligence information." Delivery vehicles such as ballistic missiles? "Generally substantiated by available intelligence." Unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to deliver WMDs? "Generally substantiated by intelligence information." As you read through the report, you begin to think maybe you've mistakenly picked up the minority dissent. But, no, this is the Rockefeller indictment. So, you think, the smoking gun must appear in the section on Bush's claims about Saddam Hussein's alleged ties to terrorism. But statements regarding Iraq's support for terrorist groups other than al-Qaeda "were substantiated by intelligence information." Statements that Iraq provided safe haven for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and other terrorists with ties to al-Qaeda "were substantiated by the intelligence assessments," and statements regarding Iraq's contacts with al-Qaeda "were substantiated by intelligence information." The report is left to complain about "implications" and statements that "left the impression" that those contacts led to substantive Iraqi cooperation. In the report's final section, the committee takes issue with Bush's statements about Saddam Hussein's intentions and what the future might have held. But was that really a question of misrepresenting intelligence, or was it a question of judgment that politicians are expected to make?

by Nguyen 09:11:26 AM 2013.06.30