will be a bit off the beaten path.  Instead of the well known issues, I'd like to hear about Allen's interest in suspending kitchen product duties.  I wrote about it here a few weeks back.

Seems that Allen has a great interest in suspending duties for a number of very specific kitchen products for a three year period.  What is the purpose of this?  It can't possibly have anything to do with national security or social issues.  The list is far too specific and limited to have any impact economically. 

The only feasible explanation I can figure is that it's some sort of payback to a supporter.  A corporation that bought some legislation perhaps? 

... going to try to tie Webb to Kerry/Kennedy/Schumer as just another knee-jerk liberal.

I hope he does, because that is just SO overplayed, and then Webb can tie Allen to Bush.

tries to call Webb a flip flopper.  So Webb can open up a can of whoopass, and remind Felix of his love/hate relationship with stem cell research.

I'd really like to hear him answer to Northern Virginia residents re: his lack of support for maintaining homeland security funding for this area.  As an Arlington resident, it's very troubling that my Senator did not vote to send critical funds to this area, which is as likely a terrorist target as there is out there.  I realize the need to support smart budget decisions, but if we are going to invest in security, it needs to go to the places that are most in need - including a part of the country with hundreds of thousands of government workers, a vulnerable transit system, critical businesses in defense, technology, etc. 

I don't want Webb to be a single issue candidate, but I'd like Webb to be able to quote a bunch of statistics/anecdotes about the war, and then ask Allen how he thinks that we are making good progress, how he can stand by policies that are clearly not working rather than make necessary tactical and strategic adjustments.  I think that's a good move for him - based on his experience, to put out that in military conflict, if a certain approach fails you go back and revise/rethink, and then make adjustments to ensure you succeed.  But the Bush admin has failed to let us do that, and brands anyone who wants to approach this conflict in a better/smarter way as an-American.

Allen will question Webb about domestic issues because that is a perceived weakness.  Webb better be prepared with concise and clear answers.  Allen will try to make the race about the hot-button social issues to rally his base.

Stem cell research is a hot-off-the-press issue that the Bush / Allen position is way out in right field from public opinion.

The Bush / Allen position on privatization of Social Security is widely unpopular and would actually make the financial problem worse, not better.  Webb ought to pin Allen down on that issue.

Webb ought to stand with McCain on the torture issue.  They both have credibility as vets.

I predict questions from Allen to divert attention away from the war to issues regarding "Virginia values." I don't want to be too specific, in the event that we stumble across something they haven't considered, and the use it to attack.

Webb should question Allen's fiscal accountability for the deficit and the disconnect between his voting record and his proposal for a Constitutional amendment to balance the budget, poor treatment of veterans, ties to lobbyists and special interests, Allen's voting record on offshoring jobs, stem cell research, and delaying tactics used in the Senate to prevent meaningful legislation. When Allen turns ugly, question why he loves the Confederate battle flag so much, why his kids have the names of Confederate generals. If he questions Jim's patriotism, get mad, make a scene, and call a press conference afterwards.

On the role of the judiciary is almost certain. Allen will ask Webb how he would have voted against Roberts or Alito, and if Webb suggests that Roberts or Alito is in some way unworthy of sainthood then Allen will try to tear him apart.

Simple question: Do you agree with George Bush's assesment, according to Tony Snow, that stem cell research is murder? If so what should the punishment be?

I'd like to hear an explanation of the border security vote and the provision on arresting Americans who purchase lower cost drugs in Canada.

I'd also like to hear how he justifies a two-fold increase in the national debt during his Senate term.

has the cost of human life and capital in Iraq been worth it? Knowing what you know now about no WMDs, the secterian violence, allies pulling out and the expansion of al-Qaida in Iraq, would you vote for the invasion again?

I personally would like to see him asked: what action he believes should be taken against North Korea and Iran?  I'd also like to know what he thinks should be done about Israel violating United States arms export laws, human rights laws and UN resolutions?  I'd like his opinion on tying the Veterans Administration budget to the defense budget mandating it be fully funded to support all veterans entitled to care.  Finally I'd like to see him and asked what is his stance on the separation of church and state, and if it is okay for Christianity to influence American politics then is it okay for Islam to influence Middle Eastern governments?

By the way, I'm going to the debate.  Anyone else gonna be there?

What does George Allen need $10,000,000 for if he is running as a supposedly successful incumbent United States Senator?

Why are corporations and special interest groups contributing this kind of money to George Allen?  Is something for sale?

How much of George Allen's campaign contributions are in small amounts from wage earners versus wealthy contributors? 

If George Allen is truely the champion of wage earners, why don't his contributions reflect this?

You'll see that 20% of Allen's money is coming from special interest PACs.  You'll also see that a number of individuals are giving large dollar donations, which may mean sympathy for the politicians cause--or it could also indicate an attempt at influence peddling (especially when those contributions are coming from several individuals who work for the same company who all max out their contribution limit).

Webb has 400+ donations that exceed $250 per contribution; however, there are a large number below this limit haven't showed up yet on the FEC filings.  His PAC money accounts for less than 5% of his overall sum.

I'm guessing that you don't understand the implications involved with big-money politics at the federal level.  If you did you'd realize that Allen's sizeable war chest isn't necessarily good news for the interest of Virginia voters. 

Here's a link to the relevant donor info . . .

http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/cancomsrs/

George Allen has been the United States Senator from Virginia for nearly 6 years.  He calls himself a friend of the common man.  Why then, have average wages for Virginia's workers not improved during his term?

Why is the minimum hourly wage still a poverty wage?

Mr. Webb will be debating George Allen on Saturday at the annual meeting of the Virginia Bar Association.  This venue, a meeting of Virginia lawyers and judges, is excellent for reaffirming the importance of an independent judiciary, and for highlighting the damage that Republicans are doing to our judicial system each time they finger that favorite scapegoat, the mythical “activist judge.”

Republican brand politics, which is now almost exclusively divisive politics, has been waging a dangerous attack on one of the pillars of our American society, namely, our judicial system. The term “activist judges” has become an acceptable slur against our courts. When first used, this term may not have been intended to be an attack on the entire third branch of our government, but it has evolved into such an attack. The mythical “activist judge” is the creation of the divisive political technique that criticizes using broad general terms in order to draw a bright line between us and them.  The criticism attaches indiscriminately to all judges. Before we know it the judiciary, as a whole, has become suspect.  What was probably a disagreement with a court decision, not a valid claim that the decision was reached unfairly, became an attack on the integrity of the entire system.

Criticism of government officials is essential to our form of government. But in order to be of any benefit to the system, the criticism needs to be directed to specific individuals and identify specific actions that violate rule of law or codes of ethics.  Divisive politics is not so deliberate.  The myth of the “activist judge” would never survive if the underlying facts had to be explained.

The President of the American Bar Association, Michael Greco, in his President’s Message in the July ABA Journal, reflects on the dangers of this “myth of judicial activism.”  He says, “The mantra of ‘judicial activism’ is simply the rant of ideologues who disagree with a judge’s decision.”  Mr. Greco goes on to say, “Attacks on the independence of the legal profession and judiciary are a direct assault on our justice system and democracy.”  Senator George Allen, aficionado of divisive politics, himself an officer of the court, frequently utters this mantra.  He shows a remarkable lack of appreciation for the role of an independent judiciary in our society, and a callous disregard for the damaging effect that his divisive posturing can have on our American principles. 

b crowe

Senator Allen crudely characterized the ordeal of the Schiavo family as "an innocent woman starving to death" as his justification for supporting Federal legislation to meddle in the private medical affairs of a dying woman in Florida.  This despite the careful review of state courts and attending physicians.

How can George Allen square this over-reach of government power with his constant railing against our "nanny" government - interfering in the affairs of a free and independent citizenry?

still haven't heard yet, is this going to be televised or webcast at all?  or are those of us that can't make it in person going to have to read about it later in the evening.  For that matter, anyone with an Air-Card wanna live blog this?
(televised in NoVa I woudn't be surprised if some NBC affiliates down south carry this, but not up here, someone prove me wrong)

I'll be on the road at the time, and out of range.

Stem cell research offers the promise of remarkable lifesaving treatments for debilitating diseases like diabetes, paralysis, and organ failure. Why should America concede these medical breakthroughs to countries in Asia and Europe?  What will Americans be asked to pay for these treatments?  Will Stem Cell Research do to American medicine what Japan and Korea have done to our auto industry?