Likable be damned and give me a Senator with the intellect to govern and demand accountablity.

To paraphrase, these are serious time that require serious people with serious answers. Allen, your 15 minutes (or 6 years) are up.

However, with Allen being the incumbent and in his best interest the "win" the debate. I would say that he did a poor job of showing voters why he is the better candidate, at the very least the better candidate on matters of National Security.

It's a draw technically, but politically.

Allen got his ass kicked courtesy of Tim Russert and Jim Webb.

damn that liberal media.

I used it to introduce dozens on voters to Jim Webb.

Thanks and kudos to 'ya

And he did start to get nasty a time or two, but checked himself.

2. George Allen voted for the Iraq out of Support for George Bush, I see a dozen or so media buys on that one.

Webb should win this with ease, Kaine and Warner have paved the way. Allen is completey lost.

This is ALWAYS been a very sensitive issue, and you know who has always been against women in combat traditionally is conservatives.

So basically, your saying that Jim Webb is the true conservative.

Thank you.

He is, Allen and his "big government" and secret police is why I left the Republican party.

I wasn't alone, and I am not talking about Jim Webb.

I would like to ask you one question, however.

Was Mary Sue Terry an extremist?  She crafted the orignal legal defense of VMI

How about Doug Wilder?

How about longstanding State Senator Elmon T. Gray (D)?

Misogynist pseudo-scientist Gerald Atkinson is no Mary Sue Terry. And neither are his bosom buddies.

But everything has to be a propaganda tool for you and I. Publius, right? Truth be damned.

And if this (and a hairpiece comment) is the best he can come up with, it's clear that Webb creamed Allen in this pseudo-debate.

And to Roger's point, Webb very clearly described the situation regarding his comments and thoughts on women in the military in much detail.  And it was sound.  Please refer back to the show as I don't have time to rewrite it all here.

But, yes, I am bald on top.  I've always heard that people who wear pieces or get hair transplants are "phony."

In fact, this was the first time that they have ever watched him.

In particular, my mother -- a woman not unlike most other women of her age -- has a very negative view of Webb.  It stems in large part to his comments to the effect that the Naval Academy was a "horny woman's" dream to those women who would dare to attend his academy.

Naturally, she grew up in a time that while women were beginning to have some doors opened...they were still limited.  She fought hard to overcome that. 

Do you defend his comments that the Naval Academy because a "horny woman's dream?"

Mom heard those words and now she will never be open to supporting him.  As I have said previously, she views herself as an independent.  She campaigned for JFK in 1960.

Just as the truth often comes of the mouths of babes...so too do our senior citizens have a way of delivering the unvarnished truth.

My mother was extemely offended by Jim Webb's comments regarding women in uniform and she was not satisfied by his supposed apology.

Neither of my parents are overtly partisan.  In fact, my mother worked as a civil servant in the Pentagon.

Her comments to me were that the most able officers with whom worked were female Naval officers.  And, mother was offended by Webb's comments and his demeanor this morning.

I am completely comfortable with the roles of women in today's military, and I fully support the advancements that have taken place.  Over the past few years I have been privileged to visit numerous military units, and to accept the invitations of female officers for command visits in Japan, Hawaii, Washington, DC and Quantico.  I look forward to continuing to do so.

27 years ago I wrote a magazine article about the issue of women in combat and women at the Naval Academy.  I did not title the article.  In the article I made clear that I would support a woman candidate for President and would have voted for Margaret Thatcher and Golda Meir.  The article was written during a time of great emotional debate over a wide array of social issues in this country, and the tone of this article was no exception.  Many leading military figures, including the Commandant of the Marine Corps, shared my concerns in these areas.

I did not anticipate the widespread reaction to this magazine article, and to the extent that my writing subjected women at the Academy or the active Armed Forces to undue hardship, I remain profoundly sorry.  On the first occasion that I was invited back to the Academy in 1983, among my comments was a strong call for harmony among male and female midshipmen.

This issue was addressed during two Senate confirmation hearings, in 1984 and 1987, to the satisfaction of the Senate, which on both occasions unanimously supported my appointments in the Defense Department.  Further, when I was Secretary of the Navy, I strengthened policies against sexual harassment.  I also personally convened a Navy-wide task force of senior male and female officers and NCOs to examine roles of women in the Navy, and as a result tripled the number of operational assignments available to women.

and before you get on webb for anything about what he said 27 yrs ago read about the history of women in combat --

http://userpages.aug...

also, as recently as 2002 the UK has kept their ban on women serving in frontline combat roles and said that allowing women into frontline combat roles would have been an "irresponsible experiment".

http://news.bbc.co.u...

so the real outrage by YOU should be that women aren't allowed in frontline combat roles here at home and with our closest ally and not what Webb professed 27 years ago and yet somehow still remains true even in the 21st century.

But that also assumes that Congress would agree with declaring war and it not being just a presidential police action.

or, don't you listen to the military on the ground?

you obviously don't hear the military experts like General Zinni, General Clark, General Hoar, and Jim Webb.

Of course they wouldn't know anything about war, and war planning.

Perhaps you are what I said in my previous commentary.

Blind and ingnorant.

If we continue with failed policies, how else will we fill this void of numbers we need in our nation's military?

how does this "question" is judgement?

Allen's going down, and you know it.

Cheap shots wont' work anymore. OR are you just tired of all the pundits, comedians, and reporters who contiually bash Allen during this campaign.

Oh, that's it.

Your a bunch of whiners.

Go, cry somewhere else asshole.

your bring nothing productive to this debate for the future. you attack, smear, and discredit anything honest and truthful.

You either don't understand or see the truth, refuse to believe it, or are blinded by your own ingnorance.

Don't tell me what I can or cannot say.

You bring a negative tone to this debate, it's only fair that we respond in kind.

How can you support a view that is without a doubt a failure?

A failure in policy, and a failure in leadership.

If anyone is unable to see an opposing point of view look no further than the person who types commentary by the name of "roger a. jarrell".

You again are blind and ignorant.

A sad, tunneled view of the world.

I pray that one day you will find some truth and maybe then you will realize what mistakes you have made in support of failure and lies.

You can repeatedly spout canned talking points, but that seems about the limit of communicative abilities.

Oh, you didn't mean that?  Just shows how poorly you write.

Go ahead, troll rate me.  Coming from you it would be an honor.

Bush Senior's premature attack against a nation doomed America to 40 years of war.

But if ANYONE is out of touch with military policy is it without question George Allen.

And this debate proved it.

Allen is lost when it comes to military and foreign policy. He even breaks lines with Hagel, McCain, Graham, and even our senior senator Warner.

Allen belongs back on a dude ranch, where he can continue his dress up of being a cowboy.

Virginia needs real solutions, to real problems.

We are at war Roger, if you haven't realized.

American kids are coming home in coffins.

There is no way you can begin to start this debate with me, or anyone else here on Raising Kaine until you realize the fact that Allen could never trump Webb on military policy.

It just won't happen.

Why?

The majority of past and present military/defense experts agree with Jim Webb.

They speak for themselves.

and that scares the shit out of Allen and his "A-Team"

Look at all the people who have endorsed Jim Webb's campaign so far compared to Allen's

Jim Webb has 2 CENTCOM Commanders, both 4-Star U.S. Marines, and then NATO Commander Wesley Clark, among other brass who have endorsed Jim Webb.

I can't WAIT until Colin Powell comes out and endorses Jim Webb, god knows he is in total disagreement with Allen's positions on National Security.

If you want to pray about something roger, pray Powell stays quiet and doesn't endorse Webb.

IF that happens, that will be the nail in Allen's political coffin.

on one of roger's truly frivolous assertions. jim webb's hair is his own and he is simply a very lucky man in that respect. i wonder about roger's hair and if perhaps he may just be a little jealous.

i met jim webb at one of the kitchen table conferences. he was genuine, unassuming, thoughtfull and interested in the opinions and concerns of individuals. i was very impressed by him and i am not easily impressed.

and to roger;
don't bother to respond because it really is pointless

Considering that roughly 20% of our military services are provided by highly paid mercenaries, and that veterans in their 40's, 50's and occasionally 60's are being called up, it certainly is an attractive alternative.

More importantly, a prerequisite for all but the most desperate volunteers signing up is leadership that potential recruits can trust.

  - He would not commit to being a Virginia senator for the next 6 years.  Simply didn't answer the question

  - He said he needed more time to figure out how he'll vote on the torture issue.  Nothing new is coming out on this in the next few days - he knows how he's going to vote and wouldn't say.

What else?  Feel free to jump in with your favorite Allen dodges...

Senator, you refused twice to answer the question asked on MTP. Did you tell me (Webb) that you voted for the Iraq war out of party loyalty to GWB? The answer is either yes or no and Senator, the truth only takes a second to say.

http://www.wdbj7.com...

Allen, Webb spar over Iraq war, prisoner policies

WASHINGTON Virginia Democratic Senate candidate Jim Webb today sided with Republican Senators John Warner and John McCain and former Secretary of State Colin Powell on the prisoner interrogation issue that's dividing the Republican Party.

Republican Senator George Allen responded in a debate on N-B-C's "Meet the Press" that he has not decided whether to back President Bush's plan allowing tougher interrogation of prisoners of war or a plan by Warner, the Armed Services Committee chairman.

The Iraq issue consumed more than half of the first televised debate in the Virginia Senate race. It's a closely watched contest that has become a midterm election referendum on the president's handling of the war.

Webb said the split is between people who haven't served in war and those who have. Like Warner, McCain and Powell, he's a war veteran. Allen has no military experience and Bush served stateside in the National Guard during the Vietnam War.

Allen is a strong supporter of President Bush and said he needs more facts before he makes up his mind. He said it's important to balance the need to protect U.S. prisoners of war from torture while still giving U.S. intelligence agents the ability to effectively question detained terrorists.

Allen said he's trying to be a bridge between those two views.

Copyright 2006 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Allen, Webb spar on Iraq policy in televised debate

09/17/2006

By BOB LEWIS  / Associated Press

Virginia Democratic Senate candidate Jim Webb on Sunday sided with fellow war veterans, Republican Sens. John Warner and John McCain and former secretary of State Colin Powell, on the prisoner interrogation issue that threatens to split the Republican Party.

His opponent, GOP Sen. George Allen, responded in a debate on NBC's "Meet the Press" that he has not decided whether to back President Bush's plan allowing tougher interrogation of prisoners of war or a plan by Warner, the Armed Services Committee chairman and Virginia's Republican senior senator.

The Iraq issue consumed more than half of the first televised debate in the Virginia Senate race, a closely watched contest that has become a mid-term elecion referendum on the president's handling of the war.

"I'm with Sen. Warner and Colin Powell," Webb told moderator Tim Russert.

Webb, a decorated Marine veteran of the Vietnam War, took pains to stress his comradeship with fellow combat veterans leading the split within the Republican party over the issue of prisoner tribunals. Allen has no military experience and Bush served stateside in the National Guard during Vietnam.

"What you see here is a split between the theorists who have never been on a battlefield or never worn the uniform" and those who have, Webb said.

Allen, who last year voted with the White House 96 percent of the time, said he needs more facts before he makes up his mind. He said it's important to balance the necessity of protecting U.S. prisoners of war from torture while still giving U.S. intelligence operatives the ability to effectively question detained terrorists.

"I'm trying to be a bridge, a bridge between these two proposals," Allen said.

If that's the initial takeaway from Lewis (sorry, that's focus group jargon) than Allen is in trouble.

Dear All:

I just watched Webb debate Allen on Meet the Press. It was perhaps the most riviting debate I've ever seen. Hopefully many people taped it, and you can also catch it on C-SPan.org or on the C-Span rebroadcasts on TV and radio, which will air beginning at noon today.

Will the campaign make it available on DVD and tape for us to distribute? No one who sees this debate and has a brain in their heads can fail to support Webb. This was truly the phony Allen vs the Real Deal Webb. It was great!

He was masterful! Coming in a tremendous underdog with no prior political experience, he destroyed Allen - in a perfectly diplomatic manner.

This was completely unexpected - by me, anyway. Many of us believed Allen would trick him into a series of blunders, that he would seem slow or flatfooted. This might have been the end of the campaign for him. It was not! This was like the Redskins going out and beating the Superbowl Champ Steelers on Monday night football - bigger, even! What an upset!

Have faith, everyone! You never know where the redeemer will come from.

Now, let's all get out there and work for this guy! And for our friends and family that don't vote in VA, send money to the Webb for Senate Campaign. And for those who don't have money, there's always something to do to help in a campaign.

What a moment here in N. VA. We also have Judy Feder, candidate for Congress in Va's huge 10th District, which runs from the Arlington Co line all the way to West VA and then south to Fauquier Co. She is an excellent challenger against Frank Wolf.
And Andy Hurst - great name, btw - who is a truly worthy challenger against Tom Davis. And Shawn O'Donnell too - don't know as much about that campaign, but everything we hear is good.

THis is an exciting year, a watershed year in US politics. Reform is possible. Taking back both houses of Congress is possible. Jim Webb could be the force that brings it altogether.

Tom

Words NOT used in this debate
Marriage Amendment
Roe v. Wade
Abortion
Gays
Guns
God

Russert did not allow the repub talking points to tilt the playing field.

Even on the 27 year old article and tailhook questions, Webb answered truthfully and completely. Felix consistently tried to answer the question he wished was asked (truthiness?) instead of the question that was asked but Russert held his ground.

Victory = Webb...

While I am glad he did that, I think I understand her sentiments.  But even while she was speaking I was hoping that she never finds out that Allen is notorious for failing to respond to correspondence.

There can be such a desperation to give meaning to a loved one's death.  Second, no one is more vulnerable than a person in deep grief.  It made me feel extremely uncomfortable today when he said that and I had already blocked it out of my mind.

There is no dismissal, the point I believe trying to be made is that when you lose someone during the grieving process you can be extremely vulnerable and weak, naturally.

And that it is inconceivable that someone would use a death of someone for political benefit. Something the Republicans has continually tried to do with 9/11 to Iraq.

She may well vote for Allen, but I can guarantee without a doubt it doesn't speak for all Virginians that have lost someone they love through this war.

You forget Jim Webb's son if over there right now, or the fact that there are far more people's family that have died. Will Allen personally write them all letters, and use them for political gain.

Or was it merely the fact that she said she supported his campaign?

Sadly, it's the latter.

I respect anyone who serves, like me, or those who have lost someone through this process of war.

The debate showcased Webb's major strengths and he didn't disappoint.

Here's Reuters from a few minutes ago:

September 17, 2006
Bombs Kill at Least 23 in Northern Iraqi City
By REUTERS
Filed at 12:14 p.m. ET

KIRKUK, Iraq (Reuters) - Insurgents killed at least 23 people with a wave of vehicle bombs across Iraq's ethnically mixed city of Kirkuk on Sunday, one day after Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki urged Iraqis to embrace reconciliation.

At least 73 other people were wounded in the coordinated blasts caused by a huge suicide truck bomb and four car bombs which rocked oil-rich Kirkuk***

George Allen claims to be on a bridge somewhere between the Bush Torture plan and the best interests of our troops. Allen can't explain where that bridge is just yet. Presumably after Allen's folks have done more polling and the Senator has done a lot more dancing, Virginia voters will find out.

I will be curious to see how Allen votes on the torture issue.  I can't imagine him every thinking or voting as a separate George.  He's connected to the hip with Bush and a total rubber stamp for his administration.  When you think about the money spent in Iraq and what we could have done with it to rebuild New Orleans, it's a travesty.  Or better yet, if we'd taken some of that money and sunk it into some decent security here in the United States. An even better idea would be to use some of it to protect our troops who are sitting ducks in Iraq.  Enough of this talk about protecting us....they aren't protecting us.  They're protecting their political cronies and looking out for their interests.  This administration doesn't care a hoot
for the average American citizen is slowly but surely eliminating our middle class.  Our freedoms are being taking away one by one all in the name of keeping us
"safer."  So much for Democracy folks.

Let's get out there and fight for our country and get Webb elected.  He's the real deal.  He's proved it for years and he came out a winner in this debate.  Allen looked like the slick, smooth talking, talking out of both sides of his mouth politician that he is. He can't even give a straight
answer as to whether he plans to finish out his six year term.

The 1979 Washingtonian article, Russert left the door open for an unequivocal apology--Webb could have done much better on this.

Allen gets and "S+" plus for slick politician non-answer answers.  I give him a "B" for presentation and an "F" for content.  Allen's national security statements don't stand up to scrutiny--I wouldn't be surprised if he simply pulled his policy positions off the White House website.

Overall a good debate.  On balance I think this helps Webb more than Allen, but I think there's still room for improvement.

Now come by and talk to Jim Webb in person at our home at 4:30 to talk to him about the debate.

Kevin Ceckowski
Robert Christie
2560 North Vermont St
Arlington, Virginia
www.webbforsenate.com and rsvp to this event.

poc Adam

Allen really did not think on his feet.  Why couldn't he pull some data, history out of his head? He really was spinning exactly what Rove wanted him to say. WHY CAN'T YOU THINK ON YOUR OWN SENATOR ALLEN?  After 24 years as an elected official and he can't recall facts as Webb was able to do.  Allen was spewing the Republican playbook, that's it.  Very sad.  He needs to go!  Poor guy.  He could not answer a simple question like would he support Senator Warner or President Bush's proposal re: Geneva Convention.  Allen would not even answer the question of his Racist comment.  Sad day for the Allen Campaign.

HAD ENOUGH? VOTE DEMOCRAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

email me offline at kber at earthlink dot net if you see this, or I'll see if you are listed in the phone book

Allen is a professional politician, nothing more, nothing less.  And that's bad for Virginia AND the nation :(

Thanks

I'll damn sure exercise my freedom of speech.

What I don't understand is how you and others here can't seem to face the facts that there are those who don't support your point of view.

Frankly, I like a vigorous debate.  If I wanted to preach to the choir, I'd go to church more often.

Are you so insecure that you need an echo chamber to validate your support of Jim Webb?  How's that, dude?

On the subject of race- Allen came across as childish and somewhat insecure- Not what would expect from a former Gov and current US Senator.  He came across as one who is not comfortable with talking about race- Something that needs to be further drawn out in my opinion.

Webb's performance and women and the military was worrisome. I know we nominated a republican, but I would have like to seen some more heartfelt appreciation of the women who serve and LEAD in all branches and on all missions. I hope he gets more clarity and a more current view as he moves from candidate to senator.

That would be the honorable thing for you to do before you start making assumptions regarding either my residency or social status.  As I have said to you earlier, I retain residency in Virginia, own property there, and pay property taxes in Virginia.

Frankly, your silver spoon comment is off base as is your comment regarding Washington and Lee.  I'm not going to publicly rebuke you regarding your comments because I think two VMI grads should discuss the either in person or over the phone.

You may email at rowhey4vmi@yahoo.com or rjarrell@spilmanlaw.com

I'll gladly discuss this with you or even buy you a beer next time you are in Lexington.

You May Be Whatever You Resolve To Be,
RAJII

Webb did very well, focus on that instead of bashing someone you don't know and will probably never meet.

Nick the bad hip/draft your ass comment is just not necessary. Come on folks, show some civility.

By the time that I reached VMI, I was able to lead a fully athletic lifestyle.  However, I was under both a moral and legal obligation to fully disclose the nature of my condition to the U.S. Army.  To lie about the nature of my childhood condition would have been an honor violation and a prosecutable offense.

After thorough review of my medical records, the Army doctors predicted that I would be a candidate for total hip replacement by age 35.

Over the years, I attempted to enlist in the National Guard and to receive a commission as a JAG officer in the West Virginia National Guard.

None of this really matters aside from the fact that Nick Stump, AES, and others take cheap shots at me for my lack of service.  I am proud of my cadetship at VMI (and, Nick I paid for that education) and my attempts to serve in uniform.

Not even Bill Clinton can claim such an effort.

As I have previously stated on this site, liberals didn't give a rats ass for those who served in uniform until they realized that they had a weakness on national security issues.

Bob Dole's military record didn't matter to liberals.  Oliver North was castigated for Iran Contra but his combat record was cast aside.

How many of you acknowledge John Warners proud service in either the Navy or Marine Corps? 

Will Mark Warner's lack of service keep you from pulling the level against him when he runs for President?

I think we know better.

Best Hewitt quotes:http://hughhewitt.to...

I just finished watching the George Allen – Jim Webb debate on “Meet the Press.” For conservatives wishing for Allen to retain his seat, their best hope is that Virginians were otherwise occupied this morning or that the state’s NBC outlets were having technical difficulties.

I should also say that given the vital partisan stakes involved this election season that Hugh and I have frequently discussed here, I squarely and unequivocally support Allen’s re-election.

Or at least I did until this morning’s debate. Now I’m not so sure.

There were also the notable stylistic differences between the two candidates. Allen seemed like a politician through-and through. Webb seemed like he was intellectually and spiritually slumming while exchanging barbs with Allen and dealing with the sometimes insipid questions from Russert (e.g. “Both of you chew tobacco. Is that a good example to set for the young?”).

AS EVERYONE HERE KNOWS, I THINK IT’S A MATTER of considerable import that Republicans maintain control of Congress. But, I have to admit, I can imagine far worse things than having a man like James Webb in the Senate.

Wow.

How about this quote:

Webb outclassed Allen in every aspect of the clash.

  John Hart
  Hart Law Offices
  Harrisonburg, VA
  VMI Class of 1986

  Rasmussen Sept 17

Approve 41%, Disapprove 57%

The only worrisome aspect to me about this is that GA appeals to people who respond to that kind of programming. I think the  Rebumblicans have a set of code words that tell them who to vote for without their having to actually listen and think.

I was very happy with Tim Russert's role in the debate. I think that he, more than JW, cut into GA's ability to mouth the complete set of tapes he had pre-programmed. It seemed to me that Russert's cutting him off distracted him and contributed to his lackluster overall performance.

JW did well, although he could help his case by warming up a bit. His weakest moments came during the women in the military discussion. My impression is that JW was pointlessly stubborn in failing to admit that, over the long run, he was mistaken in his assessment of women in leadership positions in the military. He should have responded quickly and succinctly, "At the time it seemed right, but in light of women's gallant role in the military today, I understand that I did not appreciate the ability of women to contribute to the military effort, in and out of combat situations." Discussion ended. Instead, he over-shared and rambled, keeping the issue on the table for far too long...it was, after all, a judgment made 27 years ago! I think ultimately he rescued himself, but it was a painful, lengthy and unnecessary process.

All in all, I think it was an excellent debate for the campaign and that JW is getting better and better.

You get street tough (former civilian life - thugs) Marines in Infantry units (who oh by the way - actually kill people on a mission - up close and personal like) ... and we just ignore that reality??

For the sake of female advancement in the ranks?? 

Nobody (sound bite driven voters) wants to read Nightengale's song to fully understand the cultural and generational influences on Jim Webb .... but they should (it's too bad they don't).  When you put the article he wrote some 27 years ago (when we were fully integrating women officers into my Basic School class) ... into the debate of the time ... it's a brilliant piece.... designed to stir debate and challenge the "conventional wisdom" (that's what journalist do ... don't they?? Engage the reader in provacative thought??). That was his job back then.

Webb is not going to change his basic views formed in life and death situations ... but he certainly has proven he can evolve and modify his core beliefs.  He did so purposefully when Secretary of the Navy.  Key word ... he INITIATED the bottom up review of women's roles in the Navy and did so in a very principal way.

So pissed off Naval Academy grads can bitch all they want about bad times at Ridgemont High (I mean the academy) .... but they only demean themselves .... as people who were entitled to "fair" treatment. Life is not fair ... Jim's article may have been used as an excuse by bullying / hazing upperclass men ... but it's not Webb's fault.... he was just a messenger of the times.

Short answer ....  I thought his debate performance was excellent and he handled all the circumstances well. .... The campaign had a GREAT day today - thanks.

That said, I do agree that sex often matters. But not always. There are warrior women and chicken men. The warriors should be in combat, the chickens shouldn't..regardless of their sex.  On the other hands, chickens lay damn good eggs, so they do a great job in logistics, quartermaster, or medical units.

As applies to the debate, I take a technical viewpoint rather than a moral one. I really don't care what JW should think...I'm only interested that he be able to put GA on the defensive and not have to dig and then climb out of his own foxholes.

JW did a wonderful job in the debate. I thought that this question was the only one that caused him any trouble at all, so I brought it up merely to say that I hope he is able to dispatch it more effectively next time.

2) Allen changed one answer, and it was on a subject for which Webb could have corrected him.  At first Allen said that Saddam was paying 35,000 to families of people who would be suicide bombers in Israel.  In fact, Saddam jumped in after the fact, when the Saudis were paying 25,000 after people had done it.  Saddam was trying to build his Arab street credibility.  The second time Allen mentioned it he said 45,000.  I have checked the video to be sure I heard it correctly.

3) The next time Allen uses "my opponent" Jim should claim the title proudly:  "I am your opponent because you promised leadership on behalf of Virginia and all you've been is a rubberstamp for the President.  Most of the legislation you've introduced - which has not passed - has been to give tax breaks for companies importing appliances made overseas.  Virginians deserve more from a Senator than that, which is why I am PROUD to be your opponent.

If I see Jim today, I will offer this to him.

As much as I love to joust here, I'm going to focus now on offering constructive information that the campaign might use.

My advice:

Ignore the trolls.  They're just sucking up valuable time.

Start writing letters to the editor of your local paper.

Do research that will help the campaign and post it.

Rock on Webb and Good luck tomorrow and everyone should wish the best to our great candidate Andy Hurst who will take on Tommy D and the K street Boys Tuesday night at 7:30, be there or be square. Have  a good evening.

I'm afraid the Northern part of Iraq will NOT be, in the long run, the feel good story we all want it to be.

I was wondering, when Jim Webb spoke on MTP about the necessity to open a dialogue with the regional powers that have a historic interest in Iraq, why he failed to mention Turkey?  Which country is the most formidable regional power -- Iran, Syria, or Turkey?

Which country is the most formidable regional power -- Iran, Syria, or Turkey?

Iran, no question. At least potentially.

At the moment, Turkey is hobbled by its desire to join EU -- Iran has no such clouds veiling its vision of the road to future. For that matter, Turkey has has been inter-conflicted for more than 150 yrs; it wants to belong to the "cultured" (low-level religion) Europe, but it doesn't want to cut its philosophical, religious and ethnic roots to the Middle East. A fence stake up one's "um" is *not* very comfortable.

Additionally, unlike Germany and Japan, Turkey has not been able to come to terms with its past genocidal "events" (early 20th century, I think); it's stil in denial. But, the more journalists and writers -- who dare to mention the un-oficial idea -- they put on trial for "abusing Turkishness", the deeper into doo-doo they get with the EU. So it's a vicious circle at that end.

And the Kurd-issue isn't clear-cut, either. The Iraqi Kurds would love nothing better than dis-engage from Iraq and join their brethern in Turkey. But that's not what *Turkey* would like at all; the Iraqi Kurds have grown too effing independent during Saddam's rule (he had almost no control over them, that's why he was so gung-ho on exterminating htem); they'd only add to the already existing turmoil.

Syria might have been happy to allow itself to be a conduit for Hezbollah's weapons from Iran into Lebanon, but it would hate seeing Iran dominating the ME area, which Iran would love to do, especially with Iraq in flinders and Saddam no longer a barrier. I think that's one of the reasons that Syria (apart from being -- at least officially -- a country with a separation of state and church. Officially, *just like US* ) is likely to grit its governmental teeth, spit in distaste and spout anti-US propaganda, but, in the long run will co-operate with US, rather than give an inch to Iran. Because being beholden to Iran would be worse.

Iran is now dealing with China (who has oil reserves and who doesn't enters into the equation). Given that we're up the s..t creek as regards our debt to China, it makes Iran an even more formidable opponent. All the same... I don't think there's any reason to "bomb, bomb, bomb; bomb, bomb Iran" (to the tune of Barbara Ann) quite yet, no matter what the sAdmin and death-head Rummy might be cooking in their coked-up brains

While the station does air this religous broadcast every Sunday, and has every right to air religous broadcasts, it also has an obigation to the local viewers to keep them informed about the local political situation.  Remember, these are PUBLIC AIRWAYS.  The senate debate was unusual in that it was on only one network.  As the only outlet for that broadcast for a large segment of the Commonwealth, the station should have rearranged its schedule to air the debate SOMETIME during the day.