He's alive, and always will be in their minds. They need him alive to keep the "war on terror" going.

"yup yup" from our new foreign policy expert "McCain's choice".

Did I miss something? I thought you complained that the US was wasting its energy in Iraq when it should have been going after Bin Laden...

So the republican's can steal the election if they just cause some sort of military action in October? I thought the nation was sick of war and Dubya? How would an October surprise be advantageous to McCain?

Unless you're willing to admit Republicans are better at National Security than Dems, what's the point of speculating?

Chris, you're starting to reach troll status. Which means I won't be answering your questions.

"So the republican's can steal the election if they just cause some sort of military action in October? I thought the nation was sick of war and Dubya? How would an October surprise be advantageous to McCain?"

Cause there are a lot of stone cold stupid people out there. There the same people who think its a disadvantage to dialog with other nations. There the ones who are upset that Obama is overwhelmingly supported by the rest of the world -they see that as a negative. There the same people who think Saddam Hussein had something to do with 9/11. There the ones who think foreign policy is defined by how big of a made-in-China flag pin you wear from Walmart.

Prof Jack, no matter how many times I reread your post, it still says that you think it is a bad thing to "find" Bin Laden.

There might be a series of attacks sold as targeting Bin Laden, but just a few days ago I heard McCain boasting that Bush couldn't get Bin Laden, but that "I know how to get him." I guess Johnny Boy has been holding out on W.

it still says that you think it is a bad thing to "find" Bin Laden.

No, it doesn't say that, at all.

Catching bin Laden would be wonderful. Just as it would have been wonderful in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, or 2007. Purposely leaving him uncaptured to promote the "war on ter" or influence the 2008 election, however, would be a disgrace.

Karl Rove is known for such things.

Before you put on your tin foil hats and suggest that there is a White House conspiracy NOT to find the guy (versus the more realistic theories that Bin Laden died on his own from the kidney disease or the administration is simply too inept to find him), let's not forget Clinton didn't want to hit the button to nuke the bastard back in 1997 or 1998. I seriously doubt that was a ploy to keep the "perpetual enemy" in the hearts and minds of the public.

Clinton didn't want to hit the button to nuke the bastard back in 1997 or 1998. I seriously doubt that was a ploy to keep the "perpetual enemy" in the hearts and minds of the public.

You are right. But what does that have to do with Rove and Cheney, who have been mindscrewing America for the last seven years?

Jack, it has to do with the fact that you give way too much credit to this administration taht in the same breath you call one of the most bumbling, stumbling, incoherent, etc. They are either really really dumb or really really corrupt, but not both. Why? Because it takes some intelligence to pull it all off.

Sorry, with all the bad publicity Bush has received in the past three or four years since the Iraq war went from a bad idea to a *really* bad idea, I tend to think he would have pulled the rabbit out of the hat for his own personal reasons, not to help John McCain, who he disliked all the way back in 2000.

Didn't we hear these same pathetic rumors back in 2004 and 2006?

This will make me sound far worse than I am but I really believe we need to drop a very large nuclear bomb on that part of Pakistan. It's hands down the worst area in the world by a long way, that is full of terrorists intent on making life miserable for everyone else. Nuke 'em and be done with it.

"Why? Because it takes some intelligence to pull it all off."

What? How does it take "some intelligence" to NOT CATCH BIN LADEN?

How are dumbness and corruption mutually exclusive? Obviously the W admin is both.

Geez canucken, that's pretty extreme. The problem can be that when that type of option is so casually discussed, we all become more desensitized to the real horror that would actually be. I know your post tonight is far worse than you really are.

Sam - It takes some intelligence to successfully pull the wool over everyone's eyes for seven years as Jack suggested. I think you misread my post.

"to successfully pull the wool over everyone's eyes for seven years as Jack suggested"

Where did he suggest that?

Cause there are a lot of stone cold stupid people out there...

Coincidentally, I surmise, 'cause none of them agree with you?

Imagine that.

No cc, you'd be wrong. People who believe that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11 are, indeed, stone cold stupid. People who believe
torture is an effective foreign policy are, indeed, stupid. People who look to Us Weekly for their news are, indeed, stupid.Swing voters-not all but mostly . People who's intellect I admire even if I disagree with them are not: Chuck Hagel, William Cohen, Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Olympia Snowe, Arlen Spector, Alan Simpson, Orin Hatch, and my parents.

Why the **** shouldn't we "invade" the part of Pakistan that is:

* harboring the Taliban and Al Qaeda

* not actually under control of the Pak gov't

I'm PROUD that we've decided not to allow those scumbags to hide behind some arbitrary line in the sand. Ever since 9/11 I've wanted to see their heads lined up on pikes in front of the White House. I STILL want to see that lineup.