AcesFull

China's GDP is currently an estimated 23% the size of ours. What's your point?

Palin has not ignored the subpoenas - her attorney has challenged their legality and also charged that the investigation is politically motivated. The Palins and her staff are following Alaskan law and the advice of Alaska's Attorney General and the Alaskan Senate Judiciary Committee has no legal authority to enforce the subpoenas that it issued. The public statements by Democratic Sen. Hollis French, an Obama supporter, and his participation in the "independent" investigation demonstrate that this process has been turned into a partisan witch hunt. Obama is finding that Chicago machine politics are not as effective as they were in his previous campaigns.

What a petty issue to be obsessing over when Obama has been caught undermining Bush's delicate negotiations with the Iraqi government while on Iraqi soil. It's great to see Democrats have their priorities straight.

Biden could always become a full time executive recruiter He managed to land a $1.2 million/year job for his son, Hunter, despite Hunter's lack of experience. Now, he is trying to do the same for a very green Barack Obama.

The "bogus" reference applies to the Obama supporter who has admitted to exercising control over the investigation. When an independent investigator is hired they are supposed to be, well...independent. This may have begun as an independent investigation, considering that 75 percent of Alaskan Democrats approve of Palin's job performance, but Obama's campaign has brought Chicago-style politics to Juneau.

:lol: One thread on this bogus "independent" investigation was not enough? I guess the army of muckrakers Obama sent to Alaska are not coming up with much.

Experience is not worth much if a candidate has a history of being wrong. Biden opposed the Gulf War, supported the Iraq War but claimed he was misled, opposed Reagan's strategic defense system, opposed the troop surge, and is in the hip pocket of the credit card industry. Aside from that, and the fact that he has trouble telling the truth when he is under stress, he is a fine candidate. :lol:

If you want to reread my posts, you will find not one, but two instances where Obama reportedly interfered with the negotiations - once by phone and once in person. Unless NBC's Athena Jones, the New York Post's Amir Taheri, and Obama's own national security spokeswoman Wendy Morigi all fabricated their stories, Obama did, in fact, attempt to interfere with the Bush administration's negotiations with the Iraqi government.

If paying federal income taxes is a moral duty for the rich, then are the 40 percent of Americans who pay no federal income taxes immoral? What about those people who have cell phones, multiple TVs, game consoles, and other luxury items who accept federal income tax refunds in excess of the amount withheld from their paychecks? Are thy acting in a moral way? Socialism by whatever name you want to call it that involves compulsory "patriotism" and "neighborliness" is not a moral way to govern a nation of free people.

:lol: According to Obama, it is just the neighborly thing to do. (Be neighborly or go directly to jail.)

It is always amazing to watch people defend the indefensible. Obama was wrong to attempt to undermine negotiations with Iraq and he had no legal right to do so.

Ever heard of the Logan Act? What kind of foreign policy would we have if the minority party lobbied against treaties on foreign soil to undermine the efforts of the POTUS to negotiate treaties? Advice and consent does not cover sabotaging treaty negotiations in advance and I suspect that you understand that fact.

^So, do you believe that a US Senator has a legal and constitutional right to conduct his own foreign policy?

The bigger issue is that Obama has no legal right to conduct negotiations or interfere with President Bush's foreign policy without explicit permission from Bush. The secondary issue, which should be paramount to Obama's supporters, is the hypocrisy of advocating a speedy withdrawal of troops in public while privately urging the Iraqis not to agree to a speedy withdrawal until he becomes president. Despite the admission of the Obama campaign that the alleged discussion did take place and despite Obama's own admission that he made the same pitch to the Iraqi Foreign Minister in June, this evidently is of little concern to the same people who are scrambling to find mud to toss at Sarah Palin. Obama would not, as president, tolerate this kind of behavior by a Republican Senator - and neither should President Bush. Obama's actions are the consequences of allowing people like Jimmy Carter to conduct freelance foreign policy without paying a price.

If you think a so-called journalist who is on record as saying he had a tingle running up his leg after listening to Obama speak, a man who was almost moved to tears during Obama's acceptance speech, is not a partisan Democrat, then all I have to say is, "'Nuff said." :lol: I am not globally insutlng journalists, just the large number who evidently slept through their professional ethics classes or just skipped the class altogether. My two favorite reporters of all time are Tim Russert and Sam Donaldson. They took/take professional ethics seriously.

With a major network assigning hacks like Olbermann and Matthews to anchor its coverage of the Republican convention, no exaggeration is necessary. :lol: It is amazing to watch people claiming that media bias is not a big issue when more than 80 percent of those covering national news have admitted to voting for Democratic presidential candidates in the last several elections. I will be shocked if that percentage does not go even higher in November.

Liberals tend to dismiss media bias for good reason. I guess it all depends on whose ox is being gored.

...and you act as if it exists in equal measure...it clearly does not.

Here is Obama's response. Essnetially, his spokeswoman admits that Obama encouraged the Iraqis not to agree to the "Strategic Framework Agreement" until after the election. Although Obama seems to admit to the alleged facts, his campaign still manages to make a personal attack upon McCain's integrity and label the New York Post story as untruthful This article could have been more accurately titled Obama camp hits back at Iraq claim with double-talk.

This was not the first time that Obama has tried to interfere with the Bush administration's Iraq policy. Why is Obama trying to torpedo this nation's foreign policy and why does freelance foreign policy seem to be okay to liberals?

Everybody else is wrong about media bias in favor of Obama. Ed Rendell, Mark Penn, the public editor at the Washington Post, ...interesting perspective. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews were just removed from the anchor desk because they were embarrassing the folks writing their checks. Am I wrong?

I don't think Mark Penn went looking for bias against McCain and Palin, do you? :lol:

Anybody who cannot admit the heavy media bias in favor of Obama in this campaign who believes that they are not as biased as the next guy needs to get a second opinion.:lol:

If Obama had received the same kind of scrutiny the first two weeks of his candidacy for president as Palin has received since her nomination, he would have been an early campaign casualty. I understand that the Obama campaign has been busy attacking the character of another critic. There seems to be a pattern emerging here. I wonder how far a President Obama would go to intimidate the media.

Yes, Ed Rendell, Mark Penn, and I believe the media are extremely biased. I thought not. You use the everybody does it defense but cannot even define who "everybody" is. There are no right wing equivalents of the Daily Kos and MoveOn.org. The right wing nuts who just make stuff up are working in their parents' basements and get little attention. The popular right wing sites sites operate on a shoestring in comparison to the operations funded by George Soros and Markos Moulitsas.