the whole things is a sad spectacle

Too bad nobody in the Obama campaign hd a similar idea.

For some reason I find this hard to believe.

re: #1 _RememberTonyC

the whole things is a sad spectacle

So was the election.

So when Edwards dropped out, they moved to the McCain campaign, and sabotaged it.
/

What a slimeball.

Edward voted Most Likely To Be Shot In Back By Own Troops by staff.

Elizabeth Edwards has sacrificed her dignity in the whole aftermath.

I saw that on FoxNews.com, that they were prepared to "blow up" the campaign. Wow.

Oh get Rielle

I guess Obama kept a better eye on his staff.

re: #11 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I guess Obama kept a better eye on his staff.

by his staff, do you mean the people who worked for him, or ... you know ... his staff?

Says a lot about the guy, that even his own staffers were ready, willing, and able to shank the guy's career, if it came down to it.

I'm no political analyst, but I am pretty sure Edwards sabotaged his campaign all by his lonesome.

So they say now... when that looks like the right thing to say...

HOWEVER, in the moment, when it looks like you might be 'working in the Whitehouse soon'?

Fact is that "worked on the Edwards campaign" is not a good resume point, and they need to say they 'would have' done the right thing in order to work in their chosen field ever again.

re: #8 _RememberTonyC

Elizabeth Edwards has sacrificed her dignity in the whole aftermath.

They strike me as being waaay too much like the Clintons. Political ambition trumps everything. I'll bet they (the Edwardses) haven't slept in the same bedroom in some time. Same with the Clintons.

re: #11 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I guess Obama kept a better eye on his staff.

Heh, heh, "staff."

re: #12 _RememberTonyC

by his staff, do you mean the people who worked for him, or ... you know ... his staff?

yes

Ya make your own bed...

Suck it silky pony.

re: #2 CIA Reject

Too bad nobody in the Obama campaign hd a similar idea.

My impression is that these were Obama campaign people.

re: #16 Ward Cleaver

They strike me as being waaay too much like the Clintons. Political ambition trumps everything. I'll bet they (the Edwardses) haven't slept in the same bedroom in some time. Same with the Clintons.

Kyle Smith's take on the Edwardses.

Don't count Edwards out! Give him long enough he could father enough voters to win the presidency.

re: #19 jcm

Ya make your own bed...

Suck it silky pony.

But the question must be asked, where exactly is his bed in that house of his? In the basement is my guess.

Sulky Pony

I'm of two minds about this. On the one hand, it's a good thing they spared us an ugly campaign. On the other hand, it's a kind of betrayal on the part of the staffers -- they could have just resigned and told their story, or tried to talk Edwards out of his campaign, or something. I don't know why but for all that Edwards is a scumbag, this sounds scummy too.

re: #12 _RememberTonyC

by his staff, do you mean the people who worked for him, or ... you know ... his staff?

I will refrain from making a comment about his handlers...

It was later revealed that all the staffers and volunteers on the Edwards campaign were, in fact, Republicans.

"They were?" a stunned Edwards asked. "What a fine mess this is."

Silky Pony strokes his ego among other things, Elizabeth plays along for the power.

The kids end up holding the short shitty end.

re: #24 Shug

Sulky Pony

Sulky Phoney

re: #16 Ward Cleaver

They strike me as being waaay too much like the Clintons. Political ambition trumps everything. I'll bet they (the Edwardses) haven't slept in the same bedroom in some time. Same with the Clintons.

The only difference is the body trail

re: #23 Nevergiveup

But the question must be asked, where exactly is his bed in that house of his? In the basement is my guess.

It's in the dog house, but, the dog house is 2 stories and 4,000 sq. ft.

re: #8 _RememberTonyC

Elizabeth Edwards has sacrificed her dignity in the whole aftermath.

Agreed. There's something about Oprah's couch that some people can't resist. But should.

re: #16 Ward Cleaver

They strike me as being waaay too much like the Clintons. Political ambition trumps everything. I'll bet they (the Edwardses) haven't slept in the same bedroom in some time. Same with the Clintons.

when the news of john's affair with rielle hunter came out, cancer stricken Elizabeth Edwards was the ultimate sympathetic character. But now that there is some money to be made and she can make the TV rounds while dictating what questions she WILL NOT answer, I lost a good deal of sympathy for her. Book tours are all about selling books. And in her case, her dignity is also for sale.

I am going to toss the BS flag on this story. It just does not pass the smell test. It has got something to do with Mrs. Edwards book coming out I suspect.

No matter, the Edwards rehabilitation tour is in full swing.

It only works if you have a (D) behind your name.

sorry don't buy it...staffers willing to sabotoge their own candidate's campaign? Are you kidding these are professional shills...planning a Clintonian denial is more probable. Same "staffers" all need future jobs and don't want to be tainted as being willing to lead the party into the abyss. This is classic spin.

re: #13 Guanxi88

Says a lot about the guy, that even his own staffers were ready, willing, and able to shank the guy's career, if it came down to it.

But part of it was that the MSM refused to do its job and subject Edwards to a fraction of the scrutiny they subjected Republicans. (See George Allen, for example.)

IIRC, Edwards, was viewed among the progressive Left as most likely to prevent Hillary from getting the Democratic nomination. So the job of the MSM was to shield him as much as possible. Obviously that didn't work. You can't protect someone from himself.

re: #32 Cheesehead

Agreed. There's something about Oprah's couch that some people can't resist. But should.

Maybe they'll both be on Dr. Phil.

They said they were Democrats first, and if it looked like Edwards was going to become the nominee, they were going to bring down the campaign.

Had they been human beings first, would they have engaged in such a stupid charade?

Easy to say after the fact...

re: #32 Cheesehead

Agreed. There's something about Oprah's couch that some people can't resist. But should.

It squirts e-z cheese...

Really? You trust any of these people in what they're saying they'd do to Edwards' campaign?

I don't. They knew, or had reason to know about Rielle Hunter and Edwards' infidelities, and yet they didn't think it a problem when he was out on the campaign trail, with Hunter in tow.

Now, they're talking about how they would sabotage Edwards had he gotten closer to the nomination? Funny, but with that kind of talk, I don't think I'd want them close to any political campaign. Where were they in calling on Edwards to resign? Where were they to out Edwards when the Enquirer began noting all the Edwards-Hunter links? There was nothing but crickets and denials.

Where's the loyalty?

re: #20 ErnieG

My impression is that these were Obama campaign people.

You're probably right on that!

Seems to me that John Edwards was acting like the model democrat the whole time. Why would the staffers be mad?
/

re: #38 BignJames

Maybe they'll both be on Dr. Phil.

Judge Judy would be more fun ;p

The Edwards are cementing the victim angle and by announcing the staff were out to doom his campaign he can get in on the victim action too. Just a nice guy wanting to do what's best for the country, got mixed up on an unfortunate affair, tried to do what was best for everyone... yadda, yadda, barf.

re: #46 Cheesehead

Judge Judy would be more fun ;p

Jerry Springer!

re: #46 Cheesehead

So how's that public infidelity thing working out for you, John?

Several of them had gotten together and devised a “doomsday” strategy of sorts.

Who are these "several of them" who can't be trusted? Oh yeah, they're dems.

re: #41 Baier

It squirts e-z cheese...

Mmmm...EZ cheese...!

re: #21 ilzito guacamolito

Kyle Smith's take on the Edwardses.

The following bit? Ouch!

She labels his affair "an indiscretion." No. Kicking your golf ball out of the rough is an indiscretion. Cheating on your cancer-stricken wife, lying about it, and paying off your mistress with campaign funds is to indiscretion what bubonic plague is to toe fungus.

re: #21 ilzito guacamolito

Kyle Smith's take on the Edwardses.

Oh, Lordy! If this doesn't just spectacularly sum up the left:

I am certain," Elizabeth says, "He wished what he said were all true."

re: #12 _RememberTonyC

by his staff, do you mean the people who worked for him, or ... you know ... his staff?

WAB keeps that locked up.

John Edward's hubris makes Barack Obama's hubris simply amateur.

Fragged.

re: #52 Ward Cleaver

Kyle Smith never pulls punches. He rips sacred cows a new one every time.

John, you ARE the father

--Maury

re: #54 Kosh's Shadow

WAB keeps that locked up.

The Presidential staff only comes out for State functions.

Every time I see John Edwards, I think Shetland pony.

re: #49 joncelli

So how's that public infidelity thing working out for you, John?

He's getting the swing of it

re: #59 DaddyG

The Presidential staff only comes out for State functions.

It gets used on us.

/bend over...

re: #52 Ward Cleaver

Yes, there were plenty of wonderful quotes in that article; but that was probably the best!

John Edwards got the whole JKF philandering thing down pat, he just forgot to get elected president first.
Timing, it's all about timing John.

re: #63 dhg4

Yes, there were plenty of wonderful quotes in that article; but that was probably the best!

The picture with that article makes me want to puke. How phony.

re: #53 Russkilitlover

You don't even have to take anything out of context. They lay it all out there. It just gets ignored.

It took me 5 seconds to realize this guy was a slimeball. Why did it take his staffers so long to figure it out? This guy was so phony and unbelievable from the get go, why and how did he go as far as he did?

On the topic of really stupid (D)s who shouldn't be allowed to run a lemonade stand let alone a country.

Howard Dean said the economy has had "quite enough" capitalism in the past eight years and suggested what is needed is more "regulation."

John Edwards broke the 11th Commandment.

Thou shalt not put thy rod in thy staff.

On a serious note, when it comes to the Democrats, I really find myself missing Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Sure, as a conservative, I rarely agreed with his politics.

But. He was a gentleman, an honest man, held his integrity dear, and proved an example of genuine class.

Unlike almost everyone in his party who followed. And Edwards is one of the worst.

re: #67 Desert Dog

It took me 5 seconds to realize this guy was a slimeball. Why did it take his staffers so long to figure it out? This guy was so phony and unbelievable from the get go, why and how did he go as far as he did?

I agree with everything you just said here.

What is really sad, to me . . . he must know that he is the father of this child, and is he still denying it?

This child will suffer terribly from not having a father in her life who cherishes and loves her.

re: #68 jcm

Yeeeaaarrrggg!

re: #70 subsailor68

I loved his tie.

re: #70 subsailor68

On a serious note, when it comes to the Democrats, I really find myself missing Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Sure, as a conservative, I rarely agreed with his politics.

But. He was a gentleman, an honest man, held his integrity dear, and proved an example of genuine class.

Unlike almost everyone in his party who followed. And Edwards is one of the worst.

Manohman do I totally agree with you on that. Moynihan was one prime example of what a politician should be, and I rarely agreed on his politics, too. Honorable. Ethical. Fair. With a great heart and brilliant mind.

re: #68 jcm

If this had been in place the world would still have only 5 computers and they would run on vacuum tubes and patch cords.

Makes perfect sense. Democrats don't let Democrats cost the Party an election.

But suppose we take the charitable view. Edwards was probably the worst of the 3 candidates with any measurable chance of winning the nomination, in terms of capacity to play in the big leagues. Without his blow dryer, he'd have been lost.

re: #71 reine.de.tout

I agree with everything you just said here.

What is really sad, to me . . . he must know that he is the father of this child, and is he still denying it?

This child will suffer terribly from not having a father in her life who cherishes and loves her.

The child will also suffer from having a crack pot mother who has no morals.

Steffi is a dem, a big dem, NOT an objective journalist. Whatever he says should be seen through that lens.

Same for all the other "journalists" who came out of political appointments, political beds (David Gregory is married to FannieMae) or political families (Cuomo, Brzezinski, etc).

Why do these networks not have to disclose the connections of these people as they "report"?

Utter nonsense the MSM.

re: #70 subsailor68

On a serious note, when it comes to the Democrats, I really find myself missing Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Sure, as a conservative, I rarely agreed with his politics.

But. He was a gentleman, an honest man, held his integrity dear, and proved an example of genuine class.

Unlike almost everyone in his party who followed. And Edwards is one of the worst.

Agree completely - DPM was a good and honest man, and a patriot. And he would have been run out of today's Democrat party on a rail...

20:22 Obama welcomes Iran`s `humanitarian gesture` in releasing U.S. journalist (Reuters)

? Arrest someone on trumped up charges, jail them, then release them? and that's Humanitarian? What the fuck?

edwards exhibits the kind of behavior that is, across- the- board so universally repugnant, that even his inner circle found him despicable and could not get behind him.
i'm sure edwards had no idea that he repulsed people. imagine being a relatively normal person and being at meetings w/ him trying not to laugh when he behaved like a pompous fop.
what a joke edwards is.
wow, he deserved the betrayal. it was inevitable.
especially if any of these people saw the video of him working his comb, incessantly and intensely, on the front part of his hair.

re: #81 Nevergiveup

20:22 Obama welcomes Iran`s `humanitarian gesture` in releasing U.S. journalist (Reuters)

? Arrest someone on trumped up charges, jail them, then release them? and that's Humanitarian? What the fuck?

Did he apologize?

re: #79 CIA Reject

Agree completely - DPM was a good and honest man, and a patriot. And he would have been run out of today's Democrat party on a rail...

When I was 12 years old I helped campaign for Hubert Humphrey. Another one that wouldn't fit into the current Democratic party structure.

He was fraggable.

re: #82 nyc redneck

edwards exhibits the kind of behavior that is, across- the- board so universally repugnant, that even his inner circle found him despicable and could not get behind him.
imagine being a relatively normal person and being at meetings w/ him trying not to laugh when he behaved like a pompous fop.

I can picture him with a huge wig, sort of lavender silk suiting, ala Louis IVth, with a jewel-encrusted snuffbox in his long, delicate fingers. An absolute fop, lacking even the dignity of a dandy.

re: #69 Son of the Black Dog

John Edwards broke the 11th Commandment.

Thou shalt not put thy rod in thy staff.

How did you manage to get that comment posted at that number?

anybody else watching NASA TV besides me?

they are sending up a new camera for Hubble.

with any luck it might be able to see all the way back 6000 years to the creation of the universe
/

re: #78 SpartanWoman

Why do these networks not have to disclose the connections of these people as they "report"?

Isn't there an online site with such a database?

If so - and if it's accurate - it ought to be put to use.

re: #84 Cheesehead

When I was 12 years old I helped campaign for Hubert Humphrey. Another one that wouldn't fit into the current Democratic party structure.

...along with one of my favorite presidents: Harry Truman.

re: #81 Nevergiveup

20:22 Obama welcomes Iran`s `humanitarian gesture` in releasing U.S. journalist (Reuters)

? Arrest someone on trumped up charges, jail them, then release them? and that's Humanitarian? What the fuck?

That whole thing was staged exactly for the purpose it is serving - to deflect criticism from the real problems and give The One a reason to say something nice about Iran. It's a joke except to Obama who will probably call it a sign of progress blah blah blah.

re: #88 ilzito guacamolito

How did you manage to get that comment posted at that number?

It just slipped right in.

re: #93 MandyManners

It just slipped right in.

That was John's excuse to.

Last week I heard that Elizabeth's book is not very nice toward him. Does anyone know if this is true?

Right...They were gonna blow up the campaign for the good of the country if they thought he was going to win. I call bullshit.

re: #90 SixDegrees

It is utter foolishness to accept the MSM as anything other than former Donk officials or Donk official wannabes. Revolving door. Somehow they miraculously become non-partisan?

I call BS on the MSM

re: #96 kansas

Right...They were gonna blow up the campaign for the good of the country if they thought he was going to win. I call bullshit.

Actually, they were going to blow it up for the good of the DNC. Party faithful and all that.

re: #89 Shug

anybody else watching NASA TV besides me?

they are sending up a new camera for Hubble.

with any luck it might be able to see all the way back 6000 years to the creation of the universe
/

I hope the mission goes well. I heard on the news last night that the mission is risky, and that if things don't go according to plan, they might run out of breathing air (wtf?). And that another shuttle is at the ready, to launch and rescue people. Wow.

re: #81 Nevergiveup

20:22 Obama welcomes Iran`s `humanitarian gesture` in releasing U.S. journalist (Reuters)

? Arrest someone on trumped up charges, jail them, then release them? and that's Humanitarian? What the fuck?

The Iranian's are calling it an act of Islamic mercy.

re: #84 Cheesehead

When I was 12 years old I helped campaign for Hubert Humphrey. Another one that wouldn't fit into the current Democratic party structure.

Yep. As with DPM, I didn't agree with just about everything Mr. Humphrey stood for. But I couldn't help thinking...he's an honest guy, and I probably would have enjoyed sitting down to dinner with him.

re: #92 Leonidas Hoplite

That whole thing was staged exactly for the purpose it is serving - to deflect criticism from the real problems and give The One a reason to say something nice about Iran. It's a joke except to Obama who will probably call it a sign of progress blah blah blah.

I agree that Iran just arrested her to get credit latter for her release. She was just a pawn in a diplomatic chess game.

re: #98 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Actually, they were going to blow it up for the good of the DNC. Party faithful and all that.

Well, maybe...but they are such liars.

re: #101 KenJen

The Iranian's are calling it an act of Islamic mercy.

Now there's an oxymoron if I ever heard one.

re: #91 CIA Reject

...along with one of my favorite presidents: Harry Truman.

Truman probably saved my Dad's life by dropping the bombs. He was stationed (Army Air Corp-P47 pilot) on Ie Shima near Okinawa and was to be part of the initial invasion of Japan in fall of 1945.

re: #101 KenJen

The Iranian's are calling it an act of Islamic mercy.

Pricks.

re: #106 Cheesehead

Truman probably saved my Dad's life by dropping the bombs. He was stationed (Army Air Corp-P47 pilot) on Ie Shima near Okinawa and was to be part of the initial invasion of Japan in fall of 1945.

Mine also.

"They said they were Democrats first,..." How about trying to be Americans first rather than Democrats, Republicans, or Journalists? Maybe this is why the system is so screwed up, all the politicos think about are themselves or their party instead of their country, their Republic. A bunch of partisian narcisists working for an even bigger narcisist.

re: #87 Guanxi88

Here is your foppish dandy

All is not well with the Breck Girl

re: #85 MandyManners

What is this "fraggable" and who do you mean is "fraggable"?

re: #99 Ward Cleaver

I hope the mission goes well. I heard on the news last night that the mission is risky, and that if things don't go according to plan, they might run out of breathing air (wtf?). And that another shuttle is at the ready, to launch and rescue people. Wow.

It's just that they don't have the option of using the space station in a emergency, like a cockpit breach from space debris.

re: #99 Ward Cleaver

The Hubble isn't in an orbit that allows the Shuttle to dock with the ISS, so it's on its own if there's a problem until NASA can launch another shuttle to mate. It means that if there's a problem with the shuttle at Hubble, they're on their own until the rescue mission is achieved.

One of the reasons that a Hubble rescue mission wasn't scheduled until outcry from the public was because of this very fact. NASA scrubbed the mission after Columbia because of the inability to dock with the ISS as a stopgap until a rescue craft was launched.

re: #106 Cheesehead

Truman probably saved my Dad's life by dropping the bombs. He was stationed (Army Air Corp-P47 pilot) on Ie Shima near Okinawa and was to be part of the initial invasion of Japan in fall of 1945.

You can bet that the Japanese would have either, a) slaughtered all the POWs; or, b) moved them to a place where they knew we would bomb them, killing them.

Quote-o-shop? Fauxto-quote?

Not directly political, but a good case study about how lazy and credulous the MSM has become:

Irish student hoaxes world's media with fake quote

When Dublin university student Shane Fitzgerald posted a poetic but phony quote on Wikipedia, he was testing how our globalized, increasingly Internet-dependent media was upholding accuracy and accountability in an age of instant news.

His report card: Wikipedia passed. Journalism flunked.

The sociology major's obituary-friendly quote — which he added to the Wikipedia page of Maurice Jarre hours after the French composer's death March 28 — flew straight on to dozens of U.S. blogs and newspaper Web sites in Britain, Australia and India. They used the fabricated material, Fitzgerald said, even though administrators at the free online encyclopedia twice caught the quote's lack of attribution and removed it.

A full month went by and nobody noticed the editorial fraud. So Fitzgerald told several media outlets they'd swallowed his baloney whole.

"I was really shocked at the results from the experiment," Fitzgerald, 22, said Monday in an interview a week after one newspaper at fault, The Guardian of Britain, became the first to admit its obituarist lifted material straight from Wikipedia.

"I am 100 percent convinced that if I hadn't come forward, that quote would have gone down in history as something Maurice Jarre said, instead of something I made up," he said. "It would have become another example where, once anything is printed enough times in the media without challenge, it becomes fact."

So far, The Guardian is the only publication to make a public mea culpa, while others have eliminated or amended their online obituaries without any reference to the original version — or in a few cases, still are citing Fitzgerald's florid prose weeks after he pointed out its true origin.

It's a good example of using the sociological mechanism of "wish fulfillment" to lead the media around by the nose: Give them what they want or what they expect, and they'll believe it every time.

Under different personas (not zombie), I have done stuff like this dozens of times. Even pre-Internet. And I know from my experience that probably about 1/3 of what you think is true was probably made up fakery. I've even had people I've just met repeat back to me in casual conversation some "fact" that I hade fabricated years earlier and "placed" in the media. It's astounding how easy it is.

They said they were Democrats first, and if it looked like Edwards was going to become the nominee, they were going to bring down the campaign.

I give them partial credit, but I'd be a lot happier with this:

They said they were Democrats Americans first, and if it looked like Edwards was going to become the nominee, they were going to bring down the campaign.

re: #81 Nevergiveup

20:22 Obama welcomes Iran`s `humanitarian gesture` in releasing U.S. journalist (Reuters)

? Arrest someone on trumped up charges, jail them, then release them? and that's Humanitarian? What the fuck?

Whole thing was play by Iran to show "an open hand" to Obama.

Meanwhile the centrifuges spin.

re: #52 Ward Cleaver

Couldn't happen to a better person. I love this line for so many reasons. "Elizabeth then proceeds to whitewash a story that should be hosed down with Tilex."

re: #116 zombie

Quote-o-shop? Fauxto-quote?

Not directly political, but a good case study about how lazy and credulous the MSM has become:

Irish student hoaxes world's media with fake quote

It's a good example of using the sociological mechanism of "wish fulfillment" to lead the media around by the nose: Give them what they want or what they expect, and they'll believe it every time.

Under different personas (not zombie), I have done stuff like this dozens of times. Even pre-Internet. And I know from my experience that probably about 1/3 of what you think is true was probably made up fakery. I've even had people I've just met repeat back to me in casual conversation some "fact" that I hade fabricated years earlier and "placed" in the media. It's astounding how easy it is.

I read that story the other day. Just.Wow.

re: #112 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

What is this "fraggable" and who do you mean is "fraggable"?

Fragging is the term for killing an unpopular or incompetent officer or NCO during combat, usually using a hand (fragmentation) grenade.

re: #116 zombie

Heh.

re: #111 wiffersnapper

All is not well with the Breck Girl

Check it out.

(I knew there was a reason I saved this.)

re: #115 Ward Cleaver

You can bet that the Japanese would have either, a) slaughtered all the POWs; or, b) moved them to a place where they knew we would bomb them, killing them.

Alot like they were already doing to some extent.

You can add this to the list of the biggest lies right behind
1) There are no winds on the drop zone
2) It's only a click and a half to the objective
3) Top is bringing hot chow tonight

re: #95 MandyManners

Last week I heard that Elizabeth's book is not very nice toward him. Does anyone know if this is true?

If I were her I would be tell that scumbag to pack up and get the F out. Why does she want to stay with this guy now? Take him to the cleaners and be done with him already. And, please, for god shakes, stop airing the dirty laundry out in public...that makes you lose any sympathy you might have had going.

re: #106 Cheesehead

Truman probably saved my Dad's life by dropping the bombs. He was stationed (Army Air Corp-P47 pilot) on Ie Shima near Okinawa and was to be part of the initial invasion of Japan in fall of 1945.

Same here- my dad was a gunner on a US navy destroyer that escorted landing craft to the beach and provided close artillery support to the Marines as they landed: if the invasion of Japan had happened he would have been sitting off shore in a big, slow, close-by target and in all likelihood would have died right there at his gun instead of quietly in his bed fifty years later.

re: #109 Rexatosis
re: #117 jvic

Heh & oops. Rexatosis, your comment posted right after I searched for 'Democrats'.

re: #111 wiffersnapper

All is not well with the Breck Girl

If I were Elizabeth Edwards I would wash that man right outta my hair.

re: #35 FrogMarch

No matter, the Edwards rehabilitation tour is in full swing.

It only works if you have a (D) behind your name.

Pfff. It goes both ways. Look at Elliot Spitzer!

/oh, oops, wait

re: #124 MandyManners

I remember that! Metrosexual man. Actually, he looks pretty effeminate there.

So by keeping silent they split the anti-Obama votes and gave us President Obama.

Getting a bit off topic aren't they ?

Who did Obama heal today ?

blah blah blah

If you're not willing to name names, it's all idle gossip to me. Which really has become synonymous with "truth in reporting" these days anyway.

p.s. There was no way in hell Edwards would have ever gotten the nomination anyway, affair or no affair. Not against Clinton and Obama.

re: #127 Desert Dog

If I were her I would be tell that scumbag to pack up and get the F out. Why does she want to stay with this guy now? Take him to the cleaners and be done with him already. And, please, for god shakes, stop airing the dirty laundry out in public...that makes you lose any sympathy you might have had going.

I've even seen some Dems and Hollyweird types on TV saying their sympathy for her has run out. She should have stopped while she was ahead. Now it's just plain creepy.

re: #101 KenJen

The Iranian's are calling it an act of Islamic mercy.

Kinda reminds me of the term "Islamic Scholar."

re: #134 SasquatchOnSteroids

Getting a bit off topic aren't they ?

Who did Obama heal today ?

I heard he once cured a ham

re: #139 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I heard he once cured a ham

He sure does like pork!

Is it just me, or does the Democratic Party have way more than their share of narcissists? While I think it takes a certain amount of narciisism just to run for president, the over-the-top egomania (as exhibited by our current POTUS) seems to be a market clearly cornered on the left.

re: #128 CIA Reject

Same here- my dad was a gunner on a US navy destroyer that escorted landing craft to the beach and provided close artillery support to the Marines as they landed: if the invasion of Japan had happened he would have been sitting off shore in a big, slow, close-by target and in all likelihood would have died right there at his gun instead of quietly in his bed fifty years later.

The decision to drop the bombs saved immeasurable lives on both sides compared to the number they took.
I'll bet your dad felt strongly the same way.

Really? Ethical Democrats who wouldn't cover up an affair for their boss? I'm gobsmacked.

re: #138 kansas

Kinda reminds me of the term "Islamic Scholar."

Right! Another oxymoron.

Interesting- Microsoft is going to sell bonds. Safe to say these will be a better investment than US Treasuries. I wonder if the Chinese will buy them?

re: #125 Cheesehead

Alot like they were already doing to some extent.

Ghost Soldiers book and movie, about Army Rangers doing a deep penetration raid to rescue POWs.

re: #138 kansas

Kinda reminds me of the term "Islamic Scholar."

Could have gone far worse. Remembering Zahra Kazemi

15 minutes till launch

STS-125 is go for launch.

2 minutes for final 9.

re: #116 zombie

Quote-o-shop? Fauxto-quote?

"Z finds quoto-subterfuge exciting."

Atlantis -9:00 scheduled hold.

NASA TV: [Link: www.nasa.gov...]

2 minutes to liftoff

Wait. A man cheats on his wife who is dying of cancer and has a lovechild and the Democrat party was ready to scuttle his campaign? But that is all about sex and is his private business, right?

Gotta hand it to them, they will do anything to keep power.

re: #143 Griffon

Really? Ethical Democrats who wouldn't cover up an affair for their boss? I'm gobsmacked.

Never would'a could'a happened. They be snitches.

re: #124 MandyManners

Check it out.

(I knew there was a reason I saved this.)

Here's my favorite...

re: #142 Cheesehead

The decision to drop the bombs saved immeasurable lives on both sides compared to the number they took.
I'll bet your dad felt strongly the same way.

He sure did - and so do my mother, brother, and sister.

Countdown has resumed.

9 minutes for launch.

Maybe Edwards and Spitzer can get a little help from Obama's public relations media machine? viva the holy D!

re: #154 ointmentfly

Wait. A man cheats on his wife who is dying of cancer and has a lovechild and the Democrat party was ready to scuttle his campaign? But that is all about sex and is his private business, right?

Gotta hand it to them, they will do anything to keep power.

Here I thought scandal of any type is a resume enhancer for Dems.

re: #124 MandyManners

Check it out.

(I knew there was a reason I saved this.)

Wow. I've never seen that before. The amount of primping is stunning. Hope that hairspray did not have CFCs. That amount of concentrated spraying is enough to blow that ozone hole wide open.

re: #137 Ward Cleaver

I've even seen some Dems and Hollyweird types on TV saying their sympathy for her has run out. She should have stopped while she was ahead. Now it's just plain creepy.

... and lose her double victim status?

re: #124 MandyManners

Check it out.

(I knew there was a reason I saved this.)

Makes we want to scream. Can't stand a man who fusses over himself like that. Yuck.

re: #156 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

They killed the audio! BOOO!

re: #106 Cheesehead

Truman probably saved my Dad's life by dropping the bombs. He was stationed (Army Air Corp-P47 pilot) on Ie Shima near Okinawa and was to be part of the initial invasion of Japan in fall of 1945.

One of the great success stories of the modern Left is the demonization of nuclear weapons as somehow being more sinister or more immoral than other weapons. The average person these days gets an "evil" vibes when nukes are mentioned, though few people pause to consider why.

In 1945, no one yet knew that atomic bombs would eventually acquire a reputation that somehow set them apart as particularly immoral compared to other weapons. To Truman and the Manhattan Project members, a fission bomb was simply an extremely large bomb. It was no more "evil" than any other bomb, outside of the fact that it was bigger than other bombs. It was not thought to possess some kind of inherent immoral aspect. In fact, the conventional fire-bombing of Tokyo months prior to Hiroshima killed more people and caused more damage than either nuclear strike.

It was the British anti-nuke movement (funded in secret partly by the USSR, by the way) which started the whole "nuclear weapons are in a separate category of evil" mindset. As as some here might know, what we think of as "the peace symbol" is actually the logo for the British anti-nuke movement. That's how ubiquitous the mindset became, and how it infiltrated our subconscious.

But Truman had no way to know that this cultural shift would happen starting 12 years afterward. At the time, he just wanted a big impressive bomb to make the Japanese see the futility of fighting on.

re: #142 Cheesehead

The decision to drop the bombs saved immeasurable lives on both sides compared to the number they took.
I'll bet your dad felt strongly the same way.

Dropping the bomb saved lives period.

1900-1945 war dead - 120 million
1945-1990 war dead - 17 million

With the bomb, there hasn't been a major power conflict since.

Proxy wars yes.

re: #161 Russkilitlover

Make sure you view my 156 if you liked Mandy's.

re: #153 sadhu

9 minute hold just ended...countdown continues.

nine minutes and counting

Edwards made his fortune suing doctors over bad baby cases. I can just picture his unctuous slimy approach in the courtroom. Repeated success engenders a powerful sense of entitlement in plaintiffs bar attorneys, and his infidelities mirror the attorneys that tried to crank out silicosis cases after they trashed some great companies in the asbestos years.

re: #168 Cheesehead

whoa

They said they were Democrats first, and if it looked like Edwards was going to become the nominee, they were going to bring down the campaign.

Frankly, I don't believe this story. It smells funny right on its face.

First of all, Edwards was never even close to winning, so stories about staffers plotting sabotaging his campaign are speculative, at best.

Maybe if these staffers in question had done a better job RUNNING his campaign to begin with, later sabotage might have become a viable option!

The first rule of politics is personal (not party) loyalty.

If they believed in their guy, they should have stuck by him. Clinton's people stuck by him even after getting a hummer in the Oval office, and his closest staff had to know about his serial infidelity before taking office. How is this different? Everyone on the "inside" knew about JFK's serial infidelity, etc.

If they *really* thought he wasn't a viable candidate anymore, the right thing to do would be to approach him and tell him exactly why. If he wouldn't drop out, then if they really thought he was going to hurt the party with his candidacy, then they should have submitted principled resignations.

To me it looks like these professional political operatives just feel like idiots having hitched their wagon to a sleazeball and political loser. Now they are trying to rehabilitate themselves, with an implausible story of their party loyalty.

If in the unlikely instance that the story IS true (and again, I don't believe it), then these staffers are just as slimy as Edwards.

re: #166 jcm

Dropping the bomb saved lives period.

1900-1945 war dead - 120 million
1945-1990 war dead - 17 million

With the bomb, there hasn't been a major power conflict since.

Proxy wars yes.

Yeah but I am afraid that equation my soon be changing.

RE: #129 jvic

No "oops" needed. I prefer your copy to the original.

3 minutes.

re: #175 Gus 802

3 minutes.

I think you count is kinda fast

2 minute delay on CNN webcast.

5 minutes on CNN.

re: #176 Nevergiveup

I think you count is kinda fast

[Link: www.nasa.gov...]

re: #146 jcm

Ghost Soldiers book and movie, about Army Rangers doing a deep penetration raid to rescue POWs.

While I can't find it on Amazon, there's another book, which I think is titled Ghost Sailors, written about the survivors of the USS Houston. It recounts their experience working on the Thailand to Burma railroad (see Bridge on the River Kwai), and weaves in the stories of the British, Australian, NZ, and Dutch soldiers held (and working) with them.

re: #153 sadhu

NASA TV: [Link: www.nasa.gov...]

2 minutes to liftoff

It tells me -

"Program Note: NASA TV Media, Education and International Space Station streams are temporarily unavailable. Live coverage of the launch of Atlantis on the STS-125 Hubble servicing mission is available on the public channel".

I have found other resources at the "Other Viewing Options" link on that page.

re: #180 SummerSong

It tells me -

"Program Note: NASA TV Media, Education and International Space Station streams are temporarily unavailable. Live coverage of the launch of Atlantis on the STS-125 Hubble servicing mission is available on the public channel".

I have found other resources at the "Other Viewing Options" link on that page.

Yep, that's what I did. Got CNN up and it's on a shorter delay.

re: #179 Son of the Black Dog

While I can't find it on Amazon, there's another book, which I think is titled Ghost Sailors, written about the survivors of the USS Houston. It recounts their experience working on the Thailand to Burma railroad (see Bridge on the River Kwai), and weaves in the stories of the British, Australian, NZ, and Dutch soldiers held (and working) with them.

Try the full title...

Ghost Soldiers: The Forgotten Epic Story of World War II's Most Dramatic Mission

Less than 2 min...

re: #165 zombie

One of the great success stories of the modern Left is the demonization of nuclear weapons as somehow being more sinister or more immoral than other weapons. The average person these days gets an "evil" vibes when nukes are mentioned, though few people pause to consider why.

In 1945, no one yet knew that atomic bombs would eventually acquire a reputation that somehow set them apart as particularly immoral compared to other weapons. To Truman and the Manhattan Project members, a fission bomb was simply an extremely large bomb. It was no more "evil" than any other bomb, outside of the fact that it was bigger than other bombs. It was not thought to possess some kind of inherent immoral aspect. In fact, the conventional fire-bombing of Tokyo months prior to Hiroshima killed more people and caused more damage than either nuclear strike.

It was the British anti-nuke movement (funded in secret partly by the USSR, by the way) which started the whole "nuclear weapons are in a separate category of evil" mindset. As as some here might know, what we think of as "the peace symbol" is actually the logo for the British anti-nuke movement. That's how ubiquitous the mindset became, and how it infiltrated our subconscious.

But Truman had no way to know that this cultural shift would happen starting 12 years afterward. At the time, he just wanted a big impressive bomb to make the Japanese see the futility of fighting on.

Just look at Okinawa and Iwo Jima...the Japanese fought for every inch and made us pay. It would have been 30x worse if we invaded the main islands. The civilian death toll alone would have been way worse than the two bombs.

And, I have not heard much from the left about the 1000 plane raids we did on Tokyo, dropping incinery bombs on populated areas of basically wood houses...those killed more than the atom bombs. When some libtard comes back after the fact and re-writes history to fit his little agenda, I want to scream. It was a horrible time in human history, one I hope we never see again.

In the final minute.

1 minute

Here's a shuttle launch music video for all you Countdown-ers -

She's up!

re: #182 Gus 802

Yep, that's what I did. Got CNN up and it's on a shorter delay.

You'd think the noise would have frightened away those birds.

re: #173 Nevergiveup

Yeah but I am afraid that equation my soon be changing.

The mutual assured destruction threat seemed to work...till now. Today's enemy seeks Armageddon for return of their Mahdi/AntiChrist.

Away...

Godspeed Atlantis...

Awesome!

Hail Atlantis!

7 miles

That's GOTTA be a hell of a ride!

re: #196 MacDuff

That's GOTTA be a hell of a ride!

She's hauling! 51 miles high already.

The problem with this story is why did they continue to work for him if they thought he was a scumbag?

If the entire staff, or even most of the staff, up and quit on him, it would have killed his campaign just as effectively.

This story doesn't pass the smell test.

I'm calling bullshit. The only plan they ever had was to ignore the story until it goes away.

Yep, it's very convenient to say now that they had a plan.

re: #200 redstateredneck

Yep, it's very convenient to say now that they had a plan.

the humpty-dumpty healthcare plan...

re: #165 zombie

You can't hug with nuclear arms.

re: #202 BignJames

You can't hug with nuclear arms.

if you can't stand the heat, get out of ground-zero...

re: #165 zombie

One of the great success stories of the modern Left is the demonization of nuclear weapons as somehow being more sinister or more immoral than other weapons. The average person these days gets an "evil" vibes when nukes are mentioned, though few people pause to consider why.

In 1945, no one yet knew that atomic bombs would eventually acquire a reputation that somehow set them apart as particularly immoral compared to other weapons. To Truman and the Manhattan Project members, a fission bomb was simply an extremely large bomb. It was no more "evil" than any other bomb, outside of the fact that it was bigger than other bombs. It was not thought to possess some kind of inherent immoral aspect.

I consider nuclear weapons more sinister and more immoral than other weapons. I must be one of those few people who pause and consider the issue. The inherently immoral aspect of nuclear attacks consists in the their inability to allow for targeted destruction. Everything within their ginormous target range gets evaporated: combatants, infrastructure, civilians, everything. Not only do nuclear bombs obliterate whatever they fall on in mushroom clouds, they also curse their victims' progeny through horrible radiation-caused genetic deformities and diseases. So it's a weapon that keeps on giving, for generations.

With standard bombs, you don't have to, but you certainly can fine-tune your targetting to avoid civilians whenever possible, and cause only proportionate damage (by proportionate, I don't mean the 'tit-for-tat' perverted interpretation of the notion, lately employed by anti-Israeli media to the Arab-Israeli conflict, but the traditional concept).

It is true that the traditional fire-bombing of Tokyo took nearly as heavy a toll on civilian lives as the nuclear bomb on Hiroshima, but that's because the targetting technology was primitive in 1945, and the Americans were not too interested in sparing Japanese lives, not after Pearl Harbor.

Weapons technology today affords much more sophisticated targetting and incision raids, which is why the U.S. and other nuclear Western countries are highly unlikely to ever consider using nuclear bombs against any enemy.

Oh, by the way, Truman had the option to announce its targets to Japan, so that an evacuation of civilians may have been contemplated. Even if everyone left Hiroshima and Nagasaki in advance, civilians and military included, the total damage to the infrastructure alone would have brought Japan to its knees. Truman rejected this option.

>Truman had the option to announce its targets to Japan

And he exercised it:
[Link: www.trumanlibrary.org...]

re: #165 zombie

One of the great success stories of the modern Left is the demonization of nuclear weapons as somehow being more sinister or more immoral than other weapons. The average person these days gets an "evil" vibes when nukes are mentioned, though few people pause to consider why.

In 1945, no one yet knew that atomic bombs would eventually acquire a reputation that somehow set them apart as particularly immoral compared to other weapons. To Truman and the Manhattan Project members, a fission bomb was simply an extremely large bomb.

This point is good. . .namely that to Truman, etc, this was essentially just another conventional weapon, merely a more powerful one.

But that said, the fact that in 1945 they didn't understand the full consequences of nuclear weapons/warfare doesn't mean there aren't any important differences. Today we have a much better understanding about the medical effects associated with bomb-related radiation exposure, and the associated environmental effects.

re: #205 iLikeCandy

>Truman had the option to announce its targets to Japan

And he exercised it:
[Link: www.trumanlibrary.org...]

Are you kidding me? That leaflet is post Hiroshima-bomb, as its own language makes perfectly clear. Second, it doesn't identify the next target, Nagasaki. It merely urges the Japanese population to petition their Emperor.

re: #207 medaura18586

Are you kidding me? That leaflet is post Hiroshima-bomb, as its own language makes perfectly clear. Second, it doesn't identify the next target, Nagasaki. It merely urges the Japanese population to petition their Emperor.

Look at the top line, and the bottom line: EVACUATE YOUR CITIES. It was dropped on August 6, presumably on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but I can look for confirmation if you must have the actual cities.

So they sabotaged Hillary's campaign instead.

re: #208 iLikeCandy

Look at the top line, and the bottom line: EVACUATE YOUR CITIES. It was dropped on August 6, presumably on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but I can look for confirmation if you must have the actual cities.

Did you read the document?

"Radio Tokyo has told you that with the first use of this weapon of total destruction, Hiroshima was virtually destroyed."

"Evacuate your cities" is not a target announcement. Of course, if there is a next nuclear bomb, it will fall on a city, not on a village. There is no indication as to which the next city will be though. Japan was in utter chaos, running on fumes; its government and civilian institutions utterly lacked the ability to organized large-scale evacuations of every city! And such an effort would have been likelier to be rejected out of hand by the suicidal commend, for the very costs it imposed on the state/military apparatus. If a single city had been named, however, it would have been much more likely to be evacuated, even spontaneously, without government approval or oversight: civilians fleeing if they know their city is next.

And again, where was the warning to Hiroshima?

Please, enough with the revisionism.

Yes, the leaflet refers to destruction that had already happened in Hiroshima. It (the leaflet) was presumably dropped on Nagasaki.

The Japanese were warned about the bomb before it was dropped on Hiroshima, through the Russians and himself from Potsdam.

himself=Truman

Potsdam Declaration
[Link: www.ibiblio.org...]

"(13) We call upon the government of Japan to proclaim now the unconditional surrender of all Japanese armed forces, and to provide proper and adequate assurances of their good faith in such action. The alternative for Japan is prompt and utter destruction."

The Edwards Campaign wasn't 25 years ago.. it was just a few months ago .. his staff did nothing to reveal his scumbag behavior.. in fact it seems they drew straws to see who would claim to be the babies father.. and we all know Democrats are the honorable party that always goes out of it's way to kick out criminals and liars.. hence the lines of ex Democrats going off into the sun set with even the hint of wrong doing.. WTF they don't do that? well I'm sure they would if it wasn't Bush's fault..

/freeze those peas.. stash those stamps.. set up that Haiti land deal.. it's all honest Democrat behavior just like Granddad did.

Haven't seen it mentioned, but I think Edwards main reason for running was to scoop up the Presidential matching campaign funds even though it bit him in the end. "In the 2008 cycle most of the major candidates opted out of the matching funds program; of the top-tier candidates only Edwards ultimately accepted matching funds while McCain, Romney, Huckabee, Obama and Clinton did not participate. (McCain first applied for matching funds, but later decided to opt out...press releases). Payments to eight candidates who did participate totaled about $21.7 million (Edwards $12.9 million, Tancredo $2.2 million, Biden $2.0 million, Dodd $2.0 million, Kucinich $1.1 million, and Nader, Hunter and Gravel less than $1 million each)." [Link: www.gwu.edu...]

The demonization of the A-bomb started moments after Hiroshima. Stalin knew it was a game changer and had to make sure the U.S. never used it while intensifying his own efforts, including stealing the construction details, to develop a "Peoples" A-bomb. [Link: en.wikipedia.org...] . Thus, the Soviets started a public outcry against the bomb whose echoes still bounce around today. I think fears generated by the radiation issue (unseen death rays) also focussed attention on a lot of enviromental issues. Many of the early enviros cut their teeth on anti-nuclear demonstrations or certainly made it part of their cause. [Link: www.energy-net.org...]

re: #210 medaura18586
Recognizing that CIA history might not be an authentic enough source for you, but read down and it says the LeMay leaflets with 35 target cities were dropped in the millions starting August 1, 1945. I also recall seeing this leaflet in the A-bomb museum at Alamagordo, NM. Revisionism is not just a river in Egypt.

[Link: www.cia.gov...]

Advertising the Destruction of Hiroshima

At 2:45 a.m. on 6 August, the Allies’ B-29 “Enola Gay” left the island of Tinian near Saipan. Its primary target was Hiroshima, where the 2nd Japanese Army stood poised to defend against an expected Allied invasion of their homeland. At 8:15 a.m., the “Enola Gay” destroyed Hiroshima with a single atomic bomb.

Back on Saipan, the OWI presses were turning out leaflets that revealed the special nature of Hiroshima’s destruction and predicted similar fates for more Japanese cities in the absence of immediate acceptance of the terms of the Potsdam agreement. By 9 August, more than 5 million leaflets about the atom bomb had been released over major Japanese cities. The OWI radio station beamed a similar message to Japan every 15 minutes.

Front side of OWI notice #2106, dubbed the “LeMay bombing leaflet,” which was delivered to Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and 33 other Japanese cities on 1 August 1945. The Japanese text on the reverse side of the leaflet carried the following warning: “Read this carefully as it may save your life or the life of a relative or friend. In the next few days, some or all of the cities named on the reverse side will be destroyed by American bombs. These cities contain military installations and workshops or factories which produce military goods. We are determined to destroy all of the tools of the military clique which they are using to prolong this useless war. But, unfortunately, bombs have no eyes. So, in accordance with America's humanitarian policies, the American Air Force, which does not wish to injure innocent people, now gives you warning to evacuate the cities named and save your lives. America is not fighting the Japanese people but is fighting the military clique which has enslaved the Japanese people. The peace which America will bring will free the people from the oppression of the military clique and mean the emergence of a new and better Japan. You can restore peace by demanding new and good leaders who will end the war. We cannot promise that only these cities will be among those attacked but some or all of them will be, so heed this warning and evacuate these cities immediately.” (See Richard S. R. Hubert, “The OWI Saipan Operation,” Official Report to US Information Service, Washington, DC 1946.)

re: #210 medaura18586

Thanks for the information. I had wanted to believe that America gave a real warning. But facts are facts...

re: #217 Jimmah

Not so fast. See my #216 and your faith can be restored. That is, if you want it to be.

re: #217 Jimmah

You are welcome. My basic point is that while you can aim a gun, or a regular bomb, to a specific malefactor, you cannot aim a nuclear bomb. You must destroy an entire city in the process of using one. Because the majority of a city's residents are civilians, this impossibility to discriminate becomes is the inherent monstrosity of nuclear warfare. That, and radiation contaminating for thousands of years those lands where bombs fall. That no one else in this thread sees a problem with this, or doesn't sees it as more sinister and immoral than regular bombs, is beyond me.

re: #216 Billy Hank

You are acting willingly obtuse.

Advertising the Destruction of Hiroshima

At 2:45 a.m. on 6 August, the Allies’ B-29 “Enola Gay” left the island of Tinian near Saipan. Its primary target was Hiroshima, where the 2nd Japanese Army stood poised to defend against an expected Allied invasion of their homeland. At 8:15 a.m., the “Enola Gay” destroyed Hiroshima with a single atomic bomb.

Back on Saipan, the OWI presses were turning out leaflets that revealed the special nature of Hiroshima’s destruction and predicted similar fates for more Japanese cities in the absence of immediate acceptance of the terms of the Potsdam agreement.

Hiroshima's destruction was advertised after the fact; its residents were not warned of the attack in advance. They were not given a chance to flee.

These cities contain military installations and workshops or factories which produce military goods. We are determined to destroy all of the tools of the military clique which they are using to prolong this useless war. But, unfortunately, bombs have no eyes.

If the targets were mere military installations, and workshops or factoring producing military goods, it was obviously a matter of destroying just the infrastructure. Why not warn the people of the bomb, falling on their city a few days before? Hiroshima's residents got zero warning. Their deaths were used to advertise the power of the bomb.

What part of that don't you get?

Recognizing that CIA history might not be an authentic enough source for you, but read down and it says the LeMay leaflets with 35 target cities were dropped in the millions starting August 1, 1945.

35 cities? I think Japan may have only had 35 cities then. People couldn't just leave 35 cities in droves, within 3 days. If that assuages your conscience, so be it, but that's not a warning for civilians to evacuate. It was a means of spreading panic in Japan, hoping people would just run wild, abandoning every city in droves, to undermine the military resistance. If I lived in imperial Japan in 1945, and got hold of one of those "leaflets," I'd just take my 34/35 odds of not living in the city next to be bombed, instead of uprooting my family in the midst of the chaos.

Why couldn't they announce THE next target, Nagasaki?

And I said, some of Truman's generals and men in the intelligence offered a transparent announcement as an option; you know, name that city next to go to hell. But he turned the proposal down.

re: #218 Billy Hank

Not so fast. See my #216 and your faith can be restored. That is, if you want it to be.

Contains no warnings that specify the cities to be bombed.

re: #220 Jimmah

I'm sorry, it only specified 35 possible targets within a few days. I guess you wanted them to specify target, time, altitude, and bearing.

You and medaura sound like unrepentant John Stewart fans. FYI. [Link: www.pjtv.com...]

I submit the U.S. far exceeded the requirements of warfare in the effort to warn Japanese citizens and made a conscious effort to inform them. You do not.

John Edwards could run for public office as a Democrat and still be elected (although not in his home state). After all, this is the party that is proud to have a man who'd drowned a woman he was cheating with, a former recruiter for the KKK and a guy who'd had a male prostition ring managed from his apartment as its elder statesmen or chief spokespeople.

All Edwards did was father an illegitimate child, cheat on a terminally ill woman, lie to the American public and misuse campaign funds to buy his babymomma's silence. Compared to Kennedy, Jack Murtha, Barney Frank or Robert Byrd, Edwards is a pillar of virtue.

re: #221 Billy Hank

I'm sorry, it only specified 35 possible targets within a few days. I guess you wanted them to specify target, time, altitude, and bearing.

You and medaura sound like unrepentant John Stewart fans. FYI. [Link: www.pjtv.com...]

I submit the U.S. far exceeded the requirements of warfare in the effort to warn Japanese citizens and made a conscious effort to inform them. You do not.

They were not given usable information about what cities to evacuate that could have saved lives. What you posted confirmed that.

Beyond that, I haven't expressed an opinion on whether the actions the US took were ultimately justified or not, but feel free to imagine, project, fantasize etc.

Edwards knew that even if he became the Democrat's candidate he would not be able to be elected because of his persnal problem. Yet he accepted money from supporters, drew votes from other candidates, and was totally a (you name it and it will fit). A more disgusting man would be hard to find.
God bless his wife and family. They did not deserve what the man brought on them.
My say.
Old Engineer

re: #223 Jimmah

One reason Nagasaki wasn't reported is that it wasn't known until the day of the attack that it would be the target (Kokura was the intended target)

Link

For another, would it really have been a good idea to advertise exactly where and when we would attack, inviting the Japanese to focus their remaining air force assets to attempt to stop it? How would you feel about Truman advertising this if you were flying on Bockscar that day? Wouldn't you feel that the president just put both your mission and your life in serious jeopardy by that action?

Interesting ethical dilema for the staffers. On the one hand, they appear to have been more loyal to the party than to their guy. On the other hand, if they were convinced he was lying, then Edwards was not being very loyal to THEM. And they knew that if Edwards got the nomination, there would be a whole lot more media scrutiny and the truth would have come out. They would not have wanted to damage the party chances by having the Democratic nominee go down like Gary Hart.