[tyrone slothrup]

I see - the value of my words is not proportional to the logic of my argument, but my time as a poster. Interesting analysis. I thought that this forum existed to exhange views. As an American, I am concerned that calling a speech "tratiorous," "treasonous," "anti-American," or "seditious" in a time of war when that speech repeatedly supports our current military action is not good for my country or for the conservative movement.

[Howlin]

My point is that you couldn't possibly know each and every one of us and what we are thinking or even how we post.

If you don't think it's treasonous, fine. I fail to see why you have to criticize those who do.

[f.Christian]

In so doing, they dutifully followed the lead of Columbia University's Edward Said, an honorary member of MESA. In introducing the latest edition of his book, "Covering Islam," Mr. Said... mocked---"speculations about the latest conspiracy to blow up buildings, sabotage commercial airliners and poison water supplies." Such talk was based on "highly exaggerated stereotyping."

More "education"!

[Howlin]

And just out of curiosity, do you really think Clinton would dare disagree with winning this war? Perhaps he could tell us why he didn't think we should "win" in Somalia and Yemen, et al.

BTW, three lines out of a 90 minute speech don't amount to a hill of beans.