Do you believe it's the case that Slate editor Jacob Weisberg, one of the hosts for this evening's event, doesn't criticize you (and your pro-war vote and all the destruction and misery that is the only good of it and, so, of you) because for him to do that would be as good as his testifying against himself?

Doesn't that mean that Weisberg, editor (or simply ordinary citizen like most of the rest of us), isn't free?

Is this the reason, when lots of editors do what Weisberg's been doing, that the best of us are being wasted: so that cowards and traitors and others like yourself and lacking in integrity, and not excluding those who failed in their jobs to recognize you and to expose you for being what you were, can escape being tried and known officially as what they are? Where better for a person like you to hide, or for one like Weisberg to do an interview of such a person, than in the Oval Office?

Have you ever known the need to describe a thing as being insideous?

Have you ever seen the banal in action, felt it coming after you?

What should a world which has as one part of itself a country (or a village, if you like) that is young and powerful and known to be vicious and to go off half-cocked do when that part of itself claims for itself the right to take the Fifth Amendment? Aren't you the person who not long ago presented herself as one victimized by her own spouse's having taken the Fifth with her, re Monica Lewinsky?

Are you a candidate who is, in fact and in addition to anything else and in the end and at best and by choice, a buffoon? The world, known to me as Israel, should sit and wait for you to say that the answer depends upon what the meaning of "is" is.

While I find OneTokeUnder's ramblings to be a little more vehement than I would put it, I would like to stand up and be counted.

I am angry that at least 1/3 of Americans were horrified and bothered to recognize that the UN and we as individuals had uncovered all of the discrepancies between fact and Bush's fiction, PRIOR to our Senator's voting AS ONE ... to go to war against Iraq. I am angry that WE knew this to be fiction, but our senators choose to say, "I believed him. He lied, and I believed him." What gross negligence! Bush lied, and WE didn't believe him, and it doesn't make us feel a damned bit happy to find that we were right!

I do not want to vote for a person who was a part of that, and it was why I was ambivalent when Kerry lost. I will vote for Clinton if she ends up running, because I am horrified at what the Republicans are evidently offering. But she will not be an effective president. Too many of us remain angry with her, for that vote. Too many others see her as manipulative and downright wicked. She shouldn't be running. If she becomes our president, we will have another four to eight years of Americans hating each other, and being incapable of coherent political thought.