Comments
I'd say it was pretty even, However, the way Talent stayed away from saying his own sitting President wasn't a great President spoke volumes.
Posted by: somewhere in the middle | October 08, 2006 at 09:49 AM
My favorite part was when Jim said that he didn't necessarily agree with the president 94% of the time. That he had been in politics much longer than the president, and it was perhaps the case that the president was agreeing with him on many of the issues rather than the other way around.
Posted by: | October 08, 2006 at 10:30 AM
Russert wins for best prepared. Both Talent and McCaskill gave responses that were too "canned", but I found Claire's more annoying--if she announced one more time that she prosecuted "people like that" (sexual predators, meth users, Osama bin Laden, etc.), I was going to scream. Also, Russert "picked on" Talent a little more, but I was fairly impressed with Jim's ability to respond, that is, up until the "George Bush...George Bush, who?" moment; I have to agree with "Somewhere" on that.
To my surprise, at the conclusion, my wife (who is annoyingly apolitical) announced she was voting for Claire; based on that response, I guess Claire won.
Posted by: SPSLE | October 08, 2006 at 10:34 AM
I was extremely impressed with McCaskill! She was articulate, smart, decisive and just did a fantastic job. How Talent can continue to say the war is making us safer and is going well is just mind boggling! Does he not think we listen to the news and all the government reports out of Iraq that say it's a disaster and is making us less safe???? I didn't realize he votes with Bush 94% of the time. That was the nail in the coffin for me.
Posted by: Cindy Shields | October 08, 2006 at 11:22 AM
Number of US soldiers wounded in Iraq rises sharply
WASHINGTON -- The number of US soldiers wounded in Iraq in one month surged to its highest level in nearly two years as Americans fight block-by-block in Baghdad to try to check a spiral of sectarian violence that US commanders warn could lead to civil war.
Last month, 776 US personnel were wounded in action in Iraq, the highest number since the military assault to retake the insurgent-held city of Fallujah in November 2004, according to Defense Department data. It was the fourth-highest monthly total since the US-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003.
The sharp increase in American wounded -- with nearly 300 more in the first week of October -- is a grim measure of the degree to which the US military has been thrust into the lead of the effort to stave off full-scale civil war in Iraq, military officials and analysts say.
Beyond Baghdad, Marines battling Sunni insurgents in Iraq's violent western province of Anbar last month also suffered their highest number of wounded in action since late 2004.
More than 20,000 US personnel have been wounded in combat and 2,700 killed in the Iraq war. While much media reporting has focused on the number of dead, military analysts say the number of wounded is a more accurate gauge of the fierceness of fighting because advances in armor and medical care allow many service members to survive who would have perished in past wars.
http://www.boston.com/news/world/articles/2006/10/08/number_of_us_soldiers_wounded_in_iraq_rises_sharply(no)Talent, you'd better start reading the news
Posted by: | October 08, 2006 at 11:25 AM
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
