[Ramsey Clark] has submitted a motion recently claiming the judge "is not impartial and has a manifested bias against the defendant". [...] The defence says Abd al-Rahman is biased because he is a native of the Kurdish village of Halabja, the target of a 1988 chemical attack in which about 5000 people, including women and children, died.

Republicans Support Imprisonment of Doctors, Pharmacists, Etc.
[...]
George Bush, John McCain, and Mitt Romney all agree with this provision.

They all believe that a medical professional should be put in prison for up to five years for in any way dispensing health care to a woman if it relates to an abortion.

...the definition of prevailing is an Iraq that can govern itself, sustain itself and defend itself, an Iraq that is not a safe haven for people like Zarqawi or al Qaeda and its affiliates, an Iraq which becomes an ally in the war on terror.

"The Democrats have a better idea. First we will conclude the negotiations with the Chinese and the North Koreans to disarm North Korea. Secondly, under no circumstances will a Democratic Administration ever allow Iran to become a nuclear power. Three, we will kill or capture Osama bin Laden and four, the authority and the control of the ports of the United States must be retained by American companies."

1. How can we "conclude the negotiations with the Chinese and the North Koreans to disarm North Korea" without a major, fundamental change in the attitude of Kim Jong-Il? We negotiated a treaty to end North Korea's nuclear pursuit 12 years ago, though that doesn't seem to have stopped them. What new leverage do the Democrats propose we deploy?



2. If, "under no circumstances will a Democratic Administration ever allow Iran to become a nuclear power", then does that mean that the Democratic Party proposes to somehow remove the Iranian Mullahcracy sometime between 2009 and 2016 (when Iran is projected to acquire nuclear weapons)? I mean, we'd certainly welcome a suddenly chastened, penitent Iranian regime, but is there any mechanism for achieving this policy other than determination and bravado?



3. If a Democratic administration "will kill or capture Osama bin Laden", that almost certainly means said Democratic administration will move US troops into Pakistan. Do they plan a full-scale invasion, or just a temporary incursion? How do you suppose Pakistan will react to this? (if "badly", then would it be worth it to lose Pakistan as an ally in order to make a martyr out of Bin Laden?)



4. Since US Customs and the Coast Guard are already responsible for US Port security, then isn't "the authority and the control of the ports of the United States" already effectively "retained by American companies"? Or is Dean proposing we privatize the Coast Guard and Customs?