[ATrain]

I'm pretty sure we've all made up our mind as to who to vote for for President, but what about Senate? I assume most people on here are voting for Allen, but I'm hesitant to push the screen for either. Allen did a lot for our state as governor - including being generous with holidays and raises after firing about 800 state employees (only to rehire them as private contractors) - but previously as Senator he choose to be powerdrunk with the rest of the Republicans. Kaine I don't want to vote for b/c he got the Virginia Retirement System into the mess its in, gave state employees a furlough day to support his pet pork projects in the state, and he's the one who started this public/private partnership idea for our roads and transportation infrastructure, so essentially every new major road or project that gets built will have tolls (i.e. Dulles, downtown and midtown tunnels in Hampton Roads, new 460, expanding I-81 to 3 lanes in western VA, I-95 maintenance).

[ALUmnus]

Wait, is it Tim Kaine or Tom Kaine? I'm confused.

[ATrain]

Tim Kaine

[LUconn]

They both suck but Kaine has really turned himself into a "party" guy the last few years. And not the fun kind. And Allen seemed to be of the same cloth so I guess just pick the party you most agree with. Because both guys are going to fall in line.

[alabama24]

Tim Kaine

No, I'm pretty sure its Tom Kaine. Joe Biden said so.

[Purple Haize]

I don't care for either , either. But with Allen it gives the country a great opportunity to rid itself of Harry Reid as Senate Majority leader. That is what gets Allen my vote.

And I believe it is Michael Kaine but pronounced Cane

[bballfan84]

I'm pretty sure we've all made up our mind as to who to vote for for President, but what about Senate? I assume most people on here are voting for Allen, but I'm hesitant to push the screen for either. Allen did a lot for our state as governor - including being generous with holidays and raises after firing about 800 state employees (only to rehire them as private contractors) - but previously as Senator he choose to be powerdrunk with the rest of the Republicans. Kaine I don't want to vote for b/c he got the Virginia Retirement System into the mess its in, gave state employees a furlough day to support his pet pork projects in the state, and he's the one who started this public/private partnership idea for our roads and transportation infrastructure, so essentially every new major road or project that gets built will have tolls (i.e. Dulles, downtown and midtown tunnels in Hampton Roads, new 460, expanding I-81 to 3 lanes in western VA, I-95 maintenance).

If you back abortion and same sex marriage my vote will be going the other way. I try and align my vote with my beliefs.

[NotAJerry]

I'm pretty sure we've all made up our mind as to who to vote for for President, but what about Senate? I assume most people on here are voting for Allen, but I'm hesitant to push the screen for either. Allen did a lot for our state as governor - including being generous with holidays and raises after firing about 800 state employees (only to rehire them as private contractors) - but previously as Senator he choose to be powerdrunk with the rest of the Republicans. Kaine I don't want to vote for b/c he got the Virginia Retirement System into the mess its in, gave state employees a furlough day to support his pet pork projects in the state, and he's the one who started this public/private partnership idea for our roads and transportation infrastructure, so essentially every new major road or project that gets built will have tolls (i.e. Dulles, downtown and midtown tunnels in Hampton Roads, new 460, expanding I-81 to 3 lanes in western VA, I-95 maintenance).

If you back abortion and same sex marriage my vote will be going the other way. I try and align my vote with my beliefs.

And if you back killing citizens without a trial, indefinite imprisonment without cause, and a myriad of other things, is that really better?

They both tow terrible party lines instead of trying to govern well.

[ALUmnus]

And if you back killing citizens without a trial, indefinite imprisonment without cause, and a myriad of other things, is that really better?

They both tow terrible party lines instead of trying to govern well.

But which party can you say is more in favor of these things? I don't really think you can lay that on the Republicans.

And I think it would be pretty tough to prove that detainees have been kept indefinitely "without cause".

The vote for the lesser of two evils is still evil, you say. However, it's still a vote for less evil, by definition.

[jbock13]

As much as I despise Allen, we have no choice. Tim Kaine is a vote for the Democrat socialism agenda in the Senate. Allen isn't. And it's the exactly same with the supposedly deified Mark Warner. Oh yes it's cute how he smiles, but in the end, he's a vote for the socialist agenda.

Sorry but also as a libertarian, there's no chance a libertarian will win. So why even pretend?

[bballfan84]

I'm pretty sure we've all made up our mind as to who to vote for for President, but what about Senate? I assume most people on here are voting for Allen, but I'm hesitant to push the screen for either. Allen did a lot for our state as governor - including being generous with holidays and raises after firing about 800 state employees (only to rehire them as private contractors) - but previously as Senator he choose to be powerdrunk with the rest of the Republicans. Kaine I don't want to vote for b/c he got the Virginia Retirement System into the mess its in, gave state employees a furlough day to support his pet pork projects in the state, and he's the one who started this public/private partnership idea for our roads and transportation infrastructure, so essentially every new major road or project that gets built will have tolls (i.e. Dulles, downtown and midtown tunnels in Hampton Roads, new 460, expanding I-81 to 3 lanes in western VA, I-95 maintenance).

If you back abortion and same sex marriage my vote will be going the other way. I try and align my vote with my beliefs.

I am not sure about the specific instance you are talking about...

And if you back killing citizens without a trial, indefinite imprisonment without cause, and a myriad of other things, is that really better?

They both tow terrible party lines instead of trying to govern well.

[ATrain]

As much as I despise Allen, we have no choice. Tim Kaine is a vote for the Democrat socialism agenda in the Senate. Allen isn't. And it's the exactly same with the supposedly deified Mark Warner. Oh yes it's cute how he smiles, but in the end, he's a vote for the socialist agenda.

Sorry but also as a libertarian, there's no chance a libertarian will win. So why even pretend?

You just hate anyone with a D by their name, don't you? Warner is a far cry from being a Socialist, indeed he has called for cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, along with other areas in government. He's more in the center or center-left.

[ATrain]

I'm pretty sure we've all made up our mind as to who to vote for for President, but what about Senate? I assume most people on here are voting for Allen, but I'm hesitant to push the screen for either. Allen did a lot for our state as governor - including being generous with holidays and raises after firing about 800 state employees (only to rehire them as private contractors) - but previously as Senator he choose to be powerdrunk with the rest of the Republicans. Kaine I don't want to vote for b/c he got the Virginia Retirement System into the mess its in, gave state employees a furlough day to support his pet pork projects in the state, and he's the one who started this public/private partnership idea for our roads and transportation infrastructure, so essentially every new major road or project that gets built will have tolls (i.e. Dulles, downtown and midtown tunnels in Hampton Roads, new 460, expanding I-81 to 3 lanes in western VA, I-95 maintenance).

If you back abortion and same sex marriage my vote will be going the other way. I try and align my vote with my beliefs.

You do realise same sex marriage will be legally recognized in all 50 states and by the federal government at some point, right?

[ALUmnus]

I'm pretty sure we've all made up our mind as to who to vote for for President, but what about Senate? I assume most people on here are voting for Allen, but I'm hesitant to push the screen for either. Allen did a lot for our state as governor - including being generous with holidays and raises after firing about 800 state employees (only to rehire them as private contractors) - but previously as Senator he choose to be powerdrunk with the rest of the Republicans. Kaine I don't want to vote for b/c he got the Virginia Retirement System into the mess its in, gave state employees a furlough day to support his pet pork projects in the state, and he's the one who started this public/private partnership idea for our roads and transportation infrastructure, so essentially every new major road or project that gets built will have tolls (i.e. Dulles, downtown and midtown tunnels in Hampton Roads, new 460, expanding I-81 to 3 lanes in western VA, I-95 maintenance).

If you back abortion and same sex marriage my vote will be going the other way. I try and align my vote with my beliefs.

You do realise same sex marriage will be legally recognized in all 50 states and by the federal government at some point, right?

You do realize that abortion is already a legal option recognized by the federal government, right?

[ATrain]

And you do realise every Republican administration at the state and federal level has failed to outlaw abortion, right?

[jbock13]

You just hate anyone with a D by their name, don't you? Warner is a far cry from being a Socialist, indeed he has called for cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, along with other areas in government. He's more in the center or center-left.

It's not that he's a Democrat. It's that he votes with Harry Reid in the Senate, and Obama as President, both of whom, are socialists.

You do realise same sex marriage will be legally recognized in all 50 states and by the federal government at some point, right?

How so? Is it right for the federal government to legislate issues of morality? Or should that be left up to the beauty of federalism, the origin of our constitutional roots? It seems to me that gay marriage isn't an important issue in this election. Plus, West Virginia will never pass gay marriage. We all know that.

[Humble_Opinion]

And if you back killing citizens without a trial, indefinite imprisonment without cause, and a myriad of other things, is that really better?

They both tow terrible party lines instead of trying to govern well.

What citizens were killed without trial? The only one's I know of were Anwar al Awlaki and one of his associates. If this is who you are referring to, why are you covering the fact that they 1) committed treason and 2) were terrorists, by calling them "citizens" and asserting that they deserved a trial.

I'm with JBock on this one. I'll vote for Allen, but moreso as a vote against Reid & Co. The only VA Republican with a big enough name that'd I'd actually cast a vote for because I like him, is Bob McDonnell.

[LUconn]

What about Anwar Al Awlaki's son? Although I don't think anybody backs that except for the president.

[Humble_Opinion]

What about Anwar Al Awlaki's son? Although I don't think anybody backs that except for the president.

Reports are sketchy about whether or not his son was affiliated with Al Qaeda or not. He was killed with several others though, who were members of the terrorist group.

Yemeni officials said the dead from the strike included Ibrahim al-Banna, the Egyptian media chief for al-Qaeda’s Yemeni affiliate, and also a brother of Fahd al-Quso, a senior al-Qaeda operative who was indicted in New York in the 2000 attack on the USS Cole in the port of Aden.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat ... story.html

[LUconn]

right, but... he's still a U.S. citizen. You can't just kill him because he may or may not be a terrorist. If he's done something illegal, prove it in a court of law. Then have at him. Terrorism and terrorists is really a gray area when it comes to the rules of war and what not but when it's a U.S. citizen, it's pretty cut and dry how to deal with it since there's a clear path laid out for us to follow.

[Purple Haize]

right, but... he's still a U.S. citizen. You can't just kill him because he may or may not be a terrorist. If he's done something illegal, prove it in a court of law. Then have at him. Terrorism and terrorists is really a gray area when it comes to the rules of war and what not but when it's a U.S. citizen, it's pretty cut and dry how to deal with it since there's a clear path laid out for us to follow.

But if you take up arms against your country on foreign soil it becomes a lot more cut and dry

[Humble_Opinion]

right, but... he's still a U.S. citizen. You can't just kill him because he may or may not be a terrorist. If he's done something illegal, prove it in a court of law. Then have at him. Terrorism and terrorists is really a gray area when it comes to the rules of war and what not but when it's a U.S. citizen, it's pretty cut and dry how to deal with it since there's a clear path laid out for us to follow.

The Constitution is law, not a suicide pact. If you honestly believe that the founders intended for the Constitution to protect U.S. Citizens who go to a foreign country and take up arms with our enemies against us, then you are crazy.

By that letter of the law - we'd have to task our SOG's to go in and capture these people and bring them back to the U.S. so they can stand trial. It's asinine.

[LUconn]

If you think the scenario of a citizen going to a foreign country to take up arms with our enemies against us was unheard of to them, you are crazy. You guys are basically ok with someone being a decider of who lives and who dies with no trial. I mean, I've never met either of you 2. In a non-hyperbolic statement, you could be terrorist cells for all I know. Are you comfortable with somebody having that authority not having to prove anything? Change the details around if want, foreign country, son of a terrorist, etc. I'm sure our founders would have been a-ok with maybe having to go through a legal process to kill someone.

I'm not even an anti-patriot act guy. Maybe I would be if I care to learn more about it, but I just don't see how you can defend this power.

[LUconn]

speaking of founding fathers, I was looking up how Blackstone's formulation came to find it's way into our legals system and I ran across this quote:

It is more important that innocence be protected than it is that guilt be punished, for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world that they cannot all be punished. But if innocence itself is brought to the bar and condemned, perhaps to die, then the citizen will say, "whether I do good or whether I do evil is immaterial, for innocence itself is no protection," and if such an idea as that were to take hold in the mind of the citizen that would be the end of security whatsoever

He hits all the buzzwords, citizen, security, evil. Guilty or innocent, al-awlaki's son might as well have been a terrorist according to Adams.

[Purple Haize]

Al Awlaki was a known and vocal enemy of the United States. He was not some sleeper agent. Think Benedict Arnold