Chaz, John has answered question about Iraq on the radio show "Policy Watch" aired April 18th.

He also explains his plan for covering the cost of the war.

I suggest you search for the audio and listen rather then claim he is "mum" on Iraq. Short answer, he has gone on record as being in support of the war.

I saw John Stephen speak about this issue at a GOP meeting a few months ago in Moultonborough. In essence, he said that it does not make sense to debate whether or not we should have gone into Iraq, because we are there now. He said he is opposed to nation-building (i.e. not a neo-conservative), but fears Iraq could turn into another Taliban Afghanistan if we just pull out immediately. He said "success" to him was stabilizing the country so that the government could manage it, not trying to turn it into a full-fledged democracy. I guess this puts him in the middle of the Bush/Cheney crowd on one side and the Pelosi side on the other.

Hey Chaz I've got a challenge for you. It's an open secret you're in love with Carol Shea-Porter. The way you savage anyone who dares offer a credible threat to Carol's power is both touching and revealing. Why not come out of the closet and tell us what you love most about this adorable little totalitarian schoolmarm?

Signed, Rowland.

P.S. You know Bradley's too much of a mook to be a serious threat to the Che-Porter regime. Stephen clearly has you spooked. But I know somebody else I hope will make her quake in her boots.

Richard,

I asked you to stay off my column and I meant it.

Rowland

You too. If you continue with your sick comments I'll block you.

Nevertheless thanks everyone for making Mr. Stephen position on Iraq kinda clear.

I still need to fact check what you are telling me. If someone could send a link to the radio show that would help.

Winni, you sound credible, can you aim me at something. I really need Mr. Stephens own words.

Thank you

Chaz and Rowland,

Bradley is "too much of a mook," Rowland? I may have this wrong, but a mook is a "perfect-bound pictorial publication issued in series." Mook derives from combining "book" with "movie."

So, Rowland, I thank you for the image of a candidate who is both movie and book. What this might mean politically eludes me, but it is a very curious image, or picture, or "pimage."

And Chaz, though I've only been paying attention for a short while, you should probably be heartened to know that your rather innocuous rhetoric is considered "savagery" by your interlocutors. You have quite the fierce and formidable reputation. Rather than ask these daunted foes to retreat from your blog, you should invite them further in solely to rain savage blows upon their nervous heads!

Peace and mirth!

Gnade

Bill

Truth be told, I enjoy a good fight!

Cz