First thoughts

Posted: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 9:22 AM by Chuck Todd

From NBC's Chuck Todd and Mark Murray
*** Rudy Obama? Barack Giuliani? If a focus group of 12 Baltimore County voters could build the perfect 2008 candidate, it's likely they would choose Giuliani and Obama as their main prototypes. Both candidates scored very well in an Annenberg-sponsored focus group (evenly split between Dems, indies and GOPers) conducted by veteran Democratic pollster Peter Hart. One could sense the focus group was torn between wanting a president with a hopeful vision (Obama in their minds right now) and a president who will keep them safe (Giuliani).

*** Other Observations: From the focus group, Clinton has a LOT of work to do. Eight of the 12 said they couldn't support her under any circumstance, and seven of the 12 said she has the "furthest to go" in winning their trust. Edwards has gone from a "fresh face" to a "pretty boy" (one had even seen that YouTube parody). McCain was seen as presidential but also "disappointing" and "old school." There was an openness to Romney and Fred Thompson but, frankly, the group didn't know a lot about the two. Something Dems should worry about, by the way, is the fact that when the group was asked who would be the "safest choice" for president, 10 of the 12 picked Republicans (four for Rudy, four for McCain, two for Romney and one each for Obama and Edwards). That's right, no one picked Clinton. Look for more insights from this focus group in Chuck's weekly column, which will be posted later today.

*** Not Moving On: Now that congressional Dem leaders have decided to drop their call for a withdrawal timeline in the Iraq supplemental, expect to see MoveOn and other anti-war groups go after these Democrats. Hard. In the past few months, these groups and their allies helped push the Democratic leaders into a position that's supported by a strong majority of Americans. But a strong majority in the polls doesn't necessarily translate into veto-proof majorities in Congress. Will the anti-war crowd be able to forgive the Dems? Do note that Pelosi says she will vote AGAINST the deal.

*** The Daily Kos Crowd Will Love This: Edwards, who has certainly been gunning for the MoveOn/antiwar vote, told NBC’s Matt Lauer on TODAY that the Democrats “should be standing their ground” and not back down on the withdrawal timeline. “This should not be about politics at all,” he said. “This is about life and death… We need to stand our ground.” Edwards also gives a speech today on national security and the military to the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. In last month's presidential debate, he was one of four Democrats (Biden, Gravel, and Kucinich were the others) who said he doesn't believe there is such a thing as the "Global War on Terrorism." In his speech, Edwards calls for a comprehensive strategy to replace the GWOT.

*** Winning the Battle But Not the War? Monica Goodling, the former DOJ aide who pleaded the 5th in the US attorneys controversy but later struck an immunity deal, testifies before the House Judiciary Committee. Is Gonzales' job now safe -- no matter what new revelations come out? If so, the White House may very well have won its showdown with Congress over Gonzo's fate. But what happens the next time the White House needs its attorney general to go to bat for the Administration in a prickly matter on Capitol Hill? Does he strike out?

*** It’s Fletcher vs. Beshear: Scandal-plagued GOP Gov. Ernie Fletcher got a surprising majority -- 50% -- in last night’s Kentucky gubernatorial primary, but that means he has to win over the 50% or so of GOPers who didn’t vote for him to survive in November, which won’t be easy. Perhaps more surprisingly, former Lt. Gov. Steve Beshear (D) was able to avoid a costly run-off by grabbing 41% of the vote. Beshear seems to have the edge going into the general election. Can he keep it?

*** On the Trail: Giuliani campaigns in Vermont and New Hampshire; Huckabee, in Houston, meets with the anti-income tax group Fair Tax and later appears on FOX’s Hannity & Colmes; Hunter continues to stump in South Carolina; McCain raises money in Forth Worth, TX and holds a media avail afterwards; Obama holds a young professionals fundraiser in DC; Richardson raises money in New Mexico; and Romney fundraises and holds a media avail in Oklahoma.

Countdown to the Ames Straw Poll: 79 days
Countdown to Election Day 2007: 166 days
Countdown to Iowa: 235 days
Countdown to Tsunami Tuesday: 257 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 530 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 607 days

EMAIL THIS

Comments

GOOD MORNING MONICA, LET'S HEAR WHAT "YOU" HAVE TO SAY ABOUT "GONZO GATE". WELL REALLY....HE SAID WHAT?

JOHNNY JUSTICE ANYWHERE USA (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 9:38 AM)

Why is a focus group of 12 even in the news? Its such a small sample... how could it be significant? Especially when its results contrast so sharply with national polls? From what I've seen of focus groups, the first step is to ensure the group reflects the electorate as closely as possible, and it seems evident this one didn't. That said, I don't disagree strongly with any of its findings. Obama is a guy who appeals to those wanting a vision candidate. Guiliani is a guy who appeals to those wanting protection (though I'm guessing that will wane when people start to figure out he really doesn't know much about national security). And Clinton certainly will never appeal to those who already don't think they can trust her. That's her problem - those high negatives aren't going away. In fact, she may well be the first candidate of the bunch from either party who reaches the point of mathematical unelectability.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 9:55 AM)

Your lead blog ("Rudy Obama, Barack Giuliani") obliquely suggests - quite correctly - that a sizeable number of Americans crave a new political force; a hybrid/third/independent party unbeholden to the polarized, partisan ideologies of the anachronistic Democratic and Republican machines. Indeed, such a bold move would take money and time, especially with the two majors controlling the FEC and FCC appointees who set the bar for third party access (note: America has the most stringent third-party access requirements of any industrialized, democractic country). However, there is no reason to think that seasoned pragmatists such as a Hagel (R) or a Biden (D) cannot - and will not - soon coalesce around such a hybrid vehicle (pun incidental). Sometimes, "critical mass" can be reached very quickly; and the donors are always there if the timing is right and the wind blowing the right direction.

Stephen Banick, Scottsdale, AZ. (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:03 AM)

Hillary does have a problem. Bay Buchanan was on a local talk show here this morning and she told a very interesting story about how Chelsea was out jogging and stopped off for a coffee near the world trade center when the planes hit. Hillary told a crowd that she was indeed very sad that her daughter was right in the area and very happy that she came thru the attacks unscathed. Now there is a story about how Chelsea was really in her apartment when the planes hit and her friends were calling her screaming "look at the TV, Look at the TV". No wonder Hillary has problems. I wonder how much Edwards is being paid for his speech and will this bring more then 75 people? If I were Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, I owuld get the cookies in the oven and the kool aid mixed up and the blankets standing by just in case the code pink chicks show up at their office or house. Remember Soros, this was your hand picked crowd that you bought to get into congress and they seem to have turned on you. The american people will not tolorate a hungarian trying to buy the election.

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:03 AM)

I am reading this morning that Senators are to be hard at work on the "illegal immigration" bill. After seeing Americans' outrage they have decided to make it "tougher". How? By adding a provision that includes mandatory prison sentences for those caught crossing the border illegally. Sorry. Not enough. It does not address the 12-20 million who are already here. They fail to explain why we should believe they will enforce this new provision when they haven't enforced current law. This bill does not in any way address the current problem. It sweeps it under the rug and then gives empty promises to "do better" at enforcement in the future. Meanwhile, we are giving our country away. We are hurting our children's education. We are driving up the already astronomical cost of health care. Do any of you realize that there are actually hospitals that have SHUT DOWN because they could not continue to provide free health care to illegals? Americans who support this bill seem to be perilously naive. While they are obssessed with sex, food, entertainment and political correctness, they seem be blissfully unconcerned with our very survival. American Idol seems vastly more important to many people than our national sovereignty. The reason why we have immigration laws in the first place seems far over their heads. If we say to the world that we are turning a blind eye to as many as 20 million lawbreakers who violated our laws when entering the country, what effect do you think it will have? Will anyone fear this new bill and decide that maybe they shouldn't try a run for the border? This will be the 2nd time we have done such a thing in the last 20 years. Each time we promise to get tougher millions more come and we do nothing but make their crimes profitable. Now there's a real deterrent. This bill will only encourage many more to come here illegally. By many estimates in another 20 years we could have as many as 30-60 million more crossing our borders. That my friends will be the end of America. Count on it. The vast majority of these illegals are not coming here to assimilate and become Americans. They could care less. They are not coming to add to our country, they are coming to take from it. A highly contagious new idea has crept into our thinking. It offers fantasy instead of reality and completely disregards any threat to our survival as a nation. If we don't stand up now, in another generation there will be nothing left to stand up for.

Darren, MB, SC (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:09 AM)

Stephen Banick, I believe the time is right for a third party to rise in America. We are perhaps as polarized as we've been at any time in our history except for the civil war era. If not now, when? Jerry, I don't know if Edwards is being paid to speak before the COFR, but he normally gets about $55,000 for his public speaking engagements. When he speaks at government funded universities it is our money that pays him.

Darren, MB, SC (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:15 AM)

For once I agree with you on some levels Darren. But I also think a majority of today's congress is just from a disconnected generation and they don't understand the magnitude of illegal aliens comming here. They are 5 yrs behind the rest of the country. I see immigrants everyday, scores...down here in the south. They are always doing menial jobs/hard labor. It's creating a perminent underclass that lives in the shadows/undocumented. Unless you know spanish you can't communicate with them. It's not right and yet big business condones and promotes it. This is a perversion of the labor market and a violation of our laws. And the effects will have profound implications on our country and culture within a few years down the road. I believe you'll see a huge "alien's rights" movement within the next 10 yrs where business with be paralized by strikes/protests. Tommorrow's America will look very different in the near future...but maybe it's inevitable.

CJ (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:25 AM)

I get a good laugh at all who want somehing done about lawbreakers when everyone of you has broken the law yourselves be it minor or major and just haven't been caught yet, so remember when you get caught you asked for it so dont whimper and whine when its your turn.

jus sayin (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:28 AM)

The only Democrats I fell good about our Obama, Biden, Richardson. Edwards is just a rich lawyer who probably has always had presidential aims even before he planted himself in the Senate. There is nothing wrong with that but he often seems like he cannot think beyond Democratic politics. And Hillary prefers to use her position to push her personnal programs/agendas, personnally I love her, but we've seen what that has resulted in with the current president and Hillary Care. Republicans..I would pick McCain and Romney(gulp). McCain because he's been there done that..everyone pretty much knows what his politics are(middle) even though he has attempted to pander to the social conservatives. Romney is a similar animal except he conceals his true opinions behind politically popular positions, but I suspect he would govern from his core beliefs(not what he publicly states) as a center-right politician. Fred Thompson appears to be rather open minded himself but he doesn't seem like the type of character to commit himself to such a stressful position.

CJ (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:37 AM)

Ok, jus sayin, maybe you won't whimper or whine when our nation is irreversably changed and the rights you have today disappear. You are comparing apples to oranges. I can see that you don't understand why we have laws concerning immigration. Maybe you think we should just open the door and let in any and everyone who wishes to come here? Have you really stopped to think about the effect of 1.5 million or more undocumented people entering our country every year? When you can come back with an intellegent arguement that explains how this is acceptable and will benefit our nation, let me know. Pointing to illegal activity by some does not excuse illegal activity by all.

Darren, MB, SC (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:40 AM)

Yea but I'm an US citizen, pay taxes, am not prone to modern day indentured servitude. The two do not equate. Why do people act like illegal immigration is passe'...I'll never understand.

CJ (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:41 AM)

Looks like the focus group (12 people what a joke)passed the crack pipe around too many times. Gulliani and steve forbes present more of a real danger to america than any terrorist group could. Their platform of take from the poor give to the rich should scare hell out of any real american, are you really safe if your starving to death?

MK,MO (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:42 AM)

Jerry, what's the source for your Hillary story? Is it confirmed by real sources or just something you heard from Michael Savage? Don't sell Edwards short. If there weren't something there for the GOP to be afraid of they wouldn't be working so hard to destroy his image. Likewise to First Read, who organized this focus group? Who drafted the questions and exactly what were the questions? I could pull together a focus group right now that would reach a consensus that GWB should be impeached and another that would agree that the Democratic Congress is increasing the probability of a terrorist attack in the US.

John B, Des Moines, IA (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:44 AM)

jus sayin, if I were to commit a crime and get caught, I would be prosecuted. I would not have the Senate forgiving my crime, telling me I don't have to pay back taxes on any proceeds I received while commiting my crime, giving me access to free legal counsel, and telling my family members that it will be OK if they commit the same crime.

Just the facts man (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:47 AM)

I think we need more than three parties. Imagine a sport that has only two teams. Of course those teams would end up being bitter rivals. If we had say… ten parties or so, things would probably be more “sportsmanlike”. We could have the Monarchs, the Socialists, the Evangelicals, the Socialists, the Capitalists, the Communists, ect. We could even have playoffs.

Brad, Albion OK (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:54 AM)

Our elected U.S. government officials and, in many cases, our elected state officials are so out of touch with with the citizens of this once great country. They seem to live in their larval cells while enjoying the "Good Life." They are unable to fathom what everyday, real life is all about or they just don't want to know. I firmly believe they should recieve and pay for, the same pricely health care, groceries and other necessities that "we the people" receive and pay for. They are spoiled rotten and frankly, these elected officials don't look any better in their #50.00 to #100.00 hair dos. As an American by birth I have, for forty five years, been the best American I can be. I was a soldier for seven years, I have voted in every National election for forty five years and on each day at rising I have gotten out of bed praying for the health and well being of our country. I have been very disappointed.

Nate Ervin (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:54 AM)

What? No Hillary McCain? Where is the dichotomous humor in this world?

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:04 AM)

CJ, edwards is the only one who can win the general election, from what I gather edwards is the only person currently on the planet that is wealthy,correct?

MK,MO (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:12 AM)

Ok for anyone who is actually considering Giuliani as a Presidental Candidate have you not heard the man speak? He can't complete a full senctence before spewing onto another Idea or crazy thought that comes to his mind. Just because he was in New York on 9/11 DOES NOT mean he is fit to run this country or is able to make America "safer". His pushy politics and "vote for me or you will be unsafe and die" routine is trying to bully and frighten people into voting for him. Hillary may be a women but she doesn't sound as crazy as alot of the candidates I have watched and listend to. She has a lot of good ideas, one being healthcare. Healthcare in this country SUCKS!! I can't get decent coverage for myself at a reasonable price and I am only 22! I hate to see what it is going to be like when I reach 70, that is of course if there is anything left by then. With global warming, greedy people and politicians and all these damn immigrants coming to this country I don't forcast a very good future for myself or my children. I don't know about anyone else but I am very scared of the fast downhill spiral this world is heading down.

Young but not dumb, Columbus Ohio (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:12 AM)

CJ (10:25) recognized the key to the illegal immigration problem, i.e. "big business condones and promotes it". As long as they employ them, they will keep coming. When will something be done about that?

Scott in South Texas (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:12 AM)

The 1986 immigration bill deals with all the present problems. Enforce the laws we now have. The AG and POTUS should be impeached for not doing their jobs in this area alone.

Flat-earther, Georgia (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:24 AM)

I believe the reason their is no more interest in illegal immigration is that most Americans do not have a clue what is going on. Most are caught up in their daily lives and remain very much uninformed. They get a quick sound bite that appeals to them and that makes up their mind, whether its the war, economy or immigration. Until more Americans study these issues, mob rule with the liberal press will influence the future unfortuately.

Lorin Weidner, San Antonio, Tex (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:32 AM)

A third party can win. There is a vast block of non-voters, unlikely voters, and unregistered voters for a truly inspiring candidate to tap. If that candidate ever comes along, and I don't see one in this field, he/she could come in under the radar, so to speak, as the normal polling discounts these unlikely voters. That same reasoning is why I think that Obama might not have enough to win the primaries, as he really appeals to those who are less likely to vote. His polling is especially strong amoung younger voters...and that just won't translate into a primary win unless he can become truly inspirational and get those people to the polls.

Al, KS (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:32 AM)

We need to get a grip as Americans. Immigration is a complex multifaceted issue, but there are solutions. Let's not kid ourselves. We are not going to deport 12 million residents, period. It is not going to happen. We all can agree that our borders need to be made secure. We must contemplate real solutions. American business does NOT want to lose dishwashers, busboys, lawn care providers, hotel staff, roofers, cooks, office cleaners, construction laborers, floor refinishers, painters, nannies, factory workers, crop harvesters, farm hands, gas station attendants, etc., etc., etc... the list is endless. And by the way I don't see any Americans lined up in the unemployment lines for these jobs or complaining when their lawn bill, or painting invoice is lower because of this workforce. We are hypocrites and politicians are the worst because they know the reality and instead of solving the problem they pretend it's an us vs. them game and American citizens eat it up. Wake up!

csense (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:43 AM)

It is not practible to return 12 million people back to their country of origin. But, by the same token it is not fair to the millions of immigrants who entered this country legally. Any plan must consider a real penalty for the illegal immigrants and to get at the end of the line to reenter the USA legally.

Joe, Hewlett, N.Y. (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:45 AM)

The whole idea about illegal immigration is that those "illegals" don't pay taxes. Taxes are what fund the goverenment and produce all our American benfits ie: voting rights, social security, medicare/medicaid, labor unions, FDA etc. That is what being an American is all about. The right to pursue happiness while knowing that our government is actually on our side....or is supposed to be. Unfortunately, if the canidate is rich, he or she doesn't really understand what us working people really have to face on a daily basis. We need a person who understands the negatives about illegal immigration and can do something about it like going after the businesses that profit from those illegals and yet still stay in business and make a profit!

KC, Agawam, MA (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:53 AM)

Why are we even discussing a poll of 12 people. It seems like the margin of error on this has to be near 100 percent.

John Doe (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 12:05 PM)

When I ask did this become about immigration? If America wants to truly provide counter-incentive to the millions of Mexicans plotting a border crossing we should send informants over there to personally discourage them in [their] language. Its not as if a poor citizen of Mexico has some sort of an ear for American politics and its decisions. I am quite sure they have no idea about any of the new restrictions and punishments being issued over here. Of course still the effects of such information being provided are still all of the while limited as it does not account for the already tens of millions currently living in the states. It is indeed hard to see a realistic strategy to problem solve when it comes to getting those who are already in out as it seems the 10,000 dollar fine for citizenship doesn’t exactly tickle the fancy of an illegal immigrant who cannot readily nor comfortably spare such an amount out of his or her annual salary. As far as political representation for a more hybrid third party, I say what is the point? We already have two fractious agencies subversive of domestic tranquility (to quote George Washington) tearing apart America why three? Do not get me wrong, I like where your head is. As of late the idea of political parties have become somewhat of a non-issue in America when in fact they are crippling our since of individualism causing for a modern fad of intellectual laziness. The average American of today will I assure look at the color of ones tie before constructively analyzing their political agenda. Also I also believe the behavior of the current administration (denouncing of others legitimacy, targeting liberals for lack of patriotism) has only furthermore exploited the differences of these two American opinions republican and democrat. Congress is a grudge match these days and extremely based on party loyalties; Mark Satins novel the radical middle is only referred to as such because of the utter rarity of someone actually refusing to join a side and form their own middle ground. The middle I believe something John McCain does not represent CJ. John McCain is a war junkie, counter-insurgency blabber, that’s just a nice way of saying war continued, he doesn’t plan to treat Iraq like Malaysia anymore that Bush does because neither of them are truly there for humanitarian reasons and sadly neither are the “liberals,” I think it might do the modern Hilary fan a bit of good to turn off bbc for a sec. and look up John Locke on wikipedia and seriously think about what is best for the mid-east. We all know that Clinton addressing Iraq at the D primary debate did not sound very laissez-faire saying as that whole country is going to be oligarchy of dawa-shiite majority rule as soon as we leave if you know what I mean.

Edwin, Seattle WA (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 12:12 PM)

Steve, Hillary McCain? That's great. You may have the answer to the second coming of Mary Baker Eddy.

Robert Catalano, Salem, OR (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 12:13 PM)

csense, are there any jobs in america americans will do? your list of things american business wants ilegals to do about covers every job I can think of that working class americans do, but I guess people like you would rather pay slave wages to ilegals so you can make your beamer payment on time, you should venture out into the real world sometime it's a very scary place

MK,MO (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 12:13 PM)

Joe, Hewlett, N.Y. (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 12:16 PM)

Young but...........We are so use to preses that can not SPEAK he speaks in Dubaytalkkkkkkkkkkk

H P Boston (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 12:17 PM)

doreen so turn yourself in and cleanse yo soul.

jus sayin (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 12:29 PM)

Csense hispanics occupy those jobs because they keep the wages artificially low. Who wants to hire a citizen who looks for a living wage when you can hire an illegal you can pay under the table. That's why I specifically said it's a perversion of the labor force. Traditionally, those positions have been held by minorities and lower education. You can pay an illegal even less, driving your profit up. This forces the competition to do the same...and it may be at a point where it is too late to "fix". But that will not be the status quo for long...what happens when they have children(U.S citizens) who demand their parents be treated fairly and deserve equal wages and opportunity. Not only that they themselves will need help in being educated/hospitilized b/c their parents can't afford it. Big business is wrong, and politicians who say they do the jobs Americans won't do will be in for a rude awakening in a few years. It's more than just work...it affects the very fabric of our society and economy. But when it does occur, I will support them(they will be documented and tax payers atleast)...big business won't be able to hide behind the veil of "workforce shortages" anymore when they can no longer supress the hispanic underclass.

CJ (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 12:30 PM)

Here around the meat packing plants, I can tell you that the myth of "jobs Americans won't do" is just that...a myth. 10 years ago, the meat packing industry payed an average wage of $19-20 hr. Today that wage is $9 hr. And the census will show that many towns in Kansas are now 25-50% hispanic. If you are interested, Liberal KS is 43% hispanic, Garden City KS is 44% hispanic, Emporia KS is 25% hispanic...and the list goes on. The work is hard...and yes many Americans won't do it at the present wage, but they DID do it 10 years ago at a much higher wage. Most of these plants are "hidden" from public veiw in small towns across the plains states where they can conduct their business without the first hand knowledge of most of the country...all with the tacit approval of lawmakers at all levels of government. Until we end this practice in all industries, Americans will continue to see falling wages and illegal immigration, no matter how high a fence we build.

Al, KS (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 12:37 PM)

am not sure which is better - electing a woman or electing a black man, but it's got to be someone different. That's what the pools will show us or already showing us. Obama, Clinton, and in the end we may just settle for Romney or Gulliani, with some role for the ones we really dream about.

sam a (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 12:38 PM)

I don't think most illegal immigrants come here because they are fleeing criminal charges in another country, so I don't think it's at all helpful to wonder how many of them are "ax murderers, rapists or whatever." I'm not saying they are all pure of heart, either; I think that, for the most part, illegals are normal people who want a better life for themselves and their kids. Unfortunately, they choose to forego the proper channels, which is wrong. But I don't think that they are a bunch of violent criminals.

Carrie, NW Iowa (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 12:45 PM)

darwin when you got an intellegent post I will pay attention til then keep barkin and whimperin and whinin.

jus sayin (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 12:47 PM)

Earlier I was contrasting Rudy vs. McCain. But I do wonder is the McCain of old..or has he converted to the neoconservative agenda. But still better in my eyes than Rudy .. a Democrat (??Republican??) who fancies himself as a Bush acolyte.

CJ (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 12:51 PM)

Throughout these responses I failed to see anyone mention Bill Richardson... As a New Mexican, I can tell you that his campaign may have more legs than the pundits choose to realize. I am not a supported of Richardson, however he has a very good grasp on both domestic and international politics. His Hispanic background may also be what is needed to get this country to come to grips with our completely non-sensixal immigration policies.I couldn't say for certain, but I also believethat Richardson might be more hawkish than some people realize. He's very competitive, not one to give in on a battle to be won. Again, I'm not a supporter of his and, in fact, tend to vote more often than not GOP...Just don't throw Richardson's campaign under the bus just yet.

M.W. Riley (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 12:56 PM)

It might be worth noting a fact here and there. In reference to one particularly sloppy contributor's post of the this morning about state funded universities: The average percentage of total tax generated budget support among land grant and state-funded research universities in the United States is less than 25% and, in many cases, less than 20%. The larger portion of "income" for such institutions comes from research grants and private sources. Thus we may say that Mr. Edward's speech is most likely primarily funded by private donors or corporate interests. Whether it is George W Bush giving a commencement address at a state funded university, Dick Cheney speaking to Young Republicans at a land grant college, or Barack Obama addressing a campus wide prayer vigil at the University of Illinois, little or none of the funds is "our money." Such nonsense. It is almost a waste of time to respond to each of the uninformed regurgitations of this particular BS artist. Anybody who sees "nuance" in such tripe deserves to be suckered.

Mark Thieme (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 1:27 PM)

I think, jus sayin, that most all of my posts are intelligent, they provide facts to back up my opinions. I research each issue to the best of my ability and I never just adopt a stance based on sound bites. They are open to discussion and I don't claim to always have it right. They do not however state an opinion with nothing whatsoever to back it up, nor do they attack those who disagree. Please refer me to any post where you have done the same. Your only arguement is that EVERYONE has committed crimes so NO ONE has a right to speak out on this issue. That is absurd. How many people do you think we can allow to come here before our economy collapses? Before our schools and hospitals are overburdened to the point of collapse? Please tell me the benefits of allowing rampant, unchecked illegal immigration? How much lower should our wage scale be artificially pushed? How many more millions in food stamps and other entitlements should American taxpayers be forced to subsidize for a class of people who pay no taxes other than payroll taxes in most cases? And there are many, who are working "under the table" who pay no taxes whatsoever. Why should my childrens' education, and those of millions of other families, suffer because an inordinate amount of time is spent trying to educate children who do not speak English? Or because they are trying to teach them to speak Spanish from the first grade on so that they can communicate with the children of illegals instead of focusing on the fundamentals that they should be learning? Please educate me, apparently my racist attitude is clouding my judgement.

Darren, MB, SC (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 1:49 PM)

here's a little "research" the BS artist actually missed. Just a little nuance for a Wednesday afternoon: http://chronicle.com/jobs/2003/10/2003103101c.htm Back to the books Asthma Boy and good luck trying to convince folks you are "intelligent"; but then again, in your own eloquent words, you don't have to be right. What pathetic foolishness!

Mark Thieme (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 1:58 PM)

It is quite flattering to see that there are certain individuals who come here only to attack me and my opinions. A few days ago I mentioned those who see themselves as true geniuses of mendacity, but are actually pathetically transparent. These architects of dissimilation can not stand facts when they are in opposition to their personal beliefs and agendas. When the former Senator from NC, or anyone for that matter, speaks at a public university, then his speech is partially funded by our tax dollars. The problem comes when that person is actively campaigning for the presidency. I personally do not want to contribute to Mr. Edwards campaign. The amount of my tax dollars is small, no doubt, but still they are used. When George Bush speaks on a college campus as president, he receives no compensation. Nor does Dick Cheney. Yet, some will claim they do in an effort to make my point mute. This is nothing more than an amatuerish attempt at chicanery. Smoke and mirrors. Still, I am flattered that some find my posts worthy of a good smack down. There are always those who are ready to slap down any truth that gets in their way.

Darren, MB, SC (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 2:10 PM)

I don't put much importance to poles. They never seem to be accurate, especially only 12. And then again I can think one way today and change my mind tomorrow.So I still see Clinton as the next president. I won't vote for her but I think she has the money and she has Bill. Could be wrong though. Obama seems to be the favorite to a lot of younger people, and some older people that I talk to. He is certainly on the minds and lips of a lot of people I run into. There again I don't hear the names of any other canidates in the 400 plus people I see daily. Just Clinton and Obama. Could just be the media of course. Some want Clinton others Obama, but a ticket of such is what most want. Just those little people on the street but they do vote.

Violet Eubank (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 2:17 PM)

darwin turn yourself in and clease your soul and no matter what you say I AM RIGHT AND YOUR WRONG

jus sayin (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 2:20 PM)

With regard to posts quoting Bay Buchanan: Buchanan is a professional liar, much like Rush Limbaugh. She will say anything, true, half true or entirely false, to support her partisan opinions. If she says that a certain person, even a Clinton, did something, it is very likely that they did NOT do as she describes. If Buchanan tells you the time of day, you should check your watch. At least twice.

David, Syracuse New York (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 2:28 PM)

Illegal immagrants are here to work and send money back to their starving family and relatives in Mexico. Most work for a while and go back to Mexico. Many do not intend to 'stay here' nor become American Citizens. There is the criminals also that transport drugs and people to this country. Many leave these people in the desert to die and/or box cars and etc. A work program would work for many of these persons. A green card for six month or so. Those here for criminal activities and don't want to work need to be sent back. And there are a lot of those types here in Tucson, AZ. The other Mexicans will give you the low down on those types. Personally, if I was a Mexican I would try to get here and work, just like they do. What we need to do is get better trade agreements and industry into Mexico instead of China, India and so forth so they will have jobs in their own country. Why not oil from Mexico instead of making the middle east rich with it? Well just a thought.

Violet Eubank, Tucson, Arizona (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 2:30 PM)

If I were poor, uneducated and lacking the wherewithal to get my children educated, living in a country that was not providing any job opportunities; and in areas where jobs were available was not providing my family with police protection from crime, I am unsure how long it would take for me to try to escape what I saw as being hopeless. Our reaction is to shoot, to send them back, to put sympathizers in jail. I don't believe it will work, based on the fact that those coming across the border illegally already perceive that they may die during the journey, and would rather die than live in the misery that they now exist in. I agree that illegal immigration is a problem that must be addressed, but perhaps we could have a joint effort in a buffer zone between the US and Mexico (possibly on US soil), in which we find a way to educate and keep safe those who are trying to escape that life. It must be (or become) self-sufficient, could be patrolled but the patrols would need to be paid for by the businesses out of whatever profits are seen. Further, a buffer zone out of which those who learned to speak English, and proved to be good workers capable of keeping the laws of the US, should then be provided the ability to return to Mexico as teachers. The businesses should be "owned by" the employees, much like Winco or other American businesses operate.

Barbara Weaver, Beaverton OR (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 2:31 PM)

Darren--Keep on keeping on. Your posts are reasonable and civil, which is more than can be said for many others. As for Mexicans taking over the US--well, they are taught that the US took its SW states from Mexico by force and by trickery (Gadsden Purchase). Why do they believe this? Because it is true. However, makes you wonder, when will France demand the return of the Louisiana Purchase? How about when will Russia want AK back? Or, if you go back far enough in US history, when will the Native Americans want Manhattan Island back? Hispanics are slowly becoming the majority, due to lower birth rates for European-Americans (one poster joked, "Whites, make more babies!")For the first time in US history, a non-English language is prevalent in signage, in communication, in entertainment and information distribution (TV, radio stations, newspapers). Is there an organized Hispanic agenda? A vast conspiracy? Doubt it. Just a sea-change in demographics. History develops as it develops. Perhaps European descendents have ruled the US long enough--perhaps in the grand scheme of things, it is time for another ethnic group to take control of the US.

Frances Larsen, Newcastle, WA (Sent Wednesday, May 23, 2007 2:45 PM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=200515