Bought a box of Cracker Jacks, opened it up, a Nobel Peace Prize fell out!

Is Hillary Bulletproof?   It doesn't matter when the media just shoot blanks.

I believe the only bulletproof one is the idiot in chief. Hard to believe we are still in danger from this total nincompoop!
It scares the living hell out of me.  The terror from the WH must be stopped now!

There is no such thing as global warming. Dam it's hot.

Obama is actually in Iowa today not Wisconsin.  He will be in Wisconsin on 10/15 for a huge event.

please tell me if you can what time does the train roll in

Before I decided to post on todays coverage I decided to see who was writing it ...no surprise..Domenico.

As usual if there is a negative lne in an article he can find about Senator Obama he goes for it and it is the one he writes.  If the article is at all positive its followed by some snarky remark.

First Read why do you keep this guy.  Mark my words he will spell TROUBLE for you sooner or later.  My bet is SOONER.

Gore will endorse Obama, it's a natural.  It will be a big deal, a really big deal.  Maybe revenge really is a dish best served cold.

Al's donating the proceeds for the award?  Mighty nice of him.  What's Al worth now in days, 9 figures?  Not bad for a guy that doesn't have a job.  

Wasn't Mother Teresa worth 9 figures?

Congratulations to Mr. Gore on this award. I'm sure all the nuts who have NEVER done anything in their life to try & better the world, will be on here laughing at this Accomplishment. After criticizing Barack for his comment's earlier this year, here comes hillary  saying the same thing. Now that's experience folk's! Spin away van, susan,bb&g,& all the hillaryites.

All thats left for Al to do, other than finally be President, is host The Price Is Right.

You guys wish that Gore endorses Edwards, this post almost sounds like you are begging for it.  I actually like Edwards and I don't believe any of the BS rumors. I just like Obama the most!

Hey lookie here.. hillaryclinton.com

Another watershed poll for Clinton. It is either getting EARLIER out there and people are paying LESS attention than they were before Labor Day, or Clinton has continued to increase her already formidable edge in the National Polls with two of the most recent showing her above the magic 50% mark (ABC News, Wash. Post) for the first time since the race began. RCP averages on the most recent National polls show Clinton with an almost 26 point lead (48.2-22.6) over her nearest opponent.

Some of the more interesting things about the Fox poll are the, "Most Qualified", and "Who do you think will be President?", questions, and how INCREDIBLY well she scores with independents.

From the fox poll;
do you think he/she is to be president of the United States? [RANDOMIZE LIST]

SCALE: 1. Very qualified 2. Somewhat qualified 3. Not very qualified

4. Not at all qualified 5. (Don’t know)

*****SUMMARY CHART*****

Very Qualified

Hillary Clinton 47%

John McCain 34%

Rudy Giuliani 32%

Barack Obama 23%

Mitt Romney 16%

The poll sees her as much more qualified (47-34) than even the nearest republican opponent.

The biggest mistake that the republicans and those who use the contention to hang their opposition to her candidacy on, is how much independent support she'll garner in the general election, and how that support will make her pantsuit coat tails much longer than even her most enthusiastic supporters have predicted.

The unspoken word for the republicans, the one they can't use in the campaign against Clinton is their Achilles heel, competence. It's the thing that they can't mention without impugning the entire two previous REPUBLICAN terms.

In the coming presidential campaign for the republicans, the less said about the Bush years the better. Competence will be an issue that the democrats will HAMMER the republicans with, and Hillary is seen, by far, as the most competent and qualified to lead the Nation. More independents (77%) Independents see her as most Qualified

48% of independents see her as VERY Qualified as opposed to 33% for Rudy, 39% for McCain, 23% for Obama, and 16% for Mitt and Fred.        


        --- Qualified --- - Not qualified -

               TOTAL Vry Smwht TOTAL Ntvry Not (DK)

Hillary Clinton 72% 47 25 25 7 18 1

Democrats 94% 73 21 6 2 4 1

Republicans 48% 18 30 51 11 40 1

Independents 77% 48 29 21 9 12 3

27-28 Feb 07 65% 37 28 32 14 18 4


17. Regardless of how you plan to vote, who do you believe will be the next

president of the United States? (OPEN ENDED—DO NOT READ RESPONSES)

                 All Dem Rep Ind

(Hillary Clinton) 44% 61% 25% 45%

(Rudy Giuliani)   12 5 21 12

(Barack Obama)     6 8 3 8

(Fred Thompson)    3 - 7 2

(John Edwards)     3 3 2 3

(John McCain)      2 1 4 1

(Mitt Romney)      2 1 4 2

(Al Gore)          2 2 2 -

(Chris Dodd)       1 - 1 -




Van

Obama's problem is that he is a phoney.  The kid has been running for office ever since he ditched his white girlfriend in NYC, stopped using the nickname Barry in favor of Obama, and went to Harvard Law.

That is why nothing he throws out sticks.  People can't spot phoneys a mile a way.  I don't care how good his speeches are.

Hilliary can't dodge this one, Obama has been out first some major issues it looks like Hilliary is playing copy-cat.  She has the most "experience"....please

Did i hear Hillary said she would meet the Iran without Pre-condititon? I guess she realized she was wrong during the debate and want to have it both ways now.

Why should we trust her now? She got it wrong on Iraq, She got it wrong on Iran, She got it wrong on diplomacy concerning iran. Now she want to have it both ways.

She lack judgement on foreign policy and i don't want her bush-cheney lyte policy.

This is what the clinton does best, when they are wrong they don't admit it but would rather obsure the facts and confuse American people about her position.

We know where she stand on Foreign policy? She want war against Iran.

What I loved even more was Clinton last night with Olbermann saying that she hoped Gore wins the Nobel Prize. Sincere? Probably, but not out of the goodness of her heart sincere. Sincere in that, maybe this will keep him out of the race. If there's one person on either side of the political aisle that scares the hell out of her and her campaign, it is Al Gore and the massive amount of press and following he's received with his documentary, Academy Award, and everything else he's achieved in the last year. If he enters, even now, I think he could match her dollar for dollar and vote for vote towards Denver and the convention.

My guess is that he sticks to his guns and doesn't enter the race. As others, and myself have stated previously, there is no way he endorses Clinton. I don't think he endorses Edwards, either. I think he puts his name and also his time and efforts to getting Obama ahead of Hillary. He is the one person out there that knows the Clinton playbook better than anyone. Having that knowledge and how to beat it will be huge.

Here is the headline " Hillary Clinton agree to meet with Iran without Pre- condition"

This sound like turn around to me. Did she apologize to Obama for calling her naive on this issue?

I guess she want to have it both ways. Why is the media not reporting this...I get it Clinton is their darling

Van;

Please stop paying people to say they'll vote Hillary. Please stop muddying this decent forum for discussion with your useless bashing of anyone not named Hillary Clinton. We know you'd like to do her six ways from Sunday. Just stop. Please.

Dickie Flatts-- Did you wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning? How is he a phoney? B/c he broke up with a girl in New York? I am confused by your logic, or maybe because it is not logical. Either way I am confused, please explain. To me he is the only one who is real, I love a person that don't just say what you want to hear but actually speaks the truth. He is not perfect but neither are you or I, but he sure does have the experience and foresight that is needed to be a good leader!!!!!!!!

Congratulations to Al Gore for being a tool for the folks who want to diminish the U.S.  I do believe that humans are responsible for some global warming.  Allowing the rest of the world to dictate policy to us is inviting our demise.  

The UN has become the world's democratic party, trying to redistribute our wealth by forcing us to give ground in order to level the field with the third world.  The correct way to level the field is to raise developing countries to our level.  There is tremendous wealth in other areas of the world but it is wasted by ignorance and poor leadership.  That is where the UN should focus.  

We have the ability to do something about global warming ourselves, without sacrificing our way of life.  We know what we need to do, we just all need to make the effort. We don't need the UN using this excuse to try and subdue the U.S.  

Dickie where are you getting your info from...KKK??? Don't forget to iron the white sheets in your closet.

Congratulations to Al Gore.  He might not be the source of the big ideas but he certainly recognizes which ideas will become big and promotes those causes.

I get a fearful feeling in my gut listening to Rudy-Romney talk about foreign affairs as neither as any experience in that field. Guiliani was never responsible for making decisions on military matters and I don't think Romney encountered Iranians with nuclear aspirations while running the Olympics. At least when you hear Edwards-Obama-Biden-Clinton debate you get the feeling they know what they are talking about, having dealt with issues of National Security in the Senate. The Republicans seem to be pushing ideology, as usual, "we are inherently superior, so trust us." Whereas the Democrats are debating actual strategy. Personally, I want to see a return to reality in our national policy.

Quoting Fox ...let see Murdock right LOL.  Most of the MSM won't quote polls from these guys.  

BTW wasn't it done about the same time as the Gallup poll and the new AP Pll all with different results... I rest my case.

Math 101 if you add in (bogus) high number they will impact the average.

Do you really think this will change the minds of anyone who doesn't plan to vote for her....the only people this impacts is the people who aren't following it close and that is what they want.  Works for now!!!

Before i forget, let me use this opportunity to congratulate the true American hero - Al Gore.

At least we know where Gore stand on the issues. He is man of conviction.

One year from now we will be voting for a new president and completing eight years of the worst presidency this country has ever known.  The latter is just as true as the former and rather than take the time here to cover the vastness of the evidence, I’ll just encourage anyone who is unsure to objectively review the arrogant and self-serving, grossly dishonest performance and consider all of the costly results that benefited Special Interests and a select few while providing the average American only the costs, apathy and subterfuge – and in actuality, that has negatively impacted for generations to come.  
With another election coming up it is important to understand how America ever came to elect, not once but twice, George W. Bush and the supporting politicians that allowed him to do all he has done.  The extensive details can be recalled but because of space constraint it is best to just identify those efforts that succeeded in manipulating the voters.  First, the sociopathic personality, while without a conscience, is quite capable of faking most anything and even with it’s arrogance and gross dishonesty, is very apt to be impressive – an accurate term would be ‘an accomplished con-artist’.  Next, with the substantial overt and covert support of very powerful and influential people, who were to benefit, they pursued an ‘in your face’ aggressive plan to discredit the competition, intimidate the critics, coerce the resistant and deceive the voter by first dividing based on individual biases and then with subterfuge addressing those biases.  Then they recruited support from community and religious leaders by stroking their egos and convincing them that they actually shared concern for the same limited issues, thereby creating distraction from the total picture.  Bold, belligerent, arrogant, deceptive, etc., tactics,.. yes, but nonetheless successful and when objectively viewing the actions and results, there should be no doubt about the lack of sincerity.
As examples, here in Arizona we have Senator John McCain who abandoned his identity, and his constituents, as a principled Independent Republican to become a strong Bush-backer and Senator Jon Kyl who always subserviently supported Bush in everything, including offering the scripted subterfuge word-for-word.  And consider the unbending support offered with arrogance by Senators Frist and DeLay and others.  Without that kind of strong and blind support, the Bush administration couldn’t have done the harm it has done and that really needs to be recognized for next time.
Whether Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal, Christian or non-Christian, American born or immigrant, hawk or anti-war, wealthy or poor, whatever, each of us needs to fully recognize how those individual biases, those single issue concerns, were used to segregate and then manipulate.  The only way to combat that is to check our own biases, so we can’t be manipulated by them, to objectively view the total picture, to independently determine what we believe and to make our own decision while refusing to be swayed or led or controlled by anyone else.  Then maybe the result will be a true representation of the American majority’s will and we can hopefully avoid ‘more of the same’.

Congratulations Mr Gore. To all those who will come on here and insult and belittle his accomplishments (as well as those of Jimmy Carter), I have a question...What are YOU doing to make the world a better place?

my goodness ,is there any way to say that MSNBC is not anti-Obama . I mean they might as well take out and ad in the paper and beg  Gore not to endorse Obama there. My god people !!!!!

LMAO...you can pick a bushie out of any crowd on any subject..."al gore is a loser" "there is no global warming issue and if there is its natural" "bush has saved us from those pie eyed ideas on being stewards of our planet" "clinton did it" are all republicans so mean spirited and ignorant or will the real ones ever stand up and denounce the bushies and their christian crackheads?

I love it! Al Gore wins a Nobel Prize! Which right-wing-nut radio pundit will slash his wrists first over this?.....My money is on Limbaugh.
Hillary's got da' juice, plain and simple!
Romney and Giulliani looked like a pair of cat-fighting schoolgirls the other night.
BVy the way, Giulliani LISPS even more when he's frustrated.
Obama's done, so his 5 year old speach doesn't matter. Biden's a good guy, Brownback's a jerk.....but again, none of this matters because Hillary is our next President.
PERIOD.
Have a nice weekend.

a taxpayer wrote, "The UN has become the world's democratic party, trying to redistribute our wealth by forcing us to give ground in order to level the field with the third world.  The correct way to level the field is to raise developing countries to our level.  There is tremendous wealth in other areas of the world but it is wasted by ignorance and poor leadership.  That is where the UN should focus."

This morning the IRS released some interesting figures. In 2005 the richest 1% of the US got 21.2% of all the income. That's is an increase over the the 19% of income they got in 2004. There is quite a bit of income redistribution going on here. Is that the UN's fault too?  

I hope Al Gore gets in the presidential race. He has solid inside experience as a Congressman, Senator and Vice President, but he has been outside of WDC for the last seven years so he is not responsible for any of the current mess - didn't vote for the War in Iraq, didn't increase the deficit, didn't reduce USA standing in international politics. He was an early, vocal and lucid critic of the Iraq War without self-centered political gain. His work on climate change goes back to his days in the Senate and his participation in Rio 1992. Al Gore could bring the best aspects of the Clinton Administration back to WDC, without the worst aspects (the Clinton's themselves). A Gore/Obama ticket would be a powerful combination.

"I wrote about my suspicions that Penn et al are touting inevitability of the Hillary nomination in order to suppress African-American support for Obama, by capitalizing on African-American fears of disenfranchisement.  If I'm right in that assumption, then that's another example of the heinous type of Republican cynicism to which I refer."

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY (Sent Thursday, October 11, 2007 8:14 PM)

If touting her inevitability in going after the black vote is somehow  heinous, is it also despicable in going after the Hispanic vote? the Polish vote? the auto mechanic vote? How is touting inevitability, which Rudy is trying to do on the republican side, like Kerry did after Ia in 2004

" I can't convince myself that these votes were anything but political posturing for the general election and that kind of pragmatism seems corrupt for me."

Mitchell, Chuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton and my other representatives weren't posturing back in October 2002, less than 13 months since we had been attacked, less than FIVE miles from where I live, less than a month before congressional elections when Bush pushed the vote while republican candidates used the horrors of 9/11 to depict any democrat running for election as a traitor and/or in league with OBL, if they weren't voting for the resolution. Ask Max Cleland if it was posturing. Clinton was one of the SEVENTY-SEVEN senators who voted for the resolution. Schumer, Biden, Dodd, EDWARDS, and seventy-two others did also, the house passed the bill, 296-133.

Was Clinton and many of the other democrats and republicans gung-ho for war? No, they were not, and while I will only quote senator Clinton here, she was emblematic of the reluctance exhibited by many others.

Senator Clinton; Now this much is undisputed. The open questions are: what should we do about it? How, when, and with whom?

Some people favor attacking Saddam Hussein now, with any allies we can muster, in the belief that one more round of weapons inspections would not produce the required disarmament, and that deposing Saddam would be a positive good for the Iraqi people and would create the possibility of a secular democratic state in the Middle East, one which could perhaps move the entire region toward democratic reform.

This view has appeal to some, because it would assure disarmament; because it would right old wrongs after our abandonment of the Shiites and Kurds in 1991, and our support for Saddam Hussein in the 1980's when he was using chemical weapons and terrorizing his people; and because it would give the Iraqi people a chance to build a future in freedom.

However, this course is fraught with danger. We and our NATO allies did not depose Mr. Milosevic, who was responsible for more than a quarter of a million people being killed in the 1990s. Instead, by stopping his aggression in Bosnia and Kosovo, and keeping on the tough sanctions, we created the conditions in which his own people threw him out and led to his being in the dock being tried for war crimes as we speak.

If we were to attack Iraq now, alone or with few allies, it would set a precedent that could come back to haunt us. In recent days, Russia has talked of an invasion of Georgia to attack Chechen rebels. India has mentioned the possibility of a pre-emptive strike on Pakistan. And what if China were to perceive a threat from Taiwan?

So Mr. President, for all its appeal, a unilateral attack, while it cannot be ruled out, on the present facts IS NOT A GOOD OPTION!

http://clinton.senate.gov/news/statements/details.cfm?id=233783

To depict her as anything less than reluctant and extremely cautionary would be false.

As to her vote, again as part of a large majority (76-22) of senators, on a non-binding resolution, like declaring June 7-13th, "National Asparagus Week". Your opinion is;

"I can't convince myself that these votes were anything but political posturing for the general election and that kind of pragmatism seems corrupt for me."

If you think that the first vote was about political posturing, if history can't sway you, I won't be able to. The second vote IS political posturing. That's what non-binding resolutions are for, taking political positions that you don't have to back up. They are nothing BUT posturing, that is their purpose.

If pragmatism is corrupt, than you should be in love with Bush. If it is your belief that Clinton would be the only candidate PRAGMATICALLY POSITIONING themselves for the primaries, with an eye on the general election, you aren't giving any of the other candidates from either party proper credit.

I have no thoughts of trying to change your mind on Clinton. I do hope that you look at all of the facts with an open mind when we get to the general election.

I hope that the article I posted for you will do something towards blunting your beliefs that Hillary is owned by corporate entities, at the least.





Van

Gore & the IPCC that's perfect. Many of the scientists involved in the IPCC project sued to have their names removed from the report. WTG AL!!

Mitt Romney on Lawyers and Use of Military Force
October 12, 2007; Page A15
I'm disappointed The Wall Street Journal got it wrong in yesterday's editorial "Send In the Attorneys?" The question I was asked at the Republican debate in Michigan was not when I would use military force, but rather when congressional approval would be required. What I said in response, and have said since, is that a president must act to protect the American people. As to what involvement Congress may have, that's a matter for legal consideration.

If there is any confusion, let me be very clear: As president I would not shrink from the use of military force when grave threats confront America. At the same time, when time and circumstances permit, I would indeed seek the involvement of Congress as required by law and the Constitution.

Mitt Romney
Belmont, Mass.

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY: '...Gore will endorse Obama, it's a natural.  It will be a big deal, a really big deal.  Maybe revenge really is a dish best served cold....'

Mitchell, I really don't think endorsements mean much. I don't think Jimmy Carter or Al Gore
would cause many people to change their minds.

Amy B Portland, ME: '...I get a fearful feeling in my gut listening to Rudy-Romney talk about foreign affairs as neither as any experience in that field...'

Amy, they all lean on advisors. None of the candidates are really foreign policy 'experts'.
But, I've read that Guiliani is attracting the neo-con crwod to his side. After all their failures with the Bush team, their flocking to the next bozo !

Flip-Flop-Flip-Flop does Hillary stand for anything?  I'm sorry Sen. Clinton you can't hammer Obama for being first on the idea and turn around to adopt the idea without admitting you were wrong. This is the fourth error of judgement you made and you claim that Sen. Obama is "naive".  You can't spin this, your hand was caught in the cookie jar. There is no wiggle room. You are not qualified to make good decisions, you can't come up with your own ideas, and you lack the fortitude to stand behind your ideas.  That's not leadership, that's calculation...

Hillary you are the weakest link....

It's right here, just take a lookie.. hillaryclinton.com

Source: Gore thinks Clinton unstoppable

"WASHINGTON (CNN) — A source involved in Gore's past political runs told CNN that he definitely has the ambition to use the peace prize as a springboard to run for president.

But he will not run, because he won't take on the political machine assembled by Sen. Hillary Clinton, said the source. If the senator from New York had faltered at all, Gore would take a serious look at entering the race, the source said. But Gore has calculated that Clinton is unstoppable, according to the source.

Gore repeatedly denied he has any plans to run again, but this week a group of grass-roots Democrats calling themselves "Draft Gore" took out a full-page ad in The New York Times in a bid to change his mind. (Watch more on the movement to draft Gore)"

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

Don't know if it's true, as it quotes a, " source involved in Gore's past political runs.", but id does make for an interesting little tidbit...


Van

Democratic Presidents, and vice-Presidents win Nobel Peace Prizes. Republican Presidents and vice-Presidents just dissappear into obscurity. What a difference huh? Proud to be a Democrat. Suck it neo-cons.

I'm with Braveheart from Imperial City, Ca. I hope Al Gore jumps in the race.  He's the only one who can out poll Hillary! And yes, he could bring all the good things back from the Clinton WH without having a Clinton.  A Gore/Obama ticket would be fantastic and just what this country needs now! Here I thought all was lost in this thanks to the of the idiot and his policies currently in the WH. Gore is clearly the most capable, experienced and dedicated leader that could send the Republicans packing in '08.

The Clinton camp would like to pretend that Obama's answer ended with "I would" then only talk about the exact phrasing of the question.  They completely ignore the FACT that Obama went on to talk about initiating diplomatic efforts first.

The reason for Hillary's success in this campaign might be simple: Rovianism works.  Even though Obama's experience includes a track record of legislative accomplishment and good judgment that she doesn't match up to, she "attacked the strength" in Rovian fashion.  Then, she used obfuscation as well as Rove ever did on this diplomacy issue.

The only way the campaign is going to turn around is if voters and reporters start calling her on this stuff.  For example, she talks about her experience in completely abstract terms.  Even as the Clintons fight to keep the details of her service as first lady secret, she touts that.  Well, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. had plenty of abstract experience and look where that landed us.  

Perhaps a good place for hillary to start getting concrete would be to talk about how her experience has informed the most important judgments she's made.  I'm afraid that political expediency, and not experience, is the answer to that.

Hey, you neocons - don't let ANYONE call you "stpuid beyond all human comprehension" because you chose a weasely little coward and war criminal (by '04) over a Nobel prize winner. No, Sir!

You're all VERY special to all Americans who aren't flat lining. Especially you, "Arnse." That you can function in society to the point where you purchased a box of Cracker Jacks - you're an inspiration to your fellow Bush voters.

I am amazed, I have been away from here for a few months and nothing has changed.  Conservatives are so anxious to blame the quagmire the World is in today on anyone but the GOP that they are even willing to jump on and discredit someone who is truly trying and being successful at raising awareness to a GLOBAL problem.  These are the same mice that will follow the pied piper into a war on faulty information and stand behind him 6 years later with NO progress but are unwilling to believe our world is literally melting around us.  Shameful. . .utterly shameful.  Way to go Al!!!!!  

Y'all probably have bumper stickers that read "if you aint a republican you aint right!"  Join Ann Coulter in spewing hate for no reason.  Birds of a feather.

BTW, Why would Clinton re-record a 5 year old speech from when she was touting Bush's false WMD and Saddam-aQ claims?

"are all republicans so mean spirited and ignorant or will the real ones ever stand up and denounce the bushies and their christian crackheads?"

Here I am, employee! Joined the Repukagain party last week. Time to clean a few war mongering cowards and Holy Inquisitors out. "Ya say you want a revolution?" Ron Paul.

If you think that the first vote was about political posturing, if history can't sway you, I won't be able to. The second vote IS political posturing. That's what non-binding resolutions are for, taking political positions that you don't have to back up. They are nothing BUT posturing, that is their purpose.


I have no thoughts of trying to change your mind on Clinton. I do hope that you look at all of the facts with an open mind when we get to the general election.

I hope that the article I posted for you will do something towards blunting your beliefs that Hillary is owned by corporate entities, at the least.


Van


Very insightful of you....know you want change anyone's mind.  It's like spinach, either you like it or you don't.  It doesn't matter how people try to sell you on it,..in your gut you don't like it.

For many people (myself included) that is what it is.  It's a gut feeling.

I will give you credit for trying...but  again you are right on not changing my mind and wrong I won't consider voting for her UNDERSCORE EVEN CONSIDER.

We shall continue to agree to disagree.

BTW did Hillary change her mind (again) on talking to Iran without "CONDITIONS"?  Notice I didn't say flip, flop (since you accused me yesterday of being flippant

Who is the Chairman of the Board of the Alliance for Climate Protection (the recipient of the Nobel cash prize).

And the winner is:  Al Gore

The cash prize that comes with this award will go far in funding private jets and accomodations for Brother Al's Travelling Climate Salvation Show.  Perhaps it will go toward purchasing carbon credits on behalf of the organization as it goes about exceeding the carbon footprint of the average citizen.

The Alliance for Climate Protection is a public relations entity (some might say propaganda)that is also set up to be a temporary organization.

Just go to the net and type in the Alliance for Climate Protection.

It's like if Jimmy Carter donated his award to the Peanut Farmers Information and Promotion Bureau.

Tax avoidance the John Edwards way.

What a charlatan.  Hypocrite comes to mind as well.  There were far more deserving nominees.  Perhaps, as someone recently suggested, the Monks of Burma, truly courageous people.

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