It doesn't matter about primarys cause dems will have clean sweep in 08.

This is so silly with all the states acting like spoiled children with their "I'm going first," "No, I'm going first" nonsense.  We are the UNITED States, come on, people we can do this! Compromise!  If these states want to be "first" they should get their scheduling act together, those of us in other states are looking to them to get a sense of voter opinion.
But, with all the confusion, I wonder how accurately the results of these caucuses and primaries will reflect the choices of the country as a whole.  If the ordinary voters aren't sure when to vote, will we really get a representative sampling of how voters feel?

Seems to be a leadership void in the National Party Headquarters.

This makes my head hurt.  It's pathetic that some of these states felt the need to change the dates they had agreed on months (if not years) ago.  Now they have created a situation that is unfair to the candidates and to the voters.  I hope they are proud of themselves.

Oh, and the MI Dems are way out of line.  They broke the rules, and now they are blaming the DNC for actually enforcing the rules.  That really takes the cake.

As we all know, when it comes to the rules, liberals will always find a way to get around them.

The jocking for first positon is a waste of time, what we really need is for the states to make sure every vote is counted, that is the most important job they have, no more chads, no more voting machines that change votes and do not count votes.If they want to do something for our country, they should do their job of protecting voters rights.

I can't believe people think that the calendar dance has anything to do with the so called front runners...it's all about state arrogance want to be the first and having a greater impact on the nomination procedure than they had years past.  I only wish MSNBC limited comments to those with political science and/or law degrees like myself [have both] so intellectual debate can be had as opposed ignorant emotional nonsensical rhetoric.

John S. Alexander,Ediboro, PA...couldn't agree with you more.  I always said that the real story behind this election is going to be the uncertainty in any outcome because of electronic voting devices that dont' have paper trails, change votes, or don't register votes. Also these same devices have been built by companies that donate large sums to republican candidates...that their results are skewed to favor republicans is no coincidence...this had been proven in counties in Florida that have tested these machines.  So, Jerry, for you to say liberals don't play by the rules is wholly disingenuous since republicans change the rules all the time to their advantage when they see themselves losing on the merits...the fatally flawed referendum in California to split up that state's electoral votes headed by a republican is one example.

John S. Alexander...good point about making sure all the votes are counted correctly.  We certainly don't need another debacle like the "hanging chad" episode in 2000.

well Pat:

Considering that democrats were so hot about cutting the budget when they campaigned in 2006 and went on a drunken spending spree that made the republicans look like paupers makes a fellow wonder about how serious the democrats are about being truthful.  John Murtha tried to hide the earmarks, and I can understand why?

That nitwit in Minnesota that came out and screamed about no money to check the bridges for safety problems, yet he took money for a hiking trail goes to show you the hypocrisy of the democrats.

And then to really top off my week (and it is only wednesday), Randi Rhodes does a face dive and gets some dental work and John Elliot comes out and says she was attacked by Right wing zealots and uses the F word on radio makes me wonder if Democrats and Liberals really give a dog about America.

The press still does not seem to fathom a scenario in which neither a GOP nor a democrat will have enough delegates to win the nomination on a first ballot at their respective conventions. All this jockeying for pole position by the states is to prevent an early sweep that propels a candidate to victory before the other states vote. States like Iowa, Sourth Carolina and New Hampshire are incomplete samplings of what America is.

Jerry:

You wrote:

"And then to really top off my week (and it is only wednesday), Randi Rhodes does a face dive and gets some dental work and John Elliot comes out and says she was attacked by Right wing zealots and uses the F word on radio makes me wonder if Democrats and Liberals really give a dog about America."

Don't get all hot and bothered about Randi Rhodes and make the generalization you did about all democrats...I've never heard of her until this morning. I don't listen to that radio station because it's too far to the left for me.  It's just as relevant to "just left of center democrats" as Ann Coulter is to "just right of center republicans"...both groups making up the majority of the political spectrum of this country.  Trust me Jerry...we do care about this country just as much as you do...we just have a slightly difference of opinion as to how to get us on the correct track on the domestic front and retake our leadership position in world affairs.  

Pat:

Then I guess you and I will be fighting to the end......:)

Can care less about all this stuff...George Lucs developing live action spin off of Star Wars for TV.  All is right in the world again.

"Also these same devices have been built by companies that donate large sums to republican candidates...that their results are skewed to favor republicans is no coincidence."  That is SO TRUE!! Is it any wonder the Republicans swept everything in 2006?  I mean, just look at the overwhelming evidence that voting machines are skewed to the GOP.  Are you people blind?  I'm with Pat; I'm not about to let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

AN INTERFAITH VIEW: Torture and religious liberty      
By LAWRENCE SWAIM, Columnist    

Torture is a demonic outbreak of radical evil at the heart of the social contract between the individual and the state. In our time, it is usually the product of religious hatred, and is typically supported by people who believe in religious war. It shouldn’t surprise us, then, that those who torture would attempt to destroy a person’s relationship with God. But it should disturb all Americans that interrogators at the Navel base at Guantanamo Bay are alleged to practice such obscene forms of so-called "enhanced interrogation."  
Four former detainees at Guantanamo — Shafiq Rasul, Asif Iqbal, Rhuhel Ahmed and Jamal al-Harith — are litigating in Rasul vs. Rumsfeld to hold government officials accountable for torture they endured while being held there. (All were found innocent of terrorist activity and released in 2004.) Represented by the Center for Constitutional Rights, the four British citizens first cited violations of the U.S. Constitution and international law, but these were thrown out by the district court because the alleged misconduct (beatings, painful shackling, interrogation at gunpoint, use of dogs, extreme temperatures and sleep deprivation) was seen as occurring during the "course of war." But allegations of deliberate attacks on religion were not so easily ignored and are currently being considered by an appeals court in Washington, D.C.

The former Gitmo detainees allege they were forced to shave their beards, were systematically interrupted while praying, denied the Qu’ran and prayer mats, made to pray with exposed genitals and forced to watch as the Qu’ran was thrown into a toilet bucket. Obviously, the only reason for such abuse would be to crush inmates psychologically by insulting their religion. Therefore it could, if proven, violate the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, which seeks to protect religious expression.

The RFRA was originally passed by a broad interfaith coalition including the Conference of Catholic Bishops, National Council of Churches, American Jewish Committee, National Association of Evangelicals, Seventh-Day Adventists and the Joint Baptist Committee for Religious Liberty. (The latter is supported by Baptists with whom former President Jimmy Carter has been working.) They came together again recently to submit friend-of-the-court briefs on behalf of the four plaintiffs.

The Joint Baptist Committee General Counsel K. Hollyn Hollman was in the District Court of Appeals on Sept. 14 when arguments were made using the RFRA. "As advocates of religious freedom, we’re very concerned when an attack on religion is alleged to be part of any kind of torture or coercive interrogation," she told InFocus.

The appeals court dwelt especially on definitions of the words "person" and "religion" as used in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The Justice Department argued that Guantanamo detainees might not be "persons" as defined by RFRA. At one point, Judge A. Raymond Randolph, who tends to support hard-liners in the Bush administration, asked co-counsel Eric Lewis: "What’s your definition of religion?"

Lewis knew exactly where Randolph was going with this. "I would suggest that Islam fits within any definition of religion," he said.

The Center for Constitutional Rights coordinates the work of more than 500 pro bono lawyers representing Guantanamo detainees. In a statement to the press, Eric Lewis explained his organization’s goals and legal strategy in this way: "The detainees at Guantanamo have been subject to deliberate humiliation because of the Defense Department’s misguided and illegal effort to exploit their faith to break them down psychologically. We hope to persuade the Court of Appeals that the district court was correct in finding such conduct illegal under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a statute meant to ensure that the government respects the religious faiths of all people."

http://www.medicalsupplycorner.com
http://www.allurmeds.com
http://www.infocusnews.net/content/view/16915/400/

COLBERT '08!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  Please vote!!!!!!!! Thanks!!!!!!

-A member of the colbert nation

Hey all that matters is Bush will be out. Anything to get some change started in the white house.  Changing the primary dates so much is getting out of hand though.

In Michigan most voters aren't democrats and their not republicans.They're Independants.They are a very diverse people.They are tired of being forced to choose between the parties extreme candidates.Voting for michigan voters is choosing the lesser of two evils.They don't think the Parties have the right to tell them when and who they can vote for.Furthurmore they don't care about stupid issues like abortion(which has been legal almost 3 decades),gay marriage,etc.They're worried about Corporations taking over our gov.,military,political parties,etc.The economy,enviroment,workers rights,education,social security,national debt,China,health care,civil liberties,etc.The last successful 3rd party (republican)got it's national start in Michigan.Politicians in michigan are scared it's going to happen again.The people in Michigan don't trust Political Parties,they judge you based on your character(honesty),not your party.

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