We heart hot mics

jerry/corpus christi texas — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 17:57:39 GMT

CLinton/Edwards in 08. LOL! The Queen of mean and the King of Clean.

We heart hot mics

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:06:41 GMT

Don't think so, Jerry. My guess is she's interested in ginning up a united front for not doing some gay issues debate. Still can't believe somebody came up with that idea, lol. And talk about putting the Democrats in a box - do we go or not?

We heart hot mics

Peggy, Mississippi — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:14:39 GMT

Jerry,

They are as opposite as oil and water. Plus Hillary Clinton will not run with a man that is better looking that she is.

We heart hot mics

jerry/corpus christi texas — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:20:27 GMT

Paul, I heard they are doing the Gay debate next month, Hillary, Edwards and Obama. Unless things have changed in the last 24 hours. After all that firestorm about remarks about gay people earlier in the year, Edwards must be out of his mind for going on that debate. He will be grilled and served on a platter. Hillary will be grilled over the "don't ask, don't tell" law of her husband. And Obama, I really don't know what his stance is on gay issues, he would be the wild card in that debate

We heart hot mics

MK,MO — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:28:12 GMT

edwards/clinton might work for me, although I may have to swallow a little vomit while casting my vote, the more I see of clinton's cold calculating and deceptive campaign the more I realize she is the wrong person for the job, too replulicanist for me, reminds me of bush in way too many ways, but if she were vp she could be kept at bay when she goes off the deep end, it would be better for all concerned if she just dropped out, if she wins the nomination your next president will be either the repulsive rudy, or mitt the dog hater, man I would give $100 to know how much mitt pays for that hair-cut, reliable sources put it in the $3500 range, but it's a non-issue with the repubs candidates, the cost of the lexapro to keep that dog still on top of the car still is probably also quite burdens

We heart hot mics

jerry/corpus christi texas — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:29:11 GMT

Peggy, while she is doing the gay debates next month, maybe she can do with a makeover. I'm sure there will be lots of men offering both candidates expert advice for both.

We heart hot mics

Gary, Des Moines, IA — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:29:20 GMT

Yeah, I can't believe a bunch of tax-paying, candidate-contributing, rights-deprived election-year scapegoats would want a debate of their own, right Paul? How dare they...

Who exactly would such a debate hurt? Democratic candidates gladly take "gay" money and volunteers. They should address key issues to that community, just like they would to women, African-Americans, Hispanics, Jews, Catholics, etc.

The only gay-related questions asked in "regular" debates are "raise your hand if you believe in gay marriage." As citizens, gays deserve better (and don't all Americans?)

We heart hot mics

jerry/corpus christi texas — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:31:55 GMT

Maybe she should ask Helen Thomas, that will put an end to the "looks" issue.

We heart hot mics

Ricardo in California — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:36:14 GMT

I love the way Hillary gets Jerry's underpants all tied up in a knot. Face it Jerry boy ...america is ready for a BIG change .... we've given a white male conservative republican the chance to run this nation and what did we get in return .... a "make believe" war and almost 4000 dead americans. Laugh all you want ..... change is coming ...it will be a woman or person of color running this nation. You white male conservatives will just have to deal with it :)

We heart hot mics

mj, Milford, MA — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:38:38 GMT

Why is this posted? Tantalizing? Am I missing something, what conclusions can possibly be drawn from what you've posted?

We heart hot mics

Just Saying, Here, Now — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:42:17 GMT

Jerry's mirror must be a scary place!

We heart hot mics

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:44:11 GMT

Gary, not saying gays don't deserve their own debate. I'm just saying it isn't a good move for the Democratic field. Nothing personal, just politics.

We heart hot mics

jerry/corpus christi texas — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:44:34 GMT

From a "make-believe war" (bush) to a "make believe president" (Hillary).

We heart hot mics

Ricardo in California — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:52:37 GMT

with a "make believe" president we may actually be able to minimize american deaths. Oh I forget that's not a concern of yours Jerry!

We heart hot mics

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 19:04:07 GMT

Ricardo, I don't know. Clinton never said the decision to invade Iraq was a mistake. She only criticized the management of the war. So why should we think she wouldn't make the same blunder? She might be tempted to show the Republicans how to do one "right."

We heart hot mics

Nick, Ohio — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 19:11:49 GMT

The snippets heard with the mic still on can be speculated from now until the cows come home. But, the real peice of info to be had from those encounters is this: Hillary needs to step outside of her box to win. There is too much warmth in Obama and Edwards and Richardson for her to ignore. She has some baggage as anyone would have coming from a situation like hers. However, she can turn it around with some real public warmth. Her cold attitude will help her defend her positions with any of the GOP candidates (or, even with Newt, should he enter the fray). No one can snuff-out Hillary and get away with it. She can be one tough lady. However, she needs to also appeal to those people who are for Obama, Edwards and Richardson before she can win the nomination. Money alone will not win the primary. She will need to change her tune on Iraq and admit she made a mistake in voting for it since she was as hood-winked as anyone else in Congress with a (D) by their name.
It's anyone's guess who will win the nomination. I hope for an Edwards-Obama ticket, but I would also go for an Obama-Richardson ticket. Who will Hillary choose if nominated? Probably Richardson.

We heart hot mics

David, Chattanooga, Tn — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 19:34:57 GMT

Just another piece of S--- reporting from Applebaum and Dunn. If you can't substantiate a story while in the hell speculate on any of it? Why don't you two go work for The Star.

We heart hot mics

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 19:53:04 GMT

David, this isn't reporting; it's blogging. Sure this is a little more gossipy than some of the blog entries, but anytime where a candidate tells another candidate "our people should talk," well, at least its interesting gossip.

We heart hot mics

David, Chattanooga, Tn — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 20:18:41 GMT

Paul, What we do is blogging. What they do is called reporting.

We heart hot mics

Dee of VA — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 20:39:02 GMT

This is not just gossip. By the end of the day, an expert in sound engineering will have eliminated the organ music from this tape, and we'll know exactly what they were discussion. If it's revealed that the two of them are teaming up already, Hillary's Black, female support will dry up immediately. They are only supporting her out of misguided affection for Bill Clinton and gender loyalty, but if it appears that the they are ganging up to defeat Senator Obama, they will abandon her. Let's see her take South Carolina or Flordia w/o that voting block.

We heart hot mics

diane — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 21:05:07 GMT

I saw the tape of this moment and as an Obama supporter I have to say nothing suspicious seemed to be behind the conversation.
Both Dennis Kucinch and Barack Obama were around for part of the conversation to shake hands and neither clinton or Edwards made any attempt to hide what they were talking about.
My guess is it probably has to do with something not so sneaky.

We heart hot mics

Gary Summerville, Provo UT — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 22:19:30 GMT

By the looks of things, Paul is here all day long. This is probably his only way to communicate with the outside world. Leave him alone.

We heart hot mics

ST — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 01:13:35 GMT

John Edwards said, "We should try to have a more serious and a smaller group."

I agree. The debates need to be smaller groups.

Hillary Clinton said "We've got to cut the number...They're not serious."

Clinton was more blunt. I'd like to know what John Edwards' response to her "they're not serious" comment was.

We heart hot mics

Mark in Arlington — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 02:31:41 GMT

Clinton and Edwards, caught by the "fire in the whorehouse".

We heart hot mics

poligirl, LA, CA — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:40:42 GMT

OMG... They weren't talking about teaming up in the sense that ABC was slanting it... Geez. Even FOX Noise got the story right... Here's the link (you may have to copy and paste):

http://www.update08.foxnews.com/

They were talking about possibly changing the debates and how they would like to have smaller debates, perhaps sometime in the fall, and that the campaigns should talk about it...

It's not a VP thing, it's not an Obama ouster thing, it's not a huge conspiracy...

It's simply about there being a lot of candidates on the stage and that leaves not much time to discuss actual ideas - it only leaves time for sound bites.

Geez guys...

--poligirl

We heart hot mics

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 12:57:46 GMT

Lol, Gary. Have I struck a nerve?

ST and Poli - from the one time I saw this on video, it seemed like Edwards initiated the conversation, too.

We heart hot mics

ST — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 13:43:07 GMT

Paul Miller,

That's what I was just thinking about before I came here. I have followed John Edwards since 2002, so closely that I know his mannerisms, even from when he will rub his chin, to when he will make that stupid face after he says something that he thinks is clever, to when he will lose his breath when he's trying to "attack another candidate without attacking".

With that said, I have rarely seen him initiate a conversation "OUT OF THIN AIR" in the way that the ABCNews video showed him initiating this one, so I have to assume that this was a continuation of some other conversation that we did not see, possibly before the forum or some other time in the past, hence the, "get back to it" references by Clinton.

I agree that there needs to be smaller groups, as I said before the first MSNBC debate where I said it would be a waste of time, because 30 seconds to 1 minute is not enough time to say anything.

I do not believe that it is John Edwards' intention to silence Kucinich or shut him out of debates. Just that there be a better format.

What I don't think serves John Edwards well is appearing "TOO CLOSE" to Hillary Clinton. If he wants to lose most of his netroots support, go there.

We heart hot mics

ST — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 14:11:28 GMT

What Clinton and Edwards were really talking about?

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2007/02/02/top_democrats_seek_to_limit_joint_appearances.html

We heart hot mics

Dennis Waldron, Bishop, Texas — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 14:24:11 GMT

It's kind of cute, but does anyone else ever notice how Paul writes complimentary posts to himself using fictitious names?

Or then again, maybe it's just sad.

We heart hot mics

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 14:49:02 GMT

Dennis, are you talking about me? I don't use fictitious names, and actually don't see too many complimentary posts about me, lol.

We heart hot mics

Dennis Waldron, Bishop, Texas — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:04:48 GMT

Check out the 'Obama Embraced" thread.

The fictitious posts always start with something like 'I don't post much around here, but'.

More like never.

Paul, find something else to do. Take a walk, watch game shows, something, anything.

It is really pathetic to watch.

We heart hot mics

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:45:49 GMT

Wow, hadn't seen that before. Sorry Dennis, but I'm none of those people. Not that you couldn't find a whole different set of reasons to think I'm pathetic, lol, but that's not one of 'em.

We heart hot mics

dean — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 18:42:21 GMT

Come on face it folks, you all feed on this kind of "character-free" politics. It amazes me that no one seems the least interested in anything but the same old, tired status quo!
Is it any surprise that candidates with new or even different ideas get no attention at all?
If we could just get Ralph Nader to start scheming and talking trash.

We heart hot mics

Jack Rookard — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 21:34:32 GMT

The powers that be should dump the unelectables from the stage. Specifically, everybody but Hill and OBamO. Sorry libs, no other dem stands a chance. The Breck Girl stands no chance at all of being elected to anything.

We heart hot mics

Julian Langness Seattle, Washington — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 21:36:07 GMT

I have always been a big supporter of John Edwards but after this i have lost all respect for him. I will no longer support his candidacy in the least bit as i think this was an extremely cowardly thing to say and shows that he is a despicable human being who does not deserve to be president or even stand on the same stage as people like Mike Gravel or Barack Obama or Dennis Kucinich who are actually trying to change things and willing to openly debate issues.

We heart hot mics

Stanley, Madison, MS — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 01:52:39 GMT

Oh shut up. All Clinton and Edwards said is that they believe debates should be smaller. Stop creating a vast conspiracy out of this statement.

We heart hot mics

Elaine N. Ramey; Kissimmee,,Florida — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 05:51:17 GMT

I'm withholding judgement on John Edwards unti; I hear more. Mike Gravel has already stated that he has no intention of running for president then was casting slurs about Bill Clinton. Obama breaks the rules by using notes.Hillary and Edwards know what the other cadidates are doing. EDWARDS; HE STANDS TO IMPROVE THE LIVES OF MORE PEOPLE.

We heart hot mics

Mike B, Manchester NH — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 15:07:59 GMT

Our country has serious issues and in the 2008 campaign we need serious candidates. At this point, we need to know what the candidates who have a shot at winning would do in office; not a Congressman from Ohio or a retired man from Alaska. Judging from some of the comments I read below (i.e. “Queen of mean"), I think some voters need to get serious too. Grow up or shut up! This is our country's future we're taking about here. You should feel ashamed for being so callous.

We heart hot mics

Kade, Arlington, TX — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 16:20:40 GMT

These are the champions of the "Fairness Doctrine", demonstrating once again just how much of a blow to free speech that would be.

We heart hot mics

PK, Bavaria — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 04:45:24 GMT

I believe it in the candidates self interest, and more importantly--in the interest of winning the election over the "Fair & Balanced" crowd--to control their message and maintain focus on the big picture game plan.

Don't get me wrong -- I love the notion of disclosure, and more in uncovering the potential foybles of a candidate before they attain office. I don't appreciate the notion of offering the opposition free ammunition though.

Politics is what it is -- but the American people have been abused and rolled over wet so often it is not funny. "Fair and Balanced" is akin to a magician using the distraction of a pretty bauble or assistant to keep the paying public off balance and loose focus of the real issues at stake.

I for one, as a proud American, am tired of being played the fool.

As the guy on TV used to say -- Just the Facts Ma'am... Impress me with that!

We heart hot mics

ANNA TOLBERT OROVILLE , WA — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 05:15:54 GMT

Hillery is looking tired and old and several months to go- Will she hold up Health wise?

We heart hot mics

REALITY USA — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 05:29:51 GMT

All this fuss about who is going to lose in 08 is a waste of time... Dems still can't get unified = Loss in 08!

We heart hot mics

Barrack O Washington, DC — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 06:11:29 GMT

Instead of trying to limit the numbers, Hillary should have been getting Edwards Hairdressers number!!

We heart hot mics

C.K Stewart Cape Coral Florida — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 07:00:03 GMT

Hey guys fighting on a thread is like wining the special olympics... yea you win, but your still retarted. No offence to the special olympics intended, but it seems the only way to make you get the point. Anyway, carry on with your repugnant, self serving,mindlessness.

We heart hot mics

C.K Stewart Cape Coral Florida — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 07:01:48 GMT

We heart hot mics

mellissa donnelly, regina, sask. — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 07:04:23 GMT

Go Hilary go!!!!!! I am Canadian and even I feel sorry for American's! Enough with George Dubya and enough lives have been lost! Change is a must!!

We heart hot mics

Danni Studebaker — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 09:06:56 GMT

We might have yet another male president: Hillery
Clinton. I can't seriously even consider voting for
her.......to think, Bill Clinton as first husband?
hahahahahaha................
Little boy Edwards is out. Watching Obama closely.

We heart hot mics

Mike, Lee, NH — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 13:22:17 GMT

Dem's are tired, weary of all the debating, perhaps it's time for them to accept they don't have the energy or the sustainablity to maintain what it takes to do the job. If they are this tired this soon, I would tell them adious!

We heart hot mics

Steve, Madison, WI — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 13:26:01 GMT

I think Clinton and Edwards are correct to some degree. Too many candidates limit the debate to quick answers from all concerned. Personally, I'd like to see the democrats "weed the garden" of candidates a bit. I know, they are all granted the right to be candidates, and I respect them all. However, focusing the debate on half as many candidates would help everyone decide. On the subject of "hot" mics. Although what those mics pick up can be tantalizing, interesting and, at times, sensational, I think it may be an invasion of privacy to use what is heard as "news" or talk show fodder.

We heart hot mics

john doe — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 17:51:26 GMT

John Edwards lost any support he may have gotten from me. Anyone who is afraid of REAL debate... the more involved the more democratic is more elitist than he wanted us to believe....must be the hair.

We heart hot mics

Thomas Abey,Silver Spring, MD — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:50:34 GMT

It is my assumtion that the Dems have no plans to run the country..the only thing they repeat one after the other is how bad the Reps are..just pointing fingures..what a wast of time, money and manpower..educated at that.. Irak, irak, irak that is all they do...

We heart hot mics

Julian Langness, Seattle, Washington — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 05:40:45 GMT

I love how people say, oh, we should only have the serious candidates in the debates. all these fringe ones or ones without a chance shouldnt be in them. thats a great idea. so by that rationale, if we limit it to the top three or four, bill clinton and john kerry would have been excluded at this time in their respective years. okay, you say, well then just the ones who are mainstream, not these wackos like gravel and kucinich and ron paul. well, i would say, if we only took the people whose opinioins were mainstream, then in the 1840's we would never have had any candidates in the primaries who were anti slavery, and their presence wouldnt have dragged the political climate to the left, to the point where eventually slavery abolition became mainstream. in the 30's we never would have had the radicals who wanted to make homosexuality legal. or the people who wanted to give women a right to choose. etc. just like today, you may call gravel and kucinich radical, or not serious, because they support gay marriage, and drug legalization. but in forty years these are going to be mainstream beliefs, and this will be due to the fact that because we live in a democracy, "wackos" like gravel and kucinich are allowed in the debates, and positively influence them thus.

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We *heart* hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics

We heart hot mics