First thoughts

Independent, Texas — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:26:12 GMT

"Bush and Cheney will join them in 17 months"

I pray this is true but I'm starting to have my doubts.

After hearing the newest insanity, that Bush is to declare that a sovereign country's military is a terrorist organization. Iran's Revolutionary Guard, including the elite Quds force, will soon become a "specially designated global terrorist", my only conclusion is that this administration is hell bent on starting WW3.

Notice that they still are not targeting those responsible for 9/11.

The whole lot of this infestation in the WH needs to be removed NOW!!

Please go to www.impeachbush.org and sign up. PLEASE plan to join us in the protest scheduled for 9/15.

PLEASE help get our country out of the hands of these madmen!

First thoughts

jerry/corpus christi texas — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:28:51 GMT

The same thing that brought down the Republican party will eventually destroy the democrat party as well. Come November 08, when the American people reject the wild extreme left wing side of liberalism, Howard Dean and the moron that runs Daily KOS and the others will sail off into that good night as well. Kind of like the mafia, gotta take out the leaders and bring in fresh blood every few years.

First thoughts

RAH — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:47:55 GMT

If the MSM didn't continually misrepresents his statements, Obama could get his message out better. But it looks like MSM wants to make Hilary Clinton the nominee. It certainly makes it harder for Obama to catch a break, but I'm sure if enough people find alternative ways to hear his message, then MSN won't have as much affect.

First thoughts

juan,ft lauderdale,fl — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:48:05 GMT

GOP-Going, going...gone! It Iraq stupid!

First thoughts

Yiannis, Baltimore, MD — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:48:32 GMT

From the Washington Post:

"The United States has decided to designate Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps, the country's 125,000-strong elite military branch, as a "specially designated global terrorist...The Revolutionary Guard would be the first national military branch included on the list, U.S. officials said"

First thoughts

jt. okc — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:49:31 GMT

The media can help a lot to increase name identification. THe biggest problem Huckabee has now is the fact that no one has heard of him. Most respond by saying, huckabee, who??
He's persuing a smart technique which could pay off. Just watch and see.

First thoughts

Democrat — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:53:32 GMT

One the main reasons I was uncomfortable with voting for Hillary Clinton was because of the Monica Lewinsky situation. I'm so damn tired of it all. Yet I wonder if the Republican Party will ever be able to put that behind them and allow Hillary to run on her own. I don't necessarily want her spending most of her campaign defending herself against the Rove's and DeLay's of the world because of her husband, as tough and as capable she is. Rove, Gingrich and DeLay have very little credibility as it is. As was mentioned on Keith Olbermann's program last night, it does take a machine to reach the White House. And quite honestly, because of the Bush Administration's dismal record, it won't be hard to fight back if Rove does join in the fight. I surely hope we don't have to go down that road, but I believe if we do, Hillary to her credit will be the one left standing.

I don't know if Mitt Romney will make President Clinton's behavior an issue; I don't think Giuliani should because of his own past.

First thoughts

lylepink,Huntington,WV — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:59:36 GMT

Obama has been a creation of the media to a large degree, and only recently have been covering him in the manner all pols should be.

First thoughts

Robert Catalano, Salem, OR — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:01:50 GMT

Huckabee is just George Bush without Karl Rove; another poltician who says he listens to a mythical entity whenever it suits his purpose to do so.

First thoughts

Mark Monroe, New Orleans, La. — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:02:31 GMT

Only 524 days until a Democratic takes office as President. I hope we can survive until then.

First thoughts

Monica Lewinsky — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:03:41 GMT

I'm Bill's only legacy. The only "big thing" he took on.

First thoughts

JIrby, Colorado — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:04:03 GMT

Jennifer Rubin on Iraq being a problem still hanging over Repubs suceeding Bush. No, the Repubs don't get to start with a clean slate except for Iraq when the Bush freak show takes it on the road. The Republican party has been tainted with a rotten stench that isn't going away because they change the faces on the board of directors. Okay folks, Bush and Darth Vader are gone. Everything is going to be just la-de-da from now on. No, the Repub party is complicit in aiding and abetting the entrenched special interests and in aiding the wealthy to become wealthier. How about Halliburton? Shouldn't the Repub party be policing their own a-holes and criminals? Why is that BS left up to the Dems to clean up? We left them a fairly clean house, and by god they don't get a pass on what they are leaving us to clean up. Hell no! And the nerve of Romney tossing around the word "change". Romney knows almost as much about change as I know about performing heart surgery over the phone. Every bleeping step of progress since the beginning of written history has been made over the dead bodies of bleeping conservatives. Knuckle dragging Repubs need to make more progress in the trick of walking upright before they start worrying about esoteric concepts like change. I've got your change right here, momma. Change my ass.

First thoughts

Lyn, MD — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:15:03 GMT

I want to state upfront this is not an attack on Edwards, because generally speaking I like him and would vote for him if he is the one selected.

Having said that, maybe one of you smart guys (Chuck, Mark, Domenico)has the answer to this question, or really anyone else. When Edwards first ran for President he had only been in the Senate what 4-5 years with no previous executive or legislative experience? I can't remember all of the talk of his lack of experience. Yes it was brought up time to time-more because he looked young- but not everytime he blinked an eye(or did I miss something). Secondly, that remains the only national or legislative experience he has ( I don't remember him being a standout in the Senate..was he). If that is correct where is the question about his experience to be President( running for the office before is like saying I was First Lady).

There appears to be a double standard going on here. Is it because Obama is ahead of Edwards? WHAT are his (Edwards)bona fides. Obama actually has more legislative experience.

First thoughts

voice from the past — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:21:15 GMT

My reply, if you want to go back and look it up, was that this is what they said of themselves, that they reserve these rights to break a promise, to change their ways, to be dishonest, and so forth, if it furthered the cause of socialism.

First thoughts

jerry/corpus christi texas — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:30:06 GMT

If we are going to discuss Bush and Halliburton, then of course we must discuss Hillary and the drug makers that are in bed with her, as well as the other lobbyist's that are helping her buy the White House.

First thoughts

sonya, atlanta, ga — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:30:35 GMT

The republican manchine is far more organized and wide reaching than HRC political machine. If there are any skeltons in Bill and Hill's closet they will be squashed by the RNC. Hillary is unelectable.

First thoughts

Mitchell Feldman — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:31:29 GMT

People who support Clinton are against Bush and are most familiar with her (because of her husband's legacy) as the anti-Bush candidate. People who support the others (Obama, Edwards, Richardson, Biden, Dodd, Kucinich) do not want Hillary. Her coronation is less assured when the polls are viewed in that way and I wish the talking heads would stop trying to make her nomination a foregone conclusion. Many Democrats do not want the liability of a Clinton candidacy. Many Democrats really do feel that she was disingenuous in authorizing the president to use force in Iraq in 2002 (and by opposing the Levin amendment which would have provided for Congressional oversite).
Many Democrats want a candidate that will end the Rovian polarization that has plagued this country for almost seven years now and feel that Hillary's polarizing nature (unfortunately for her) disqualifies her for this role.
Obama, with his history of being a concensus builder, is the candidate who can lead us with honesty and with newness of ideas. He can serve as the true agent of change and help this nation find its way after this long nightmare of corruption, incompetence and disrespect for the Constitution of the United States of America.
Obama 'O8

First thoughts

mad in Madtown — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:34:12 GMT

JIrby, Well said!

First thoughts

jerry/corpus christi texas — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:38:14 GMT

If it comes down to a Rudy V Hillary, there is just no way Hillary will win. Her past is just too much to overcome. Rudy will be dragged thru the mud on his marriages and dress wearing and all that, but Hillary as wayyyyyy more skeletons in her closet then Rudy will ever have.

First thoughts

scott — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:49:06 GMT

I just love hillary's arguement that she has far superior foreign policy experience as compared to Obama. apparently his living abroad during his childhood gives him no insights.

Also, if she is going to use her first lady position as experience in foreign policy, then i must laugh. So she is good at making conversation with strangers? (that's essentially what the spouses of world leaders do with the other spouses) Hell, if we are using that logic, my for job I have to talk to strangers all time, I'd be the best damn foreign policy expert ever because I make good first impresssions! God, Hillary is so irrelevant

First thoughts

Sierra, San Francisco — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:50:41 GMT

It's about time, Obama.
This is a MAJOR ISSUE:
Obama can unite this country, Hillary CAN'T.

Hillary's got too much baggage.
As reported here, recently Congressional Democrats say her high negatives will have a major drag on the Democratic Congressional campaign.

You govern the way you campaign, and Hillary has been dishonest, mean spirited and vindictive in her campaign.

Another recent article here compared Hillary's campaign to George Bush's. There are too many similarities.

On top of that, Fortune magazine calls her 'Business'Favorite Candidate' !!!
Why is she BUSINESS' FAVORITE ??
What is she promising in exchange for her campaign contributions ?

Democrat: It wasn't just Monica (and Bill's cigar tricks in the Oval Office).
There was also Gennifer Flowers and Paula Jones.
Kathleen Willey and Juanita Brodderick charged Bill Clinton with sexual assault (but the statute of limitations had run out).

Bill Clinton agreed to be disbarmed in Arkansas in exchange for dropping Federal charges in connection with the Whitewater scandal.

These are REAL scandals. Has Bill 'matured' since ? Has Bill 'reformed' ? Has he even admitted any guilt ? Who needs the distractions ?
Who needs this dysfunctional family to lead America?

Democrat: can you think of any pieces of legislation Hillary has been responsible for in the Senate ? What has she accomplished during her tenure as a Senator ? (other than gaining 'experience' ?).

The most important vote of Hillary's career was to VOTE FOR THE IRAQ WAR !!

Some record, huh ?
Her most important vote lead to an American catastrophe !
Her most important vote helped Geroge Bush to convince the American people that the Iraq war was needed.
Hillary displayed some real leadership, huh ???

Obama can unite this country, Hillary will divide it

First thoughts

Betsy Jackson, Tupalo, Mississippi — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:55:44 GMT

The next President of the "United" States of America, Hillary Clinton. hillaryclinton.com

First thoughts

Zack Adams, Boston,Ma. — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:58:21 GMT

Alberto Gonzales to resign ?

First thoughts

DEMs Fighting Back Against Demonic Wingnuts — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:08:04 GMT

Jerry, once again you have your facts wrong. Election Day in 2008 is NOV 4 (the first Tuesday after the first Monday of NOV). NOV 8, 2008 is on a Saturday.

Sierra, I love your passion about Obama and I agree with you.

First thoughts

Democrat — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:12:14 GMT

Sierra, I am completely turned off by the Republican Party and I want a Democrat in the White House.
I'm voting for Senator Obama in the primaries. But if Hillary Clinton is the nominee, I will vote for her in November. But I guess I don't need to worry about the Republican Party going after her; Obama's supporters will do it for Karl Rove.

They are both excellent candidates. We should all stick together & support each other if we want a Democrat to win in 2008.

How do you feel about that?

jerry, I agree with you; both Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton are going to get creamed if they're the nominees. Maybe somewhere someone from each of their campaigns will come together and decide to try and take the high road on this one. Just stick to the issues at hand.

I'm not holding my breath.

First thoughts

Jerry/Corpus Christi texas — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:27:00 GMT

I see DEMS hasn't had his coffee yet. I think Hillary's foreign policy experience is shaking hands with people after her husband was introduced first.

First thoughts

Linda Tripp — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:27:17 GMT

Monica, Monica, Monica -- keep your mouth shut and you will stay out of trouble. Also don't confide your intimate affairs with 'friends'

First thoughts

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:27:37 GMT

I do think this is a key question. It goes to the motivations of many of those supporting Clinton and Obama.

Many people supporting Clinton want her because she's the big stick for the final poke in the Republican gut. I've posted that several times, and I haven't had too many if any Clinton supporters take issue with it.

Many people supporting Obama want to put the trench war in the past and start looking for ways to unify and move forward - perhaps only a little - no one is saying partisan differences won't remain.

So its a question of what the party wants. Is it still looking to fight the "evil" Republicans or is it looking to move past this trench war?

First thoughts

Susan, Miami — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:28:43 GMT

All the dems have to do is continue to show Guliani wearing dresses and makeup, over and over and his goose is cooked. 3 marriages is bad enough and his children hate him, but dressing in drag again and again is VERY odd to say the least. Also getting an interview with the exwife that he cheated on and made a fool out of might be interesting. I have a feeling their is sooo much more dirt about this guy that hasn't surfaced yet, that will ultimately destroy him.

First thoughts

Democrat too — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:30:20 GMT

I sure hope all of the Democratic field for President begins to take a look at the big picture. Maybe HRC could win, but what are we going to endure to get her there and what kinds of attacks will linger during her tenure? Senator Obama is my choice; former Senator Edwards second. Many posts here have stated the desire to set a new course of politics and hope. The audacity of our hope is to get some new blood in DC and the WH. I cannot fathom the fatigue I will feel after 4 years of Bush I, 8 years of Clinton I, 8 years of Bush II, and maybe 8 years of Clinton II. We deserve better, and she is not it. Go Obama.

First thoughts

KARL ROVE, WASHINGTIN,D.C. — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:35:48 GMT

TODAY I DECLAIR MY CANDIDACY FOR PRESIDENT !

First thoughts

Felice, Littleton CO — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:39:47 GMT

Well, the supposedly liberal media is following recent precedent by becoming press secretaries to the right and hyping Hillary's White House experience (as what, First Lady? Big deal) her being so presidential, so charming, so inevitable, thereby helping the right get the candidate they most want to run against.

HRC takes away any need for Rs to give up the middle and choose a hard right social conservative. With HRC, they can count on an energized right wing coming out to vote against her regardless.

Just as when the supposedly left wing media treated the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth as if they deserved an iota of credibility, made fun of Kerry's wind-surfing (looks like a pretty cool sport to me) and encouraged the entirely inaccurate image of him as a phony hunter, the right can always count on their support. Who needs FOX when you have the main stream media? Here we go again.

First thoughts

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:44:27 GMT

Lyn - I didn't read First Read back then (was it even around?) but I can assure you, in Iowa there was a lot of talk of Edwards lack of experience in 2004.

Scott - How much insight can you get before you turn 10? If I'm not mistaken, he was very young when he lived overseas. Sure, you can develop some sort of appreciation for the people and culture but I don't think an 8-year-old is contemplating global affairs.

Sierra - Is Bill running for office? Hm..nope, don't think so. I guess that kinda makes all of that rehashed junk you are spewing out right and left kind of irrelevant, doesn't it?

First thoughts

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:49:34 GMT

Independent - I'm not sure that is all that much different than the whole "enemy combatant" designation for Taliban troops that were captured in Afghanistan. Whether we like it or not, the Taliban was the governing body in Afghanistan at the time we attacked. It only follows that the military arm of the Taliban, their armed forces if you will, was necessarily the army of Afghanistan at that point in time. They were the troops of the governing body of that nation defending their territory against an outside invasion.

But this takes it one step further, you are right. The Taliban was recognized by some governments but not by others as being the legitimate ruler in Afghanistan. I don't think there is any doubt that the government in Iran is the official and legitimate government. It's all part of Bush's slippery slope. Pretty soon any country we disagree with will be classified as terrorist and then we can just bomb the hell out of everyone we don't like in the name of the War on Terror.

First thoughts

Darrius, Arkansas — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:54:53 GMT

JIrby, I have to disagree with you on only one small point.....Mitt Romney does know all about change; he changes his political positions almost everyday. lol

First thoughts

Joseph T. Jaffe Sr., Little Rock, Ak. — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:56:57 GMT

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, "IMPEACH" BUSH NOW !

First thoughts

Lisa - Fort Worth TX — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:57:52 GMT

Well said, Mitchell!

First thoughts

MK,MO — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:58:07 GMT

you can stick your heads in the sand if you want but the fact is hillary is already a part of the problem in washington, there is no way to defend her being in bed with some of the most disgusting lobbyists in washington and her rovian tactics of never answering a direct question on any important issue, I still don't think obama can win the general election but if he's nominated I will vote for him, I can't vote for hillary, it would be in everyone’s best interest to vote for the safest dem candidate which is edwards, and always has been, the dems have to have a candidate that can beat the repubs in the general election, we can not afford four years of rudy or mitt

First thoughts

jus sayin — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:06:19 GMT

bush/cheney/rove /jerri have gauranteed a dem will be president and dems will control both houses of congress for next 20-30 years, thanks guys.

First thoughts

Class Warrior, D.C. — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:14:56 GMT

IF Cheney/Bush allow an election, I can see Clinton getting smeared and wiftboated right out of the race---too many weak points for the attack dogs of the GOP to hit, which makes her unelectable. And if a Republican gets in, he will solve that little Iraq problem by starting up the draft again, and then the American people will see just what brand of garbage they just bought for themselves.
And Jerry; I know saying "democratIC'makes Dems sound like they're more for a democracy than Repugs---which they clearly are, given the current transhing the Constitution has gotten at GOP hands, but, so sorry, the word still is DemocratIC (as in stands for democracy, unlike its opposition) Party. Get it right.

First thoughts

rick,ky — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:15:14 GMT

Make No mistake about it Mark Murray, Obama is very comfortable in drawing a distinct line between him & hillary. Only the so-called pundits, need there heads removed from hillary's ASS(maybe a colonoscopy is in order). The rest of America is very aware of MSM desire for hillary to be annoited."DELUSIONAL THINKING BY COMMON SENSE AMERICAN'S IS OVER"

First thoughts

Dee Anna Roberts — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:21:02 GMT

This Bears Repeating:

POLARIZATION

This is the reason why Hillary Clinton has the highest unfavorables.

Democrats, whether we want to admit it or not, we will require the support of Moderates and Independents who are not very fond of this polarizing bickering back and forth, to win in 2008. Hillary Clinton is demonstrating , yet again, that she is just as , if not more divisive than George Bush. She ran an ad that would have been great......in 2004. She has yet to join us in the PRESENT DAY and she is showing us all that she is a Polarizing and Divisive politician . What is SHE talking about when SHE says "CHANGE"? Change from what? Change from one Polarizing and Divisive President to another Polarizing and Divisive President? That's what she's showing me. Barack Obama has noticed this as well as he so eloquently pointed out that he is the candidate that can unite the nation.

Sure, this is fun for us Democrats. I love to see Bush attacked. I get a kick out of it too. But, this just in....we are not running against George Bush, we are running to move America forward. All of America. Senator Clinton needs to leave the polarizing partisan warfare to the real professionals....the Progressive Blogosphere and not try to openly divide the nation before the Primaries are even held. It's not about just winning over Democrats in a Presidential Election. It's about governing a nation in the General. In case Hillary has not noticed, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party voters are dropping like flies and re-registering as Independents. Why the hell do you think that is? In any event, I believe we are obligated to reject this partisan bickering and join Barack Obama in the real Politics of CHANGE. I believe we can achieve this WITHOUT dividing the nation in the process. Don't you ?

First thoughts

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:35:22 GMT

Paul - I'll take issue with it. Revenge has nothing to do with my support of Hillary. Would it be a nice side dish? Absolutely. But I wouldn't spend my vote on someone merely to stick it to Republicans. I think that sort of thing is childish.

First thoughts

Ollie frenchburg ky — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:37:13 GMT

Susan...Kick it in high gear girl, I'm on your side. I feel the same way about the DRAG QUEEN! Rudy is the worst of the lot.

First thoughts

Nate — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:41:32 GMT

in response to democrat:

Mitt would hold Hillary's feet to the fire over health care, and other real issues. He doens't care about the Monica stuff.

First thoughts

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:53:07 GMT

In response to the Democrats who seem to be embracing Ronald Reagan's 11th commandment of 'speak no evil against thy fellow (in this case) Democrats, I have to paraphrase Mario Cuomo, when he praised Newt Gingich, and state that I am a patriot before I am a partisan (and I am a very partisan Democrat). And with that in mind, I can't say that I would support just any Democrat who wins the nomination for president. I support Obama because not only was he prescient on the issue of the war in Iraq and certainly demonstrates tne mettle to pursue a strong foreign policy but also because he is the embodiment of the attributes required to build the concensus necessary to successfully lead this country. What a contrast to the man now occupying the office.
And that's not to say that Hillary isn't intellegent; it's simply that she doesn't have the credentials needed to unify this sadly polarized nation. Why would we start from a position where the opposing political lines are already drawn? We really have to move forward and she is not the best engine to accomplish this goal. BTW, John McCain also possesses the qualities for leadership (or had possessed them before he was compelled to make himself a Bush clone in order to try to win the Republican nomination). And although I strongly disagree with McCain's position on Iraq, I have seen him demonstrate, time and time again, that he is able to lead in a bipartisan a manner.
Obama, on the other hand, has got it all, the right positions and the right temperment, and he has inspired me more than any presidential candidate since JFK. I will work strongly for him and expect him to win. However, if Hillary gets the nomination, I will be disappointed that we Americans have missed a great opportunity to effect a positive change in government and advance toward the goal of fulfilling the spiritual nature of the American dream. I may still vote for Mrs. Clinton if she gets the Democratic nomination, but only as the lesser of evils. And if she is running against McCain (both of whom have supported this catastrophic war), I will either consider my vote very carefully, or maybe, not vote at all (which, contrary to conventional wisdom, is a vote for none of the above) .

First thoughts

John Doe, The Peanut Gallery — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:56:47 GMT

Wow, Jerry. Someone must have put some pep pills in the kool aide this morning. You're just so chipper!

Try coming back here when any GOP candidate can post a lead over a Dem candidate for at least two or more polls, when the generic ballots aren't so far to the Democratic Party's advantage that it is a joke, or when the GOP candidates start to close the HUGE money gap that they have with the Dem candidates. If they can do any of those things (but especially the money, good LORD you guys are getting pasted on the fund raising) you might have a chance. But I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.

First thoughts

Democrats — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:08:53 GMT

Mitchell, I think you answered my question. I have been wondering if Senator Obama's supporters were strictly Democrats. I don't believe they are after reading everyone's thoughts here. Someone here posted a poll earlier last week that showed Senator Obama coming in third with Republican voters, which at the time I found curious.

There is something strange going on with the Clinton and Obama supporters. And at the core is the "divisive" issue.

Great comments on this issue from everyone. Very interesting.

Senator Obama is my choice as well.

First thoughts

Pappy (happy) — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:16:12 GMT

My work on earth has not been in vain. Even Jerry makes sense this morning and Carrie hasn't screeched once. My compliments to all on a great thread.

First thoughts

Pappy (happy anyway) — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:23:35 GMT

oops! Carrie did screech once responding to the tres serious Sierra about Bill Clinton's not being on the ticket and "rehashed junk." But then nobody's perfect. At least she is trying. She sure is.

First thoughts

Sierra, San Francisco — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:40:03 GMT

Thanks, Dems fighting Back...

Democrat: It's NOT JUST ABOUT WINNING ELECTIONS !!
It's about governing. It is about building consensus.
If Hillary gets the nomination, will I support her ?
I don't know.
I promised mself I wouldn't vote for Clinton/Gore in '92, but I ended up voting for them.
I promised myself I wouldn't vote for Gore/Lieberman in 2000, but I did. And actually if Gore/Liebermann has won, we might be fighting in Iraq AND Iran right now !!
If Hillary gets the nomination, she'll end up governing a deeply split nation. She'll be as ineffectual as Jimmy Carter !! We'll be treatyed to the same ol BS and scandals from Clinton I.
She'll pander to Big Business and Washington insiders
Hillary will usher in the Republican renaissance !!

Is that preferable to Mitt Romney or Rudy Guiliani ?
I don't know.
What do you think ?

MK:
Well put, Hillary is Bush in drag.
You're either with us or against us

And thiank you Mitchell Feldman, that was well put, too

First thoughts

Sierra, San Francisco — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:43:55 GMT

Carrie: 'I guess that kinda makes all of that rehashed junk you are spewing out right and left kind of irrelevant, doesn't it?'
No, it doesn't, Carrie.
Hillary is running as the 'Clinton restoration'

She'll bring back that same old pathetic circus of scandal and lies. People don't change, Bill and Hillary sure don't.

The Republicans would be thrilled to have Hillary get the nomination !! Do you ever wonder why ?

First thoughts

Jeff Morgan, Austin, TX — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:09:25 GMT

What I'm disappointed in is Hillary's characterization of this as an attack.

Paul Miller, we need a re-posting of that email contribution solicitation calender.

Arianna Huffington wrote a nice piece on this last week:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/campaign-alchemy-candida_b_59540.html

" "When you're attacked, you expect your family and friends to stand with you. And one thing is crystal clear: you are Hillary's family; you are Hillary's friends... Now there is only one thing I'm going to ask you to do: CONTRIBUTE.... Every dollar helps Hillary fight back."

The message was clear: Hillary has been attacked (indeed, "attack" appears six times in Doyle's 440 word whimper) and the only way to salve her wounds is with a CONTRIBUTION "

First thoughts

D of Illinois — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:43:04 GMT

The most important issue in the coming election is whether the citizens of America can wrest their government free again from the grip of the self-appointed Bush/Clinton monarchy shareholders.

First thoughts

Pappy (I dreamed I was there in hillbilly heaven) — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:10:03 GMT

Before I pass back into invisibility, I want to express my admiration for those who have responded to the call. Today, on this thread a miracle occurred: People otherwise self-righteous and perhaps a tad shallow in the low spots have risen to the occasion, written full sentences, coherent paragraphs, turned on their spell-checker and moved beyond screeching and name calling for just one shining moment!
Ah...the joy of making a difference in just this one little piece of the world here on First Read. I now go in peace, my work having been done. Peace to all and if not peace, grace. Ciao.

First thoughts

nuanced — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:18:42 GMT

Come together, right now, over me -- Beatles

First thoughts

JeanneGA — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:23:23 GMT

MK welcome to politics.What politician doesn't deal with lobbyists?Find me one-bet you can't.I work for a drug company and am a staunch democrat.

First thoughts

Democrat — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:44:13 GMT

Sierra, you've just reinforced my concerns about Hillary Clinton. As we've read this week, your feelings are shared by many in the Democratic Party. I think Senator Obama has a better chance of winning in November than she does. The more he speaks, the more I like him.

As far as winning elections, generally speaking, I like the Democrat's positions better than the Conservatives on most issues, so I would be more apt to vote for whomever the democratic nominee is. I hope Hillary does not hurt any chance the Democrats have of getting back into the White House.

I would not be inclined to vote for Mitt Romney. He's so obviously scripted and while I don't particularly mind if a politican changes his or her view on something, Romney does take the flip flopping to a whole new level. And I do take issue with his sons not serving in the military, since they are pro-war.

Giuliani, he's cashing in on 9/11. That was such a tragic day and for him to run as the "tough on terror" candidate is disgraceful. As Bill Maher said last night, Terrorists 2, Giuliani 0. NYC has been attacked twice. Twice.

But the bottom line for me is anyone who is still echoing Bush & Cheney's reasons of why we should stay in Iraq has no credibility in my mind. That takes care of most of the Republican candidates.

Thanks for your insights, Sierra. It's going to be a hard fought, interesting campaign.

First thoughts

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:47:54 GMT

Jeff, I should have kept a copy of that one, lol. But you do bring up a good point. How long before the Clinton campaign sends out a fundraiser asking for money to battle Rove - the anti-Christ himself.

I'm guessing the battle against fashion reporters didn't bring in too much. But the Rove fundraiser... that could be gold.

First thoughts

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 20:21:03 GMT

Pappy - I'm sorry, did I miss the part where you were appointed First Read Judge and Jury? I have yet to see you contribute much of anything to the discussion other than to whine (yes, whine) about how pathetic the comments are here. And, oh yes, about how I screech.

Anyway, if it's all the same to you, I will go about my business and say EXACTLY what I want to say, EXACTLY the way I want to say it. If you don't like it, there's a little red box in the upper right corner of your screen that has an X in it. I suggest you use it.

First thoughts

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 20:24:46 GMT

Sierra - I don't recall having seen Hillary running on a "Clinton restoration" platform. I see her running on an anti-Bush platform, i.e. getting away from the problems caused (perhaps only allegedly caused in some cases) by Bush and his Administration. I suppose if you want to stretch the interpretation of that, you could say that necessarily means a return to something pre-Bush, and pre-Bush there was Bill...but I don't see her doing that, honestly. If I am wrong, please point me in the direction of speeches she has made or statements she has released in which she has done so.

First thoughts

Wed, 15 Aug 2007 20:32:09 GMT

DID SOMEONE SAY GONZO-GATE ?

First thoughts

leon — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 20:40:42 GMT

Jerry, get ready Dean is coming your way and I don't mean Howard. I hope perry helps you out more than us.

First thoughts

Pappy (it wasn't God who made honkey-tonk angels) — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 20:55:46 GMT

Carrie,
...and I had such high hopes for you.
My ears are still ringing from that last blast.
As well as being a perfect pitch screech (kudos there), it was perhaps a smidgen defensive.
Nonetheless, in spite of the shrill projectile purgation, I detect a kind heart in there somewhere.
Talk to someone who understands.
Where is that X again? Mine isn't red.

First thoughts

Mitchell Feldman — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 21:23:10 GMT

It's now apparent that Karl 'the cynical and self-annointed master puppeteer' Rove, thinks that he can manipulate the Democrats into supporting Hillary as the agent of change, (ha ha imagine Hillary, the supporter of the war in Iraq, the lobbyists' dream, Fortune Magazine's favorite, as the agent of change) by attacking her. We all know that Hillary is the candidate that the Republicans would most like to run against (every Republican commentator has already given the nomination to her -just watched J.C. Watts make that pronouncement on CNN).
Sorry Karl, as much as we disdain your methods and your trashing of the government for political purposes, we're not going to allow you or your fellow Republicans affect the selection of our candidate as a reflection of, or reaction to your attacks on them (wow, that's a bit convoluted, isn't it?). Karl, it's no longer all about you (not that it really has been for quite a while - vis a vis Congressional elections 2006). Face it, you've been marginalized, as has been your boss. We Democratics will pick our candidate based on the merits that we recognize as those needed to elect the best leader for this country. We're not interested in choosing someone who the Republicans will hand pick for us, either directly or through subliminal means.
We will pick the candidate best able to undo the damage for which you and your boss (was that Bush or Cheney?, I forget) are responsible. We need someone with a new vision that will appeal across the party divide. We need someone to lead this country honestly and with the best interests of the nation in mind, not the interests of the plutocrats whom you and your former boss (whoever he was) represent. Obama is the man. I'm done for the day, guys, sorry for taking your time.
Obama '08

First thoughts

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 21:23:33 GMT

Pappy - I didn't say the X was red, I said there is a little red box with an X in it. My X happens to be white. Perhaps your X is a different color? Or perhaps you are color blind as well as rude?

I don't know who you are, and I don't know why you have decided to focus on me, but by all means, knock yourself out. I'm certainly not intimidated by the likes of you.

First thoughts

Pappy (I was there when it happened and I guess I oughta know) — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 21:48:23 GMT

Thanks for the tip Carrie. Red box. White X.
Sorry though, this is as far is goes. I can't follow you into the gutter.
Regardless, I do send heartfelt best wishes for a full recovery.
Calm down, everything is going to be fine.

First thoughts

Richard, Washington State — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 23:25:05 GMT

It's funny how so many of you folks abandon and deride Hillary Clinton and then say SHE's divisive. At one time she was your messiah (don't know how to feminize "messiah", maybe ms.siah?) and now she's a pariah.

You have no idea how many Republican hearts that warms. It's a lovely development and I will work hard to encourage the trend.

Carrie, I support you. Don't forget to chill the dish before it's served. Sierra, you're the bomb, or maybe the Obomba. Mitchell, you're the man! I support all of you and your candidates, whoever they are. I encourage you to vote for all of them at one time or another and at least two of them on November 4, 2008.

It's also simply inspiring to observe Democrats soberly, somberly, objectively and rationally contemplate the metastasizing Republican evil that threatens to engulf them in their cities, towns and neighborhoods, yea verily in the entire world!

Looks like I'll have fun, fun, fun 'til Dick and George take the election away.

First thoughts

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 02:23:21 GMT

Pappy, seems to me you are responsible for causing the very reactions you say you want other posters to avoid. You tried to bait Carrie into a response with posts that you know were a little demeaning toward her. And it degenerated into an argument about the color of the X?

Hmmm, I'm having second thoughts about getting between you two before I press submit, and I rarely even have first thoughts. Oh well, I typed it...

First thoughts

nuanced — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 02:41:28 GMT

Pappy, as contradictory as it may seem I have found that nothing infuriates people more than telling them to calm down. Try using "I hear what you are saying" or "that's an interesting point" or "please help me to understand"

One question Pappy -- after your work is done here where do you go next?

First thoughts

FairMark — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:01:09 GMT

I also agree with Huckabee's strategy. Where else should such a talented, media-savvy unknown present his case? Huck should talk to the writers and let the writers report to millions...free of charge.

First thoughts

Mark Thieme — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:44:31 GMT

This dust-up between "Pappy" and Carrie is the most intriguing conversation I have read here in months. This guy is crazy, but smart and funny too. He is rude and callous and he angers me with his arrogance.
Perhaps all that is a mask for something else. He started out gently nudging people here to stop kicking each other's shins and to actually say something worth reading. Worthy goal, it seems to me.
He identified several people who irritated him and nobody got upset but Carrie--the one who doesn't scream or screech.
Whatever she calls it, she made his point beautifully. I am afraid Carrie has been hoisted on her own petard. "Pappy" made his point and, as I have said here before, I hope he will go where he keeps threatening to go---away! Finally, though I almost always agree with her posts, I hope Carrie and others may have learned something here.

First thoughts

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:00:45 GMT

Mark - Sorry, it's not in my nature to allow someone to bait me and insult me, and to not respond to it. If that means, in your view, I scream and screech, so be it. I'm curious though - what is it that I have said that qualifies as screaming and screeching? Please, provide me with examples. Use evidence, rather than vague accusations. Point to a post that I have made (or actually, multiple posts, because this is apparently the norm with my writing) in which I am ranting and raving like a lunatic. You do that, and I will happily concede that I scream and screech.

First thoughts

Mel(back in Illinois) — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:50:55 GMT

Did KenO(addedstuffafterhisname) turn into Pappy(addsmorestuff) while I was away camping for the past week and a half?

First thoughts

H P Boston — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:22:25 GMT

Well Paul glad you chimed in on the sappy pappy posts. Carrie can certainly take care of herself.
She is being baited by the collusion of nuanced, Mark Thieme and one or two other that are here in group therapy. They all know who they are. I read Nuanced say where are you Pappy? I heard Mark T converse with his buddy. Be careful Carrie they are here to make you go away because you are the best poster on this thread.
I reiterate, thanks Paul Miller for being there, I am not being sarcastic but grateful. You too are one of the better people on these threads. I typed too so hear goes. Rove may have a new job in MEDIA?????

First thoughts

H P Boston — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:45:56 GMT

Ya Mel me thinks something stinks too.
I caught the KENN to Pappy metamorphosis.
I am perplexed at the attacks on Carrie.
KENN was making sense even though I found him drunk or delirious most of the time but those tag lines gave Pappy away. He could be Mark-ing Time.

First thoughts

George C. Filchak Edgewood,NM — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 18:31:41 GMT

Everyone talks about George Bush leading us into world war three without realizing that we have already been there for many years.The conflict will only continue to widen regardless of which party takes the white house in 2009.

First thoughts

Pappy (head buzzd) — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 21:23:53 GMT

Speaking of strange, I talked with Mark Thieme off-line this morning. Thieme knew who I was and had his secretary call me at home. Spooky.
And, I don't think he'd mind me telling that he lives in a suburb of DC (he called me first) and has a secretary answer his phone. He was not, shall we say, especially flattering to me in our brief conversation.
Of course, "Mark Thieme" is the cover for someone quite surprising. Did I say too much Marko? He seems to know a lot about a lot of things. I'll leave it at that. With "friends" like him...
As I said to Carrie, I am in over my head here and I apologize to anyone who took me too seriously. Especially, my new pal "Mark."
It seems everyone will be happy to hear I'm history on First Read. Ciao.

First thoughts

Mark Thieme — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 21:55:59 GMT

Don't know who "Pappy" is or what his game may be, but I have never spoken to him and don't plan to do so. The post of 5:23 is pure fabrication.

Not happy so many here have used my name so loosely.

First Read is getting weirder by the day, but don't take it from me.

First thoughts

Hillary Clinton, NY — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 22:03:08 GMT

I.m Black enough!!!

First thoughts

Observer — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 02:39:33 GMT

Q: Why do you think the Republicans want Hillary to win the nomination? A: Because they can beat her in the general election. I am a Democrat, and given the choice between Hillary and who ever she is facing I will either vote for an independent or a Republican instead of her. Republican's know this and are setting the table for the Democrats, in a few short months it will be all over and then we can look forward to 9 months of the same old partisan mudslinging...