First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

jerry/corpus christi texas — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 13:43:13 GMT

If Bill Clinton is directing the money funneling in the democratic party, I expect a softball approach. otherwise, several candidates bank accounts might dry up under the pressure of the Clinton's.

If Edwards and Obama are going to be takes seriously from here on in, they had better go after Hillary tonight. Norman Hsu, the Italian connection, Bill Clinton killing free speech in the media, they have plenty to choose from.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Sam Adams, Warren Ohio — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 13:44:00 GMT

Setting themselves to be MoveOn-ed? Setting up? Guys, the Democratic candidates for President are fully bought and paid for subsidiaries of MoveOn.

And, Hillary laughing when she gets tough question is nothing new. Same with the constant head shake. She'll giggle her way through the Democratic primaries, but wait for general election, Hillary will be rolling on the floor yucking it up when the real questions are finally asked to her. It's obviously a nervous reaction, but Hillary is so scripted, she gets nervous when a question comes up she is not prepared for, then we get the giggle.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Class warrior, D.C. — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 13:48:01 GMT

Let's see whether or not the Dem candidates put their votes where their cacmpaign mouths are on the war-funding thing, since the SECDEF wants to beg the taxpayers more another shot of money to flush down the toilet. Let's see if they really mean no votes on funding without a timetable, or whether they'll wimp out as they've done since they were elected/re-elected in '06. And who cares who says they don't support the troops---this from a party that ran Walter reed into the ground!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Lyn, MD — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 13:51:00 GMT

Why do you keep saying she has widen her lead when 55% of the people were undecided? I know you guys can read !!!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Grace, NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 13:55:16 GMT

For the past six years, the road to Bill Clinton has often run through Douglas Band, a 34-year-old former White House intern who has helped manage Mr. Clinton's time, accompanied him around the world and even fielded some of his calls.

Bill and another intern... I guess they couldn't strong arm WSJ. Based on GQ and the new strong arming of NY resturant...I guess this is what a Hillary administration would look like. How is this different from Bush Administration? Bush-Lite

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Steve, San Diego — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:05:43 GMT

Jerry- In all honesty, if HRC was not the nominee and Senator Barack was the nominee, what would your thoughts be? We know you do not like the Clinton's, and you tease/chide Edwards. Just the other day you said your GOP field was not spectacular. Would the neo-con attack dogs come after Senator Barack?

OBTW Lyn, MD very good point!!!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:09:34 GMT

http://www.fec.gov/index.shtml The Federal Elections Commission is where the candidates file the financial information for their campaigns.

http://www.opensecrets.org/ Opensecrets.org is "Your guide to money in U.S elections."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ Is THE source for political junkies, with links to every major political site on the right, left and center.

http://www.pollster.com/

http://romneyfacts.com/ Mitt, then and now!

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/ is the one of the most accurate polling companies in the business, with daily tracking polls.

http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/sen/lib.htm?o1=lib_composite&o2=asc#vr Has the voting records for all members of congress, and their Liberal/Conservative ratings.

http://votesmart.org/index.htm Here's what they say at the site;
Thousands of candidates and elected officials. Who works for you? Who is seeking your vote? Project Vote Smart, a citizen's organization, has developed a Voter's Self-Defense System to provide you with the necessary tools to self-govern effectively: abundant, accurate, unbiased and relevant information. As a national library of factual information, Project Vote Smart covers your candidates and elected officials in five basic categories: biographical information, issue positions, voting records, campaign finances and interest group ratings. What would you like to know?

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Bunny, Winston-Salem, NC — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:10:56 GMT

Speaking of patterns---On FOX, Hillary cackled like a plucked chicken (or deranged witch)---that was at 9:00 AM Sunday. By 11:00 AM, not even a titter. Hmmmmm, handling? I suspect so. Even her own people recognize the Clinton version of the Howard Dean scream.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Robert, Concord, NH — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:11:29 GMT

Yes, when we hear Clinton laugh during a "tough question" it is a sign of nervousness and it alsp reflects she does not know the answer and depends on a "script" If this is any indication she is more of a "celebrity" than a credible presidential hopeful it would make sense she is popular amonsgt mostly women. It also indicates her competition is not fierce, and though she could come out ahead in the primary, she will not win the genral election because she is weak and insecure. It is just that simple

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Pat, Boston, MA — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:13:12 GMT

Willie Geist,
I love listening to you, Joe & Mika "talk sports" with your guests on Morning Joe. I love the informality and easiness you guys bring to morning tv.

You should be proud of your New York Yankees. What an absolutely stunning, stunning season they had for their fans. And they ain't done yet.

Go Cubs.

Sincerely,
Red Sox Fan

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Edgar Brown, Harvey, IL — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:16:29 GMT

//Let's see whether or not the Dem candidates put their votes where their cacmpaign mouths are on the war-funding thing,//

Why should anything change from the previous votes? Prepare to be disappointed again. You people voted them in. You happy with what you got?

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Susan,Miami — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:17:38 GMT

Oh all you frightened scaredy cats are soooo funny. You make up stories about the Clintons, embellish them and quake and quiver when Hillarys name is mentioned. She has shown intelligence and grace as well as the upmost professionalism and class. Hope she gets the nomination, but any other democrat would fit the bill. They all share almost the very same ideas and values that democrats have had over the years. We need a democrat in office real bad. Hillary Clinton would be just fine. So would Obama or Edwards for that matter.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:18:01 GMT

Looks like the failure to advance in the polls will cost Obama in the only place he had an edge, in the funds race;

"Slow down in fundraising hits Clinton, Obama

BY GLENN THRUSH | glenn.thrush@newsday.com
9:09 PM EDT, September 25, 2007

WASHINGTON - The torrid fundraising pace set by Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton is cooling faster than the housing market, with both camps claiming to raise millions less over the last three months than in previous quarters.

Obama is expected to pull in between $18 million and $19 million during the July-September reporting period, according to spokeswoman Jen Psaki -- $14 million to $15 million less than his $33 million second-quarter haul. Another Obama supporter, speaking on condition of anonymity, predicted that number could be somewhat higher, "in the low 20s."

Clinton will take in between $17 million and $19 million over the last three months, according to a person familiar with her fundraising."

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/ny-uscamp0926,0,7000913.story

"Clinton May Erase Obama's Fund-Raising Edge in Third Quarter

By Jonathan Salant and Kristin Jensen
More Photos/Details

Sept. 26 (Bloomberg) -- Hillary Clinton may blunt one of rival Barack Obama's few advantages in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination: money.

As the campaigns press donors with predictions that their candidate is losing the fund-raising race, both Clinton and Obama are set to report about $20 million in donations during the third quarter, which ends Sept. 30, according to campaign officials and fund-raisers.

A failure to out-raise Clinton would deprive Obama of the momentum he needs to overcome his rival's significant leads in national and key state polls. Obama raised $33 million to her $27 million in the second quarter and ended up with more cash on hand for the primary elections. His campaign had aimed to be able to outspend her significantly in the last part of 2007 and early next year.

``The Clinton juggernaut is moving if she out-raises him this quarter,'' said Peter Fenn, a Democratic consultant who isn't affiliated with any candidate this year. ``It makes the argument for her winnability an easier one.''

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aIF6FJQi_dvU

It isn't inevitable, but it's more likely every day.

Look for Obama's toughest performance tonight. His camp knows that they have to make something happen.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Sue Kline — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:18:53 GMT

So Chuck Todd doesn't like Hillary's chuckle? Why then does he always have this peculiar smirk on his face? OK for men to smirk, chuckle, laugh, but not women? Would we rather she hook her thumbs in her jean's belt, rock back and say "Now boys, let's get the job done!" So OK then, let's mention that to her.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Ki houston — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:23:01 GMT

well i see my post yesterday was censored so i will post it again and again until you hillary bought censors post it . It gos as. How scary is it that clinton can show up on all five sunday talk shows from a outside location where she can have anything and any one at her disposal whith little to no follow up questions on issues of scandel and get away with giggeling as a sufficiant answer for them all. On top off that they turn around and kill a story about a one of her staff going to Obama because of how bad they treat staff at the clinton camp.Then the msm pundits admit that the msm is in her pocket and they pass it off as just a good campain . What has happen to this country ,what has happen to free speach but most off all what has happen to our media . How can anyone contest that this is propaganda at its rawest form .People please wake up this is the same way they got us in to the war in Iraq. Did any of you hear anything about Obamas speach before the war in the msm. If you really love this country you must protest.I dont care who you like for presedent this is not how our country is suppose to be .Propaganda is not how our founders intended for our elections to be decided our any other issue in this country . And you people expect educated people to believe the polls the MSM spit out whenever clinton run in to a problem like killing a news story. Please people wake up and take your country back for god sake.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

jerry/corpus christi texas — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:23:32 GMT

Hmmmmm I'm shocked Bill Clinton had male interns....

One to tote his books....

One to take care of his needs.....

He sounds more french then hillbilly

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Scott H — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:24:42 GMT

The war will be continued for the NEXT president to control and END c.2009. Everybody is starting to concede this, including HRC. Who is willing to cut off funding for prtection and supplies now??

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

matthew — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:31:51 GMT

Tonight could be Hillary's coronation if Edwards and Obama don't make move. Have you seen her latest NH poll lead? Iowa doesn't even matter at this point.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:32:41 GMT

vanreuter, NY NY--
Hi Van. I'd like to introduce you to
bubba (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 9:58 AM).
As you can read from his post bubba has many misconceptions about the Clinton's in general and Hillary in particular. He seems to hold many urban legends to be truth. I disagree with him on just about everything he believes about the Clinton's. But the fact is, neither you or I are going to convince him otherwise. There are a lot of bubba's out there. The most positive thing about the bubba's is that they are not Bush fans and that given the proper alternative they would vote for a Democrat that they feel is offering the best course of change for this country. This country needs a President with a landslide victory and a mandate to move forward. We can't handle another photo finish election with a congress that is paralysed. We need the bubba's for this. We need a candidate with broad appeal and low negatives.
Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 10:37 AM)

I replied

We need the bubba's for this. We need a candidate with broad appeal and low negatives.

Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 10:37 AM)

Look Gary, you are obviously an anyone but Clinton guy, and spouting a couple of urban myths yourself.

Here are the current fav/unfav #'s for the candidates

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/favorables/election_2008_democratic_candidates_running_in_2008_presidential_election

Please note that Clinton's favorables are comparable to Obama and Edwards. Their negatives are lower, but so is their recognition.
Winning by a landslide would be nice, but NO candidate guarantees a landslide in the general election.

Clinton is much more popular in the democratic party than her two top challengers;

"Among Democratic contenders, this week’s polling brought few changes. Hillary Clinton is viewed favorably by 81% of Democrats and unfavorably by 17%. Seventy percent (70%) of Democrats have a favorable opinion of John Edwards while 21% say the opposite. Barack Obama’s numbers are 62% favorable, 30% unfavorable. Democrats see little ideological difference between their leading candidates, but Clinton is viewed as the most electable Democrat. Clinton remains solidly in front of the pack among those seeking the Democratic Presidential nomination."

Winning the general election is all that is necessary to win and the last guy claimed a mandate when he didn't have one. Logically speaking for a democratic candidate, it would be important for that candidate to get most of the DEMOCRATS to vote for them. You can disagree with the numbers, but they favor Clinton in a big way. It's hard to make a case for republicans and independents flocking to a candidate who is at 30% unfavorable within their own party. or to knock one who is seen favorably by over EIGHTY percent of the same.
Read David Brooks' article; Hillary will get the moderate vote in the general because she IS a moderate, centrist, democrat. It is illustrated here by the fact that the extreme left says that she's just like Bush (Which is ridiculous) while the extreme right says that she's a socialist.
The argument that her candidacy represents, "more of the same", when electing the first woman in our history is well, history making, is also bogus and repeated here ad infinitum.

There will NOT be a candidate with low negatives, democrat or republican. Look at the numbers and it's obvious that the candidates for both parties will be running someone who has an unfavorable rating in the mid forties. You are only pointing to the unfavorables because they are the only place where the other candidates have even a slight advantage.

You insist that we can't win without the center, yet strongly reject the candidate who represents that demographic, despite all of the evidence to that fact.
There have been a half-dozen articles over the past couple of days attesting to the fact that Clinton appeals to the heart and soul bedrock, "Beer-track", of the party and that Edwards and Obama appeal to the intellectual, or "Wine Track", segment. Which better exemplifies the center?
By your own logic, you should be supporting Clinton, not grasping for reasons not to. She will be a great candidate, really DOES represent change, the most significant change to the office of President in 230 years. If you study her career and record you find a much different person than is depicted by the crazies here, many of whom are not democrats anyway.
Thinly veiled attempts to cast her as unelectable are going to be out there until she is elected, I hope you find the logic that allows you to leave that camp in time for the general election

Van
vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 10:04 AM)--
How does she fair in the General election Van? That is all that matters.

Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 10:42 AM)

Why do you address me as though I own the polls?

Here are the RCP averages of all the available polls.Clinton leads in all the aggregates;

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html

Even you should be able to see that your logic is dictated by your conclusion: You don't like Clinton and don't want to see her nominated or elected, so first you say that polls don't matter, them if she's the most popular democrat in the polls, it's the independents who are most important. When she dominates the other candidates in the national numbers and state primaries, it's about how she has high unfavorables or that the only numbers that matter are the general election numbers.

You are playing a shell game and calling it rational thought. You have to compartmentalize your thinking and your assessment of the available information to tailor it to fit your feelings.
It doesn't really matter if John Edwards looks better in the general election polls when he can't get to 20% in his own party. Even if Ron Paul CRUSHED all competition in general election polls, the fact that he can't get 3% support in his own party makes the other statistic moot.

Van
vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 1:37 PM)

Gary replies

vanreuter, NY NY--Stop telling me what I think. I post what I think and it requires no analysis or interpretation. I have no hidden meanings or agendas and I have stated my respect for Mrs. Clinton and have full confidence in her ability to govern. I will vote for the nominee of the party and until then I will express my opinion that we should choose the Candidate with the broadest appeal and the biggest coat tails.
Democrats on both sides who threaten to vote for the other party if their candidate is not the nominee need to stop and think what they are saying. Democrats on both sides who call into question other democrats...loyalty?... to the party need to lighten up a tad. This is intramural kids, no need to break any bones before the big game. Chill
Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 3:20 PM)

What the???? Gary seems like he wants to have a conversation, but he bridles at the opportunity to do so, even when HE is the one initiating the conversation.

Gary, everyone can see that I am saying a lot more than telling you what you think, and the fact that you do not address the greater part of my REPLIES to specific questions you asked ME demands explanation.

I address the issues that you raise and cite sources besides my own opinion to buttress my refutation. You addressed me Gary. READ your own questions, directed at me. Read my answers. I am addressing your points, not attacking you, yet your reply is one of someone who has been insulted. Did I insult you by doing my best to address the points you made in your posts to me?

I don't get your reply to my answers to the 2 posts you specifically addressed to me. You raised salient points, I did my best to answer them. Why didn't you address MY points countering your argument? I thought that's what you wanted, otherwise, why would you ask SPECIFIC questions and address them directly and only to me?

Don't you think that I deserve a better reply than the one you left? I actually took the time to consider your points and gave you the courtesy of a reply. If you didn't want a dialoge, why did you start one?

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

LinnieFB, Corona, CA — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:39:10 GMT

One other thing....the anniversary of the October 11th vote which authorized the Iraq war is coming up. Several of the candidates supported it.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

John B, Des Moines, IA — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:41:22 GMT

Bill Clinton controls the flow of money within the Democratic party? Wow, that's a conspiracy theory! Democrats have enough trouble just getting on message, let alone having one party boss in charge of everything.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Dan Wood, Cincinnati, OH — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:41:32 GMT

As someone with no real dog in this fight, I'm surprised that Sen. Biden's Iraq solution, a tri-partite state with a loose central government essentially just distributing oil revenues, hasn't gotten more traction. It's appearing more and more like that will actually be the final solution.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

annie Delores williams, springfield, IL — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:42:21 GMT

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Michael, Atlanta, GA — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:44:07 GMT

I sent a rather stinging question about the party's bigotry. I doubt it will be asked. The powers that be will not want the candidates to answer tough questions, as far as I'm concerned. That being said, Tim Russert, prove me wrong.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:53:01 GMT

Tim Russert will shake things up tonight. Obama will take the gloves off. There's just so much material on Hillary that she will not get away with the cake walk that she's had up until now. (Yeah this is wishful thinking). I just can't fathom her being the Democratic nominee. What the Dems really need is change and not a polished GWB.

Seriously though, my inside information in NH tells me that the polls are not accurately reflecting the fluidity that truly is the situation. As I've reminded people before, in December of 2003 the race in Iowa was supposedly between Dean and Gephart and we know what happened. So, I don't think that Hillary should be ordering her coronation robes quite yet. I think the Dems will make the intelligent choice in the end and it is not Hillary.
Obama/Webb '08

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Annie D. Williams — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:54:15 GMT

Senator Clinton is constantly mentining about the thousands of americans without health insurance. How many of of these people are here in America illegal? The public should know the real number of Americans who are without health insurance. The American people are not obligated to take care of anyone who sneak in into this country illegal.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Sally Burnell — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:54:40 GMT

Why doesn't anyone take Dennis Kucinich seriously? He is the only one with a concrete plan to end the war in Iraq and the only one with a concrete, single payer national health care plan.

All the other Dems would just dither where it comes to these issues and would probably not be able to solve these two pressing issues in a timely manner. Kucinich can and will, and it's high time that the Mainstream Media quits ignoring him.

The only reason that he's a second tier candidate is that he's been largely ignored by the media. We who support him know better that he could win this thing if only the media would listen to him.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Blue state baby — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:57:30 GMT

annie Delores williams, spoken like a true republican.
just kidding

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

lester holder — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:03:01 GMT

>> Hmmmmm I'm shocked Bill Clinton had male interns....

They did recon and told Bill what female interns were, shall we say, "available".

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:03:57 GMT

Hillary will hardly be seen as prophetic, should anymore terrorist threats materialize. The Amen Corner of the GOP is praying constantly for such a thing. Let's just hope the worst that happens, is an Administration return to the now, seemingly vanished, "Color Coded Terrorist Alerts". 'Chartreuse Alert! A Barney Frank Speech!'.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Sierra, SF — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:04:10 GMT

Dan Wood, Cincinnati, OH: '...Sen. Biden's Iraq solution, a tri-partite state with a loose central government essentially just distributing oil revenues, hasn't gotten more traction. It's appearing more and more like that will actually be the final solution...'

Sorry, Dan Wood, see how long THAT would last before the Turks invade the Kurdish portion.
Then, what would we do ?
It is an IDEAL imperial solution because the Kurdish state would have NO FRIENDS in the area except Uncle Sam !!
That would make them our dependent lap dog.
(just like Egypt and Jordan) (roll over !! fetch !, play dead !)
Why not let the IRAQIs decide their own future ?
Wasn't that why all those people got their thumbs imprinted with purple ink ?
(or was that just a photo op?)

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Tuck,Realityville,Kansas — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:05:39 GMT

mitchell, why was obama against the war when running for the senate in one speech only, then repeatedly voted for funding the war as a senator, then against the war again when running for president?

why should anyone take his words over his actions?

that would be like voting for another bush!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

ki houston — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:08:29 GMT

obama /webb ,I like it .

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Susan, Indianapolis IN — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:08:36 GMT

no, I don't think Hill's laugh is a nervous giggle. My theory is that she is trying to be relaxed and convey the idea that tough questions don't rattle her.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Sierra, SF — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:09:47 GMT

Dan Murphy: 'national polls are MEANINGLESS until AFTER IOWA'

Case closed !!

From the LA Times:
The courtship of black voters in South Carolina
Half of Democratic voters there are African American; a majority of those are women who have yet to make up their minds in the Democratic presidential race.
By Robin Abcarian, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 26, 2007

'...In South Carolina -- a newly important Democratic battleground with an early primary -- the black vote is crucial. Half of Democratic voters here are black; a majority of those are women. And because so many black women have yet to make up their minds -- about 40% in one recent poll said they were undecided -- experts suggest that the victor here Jan. 29 will be the candidate who successfully courts them.....'

It ain't over 'til it's over.
Very interesting that Black voters might be decisive in the Democratic race.
Black Americans have been the most loyal members in the Democratic party.
Maybe, it's their time.
Let's just see......

Obama/Edwards '08
TURN THE PAGE

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Sal Money, Sante Fe NM — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:10:27 GMT

You know what would make this debate fun would be to throw Ahmadinejad in the mix. He'd probably fit right in with the crowd.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:13:32 GMT

jerry.....If you think Hillary would be so easy to beat, then why would you want Obama and Edwards to "go after her tonight"?
Why wouldn't you want her to win the nomination?
I know why, and so do you...Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!
YOU ARE SCARED TO DEATH OF HILLARY. YOU KNOW DAMN WELL THAT IF SHE GETS THE NOMINATION, SHE WILL WIN THE PRESIDENCY.
I LOVE IT! jerry just tacitly acknowledged what we already knew; republiCANTS not only want anyone but Hillary to be the Democratic nominee, they also want us to fight amonst ourselves.
Think about that!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

RuthieM, East Stroudsburg, PA — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:16:34 GMT

That's so true what someone mentioned above and what we had been wondering too. How in the world can Clinton sweep the networks with these 5 appearances???? Although it got me sick, I was waiting for the networks to announce when the other candidates would be sweeping with their 5 appearances. This is outrageous, not to mention the MSNBC network having turned into a complete CLINTON SHOW propaganda these days with Chris Matthews smiling and snickering over Clinton stories and over Hillary Clinton's frontrunner status as if he was a starstruck kid, or a kissass one! This is amazing. Whatever happened to the equal time for presidential candidates? What in the world is happening here!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Dot, Illinois — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:16:58 GMT

Could the answer to why some of these other candidates are not wanting to " go after" Senator Clinton be found in the word "Veepstakes?"

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:18:49 GMT

Who's the one who was talking about, "trends", and how the trend for Obama in the Rasmussen daily tracking poll was going up, up up?

Will they be posting today's poll? Just in case they're too busy working, can't find that pesky link, or incapaciatated, here are today's numbers and the, "trend" over the past days.

Wednesday, September 26, 2007

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that New York Senator Hillary Clinton now attracts 41% support in the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination. Illinois Senator Barack Obama now earns the vote from 21% of Likely Democratic Primary Voters. Former North Carolina Senator John Edwards is at 17% in while New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson is a distant fourth at 4%. (see recent daily numbers).

Clinton leads Obama in virtually all demographic categories except African-Americans. A commentary by Douglas Schoen suggests that last week was a very good week for the Democratic frontrunner. For Obama, Iowa has become a must-win state."

Edwards pulls within FOUR percentage points, of Obama.

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/daily_presidential_tracking_poll__1

Here are the trends over the past three months;

7/23 it was 40-22 Clinton
8/01 it was 42-21 Clinton
8/13 it was 43-23 Clinton
8/27 it was 40-21 Clinton
9/05 it was 40-21 Clinton
9/19 it was 39-22 Clinton
9/24 it was 40-28 Clinton (do we have momentum?)
9/26 it's 41-21 Clinton and back to a 20 point lead.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/daily_presidential_tracking_polling_history

The trend is that the numbers essentially have not changed over the last months, with Clinton holding around a twenty point lead.

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Sierra, SF — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:27:54 GMT

The above mentioned Wall Street Journal article:

PRESIDENTIAL CONNECTION
How Bill Clinton's Aide Facilitated a Messy Deal
Mr. Band Introduced Italian to Ron Burkle;
Lawsuit Over Spending
By JOHN R. EMSHWILLER and GABRIEL KAHN
September 26, 2007

For the past six years, the road to Bill Clinton has often run through Douglas Band, a 34-year-old former White House intern who has helped manage Mr. Clinton's time, accompanied him around the world and even fielded some of his calls.

Two years ago, Mr. Band befriended a handsome and charming Italian businessman named Raffaello Follieri. The young Italian, now 29 years old, had moved to New York in 2003 to launch a business buying and redeveloping Roman Catholic Church properties. He claimed close ties with Vatican officials that would smooth the way for deals, according to business associates and material issued by his company, Follieri Group LLC. He also said he could help Mr. Clinton's wife, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, with Catholic voters during her presidential campaign, people in the Clinton camp recall....'

That'd be GREAT !!
Maybe he can get Hillary MORE VOTES !!
How can he trick Catholics ?
Let's steal some money from the Catholic Church !!

As a gatekeeper to the former president's web of business and charitable enterprises, Mr. Band helped Mr. Follieri get into business with Mr. Clinton, according to people involved with the three men. In 2005, Yucaipa Cos., a Los Angeles investment firm where Mr. Clinton has been a partner and a senior adviser, agreed to invest up to $100 million in Mr. Follieri's church-property venture.

Later, Mr. Band helped Mr. Follieri secure several million dollars more from Michael Cooper, a Toronto real-estate executive and supporter of Mr. Clinton's humanitarian initiatives. Mr. Band received $400,000 from Mr. Follieri for arranging that deal. Mr. Band's connection to Mr. Follieri was reported in Il Sole/24 Ore, an Italian newspaper.

These days, the Clinton camp's relations with Mr. Follieri are in tatters. Yucaipa managing partner Ron Burkle, Mr. Clinton's longtime friend, has sued Mr. Follieri in Delaware state court for allegedly misappropriating at least $1.3 million. The lawsuit claims Mr. Follieri used Yucaipa's investment money to fund a lavish lifestyle that included a Manhattan penthouse, five-star meals and private jets for Mr. Follieri and his girlfriend, actress Anne Hathaway. Mr. Follieri has denied any wrongdoing. Mr. Cooper has demanded his money back.

Since leaving the White House, Mr. Clinton has earned more than $40 million giving speeches, has raised billions of dollars for his own charitable foundation and other causes, and has entered into business relationships with Mr. Burkle and others. Today, heads of state, business leaders and other notables will gather in New York for the annual meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative, an organization that obtains charitable pledges from various sources.

Jimmy Carter worked for human rights
Housing for the poor
Free elections

Bill Clinton works for himself !!
and his 'charities'
How does he manage to attract all these con men ?
'My friend, Norman Hsu'
Peter Pauls' Tribute to Hillary'....

Mrs. Clinton's presidential run is likely to draw scrutiny of her husband's recent activities. Jay Carson, Mr. Clinton's spokesman, said in June that while the former president had met Mr. Follieri a few times, "he obviously meets hundreds of people every day, and does not know him well."

And he doesn't know Norman Hsu
or Peter Paul
He's never met Monica Lewinsky ....
Why do the Clintons always attract crooks ?
Why are there always scandals bubbling around the Clintons ?
The air of crookedness ......

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:33:25 GMT

"Seriously though, my inside information in NH tells me that the polls are not accurately reflecting the fluidity that truly is the situation."

New Hampshire;

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/new_hampshire-primary.html

CNN/WMUR 9/17-9/24 Clinton 43-20 (over Obama)
Rasmussen 9/16-9/16 Clinton 40-17
Franklin Pierce9/11-9/14 Clinton 39-19
LA Times/Bloomberg 9/6-9/10 Clinton 35-16

With 20+ spreads everywhere you look, that info must be way, way inside.

Where do you get your inside info?

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:37:21 GMT

***** B U S H S U C K S *****

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Brendan — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:38:07 GMT

You idiots in the mainstream media need to cut the crap about MoveOn and all these other non-issues. Who the hell cares what a nutjob activist group says? How about we actually focus on the War, rather than all these peripheries? Oh, right, that would involve the MSM actually doing some real investigative work. You hacks are dreadful.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:38:20 GMT

Your right Z, Bush "sucks".

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:39:00 GMT

Your both right "Bush Sucks".

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

ki houston — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:41:16 GMT

van , I answered your question in my earlier post . killing news stories . Have to get her back in a good lite , Wake up . think for yourself what ever you think dont let polls and pundits think for you ,they are obveiously bought anyway. Go to the places where theses polls show one thing you will see another .

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Grace, NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:43:28 GMT

Looks like the failure to advance in the polls will cost Obama in the only place he had an edge, in the funds race;

vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 10:18 AM)

Keep Dreaming.....LOL

BTW I believe the pundits have been saying each quarter she would out raise him "Who could beat the Clinton Financial Machine".

Van want to put your MONEY where your MOUTH is !! . Money and Number of donors, this quarter. We will see who really has the strongest support. PUT UP or SHUT UP

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:44:23 GMT

Tuck and everybody: Obama has said repeatedly, we must be as careful getting out of this war as we were careless getting in. Or as someone on First Read quoted the prophetic fifth grade teacher of her child, "the road to war is wide but the road out is narrow".
I know that people can't possibly believe that Obama, who bravely stood against this war when it seemed that the majority of Americans supported this incursion (because we were lied to by this unscrupulous administration) would then support this war when political sentiment against the war was rising - that just wouldn't make any sense. The truth is that moving against this war with a slim (non-veto proof) majority in both houses of Congress is not easy. And playing a game of chicken with this a**h*le president, when the safety of our troops is at stake, is not an option. The extrication of our troops while negotiating a new found stability in a region that by nature is volitile, will be a long and arduous process.
By no means does Obama's voting for continued funding of the troops reflect any change in his original opposition to this war. This is not a game of Risk. We have already sacrificed almost 4000 of our brave young men and women and caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. The goal now is to leave this civil war, causing as little additional death and destruction as possible. This will not be easy. His judgment which has been exemplified by a cogent analysis of the problem (and with the help of an impressive staff of military and diplomatic advisers) will afford a rational approach to correcting this untenable position, a disastrous position that will be the legacy of GWB.
Obama/Webb '08

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

ki houston — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:46:08 GMT

do we have momentum . Look at the number off donors , it cant be minipulated.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Anita, Tifton, GA — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:47:41 GMT

Rasmussen and Gallup lean Republican - and Hillary Hawk is their preferred Dem.
But Edwards leads in Repub matchups in most state polling.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

csh, IL — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:47:53 GMT

Hillary is in the strongest position of all the candidates (democrats and republicans). She’s achieved this through diligence, strength and hard work which is further proof she has what it takes to be an effective commander-in chief. Looking forward to another of her superior debate performances tonight.

Hillary Clinton - Ready to Lead!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Susan, Miami — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:49:19 GMT

I love you guys-Van and J merle. Keep up the good work.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

annefrank — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:50:59 GMT

Ahh...another Clinton $candal - this time - Chri$tians!
The Clintons will use any mean$ to grab more power.

John Edwards will be a great president! WooHoo!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Tony Newbill — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:52:25 GMT

How can Oil at 80 bucks a Barrel be 1000 % higher today than 10 years ago when it was 8 bucks a barrel , and the demand has not been raised 1000 % ?? So was the Clinton Administration making deals for cheap oil and in exchange for access to American benefits to the OPEC regimes , for the price of Oil to be Cheap , was this the result of all those Donations to the Clinton Library by Saudi officals , and all this at the time when the Cheap Oil was causing Great Poverty to the Middleastern People , and as a Result hatred rose up out of the demise of the people , and today has resulted in the violence we face ??
Also now that this has caused a focus on the dependence for oil that we share with the rest of the industrialized nations , and if we leave the Middleast and destablize the region , Iran and Syria will take control of the region and cut off the flow of the oil , and Hugo Chavez aligns with Iran and Russia joins the side of Iran , then the United States and the European Unions will lose 60 % of their Oil energy requirements overnight with now backup replacements of these vital resources that we depend on for our production of food , and overall economic functions , and at this point , the US and Euro currencies collapes , and at a time when we need to trade for other food ingrediences and imports of other goods , how will we keep stability in our country if we are broke from these events unfolding , and are cut off from the rest of the world , Isolated by our own economic collapes ???

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

David Jacobson, Durham, NC — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:01:27 GMT

A question on people's minds seems to be how meaningful Hilary Clinton's lead is. They compare her with Howard Dean or Bill Bradley. Those comparisons would be more meaningful if it was Barack Obama who had the lead. Hilary is not running on the excitement of novelty. All her negatives are already under the microscope. What is emerging is her effectiveness and her stamina as a long distance runner who has been getting beyond her negatives throughout her post first lady political career. Of course, it always is a good idea not to count the results before the votes are made. But it is going to take more than a modest mistake to derail Hilary.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Don, Tulsa, OK — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:02:12 GMT

Susan, Miami says:
"Oh all you frightened scaredy cats are soooo funny. You make up stories about the Clintons, embellish them and quake and quiver when Hillarys name is mentioned. She has shown intelligence and grace as well as the upmost professionalism and class."

WOW!! What color is the sky in your world?

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Michael, Columbus, Ohio — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:04:23 GMT

How come no one talks about the Democratic Partys support for Amnesty for illegal aliens? A vote for Hillary is a vote for North American Union. Hillary gets her money and marching orders from same people who support George Bush. Her stand on Iraq war and amnesty for illegals is same as Bush.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

sonya, atlanta, ga — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:05:03 GMT

likely voters. HRC is a favorite with the dems but not in the general. Dems don't know how to pick a canidate.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

jerry/corpus christi texas — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:05:25 GMT

Merle:

I always believed in Scorched earth policy....
Let's see Hillary get out of this one.

Bill had better be careful going around and threatening media outlets. Why GQ killed the story is very strange indeed. He walks into an office and starts threatening people, he better realize there are a lot of offices with cameras and microphones in them.

Bill CLinton as Boss Hogg. I love it.

Susan in Miami:

better get ready for the criminal indictments against the Clinton's girl! The press is digging deeper and deeper, sooner or later they are going to hit pay dirt and all the threats and beat downs that Bill Clinton will use will not stop the stories from going public.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:05:26 GMT

How could Hillary sweep the networks? It's called clout. She's got it, the others don't. It's not such a bad thing for a president to have.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Amy B Portland, ME — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:12:19 GMT

hey, Bunny, Winston-Salem

I watched Hillary on FOX's interview (on YouTube).I LOVED her response to Chris Wallace! She didn't laugh on the other talk shows because the interviewers were not going for the cheap shots. They asked serious questions and she answered seriously. I was inspired by Hillary to decide not to blow a gasket ever again over the Ann Coulters, et al, of the world. Like Mom said, they are trying to get your goat. She (and Hillary) were right: when FOX News attacks, Just Laugh.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

MK,MO — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:15:42 GMT

RuthieM, East Stroudsburg, PA / clinton is owned by the corporate lobbyists, the media is owned by the same corporations, that is the way our system works. ask van, maybe he/she has something in his ammo pack (van also feeds off of the same corrupt money) that can explain it

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Scott, Denver — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:21:51 GMT

As someone trained in CIA/FBI interviewing techniques; I know that the laugh is an uncontrollable delaying technique to allow her to come up with her either spinned, or flat-out lied answer. A truthful response from an interviewee is quick and does not require a delaying response. The laugh is a delay intended to let the brain have time to formulate a response; if she were just relaying her actual thoughts, not trying to "spin" them for TV consumption, there would be no laugh. See how many times, not just her, but any of our politicians do "delaying" techniques like a laugh, or repeating the question, or using some other diversion/delay tactic before they get to answering a question...you'll see how often we get a truly honest answer from any presidential candidate. Watch them for when they answer directly and without delay; then you can be relatively sure they're telling you what they really believe as opposed to what they think they should say.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Ken Collins/Wagoner,Oklahoma — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:27:29 GMT

I would think that most Americans would be exhausted of the Clintons !
Let us not forget that Bill the Trickster Clinton is the one who cashed in on NAFTA and was paid big bucks for the transfer of manufacturing shipped over seas depleteing the American workforce to a very small percentage !
The Clintons also carried out some of the rare furnishings from the Whitehouse when the left.
These two characters are thieves with silk purses.
I have never seen a guy in Bill Clinton's position and Hillary who get by with as much as they do and still act like they are friends of the poor and middle class.
Why doesn't someone throw up NAFTA to Hillary in the debates ???

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Jim, Santa Cruz — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:27:39 GMT

Regarding Hillary's laugh during the Wallace interview, I agree it was contrived, but that is television. Look, millions of people are watching, some only for seconds, so they see her laughing and happy, she projects positively, even though it's a nervous response. All successful TV people project a happy go lucky image - remember Ronald Reagan? One more point - if you want to dissect body language on the Fox interview, try going back to the tape and focus on Chris Wallace's smile.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Kato in Des Moines — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:29:53 GMT

Sierra SF: I respectfully disagree with your analysis of Senator Biden's plan. There is nothing "imperialistic" about his plan. It calls for a political solution agreed to by the Iraqis, much like what was done between the various sects in Bosnia. Biden's plan provides the framework for a political settlement between the Shia, Kurds and Sunnis to stop their civil war. The plan is simply a starting point for political dialogue. The details need to be worked out by the Iraqi people through their elected representatives in the national parliament. So in that sense, the Biden plan does let the Iraqi people decide their own future -- peacefully, through political means, rather than through violence and civil war which is what will happen when the US unilaterally leaves the country. Absent a political solution before US troops withdraw, there will be mass genocide in Iraq on an unprecedent scale. I am less concerned about a Turkish invasion of the Kurdish north as I am about the US leaving the country before a political solution is in place. Biden's plan for a tri-partite state with a decentralized federal government provides the best solution for stablizing the country. To simply say "let the Iraqi's decide their own future" without regard for the manner or process in which that decision is made is to invite full-blown civil war, mass killings, and ethnic cleansing. A decentralized federal government makes sense because Iraq is not and never has been a true nation state. It is a fictitous nation-state created by the British Empire, and it continues to suffer the vestiges of European colonialism to this day by forcing three different sects to live under the autocratic rule of one sect. Under Saddam, the Shia majority and the Kurdish minority lived under the harsh rule of a Sunni-led dictatorship. Now the Kurdish and the Sunni minorities fear being forced to live under the dictates of a Shia majority, possibly a Shia theocracy. Iraq is the "Yugoslavia" of the Middle East. A decentralized federal system is its best hope. It's working in Bosnia. I say, give it a chance in Iraq.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mike, Nashville, TN — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:31:33 GMT

You're right. Clinton always laughs when facing a tough question. Really, it sounds more like a cackle instead of genuine laughter and is rather annoying. I can only assume that she and her handlers think laughing or cackling makes her appear more human.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Paul A Trouve — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:38:46 GMT

I hope Hillary does get the Democratic nomination in 2008 because she will never win the presidency. Silly Democrats may nominate her but sensible Americans won't vote for her because they don't want Billary back in the White House!

The Liberal Media is just waiting for the coronation but they are out of touch with real Americans! That is why Liberals want amnesty for illegal immigrants, so that the country will be less white than it is now, making it more likely for HRH to be crowned!

If the Democrats had any sense they would nominate Edwards. He is the only one in the field who has a real chance at the White House. This Jena black thing in LA will create a solid Republican South for any Democratic candidate except for Edwards!

Wake up Dems! You have a shot in "08 but not with Her Royal Highness, Hillary!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

mary, northern new mexico — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:44:27 GMT

Let's see...how long into the debate before Dennis Kucinich is asked a question.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Sam W., Portland, OR — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:46:10 GMT

Vanreuter, NY NY: daily tracking polls mean less than the value given them because the organization doing the tracking can be infiltrated by any candidate's staffers. It can be said that because the results were skewed in favor of the infiltrator's candidate, they are incorrect, therefore flawed, inaccurate, and untrue.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

cheryl, NH — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:46:18 GMT

How could Hillary sweep the networks? It's called clout. She's got it, the others don't. It's not such a bad thing for a president to have.
Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 12:05 PM)

When Bush does it we Democrats call it intimadation...its what got us in this war Carrie...or don't you remember? If she has nothing to hide why the intimadation tactics, with GQ, why did she need to speak in a control setting, why do they not want Chelesa picture in a resturant now...because they can? I for one don't won't a President Democrat or Republican who tries to suppress or intimadate the media. I am now having second thoughts about Hillary

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:47:43 GMT

Van: My information is very inside. But that doesn't matter. I'll be interested to see the commentary on this site after tonight's debate. It should be interesting. Everyone should keep in mind that political polling in primaries is always very fluid, as is most polling. The only poll that counts is the one on election day. Just ask Prof. Sam Wang of Princeton University - I refer you to his meta-analysis of the 2004 presidential election. My own prediction is that Edwards will not win in Iowa and the subsequent anti-Hillary vote in NH will be enormous.
In any case, I support Obama because he has the most integrity of any of the top tier candidates. He is cogent and doesn't speak the political doublespeak that I hear from Hillary. I haven't heard the pandering that I've heard from Edwards (who I actually like but he's obviously not my first choice). But the most important reason I support Obama is that, HILLARY AND EDWARDS VOTED FOR THIS WAR!
Obama/Webb '08

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Randy Isyse, Portland OR — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:50:45 GMT

Don, Tulsa, OK writes: WOW!! What color is the sky in your world?

Wait. It gets better, and much more funny.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

J Cunningham, Philadelphia, PA — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:57:01 GMT

If a candidate... such as Obama, Edwards, or even Dodd were to annouce that they plan to name their number 1 and number 2 choice for running mate, and key cabinet positions before the end of next week.... it would show some real out of the box thinking and leadership. After the last 8 years, voters would love to know not just what candidate they are voting for, but what administration. What an opportunity for someone to distinguish themselves from Sen Clinton.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mike — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:59:57 GMT

The people voted for Dems in the last election, and they promised to 'bring the troops home.' They shouted it in congressional speech after congressional speech.

Now they are recommending some timetable or plan. Because they are afraid that taking a stand will make them look weak on terrorism.

Backing down made them look weak on everything. What happened to this parties soul?

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:00:05 GMT

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

b.b. ft lauderdale — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:00:31 GMT

i only hope that hillary is dragged off camera to be arrested for the crimes her and her dirt bag husband have commited... shame on the defeatist cowards

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Angel, Mclean, VA — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:06:17 GMT

The real question that America must ask is:
Are we prepare for another 4 to 8 years with the Clintons after the 20 we have gone thrugh with the Bushes and the Clintons?
Do we want another 4 to 8 years of nothing, except more bla, bla, bla.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Bruce Petersen — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:07:04 GMT

The Rassmussen polls have also shown that John Edwards does substantially better than either Hillary or Obama when compared in head to head matchups against EVERY Republican candidate. Will the Democrats once again, shoot themselves in the foot and nominate a weaker candidate to go up against the Republicans? It looks like it. If they want to win the election, they need to nominate Edwards.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

OBAMA in '08, Pittsburgh PA — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:07:13 GMT

The gloves have to come off tonight! The other Democratic candidates must make it clear that Hillary can win the nomination but she CANNOT win the general election. She is unelectable...not just because people have doubts about a woman as commander-in-chief but because SHE IS HILLARY! This woman carries so much baggage from her 15 years in Washington. How the hell can she sell herself to the country as an agent of CHANGE? As a Democrat, I watch in absolute frustration as Senator Clinton moves closer to being the party standard bearer in 2008. I don't want another 4 or 8 years of Republican control of the White House. I don't want Rudy, Mitt, Fred, or any other newly minted version of George Bush LITE succeeding the current idiot-in-chief. There is NO DOUBT that the Republicans want to run against Hillary. Nothing will turn out there disgruntled base like another Clinton running for the Oval Office. They are even willing to stomach Guiliani and his liberal social views to guarantee victory in November, 2008. Barack Obama has to stop being Mr. Nice Guy and tell it like it is. Hillary cannot win this crucial election but HE CAN! He represents REAL CHANGE. Obama was right when it counted...long before the Iraq war ever began. EXPERIENCE DOES NOT EQUAL WISDOM! If it did, then the banner MISSION ACCOMPLISHED would have truly meant something when it was displayed. For all their years in government service (aka experience), Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld made matters worse. Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, John Edwards...They ALL VOTED FOR THE WAR! No amount of mea culpas at this point can change that fact. Barack Obama is the one candidate the Republicans DO NOT want to talk about. Karl Rove, Dick Morris, Newt Gingrich...even Bush himself are very public in touting a Hillary nomination. THEY FEAR OBAMA! Obama's candidacy is one of HOPE and a a REAL PROMISE of CHANGE! So I say to the Democratic field...tonight you need to speak candidly about WHO BEST REPRESENTS WHAT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY SHOULD STAND FOR IN 2008? The American people do not want more of the same... They made their feelings known in the 2006 election. The opportunity for significant Democratic gains...in Congress and control of the White House will be SQUANDERED, THROWN AWAY... SACRIFICED on the altar of a Clinton defeat! Speaking as someone who voted and supported Bill Clinton both in 92 and 96, I say let's put the Clinton and Bush eras behind us...and with it all the partisan rancor and division of the country into red and blue. Barack Obama can unite this country and reach across the party lines to find solutions to our nation's many problems.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Jason — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:09:38 GMT

Does no one know how to use spell check anymore? Seriously, if you do not know how to spell you should use it-----

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Greg Cooley — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:12:55 GMT

Mike, Nashville, TN {{I can only assume that she and her handlers think laughing or cackling makes her appear more human.}}

The trouble is, the tail always gives her away.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:13:24 GMT

"Van: My information is very inside. But that doesn't matter."

Actually, it does matter. When you claim inside information that completely contradicts the available numbers, and the prevailing wisdom, you should be able to back it up. Are you a pollster for one of the campaigns? Are you with a campaign and privy to their internal polling numbers?

Fluidity aside, with a burgeoning lead of over 20 points (4-5 times the usual margin of error) with the smallest lead in any single poll this month being NINETEEN points, with the trend going up, your contentions don't seem to have any, "non-inside", information to give them credence.

I'm not saying that you are wrong, just that there is no empirical (statistical) evidence to back up your claim.

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

T. X. Peccini, Nicosia, Cyprus — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:14:11 GMT

Hooray J. Merle Stanley from Westchester, NY! Plainly put and to the point. It is hard to not overlook people's misogynistic attitudes in their posts: giggling (=feminine) is bad. What is apparent is that her detractors are absolutely tuned into to her and some even obsess over her mannerisms. I can't even bear to hear or see the current occupant of the White House much less spend time channel surfing to see how many networks he is on at the same time. I am surprised no one commented on her hair, as was done when she was first lady.
As for MSM's coronation of Clinton, it is up to each campaign to successfully court the fourth estate, in addition to the internet. Clinton has done this the best. Don't forget that a year ago this didn't even seem like a real possibility because of the nay-sayers. Where she is now is all because she is a better campaigner than her husband ever was. She is where she is now because she is who she is: disciplined, dedicated, determined. What I learned back in the microcosm of high school when I ran for class president applies to life in general: who you court and get behind you leading up to the election so as to create a sense of inevitability decides who wins the election. The vote is simply an affirmation. You heard it here first: Hillary Clinton will win the presidency in a walk. You should really be scared of that...
Expatriate Registered Voter

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

ki houston — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:26:50 GMT

I notice van does not comment on the fact that donor numbers cant be minipulated like poll numbers and unlike polls they are actual fact not estamates using less than .001 percent of an actual field . Maby because his candidate has less than half the number Obama does. If your candidate has less donors ignore the evidence .

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Lauren,OH — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:30:38 GMT

Angel-you are so right! We need someone in office who is not a Bush or Clinton...let's get some new blood in there!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:35:09 GMT

Van: Sorry buddy, I won't take the bait. But I do stand by my assertion and after all, three plus months before the primary, my assertion makes the most sense. Tom Dewey sure liked the polls in September of 1948, didn't he? Face it man, Hillary just has too much baggage and the longer people look at her and her triangulating corruption (a la Dick Morris - who she allegedly hates), the longer they have to deal with this war (WHICH SHE VOTED TO AUTHORIZE), any lead that she may have in the polls on September 26, 2007, will melt away. Anyway, are you more in love with your candidate or the polls? Me?, I have a big fat man crush on Obama. This guy is my president because he represents what is right with America and I will do my damndest to get the word out in every way that I can.
OBAMA/WEBB '08

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Grace, NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:36:28 GMT

Hey Van....what about that bet. I will make it easy for you.

Let's subtract the cost of cleaning the sofa and I will spot you the 260 HSU donars she had to give their money back ( she won't subtract them until after quarter end anyway).

She's so bad...what do you say....don't you have faith in her money machine ( now, now you can't count GE money...she can't spend it yet)

Anyone that far ahead it the POLLS must have millions of dedicated supporters...isn't that what she said a month ago. All it takes is $20-$30 each.

talk is cheap...people can and do tell pollsters anything...where do they put their MONEY ( this day and time when people are on a tight budget it is very true).

Van ....I'm waiting !!!!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

arpad kemeny — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:36:43 GMT

to jerry, corpus c... must be something in the water down there that makes you folks so stupid.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

L. Larson, Homestead, FL — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:39:04 GMT

Barack should mention that Hillary did not do her homework before voting for Iraq. She failed to read the intelligiance reports that were available. Seems like a BIG mistake to me!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

arpad kemeny, portland, or — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:39:35 GMT

to jerry, corpus c... must be something in the water down there, get a clue. the bush administration is the motherlode of bad ideas and stupidity

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Edwards/Obama 08 — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:39:35 GMT

It's all over! The oracle has spoken and the future has been set in stone - Hillary has been ordained to win the primaries and lose the general election. Sorry Libs you'll have to whine and complain for another four years. The country may be tired of Bush but aren't stupid enough to elect Hillary.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Bunky Melrose, Cincinnati Ohio — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:45:20 GMT

The people voted for Dems in the last election, and they promised to 'bring the troops home.' They shouted it in congressional speech after congressional speech.

[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]]

Obama has got this one figured out. First act as President? Make Iraq the 51st state. There, they're home.

The man is a genius.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:47:04 GMT

"I notice van does not comment on the fact that donor numbers cant be minipulated like poll numbers..."

No, actually I don't comment on your posts, but if you insist;

So, the only number that can't be manipulated is the one and only number you can find where Obama may be leading? I am sure that it makes perfect sense to you, but I am not sure that anyone NOT supporting Obama really finds it very significant.

Did you know that if you buy Obama campaign merchandise, like a key-chain or t-shirt, that you are listed as a, "contributor"?

"The news that Barack Obama has been counting all the people who buy his t-shirts and bumper stickers as being among his record 258,000 campaign donors is causing something of a stir today."

http://time-blog.com/swampland/2007/07/who_are_you_wearing_barack_oba.html

"CNN alleged "creative math" in Obama's fundraising before debunking the allegation

During the July 17 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, host Wolf Blitzer repeatedly teased a report on Sen. Barack Obama's (D-IL) fundraising practices by asserting that Obama is using "creative math" and suggesting he is "overselling his grassroots support" in reporting that 258,000 individuals donated to his presidential campaign in the first six months of 2007. Blitzer stated that this "new flap" is due to the fact that the campaign counted those who purchased campaign merchandise as donors. In his ensuing report, however, CNN correspondent Tom Foreman rebutted the suggestion that Obama engaged in "creative accounting," reporting that Obama is actually "obeying the law in all of this" because "[u]nlike most of his opponents, Obama sells his campaign merchandise directly, instead of outsourcing it," and the law requires that money paid for merchandise sold directly by the campaign be counted as a contribution."

http://mediamatters.org/items/200707180004

"Like other candidates, he has worked hard to cultivate a network of bundlers, who can solicit the checks from individual donors for the legal maximum of $2,300 that are the mainstay of any major campaign. But to capitalize on his celebrity, Mr. Obama’s campaign has also employed novel tactics — like counting sales of $5 speech tickets or $4.50 Obama key chains as individual contributions — to pump up his numbers and transform grass-roots enthusiasm into more useful forms of support. No other campaign is known to have listed paraphernalia sales as donations."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/17/us/politics/17obama.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

There's more, but this should be more than enough to refute your contention that donor numbers aren't subject to manipulation.

Now I HAVE commented. It's just grasping at straws for Obama supporters at this point, and this is one more straw that won't hold.

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Josh — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:51:44 GMT

You Clinton haters are so transparent, it's disgusting.

He's a former PRESIDENT, of COURSE he'll have assistants; CEOs of corporations have assistants...my DENTIST has an assistant, my God!

Hsu was trumped up...considering Mitt Romney's co-Chair of his finance committee was indicted TWENTY THREE times...one of his STAFF members, while this Hsu guy is a donor. That sure got coverage by the "liberal" MSM, huh?

And Ki, how does it feel buddy? Getting a taste of Bush's own medicine, huh? Waaaa, waaaaa, waaaa. At least they're not making up intel info on the sly, to justify a major quagmired "war".

Read the ABA's report on signing statements..you want to see who is for the good of the American Constitution? I'll give you a hint..It's NOT GWB!

Clinton '08!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:55:51 GMT

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 1:35 PM)

Asking you to reveal something, anything, about your wild, in the face of the facts claims about NH, isn't trying to bait you. It's a reasonable request about an unbelievable claim.

So what you have is an opinion based on a belief that she has too much baggage and your upset over her vote of five years past?

You would find the progress in polling since 1948, like the advances in computer technology, medicine, manufacturing etc. to be simply amazing. If you have to go all the way back to, "Dewey Beats Truman", for an example, I think that speaks for itself.

I really wish you could reveal something that would lend SOME small degree of credibility to you contention.

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:58:52 GMT

Van ....I'm waiting !!!!

Grace, NY (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 1:36 PM)

Wait no more. See my reply to someone else singing the same song above.

Van

Now I say good-day to you Gracie, good-day.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Amy, Amherst NH — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:04:54 GMT

Hillary's Nose Is Growing

Wednesday, September 26, 2007 9:17 AM

By: Ronald Kessler Article Font Size

As Hillary Clinton rises in the polls, her nose grows longer and longer.

To be sure, she has never had any shame about making stories up out of thin air. After 9/11, Clinton appeared on national TV and claimed that when the two airplanes hit the World Trade Center, her daughter Chelsea was going to jog at Battery Park near the towers, where she heard and saw the catastrophe unfold.

Clinton’s arrogance was so profound that she did not coordinate the story with Chelsea, who wrote an article for Talk in which she described what she had been doing that day. According to Chelsea, she was on the other side of town in a friend’s apartment on Park Avenue South. She watched the events unfold on TV.

Nor does Clinton’s hypocrisy have any limits. When asked about the recent MoveOn.org ad suggesting that Gen. David Petraeus has betrayed the country, Clinton on "Meet the Press" on Sept. 23 called for an end to such attacks. “I don’t condone anything like that, and I have voted against those who would impugn the patriotism and the service of the people who wear the uniform of our country,” she said.

Yet three days earlier, Clinton had voted against a Senate resolution to condemn the MoveOn.org ad. Her closest competitor, Sen. Barack Obama, voted earlier that day but conveniently missed the vote condemning the ad.

Now that she begins to see her candidacy in the general election as a certainty, Clinton’s prevarications — largely ignored by the media — are becoming more frequent.

On Sept. 23, on "Fox News Sunday," Clinton said that she has “fought hard” for body armor . . .” She added, “I’ve stood with my colleagues to fight hard for armored vehicles because we knew that they needed additional protection in Iraq and they weren’t getting it.”

Yet last May, Clinton voted against the emergency supplemental bill to provide $1.6 billion for body armor, including advanced combat helmets; $2.4 billion to help protect against improvised explosive devices; and $3 billion for mine-resistant, ambush protected vehicles.

During her Sept 23 appearance on "Meet The Press," Clinton said that current strategy in Iraq is not working: “I will end our involvement at the level that we’ve seen that has not proven to be successful.” But in August, Clinton had said in a speech at the Veterans of Foreign Wars national convention in Kansas City, Mo., that the so-called surge in Iraq is “working.”

Clinton’s prevarications about her vote to support the Iraq war are even more striking. On Oct. 10, 2002, she stated on the Senate floor: “It is clear. . . that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.” On Sept. 15, 2002, she said on "Meet the Press": “I can support the president, I can support an action against Saddam Hussein because I think it’s in the long term interests of our national security . . .”

Yet this year in the Democratic presidential debate on Aug. 19 in Des Moines, Clinton claimed that when she voted for the Authorization of the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq, she thought she was voting to support more diplomatic efforts. She said she “regret[ed] giving George Bush the authority that he misused and abused.”

In fact, she voted against an amendment introduced in 2002 by Sen. Carl Levin that would have required more diplomacy. On the Sept. 23 "Meet the Press," Clinton made yet another misleading statement about that vote, saying she opposed the measure because she did not want to give the United Nations veto power over U.S. actions. But the measure did not give the U.N. veto power and explicitly said the U.S. has the inherent right to use military force in self-defense.

In fundraising appeals, Clinton has claimed the administration is spying on innocent Americans, when she knows that National Security Agency intercepts of calls and e-mails are to ping in on terrorists before they kill innocent Americans.

Last Sunday, when asked questions by Chris Wallace on "Fox News Sunday" and by Bob Schieffer on CBS' "Face the Nation," Clinton engaged in prolonged cackling. In particular, when asked by Schieffer if her healthcare plan was a step toward socialized medicine, Clinton began to giggle uncontrollably.

Like her ever changing positions on Iraq, her contrived performance suggests that she thinks she can give almost any response to a question and get away with it.

“Hillary has a keen sense of entitlement,” Bay Buchanan, author of "The Extreme Makeover of Hillary (Rodham) Clinton," has told me. “She doesn’t admit mistakes or learn from them. She believes in her own mind that she doesn’t have to take responsibility for things she’s done in the past. She can say whatever it is she wants to say today, and it’s as if the slate is clean and nothing has occurred before this.”

At a hearing on Sept. 11, Clinton told Gen. Petraeus that “the reports that you provide to us really require the willing suspension of disbelief.”

In making that accusation, Clinton aptly described what our own reaction should be to her serial dissembling. If any other job candidate had such a record, only a fool would hire the applicant. If Hillary Clinton becomes the Democratic presidential candidate in 2008, it will say as much about us as about her.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mimi — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:05:24 GMT

Jasen.. I aggree with you sqell check can be a very resuorcfull tool

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Ron Michaels — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:06:04 GMT

He's a former PRESIDENT, of COURSE he'll have assistants; CEOs of corporations have assistants...my DENTIST has an assistant, my God!

----------------------

Bills assistants names is Bambi. No word on how many words she types a minute.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mark Thieme — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:06:09 GMT

In a small town community musical theater production a few years ago, the male lead was played by a pompous politician who was the local joke (for a variety of reasons; some actually humorous, and others, sad and serious).

As he charged out onto the stage, full of bluster and self-absorption, he began to intone a song of love for a fair damsel who was sitting, coquettishly poised, on a swing.

As she swung languidly, she looked deep into his eyes and then... burst out in hysterical laughter.

Soon the entire audience was laughing uncontrollably; many were in tears.

It seems the very serious Mr. Ego had forgotten to zip his pants. He was wearing a black suit and protruding from his open fly was his shirttail and perhaps something more...

Not to be daunted in the least, Mr. Ego, turned and faced the audience to sing the final stanza of his prosaic song. By now the place was pandemonium.

But then, poignantly, Mr. Ego, in front of his roaring community, looked down and saw what every one else had seen. Red faced, humiliated, he ran from the stage and did not return.

You see, in his pathetic need for attention, Mr. Ego chose to ignore all the clues and continued to embarrass himself beyond repair.

He thought he was a star. How else could it be? He thought the audience loved him... and in a pitiful way, they were having a ball... at his expense.

Keep singing van... you're a star! This song goes out to you!

And the show goes on.

Until it doesn't.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

ki houston — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:07:17 GMT

Van How weak , are you saying that people that buy obama shirts and obama stuff (to make it short ) dont support him . Realy what are you saying . Now I see why you did not responed at first . How rediculas , who will buy that for a dollor .

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Jerry, Mason City Iowa — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:09:10 GMT

If you remember, 4 years ago at this time Kerry was polling at around 4% and was considering dropping out.
It ain't over til its over. I'm hoping that the "second tier" candidates will gain traction because any of those (Biden, Dodd, Richardson) would make a better president than Clinton, Obama or Edwards. Experience counts. We can't afford on the job training for the next president. We need one who can hit the ground running and be able to work with all sides to get the people's work done. Clinton might have some experience, but she is a polarizing figure. No Republican worth his/her salt would ever work with her to get the people's work done. We would be stuck with another 4 years of nothing getting done. I'm tired of having our elected officials do nothing but fight. We have lots of major issues staring us in the face, something needs to start happening, berfore it is too late.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Barbara C. — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:11:42 GMT

I find it amusing that the WSJ has a "hit piece" on Bill Clinton already. How long ago was it since Murdoch bought the paper? Here we go....

As far as Hillary laughing....it is far, far better than acting like a mad shrew. I actually found her laughter refreshing on Sunday on her 5 meetings with the MSM. After all, she is the only woman in the race. Cut her some slack...!!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

MileHighMBA — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:14:14 GMT

Arguing over what Clinton or Obama need to do to win the nomination is a moot point. Neither one of them is electable because neither one of them can carry the south. That part of the country is still struggling to emerge from the 19th century culturally, socially, and politically, and would never elect a woman or anyone of color. A Biden/Edwards ticket is about the best chance the Democratic Party has right now, and even that is a long shot. As much as it pains me to say it, a Giuliani/Thompson ticket would be hard to beat. Oh well, at least Giuliani is somewhat progressive for a republican unlike the extreme right-wing, chicken-hawk, religious whack-jobs running the country now.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:16:20 GMT

Cheryl - Actually, I do remember. Are you suggesting that the Clintons saying they are not going to give GQ access to Bill if the magazine runs a negative story on Hillary is even remotely comparable to the snowjob the Bush Administration did regarding Iraq? That's ridiculous, if that is what you are suggesting.

Let me ask YOU a question, Cheryl. If a magazine ran a negative story on your spouse, would you then agree to do an interview/profile with that same magazine shortly thereafter? I know I wouldn't. From what I gather, the Clintons informed GQ that if they ran the negative story about her, they would not have access to Bill for an upcoming article. I see nothing wrong with that. Is Bill obligated to do interviews with every magazine that requests it? Of course not. I think trashing his wife would be a good reason not to do an interview with a publication.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:20:22 GMT

Van want to put your MONEY where your MOUTH is !! . Money and Number of donors, this quarter. We will see who really has the strongest support. PUT UP or SHUT UP

Grace, NY (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 11:43 AM)

Which is it, amount of contributions or number of donors, or both?
How could anyone make and/or collect on a bet here?

You will have every chance to tout your t-shirt and keychain, "contributors", after the 3rd quarter numbers are released next week, and I'm not going anywhere.

Your ability to raise money is almost always in direct proportion to your position in the polls. Obama's ability to raise funds will depend on whether he can move the poll numbers, and so far he's been moving them in the wrong direction. Logic dictates that his fund raising will dry up if he can't start to show something in NH, or SC, where Clinton leads by over 20 points(NH) and leads by 18 points (SC) in the most recent polls;
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/

You could look it up.

I'm sorry that a lot of the Obama supporters like you aren't very happy with the way the campaign is going, but attacking Clinton and her supporters and posting snide, often false claims won't change a thing.

Clinton REALLY has the strongest support, any way you slice it. Obama supporters are reduced to taking comfort in whatever last refuges of his candidacy's viability they have left. It looks like we are down to the number of contributors. What will be left after Monday?

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:25:16 GMT

Amy, Amherst NH (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 2:04 PM)

Newsmax? Please! Have the stones to post your Democrat hating right-wing source next time, so we can all give it (and you) the consideration it deserves

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:29:16 GMT

How rediculas , who will buy that for a dollor .

ki houston (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 2:07 PM)

What more is there to say?

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Jerry Greenberg, El Dorado, Arkansas — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:30:42 GMT

The politicians love to gush about their deathless devotion to democracy.
Democracy is a system that is responsive to the will of the people.
The people want to get out of Iraq and have wanted to for some time.
They have been ignored.
Is this a democracy? Explain!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Hans — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:35:45 GMT

Consider this: Democrat's popular proposals are all unable to be enacted with no increase in the debt. Since they claim they will not raise taxes.
Since they claim they will not reduce benefits. Since they claim they will raise benefits.

If they could persuade themselves to run a canidate which would boost the system by real amounts, even if that amount was not dramatic- see "no child left behind"- without costing dramatic dollars....

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Brenda Utley, East Lansing MI — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:38:50 GMT

Barbara C [[I find it amusing that the WSJ has a "hit piece" on Bill Clinton already. How long ago was it since Murdoch bought the paper?]]

Imagine that, a negative story about the Clinton's. I guess Bill will no longer allow access to the WSJ.

Seems like a lot people on this thread have their noses firmly up the Clinton's collective butt. They get a kind of defensive when Her Highness catches a little flak. Looks like a nerve is getting struck. Either that, or its some kind of an inferiority complex.

Hillary certainly appears to be the delicate one.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mark Thieme — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:40:01 GMT

Van, if you can't find the courage to zip your fly, at least do humanity a favor and take a long limpid look at your delusion.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:42:15 GMT

To Obama in '08, Pittsburgh PA.:
Man, you say it better than I could ever hope to. Keep the faith. It's going to work out in the end. People will realize that, sadly, Hillary has sold herself to the devil and is just like most of the other Rebublicans. Too bad. The concensus builder, the next president will be Obama. It's interesting that even among conservative young voters, Obama is the candidate of choice (they like Ron Paul as well) and I think that in the end the Dems will rally around Obama, the best that America has to offer.
Obama/Webb '08

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

ki houston — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:48:13 GMT

Nothing till monday ,put up or shut up . if obama has less donnors or funds i will stop posting if obama has more in both you stop posting. Bet or what

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mark Thieme — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:51:36 GMT

No, Jerry America is not a democracy. The United States used to be a Republic.

It remains to be seen what we will be after the Bush/Cheney/Rove coup.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:57:43 GMT

Mark Thieme (park) (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 2:06 PM)

Thanks for again taking time away from your very important position (I'm sorry, which campaign do you pretend to be with again?) to post another homage.
Do you have any thoughts other than sophomoric attempts to, well I'm not really sure what anymore.

Anything about the campaigns? Today's headlines? Anything?
Except for the fact that you include my name in your, (really, what the heck do you think you're doing?) post(s) that you have nothing to say worth commenting on would make you easy to ignore, as this is a political message board and that's why I'm here.

What seem to be cries for help, or an unrequited love for me, make me feel embarrassed for you. Why don't you go back to making believe you are a major player in one of the campaigns? I know that it will be hard now because no one in their right mind would believe that someone who posted the weird, completely off-topic mistake you did in this thread could be involved in any ADULT pursuit, let alone running a PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, but rather than change your screen name or simply finding another blog, it is worth a try.

Remember when you posted about the days events instead of conducting a sadly comical vendetta no one cares about on someone who sees you as someone to be pitied?

Go back to your make-believe campaign and help your imaginary, mystery candidate take the pretend primaries, win the fantasy nomination and go all the way to the Presidency of...

http://www.lomb.com/

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:03:34 GMT

Nothing till monday ,put up or shut up . if obama has less donnors or funds i will stop posting if obama has more in both you stop posting. Bet or what

ki houston (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 2:48 PM)

You would just change your screen name. Luckily, your unique take on the English language would give you away.

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Dr. J. diggs jr — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:03:45 GMT

will the next admin sweep REPARATION FOR SLAVERY TO AFROAMERICAN UNDER THE RUG. IF THIS IS DONE, THE VIRUS OF RACE WILL PREVAIL IN THE USA. make them equal, can we be conquered one day that will end this racial virus. the elected president will have to restore our image at home, for we are divided, as well as abroad.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Susan, Miami — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:08:13 GMT

Hey Don, the sky is blue here in florida most of the time, although it does get a funny yellowish,green when hurricanes get close. I stand by my comments about Hillary and am predicting she will be our next president. Can't come soon enough. What color is your sky there in Tulsa OK by the way?

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Dimas Pasaye — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:10:44 GMT

I believe these last debates might get a little more heated than the earlier ones. I want to see the gloves come off and see who is left standing at the end of it.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mark Thieme — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:12:00 GMT

Mitchell Feldman...

I cannot remain silent to you any longer.

I agree with you completely in terms of what Obama means to this country. And it will disappoint us dearly when Clinton wins the nomination.

You say you have inside information, very inside. I think I know of what you speak. However, you have left out the Clinton/Bush factor which is playing very strongly now.

Yes, she has sold herself to the devil in a sense, but she and Bill seem to be the only ones who can hold Bushco at bay.

If your insider info tells you why this is so, you will see that Hillary is ordained. Even Bushco won't interfere in any substantial sense.

Bushco always acts in its own best interests and if you know where those interests lie, you are dealing with the most inside info there is right now.

Clinton will win because of something that may only emerge long after the fact. No worry. Obama is clean, but he is smart. He knows the role he must play now. And his future at this juncture is pretty solid.

Some of the more metrically inclined are excited about polls, but polls follow reality about five miles back. They may not be wrong, but they are damn shallow indicators of what is going on.

So, I'm with you. I love Obama... but I will welcome the Clintons back to "restore dignity to the White House."

Obama's day will come... and God willing, I'll be there with you, dancing all night!

Vaya con Dios, amigo!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:12:39 GMT

Mark - Am I going to have to spank you? LOL

Van is good for this site. I get to work out my finger scrolling past all of his long posts. Man, you should see how strong it is now. :)

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:15:18 GMT

Van: The trouble in 1948 was not with polling techniques but that polling stopped in September of that year (just 6 weeks before the election) and they were way off. You really can't draw regression lines in polling because just as all politics is local (Tip O'Neill), most politics is temporal. The solidifying of poll numbers don't happen until right before the election. These polls don't mean diddly sqwat at this time. In fact polls in general are questionable. In 2000,when people were polled about the election (both primary and general) there was a fair number of people who thought that they were being asked about George H W Bush and not our very own GWB (imagine the problem in Virginia). I'm sure that name recognition still plays heavily in calculating the lead that Hillary may have at this time. Also, while Hillary's name recognition makes her a logical choice if one is voting against Bush's policies, the vote for the other Dems is not only anti-Bush but anti-Hillary. Looking at the polls that way, there's a lot of anti-Hillary sentiment among Dems and Independents. Again, I propose that the outcome, whatever it may be, cannot be determined by polls as of September 26th, 2007. And, actually, I am very happy with how the Obama campaign is progressing.
Obama/Webb '08

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Sierra, SF — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:15:50 GMT

Kato in Des Moines:
Thanks for your response.
EVERYTHING I've heard
(admittedly through the focus of the media)
is that the Iraqis DON'T WANT PARTITION.
Sorry, for American politicians in the heat of an election to decide this for Iraqis is paternalistic.
Even politicians trying to look 'statesmanlike'.
To repeat, everything I've read says the Iraqis don't want a partition.
Who are we to say otherwise ?

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Crystal (Time for change) — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:28:23 GMT

Van why do you dislike Obama and Edwards? I mean honestly I am just asking? Especially Obama, it seems like your comments are a bit racist. Racism is a heart issue and once it evolves it comes out in different forms. I mean if you tell me some real, honest reason why you think a person should not vote for them, I would listen, but please don't make up lies and try to deceit people.
That is really uncalled for. If you like Clinton fine, but I challenge you to question her weaknesses instead of boasting on what YOU perceive to be her strengths!!!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

George — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:31:18 GMT

Obama/Webb '08

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 2:42 PM)

Two freshman senators for president? Sounds like a winner.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mark Thieme — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:34:51 GMT

Don't spank me, thank me.
Or is it the other way around?

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Sierra, SF — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:35:52 GMT

Mark Thieme (: 'No, Jerry America is not a democracy. The United States used to be a Republic.

It remains to be seen what we will be after the Bush/Cheney/Rove coup.'

Actually, Mark Thieme, I think it's an empire, now.
Let's see if Obama or Edwards can turn it back into a republic.....

(..... where's Brutus when you need him ?)

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:47:57 GMT

"it seems like your comments are a bit racist."

Crystal (Time for change) (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 3:28 PM)

Please post one of my racist comments. I demand that you quote my racist comments. I demand that you back up your disgusting accusation. I demand it!

Then we can put them along side your bigoted comments above. The lowest form of discourse is to accuse another of something without any proof. Your accusation disgusts me,as does the ease with which you sling it at people.
I demand that you either post the source of your evil, disgusting insult, post an apology, or be shown for the race-baiter you are.
You don't even know my ethnicity. Your contention is repulsive and obviously false.

If I was to challenge you to question Obama's weaknesses instead of boasting on what YOU perceive to be his strengths, what would YOUR response be?
Yes, that's what all supporters of the different candidates do, question their weaknesses. lol

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Grace, NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:50:28 GMT

"[u]nlike most of his opponents, Obama sells his campaign merchandise directly, instead of outsourcing it," and the law requires that money paid for merchandise sold directly by the campaign be counted as a contribution."

Well you defeat your own arguement...Hillary could have finance her own merchandise, if she had thought anybody would WANT it. But I don't blame her for not taking the RISK and OUTSOURCEING it. People know when they buy it it is a contribution...no different from sending in $5 or $10. But of course Hillary has never had a new idea.

Don't worry she has copied everything else he has done I am sure she will copy this soon also.

So anty up...You believe she is going to do better...put your money where your mouth is...this shouldn't bother some one with 1,ooo,ooo supporters. That's what she SAID she had. Couldn't be she was LYING now could it.... I forgot minus 260 HSU donors LOL

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:51:28 GMT

Mark - Maybe a little of both? It doesn't always have to be one or the other you know. A little from column A (whether it be spanking, or Hillary) and a little from column B (whether it be thanking, or Obama)...and well, this sounded a lot better before I wrote it down. :)

...still waiting for the ride to FOD.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

ki houston — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:53:04 GMT

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:53:43 GMT

Captain Sky-

Do the Clinton campaign a favor and support someone else. Your rhetoric disgusts me and I hope, everyone else here.
Senator Obama is a great AMERICAN, and to disparage him with race and religion inflaming outright lies and your (not-so) thinly veiled bigotry aimed at one of his supporters here is disgraceful and perhaps should not have made it past the moderator.

Van

vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 3:23 PM)

Posted from another thread to address the race-baiter Crystal and to further discredit her lying gutter smear.

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

MK,MO — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:57:09 GMT

once again it should be pointed out that the republicans want mrs. clinton to receive the democratic nomination. after the nomination, if hillary is successful, the repubs will bring out all the extremely damaging issues that many posters on here say doesn't exist. this will energize the fence sitters to vote against her, then it's all hale president giuliani, what do you think him and his mentor steve forbes have in mind for the good 'ol u.s.a.? that being said hillary will still have all the sexist females mindlessly screaming for her, but that won't be enough, hillary is not the candidate needed for the changes that must take place soon, contrary to what the self-ordained experts say, this nomination cycle is far from over, I still believe enough sensible dems exist to save from the hillary disaster, time will tell

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Grace, NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:58:02 GMT

Nothing till monday ,put up or shut up . if obama has less donnors or funds i will stop posting if obama has more in both you stop posting. Bet or what

ki houston (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 2:48 PM)

Van...I like his challenge. I'll go for that. Afraid to bet on the Fat Lady...Just like we thought just like Hillary nothing but talk...back it up!!!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mark Thieme — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:59:10 GMT

Hang on folks... another vanreuter meltdown...

sit back and enjoy the show!

The popcorn is popped and the beer is chilled... way chilled.

God I love this board!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mark Thieme — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:00:27 GMT

Carrie...

Actually, it sounds great to me. Either and both...
But that's just me.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Kato in Des Moines — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:05:01 GMT

Sierra: The Bosnians didn't want partition either, Eventually, diplomacy prevailed and they came around.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:06:38 GMT

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

ki houston — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:07:10 GMT

van i will post one of your slightly i will admit , but still racist if you know our history. remeber "obam-bozzeled "

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:09:28 GMT

van, sounds like someone is a-scared . But i guess u figured out that it was me that was "me" whom exposed u back when you were trying to act like you were imparcial and just stating facts but i gave you a lot of clues. shows your lack of common since . but if screen names are all we give up so what. looks like your all talk and grammar and no substance like ya girl. One more chance to be a man . Whats up bet or no.

btw ,this is a blog not a english class have a point and some balls.

ki houston (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 3:53 PM)

If anyone can translate what ki has addressed to me, maybe I'll respond. The first part seems to require a secret decoder ring.
Do you really think that if you can't take the time and effort to compose a coherent post, that your opinions and thoughts can be taken seriously? This may not be English class, but English is the language we're using to communicate here.

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Crystal (Time for change) — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:11:15 GMT

Race-baiter? Well if that is the case you DEFINITELY took the bait!!! I am just simply saying I am trying to find the source of what I perceive to be anger towards the other candidates. You speak about Obama with so much conviction in your posts, try hard to discuss what you perceive to be weaknesses to no avail. And yes, each candidate that I am interested in I know there weaknesses, that is just as important as knowing there strengths.

The lengths you go to discredit Edwards and doubly to discredit Obama are mindboggling!! Now I don't know your race and you do not know mine, but I just call it as I see it, and I figure if you were African-American you would have put it in your reply to me, since you didn't and based on the conviction you displayed in your subsequent posts, I stand by my claim. But don't fret it is just my opinion, I may be wrong but........I doubt it!!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mark Thieme — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:12:04 GMT

Vanreuter...

Get with it. Dozens of campaign staffers all over Iowa (a couple or so in DC) are waiting for the show to start.

I know its late for you and all, but just one more time with the rage and the demands and that shirttail sticking out of your open fly...

Your loyal fans await.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Aaron, Arlington, Va. — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:13:10 GMT

Finally, Mitchell Feldman, someone has pointed out the real difficulty with the Democrats accomplishing any significant change in the Iraq war situation. I've heard too many times how continuing to vote to fund the war is hypocrisy for the Democrats, but you are correct: NOT funding the war, or passing a spending bill with timelines attached, will just garner a veto that the Dems don't have the numbers to overturn. It's as simple as that -- a political game of chicken with the risks borne by our men and women in uniform, which to me is unacceptable.

Oh, nice to see you're from little old Vestal, Mitch -- born and raised there myself! Nice!

Another thing is that I wish people will make the distinction that supporting our troops, which just about everyone does, is very different than supporting the war in Iraq as a concept and as it is being led.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:14:24 GMT

God I love this board!

Mark Thieme(park) (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 3:59 PM)

The board does not reciprocate.

Van
What campaign did you say you were with AGAIN? lol

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

ki houston — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:16:16 GMT

nice jesture van. If it was sincere and i have no reason to think other wise. yes i give you credit for that. still think you are a-scared though.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:16:38 GMT

Crystal,

Go to the trash heap quickly, before I have a complete meltdown.

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

MK,MO — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:18:26 GMT

the self proclaimed vanreuter the great, NY NY, 'I demand that you back up your disgusting accusation. I demand it!'

I demand this, I demand that. van were you stomping your feet, waving your arms about when you typed that.

van baby, in case you hadn't noticed no one cares what you demand, your arrogance is surpassed only by the candidate that pays you to clog up this blog, get over yourself it's unhealthy to imagine you are that powerful

what ever institution your in should think about suspending your computer privileges until you calm down

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:25:04 GMT

Race-baiter? Well if that is the case you DEFINITELY took the bait!!! There it is. you said it yourself.

You accused me of being a racist.

You are a race-baiter and a liar.

I have my proof. What do you have?

Anyone who expressed delight at someone being falsely accused of something as serious as being a racist, is even lower than the one who made the false accusation.

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Crystal (Time for change) — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:25:53 GMT

Awhh, Van, sorry did I pinch a nerve? Let me not get on your bad side, I would hate for you to spend countless number of hours trying to think of false stories and find ridiculous polls to use to discredit me!!!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:26:43 GMT

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:30:22 GMT

MkMO

I find many of your posts to be slightly racist and supportive of child molesters. Why do you support child molesters? Why are you a racist? We all want to know. I am sure that many will find your answers very revealing.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mark Thieme — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:33:19 GMT

MK..well said.

The dude wants attention and boy does he have it now!

I really don't think he is paid by any campaign, he is just lonely.

I think I see why.

It will be sad (sort of) watching him implode in the coming days, but he is well on the way... maybe he can find a reading group to disrupt.

MK, you and I have been on this board forever and we almost never agree, but we never have exchanged a harsh word. Ironically, we find complete agreement in the toxicity of a man whose politics are more like mine, but who would embarass any candidate he supports.

And then, as you say, as if anyone cared about all his Rasmussen ramblings. He is good for the entertainment value though.

I just hope he gets help.

Pass the popcorn...

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Betty Schier — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:35:07 GMT

Even though Dennis Kucinich won the last debate, at ABC News' own admission, despite the fact that he was nearly excluded from the debate, you are still censoring him. People, Dennis Kucinich is America's best and only real hope, for our own future and for the world. Don't dismiss him without learning what he stands for> GO DENNIS!!!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:36:55 GMT

"Van why do you dislike Obama and Edwards?"

Crystal (Time for change) (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 3:28 PM)

Because Clinton is ahead in the polls, and the polls are God's gift to the humans.

Van

vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 4:06 PM)
van i will post one of your slightly i will admit , but still racist if you know our history. remeber "obam-bozzeled "

ki houston (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 4:07 PM)

The first post is a fake from ki

Please post whatever it is you are talking about. If playing on a candidate's name is a crime, there is more than enough guilt to go around with the many variations on senator Clinton's or Obama's names to be found here.
Not to bruise your ego, but I have no idea who you are or what you are talking about, so be a little less cryptic.

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mark Thieme — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:42:58 GMT

I am a make believe campaign staffer and I'm here to let you all know that I have super secret information that Hillary Clinton will lose! That mean van guy keeps posting those stupid polls. Make him stop! They hurt my eyes as I plot my imaginary campaign stops in my basement apartment in my bathrobe. Maybe I'll pretend to be him and post something here, as I am very good at playing pretend....

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Steve, San Diego, CA — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:44:46 GMT

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Steve, San Diego, CA — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:45:12 GMT

Republicans make me laugh. I grew up in a Republican area, in a Republican family and was a Republican until I reached the age of reason.

As an old friend of mine once said, “American politics is a matter of proportion; if the Democrats steal a dollar, the Republicans steal $10”.

There is no more under handed, corrupt bunch of complete liars than the “modern” Republican party. ANY American with an ounce of honesty or integrity should be thoroughly ashamed of them.

They denounce the Clintons for a piddling little land deal named Whitewater while totally ignoring the huge excesses by the Bush family which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Bin Laden family since shortly after they finished illegally trading with Nazi’s after the war. They go after Hillary for stopping a stupid little negative article on her staff while deliberately and with malice of forethought planted completely erroneous information through their stooge Judith Miller to sway the American public into an illegal and false war.

Never mind the complete lies the Republicans have no trouble justifying under “end justifies the means” mantra. Remember when we were kids and that most dangerous philosophy was shown to be the tirade of dictators and bad men everywhere? Like propaganda we rejected it! The modern Republican party worships it.

Clinton was dumb to get a BJ in the white house is true, but how does that compare to Bush who gets his jollies off in the same way by the reckless and totally self serving killing of our fine men and women in uniform in Iraq. Yes, they knew better as Cheney demonstrated in 1994, they did it for one reason; to fill the coffers of their friends.

The American people can’t even protect the health of their children or rescue beleaguered NO, but we can sure spend billions killing brown people who don’t even want us there. We will NEVER get the true story of the corruption in Iraq or the Repuke companies walking away with billions while our young men die.

The once peerless reputation of America is now, after seven years of Republican rule, smeared with illegal wiretaps, illegal internments, murder, CIA contractors ie. hired assassins which was illegal for years since Kennedy but resurrected by Bush and the toy soldiers, blackwater ops, secret detention centers, waterboarding and torture already proven not to work worth a dam. The Republicans have shat all over the beauty that was the United States of America.

I won’t even go into the historical facts that make plain we and no one else caused all this with 50 years of pathetically childish foreign policy.

George Bush should be impeached under that most basic law; US Presidents have and swear to only one duty, to protect the Constitution of the United States of America. George Bush has monumentally failed and even deliberately failed in that task.

While our press is asleep at the wheel and has been for some time, even our people are blind. “The Conservative takes up an ideal only after the Liberal has used it up and thrown it away” Mark Twain. Every single great idea in this country is born of Liberal ideals from minimal government, flat taxes to school meals. This country was founded by Liberal revolutionaries. The most Liberal people of their time, who were revolting from exactly the kind of people who are currently in power in America. The Conservatives just copy those ideals and can’t even get that right!

Minimal government? George Bush has created the largest government in American history and presses for it to be larger! The only government services he cuts are those that serve the people! While he wishes to gorge the military industrial complex over its whooping 50% of our GNP already!

Gore as VP, under the instructions of Clinton, reduced our federal government by 300,000 (non-military) personnel giving us the smallest federal government we had in 50 years.

Fiscal responsibility? The Republicans claim? This one is hilarious! The last time America had a balanced budget and beyond; a surplus! A Democrat did it! As with the time before that. Republicans think of government money as a child thinks of his parents money, inexhaustible. They have now left a debt even the Democrats will struggle to make up for, never mind putting us in the pocket of the Chinese… anyone else remember the screaming Republican rhetoric regarding the Chinese during Clintons time? Pure Repuke hypocrisy as usual.

Business? The Republicans? Whose business? The only business sympathetic to the Republicans are their crony businesses or those with a large labor content they wish to screw over… the rest suffer.

Law & order? Is it any shock to anyone crime ALWAYS goes up during a Republican administration, while it was a Democrat not a Republican who increased police forces in the US, while the Repuke answer is always build more prisons and enact more stupid laws to inter citizens like that stupid waste of time flag burning amendment. Lets save brain dead Terry Schiavo but lock up half a million Black men for having a joint. Dumb in the extreme, then complain about prison costs!

Anyone remember the 60+ congressmen implicated in the Jack Abramoff scandal so short a time ago? Funny how that story was never followed up. Never mind Foley, Craig, Vitter etc and the Republicans total hypocrisy on “family values”.

There should be a perp walk right out of the White House and every single Senator guilty or indicted of a felony crime, no matter which party. It is a privelidge to serve the American people and I fear many have forgotten that. Remember the standing ovation the Republicans gave David Vitter??? Extreme Hypocrisy again.

Under international law George Bush IS a war criminal. No wonder they constantly belittle the UN and the international courts which is strange as America was a primary sponsor in setting them up to begin with! That’s how far we have drifted from our core values.

There is not Left in this country, hasn’t been in a long while. The Democrats are Centerists and the current Republican party has gone so far to the right they are neo-fascists, by every definition of the word.

My hope was that academy award winner, author, statesman and soon to be Nobel winner Al Gore would run and win to wipe away the disastrous last 7 years… but if not I’d take Hilary or any Democrat any day over the scurrilous lying and completely corrupt scumbags that call themselves the Republican party these days.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Olerb, Lenoir City, TN — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:45:56 GMT

Mr. Bush just upped the ante to $190 Billion to fund only 2008 Iraq War! What are the candidates going to do individually on the floor votes to prevent his getting that kind of money. Wouldn't defraying withdrawal costs ONLY be more sensible and people satisfying?

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mark Thieme — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:50:23 GMT

As I watch vanreuter slowly disintegrate like the fabled Dead String Quartet on SNL of times past, it occurs that he is indeed a fragile person.

I, for one, refuse to pile on (any more!).

Time to cut the poor guy a break.

Sorry boys and girls, there is nothing to see here. Move along.

Damn good popcorn though!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Crystal (Time for change) — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:53:22 GMT

Steve you like Al Gore, but say you would vote for Clinton, Al Gore wouldn't even vote for Clinton!!! That is why he hasn't endorsed her, they aren't even on speaking terms!!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:54:17 GMT

Mark, Mark, Mark...you really should not feed the animals. But since you are, you might as well share the popcorn with me.

By the way...I think someone is pretending to be you. They lack your sense of style, however.

Oh, and Van? I think I'll keep Mark, if it's all the same to you. He's at least interesting and, as far as I know, is not prone to temper tantrums.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Olerb, Lenoir City, TN — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:54:43 GMT

One more time:

ROME/USA IS BURNING RAPIDLY AND CONGRESS CONTINUES TO FIDDLE!

Thank you!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:54:45 GMT

This is getting out of control. I apologize to everyone for my pretentious ways. My assumptions that Clinton and myself are vastly superior to everyone are unfounded and out of line. Once again please accept my apologies.

Van

vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 4:26 PM)

More bullshit from Make-believe Markie

I have never attacked anyone on this board. That you think that it's okay for someone to accuse me of being a racist, even reveling in it, says much about the quality of your character.

When Clinton sews up the nomination, in FEBRUARY, I will have a little chuckle remembering all the desperate characters who are no longer here.
You must see me as very powerful, to be the focus of so much invective and abuse, from so many (or is it two or three people with 10 screen names each?) who go out of their way to bet, challenge, smear, and otherwise devote their somewhat limited energies to me and my mostly statistical posts.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:07:30 GMT

Oh, and Van? I think I'll keep Mark, if it's all the same to you. He's at least interesting and, as far as I know, is not prone to temper tantrums.

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 4:54 PM)

Keep him? you could be him. Do you know which campaign he is working with?lol

Thank you for standing by when Crystal accused me of being a racist and being quick to accuse me of a tantrum for being legitimately outraged by it. I am sure that it wouldn't bother you to be accused of racism, but please know that I would be quick to come to your defense.

Have I ever directed a post to you or replied to one of yours before this one? I am sure that I have not.

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

tarheeldem, charlotte nc — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:08:30 GMT

please Tim, PLEASE give the "second tier" candidates equal time -- Dodd and Biden are the only Senatorial candidates who voted against the dangerous Kyl-Lieberman amendment today. I would like to hear their views at least as much as those of Clinton and Obama. Let them speak!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

your vote doesn't matter anyway — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:08:37 GMT

When it comes to the Iraq war the time table thing is a joke. "Fight for that hill today and give it up tomorrow." That's retarded. If you want to get out say "tomorrow we are leaving Iraq". If you don't, then any blood shed during the "time table" will be on your hands.

Did we have faulty intelligence going in to the war? Yes. Does that mean we need to leave now? No. We started this and we need to find a GOOD solution. We lost 4,000 brave soldiers. Does that mean any Iraqis that were killed are any less? No. If we leave now and don't try to help them then we just created a whole bunch of new terrorists who will hate us.

You say the military is failing? It's not failing. The military is doing exactly what it's supposed to do. It has control of the important parts of Iraq. What is failing is our DIPLOMATIC mission. Anyone who says you send a soldier to be a diplomat is dumb. We are sending our soldiers to try to control all of Iraq. That is impossible.

Where are our diplomats in Iraq? Where are the talks amongst the different groups trying to hammer out a Constitution? That's where we failed. You can kill as many insurgents as you want, but that doesn't help if you can't win the peoples' minds. People are yelling to go to Darfur to help. What do you think we will create when we leave Iraq in its current state? I don't want our troops over there either. You want my support Democrats/Republicans? Actually find a good solution and I'll vote for you.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:09:55 GMT

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mark Thieme — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:12:39 GMT

Carrie,
As you see I'm back in my cage for now.
Only one other person has disgusted me more than our current poseur, and I got a little snotty on that one too--- but someone needs to scrub the commode...

One point: Yes, Of course he is posting as me.

No problem, I have been on here so long, everybody knows my style or lack thereof.

Just for the record, I am using no other names to post and I have NEVER (you can look it up!) stooped so low as to use another person's moniker on this or any board.

Of course the moderators, and the regulars who have survived the vanreuter tsunami, already know that, as you have well pointed out.

I am (a little) sorry for my part in driving him to this pathetic public embarassment... so, I will do penance by actually getting some work done for awhile.

See you in FOD.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:14:17 GMT

Mark Theime(Park)

Thanks for again taking time away from your very important position (I'm sorry, which campaign do you pretend to be with again?) to post another homage.
Do you have any thoughts other than sophomoric attempts to, well I'm not really sure what anymore.

Anything about the campaigns? Today's headlines? Anything?
Except for the fact that you include my name in your, (really, what the heck do you think you're doing?) post(s) that you have nothing to say worth commenting on would make you easy to ignore, as this is a political message board and that's why I'm here.

What seem to be cries for help, or an unrequited love for me, make me feel embarrassed for you. Why don't you go back to making believe you are a major player in one of the campaigns? I know that it will be hard now because no one in their right mind would believe that someone who posted the weird, completely off-topic mistake you did in this thread could be involved in any ADULT pursuit, let alone running a PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, but rather than change your screen name or simply finding another blog, it is worth a try.

Remember when you posted about the days events instead of conducting a sadly comical vendetta no one cares about on someone who sees you as someone to be pitied?

Go back to your make-believe campaign and help your imaginary, mystery candidate take the pretend primaries, win the fantasy nomination and go all the way to the Presidency of...

http://www.lomb.com/

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:17:16 GMT

Van - I have been accused of all sorts of things. I don't need anyone to defend me, however; I prefer to fight my own battles. You're a big boy, I'm sure you can handle a little roughing it up.

Also, sorry to disappoint you, but I am not actually Mark Thieme in drag - or would he be me in drag? Hmm. At any rate, we are not the same person.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:28:40 GMT

My posts are based on undebatable statistics, so leave me alone. As a matter of fact, in New Hampshire, 132 people said that they are voting for Clinton, whereas only 61 said they are voting for Obama. That's enough for me, and it should be enough for you. Take that Mark.

Van

vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 5:09 PM)

Yet another fake post attesting to the fear I strike into the hearts of the anti-Clintonites and pompous, self-important asses whose thin skins and oversized egos I inflame by my very existence. Thank you for exposing what people are reduced to when they can't compete in an honest debate based on facts.

"I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O, Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it." Voltaire

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Mark Thieme — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:41:20 GMT

Since vanreuter does such a good job posing as me on this board I have outsourced all my posting for the rest of this week to him.

This is a tryout only!

If he does well, he could have a career in politics. If not... you know what's coming...

Back to the rubbish pile.

Be back Monday and we'll see how the Rasmussen Ripper does being me over a longer stretch.

Remember... until next Monday...when you see Mark Thieme, it will be vanreuter!

Cool, huh? My own ghost writer!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

ki houston — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 22:10:14 GMT

mark stop man . you making my stomach hurt plus i will get fired if i cant be quite. for van all of my post are me . no one can emulate my bad english im good at math though , want to bet on some math problems since you dont have any faith in ya girl.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 22:18:05 GMT

Who do you think cares about your none too clever feud with me when I barely do?

You are a joke pretending to be in a campaign and having a flame-war with me that has it's genesis (and I'm forced to speculate here) in your thin skin and oversized ego having been pierced and deflated by my exposure of your big lie. You are a poseur, pretending to be something you are not.

You have no more audience here than I do, which makes your seeming to play to one even more pathetic, but I suppose if you can create an imaginary campaign, you can create an imaginary audience too.

I make fun of you because I see through your phony claim to be a, "top-level" campaign staffer on one of the presidential campaigns. What is your reason Mark?
What is it that drives you to make most of your posts either about me or directed to me?
For someone who has accused me of suffering from a mental illness (as an insult, yet), the cause of your obsession with me has never been clear.

You are not a top campaign staffer with anyone, so why don't you come clean and admit it, it's good for the soul. You aren't very politically astute, or even very amusing or clever in your feeble attempts at satire.

If You never posted anything that referred to me, you would be very easy to ignore, and I know I have implored you to ignore me on more than one occasion.
Nobody cares if you come back on Monday or any other day for that matter, and I don't think that you have to worry about anyone using your screen name in vain. You just aren't that important.

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Tony Newbill — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 22:58:56 GMT

As far as thinking about the majority needs of all , Oil flow is at the heart of the matter , and if we leave the Middleast to destablize , the signal that will send to Chavez and the rest of the world Dictators will cripple the USA and Europe , from the collapes of the oil markets around the world , as the Iranian regime and these other oil exporter dictators take over the Oilflows and cut off the flow of these oil supplies ,and this will crash the Free MARKETS OF THE Industrialized Nations , and What will we do then for Food and Energy replacements here in the USA and in European countries effected by these Import needs , once we are cut off from the current world supplies we Import ???

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

amazed again, springfield, va — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 23:36:33 GMT

We should all hope that Hillary does well and does win the nomination and the presidency! We will get Bill back and this country will once again be respected around the world. Those of you who are so afraid of Hillary are bigots or extremely jealous that a woman might win. Get a life!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, ny, ny — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 23:51:07 GMT

To All:

I have to post these baseless statistics showing Sen. Clinton is ahead otherwise she's is going to have Howard Wolfson and Mark Penn slap me around. I'm tired of being the GIMP!

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Not much — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 00:22:39 GMT

What do you know?

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

K Aitken, FT Worth TX — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 00:26:12 GMT

Although I am a staunch Democrat, does anybody else out there find it disconcerting that, if Hillary wins, that this country will have had 24 consecutive years with just two families running the Executive branch of the US Government? (4 - Bush Sr, 8 - Bill Clinton, 8 more Bush Jr.) That is too much power and control in the hands of two elitist families. We need a change people -- someone who thinks "outside the box" and not just "inside the Beltway"!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Period — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 00:53:22 GMT

Focus.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

vanreuter, NY NY — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 00:56:57 GMT

To All:

I have to post these baseless statistics showing Sen. Clinton is ahead otherwise she's is going to have Howard Wolfson and Mark Penn slap me around. I'm tired of being the GIMP!

Van

vanreuter, ny, ny (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 7:51 PM)

Another bogus post by a bogus person. You are a nut-job, whoever you are. What do you hope to accomplish with this idiocy?

I love the moderator at MSNBC too. Great job guys!

Van

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Nada — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 01:03:58 GMT

Sunyata

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Karma — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 01:14:04 GMT

Bully bullies

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Paul, rural Minnesota — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 03:12:46 GMT

I just stumbled on this massive collection of classic punditism that regular people just can't believe. And, of course, it contains the usual dose of "the Clinton's are the most diabolical couple in human history." Sorry, what matters to just about everyone's lives is who a President picks to run the military, the Cabinet, and on and on, and both of them would NOT pick the gang of ideological--or congenital crooks and suckups--who gather around our Current Occupant like flies on road kill.....If B.C. could run for a 3rd term, he would win hands down. Think about it.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Pat — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 03:32:54 GMT

Duel at Dartmouth invites undue criticism and fodder for Republicans to focus upon, and doesn't put Democrats in their best light - as they tend to challenge each other unnecessarily.

The tradition of debates need not be those that become that of Democratic gladiators to appease party factions, or to polarize the candidates sufficiently to create a favorite. Voters are more sophisticated than that, or should be. Gladiators are relics of Rome, not for modern political entertainment.

It was barely possible to listen to the answers for assessing the electricity between the candidates.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

StevenAK — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 03:46:01 GMT

Obama was impressive...again.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

David — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 04:09:58 GMT

All the Dems sound like defeatists. Not once did i hear we'll get out when we're victorious!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

John — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 04:27:33 GMT

Obama/Webb 08. Here here.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Wayne, TN — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 04:56:19 GMT

"Republicans make me laugh. I grew up in a Republican area, in a Republican family and was a Republican until I reached the age of reason."
Steve, San Diego, CA (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 4:45 PM)

Actually the rest of your post reveals that you have a long way to go before you reach that goal.
Its a fairly complete list of outdated and long debunked canards.
I wouldn't bother mentioning your post except for the recent poll which shows that Democrats are twice as likely to be snookered by conspiracy theorists.

Also you Democrats would do well to be a bit less sarcastic about the Southern States, most are majority Democrat yet they vote Republican in National Elections because the Democrats seldom field a trusty worthy candidate, which in their eyes would be a Conservative Democrat from a Southern State.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Iiz — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 06:10:01 GMT

Hillary... laughing? Oh no! C'mon, guys, do you really have to provide yet another example that our 'political discussion' in this country has devolved to nothing more than a parade of celebrities and soundbites? If we're analyzing speaking style, let me point out that our current 2-term prez regularly responds to questions by stuttering and stammering, giving the impression he knows nothing about any of the canned answers he's trying to spit out at the same time. Not to mention his annoying tendency to lose his train of thought mid-sentence. A chuckle would be a refreshing change, hardly a presidential impediment.

As to the WSJ front-page report on Bill's supposed 'involvement' in some dude's possibly bad business dealings, I can only assume this was a no-news day. Or are we seeing the early signs of Rupert Murdoch's influence? I've seen better journalism in the National Enquirer. Ok... not very often.

iz

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Iiz — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 07:33:10 GMT

. . .if Hillary wins, that this country will have had 24 consecutive years with just two families running the Executive branch of the US Government? (K Aitken, FT Worth TX

And if Hillary is elected to two terms, Chelsea, Jenna, and Barbara will all be old enough to continue the legacy.

iz

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Terry Bellville, Wilmington, DE — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 11:43:55 GMT

Why can't Hillary answer a tough question? Laughing like a loon just doesn't do it. We need answers, and this is no laughing matter. Frankly, I don't trust her, and 8 years of the Clintons are enough, period. Who's the answer? I don't know; we need to find out.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

b.b. — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 13:32:16 GMT

here is one for you clinton lovers... the word DICTATE.. how does bill clintons dictate?

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Ted Rahm — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 13:56:17 GMT

Lets face it, this country will not vote for a black person, or a lady for president.. Although I find this REPULSIVE, I think it to be true. Whats more, I also believe that HRC will find herself at the losing end of the votes, because the "Good ole boy, white mans world" people will take over. I sadly listened as a niece of mine, 15 years old, and a resident of Alabama explained that no woman in this country is smart enough to become president. Folks, they're teaching this in the public schools in the south, its' a way of life in the south. SICKENING!

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Jack Lucas, Phoenix Arizona — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 15:10:36 GMT

John Edwards is the only candidate who can win the general election. He is the man. This country has been completely overtaken by corporate greed and an executive branch that does not recognize the rule of law. Edwards is the man to fix that. He is a TRUE change agent, not just mouthing the words. Clinton is BUSH LITE. Obama is looking shell-shocked and scared, like he has the 50 million dollar lottery ticket in his hand and he's not quite sure what to do next.

The NeoCons and RePubes want Clinton to get the Democratic nod BECAUSE SHE CAN BE BEATEN! BUSH LITE. She is already selling out all over the place. By the time the primaries hit, the woman will have no soul left to sell.

John Edwards is the only guy who can restore dignity, trust, fairness, and pride to this country's working class men and women.

John Edwards is the only guy who presents a distinct choice, both within the Democratic party and in opposition to the Republicans.

Hell, Hillary might wind up in third or fourth place at the REPUB convention. Thats how republican she is!

It is not yet time for Obama

Edwards is the man. He won the debate. He is a great communicator...

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

ML — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 16:19:41 GMT

Ok...Let me make it clear to everyone. This country has been governed by MALES...and here we are TODAY...3 CENTURIES DOWN THE ROAD...going no where, getting nothing done, and causing more trouble for our country. IT IS TIME...to let a LADY run the country. NO judgement can be made against Mrs. Clinton because there's no proof in the past of any failure from the First Lady. But look at all the failures the men has put on. We all want to see changes made, and now is the time to make those changes...

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Terri Wright, Saginaw, Mi — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 16:37:38 GMT

I am so sick of Obama talking about how he opposed the war. He is like a broken record. He only takes about this as he has nothing else solid to latch on to.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Willie Pearson (Female) — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 17:46:36 GMT

Come on media, stop bashing each and ever candidate that seems to have the lead. The media made John McCain the darling, then Obama the darling, and see what happened Hillary is still ahead. It takes intelligence, judgment, leadership, and simply the know how when to and when not to answer hypathetic questions. Give each politician running a fair shake. It is unfair to the people of America for the media to decide to lift one up and tear one down. We are all intelligent, caring and curious and interested people, so let us decide which candidate we should vote for. I for one am not influenced by the who the media places on the pedstal or in the gutter. I am informed enough to make my own decisions.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

R K Ando, Dallas, Texas — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 18:06:13 GMT

Another DUH! moment. Do you think Hillary will be forward thinking? The more she speaks the more that anyone can see that is would be more of the same. Obama said it right- " experience means more of the same".

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

BILL MANZIONE BKLYN N.Y. — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 20:20:21 GMT

BOTH PARTIES STINK ALONG WITH THE RUNNER UPS. NOT ONE PARTY CAN HAVE A SOLID CANDIDATE ON ONE PERSON. THEY ALL HAVE IDEAS ABOUT THE MONEY FOR THE WAR AND BUDGET IT, BUTH THEY CAN'T BUDGET SOCIAL SECURITY OR HEALTH CARE WITH OUR OWN TAX MONEY WE PAY FOR. I EVEN SENT BUSHY BOY A DRAFT/OUTLINE ON THESE TWO ISSUES.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

albert j. wilson port saint lucie florida — Fri, 28 Sep 2007 01:38:50 GMT

I believe the people of this country must have the courage to vote for a candidate who will truly lead our great nation.A candidate who will be an inspiration to other nations and their people.We as americans have a moral obligation to do what is right and just.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

Cynthia, Helenwood, Tennessee — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 19:07:32 GMT

I am still not sure who I want to vote for. I do know that Obama will not be one of the candidates I will vote for. This is why. I understand that there are many different varieties of Christianity. I have no problem with that. If we are to have a new President, I think that people should do their homework. In his religion, he does not put his hand over his heart when the National Anthem is being sung or when the Pledge is being said. Who in their right mind would vote someone in the Presidents office and NOT do those things. It is a disgrace to those of us who love our country and those of us who fight for our country. I think that is so disrespectful. Does he also turn his back on our flag? I just know that he will not get my vote. I know this is a country that everyone can have their own oppinion and this is mine. I don't want to be negative, but he is not someone I would want to run our country.

First thoughts: Duel at Dartmouth

john skarrface, sac, cal — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 19:59:00 GMT

he has no chance because he has different ideas on the way we should take care of our vetrains, and the people the protect our coutry and our freedoms from the people that want to take away our freedom. he also believe that we should strengthen our armed forces the one and only thing that is and has kept this country from falling to oter nations. for instance if we had lost in world war 1 we would be speeking a different language write now our freedoms would not be intact. even in ww2 we would be speaking germany or japan... then in vietnam obama no's not what he is doing this is not becasue he is black, but because he has never been in a war he doesnt know what it is like to have 3000 angry people wanting you dead. maybe if he was in ww2 or vietnam he would think differently about limiting our many soldier thatfight for us to about a 10th of what it is. this act would leave us barly able to if able to at all protect our homeland... we would be in a state of crisis because we would have our first fight on homeland it would be a disatster if we wouls allow man that would allow there to be a war on our homeland... we have allways fought on the enemys side it would be a disater if we fought at home our lines of suplies destroyed daily because we allow a man like obama to take away our security. it would be like our worst nightmare "imagine this for a second" .... ... a land where the sky is red, looks like a junk yard planes flying over bombs dropping every where.... ... ... now no one wants that so dont allow that to happen... and he wouldnt strengthen our borders........... to allow this man to take our country into his hands... its like leting a baby play with a tower with block at took 232 years to build up... what will the baby do he will just knock it over... dont let OBAMA DO THIS HE IS LIKE A BABY HE DOESNT KNOW WHAT HE IS DOING WITH OUR COUNTRY... thanks for reading this i hope you agree or think that maybe we dont want our country to go to hell