First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Crystal (Time for change) — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:32:18 GMT

Say it ain't so!! Poor Chinatown residents that don't even have trackable addresses being able to raise $380,000 toward Clinton's campaign and actually saying that they were pressured to give money!! Who would have thought!!!!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

jerry/corpus christi texas — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:37:14 GMT

So what does the L.A. Times story tell us?

1. There are a lot of Norman Hsu's in the world that are running their money thru poor people in Chinatown.
2. Clinton receives money from people that do not live in Chinatown, or are not living at all.
3. I love the way the Times mixes the Clinton name with gangsters and mob bosses, a taste of things to come.
4. Average family income in the area is $21,000. I wonder how people could be giving thousands of dollars if they are so poor. 45% of the population is living below the poverty line. The democrats should have used one of these families instead of the Frosts.
5. one person went to a Clinton rally, but did not give her $1000, even though this person's name was on the list. That alone, should have set off red flags that there is a criminal element in the Clinton campaign.
6. A man makes $500 a week, living in New York City, and yet he can afford to give $1000 to Hillary Clinton. Very interesting, I wonder how he can live on that?

Once again, the liberal media has shown that when it comes to playing dirty, the Clinton name shines brightly.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

jerry/corpus christi texas — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:40:41 GMT

I think a lot of democrats are going away in Louisiana after the way they handled the Katrina disaster. Bad enough Ray Nagin lacked the intelligence and guts to handle a dangerous situation, now the democrats have wasted billions of dollars building things that have nothing to do with the rebuilding of New Orleans.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

diane — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:47:13 GMT

Amazing how strong arming donors extend to even the poorest and most vunerable with the Clinton campaign.
It's not enough to shake down the wealthy who can afford it but, to shake down the very poor is just amazing.
It's not enough to arm twist the big shots into endorsing but, hang their vunerability over the heads of our most vunerable.
But, for someone who's reputation is not associated with honesty, intregrity or compassion, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.
I just wonder how long it will take for my party to wake up and see that the clintons are not something our party needs to relive or their ethical problems and daily soap operas.
And if my party still insists on living in a koolaid haze and nominate Hillary, how long before the people in my party are going to be wishing they listened to the warnings.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:47:56 GMT

Rudy speaks to Value Voters tomorrow. He is the one candidate for the republicans who could cause the religious right to form a THIRD PARTY. Here's what they're saying about him. (From "The Page")

Steve Scheffler, head of the Iowa Christian Alliance, on Giluiani to the Washington Post: “He has done everything to . . . put his finger in our eyes and tell us this constituency does not matter.”

But Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, says this about Giuliani’s appearance at the Summit: “He’s dehorned [just] by coming.”

But (another “but”) Ohio conservative leader Phil Burress says the only way he can convert them, “is to stand up and say, ‘I’ve been wrong all these years. I’m now pro-life.’”

But (one last “but”) Bill Bennett says, “He fights for causes dear to the heart of the audience he’s addressing, and he ought to remind them of that.”

Rudy scares his own party more than he scares us democrats...

http://thepage.time.com/

Note to First Read Staff;

The sometimes two plus hour delay in posting our comments here negates the primary purpose of the blog, real-time discussion and debate of the, "red meat" items being presented by your staff. It is frustrating to post an item and not see it appear for hours.
If this blog is for the folks who post on it, your management of the process should be more user-friendly.

Van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Rick Lapin, Albuquerque, NM — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:50:58 GMT

No time like the present to send along this little tidbit, since campaign corruption of various sorts and degrees has all but been raised to the power of a positive virtue by those who assure us in so many words that this is some kind of Dirty Campaign To End All Dirty Campaigns, so with your kind indulgence, Mr. Murray ...

SCENE: A courthouse in Chicago. “Kid” Gleason, regular-guy manager of the 1919 Black Sox and definitely NOT in on The Fix of the World Series that year, is being questioned about his earlier playing career as a pitcher, and has just stated that yes, the pitcher is the most important link in throwing a ball-game. He is desperately unhappy about The Fix his own guys pulled behind his too-trusting back, and just as unhappy that his testimony will further incriminate starter Eddie Cicotte. He wishes he was anywhere but on that witness stand -- but he’s Kid Gleason and he is under oath.

PROSECUTOR: Were there gamblers involved in sports in your day, Mr. Gleason?

GLEASON: Sure. How you gonna keep ‘em out?

PROSECUTOR: Were there incidents where games were thrown?

GLEASON: I heard stories.

PROSECUTOR: Were you ever approached personally?

GLEASON: Oh, no ... no, not personally. I ... I, uh, I had, uh, y’know, a reputation for, uh, bein’ the kinda guy who wouldn’t go for somethin’ like that.

PROSECUTOR: So you never had any thought of instigating a deal?

GLEASON: Oh, no ... no ... I never, uh ... I mean, I can see, though, where, uh ... well, maybe if a guy feels like he’s bein’ underpaid and, uh, maybe falls in with the wrong kinda people and they fed him a line ... how he could ... y’know, people are human. But I never, uh ... well, not that I’m a Holy Joe or nothin’ like that, but I just, uh --

PROSECUTOR: You don’t have to apologize for being honest, Mr. Gleason.

GLEASON: Yeah ...

-- from John Sayles’ “Eight Men Out”

* * * * * * * * * *

See ya after The Series, y’all ... or not ...

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

mikeeg,abdn,wa — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:52:00 GMT

I wonder if the repubs will backstab mccain again with their lies about mccain and his family, no lie or backstabbing tactics are too far for repubs.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Spud, Delmont, PA — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:54:26 GMT

Hey Jerry-do you and Rush sleep together?
Your song is as old as his

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:54:29 GMT

Interesting piece that hasn't been posted here;

The Power of 'Madam President'

y Eugene Robinson
Friday, October 19, 2007; Page A21

A friend of mine in New York -- a high-powered professional woman -- told me the other day that she thought the country had moved beyond the point where women should want to vote for Hillary Clinton just because she would be the first woman president. "Just vote for the best person," she said, with what sounds like impeccable logic.

But Clinton, according to all the polls, is winning overwhelming support from female voters. And the reason, I think, is that there's a flaw in my friend's logic: Except in some sort of arcane higher-dimensional geometry comprehensible only to mathematicians, you can't get beyond a point that you've never actually reached.
The fact is that we've never had a female president. And for many women across the country -- especially those of the boomer generation who have seen the role of women in American society change so dramatically -- Clinton's election would be a historic milestone and a source of great pride.

That's certainly not the only reason Clinton leads the national polls for the Democratic nomination. She started with universal name recognition and has proceeded to run a smart, largely mistake-free campaign. She is surrounded by the aura of her husband's eight-year administration, and while that may be a mixed blessing if she gets to the general election, it's a huge asset among the Democratic faithful.

But her lead among women over Barack Obama and her other rivals is so huge -- and so much greater than her lead among men -- that it has to have something to do with gender. Which is perfectly understandable.

Obama, of course, would be the first African American president, which would be equally historic. And the predictable notes of caution that must be inserted into any column about Clinton's campaign -- that the polls in Iowa show a close three-way race, that anything can happen in New Hampshire, that Obama can rebound in South Carolina, that Howard Dean was leading in the polls four years ago, that nothing matters until someone, somewhere, actually casts a vote -- are more than cover-your-behind caveats, they're real. There's plenty of time for the whole nature of the Democratic race to change.

But some of the numbers are stunning. A national CNN poll released Wednesday showed that among registered Democrats, 68 percent of African American women said Clinton was their likely choice for the nomination while only 25 percent backed Obama. By contrast, Obama led Clinton -- 46 percent to 42 percent -- among African American men.

The CNN sample of black voters was small, meaning those numbers are not precise. But even taking into account the margin of error, the poll reports an unmistakable tendency that clearly works in Clinton's favor: To the extent that African American voters are taking identity into account as they ponder the presidential race, women are considering not only race but also gender. Democratic strategist Donna Brazile, who ran Al Gore's 2000 campaign, has called it "the 'sistah' vote."

That advantage among blacks is mirrored among Democratic women overall -- and with a series of "Women Changing America" campaign events during the past week, including a huge fundraiser Wednesday in Washington, Clinton has been making an overt appeal to consolidate this support. Her campaign Web site is full of encomiums from women -- professional women, working-class women, stay-at-home mothers -- who express their pride in the first front-running female presidential candidate. Clinton asks voters to help her shatter " the highest glass ceiling."

At recent campaign appearances, Clinton has told of meeting an elderly woman -- born when women didn't even have the vote -- who came up and said she just wanted to shake the hand of the first female president.

As the old proverb goes, "women hold up half the sky" -- actually, a bit more than half. If Clinton can sustain her advantage among women -- especially among the working-class and middle-class women who could be said to constitute the spine of the Democratic Party -- it's hard to see how Obama, John Edwards or any of the other challengers can gain much ground on her.

Not that they aren't trying. Clinton's rivals are full of promises and proposals that are meant to appeal to female voters -- initiatives on issues such as family leave and health insurance. All the Democratic contenders have records of support for gender equality. All of them, especially Obama and Edwards, are more than capable of projecting themselves as strong-yet-sensitive, modern, caring guys.

But they can't hide the fact that they're guys. And she's not.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/18/AR2007101801702.html

Van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Thanks Dirty Harry — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:55:25 GMT

http://cgi.ebay.com/Original-Harry-Reid-Rush-Limbaugh-Smear-Letter_W0QQitemZ260170172469QQcategoryZ4105QQcmdZViewItem

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

MIke RC, Rockwall, Texas — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:55:38 GMT

Mitt Romney looking like the pandering politician? Surely you jest!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Lyn, MD — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:58:18 GMT

Dishwashers, waiters and others whose jobs and dilapidated home addresses seem to make them unpromising targets for political fundraisers are pouring $1,000 and $2,000 contributions into Clinton's campaign treasury. In April, a single fundraiser in an area long known for its gritty urban poverty yielded a whopping $380,000. When Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) ran for president in 2004, he received $24,000 from Chinatown.

So now we see..Objective beat Obama in $$ and donors it doesn't matter how you do it. Want to take a bet that there is plenty more where this came from?

The arguement that we didn't know is getting old.

Well Van explain this one away...?

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Independent@large America — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:59:13 GMT

Hillary is going to PRISON, This illegal contributions from Illegals will bring her down, its time for the Democratic Party to investigate with with a special prosecuter. Nancy Pelosi makes major mistake on turkey as Democratic member abandon her, She needs to step back a bit.. the 3 words that the Democrats and the Media do NOT want to hear. VICTORY IN IRAQ

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Dot, Illinois — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:08:45 GMT

Van

I agree with you on the delay in posting comments. Seems like certain times of the day are worse than others. Very frustrating!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

jerry/corpus christi texas — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:08:58 GMT

I'd love to see how the liberals in here are going to defend Hillary after this one, specially those in new York (I won't mention names). By defending Hillary, you agree that she needs to be a criminal to be president. If you vote for Hillary, you are basically giving the OK that crime is a good thing.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

--NSMSNBC — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:11:11 GMT

Ha! At what point will H.R. Clinton supporters concede a crooked candidate.

I agree, a GOP that sets up a contrast to Clinton, that's what's needed to win--sorry Rudy. (Romney or Huckabee).

They are both celebrities, though I will concede better than Britney Spears or Paris Hilton. Giuliani happened to be mayor of a city during a tragedy, of which he questionably did a good job following 9-11. Hillary got elected to the Senate after not really being a long-time NY resident and I think it would be impossible to deny that name recognition and other circumstances helped. I would be excited to know where she would be in this world w/o Bill.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

CitizenJ — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:11:36 GMT

"Note to First Read Staff;

The sometimes two plus hour delay in posting our comments here negates the primary purpose of the blog, real-time discussion and debate of the, "red meat" items being presented by your staff. It is frustrating to post an item and not see it appear for hours. If this blog is for the folks who post on it, your management of the process should be more user-friendly."

Hear, hear.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Jim B., Towanda, PA — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:13:21 GMT

http://cgi.ebay.com/Original-Harry-Reid-Rush-Limbaugh-Smear-Letter_W0QQitemZ260170172469QQcategoryZ4105QQcmdZViewItem
Thanks Dirty Harry (Sent Friday, October 19, 2007 9:55 AM)

Now that's something you won't find covered on MSNBC. Considering all the crap First Read covers I would think this would at least be mentioned.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Grace, NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:17:41 GMT

Not that they aren't trying. Clinton's rivals are full of promises and proposals that are meant to appeal to female voters -- initiatives on issues such as family leave and health insurance. All the Democratic contenders have records of support for gender equality. All of them, especially Obama and Edwards, are more than capable of projecting themselves as strong-yet-sensitive, modern, caring guys.

But they can't hide the fact that they're guys. And she's not.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/18/AR2007101801702.html

Van
vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Friday, October 19, 2007 9:54 AM)

Van...you logic along with theirs is insulting to women. It assumes that we we prefer a woman regardless of how corrupt she might be...

When women and hopefully not to late democratic women realize just how corrupt Hillary is, NO, like myself they WON't support her

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Mark Murray — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:20:09 GMT

Van, Dot, CitizenJ, and others:
Unfortunately, the way the system is set up on the blog, Domenico, I, and a couple of others have to approve each comment before it's posted. So, if we're busy at work -- or if it's after hours or on the weekend -- that's the reason for the delay. We appreciate your feedback and we'll try harder to get your comments posted as soon as possible. Thanks for understanding. And thanks for reading us!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Joyce, SC — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:22:41 GMT

Van I see is trying to change the subject...he doesn't want to address the fundraising scam.

As always he goes into the Hillaryis44 library and pulls out documents.

We want to hear your defense Van, of the topic of the day. Do you think any of them are attending the Birthday concert? This woman put the "C" in corrupt.

She would do anything to try and out raise Obama.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

jerry/corpus christi texas — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:22:44 GMT

The letter that Dingy Harry wrote demanding Rush be silenced is now $2.1 million dollars......

Wish I was a millionaire, i would have bid on it.

The money is going to the Mainre Corp/law enforcement fund and Rush is matching the total bid.....

By the way, how much did Harry Reid donate to this fund last year? Probably none, he doesn't care about Marines.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

NotALemming — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:27:13 GMT

I don't see what the big deal is about the Chinatown thing. The Democrats have been illegally funding campaigns and falsifying voter registrations and absentee ballots for 50 years. I guess when you falsely, and knowingly, blame the Republicans for fraud they start to believe their own lies.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

bob u, Corpus Christi, tx — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:28:53 GMT

Why does Mcain remain a republican? The Rewpublicans crapped on him time and time again. Even Bush put his character assasins on him in South Carolina. Wonder who was worse his Republican friends or his viet cong prison guards.?

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

nuanced — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:38:13 GMT

Frankly, the Value Voters would be dissatisfied with JC himself.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

jerry/corpus christi texas — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:40:08 GMT

NotALemming:

It could be because of the past Clinton crimes?

For a woman who is talking about a "brand new day"...
we wake up every day to a new Clinton crime finding.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

James, downstate Illinois — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:41:07 GMT

Jerry, how much did you donate to the 'Mainre' Corp law enforcement fund last year? I'm guessing $0, so by your logic that means you don't care about them either. Do you let Limbaugh/Hannity/O'Reilly do all of your thinking for you? That 'Dingy Harry' nickname is the height of clever repartee from you and your ilk. If you ever once posted anything that wasn't straight from the First Book of Rush, I might gain some respect for you. Kool-Aid drinkers, extremists and 'true believers' on both sides of the political spectrum that do nothing but spew venom and name-call are indicative of the level we've sunk to these days.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

pat, huntington, ny — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:42:51 GMT

Both sides are guilty of nefarious conduct when it comes to campaign fund raising. It's ludicrous that Hillary's being targetted here. Why not look into the dirty coffers of Guiliani, Romey, and McCain? And this kind of stuff doesn't have much impact on the general voting public. It's a distraction from a discussion of the real issues facing this country, and how they are going to be solved. In fact, it's better catagorized in the column of smear politics, or mud-slinging. This will backfire on the rethuglicans.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Rick, WS, NC — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:43:22 GMT

rightwing bushie toadies have no credibility on issues of legality and morality since they support a bunch of criminals in the WH and congress who lied us into war, profited from it and then don't have the balls themselves to go fight, just cheerlead

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:44:35 GMT

Mark-

"Unfortunately, the way the system is set up on the blog, Domenico, I, and a couple of others have to approve each comment before it's posted."

That said, racist sexist and personal attacks commonly blot the blog despite your lag-time. It doesn't really seem like there is much moderating at all;

"We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others."

If you were taking the time to actually enforce your own rules it might justify your reason.
Even if you were applying stringent standards to what gets through to the blog, it shouldn't take HOURS.

Thank you for your response.

Van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

matt — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:46:09 GMT

I don't get how Brownback never got religious right support. Isn't he their perfect candidate?

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

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

clearthinker — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:47:11 GMT

One thing that really must be admitted by all interested voters - a democratic administration on their worst day could never remotely approach the singular accomplishments of the Bush administration in lying, incompetence, governmental malfeasance and generally corrupt behavior.

Yes folks, there really is a sliding scale, and these nitwits are so far off the right end that a scale extender had to be created to accomodate their new record.

So have all the doubts you want about various democratic candidates - but know that if we make it to 2008 without another Bush war, life will improve in all sorts of ways. Not necessarily to the degree that we might like, but the Bush fiasco will take many years to undo - much like Bill Clinton was forced to do when he resurrected the economy and put the federal budget in the black after monumental mis-handling and overspending by the Reagan administration - essentially Bush's role model.

Even so, he and his boys have outperformed the previous master of mis-management by a large margin. Don't be distracted by the neocons and right-wingers....they have no place left to go except to bother more even-minded thinkers - kind of like a swarm of flies bothering the after-school celebration picnic. Well, schools' almost out and hopefully we all learned a thing or two. Dump the GOP.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

jerry/corpus christi texas — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:50:08 GMT

Where is the proof of dirty money in the GOP race?

If the press can find Hillary's dirty money....
why can't she?

Bill clinton's past will be the defeat of Hillary.
I wouldn't be surprised to hear of a divorce if she loses.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Sierra, SF — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:50:47 GMT

'...To them, Giuliani (abortion, gay rights), Huckabee (lack of money), McCain (past scuffles with the Religious Right, campaign finance reform), Romney (Mormon faith, evolving position on social issues), and Thompson (scant church attendance, Dobson’s criticism) all seem to have warts...'

You didn't mention the stupidity and the cowardly draft dodging.

Warts, my foot !!
... these bozos have TUMORS !!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

John B, Des Moines, IA — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:51:22 GMT

Just shows that our system of campaign financing is corrupt. The idea that money is speech is fatally flawed, but it was enshrined in conservative thought all during the period when they were winning the fundraising contest. Money is not speech. In our system money comes closer to being votes, and some people have way more votes than I. As long as money is speech the people with the most money will find some way to funnel it to the candidates. Money is not speech, it never has been, and accusations of corruption will be a part of every candidate in every campaign until we set aside that insane concept.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

jerry/corpus christi texas — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:52:57 GMT

Nuanced:

What does Jimmy Carter have to do with that?

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

John B, Des Moines, IA — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:56:02 GMT

"I guess when you falsely, and knowingly, blame the Republicans for fraud they start to believe their own lies." NotALemming, ever heard of Jack Abramoff? There's plenty of dirt on everyone's hands. Is anyone willing to work together to clean it up?

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Dave, NH — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:56:58 GMT

And this kind of stuff doesn't have much impact on the general voting public. It's a distraction from a discussion of the real issues facing this country, and how they are going to be solved. In fact, it's better catagorized in the column of smear politics, or mud-slinging. This will backfire on the rethuglicans.
pat, huntington, ny (Sent Friday, October 19, 2007 10:42 AM)

Pat..what color is the sky in your world?

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

jerry/corpus christi texas — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:59:20 GMT

Sierra:

Dan rather tried the draft dodging thing with President Bush.....

Really worked for him didn't it?......

By the way....
what time is the ceremony for the drug center?
what is the name; Drugs for Thugs?

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

jerry/corpus christi texas — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:04:04 GMT

Harry Reid knows Jack Abramoff.......
By Jeffrey H. Birnbaum and Derek Willis
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, June 3, 2005; Page A01

Lobbyist Jack Abramoff and an associate famously collected $82 million in lobbying and public relations fees from six Indian tribes and devoted a lot of their time to trying to persuade Republican lawmakers to act on their clients' behalf.

But Abramoff didn't work just with Republicans. He oversaw a team of two dozen lobbyists at the law firm Greenberg Traurig that included many Democrats. Moreover, the campaign contributions that Abramoff directed from the tribes went to Democratic as well as Republican legislators.

Bipartisan Spread Many of the top beneficiaries of the campaign contributions that Jack Abramoff and his team of lobbyists directed from Indian tribes were Democratic legislators.

Among the biggest beneficiaries were Capitol Hill's most powerful Democrats, including Thomas A. Daschle (S.D.) and Harry M. Reid (Nev.), the top two Senate Democrats at the time, Richard A. Gephardt (Mo.), then-leader of the House Democrats, and the two lawmakers in charge of raising funds for their Democratic colleagues in both chambers, according to a Washington Post study. Reid succeeded Daschle as Democratic leader after Daschle lost his Senate seat last November.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Daniel — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:06:09 GMT

Campaign Diaries just updates its House rankings -- with full detailed descriptions and ratings of all vulnerable seats. Check it out <a href="http://www.campaigndiaries.com/houserankings">here</a>">http://www.campaigndiaries.com/houserankings">here</a>: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/houserankings

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Crystal (Time for change) — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:15:50 GMT

Pat...really I am beginning to lose confidence in you? It is one thing to support a candidate but when you know they are blatently wrong and continue to defend them, that kind of speaks to your character!! It is sad (and pretty scary) if this type of stuff don't have an impact on your VOTE, I mean really.

Support your candidate on substance, your vote affects all of us to some extent, I hope you don't get defensive and lash out about my post, I am simply challenging you to STOP! THINK!!, learn about each candidate, know why you support that candidate, know what issues the candidate has fought vigorously for and against, and know what separates them from their competitors!!
And please don't simply say experience, their is good experience and bad experience. I don't want to know the "quantity" of the time they have spent in Washington/politics, but the "quality" of the time that they have spent there!!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Jim, Santa Cruz — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:20:08 GMT

Simple solution - ban all television ads for political candidates. Let them debate as much as they want, let them publish on the internet, but eliminate the huge cash outlays for TV ads from the electoral process.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:20:18 GMT

Harry Reid knows Jack Abramoff....... But not as well as the republicans who were so far up his ass that they were chewing the same piece of gum...

Investigative Reporting | The Washington Post's Susan Schmidt, James V. Grimaldi and R. Jeffrey Smith won the Pulitzer Prize for investigative reporting for coverage of the Jack Abramoff scandal. Read their coverage below:
"Former Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff was sentenced to five years and 10 months in prison on March 29, after pleading guilty to fraud, tax evasion and conspiracy to bribe public officials in a deal that requires him to cooperate in an investigation into his relationshps with members of Congress. Sources familiar with the federal probe have told The Post that half a dozen lawmakers are under scrutiny, along with Hill aides, former business associates and government officials.

The scandal prompted Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) and Rep. Robert Ney (R-Ohio) to give up their leadership posts, and on Oct. 13, 2006, Ney pleaded guilty to charges stemming from the scandal. On Jan. 19, 2007, Ney was sentenced to 30 months in prison for his role in the scandal. Two of Abramoff's former business partners have pleaded guilty. Three men have been arrested in the slaying of Gus Boulis, who sold Abramoff and partners a fleet of Florida casino ships in the fall of 2000. Another former Abramoff associate, David H. Safavian — most recently the top contracting official in the White House Office of Management and Budget — was convicted for lying about his dealings with Abramoff."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/06/22/LI2005062200936.html

Guilt by association vs. IN JAIL.

Van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

pat huntington ny — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:22:25 GMT

Dave, NH - the sky is a lovely shade of light blue here in NY [except today, very cloudy, expecting severe thunderstorms...must mean Jerry is arriving at LaGuardia soon.].

I don't think I said anything outragesous. The fact is that if you walked up to any stranger on the street and asked them what is the most important factor for them in chosing a candidate, I highly doubt that their campaign funding practices will top their criteria list. BUT I will admit, that if a candidate has engaged in campaign funding that knowingly violates applicable rules regulations and laws, then yes, it should be a matter for discussion and debate against that candidate. However, it is not the end all be all for candidate selection.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:22:47 GMT

Judging from the past year, Christian Conservatives have picked up a few Warts of their own.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

IntheMiddle, TX — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:28:08 GMT

Van: If you dislike this blog so much, go elsewhere. We all can do without your page long entries and paste. We all can read newspapers. We dont need a link to the L.A. Times or the NYT to help you support liberal views. Half of the she-i-t you post is BS anyways. A typical NY liberal that thinks he is smarter than the rest of us.....BTW..you have the audacity to speak of personal attacks...man you guys attack Bush personally everyday so dont come in here frontin' like you are so morally correct. If you can disrespect the leader of our country then you can be disrespected too. If you cant handle that, then step.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Sonic/Corpus — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:30:43 GMT

Dingy Jerry is on a roll today! If you are stupid enough to think that only the Democrats are criminals, then you are right where you should be in your daily worship of George Bush and his thugs. Neither party gives a damn about you Dingy jerry, even though you want to believe the Republicans are in your corner. Guess its easier than thinking!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

jerry/corpus christi texas — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:31:44 GMT

Pat:

High of 90 today not a cloud in sight.......

I would say your defense of Hillary is going to be a long day (and weekend). Now everyone is going back those FEC files with a fine tooth comb and lots of reporters looking and looking hard.

Steve Turner:Christian Conservatives have picked up a few Warts of their own.......

I owuld say the Clintonites have walked into a room full of rat traps and set them off....

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Nathan Gau — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:40:13 GMT

The only member of the GOP that could honestly beat Hillary is Ron Paul. What does Guliani offer that is significantly different that Hillary? He's pro war, gun control, and isn't going to bring anything significantly different. On the major issues (the war, debt, personal liberty, etc) none of the annointed front runners honestly stand a chance due to this fact and the fact that GWB has managed to leave the people a very sour taste of the Republican Party. Ron Paul is the only one who has a shot at changing that. His campaign is doing wonders right now, and he's raising money too. It's time for people to start recognizing this, as he represents the only legitimate alternative to the current front runners.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Amy B Portland, ME — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:45:59 GMT

All we ever hear is how much money the candidates have raised, as if that's the sole indicator of their standing in the race. Now we find out Clinton's campaign is obviously skirting the campaign donor limits rules. Is it any wonder the campaign cheated, though, when being able to inflate the perception of her ability to raise money lead to more coverage for her and to a MSM storyline of inevitabilty? More than TV time, it seems her cash advantage bought her front runner status. Personally, I'm sick of being manipulated by the pundits and the general media pack.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

John S. Alexander, Edinboro, PA — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:49:13 GMT

Spending 60 million tax payer dollars to find any kind of dirt on a sitting president is okay when it is the opposite party in power. I bet we can spend 50 dollars to find out that Bush is a crook. We were attacked and all the rebums could do was attack Clinton, remember the taliban and the rebums both agreed on the presidents immorality. It's okay to be in bed with your enemies when it is politically expedient. Hide your head in shame, you put your party ahead of your country, how despicable, how republican.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Dot, Illinois — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:49:47 GMT

Mark Murphy

Thank you for your response; I realize that patience is not my strongest virtue. Given some of the posts that I see on the blog, I can only imagine the job you have trying to go through all the material you receive. I understand that delays are (and I hate to use this word!!!!!!!!!!!!) inevitable!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:50:07 GMT

Back in the real world;

Most Electable Democratic Candidate
81% of Democrats Think Clinton Can Win if Nominated
Friday, October 19, 2007
Advertisment

The fall of 2007 is a good time to be Senator Hillary Clinton. Her lead has been growing in national polls for the Democratic Presidential Nomination, her negatives have held steady while those for her challengers have been growing, she leads now in Iowa and New Hampshire, and the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that Clinton is seen as the most electable candidate in either party.

Eighty-one percent (81%) of Democrats say that Clinton is at least somewhat likely to win the White House if nominated by her party. That’s up from 75% a month ago and the current total includes an astounding 50% of Democrats who believe she is Very Likely to win it all if nominated. No other candidate—Republican or Democrat—comes close to that figure. A month ago, 41% of Democrats thought Clinton was Very Likely to win.

About the only concern for Clinton in the numbers is that the election will be held in the fall of 2008, not this year. Not only that, of course, but the first actual votes to be cast in Election 2008 are still a few months away.

Sixty-five percent (65%) of Democrats think Senator Barack Obama is at least somewhat likely to win the general election if nominated. However, just 23% believe he is Very Likely to do so. A month ago, 69% said that Obama was Somewhat (43%) or Very (26%) Likely to win if nominated. A recent Rasmussen Reports survey found that Democratic voters are beginning to see Obama as more politically liberal than Clinton.

Perceptions of electability for former Senator John Edwards have slipped over the past month. Just 60% now say he is at least somewhat likely to win, down from 73% a month ago. Only 17% say he is Very Likely to win, down from 24%.

Just 30% of Democrats think New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson would have a chance of winning if nominated. Only 6% believe he would be Very Likely to win."

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/most_electable_democratic_candidate

The dirtier they get...the stronger she gets.

Van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

wayneTx — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:53:19 GMT

I have to agree with IntheMiddle on this. A little dicussing and arguments is enjoyable on here. If all we had were page long fact sheets like Van puts up what a boaring blog this would be.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

IntheMiddle, TX — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:54:30 GMT

Here we go with this Ron Paul BS one more time. You Democrats are not going to persuade Republicans to nominate Ron Paul, no matter how much you build him up on the internet.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:55:49 GMT

IntheMiddle, TX (Sent Friday, October 19, 2007 11:28 AM)

Thanks for taking the time to post. Two words, ANGER MANAGEMENT.

Van

Note to all the Usual Suspects:
I admit it! I'm an agent of the dreaded, MSM!
I get FIFTY-BUCKS every time someone uses my name or responds to my posts. So every time you waste your time with me, you put money in my pocket. Please keep up the good work, I'm going to make $4,500.00 this week alone, not counting today...

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Dot, Illinois — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:02:07 GMT

Pat, Huntington

"BUT I will admit, that if a candidate has engaged in campaign funding that knowingly violates applicable rules regulations and laws, then yes, it should be a matter for discussion and debate against that candidate."

I agree with this part of your post and might add that if these types of fund raising irregularities appear to be a part of a pattern, then perhaps the character of the candidate benefiting from these activities could rightly become an issue.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:03:32 GMT

wayneTx (Sent Friday, October 19, 2007 11:53 AM)

Thanks for the $50.00

BTW: Watch for my even longer posts to come.

Van

Right-wing's goin' DOWN!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:04:11 GMT

Crystal - We are all capable of thinking for ourselves. As I have said many times before, what matters to one voter doesn't necessarily matter to another voter - and it is not YOUR place, or anyone else's place, to tell me or Jerry or Sierra or anyone what should matter to them in selecting a candidate to support.

If you think that a candidate is dishonest, don't vote for them. If you think a candidate is disingenuous, don't vote for them. If you think a candidate is the best thing since sliced bread, then by all means, vote for them. But don't put your value system on someone else. We all get to decide for ourselves who we want to represent us.

Your vote affects mine as much as mine affects yours - maybe I don't like your decision-making capabilities. Maybe I disagree with what you find important in a candidate. I can do that, certainly, but I have no right to tell you on what basis you should make your decision.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

CitizenJ — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:08:50 GMT

"The dirtier they get...the stronger she gets."

"The dirtier [Clinton's spin] gets...the [more illegitimate money, donors, and press coverage] she gets."

"The [cleaner] [Obama's campaign] gets...the [more true support] he gets."

Perhaps "they" are getting dirtier because the more "they" uncover about her campaign, the closer "they" are to filth.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

H P Boston — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:10:12 GMT

Reporters WATCH DOGS? POODLES do a better job!

Don't think you can fool people into thinking the press, the media, or reporters are very good at anything anymore. They are jokes and work for the government and big biz. They are also afraid or being killed or at best losing their jobs.
It is a game , like sports, they get paid for throwing the game!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

jerry/corpus christi texas — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:10:42 GMT

Van:

After the story of Hillary and the Chinese dishwasher money, I can imagine her people could use a little anger management about now LOL.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Yiannis, Baltimore — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:12:21 GMT

“STUDENTS FOR BARACK OBAMA” TOLD ATTENDINGHILLARY PRESS CONFERENCE WAS “PART OF CLASS”

Students at Claflin University, a historically blackcollege in Orangeburg, S.C., are accusing the school'sadministration of prohibiting them from forming a"Students for Barack Obama" chapter, yet simultaneously compelling them to attend a press conference supporting his chief rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, Sen. Hillary Clinton. In fact, several students who serve as volunteers on Obama's presidential campaign tell FITS News that theywere coerced into holding Clinton signs and standing behind State Sen. John Matthews, who unveiled Clinton's higher education plan at a press conference held at the school last week. Which would probably explain some of theunenthusiastic expressions visible in this photograph. http://www.hillaryclinton.com/blog/view/?id=14620

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

The big Dripper — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:12:52 GMT

No just you jerry the biggest cloud of them all. All dark and wet! You are........

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

John B, Des Moines, IA — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:13:00 GMT

Jerry, the Rather memos weren't able to be authenticated, but no one ever refuted the facts contained therein. Bush was a draft dodger and never fulfilled his Guard service. His record speaks for itself.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Crystal (Time for change) — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:15:51 GMT

Carrie, Eastern Iowa---You get so angry about my posts about reality. Why do you find so much disagreement in it? I have NEVER said you don't have a right to vote for who you want, I simply want you to know the value of your vote and to think about it. I mean what is so wrong with that. You also have the right to jump in front of a train, that doesn't mean that I shouldn't try to stop you!!! Sheesh!! WAKE UP!!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:18:28 GMT

Perhaps "they" are getting dirtier because the more "they" uncover about her campaign, the closer "they" are to filth.

CitizenJ (Sent Friday, October 19, 2007 12:08 PM)

or maybe it's what you do when you're way behind in the polls. Actually, it IS what you do when you're way behind in the polls.
Even further today...

Barack is a great guy and will be a real asset to the campaign in the general election.

Van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:27:33 GMT

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Friday, October 19, 2007 12:10 PM)

And you could use a party that isn't corrupt and perverted that is so slimy that you prefer to troll the democrats than associate with your own kind.
You do know that your endless inanities are because you're certain that Clinton is going to CRUSH the republicans and it infuriates you that the democrats will control the White House for the next two terms, at least.

Who cares what you have to say about the democrats?
You support and vote for corrupt, perverted losers.
Tom DeLay
Mark Foley
Duke Cunningham
Jack Abramoff
Larry Craig
Bob Ney
and the republican party
It's like a murderer's row of corruption and perversion.
No amount of carping about democrats can hide that.

Van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Sieera, SF — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:40:54 GMT

'...we have to ask: What are they thinking? Who pushed the envelope needlessly on this one? Do they need the money THIS bad? If reporters can easily watchdog this stuff, can't someone on the campaign?...'

Face it, the Clintons are corrupt.
They're completely unethical.
Their crimes will be forgiven by their followers the same way Bush's crimes and incompetence are forgiven by his true believers.

Don't drink the Kool Aid !!

PS: yes, jerry you're right, SF does earn its'kooky reputation !!
A shooting gallery is like legalizing drug use.
It'll attract dopers from around the country.
My tax dollars at work

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Molly, Iowa City — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:49:47 GMT

Crystal wrote : STOP! THINK!!, learn about each candidate, know why you support that candidate, know what issues the candidate has fought vigorously for and against, and know what separates them from their competitors!!

Carrie responds:
Crystal - We are all capable of thinking for ourselves. As I have said many times before, what matters to one voter doesn't necessarily matter to another voter - and it is not YOUR place, or anyone else's place, to tell me or Jerry or Sierra or anyone what should matter to them in selecting a candidate to support.
...
But don't put your value system on someone else. We all get to decide for ourselves who we want to represent us.

... Maybe I disagree with what you find important in a candidate. I can do that, certainly, but I have no right to tell you on what basis you should make your decision.

Carrie, Eastern Iowa "

1. Carrie- Aren't you trying to influence others by your post, if not why are you posting?

2. What did Crystal say that was so wrong?

3. Don't you believe that voters should research the candidates and know how candidates stand on issues that are important to them?

4. Isn't it important for a voter to find out what a candidate has actually accomplished, and learn the candidates position on the issues?

My guess is that the reason Crystal's innocuous post upset Carrie is because she realizes if the records of Democratic candidates were actually researched people would learn that Hillary Clinton has accomplished nothing in Washington (unless you count renaming post office's etc), has made claims on the campaign trail that are contrary to her voting record (at the AFL-CIO forum she said NAFTA neede broad reform and volunteered she voted against CAFTA but left out she's voted in favor of every other trade agreement while in the Senate- even though a majority of Democrats opposed these anti- US worker trade agreements.)

If Hillary was all her supporters claim she is they would welcome people researching the candidates, but when knowledge, and full information is your enemy you want tio keep people in the dark.

That's the only explanation I can think of for Carrie being upset that Crystal wants people to God forbid educate themselves on the candidates.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:50:50 GMT

Crystal - I am awake, thank you. I'm not angry, however. I simply think that it is not your place to tell Pat or anyone else what should be important in a candidate. And you did do just that. You said "please don't say experience" - well, what if experience is what Pat values? You might have a different opinion on it than she does, but that doesn't make you right and her wrong.

The point is, it is NOT your place to tell anyone else how they should make their decision and on what criteria that decision should be based. Just because someone supports a candidate that you don't like doesn't mean they didn't STOP! or THINK!! about whether that candidate best fit their own values and preferences.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

nuanced — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:54:36 GMT

Nuanced:

What does Jimmy Carter have to do with that?
jerry/corpus christi texas

--- you got me on that jerry. I meant the one who does good works around the world and who people admire.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

nuanced — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:55:12 GMT

Don't want warts? Stop kissing frogs.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 17:01:27 GMT

October 19, 2007
Watching the Favorables
Posted by TOM BEVAN | E-Mail This | Permalink | Email Author

We're still more than two and a half months away from the first vote being cast in the presidential nominating contests, but could there be signs that the increasingly negative tone of the campaign is turning off voters?

Take Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney. Leading into the most recent debate last week in Dearborn, Michigan, the two men spent days waging war against each other over taxes and spending, then continued the skirmish for nearly a week over Mr. Romney's answer about seeking lawyers' advice in consulting with Congress over taking military action against Iran.

The public appears to have noticed the squabbling -- and was not impressed. According to the latest USA Today/Gallup poll, taken last Friday through Sunday, Mr. Giuliani's unfavorable rating shot up nine points in ten days, while Mr. Romney's jumped eight points. Add the drop in their favorable ratings over the same period and Mr. Giuliani suffered a net 14-point decline in his favorability rating in the last two weeks. Mr. Romney's favorability dropped 11 points.

John McCain and Fred Thompson also saw their favorability ratings take a hit in the Gallup poll, but not nearly as severe as Mr. Romney and Mr. Giuliani.

Even Barack Obama, who has the highest favorable ratings of any candidate in the field, is apparently not immune. Last week Mr. Obama announced that his campaign was entering a "new phase," which many noted was characterized by stepped up attacks on Hillary Clinton. Mr. Obama's unfavorable rating in the latest Gallup poll is up five points in ten days.

Meanwhile, Mrs. Clinton continues to enjoy the benefits of being a clear frontrunner, portraying herself as above the partisan mudslinging. It may not be coincidence, then, that Mrs. Clinton was the only person surveyed -- with the exception of Al Gore who was in the news for some reason -- whose unfavorable rating did not increase in the Gallup poll. To the contrary, Mrs. Clinton's favorable rating ticked up two points to 53% and is now the HIGHEST it's been since May, while her unfavorable rating is the LOWEST recorded by Gallup since March.

The good news for the competition is that Mrs. Clinton's unfavorable ratings are already in the mid-forties, well above any other candidate's, which means the rest of the field can bang a way on each other (and her) a while longer without generating the level of negative sentiment the public already feels for the former First Lady. But the moral of the story is that aggressive attacks, while effective, carry a downside risk. In a campaign this long and this intense, candidates have to be especially mindful of that truism.

http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2007/10/watching_the_favorables.html

They attack and THEIR negatives go UP, while hers go DOWN.
The more they attack, the stronger she gets...

Van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Sieera, SF — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 17:03:18 GMT

pat, huntington, ny: '...Both sides are guilty of nefarious conduct when it comes to campaign fund raising...'
No, pat !!
Don't try to tar honest Democrats with Hillary's sleazy behavior.
Don't try to excuse Hillary's unethical behavior by saying Republicans did it, too !!
You sound like a Bushie, excusing everything Bush does by blaming Clinton.
There's really not much difference between the Clinton and the Bush 'Dead Enders'....
They'll both defend their crooked, corrupt idols until the dead end....

Rick, WS, NC: '...rightwing bushie toadies have no credibility on issues of legality and morality since they support a bunch of criminals in the WH and congress...'

Right, Rick, but if we nominate Hillary, we'll negate legality and morality as campaign issues.

Character counts
Let's nominate someone with good character
Let's nominate an honest candidate !!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Jessica, Wisconsin — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 17:05:14 GMT

Some good things that Barack is doing:

Obama Comes Out Against Telecom Immunity Bill
By Greg Sargent - October 18, 2007, 7:18PM
Barack Obama's campaign has just sent us a statement condemning the Senate FISA bill granting retroactive immunity to the telecoms:

“I have consistently opposed this Administration's efforts to use debates about our national security to expand its own power, whether that was on the Iraq war, or on its power grab to curb our civil liberties through domestic surveillance programs. It is time to restore oversight and accountability in the FISA program, and this proposal -- with an unprecedented grant of retroactive immunity -- is not the place to start.”
Earlier today Chris Dodd said he'd put a hold on the bill, raising questions about where the other Senator-candidates would come down on this. We now have Obama's answer -- against. No statement yet from Hillary on this.

http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/10/obama_comes_out_against_telecom_immunity_deal.php#comments

Obama: Fire Voting Rights Chief
By Paul Kiel - October 19, 2007, 10:45AM
In a letter today, Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) urged the acting attorney general to fire voting rights section chief John Tanner. Citing Tanner's remarks earlier this month that "minorities don't become elderly the way white people do: They die first," Obama wrote that "Through his inexcusable comments, Mr. Tanner has clearly demonstrated that he possesses neither the character nor the judgment to be heading the Voting Rights Section." He concluded: "For that reason, I respectfully request that you remove him from his position."

Tanner made the comments as justification for his decision to overrule Justice Department staff attorneys and approve a Georgia voter ID law that was subsequently halted by a federal appeals court. Tanner made the novel argument that such laws actually discriminate against whites.

Things are only getting worse for Tanner. In a couple weeks, he'll appear before the House Judiciary Committee, where he'll get to explain personally to its 78 year-old African-American chairman that minorities don't "become elderly." He'll also have to explain why he took the unprecedented step of publicly assuring officials in Columbus, Ohio that there had been no discrimination against African-Americans in the allocation of voting machines for the 2004 election. The fact that African-Americans had to wait in long lines deep into the night, he said, was due to "the tendency" for "white voters to cast ballots in the morning" and "for black voters to cast ballots in the afternoon."

This is second time this month that Obama has come out hard against a controversial figure from the Civil Rights Division. Earlier, he joined with Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) in blocking the nomination of Hans von Spakovsky to the Federal Election Commission.

Obama's letter is below.

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004507.php#comments

Nice to see him standing up for the American voter. Go Obama.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Crystal (Time for change) — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 17:39:53 GMT

Interesting article on how Clinton told a fib to make a point:

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/?hpid=topnews

Check it out!!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Susan, Miami — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 17:44:17 GMT

Crystal, I think Carrie wants you to shut up and let us think and vote the way we wish. I will be voting for who I think is the most open minded, intelligent, experienced and trustworthy person. THAT person is Hillary Clinton. Van, keep writing and making sense and telling the truth.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Students at UNF — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 17:45:10 GMT

go Hillary ! WE love you and will vote for you on election day as you will be the nominee!!!!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Deb, Lombard Il. — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 17:47:10 GMT

Seem to me Mrs Clinton is the only candidate that can help get this country out of the huge disasterous mess that this administration has us in. My vote is for Clinton, again.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Robert Catalano, Salem, OR — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 17:49:12 GMT

Warts, Hell; this Administration has been a cancer on America for the past seven years.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Jessica, Wisconsin — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 17:52:51 GMT

Van,

A big part of the reason you get attacks on Hillary is because of your statements like this.

Barack is a great guy and will be a real asset to the campaign in the general election.

Van

This kind of dismissing of another persons candidate is not necessary, it is insulting and it does not encourage constructive discussion.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 17:53:41 GMT

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:09:35 GMT

Molly - My guess is you shouldn't speculate about what motivates me. Thanks much. :)

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:12:24 GMT

Molly - Oh and by the way, there is somewhat of a discrepancy between what people who support Hillary are expected to do and everyone else. It's fine for an Obama supporter to say something as vague as "he is the voice of change!" but if you support Hillary, it is demanded that you provide detailed reasons for that support. Which, frankly, is complete crap.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Houston — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:12:47 GMT

The wingnuts are smart enough to know that Giuliani will flip flop their way if he gets elected because he has no principles. He had "moderate" positions for the same reason as Romney: he needed to run in a region with a liberal constituency.

The religious right can count on Giuliani to pack the Supreme Court with more nutcakes like Scalia who'll do the dirty work of the religious right for him. He'll take up where Bush left off, infringing on human rights, screwing the middle and lower classes, and increasing corporate welfare. Giuliani will gradually drops his moderate pretenses as time goes to please the wingnuts. He'll do whatever it takes to get power. He's as much of a flip-flopper as Romney, but he's a little more subtle about it.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Crystal (Time for change) — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:14:37 GMT

Van says,

"Mrs. Clinton undeniably has been, and is currently the only female candidate of her stature and integrity in the race."

I am sorry Van did I miss something, is there another female candidate in the race that I didn't know about? She is as you say "the only female candidate of her stature and integrity in the race" b/c she is the ONLY female candidate in this race!! You are not the BEST because you are the ONLY!! You have to be the BEST because you are the BEST!!!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:16:59 GMT

To the mal-informed who assume that using the Chinese Mafia to extract legitimate donations from the unwilling Chinese poor somehow casts a cloud of suspicion on Mrs. Clinton, I would like to say that you cannot produce polling data to back up your erroneous allegations.

Mrs. Clinton undeniably has been, and is currently the only female candidate of her stature and integrity in the race.

Only the facts.

Van

vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Friday, October 19, 2007 1:53 PM)

MSNBC-
If you MODERATE this blog, why do you continue to permit the hijacking of another's identity?
It's happened to several others besides myself and is something that should be easy to police as YOU can see the email address attached to the offender's post.

Why don't you do your job?

Van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

CitizenJ — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:17:14 GMT

"or maybe it's what you do when you're way behind in the polls. Actually, it IS what you do when you're way behind in the polls."

Oh yeah. I forgot. Thanks for reminding me. I must have just gotten confused with all the insufferably trite posting going on.

And since my remark accomplished its sole purpose of getting a response about how far ahead Clinton is in the polls without so much as an inkling of any reason why you support her, other than that less than 1% of the population told a pollster they support her, I feel that I should thank you for relieving me of this Friday afternoon boredom.

It is long since I held any hope that First Read could be a productive forum for discussion, and so I come on here hoping to get a little amusement from reading mindless posts from people so astonishingly lacking in rational political thought, and yet still having the gall to question others' intelligence. It is remarkably entertaining.

And then there are those who claim a monopoly on reality by posting poll after poll and article after article, and dubbing those who see some flaw in either the technique or the premise of the poll or article itself, as playing dirty or cherry-picking facts.

I tell you, ever since I started reading each post with the assumption that (with a couple exceptions) the author knows nothing about which they are spouting, it is much more rewarding. I feel like I am finally free to intentionally post not what I feel will assist those who have yet to make up their minds on a candidate, but what will frustrate and beleaguer those who have already made up their mind and are blind to all else that goes on.

You should join me in this effort, and finally push First Read over the precipice of insanity that it has been teetering on for quite some time.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

canyoufeeltheflamesofwar — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:18:24 GMT

All this bickering about campaign contributions, haircuts, value voters and crap is bs. Why is first read not putting up any articles about the FISA bill, Dodd's impending filibuster on it and Reids lack of balls? Our rights are being taken away while large corporations that do bush's bidding get immunity? WTF is wrong with all the politicians? What is it that the bush cartel has to hold over everyone's head making them do his bidding? We have a crazy little dictator and his puppetmaster running the show and no one gives a rat's a$$ about it. War with Iran is on the horizon, which will only lead to bigger (and better for the gop crazies) conflicts. Time to start re-stocking those bomb shelters cause our government sure as hell doesn't care about us.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

working cowboy Jackson Hole — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:22:10 GMT

I am not a good writer but I can read. I support Hillary Clinton because she is one tough cookie. None of this badmothing changes my minds.Othes at my place of employment agrre with me. we read First read ever day on break. severl of us have voted me to write that van is full of shit and ruins the whole thing.so I have 2 words:

shitcan van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Richard, Washington State — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:25:12 GMT

Pat, Huntington:

A suggestion: Why don't you spell "rethuglicans" "rethuglycans"? With one clever letter change, you can not only call us "thugs" but "ugly thugs" and increase the intrinsic smear value of your mudslinging.

Just a thought because just the other day you were pretty serious about being taken seriously.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:31:23 GMT

Van,

A big part of the reason you get attacks on Hillary is because of your statements like this.
Barack is a great guy and will be a real asset to the campaign in the general election.
This kind of dismissing of another persons candidate is not necessary, it is insulting and it does not encourage constructive discussion.

Jessica, Wisconsin (Sent Friday, October 19, 2007 1:52 PM)

Yes I'm horrible. How dare I believe that Hillary is going to be the nominee. Who do I think I am to praise the other candidates?
What the heck are you talking about?

Read this blog. You find my comment insulting?
I don't support Obama, but I'm not against him. I believe Hillary will win and I want Barack by her side helping her take the White House back for the democrats. If that insults you, there are a lot of Obama's and other's supporters who you need to counsel on their rhetoric.

I really don't get your point, especially blaming attacks on Clinton on anything I post. The usual suspects don't need any excuse to attack Hillary, again, just read this blog.

Also, find me one post from an Obama supporter that is as insulting as mine is to Obama here. By that I mean find one post that is in favor of Obama but also praises Hillary, even to wanting her support in the general election.

Van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

AllAroundYou — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:32:11 GMT

"A typical NY liberal that thinks he is smarter than the rest of us....."

You tell him, Sarge! Your opinion is the only one that matters. Who but a lifer has anything worthwhile to say?

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Mark Thieme — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:43:31 GMT

Many in Washington are whispering what the people are yelling...
Bush and Cheney have serious emotional and mental issues that are untreated.
We may be in for a bad run of it.

Duck and cover, America.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:53:21 GMT

You should join me in this effort, and finally push First Read over the precipice of insanity that it has been teetering on for quite some time.

CitizenJ (Sent Friday, October 19, 2007 2:17 PM)

Are you really saying that if you can't control it you want to DESTROY it?

Van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

working cowboysJackson Hole — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:54:33 GMT

Since you sensored our first email probably because of the s word, we want to registrar our idea about the elections. about 12 of us out here are like a Hillary fan club. we know what a strong woman can do. She is a tough cookie andsome are voting democart for the first time for her.

And s---can van!!!!!!!!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Jessica, Wisconsin — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:55:08 GMT

Van,

My point is that you continually complain about how other supporters attach Hillary and fail to support their own candidate. Is there a way that you can support your candidate with making snide comments? We all understand that you think Hillary is the best candidate and we all understand that you think she will be nominated.

I guess I would like to have dicussions about the candidates positions and how they differ. I guess that is not possible with people who refuse the even consider that there are other viable candidates in this race. I think I will spend my time elsewhere. There are other places where people actually discuss these issues.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Crystal (Time for change) — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:58:05 GMT

Carrie, Eastern Iowa and Susan, miami--I really believe it is more to the post then you are leading on to be. I think Molly is right on the money. What is so wrong with people doing research on all the candidates? At the end of the day you can vote for whatever reason you want to but all I am saying it is better to make an informed decision than just to draw names out of a hat!!!

Now the reasons that I may decide not to vote for a candidate may be different than your reasons, which is only logical sense we have different interests at heart but I am just saying STOP!! THINK!! and become informed b/c nothing is worse than an ill-informed decision. You like Senator Clinton, would you find it okay if she voted on a bill without any background information regarding it or simply voted for something b/c she liked the color paper it was presented on?
I am simply saying it is up to us to be informed about issues and candidates, b/c it is crazy for us to scream "I didn't know this or I didn't know that before I voted for them" when all the information is readily at our fingertips!!

My post didn't apply to those who are informed, but to those who are not!!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Real Democrat, CA — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:00:36 GMT

There's Vanreuter, Hillary's loyal lapdog, doing damage control for the Old Bird. Once again, the only weapon in Van's arsenal are the unscientific polls that he cites... which have been deemed worthless by political scientists. FYI, Hillary is not getting stronger...she is being exposed for what she is: a manipulative, opportunistic woman running on her spouse's credentials.
Van...looks like you have the case of proctalgia fugax.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

nuanced — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:06:51 GMT

Richard, Washington State, Rubpelicans is a good anagram.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Crystal (Time for change) — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:10:25 GMT

Clinton Dealt a Bummer on Woodstock Museum

Busted!

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and her Senate colleague Chuck Schumer thought they had safely placed a $1 million earmark for an upstate New York Woodstock Museum in a health and education appropriations bill-- but then the GOP pork patrol caught wind of it, and now the party's over.
Democrats today failed on a 42-52 vote to stop an amendment by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) to cut the funding. Coburn's effort is now almost certain to succeed. Three of the six senators who missed the vote: Clinton's Senate Democratic rivals, Barack Obama (Ill.), Joe Biden (Del.) and Chris Dodd (Conn.).
Almost as a taunt to Clinton, who is heavily courting female voters, Coburn proposed shifting the money to"additional care for pregnant women, mothers, and infants." The Democrat is spotlighting women's issues on the campaign trail this week, including proposing new legislation to establish a paid family leave program.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), an avid pork foe, calledthe Woodstock earmark "a shining example of what's wrong with Washington on pork-barrel, out-of-control spending."
The museum, located in Bethel, New York on the site of the 1969 music festival, is the brainchild of billionaire Alan Gerry, a Republican who has donated heavily to both Clinton and to Senate Democratic coffers, which Schumer oversees.
In a press release in June, after the Senate Appropriations Committee approved the bill, Clinton said the funding would help the Bethel Woods Center for the Arts, as the museum is officially known, to "continue to promote education, the arts, culture and tourism in the region."
The Clinton release never referred to "Woodstock," but described the facility's focus as "the post-WWII period and cultural, political, social, and significant historic events during this period including, in particular, the period of the 1960's and its continuing legacy."
-- Shailagh Murray

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

nuanced — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:14:37 GMT

comedic-rat is an anagram for democratic
nude-can is an anagram for nuanced

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

H P Boston — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:17:58 GMT

Many in Washington should be YELLING what should not be whispered!
We are still have a BAD run!
There is no place to run, no place to hide!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:19:00 GMT

Van: I would be outraged if Barack ran as Hillary's running mate. That would compromise his claim to integrity. I wouldn't vote for Hillary if Jesus were her running mate (or Yawah for that matter).

Jerry: What's interesting to me is that many of us who post on this site agree with your pronouncements about Hillary. But, the fact is, the behavior that she manifests, the behavior of which we don't approve, is that which reminds us of your
Bush-fascistic Republican party. Anything from her position on the war, to her cozying up to corporate entities and lobbyists,to her questionable raising of campaign funds remind us of your party. It surprises me that you're so against her; no, you should be singing her praises. What many of us want is an honest candidate with values that protect the middle class. We want a candidate who truly supports our troops and disdains using them for imperialist ventures that compromise them and the world standing of the U.S. Surely this would be a candidate who would really send you into the duldroms.
Obama for America '08

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:19:40 GMT

Crystal: I will repeat to you what I said to Molly. It's a waste of time to speculate about what motivates me. I can't even recall what Molly's uninformed assumption was, but given that she doesn't know me from Jack, I'm pretty sure she is wrong.

Yes, it is better to be informed than not informed. But you seem to want people to be informed to YOUR way of thinking. Example: You specifically told Pat, after demanding that she stop and think about why she supported Hillary, that experience didn't count. And as I said, it is not up to you to determine what counts and what does not count as a valid reason for someone else supporting a candidate. If the experience argument holds no weight with you, that's fine - but it may hold weight with someone else, and that's fine, too.

That is the point. Encourage people to think about the issues, but don't require them to think about the issues the way you have framed them from your vantage point.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

CitizenJ — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:21:30 GMT

In the words of the great Chili Peppers, "Destruction leads to a very rough road, but it also breeds creation."

But I am hardly destroying it. I don't claim to have that kind of influence. All I'm trying to do is to enjoy what it has become.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Mark Thieme — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:25:34 GMT

Real Democrat:
Of course she is: "a manipulative, opportunistic woman running on her spouse's credentials."

All the more reason to vote for her. She is, as the cowboys said above, a tough cookie. I think she is a smart tough cookie with little sense of personal morality and will make a great president.

Me, I support Obama. Until it's over.

Oh and, along with many others here as well as those who have gone beyond, into the great silence, I totally support your assessment of the silly dude with his pie charts.

Certainly glad to know that proctalogia fugax is not contagious, although it is terminal.

Hillary deserves better.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:25:34 GMT

Real Democrat, CA (Sent Friday, October 19, 2007 3:00 PM)

Thanks for the $50.00.

Everyone is very impressed with your knowledge of Latin, if nothing else.

I'm sure you're going to follow up by veirifing some of the wild claims you make;

"Van's arsenal are the unscientific polls that he cites... which have been deemed worthless by political scientists."

Please produce the information you allude to and disarm me! Look here;

http://www.ncpp.org/

"FYI, Hillary is not getting stronger...she is being exposed for what she is: a manipulative, opportunistic woman running on her spouse's credentials."

I'm sure that you can back this up too. It couldn't possibly just be the baseless ranting of an angry troll.

Most Electable Democratic Candidate
81% of Democrats Think Clinton Can Win if Nominated

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/most_electable_democratic_candidate

Van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Mark Thieme — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:27:06 GMT

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

working cowboys, Jackson Hole Wyoming — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:29:09 GMT

Thank you for printing our email. We noticed words spelled wrong, but we can readbetter.

Go Hillary!!!!!!!!!

And van knows what he can do.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

H P Boston — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:29:13 GMT

Crystal what the heck is your point? We should care about this Why? I do care about and love Senator Clinton.
What can I say love is blind. As much as you dig and dig it has all been said and done, save your breath we are not listening.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:31:54 GMT

Crystal (Time for change) (Sent Friday, October 19, 2007 3:10 PM)

Someone has a rosy future with the RNC. When Crystal says research, she means, opposition research.

Here's something you might have missed;

Can Hillary Clinton claim credit for children's health program?
Last update: October 05, 2007 - 9:42 PM

The claim: Hillary Rodham Clinton claims significant credit for helping
launch a multibillion- dollar health insurance program for children. Is she
justified?
The fact check: After her universal health insurance effort was defeated in
1994, she began looking for other changes. Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and
the Clintons explored expanding health insurance coverage to children who
had none. President Bill Clinton announced a plan to expand coverage to as
many as 5 million children in his 1997 State of the Union address. Kennedy,
meanwhile, introduced legislation.

But Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, a Republican, said the plan violated
the balanced budget deal, prompting the president to call lawmakers to kill
the bill. But Hillary Clinton said he would find ways to provide the
insurance. The effort was revived, and Bill Clinton signed the bill in 1997.

Bottom line: While Kennedy is viewed as the driving force behind the
program, the former First Lady's pressure was seen as crucial. Kennedy said,
"The children's health program wouldn't be in existence today if we didn't
have Hillary pushing for it."She wasn't a legislator ... and she wasn't the
president," said Nick Littlefield, an ex-Kennedy aide. "But we relied on
her, worked with her and she was pivotal in encouraging the White House to
do it."

ASSOCIATED PRESS

http://www.startribune.com/10215/story/1467975.html

Van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Mark Thieme — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:32:52 GMT

Citizen J

You must have gotten the message.

Rock on.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:34:07 GMT

Real Democrat,CA:
Proctalgia fugax! I fell off my chair laughing. Great line and you give away your profession.
Thanks for making my day.
Obama '08 Politica Pellucida

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

pat huntington ny — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:38:39 GMT

PS- to the Crystal/Carrie feud...I'm not a she..it Pat as in Patrick. Just shorter to write.

I see that there is a lot of focus on whether Hillary's campaign is guilty of questionable campaign funding practices. This is stemming from a LA Times investigation into her campaign funds specifically. However, when will the media start investiging Guiliani's campaign as scrupulously?

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:40:03 GMT

Van: I would be outraged if Barack ran as Hillary's running mate. That would compromise his claim to integrity. I wouldn't vote for Hillary if Jesus were her running mate (or Yawah for that matter).
Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY (Sent Friday, October 19, 2007 3:19 PM)

Mitchell-

I know that this is an opinion blog but...

You're perhaps a little over-the-top in your rhetoric.

She would sure lock up the, "value voters" if not the Mitchell Feldman vote.

Whatever Barack Obama decides to do if he isn't the nominee, and I don't think he will be, I don't think many of his supporters will desert him for it.
That's just my opinion, of course.

Van

Van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:44:21 GMT

And van knows what he can do.

working cowboys, Jackson Hole Wyoming (Sent Friday, October 19, 2007 3:29 PM)

You want me to stop supporting Hillary? Why?

Van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Mark Thieme — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:49:24 GMT

All this inside medical Latin is not fair to van.

Merck Manual summarizes, and I will be brief for the purpose of delicacy:

"Proctalgia fugax is a severe, episodic, anal pain caused by cramp of the pubococcygeus muscle. It most often occurs in the middle of the night and lasts approximately 20 minutes, occasionally 30 minutes or longer. Because pain threshold drops during sleep it intensifies as you go to sleep and wakes the sufferer up again. Most sufferers encounter it less than 6 times a year and can go for many months without an episode. Onset can be in childhood. Men are affected at least four times as often as women."

great diagnosis, doctor!

stuff happens.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

working cowboys JaksoHole Wyoming — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:58:21 GMT

You asked the question.we have to keep the words clean her sothis wont be what we want to say.

You are full of it. A bser. all mouth. more but we cant say it.

Get real or get off!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

MItchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:04:07 GMT

Van: Very funny. Seriously though, I don't think you get how deep the anti-Hillary sentiment runs.

Pat: Who would care about Republican fund raising practices (especially Guiliani, the king of mendacity); after all, the assumption, is that for the most part they're corrupt (except for Paul, and Huckabee [if Huckabee were corrupt he would have raised more money]). The bar is just higher for the Dems. Too bad Hillary chooses to do the limbo.
Obama '08

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:05:33 GMT

All this inside medical Latin is not fair to van.
Mark Thieme (Sent Friday, October 19, 2007 3:49 PM)

The most surprising thing is that you're an adult.
Here's how I like to remember you Mark, emotionally bidding farewell to all (and hoping to take some with you one supposes), amidst one final attack on me, before you broke your word and came back a week later.
Here is some of the wit and wisdom of...
And to think that you are the one to lament the demise of civil discourse on the board.

It is only when you hear a pompous, half-baked, pretender pontificating, lording it over others, that it starts to rankle.
Mark Thieme (Sent Wednesday, October 17, 2007 12:24 PM)

Perhaps Van's vitriol needs closer monitoring.

In a word, he has ruined the board.

Mark Thieme (Sent Monday, October 08, 2007 1:23 PM)

As a radical supporter of the First Amendment, I have opposed censoring even the most provocative and distasteful materials.
I do not support anything Rush Limbaugh has ever said, and my own opinion of the man as a human being is quite low. No, he should neither be censored by the government nor the media. But anyone who listens to him for "facts" does has not earned and do not deserve the rights and privileges of American citizenship.

This vanreuter character comes blasting on this board with his biased facts as if he were the Word come down. Like Limbaugh, he cries when his judgment or intelligence is questioned, bleats and blares his acid in whatever direction he pleases. Like Limbaugh, he is wind tunnel.

If that is what people want to read on a political blog on Monday morning...well, I think you know my opinion.

Maybe someday vanreuter will have his own radio show where he gets to make fun of others and scream foul at every challenge.

Until then, I'll be waiting, listening, but no longer reading First Read, what was once one of the best political blogs online.

Best wishes to all who linger here.

Listen to the silence of all those who have left.

Click.
Mark Thieme (Sent Monday, October 08, 2007 2:01 PM)

Unclick: ...has not earned and does not deserve...

Just a little more fodder for the little man who never makes a mistake.

Re-click.
Mark Thieme (Sent Monday, October 08, 2007 2:12 PM)

HP: it is not so much FOD as it is that the dude who calls himself van is FOS.

I actually agree that Hillary will be the nominee, win the general election against any of the clowns in the debate tonight.
Although I do not formally support her, I think she will be a first rate president if the bubbas don't ruin it for all of us.

HP, I have always appreciated your posts and your intelligence. In this case, I must say we do disagree. I cannot agree with the behavior of everyone whose politics are the same as mine.
Never have liked pretentious louts (Rush). Van reuter's facts are frankly misleading and FOS, as is the person who uses that moniker.

His "facts' are merely props for his LOS. They have virtually nothing to do with the reality that Hillary Clinton is a brilliant strategist and political tactician and will be a great president.

HP, trust me, van is doing Hillary no good and her people would just as soon buffoons like him would stay off the boards.

Van's interest is van and nothing more. His FOD is all about him, but nonetheless, he remains, first and primarily, FOS.

Cheers.

Mark Thieme (Sent Monday, October 08, 2007 3:20 PM)

Click.

Van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Crystal (Time for change) — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:18:04 GMT

Carrie, Eastern Iowa--- I see you are one that takes points and twist them to fit your own criteria. I am saying that simply "quantifying" experience is not the same as "qualifying" experience. I could have spent 8 years in college, that doesn't mean that I left with a degree or that I accomplished/learned anything while I was there. That is all I was saying and I think it makes sense to most LOGICAL people. Sheesh!!!!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vansteam — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:24:50 GMT

You go Van!! Tell them you now know exactly where to put your foot next time one of these would-be proctologists complains of a pain in the a$$ - and cowboys must be particularly susceptible, given their line of work. Keep up the good work Van -

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

CitizenJ — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:28:08 GMT

Mark has been Trash-Heaped.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

van cheerleader — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:38:26 GMT

I have never liked Mark. I hope he gets sick.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:38:42 GMT

Mark has been Trash-Heaped.

CitizenJ (Sent Friday, October 19, 2007 4:28 PM)

It was self-inflicted...

Van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:41:56 GMT

Crystal - Dear, that IS the point. You want people to evaluate things on YOUR terms, according to what YOU deem important. You think x experience matters more than y experience. Maybe someone else thinks y experience matters more than x experience.

The point is, and let me be very clear since you are not getting it, people can use whatever criteria they want. They can think about issues and rank their importance in whatever manner they choose. It's not stop and think the Crystal way.

Sheesh.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Mark Thieme — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:46:24 GMT

Oh No! Not the trash heap again!

Last time I had to spend the weekend in van's front yard (the precise location of the heap) and make motor sounds while he sat in his rusted out Buick on blocks.

It was worse than hell.

I came back a little shell-shocked, with some short -term memory loss and a bad case of... well enough about that. Nobody wants to hear about diseases caused by exposure to chicken poop.

If I live through the weekend, I shall return, a better man.

It could be worse.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

CitizenJ — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:51:09 GMT

Well, I'm glad we could all have a little fun today.

Have a nice weekend. Except for Mark, who is apparently spending the weekend in Van's front yard.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

cheerleader for van — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:53:52 GMT

Mark. Do you have a cat? Well I hope it gets sick too.

Nanny nanny boo boo!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

MItchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:54:44 GMT

I like Mark and I think we'll find that most of the popularity here depends on similarity of allegiances. My favorite commentator, however, is Sierra because he says precisely what I think but with more exactitude. Unvarnished truth.
Obama '08

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

CitizenJ — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:55:00 GMT

I also hope Crystal and Carrie come back on Monday with a resolution to their dispute. I'm pulling for you guys.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Mark Thieme — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 21:12:05 GMT

Thanks Mitchell:
Before I board the bus for my little weekend getaway, I think you know you are one of my favorite posters here. Alas, you are not, however, my bestest favorite.

That would be van.

I have grown to love and respect him.
Adore his infectious sense of humor.

really.

I hope he reads this before I get to his detention center.

If I don't get home, give my billfold to mother.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

van's peanuts gallery — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 21:15:11 GMT

Anybody who likes Mark should get sick and have a painful surgery.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 21:15:26 GMT

Mark Thieme (Sent Friday, October 19, 2007 4:46 PM)

Until then, I'll be waiting, listening, but no longer reading First Read, what was once one of the best political blogs online.

Best wishes to all who linger here.

Listen to the silence of all those who have left.

Click.

I wish....

If only you were a man of honor who keeps his word, instead of a melodramatic egotist harboring a grudge, maybe I could like you too.

My Manhattan hi-rise lacks a yard, but you can take your troubled soul to either Riverside or Central Park. If you're looking for followers, and from the tone of your resignation, that would seem likely, there are many who live there for you to recruit.

Regards
your friend,

Van

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 21:20:38 GMT

Citizen J: It's like cliffhanger Friday on the soaps - they gotta leave you wondering if Jennifer's car really will spin out of control and plummet into the river.

Tune in to First Read Monday to see if Mark Thieme made it out of Van's front yard alive - and unharmed. Or did he finally succomb to that bad case of...nevermind?

As for myself and Crystal...well, it is what it is. Stop! Think!! Sheesh!!!!! :)

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

cowboys for Van, Driggs, Idaho — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 21:24:39 GMT

We hope Mark has to have his gall bladder removed without anesthesia.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Mrs. van — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 21:51:22 GMT

Omigod! Van has incarcerated that loonie Mark Thieme again. Don't know what van sees in him, but he does seem to enjoy his company.
I can see now it will be another terrible weekend, what with all the motor sounds and van yelling.
I do resent Thieme's disparagement of our humble home. First, it is not a Buick Special, they didn't make one in 1958. It is a '27 Whippet Model 96 Coach and only the hood and top are rusted out. Vroom!
And about chicken poop. The only chicken poop I saw outside was the stuff Thieme tracked out there from the kitchen. We have house chickens that are very well trained.
He made fun of our predilection for KFC, but where else can you get a big bucket of fried chicken with slaw and mashed potatoes for $5.95? Van loves his chicken! I didn't notice Thieme passing up the gizzard van tossed him.

All I can say is that I wish van would bring someone home for the weekend who could appreciate our special brand of urban hospitality. Someone like Jerry, for instance.

Well, as Mark Thieme always says,

It could be worse.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

van's rear guard — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 23:14:10 GMT

Mark Thieme:
Do you have grandchildren?

If so, we hope they grow up to be fundamentalist TV preachers and vote a straight Republican ticket.

Or become Muslim fundamentalist mullahs.

Or marry the Bush twins' kids.

Or have tattoos all over their bodies and sell Amway.

You are a despicable waste of protoplasm.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Amy B Portland ME — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 01:30:02 GMT

You people crack me up. (Rubpelicans, ha ha). See you all Monday.

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Dot, Illinois — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 01:33:15 GMT

What a day this has been!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

H P Boston — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 04:12:04 GMT

OH MY DOG! dejavu!
I love a good rerun.
The Van and Mark comedy posts!

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Desmond — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 12:53:23 GMT

Richard , Washington State,I saw your post about about the changing of names of those who belong to the Republican Party.
I think , as a registered member of the Democratic Party, this argument about semantics, began when our President began to call Democratic Party members of the Democrat Party. All very silly.
As for the idea surfacing that the Democrats will not be happy if it is perceived that the war is getting better before the Presidential election, that too is a silly argument.
As someone who was never for the invasion, I personally would like nothing better than to see this all end soon in a way that has a positive outcome for the Iraqi people and that insures our citizens can come home sooner rather than later.
"There are many ways of going forward, but only one way of standing still"-FDR

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

the dark side of the moon — Sun, 21 Oct 2007 19:57:17 GMT

for some it was TGIF for those who lost loved ones in Iraq and Afhganistan this week it was

First thoughts: Plenty of warts

Phd Political Science, Phd Mathematics — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 04:06:49 GMT

The dark side of the moon reminds us what is really important here. Thank you.
For whatever it is worth, van reuter is rude to anyone who dares cross him, an obnoxious bully.
Mark Thieme can be caustic, but only to rude posters and at least he has a sense of humor.
Thieme is known for his encouragement of those who present cogent arguments that run against his own opinion.
Van reuter's "facts" present rather the lowest common denominator of political analysis. More like factoids.
It is a fact that the Colorado Rockies are the American League champions, but that fact does not tell the story, it is a fact that the Red Sox took their series to 7 games... but unless you stuck it out until the bottom of the 8th that fact is a whiff. Just as in quantum mechanics 2+2 may not necessarily add up to 4 until the counting is done as it does on the one dimensional plane, reality cannot be shoehorned into pithy numerical equations. What matters is what qualities and textures lie behind elegant mathematical expressions.
Just like life, the ball takes funny bounces. As with all things quantifiable, numbers and statistics are limited in their efficacy because ultimately they are metaphors, analogies, projections, and subjective human constructs.
Thieme's contacts give us an inside as to what is happening behind the scenes. For me, he is far too cynical, but at least he does not insult my intelligence. Van reuter, on the other hand, is a slave to subjectivity and egoistic perception.
Thanks for the numbers, but most of us know where to find poll results. I am grateful for Mark Thieme's good-natured endurance of van reuter's abusive verbosity.
I do, however,disagree with Thieme's primary premise. I think there are things (and people) which/who couldn't be much worse.