First thoughts: Dueling memos

jerry/corpus christi texas — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:26:34 GMT

Instead of going on the attack early, Obama and Edwards sent their wives out to fight for them early. When that didn't work, they started sending out E-mails and such from the staff to attack Clinton. Now that didn't work either and both of them are falling further and further behind, despite all the crowds and money flowing in.

If you two idiots hadn't sat on your hands and let Hillary dictate the race early, this might be a fight to the end. Instead you two let her go ahead and stay ahead. Anybody who donates money to your campaigns from here on should be considered morons. I think we already have our battle set; Hillary V Rudy.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Real Democrat, CA — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:33:05 GMT

The only stagnant one is Hillary. Another example of Hillary's rhetoric not matching her record. Another example of the Clinton campaign's arrogance in thinking they've got the nomination sewn up...so they start running a general election campaign. Clearly, she knows that she messed up on her vote and now she's trying to spin the story. Despite what Hillary's corporate friends tell her...this race is far from over.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Real Democrat, CA — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:36:26 GMT

Politics of hope does not mean that one cannot question Hillary's policy positions. Whenever, Hillary displays poor judgment, and is called out on it- she resorts to playing the "politics of hope" card.
Hillary...how about playing the "telling-the-truth card" for a change?

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Crystal (Time for change) — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:38:15 GMT

This is stupid. For clarification on the Iran vote issue and Obama please read:

From:

http://thinkonthesethings.wordpress.com/2007/10/11/did-obama-skip-the-iran-vote/

1. The dictionary defines “skip” as “to avoid attendance at.”
This is a question of motives. Just because he was absent, it doesn’t mean that he avoided attending it. Liberal bloggers need to come up with some proof that he avoided voting if they are going to throw around this argument.
The congressional record clearly states that senators were informed that the Kyl-Lieberman amendment would not be coming up for a vote in the near future.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. REID. Mr. Chairman, there will be no more votes tonight. We have tried to work something out on the Kyl-Lieberman amendment and the Biden amendment. We have been unable to do that.
We have been very close a few times, but we have just been informed that Senator Biden will not have a vote anytime in the near future. There will not be a vote on the other one anytime in the near future. We hope tonight will bring more clearness on the issue.
But right now, I think it is fair to say there will be no votes tonight.
Does the Senator from South Dakota have any comments?
Mr. THUNE. No, I do not. I would say to the leader, that is good for our Members to know. We have Members who have been inquiring whether they will be able to vote.
2. Barack Obama took a position on the issue.
Now, if Obama had missed the vote and not taken a position on the issue, then I’d see where you can go after him. However, I don’t quite understand the logic of attacking him when he took a position on it!
3. Many other progressive leaders plus Chuck Hagel and Dick Lugar voted against the Iran bill.
If the bill was not as potentially harmful as Hillary and her blogger friends are implying then why did the following people also oppose it?
Chuck Hagel, Jim Webb, Tom Harkin, John Kerry, Joe Biden, Barbara Boxer, Sherrod Brown, Robert Byrd, Christopher Dodd, Russ Feingold, Ted Kennedy, Richard Lugar, Claire McCaskill, Jon Tester, Patrick Leahy, John Edwards, Bill Richardson, and Mike Gravel.
Jim Webb said:
“At worst, it could be read as a backdoor method of gaining Congressional validation for military action, without one hearing and without serious debate.”
Chris Dodd said:
“I cannot support the Kyl-Lieberman amendment on Iran. To do so could give this President a green light to act recklessly and endanger US national security. We learned in the run up to the Iraq war that seemingly nonbinding language passed by this Senate can have profound consequences.”
4. Barack Obama missing the Petraeus-Moveon vote is not the same as this.
Taylor Marsh tries to link the Iran vote to Obama also missing the Petraeus-Moveon vote. They aren’t the same. Obama missed the Moveon vote and called it a distraction. He didn’t take a position on it (and said in campaign speeches that he chose not to vote on it) because he thought the whole point of the vote was ridiculous, as it was. Let’s face it progressives, Moveon did more harm than good with that ad.
The Iran vote though is a vote he missed, but took a position on. That’s a big difference.
I think some people need to think through their logic. If Obama were afraid that Republicans would blast him for voting a particular way on the amendment and that’s why he missed it, then why would he take a position? They still get what they want, his position on it, which they still can use against him. As long as they have your position on it and how you would have voted, then politically you’re in the same place.
5. The vote wasn’t even close.
Obama’s missed vote from not being able to get back for the vote that was moved up, was not a tiebreaker at all.
6. Taylor Marsh misuses Obama’s co-sponsorship of the Counter-Proliferation Act of 2007.
The Counter-Proliferation Act of 2007 that Obama voted for had language that specifically stated:
Nothing in this Act shall be construed as authorizing the use of force or the use of the United States Armed Forces against Iran.
This act was about economic sanctions rather than military action, something that Obama has long advocated. It specifically checks any potential use to go to war. It also does not connect Iran with Iraq as does the Kyl-Lieberman bill.
7. Clinton’s Co-Sponsorship of the Webb Bill Came After She Took Heat From The Preceding Kyl-Lieberman Vote
Clinton is using in her defense of the Kyl-Lieberman amendment vote that she co-sponsored the Jim Webb bill. However, let’s not get the chronology twisted. She became a co-sponsor of the Jim Webb bill after she took heat for her Kyl-Lieberman vote.
8. Having Iran as “His Issue”
Marsh wonders– if preventing an Iran war was so important to Obama, why didn’t he show up and have it as “his issue”? This is even more interesting because before this Kyl-Lieberman vote, Barack Obama was already out there talking about the need for economic sanctions and diplomacy, not military action, and Crooks and Liars went after him! You can’t have it both ways. He has made numerous statements before the vote about this issue. See:
• 9/12/07: Obama to Bush: You Don’t Have Our Authorization for War with Iran

• 8/30/07: Barack Obama Editorial: Hit Iran Where It Hurts
• 8/29/07: Alabama Senator Blocking Obama’s Iran Divestment Bill
• 7/31/07: Obama Urges Swift Passage of Iran Divestment Bill
• 5/17/07: Barack Obama Introduces Iran Divestment Bill
Therefore, Obama is not a Johnny-come-lately on this issue. He has the right to speak out about it since he has been a public voice on it prior to the Kyl-Lieberman vote in late September.
9. Priorities?
The interesting thing to me is that some bloggers are more concerned about a candidate who couldn’t get back in time for a vote, but took a clear position on it rather than with the possibility that Clinton’s vote could potentially be used by Bush to take us into war with Iran.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Real Democrat, CA — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:38:33 GMT

....here comes Van with some "poll" numbers. Hillary's supporters must really like her if their willing to lie for her!

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Lyn, MD — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:39:23 GMT

A blogger wrote...

Mrs. Clinton, whatever happened to the “Politics of Hope?”.
There you go again, trying to blame other people for your votes. First it was that George Bush ‘fooled’ you into voting “YES” on the Iraq War. Now, you are blaming Obama for not being there to vote on the Kyl/Lieberman amendment (so you could follow his lead once again like on the war funding vote).... But, once again, you voted “YES” on that bill, that everyone, including Sen. Jim Webb, says that it was giving Bush a ‘green light’ to bomb Iran. You could have voted ‘No’.

Hillary, it’s all about your BAD judgment. Just like when you voted ‘NO’ on the Levin amendment, that could have prevented Bush from invading Iraq.
You NEVER explained that vote either..Let’s face it, if George Bush bombs Iran, you are ‘TOAST.’

It’s all about judgment, not about blame.

I agree...it seems when you have to make a decision on your own, its always wrong. As President who should we expect to "Make" your decisions for you?

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Jessica, Wisconsin — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:41:07 GMT

Senator Clinton continues to tout insignificant popularity polls as a sign of strength in a campaign that is more about the triangulation and divisiveness of the past than the future of America.

While Senator Clinton may be popular among Democrats, her astronomically high negatives nationwide, due in part to her huge 'baggage' and the kind of politics she's been associated with since the 90s, is a significant electability concern for Democrats who badly want to win in 2008.

Every time Americans think about the casualties of the Iraq war and the heavy price America is paying, they should remember that Senator Clinton wholeheartedly gave George Bush the authority to wage that war. The Iraq war is Hillary Clinton's war too. She can try to hide from it, but she can't run away from it.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Lyn, MD — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:45:28 GMT

For those of you who keep harping on why he wasn't there ( I know you could go to the congressional record on your own...if you chose) But you would rather continue with the only "talking point" the Hillary campaign gave you..

• First, let us dispense with yet another Clinton fallacy, i.e. the erroneous assertion that Obama was ducking the vote on Lieberman-Kyl. The official transcript is below (can’t seem to get a link to work, but search for it at http://thomas.loc/gov):

• The congressional record clearly states that senators were informed that the Kyl-Lieberman amendment would not be coming up for a vote in the near future.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. REID. Mr. Chairman, there will be no more votes tonight. We have tried to work something out on the Kyl-Lieberman amendment and the Biden amendment. We have been unable to do that.
We have been very close a few times, but we have just been informed that Senator Biden will not have a vote anytime in the near future. There will not be a vote on the other one anytime in the near future. We hope tonight will bring more clearness on the issue.
But right now, I think it is fair to say there will be no votes tonight.
Does the Senator from South Dakota have any comments?
Mr. THUNE. No, I do not. I would say to the leader, that is good for our Members to know. We have Members who have been inquiring whether they will be able to vote.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

MK,MO — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:47:44 GMT

obama and clinton both are owned by the corporate war machine,it is a fact, vote for edwards not business as usual

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:51:35 GMT

My wife and I sat 6 (me) and 5 (her) seats away from the Clintons at her 60th B-Day bash! We were in the 10th row and they were in the 7th row. My wife gave Hillary a birthday card that said, "Best Birthday ever, Best Year Ever", to which we added, "best campaign ever, best inauguration ever!" and, "here's a little something for the campaign", with a dollar bill in the card. I am sure some will want to contact the FEC about this contribution...

Crystal was hilarious, ribbing Bush and Rudy, calling Clinton 60th birthday parties and "annual event". He said that Bill had a dozen parties last year for his sixtieth, so now he's "technically 72 years old."

The Wallflowers were terrific, Jakob Dylan intimating that, "This isn't out typical audience." Elvis Costello did an acoustic set and finished up BACKED by the Wallflowers. More later.

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Trace, Scranton — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:54:20 GMT

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Trace, Scranton — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:57:37 GMT

hey, how would obama feel if edwards had a racist speak but then also had a non-racist speak?

it's the same thing that obama's doing to gays!

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Bee — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:57:56 GMT

By now we all know what Mrs Clinton is capable of. She doesn't like to admit mistake and she like to blame other people for her flaw.

Another Clinton is not good for America. What is good for CLinton is not good for America. They will try to blur the line whenever they are wrong. That is what they do best. She is so dishonest about her vote.

When it comes to Clinton, she is as good as George Bush. See, Bush-Chenney lyte is what i am afraid of.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0icVblxh2dI&NR=1

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Bee — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:02:48 GMT

Jessica,

You are right in the money. Bush war = Clinton war. We've not forgotten, she voted for the war. Democrats have turn George Bush to a punching bag - most especially Senator Clinton.

After looking at every foreign policy in the last 5 yrs, i realized Hillary is totally equivalent to George Bush. There is no difference. She is the new-neo con of the democratic party. Bush-Chenney Lyte.

She voted for the war in Iraq and now Iran. She cannot be trusted

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Trace, Scranton — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:04:04 GMT

Bee, Obama has the highest missed votes in the senate (democrats).

Maybe he should concentrate on the job he has, instead of the job he isn't qualified for.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Bee — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:06:50 GMT

Here is an interesting link on "war with Iran". Check out the PBS documentary. Please, take time to watch the whole thing, if you truly care about this country. This documentary will give you a better overview of the region.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/showdown/etc/synopsis.html

If you think Kyl-Liberman amendement is not for real. Think again. This documentary shows why you can't give George Bush another blank check against Iran. I wonder when Senator Clinton is going to learn.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

jerry/corpus christi texas — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:07:45 GMT

My wife and I sat 6 (me) and 5 (her) seats away from the Clintons at her 60th B-Day bash! We were in the 10th row and they were in the 7th row.

The 7th ROW???????

Thought this was her birthday party......

I wonder who was in the front row??????

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Lek — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:08:55 GMT

Obama's vote doesn't give HRC the right to vote for another war. Please cut your "talking point" out.

CLinton should be a leader but her vote demonstrate otherwise.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

RH Oregon — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:13:01 GMT

A new low in shallowness has been hit by the Vanster. Counting seats and giving the play by play of the card. Wow! What a shallow dink you are.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

RH Oregon — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:16:13 GMT

Obama has jumped on the pander-wagon full blown. No pun intended. And a 'openly gay minister'?? Sorry bub, but the two don't mix. If God is up there, he has not changed his mind on your sexual choices.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Grace,NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:19:03 GMT

hey, how would obama feel if edwards had a racist speak but then also had a non-racist speak?

it's the same thing that obama's doing to gays!
Trace, Scranton

When a Rev Mayberry who called gays "THIEVES" endorsed Hillary and she "CELEBRATED" the endorsement. How did you feel?

First thoughts: Dueling memos

ki houston — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:19:16 GMT

Used to have respect for hillary , Which is why i reframe from personal attacks on her . But too use Obama's missed vote when she was diffenatly aware off her friend and campain supporter (harry reid ) intenionaly misleading obama during campain season so he would miss the vote , is just too sleazy.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

CitizenJ — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:20:05 GMT

"Lyn and Crystal... the Senate was in session, why wasn't he there? Its okay for him to skip work if he's out raisng money?"

I'm willing to venture a guess that you are the exact type of person that would ask why he wasn't out talking to voters if he were in the Senate everyday.

EVERY presidential candidate has to campaign. Duh. And when you are told one day that the legislation is not going to come up for a vote soon, and yet it does THE NEXT DAY, you blame him for not being there.

I don't want to make any excuses for him. It is not good that he didn't vote. But that shouldn't be a reason that other Senators (Clinton) use to justify their vote.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:23:05 GMT

"...who's typin' a memo 'round here?" - Scene from 'e-mail deliverance'

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Lyn, MD — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:24:29 GMT

Lyn and Crystal... the Senate was in session, why wasn't he there? Its okay for him to skip work if he's out raisng money?

And why doesn't he support the amendment by Sens Webb and Clinton that would stop bush from attacking?

Trace, Scranton (Sent Friday, October 26, 2007 9:54 AM)

Same reason that "NONE" of the Senators are there "everyday"...including Hillary...that they are in session ( be careful if you live in a glass house)

Do you know he doesn't support it?

First thoughts: Dueling memos

CitizenJ — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:25:31 GMT

"And a 'openly gay minister'?? Sorry bub, but the two don't mix. If God is up there, he has not changed his mind on your sexual choices."

How dare he believe in God. And not only that, to preach about it to other people! Gasp! What is this world coming to?!? I can just imagine God speaking down to us from above: "Don't listen to him!! He's gay! He's gay! Quick, Georgie, someone ban him from getting married! If he keeps spreading my word about love and peace, I will smote him!!"

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:28:33 GMT

It's a non-binding resolution. 75 other senators voted for it, so you're impugning all 75. When it comes to judgment, do you really think that this is an important issue to the electorate? That senator Clinton was one of the vast majority voting for a non-binding resolution is a much an issue as it was binding.
Every day there is some other, "hail-Mary", pass that Obama supporters are SURE will turn the campaign around, but it doesn't. Instead another week goes by and we're another week closer to the primaries.

Still miles behind in the polls, they're, "insignificant popularity polls", because Clinton is so popular? The willingness to suspend disbelief and deny the objective model of reality that the rest of the world agrees on isn't very realistic and makes it impossible to correct your mistakes and change.

When I have asked Obama supporters how they feel the campaign is going and what they think the Obama campaign has to do to turn things around, they attack Clinton, deny that being so far behind in the polls means anything and allude to a conspiracy involving everything from the MSM to the Senate majority leader as obscuring their truth.

If you folks really think everything is going great and there's nothing to change, thank you, because you should run a campaign like you're behind even when you're way ahead. Running a campaign like you're ahead when you are trailing by the equivalent of your total support (20-22%) and focusing on non-binding resolutions with 10 weeks to the first caucus is like giving your opponent a gift.

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Lyn, MD — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:35:36 GMT

The Wallflowers were terrific, Jakob Dylan intimating that, "This isn't out typical audience." Elvis Costello did an acoustic set and finished up BACKED by the Wallflowers. More later.

Van
vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Friday, October 26, 2007 9:51 AM)

VAn...I am happy that you had a good time and that you were seated close to Hillary...but as to the more info later... Thanks, but no thanks

BTW didn't I read from you a couple of weeks ago that this whole B'day bash (LA & NY)would bring in 3-5 million dollars. By my count the two only brought in about 2.5 million. That won't have her out raise Obama by 100% this quarter as you predicted. Maybe you should have put more than $1 in the card.

Glad you had a good time though

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:35:44 GMT

I wonder who was in the front row??????

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Friday, October 26, 2007 10:07 AM)

With The Governors of NY and NJ, both senators from NY, the entire NY congressional delegation and a hundred dignitaries in attendance, there were a couple of security people on the scene.

Crystal told about being at game 2 of the 2001 WS when Bush threw out the first pitch. He called out to Crystal, "BILLY C!, BILLY C!, what'd you think of my fastball?" Crystal: "And I'm thinking, where the hell's Bin Laden?" He said that Bush sounded more the the president of the "Dukes of Hazzard", than the US.
Everyone laughed and laughed...

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Looking for the Truth — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:36:17 GMT

I must admit Hillary’s ability to have her shills infiltrate the media (TV, print, internet) and control the message has been amazing. For those of you who wonder why their candidates weren’t getting the coverage, or only bad coverage, and wonder why all these fluff articles on Hillary keep appearing it’s because the Clinton mob has their backers placed in all the top media outlets. You don’t even to have to look farther than First Read and MSNBC to see that there are a number of the Clinton shills deliberately pushing or hold information in support of Hillary.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Vic, Rye NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:37:46 GMT

jerry --> I wonder who was in the front row??????

What, is this hard to figure out? All of her Chinese money launders, ehh, donors. They think Elvis Costello is Elvis Presley.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

pat huntington ny — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:39:56 GMT

Hillary did not go on the attack with Obama's missed vote...rather, she's used it as a response to Obama's basless attack against her vote. Therefore, Obama opened the door on this one.

I feel she showed courage and good judgment on her vote. After all, the overwhelming majority of the Senate approved it. Why wouldn't we call the Iranian Guard [whatever they're called] terrorists? And if anyone thinks that but for this resolution we're not heading for a military confrontation with Iran, you're pretty naive. It's going to happen one way or another. Don't get me wrong. I'd much prefer we stay out of Iran.

I think that the Dems are your best bet for giving diplomacy every possible chance. It seems the Republicans only give that lip service.

And lets talk about judgment. Bush thought Putin would be behing the US on the Iran problem. He must have done some more of that look into my eyes soul searching with his Russian lover. But, we now know Putin doesn't think Iran poses a threat.

Last thought on this issue. I think Hillary demonstrated good judgment on voting for the resolution at issue. It was meant to facilitate diplomacy over war, by providing the basis for US imposed sanctions on top of those from the UN. It clearly does not give Bush a blank check to go into Iran on his own, whenever he wants. If I am wrong, then I invite anyone to quote me the resolution provision that gives Bush explicit authority to invade Iran when he wishes.

Oh, and a belated happy birthday to the Future Madam President.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:45:09 GMT

This is really re-arranging deck-chairs day. Clinton voted for it. Obama missed the vote. Obama has a gay problem, well, Clinton was endorsed by a gay-bashing reverend. Tiny issues, marking time towards the primaries.

The question in my mind is why, if Obama is so inspiring, has his support been pretty much stagnant or declining since his entry into the race by every objective measure that we have?
Sure, attack the methods, call them insignificant, but why is there no metric that points to anything other than a DECLINE in Obama's fortunes?

He's lost his fundraising edge, he's dropped below 20% in many of the national polls and trails by more in every state poll than he did this time last month.
Can anyone explain this?

Seriously, can anyone explain this without bashing the polls the Clintons or the dreaded MSM?

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

sonja, Cross SC — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:50:08 GMT

Trace, you and other gay americans need to weigh your options here. Obama is the best thing that gay americans have to helping advance your cause. Now you are willing to throw him overboard because he is making good on his campaign rhetoric to reach out to all sides, even if the point of views differ from his own. Where was your outrage when a minister who raged against gays endorsed the Clinton campaign? Once again it seems because gays cannot have everything their way, they are willing to shoot themselves in the foot. Go ahead and research the other candidates records and see if you can find another that has done more for the gay community.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

sonja, Cross SC — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:51:31 GMT

Van if I'm not mistaken the Iraq vote was nonbinding as well, and now we are engaged in a lengthy and costly war with Iraq.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Jessica, Wisconsin — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:53:02 GMT

I saw Obama at a rally in Madison on 10/15. I was pretty close to him. I couldn't tell you how many seats away I was because there really wasn't any room for chairs. The room was packed. But Obama did take time to come over and talk to & hold my son. It was amazing how comfortable he was with my son. You can really tell that he love kids. Now there really weren't any famous people there, but you know what I'll take what I had with Obama over some big huge expensive Hillary fundraiser anyday. If you'd like to see a video of Obama with my son click the link. (It's near the end of the video).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQv9oUntTf8

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Grace, NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:58:51 GMT

Last thought on this issue. I think Hillary demonstrated good judgment on voting for the resolution at issue. It was meant to facilitate diplomacy over war, by providing the basis for US imposed sanctions on top of those from the UN. It clearly does not give Bush a blank check to go into Iran on his own, whenever he wants. If I am wrong, then I invite anyone to quote me the resolution provision that gives Bush explicit authority to invade Iran when he wishes

Pat...exactly her excuse ater the Iraq war vote. Same song different country. It won't be the last word...not by a long shot

BTW if she didn't think it was a problem why is she responding...afterall isn't she inevitable. The tephlon queen. Nevermind that Fox poll this week has her dropping in their poll in "One week" by 8% points cutting her lead on Obama in half

First thoughts: Dueling memos

CitizenJ — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:01:46 GMT

"It's a non-binding resolution. 75 other senators voted for it, so you're impugning all 75. When it comes to judgment, do you really think that this is an important issue to the electorate? That senator Clinton was one of the vast majority voting for a non-binding resolution is a much an issue as it was binding."

Yes, Van, we are impugning all 75. I don't give Obama a free pass for missing the vote, but the fact that 74 others besides Clinton voted for it doesn't mean she made the right choice. I don't care if it was non-binding. When dealing with the rouge Bible boy in the White House, you ALWAYS have to err on the side of caution.

Maybe she only read a summary of the legislation, kind of like in 2002 when she only read the summary of the intelligence report. I don't know, but personally, I would rather her not vote than vote for it.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Bee — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:03:13 GMT

Am i suppose to take seriously words from Clinton's supporter. The answer is No.

Experience without judgement is an empty head. Perhaps, another talking head like George Bush.

Hillary Clinton cannot be trusted.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0icVblxh2dI&NR=1

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Trudy — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:03:55 GMT

Anyone who is thinking of voting for Hillary should think for a moment about her pro-war record. She is so afraid of looking “weak on defense” that we’ll be mired in Iraq many more years if she is elected

That’s even leaving aside the question of starting a war with Iran, which she seems perfectly willing to do even though U.S. troops are at or past the breaking point from over-extension already.

Let’s not follow the disastrous Bush Presidency with a disastrous Clinton one. Hillary is just not competent to be President, and wouldn’t even be in the running if people weren’t assuming Bill would be backing her up. There is no evidence that she would listen to him about anything important.

Vote for Edwards, Obama (or, please, Al Gore, run), but not Hillary.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:04:04 GMT

VAn...I am happy that you had a good time and that you were seated close to Hillary...but as to the more info later... Thanks, but no thanks

BTW didn't I read from you a couple of weeks ago that this whole B'day bash (LA & NY)would bring in 3-5 million dollars. By my count the two only brought in about 2.5 million. That won't have her out raise Obama by 100% this quarter as you predicted. Maybe you should have put more than $1 in the card.

Glad you had a good time though

Lyn, MD (Sent Friday, October 26, 2007 10:35 AM)

Thanks, but if I decide that I want to post a transcript of the whole evening, I will.

Last night brought in 2 1/2 MILLION dollars, today's part at Rob Reiner's will bring more.

Lyn- common sense should tell you that the candidate 20-30 points up in the polls would probably be out raising the others, if not that, being out raised by over SEVEN MILLION last quarter would indicate a trend, and the candidate's name doesn't matter.

Clinton is outraising Obama, and now by a large margin. This isn't some hope, or dream, it's reality.
She'll raise between 30-40 MILLION this quarter and Terry McAuliffe stated that the campaign had raised over NINETY-TWO million as of yesterday. Add that 10 mil she had to begin with and we're over a hundred million dollars.

And forgive me but for all the great Obama fundraising, it hasn't meant squat in his ability to persuade anything beyond his beginning core constituency of about 20% of voters.
She has more funds, but what's more important is that she has more votes.

I had a great time. Those here who demonize Hillary and her family like they are somehow less than human, should have been there to see how absolutely wrong they are, and how many people truly see her as the future of our nation.

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Keith, NH — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:04:29 GMT

am blown away by Clinton’s e-mail. As someone who has been following this race closely, relying on a variety of sources to keep a balanced perspective, it is pretty alarming to see the way she has manipulated facts, created spin, and mislead her own supporters.

There was a time when I was open to her candidacy. Now, the idea makes me cringe. She’s lost my trust. Her leadership is the number one reason we need the new politics of hope.

There is some wonderful discussion in this blog. Take a look at it. A campaign that is stagnant can’t generate support like that! Obama is on the right track. His movement is stronger than ever. This is Obama’s moment.

And Hillary knows it

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Lek — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:05:22 GMT

Hillary totally can NOT be trusted on literally ANY issue that she takes. I sure hope Obama is the Democratic nominee

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Peter, Iowa — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:08:44 GMT

Two days ago, HRC admitted that she was not the inevitable nominee. Looking at internal polling, she also admitted that Iowa was a steep hill for her. She followed it with a mail-out and now an attack on senator Obama? Guys, her house of Cards is collapsing and she knows it. The only way she can stand is to soil Obama and obscure her records.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

An Observer — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:12:01 GMT

Van, other than Chris Matthews I don't know anyone who likes to toot their horn more than you. I guess it's that Long Island thing.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Lyn, MD — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:12:12 GMT

It's a non-binding resolution. 75 other senators voted for it, so you're impugning all 75. When it comes to judgment, do you really think that this is an important issue to the electorate? That senator Clinton was one of the vast majority voting for a non-binding resolution is a much an issue as it was binding.

Van

Well Van a majority of them were wrong before...some have had the courage and strength of character to admit it.

Posted by Pam:
• If the bill was not as potentially harmful as Hillary and her blogger friends are implying then why did the following people also oppose it?
Chuck Hagel, Jim Webb, Tom Harkin, John Kerry, Joe Biden, Barbara Boxer, Sherrod Brown, Robert Byrd, Christopher Dodd, Russ Feingold, Ted Kennedy, Richard Lugar, Claire McCaskill, Jon Tester, Patrick Leahy, John Edwards, Bill Richardson, and Mike Gravel.
Jim Webb said:
“At worst, it could be read as a backdoor method of gaining Congressional validation for military action, without one hearing and without serious debate.”
Chris Dodd said:
“I cannot support the Kyl-Lieberman amendment on Iran. To do so could give this President a green light to act recklessly and endanger US national security. We learned in the run up to the Iraq war that seemingly nonbinding language passed by this Senate can have profound consequences.”
— Posted by Pam

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Trace, Scranton — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:17:27 GMT

Well, lyn, if obama is so easily out-manned on missing a vote, imagine what the gop and the world will do to him if he's the nominee or , heaven forbid, the president.

Your version of Obama's missed vote show his inexperience... we already have a president who is lost + floundering, we certainly don't need another.

now, why doesn't Obama support the Webb and Clinton amendment?

Because Clinton is attacthed to it?

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:29:58 GMT

The Clintons are incredibly intelligent. What you consider arrogance by them assuming the nomination is simply brilliant marketing. In the US perception equals reality. They realize that if they make it appear that they ARE THE CANDIDATE, they will be the candidate because people will stop supporting the other candidates, jump on their team and continue to gain strength. It's a smart political move and for one I'm ready for a little intelligence in the white house. I feel like this country is currently being run by a bunch of mindless drones who look at each issues as: Can we make money off of this? Can our friends make money off of this? If not, it's going to get vetoed!!!

i.e. The childrens health bill that would have given 10 million uninsured American children healthcare. It failed the first time with the republican excuse that it allowed too many adults to enter the program (which states determined for themselves and was not included in the bill) and that illegal immigrants might get benefits (the bill stated that only legal immigrants who had been in country 5 years or more would be eligible) but it gave them an easy out and a reason to gain support from their constituats. So the bill was re-written with broad republican and democratic support to address those two specific concerns and yet Bush and his core republican cronies have pledged to keep it from passing. WHY? Because it would add to the deficit? NO, it would be paid for with a .61 cent cigarette tax (which aligns with a priority of better health as increased cigarette taxes have led to more people quitting smoking). It won't pass because the insurance companies don't want this bill to pass. The republicans are in so thick with the insurance companies and Bush showed his hand when he said that he was afraid too many people might cancel their private insurance and use the SCHIP insurance. The SCHIP insurance isn't free......it's just affordable insurance for families that work but can't afford private insurance (which costs $1000 to $1500 per month for a family of 4......who could afford it?). If private insurance didn't try to make billions of dollars in profits off of lower and middle class citizens and offered affordable insurance there would be no reason to switch from private insurance. The republicans are afraid of insurance company retaliation in the form of not supporting their upcoming elections and which they KNOW THEY ARE GOING TO NEED!!!!

If the American people are smart and the democrats control all three branches we'll finally start see things getting done that benefit the citizens of this country. It's kind of absurd to think that a child in Iraq can get medical attention at a facility paid for by the citizens of the US but an American child in the lower class can't get medical attention without insurance.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

sonja, Cross SC — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:37:23 GMT

Trace why do you support Clinton?

First thoughts: Dueling memos

ki houston — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:39:17 GMT

van are you forgeting money and donnors the most inportant metric , because obama is ahead in both , although you and the msm will gladly leave that out . Because Obama beats her in both . And his fund raising is getting stronger 1mil in one day on the net. Not to mention the huge crowds he attracts ,which clinton cant come close to. Seems like the only thing she does lead in is the polls ,And who's doing these polls . It wouldnt be her friends over there at ras. could it . Van you are becoming a joke with these blatently false statments.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Bee — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:40:49 GMT

Senators missed vote all the time. The questions is simple, why did you vote for it?

Obama's missing vote does not justify your vote for another war. Clinton blew it.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

sonja, Cross SC — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:41:37 GMT

I would also like to make an observation. Clinton's negative attacks on Obama's experiance and character,(calling him naive) will alienate many of his supporters if she were to win the party's nomination. Many democrats, such as myself, do not appreciate the tone and dishonesty surrounding her campaign. If she has to resort to these kind of tactics to win, she will I predict, ultimately lose in the general because I'm not so sure if I will turn out to vote for her in the end.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

UP UP AND AWAY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:41:58 GMT

Wow Hillary is awesome. She has no worries on the Obama front, he is behind!

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:44:00 GMT

Van if I'm not mistaken the Iraq vote was nonbinding as well, and now we are engaged in a lengthy and costly war with Iraq.

sonja, Cross SC (Sent Friday, October 26, 2007 10:51 AM)

You are very mistaken. How can we criticize what legislators do and what legislation is if we don't even know basic civics? I don't mean to be insulting but here;

A non-binding resolution is a written motion adopted by a deliberative body that cannot progress into a law. The substance of the resolution can be anything that can normally be proposed as a motion.

This type of resolution is often used to express the body's approval or disapproval of something which they cannot otherwise vote on,[1] due to the matter being handled by another jurisdiction, or being protected by a constitution. An example would be a resolution of support for a nation's troops in battle, which carries no legal weight, but is adopted for moral support.
Use

Non-binding resolutions are usually specific simple or concurrent resolutions that are not passed on to the president to be signed in to law.[2] These resolutions differ from pure concurrent resolutions (that are used for various procedural requests such as adjourning sessions) in that they are designed to formally express and document opinions, not initiate a process.

These resolutions offer a means for elected officials to publicly air the concerns of their constituents[3] and are closely followed by major media outlets. Additionally, these resolutions can be used to state the position of congress, showing a preview of how they will vote on future legislation and budget allocations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-binding_resolution

House Passes Symbolic Iraq Resolution
256-153 Vote For Resolution Against Arbitrary Troop Withdrawal.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/16/politics/main1719964.shtml

joint resolution
n.

"A resolution passed by both houses of a bicameral legislature and eligible to become a law if signed by the chief executive or passed over the chief executive's veto."

http://www.answers.com/topic/joint-resolution

SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE.

This joint resolution may be cited as the "Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq".
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html

So a joint resolution can become a law and a non-binding resolution is an opinion that can not be ACTED upon. They are a different as talk and action.

It took me less than five minutes to put this together, even though I already knew the difference.
You have a computer the internet and Google, why if you care enough to have an opinion, didn't you check this obvious point before posting your contention?

How could you think that something that is non-binding could have been an authorization to do anything?

The definitions and examples above should make the differences clear and render this argument moot once and for all. But I know it won't.

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

jerry/corpus christi texas — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:48:02 GMT

Van:

With The Governors of NY and NJ, both senators from NY, the entire NY congressional delegation and a hundred dignitaries in attendance, there were a couple of security people on the scene.

Oh, I see.......

The Queen overlooking her court?.......

First thoughts: Dueling memos

CitizenJ — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:52:18 GMT

I have read the 2002 resolution for Iraq. I have read Kyl-Lieberman. The 2002 resolution authorizes the use of force to "achieve implementation of Security Council Resolution 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677"; Also "...acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorist and terrorist organizations..."

Basically, in order to force Iraq to comply with these UN resolutions, Bush has the authorization to use force to achieve this goal.

Kyl-Lieberman "designate[s] the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps as a foreign terrorist organization under section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act and place the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps on the list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists, as established under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and initiated under Executive Order 13224".

Read the text for yourself. Kyl-Lieberman calls the IRGC terrorists. It also says that IRGC is disrupting security in Iraq. In order to secure the objectives of the 2002 resolution, Bush has the authorization to use force to achieve it. Now that the IRGC is a terrorist organization that is obstructing the mission in Iraq, force is justified to end that obstruction.

2002 resolution:
http://www.c-span.org/resources/pdf/hjres114.pdf

Kyl-Lieberman:
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/issues/kyllieberman.html

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Crystal (Time for change) — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:55:56 GMT

Trace, Scranton--- did you look at this, because you keep referring to the missed vote which means you clearly don't take the time to read on issues:

http://thinkonthesethings.wordpress.com/2007/10/11/did-obama-skip-the-iran-vote/

First thoughts: Dueling memos

MK,MO — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:56:51 GMT

thanks to hillary's vote to empower her mentor mr. bush with the ability to carry out a preemptive strike on iran we will now be blessed with $100 a barrel oil, all of hillary's backers get a piece of the pie, her war mongering defense contractor buddies, the oil companies, the insurance and pharmaceutical companies, those lobbyists are really getting a good return on their investment in the hillary, the only one's not getting any benefit from hillary's vote to attack iran are the american people, which is exactly how she thinks it should be.

All together now, GO BUSH LITE !!!

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Trace, Scranton — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:57:02 GMT

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:58:42 GMT

In the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination, little has changed. Clinton attracts 46% support and continues to enjoy a commanding lead over Barack Obama, who earns the vote from 18%. John Edwards attracts 14%. Bill Richards is at the 4% mark and no other candidate attracts more than 3% support from Likely Democratic Primary Voters

Numbers for the Democratic Primary in New Hampshire will be released this weekend."

Whatever the rationalizing or denials, and claims of a falling house of cards, from the candidate with the strongest support yet, 18 percent is 18 percent, and that's not going to win anything.

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Deb, illinois — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:58:48 GMT

Hillary will do just fine. Bill did just great. Cant wait for the clintons to be back in the WH.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

ki houston — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:03:40 GMT

First thoughts: Dueling memos

George Sears, Cedar City, Utah — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:04:29 GMT

Well, here is Bush defining the Dems with THE issue. Meanwhile Iraq, via Kurds, has toasted Turkey, which now probably has no chance of making it into the EU. This was a Big Idea for integrating part of Islam into the West. Rather than fighting them is Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, etc, and paying 90 bucks for a barrel of oil.

Couldn't the Dems simply point out Bush is a failure?

I don't think we are going into Iran. I think Bush is playing the Dems and this is why the Dems are not a sure thing in 08.

America governs only by crisis. Where, oh where, will it be? Here? There? Everywhere?

I think if I were Obama I would say "The war in Iraq was a complete failure. If Bush goes into Iran he should be impeached and removed. "

But, you know, say it with HOPE.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:05:33 GMT

His movement is stronger than ever. This is Obama’s moment.

And Hillary knows it

Keith, NH (Sent Friday, October 26, 2007 11:04 AM)

One of us is missing something here...

October 26, 2007
Obama Plateaus In New Hampshire
By E. J. Dionne

MANCHESTER, N.H. -- Quietly but systematically, Hillary Clinton is building a firewall in New Hampshire. She can afford to lose the Iowa caucuses as long as she can win here. She can't afford to lose both states."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/10/obama_plateaus_in_new_hampshir.html

October 25, 2007
Trying Times for the Obama Faithful
By David Broder

CHICAGO -- These are difficult days for supporters of Barack Obama.

This city is filled with people who have voted for, worked for, contributed to, and, in many cases, prayed for the success of the young senator from Illinois. The struggle he has had in trying to overtake Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination is wearing on their morale.

Last weekend, I heard them tell each other that while the race started months ago, it is still early going; that the crucial days in Iowa and New Hampshire are still ahead; and that there is time for Obama to close with a rush, as he did when he came from behind to capture the nomination for his Senate seat back in 2004.
But the steady drumbeat of polls showing Clinton with more support than all the other Democrats combined -- and twice as much as Obama -- is taking a toll. In their private moments, they wonder whether even Obama, as gifted as he is, can pull off this feat."
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/10/obama_voters_at_the_crossroads.html

October 25, 2007
CBS News Poll
Posted by TOM BEVAN | E-Mail This | Permalink | Email Author

New CBS News poll on the Dems (Oct 12-16, 440 Dem Primary Voters) showing - surprise! - Hillary Clinton extending her lead over Obama and Edwards in a three-way race:

http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2007/10/cbs_news_poll_4.html

Clinton 51 (+8 vs. last poll in September)
Obama 23 (+1)
Edwards 13 (-3)

One of us is missing something here...

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

--NSMSNBC — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:11:06 GMT

Jerry--An Update

Apparently, the protester at Bill Clinton's fundraising for Hillary was a 9/11 conspiracy nut job. He thinks that flying planes into the WTCs was an act from the administration. I think he blames the Bush administration, but also believes Clinton had a role in the planning, which would make it a bipartisan attack on our country. See, I told you we could all get along. Anyway,they had audiotape of Bill Clinton responding with "How dare you," and he told the guy to shut up and let him talk. He had every right to. Then they escorted him to his car, sadly without a taser.

It's a radio station, not a reputable news source, but they had audio of the above, so that is true. Following is news commentary. This guy/group believes that the pentagon was hit with a ballistic (?) missile and apparently has a cellphone image to prove this, and then they strew around airplane parts. They went on to say that apparently this group thinks that planes did not actually crash into the WTC, but those were missiles too. Apparently, the planes flew by the WTCs and had missiles on their bottom. As for all of the passengers from all across the country who supposedly died in the attack, they were apparently kidnapped and shot by our government and their bodies hidden. Rosie Oh-My Donnell that's crazy.

Later, they had a guy on who said that Al qaeda/bin Laden were not the first to think up flying planes into buildings. This is completely unrelated to before. Anyway, Hitler first thought it up, only he might have had zeppelins in mind. But the Japanese went all kamakaze on U.S. battleships so ... So, it's debatable whether bin Laden got the idea from Hitler.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

jerry/corpus christi texas — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:11:54 GMT

it would be paid for with a .61 cent cigarette tax (which aligns with a priority of better health as increased cigarette taxes have led to more people quitting smoking).

This just begs the question........
What if the smokers can't smoke enough to pay this bill?.......

The what other goofy tax will the taxpayers be burdened with next?

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Amy B Portland ME — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:12:55 GMT

Jessica! That video is adorable. When I get sick of politics and worried about the road America is going down, I think of Obama and I have hope.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:17:47 GMT

Good article on Hillary's management style in today's NYT;

The Long Run
A No-Nonsense Style Honed as Advocate

By MARK LEIBOVICH
Published: October 26, 2007

WASHINGTON, Oct. 24 — Hillary Rodham Clinton needs her rest. She shuns the nocturnal habits of her husband — the 2 a.m. staff calls, the all-hours games of hearts. “It doesn’t suit my body rhythms,” said Mrs. Clinton, who typically sleeps six or seven hours, sometimes beside the briefing book she had been reading.

Her meetings have clear agendas and rarely devolve into open-ended “brainstorming” sessions. She might indulge gossip at the outset (Who’s pregnant? Who saw “Grey’s Anatomy”?) but hates wasting time. “Every meeting should be transactional,” said Tamera Luzzatto, Mrs. Clinton’s Senate chief of staff.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/26/us/politics/26clinton.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Disclaimer:
(You can read the entire entry by following the link. I am trying to balance my posts between those who complain that they are too long when they are complete, and those who complain that I am, "distorting the facts", when I leave the reader to their own devices.)

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Lyn, MD — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:19:07 GMT

She has more funds, but what's more important is that she has more votes.

Van

Gosh Van...I didn't know that anyone had voted !!!

And of course we know that if "Terry I never tell the truth McAuliffe' said it, It must be for real. Lets see at the end of Q3 she had raised $62 million plus the $10 million transfer gives her $72 million. So she raised almost $20 million in 3 weeks. WOW!!! good for her. Has HSU been released?

BTW The papers report she raised 1.5 million last night and that the event over the weekend raised $500,000. As far as dollars that "count" she got 2-3 million more and you know this. It doesn't seem that 20 point lead stopped Obama supporters from raising $2+ million in 86 hours online. Nor has it hindered me from reaching my "bundling" goal this quarter. I should finish by Nov 30th. Easiest money I ever raised , I may up my goal.

Regardless, whether she raises 100 million or 200 million Obama will have more than enough....Bank on it

Since I am trying to refrain, and I know how "thin skinned" you are regarding her weight,I avoided a gratatious "shot" as to how she could use some of that money. LOL

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Ron, TX — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:26:05 GMT

My first comment didn't seem to make the cute for some reason or another. The issue is NOT that declaring the Republican Gaurd terrorists is bad. The issue is that it TIES TROOP LEVELS in Iraq to Iran. Obama has said this repeatedly, but Clinton keeps trying to spin it. Obama agrees in theory with the terrorist idea and even tried to get the State Department to declare them terrorists earlier. The issue is the troop levels being tied to Iran. Hillary doesn't plan on leaving Iraq. She still hasn't released a timetable. We don't need Bush-lite. A name change in the White House isn't enough. We need REAL CHANGE.

From the Kyl-Lieberman Bill Text:
" (3) that it should be the policy of the United States to COMBAT, CONTAIN , and ROLL BACK the violent activities and destabilizing influence inside Iraq of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran...
(4) to SUPPORT the prudent and calibrated use of ALL INSTRUMENTS of United States national power in Iraq, including diplomatic, economic, intelligence, and MILITARY INSTRUMENTS, in support of the policy described in paragraph (3) WITH RESPECT TO to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and its proxies;"

First thoughts: Dueling memos

sonja, Cross SC — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:32:55 GMT

Van, in the end the tactics that the Clinton campaign are using may cost her in the general, if she were to win the nomination. She is hoping that the Democrats are so desiring of seeing a democrat in the White House, that we will hold our nose and vote for her. She does not take into consideration that many democrats view her as Bush/Cheney lite. If her war policy is so similar to the Republicans how can she say she is different from them? If there will be no significant change than why bother voting for her versus the Republican nominee? If she does not stop trying so hard to be a hawk, she will lose many of the Democrats she needs to win.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:34:20 GMT

van must work for msnbc every time i expose his lies they dont post it . hmmm will the latest lie is clinton out raised obama by seven million . uh 27-22=5 22-19=3 oh well i geuss little things like facts dont matter . Wont even mention how she cheated anyway , million dollor dishwashers .

ki houston (Sent Friday, October 26, 2007 12:03 PM)

I'm sorry. I'm such a dishonest liar. That's all I do here is lie. Thanks for pointing that out.

Clinton Q3$27,859,861
Obama Q3$21,343,292
6,516,569 difference

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/index.asp?cycle=2008

Is SIX and a HALF MILLION closer to 5 or 7?

How long have you been reading my stuff and accusing me of things ki? Do you think you have to lie when you're ahead? I don't even believe in lying if I'm behind. You can criticize me for many things I'm sure but lying really isn't one of them. You could have gone to the actual numbers yourself before you posted.
I try to respect your opinions even though we don't agree.

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

students at UNF — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:36:04 GMT

Gooooooo Van, you are Awesome, we all love you here. Go Hill!

First thoughts: Dueling memos

TheDonald — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:36:36 GMT

I fell sorry for Dick Durbin for becoming Hillary Clinton's political porn.

I think she has been pushed to a corner by the opponents that it will take a miracle for her to come out the corner unscratched. This is not a good time for her to be in this kind of situation when people are just tuning in to the campaign, with the bad fresh memory of the quagmire going on in Iraq right now.

The fundamental problem with our Senator from NY is that she wants to have it both ways - Dove and Hawk - at the same time.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Daniel, NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:37:00 GMT

Lots of other congressional news today:
- North Carolina Dems are finding a new candidate, while in Nebraska to run.
- In the House, Patricia Madrid is NOT running for the House.
Full rundown: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/10/north-carolina-and-nebraska-dems.html

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Trace, Scranton — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:38:59 GMT

Either clinton or edwards are fine.

Obama doesn't have the experience to be prez... he's a poliitical climber, who is conning people.
silly people.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Jen, Mn — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:44:06 GMT

Her meetings have clear agendas and rarely devolve into open-ended “brainstorming” sessions. She might indulge gossip at the outset (Who’s pregnant?

And, "Is it Bills?"

First thoughts: Dueling memos

CitizenJ — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:47:51 GMT

"Gooooooo Van, you are Awesome, we all love you here. Go Hill!"

Students at UNF,

Nobody cares who you love. I have never seen a post from you that is comprised of any substance. In fact, I think this is the first one that has deviated from your usual template of "Go Hillary! We all love you!". All you did was substitute "Van" for "Hillary".

If this is all that the "Students at UNF" can come up with, it must be a sorry institution. I mean, at least post something controversial and off the wall. Even the most degenerate of bloggers can do that.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

RuthieM — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:48:36 GMT

It's the tricky lying Clintons and the manuevering slick Clinton campaign that has infiltrators in every corner including the Senate when it comes time to vote, just like they squashed the Obama amendment dealing with voter protection/voter fraud when it cqm time to vote on it. A Clinton backer said because it had Obama's name on it they didn't vote on it because they didn't want it to appear they were endorsing Obama. It's amazing the American people want a lying, misleading, fence-straddling, secretive, inexperienced person in the white house again, in Hillary Clinton. How irresponsible and naive of Hillary Clinton to vote on the Kyle-Lieberman bill, chancing an attack on Iran at Bush's whim, like Iraq. She should not only not be president but I question whether she should even be in the senate, with her dangerous, and faulty judgment.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Robert, Houston — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:01:42 GMT

Crystal- WOW! It's great to see that you have so much time on your hands to post so much stuff. Your long verbose love affair with Obama and the 'Iran' issue loses ANYBODY after the first few blah blah blah lines. His campaign is sinking and he's going down the drain. I was hoping he'd win as he is the weakest of all the major Democratic candidates. Still, everything you listed is just fluff since the bottom line is- Obama is yesterday's news. He will never be elected President, nor win the nomination- so argue about Iran all you want.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:02:52 GMT

Lyn-

I know things are going so well for Obama that you have to try to torpedo Hillary with every post and things are going so bad for the evil Clinton machine that her supporters seldom have anything bad to say about him.

You seem to be a very smart person who I have come to like even though that feeling may or may not be mutual. The Obama people's rhetoric sounds like the hyperbole of desperation. I have asked what I thought were legitimate questions about the campaign and instead of a dialog I get the equivalent of "Oh Yeah, you mother wears Army Boots" in response.

Do you really think the issue du jour is really having any impact on the electorate?

How do you explain Obama's failure to have the claimed success of his movement reflected by any empirical evidence or metric available?

If you accept the fact that his success isn't reflected in anything we can see or measure, what should I be looking at that is below that radar and how can we quantify that?

Do you really believe that the manager of the Clinton campaign would stand before the candidate and many of her biggest supporters and lie about money? Why?

When if ever does Obama need to show some demonstrable metric of advancement against Clinton? Meaning, If Clinton is up by 10 in Iowa, 20 in NH and 15 in SC on Halloween? Thanksgiving? Christmas? January 1st? When if ever would you consider this to be an indicator of the actual vote?

Please notice how I do not bash Obama or throw slights and snide digs about his person etc. I know you are smart enough to make your argument without resorting to that stuff either.

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Trace, Scranton — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:03:07 GMT

Crystal, by your beliefs obama was out-manuovered in the vote...
(rather than skipping it)

If he's so inexperienced that he screws up in a simply thing like a vote , why on earth would you want him as prez? You believe the gop and the world wouldn't overmanoeuvre him

your explaination for him is even more of reason to avoid the young man.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Adam Columbus OH — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:07:09 GMT

Thoughts on Iowa:

Primary date is now set for Jan 3rd, the earliest ever. 2 days after New Year's. The voters that will actually end up turning out will overwhelmingly be repeat voters, (older voters predominately) that always turn out for the caucuses, not the first-timers that Obama and Edwards are counting on. Love her or hate her, she has run a nearly flawless canpaign.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

another great game in Boston! — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:08:17 GMT

Great posting Van! It is so refreshing to read your intelligent, well thought out rational, truths.

The lying posters out here are tripping all over themselves trying to keep up. That is the trouble , when you lie constantly you lose track and lie about your lies. It gets complicated!

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Smart as a whip — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:12:44 GMT

I am sure you can fill her Senate seat and do a great job Ruthie M! Get Citizenj to help you. You two will probably need 10 more people to help you!
Be careful who you vote for.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:17:29 GMT

Jerry,

If the smokers just can't smoke enough I've already emailed my representatives that a luxury vehicle tax would be appropriate. Any vehicle costing over $75,000 should be taxed at 1%. I don't think it will deter the super rich from buying another mercedes and CHILDREN can get healthcare. How you can argue against childrens healthcare is beyond me. AT least the democrats are looking to ACTUALLY PAY for it instead of indebting us further.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

sonja, Cross SC — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:18:37 GMT

Trace,
judgement trumps experiance in my opinion. All the experiance in the world will not help one to make the right decisions if one lacks the sound judgement needed to execute it. And just what "experiance" does Clinton have that is more substantive then Obama's? People like you are being "conned" into believing that she has more experiance than Obama. Being first lady does not necessarily translate into experiance. Obama certainly has held public office longer than she has. He served in the Illinois state legislature before becoming a United States Senator. I thought that the issue for you was the gay movement Trace? If you want to talk about conning people, than Clinton is your candidate. She has a minister endorsing her campaign who really is anti-gay, and then she professes to support gays without doing much at all to advance your causes. Seems to me that you sir are the silly one.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

American Voter — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:19:39 GMT

So, the next time we're attacked one of these lefties if elected, will send a memo to our enemy?

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:29:20 GMT

sonja, Cross SC (Sent Friday, October 26, 2007 1:18 PM)

You're welcome...

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Adam Columbus OH — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:29:40 GMT

A,

"Any vehicle costing over $75,000 should be taxed at 1%."

Also:

End mortgage interest deductions for houses over 3000 sq. feet. There are a whole panoply of luxury items on which revenue could be generated.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Ron, TX — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:33:12 GMT

Van Wrote:"When if ever does Obama need to show some demonstrable metric of advancement against Clinton? Meaning, If Clinton is up by 10 in Iowa, 20 in NH and 15 in SC on Halloween? Thanksgiving? Christmas? January 1st? When if ever would you consider this to be an indicator of the actual vote? "

... McCain was up big in Iowa down to the last minute. Then Kerry won. The ONLY poll that matters at this point is the one scheduled for Jan 3rd. Obama has had hundreds of thousands of people show up at rallies across the United States to listen to him, to hear him talk, more than 350,000 donors. Clinton's magical mystery poll numbers show her higher, but pictures don't lie. Go read some news stories about her rallies and the whopping 3,000 strong crowd, and then go read some news stories about Obama's rallies... 10,000; 15,000; 20,000; 24,000 strong.

We'll see on January 3rd...

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Crystal (Time for change) — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:39:20 GMT

I second that CitizenJ, regarding post about students at UNF!!!

Trace, you have no basis for not liking Obama, your only argument is experience which just shows that you really don't have a point. This is a really simple example, I hope you can follow but case in point:

Scenario:
Two mothers, Mother A and Mother B run family child care centers, Mother A has 3 children, ages 5, 12 and 17. Mother B has 1 child aged 8. So mother A has 17 years of experience with children versus Mother B's 8.
But during those 17 years, all 3 of Mother A's children have been burnt by the same Iron, left in the same spot after the mom ironed their clothes before school. In contrast, Mother B, the "least experienced" mother, makes sure as soon as she finish ironing she puts the iron away, recognizing that if she leaves it down low enough her child could get to it and get burned.

So to make a long story short, experience means nothing if you continue to not learn from your mistakes. I am impressed when Van shows the polls with Obama in second place, because it tells me, whoa it must be something about this man to come in the race with NO name recognition, with the amount of experience he has relative to his counterparts and actually be a true competitor. There are candidate's that people know well, with decades of experience that couldn't raise the kind of money he has!! And they say that he is stagnant in the polls, I think that is why Hillary and her supporters is scared b/c it shows that people aren't wavering on their feelings for him. Once people know him, they love him, all he has to do is get his message out!!!

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:43:55 GMT

People, let's not get so wrapped up that we take our eye off the prize. I personally support Hillary but I could also support Obama or Edwards over any of the Republican candidates. Saying Hillary is a talking point of the replublicans that we shouldn't be using. Only SATAN is Bush-lite. Any one of the democratic candidates would do more for Americans than all of the republicans did in their first 4 years of monopoly. The republicans had the majority and saw fit to give huge tax breaks to corporations and the wealthiest 1% of America. They also guaranteed that our seniors could have extended benefits through Medicare at a heafty price to them and us. They encouraged energy dependence on foreign oil by giving tax credits for businesses who bought gas guzzling HUMVEES. They made (I believe knowingly) false arguments to convince America we had to go to war with Iraq, they let Osama Bin Laden off the hook by taking the heat off of him, they secretly signed memos allowing torture against the principles of the geneva convention, wire tapped our phones without justifying cause, put 72,000 of us on a secret terror watch list (if you have trouble in security when flying you are probably on it) while knowingly admitting that many errors on the list have causes countless issues for those wrongly targeted, they created secret jails so that they wouldn't have to comply with the constitution and laws they swore to protect. I could go on but that should be enough to declare that any of our candidates issues PALE in comparison

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Blowing in the wind. — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:44:22 GMT

Face it ..OBAMA is toast.
Try to get your money back.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

HOT DAM — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:45:26 GMT

ki...the polls are real you are not.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:46:40 GMT

Grace: As I referred readers to paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Lieberman/Kyl amendment yesterday, I refer you to them today.

3)that it should be the policy of the United States to combat, contain and roll back the violent activities and destabilizing influence inside Iraq of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, its forceing facilitators such as Lebanese Hezbollah and its indigenous Iraqi proxies;

4)to support the prudent and calibrated use of all instruments of United States national power in Iraq, including diplomatic, economic, intelligence, and military instruments, in support of the policy described in paragraph (3) with respect to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and its proxies.

I hope that this clarifies that point for you that indeed the use of military action is condoned by this resolution and we all know that this criminal administration needs less than the slightest acknowledgement to launch another war.

The fact that Hillary endorced this (and yes 75 senators including Dick Durbin) thinking that this resolution would be used as a tool for negotiation by this administration and not as an excuse for war is incredibly naive. It's truly mind boggling.

I guess that some are so busy gazing at the stars and Crystal that they can't be bothered with the details of the real issues at hand. I mean, one cannot honestly being against the lies and poor judgement that led us into this conflict in Iraq and threaten to repeat the mistake in Iran and still support Hillary for president.

I suppose that we as Americans are fortunate that the smart and practical people of Iowa will be responsible for the kick-off of the selection process. I'm counting on them to make the wise choice (Obama) and put this race into perspective.
Obama '08

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:52:31 GMT

Adam,

Great idea! Probably not popular with this president but maybe the next one will be more receptive!

A

First thoughts: Dueling memos

CitizenJ — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:53:03 GMT

"I am sure you can fill her Senate seat and do a great job Ruthie M! Get Citizenj to help you. You two will probably need 10 more people to help you!
Be careful who you vote for."

Smart as a whip,

Why would I want to help Ruthie M run for her Senate seat? Have I posted something that would give the impression that I am interested in campaigning? I don't know why you have called me out on this issue, but doing so makes me think that the only whip whose intelligence you might be able to challenge is Trent "Strom Thurmond for President" Lott.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

pat huntington ny — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:55:36 GMT

Ummm ... Mitchell Feldman and the rest...it has always been US policy to use force, if necessary, to respond to Iran's nuke agenda. And again, no where in the resolution at issue does it specifically state that Bush, go ahead and attack Iran with our blessing. Without that, he has no authority to wage a preemptive war against Iran outside of the authority vested under the War Powers Act! Therefore, all you Hillary haters are grasping at straws on this one....

First thoughts: Dueling memos

ki houston — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:07:09 GMT

van,
yea just like that was 33% more than obama or that he has not raised more money than her for the year, or that she will out raise him by 100% , come on dont act like you ant on here misleading. being off by 500,000 is just the start. But for your info i do take your point of view seriously when you are dealing with facts ,although i might not agree ,but latley you have been a little out there ,just want to bring it to your attention .

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Desmond — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:15:36 GMT

Amy, from Portland, Maine, I thought you did not have cable?

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Angela Firth - NH — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:20:31 GMT

If I had to choose between trusting Hillary Clinton, Wesley Clark, Dick Durbin and other anti-war Democrats OR two desperate candidates, named Obama and Edwards, standing in Iowa's cornfields bashing and trashing Hillary and Bill Clinton, I'm going to go with the former.

Barack Obama is detached, vague and when it really counts for him to be there, he is missing in action.

John Edwards never had a hope with his decadent lifestyle, his Two Americas and his headline-grabbing wife. Only 10 percent of the Democrats in the country like him. Don't even get me started on "trust".

First thoughts: Dueling memos

ki houston — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:22:29 GMT

hot dam , i guess the 24,000 people that showed up for obama at hills house are not real also.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Trace, Scranton — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:24:38 GMT

sonja, so in obama you have neither judgement nor experience.
a great canidate.

he speaks against the war, but votes for full funding and against troop withdrawl.

DO you believe what bush says after he lied to you too?

I've noted that no one address the questioin of why obama hasn't signed onto the webb/clinton bill.

It ought to be everything obama wants... but it puts Hillary in a great light.... Obama can't have that.

As to experience... Yes Hillary has tons of experience.. if you are old enough to remember she was considered Bill's right hand, a second President for free.

Obama? I'm not even sure he's ever displayed any competence..

a couple of years here, a couple there...t

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Hanoi Sally — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:25:39 GMT

Why don't we just seize the assets of anyone making over $500,000 a year and all conservatives. Smokers are just the beginning. Next it will be fast food people and if that doesn't raise enough we'll tax meat eaters. Finally you are starting to get the picture. Beyond the top politicians in the land only the highest Party supporters will be allowed luxuries. This will ensure healthcare for all and that the people act within authorized limits. A Marxist/Socialist America will save the people from themselves and it's up to Hillary to begin the journey.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

kmnecole, St Louis, Mo — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:32:20 GMT

Don't normally post- but Crystal- that example was phenomenal- and so dead on

Obama is in St Louis, MO and Columbus, OH today- if you live close- go hear him

First thoughts: Dueling memos

sonja, Cross SC — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:38:19 GMT

Trace, don't you dare accuse me of believing anything this administration has to say about anything. My husband is fighting this war. I want to hear clearly from Hillary that she is going to withdraw all troops, and will not establish permanent bases in Iraq. I am indeed a Democrat, but I am an American first. I will not compromise any of my principles by voting for any person that I perceive to be Bush-lite. You may not think much of Obama, or his campaign. But with my husband serving his second tour in Iraq, and another possible one on the horizion, I have to choose the candidate that offers me something to look forward to. BTW, I do not think that they should cut off funding for this war. Hillary and Obama and the others have also rightly decided to continue funding it. And we should as long as there are still troops over there fighting. The money pays for a lot of supplies that my husband and many in uniform need to survive over there. Not all of it, but some of it does, and until we get them out, we should not cut off funding.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:45:29 GMT

Ki-

I accept your apology, as I can see that that's as close as you'll come.
Your contentions are unfounded and bogus. You called me a liar and quoted numbers far more off the mark then those you criticized.

Which number was closer to the truth? Your 5 million or my 6.5 million, with the REAL numbers backed by the source? I have little respect for someone who calls me a liar and doesn't have the intellectual honesty to apologize when they have been shown to be wrong.

If you were honest you would have admitted that your numbers were wrong, and that you didn't bother to find the actual totals.

BTW- this, being old news from last quarter, is just more re-arranging the deck chairs. It means little today. There are 10 weeks left till the first caucus in IA. and Obama's campaign shows no signs of gaining ground.
See my later post on, "Huckabee, Obama and the poll deniers.

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Adam Columbus OH — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:47:36 GMT

pat huntington ny & van

I'm sure we all appreciate the civics lesson, but I think you are both over-lawyering this. The resolution is a sense of the senate, does not **explicitly** give the president the authorization to attack Iran. The president also, offically, lacks the authority to issue 'signing statements' about which parts of federal law he will or will not abide by, abrogate the Geneva conventions, redefine torture to mean whatever they want it to mean on any given day, wiretap outside the provisions of the FISA court, etc. etc, although he has of course done all of these things. The president and his inner circle really do beleive that any law, treaty, etc. can be set aside as, when and if they see fit in the interests of national security. That Sen. Clinton hasn't taken *that* lesson to heart over the last 6 years is what people are so up in arms about.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Ron, TX — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:48:20 GMT

From Pat Huntinton:
Ummm ... Mitchell Feldman and the rest...it has always been US policy to use force, if necessary, to respond to Iran's nuke agenda. And again, no where in the resolution at issue does it specifically state that Bush, go ahead and attack Iran with our blessing. Without that, he has no authority to wage a preemptive war against Iran outside of the authority vested under the War Powers Act! Therefore, all you Hillary haters are grasping at straws on this one....
===============

Sounds like a Hillary Clinton press conference, completely dodging the real issue. The bill clearly ties TROOP LEVELS in Iraq to IRAN. Bush doesn't have to declare war against Iran if it's still the Iraq War, does he? No. No he doesn't. Even more scarily, go back and read number 4, posted above by Mitchell and also myself. It states that the US should use "diplomatic, economic, intelligence, and military instruments" to defeat Iran in Iraq. Well, we've tried the first two already. Military action against Iran is only two steps away, as per the text of the bill. Ignorance led to Iraq War. Ignorance can lead to an Iran War just as easily. 25 senators realized this. Why didn't Clinton?

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:03:38 GMT

Pat: You and I both know that this administration will use any authorization to use force, as an excuse to actually use force. Again it would be naive not to recognize their intent as the events of the last 24 hours have unfolded.

The drumroll to war is unmistakable and for the life of me, I cannot see how HRC, who claims that she never thought the vote for the 'authorization of force in Iraq' in 2002 would be used as anything but a negotiating tool and then repeats the same type of vote against Iran and claims that this too is to be used as a negotiating tool, is using good judgment. She is either naive or triangulating for the general election and is just not telling the truth.

In either case it would call into question any anti-war person's support for her. Mrs. Clinton cannot run as a legitimate candidate for change or experience while maintaining these positions. In all sincerity, I can guarentee, that I'm not the only voter who sees it that way.
Obama '08

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Lyn,MD — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:04:04 GMT

When if ever does Obama need to show some demonstrable metric of advancement against Clinton? Meaning, If Clinton is up by 10 in Iowa, 20 in NH and 15 in SC on Halloween? Thanksgiving? Christmas? January 1st? When if ever would you consider this to be an indicator of the actual vote?

Van

When the actual votes are counted...case closed

So having closed that issue...how about you explaining why she thought based on GWB previosus actions, that voting for this resolution..which eliminated the lanaguage forbiding him to attack without congress approval...was a good idea. Or was she looking to the GE and thought she could triangulate. 'Mission Accomplish"..better ask GWB about that.

Remember I told you karma

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:04:20 GMT

Huckabee, Obama and the poll-deniers

Friday, October 26, 2007

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows—for the first time ever--Mike Huckabee moving into the top four among those seeking the Republican Presidential Nomination.
Rudy Giuliani remains precariously atop the pack with support from 20% of Likely Republican Primary Voters nationwide. Fred Thompson is close behind at 19% while John McCain enjoys a second straight day in third place with 14% of the vote. Huckabee continues to gain ground and is just two points behind McCain at 12%. This is the first time all year that Huckabee has surpassed Mitt Romney. The former Massachusetts Governor slipped another point and he is now at just 11% nationally. No other Republican attracts more than 3% support while 18% are undecided."

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

Mike Huckabee started out with less than 1% in the polls. Over the past 5 months, based on his showing in the debates, his personal story and hard campaigning, he is muscling his way into the top-tier of republican candidates for the nomination.

There has been a good degree of movement and volatility in the republican race and in the polls.

Contrast that with the democratic race;

On August 26th 36-23-18 (Clinton-Obama-Edwards)
September 26th 41-21-17
Today 46-18-14

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

Do the Obama supporters/poll-deniers think that the republican poll numbers are NOT reflecting the changes in the race? What if anything do you think that Huckabee's gains are caused by? Do you think that Huckabee's gains mean nothing?
Do the republican polls accurately reflect the changes in the race? If not, why not?

It would seem that Mike Huckabee's rise is real and measurable. Do you agree or disagree?

I think Huckbee's gains are real and pretty remarkable, and reflect the republican's uneasiness with the front-runners. I also think that if Obama's message was gaining traction it would be reflected in the polls just as Huckabee's has. Tell me why I'm wrong.

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:17:32 GMT

Sonja Cross, SC:

All politics aside, I thank you and your husband (and all of the other families of fighting men and women in Iraq and around the world, for their generous sacrifice to this country. I have to say, whenever think about what these people do for us (even though I am vehemently against this administration's policy and all who aid and abet) it moves me to tears. That is why I am trying in the only way I know, to make sure that this election leads to a speedy reunion of these brave people and their brave families. All my best for a safe tour of duty.
Obama '08

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:18:29 GMT

Hanoi Sally,

I can see that it's upset you that the SUPER RICH (which must include you) may have to pay some taxes. You are happy to take deductions and business write-offs paid for by the working lower and middle class. When it comes to paying your fair share you scream "bleading heart liberals" ....blah, blah....taking my money........blah blah.....telling me how to spend my money.......blah blah........capitolism rules!!! I have no probalem with Captilism. If I have to pay 28% in taxes, I think anyone making $500,000 should have to as well. But if you own a business you get the benefit of writing off losses (your bad decisions are paid for by me) when business is slow and making killer profits on the backs of your employees when times are good and taking as many bogus deductions as possible (again paid for by my 28%). You funnel money in overseas accounts and play shell games to avoid paying taxed like the rest of us but you are happy to take any subsidies and deductions that are available to the super rich. You are very in-line with your republican party and they are working for YOU. They aren't working for me or for most of the country.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Bee — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:21:08 GMT

Don't expect anything from Clinton's talking point when it comes to the isssues.

The question is simple, why did she vote for Iraq war? Why did she vote for Karl- Liberman amendment?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0icVblxh2dI&NR=1

Clinton can dodge the questions all she want. The facts still remain clear, she blew it.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:30:13 GMT

Bush-lite, triangulate, and and mission accomplished are all phrases from the Obama campaign, and have been used here so many times as to be worn threadbare.

Lyn- The vote is a non-issue to me and to most everyone else. You and the other Obama and Edwards etc. supporters are obviously free to spend as much time on the topic as you see fit, but as I have already posted the differences between a real resolution that can become law and a non-binding one (which should be self-explanatory), for sonya, (who somehow believed that we invaded Iraq based on a non-binding resolution) I will let that post be my reply.

Over the past weeks there has been a parade of issues presented here by the anti-Hillary crowd, each one tossed out in hopes that it would, unlike Barack's message, catch fire and change the dynamics of the race. This hasn't happened. There is less and less from the other candidate's supporters on how they are a better choice and more about Clinton's negatives. This has failed to gain support for her competitors, in fact, the strategy has backfired if the polls are any indication and they are.

On Monday, there will be 9 weeks to the first caucus. On Monday, the current topic may change, but Hillary will still have a commanding lead.

I know that there is that rational side of every Obama and Edwards supporter that KNOWS the polls reflect reality and that the time is growing short to shake-up the race, despite what their hearts are saying.

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:31:02 GMT

Hanoi Sally,

In retrospect I guess you didn't get SUPER RICH by donating your money to poor children who need healthcare. That's fair. WAIT, unless you could take a deduction for it!!! Maybe then the republicans would be in favor of children having healthcare!?!

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:34:23 GMT

Van: You're wrong because you're Van. You're wrong because aggregate polls are worthless as the primaries are sequential with one affecting the outcome of the next. Iowa is the only gig of importance at this time and you know that. You're wrong because these polls are only preferences and as indicated by Howard Fineman (Newsweek 10/2) only 17% of NH voters (for example) indicate their preference with any certitude. You're wrong because these polls are of Democratic voters only and many states allow independent and even Republican cross-overs to vote in specific party primaries; these polls do not take these factors into account. In NH 45% of voters are Indies, so what significance is a poll of Democrats? You're wrong because you pay more attention to the horserace than to the true issues of the campaign (i.e. anyone who wants to march against this war and is for HRC is by definition wrong). Finally anyone who has their head so obviously up the as*es of celebrity has to be wrong. By the way my cousin was the President of Paramount and we got the special studio tour. BFD. You know, about those stars, from what I understand, their sh*t still stinks.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

MK,MO — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:34:27 GMT

vanreuter, NY NY / I think Huckbee's gains are real and pretty remarkable, and reflect the republican's uneasiness with the front-runners. I also think that if Obama's message was gaining traction it would be reflected in the polls just as Huckabee's has. Tell me why I'm wrong.'

the short answer would be because mark penn is controlling the democratic poll numbers, the dem poll numbers are as carefully orchestrated as any symphony, but that will become difficult to do after hillary is defeated in iowa, money will buy anything in this country including favorable poll numbers

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Bee — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:38:02 GMT

To the interested party. Here is what is at stake in this election. I am tired of two families controlling our nation. 20 years of mob run country, this is no United State of Dynasty.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=5c0eLVYbnI4

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Bee — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:43:56 GMT

Why are you people paying attention to Van and his Clinton empire?

Please top worrying about Van's post. He dinn and wine with the Clinton every day. We all know that. Ask Van, how many lives he has sacrifice in Iraq just because someone failed to read the intelligence report?

The real democrats are not going to vote for Clinton. We all know that. And if they do, democrats can kiss the election good bye. This is what the republican ad is going to be.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=5c0eLVYbnI4

First thoughts: Dueling memos

sonja, Cross SC — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:45:48 GMT

Van get a life. I am not going to sit here and let you try to portray your candidate as the best that the Democratic party has to offer. If I stated wrongly that the Iraq war came about from a nonbinding resolution, than I apologize. However, that said, Clinton and many others gave up their war powers in Congress to this president and that was wrong. She gave him the authority to attack any entities deemed terrorists. Unfortunately, this now includes the Iranian Revolutionary Guard since she mistakenly agreed to label it as such with that Kyl-Lieberman vote. There is no getting around that. You and your kind are just the type of partisans that this country is tired of and does not need any longer. I think for myself, I have a vested interest in this election. I will not compromise my beliefs and vote for Clinton because I think she is too much like the Bush administration in more areas than one.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:46:06 GMT

Van: You're wrong because you're Van.
Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY (Sent Friday, October 26, 2007 3:34 PM)

Mitchell-

Honestly, would you ever take anyone seriously who posted that about YOU?

It's obvious that you seek a spirited debate based on the issues and free from petty personal attacks. Thank you for your thoughtful response.

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

sonja, Cross SC — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:47:48 GMT

Thanks for the kind words Mitchell. I cannot support Hillary Clinton at this time because I do not believe she will do much to change the current path we are on with regards to the war and partisan gridlock. I am an American first, Democrat second!

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:59:13 GMT

the short answer would be because mark penn is controlling the democratic poll numbers, the dem poll numbers are as carefully orchestrated as any symphony, but that will become difficult to do after hillary is defeated in iowa, money will buy anything in this country including favorable poll numbers

MK,MO (Sent Friday, October 26, 2007 3:34 PM)

You know we never do anything but shout at each other, but I'm always willing to give things another shot...

Do you really believe that Mark Penn CONTROLS anything? Are you really saying that EVERY polling organization is CONTROLLED by Mark Penn?
Here's a short list; Explain if you can, how you reached the conclusion that while the republican polls are just polls, the other side of the same companies are all CONTROLLED by Mark Penn.

Rasmussen Reports
ABC,CBS,NBC,CNN,FOX,Bloomberg,WSJ,NYT,LA Times,USA Today, Gallup, AGI, Des Moines Register.

How does Mark Penn CONTROL all of these outlets?

Don't you think that embodying your opponents with supernatural powers is detrimental to your own cause?

How can Penn control the democratic side of the polls while NO ONE controls the republican side?

I'm serious. What have you read/seen/heard that supports your contention?

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Tuck, Realityville, KS — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:02:03 GMT

let's see 98 senators were present for the vote...but Obama appearently thinks he was ripped off!
Maybe the senate should have waited just for him...

guess that blows the conspricy(SP) theory too...

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Red State Baby — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:10:23 GMT

Bee,

Where did you get that video from? I sure bet my republican candidate can use it come general election. We can't waith to pound on her. Ha!Ha!

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Lek — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:12:20 GMT

Van,

We all know Mark Penn control all the polling outlet in USA.

Do you want to get fire? I am not going to expose it because you won't have a job.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:16:09 GMT

Sonja: My sentiments, exactly, American first and Democrat second (but I am intensely patriotic and a bad a** Democrat).

And Van: I'm not surprised that you disregard all of my commentary. However, it does cast some doubt on the validity of primary polling though, doesn't it? And the first line was meant as a joke. Sorry, if it was offensive; but I can't believe that you who can sure dish it out, can't take it.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Mark Thieme — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:20:11 GMT

Van reuter is a dangerous and silly man. I won't speak to his hijacking of my name and creating chaos here, because that is still under investigation.

I can tell you he makes himself ridiculous going on about the Clinton event. Those of us involved in government and media have a hard not not laughing out loud when we see the funny little folks who scrape up enough money to be 5 seats away from Hillary, et all (Oh wow!) Mitchell, you nailed it. These termites are called "starf---ers", for their wide eyes adrenaline rush around celebrities.

I am pretty much off this blog for awhile, but could not help but comment how van has taken over in one day. His adrenaline is rising from his brush with destiny in the cheap seats last night.

Good luck to all. Sorry to leave you with a real nutcase, but enough is enough.

It could be worse!

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Ty — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:21:08 GMT

Reading this is amazing...so much hate and slandering...everyone want to twist and bend...
Just because the majority supports someone or something does not make it right...and just because someone is willing to work with people or groups from different background and different beliefs in order to make the ENITRE WORLD BETTER does make them anti-you.

I dream of a country where we stop hating the people and things not like us...

Race- you are born into it so why hate someone because of their birth

Gender- see race

Sexual Orientation- what you choose/born with should only matter to you and the person you are involed with...anyone who don't like it should never consider dating you.

Religion- a choice...you serve/believe what you want...it does not make me better are worse than you...unless God says so...and until he comes in person (some will say again) then DON"T JUDGE FOR HIM...

...my stance I don't care if it's a Dem, Rep, Ind, Man, Woman, young, old, gay, or straight...I want a responsible, honest, accountable...LEADER WITH GOOD JUDGEMENT...not perfect but willing to be accountable for mistakes...

Please if you are not debating the issues and judgement of our leaders then you are no better than the person you are bashing....

Van-
thanks for the poll updates...but until the first 3 votes are cast the leader right not in the polls are as useful as an empty glass on the moon to a thirsty man...

anyone who want to talk real issue with me instead of insults can email me tyrickfoard@yahoo.com
or join me at
www.barackobama.com

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Mark Thieme — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:24:45 GMT

Multi-tasking here. Made a few typing errors on the first try.... one more time...

Van reuter is a dangerous and silly man. I won't speak to his hijacking of my name and creating chaos here, because that is still under investigation.

I can tell you he makes himself ridiculous going on about the Clinton event. Those of us involved in government and media have a hard time not laughing out loud when we see the funny little folks who scrape up enough money to be 5 seats away from Hillary, et al, (Oh wow!). Mitchell, you nailed it. These termites are called "starf---ers", for their wide eyes adrenaline rush around celebrities.

I am pretty much off this blog for awhile, but could not help but comment how van has taken over in one day. His adrenaline is rising from his brush with destiny in the cheap seats last night.

Good luck to all. Sorry to leave you with a real nutcase, but enough is enough.

It could be worse!

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Crystal (Time for change) — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:28:58 GMT

Tuck-Realityville, you are not really making a valid argument in saying that he missed the vote.

What of the absence of Barack Obama? In a speech in Iowa on September 12, he addressed by anticipation the matter before the Senate in Kyl-Lieberman: "We hear eerie echoes of the run-up to the war in Iraq in the way that the President and Vice President talk about Iran. They conflate Iran and al Qaeda. They issue veiled threats. They suggest that the time for diplomacy and pressure is running out when we haven't even tried direct diplomacy. Well George Bush and Dick Cheney must hear--loud and clear--from the American people and the Congress: you don't have our support, and you don't have our authorization for another war."

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Crystal (Time for change) — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:35:19 GMT

Despite phone calls from both Clintons -- Bill and Hillary -- Mayor Michael B. Coleman will endorse Barack Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination at an Obama campaign rally today in Columbus.

Comparing Obama to two Democratic icons, Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy, Coleman called the Illinois senator "a one-of-a-kind who comes along only every few generations."

"Every once in a while, a figure comes in history who is a galvanizing and uniting force, an inspirational person who lifts up peoples' hopes, and I think that person is Barack Obama," Coleman told The Dispatch.

Coleman, who is challenged by Republican Bill Todd in his run for re-election on the Nov. 6 ballot, will introduce Obama at an 11 a.m. rally and fundraiser today at the Columbus Convention Center. Tickets are $25 for adults and $15 for students; doors open at 10:30 a.m.

Two Democratic mayors of cities bigger than Columbus, Richard M. Daley of Chicago and Adrian M. Fenty of Washington, D.C., also have endorsed Obama.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Bee — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:35:48 GMT

Here is Clinton plan for rural America.

http://media.www.dailyiowan.com/media/storage/paper599/news/2007/10/25/Opinions/Hilarys.rural.Meeting.Actually.A.Powwow.With.Lobbyists-3056333.shtml

First thoughts: Dueling memos

MK,MO — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:42:13 GMT

vanreuter, NY NY / van I believe nothing the press in general puts out any more, if you look at how the media has become controlled by a handful of corporations the so called independent press really does not exist any longer.

I believe the whole election process has become a huge hollywood production that's only purpose is to make the american public think they somehow have a say in the election process, when in fact the president is actually determined by a few wealthy and powerful entities.

I sincerely wish this were not the case but look at how it has become impossible for all but the filthy rich to even consider a run for office, and even then they have to sell out to lobbyist to make a go of it, putting the american public behind the eight ball and ignored.

but non the less I will cast my vote as usual and try to hope for the best, I can tell you had a very good time at the clinton affair last night, it is good when someone gets the chance to be involved with someone they admire, may have even took the edge off of you a bit.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Bee — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:43:31 GMT

HAHAHAHAHHAH! Van every body knows you're a knuckle head.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Mark Thieme — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:53:16 GMT

Just got some good news to leave you with on Friday afternoon!

There is a 50/50 chance we will be able to reveal what we know about van that is public record. Like van, we do our research!

Know for sure next week, so keep your fingers crossed. Fascinating.

This little revelation may dampen his rush.

Here is a pathetic guy who is willing to do anything to dominate this little board, making wild accusations, slandering others.
So now the tables turn.

As we approach Hallowe'en, it seems he has some skeletal remains in his closet (all public info, and all quite legal.)

Stay tuned.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

like a rock — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 21:04:09 GMT

No Bee we do not know. What we do see is your constant drip, drip , drip of boogers for brains.
Knuckle heads in glass houses should never throw stones.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 21:21:25 GMT

Good luck to all. Sorry to leave you with a real nutcase, but enough is enough.

It could be worse!

Mark Thieme (Sent Friday, October 26, 2007 4:24 PM

If this jerk keeps bothering me I will keep rubbing his nose in the crap he's dumped. It straightened out my cat...

Everyone knows that you are a liar and a nut.

Simply reading your crap the past few months is proof-positive. Your silly rantings about how dangerous I am has even those few who paid attention to you laughing in your face.
I pity you. Despite your many insane attacks, whether under your own name or your imaginary supporters, who all not only beg you to stay, but share your hatred of the evil vanreuter, I know that you are just an ill and tortured soul.
How many times have you left now?
I really enjoyed your insanity about NOT being the author of this, your masterpiece;

Please tell everyone again how YOU didn't write it.

Watcher 4 kind of gave us away, so we have decided to go ahead and come clean. Besides, the game here is getting a little out of control. We actually never intended to be the cause of anyone's meltdown.
Our fearless leader (not Mark Thieme) invented that name about a year ago with Samuel Clemens in mind. (Mark Twain/Mark Thieme... marking time)
It started as a group of five people, 2 women and 3 men who worked in the same campaign, but soon it spread to other campaigns as well. Once we had more than 50, but due to the increasing intensity of the campaign, we have lost some members.
Diverse group. Some young, some old, only 5 white males! Some are veterans, some are not. We have almost as many women as men and even 2 Republicans who claim they won't vote that way in 2008.
Our original intent was to choose some interesting blogs and have some good clean fun.
Soon, though, we found ourselves in the most horrendous and vile shouting matches most of us had actually witnessed up close.
Our idea had been to inject some of the reality of campaigning into the dialog. But we soon found out, that as Thomas Merton famously said, "Most humans can't stand much reality."
We found ourselves being punched out by weekend warriors, both political and military. Our veterans were incensed, our political operatives laughed at first, but then Mark Thieme suited up.
The Thieme character was flawed from the beginning. We keep a diary of faux pas which we were never called on. One time Thieme has kids, other times he is single, and so on. It was always according to who was blogging.
Last night there were howls of laughter as van reuter pompously announces that he can't find Mark Thieme on Google! Really?
The truth about Thieme is that he has become a man of many incarnations, as van has pointed out. We voted yesterday to kill him, (Mark Thieme, not van) and so we did. So van won't have Mark Thieme to kick around any more.
We regrouped and voted to bug van like he had harassed so many on First Read with his trash heap and hot air attacks.
One reason we stayed on is that some here know van from other times and places and do not like him. Apparently the guy knows how to make enemies. Also we have 3 designated smoke detectors and they all honed in on him. All in all, probably unfair.
That is what we meant when we hinted that we have an unfair advantage over whoever we go up against. We know them better than they know us. (Hey Google, right van?)
So we'll be watching, but at least using new names. Most likely we'll spend more time in other places for awhile until van cools down.
By the way, we were surprised that no one noticed we were multiple personalities except in name calling and bashing. There are hundreds of groups just like this all around the globe. We, being high-minded and morally pure, do want to offer sincere apologies to anyone who took us seriously. HP was catching on, but van was far behind... and that's where we will leave him for now.
It has been fun and we have met some great folks here. Thanks to all.

Peace,

The Mark Thiemes

Watchers 1-34 (Sent Wednesday, October 24, 2007 5:25 PM)

You are again, a laughingstock. Please take your lies, fantasies and mental illness somewhere else, or better yet, stay and give me even more laughs. I think I speak for most when I say I don't really care.

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Mark Thieme — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 21:22:00 GMT

Oops! My attorneys tell me now that I may be able to go public, but not likely on MSNBC since they have an airtight policy of not revealing background on posters. I respect that, but this means we'll have to find another venue.

Should be doable.

And worth waiting for I can assure you!

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 21:30:34 GMT

MK,MO (Sent Friday, October 26, 2007 4:42 PM)

Thanks. I know that you are not alone in your feelings about the political process and that the things you contend aren't really easily proven or discounted by the MSM.
I do disagree that there was ever a time in politics that a poor person could run for national office, unless they were backed by the very influences that you believe render the process moot. Politics has and always will be a rich man's (or women's) game and we are left on the outside, mere spectators.

Please don't let me lose my edge! lol

Van

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Mark Thieme — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 22:08:38 GMT

Van reuter is not losing his edge.

It still takes him 500 words to say he doesn't care.

He would be more believable in stammering out that he doesn't care if he would stop running breathlessly to the bait.

By the way, the only people on here who believe his rubbish, his lies to cover his own risky crimes against the board, are his trolls or him, himself.

If he will leave me alone and stop chasing me out the door, perhaps I could live in this neighborhood with a wacko neighbor. It's been done.

IF ONLY HE WOULD CEASE AND DESIST HIJACKING MY POSTING NAME!!!

PLEASE, MSNBC, CAN'T YOU CONTROL THIS THUGGERY?

I hate to start sounding anything like him, but if you knew what I know, you might think something was dreadfully wrong with him.

Have a nice weekend, anyway!

And remember, "The goblins will get you if you don't watch out!"

They sure will.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

vanreuter, NY NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 22:09:41 GMT

Oops! My attorneys tell me now that I may be able to go public, but not likely on MSNBC since they have an airtight policy of not revealing background on posters.

Now he has attorneys. lol Do you NUMBER them 1-34?

Perhaps you mean your attendants...

Laughingstock who doesn't even seem to understand the meaning of good-bye...

Van
(I still bet that you're a kid)

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Steven, KDH, N.C. — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 23:07:39 GMT

Van....Obviously you don't speak for most. Mark/Watcher...I agree with Van that you should definitely stick around for laughter. Apparently you are/are not ruffling Van and that's funny as hell. Keep it up!
Van....you are sooooo boring!!!! I'm glad you got to spend some time with your wife at the party though, sense it seems you spend most of your time away from her blogging your tiresome poll numbers and rhetoric.
Riddle me this Vanman...When the voting in the early states finally does happen and Clinton loses...will you finally stop posting your meaningless polls. I think I speak for most when I say we don't care about them.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Richard, Washington State — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 23:24:17 GMT

First Read: Studies in Obsession

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Amy B Portland ME — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 01:07:13 GMT

Special to Desmond, I still don't have cable. I meant I can watch news videos on other Internet sites and You Tube but not on MSNBC. Sweet of you to ask!
(Can you hack into my computer and fix it so I can see vids on this site?)

First thoughts: Dueling memos

johnreagan30@comcast,net — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 02:26:59 GMT

Crystal, 9:38 A.M. GO TO HER POST. Major Point. Don't waste time, go to her post. Avoid rants and knuckle heads. Go to where the rational logic is. Good Job by Chrystal at 9:38 A.M.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Sharon — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 03:39:02 GMT

Tracie in Scranton:
Jim Webbs legislation sat without a co-sponsor for 7 months. When Hillary started to realize that there was a public outcry over her L-K vote, she decided to attempt to blur the lines by sponsoring Webb. Senator Webb appeared on a news program later that day to say that it came as a surprise to him. Hillary didn't call him to tell him she would co-sponsor. Her campaign issued a press release.

Now I think we know why Hillary co-sponsored Webbs legislation. It's called politics.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

sonya, atlanta, ga — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 10:35:21 GMT

Bottom line wait until Jan and the votes. Most people are just parking their vote with Clinton because of name recognition. But a poll has been done of voters who know both Hillary and Obama and they choose Obama overwhelmingly. Once he gets his ads up in the early states and wins Iowa, NH,Nevada and SC all the other states will soon follow. Obama will win the nomination by March. Mark my words.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

VAN IS OUR MAN — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 13:53:14 GMT

Bravo MK MO glad to see your post to Van, a real conversation and an acknowledgment that Van is NOT THE VILLIAN! He adds a much needed sanity level to this blog. I see many instances here that we are being stalked by people who want to destroy the conversation. Please do not help them, if you read for a day or two and do not post a reaction you will see who they are.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

VAN IS OUR MAN — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 13:53:27 GMT

First thoughts: Dueling memos

F O D — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 14:05:56 GMT

Mark Thieme and his attorney off to court with you!

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Phyllis, Dallas, Tx — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 19:45:40 GMT

Give me a break. Do you really think that Hillary Clinton is going to loose this race? I hope she does, she'll never get my vote, but it is already shady dealings going on. That's what she does best.

www.thinkingdemocrate.bloghi.com

First thoughts: Dueling memos

John Beruda, Seattle Wash — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 23:24:58 GMT

Zionists Kyle and Liebermann who continue to hold America hostage to Israeli interests keep dragging our country to economic destruction...first they warmongered us into a war with Iraq, now they are seducing us into a war with Iran, sent by Israel...America will never prevail until we rid ourselves from these treacherous agents in our political landscape...who do not care about our housing, our economy, our health care system, our general interest. All they care about is Israel and Israeli interest. And Clinton behaves like a Bush clone to support these zionists.

First thoughts: Dueling memos

Desmond — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 14:29:10 GMT

Amy B, so glad you cleared that up. It was bugging me.