First thoughts: All tied up

vanreuter, NY NY — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 14:29:45 GMT

Daily First Read Truth-Pak-

Trust no one...
The following sites devote as much time and space to Denis Kucinich and Joe Biden as they do to the big three. Whether you are a dem or republican, liberal, moderate or conservative, your candidate is represented equally at these sites. Forget about Big Media and the MSM, create your own narrative.

We don't need anyone to spoon-feed information to us about the candidates or the election, it's right there for everyone if you know where to go. Campaign money, donors expenses, go here

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

Just about every poll from every pollster, averaged out, with a link to the source
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ Is THE source for political junkies, with links to every major political site on the right, left and center.

What the candidates actually have said about the issues.
http://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm This is a Great site! Every candidate on every issue!

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

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

http://www.govtrack.us/ Do you take transparency seriously? Consider how important to you an open and transparent government is to a healthy society. More work needs to be done to make Congress open. Make a statement to your elected officials by joining now 200 others in signing a pledge for transparency.

Van

First thoughts: All tied up

Chuck,San D. — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 14:39:03 GMT

DOes Obama pay you like he did politicos in NH,Iowa, SC, and Nevada?

First thoughts: All tied up

jerry/corpus christi texas — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 14:41:06 GMT

But the polls also remind us not to discount Edwards in Iowa, where only Bill Clinton (72%) has higher favorable numbers than the former North Carolina senator (69%).

It may be a bit far fetched, but I don't think Bill Clinton is running for president, unless he is doing so under the disguise of his wife.....

LOL, a republican being unpopular in the northeast is like a Michigan Wolverine football player campaigning for the heisman trophy in Ohio. Talk about being unpopular....

Rudy will have a lot of baggage to carry on next year and Huckabee, even though he may be surging is liable to be a thorn in the GOP as well. Romney gave a great speech and he may end up being the GOP nominee because people don't want a guy (or in the case of the democrats, a woman) who brings a lot of troubles with them.

The concerns about Clinton, 60, a New York senator, are that she is devious, calculating and, fairly or not, a divisive figure in American politics.

Those are a lot tougher to overcome.

It was revealing, too, when Hart pushed them to envision these senators as leaders of the country or, as he put it, their ``boss.'' Obama, they say, would be inspirational, motivating, charismatic and compassionate. After praising Clinton's experience and intelligence, they say she would be demanding, difficult, maybe even a little scary.

Guess Al Hunt doesn't write for GQ magazine....

First thoughts: All tied up

Shadow, Hamden, CT — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 14:41:08 GMT

I've been saying Obama and Edwards help each other for the entire year, as nothing hurts Clinton more in Iowa than a third place finish.

Conventional wisdom has a pretty slow reaction time to obvious fact.

First thoughts: All tied up

Ron, TX — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 14:42:44 GMT

Clinton's new ad sounds like she stole lines directly from Obama's speeches and news stories. How desperate... All of a sudden she's beginning to realize people care less about "experience" and more about ACTUALLY being able to DO SOMETHING besides fight with Republicans. Unfortunately, she cannot bring change. She still believes a president shouldn't talk to people they don't like. She still believes that it was the Republicans that "tricked" her into Iraq, and she's making the same mistakes with Iran. She uses cop-out answers on everything by refusing to offer any of her own ideas (i.e. show Leadership) and instead falling back on "bipartisan committees" whenever she thinks answer the question might be bad for poll-driven politics.

Change=Obama. There's no gettin' around it. Obama has an ENORMOUS amount of momentum. It is exactly how his campaign has planned it since the beginning. They said they don't expect to be up in the polls until the last home-stretch, and even then, they don't expect to be up in the national polls until Iowa.

We're about to experience a new revolution in politics, America. Hold on! It's ACTUALLY going to be GOOD!

First thoughts: All tied up

Rick, WS, NC — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 14:50:09 GMT

I'm still amazed at the obsession by some over Hilalry Clinton, especially from the republican side...they don't seem to care to comment on any of their candidates but have plenty to say about hillary...interesting...

Of course if my candidates were a bunch of immigrant bashing, muslim hating, war mongering chickenhawks like the republicans I wouldn't own up to being a supporter either...lmao

First thoughts: All tied up

Dante — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 14:51:40 GMT

I completely agree, Ron, TX!!!

First thoughts: All tied up

Jean Moeller, Mesa, Arizona — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 14:57:01 GMT

Momentum DOES NOT EQUAL Change. Obama already has one wife speaking for him on the campaign trail, why does he need another one .... Miss Oprah? She has her island (Hawaii), her country (Africa), her town (Santa Monica), her tv show, her tv channel (oxygen), her girls academy, her magazine, NOW she must have her OWN PRESIDENT, TOO??????? Then, WHAT WILL SHE EXPECT OF HIM AFTER HE IS ELECTED???? OPRAH HATH SPOKEN! I am so disappointed in her!!!

First thoughts: All tied up

Brian Horsfield — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 14:59:59 GMT

It's probably true nationwide that the majority of Ron Paul supporters did not vote Republican in the last Presidential Primary, and many still to register Republican. In my town 79% of those who declare their support for Ron Paul are NOT registered Republicans. So this greatly skews the polls since the may not be considered "likely Republican Primary voters" by the pollsters. Straw Polls are a better measure of Ron Paul's support - he's won 25 and placed in the top 3 in 38 out of 47 so far. Votes are what count not polls - by this measure he's number 1 in the GOP.

First thoughts: All tied up

ace p washington, d.c. — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:00:58 GMT

wow. the campaign season is officially getting into gear. after x-mas we will know a lot more. some will be in it and some will be officially out of it.

First thoughts: All tied up

--nsmsnbc — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:02:19 GMT

[What's to defend, children? I post POLLS! is this a poll?

Van

Vanreuter, NY NY]
--You can google anything if you know what to look for.

I’ve got two observations from the MSNBC polls F-R is dutifully playing up.

First, one disparity in support between Clinton and Obama is age. In general, young rapscallions/whippersnappers embrace Obama’s message of change, and older folks favor Senator Clinton. One thing I know about old people is they like it when people smile, and Hillary, I think, smiles more—Obama seems more serious/focused on the stump, maybe. Anyway, I’d be curious as to how much smiling verses not impacts the campaign trail, and no, I don’t think that Clinton’s lead with old people is because she smiles more, probably a whole bunch of other factors. One thing does bother me about her smile, it seems so smug or ‘I-did-something-good-and-I-want-voters-to-know.’ Watch the debates, that smile is there, on the stump might be different.

Second, this same poll offered second choices and I was wrong in my estimation. I thought that Clinton would be hindered and that Biden (or any of the 2nd tier for that matter) would be elevated. I was incorrect, if anything it was more of a dead heap for the three frontrunners than the first choice polls—all about 30%. I just wanted to thank MSNBC and F-R for polling and posting such to make me look bad. : )

Hillaryland? That sounds like a theme park I’d love to attend ... waiiit aa miiinute. (I know it means her campaign, cutsie shorthand). The Clinton camp really needs to take more responsibility for their successes (wait they do that well) and their shortcomings, and quit blaming everyone else and the media--but they wouldn't take responsibility for that shortcoming either.

Hmmm, Shadow, that's an interesting hypothesis. That might explain why Edwards is 'kinder' to Obama, because if Obama is unseated, he'd have a tough time going up against Clinton post-Iowa.

First thoughts: All tied up

Jerome Jefferson Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:03:25 GMT

A MUST READ FOR ANY OPRAHBAMA groupie
http://www.obamatruth.org/

LOOKS LIKE OPRAH AND OBAMA SWITCHED PLACES, OPRAHS NOW RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT? AND OBAMA IS HER CAMPAIGNE FLUNKIE?
Go Oprah! We ALL know if anyone can’t take the attention off of obama’s no experience lack of leadership, refusing to show up and vote in the senate on Iran, Abortion measures etc... Seeking a trillion-dollar tax hike and raising the retirement age for Social Security!!!! Is not in favor of a health care plan to cover all children rich or poor and that he cannot make a decision on his own. You can….YOU have disgraced American woman, now as a last ditch effort you throw Dr Kings name at the black voters, now American knows where you stand on race…

SHAMEFUL ACT...I SUGGEST WE ALL TUNE OUT BOTH!!!

WAKE UP AMERICA! Its time we stop playing with Oprah and elect a QUALIFIED PRESIDENT!!! not just a man because he’s black and oprah says so, she may know soap and books, but why in he world would anyone jeopardize your future because a TV talk show host said so?... This weekends Oprah circus, will not help obama, its make us all realize Oprahs running the show not obama...Our great country needs a qualified leader, maybe if oprah was legally running, but obama is…. Glad the dog and pony show is over

Oprah is a shame to her gender, yes the same gender that made her who she is today and she turns her back on them in a second when race is involved...

I think its time WE ALL tune out the oprahbama show, and let’s elect a REAL Presidential candidate like CLINTON!

First thoughts: All tied up

jerry/corpus christi texas — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:06:58 GMT

Hillaryland? That sounds like a theme park I’d love to attend ..

Maybe they can do a movie like Tommy.......

Would love to see Oprah as the acid queen.......

First thoughts: All tied up

Dot, Illinois — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:09:55 GMT

As Senator Obama moves up to share(for all intents and purposes) front runner status, I sincerely hope that the criticisms and attacks that will inevitably go along with that leading position will be tempered by fairness and civility. From some of the posts on this site, I can see that there are some unhealthy, and frankly, bigotted, semtiments about his campaign out there; I would hate to see his candidacy evolved into a another divisive issue for our voters. Hopefully, everyone can keep their emotions in check.

If there is the perception that Senator Clinton's campaign is criticial of the press, I hope the members of the media try very hard not to allow that to become a self fulfilling comment, but try to be fair and balanced in their reporting. Personally, I think Senator Clinton's campaign was caught off guard by the stength of both Senator Obama and Senator Edwards' campaigns and was not prepared to deal with such a close, hard fought campaign. I think they believed the "inevitability" line and now are in some disarray trying to catch up to the actuality of the campaign. Plus, they are way to sensitive to criticism of any kind; in my opinion she was far more effective when she presented her proposals and didn't try to combat every word the opposition candidates said. Just my two cents.

Me, I'm still hoping Senator Biden can surprise everyone!

First thoughts: All tied up

Yolanda — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:11:22 GMT

Jean Moeller, Mesa, Arizona-- I am confused, you are disappointed in her b/c she wants to endorse someone whose message she believes in, I am impressed with her to tell you the truth. It seems like you are a bit jealous of her, b/c I don't really get the logic behind your feelings, last time I checked this is America!!!

First thoughts: All tied up

ILikeMike, Washington, DC — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:11:43 GMT

American voters are starting to understand why folks in Arkansas (Republicans and Democrats alike) elected Mike Huckabee as their Governor. The more he is attacked, the higher he goes in the polls. When will his detractors get it that he shines in the face of adversity?

If you believe in his message, I urge you to take my challenge by visiting: www.abuckforhuck.com

First thoughts: All tied up

Tim, CT — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:14:05 GMT

"Who can best explain his past Who can best explain his past in an authentic and trustworthy fashion?"

Ron Paul

And if no one has 50% of the delegates at the August convention... and the issue is Iraq (keep in mind, the Surge is done in April)... he may get the nomination.

First thoughts: All tied up

Lyn, MD — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:20:28 GMT

Jerome...there is so much that could be said to debunk your rantings...but I won't waste my time.

If people (incld. MSM) weren't afraid of just what impact she would have(no one including Oprah knows) if any,they would not be so fixated on it. Get over it.....

Funny you don't seem to mind when she brings her surrogates out. what bothers you is that none of them are as big as Oprah....btw she would have taken the endorsement in a NY minute

First thoughts: All tied up

Sheila — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:20:49 GMT

Ah, the MSM and their devotion to the top tiers in both camps. Personally, what I want in a candidate this time around, since our poor Republic is in such shambles is the following: I want smart, articulate, knowledgeable in both foreign and domestic issues, a plan to get out of Iraq ASAP and wants dialogue instead of war with Iran. I want a delegate who is polished, has the ability to "cross the aisle" and make me proud when he is visiting other countries while gaining the respect of those foreign nations. I want a candidate who has a plan for medical care for everyone, for the poor perhaps on a pay scale or something along those lines. Most of all, I want a candidate who needs no "on the job training." A candidate with years of experience in government and how it works. I don't care about endorsements from rockers or movie stars. I do care about endorsements from his peers, others in legislation from local, state and national. How possibly could the MSM be ignoring JOE BIDEN???? He is the man, he is my candidate and a wonderful choice for this country in a pivotal and fragile time in our history. GO JOE!

First thoughts: All tied up

Eric — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:23:21 GMT

Jerome Jefferson Iowa says,

"Oprah is a shame to her gender, yes the same gender that made her who she is today and she turns her back on them in a second when race is involved..."

You are a shame to the human race. Oprah is free to endorse who she wants to endorse and if was purely based on race then I didn't see her endorse Jesse Jackson. Oprah is supporting Barack Obama based on what she believes he can do for this country. If you think otherwise, then you are really blind!!

First thoughts: All tied up

Eric — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:23:41 GMT

First thoughts: All tied up

Jackie J. — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:25:20 GMT

Just lookie here, Oprah. hillaryclinton.com

First thoughts: All tied up

Dante — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:26:15 GMT

www.barackobama.com

www.barackobama.com

www.barackobama.com

www.barackobama.com

www.barackobama.com

www.barackobama.com

First thoughts: All tied up

Nashville_fan — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:30:41 GMT

Just reposting this point I posted in the Oprahpalooza thread here as well:

I'm confused about why the issue of "too young" continues to brought up in reference to Senator Obama. He will be 47 years old when the next President is inaugorated.

There have been 8 previous presidents in their 40's when they took office, and 4 of them were younger than Senator Obama will be.

Ulysses Grant - 46
Franklin Pierce - 47
James Polk - 46
James Garfield - 49
Grover Cleveland - 47
Theodore Roosevelt - 42
John F. Kennedy - 43
William Jefferson Clinton - 46

First thoughts: All tied up

Nashville_fan — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:36:30 GMT

You know your campaign is in its final days when you are sitting in your strategy session trying to figure out a way to smear Oprah.

lol

First thoughts: All tied up

Mark, Atlanta Georgia — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:40:44 GMT

Why do people actually vote on who they want as president by their race or their gender? It's funny because you all are the people that are running america into the ground, you are probably the same people who voted for Kennedy because he was atractive, and you should be ashamed to even vote at all. If you vote the vote on the issues and not just because you like someone's appearance more than someone else.

First thoughts: All tied up

ace p washington, d.c. — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:43:30 GMT

First thoughts: All tied up

truth n media — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:43:32 GMT

Lmao Chuck Todd, Rudy is not going to say anything, he took a page from your annoited one Hillary who will not release a document, note, or sentence until the election is over, The DNC and the Rnc will have a feild day with both candidates. Just as a special counsel will have afield day on the Democrats knowing about all the torture goin on and saying DUH i din't know that. The WashingtonToast is spilling the beans on Nancy Pelosi and Harman being briefed and Namcy even asking if the torture was "hard enough". Still haven seen on the MSNBC web site, that NBC has caved in because of massive viewer displeasure and threats of a boycott for not showing Christmas messages of Thank You to our troops. The Blame America, Anti Miltary NBC and Moveon.org was put in its place again LOL

First thoughts: All tied up

Sierra, SF — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:44:31 GMT

From theLA Times:

'...Clinton rolls a sizable pork barrel

SYRACUSE, N.Y. — It's a real estate developer's sugar-plum dream: a mega-shopping mall complete with 10 Broadway-style theaters, an indoor river, a Tuscan village and a 39-story luxury hotel sheathed in green solar panels shaped like giant blades of grass. Plus as much as $1 billion in government-backed financing, thanks in part to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Not everyone thinks the plan, known as Destiny USA and still in the early bulldozer stage, is a good idea. Many on the Syracuse City Council consider its tax breaks a waste of public money. Others fear it could damage the struggling downtown area. Others question whether all its dazzling features will ever be built.....'

As long as it gets Hillary elected
That's all she's intereszted in
Who's bringing 'change' to America ?

'...One thing is clear, however: Destiny is a classic example of how New York's junior senator has embraced old-fashioned pork-barrel politics, first to build power in the state, then to extend it nationwide as she becomes a leading candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination....'

Did somebody say 'pork barrel' ?
Business as usual for Hillary
Is Norman Hsu involved ?

'...And to fuel her rise, Clinton has relied on the controversial funding device known as "earmarking." The earmarks enabled her to win favor with important constituents, many of whom provided financial support for her campaigns....'

There's the IMPORTANT THING !!
Pay to play !!
Let's elect Hillary !!

'...In the case of Destiny, she teamed up with other New York lawmakers to secure federal backing for the private investment project. And she collected tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from the developer and others associated with the project.

Nor does the Syracuse project stand alone. From the beginning of her Senate career, Clinton saw earmarks -- which enable lawmakers to bypass the normal budget process and insert narrowly drafted spending provisions directly into legislation -- as a key to funneling aid to a depressed area and building political power among normally Republican-leaning voters.

Since taking office in 2001, Clinton has delivered $500 million worth of earmarks that have specifically benefited 59 corporations. About 64% of those corporations provided funds to her campaigns through donations made by employees, executives, board members or lobbyists, a review by the Los Angeles Times shows....'

Say that again.....
Since taking office in 2001, Clinton has delivered $500 million worth of earmarks that have specifically benefited 59 corporations. About 64% of those corporations provided funds to her campaigns
Does this sound familiar ?
Is this the CHANGE Hillary embraces ?
Does this explain the deficit ?
How will Hillary balance the budget when she's giving handouts to her campaign contributors ?

'....All told, Clinton has earmarked more than $2.3 billion in federal appropriations for projects in her state since her election to the Senate, much of it for public works projects funded in conjunction with fellow Democratic Sen. Charles E. Schumer and others in the New York congressional delegation.

A different scale

Clinton is not the biggest earmarker in Congress; senior congressional leaders and members of the appropriations committees can and do write many more such provisions into the huge spending bills they draft. But Clinton does significantly more earmarking than most others with her relatively low level of seniority.....'

She 'hit the ground running...
... with earmarks !!
Crooked Hillary !!

'...Clinton's staff said she used the earmark privilege effectively for her constituents and denied any connection between her legislative action and campaign contributions.

Her record stands in contrast with others in the Senate seeking the presidency, particularly John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.). McCain, who has long opposed earmarks, does not write them. Obama has used the device, but now declines to earmark funds for private companies; he uses earmarks only to secure funds for government projects such as road building and hospital construction. Other senators seeking the presidency provide earmarks to home-state constituents and collect donations from recipients of the federal largesse. But The Times review found that Clinton does it on a different scale.

For example, in the appropriations bills that have passed the Senate so far this year, Clinton earmarked 216 separate projects for a total of $236.6 million. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) secured $112.8 million; Obama earmarked $90.4 million, and Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.) earmarked projects totaling $70.8 million.

Since Clinton arrived in the Senate, she has collected in excess of $1 million from earmark beneficiaries and their associates.

"This pattern shows that Clinton has made aggressive use of the pay-to-play earmark game," said Keith Ashdown, research director for the Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan research organization in Washington....'

Agressive use of pay to play earmarks
Crooked Hillary !!!

'...The practice of congressional earmarking has a long history. But in recent years, its use has skyrocketed, and earmarking has emerged at the center of high-profile scandals, including the one that sent former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham of Rancho Santa Fe and former lobbyist Jack Abramoff, both Republicans, to prison. Those scandals involved earmarks that led to the personal enrichment of lawmakers. There is no evidence of that in Clinton's case.

Because of the scandals, the practice of earmarking has become the subject of a heated debate among politicians, watchdog groups and good-government advocates.

Critics of earmarking object that it remains a relatively closed process that adds billions in spending directives, often over the objection of the president and Cabinet departments.

Democrats made earmark reform a priority when they took over Congress in January. The Senate passed rules making it easier to identify the authors of the once-secretive practice.

Clinton supported those basic reforms, but she and other Democratic senators running for president balked at a proposal by Obama that would have required members to disclose their proposed earmark requests, not just those that were enacted into law....'

Why would she oppose transparency ?
Is she ashamed of her pay to play scams ?
Hillary Clinton exposed !!

Mostalgic for the '90's ?
Dying for a dysfunctional White House ?
Want some earmarks ?
Vote Hillary for business as usual !!

First thoughts: All tied up

Jan, Winsted, Connecticut — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:48:10 GMT

Jerome, I watched Oprah once, but her show does not appeal to me. She is not the reason I support Obama. Every other candidate, Rep and Dem, seems to have been cut from the same cloth. Obama is the only one who stands out. Please try to get over the Oprah thing; she's not the reason he'll be elected.

First thoughts: All tied up

Nashville_fan — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:48:30 GMT

I found this story to be interesting - I would like to believe it isn't true - it would truly be a sad commentary if it were.

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGEzOGI2OTM4ZjE0MTZmYmZlZjRkZWZmN2M0NTEyZDc=

First thoughts: All tied up

Roberta Cooper Mesa,Az. — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:49:34 GMT

Oprah should stay home or on her own show. It looks like she is the one running for president. We cannot have someone like Obama for president who is'nt even qualified on how to run this country. We need someone with experience like Hillary who has been around and knows how to make decisions. We need her because she is the most qualified.Come on people wakeup and hopefully you will vote for Senator Clinton.All these other that are running for presidents and are are trying to act so religious make me sick. like Romney and Huckabee.Religion is personal and should be kept that way.

Bert

First thoughts: All tied up

Bill C. — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:52:37 GMT

What did you say ? hillaryclinton.com

First thoughts: All tied up

Mariann Pepitone. Chicago, IL — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:52:40 GMT

First thoughts: All tied up

avraam jack,alexandria,va — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:54:43 GMT

-----CLINTON SLEEZE FATIGUE WILL INVIGORATE GOP, DISPIRIT DEMOCRATS AND SINK DEMOCRATIC TICKET-----

-----EDWARDS/RICHARDSON TO WIN-----

It is possible that Senator Clinton is the best candidate. However, even though many may like the policies that Senator Clinton proposes, they should also consider her record, just as Senator Clinton insists.
.
The last Clinton Administration, when faced with the fact that protection rackets where assaulting, torturing and murdering people with poison and radiation, chose to avoid its responsibilities to incarcerate the criminals and to protect the citizenry.
.
Instead, they made a deal with the criminal gang stalker protection rackets to leave them alone and to consequently abandon the citizenry.
.
Do we want a President who sells out the citizenry for votes?
.
Do we want a President who sends a "crime does pay" message to society?
.
Would you vote for a President who signed nonaggression deals with the KKKlan or the Nazi party? Gangs that torture with poison and radiation are much like the KKKlan and Nazi Party.
.
We do not need a sellout President. We need a principled leader President.
.
If you are one of the few who do not know what the above refers to, do a web search for “gang stalking” to see the tip of the dirtberg. Please do it before you decide to reply to my post. Here let me make it easy for you: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22gang+stalking%22.
.

First thoughts: All tied up

jerry/corpus christi texas — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:00:29 GMT

We need someone with experience like Hillary who has been around and knows how to make decisions.

What?.....
Takes five positions on Drivers licenses for illegals?
can't decide what to do with social security?
can't make a decision without her husband in the mix?
doesn't sound like a rational choice for president to me.....

experience?
at what?

First thoughts: All tied up

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:00:46 GMT

Ron, Tx...."momentum" does not equate with "change."
Barrack Obama has done absolutely NOTHING that would qualify him to be President of this country. When people listen to his "message," he suffers in the polls. It is only when he recites the G.O.P. mantra of the 1990's,..."I hate the Clintons, and you should too," and only when he attacks HIllary with with vitriolic hate-speak, that he makes any headway in the polls. (Personally, I think this "momemtum" thing is the same kind of media hype Howard Dean got in Nov/Dec of 1993.)
Senator Clinton has 7 years worth of experience in The United States Senate. She's dealt with matters of both domestic and foreign policy. I might add, she's dealt with those issues in the aftermath of 911 as a representative of the city which was attacked. Hillary didn't have the luxury of being on the outside looking in, or of second guessing someone else after the fact. She made a decision to do what she felt was in the best interests of her constituency, and she stuck to that decision. THAT, not armchair quarterbacking, is leadership.
She also spent 8 years as First Lady, and is "familiar" with international politics and the diplomatic scene abroad.
Obama may be a "nice guy" with a charasmatic way of speaking.
But, he's just too inexperienced. Hillary was right when she said "change is a just a word" - if you don't have the ability to make it happen.
Nominating Obama would hand the Presidency back to The Republicans on a silver platter. Why do you think Karl Rove is openly giving Obama talking points, and "pointers" on how he should campaign against Hillary?
The answer is as plain as the nose on your face. The G.O.P WANTS Obama to be the Democratic nominee. They want to run against him.
They are scared witless of Hillary because they know she'll win, and win BIG if nominated.

VOTE HILLARY 2008! ***experience counts***

First thoughts: All tied up

Sierra, SF — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:01:26 GMT

From First Read:

'...Bloomberg’s Al Hunt has some behind the scenes in "Hillaryland" claiming tension between Bill and the campaign. "There are also political strains with her greatest asset and surrogate, Bill Clinton. The former president was quoted last month as saying he had really opposed the invasion of Iraq from the beginning; he later claimed he was misquoted. Top Clinton campaign officials were privately furious at the former president, saying he had revived the complaint that the Clintons lack credibility, unfairly tarnishing his wife in the process.”...'

The Clintons lack credibility ?
How can he tarnish Hillary ?
Isn't that her job ?
Don't her earmarks tarnish her ?

'...Hunt also notes this: "And her campaign has a near-obsession with what it perceives as a hostile press. They were incensed at a New York Times story that reported skepticism about Hillary's contention that her proposal to overhaul health care would help a lot more people than the plan of her rival." ...'

Are those boys picking on Hillary ?
whay would anybody have:

skepticism about Hillary's contention that her proposal to overhaul health care would help a lot more people than the plan of her rival

It won't even go into effect until AFTER her 'second' ? term !!!!

First thoughts: All tied up

Mike K, Denver — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:02:52 GMT

First thoughts: All tied up

kenn — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:04:12 GMT

It must hurt to say hilliary is in the lead ,last poll was within margin of error but that was a lead for Obama now hilliary is ahead its within error,which is it ?

First thoughts: All tied up

Annette, Portland, Oregon — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:05:01 GMT

Let's talk about Dennis Kucinich. Why do we seem to think he's a fairy tale when really he's saying what a lot of us want, think, and feel. Let's elect him. I'll be voting for him, even though I live in Oregon and my vote won't mean much. To those who live in New Hampshire, Iowa, the states that get to vote first: use your incredible voting power to show mass media that they're wrong.

Dennis Kucinich is electable. He is what America wants and needs right now! Even if (ESPECIALLY if) he hasn't received as many large campaign contributions from corporations as "the frontrunners" (who only became frontrunners because the media portrays them that way).

First thoughts: All tied up

kenn — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:11:02 GMT

Lets see Hilliary worked for the Goldwater back in the day when you were wetting your diapers a law degree back when women were made to work twice as hard as a man to suceed,then first lady of arkansas now first ladies dont do much but then again niether do vice presidents but we have one running the country now.As first lady of the united states she handled a staff and had more responsibility than jerry has had his whole life what experience,oh yea a senator for 8 years no experienceneeded ask your favorite president ,national guard son of a ....president and loser ballclub the rangers and oh yea gov'ner of texass.COMPARE MISSION ACCOMPLISED

First thoughts: All tied up

Dante — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:11:29 GMT

It must hurt to say hilliary is in the lead ,last poll was within margin of error but that was a lead for Obama now hilliary is ahead its within error,which is it ?
kenn (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 11:04 AM)

Kenn, margin of error is based on sample size, so while one poll might be within the margin of error another poll may not. It has nothing to do with how low the percentage is, it is strictly based on sample size!!

First thoughts: All tied up

Jess — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:11:48 GMT

Ugh why do the WORST candidates always move up in the polls, what have we come to expect from a country that voted in Bush twice?????

Obama, does he follow through on anything? He spoke out against the Patriot Act then voted in favor of reauthorizing it, he cannot commit to withdrawing the troops out of Iraq by 2013, possibly later.. He hasn't ruled out using strikes against Iran, not to mention the same vote he criticizes Hillary for, he missed himself and sponsored the exact same legislation designating the IRG a terrorist organization in back in April.. He implied that he would invade Pakistan, without the consent of their government.. He made votes making it more difficult for average citizens to sue big corporations.. He has no consistency on the issues of social security and taxes, in the very beginning he was for raising the cap, then having all options on the table, then appointing a bipartisan commission, now he's back to raising the cap.. He receives contributions from lobbyists, corporations and interest groups

Tax Hike Mike? no thank you

Vote for change, vote Ron Paul!
-he voted against the Iraq war
-he has never voted to raise taxes
-he voted against the Patriot Act
-he opposes amnesty for illegals
-he opposes entering war with Iran
-he voted against Bush's amendment banning gay marriages
-he is for reducing the national debt by cutting government spending instead of placing the burden on taxpayers
-he is for free trade
-he is for limited government
-he is for handling global situations with diplomacy
-his voting record is consistent
-he isn't backed by corporations, lobbyists and special interest groups

www.ronpaul2008.com

First thoughts: All tied up

D. Fitzgerald — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:13:00 GMT

Jerome Jefferson has again demonstrated to America and the world that close-minded bigots are still alive and prospering in this otherwise great nation.

I recently had occasion to reread Dr. King's "I Have a Dream" speech. It is incredible that he could have delivered the very same words this morning and they would sadly still apply. People like this Jefferson fellow and many contemporary whites and some blacks in our nation today wouldn't even consider examining themselves again such ideas. Those who cry loudest against promoting national disunity are often the ones doing the dividing. "...shame to your gender...", because Oprah and Obama happen to both be African American. Oprah is just fine when she is promoting a Caucasian in anything. Some Blacks turn a slightly critical eye to what at times seems disproportionate, but they keep it to themselves and are happy that a person of color has been tolerated at her level of success. However, the rather large segment that Jefferson represents, makes it quite clear that there are those who believe in freedom of speech, unless it tells the complete and sometimes embarrassing truth. It is very unfortunate for our progress and world standing as a nation that Americans and our big money global partners are the only ones to see or care about the contradiction in principals.

First thoughts: All tied up

Daniel, NY — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:13:19 GMT

Huckabee also got on the cover of Newsweek this week with the title "Holy Huckabee!" No comment... Check it out: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/12/huckabee-draws-scrutiny-but-he-will.html

First thoughts: All tied up

Mike K, Denver — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:14:07 GMT

One of the scary things that I notice when going through the poll results links for all three early contests is that Hillary leads in all three on "Experience" when people split why they are leaning towards a given candidate.

Maybe someone in one of those states can clear this up for me: Why are you all still drinking from the Hillary kool-aid that she's the most "experienced" democrat in the field? She's served 1 full term in the Senate in which she's done absolutely NOTHING. If you all believe that 8 years as First Lady is "experience" why is she the first one ever to run? Don't you think others would have tried it by now? She ruined the chance for us to fix healthcare in this country once. Do you really trust her "experience" to get it right now? She's lied. She's gone negative in an election where going negative is really a turn off to voters nationwide. She has given no details on ANYTHING given that to get the simplest of answers out of her during a debate or other forum is akin to pulling teeth. I trust her about as much as I trust Dubya, which is to say I don't. If she can't properly defend her positions such as Iraq or her vote on Iran, either she has no position or she knows damn well that no one who is registered as a Democrat or Independent would ever agree with her.

Hillary: It is time to either put up or shut up. Period.

First thoughts: All tied up

CK, chicago — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:14:46 GMT

Obama Biden 08

Obama has the courage and integrity to be the leader we need, Biden has the audacity to say what needs to be said. I think it's a winning ticket

First thoughts: All tied up

squintz, philly, pa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:15:37 GMT

Seems as though Oprah's not too popular in AZ...no matter, she's plenty popular in IA!

First thoughts: All tied up

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:17:05 GMT

After reading all the above, I think every one of them is in love with Hillary. Especially the hateful ones. Go figure, huh? My choice for a long time, has been the use of Temps to run the Government. If we don't like them, we fire them on Friday, and bring in new ones on Monday. Hillary for President? What Ever.

First thoughts: All tied up

kenn — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:17:52 GMT

I cant wait to vote for Obama now that Oprah has said I should .Her name is known for honesty except for the time she had us fall for the guy who lied in his book and called it the truth It can happen to the best of us,and oh yea the school that was abusing childern she opened Im sure it was just the people she picked that were the problem.So why listen to her at all except she has made alot of money off women and now she won't support one for president,makes you go hmmmmmm

First thoughts: All tied up

Marty CR Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:20:00 GMT

It is a sad thing to me that this speech cannot be delivered by every child attending our schools, why?? because it mentions the word that is being taken away from us. I want for my next president to stand up for America's values that was given to me when I was a child. I could freely put my hand over my heart and say the pledge, I could pray in school, I could say Merry Christmas to any one. I don't shout my faith neither do I whisper it, it is just there in my heart. I don't care what church you go to, what color you are or what language you speak, just don't demean my faith, my color or my speech. I am an American and I will defend your rights to the last, but you must defend mine also. The words of this speech could be easily altered to fit us today, please read them and feel the same surge of power I feel every time I hear it: Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate—we can not consecrate—we can not hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

First thoughts: All tied up

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:21:11 GMT

nsmsnbc:

Another difference - older people participate, younger people don't. Obviously no one knows for sure what the turnout for younger voters will be at the caucus here or in other states - they could make a huge difference. Or they could do what they usually do and not show up.

I have expressed my concern before that Obama is banking on an unreliable group of people coming through for him. Maybe it will pay off and maybe it won't, but it is a somewhat risky strategy.

First thoughts: All tied up

Bill C. — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:21:46 GMT

Ok..time out, to check it out once an for all. Just take a quick looksie. hillaryclinton.com

First thoughts: All tied up

pat huntington ny — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:22:17 GMT

First, I watched Oprah's speech before Obama took the stage the other day and was impressed with her. She spoke with passion and conviction. She definitately believes in this guy and for that, she should be commended that she's taking a role in this election.

Second, Obama has more experience than Hillary in elected position. He was a state senator for a number of years before becoming a US Senator. Hillary had zero elected experience before she was elected to the US Senate.

Third, I was, at one point, a strident Hillary supporter. I am now undecided between her and Barak. I am leaning a bit his way. This is because I am getting answers from Barak that Hillary refused address.

Fourth, Huckabee is the last thing this country needs...another bible beater who denies evolution. What a laughing stock in the world we'ld be if we had a president that thinks the world and the universe is only about 6000 years old, and we all came from Adam and Eve, who only had two sons.

First thoughts: All tied up

kenn — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:22:23 GMT

Winning campaigns dont have these problems .ASK RUDY OR MITT one has so much corruption and the other belives in a fairytail religion hows that for winning.Or how about 400 dollar haircuts is that a sign of a winner how about not talking about your past record laced with shady deals in chicago obama is that how you win LAST WORD cant wait till hill wins and you eat those words while trying to gain access to an interveiw why would she waste her breath on you.

First thoughts: All tied up

ace p washington, d.c. — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:22:56 GMT

why hillary won't let us verify her experience in the white house? the good and the bad? i want to see it.

First thoughts: All tied up

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:27:46 GMT

First thoughts: All tied up

Erika Ruud Twin Valley MN — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:29:09 GMT

To Jean Moeller, Mesa, Arizona: Africa is a continent, not a country!!! Wow and your comments were very ignorant as well.

First thoughts: All tied up

Liz C, Dover, NH — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:30:32 GMT

Ummm, was this another poll where Ron Paul wasn't even given as an option? because I know he has been polling higher than 5% in IA and higher than 7% in NH. Idiots!

First thoughts: All tied up

Erica, Las Vegas, NV — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:31:35 GMT

Sheila said:

"I want smart, articulate, knowledgeable in both foreign and domestic issues, a plan to get out of Iraq ASAP and wants dialogue instead of war with Iran. I want a delegate who is polished, has the ability to "cross the aisle" and make me proud when he is visiting other countries while gaining the respect of those foreign nations. I want a candidate who has a plan for medical care for everyone, for the poor perhaps on a pay scale or something along those lines. "

I agree. Who is in first place right now, who has more skeletons in their closets, who called who what ugly names, and who believes in what version of god are all attempts to sidetrack us each from doing the work it requires to decide on the best candidate. For too long, the presidential campaign has been akin to a high school popularity contest. "The people," en masse, are led by the media, the polls, the surface sound bites. Each one of us has the responsibility to do some research on each candidate's position, and choose the one that best fits our own ideals.

Personal responsibility is a hard thing to teach present-day America. But it is the only way we are going to restore our country to the noble democracy it can be. Stabbing each other's opinions of various candidates does nothing but slow us down.

First thoughts: All tied up

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:33:21 GMT

First thoughts: All tied up

John B, Des Moines, IA — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:33:25 GMT

"Why do people actually vote on who they want as president by their race or their gender? It's funny because you all are the people that are running america into the ground, you are probably the same people who voted for Kennedy because he was atractive, and you should be ashamed to even vote at all. If you vote the vote on the issues and not just because you like someone's appearance more than someone else.
Mark, Atlanta Georgia (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 10:40 AM)"

You're absolutely correct. Analysts believed that GW Bush won in spite of his platform being at odds with large numbers of people who voted for him because he was considered "more likeable", "a regular guy", "someone you'd like to sit down and have a beer with". Look how that turned out.

First thoughts: All tied up

Dot, Illinois — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:36:00 GMT

I tried to post this earlier, so if it a duplicate, I apologize. Senator Edwards has not been very critical of Senator Obama---do you think he would run as VP if Senator Obama gets the nod?

First thoughts: All tied up

Dot, Illinois — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:41:51 GMT

Carrie

I tend to agree with you--but that bothers me. I would just hate to see this election "polarize" our voters along ethnic lines. If that happens, our country suffers.

First thoughts: All tied up

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:44:27 GMT

First thoughts: All tied up

Jimmy CHICAGO IL — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:44:39 GMT

Mariann Pepitone. Chicago, IL

You ought to post something with substance. Everything that you posted passes as just hyperbole. As far as Oprah stumping foer him, that is what campaigns do, campaigns get people with big names/big draws to draw crowds so they can hear the candidate speak. You probably wouldn't be so venomous if she were stumping for your candidate. As far as the drinking/drugging, at least he didn't lie about his experiences or try to spin out of them.(I didn't inhale)
"I can just imagine both of them in the white house, Oprah doing the talking and Obama doing the drinking."-Are you kidding? What do you imagine if Bill and Hill are in the white house? You sound just as vitriolic as your candidate. post something with substance that you can back up.

PS If you don't live in the city of Chicago, but in the outlying suburbs, don't say you live in Chicago, you are from the suburbs!

First thoughts: All tied up

Sierra, SF — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:44:41 GMT

From the Bloomberg article cited:

These are DEMOCRATS !!

'...The concerns about Clinton, 60, a New York senator, are that she is devious, calculating and, fairly or not, a divisive figure in American politics.

Those are a lot tougher to overcome.

It was revealing, too, when Hart pushed them to envision these senators as leaders of the country or, as he put it, their ``boss.'' Obama, they say, would be inspirational, motivating, charismatic and compassionate. After praising Clinton's experience and intelligence, they say she would be demanding, difficult, maybe even a little scary....'

These are DEMOCRATS, ready to support the nominee

'...devious, calculating and, fairly or not, a divisive figure in American politics....'

They go that right..
I wonder what independents think ?
They might not support a devious, calculating politician....
Why would independents support a 'devisive fighre in American politics' ?

Time to turn the page
Let's look for new leadership
Let's look for change and reform
Let's support honesty and integrity
It's important !!

First thoughts: All tied up

Mark C, Asheville NC — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:45:00 GMT

*** He needs Oprah to speak for him because he lacks the ability and training to know how to make speeches. ***

That's an amazingly stupid comment, considering that he rose to national prominence on the basis of his speech at the Democratic Convention in 2004.

*** I can just imagine both of them in the white house, Oprah doing the talking and Obama doing the drinking. ***

Yep, what we're witnessing here is the death rattle of the Clinton campaign, and this is the quality of the commentary from them.

First thoughts: All tied up

vanreuter, NY NY — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:47:06 GMT

Imagine someone so dense that they confuse links to unbiased information as sites promoting one candidate over the other. Now imagine that they are so dense that they broadcast this ignorance to everyone here. Finally, imagine the arrogance of ignorance it takes to call this information, "vomit".

"And you ride yourselves over the fields
and you make all your animal deals
and your wise men don't know how it feels
to be thick as a brick."*
From Ian Andersen, to Meth-lab Mike.

Van
(From, "Thick as a Brick" by Jethro Tull

First thoughts: All tied up

John Morris, Cape Town NC — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:52:18 GMT

Mike K -> maybe someone in one of those states can clear this up for me: Why are you all still drinking from the Hillary kool-aid that she's the most "experienced" democrat in the field? <-

Maybe I can clear this up for you. She has experience because Bill has told us so. Thats it, nothing more. It's more of a perception thing then a reality thing.

But, now things are changing. People are paying a little more attention to what the Clinton's are babbling, and then truth is coming out. And we all know that the truth and the Clintons don't mix well together.

First thoughts: All tied up

Dot, Illinois — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:57:20 GMT

J Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY

"Don't you dare hit them back with the truth about Little Baracky."
--------------------------------------------------
If that was in refercence to my earlier post, I have consistently commented on the lack of civility in many of the comments about Senator Clinton too. Frankly, I think all the insults about any of the candidates, the name calling, and down right hate filled blah, blah, blah, are childish rantings.

First thoughts: All tied up

Marty CR Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:01:31 GMT

If it is experience you want, then look up to the "older voter" we have been there, done that. We have been running this country for years, for bad and for good. If it is change you want then, vote in the kids. But don't expect too much to get done till they grow older. I will vote for experience every time over youth, I know where I want my country to go and it can only get there with a dedicated American for all the people. John McCain.

First thoughts: All tied up

JZW, Los Angeles, CA — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:03:26 GMT

The problem for Hillary isn't that straight male voters are uncomfortable with a woman as President; it's that they're uncomfortable with the idea of Bill Clinton as First Lady. The sad truth is, most straight men (and conservative women) cannot yet accept the idea of a man fulfilling the role normally held by a woman. Because in our society, it is acceptable for a woman to fulfill roles held by men; for a woman to be more masculine. But America has a real prejudice toward men fulfilling roles performed by men.

What happens in the general election when the media do stories on the future First Lady? We may have Mrs. Romney or Mrs. McCain or Mrs. Guiliani... with Bill Clinton. Are they going to ask Bill for *his* chocolate chip cookie recipes? Then there is the issue of visiting dignitaries and political figures from other nations coming to the White House--and being told they'll be leaving their wives for tea with Bill Clinton.

This is an issue Margaret Thatcher never had to contend with: her husband fulfilling a role defined solely by British society's prejudices about what it is to be a man. I think voters can accept a woman for President, but they are not yet ready to see a man fulfill the duties and responsibilities of First Lady. Is it fair? No. But I think it is reality.

First thoughts: All tied up

Mike K, Denver — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:05:43 GMT

Also looking at the poll results, I notice that a big difference between Obama and Hillary supporters are their age. The under 50 crowd is mostly Obama while the over-50 crowd is mostly Hillary. I'd love to see these numbers broken down even further so that we can see how each candidate fares among the college crowd, the working crowd, those over retirement age, etc.

It appears to me that Obama's "message of hope and change" scares the crap out of old people. They like the status quo. They believe that changing the way government runs or a shift in the beliefs of government will cause them some great harm. I believe it is the opposite. The current way government runs will cause Social Security to go bankrupt before those +50 folks have even one toe in the ground. Change is hope that this and other programs meant for the benefit of everyone are maintained, if not improved drastically.

Clinton has given no reason TO change or FOR change. She hasn't given any details of how she'd do things differently than we've had for the last 8 years. If even the over 50 crowd is convinced that Dubya is the worst President this country's had, why would they continue to support a person that has given absolutely no indication that she will make the necessary changes so that we do move on to a different, better course in our nation's history?

First thoughts: All tied up

Kelly, Washington, DC — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:07:29 GMT

I called Thompson's bluff over three months ago. Who thought 3 months ago that Thompson would be in fourth place in South Carolina? Anyone with half a political brain. The only ones who believed Thompson's hype was cable news...

First thoughts: All tied up

Ron Jeffers, Arizona — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:11:51 GMT

This Independent is still hoping that Biden can make a strong showing in the early states. He is the only candidate of either party that seems to have the entire package of knowledge, trustworthyness and ability to relate to the people. I could live with Obama, Guiliani or Edwards, but I could not in good conscience vote for any other candidate of either party.

First thoughts: All tied up

Ava — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:16:18 GMT

Kenn - visit www.realclearpolitics.com

There are at lest 5 Iowa polls released over the last 2 weeks showing Obama ahead of or tied with Hillary. Until recently, he was consistently 2nd, and in the spring he was back in 3rd in Iowa.

First thoughts: All tied up

Jeff, Boston — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:16:44 GMT

Has Oprah ever been in a Civil-Rights march. I have not seen her helping the black politicians over the years, but suddenly she has become one who wants to tell Afro-americans who to vote for. Stick to what you do best "Talk show hosting" or else your career
may take a hit.

First thoughts: All tied up

Mike K, Denver — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:17:20 GMT

it amazes me at the number of racists remarks that are made here. it amazes me at the number of anti-female remarks that have been posted. how can one be serious voter and claim they are truly american and are for the best interest of our great country when they have hate of race and hate of gender in their thought process? more importantly how can a person hold such ugly and vile poison within them and claim to be american?
---------------------

Excuse me? I am neither a racist nor anti-woman. I am a Barack Obama supporter. I do not hate Hillary because she lacks a penis, either. I dislike Hillary because she comes off as a smary, good-for-nothing, Republican-lite in her speeches and policies. She has consistently taken the low road in debates, her ads, and her other appearances when speaking about her opponents, but heaven forbid any of them say one word against her because, according to her campaign, that would be gender bashing and is highly frowned upon. If she were truly strong enough to be President of the United States, she would take any and all shots that come at her instead of hiding behind her gender as she did following the debate in Philadelphia and has consistently done since. Her "kitchen" comments are arrogant at best, gender-bashing in their own right, at their worst. I would line up in a heartbeat to vote a woman into the job, but it has to be the RIGHT woman. Hillary just isn't her.

First thoughts: All tied up

'W — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:18:42 GMT

Obama is God.

First thoughts: All tied up

Mike K, Denver — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:18:59 GMT

First thoughts: All tied up

Dante — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:19:05 GMT

Marty CR Iowa (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 12:01 PM) As another poster previously posted:

There have been 8 previous presidents in their 40's when they took office, and 4 of them were younger than Senator Obama will be.

Ulysses Grant - 46
Franklin Pierce - 47
James Polk - 46
James Garfield - 49
Grover Cleveland - 47
Theodore Roosevelt - 42
John F. Kennedy - 43
William Jefferson Clinton - 46

First thoughts: All tied up

Chelse C. — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:22:09 GMT

Her it comes again, hillaryclinton.com ,please come join the conversation

First thoughts: All tied up

M. Houck, Houston, TX — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:22:48 GMT

Are you aware that your article refers to BILL Clinton as the candidate, not Hillary?

First thoughts: All tied up

T. X. Peccini, registered expat voter in Nicosia, Cyprus — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:23:57 GMT

Cheers to "ace p washington, d.c." for above comments on civility of discussion. Certain bloggers from Texas and New York keep posting the same old comments. All right, we got it! You hate Hilary! So what? Shouldn't the comments be related to the topic of the article, "ALL TIED UP"? The framers of the constitution protected the right to free speech but there was nothing they could do about overbloated nincompoops. Oh well. Next!
That said, how great is it that this is a three-person race? I do hope it stays that way until February. Iowa is really not a bellweather state and neither is New Hampshire... Interesting that Clinton is still leading, though, even within the margin of error after weeks of attacks and the O-fest... Amazing that Edwards is still on the radar screen...

First thoughts: All tied up

jerry/corpus christi texas — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:25:05 GMT

Dennis Kucinich is electable. He is what America wants and needs right now! Even if (ESPECIALLY if) he hasn't received as many large campaign contributions from corporations as "the frontrunners" (who only became frontrunners because the media portrays them that way).

Annette, Portland, Oregon (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 11:05 AM)

Maybe on mars he is electable, but here he is just another left wing nutjob with a hot wife.....

First thoughts: All tied up

Mike K, Denver — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:27:13 GMT

Hillarys' ad wasn't copied from Obama because Obama doesn't have the intelligence to know how to place an ad. I have seen some of his ads and they are a JOKE!!
And to go on record he is a joke. He needs Oprah to speak for him because he lacks the ability and training to know how to make speeches. That's what drinking and drugging can do for you. Make your brain waves shot. Besides that, America is not ready for him and may never be no matter how many times he campaigns again and Oprah keeps campaigning for him. Does she want to be the VP. Of course she does. I can just imagine both of them in the white house, Oprah doing the talking and Obama doing the drinking.

Mariann Pepitone. Chicago, IL (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 10:52 AM)

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

Have you read one of his speeches or attended one? His words and his presence on stage are simply amazing. He commands the stage better than any of his opponents. He doesn't need Oprah, but if she's willing tohelp someone she truly believes in, and can use her star power to help him, so much the better. I think you hate hearing him speak because you can't understand him. He speaks in words to hard for you to understand. Either that or you're one of the few that still think Hillary will manage to change anything other than the furniture in the White House.

First thoughts: All tied up

--NSMSNBC — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:29:36 GMT

Carrie--You are true about who historically and will likely vote (older folks). I will disagree that Obama is not seeking the elderly vote. I'm bracketing, because I'm not sure of the accuracy of my statment. [Hillary's support used to be strongly with women, now they are more even. Hillary/Barack were about even with the black vote, but it is now trending towards Obama.] I think we will yet see a similar trend among the elderly population. We'll see what happens.

Maybe H.R. Clinton's elderly support can be attributed to the fact that she is now an old person--she just turned 60! No, there are a bunch of things, to name a few. Older people seem, to me, to respond stronger to fear mongering (not that I think Hillary is doing that), but she is lumped with Republicans who do, and she does try to portray herself more hawkishly. Ummm, I seriously doubt older folks are as interested in the change message as younger folks, and probably favor the experience line. Also, it could be generational. Older/younger attitudes about race are much, much different, but older women and men might favor the prospect of a woman as something they've been waiting for. Like my grandma who flat-out stated that Germans arethe superior race, even though her husband fought a war to prove that wrong. And I was shocked, but skipping the AARP forum/debate seems to have labeled Obama in a bad light with many seniors.

Dot--I doubt that Edwards would run for a VP nod. He's done that before, but much more, I wouldn't think the Democrats would run him for VP again if he and Kerry were unsuccessful the first time. He claims it's more that he disagrees with Clinton on the issues. I could be wrong.

Mark and People--What's wrong with using race, gender, other personal qualities/factors when deciding whom one wishes to support for President? Ideally, people would live in a vacuum and only consider the 'proper' factors, but realistically, it's going to happen. What's wrong with women saying, hey, it took you smucks 150 years to give us the right to vote and 100 years more to allow us a candidate from our background? What's wrong with blacks saying, look at all the trials we've gone through in American history, I'm going to support the candidate that represents the obsticals we have overcome and are yet overcoming! Those who say it shouldn't be a factor (me included) need to understand that it is important and it is meaningful. And I think people do take the issues into account along with the subjective.

Voting for religion is kind of a different matter. Many people 'get their' values from religion (which I say is wrong), so it is probably an issue in the sense that people can understand where a candidate 'gets his or her' values from and relate and agree.

Why did F-R not report that Gore accepted the nobel peace prize today--that seems right up their alley. Who might he endorse and when? Right before the election might offer a much needed media boost for whichever candidate. How about Kennedy/Kerry, with the closeness of the race, might they wait until after Iowa but before NH? Especially, if one or both support(s) Hillary, could that help her firewall in NH? I guess, I'm unsure of their sway in NH, part of the NE family.

On a final note, what the heck is kool-aid, though I doubt it's clever? I get nicknaming Bush, scrub, ho-ho also clever, hardly. I get that it means BS, but the term kool-aid is seemingly out of nowhere to me. Anybody?

First thoughts: All tied up

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:29:45 GMT

First thoughts: All tied up

dedicated to liberty, MO — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:29:48 GMT

Thank-you Marty CR Iowa, for reminding me what it's really all about!

First thoughts: All tied up

Marty CR Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:32:18 GMT

All this hype about Hillery and Obama for Iowa voters, I have the feeling that Edwards will come out on top in the long run here. Not that I think he is presidental material, but I know how Iowa thinks. They believe in honesty and experience, and that says it all.

First thoughts: All tied up

Scared of Obama — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:33:15 GMT

Obama is the AntiChrist.

First thoughts: All tied up

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:33:23 GMT

Mike, exactly where in the debates did Hillary take the low road when speaking about her opponents?

First thoughts: All tied up

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:37:38 GMT

RE: Presidents and their ages

Looking at the list, I feel it prudent to point out that when many of those men were president, the life expectancy was probably 20-30 years younger than it is now.

First thoughts: All tied up

Tim F., Palm Springs, CA — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:38:10 GMT

In Al Hunt's column he says that no one, in the last 30 years, has lost both Iowa and New Hampshire and gone on to win the nomination. Why, then, does Guiliani think he can stay viable with a loss in these two early contests?

First thoughts: All tied up

Joan , South Bend, IN — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:40:46 GMT

First thoughts: All tied up

Paula, Post Falls, Id. — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:42:28 GMT

What amazes me with all the negativity about Hillary is where you picked up your information. The polls according to Chuck Todd states people believe she is less honest and less trustworthy. That begs the question who is promoting this, why are they and what do they have to gain? When members of congress, both Republicans and Democrats alike, who work with her are asked can they rely on her, they say yes and she is one of the hardest workers the Senate has. If people were true to themselves, they would be questioning their own motives. Everyone complains about the candidates when really they should be looking at the person they see in the mirror. The media and candidates will give you what you are seeking. When you want to smear and degrade Hillary for wanting compromise and working across the isle, then what you really want is not a leader to move us together in solving our country's problems, but a one dimensional individual who is narrow minded in his or her views. We have had enough of that my way or the highway mentality with Bush. Electing a president is not entertainment, it takes a serious, well informed voter to elect the most qualified, experienced and mature individual. For those of you who are against Hillary because she is a woman and feel threatened because she might empower women in your own lives, take a step back and look at your own mothers, sisters and grandmothers and ask yourselves what contributions did they make in your lives. Perhaps then you might not be so freightened of her Presidency. Ask Hillary's daughter, mother, co-workers and people who know her if she is honest and trustworthy, not an opinion of the media or opposition party. Do your homework!

First thoughts: All tied up

Elton Smith, San Antonio, Texas — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:45:30 GMT

Senator John Edwards has a strong message for the future of our country, wheather you are a democrat or an independent voter.

This "yellow dog democrat" is going to support the democratic candidate that wins the nomination.

Moderate republicans would be wise not to waste their votes on the republican nominee.

Your party is over thanks to the last eight miserable years of George Bush and company.

It will take democratic leadership to restore America as a moral leader in the world community.

It just a matter of time.

First thoughts: All tied up

Real E. Disgusted, Issaquah, WA — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:50:26 GMT

How do I loath the American political process? Let me count the ways.

I hate the American political process for the massive media hype over frontrunners in early primary states even though cumulatively South Carolina, Iowa, Nevada and New Hampshire have but 3.65 percent of the US population. Get thee a life political reporters for I give not a crap about these political want-to-be's who are but encouraged and enabled by assignment of such importance by the town crier (who often seconds as the village idiot).

I hate the American political process for the ability of candidates to front others as themself to gain favor. Oprah? Heavens, she is an astute business woman but she bows too often to a cause without checking facts or using any sense whatsoever? Can you say "A Million Little Pieces"? or abuse in her own (vanity driven)school? I had but little respect for Senator Obama before this as he hasn't experience, a real strategy for changing the country, or (indeed) a clue (I think most surely he is the Democratic equal to King Bush II - another admitted slacker and substance abuser - now I have ZERO respect for him). I believe that once the media face and power of Ms. Winfrey blows away he will be not but another of her mistakes.

I hate the American political process for allowing someone like Mr. Huckabee to gain any credence whatsover. Yet I loath the American people even more for this. Truth, fact, and science have no meaning for Mr. Huckabee for he has The Book. He truly believes that he is devinely anointed. He would be an ideal candidate for the Taliban, and could perhaps be elected in Iran. What are his supporters thinking? Wait, they don't have to think for they have faith. I ask of them but one favor - please continue your support for him as this will most surely give ANY Democratic nominee a landslide victory. Burn witches, burn!

I hate the American political process for the lack of will the candidates show to do the right thing. Eliminate lobbying, special interest and business contributions to politicians, and pork barrel spending and then perhaps we can elect a candidate of, by, and for the People.

I hate the American political process for the slavish devotion to propaganda - based on fact or not. Give us universal health care, give us a simple tax system, give us simple basic and universally equal access to government. Obviously universal health care can't work since we are the only developed country in the world who has it not (and there are few medical advances elsewhere). Obviously it is more important to suck up to corporations and the greedy and to employ lawyers and accountants than to make taxation so simple that every person and business could understand and administer their own payment, and obviously it is important to promote a system where people decide not to participate because they feel they can not make a difference. Woe to snakes of every kind who do little but demonize others.

The dumbing down of America is real. The hopelessness and laziness of the people are shown in many ways but most obviously in our trust in faith over science and true human compassion. I hate the American political process for beating down the ability of any candidate to challenge this. We are stuck with what we have until we decide to think about each other as much as we think about sports stars, media princesses, or an imagined divine being. Help us all help us all. Learn to love, learn to think, learn to be kind - and elect people who have that same devotion, to each other and not to any label, philosophy, or religion.

I hate the American political process as it makes ME want to give up hope - for the fools are in charge.

First thoughts: All tied up

norb jackson michigan — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:50:29 GMT

Clinton? Obama? Oh please! I'll go with the straight talker, Joe Biden. Does anybody really think other than Hillary that she will be the Democratic nominee? Obama ran against a guy from out of State who filed the required residency requirement and was a token opposition to his claim. His main competition, if anyone remember's dropped out because of a sex scandal. He's unproven and has no experience at the national level. After George W do you really want Hillary or Obama? Get real people.

First thoughts: All tied up

Dave - CO — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:51:13 GMT

ATTENTION SCREENER:

I can't believe you post all this nonsense on the MUST READ Blog. I sent a simple two sentences and it was never blogged. I think you screeners are biased and truly disrespectful to people who read MUST READ.

Respect everyone who has something to say, don't just pick out what you think people would enjoy reading. You allow the same people to blab because they have nothing better else to do that trash folks.

Become more respectable because you're not getting many new readers you have the same people readings. I compare you to other blogs and see that you allow the same nuts to post.

Dave

First thoughts: All tied up

Dot, Illinois — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:52:37 GMT

NSMSNBC

I love your posts but please tell me 60 is not old! Seriously, some people are old at 35, some are still young at 80. Some people are never really young at all. All depends on attitude. I admit, I like Senator Biden's experience, not so much because of his age but because of what he has learned about foreign policy over the years, but if he fails to win the nomination I could very happily support either Senators Obama, Clinton or Edwards.

Keep smiling!

First thoughts: All tied up

Sierra, SF — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:57:54 GMT

Dot, Illinois: '... tried to post this earlier, so if it a duplicate, I apologize. Senator Edwards has not been very critical of Senator Obama---do you think he would run as VP if Senator Obama gets the nod?...'

Let's hope so
It would be the Democrats strongest ticket
Two reformers
Obama/Edwards
Biden would make a fine VP, too
Obama/Biden
Reform and REAL experience

All three have integrity and honesty
That would be important in confronting the Republicans, expecially Guiliani

Obama/Edwards '08
Honesty, Integrity, Reform

First thoughts: All tied up

--NSMSNBC — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:01:45 GMT

Dot,

: )

First thoughts: All tied up

Aidyn, NY — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:02:16 GMT

Can someone please explain to me how Clinton in all the polls comes out on top by a larger amount over Obama on experiecen and issues but for some reason they are both tied. How is it possible that the people are letting honesty( something that you cannot even know for sure, who do people know Obama is honest?) overshadow expereince? I am just so shock by this polls.

First thoughts: All tied up

Mike K, Denver — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:02:39 GMT

I hear the teacher from Peanuts cartoons everytime I read this crap. Please, for the love of all things holy and right, Van, stop vomiting all voer First Read. We know. We know. There shall be no ther candidate before us but Clinton. Spare us.
Mike K, Denver (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 11:02 AM)

Instead of whining about it all the time, scroll past it. It is pretty simple to do. It would have taken less time to scroll past it and read another comment than it took you to write your post.

You have no greater right to post on First Read than anyone else does. You are no better than anyone else is. I think those are two things you have forgotten.
Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 11:33 AM)

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

SSDD, Carrie. He does have a right to post, but to sit like he is god almighty is another thing altogether. He has a right to pronounce Clinton as his saint and savior. You are too. Just don't shove it down the rest of our throats if we're not wanting to believe it. There's a different between championing a candidate and brow-beating people with them. I think you know which one I am accusing Van of doing.

First thoughts: All tied up

Marty CR Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:03:20 GMT

Here in Iowa, we are not Calif. or NY. We are not the so called "hicks" of yesteryear. We want what is best for all, but will not accept "out of the norm" politics. We are not known for setting fashion trends or discarding family values. We are about feeding the world, and we are hard working people with a firm belief in truth and integrity from our leaders. We may be first to decide, but there are 49 more states to be heard from. Let them also choose wisely and lets get our nation back to the basics of a good safe place for our children. No candidate should be allowed to buy the Oval office, all the money in the world will not heal our ills, we need experience and a dedication to our country to secure it from the evil that has been allowed to slip in and take away our rule of the majority. To sit back and allow a few to take away from the many is not desirable to me. Many of those former presidents were younger than Obama, yes, but the past holds no ties on me, I want a future to look forward to. We will have a new president next year, I just hope and pray it is the right one.

First thoughts: All tied up

Sierra, SF — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:05:13 GMT

van: '...Daily First Read Truth-Pak-
Trust no one...
The following sites devote as much time and space to Denis Kucinich and Joe Biden as they do to the big three. Whether you are a dem or republican, liberal, moderate or conservative, your candidate is represented equally at these sites....'

Gee, van
First Read must LOVE you citing competing sites
On their own blog !
And calling it a 'truth pack' !!
Keep up the good work

(Now you know why the don't always post your comments)

First thoughts: All tied up

bydand — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:06:57 GMT

To Rick; you are a bit off calling republicans chicken hawks since that refers to older men hitting on sweet young things (Like Bill Clinton did)
War mongering? The last 4 major wars, WW1 WW2 Korea, and Vietnam were all run by DIMOCRATS So who are the war mongers?

First thoughts: All tied up

Mike K, Denver — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:08:35 GMT

Exactly Carrie.
Obama supporters lie about Hillary continuously, on this board and in other forums.
That brand of filthy, slash and attack politics is fine with them when THEY are directing it towards her.
But, don't you DARE hit them back with the truth about 'Lil Barracky!
Can we PLEASE get an answer from Obama as to WHY he's involved in a land deal with indicted political racketeer Antoin Rezko?
J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 11:44 AM)

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

Hit back all you want to me, to other Obama supporters, at him directly. Just come with some substance and not just because he is "inexperienced." That is laughable given that, other than being a carpet-bagging senator, Hillary has no other elected experience at either the local, state, or federal level.

First thoughts: All tied up

Nada Fanaobama Laffinathuck, Preston, WA — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:13:52 GMT

First thoughts: All tied up

Sara, Cedar Rapids, Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:18:18 GMT

"Considering the lack of civility that has been demonstrated regarding Hillary, I wouldn't bet on it. It was fair to critique every minute detail of Hillary, from the way she laughed to her clothes to (on this blog at least) speculation about her sexual performance. I doubt there will be less of a microscope on Obama.

Carrie, Eastern Iowa"

The laugh, was manufactured (and annoying) that was never present until mid September. It was intended to show how stupid the question was, when in fact the question was anything but stupid. The laugh first appeared the weekend she did all the Sunday morning shows and at the 9/26 debate. Then it was gone, The criticism of the "laugh" would not have been there except it was manufactured. And guess what when it doesn't "play well" the "laugh" disappears. Chris Matthews has an annoying laugh, but it's real, it doesn't disappear.

"the lack of civility that has been demonstrated regarding Hillary,"

What Kool-aid have you been gulping? At most debates the others have bent over backwards not to criticize her, they have held back.

Are you implying that the fact that she gives answers that are untrue (we can grow our way out of the social security crisis) that Joe Biden is showing a lack of civility by saying that isn't true? Was Biden showing a lack of civility when he said that he believed everyone who voted for the Iran resolution, not just Hillary was wrong, when he was asked if Hillary was wrong to vote for the Kyl-Lieberman resolution?

Was Chris Dodd showing a lack of civility when he called her on her false statement regarding drivers licenses at the 10/30 debate? Are you suggesting that she has a right to make a false statement, and none of the other candidates can question that?

Joe Biden was asked whether he thinks that his contact with foreign leaders has been more substantive than Hillary's. The answer is of course, and I doubt even Hillary, or her blindly devoted supporters would seriously disagree, but Biden didn't answer that question (one of the few times he didn't answer the question posed) instead he said he wasn't running against Hillary he was running to be President, and then attacked Rudy. Had Biden said yes, and mentioned that in total number he has met with twice as many foreign leaders as Hillary without even looking at whether her meetings were substantive. And then stating the bulk of Hillary's contacts have been as first lady, and that of those ___% were as the hostess at state dinners, and that even the contacts Hillary had overseas, without Bill, where she was the face of America (Even though her campaign hadn't come out with that claim yet)his contacts, such as leading the negotiations on the START agreement with Brezhnev in 1979, were far more substantive. This would not have been unfair, or untrue or lacking in civility.

The reality is all candidates, even Edwards, who the media credited with going after Hillary at the 10/30 debate have not only not unfairly attacked her, they haven't lacked civility.

Not a single Democrat, directly or by implication has brought up her Rose law firm billing problems, travelgate, the 100,000 over night securities gain, or any of the scandals she was responsible for. And even on health care reform, where her "my way or the highway attitude" was largely responsible for its failure, they have been far too deferential.

If Hillary was a he, lets say the brother of a past President, as opposed to the wife, she would not be getting the kid glove treatment she's getting.

"the life expectancy was probably 20-30 years younger than it is now.

Carrie, Eastern Iowa"

You are joking, the life expectancy for males since 1960 when JFK was elected has not gone up much. According to the 2001 CSO mortality table (page 7455 Iowa code)the life expectancy of a male is 76.60 years, are you seriously claiming that in 1960 the male life expectancy was 56 and a half years or 46 and a half years? The life expectancy of men has increased in men since JFK was elected, but the amount has been a couple years! When was the life expectancy in the US ever been as low 46.60 years.

First thoughts: All tied up

Nashville_fan — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:26:02 GMT

RE: Presidents and their ages

Looking at the list, I feel it prudent to point out that when many of those men were president, the life expectancy was probably 20-30 years younger than it is now.
_________________________________

Carrie,

I see your point, but I am not sure how the life expectancy at the time relates to their judgement to do the job. Also, JFK and Bill Clinton are recent enough for this issue not to apply to them.

First thoughts: All tied up

Lyn, MD — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:39:56 GMT

First thoughts: All tied up

Mike K, Denver — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:41:37 GMT

It appears to me that Obama's "message of hope and change" scares the crap out of old people.
Mike K, Denver (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 12:05 PM)

Or, perhaps, maybe the older voter just doesn't believe Obama? Maybe they see things differently than Obama does?

Maybe it's not that they are scared - maybe, just maybe, after decades of voting in presidential elections, they actually know what they want and it is NOT Obama.

Did you ever consider that before making assumptions?
Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 12:29 PM)

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

I did consider that for about 0.2 seconds before deciding it was a silly notion. My you really are venomous today, Carrie. Is it because Hillary's numbers are slipping? They dislike change. Period. The numbers show they dislike change and Hillary, to them, is least likely to make dramatic changes in how the country is running. Old people, in that regard (and their driving skills, but I digress), scare the crap out of me because they DO vote in droves. I hope that all the college students that have turned out in some of the crappiest weather I remember Iowa getting this early, do return on the 3rd to attend the caucuses and make their voices heard that they oppose the direction the country is taking and want their voices heard and understood loud and clear that the s--t going on in Washington needs to end; that we need healthcare for everyone, the rights of all students to be able to afford a college education; to get our soldiers out of Iraq ASAP; to fix Social Security; and all the other things that Obama has said will be the hallmarks of his Administration. He has the vision, he has worked on key legislation across the political aisle of the Senate, something Hillary cannot say, and will be able to work out disagreements quickly and effectively. I believe he will be better at foreign matters due to his willingness to meet with leaders of all nations, even those thought to be hostile to us. We did eventually sit down with the Soviet Union, afterall, and they had nuclear weapons pointed at us at the time.

It is time to change direction and I believe that, of all the candidates, Obama is the most capable of doing the things this country needs to get done.

First thoughts: All tied up

B.BILLINGS — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:46:46 GMT

MAJOR CLINTON ENDORSEMENT TO BE ANNOUNCED SHORTLY.

First thoughts: All tied up

looking for a real candidate for change — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:52:35 GMT

Sierra, SF:
I couldnt agree with you more. Your posts have been the most articulate and pointed, no slinging or insults, just stating your opinion.

First thoughts: All tied up

Fred Haeberle, Audubon, Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:54:01 GMT

If the voters actually had concern for this country, and realize that VERY FEW candidates are INTERESTED in things that they would do to solve our most important issues !
Stop Illegal Immigration ! Protect our
borders! Build up our Military ! Fight Terrorism !
THESE ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT ! We don't want celebrities,double talkers and fireside retoric, just a
sincere government without sell out
elected officials ! We need officials that represent
OUR interests.
Vote wisely, but forget to play the Political party game, with pop-star endorsements !

First thoughts: All tied up

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:56:27 GMT

Carrie: Not meaning to be a stickler for details but I feel that you should know that life expectancies are averages done from birth. The main increases in life expectancies (in spite of all the hooplah from modern medicine) have come from improvement in infantand childhood mortalities (before the advent of antibx, half of all children never reached the age of 5). Once people reached adulthood in the 19th century, they (for the most part) lived pretty much as long as they do now (and the additional years that we have gained, aren't necessary quality years). It's a shock to most of us, that our immortality isn't better guarenteed, living in the 21st century. Oh well, I'm sure Mark Penn could spin it another way. HAHAHA.
Obama '08

First thoughts: All tied up

sas , upstate NY — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:59:53 GMT

Roberta from AZ -" We need someone with experience like Hillary who has been around and knows how to make decisions. We need her because she is the most qualified."

How can you say this? She is the biggest flip-flopper in the race. Her best qualifications as a politician are her ability to lie and steal and cater to megacorps. Do you want Walmart in the Whitehouse?

I plan to vote for someone with integrity, someone who will truly return this country to its former greatness because of the individuals who make up such a great nation, not someone who wants to give me a real id card, release my library records and give my kids healthcare that comes with strings, like microchips. I am not going to vote for someone in the Bilderburg society who has already committed treason against our nation by meeting in secret with other world leaders to plan our nation's fate.
I hope everyone researches the candidates thoroughly!

First thoughts: All tied up

--NSMSNBC — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:05:52 GMT

Aidyn: I didn't want to respond to you obviously loaded question, but I remembered a point about how much experience is needed. I think F-R mentioned previously that it appears that there is a bar to reach for experience. B.H. Obama doesn't have to exceed H.R. Clinton, just meet the bar, which makes experience that much less of an issue. I thought it was an interesting point, so I wanted to reiterate it. The other thing is that as you mentioned, while Sen. Clinton polls well for experience, Obama polls well with hope and change. These, clearly, are all important values, but keep in mind that it is a change election. Look at the Republicans and the Democrats for that matter, neither is really focusing on experience, otherwise the frontrunners would be different all-around. In all honesty, the change vs. experience is pretty much a manufactured argument, but it's easier to follow that story line. Another factor, is that with everything happening (and I'm being kind here), H.R. Clinton has lost the trust of a number of her potential voters, and I think that has hurt her most of all.

First thoughts: All tied up

Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:09:14 GMT

Will Obama say the Pledge of Allegiance? How will that look to other countries if he will not, as our President, say the Pledge of Allegiance?

First thoughts: All tied up

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:17:07 GMT

Mike, exactly where in the debates did Hillary take the low road when speaking about her opponents?

Carrie, Eastern Iowa

Carrie,

When did her opponents take the low road in the debates. And if you didn't hear the NPR debate read the transcript.
Joan , South Bend, IN (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 12:40 PM)

Hm, I don't seem to be making any assertions that they were. See, what I did was ask Mike where Hillary took the low road during debates, based on his comment that she had been doing that. I was asking him for facts to back up his argument. I was not, however, making a counter-argument that someone else took the low road.

But thanks for playing.

First thoughts: All tied up

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:20:27 GMT

SSDD, Carrie. He does have a right to post, but to sit like he is god almighty is another thing altogether. He has a right to pronounce Clinton as his saint and savior. You are too. Just don't shove it down the rest of our throats if we're not wanting to believe it. There's a different between championing a candidate and brow-beating people with them. I think you know which one I am accusing Van of doing.
Mike K, Denver (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 1:02 PM)

With all due respect, Mike, I think its fairly obvious which side of that fence you sit on as well. And it's the same side as Van.

First thoughts: All tied up

Nino St. Cloud, Mn. — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:24:55 GMT

There was a story that came out in the Storm Lake, Ia. web page about Obama. It was a short blurb that came out from Chicago.(www.stormlake.com)The story was printed early this year. It seems that Obama has a friend that is a slum lord. His renters needed heaters but could not get them but yet the slum lord contributed 50,000 to Obamas campaign. It also says that he sold a house to Obama for half what it was worth.

First thoughts: All tied up

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:32:24 GMT

Sara:

How about you look at my ENTIRE comment re: the age of presidents instead of just picking part of it out. Here it is, once more:

"Looking at the list, I feel it prudent to point out that when many of those men were president, the life expectancy was probably 20-30 years younger than it is now."

Did you notice in the list that a lot of the 40-something presdients were in office in the 1800's? According to the CDC, the life expectancy for a man in 1900 was 46.3 years. So, I stand by my original comment - when many of those men were president, the life expectancy was probably 20-30 years less than it is now.

As far as everything else you've said...I was speaking about the complete lack of civility on First Read more than anything else. Obviously I did not make that clear; however, I also did not point fingers at any candidates as I don't think any of them have crossed the lines of civility. I've neer said otherwise.

Next time, perhaps you should ask for clarification if you are unsure about what I said rather than going off on a long rant. It would certainly save yourself some time, as it seems to be a habit of yours to assume that I have said something that I did not say.

First thoughts: All tied up

Richard, Washington State — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:33:36 GMT

Kool aid:

Origins in the Jim Jones cult, where people blindly following the cult leader drank kool-aid laced with poison in a mass suicide.

Thus, "drinking the kool-aid" used in the political sense is to refer to positions blindly followed.

It's an interchangeable term, useful on nuts from both sides, although I, from my perspective hear it used in reference to Democrats and liberals more often. I

It's usually used for the most extreme elements of the political spectrum. In the current situation, kool-aid drinkers might be associated most with Kucinich or Paul, though their respective kool-aid drinkers would vociferously disagree.

On First read, the lefties would think almost any Republican/conservative is drinking the "kool-aid" and of course, the reverse for righties.

First thoughts: All tied up

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:36:36 GMT

Carrie,

I see your point, but I am not sure how the life expectancy at the time relates to their judgement to do the job. Also, JFK and Bill Clinton are recent enough for this issue not to apply to them.
Nashville_fan (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 1:26 PM)

The point is that they were elder statesmen at the time. They were the Bidens and McCains, the ones that had been around and experienced it. They were nto the Kennedys and the Clintons.

First thoughts: All tied up

--nsmsnbc — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:38:11 GMT

Richard: cool, thanks, interesting. I guess the term is perhaps a tad bit more clever than I had initially thought.

First thoughts: All tied up

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:39:40 GMT

Carrie...maybe you are correct about the age of voters...however based on reporting and what I saw watching the rallys the woman who showed up we're over 45 and the majority over 50. If so this is the demographic they wanted to hit.

In addition those I saw interviewed who said that they had decided or changed their minds and were now supporting Obama they also fell into this category...so once again seems they hit their target. Next month we will know
Lyn, MD (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 1:39 PM)

Then that is good news for the Obama campaign. I really do think that he needs that demographic, and that it would be a mistake for him to put all (or a lot) of his marbles on the college vote as they are pretty fickle and apathetic as a general rule. I think it's a good move on Obama's part to reach out to the types of voters with whom he has not been as strong.

First thoughts: All tied up

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:48:00 GMT

Mike:

These people have been turning out in droves for DECADES. I hope you realize that just because they believe differently than you, that doesn't mean they are scared. That doesn't mean they are wrong, either. They may have many reasons for thinking the way they do.

Incidentally, I could give a damn where Hillary is in the polls, or where Obama is in the polls. They are not my concern, and as I have stated repeatedly, I am not supporting either one of them when I go to caucus on January 3.

First thoughts: All tied up

J Bradley Albuquerque NM — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:55:29 GMT

If you were hiring a person to run your business you would want the best qualified applicant. If you carefully check the experience of the candidates you would hire Bill Richardson. He ha been in congress. UN ambassador, Secretary of Energy and a Governor who was elected to a second term by over 60% of the voters Including many life long Republicans like me. He has negotiated the relea to end conflicts around these of several hostages over the years and was the one person that the North Koreans came to America with to end the nuculer stale mate even tho he was not an official OF The Federal Government at the time but the governor of a small State of NM.He has been nominated for the Nobel peace prize several times for his negotiating cease fires around the world. He is the most respected of the candidates by our allies around the world as well as our enemies. This is the man you would hire if you were looking for the best person to run the business of the United States.

First thoughts: All tied up

D - New Hampshire — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 20:04:35 GMT

Oprah as a member of the press (her tv show and her magazine make her a card carrying member of that group) should not be actively campaigning for ANY candidate. You dont see the anchors of any of the big 3 networks actively campaigning for any candidate do you? Thats because as a member of the press you have to be able to maintain some public un bias ness. Oprah has toss that aside like it doesnt matter, well it does. So unless Oprah is on the ticket with Obama she needs to stay in the studio or the pressroom and leave the campaigning to campaign workers.

First thoughts: All tied up

Marbw — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 20:20:29 GMT

I suggest that you visit sites below for more info.
I believe that, based on Barack Obama's self-written books 'Dreams from MY Father' and 'Audacity of Hope'/
his work throughout the years to give voice to the voiceless and hope to the hopeless(poor and union-workers)/ his speeches etc, he is a better candidate. He did not just happen upon Dem principles in this campaign, he gave up hundreds of job offers over 20+ years ago to go work for $12,000/yr in one of the poorest neighborhoods in Chicago. He graduated magna cum laude/head of Harvard Law Review/Civil Rights Attorney/taught constitutional law for over 10 years etc. He was finally able to pay off his college debt using proceeds from his first bestselling book.
"As a state legislator, Obama worked with both Democrats and Republicans in drafting successful legislation on ethics and health care reform. He sponsored a law enhancing tax credits for low-income workers, negotiated welfare reform, and promoted increased subsidies for child care. Obama also led the passage of legislation mandating videotaping of homicide interrogations, and a law to monitor racial profiling by requiring police to record the race of drivers they stopped. During his 2004 general election campaign for U.S. Senate, Obama won the endorsement of the Illinois Fraternal Order of Police, whose president credited him with having been "immensely helpful in working with police organizations" on death penalty reform."
While in the US Senate Obama has passed Lugar-Obama, a bill that expands the Nunn-Lugar cooperative threat reduction concept to conventional weapons, including shoulder-fired missiles and anti-personnel mines. He has also passed the "Coburn-Obama Transparency Act" provides for a web site, managed by the Office of Management and Budget, listing all organizations receiving Federal funds from 2007 onward, and providing breakdowns by the agency allocating the funds, the dollar amount given, and the purpose of the grant or contract. In addition to those two he has also gotten through the "Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act," which had his name on it as the first sponsor.
He also worked with Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) in strengthening restrictions on travel in corporate jets to S.1, the Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act of 2007. And then Obama sponsored with Kit Bond (R-MO) an amendment to the 2008 Defense Authorization Act adding safeguards for personality disorder military discharges, and calling for a review by the Government Accounting Office following reports that the procedure had been used inappropriately to reduce government costs. He sponsored the "Iran Sanctions Enabling Act" supporting divestment of state pension funds from Iran's oil and gas industry, and joined Chuck Hagel (R-NE) in introducing legislation to prevent nuclear terrorism. He also sponsored a Senate amendment to the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to provide one year of job protection for family members caring for soldiers with combat-related injuries.
"I sit on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee," he said. "So I have frequent interaction with world leaders who come to visit here, and I take trips on various fact-finding missions, whether it's to Iraq or Russia or Africa. But you know, probably, the strongest experience I have in foreign relations is the fact that I spent four years living overseas when I was a child in Southeast Asia."
"A lot of my knowledge about foreign affairs isn't just what I studied in school -- I studied international relations when I was in college -- it's not just the work I do on the Senate foreign relations committee.

Barack Obama is on the following commitees in the US senate:

Senate Foreign Relations Commitee
Senate Commitee on Veterans' Affairs
Senate Commitee on Health, Education, Labor, Pensions
Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

Visit his rally. More info can be
found at homepage here:
click
http://www.barackobama.com/index.php

http://factcheck.barackobama.com/

http://obama.senate.gov/

First thoughts: All tied up

Simon, IA — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 20:21:36 GMT

Mostalgic for the '90's ?
Dying for a dysfunctional White House ?
Want some earmarks ?
Vote Hillary for business as usual !!

Sierra, SF (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 10:44 AM)

Business is good, Sierra. How is your welfare? :-)

Go Hillary!!!

First thoughts: All tied up

Mike K, Denver — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 20:23:24 GMT

The venom shown by supporters of Mr. Obama toward anyone who doesn't think he is the best candidate is reason enough not to vote for him.

The support for Mr. Huckabee is just absolutely scary. Face the facts the man is an ignorant zealot not unlike an Ayatollah or Taliban leader. Young earther? Can't distinguish between myth/fiction and the real world/science? Yikes!!!

The posts that use "Hillary" instead of Mrs. Clinton or Senator Clinton show a lack of respect for her that is typical of the shallowness and ignorance of the American people. Maybe we should all just go on a first name basis, or just one name and no titles? Barack? Fred? Rudy? Huckabee? Oprah (wait, not a candidate) Ron? Paul? (oh, same guy)... Maybe I've reduced the candidates to a pool of names for a bad comedy troup or circus clowns. That is about right.

This isn't a game. This is the selection by the American people of the most powerful figure on earth. Do you think maybe we can treat it that way?
Nada Fanaobama Laffinathuck, Preston, WA (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 1:13 PM)

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

How many people in here say "Obama"? I do. I drop the Senator and the Mr. It isn't out of a lack of respect to he, or Hillary (look! I did it again!). I call them that out of simplifying the length of post.

To the more pressing matter of your post: We Obama supporters post venomous hatred towards our opponents? Wha? Have you even bothered to read Carrie or Van's posts? Or just because they are pro-Hillary, they can get away with whatever they want? Please.

First thoughts: All tied up

vanreuter, NY NY — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 20:32:54 GMT

First thoughts: All tied up

CitizenJ — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 20:44:42 GMT

Post ONE of my anti-ANYONE(candidate) posts, or,as you have so VULGARLY put it on several occasions STFU!
I'm tired of being accused of this garbage by the dregs of this board, so put up or shut up.

Thanks,
Van
(That goes for anyone else also.)

vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 3:32 PM)

You smell funny, Van. Nanny-nanny-boo-boo.

First thoughts: All tied up

Simon, IA — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 20:44:47 GMT

Obama, they say, would be inspirational, motivating, charismatic and compassionate.
Let's support honesty and integrity
It's important !!

Sierra, SF (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 11:44 AM)

Looking at the hatred Sierra, Bee, Ron type in here as Obama supporters, I am not sure where I see any charisma, compassion, motivation.

Only motivation I see from Obama supporters is to spread hatred and lies and act holier than thou and lack of clarity.

I dont like living on Hope. Only welfare, lazy ass people live on it. Real hard working people love Hillary, I guess.

Is that why there is so much hatred for Hillary from Obama supporters?

If Obama was honest, he wouldnt have changed his position on Social Security 3 times in a year.
If Obama was honest he wouldnt have fumbled on license for illegals in 2 weeks.
If Obama was honest, he wouldnt have push for IRG as a terrorist organization in April in the Senate bill and then changed by fall.

Sierra needs a list of honesty? I guess Ron can help:-)

First thoughts: All tied up

Mike K, Denver — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 20:45:58 GMT

To the more pressing matter of your post: We Obama supporters post venomous hatred towards our opponents? Wha? Have you even bothered to read Carrie or Van's posts? Or just because they are pro-Hillary, they can get away with whatever they want? Please.

Mike K, Denver (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 3:23 PM)

MethLab Mike-

Post ONE of my anti-ANYONE(candidate) posts, or,as you have so VULGARLY put it on several occasions STFU!
I'm tired of being accused of this garbage by the dregs of this board, so put up or shut up.

Thanks,
Van
(That goes for anyone else also.)

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

"Methlab Mike"
Need I say more about your sense for others posting on this board. Seriously. I have done nothing but point out flaws in your arguments for your beloved Hillary and you stoop to the level of calling me a drug-addict. In the words of Guinness Beer: "BRILLIANT!"

You've done wonders for your own value as a poster on here for this. It is a wonder that anyone pays any heed to anything you post from here on out.

First thoughts: All tied up

--nsmsnbc — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 20:48:13 GMT

Yeah, I'm trying to stay out of this, but Van is right. He is generally pretty optimistic in his posting, and I cannot off-hand think of any vulgarity. I'm assuming Mike K. was initially accusing Van of championing Sen. Clinton. That's a good thing, well not a good thing, but a good thing.
: )
I've taken issue with the emphasis of polls and the amount they can be manipulated or cherry-picked, but Van has not, to my knowledge, posted anything purposely dishonest or not on the up-and-up. There consistently are many anti-Obama or anti-Hillary post to make a point, Van is not one of them.

First thoughts: All tied up

CitizenJ — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 20:50:47 GMT

Looking at the hatred Sierra, Bee, Ron type in here as Obama supporters, I am not sure where I see any charisma, compassion, motivation.

Simon, IA (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 3:44 PM)

So are you suggesting that the candidates are responsible for what their supporters write on political blogs? If so, then we wouldn't have many viable candidates left.

First thoughts: All tied up

Mike K, Denver — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 20:51:07 GMT

If Obama was honest, he wouldnt have changed his position on Social Security 3 times in a year.
If Obama was honest he wouldnt have fumbled on license for illegals in 2 weeks.
If Obama was honest, he wouldnt have push for IRG as a terrorist organization in April in the Senate bill and then changed by fall.
------------------
1) He didn't change positions. He never HAD one. To say that going from not having a position to take time to discuss various options and ideas with those more knowledgeable about the topic and then making his position known is "flip flopping" you need a new dictionary. One that isn't edited by Hillary Clinton.

2) He never changed his position on DLs for illegals. That was Hillary who gave 2 answers in less than 90 seconds on live national television and then let her campaign deal with the fallout from that for the 2 weeks immediately following the debate. Get it right or don't post.

3) Um, why would he say he never supported the Iraq war and then support an amendment that, taken by this President, is giving him the authority to bomb the Hell out of Iran? Notice that they're still rattling that sabre today even though much of the rest of the world is 1) against them and 2) ignoring them. Even the CIA and 14 other intelligence agencies noted that Iran had stopped its nuclear weapons program several years ago. If he supported the amendment, he'd be a flip flopper the likes of which only Hillary is known for.

First thoughts: All tied up

Simon, IA — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 20:51:43 GMT

Clinton has given no reason TO change or FOR change. She hasn't given any details of how she'd do things differently than we've had for the last 8 years.
Mike K, Denver (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 12:05 PM)

Mike, you just contradicted yourself again (which is not new:-)). Read it again what you said. Use some intelligence and you will be enlightened.

First thoughts: All tied up

vanreuter, NY NY — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 21:13:26 GMT

It is a wonder that anyone pays any heed to anything you post from here on out.

Mike K, Denver (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 3:45 PM)

Frankly, you could be writing that to yourself. I call you MethLab Mike because you go an a jag where you post about 50 times in a day, replying and critiquing every and all posts and posters here.

Some might think that your calling my posting of links to useful sources, "vomit", to be somewhat insulting, indicative of the type of thing we could use less of, and ironically, deserving of the quote above.
You, sir have an appointment with the man in the mirror...

Van
(so much more of my time then you deserve)

First thoughts: All tied up

vanreuter, NY NY — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 21:16:14 GMT

Nicholas-

While I do not need or seek validation (all right, maybe a little) I would like to thank you for the post, and the kind words...

Van

First thoughts: All tied up

vanreuter, NY NY — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 21:18:20 GMT

Well, somethin', somethin' somethin', right back at you, CitizenJ...

Van
(nanny-nanny boo-boo indeed!)

First thoughts: All tied up

Carol L. Anchorage, Alaska — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 21:19:51 GMT

I have one question - who is running for president, Oprah or Obama? I watched Oprah this weekend when she was trying to "sell" Obama, I am sorry but what a joke.

First thoughts: All tied up

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 21:29:49 GMT

Er, Mike...have you forgotten that just in this very thread you called someone a moron?

As I said to Bee the other day...it's the pot calling the kettle black.

Personally, I am sick of being called names because I like Hillary Clinton. I'm tired of being called stupid, uninformed, dishonest, uneducated, etc. I am none of those things. But it makes people like you comfortable to think that all the smart kids think like you do. Sorry, that's not true.

First thoughts: All tied up

CitizenJ — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 21:44:53 GMT

Well, somethin', somethin' somethin', right back at you, CitizenJ...

Van
(nanny-nanny boo-boo indeed!)

vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 4:18 PM)

Yeah, well, that blue font that your name is written in is ugly.

First thoughts: All tied up

Sierra, SF — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 21:51:39 GMT

Simon, IA: '...Looking at the hatred Sierra, Bee, Ron type in here as Obama supporters...'

Simon, I'm all about LOVE !!
(have a nice day)

vanreuter, NY NY: '...I'm tired of being accused of this garbage by the dregs of this board, so put up or shut up.
Thanks,
Van
(That goes for anyone else also.)...'

Is someone having a bad day ?
How about some hot milk and a nap ?

It's been tough these last few weeks, van.....
Relax...
Take it easy .....
It's not so bad......
(now isn't that better ?)
shhh, shhh, the 'Jet Li' of First Read is napping....
(sweet dreams)

First thoughts: All tied up

Dennis, Richmond VA — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 21:53:32 GMT

What we really need is an Independant Primary. Something to measure the strength of third party candidates, yet big enough to attract national media attention.

First thoughts: All tied up

Nashville_fan — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 21:54:05 GMT

Listen folks.

About all the posts about which candidates supporters are the worst about attacking so and so.

First: Me thinks that politics is a dirty business. Me thinks that everyone is not going to agree. Let's all grow a thicker skin and get over it.

Second: No matter how many times we bash each other over the head with the same facts - those who have already made up their minds (like me) are not going to be swayed, soooooooooooooooooo once again I say - let's get over it.

Third: If Hillary Clinton wants to tout her experiences, she has to accept the good ones with the bad ones. If Barack Obama wants to be about freshness and change, he has to accept the concerns about being too fresh and too different. This is human nature and quite normal. No need to freak out about this me thinks.

Fourth: I interject myself in these conversations primarily to refute things I feel are misleading or untrue. No matter how you decide to vote, I think it would be better to base that vote on truth.

Fifth: Now let's have a spirited political debate, accept all blows (high and low) and may the best CANDIDATE win!

First thoughts: All tied up

vanreuter, NY NY — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 21:58:57 GMT

I have always believed that the letter, "J", is just an, "I", that's been corrupted.
(I'm sorry, that's the best(worst) I could come up with.)

Van
(I got nothin'!)

First thoughts: All tied up

Frank — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 22:08:25 GMT

The best statistic in the lot, only 407 days until we can say goodbye to the worst president and most damaging political figure in recent US history.

First thoughts: All tied up

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 22:10:02 GMT

Van and J, if you don't stop it right now, I am going to have to separate you.

Don't make me do it. If I have to come over there, you will be sorry...

First thoughts: All tied up

Sierra, SF — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 22:14:15 GMT

Hey, thanks, looking for a real candidate for change

Everybody's always picking on me !
;-0

(with apologies to van)

First thoughts: All tied up

jim giacomini, sherman, Illinois — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 22:29:31 GMT

I haven't decided for sure who I will vote for yet. I usually vote for republicans although I did fot for Clinton the first time he ran and I have voted for democrats locally. The one thing I am sure of is that Hillary would do anything including selling her sole to be president and that scares me. I also don't understand where she thinks all this experience comes from that she talks about..I have seen over 5,ooo pro baseball games but I sure as heck couldn't play with them.

First thoughts: All tied up

PulSamsara — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 22:36:18 GMT

No thank you mama - I'm for Obama !

Obama 2008.

First thoughts: All tied up

Sunny, Las Vegas, NV — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 23:15:27 GMT

Thanks to Nashville_fan for stating the facts as to the age of previous Presidents. Along that same line, I would like to add that President Kennedy was only in his second term as a US Senator ... that he had not been a governor or a mayor ... and could have been said to have had no experience to be President ... YET, he brought us through a very tense time during the Cuban Missile Crises. The military were pressuring him to invade Cuba ... but he had no taste for war and held out for another answer. He had the strength to stay calm and find other avenues to avoid ultimate conflict. There is no dress rehersal for many of our critical situations ... instead we need someone who is careful, analytical, willing to listen to many voices, and exercise final judgment in the best interest of our country. Kennedy insisted on talking to Krushchev. I believe this is the kind of President we need this time around. Enough of the drums of war.

First thoughts: All tied up

Meri — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 23:38:08 GMT

Obama has momentum....UMMMMMMMMM? He only gained that momentum once he got nasty, but that's his MO, go on the offensive. AND, when you don't have a record to defend AND nothing to offer. Let me make this clear: I'm from Illinois. I voted for Obama for Senator. He's been a BIG, BIG disappointment in that role. He's voted with Bush more times than not when he has shown up for his votes, which in the last few months has BEEN ONLY 20% of the time. Hillary served a full term in the US Senate, where she built coalitions with bi-partisan support. That is why she was RE-Elected to a second term. Obama has lied about his foreign policy experience everytime he opens his mouth about it, because he doesn't HAVE ANY! He was quite willing to invade one of our few middle east allies, including one with nukes, and sit down with meglomaniacs like those nutjobs in North Korea and Iran. Beside the obvious problems, other Senators have had to remind him that we really can't invade ANYONE, because THERE IS NO ONE TO SEND Our all-volunteer force is stretched to the limit.He doesn't have an economic policy to speak of. His health plan is a carbon copy of Clinton's but without funding. As for how many Illinois Democrats feel about Obama, we are indeed fortunate to have a hard-working Democratic Senator with a great deal of experience. It's Dick Durbin. Before you write platitudes about Obama and try to pass off snotty sexist comments regarding Senator Clinton - or any candidate you really should check your facts. You really don't do your own candidate ANY FAVORS when all you can do is lie, use derogatory terms and hope no one catches you.

First thoughts: All tied up

Kurt Cypress, TX — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 01:11:32 GMT

Bravo Sierra! BOO- Roberta. If someone talks about their relationship with God, then it's personal? I truly understand the state of our country when people can't discuss what's important to them. You can see that it's the things that people like Hillary don't talk about that is important for them. Money, power- at any expense.

First thoughts: All tied up

Chris B, Austin, Texas — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 01:26:49 GMT

I have noticed on MSNBC's Candidates + issues matrix, R. Paul has the most favorable stance on all five issues. Ron, from Texas, makes a great point, we are not voting on issues, we are voting for a president. What difference can a persident make anyway?

First thoughts: All tied up

Nashville_fan — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 03:14:47 GMT

Meri,

More details, less drama please. What lies has Senator Obama told about his foreign policy experience? What sexist comments has he made?

I would rather at least TRY to talk to a meglomaniac before getting hundreds of our troops killed and THEN talking anyway.

Every Senator running for President misses votes, so spare me that one. Doesn't seem like Congress is very productive this term anywho - seeing all the cooperation we have between them and the Whitehouse.

If you don't like Obama - GREAT! But don't come on here with smoke and mirrors and try to pass it off as facts.

First thoughts: All tied up

Rev. Dewey Leon Everts Jr Santa Barbara CA — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 07:39:21 GMT

DOES ANYONE REMEMBER HARRY GRINNING FROM EAR TO EAR HOLDING UP THE NEWSPAPER WHICH WAS HEADLINED SOMETHING LIKE DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN? I ALWAYS BELIEVED THAT THE BEST MAN FOR THE JOB HAS TO HAVE CHARISMA. and money----lots of money.

First thoughts: All tied up

Lee, NY — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 07:49:19 GMT

It's not about experience, it's about being dumb, you must be dumb to be the next President, or should I say dumber, GW Bush, dumb, Obama, dumber. In fact I think Hillary Clinton, ought to attack the messenger Oprah, save all her venom for Oprah because Oprah attacked her in her speech for dumber Obama.

Obama does not represent hope but hopelessness, and Oprah represents hype.

First thoughts: All tied up

Lee NY — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:04:01 GMT

Re: Obama/ Biden, you say Obama has integrity,but maybe you forgot Biden thinks Obama is articulate. Obama doesn't rail against injustice and threaten delicate white surburban and middle class sensibilities, I guess that's why Biden thought like most that will claim they are going to vote for him he'd make a good black President.

First thoughts: All tied up

Dan, CT — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 15:33:45 GMT

These are polls. People lie. Enough said.

First thoughts: All tied up

ace p washington, d.c. — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:15:55 GMT

no matter what not having buch and cheney in office any longer will be ours and americas best blessing in a long time.

First thoughts: All tied up

Steve Bates, Sanbornton New Hampshire — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 17:40:16 GMT

Obama Biden 08

Obama has the courage and integrity to be the leader we need, Biden has the audacity to say what needs to be said. I think it's a winning ticket

CK, chicago (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 11:14 AM)
______________________________________________

Should be Biden/Obama 08!
Joe Biden not only has the conviction to tell people what they need to hear, but he's got the experience needed to be President.

First thoughts: All tied up

kenn — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 17:55:52 GMT

SEIRRIA whatever you pretend to be,you honestly think the way this has been handled ANY hilliary supporter will support Barrack over anyone .Good luck trashing hilliary and getting us to vote if your man does win ,it will be the only thing he wins because his campagian has divided the democrats and doomed us to a republican ENJOY

First thoughts: All tied up

Mike, Rochester, NY — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:47:45 GMT

I might not know much about the candidates but I do know that my dollar isn't going as far as it used too. In fact, it's not going anywhere except to the gas pump! Stop ripping off the middle class!

First thoughts: All tied up

SmapBot, Net Box.us — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:02:00 GMT

The Ron Paul SpamBot does not have a land line. So IT would not have voted in these polls. Are single IP intenet polls not real?