On the subject of experience, here's what syndicated columnist Charley Reese had to say around Thanksgiving, 2005, in an column entitled "Vote out all incumbents":

"Next year, we should all go to the polls and vote against every single incumbent running for re-election, regardless of his or her party or so-called philosophy."

"Six years in the House or Senate is enough for any citizen. Don't get fooled by the so-called value of experience. The experience they gain is the same as whores and thieves."

"Let's face it, folks: We have allowed our political system to deteriorate to the point where it attracts incompetents, crooks and mountebacks."


And doggoned if we didn't turn out and send some of the worst of the lot packin'!

In 2008 and 2012 we can finish the job, and hopefully return OUR government to its intended purpose - representing US, "We, The People"!

In 2004, Dick Gephardt and Howard Dean tore into each other, thus creating an opening for John Kerry.

Likewise, if the current situation between Obama and Clinton creates an opening for my favorite candidate, John Edwards, then so be it.

I'll vote for whoever wins the Democratic nomination, but I'll work really, really hard for a real liberal Democrat like Edwards.

John Edwards...Security, Privacy, Justice!

In 2004, Dick Gephardt and Howard Dean tore into each other, thus creating an opening for John Kerry.

Likewise, if the current situation between Obama and Clinton creates an opening for my favorite candidate, John Edwards, then so be it.

I'll vote for whoever wins the Democratic nomination, but I'll work really, really hard for a real liberal Democrat like Edwards.

John Edwards...Security, Privacy, Justice!

Well it looks like we have a "Junior Senator" Meaning little experience I would guess, running againest another Junior but he held office in the state before coming out to run for president. Did she have a real job before or after marrying Bill? I just don't think that being a wife has the same kind of experience as having the job instead of the Hubby doing the real job. She's barking up the tree and are we paying attention to reality? Ours not hers.

More from the article:

"But the source that Gerth and Van Natta cited with supposed first-hand knowledge of this plan -- historian Taylor Branch -- has since vehemently denied that any such pact existed. "The story is preposterous," Branch told The Washington Post, adding: "I never heard either Clinton talk about a 'plan' for them both to become president."

"It's hard to see how the use of Gerth's allegations could possibly play well among Dem activists. Many of them dislike Gerth for his role in "breaking" the Whitewater story and see Gerth's book as an anti-Hillary hatchet job."

Weak, faltering campaigns call for desperate measures (if clear, convincing, detailed proposals are unavailable).

This cranky narrative of Clinton conspiracies, set-ups, plants and corporate sell-outs is getting really old, really quick.

To the best of my knowledge, Hillary has not involved in any decisions the President made except the failed health plan. There is no record of anything else

Queen Hillary is going to cry like a baby if she looses.

She should loose too because she has done NOTHING. Nothing at all. For sure the only thing I know about her is that she has a big smartass mouth.

Hillary Clinton needs to give up her claim that she is the most experienced candidate in the race. That is far from the truth and she knows it (but the media rarely challenges her on it). First, Joe Biden is clearly more experienced than she is in every way relevant to the white house. She is simply lying when she denies that.

The unfortunate truth for her is that there is only one candidate she has more experience than: John Edwards.

When Americans start realizing that if they vote for Hillary in 2008 - the United States will have had a total of 24 years (a possible 28 if re-elected) of the Bush, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton families in control of their nation.

How are we any different then a dictatorship or kingdom/queen?

Coonsey's View
Political Blog
http://www.freewebs.com/coonsey/

I am mystified that this question of experience keeps coming up without a reference to past presidents, specifically another presidential nominee whose only government experience was as an Illinois State Representative followed by a single term in the US House representing Illinois before he ran for the presidency. His name is Abraham Lincoln, considered by many to be one of our greatest presidents. By today's "standards", he would not have enough "experience" to be president?

SInce when does experience as first lady trump experience as a State and/or Federal Legislator? Granted, Hillary has been a US Senator longer then Obama, but add Obama's State Representative tenor and he has more legislative experience.

George Washington was a farmer then general before becoming president, he had no prior government experience. James Madison was a lawyer and then a member of the Congressional Congress before becoming president.

I am not claiming that Obama trumps Hillary in this arena or vise versa, I am only trying to demonstrate that this notion of "experience" or "inexperience" is ridiculous. Some of our greatest presidents had never stepped foot in the oval office prior to them being sworn in, and I don't think that working in a prior administration somehow makes one more qualified then someone else. It IS a matter of judgement. Individually we can conclude who has better judgement and who doesn't.

Obama pulls ahead in latest IOWA poll, and is considered "more trustworthy" than Clinton.

Here is the link: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1107/6979.html

Barack Obama: BLUE STATE credentials,RED STATE credibility.

I'm really getting tired of Barack Obama and his witchhunt of the Clintons. In this instance, and with Pushing Novac's column as credible, he is clearly using pages out of the right wing playbook. He's clearly doing everything he can to dig up whatever dirt he can on them. His wife a few month ago brought up the Lincoln Bedroon being for sale.

The politics of hope, please. Obama is just another politician.

Hillary has NO experience as president. She watched and learned from her husband, but he was no great president. Bill failed to roll back the policies of the Reagon and Bush years. And Bill was the first president to expand and greatly use signing statements. He made NAFTA, he gave the republicans welfare reform, he made "dont ask dont tell" laws for the military. He was an OK president, a lot better then both Bush's. But do we really want more of the same Clinton team?

Or do we want a new direction with new leaders?

I don't like the idea of Queen Billary, and
I'm not that fired up about having Obama, either. I saw their little smile-fest, and
the only guy that had anything really worthwhile
to say was Kucinich, as far as I'm concerned.

Reform, starting with federal spending reforms.
While they're at it:
http://www.impeachbush.org

OK OK OK I GET IT

LETS HAVE W FOR A THIRD TERM