syllepsis

Hagee is not frightening: He is your ordinary pseudo-Christian wacko. What is truly horrifying is that his third-rate poachings from the Book of Revelation are given a ready ear by such loathesome men as McCain and Lieberman, not to mention our apocalyptic President himself.
Cheney, of course, believes none of it, but knows it's a useful way to manipulate the clueless bastards around him, as well as keeping the funds rolling in from these legions of hellish preachers. posted 05/17/2008 at 07:14:30

In any case, comparing either the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany to present-day Iran is absurd (egregious NYT hack makes the Soviet comparison- return of the Cold War with Mahmoud playing Stalin!). There is yet another remarkable piece of historical deceit attributable to the Bush Administration- painting Iran and Iraq, mortal enemies, as an "Axis of Evil."
The phrase conjures up that WWII buzz that Rumsfeld's "message force multipliers" hit the American public with. It created an opening for the "appeasement" meme to be used on the hapless opposition. If you want to flush $3 trillion down the toilet without gaining anything of note, that is certainly the way to sell it to our gullible nation. posted 05/16/2008 at 06:13:00

Conyers is putting his credibility on the line. I hope, for his sake, that he delivers. posted 05/15/2008 at 19:25:40

I hate it when McCain steals Hillary's lines. posted 05/15/2008 at 19:13:37

A damn good question.
The Republicans could not have done this alone. They needed the help of the other major party. And they got more than they could have wished for in their wildest dreams. posted 05/15/2008 at 19:30:17

See my link below- the second one works!
It is very important that history show who the true appeasers are. posted 05/15/2008 at 19:20:35

"Simpleminded people?" That applies to Bush and his cabal, not Biden. posted 05/15/2008 at 19:06:54

I don't want to hear any more of his bullsh*t either. He belongs in an impeachment hearing or a war crimes trial, but not addressing parliaments. posted 05/15/2008 at 19:03:02

http://www.mia.org.il/archive/861106lat.html posted 05/15/2008 at 18:59:31

This is for the poster who repeatedly misspells Jimmy Carter's first name, and who claims that Reagan, as a "private citizen," had more clout with Iran than Carter as a "sitting President," implying that soome kind of macho factor was at work. Call it the Appeasement Factor: Ship arms to the "radicals" who have taken your citizens hostage:

http:/www.mia.org.il/archive/861106lat.html

if this individual reads the article, he might start spelling Carter's first name correctly, because Carter refused to ship arms to the "terrorist regime" that had seized the diplomats. If shipping major weaponry to secure release of hostages isn't the very definition of this individual's notion of "appeasement," I don't know what is. posted 05/15/2008 at 18:47:08

Clinton is in Lieberman and Bush's camp on this one. She wants an excuse to obliterate as badly as they do.
She is no 'appeaser.' She is an obliterator. That is why the Republicans with IQ's lower than Gates will vote for her. posted 05/15/2008 at 17:54:39

Are you claiming that Bush's own Defense Secretary is wrong? Gates is an intelligent, decent man. You make yourself look like a fool. posted 05/15/2008 at 17:44:50

"Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along," said Bush, in what White House aides privately acknowledged was a reference to calls by Obama and other Democrats for the U.S. president to sit down for talks with leaders like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. >

Reading skills are needed. posted 05/15/2008 at 17:41:54

That seems like your MO. posted 05/14/2008 at 03:58:17

It's a bad idea to refer to Obama's "encyclopedia of lies," without providing a one. posted 05/14/2008 at 03:56:11

What religion does Obama practice? As far as you know? posted 05/14/2008 at 03:49:40

The voice of the old, corrupt establishment has spoken. posted 05/14/2008 at 03:45:50

Hillary is the GOP's last hope. That is why she displays the tenacity of a hookworm. posted 05/14/2008 at 03:21:35

Do you want to go back to the 90's, or spend the next century in Iraq? Make up your mind. posted 05/14/2008 at 03:08:03

Ron Paul hasn't conceded yet either. posted 05/14/2008 at 02:30:08

maybe Hillary believed what Carville told her- That if she voted for Bush's war, she'd be Bush's heir.
And since she's fond of Bush's logic- her nomination is a success that hasn't happened yet. She just needs patience, since it is already a 'success.' posted 05/14/2008 at 02:24:35

By your definition, clown, FDR would be a "self-hating American," too. He told us that the only thing to fear was fear itself, while Hillary tells us to fear everything- she boasts about her readiness to obliterate everything in sight, and brags like Giuliani about her "Commander-in-Chief" credentials.
Giuliani was once a Democrat, too, you know. posted 05/14/2008 at 02:05:17

Maybe Hillary shares her husband's yen for the liberal pardon., and fears that Obama's lack of graciousness to her fellow dynasts may spoil the cozy grip these families have kept on our highest office. That is worth her staying in at all costs- to keep the dynasty and dream of perpetual power alive. Is that the real motive for Limbaugh's "Operation Chaos?" posted 05/14/2008 at 01:58:54

Well,. to appease the Hillary sycophants: The death of a brave soldier made Bush give up golf, and Hillary's boasts about having the balls to let loose Armageddon made Obama wear a flag pin. See, this pathetic symmetry makes her relevant to this story after all.
Happy? posted 05/13/2008 at 21:04:52

The neocons made a huge miscalculation when they made this man their figurehead. He is the most pitiable Leader the world has ever seen. The PNACers don't understand the first thing about Propaganda. Noble Lies and hate and Blood Sacrifice need to be....dignified somehow with the sort of charisma the world's great destroyers have always had, or the blood lust you need to go aroused will be lacking.
This Bush is lower than the ones the dogs piss on. posted 05/13/2008 at 20:40:27

Yes, he is saying we don't have the "maturity" to understand Blitzkrieg and bodies raining from the sky.
This from the mastermind of Abu Ghraib. posted 05/14/2008 at 02:48:38

How many people died in that fire? Anyone? posted 05/14/2008 at 01:39:14

No need to cover your tracks when Nancy Pelosi leads the opposition.
Luckily, she will be irrelevant after the elections. Obama will not, I trust, make Ford's error.
And I trust nothing. But Obama knows that doling out pardons will not be a good idea if he plans to serve a second term. posted 05/14/2008 at 01:07:04

You mean conservatives. You don't mean Republicans.
There will always be conservatives. But fpr God's sake, no more Republicans. posted 05/13/2008 at 21:57:25

a noble post.... posted 05/13/2008 at 21:53:52

Sarkozy's latest approval ratings are 32 percent. Doesn't augur well for said war criminals' long-term prospects. posted 05/13/2008 at 20:44:44

The darksiders were still in disarray after Nixon's debacle. It takes time to regroup and perfect a putsch- the first one often results in ignominy (read your history books). posted 05/13/2008 at 20:22:37

Johnson would know. He pissed on his Secret Service guard's leg.
It;s a good thing he was the Chief Executive- if he were a dog, he'd have been thrown out of the K-9 Unit. Humans- one hell of a species. posted 05/13/2008 at 20:18:01

Wrong. So many documents would need to be destroyed (I know millions already have been) that a real investigation, not the Democrats' token "subpoenas" that Cheney uses when he gets the urge, would be certain to turn up something that would put this crew away for life. And Addington knows it. You can't destroy EVERYTHING. That is a fact. posted 05/13/2008 at 20:09:03

What this interview mainly illustrates is that his launch pad is practically on fire. posted 05/13/2008 at 20:02:50

"I mean of all the countries in the world, we are more dependent on space and more dependent on information technology than any nation on the face of the earth, and they're all, they all represent weaknesses, if you will -- strengths on the one hand, but weaknesses on the other, because we have not hardened ourselves against those kinds of threats.

In the case of terrorism, because it's so difficult to do; in the case of -- We're working on cruise missiles and ballistic missiles, but there's been some sort of a battle in our country on the issue for many years, which has delayed and impeded progress...."

This is SENSELESS - a non sequitor- cruise missliles are useless against "asymmetrical" threats like the ones that had just flown into the WTC and the Pentagon. But it explains why Mr. Secretary made the purposeful "slip" of calling a hijacked plane a "missile." A missile, unlike a passenger plane, is a nice symmetrical threat, and an excuse to further weaponize space- Damn it, this man lies so badly, he is so transparent, he assumes we have no brains.
He needs to rot in prison for the rest of his blitzkrieg-loving life. posted 05/13/2008 at 19:57:56

You have an interesting dictionary if any dicttonary lists "missile" as a meaning of "airliner," or vice versa ("airliner" as a "missile.") posted 05/13/2008 at 19:44:14

There need to be full-fledged investigations now. The unconstitutional claims of Executive Priviledge need to be cast aside by Congressional imperatives to learn about possible treason in the Executive Branch. Addington's arguments are spurious and there is more than enough "probable cause" to set impeachment hearings with the power to turn Bush's tawdry White House upside down.
There is simply no reason not to. Other than reprehensible motives on the part of Democrats themselves. Maybe this the Republican strategy? make the public aware not only of Republican treason, but Democratic calculation and fear?
It seems like a no-win strategy for Republicans, but we've seen NOTHING yet. I hope Sen. Biden keeps his impeachment threats in mind. He may have to act on them, and force the Dem Reps to actually do something. This will be a zero-sum game- Only one party will be left standing in November.
if it's the Dems, America will still exist. posted 05/13/2008 at 19:35:42

It's an assault on more than reason, my friend. posted 05/13/2008 at 19:13:15

That's like saying you'd vote for Mussolini because he could get the trains to run on time. Try again. posted 05/13/2008 at 19:09:59

The genie is out of the bottle. Pelosi is too gutless to act, and if, contrary to my expectation, Obama is as well, he will not retain the support of the people who will vote him to office.
But Obama is not Pelosi, not Clinton. We cannot have any more of that kind of politician, and Obama is well aware of it. How do i know? because he would not be where he is without the famous "bitterness," fast turning to rage, of Americans who have been betrayed by the disgraces in high office here....on both sides of the aisle. posted 05/13/2008 at 19:05:42

Yes, terror-loving Reichsmarshalls such as Rumsfeld use "attacks" to make their "points." No need to "advocate" them, when Shock and Awe speak for themselves.
You are transparent. You are fooling no one. posted 05/13/2008 at 18:59:04

And throw in a couple of Noble Lies to season the fear a little. Add a pinch of Woodrow Wilson- "Make the world safe for Democracy"- to get the gullible Op-Ed writers of the New York Times in your corner.
but how in God's name they got away with that "axis of evil" bullshit, when every thinking person knew- dear God, every AMERICAN must have known- that we left Saddam in Baghdad after Oil War I BECAUSE he hated the mullahs in Tehran even more than he ever hated us- how this nation descended to a level of stupidity even Strauss could never had dreamed of-well-
I am- besides angry, disgusted- INCREDULOUS that they have gotten away with this for so long- posted 05/13/2008 at 18:52:57

Nazis could still remember "the carnage, the lethality" of the Great War. I suppose by Rumsfeld's sick metric, they were more "mature" than Rumsfeld himself, because they did not have the arrogance of the American neocon, who believed wars could be won by blitzkriegs alone- except for Goering.
The neocons are Goering's heirs, in a tactical sense. That is one hellish crowd we have there. posted 05/13/2008 at 18:42:31

Pelosi is a disgrace who makes my heart sick, but Obama will not be so conciliatory with these traitors who dare us to put them in a cell where they will slowly rot away. posted 05/13/2008 at 18:35:26

This time, NO PARDONS. Trials, a la Nuremberg. posted 05/13/2008 at 18:30:10

The media cannot accept that the leaders whose a$$es it kissed for eight years of hell were, in fact, swine who think terrorism is good for America.
If we lived in Revolutionary times, this man's head would be on a bayonet. . posted 05/13/2008 at 17:52:28

Trey, this blog entry is predicated on fantasy. The Repubs can't even win in Mississippi.
The only way a Republican wins anything in November is if they call the elections off. People hate, genuinely hate, the President. His negative ratings make Nixon look like George Washington in comparison. McCain, with Lieberman whispering in his ear, has inexplicably emulated this loathed, criminal figure. Ralph Nader could beat a Republican in an honest election this year. posted 05/14/2008 at 01:00:31

The Repubs wish they could turn McCain into Carter's Reagan.
But even Repubs will admit that Bob Barr looks more like Reagan than McCain does. posted 05/13/2008 at 21:17:32

This man can't keep a bridge standing. No wonder she won't have sex with him. posted 05/12/2008 at 17:12:52

Schumer also thougt waterboard-loving Mukasey would be a good Attorney General.
Frankly, both Schumer and Clinton make me sick. I regret having voted for them in '06, and will never do so again. posted 05/12/2008 at 18:31:08

All right, Republican swine (you are not human). Wrap your snout around this quote:

. "We haven't had an attack in five years. The perception of the threat is so low in this society that it's not surprising that the behavior pattern reflects a low threat assessment. The same thing's in Europe, there's a low threat perception. The correction for that, I suppose, is an attack. And when that happens, then everyone gets energized for another [inaudible] and it's a shame we don't have the maturity to recognize the seriousness of the threats...the lethality, the carnage, that can be imposed on our society is so real and so present and so serious that you'd think we'd be able to understand it, but as a society, the longer you get away from 9/11, the less...the less..."

-Donald Rumsfeld. Yes, it's a "shame we don't have the maturity to recognize the seriousness of these threats." I live in New York, you Republican scum. Do you think I need a "correction?" Yes, evidently. I think New York, in its own interests, should have seceded a long time ago from a regime in Washington that loves terror more than Hamas- those minor league suicide bombers never thought their explosions were lost on a society too "immature" to recognize "the lethality, the carnage." Stop blathering about Hamas, and go join bin Laden, who shares your aims and methods. posted 05/13/2008 at 18:06:08

No surprise this insightful post went over your head. posted 05/12/2008 at 18:00:01

Lieberman is trying to paint Obama as anti-Semitic.
This kind of slander is unfortunately what we have come to expect from a man whose moral and mental decrepitude parallels McCain's. Lieberman reminds me of 'Wormtongue' from the Lord of the Rings, who followed his master Saruman around trying to push around the hobbits after getting their a$$es kicked by folk their own size.
It's not an American tragedy- it's pure farce what has happened to McCain and co., the Republicans (and ID's) left in the wake of the catastrophe that is George Bush. Who is Sauron, by the way. posted 05/12/2008 at 17:48:16

'Perverse' is a polite way of putting it.
I call it criminal. posted 05/12/2008 at 17:22:54

Youre opinion would be more valuable if you explained why you disagree. Myself, I agree with philistine and Mr. Bernstein. "Critical agencies are staffed with cronies at best?" Heckuva job, Brownie. "Secrecy trumps transparency?" Dick Cheney destroyed his Secret Service logs: http://citizensforethics.org/taxonomy/term/1010
If anything, Mr. Bernstein understates the matter. posted 05/11/2008 at 23:16:36

I am sure Hillary never had any interest in being VP. But if she did, she would be a horrible one. She sees the Executive Branch in the same terms Bush/Cheney does- in military terms (completely contrary to the spirit of the Branch). posted 05/11/2008 at 19:46:12

PERFECT! posted 05/11/2008 at 21:50:51

Further clarification-- the charges Fitzgerald secured against Scooter Libby were perjury and obstruction of justice.
In an act worthy of "The Sopranos," Bush commuted his sentence at the last minute- so he wouldn't 'sing.'
Bush should be brought up on RICO charges as soon as he leaves office, for his brazen use of the DOJ as a racketeering operation. posted 05/11/2008 at 21:27:50

Obama's communications director is a literary critic of genius. Novak is truly the "Prince of Darkness-" he belongs 'where the sun don't shine.' posted 05/11/2008 at 20:56:43

Thank you, that takes away the pain of getting cut into ribbons. . posted 05/11/2008 at 23:40:41

That's because more people wish Bush were impeached already, than approve of his performance. The biggest joke is Conyers' pitiful claim that impeachment would generate sympathy for Bush. It might generate sympathy for Congress. posted 05/11/2008 at 23:23:05

Iraq is not Afghanistan. there is no way al Qaeda could take over Iraq. Al Qaeda could not even get Iraq's Sunnis to stay with them instead of joining Petraeus' 'insurgency.' posted 05/11/2008 at 22:48:33

I gave an example that is fundametal to the structure (these are merely incidental). Anyway, Bush tramples on 'states' rights.' His meddling EPA refused to let California impose its own emissions standards (a right it has had since 1966). Bush's FDA refused to allow a beef supplier to conduct its OWN mad cow inspections, in addition to the ones the FDA does (and are acknowledged even by the FDA to be woefully inadequate). Bush is no friend to small business, states' rights, OR anybody's rights. posted 05/11/2008 at 22:43:17

I hope you don't mind my replying to you here, as as I could not thread my reply below. Kissinger was not trying to be ornery. It was realpolitik. In Kissinger's mind, I am sure Bismarck would have approved.

The living breathing Constitution, yes. But its basic principles cannot be trashed, or there's no Constitution at all. Bush and his friends do not understand the principle of separation of powers. posted 05/11/2008 at 20:29:30

Al Qaeda is in iraq only because we invaded (or crossed the 36th parallel). Iraqis, like sane people everywhere, hate them and want to be rid of them, and i am glad we are training their Army to defeat them. If we left, we would still provide assistance to destroy them, I am sure- as would the Iranians. But I agree, that since our crossing of the 36th parallel is the proximate cause of al Qaeda's being there, that we have an obligation to rout them out of there. Absolutely. posted 05/11/2008 at 19:07:18

Kissinger was (and is) the most well-informed of men, but he has a personal stake in absolving himself of what would otherwise be monumental war crimes.
That makes me skeptical of his claims. posted 05/11/2008 at 18:55:22

Of course, if we left Iraq, we could easily make sure that al Qaeda's gloating would be short lived. posted 05/11/2008 at 18:31:08

Call it what you will. It's not a war, either, and never was. posted 05/11/2008 at 18:27:22

http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/cambodia/tl02.html

The key quote (which is a matter of fact, so if you think it's wrong, by all means provide countering evidence) is this:
"the raids exacted an enormous cost from the Cambodian people: the US dropped 540,000 tons of bombs , killing anywhere from 150,000 to 500,000 civilians."
That was more destabilizing to their society than our flight from Saigon, by a factor of millions. In my opinion, of course. (I am not saying that our dropping 540,000 tons of bombs on their country was INTENDED to lead to the Killing Fields. But it certainly introduced them to catastrophe on a vast scale, and it did have major "blowback." You can't cause that much death without there being consequences... posted 05/11/2008 at 18:18:38

Then why was it necessary to invade Iraq again? posted 05/11/2008 at 17:49:11

Self explanatory. Only Republicans think bombs are good for the hapless people they rain on. We won nothing in Cambodia. We could only widen the scope of chaos- which is precisely what happened. posted 05/11/2008 at 17:46:46

Interesting.
I think Republicans are so misinformed, they can't even tell their wars apart anymore. posted 05/11/2008 at 17:34:44

The Cambodian genocide is causally more related to Nixon's decision to bomb there, than to any subsequent retreat. The Republicans lie about everything; but their lies about Vietnam .are their most contemptible and destructive. It is disgusting the way they have perverted every discussion of Iraq with this. posted 05/11/2008 at 17:22:35

True, policing other countries is something that doesn't sit well with many people. In this case it is causing the Republican spin machine to implode, because we are essentially working as police for one of Iran's many allies in the region, and yet the Administration blames Iran for all the world's problems. Nobody would come up with such an insult to reason, except a Republican on the warpath. And people are dying for this, for which Bush and co. will never be forgiven. posted 05/11/2008 at 17:11:47

Pathetic. posted 05/11/2008 at 16:59:19

Hmm, I thought that was what no bid contracts were all about. posted 05/11/2008 at 16:57:09

Boehner will be crying when the sees the kinds of "agents of change" he has available. But he's crying already... posted 05/11/2008 at 16:37:49

"It's a time of sober reflection and, to some extent, resolve. I hope these special elections are a wake-up call," said Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Tex.), the leader of the conservative Republican Study Committee.

Wisdom truly does begin at the end. It is impossible not to have certain empathy with him. The sober reflection always seems to come too late. We will hear more fine words from Sen. Arlen Specter, too. He excels at this sort of thing. posted 05/11/2008 at 16:20:38

This election is a reaction to the way the country has been led, or rather run into the ground, by Republicans intoxicated by the dream of absolute power. The Bush Administration lined up its party and ordered obesiance, then imagined that if they only clamped down on the media, kept the DOJ in its pocket, and used its racketeering tactics against the Democrats, that America would be theirs forever. The problem is that the stupidity of the American people was overestimated (by both parties, to be sure).. You can cremate soldiers in a pet cemetery, out of the media's watch, but communities notice and are grief-stricken and appalled. You can hide the Secret Service logs from intimidated Democrats, but secret energy deals don't keep the price of gas down. You can burn the CIA tapes, but in so doing you damn your whole Party as torturers. Every day that GW Bush spends in office sinks the country into a greater state of bitterness, which is becoming a tremendous anger that will destroy the Republican Party. I can only believe that Senator Obama, an intelligent man, will see the lessons in the hubris of his predecessors. (What is astonishing is that of the three remaining candidates, he is the only one capable of this.) posted 05/11/2008 at 16:09:00

It's a sad day when the presumptive Republican nominee lies that he voted twice for the worst President in 70 years.
But to look on the bright side, it might be worse if he were telling the truth. posted 05/09/2008 at 16:00:30

Hillary Clinton is certainly not the cause, but a major symptom of the ills of our politics. Her husband, a competent President (but competence is not wisdom), was blackmailed by hypocritical, thuggish Republicans until his Party decided to revoke the Nixon-era controls on our would-be Imperial Presidency. (I could curse the Democrats forever for giving in to this blackmail, but the Party has until lately shown no big-picture thinking at all.) Hillary, understandably, does not want to be blackmailed again. But lacking insight- she is DANGEROUSLY lacking in insight- she does not see that the problem is institutional, and not a matter of simply making sure that she can give as good as she gets. The American people are wiser than her in this regard. This is why she has already lost the Democratic nomination. posted 05/11/2008 at 12:02:48

Bloomberg is right, but then again, it's pretty easy to attack an idea that has no merit whatsoever. posted 05/02/2008 at 11:42:16

The Fopunders had plenty of experience with intrusive government and wanted to make sure it wouldn't happen here. The three Amendments listed here will help you understand how one's "privacy" is one of our basic rights. posted 04/29/2008 at 10:54:35

Amendment 3 - Quartering of Soldiers. Ratified 12/15/1791.

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.


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

Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


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

Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. posted 04/29/2008 at 10:51:19

You can literally justify anything by saying that terrorism is involved in a case.
The law is worthless if the Government says breaking it is needed to keep you safe. That is the definition of anarchy.The circular logic is astounding. These proceedings are top secret, yet they are justified on the basis of the would-be judgements of "reasonable observers?" What reasonable observers? There can be none- these proceedings are not public. I have never seen such illogical argumentation in my life. And we are expected to believe a word of this- that lawyers and politicians who cannot make sense can nonetheless identify what must be done to keep us "safe?" posted 04/26/2008 at 20:57:32

You know, the irony of this is unbelievable. The terrorists attack us, and do we "repay them in kind?" Not really. We attack Babylonia!
And what a talentless man wrote this hit job we have here. Is he employed by Hillary? posted 04/26/2008 at 20:28:57

What is truly pathetic is the Democrats have behaved exactly as predicted. The conventional wisdom is that Dems only win when tasking as closely to Republican deceit as possible ("triangulation"). So when a nation sick and angry at what Republicans had gone to our country gave the Democrats Congress in 2006, every cynic predicted that the Democrats would do nothing. The cynics were right.
There are more soldiers in Iraq than there were in November 2006. The economy is collapsing under the weight of Bush's unopposed economic policies and vanity war. People trust the Government less than than they did in 2006, and that is unbelieveable, because the Republicans were drubbed precisely because no one except the 25 percenters trusted them for a second. The 25 percenters still think that the Government is doing a heck of a job. They will vote for McCain, of course. Whose vote have the Democrats in Congress been angling for? The 25 percenters', of course. It never changes.
Pelosi, Reid, Emanuel, et al. gave Hillary the cue to run like this (not in their words, but in their example, which is nothing less than reprehensible). Why, exactly, is there a Democratic party? posted 04/26/2008 at 07:31:50

If nothing else, Hillary will remind the Democrats that the Party is full of bigots. No more moral self-righteousness. for the Dems. They belong in the gutter with Karl Rove. posted 04/26/2008 at 08:32:59

Watch Hillary set the races at each other as expertly as Nixon or Rove. It is truly disheartening, as well as one of the few things that could still disgust me after eight years of the worst president in history. posted 04/26/2008 at 08:28:44

"Many Republicans, like Rush Limbaugh's followers, Ann Coulter's listener and Fox viewers, who don't want to see a black man become president will vote for Hillary because she's white."
If Hillary wins the Democratic nomination, she will be running against McCain, who's white (in case you've forgotten). If she runs as Independent, she will divide the racist vote with McCain, and Obama will win in a landslide. If Hillary runs against McCain, McCain will win, because Dems cannot win without the black vote, and they cannot win without the under-40 vote, or without the first-time Democratic-voting contingent whom Obama has brought to the party.
The only candidate who actually has a chance as an Independent is Obama, because you will see massive defections from the Dem Party if Hillary gets the nomination, and McCain will get a lot, maybe most, of the racist vote, and remember how much many Republicans actively hate Hillary.
Are there more people, regardless of party, who will never vote for Hillary, than who are racist? (Sad that we are talking about this in 2008, but there you go.) Given that the racist vote will be split, and that Hillary will not get any of the anti-Hillary vote (about 45% of the electorate), Obama would win this election. posted 04/26/2008 at 07:00:04

Plenty of white people will write in Obama's name, too. This white NY resident cast his last vote for Hillary two years ago. posted 04/25/2008 at 21:51:40

If Hillary wins the Dem nomination, McCain becomes President. HRC has already lost the African-American vote, without which no Dem can win in a general election.
She knows this, but is hellbent on sabotage- It will undermine the Dem party yet again. Maybe it will destroy it for good. Its achievements lately have not been notable. Something better will come along eventually... posted 04/25/2008 at 21:47:13

Some history for you folks: In 1860 the Dem party was led by southern racists, the Whigs were dealing with 'Radical Republicans' led by Lincoln, and a few border states went for something called the 'Constitutional Union' party.
2008 could be such a an election, a defining moment in the nation's history. We are clearly at the end of the current era of indistinguishable, corrupt Dem/Repubs. People have had enough. That the Clintons are using a nasty new variant of Nixon's 'Southern strategy' spells the end of an era. posted 04/25/2008 at 19:54:58

For those who like this sort of thing, there's the fact that GOP is the translation of 'Hezbollah' spelled backwards. posted 04/25/2008 at 19:36:45

Al-Zawhirhi just made a video denouncing America's "crusader" allliance with Iran. Since the Iranian-backed Hamas evidently endorses the Democratic candidate, I wonder if the Sunni terrorists will counter with an endorsement for McCain. posted 04/25/2008 at 19:25:37

Sure, Hamas is a terrorist organization. And you want them to pick our next President. posted 04/25/2008 at 19:20:29

Hamas also said that McCain looks like Steve Martin. They are clearly a credible source of opinion on American politics. posted 04/25/2008 at 19:17:15

You think THIS isn't important? You don't have much of an eye for what matters, then. posted 04/25/2008 at 18:58:48

McCain: A prostitute, a torturer, and Osama bin Laden's wet dream. And Hamas'. He is no patriot. posted 04/25/2008 at 18:56:57