I will not support Hillary Clinton for president
January 20, 2006

"AUSTIN, Texas --- I'd like to make it clear to the people who run the Democratic Party that I will not support Hillary Clinton for president.

Enough. Enough triangulation, calculation and equivocation. Enough clever straddling, enough not offending anyone This is not a Dick Morris election. Sen. Clinton is apparently incapable of taking a clear stand on the war in Iraq, and that alone is enough to disqualify her. Her failure to speak out on Terri Schiavo, not to mention that gross pandering on flag-burning, are just contemptible little dodges. "

I'll take Molly's word for it . We saw more triangulation when HRC proposed a foreclosure moratorium. She knows very well this is an impossibility and played it for all it was worth. The vote with Lieberman on Iran was the last straw. "Enough. Enough triangulation, calculation and equivocation."

The dislike of HRC is well grounded in fact and will only be exploited.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Justify all you like with her questionable votes and unfortunate personal life. I don't believe anyone has a serious doubt that Clinton is polling low out of sexism.

To a man, the republican field is pitiful. Whatever Clinton's shortcomings, they are shared or worse in her prospective opponents. Giuliani is the favorite hated of fire and police departments for his disastrous treatment of city resources leading up to 9/11, and battling issues of legality over his use of funds. Religious zealotry and political sell-outs characterize her opposition, yet still she polls behind.

What's yet more surprising is her downright viscious treatment by women. Sexism is a factor among men, certainly, but it appears that Hillary will not be able to count on one iota of greater support from the population of women voters.

Why? The country can do better on the democratic ticket than Hillary, that's for sure, but not in the republican ticket. Women on the right seem to be siding with the patriarchy. Do our god-fearing southern ladies feel so inferior?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is how "mainstream" corporate Democrats think these days: Pick the most boring candidate who acts the most like a Republican. In a lovely irony, that thinking looks like it will come back to bite them...again.

That's why they trotted Kerry around as a war hero. He had no substance, but if they could only convince Red voters that he burned a lot of villages like a good soldier...Nice try.

Remember Bentsen, Lieberman...?

It will be interesting to see what they try next to appease the wing-nuts. If Obama is showing well in the polls, maybe they'll paint him white and have his hair straightened.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As a feminist, I'm disheartened by the low number of women in public office, but as a progressive Democrat, I've been appalled by Clinton's by-the-poll-numbers approach to politics. I would have voted for the Wellesley graduation speaker or the nerdy Arkansas first lady Hillary or the Hillary who went to China on our behalf while Bill was president, but in the Senate, she has become an automaton, agreeing mindlessly to give Bush (and successive presidents) powers approaching dictatorship and paving the way for pre-emptive wars in Iraq and Iran. In spite of her wishy-washy position on abortion, Emily's List still supports her, but I won't.

Ironically, opposition to Hillary is the only political point on which my right-wing, Wall Street son-in-law agree. His reasons are different from mine; they come from the gut, but I think his political agenda would be well-served by a Clinton presidency. Which is why, as the writer points out, it ain't happening.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

for third party candidates as well as for Republicans.

When I became eligible to vote, I registered Republican in order to vote against Goldwater (who seemed about as far right as possible at the time) in the California primary. Would it really be surprizing if a number of Republicans have switched registration (in states that don't have open primaries) in order to promote Hillary's candidacy? They have the "we must do whatever it takes" mindset!

Many Republicans are now disgusted with the failures of George W Bush and look to be uninspired by whoever gets to be their candidate, but the rabid Clinton haters will not stay at home on polling day if they can vote against her.

Her being a woman is no big deal one way or another to me. We need an electable progressive. That's Edwards, in my view. Remember that the presidential election is above all about the Supreme Court.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is a lot of speculation that Senator Clinton is weak among non-Democratic groups.

I write speculation because it is based on hypothetical polling match-ups.

In the only polls that count, the ones in which voters come to the polling place and have their ballots certified by their election boards, Clinton is a monster.

In NYS, Clinton runs better than Democratic registration in ALL DEMOGRAPHIC GROUPS.

Clinton has shown enormous strength among unaffiliated voters.

Most importantly, Clinton's support is deep.

There is no buyer's remorse.

People who support Clinton stick by her, an important factor for governing effectively.

There is simply no other person in the Democratic race who shows this sort of strength.

The areas and demographics where Clinton is weak are areas and demographics where all the Dems are weak.

Clinton alone has shown the savvy, persistence and ability to push the numbers- Clinton can change people's minds through her campaigning.

She will be a formidable nominee and she will have strong coat-tails that will pull other Democrats into office behind her.

There is no one else in the race for the 08 nomination race who can bring more unaffiliated voters into the Democratic colunm than Clinton.

Hilary Clinton as nominee will strengthen the down ballot appeal of the Democratic Party more than any other person in the 08 race.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ah! Finally a little common sense!

Why do you think that most of the right wing talking points and talking heads are proclaiming that Hillary will be their most formidable foe next year? Whoooa! They're sure scared of her, ay? Don't you see what they're trying to do here, folks? They're trying to lull the Democrats into thinking that she's unbeatable - and the Dems are falling for it hook, line and sinker!

Why do you think Rupert Murdoch (of all people) has been holding fundraisers for her? Do you sincerely believe that the owner of FOX Noise and the New York Toast wants her as our next president? It's merely a cynical, political ploy on Murdoch's part. Why do you think the corporate media has virtually crowned her as the heiress to next summer's nomination? They all want her to be the next nominee because they know damned good and well that she's bound to lose - and the stupid fucking Democrats haven't the wit to figure any of this out! EEK GADS! It embarrasses me that I was even associated with that worthless party for twenty years!

Trust me on this one, campers: the right wing is praying for Hillary Clinton's nomination.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY.
"The
Rant" by Tom Degan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It is appalling to me that readers refer to corporate America as if they are invoking the kingdom of evil.

Clinton's support from corporate America is another demonstration that she is willing to be the President of all of America.

Unlike Bush, she will not be a corporate pawn, instead she will work in the manner of T. Roosevelt, Wilson and other progressive President's to make corporate America better citizens.

Clinton's philosphy, spelled out in It Takes A Village, is a philosophy of shared risk, shared benefits, shared responsibility, accountability and shared benefits.

It stands in stark contrast to the every man for himself philosophy currently prevalent in America.

Unlike the GOP conservative "revolutionaries" who run rough shod over opposition and the constitution to enact their goals, Senator Clinton is striving to accomodate all views.

The policy of triangulation requires a patient advocacy of right and left views and then a creative dialog to devise a third way to effectively deal with the issue at hand.

Clinton is not promising revolution, heaven on earth or any other hot tempered intolerant form of change.

Instead she offers patient, nurturing strength- moving us together to tough mindedly and realistically deal with our differences and then solve our problems.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hillary can't win and won't win. I know that because I would never vote for Hillary. If I won't vote for her, millions of other older men with college and advanced degrees who read and think, in other words, one of the Democrats' core constituencies, will never vote for her either.

You may say "but consider the alternative!" That's the problem: I can rationalize that having some new Moron in Chief like Huckabee who puts his stock in Stone Age myth and hasn't seen a freebie he can't resist taking home with him will HASTEN the day when America either grows up or blows up. Maybe we need some more fat white fascists on the Supreme Court to tell women what they are allowed to do with their own bodies; maybe we need tens of millions of women to wake up one day no longer sovereigns of their own wombs to shake this country up. When we had the draft, we ended the war. When women become subject to the domination and will of their husbands and fathers, they will begin to take their role in a democratic society seriously.

So, fuggedabowdit: no way. Dream on. Hillary is "more of the same" and I refuse to vote for more of the same. I want change.

By the way, has anybody figured out what Hillary stands for yet?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Dems need to nominate a candidate who will energize and inspire "the base". Hillary Clinton is not the person who will do that. If they make her the party's standard bearer next year, they can count on another third party uprising. That's a chance they can't afford to take. You remember what happened in 2000, don't you?

I'll be voting for the Democratic candidate next year come heck or high water. But if Hillary is the one I'm forced to vote for, I'll be holding my nose, trust me.

Tom Degan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hilary Clinton is the Democratic dream candidate
for any Republican.

The Democrats show once again their complete lack of political guts -- Hilary Clinton supported her husband when his embargo was killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children -- and political intelligence: Hilary Clinton is eminently hateable
on a gut level.

Note from the Republican Party: Dear Democrats, Please, please make Hilary Clinton my opponent.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hilary Clinton's It Takes A Village philosophy is exemplified by her standing silently by while the embargo against Iraq maintained by her husband and established by his predecessor in the White House caused the deaths of approximately 850,000 Iraqi children who lived in thousands of villages across the country; by her support for the invasion of Iraq which has led to the deaths of more than one million civilians in cities and villages; by her support for US-Israeli policies which, in defiance of international law and virtually every government in the world, prevent three million Palestinians from returning to the villages and cities from which they were expelled by the Israeli government.

Unfortunately, this policy does not stand "in stark contrast" in any way to the standard philosophy of corporate capitalism and militarism applied every day by the powerful in America. It exemplifies that policy while describing it in a patently ludicrous homey, "village-friendly" language that demonstrates Hilary' thorough hypocrisy and cynicism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Anyone who had any doubts, that the republicans would join forces to defeat Hillary, have ample proof that it's happening with unbridled intensity You have the spectacle of all these posts, telling us how badly Hillary will do against the republicans, and that Hillary isn't liked, and that she's unelectable, and blah, blah, blah! What bullshit. If Hillary can get through to the nomination and win it, she'll trounce any republican, and that's with Zogby (the republicans's favorite pollster) delilvering bad news about her candidacy all along the way. People should look at "all" the polls, not just the ones being published in media. By the way, why is Alternet delivering this pretense to the readers? The Zogby poll is among a couple of polls showing Clinton in the worst possible light; this among about a dozen polls, most of which are showing Hillary with double digit leads over all the candidates. Why is Alternet not clarifying this fact? Why are all of media playing this game, with all the republicans piling on with their BS; because that's the only way they have a chance of defeating Hillary in the few weeks remaining where her chances of getting the nomination must be derailed. It's amusing to see all these posters desperately telling us not to vote for Hillary, because she's unelectable. Where do they get this notion? They're not getting it from her front runner status, because the notion is preposterous. Front-runners are front-runners. The only hope the republicans have, is not in having a good program of their own to offer the people, but in destroying their competitors.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I was wondering why they mention one of the Republican candidates running for the presidency Ron Paul

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Same old BS I remember from 2000. Do you recall--"no difference between a republican and a democrat"?

We not only missed the opportunity to have a brilliant young (then) politician as prexy (his credentials were evident at the time) but we got the Shrub? Progressives need to pull their saintly heads out of their unsaintly stink holes. If you want a saint, go to church and stay out of politics.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rudy Ghouliani's own poll numbers plummetted by nine points recently as more skeletons in his large closet are being exposed in the MSM, and Huckabee and Romney are getting a lot of attention lately.

I could believe that poll number if the matchup was against Ron Paul. But we'll see.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Well, Hillary is certainly the dream candidate for the Republican opposition.

Now, Obama and Edwards and are very much alike, platform-wise, and these two together have a lot of support. So an Obama-Edwards or Edwards-Obama ticket looks very promising compared to their opposition.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I would dearly love to see a woman as President, but someone like Barbara Boxer, not Hillary Clinton.

What worked for Bill Clinton will not work for Hillary. Bill veered to the right on social and economic issues, and so he outflanked Newt Gingrich and the Republican revolutionaries. Hillary's veering to the right in voting for the war, accepting corporation money, and cozying up to the likes of Rupert Murdoch runs her into a wall. The Bush administration is so far to the right, that there's no more room for the type of manuevering that Bill was so adept at. Hillary's present positions--on the war, on Iran, on globalism--do not distinguish her from moderate Republicans. Therefore, if she runs against someone like Giuliani or Romney, voters would be likely to pick the real Republican over the faux Democrat.

Hillary is smart and Hillary is ambitious and crafty. She has even convinced some people that she has more experience than the other Democratic candidates, which, of course, is false, because her only real experience is in the Senate where she voted to support Bush's wars.

Hillary might just win a general election, but it would be a long shot. The best thing she could do for the Democratic Party and for the country would be to retire from the race. That would ensure a landslide victory for whomever the Democratic nominee is. Will she do that? Fat chance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hillary has been the front-runner from the beginning. Why, then, are media ganging up on her, while they pretend she's the favorite candidate of a right wing that can win against her? Media simply doesn't care what the public wants, and never will. They're determined to impose their will on the proceedings, including savaging Hillary's campaign, even though she's easily the most popular candidate. Everywhere I look in media, they're boldly stratgizing various methods of derailing her campaign, as if destroying Hillary is fair game for "objective" or "liberal media." Is it any wonder that her numbers have fallen. Hillary can easily overcome the oppositions she faces from other candidates from both sides of the aisle, but when to this competition, is added a concerted and vicious effort by media, to derail her campaign, what chance does she have? If media are working to destroy Hillary, it should tell us that conservatives are behind it; since they own and operate media. Ironically, we're also being told by these Hillary haters, that "the republicans favor a Hillary nomination." If people believe that, they'll believe anything. All I've seen in media, even here on Alternet, is a determined effort to overcome her campaingn with insult, innuendo, lies and exaggerations. Hillary may lose, but everything tells me I should vote for her.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

America is awash in this poll mentality. I wonder which Repugnant thought of them first? "Hmmm, what if we ask our friends what they think and then call it a poll? If we ask 10 people and 4 of them agree, then we can say that as a result of our poll, 40% of those polled agree. Meanwhile, the more polls we can create the better." Have you gone on the blogosphere lately? Every post can have its own poll.

Mean, in another, while, if Hillary wins the Democants nomination, it will be because the majority of the voters in her party voted FOR her. That will be the only poll that counts.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It has nothing to do with polls, Repug strategy, talk radio, sexism, the main stream media or anything but a clear look at Hillary's record and lack of character, integrity and honesty!
That's why so many non-Repugs (Dems or Indy's) WON'T VOTE FOR HER!
She exemplifies the worst (aside from Rove,Cheney-Bush, Ghouliani, et al) side of cynical politics. I just don't believe her.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As a democracy hating, facist, right wing Republican troll I can tell you that I want Hillary to get the nomination. A well placed source has told me that my fellow republicans are just waiting for Hillary to get the nomination so they can trot out Jeb Bush to be the next President. Another Bush Presidency! It doesn't get any better than that. Just think of all the countries we can invade in the next 8 years being our entire military is already oversees. You progressives shouldn't bother protesting either or we'll send you to gitmo. Support Hillary and make my Republican dreams come true!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I have read the disapproval of many on this list of a Hillary presidency and I am convinced your comments are motivated by latent sexism. No, you are not aware of it; people rarely are aware that they are sexist or racist. Sure she is not perfect, has been unfairly assailed by conservatives over the years, and I am not happy about her corporate point of view, but were she a man, not many of you would wage the same arguments, or focus on the same issues. She is intelligent, well spoken, and is vastly superior to the entire group of Republican candidates. I have heard comments about women in public life all my life, things like, "Sure I am in favor of a women in the Senate/Presidency/any leadership role, but not THIS woman." Then the commenter goes on to give a few examples of who he or she would support. Oddly, the support rarely seems to come for the woman who is actually running. Sadly, there never seems to be the right woman at the right time. I am dismayed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm not a big fan of the Democrats. I think both parties are shoulder-deep in big money corruption, and collude more often than debate. But if a Republican wins after the last 8 years, it'll clearly be the end of the world. We'll either have a crook (Rudy) or an apocalyptic religious maniac with a record of administrative incompetence (Huckabee) in the White House. I doubt that either of those fools could even keep the basic mechanisms of government operating, especially if we have more natural disasters or shortages from peak oil.

Hillary needs to appreciate that there's too much at stake for her to push her personal ambition above the good of the nation. Democrat primary voters need to realize that too many people will suffer if they, true to form, vote for someone who appeals to the party faithful but lacks the charisma and appeal to carry the national election. Actually, I wish that most Americans weren't so stupid that they continually voted for either Democrats or Republicans.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

http://bushclintonhurtchildren.blogspot.com/

BUSH CLINTON HURT CHILDREN GAYS BLACKWATER, MARK PENN, HILLARY, AMY GOODMAN, GOP TIES, ETC **its all here**

The following is a long laundry list of sites and people speaking the truth to people we all trust. I have been acumulating them and it has sickened me to see this truth. I hope and pray people will take the time to get this word out for all to see.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hilary (like her husband) has always been a DLC "Democrat". Like Pelosi. Like Reid. Like virtually every "Democrat" in a "leadership" position.

If you look even a little beneath the surface and compare what they've done and said with the neocon agenda, it would become clear that it's all been a facade; that these people are being used to as fronts to place a more populist facade on the neocon agenda to make it appear there is real opposition and to hook those of us who are too smart or aware or kind (in other words, "Progressive") to buy into the crap the "Republicans" have been spewing; and that their words and actions have been carefully crafted so as to not upset the apple cart, as it were.

The fix is in folks (and has been for quite a while), and you bought into it.

So what can we do that that's gonna help restore the democracy that we allowed to be stolen from us?

I'm not sure.

Wait. I know. We can......we can......EXERCISE OUR VOTE.

(Insert name of desired deity or spiritual phenomenon) help us all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Here is an overview of where we are and how we got here. I've included a separate page just for Hillary. Click here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I read the poll too, and it scared me. The "inevitable" Democratic candidate for president can't win against most of the torture-loving, nuclear-war-wanting, criminally-connected, ultra-fascist SADISTS who make up the Republican candidates.
You think Bush was bad! Just wait!

I must say that H Clinton scares me, not just as a person and politician (that whole Kill/Liar-man amendment among other things), but I always knew she couldn't possibly win against the Republicans.
WAKE UP DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY VOTERS!
Just look at all the liberals and Democrats who would not vote for her under ANY circumstances, even if the alternative is far worse than Bush!

We are literally doomed!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is it not foolish to ignore and not run on accomplishments?

Democrats have the record.

TWO FOR ONE—WHAT A BARGAIN FOR ALL-AMERICANS

Bill-Hillary success
ARE THEY ASHAMED OF SUCCESS?

Why no promos?

GDP--rose from 6300 to 11,600

NATIONAL INCOME-5,000 to 8,000 Billion--took 20 years to grow 2500B before Clinton

JOBS CREATED--over 22 million--record by far

AVERAGE WEEKLY
EARNINGS--$360 to $478

AVERAGE WEEKLY HOURS WORKED--never hit 35.0--hit that mark 4 times in 80's

UNEMPLOYMENT--from 7.2% down down down to 3.9%

MINIMUM WAGE--$4.25 to $5.15

MINORITIES--did exceedingly well

HOME OWNERSHIP--hit all time high

DEFICIT--290 Billion to whoopee a SURPLUS

DEBT----+28%---300% increase over prior 12 years

FEDERAL SPENDING--+28%---80% under
Reagan- who da true conservative?

DOW JONES AVERAGE--3,500 to 11,800 all it's history to get to 3500 and Clinton zooms it

NASDAQ--700 to 5,000---all of it's history to get to 700 and Clinton zooms it

VALUES INDEXES-- almost all bad went down--good went up in zoom zoom zoom

FOREIGN AFFAIRS--Peace on Earth good will toward each other---Mark of a true Christian--what has Bush done to Peace on Earth?

POPULARITY---highest poll ratings in history during peacetime in AFRICA, ASIA AND EUROPE even 98.5% in Moscow--left office with highest gallup rating since it was started in 1920's.

STAND UP FOR JUSTICE--evil conservatives spent $110,000,000 on hearings and investigations and caught one very evil man who took a few plane rides to events. Period of shame. Spend $72,000,000 using a 200 acre land purchase as a base for attempting to destroy a government. Conservatives will live with the Black Mark forever.

BOW YOUR HEADS—“Thank you God for sending us a man of Bill Clinton's character, intelligence, knowledge of governance, ability to face up to crises without whimpering, and a great leader of the world. Amen!”

THANK YOU GOD FOR THE GOOD TIMES THE CLINTON YEARS.

clarence swinney—political research historian-lifeaholics of america–
burlington,nc clarenceswinney@bellsouth.net
6-28-03

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Something there is that does not love a Hillary.
Maybe it is her stand on the Iraq War.
Maybe it I her stand on the imminent Iran War.
Maybe it is her stand on Universal Medical Insurance(Not univeral health care)-which is just a get rich scheme for insurance companies.
Maybe it is her failure to speak up for Habeas Corpus. It should be noted it was her husband who first started the entering wedge to destroy our right to Habeas with the first Patriot Act.
Maybe it is her vote to allow continued wire tapping of all of our phone calls and e-mails.
Something there is that does not love a Hillary.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Please spare us the poor sexism silliness by those who cannot understand that the push back against Hillary. It has nothing to do with gender.
There are so many democrats, women included like myself, who won't vote for Hillary if she is the nominee.
It's a matter of questionable character and ethics, bad judgment, nepotism, cozying up to the likes of murdoch, being the biggest receiptient of the defense industry money over any other candidate of either party, her hawkishness, ect.
As for the supposed sexism, then why did democrats of both sexes cheer when Pelosi took the gavel for the first time? Were proud she became speaker. Nancy is the most powerful woman in Washington and I don't see men begrudging her the position.
I feel so insulted everytime a Hillarylander cries gender because people simply do not like HRc. most people will support a female and for that matter, an african american. I'd bet the republicans would support Condi Rice if she ran. So, gender is just a false cry.
Hillary is a weak candidate because half her own party, men and women, won't support her if she is the nominee and it's because they just don't like her. Add with that the fact that no republican or indie crossover can be counted on either.
it has been proven that both Obama and Edwards attract both indies and republican support. Neither divide their own party like HRC and in fact energize it.
Hillary is another corporate candidate in the mold of mondale, dukakis, kerry, ect. Our losing streak continues as long as we keep nominating these unappealing, stiff and establishment candidates who leave their own party cold.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I am sorry to disagree with this hateful negative add. Hillary Clinton is the only candidate that has experience and can bring us to the respect we once had. Our Country is in a crucial state and we can not elect a president that has no experience, I don't care what Oprah says. It would be irresponsible to vote for someone just because some say its good or bad, we need to be responsible and look at resume's. Mrs. Clinton is the most elective and those of you Clinton Haters should really do research instead of going with the hate and negativity. We need to vote responsibly with our minds, heart, soul and most of all honesty.Personally I have voted Republican for the past 24 years and this will be my first. I have done my homework and Hillary is the chosen one. She will be the best.She has passion, commitment, knowledge and most of all Experience.
Sorry to say that knowingly voting for an inexperience person will be risk the American people can not take.Lets vote responsibly, it does not need to be for Mrs. Clinton, but certainly should not be for an inexperience person, because our future can not be at Risk. Therefore for those that know better, Mrs Hillary Clinton is the only electable in the crowd of Democratic candidates. Lets stop this bashing and hatred.Lets vote intellegently and lets not take a risk we can not afford to take.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Too bad the author of the story hadn't done a little research.. shouldn't a journalist do that?

The Zogby Poll done 3 weeks ago shows without a doubt that Ron Paul would wipe the floor with Hillary - compared to his fellow Republicans.

>>The blind bio question was also posed to a larger pool of 1,009 likely voters nationwide, including Democrats and independents, and Paul was the big winner among that universe of voters, winning 33%, compared to 19% for Giuliani, 15% for Romney, and 13% for Thompson.

Why is the people's choice given so little coverage in.. this Supposedly Atlernate News?

Question Answered.. I think.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just as phony as it can be. But it wouldn't be make-believe if you believed in (?). That's the question, isn't it? Maybe H. Clinton is a female T. Roosevelt, lying doggo and making the corporatocracy think she's their girl, only to pounce on them come Jan. 20th, 2009 a la Teddy. There is one candidate, however, who's shown time and again that he's courageous enough to stand up to the neocons, and SHOW US ALL WHAT WE KNOW TO BE THE TRUTH. That truth is that business as usual can no longer be tolerated, and our society MUST change from "Every man for himself" to "Yes, I AM my brother's keeper. I believe it and want to live it". That candidate is Dennis Kucinich. Don't get me wrong; Billary would be ten times better than any of the bufoons calling themselves "republicans", but would they be the BEST we could do? Are there STILL as many nitwits left over from supporting cheney/bush to push a rethug over the fence? I don't think so, and I don't think for a minute that the rethugs do, either. That's why they'll do their damnest to rig the '08 election as they did (at least) twice before. We live in a political world where nothing is as it seems to be. What we need more than anything now, is some old-fashioned HONESTY AND INTEGRITY. In my mind, these are personified by Dennis Kucinich. Can he win an election? Of course he can if WE VOTE FOR HIM, either as a write-in or directly if he's on the ballot. He's the real deal, folks, and quite possibly the ONLY one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There are actually two issues here:
1) Finding a Democratic candidate worth electing
2) Finding a Democratic candidate who can be elected.

Hillary Clinton is disqualified on both counts.
WORTH ELECTING?
We have just endured shattering damage to America domestically--a government looted to engorge the super-rich while the poor in New Orleans and elsewhere were utterly abandoned, and a vast apparatus of spying and repression established--and overseas via the lie-strewn path to the endless occupation of Iraq and the attempt to also decimate Iran.

We now need a Democratic candidate fully committed to the needs of working Americans and willing to repudiate all of Bush's preventive war doctrines.

In Hillary Clinton,we see someone who not only voted for the Iraq War but also voted against Sen. Carl Levin's modest proposal that all diplomatic avenues should at least be exhausted before the US goes to war. She continues to speak of an ongoing military combat presence. After 8 years of Bush and Cheney, we can't do better than this?

Meanwhile, her fundraisers with Rupert Murdoch and her status as the top recipient of health insurer and medical industry money should drive home that a Hillary Clinton presidency will be committed to keeping the president mal-distribution of wealth and income pretty much as it is (the richest 1% now haul in at least 16% of all annual income), and that any health reform will have to be acceptable to the insurers.

Bill Clinton shattered the electoral base of the Democratic Party by ramming through NAFTA, selling out blue-collar workers and winning lavish support from Corporate America. The cost: the ongoing mistrust of working-class Americans and the shift of over 1 million jobs to Mexico (Economic Policy Institute data). While Hillary Clinton may reluctantly admit that NAFTA didn't work "as intended," she still buys into the NAFTA-style job-exporting agreements like the one with Peru.

In H. Clinton, we also see someone whose top advisor Mark Penn whose PR firm represented Blackwater USA and has flacked for union-busters.

Earlier this week on Iran, Hillary Clinton echoed Bush's claims about that nation's intentions to build a nuclear bomb--but then the new National Intelligence Estimate exposed how much she has bought into Bush's war-obsessed policies . Once more, we see why she is not worth electing if we wish to escape the shadow of Bush-Cheney empire-building.

ELECTABILITY?

Let's keep the scary results of the polls comparing her to GOP candidates in mind, but let's also focus on the public's unfavorable response to the utter lack of sincere commitment to the Democratic base and Democratic values that characterizes both Clintons (Bill is relevant here because Hillary was a close advisor while he blew the chance for health reform, pushed through the Republican-initiated NAFTA, and backed the abolition of welfare). Thus, she lags about 30 points behind other Democrats in the eyes of the public when it comes to believing that she is committed to what she says.


With Hillary Clinton, we witness petty and vicious maneuvering (the truly absurd attempt to smear Obama as ambitious for something he wrote in grade school about wanting to be president!) while any criticism of her record by John Edwards and others is called "mudslinging."

This was another reminder of the kind of cynical ploys and "triangulating" to which both Hillary and Bill Clinton are so deeply wedded, and to which the public has grown disgusted.

Hillary Clinton is a candidate that will sink the Democrats in 2008 if party members listen to her soaring rhetoric and ignore her sordid record.

Roger Bybee, Milwaukee

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The antiwar vote is not only the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party, but the issue crosses over to Independents, Religious Right voters and even Suburban White Middle Class Republican Males. Bankrupting the country, creating 5,000 vet suicides a year and vast numbers of wheelchair vets, having no idea who you're bombing or what you actually get back for the next million dollars. If you want a million dollars worth of ashes, go buy a coal furnace.

Anyways, Hill is now behind the 8-ball because she didn't reach out much to the antiwar people. Her new friends the Republicans are certainly going to ditch her.

The Democrats probably shouldn't nominate such a mess-up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who picked these guys now running? Not me...

I think Americans are just sick of voting for 'lesser evils'.
Hillary might be a good politician. She may be supporting the war just to get elected. But I think Americans are sick of 'good politicians'.

We want someone we like and trust, that we can be proud of, who SAYS what they MEAN.
If that is no longer possible-to be that and get elected-then we need a new system..not just another President.

Hillary or that nut from New York? If that is the choice-I don't think anyone is going to show up at the polls-except the rich Jews and the Republicans.

Personally I am voting for Kucinich-even if I have to write him in. (Is it even possible to write in names on computer voting machines?)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is why Hillary had been polling so well, they have a machine of party insiders who have been displaced w/ the Bushies, and see Hillary as the way to regain their lost status. The insiders support Hillary, the corporations support Hillary, the lobbiests supports Hillary.

The American people do not, thankfully, support Hillary.

If you want more secrets, more cover-ups, more playing to the pollsters, more cooperation with lobbyists, more capitulation to corporations, by all means, vote for Hillary.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Billary's dream is America's nightmare. Democrat or Republican, her victory can only spell disaster for this country. Where as her campaign started strong, built on her beloved Hubbie's name recognition, her true nature has surfaced and the people don't like what they see.

An eel in water does not compare her slippery nature, avoiding solid questions with Gotcha remarks, and blaming everything on the GOP while touting the gender card all along.

The way she incites the women while playing her gender card, reaffirms that she has a meat cleaver in her hand, ready to chop off the twins from every mans crotch! Just because her hubbie played her, does not justify butchering all men at every opportune.

Nevertheless when the going gets tough, as it has lately, she invokes her ace, Bill, to come to her rescue.

Americans have finally figured out that she is the most polarizing political figure out there and this can only be attributed to her lack of substance; she is running on pure hate.

She failed as the first lady, and will not succeed as the president.

Most importantly, there is just something about her that makes one just distates her; and I'm not talking about the mechanical laugh.

She should finish her term in NY. and go home to roost.

Her dream is our Nightmare but Huckabee will Save us all

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think the Democratic party has done it again--two main candidates that cannot win against the Republican candidates thatare supported by the media. Obama may have the necessary credentials but there is still a significant percentage of the voters that would not vote for a black man for president. We have EDWARDSwho could also inspire confidence among the voters --unfortunately the Democrats donot want to admit that we are walking on thin ice with both Clinton and Obama. I think the Republicans would welcome either Clinton or Obama as Democratic candidates because they might not get the support and votes needed to defeat the Republians---

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

BARACK OBAMA'S ANSWERS Top Priorities, Iraq war, SecurIty, Health care, Education, Gay Marriage, Abortion, Poor, Guns, Stem Cell Research, Energy, Affirmative Action, Budget Issues, Social Security as listed on Wash Post Poll

http://my.barackobama.
com/page/community/post/
danielleclarke/C5Ph
BARACK OBAMA'S ANSWERS as found on
choose your candidate washington post

CHOOSE YOUR CANDIDATE
http://www.washingtonpost.
com/wp-srv/politics/interactives/
candidatequiz/?

BARACK OBAMA SAYS:


TOP PRIORITIES:
My top priority as president will be ending this war
in Iraq, a war that should have never been authorized
and never been waged. In doing so, I will work to keep
our country safe from terrorists and to restore
American credibility around the world. Providing
universal health care to the 47 million Americans who
currently do not have it will be another top priority
of my administration, as will combating global warming
and putting our country on the path toward energy
independence. But all of the issues that I have
focused on in this campaign -- whether it's creating a
21st century education system and fighting poverty or
achieving comprehensive immigration reform and
strengthening our economy -- are vitally important and
must be prioritized by the next president. And all of
these issues share one thing in common: in order to
fully address them, we have to do more than change
political parties. We have to fundamentally change our
politics and transform the way business is done in
Washington.

IRAQ WAR: 1
IRAQ WAR: 2


SECURITY:


HEALTH CARE


EDUCATION:
CHANGES IN EDUCATION:

GAY MARRIAGE:
CIVIL UNIONS:

ABORTION:

POOR:

GUNS:
GUN CONTROL:

STEM CELL RESEARCH:


ENERGY: 1
ENERGY: 2

IMMIGRATION: 1
IMMIGRATION: 2


AFFIRMIATIVE ACTION:

BUDGET ISSUES: 1
BUDGET ISSUES: 2

ECONOMY: 1
ECONOMY 2:

SOCIAL SECURITY: 1
SOCIAL SECURITY: 2


CLICK READ MORE TO SEE ALL THE ANSWERS BARACK HAS LISTED AT THIS WASHINGTON POST POLL SITE. I THINK IT GIVES AN EASY READ TO HIS PERSPECTIVES.

http://my.barackobama.
com/page/community/post/
danielleclarke/C5Ph

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I won't vote for Hillary but sadly I believe Obama has even less chance than Hillary in the General Election..

I'm voting for Kucinich you want change he's the only real change candidate and after that I support Edwards who is actually the most electable of the Democrats..especially if he selects Wesley Clark as VP running mate, even though Clark now supports Clinton..

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hillary has a chance in 2008!

Picture of Hillary as a fighter

- After 8 years of Bush/Cheney in the White House. The budget is at 9.1 Trillion dollars. The Democrat President the last time around gave America a budget Surplus.

- How Many families will be losing Homes because of greedy loan lenders protected by Bush and the Republican Party?

- Health care for everyone? Health secure people are productive people that fuel this economy

- The Hispanic Voters are getting no love from the Republicans. They know that they will get the love from Hillary, Barack or John.

- Even Brad Pitt is doing more for katrina's victims then Republicans or Bush by building 150 housed in New Orleans.

- Woman Voters! Moms! All leaning Democrat after 8 years of a not very compassionate Republican President. Yes Karl Rove you may be writing for Newsweek now. But you can't spin the truth!

- I've seen the walking or not walking wounded returning from Iraq. Over 28,500 are back home now. Its affected everyone families, friends and lovers. We have the Republicans to thank for this! First they lie to get Americans into Iraq. Then they try to protect thier lie by making it unpatriotic to even question the lie! Just today 2 suicde bombers took 32 lives! In order to fund this war Bush has cut funds even to the poorest of Americans the Alaska Natives and American Indians. You can not spin the truth about Iraq! Americans are better then that!

- Americans are looking for a new postive direction. The Democrats running for President or the Senate and Congress represent that change. The Republican minnority in the US Senate and Congress are blocking that change. The 2008 Republican Presidential Candidates = another 4 years of the Bush/Cheneny/Rumsfeld.

Thats why a woman like Hillary has a fighting chance in 2008!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I sent a little $ to the Edwards campaign - a first for me.

Only one month and it's probably all decided. Where I live we get NH tv commercials - Hil & Bam are in "heavy rotation," as are Romney, "Rudy" (as the commercial says) & to a lesser extent Huckabilly. But I haven't seen even one Edwards, or Kucinich, commercial yet. Or come to think of it, Richardson, Dodd or Biden either, or Fred Thompson. At least Ron Paul is spending all that money he raised, there have been a few from him.

I'm not sure if Obama is as unelectable as some say. I think he would hold on to every Gore & Kerry state, possibly add Ohio & even Indiana - Evan Bayh for VP, anyone? - and that would be enough.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm in Texas, and did not vote for Bush as Governor or pResident. As a matter of fact, I crossed over and voted in the Republican primary in 2000 just to vote for McCain. Not that it really mattered, as he had already been swift-boated in South Carolina.

Since then, McCain has sold out and lost me when he painfully said three times, "I support Geroge Bush." I am an Independent who votes for the person, not the party.

With that being said, being in a "RED" state surrounded by Dumbyah supporters, I have said for a couple of years that the dumbest thing the Dems could do would be to have Hillary as their candidate for Prez.

Like it or not, right or wrong, there are enough people who wouldn't vote for her come hell or high water. She would serve the nation better by staying as a Senator from New York. She and Bill should put their egos in check and look at the big picture.

As they say here in Texas, "That dog won't hunt." I predict she will lose if she gets the nomination. If I'm wrong, I'll come back here a year from now and eat my words.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

one that very few people have addressed, at least to the extent that I have been exposed to. I fear for what will happen to the Democratic Party as a whole. I, must state that I am not a Democrat...though I do support Democrats over Republicans. But this is exactly the point I am going to make. Hillary Clinton will do more damage to the Democratic Party than any Republican could. We need an opposition party to keep the neo-Republicans in check. If we do not have that, then we loose any moral authority we may have had. We also are placed into a state of endless war fighting a tactic. Hillary, just like her husband did, will move the party to the right and hurt this country. She will not roll back any of the things Bush has done, and by doing that will just place the imperial presidency into stasis. That is the best case scenario...I see that she will drag the Democratic Party into supporting issues that they normally wouldn't (eg NAFTA, "Welfare Reform, etc)...That is what I dread about a Hillary presidency. If she doesn't use the expansion of executive power to its fullest, she will keep the powers intact for the Republican who follows her (and one will) surely will use that power.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One doesn't have to be too saavy to get the drift of this insidious point of view concerning? Hillary Clinton's electability. This piece is just more proof about the lack of imagination and creative thinking that Democrats have to getting ANY- that's right ANY Democratic candidate elected or ANY of the serious issues that we face in this country resolved!

You don't' support this highly accomplished candidate, Hillary Clinton! So why try to confuse the reader and say you do? It obvious! But how about this important and illuminating question: Is this all the more creative you would be if this candidate was your son? Would you early on in your son's attempts to achieve something - tell him that he wasn't going to make it? That someone was going to keep him down? Yet at the same time convince him that you support him? EVEN WORSE, write an article and tell the world that(he, your son) isn't going to be the one likely to make it? It's the very same principle or lack of it at work in this article!

Further, do you really think that Karl Rove would say the things he does about Hillary Clinton if he didn't see the value in manipulating Democrats to put Obama on the ticket? Wow, where have you been! You bet this was another huge disappointment in the writer, in Alternet and the DEMOCRATIC point of view! You could ALL REALLY be imaginative, find the weak links in the (son's) candidacy and find a way to develop those links and make a real differance! She IS the strongest most hopeful candidate to get something done in this country! Get over yourself that she's a woman! We've got to start seeing everything differently or we're a doomed society!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dems wake up: Hillary is the safest bet for the new world order One Big Money Party of elitists.

For Republicans, Hillary is a special interest dream come true for the tech and insurance lobbies and others.

For Democrats, ditto...Remember Bill, a Democrat -- authored NAFTA, the blueprint to fastrack this country's decline and shitcan our jobs to the third world. Writer's strikes?45,000 Citi-layoffs? Subprime mortgage crisis?
And guess what? The other two Dem frontrunners are on the same page as Hillary. Buh-bye, American white collar jobs. Dems (possible exception Kucinich) are just not that into you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If any change for the better is going to be made in this country, the next president must come into office with a clear and unequivocal mandate; that is, he or she must be elected in a LANDSLIDE! That's the only way to humble the oppostion and shut up the DLC obstructionists.

We cannot afford to re-hash the political mud-wrestling matches of the 90s; we need a fresh start and a way to look forward. We cannot afford to elect somebody who will appear to be compromised even before taking the oath of office.

If we Democrats are so foolish as to nominate somebody with HRC's super-high negatives and polarizing persona the best we can hope for is another "squeak through" and that's just not acceptable, especially when the GOP is so weak and we have such a strong field of good candidates. I personally am supporting Edwards, but I also like (and could enthusiastically support) Obama, Richardson or Dodd.

Don't get me wrong; I hope for a day when a strong, qualified woman can take the oath and lead this country; but HRC IS NOT THAT WOMAN!

Oh where are you now that we need you, Shirley Chisholm?????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

He said something like "historically, a foreign empire run by a domestic democracy is a very unstable situation - either the empire collapses or the democratic republic is replaced by a totalitarian regime." He then went on to say that people who think that the choice of President will do much to change things are not thinking too clearly.

One of the more telling quotes from one of the U.S. military-industrial apparatchiks in Iraq was this: "This is bigger than domestic politics."

That truly is the mentality of much of the government and political class these days. The empire comes first, and the democratic process has to be set aside in the interest of maintaining and expanding the empire, when necessary.

The choice for the U.S public isn't between a Democratic and Republican Presidential candidate - it's between a foreign empire run by a more-or-less untouchable regime, and a democratic republic whose leaders are accountable to public opinion via the democratic process.

The practical fact is that a militarily enforced foreign empire is doomed to collapse due to the classic issue of imperial overreach (ask the British about that, for example - though they're now riding the coattails of the U.S. empire, so they might not want to be too forthright).

So, who to vote for? Vote for Edwards - he is opposing the NAFTA-like trade pacts (Peru, Columbia) that are used to tie the empire together, and which have also been driving down most wages in the U.S. for several decades now, and which are currently threatening to turn the U.S. into a two-tiered feudal system of aristocrats and serfs. Maybe he'll pick Kucininch as a running mate. That'd be the best possible outcome, though I fear it has the proverbial snowflake's chance in hell. The corporate media, devoted to continuation of empire, has been snarling at Edwards ever since he said that

"It does not work to replace corporate Republicans with corporate Democrats."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Vote for Hillary in the Democratic Primary.
That way, come November, you can choose between two corporatist NeoCons.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

HELLO! Did anyone read or pay attention to the most important part of Hillary's problem-- as cited in this article? It is: "Bill: When Will the Other Shoe Drop?" That is THE question! To believe this sexual addict has given up his womanizing is completely naive and really not possible (read about addictions, if you don't understand)! In this age of YouTube and cellphone cameras, it is very likely that Clinton haters already have put together at least a dozen videos of Bill asking for, getting ready for, or just finishing (eeek) getting a BLOWJOB! And probably with appropriate background music! Just as soon as the general campaign kicks off, these videos will be "floated" out on the internet--and picked up immediately by the MSM, especially Fox and CNN. Now, of course, this is not Hillary's problem. But, folks, this is AMERICA--home of the homophobic, sexually puritanical evangelicals! And, even many Democrats would be swayed by such naughtiness. After all, the Congress DID impeach Bill Clinton, remember? I think this is all just ridiculous and immature; however, it will happen if Hillary gets the nomination. And Bill's antics would once more lose the Presidential race for the Democrats! How about Guiliani (the Mobster) or Huckabee (what NIE?) as our Leader? This gets really, really crazy!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hillary's unelectability goes beyond the negatives we are most familiar with. Even if she polled better in those areas, she would still be a long-shot, because the american people are not predisposed to elect a woman for president as long as we are on a "war" footing (and, believe me, when we get close to the election, the neocons will make sure that we WILL be on a war footing.) This is the major reason she gets sooo much air time compared to Obama, and the major reason she has raised sooo much money, much of it from some pretty nefarious characters who in the past have supported right-wing conservatives.

A similar, but less significant, problem haunts Obama, revolving around his lack of experience, especially in foreign policy, and the fact that he is black. However, Hillary is still the best "straw dog" the Dems could put up, so she is the candidate the right-wing-leaning mainstream media fawns over the most. They, and their conservative owners, are playing "rope-a-dope" with Hillary – and Democrats are walking right into the trap.

Truth be told, nothing would please the Republicans more than to have their "champeen" get in the ring with Hillary. Come next fall, it's a K.O. in the first round. (I mean, even with allegations that Rudy is a crook, he STILL out-polls Hillary?!)

By contrast, in my opinion, Edwards is the candidate the Republicans fear most: handsome, smart and tenacious as hell, and without the baggage of Hillary/Obama – and this is precisely why the media go out of their way to minimize his exposure. Oh, yeah, and he has promised to break up media comglomerates if elected. Any questions?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hillary is Bush lite. Giulliani is Bush on overload. Obama is the OREO younger version of Bill Clinton. Edwards has no support away from the South. The rest of them, except for Kuicinch,
are mostly opportunists, Republican biggots with a little PR or Dems on the corporate cash take.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I like Hillary. I think she's very intelligent, tough, and can do the right things. Is she a consumate politician? Yes. Is that good? Not necessarily. Is it needed? Yes. Because, like it or not, to be president one has to play with others to a point. Obama panders to bigots and Edwards--whom I like--simply doesn't have any fight. He's already "lost" once when he ran with Kerry. He should have come out fighting then and didn't. I like Dennis but there is no way he can win. He's polling less than 5%. Not a chance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This nation craves REAL change, an end to the war, end to the patriot acts, end to corporate welfare, healthcare for all (without insurance companies literally making a "killing") and so much more.
This is a democracy (kinda). WE choose who is electable with our vote. If we actually voted based on platforms and NOT polls, patriots like Kucinich would be running our country, not the other way around.
Stop playing politics. Isn't that what got us in this mess in the first place?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The following is not politically correct and may draw fire, whatever, here goes. Neither Clinton nor Obama can get elected as each is a candidate lacking universal appeal for obvious reasons that unfortunately still exist in the 21st Century.

After they beat each other to a pulp one of the lower polling White Men will win the nomination at the Democratic Convention and go on that fall to win the election and become our next President.

You may not agree, that is your option, but remember, you read it here first.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We are getting around to that point in this coming election when we are going to be told repeatedly (the author does this near the end of an otherwise decent article) that we must vote for Clinton regardless of the fact that she is a warmongering corporate AIPAC whore in order to spare our poor country another round of Republican terror.

Bullshit.

I will not vote for Clinton (or refer to her as "Hillary," for that matter). I will vote Green should Clinton be the candidate, and never vote again as a Democrat.

Please spare me your efforts at changing my mind. The Democratic party has been dead for some time. Wake up and smell the decomposition. And if Clinton wins the nomination, the resulting loss should make this clear to even most Democrats.

There is likely only one way to fix things in this country, short of revolution. That is to let them get even worse. A Clinton loss (which is a sure thing) will guarantee that (not that a win would prevent it).

Maybe a few more years of Republicans utterly destroying Amerika will finally convince the benighted, ignorant populace we call our neighbors that there are more important things to worry about than Survivor, American Idol and Brittany Spears.

But I'm not going to hold my breath.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What polls is Hillary loosing? In all the head to head polls of Hillary vs. anyone she is ahead:

Look here:
Real Clear Politics

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Money Party always defeats the Peoples' Party. Always has, will this time, and always will. You know the old saying: Money talks and BS walks!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Because the democratic party needs a leader who can identify and personify core democratic values. If the party cannot or will not represent the interests , THE REAL INTERESTS, of a non imperialist, anti-corporate, secular republic of empowered individuals, then it deserves to fail. America needs to have a bona fide opposition to the ruling corporate cabal. Hillary is just one of the flickering flames fueled by the old lamplighters. There must be a glimmer of hope out there. There are some dynamic personalities among the contenders that can offer that hope. Hillary is the death of hope.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One doesn't have to be too saavy to get the drift of this insidious point of view.... concerning?... Hillary Clinton's electability. This piece is just more proof about the lack of imagination and creative thinking that Democrats have to getting ANY- that's right ANY Democratic candidate elected or ANY of the serious issues that we face in this country resolved!

You don't' support this highly accomplished candidate, Hillary Clinton! So why try to confuse the reader and say you do? It obvious! But how about this important and illuminating question: Is this all the more creative you would be if this candidate was your son? Would you early on in your son's attempts to achieve something - tell him that he wasn't going to make it? That someone was going to keep him down? Yet at the same time convince him that you support him? EVEN WORSE, write an article and tell the world that (he, your son) isn't going to be the candidate likely to make it? It's the very same principle or lack of it at work in this article!

Further, do you really think that Karl Rove would say the things he does about Hillary Clinton if he didn't see the value in manipulating Democrats to put Obama on the ticket? Wow, where have you been! You could ALL REALLY be imaginative, find the weak links in the (son's) candidacy, find a creative way to develop those links and make a real differance! She IS the strongest most hopeful candidate to get something done in this country! Get over yourself that she's a woman! We've got to start seeing everything differently or we're a doomed society!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not Hilary, I mean this "electability sh*t. Voting for "electable" candidates is what got us the milquetoast and utterly worthless John Kerry last time around. I say, if you like Hilary's platform, vote for her. If you don't like her, don't vote for her.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If Molly were alive, she would now support Hillary. The country has changed as has its politics. Molly was smart, and she would've loved to be alive to see the first woman president elected in the USA.

The article posted by Molly was from several years ago. I reiterate, things have changed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Excellent in every respect! You told 'em. Hillary haters on this site are trolls. She is the only experienced, intelligent, qualified candidate of either party running who can make a real difference, and her heart is in the right place.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who is more dynamic than Hillary among all the contenders? Who is more brilliant? Who is better-educated? Who spent 8 yrs. in the White House? Who cares about people's health care, education, well-being, employment, aid to the poor and homeless? Who stands up for civil rights for all? Hillary WILL get the nomination and Hillary WILL be the next, and first woman, president of the United States! Hurray, hurray.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Where do you get your information that Hillary is polarizing or negative in the polls? You must not read much since my info puts her ahead of all Dems running! She is the most qualified candidate, period; the ReThugs have no one who can beat her. I like Edwards and Obama, but they have no chance of winning. Even the actor Thompson could beat them! That would be another crying shame, and you know what? I am tired of crying the past 7 yrs. over the shambles the Republican party has made of our country.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

HILLARY is the candidate with the strength and experience to restore America's standing in the world and to return the candidate with the strength and experience to restore America's standing in the world and to return the United States to a position of global leadership

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'll be glad when this nightmare is over. But, that Hillary, the most despised candidate to face the republicans, since her husband; the most hated since her husband, by media, and arousing the worst case of petty, snobbish, bickering from political imbeciles, I've ever seen, has nevertheless, been able to maintain "front-runner" status, apparently till the last day before nomination proceedings commence, is breathtaking. The hate-mongers may be able to contrive a way of stopping her, but I've never been so convinced, so supportive of her candidacy. She obviously has everyone tearing themselves apart. Everyone, that is, except her supporters. And, so far, they're the majority.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A former Washington Times janitor provided my title. I hate to spread rumors, but sometimes it's the only way to be fair to the rumors that might be true. That's the honest truth, not to be confused with the dishonest truth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We are so close to the line and yet, we argue like we have all the time in the world. The Republicans have their organizers working overtime on every subplot to get one of theirs into office and just like the old, elementary school, "girls versus boys" voting trick. Nominate many and vote for one. Divide your enemies votes.
Did I hear right? Hilary's as bad as the Republicans?! I know she's no saint, but... ARE YOU NUTS?!!!?
She's done a lot more good than bad, has managed to hang on through the Republican nightmare and knows their playbook.
She's a smart woman and doesn't take a lot of crap from sexist Republicans, who are scared shitless of her. If you don't think that's being downplayed, watch a little closer. To them, a woman president is scarier than a Black one! I mean, at least he's a MAN, right?
We have to pick the most likely candidate to beat out the evil bastards who have RUINED our country and it's reputation all over the world and she's it, so far.
To me, a Democrat wins the next election, or I consider moving out of country until the Republican is gone or I join an organization willing to take any steps need to get us moving forward again. Our country has become a joke and as an American, I'm F---ing OUTRAGED. We use to be the best. We inspired others to be the best they could be. Not anymore.
Republicans steal money they don't need. They take the food out of children's mouths. They deny treatment to the poor to keep money they took promising that same treatment, to give a CEO who does nothing another million a year that he will never spend on anything that benefits his country or countrymen. Just himself.
The idea that we may be looking at the complete breakdown of our country's infrastructure within a decade or two is not a joke anymore. Greed, fear, lies and more lies have become our modus operandi thru ignorance and collusion. It needs to stop, NOW and if it means we take the lesser of two evils to avoid a violent upheaval when we reject being controlled, I say we take it. Only time will tell if she can use her knowledge of the machine for good or evil and I'm willing to gamble she will be less of a risk than letting the status quo continue. Republicans need to be removed from every position of power and decision making, yesterday. And some imprisoned.
Americans, who used to protest with some effect, have been beaten into submission, demoralized and barked at by trained lap dogs in the media and their easily frightened constituents who bought the campaign lies about truth, conservatism, Christianity and ethics.
The funny thing is, I can think of no group of people who have fewer ethics or morals than the evil people decided their best chance to achieve their twisted goals was to hide behind and use the Republican party monicker.
The murder, the rape and pillage of towns in other countries and even in our own. The racism and alienation. The slow death sentences forced on America's poor and disenfranchised. The HMO's, the insurance racketeering and oil scams. Conveniently dying witnesses. Genocide. War. All under the guise of Christianity and the American flag. Nothing can compare to the breadth, scope and evil genius of the Republican party's take over of our country.
They are barely outdone by Nazi Germany's campaign during WWII.
I will take a Democrat, Green Party, Independent, ANYBODY, over a Goddamn Republican! I don't care if they're wearing a red rubber nose and big F-ing shoes, at this point. It just so happens I like Hilary for a number of reasons, warts and all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We are so close to the line and yet, we argue like we have all the time in the world. The Republicans have their organizers working overtime on every subplot to get one of theirs into office and just like the old, elementary school, "girls versus boys" voting trick. Nominate many and vote for one. Divide your enemies votes.
Did I hear right? Hilary's as bad as the Republicans?! I know she's no saint, but... ARE YOU NUTS?!!!?
She's done a lot more good than bad, has managed to hang on through the Republican nightmare and knows their playbook.
She's a smart woman and doesn't take a lot of crap from sexist Republicans, who are scared shitless of her. If you don't think that's being downplayed, watch a little closer. To them, a woman president is scarier than a Black one! I mean, at least he's a MAN, right?
We have to pick the most likely candidate to beat out the bastards who have RUINED our country and it's reputation all over the world and she's it, so far.
To me, a Democrat wins the next election, or we will have to consider some drastic steps to get us moving forward again. Our country has become a joke and as an American, I'm F---ing OUTRAGED. We use to be the best. We inspired others to be the best they could be. Not anymore.
Republicans have stolen money they don't even need. They take the food out of children's mouths by proxy. They deny treatment to the poor by policies crated to keep money they were given in good faith promising that same treatment. All to reward a CEO who does nothing but cheat others another million a year that he will never spend on anything that benefits his country or countrymen. Just himself.
The idea that we may be looking at the complete breakdown of our country's infrastructure within a decade or two is not a joke anymore. The greed, fear, lies and more lies have become our modus operandi thru ignorance and collusion. It needs to stop and if it means we take the lesser of two evils to avoid a violent upheaval when we reject being controlled, I say we take it. Only time will tell if she can use her knowledge of the machine for good or evil and I'm willing to gamble she will be much less of a risk than letting the status quo continue with another Republican. These evil relics need to be removed from every position of power and decision making, yesterday. And some imprisoned.
Americans, who used to protest with some effect, have been beaten into submission, demoralized and barked at by trained lap dogs in the media and their easily frightened constituents who bought the campaign lies about truth, conservatism, Christianity and ethics.
The funny thing is, I can think of no group of people who have fewer ethics or morals, or less to do with God than the evil people who decided their best chance to achieve their twisted goals was to hide behind and use the Republican party monicker.
The murder, the rape and pillage of towns in other countries and even in our own. The racism and alienation. The slow death sentences forced on America's poor and disenfranchised. The HMO's, the insurance racketeering and oil scams. Conveniently dying witnesses. Genocide. War. All under the guise of Christianity and the American flag. Nothing can compare to the breadth, scope and evil genius of the Republican party's take over of our country.
They are barely outdone by Nazi Germany's campaign during WWII.
I will take a Democrat, Green Party, Independent, ANYBODY, over a Goddamn Republican! I don't care if they're wearing a red rubber nose and big F-ing shoes, at this point. It just so happens I like Hilary for a number of reasons, warts and all. I pray she wins, because she is our best hope right now. Thats not as sad as it sounds, if you think long term.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I hate the whole notion of electability this nation uses to decide who to vote for.

It encourages the people to not vote for who they think has the best ideas and would implement the best policies while in office.

It encourages the people to vote for who, among the lesser of all evils, they think has the best chance of winning.

Electability is a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy:
a self-fulfilling prophecy is, in the beginning, a false definition of the situation evoking a new behaviour which makes the original false conception come 'true'. This specious validity of the self-fulfilling prophecy perpetuates a reign of error. For the prophet will cite the actual course of events as proof that he was right from the very beginning.

We are getting it beaten into our heads that Hillary Clinton will inevitably be elected. Part of her campaign strategy is to give the impression that she will inevitably be the Democratic candidate.


We should not vote for Hillary cause her policies suck.

From her votes on declaring part of the Iranian military a terrorist organization, to her not doing her homework and reading the classified NIE on Iraq and subsequent yes vote on the Iraq war resolution, to her refusal to support impeachment for the administrations lies that got us into war, illegal torture policies, illegal domestic spying, to her support for the lawsuit against a Rockstar Games and Grand Theft Auto's Hot Coffee patch, she is flat out atrocious.

The Democratic party needs to realize that they cannot take its base for granted.

If she is nominated I will not vote for her, I will vote for a 3rd party candidate and I am sure I am not the only one.

If the Democratic party wants to win elections it has to nominate candidates that reflect the party's citizen supporters and not its corporate supporters.

Candidates like Dennis Kucinich.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

HR 1955 introduced by Rep. Jane Harman (D CA) passed 404 to 6. Now traveling thro the Senate as S 1956.
SEC.899B. Number (3)
"The Internet has aided in facilitation violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streems of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens."
(we're citizens not consumers in these bills - interesting.
The rest of it is equally as interesting and ambigious, and very, very dangerous.
Vote for Clinton - I think not. Wonder how she will vote on S 1956?
I don't see a Constitutionalist in the whole batch of front runners. Statesmen/women are only mentioned with scorn by the ministry of truth.
Ms Clinton and her ilk have turned the law on it's head. We are all GUILTY untill proven INOCENT. Justice is now a commodity and must be purchased with dollars. Check the voting records of each and everyone - before you vote.
In as much as voting still exists - it must mean something to these parasites, but I'm not sure what.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

That's right, Bill Richardson is the most electable Democrat. Experience that Obama does not have (and who wants to give Oprah access to the White House and power); Statemanship; leadership with success at getting the only state of 50 to comply with the Kyoto accords; and he actually has a Plan! a Plan, he has!!

And the Richardson plan would address the single most important issue of 2008-2016: The Environment Beyond Global Warming.

That is to say, there is much much more to the Environment as the Single great issue of our time, beyond the concern for Global Warming and its management. There is the Environmental issue of Peak Oil, which translates into the bloodstains on the dollars we spend for gas and plastics of all kinds. Richardson has the plan, the answer, when he states that it would be the highest priority of his administration to get this country moving rapidly in the direction of Solar Age implementation and other alternatives to oil as the dominant source of energy. A fraction of the money spent on the war, invested in Solar/alternative energy, would free us from the dependence that locks the marginal republicans in the wars for oil.

When it comes to oil, the "conservative right" is exceedingly liberal about spilling blood "over there" to keep the oil flowing in the SUVs they drive over here. Only by following Richardson Plan for state,local and federal tax incentives and grants to convert to Solar and other fuels, and to build and finance electric cars, will we get to the point -- possible within four years -- of being free from the need for Bloody Oil.

Although few people seem to know it, Richardson is a Catholic, and should appeal to the middle of the electorate that finds it hard to vote to the far left on social issues. He seems to back up his words with actions; the government needs to stay out of the private lives of people, and leave moral decisions as a matter of personal conscience, which is the most sensible course for all of us to take.

Bill Richardson, because when it comes to the final choices to be made, he is the one that will pull from all ends and that middle, except of course those who still believe that Bush, as President or as governor of Texas, has acted in any way consistent with the "Christian" values that he claims as his own.

(Bush has not; not a single act while in power can be construed in any way as within the tenets of the teachings of Christ. We should all remember this as we shout across the room at each other about the "dangers" of religious beliefs in positions of power. The fact is, we should be more concerned with the complete contradiction of those moral values that those aspiring to greater power profess to hold.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Actually, I find the most electable to be Barack Obama (who defeats ALL repub candidates handily in most polls, better than any Dem). This is because he attracts more Indy's and Republicans than any of the other Dem candidates. In Iowa, Obama is definitely pulling ahead in the final days as more of the undecideds begin to commit. See most recent reliable pools here:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/

As I walk my DSM precinct, where I am an Obama precinct captain, both Biden and Richardson are running a distant fourth, with BO first, JE and HRC tied for second. Not finding much support for Chris Dodd.

You need LOTS of money to wage a Presidential campaign and the only two viable are Barack and HRC. Even Edwards will quickly get short on cash -- he just doesn't have Mitt Romney's money.

I'm putting my money on the Dark Horse candidate -- the great Statesman and Senator from Illinois - Senator Barack Obama, and here is why.

People who are standing up for HRC are standing up for 8 more years of Reagan/Bush, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton -- an oligarchy and not a Democracy. She will not win but instead will polarize, energize the Republican base against us, and some Dems would even vote for Mike Huckabee before they would vote for HRC.

Her husband energized the Republican base AGAINST us in 1994 and the Republicans took over the Congress for 12 long years! Dems seem to have short memories!

Do you not remember the pain of the Gore and Kerry loses? If John Edwards was our guy, why wasn't he our guy in 2004? He lost to John Kerry and Kerry lost to George Bush! OMG, Dems, wake up and smell the coffee. JE has voted wrong and has had to apologize for it way too many times! (Review night of Brown & Black Forum).

Obama will WIN BIG!!! in Iowa, and you can take that to the bank. He has the best leadership skills of them all -- he is a uniter -- and he is the only one bringing a new face and message of Hope into this campaign.

Makeup of an Obama Administrative Cabinet:
Biden - Sec'y of Defense
Clinton - Sec'y of Education, or to remain the Jr. Senator for NY.
Richardson - Sec'y of State
Edwards - AG
Dodd - Sec'y of HUD
Kucinich - Sec'y Dept of Peace
Gravel - Help with the archives and continuing his Democracy Initiative?

Once Obama wins in Iowa, or is even a close second, I trust the rest of the country will see the huge DIS-advantage to the Dem Party of a HRC nomination, unless we enjoy losing to the Republicans.

As for Biden, Richardson, and Dodd -- well this is what the Iowa Caucuses do well -- they help to winnow out the field of the viable candidates vs. the non-viable. If you don't score at least 15% support in each caucus, you're considered "not viable", and that's the way it should be, painful as it may be.

It's going to be an exciting night, in just 23 days, and we'll see who remains standing. Candidates who are not viable CAN go on, but it takes a LOT of money to compete in a Presidential campaign. Without VOE's (I hate that we voters don't OWN our own elections), the system tilts to the most popular candidates AND to those who can bring in the dollars for support. Obama has had more small contributing donors than all the other candidates, combined!

Fortunately, this time, we have someone who is both very popular, very intelligent, AND a great leader -- study Barack Obama on the issues (just go to http://barackobama.com and click on Issues at the top).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The clinton years may have been good at the time but
the welfare to work bill never funding the mothers for
proper education and never funding the children for
proper child care and the 1994 clinton crime bill that
took away pell grants which lead from a 30% recidivism
rate to a 70% rate cost americans dearly as prisons
were privatized and children were allowed to go wild
due to mothers having to work two jobs at micky D's
and now we pay 100k a yr to support these children in
jails as bill never reduced crack cocaine which puts
them in jail longer and thusly we pay to keep them
there which has caused us all to be further in debt
and more kids killing others as they see no jobs
because their mothers never got educated and could be
examples to them.

yea they were great yrs but turned to hell very fast
after Slick willy got out and then he goes to a bunch
of balck churches and gets seen as the black president
NOT and now we all suffer and blame bush for slick
willys term and actions and inactions.

yeaa it was great but for who and for how long ???

ITS NOT THE TERRORIST THAT WANT HER its the BUSH CLINTON REGIME AND THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX THAT WANTS HER. The true terrorist are Bush and Clinton who have laid a scam on the american public, where now we are so deeply in debt that we will be paying forever to her chinese friends interest on our debt for the military cost that have put us there.

***House Hearing on the Cost of Operations in Iraq***

Artist / Source C-SPAN
AUDIO FILE HERE:
File Name


rtsp://video.c-
span.org/project/iraq
/iraq102407_budget.rm

SO FAR WE HAVE TO TODAY SPENT ENOUGH FOR 2 KOREA WARS AND 16 YRS OF THE VIETNAM WAR AND THAT DOESN'T EVEN CONSIDER WHAT WE HAVE FOR THE REST OF THIS YEAR AND THE FOLLOWING YR WHICH HAS BEEN APPROPRIATED..


http://www.c-
span.org/Video
Archives.asp?CatCodePairs=,&Archive
Days=100&;;;Page=4


House Hearing on the Cost of Operations in Iraq
Budget Committee Chairman Rep. John Spratt (D-SC) held a hearing on the cost of military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Witnesses include: Amy Belasco, Congressional Research Service, Defense Budget Specialist; Peter Orszag, Congressional Budget Office; and others.
10/24/2007: WASHINGTON, DC: 2 hr. 52 min.

NO REPUBLICANS SHOWED UP AT THE HEARING TOO !

Hillary Clinton Piles on Pentagon Earmarks
http://thehill.
com/leading-the-
news/clinton-can-
boast-wealth-of-
earmarks-2007-06-13.html


Weapons Industry Dumps Republicans, Backs Hillary
http://www.alternet
.org/story/65869

The U.S. arms industry has all but abandoned its traditional allies in the Republican party and is putting their money on Hillary Clinton.
................
****BLOG THIS TO LET AMERICA HOW MUCH HILLARY CLINTON AND BUSH ARE COSTING AMERICA****





I'M BLOGGING THE TRUTH = http://bushclintonhurtchildren.blogspot.com/

Sunday, November 18, 2007
BUSH CLINTON HURT CHILDREN GAYS BLACKWATER, MARK PENN, HILLARY, AMY GOODMAN, GOP TIES, ETC **its all here**

The following is a long laundry list of sites and people speaking the truth to people we all trust. I have been acumulating them and it has sickened me to see this truth. I hope and pray people will take the time to get this word out for all to see.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I won't vote for her. Call me sexist.. I don't care, but you'd be way off base. I won't vote at all this election unless it's for a 3rd party, because the system is broken and the 2 party system is fixed like an obvious boxing match. Face it, YOUR VOTE DOES NOT MATTER ANYMORE! It's all rigged. Democrats and Republicans are identical.

Anyway, like it or not, if nominated, she'll lose the general election because she's a Clinton. Clinton is still despised by the majority of redneck voters; That's most of the country that votes.

I personally see Hillary as a fake. She's a carpetbagger that went the NY because she knew she had zero chance being from Arkansas. She has no guts at all and stands for nothing.

Remember, early on, people never thought W would get nominated much less get "elected".. and if Gore didn't have the Clinton baggage W wouldn't have been appointed President and hanging chads, war in Iraq, etc would have never been an issue.

Democrats have a golden opportunity to win the White House, but watch them blow it.

Al Gore is your only hope.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As someone who reads this site daily, I see a rash of new reader names, all wildly supportive of Hillary Clinton, all saying much the same thing.

Considering that AlterNet's regular readers are for the most part actual liberals and real progressives, I believe it is safe to say that the wave of sudden pro-Clinton responses has a distinctive smell of troll.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Clinton's experiences "make her uniquely qualified to lead our nation at this time of great challenge. She is the candidate with the strength and experience to restore America's standing in the world and to return the United States to a position of global leader.
Our country is in a crucial state, how can we possible not vote for her. Do we put our the future of our country in the hands of a Jr. Senator of 2 years? or do we go back to the Republicans..We need to vote responsibly and that is only voting for Hillary Clinton!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's amusing reading the vitriolic criticism of Hillary here. I do agree that she appears to be in two places at once on a lot of issues, so let's make her our quantum candidate. Just as a quantum particle can be in two places at once, so can she.

But, seriously folks, so what? The low attention span of the American voters and the fact that they won't allow any politician to change their mind when new facts are known, almost guarantees that whoever is elected from whatever party will sooner of later become a hypocrite.

Remember, Lincoln only freed the slaves in the South, not the North, and he's considered one of our greatest presidents.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

To me it's a choice between Obama and Edwards. Both would make a fine president.
I'd love a woman running the Oval Office but when the democratic primary comes my way I will vote for the man who has the best chance of defeating a candidate who's polling well with Democrats because she's a woman and her last name is Clinton.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

THE TORRES-VIGNALI CONNECTION is explored in detail in a congressional report that resulted from Pardongate, when revelations surfaced that President Clinton granted clemency for Carlos Vignali Jr. — convicted of drug trafficking and sentenced to 15 years in federal prison in 1995 — along with other convicted criminals and one-time international fugitive Marc Rich. The granting of clemency occurred after payments were made to Clinton’s brother-in-law, Hugh Rodham, the brother of former first lady, New York state senator and 2008 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton.


Released in March 2002 by the congressional Committee on Government Reform, “Justice Undone: Clemency Decisions in the Clinton White House” details Hugh Rodham’s involvement in the Vignali affair, as well as the long business history Vignali once shared with George Torres.

The report takes to task top L.A. elected officials, including county Supervisor Gloria Molina, then–state Senator Richard Polanco, then–state Assemblyman Antonio Villaraigosa and U.S. Representative Xavier Becerra, among others, for lobbying on behalf of Vignali Jr., in light of his drug conviction and the fact that DEA agents long suspected Vignali Sr. to be involved in drug trafficking — along with Torres. While a member of the California state Assembly, Villaraigosa wrote the first letter on Vignali’s behalf on May 24, 1996.


Saying Hillary Rodham Clinton was a leader who offered a new path, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa today formally endorsed the New York senator and former first lady in her race to become president of the United States.

Villaraigosa will also serve as one of the four national chairs of Clinton’s campaign for the Democratic nomination for president, it was announced.

At a televised news conference from the UCLA campus in Westwood, Villaraigosa praised Clinton’s approach to domestic issues, particularly education, and her pledge to help end the war in Iraq. The pair earlier toured the preschool at UCLA’s Krieger Center. — La Times

http://mayorvillaraigosasdemons.blogspot.com/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hillary Clinton on Iraq

Public opinion polls have consistently shown that the majority of Americans – and even a larger majority of Democrats – believe that Iraq is the most important issue of the day, that it was wrong for the United States to have invaded that country, and the United States should completely withdraw its forces in short order. Despite this, the clear front-runner for the Democratic Party nomination for president is Senator Hillary Clinton, a strident backer of the invasion who only recently and opportunistically began to criticize the war and call for a partial withdrawal of American forces.

As a result, it is important to review Senator Clinton's past and current positions regarding the Iraq War. Indeed, despite her efforts in response to public opinion polls to come across as an opponent of the war, Hillary Clinton has proven to be one of the most hard-line Democratic senators in support of a military response to the challenges posed by Iraq. She has also been less than honest in justifying her militaristic policies, raising concerns that she might support military interventions elsewhere.

http://www.antiwar.com/zunes/?articleid=12052

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Read it Clinton supporters.

http://tinyurl.com/2dw6z6

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]