Morris: Hillary Will Not Withdraw From Iraq Because She’s ‘A Woman’
Morris: Hillary Will Not Withdraw From Iraq Because She’s ‘A Woman’
Last night on Fox News’s Hannity and Colmes, right-wing pundit Dick Morris claimed that if Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) becomes president, she “will not withdraw from Iraq.” His evidence? She’s a woman. “As a woman, she would not want that record,” Morris stated. Watch it:
Morris’s claim is completely baseless. Clinton has explicitly stated, “If we in Congress don’t end this war before January 2009, as president I will.” Moreover, she was recently one of just 14 senators who voted against the Iraq war funding bill because it didn’t contain a timeline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops. Other women in the House and the Senate, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA), and Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), also voted against the legislation.
Morris appears to be branding withdrawal from Iraq as a weak position that a woman running for president will want to avoid. But according to recent polls, a majority of Americans want a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. With over 3,500 U.S. troops now dead from the Iraq war and the Army warning that the longer we stay in Iraq, the more casualties will rise, the only position that’s weak is not having the courage to support a timetable for withdrawal.
Transcript:
HANNITY: I get this last question, putting you on record early, who, — I think the Republicans will win the election because the Democrats are now so positioned left and I think it will be very hard for them to overcome that. Agree or disagree?
MORRIS: Disagree. Hillary will be the next president. But let’s all work to try to stop it.
HANNITY: You really believe that?
COLMES: Let’s all work to make what’s best for the country happen and get out of this war in Iraq, something Hillary will do before Rudy will.
HANNITY: Hillary changes her mind every second.
MORRIS: You know what, Hillary will not withdraw from Iraq. As a woman, she would not want that record.
COLMES: We will talk about that the next time you are on the program.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Morris is still carrying out his personal vendetta against the Clintons.
June 12th, 2007 at 10:52 amForget about whether she’s a woman, she won’t withdraw because she said she won’t.
June 12th, 2007 at 10:52 am“As a woman, she would not want that record,†Morris stated.
So what’s Chimpy’s excuse?
June 12th, 2007 at 10:53 amthat’s like a new variation of the chewbacca defense
June 12th, 2007 at 10:57 amDick Morris is an idiot. He looks drunk in that photo too.
Why is anything from FOX News even being discussed in here?
FOX News has proven neocon bias and is not legitimate news.
June 12th, 2007 at 10:57 amJake,
“she won’t withdraw because she said she won’t.”
The Clintons also say they care about the American worker, but then hire anti-union press agents, and support the outsourcing of jobs through terrible ‘free’ trade agreements.
June 12th, 2007 at 10:59 amMorris is a perverted toe sucker, so who cares what he thinks about anything. Dick is just a FOX news whore now.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:00 amNo, Hillary as a person tends to be more conservativeon defense issues (when compared to her peers) in my view. Now, that declaration is subject to ridicule by fellow posters – conservative ones especially – but I can imagine Hillary taking a slower approach to end the conflict, rather than the typical democratic plan of yank-em’-out now.
Morris’ statement is weak and odd.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:00 amWOW TP!!! Can’t handle a little word like Pen*s. You have to delete that?
I was unaware that genitalia made a difference in whether a person could/would withdraw troops.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:01 amHey Zooey at the very least President Bush is as smart as the Smartest Woman in the World , Hillery . which by the way is not you . Hillary refuses to bring the troops home because of the bloodbath that would ensue which would be as great as the last time that the Democrats tucked their tail between their legs and Surrendered , which was Vietnam . I applaud Hillarys Courage .
June 12th, 2007 at 11:01 amAh, yes! Another outstanding proclamation from that pillar of honesty and integrity and truthfulness, Mr Dickless Morris.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:01 amSo what’s Chimpy’s excuse?
Comment by Zooey
Clever girl. :)
June 12th, 2007 at 11:02 amHas Hillary fired that union busting hack yet?
I didn’t like her before, now I really hate that bitch.
Unions are the backbone of the Democratic party and the Clintons sold them out a decade ago.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:03 am#5 Tom3 I concur Morris is a tool but Hillary has already stated she would keep troops in Iraq for ’stategical reasons’ i.e. Oil and Israel. She is on record for keeping some troops there as in a Korea Model.
Dems and Progs need a sober objective assessment of hillary as the corporate shill that she truly is. My concern is Hillary albeit much brighter than Bush will have the same foreign policy as him.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:03 am“I was unaware that genitalia made a difference in whether a person could/would withdraw troops.”
(only makes a difference in their ability to simply withdraw….:)
June 12th, 2007 at 11:04 amDickie Morris will not withdraw from the talking head circuit becuase he’s an idiot.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:04 amTroll has been smoking crack for breakfast again.
The Democrats did not “lose” Vietnam and we never surrendered.
NIXON finally got us out of Vietnam, six years after he promised in 1968 that he had a secret plan to end the war.
Troll is a typical inbred Repuke moron and probably drools on his keyboard.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:04 amDICK Morris: Master logician.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:05 am(only makes a difference in their ability to simply withdraw….:)
Comment by heyzeus
LMAO!!!
June 12th, 2007 at 11:07 amI’m surprised that many liberals here would vote for Hillary, to be honest.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:08 amheyzeus women think and act from the Heart , Men on the other hand think with their Brains.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:08 amDick Morris is just another unprincipled beltway hack, part of the Washington values crowd that is ruining this once fine country.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:09 amJake your Comment #20 is good news so your an Obamaman ?
June 12th, 2007 at 11:10 amJake
“I’m surprised that many liberals here would vote for Hillary, to be honest”
See, we can agree on some things.
Hillary will only get my support if she becomes the nominee for the Democratic party. But I will not support her during the primary season. She’s wrong on too many issues in my book.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:11 amOT, but just for fun, George’s wristwatch suddenly disappeared from his arm while he was glad handing the crowd in Albania yesterday.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:13 amThere one moment, gone the next.
US Embassy emphatically denies it was pick-wristed…….
Rudy Guiliani wears dresses.
John Boehner cries on the floor of the House.
Ted Haggart has sex with men.
Jeff Gannon, a gay male prostitute, visited the White House regularly.
The Republican Party: showing the world the meaning of “a man’s man.”
June 12th, 2007 at 11:14 amheyzeus women think and act from the Heart
Comment by Harry Truman
I must have missed that one in my Anatomy class.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:15 amheyzeus women think and act from the Heart , Men on the other hand think with their Brains.
Comment by Harry Truman
_____________________
Where does one start to respond to this idiotic statement? It’s just easier to say the “suck” stopped here.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:15 amIf the choice is between Hillary and Thompson, you wouldn’t vote for Hillary?!
June 12th, 2007 at 11:16 amSadly the Corporate Shill Hillary would NOT get us out of Iraq as proven by her own words; NY Times excerpt
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton foresees a ”remaining military as well as political mission” in Iraq, and says that if elected president, she would keep a reduced military force there to fight Al Qaeda, deter Iranian aggression, protect the Kurds and possibly support the Iraqi military.
She said in the interview that there were ”remaining vital national security interests in Iraq” that would require a continuing deployment of American troops.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E6DB1E31F936A25750C0A9619C8B63
Sober up America, Clinton is Bush in a skirt.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:16 amtom3 you silly young’un . we ran from vietnam , deserted them . the liberal as you people call it neocon zionist media with the help of protests on college campuses across the country turned public opinion against the war . we left vietnam as now you people want us to leave iraq . do they not teach history in the government school anymore ? educate yourself should you wish to express your opinion .
June 12th, 2007 at 11:16 am.”….Men on the other hand think with their Brains.”
Comment by Harry Truman
Which is part of the problem.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:16 amThey use it to invade, but don’t know how to withdraw.
Harry Truman:
I would vote for Thompson.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:17 amI hate to say it, but I agree with Morris on this. With HC we’d get a lot of talk, but in the end I think the status quo would remain. Of course there’d be a lot of window dressing there and our forces on the ground would be ‘re-configured’ (to us the GWB terminology), but the concrete bases are there and subsequently not going to be dismantled. Sadly, for anyone who becomes the nominee (with the exception of Kucinich and Gravel) our presence in Iraq has been literally cemented into place by this imperialistic swashbuckling oil raid of a fiasco! In order for anything to change…and that’s what we want…fundamental, real, honest to goodness change and a real return to bringing our nation’s reputation around the world, there has got to be a complete overhaul on how we do things and how we look at the rest of the world. The Romans, the Portugese, the Dutch and the British all saw their empires fizzle and America will too…it’s inevitable! We’re not special! God has not singled us out for special favor! Until we realize it’s not all about power and money we’re going to continue a slide into the abyss. It’s up to us to set ourselves on the course of a soft landing or do we fall hard? Right now…we’re in a free fall and the parachute isn’t opening. I honestly don’t think Hillary is going to our ‘reserve chute’…if anything…all she we do is buy us a little more time before we hit bottom. Can we get out of this mess? Absolutely! The question is do we as Americans have the courage to face up to realities of the world and stop trying to dictate to everyone else on this planet. We can be the beacon of hope, we can be the light of prosperity, but we’ve got to stop this attitude of our shit doesn’t stink! I hope that Hillary isn’t the nominee…if she is…you think the election of 2000 was a mess…the GOP will destroy her and relish in the ability it will give their base to organize against her. We’ve had a Bush or a Clinton now in the WH or as VP for 27 yrs! Enough already!!!!
June 12th, 2007 at 11:18 amJake I would vote for Donald Duck before I would vote for Hillary
BETTER FRED THAN RED
June 12th, 2007 at 11:18 amIs it a wonder Harry Truman & Dick Morris have to hire hookers…..?
June 12th, 2007 at 11:18 amIs there a bigger sleazebag weasel on the talking head circuit than Dick Morris?
June 12th, 2007 at 11:21 am[Refresh]
June 12th, 2007 at 11:24 amDidn’t Pelosi state that she had prospective plans to bring impeachment to the table during the 06′ election? Didn’t she retract her statement by removing the impeachment proposal from the table? How can Hillary be trusted? Is she basically stating that she will begin the redeployment of troops from Iraq for political purposes? If Hillary is elected, I believe that she will not remove the troops and end the war. She is just carrying this ill-conceived promise as a political banner for winning the presidential seat. Libs, you are so naive.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:25 amBush the Smarter didn’t withdrawal either. Look what we got; Bush the Dumber. Geez. Don’t these uber-rich uber-entitled classes know about “safe” sex?
June 12th, 2007 at 11:26 amComment by Zooey
Everybody needs to buy hookers. You can get those at Lowes for pretty cheap.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:28 am#26 – Rudy Guiliani wears dresses.
John Boehner cries on the floor of the House.
Ted Haggart has sex with men.
Jeff Gannon, a gay male prostitute, visited the White House regularly.
The Republican Party: showing the world the meaning of “a man’s man.â€
Excellent point.
ReichWingNuts, are you really this screwed up? Yes. I thought so.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:28 amLibs, you are so naive.
Comment by Daryll
Coming form you, Daryll, that’s the funniest thing I’ve heard all day.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:31 amMorris is pushing his new book. He harangues against Hillary, but conceded last night on Fox that Hillary will be the next President. He doesn’t question her ability to lead. Neither do I. This is the only statement I’ve agreed with from Morris.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:31 amHANNITY: I get this last question, putting you on record…
I see the problem right there at the beginning… Hannity – part and whole – is not part of “the record.” It is barely part of “the consciousness” and very, very far removed from “the reality.”
June 12th, 2007 at 11:32 amGood Morning Lady Z, In response to your question it is no suprise to me…What baffles me however is that we as a nation pick men at all for our leader’s..No I’m not going down the Hillery road…What I will add is a article I read several year’s ago about men in general….45 minutes out of every hour their big brain looses it’s blood supply to the little brain as they think thought’s of sex…..LOL….Sorry guy’s but it’s true….So they think with their little head and this is what we get, constant hard on’s for war or sex…I would like to see a new face in this dreadful race for the black house, Barbra Boxer comes to mind…Blessings
June 12th, 2007 at 11:32 amWill someone tell “Little Dicky” that the hooker wants her money. She will be waiting for him in the lobby of the Watergate Hotel am sure he can find his way over there.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:32 am…
June 12th, 2007 at 11:35 amI am not a Hillary fan, and I hope she doesn’t get the nomination. I don’t think we need two families trading off the presidency term after term.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:36 amHey Daryll, I picked up a new bumper sticker last week, I thought of you the momennt I saw it!
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS NO MATCH FOR NATURAL STUPIDITY
June 12th, 2007 at 11:37 amHillary’s position is that she’ll leave tens of thousands of US troops in Iraq if anyone cares.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:38 amSince I/m not speaking to trolls, would someone ask Daryll why his wife was wearing a head cover last night, after all, she wasn’t in church?
June 12th, 2007 at 11:39 am.â€â€¦.Men on the other hand think with their Brains.â€
Comment by Harry Truman
I thought it was with something a bit lower down than that and ‘thinking’ might be a conceit.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:39 am#50, she does that and there’ll be lots and lots of new faces in congress in ‘10.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:39 amI am not a Hillary fan, and I hope she doesn’t get the nomination. I don’t think we need two families trading off the presidency term after term.
Comment by Krazny — June 12, 2007 @ 11:36 am
Can you say ‘monarchy’?
June 12th, 2007 at 11:40 am[Refreshin']
June 12th, 2007 at 11:41 amStrike a new deal with Karl, CT-1?
Is he paying you by the comment now, instead of by the hour?
;)
June 12th, 2007 at 11:44 am“Clinton has explicitly stated, “If we in Congress don’t end this war before January 2009, as president I will.”
You can always tell when Hillary is lying because her lips move.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:47 amRefreshment
June 12th, 2007 at 11:53 amYeah women don’t like withdrawal, they want to get preggo and trap you.
/sarcasm
June 12th, 2007 at 11:54 amI think Hillary would leave the troops in Iraq. Not because she’s a woman, because she’s basically a republican.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:55 amping
June 12th, 2007 at 11:55 amDick Morass
June 12th, 2007 at 11:57 amComment by heyzeus
Karl was a hostile employer. He stated that all paid-blogging jobs will be extinct by 2015, so I will never work for him again.
What do you guys call him, KKKarl? Is that it? Well, you’re RIGHT.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:58 amOn second thought I think that a Hillary/Kennedy ticket is just what this country needs, would probably drive the rightwing so crazy they would leap lemming like into the ocean.
June 12th, 2007 at 11:59 amI think an Obama/Hillary ticket would do the trick.
So many ReichWingNuts would willingly leap into the sea from a high ledge that Faux News would have no one left to lie to.
June 12th, 2007 at 12:02 pmA Clinton/Kennedy ticket would make Mondale/Ferraro look strong in comparison.
June 12th, 2007 at 12:09 pmAmanda notes, “Morris appears to be branding withdrawal from Iraq as a weak position….” (I do not oppose leaving Iraq if Iraqi elected officials ask us to do so.)
Note to TP…..Osama bin Laden and our terror-enemies believe withdrawal from Iraq will constitute a victory for THEM…..that is a weak position – enought of the PC semantics. (Next Progs will be telling us how our “self-esteem” will improve…….ble-e-e-ch!
June 12th, 2007 at 12:11 pmAs various comments here and U.S. history demonstrate, connotations of gender weigh heavily in the presidential race — even among the male candidates (part of Republican strategy was to feminize Kerry, and they’re doing it to Edwards already). So I think Hillary’s hawkishness is partly an effort to deflect this sad reality.
Morris is still a bonehead, though.
June 12th, 2007 at 12:12 pm[Refreshinizin']
June 12th, 2007 at 12:13 pmOnly us Liberals believe the campaign promises of our politicians. I pity you my masses. Incredible that you have not learned your lesson from what Pelosi and Reid have done in Congress and how they have broken every promise they made before winning in Nov. 2006.
my poor Liberal masses. so innocent, so naive, so stupid, so idiotic, so easily fooled and manipulated.
I LOVE IT!!!!!
June 12th, 2007 at 12:20 pmOsama bin Laden and our terror-enemies believe withdrawal from Iraq will constitute a victory for THEM
Comment by valiant venus
_______________________________
I don’t care what THEY believe! We are bogged down in Iraq. We are trying to accomplish a worthy goal of diminishing the impact of terrorism on the world. But we are limiting ourselves to ONE “battle field” of the “war” and limiting ourselves by defining the situation solely as a “war”. A strategic withdrawal from this hopeless “battle field” and redefining our overall approach with development of a more comprehensive package of strategies (including diplomacy and law enforcement-based interventions) seems to me to be more logical.
June 12th, 2007 at 12:21 pm[Refreshinen']
June 12th, 2007 at 12:28 pmPresident Clinton,
Can you give me a glimpse on how well or poorly your wife would relate to the Pentagon as president?
June 12th, 2007 at 12:29 pmHillary will only get my support if she becomes the nominee for the Democratic party. But I will not support her during the primary season. She’s wrong on too many issues in my book.
Comment by Crump’s Brother — June 12, 2007 @ 11:11 am
Spoken like a true drone. The primary doesn’t matter. It’s a “Let’s pat ourselves on the back” suck-up contest within the party. If your favorite candidate does doesn’t pass the primary, you can still vote for them in the general election, even if you’re registered with another party. We have too much party loyalty and not enough critical thinking. If you think Hillary is wrong for the country don’t vote for her AT ALL.
June 12th, 2007 at 12:30 pmswordsbane,
“Spoken like a true drone. The primary doesn’t matter. It’s a “Let’s pat ourselves on the back†suck-up contest within the party. If your favorite candidate does doesn’t pass the primary, you can still vote for them in the general election, even if you’re registered with another party. We have too much party loyalty and not enough critical thinking. If you think Hillary is wrong for the country don’t vote for her AT ALL.”
DUMB!!!
I will not support Hillary Clinton for the nomination of the Democratic Party for President. But if the rest of the voters selct her, I will certainly support her in the General Election. If you can’t see the difference, then you are the ‘drone’.
The point being, that I prefer Hillary over anyone from the Republican side.
June 12th, 2007 at 12:35 pm[Prefresh]
June 12th, 2007 at 12:37 pmHillary will do whatever Mark Penn tells her that the polls say. She is not exactly someone I would trust with anything. She can’t even keep her husband’s zipper up. If she gets the nomination, I am going independent with Bloomberg/Hagel, etc. They are more competent, offer more leadership capabilities, and a saner view on Iraq. That said, I am still hoping for Gore or Obama. Hillary will be a disaster any way you look at it.
June 12th, 2007 at 12:38 pm“I don’t care what THEY believe! We are bogged down in Iraq. We are trying to accomplish a worthy goal of diminishing the impact of terrorism on the world. But we are limiting ourselves to ONE “battle field†of the “war†and limiting ourselves by defining the situation solely as a “warâ€. A strategic withdrawal from this hopeless “battle field†and redefining our overall approach with development of a more comprehensive package of strategies (including diplomacy and law enforcement-based interventions) seems to me to be more logical.”
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC)
Dear PLC – OF COURSE you don’t care – you understand military and psychological warfare as well as I understand quantum physics. Pathetic leftist military startegy includes the “warm and the fuzzy” – BTW, our enemies don’t believe in “diplomacy”….the fact you haven’t comprehended this fact is NOT surprising. You may go back to PBS, Air America or planting your urban organic garden now…..
Tooodles…..
June 12th, 2007 at 12:41 pmTooodles…..
Comment by valiant venus
It seems I got late to indoctrination crap class.
June 12th, 2007 at 12:45 pmthe thing I love, is the guy who is the most wanted by the republicans at this point is a 70+ year old actor. Remind you of anything? Why do so many republicans clearly have “daddy” issues?
June 12th, 2007 at 12:53 pmHillary Clinton didn’t just vote FOR the invasion of Iraq. She also helped George Bush sell that war to America!
June 12th, 2007 at 12:54 pmI can’t forgive her for this because she doesn’t even want to be forgiven for doing it! How can I vote for someone with that position?
As for Dick Morris, who cares what he says, he’s just another beltway dinosaur looking for table scraps.
That’s funny, because I conducted an interview with Ms. Deborah Jeane Palfrey recently. She didn’t mention Dick Morris–though he has been named, and she’s trying to get an affidavit out of him–but she did mention ABRAMOFF. Any comments by Morris should be viewed through the lens of what could be at the heart of the “Hookergate” scandal: that certain political elements (many based in Baltimore) are duking-it-out over whether she has information that certain politicians sold-out to a foreign power, or were compromised in some way possibly related to her escort services (maybe through a female intel-operative from a Middle Eastern nation). Someone thinks she knows something explosive. Perhaps she does. This could all be connected to the largest events facing us today, and possibly the cure.
Here’s my first article from 2hr. interview:
WHO ARE JOE CLARK AND MARIA CUVILLON? WHO ARE “DC MADAME” DEBORAH JEANE PALFREY’S ACCUSERS?
“It’s my understanding that there really was no investigation.”
–Deborah Jeane Palfrey to the author.
Washington D.C.–”Do you realize that the information contained in the search warrant was 3-to-3 1/2, to 5-years-old?” states an exasperated Jeane Palfrey. The first thing one notes in speaking with Palfrey is her directness and approachability. She’s a very well-spoken woman who sees the implications of her case, and that they go well-beyond her own peculiar predicament. I point-out that the AP used the same excuse in October of 2006 as ABC recently did for not naming names on their 20/20 segment–she calls ABC’s decision “curious.”
Palfrey’s clients might have included wealthy doctors and lawyers in Washington and its Maryland and Virginia suburbs, but now well-known names have so far surfaced, said a law enforcement official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing. The escort service, Pamela Martin & Associates, advertised in newspapers, on Web sites and in the Yellow Pages. It operated since 1993 “as an out-call prostitution business†of college-educated women with other jobs, the affidavit says. (AP, 10.10.2006)
The piece is careful not to use the words “confidential informants,” but that’s exactly what they were and are. Palfrey adds, “They would have had no knowledge of who the clients were at that point [October 9th when the interview for the above quote took place]. These folks did not have a black book–there never was one. They passed-up 46 lbs. of phone records…they were already making statements about the doctors and lawyers on the 9th of October.” Could this suggest they already had an prepared outline of what to charge Ms. Palfrey with?
It appears at this point that the prosecution has lost the script, with the defendant shut-out of court–an obvious abrogation of due process, a Kafka hell. The good news is that the Supreme Court could be her venue-of-choice soon. Interestingly, the decision is being pushed by Justice Clarence Thomas. Also of-note: her “gentleman’s agreement” not to divulge any information expired after the 20/20 broadcast (they wanted the other nine years of her phone records too), and the gag order barring her from releasing more phone records appears to be floundering with a lot of back-peddling by Federal District Judge Gladys Kessler.
The AP article on October 10th, 2006: http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20061010/news_1n10hookers.html
More primary-documents: http://www.deborahjeanepalfrey.com
June 12th, 2007 at 12:54 pm[Poppin'fresh]
June 12th, 2007 at 12:57 pmkjkjkljl
June 12th, 2007 at 12:59 pmDUMB!!!
I will not support Hillary Clinton for the nomination of the Democratic Party for President. But if the rest of the voters selct her, I will certainly support her in the General Election. If you can’t see the difference, then you are the ‘drone’.
The point being, that I prefer Hillary over anyone from the Republican side.
Comment by Crump’s Brother — June 12, 2007 @ 12:35 pm
Why not try voting FOR someone instead of voting against someone. Voting is really simple. Find the person you think would make the best president and vote for that person. I don’t vote in the primary because the primary is stupid. As far as the candidates go, if I like one, I vote for him/her. If I don’t, I don’t. Voting for someone you think makes a poor president (ie voting for Hillary even though you don’t think she makes a good president) is what’s dumb. Voting for the person you think makes a good president is what the election is all about. An untrained lemur makes a better president than any Republican, but I’m certainly not going to vote for one.
June 12th, 2007 at 1:01 pmmkjkjk
June 12th, 2007 at 1:14 pmAs I recall:
June 12th, 2007 at 1:21 pmHillary Clinton didn’t just vote FOR the invasion of Iraq. She also helped George Bush sell that war to America!
I can’t forgive her for this because she doesn’t even want to be forgiven for doing it! How can I vote for someone with that position?
As for Dick Morris, who cares what he says, he’s just another beltway dinosaur looking for table scraps.
Comment by swordsbane — June 12, 2007 @ 1:01 pm
Different places but same perspective. I would rather be the only guy voting for Ted Nugent, than put my vote on for Rosie.
June 12th, 2007 at 1:26 pmIs Think Progress backing Hillary Clinton for POTUS?
June 12th, 2007 at 1:37 pmDifferent places but same perspective. I would rather be the only guy voting for Ted Nugent, than put my vote on for Rosie.
Comment by Tundra — June 12, 2007 @ 1:26 pm
On the nose. So far, the best candidate I see out there so far is Dave Barry. He’s got my vote at least until everyone else gets tired of the dog and pony show and someone comes up with an original, creative, intelligent thought.
June 12th, 2007 at 1:38 pmTHANK YOU, an hour just to post that, sheesh!
June 12th, 2007 at 1:39 pmIMO one of the best guys to actually run things would be Kucinich, but sadly he looks like a woodland creature and won’t get elected.
June 12th, 2007 at 1:48 pmKrazny: Kucinich will get elected if we vote for him.
But if we vote for a DINO like Clinton, then even if we win we lose.
June 12th, 2007 at 1:57 pmHuh. Let’s send ALL the reichwingnuts to the cornfield. Permanently.
Now, pardon me, I’m going to go enjoy my fantasy of a Republican-free world.
June 12th, 2007 at 3:09 pm90jni9
June 12th, 2007 at 3:31 pmp,l,
June 12th, 2007 at 4:08 pm#90 – “the thing I love, is the guy who is the most wanted by the republicans at this point is a 70+ year old actor. Remind you of anything? Why do so many republicans clearly have “daddy†issues?”
Comment by Krazny
Such freakishly weird connotations you have. Conservatives like Thompson because he doesn’t pull a Kerry/Romney/Clinton and change his position to conform to the latest polls.
Speaking of have a fixation for a “daddy” – it’s interesting to note Progs want government to “parent” children and reward the “bad choices” of supposed adults. (If you REWARD bad – or stupid – behaviour….what do you end up with? Hint: MORE bad or stupid behaviour.) It might be understandable for Progs to be in quest for dad….so many of them forget to get married……
June 12th, 2007 at 4:11 pmLeftside Annie – With a socialized Left world…..who in YOUR world would pay taxes and support charities so generously? (Trust me…if libs weren’t so amusing, we would enjoy living without you.) Here’s something interesting for YOU – and something you obviously DON’T KNOW
(Arthur) “Brooks has spent his academic career studying the economics of charity, and for this project he accumulated a vast store of data in hopes of describing the difference between the 75 percent of Americans who give to charity and the 25 percent who don’t.
“In my preconceptions, I was in the usual box about charitability and compassion,” he said in an interview.
“I figured conservatives were hard-headed, pragmatic, tough-minded but didn’t care as much about others and wouldn’t donate as much,” he said. “I figured liberals were soft-hearted and cared more.”
What he found was that self-described conservatives were “a percentage point or two” more likely to give to charity than self-described liberals. That was surprising enough, he thought.
But what really astounded him was the amount of giving: In 2000, he says, conservative households gave 30 percent more money to charity than liberal households.
The discrepancy wasn’t a function of income; on average, liberal families annually earn 6 percent more than conservative families. The difference in giving held throughout every income level. Indeed, poor conservative families gave a larger percentage of income than wealthy liberal families.
“That was the wow,” Brooks told me. A former Democrat-turned-Republican-turned-independent…”
Why are Leftists so stingy when it comes to charity?? Could it be they are only well-versed in spending “other people’s money”??
June 12th, 2007 at 4:21 pm“One ping only!”
June 12th, 2007 at 4:34 pmI also believe that Hilary will not bring our troops out of Iraq.
To win the presidency I always believed that she would present herself
in a very hawkish manner.
I don’t trust the Clinton’s much more than the Bush’s. It’s time for some
new blood in the Oval Office representing America.
I wish another woman, besides Hillary whom I just cannot support, was running for the Democratic ticket. Hillary has way too many negatives regarding progressive causes for me to support her. She is completely bought and paid for.
Deal breaker for Hillary was during the debate when she said that America was safer now than we were before 9/11. That is just too far gone for those of us who pay attention to worldwide media outlets, official governmental documents, and intelligence agency analysis.
Dick is still a dick, though.
June 12th, 2007 at 10:49 pmping
June 13th, 2007 at 9:07 am