So much for my “not worth threading” protestation! :D

Rather facetiously I have to say that Kucinich didn’t have the height or the hair to succeed, and no matter how smart ( and incidentally attractive) a Democratic candidate’s wife is, it doesn’t seem to help (whereas Republican idiot stepford-wives are a positive boon to electablity, apparently).

Edwards was too goddamm cute to order the invasion of a country and be taken seriously(in the general scheme of things you understand–not my opinion).

The DEPTH of the opening 2008 Democrat field when all this began was extraodinary–a far-cry from 2004. I’ve no idead, had i the powere, how to resolve Obama and Clinton, but Edwards and Kucinich IMHO would do us all proud in domestic cabinet posts–Edwards as VP perhaps, Kucinich at Interior?

Clinton or Obama. I;ve no idea how either of them view Kucinich, but IMHO they should empower him in some way–he’s got the heart and the intellect to motivate people and to initiate and execute smart and necessary policies.

http://newsprism.wordpress.com

“It wrecks me that I cannot find the enthusiasm to support Hillary”

Ironic LOL (on my part)! My support of Hillary has been based on calculation, not enthusiasm–I sure don’t have a crush on her but some do. Emotional appeal is an important and unavoidable factor, not to be underestmated or denigrated by anyone.

“I can kind of understand why she, Hillary, feels the need to appear all tough…”

I understand that too, but though I’d prefer to think she’s motivated to “appear tough” she’s either overdoing it ( poor political judgment) or she really is that hawkish. The former undermines the “experience” argument, the latter undermines the “representatice” argument (of public opinion and need).

It’s all quite extraordinary.Bring on the Conference and bring on the election! The owrst of Obama or Clinton is still bound to be a thousand times better than the GOP option and hopefully the energized and clearly majority Democrat voters will maintain their curent interest and force the professional politicains to pay attention to the public.

She’s not in the same “class” as John McCain as I note a lot of OBamadem’s like to claim–in general that is— but this is one aspect of the candidates’ expressed outlook at least where I favour Obama. If that one issue persuades anyone, caucus voter or superdelegate, to side with Obama rather than Clinton. I’d call that a rational and smart choice.

Just mu view, not worth “threading” really, just wanted to put that out there.

I really wanted to believe in her because of Bill. But there have been too many instant’s like this (what Mary posted), that killed it for me. It seemed like everytime she opened her mouth she made matters worse. The lying was the icing on the cake. But, in my case, I didn’t want either one. I wanted Kucinich, he is awesome and the media completely ignored him. If you check his voting record and what he has done in my state you would truly be impressed. The media calls him very liberal. They don’t like him at all…

Have a great day …5th Estate!!

It wrecks me that I cannot find the enthusiasm to support Hillary. Someday, before I die, I hope there’s a female candidate I can fully support. I’m hoping for Obama at this point, if only because he seems the least hawkish of the remaining three candidates, and the most trustworthy (not that I really trust any of them). I really, really, really don’t want us to end up attacking Iran. I think it’d be a huge mistake.

I can kind of understand why she, Hillary, feels the need to appear all tough, but, I hate it. At this point the truly “tough” route is going AGAINST all of the aggressive, saber-rattling that’s been going on for 8 years.

And, btw, if it’s your view I’m always glad to read it!

http://www.stephaniemiller.com/files/mp3/2008_0422_ritter.mp3

I don’;t know who your are rooting-for (and don’t need to know, I just want a DEM to win in November) but I happen to prefer Clinton over Obama for many reasons.
This kind of crap however from Hillary makes me despair, and makes me angry.
If I screw my brain into knots I can choke out an argument that she’s pandering to the hawks and middle America and what not and dosen;t REALLY mean it, but the trouble is the words aren’t carefully chosen, they seem adamant.

She’s not in the same “class” as John McCain as I note a lot of OBamadem’s like to claim–in general that is— but this is one aspect of the candidates’ expressed outlook at least where I favour Obama. If that one issue persuades anyone, caucus voter or superdelegate, to side with Obama rather than Clinton. I’d call that a rational and smart choice.

Just mu view, not worth “threading” really, just wanted to put that out there.

Fallon told Petraeus [in March] that he considered him to be “an ass-kissing little chickensh*t” and added, “I hate people like that”, the sources say. That remark reportedly came after Petraeus began the meeting by making remarks that Fallon interpreted as trying to ingratiate himself with a superior.

Great, we have a total failure as leader and “an ass-kissing little chickensh*t” leading the military. All we need is a Maj. T.J. “King” Kong to complete the incompetent bass-akwards plummet into WW3.

Whomever cast a vote for bush is automatically classified a vegetable.

Yes, he should be forced to account, but unless the Dems grow some balls, he’ll be confirmed.

After reading more about Adm. William Fallon, the more I like him. I completely understand why he resigned. He knew what needed to be done and that is get out of Iraq. That conflicted with George’s plan; you are not allowed to disagree with Bush.

Petraeus is a kiss a** and a lackey. That is what we are left with. Someone who walked all over his boss and disregarded the chain of command. Only in the Bush Administration would that be admired and revered..

Well, Congress can divert this looming lunacy by calling Petraeus to testify about how he “lost” or actually lost, hundreds of thousands of weapons and millions of dollars when he was commander of MFN-I.

At the risk of being an attention seeker, here’s a link ( at the end of this comment)to a post on my long neglected blog which tries to make sense out of the debacle of equipping the ISF so that they could “stand up” etc.

The upshot is that under Petraeus’ command over two years anywhere from approx. 190,000 (reported by the WashPo) to 297,000 (my calculation) were purchased for the Iraqi forces with US money and then WENT MISSING! Better yet, the ISF was already situatted to already have or recieve all the weapons they needed and would need BEFORE Petraues took over.

And ‘better’ still despite a total of 701,000 weapons purchased and supposedly distibuted to ISF and the Iraqi police (who combined would number just 350,000), Maliki just stuck a $100 million deal with the Chinese last year for…wait for it….provide the ISF and police with the weapons they apparently need ( using Iraqi money this time.

In other words there’s been massive fraud,massive incomptence or both under Petraeus command and he needs to be called to account. Now would be a very good time to brin Petraeus back from his present and near future “duties” of doing what the neocons say, and demand he account for his quite recent past professional ‘duties’ and incomptence. Doing so should mean he’ll be too busy defending himself to plan an attack on Iran.

here’s the link from August 2007 (the content is longish and a bit complicated, but take a peek):

http://at5thestate.blogspot.com/2007/08/guns-and-money.html

“I want the Iranians to know that if I’m the president, we will attack Iran,” Clinton said. “In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them.”

http://www.abcnews.go.com/WN/Vote2008/story?id=4698059&page=1