And people don’t vote for the best candidate or even get the best chance to vote for the best candidate. I like Obama but Biden and Clinton were obviously better prospects for the presidency than Mr. Obama. And Romney and Hagel would have been better than Mr. McCain. But Hagel was eliminated because he didn’t care to run and Romney got eliminated because he’s technically not a Christian, though probably a very fine man.

No Blood For Oil or No Drilling For Oil?

===

Bush will go down as one of our great Presidents.

Profiles in courage indeed.

When Democrats say it, it’s true.

When Republicans say it, it’s a lie.

“Four legs good, two legs bad! Buck-buck-buck-buh-KAWK!”

This is typical smearing that liberal lefties do to vilify a policy.

They should not get any more consideration for their absurd arguments. If they want to arrest Bush and Co. they have to get through the Secret Service cordon. The rest of people can blast them legally or physically if they are so foolish to take this stand.

I mean if these idiots attempt to do a citizen arrest for “war crimes” they are likely to get roughed up. Tolerance for this idiocy is getting low.

The problem with the liberal fringe is that they think they are winning the war of words. The MSM is an echo chamber for them and the Democratic Party has appeased them since Deaniacs took over the party.

Once Hillary decided to revolt against the Codepink and MoveOn people vote numbers went up. This was in the Democratic primaries. Obama’s contempt for those that love God and guns showed that a large number of Reagan democrats are getting fed up.

The denigration and a vilification of Hillary by the leftist’s portion of the Democratic Party is creating a backlash. A good portion of these people may jump to McCain. These types of tactics to criminalize differences of opinions feed that feeling that these idiots are dangerous and need to be slapped down.

If Obama wants a real chance to get elected then this type of verbal war needs to be shut down. Olberman is an Obama supporter and Clarke is not helping.

There was a reason that the Bush administration stopped all talk of going after Clinton people once they won. It would have tied them up in recriminations and they never would have a chance to try to promote their own programs. Obama tries to transcend the partisan bickering and Truth and Reconciliation tribunals would just entrench the partisan warfare.

As for Dick Clarke having some legitimate grievance for revenge, what pray tell would that be? Especilly after all his duplicitous b.s. between administrations?

Seriously, the guy has no idea at all how to go about fixing all the defects he claims to see in America. None. Not one of his analyses rises above the level of a freshman’s beginning sociology essay.

The last politician who managed to pull off this particular con, by the way, was… Tony Blair.

I appreciate your clarification, and I regret the error; I’ll make sure to correct my post.

Here in the fever swamps, when we’re not gossiping amongst ourselves about the indisputable Queen Bee, we never miss an opportunity to ascribe dark conspiratorial motives to overlords—especially those at the Times.

“Arianna in Tahiti” is piquant, but it was just a peg for my post, and a silly distraction.

This is a really fascinating story all told, and I do appreciate your reporting of it.

–”Hepzeeba”

A tour of Google entries indicates that there’s a long investigation into the origin of the quote.

I won’t adopt it as a tagline, though, ’cause it’s actually something I’m dedicated to fighting when known by its usual name: prejudice.

“The infidelity of the Gentile world, and that more especially of men of rank and learning in it, is resolved into a principle which, in my judgment, will account for the inefficacy of any argument, or any evidence whatever, viz. contempt prior to examination.”

AA members know the quote in their “bible” as attributed to Herbert Spencer as: “There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance — that principle is contempt prior to investigation.”

Although, I understand it has yet to be found in any of Spencer’s writings.

I could be snarky about it but Winokur has given an old observation fresh life — I like his spin on it.

Both publicly pledge that if are nominated for President, the other candidate will be their first choice for the Vice Presidential spot.

This immediately puts a stop to attacks on the other, or calling their ability into question. They can still debate the issues and clarify their differences, but the main focus of their anger and outrage can now be directed at the Bush-McCain policies of the past 8 years.

The enthusiastic support of the other is exactly what each candidate will need in the fall to win. Each appeals to the voters the other has the hardest time attracting. If they combine their strengths – “hope” and “work” - they both will almost certainly be in a position to lead America out of the mess we are in.

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/bronx/2008/03/04/2008-03
-04_dem_win_could_mean_big_bronx_bucks.html

Now what should residents of his District do?

Here are his staff salaries! And they dare not arrange a meeting with
constituents on such a historic shift in U.S.-Mexico relations which
he’s allowing to take place under his ‘watch’!

http://www.legistorm.com/member/220/Rep_Eliot_Engel/36.html

One has to wonder what they do with our money.

Disgraceful.