Craig Crawford's Trail Mix

I'd say how pleased I am that someone is putting the war in front of all of this politick-tocking, but I dont want to jinx it........

yes, I know.....Richardson, Kucinich, Biden, Dodd, etc etc........but they dont seem to be able to make it NEWS when they say it........I'd like it to be THE conversation thru-out the democratic party......all thru the next year, a drumbeat of opposition and rejection of the last 8 years of fools........(I believe someone here has a list?)

a good campaign speech for some candidate would be one where they simply read the names from that list.......name after name......it'd be like a chinese water speech.....

Sturg,
What the Clintons can do better than anybody is get their face on tv. When she did bad in the debates, she got on tv. When they called Obama a coke-head, she got on tv. When they claimed she got more scrutiny, she got on tv. Think about that last one.

Biden could cure cancer, Richardson create world peace, but they'd put Hillary on tv when covering the story.

Speaking of lists, dnd's five favorite Tom T. Hall songs:

5. The Homecoming
4. Deal
3. I Like Beer
2. Faster Horses
and the number one favorite song (and in honor of Iowa)
1. Who's Gonna Feed Them Hogs

http://www.myspace.com/therealtomthall

Instead of listing them alphabetically, it would be an inverted pyramid with growing levels of enabling, lies, corruption and blunders buildiing toward the apex of the top few.....or two......or one. Pretty powerful list......

Faster horses, more whiskey.......

Hillary has become - or perhaps always has been - a manipulative chameleon. I no longer believe that anything she says can be trusted. She loves power far more than truth.

I dont think Hillary "loves" power......I think she has a cold hard reckoning that power comes with winning the election......and it's a power that will contradict that of the neo-cons.

David Corn, with a little Huck-a-note:
For years, the Republican Party has played the Christian card, pushing "family values" and decrying abortion and (more recently) gay marriage and, in return, collecting the votes of evangelicals across the country (including key presidential swing states). But if Huckabee wins Iowa and continues to do well in subsequent states, how will the GOP elite react to the possibility of this former Baptist minister nabbing the nomination? My hunch: with panic. While Huckabee can pull social conservatives, he's not what the party needs to attract independents and those suburban GOPers who are not social conservatives. Consequently, there may well develop a campaign--call it a crusade?--to stop Huckabee. And if such an effort emerges, how will the social conservative grassroots of the GOP will take it? Another hunch: not kindly. They've been there for the party, and if they see their party not standing by one of their own, there will be resentment, anger, and alienation--hell to pay?--which could last until November and beyond.

Power more than truth? You make her sound like Ugo Chavez. Shouldn't you two be BFFs?

I think we will start to see the "party" take charge....you can't tell me that Tacredo came up with the Mitt-endorsement on his own.

Craig.... I bet the war becomes a subject of discussion again once the nominees are picked and campaigning for the general election begins.....
BTW... nice appearance on Abrams last night.... you looked like you were having fun....

Colleen.... I'd like to know how anyone.... in any party... can decide to try to become the President of the United States..... Leader of the Free World.... and not be ambitious and have love of power...... if such a creature exists, I suggest you don't vote for him/her.... the job would overwhelm them.....

sturg..... I like that scenario you laid out..... it would tear the GOP asunder.... how much fun would that be to watch.....

9/11.... if you go I will miss you..... I too miss the way this blog used to be.... we fought some, but you could always count on coming here and reading intelligent discussion..... I learned a lot back then.... now it's clogged with insipid and vapid one liners..... please stick around....

Blue if she was more like Chavez I would seriously consider voting for her.

Craig,
Hello? During the last Democrat debate Richardson used his "say anything you want" slot to talk about Iraq. Sheesh. The guy can't get arrested.

She's a complete fraud. Before you know, it she will take credit for summer,fall,winter, spring and and night and day. PHONY, PHONY, PHONY....

but if hillary brings the war to the forefront, it can only help Richardson, Biden, Dodd and Kucinich that it's there......Richardson might not have to "take advantage" of some situation to have a chance to talk about it......

In the "be careful what you wish for" category, Tom Tancredo has dropped out of the race. This means, for those who watch MSNBC, that his campaign manager, Bay Buchanan, will be showing up on Hardball and Tucker any day now...

Ok.....who let Holden Caulfield in............

Alone among the 08 candidates, Senator Clinton has the ability to devise political and policy positions that are defined by reality and not appeals to the base.

Clinton's stand on Iraq has consistently been that is unnecessary, poorly executed and strategically detrimental.

At the same time, she has recognized that GW Bush has exposed us to far greater danger and that we have to be skillful and cautious in executing a withdrawal from Iraq.

Senator Clinton shows similar aplomb on other issues.

This is why she is the Democratic front runner, why she will secure the nomination, win the election and serve proudly and well as America's first woman President.

sturg...... LOL! (your one liners are priceless!)

dnd.... your frustration over how the media is covering the candidates is showin'.... isn't it despicable..... Hillary burps and it's all over the news..... Richardson or Biden could make the speech of a lifetime.... nary a mention....

Bay Buchanan....... can't wait to see his face on tv...... ;)

Judgment is SUCH a crucial issue, and when 23 Senators voted against use of force in Iraq back in Oct. 2002, it worries me that we may be giving Clinton, along with Edwards, Biden and Dodd, a pass on this--the consequences are not small, and I agree with sturgeone that it should be a much larger consideration than it is appearing to be. However, for that very reason I also disagree with sturgeone's later comment that "Clinton's stand on Iraq has consistently been that is unnecessary, poorly executed and strategically detrimental." I think it is entirely too easy to have a short memory about how her vote, and that of the others, just five years ago, completely negates that comment, showing how she did not think it was unnecessary then, or strategically detrimental--especially when other candidates spoke out or voted against it (Obama, Kucinich, Gravel, others perhaps). If any are interested in some more details on this consideration, check out a recent post of mine here: http://election2008options.blogspot.com/2007/12/whats-in-vote-for-war.html

during the Clinton war reminder tour she shoud raise the question of why the Betrayous report has been moved to from March and where are the 5k troops who were supposed to come home for Christmas

Where is Senator Warner now?

Repost from last thread:

9/11

I was glad you returned, I will be sorry if you leave. I've always been interested in your comments and world view. They opened a window to a life experience far different than mine.

I do agree that the level of discussion has changed since the early days of this blog. That is probably the reason I comment here much less frequently.

I wish you all the best.

What about the war in afghanistan which is getting worse. I blame the media for giving a false picture of what is going on.

9/11....
I almost left too.... if your comment was directed solely at me (which I'm sure it wasn't).... well... you're preaching to the choir....

it's been truly a pleasure getting to know you through this blog..... like Bowman, I wish you all the best.... and the same goes for Miss Birdies..... who is truly blessed to have you as a father.....

Godspeed....

For whatever reason , Hillary seems to be the one candidate that a lot of people have an opinion about. Even my Mom told me last night that she doesn't want Hillary to be our next President.

Hey Corey
did your Mom say why not?

9/11-- please stick around...also, email me at balecox at aol dot com....Thanks (Put 9/11 in the subject line!)

Brendan.....
I agree with you that 2002 vote to authorize force against Iraq was no small matter..... I think the Democrats who voted for it were mostly concerned with their own political careers..... but then, it's the rare politician who isn't.....

I think some of them were cowardly..... and I think some.... like Biden and Dodd... truly believed that the President of the USA would only use force as a last resort..... too bad that president happened to be Bush.....

But enough time has passed and I decided it was time to move forward... I was seriously thinking of voting for Hillary in the primary... I was excited about the prospect of actually electing the first woman president of this country...
but then came the Kly/Lieberman vote.... that was the deal clincher for me...

I cannot and will not be voting for her in the NH primary...... if she's the Democratic nominee..... I'll vote for her while holding my nose.....

Corey,
My mom won't vote for Hillary either, for reasons articulated by Colleen and Renee. And she's prepared to vote for any of the demmycrats; 'cept Hillary.

Branden's post is very interesting because it lays out the positions as they originally were stated not as they have become. Senator Clinton is for the war and is just unhappy that it was badly managed. Even with out wmd, it Shrubco had done a better job she would still be supportive.
I think a lot of people also have that view. Antiwar America is still in the minority.

The Hillary Hater crowd in here is starting to sound like a bunch of sign carriers at the Mena Arkansas Airport with "Killed by Clinton" author autographed editions in their back pockets.

9/11

Don't you dare go anywhere!!! Everything is better when you are around and I've hung in here waiting for your appearance. Your being here has brought back appearances by CBob, Blue, Sheila and Tylenol. All the old regulars know what a positive effect you have on the list and you've been sorely missed. You go this time, and I take a powder, because it isn't worth being here without you.

Jamie....
I don't hate Hillary.....
I do, however, wish another candidate would become the Democratic nominee.... but as I've stated in the past I do think she will become just that...

we ought to be able to discuss the merits of why or why not we will be supporting any candidate in an intelligent and level-headed manner.....

what?!!!..... you're the one who convinced me to stay on this blog when I wanted to leave...... don't even threaten that girlfriend......

Renee,

I wasn't talking about you. My candidate of choice is still Biden and that is where my "snowball's chance" hopes are residing.

It is just that sometimes a "cigar is just a cigar" and between Tweety, Tucker and the Greek Chorus of MSM, Hillary sounds like Mrs. Macbeth on steroids instead of a brilliant, competent woman with whom they have policy differences.

Jamie,
W.r.t. Hillary and the press, I subscribe to the "they build you up just to tear you down" theory. There's an easy story there. They get ratings. You don't get ratings from candidates that 1) don't have name recognition and 2) people don't have strong opinions about.

My take away from this is that it isn't about Hillary, it's about what a pack of jackals the MSM is.

9/11,
We don't always agree, but I enjoy your opinions. Take care of yourself. That's what's important.

"My take away from this is that it isn't about Hillary, it's about what a pack of jackals the MSM is."

dnd..... that quote is so spot on it's worth repeating.....

Jamie..... ahhhh..... so something that was just said on MSNBC about Hillary got you upset...... well, let me take this opportunity to reiterate something that dog has said several times...... when those of you who watch that channel post about some comment made there on this blog..... those of us who don't, and or, aren't watching it..... don't know what the hell you're talking about most of the times...... I know you don't intend this..... but it feels like an "insider's clique".....

BTW..... 9/11..... I just remembered you can include eprof on your list.....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20071221/giuliani-secrecy/

More bad news for Rudee wow
maybe the boxes were full of old fruitcakes

Renee,

I was talking about the remarks by people writing here (See Colleen at 7:19) above as just one sample. When it is just one person or intermittant remarks it doesn't bother me at all. I just don't ascribe evil motives to people I don't know or when I don't even have second hand knowledge of their activities.

To hear Democrats literally echoing everything negative that has ever been said about Bill and simply transferring them to HIllary is a bit off putting. When combined with the political pundits barrage (again without any proof of any kind about the woman ... just making noise).

Just one example that I questioned at the time: Tweety interrupted his daily spiel of Hillary is Satan rant to say out of nowhere, "when you meet her in person she is really nice". It just made absolutely no sense whatever.

Disagreements or other viewpoints are no problem at all. Certainly I don't subscribe to "cliques". Heck, most of the ones who departed disagreed with me at some point and we always observed the "agree to disagree" rule which is what made it so pleasant.

Jamie....
sorry if I was wrong about a comment from watching MSNBC..... it's just done so often.... it's hard to tell.....

I'm wholeheartedly in agreement with you about the MSM and their comments about Hillary and Bill..... Tweety is so inconsistent it's laughable..... one of the many reasons why I rarely watch him anymore.....

gotta run..... I'm going to a local restaurant for an Xmas party with some girlfriends.......

It's A Blunderful Life by Jim Ward from the Stephanie Miller Show

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72xwfJxSs_k

I am going to intrude on this drama just once and will then let it pass. I’ve straddled both crowds on this blog and I have witnessed some of the childish nastiness that has caused many to leave and others not to post comments very often.

The main problem that I see is that this resource has become a chat room rather than a forum for discussion. Pithy and biting comments are more suitable for countless other blogs, not this one. For Lord Sakes, this is now hosted on Congressional Quarterly and we are guests of a prominent personality. One would think that those facts would inhibit anyone from making nonsensical or hateful remarks.

My suggestion would be to think carefully before you post a comment and to respect those with whom you disagree as you would want to be respected. Simple steps, but they do work.

I was very critical of Hillary for many years. Primarily for botched health care, and for not being --in my terms -- not a strong enough feminist. I was pissed that she buckled on changing her hair, dropping her glasses and not speaking out stronger.

But one day I was going back over some papers from my grad school days in history....my primary area of European history was the Holocaust and the Nazi propaganda machine. I had started out in Ancient History, but after being married and living in German, and a trip to Dachau, I returned to try and make ssense of what the hell had happened to humanity.

I began evaluating how and why I had been so critical of Hillary Clinton. And I had to face up to what the Lakoff book calls language framing. Years earlier I had done a great deal of reading on how language alterations and slants shaped German thought....I also knew all the codes used against women when I was a feminist editor. It was all there. America didn't want a feminist in the White House. Not one who looked like a feminist or -- God forbid, a '60s long hair with black framed glasses. Betty Ford was able to get away with a lot of her views because of her overall demeanor.

To my intellectual chagrin, I knew I had been systematically suckered. And while I probably don't want to have a beer with Hillary, I know what that mindset got us in a presidential election.

And here's my take on that "apology" question about the so-called war vote, which was in fact NOT a "war vote." I think Hillary could and maybe should have said the only thing she'd apologize for was not recognizing that George Bush couldn't be trusted with power.

Furthermore, I am so damn sick of this "apology" culture that I could puke. My father always said people apologized too much....His reasoning -- "Don't insult or hurt anyone unless you mean it."

FDR pushed a lot of people's buttons, too. As did JFK....

Mad/Patsi

Thank you.

Thank you, Mad. That's exactly what I was asking for, from all of us here on this blog. Most people here have manners, are respectful of others and provide thoughtful commentary, and it's both enjoyed and appreciated.

I read Renee's 11:10 comment with interest. If she feels as though this becomes an 'insider's clique' when MSNBC is referenced, I would ask all of you who've been here longer to think about what it feels like to those of us who are newer at posting here. It's not much fun to be told, even subliminally, that we're having a negative effect on 'your' blog. We, too, want to benefit from the collective knowledge and experiences of everyone here. And some of us, like you, really miss posters like C'bob and Sheila. (I didn't know any of the others you've mentioned - some very little, and some not at all.) Anyway, I'm just sayin'

Patsi...Your 12:06 post was fabulous! Very thought provoking....

And dog...thank you! You are always a calm and gentle voice of reason. I appreciate that a lot!

well this is a fine howdoyoudo.

I think I'm going to take a break from this place
it's become quite unpleasant in the last 24 hours

"If Hillary wins the nomination can she unite the party."

Who cares? If Hillary wins the election, can she unite the country? No matter what you think of her or her ideas, the perception of her is such that it would be very difficult if not impossible. That said, I think it would be as difficult for Obama and Edwards as they lean pretty far left.

If the dems don't nominate a moderate, they lose.

Well, just as we're having a kum-ba-ya moment, I go and step in it. So I may as well just keep it up...

harborwoman, just because you're relatively new her is irrelevant. We were all new at one time or another. Just keep posting your thoughts.

Patsi, your 12:06 post was really interesting. Especially the part about language framing. When you have the time, I'd like to hear more about it.

And now I better get started Christmas shopping. See y'all later.

I think it may be more of a kum-bye-bye moment, dnd, but thanks for the moment of levity in all this seriousness! And I don't plan to leave...not in me to run when the going gets tough...so I'll see you later. Right now, I've got about a million things that need my attention, so I'm gonna' go give it to them...or as many of them as I can....

NEW THREAD