Who cares whom Gore endorses? This is the clown that ran a worst campaign than Kerry and almost gave us Leiber-schwartz as a Vice President. Talk about knowing how to pick 'em. Go home, Al. We don't care what you think of Hillary.

Gore should endorse Obama and here is why.

League of Conservation Voters releases environmental ratings of 2008 Presidential candidates - Obama is at the top of the list!

http://presidentialprofiles2008.org

There is more info. on Obama's environmental record here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/9/14/9017/67671

Timing matters so much to endorsements, and even then it probably matters more to our perception of an endorsement's power than it does to the actual power of an endorsement. An "I like this guy" statement can help one day, yet have no effect a few days later.

If Gore's endorsement is to have any meaning, it will need to come early enough in the primary season to influence the opinions of undecided voters in the early primary and caucus states. In other words - pretty soon. With so many states setting earlier and earlier dates - I think Iowa is going to retroactively schedule theirs for last week - voters are choosing candidates very early in this cycle. A Gore endorsement of Richardson next week, for example, might influence enough undecided voters to move him into a tie with Edwards for third in New Hampshire. A Gore endorsement of Edwards next week might influence enough undecided voters to move him into a tie with Obama for second in New Hampshire. But that's only if the endorsement happens very soon. Shortly, the undecided voters will have formed their own opinions and won't bother with Gore's.

They are Con Artist Sally Westgate from buyblue.org Monica Friedlander , Linda from Draft Al Gore, Susan Madrak, Neo Libman - NeuvoLiberal, Nicholas Smith , MB Williams from , Jim .
Racist Draft Gore Con Artists Looking for Black Slaves , Jews, Hispanics , Latinos, Asians, Arabs, Iranians, Indians , Pakistani's and other Foreigners for Votes and Donation Conservative Racist Draft Al Gore Con Artists Looking for Black Slaves, Hispanics to work in their Farm, Clean their houses, and asking for their Votes and MoneyElectGore2008.com Urge every Americans to stay away from the Racist Draft Gore people.ElectGore2008.com Urge every minorities to stay away from the Racist Draft Gore people.

I would urge every Blacks, Jews, Asians, Hispanics, Iranians, Arabs, Latinos and other foreigners (French, Germans, Italians, Russians) to stay away from these Conservative Racist Draft Gore people if you have some self respect and dignity. They hate the minorities and they discriminate against you. Therefore use your own Judgment.

They have made many racial comments about you , they abused you, they insulted you , they called you by names , they criticized you on their forums (algore.org, algore2008.net, draftgore.com ) and they don't like you because they are Evil and you are God's children . Now they want your Votes, Money and Support. Have some self respect for your self. Stay away from these con Artists and Criminals. That's why I call them Racist Draft Gore Con Artists.

They stole money from Katrina Victims. Now they steal money from the American people daily, by lying, cheating and conning the innocent vulnerable Americans. As far as I am concerned they are worthless trash.I Predicts that Conservative Racist Draft Gore people will never accomplish anything in this world or in America as they wanted.

------------------------------------------------------------
Racist Draft Al Gore People discriminate, insult, and abuse Minorities (Blacks , Hispanics, Latinos, Asians, Arabs , Jews and other foreigners) on tRacist Draft Al Gore People discriminate, insult, and abuse Minorities (Blacks , Hispanics, Latinos, Asians, Arabs , Jews and other foreigners) on their forums (algore.org, algore2008.net, draftgore.com ) .
Draft Al Gore Videos

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foeEyYN3aaw&watch_response
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmWgJjMVVkM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-qrj8rZoBI

They stole money from Katrina Victims. These people are Evil doers and they are worser than the criminals.Racist and Con Artist Sally Westgate (from buyblue.org) Monica Friedlander , Linda from Draft Al Gore, Susan Madrak, Neo Libman - NeuvoLiberal, Nicholas Smith , MB Williams from , Jim are racists, thieves and con artistsRacist and Con Artist Sally Westgate (from buyblue.org) Monica Friedlander , Linda from Draft Al Gore, Susan Madrak, Neo Libman - NeuvoLiberal, Nicholas Smith , MB Williams from , Jim are racists, thieves and con artists

There are Millions of Democrats and the republicans who are honest, Genuine and who are not racist . However this small group of Draft Al Gore Con Artists are Racists, Liars, Thieves, and Manipulators who are trying to deceive the American people and ruin the entire country. You need only few Evil doers to ruin the entire world or the country. These are the same Cold hearted , heartless Evil doers who stole money from the innocent Katrina Victims.They are evil doers trying to ruin the entire America and ruin Al Gore's name and his reputation by lying , cheating and Conning the American people daily.

pathetic: only $4800 for Gore on ActBlue?by azizhpTue Jul 10, 2007 at 06:02:17 AM PDTUpdate [2007-7-10 10:3:26 by azizhp]: people seem confused about ActBlue's Draft page. The money goes to Gore if he declares, or the eventual Dem nominee if he does not. So its risk free.Update [2007-7-10 10:7:30 by azizhp]: Fred Thompson, another undeclared candidate for President, is raising boatloads of cash.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/7/10/84355/0209

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to this Posting on DailyKos these Racist Draft Gore con Artist were able to raise only $4800 through actblue, Lets say if those 100, 000 people donated $1, each person , they shoud have $100,000 in their account and can they show to America that they $100, 000 in their account. Evil witches and Demons why are you lying to the American people and deceiving them. This Evil witch Monica is the Major witch who is responsible for conning the American people and Al Gore.

Racist , Con Artists, thief, Evil witch Monica Friedlander Cheat , lie Con American People \

Racist Draft Al Gore Con Artist are Deceiving America and Al Gore by creating thousands of fake signatures Racist Draft Al Gore Con Artist are Deceiving America and Al Gore by creating thousands of fake signaturesDraft Al Gore Con Artists Created 1000s of Fake signatures to fool the American People and Al Gore so that they can steal more money from America. These people are Liars, Crooks, Con Artists, and worthless Unemployed trashes Monica is a biggest Evil witch and a con Artist.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Group Urges Gore To Run For President

100,000 People Sign Petition To Urge GorePOSTED: 8:38 am CDT July 12, 2007UPDATED: 10:48 am CDT July 12, 2007
http://www.wsmv.com/politics/13668659/detail.html?rss=nash&psp=news-

Check out this US Carbon Footprint Map, an interactive United States Carbon Footprint Map, illustrating Greenest States to Cities. This site has all sorts of stats on individual State & City energy consumptions, demographics and more down to your local US City level...

http://www.eredux.com/states/

First, who do you think Gore is going to endorse and why? I think he endorses Obama because its the politically hip pick and, as we know, Hollywood Al is now hip. If he was smart he would endorse Hilary and go with the winner but i don't think past history will allow that.

Second, how much does a Gore endorsement matter in the Democratic primary? I've always been one to question why endorsements matter at all. I think they are a waste of time. I just can't hear myself saying - I'm voting for so and so because Al Gore gives him/her the thumbs up. So to answer, hopefully not at all meaning that people decide based on their own thoughts and feelings.

Rufus, I already told you why that poll was invalid, in my post yesterday at 3:41. You might have noticed that if you ever actually read anyone's posts.

As JasonL said, the poll is phrased as an "or" question. That's ridiculous. If the pollsters actually wanted to know peoples' opinions, they'd give discrete options. The breakdown could be 30% believe the government knew in advance and 3% believe the government is involved. Or it could be the other way around. Who knows?

And neither option on the poll has anything to do with your original statement, that Bush and Bin Laden are conspiring together to make people vote Republican. It's very possible to believe that the government knew about 9/11 but not believe that. It's also possible to believe that the government caused 9/11 but not believe that. The poll says nothing about whether your belief is popular or correct. Bring it up as often as you want; it doesn't help.

Boko - all of Bentsen's papers are in the UT Library but he only died last year and they are not all catalogued to the web yet. He did have many personal contacts in MX and was a fluent Spanish speaker.

Bokonon, one part of Bentsen's plan became law - NAFTA. He encouraged maquiladoras - plants on the MX side of the border with duty free US trade. These plants used to account for maybe a third of industrial employment in MX, and led to the move of many north, but inside MX.

He was unsuccessful in getting the MX govt. to enforce its wage and hour laws in the maquis and he began to lobby for enforcement of both the labor and environmental laws, when the maquis started polluting the Rio Grande. What I am looking for are some position papers on plans to use NGOs to circumvent the MX govt's unwillingness to play by the rules.

For all the heat NAFTA takes and despite the fact that the maquis were our first huge outsourcing effort, without both, most of MX would have already moved to TX, because there would be less than half the trade with MX we have now.

Our own farm subsidies have done a great deal to crush farming in MX, and I do not
have access to Bentsen's views on this on the web.
------------------------
I think there is only one positive from our invasion of Iraq - Saddam is gone.
That makes constant overflights by the USAF and RAF to protect the Kurds and Shia unnecessary. Replacing constant overflights with an occupation on the ground seems... an unintended consequence.
I do think Petraeus made an excellent presentation, but not one that could answer the question George Will [today] raises about "the mission".
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/10/AR2007091002065.html

It strikes me that there are a couple of possibilities here for the type of endorsement Gore could want to make:

1. The "Likely Winners": Hilary or Obama. Gore endorsed Dean last time around at a point where Dean was flying high. Given that Obama's campaign still isn't gaining much traction in the polls and how unlikely an endorsement of Hilary is, I can't see him going for this option. If Obama makes a few early gains however he could well leap on board.
The reasons he might choose this path would be to emphasise his status as an elder statesman of the party.
2. The "Issues" Candidates: Dodd or Edwards. The Goreacle could favour this path for a couple of reasons.
Firstly there is no risk that if his candidate loses, his reputation takes a tumble too. He can say that he endorsed to bring an issue to the table.
Secondly it would likely do just that. I agree with others that Gore's endorsement is a few days of newspaper stories at most - what may be remembered is the story that "candidate x is said to have the best environmental strategy". It'd be little more than the slightest of polling bumps in any case.

Mark, I'm curious about Bentsen's Mexican plans. did he have anyone he was talking to/working with on the Mex. side of the border? also curious what you and others thought of the Petraeus Show today... I didn't hear a lot of it, but it didn't seem to me that anyone's mind was changed in either direction.
Dave S, you're right to say that the commitment Bushie made to Iraq is going to turn out to be a generation-long one, despite what was said at the time. I am afraid that the only way to keep this from bankrupting our country will be to internationalize it to the extent possible. Yes, this will entail giving up some control over the military ops. Yes, this will mean working with and maybe even fighting alongside some folks who aren't too fond of Americans. And yes, even if we are successful in attracting some nations (back) to Iraq with their troops and funding, we will no longer be able to dictate how the situation will be managed. However, the alternative would be a nation sliding more and more quickly into debt to the Chinese.
Can anyone at this point convince me that anything positive has come out of our involvement in Iraq?

What differance does that make jason. Either why, aren't they liable. Elaborate please.

SO your saying a most people were in the "let it happen" group. Ok that's fine. That may or may not be true.

But my point is there is no differance between the two. none at all. The cover-up should tell everybody one of the two happened. Now if that's true then what? Take that poll again. I want these gop'ers to wet themselves.

Elaborate please jason. I still don't get your or blarg's position. If they knew but did knowing, is that better or worse than doign it themselves? I don't see a differance between the two. Same thing to me. The deaths are on gop hands. iraq and that war is also on their hands, with a HUGE jelp of fox "news"

elaborate please.

So you saw the 33% poll. Now why again is that poll invalid? - Rufus

It's not a good question because it is phrased as an "or" question.

"Do you think that the administration knew or was involved with the 9/11 attack?"

If someone just thinks they knew about it then they get lumped in with the people who think that they conspired to make it happen.

Hey. Who is this Powell guy. He sounds like me :)

""Colin Powell: Terrorists are not greatest threat to nation
In an interview with GQ magazine that's scheduled to be put online here at 11 a.m. ET, former secretary of State and one-time potential presidential candidate Colin Powell has this to say about terrorism and the threat it poses to the USA:

"What is the greatest threat facing us now? People will say it's terrorism. But are there any terrorists in the world who can change the American way of life or our political system? No. Can they knock down a building? Yes. Can they kill somebody? Yes. But can they change us? No. Only we can change ourselves. So what is the great threat we are facing?"

Powell adds, in an interview with Walter Isaacson, that to improve its image in the world, the USA should focus on welcoming newcomers. He takes on the immigration debate that has become a hot-button issue in the presidential race:

"America could not survive without immigration," he says. "Even the undocumented immigrants are contributing to our economy. That's the country my parents came to. That's the image we have to portray to the rest of the world: kind, generous, a nation of nations, touched by every nation, and we touch every nation in return. That's what people still want to believe about us. They still want to come here. We've lost a bit of the image, but we haven't lost the reality yet. And we can fix the image by reflecting a welcoming attitude -- and by not taking counsel of our fears and scaring ourselves to death that everybody coming in is going to blow up something. It ain't the case."

As for the Iraq War, Powell -- a retired general and former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff -- tells Isaacson that as he and others in the Bush administration debated strategy in the lead-up to the war, he did not think the Pentagon and then-secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had planned for what would happen after Baghdad fell.

"That was the big mistake. Don had written a list of the worst things that could happen, but we didn't do the contingency planning on what we would do about it. So we watched those buildings get burned down, and nobody told the divisions, 'Hey, go in there and declare martial law and whack a few people and it will stop.' Then the insurgency started, and we didn't acknowledge it. They said it wasn't an insurgency. They looked up the definition. They said it was a few dead-enders! And so we didn't respond in a way that might have stopped it. And then the civil war started at the beginning of last year. I call it a civil war, but some say no, it's not a civil war, it's a war against civilians. In fact, we have total civil disorder."

Also today, GQ has already posted a lengthy interview with Rumsfeld. Author Lisa DePaulo sums up her conclusions this way:

"If you're expecting Don Rumsfeld -- out of government now, on his farm, in a moment of repose -- to play the bitter, angry, reflective, tragic fallen hero ... ain't gonna happen. If he feels any of those things, he's not showing it. (And if he did, he probably wouldn't be Donald H. Rumsfeld.) The man does not do regret. Over the course of the next few hours, he will answer every question asked of him, and even when the answer is 'I'm not gonna talk about that,' there's never a flash of anger. Impatience, yes, but never anger."
"

sounds an awful lot like rufus. If colin powell says what Rufus syas, does that make rufus smarter? If so why?

Listen to THE WORD, and see if you agree, not the SOURCE."

""cc is silencing me again."

Posted by: Don't We Wish! | September 10, 2007 06:09 PM "

Alright zouk. You show your fascist face. You wish me gone for making "over the top" statements. does the same rule apply to fox rush and hannity. If not you are a hypocrite. But I'd at least like to hear your defense of them. Once. coward

Mark in Austin - Kinky Friedman's "Mexican Generals Plan" doesn't count.

"cc is silencing me again."

Gore's endorsement is a non-factor. Despite the fact that he won and Oscar for An Inconvenient Truth and the fact that he is bringing much needed attention to the issue of global warming, he is essentially irrelevant. If Gore does make an endorsement he will most likely support Obama. Obama represents the most "non-Clinton" element and God knows the recent history between the Clintons and the Gores is not very good (has anyone read the book Sammy's Hill by his daughter? There are some barely hidden shots at both Clintons in there under the guise of fiction).

If Gore endorses anyone it will be news for a few days and then when it is realized that no one cares except the chattering classes the Gore endorsement will fade into oblivion as all endorsements do.

Great. So my posts are to up cc's gop lipmus test.

It will be fun seeing what you propogating fascsits allow and what I can say.

Gore fat, ok.

Bush behind 9/11. Not ok.

Blarg. Elorborate, please. So you saw the 33% poll. Now why again is that poll invalid? And why do you think that number woul dnot be a lot higher now. Defend bush, please.

test. cc is silencing me again. I know you gop'ers make the rules. I know the gop only has free speech.

Just thought I'd let the rest of you fascists know. You got a freind in CC.

If you can't win cheat.

FOX does not believe Rufus will stop posting if FOX stops broadcasting.

FOX demands that Rufus show good faith by not posting for 48 hours before FOX enters negotiations with Rufus.

If Rufus is not a mere windbag, let him prove it.

"

Hey. I did stop for 48 hrs. It's called the weekend :). If I don't coem here I feel as though I'm not doing my job as an american. Fighting the fascists who are destroying this great nation. I no longer serve in the army bu tI still serve the country. Who do you people serve and why?

I am a fly to fox. Fox is the big fish. Rufus isn't even a bateria in fox's ocean. They own it all. The right controls everything. What do I control? I don't even control this ONE blog. Share and share alike gop. You have everything as it is. But like 5 year old's that's not enough. You want more. You want it your way. Or what? You'll cheat, you'll lie you'll spin.

I'm am nothing in the grand sceme of things. The only power I have is the power you people give me. Unfortunatly, you don't give me much power. I will take it if you give a part of yourselves. Are you willing to do that? No. Not inthis country anyway. Not when everybody is their own god in their own universe.

God will judge you, not me.

I forgot Baja. There are 6 MX border states - 4 border TX, one borders NMx and AZ, and one borders CA.

The right wing attack mahicne is so big because the right are full of dittoheads. they take orders well. The left radio doesn't do as good because we are all individauls and do not follow external avatars. And it's the individuals fault the right is doing what it's doing? Lies spin and misdircetion

You gop'ers are responsible for what you have doen the last 15 years. You cannot balme everything on others. Your time is almost up. Say what you will. Just don't expect your children to follow you down down down, into a burning ring of fire.

Gore will endorse Gore. If not, then I'd say head for the hills as The Earth is in the Balance, and he understands that - moreso than any other candidate running for the office.

The strengthening of the Mexican economy, especially in Mexico's five border states, was a strong issue for Sen. Bentsen.

He had even thought of work arounds for the corruption of MX government.

I will try to find some of his policy papers on the web, if they exist, and cite them if an appropriate occasion arises.

JasonL--I was against the US going into Iraq in the first place because I believed even though Saddam was crazy, he would not be crazy enough to do something that would lead to a U.S. invasion that would result in his death. Now that the U.S. is in Iraq, it is inevitable that we will stay there in one form or another. If the US withdraws, there will be a real civil war in Iraq, not the low-level fighting (call it a civil war if you want) that they are seeing now. Iran would not be able to resist getting involved, which then destabilizes the region responsible for providing a good percentage of the world's oil. The U.S., EU, and even China are not going to sit around while the oil supply gets choked off by violence and will send a U.N. coalition back in. In other words, now that the U.S. opened the box, there is no good way to close it. Either 1) the US continues to camp in a failed state for years, or 2) they leave, all hell breaks loose, lots more people die, and the US returns and camps in a failed state for years. I prefer option 1 because I think it will lead to less bloodshed. If option 2 would somehow lead to a more stable democracy, then I would lean that direction. It's just that bloodshed in a civil war setting has not been proven to lead to a better democracy. (See Sudan).

In response to your point about timing and why the US could not have waited, if the US had waited more than a year or two, the US never would have gone into Iraq. 9/11 provided the political will and capital to go in. The main problem with the Bush II administration is that in all his efforts to not be his one-termer do-nothing father, he became the two-termer try to do too much son. He was too hasty to use his political capital and put the US in a situation from which there was no way to remove themselves. I chuckle a little bit whenever people criticize the administration for going into Iraq without an exit strategy. What good is a strategy for something that cannot be done? Bush knew this. The administration knew this. Unfortunately, a large enough chunk of the American public believed that we would be able to go in, draft a constitution, build a few court houses, and the Shiites and Sunnis would all sit around singing the Star Spangled Banner.

After endorsing Dean in 04, I would that Gore is looking _for_ reasons to support Clinton. There would be no surprise in Gore, whom Republicans try to paint as Ted Kaczynski with a Secret Service detail, supporting Obama or Edwards or another 'insurgent' candidate. Supporting Clinton, on the other hand, would suggest a semblance or unity or purpose among Democrats, centred around a figure other than Bush.

FOX does not believe Rufus will stop posting if FOX stops broadcasting.

FOX demands that Rufus show good faith by not posting for 48 hours before FOX enters negotiations with Rufus.

If Rufus is not a mere windbag, let him prove it.

"Wouldn't the best solution to our immigration problem be successful economies in Mexico and Central and South America?"

Sure, but how do you propose we do that? - | 04:55 PM

To be honest I hadn't really thought about it before; it simply dawned on me that the Immigration debate focus is on the effects and not on the cause.

I've heard comments about why "illegals" are coming to this country, but the discussion immediately moves on to fences and fines and amnesty, etc.

It's been over 40 years since an Administration paid serious attention to that, with the exception of NAFTA.

It would be nice if some of our philosopher politicians looked seriously in that direction.

Got any ideas?

The right, and to a large extent, FOx "NEws" are %100 responsible for the current level of political discourse. To me anyway. 100%.

Bill O'Reilly brought me into this verbal american war, when I knew nothing. When I was a (verbal war) non-combatant.

The right is responsible for the deep water we are in. Both politically and media-wise. YEt I am the one to be shunned. How does this happen, in america. Why is Imus off the air but Rush, with his magic negro, still on the air? How does ann coulter continue to appear on fox daily?

We have a big problem in this country. That problem is not me, an anonymous poster. Fox is to blame to a large exent, much bigger than me. Get Fox off the air and I'm gone. Plain enough for you. All those that want me gone, do you feel the same way about fox? If not why?

Rufus, free lefty radio is available 24/7 om XM Satellite Radio,Ch. 167. It will make your heart sing!

Sorry blarg. I'm assuming your a clinton supporter based on your posts. I don't read all and remember all.

Enlighten me.

Biden? PauL? What?

You think I'm a moderate Clinton supporter? Do you actually ever read anyone's posts? Or would that cut down on your output?

would like to welcome our newest member Rufus. In writing on this blog he has exemplified everything that we hold dear. By pushing to ban FoxNews and Rush Limbaugh, he has shown intolerance and the willingness to censor viewpoints that disagree with his own."

Like I said numorous times. Fox and rush and malkin and coulter and malkin and savage, all these fascsists, should be "banned" in their current state. Fox is not news. They should not be able to pose as news. They should not have "news" creditials. They should be treated like us weekly or the national enquierer. Stripped of press creditials. Stripped of their apperance of real journalist credibility.

Now rush hannity malkin and so on should have their shows. If they are going to be on FREE radio they should be balanced out. They would never stand for somebody on air telling everytbody how they are lying all day everyday. So they woudl not do it. Not the rest of the countries fault.

I think all these lying propogandists should have to put cd's out. I would have no problem with any of that.

What I object to is fox labeling itslef" Fair and balanced". I also object to them given the same level of respect as cnn or MSNBC or ABC. They should have NO representatives in the white house.

That's not to much to ask, is it? Where is the left "news" station. Where is the free lefties propoganda on the radio? It doesn't exist AND SHOULDN'T exist. We are a self govermnet. In a self-government we need all the real news we can get. And nonne of the lies misdirection and propoganda

"I went to grade school with one of the dudes on that plane. What happened to him, if you're implying he wasn't actually on a plane that crashed in PA? "

I'm sorry about that simon. Really. I don't have all the answers. The differance between me and the rest of you people is.

I want the answers. I need the answers. Why are not not ten times more angry than me simon? The people being lied to all this time, like the tillman family, sheehan, and you simon, should be the angryist of us all. Why are you people enabling the fascists rather than punching their teeth in (mediforically of course, don't want you cowards crying to the patriot act cronies), like me?

"While you debate your crackpot theories about disappearing planes and missiles and international Jewish conspiracies, the Republicans are laughing at you. Then the moderates start laughing too, and we lose again. You make all liberals, and all liberal ideas, look foolish. You can attack me as much as you want, but you're the one who's hurting our movement, not me."

Whatever blarg. There was no movement without peole like me. People like me gave us the majority. What have you been doing the last 7 years. Standing by letting the r's destroy the country, that's where. With a big smile on your face. Now you want to reap the progress ME and other s like me are making.

As to the r's laughing at me. WOW. They are the dylusional ones. The r's are the people to be laughed at. I have no love for you "moderate's" blaarg. I have to say. You take all the credit, eyt do none fo the work. YOu moderates. Moderates are sell-out gop'ers that haven't been paid yet. You have no ideals. You have no morals. YOu don't care about this country. This is why clinton's numbers are up

"She can win". That's waht you say. Guess what. I'd rather lose to the gop, than elect a closet gop to do the same thing that they would de if they were in power. Why not just elect them again, if your going to do that.

The moderates hate the left because of our passion. Because we care. Because we are doing something. What are you doing blarg? Parroting talking points. Attacking the voice of the party? Why? You scared the right is going to be scared off?

Screww them? If they choose party over country. SCrew them blarg. If they choose fascism, screw them.

This is not game to win as many fascist gop votes as possible, blarg. This is to change the government. To change the way the country runs

If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem.

Again blarg. I care about the gop'ers feelings (that your trying to sway) as much as they care abou tmy feelings. I care about a goper's feelings as much as they care about the constitution.

As to your comment about," Playing into the gop hands". They got YOU fooled. Who is fox pushing for president? Who is rove pushing for president? Clinton.

Now who is playing into their hands? the moderates or the "liberals"

Pick a side blarg. Stick with it. Better to hold your tougue that cause division amounst the "good" side.

Dave S:
So the alternative is sitting in a quagmire of a failed state fighting against insurgents while our primary focus in Afghanistan falls by the wayside?

That reasoning is worse. I'm not against overthrowing dictators and spreading democracy, but when do our needs come before theirs? Did the invasion of Iraq make us safer? Arguably not. Couldn't it have waited while we solved our own problems? Was Saddam the worst dictator alive? Probably not. Could a peaceful, successful democracy in Afghanistan have made a democracy in Iraq better, easier to form? Maybe it could. Maybe having seen the good work we did in Afghanistan the Iraqi people would have asked for our help, really assisted in our efforts to make Iraq better.

What we have instead is an incompetent Iraqi government and a rising death toll and an Afghanistan that is rapidly degenerating.

! : That is about the only thing that makes sense, because, according to reports, our being there is the best recruiting tool Al Queda has. I am trying to look at this whole mess and what logic there is in arguements from many angles. I cannot justify, in my mind, how the loss of life and limb is worth the Oil/Money for a few, when there is no threat from Iraq.

Nuts. | September 10, 2007 04:55 PM is me.

"Wouldn't the best solution to our immigration problem be successful economies in Mexico and Central and South America?

Maybe then people wouldn't want to leave their homes to come here." -| September 10, 2007 04:45 PM

Sure, but how do you propose we do that? We send billions of dollars to Central and South America every year. How do you propose that we eliminate graft, reform their schools, and otherwise assist their economies?

JasonL--Your archaic, political realism in assessing which people deserve to live under a dictator and which people do not no longer flies in a world where government intelligence and military power have increased to the point that a citizenry can no longer opt to revolt and throw off their shackles. The American and French Revolution never would have happened if the ruling government had machine guns and phone-tapping capabilities. Your "they were getting by well enough" is paternalistic bull#@$! There are plenty of good reasons to be against the U.S. going into Iraq, but the reason you give is not one of them.

Wouldn't the best solution to our immigration problem be successful economies in Mexico and Central and South America?

Maybe then people wouldn't want to leave their homes to come here.

"They again deny a cival war is going on, and to withdraw would indeed create a cival war. Something is wrong here folks." - LylePink

Well, Iraq has met the technical definition of civil war since 2006. Many scholars and retired officers believe that there will be civil war in Iraq whether we leave tomorrow, next year, or ten years from now. Our, presence is keeping the stew simmering but hasn't, if it ever can, taken the stew off the fire.

As someone else was saying earlier, you don't get a democracy by handing people a ballot. Look at the French revolution and the American revolution. The people wanted change and they took it with their blood and sweat. The Iraq's didn't REAllY want that change. They were getting by well enough before and now they're always looking over their shoulder, certain that a Sunni or a Shiite, or al Sadr's Army, or someone else is going to kill them or stuff them in the trunk of a car to be tortured and dumped on the street.

drindl writes
"we have a considerable number of 'knowledge workers' who have been displaced because foreigners from a country with a lower standard of lving will work for less, so American workers will always be at a disadvantage against people from poorer countries."

So why can't the displaced American knowledge workers use all of their smartness to create a new type of job that is fun and rewarding?

Actually Zouk, some of those things which you propose in the 4:21 pm post wouldn't be bad at all.

Even though I think that rufus' neurons are misfiring somewhere on Venus, I've always wondered about pictures from the security cameras at the Pentagon.

DOD must have hundreds of cameras all over that place, with "potential attack" being one of the reasons. Which means that all sides of the building would be surveilled.

I have no reason to believe in the conspiracy theories, and am not surprised that DOD has not been forthcoming with tapes, but do wonder just what the cameras recorded.

It's as if the State of Texas wouldn't say that the School Book Depository Building had a 6th floor.

I would like to welcome our newest member Rufus. In writing on this blog he has exemplified everything that we hold dear. By pushing to ban FoxNews and Rush Limbaugh, he has shown intolerance and the willingness to censor viewpoints that disagree with his own. In order to push his views, he demonizes another segment of the population into a soul-less, treasonous mass that is worthy of death and could be stamped out of existence according to the will of his own party. Welcome to the club Rufus, and keep up the good work. Fascists everywhere are cheering you on.

lylepink - My guess is that if we leave Iraq that al Qaeda gets weaker, for two reasons: 1) their primary reason for being there will no longer exist and 2) because any that stay will simply be getting in the way of the Sunnis and Shiia as they go at each other. Those factions will quickly dispose of them.

To answer Blarg's question -- if no candidate deserved endorsement in 2004, Gore should have refrained from making an endorsement.

That said, as an Obama supporter I hope that Gore will endorse Obama but do fear that the Dean onus might stick to Obama because of it.

But Gore's endorsing Obama would still be good so that the Gorelovers won't mistakenly vote for Edwards.

Blarg is right, and I shouldn't respond. But...

rufus writes
"The flight that crashed in PA. Where is the plane? Where are the bodies?"

I went to grade school with one of the dudes on that plane. What happened to him, if you're implying he wasn't actually on a plane that crashed in PA?

The idea that Al Queda would gain strength if there was a troop drawdown seems to be somewhat of a no brainer. Thinking back a few years, I seem to recall Al Queda was primaryly in Afganistan and most of them were from Saudi, Jorden, and other countries, and hardly any were from Iraq. They again deny a cival war is going on, and to withdraw would indeed create a cival war. Something is wrong here folks.

I think that he will endorse Obama.

Edwards has too much baggage right now, despite the union endorsements to make a great run in the general election. Between the Breck girl clip, the Louisanna mortgage issues, the reform platform that Murdoch's paper called him out on and all he doesn't really have a chance anymore, despite his valiant effort in Iowa.

I think Obama has spent the time to build a great organization and has the money on hand to fight out the nomination and given Gore's support and popularity he could seal the deal in Iowa and New Hampshire and hit the ground running Feb. after winning S.C to boot. Gore going to work for him and Oprah stumping too would mean a lot for Obama and with his message, his lack of baggage and the strength of anti-Rep. sentiment he has a great shot at crossover appeal.

I don't think he'd endorse Clinton because of the baggage between the two families.

I think it'll be Obama and hopefully he'll be right this time, lol.

Al Gore will endorse Barack Obama.

The endorsement will be worth 5 points in the primary. [Howard Dean's implosion was exclusively self-triggered. Even the Almighty's endorsement would not have saved Dean from himself.]

Gore has acquired considerable extra stature over the past few years. Hence the huge (5%) impact.

Why Obama? Liberated from his own presidential yearning, Gore is free to do what he sees as the right thing -- at peace, unencumbered.

The poll says that 33% of people think that Bush and Cheney were either aware of or involved in 9/11. It says nothing about whether people believe that "bush and bin laden are working together to put fear in the voting public to vote r".

And notice that the poll question had an "or" in it. The poll didn't separately question knowledge or involvement; it lumped them together. I find that very suspicious. There's a huge difference between believing that our government had prior knowledge of 9/11 ("Bin Laden Determined to Attack in US") and believing that our government orchestrated the attack. And even the latter position is more sane than your belief that Bush and Osama conspire to get Republicans into power.

What good do you think you're doing with these whacko conspiracy theories? I'll tell you what you're doing: You're playing right into the Republicans' hands. You, and the rest of the "9/11 Truth" movement, are embodying the most ridiculous stereotypes of liberals. While you debate your crackpot theories about disappearing planes and missiles and international Jewish conspiracies, the Republicans are laughing at you. Then the moderates start laughing too, and we lose again. You make all liberals, and all liberal ideas, look foolish. You can attack me as much as you want, but you're the one who's hurting our movement, not me.

Brave gop. Get teh enemy. An old lady who is broken by the greif of her son being killed for oil and stock profits. I might me angry if I was her too.

Brave gop. You people are so tough.

"Cindy Sheehan arrested at Petraeus hearing
By Klaus Marre
September 10, 2007
Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan was arrested Monday in or near the hearing room where Gen. David Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker are testifying on the situation in Iraq, according to the U.S. Capitol Police.

Four anti-war protesters were arrested for disorderly conduct. One of them, who was not named, is being taken to George Washington Hospital "due to complaint of injury" and is also charged with assault on a police officer.

According to the information from the Capitol Police, Sheehan and the other three were shouting in a hallway.

Sheehan was the face of the anti-war movement before saying in May of this year that she would "retire" from the cause. Shortly thereafter, she announced that she would seek the congressional seat of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

"

Iraqi Boys are Looking for Hookers in Basra, Baghdad and Fallulah. I think Condoleezza Rice would be perfect for that job if she can get gold teeth and Gold fillings with her sexy face and Hot Body..

http://911review.org/Reports/NEW_VIDEO.html

Watch the video blarg. What do you see?

Is it a fake. Let me ask you this question, since your a foutain of knowledge.

The pentegon should be on camera 24-7, right? I'm sure you'd agree with that statement. So if that is a true statement why are the tapes under lock and eky? Why is this video that shows no plane the only video?

I watched something that showed inside the pentegon, through layers of buildings. There was a 10 foot perfect hole in the wall. how is that possible. It is a rocket, not a plane.

The flight that crashed in PA. Where is the plane? Where are the bodies? If you cared one bit you would reserch these things and come to the same conclusion. The fact that you refuse to do the research and instead attack me daily. I have to assume you people are lying propogating fascsits, choosing party over country. Don't I have to assume that, if you people are taking the positions you are? How can any independant thinker think otherwise.

Why are people burying this? Money? Power? fear?

Doesn't matter to me. I care. To much maybe. I will make you hear the truth. What you do next is up to you.

But when you all reach the pearly gates, many years from now, you won't be able to tell peter you didn't know what you were doing.

Activists Take Al Gore To Task For His Diet He may be the hero of the environmental movement for his crusade against global warming but Al Gore is about to be targeted by animal rights activists over his carnivorous contribution to greenhouse gases

I am curious to see who Gore endorses. Does he know what the candidates' stances are on the status of Humanitarian issues? Has that an effect on his choice at all?

I say that blarg. Because you are hindering truth and trying to divide and conquer. That is zouk's game. He's got a patent on it (on this site).

The last poll was at 33%. That's high no. You must also take into account the fascist borg gop vote of 10-25% which will always vote for gop no matter the poll. Mindless dittoheads. That makes that 33% that much more impressive, don't you think?

And that was back when people still didn't know fox was propoganda and bush was lying to them constantly. We know that now. It makes the clinton impeachment the 2000 election and 9/11 come under a differant light. To most americans anyway. To people that will not look at the facts or the tapes, not sure what to say to you.

I can't put knowledge in your heads. I'm trying, but you got to put the work in yourselves. I can't make you care.

Bokonon: I have been listening to the hearings and both the Gen. and Amb. are using almost the same reasoning for staying in Iraq. This did not suprise me in the least. The deal about al Quida and Osama bin Laden did not ring true, in that everything I have seen and heard seems to be helping these folks in turning the world against us. Another thing I noticed was the seemingly attempt to gain support for a war against Iran. The results are mixed at best, when anyone knows that an increase in troops in one area only takes them from another, and then the violance will increase there. I have read a few stories about "Cooking the books" and this seems to be what is going on. The Amb. wants to prop up the current Govt. Lot of difference.

You got me, Rufus. I'm Zouk. That's the only reason that I disagree with your statement that "bush and bin laden are working together to put fear in the voting public to vote r". Everyone who isn't Zouk knows that Bin Laden's big goal is getting people to vote Republican. It makes perfect sense. I tried to trick you, but you're just too smart for me.

Gore will pick the one most likely to give Hillary indigestion. I just wish it were Joe Biden--the best candidate in the race.

That or be a child molester dem1 :)

Frickin republcians. And they think nobody knows what they are doing. HAHAHAHAHA.

Your party is done. Criminals and child molesters. That is the current state of teh gop. OH, and war loving liberal hating gun totting fascism. That too. Forcing your political beleifs on the nation. Forcing you ideals (that you don't have any intention on living up to yourselves) on others.

Sell-out gop. You have sold this nation out. And you did it for money and power. What did that used to be called? Treason. What did the people that commited treason used to be called? Traitors.

YOu have a year and a hlf gop. Use it wisely.

If I want to become Gop Member do I have to learn footsie???

they are wholly dependent on state sponsors now

and of course the Democrats in congress

"xposed. Do you remember the 069 elections zouk"

06 elections. CC is messing with my posts again.

ZOuk has been a bad boy. A dirty nasty bad boy. I hear his foot tapping. :)

Bin laden is not stupid? did he foresee that an attack on the US mainland would cause the Taliban to be ousted and his life to be forever confined to a cave? I admit that clinton's perpetual non-reaction might have led him to believe this but with Bush in power, his strategy clearly failed and he is therfore to be considered stupid. al queda is more and more on the run, suffering massive defeats and the killing of the leadership. their money is tied up, they are wholly dependent on state sponsors now - mostly Iran.

and this was not stupid?

Whatever zouk. That is the differance between the right and left. Ready?

The left are doing what they are doing becasue we love this coutnry. That is the differance. If it was a dem doing this to our country nothign would change. The left would rally against them too. But that wouldn't happen. The dem's tend to listen to the country and rest of the world.

Again, zouk,. Something you would never understand. COUNTRY over PARTY. Ok zouk. COUNTRY over PARTY. The left is not rallying against you people because of your political party. They are rallying agianst you becasue you have destoyed the constitution and country. You have divided the country in to two americas, not the left.

You say the "waccos" hijack the left. Wackos have hijacked ,not only you party, but the country for the last 7 years. Crazies are the one's who are still believing bush and his propogandists. That's crazy. Following who you folow, knowing they are lying to you. That is what's crazy zouk.

The lef tin this country has become you conscince. To listen to the left is to listen you yourselves. The problem is, doublethink. Gop doublethink. Lie spin and discredit. sabotage.

It's ok zouk. The great hing about all this prognostication is, we will find out soon.

Don't cry like a baby when you people are xposed. Do you remember the 069 elections zouk? Wher eyou living in a cave then. The people have already rejecting you. You didn't get the memo?

Does Gore or Bush know anything about Footsie..?? I can teach them if they are interested.. I think Clinton is a very Naughty boy.. You bad Boy Clinton...

Bokonon--
I think that answers my question. I will concede the idea that Bin Laden released his video just prior to the Petraeus report to keep America in Iraq longer is a strong argument, as is your argument about the last election. In the pro/con balance that we all do, I come out with the cons of leaving being higher than the pros of leaving, but I hate that Bin Laden has any degree of input in the process.
In terms of Bin Laden enabling, I think that posters like the one that everyone ignores are as guilty as anyone. Unfortunately there is a great deal of guilt by association in politics and having loonies on your side when it comes to national security doesn't help the democrats win elections in a war on terror world.

aNyone remember that iraq vet soldier at the gonzales hearing? The one that was keeping a tally of the " I don't recalls".

I saw he was arrested last friday for putting up war rally signs. I saw it on firday. They brought in a bunch of cops and a horse and arrested him and other anti-war vets. For putting up posters.

What country are we living in? Is this still america. What country are we living in where a war veteran is arrested for putting up signs organizing a anti-war march. Seriously.

Blarg, maybe you can answer this. Your defending this. What country is this now? Are we still a democracy/republic? Are we an empire? Are we now a monarchy? What country is this? When and why did it change? Who is responsible?

Blarg, what will you Dems do with the support of people like Rufi and ignorant coward? move on is now calling General Petreus a liar? How will the Dems shake off the loony toons wing of the party? the Rs are moving away from the evangs this time to regain the middle. Meanwhile your party moves ever further into unelectable zone. clinton won with the DLC, hillary will lose with Kos.

Like the muslims, there are few who call out the wack jobs among them. why only you? I don't remember anyone defending the rascist william on the right or other conservatives who went out of bounds. Is it the lust for power thing?

Well, that does it Blarg, rufus has outted you as being Zouk.

Close the case file.

We are heading and we are already in Recession... good Luck Repubs and Mr.Bushy

Dr. Gore is passionate about Global warming and this country. I bet If All the democrats stop breathing for 30 minutes we can stop Global warming and save millions of people.

The rest of "you" blarg are sell-outs. You don't care about truth. Your just as bad as the rest of "Tehm" Shoot. Your probably zouk, for all WE know.

Last time I heard 33% said bush/gop/cheaney either knew about or orcastrated 9/11. That's one third and that was over a year ago. YOu don't want to run that poll now. I think the MSM and gop are to scared to run that poll again. I would put that number at least up to %0-50 now.

Blarg/zouk. Enough from the peanut gallery. Post your posts. Don't mess with me today. BAd day. Another bogus petreus report saying we are staying in iraq. " Wait for the sep. report". We could have gave this report 3 years ago.

Gop lies spin and misdirection. And you by playing their game are prolonging it Blarg. Stand up. If you are not stopping the fascsits you are enabling them

i know you gop'ers don't awant to hear that. But you don't want to hear a lot, these days. To bad. Reality check.

Who attacked us on 9/11? Read up on the saudi ties between bush and SA. Now who does terrorsim "help"? A terrorist attack is the only hope the gop has in the next election. So who is on the side of the terrorists? What does the "left" in this country want? Does it go in line with bin laden and AQ? No. how about the right? Yes.

Do the research. The gop has hijacked this nation. They are holding the voting populance hostage with fear/terror. not the left. All non-dittoheads know this. The gop is a bout to be voted out for a generation and no amount of tim mcveigh tactics will stop that now. Try it again, gop. See what happens. The american people now see you and what your for. SAbotage. divide and conquer. PArty over country

Rufus, you and the voices in your head might believe that Bush and Bin Laden work together. That doesn't amount to "many on the left". That's a belief of the super-paranoid black-helicopter crowd, not the mainstream progressive movement. Believe whatever idiocy you want, but don't pretend that the rest of us are behind you.

"I don't mean this in a pejorative way or anything, but did anyone else notice in the bin laden video how much he echoed sentiments from the left when it came to the war"

Many on "the left" think bush and bin laden are working together to put fear in the voting public to vote r. If that is the case it would make sense to have the enemy saying what your enemies are saying. So if bush really is behind 9/11 then bin laden's comments would make more sense, no?

Like rove/fox trying to force the dem's to nominate Hillary. The gop is trying to burn the candle at both ends. I have said here repeatly bush is behind 9/11. Again, if this is true binladen comments soundly like a leftist (which if you know anything you know he is a RIGHT-WING fundelmentalist LIKE the religous right in this country).

If you look at the big picture. The gop and bin laden are on the same side. Religous laws. Fascism. Killing those they disagree with. Forcing their ideaology on others. The gop and the terrorists stand to win with the same things. Who does terrorim in this country "help? The gop or the dem's? If terrorsim helps teh r's tehn would it make sense they are aligned?

Bin Laden Video Comment - I believe that Bush and the hawkish stance (in Iraq, while until recently downplaying Afghanistan) actually benefits Bin Laden much more. Whatever else Osama may be, he's not stupid (nor is Zawahiri, who by some accounts is now running the group) and he knows that his "statement" before the last election helped Bush get back in. Bush is the greatest recruiting tool al Qaeda could ask for, and they want to get as much use out of him as possible before he leaves, not to mention help to elect someone with a similar mindset/approach to foreign policy.

Do your thing Gore. You must have the gop scared if they are spending so much time on you. You must be on point if all they can talk abou tis your weight or the fact that you to fly private jets. The gop must really be scared of this guy. Maybe it's becasue he has as big a reason to hate bush as anybody. if he were elected vp he would ensure the gop does not walk out of the oval office without some form of accountability. I say 30 years each for bush/cheaney/card/ armitage and so on.

That will make sure this never happens again. The treason that is. The selling out of the country for betterment of a party that can be voted out at any time by the people. The will of the people. A concept that is foreign to the empirical slave followers of the gop.

does anyone know when Gore would make his endorsement, if indeed he does? If he endorses this fall, before the voting starts, I would guess he would go with Obama. However, if he waits until after Iowa (which might be too late already?) he might go with Edwards, who I think is going to come on strong in Iowa and NH, and then - right before Feb. 5 - he will be looking a lot more electable and might gain support. Of course, if Obama is strong 2nd (to either Edwards or Hillary) in one or both, he will be a lot stronger going into 02.05. then again, if lylepink is right, we may be looking at a Hillary juggernaut. lyle, I say respectfully, I don't think that will happen - I think it may not be over until the spring - but how do I know?

Gore, like Oprah, like the rest of the flavor of the month club, will endorse Obama. This will save President Clinton from having to reserve seats for him at her inauguration.

However I can gurantee one thing for sure No Giuliani or Romney or Fred or Hillary or edwards or Obama will get elected in 2008, Anyone dares to bet me...?? or Anyone has the guts.. Bring dem on...!!

I don't mean this in a pejorative way or anything, but did anyone else notice in the bin laden video how much he echoed sentiments from the left when it came to the war. It's like he is trying to anticipate which way the country is leaning politically and crafting his message accordingly. Politically I fall into the Lieberman camp, so I was wondering what the anti-war democrats think about Bin Laden using their arguments.

It looks like a "can't see the forest for the trees" situation. Try looking beyond the "trees" in the foreground. Lots can happen before the first primary. Both the Big H and Obama have taken questionable funding. They could well duke it out leaving damaged goods on both sides. That would leave Edwards who will do well in Iowa but has big gaps elsewhere. He will likely disappear in a puff of hairspray!

Gore should wait for the perfect moment, that lull in the campaign, and endorse Richardson who could score a series of 2nd places and a first in Nevada. He is the consensus candidate with both foreign and domestic experience. Hey, it could happen!

Hey Bush used to do cocaine , he was a drug addict, alcoholic, Pervert, Screwed up Frat boy, Now he is The Most wanted muderer who Killed and still killing Innocent people. The white house is full of thugs from Enron, So what if Gore's son smoked whatever he wants . That will not affect Gore's Love Service, dedication for this country.. Bush used to be a Dop Dealer Dude.. Back off Republican Criminals.

5,258,726 angels can dance on the head of a pin.

And, Bush won the Florida electoral votes. Whether by 600 votes, or by the 5-4 vote. Nothing is going to change that!

"This is exactly the kind of stuff I'm talking about. Why can't people who work hard in this country attain citizenship? Maybe not only by military service (a little Starship Troopers for me"

iT'S FUNNY you mention that JAson. That is the gop plan. Only certain people should be "citizens". All citizens should be gop members. Fascism in action.

If the military brainwashes young men to become republicans and if military can only be citizens, then what do you have? A country dominated by clones, the borg, people that will take orders before thinking about it.

When I was in basic training we were allowed to read a couple books. We had the military training book. With military laws and duties. We could read religous books such as the bible quran torah etc. No other reading were allowed. But our training capt gave us one other book we were allowed to read and have. Do you know what that book was?

Can you guess. Starship troopers. Why? Read above. Only gop'ers are allowed freedom in this country. oinly gop'ers are citizens. In a gop madmans brain, anyway.

ONE NATION. ONE PEOPLE. ONE WOrLD

No Edward or Hillary or Obama or richardson will get elected into the White House in 2008... Don't hold your Breath Please and don't waste your time and people's money..

I gurantee 20000000% the Gop will not win the election in 2008.. Anyone wants to bet?? whether it's Giliuani or Romney or Fred Thomson

Gore will endorse Obama unless the Edwards campaign grows legs. Gore is a better issue advocate than elected office holder, but unlike Edwards, he guessed right on his issue, so he could also be an appealing vp candidate. I think Edwards (like many people) did not think the US economy could continue to grow the way it has, so he put all his eggs in the What about the poor? basket. As the economy has done better than expected, the Edwards campaign has done worse than expected, which in turn has helped Obama. While this discussion is interesting, it is irrelevant unless Hillary gets caught tapping toes in a restroom before the election. She will get the nomination, Gore endorsement or no.

'It seems Osama and Obama have much in common. an osama/obama ticket would suit the Dems perfectly.'

I see zouk is back with his blatant idiocy. LOL at the 'Republican women like men' -- too bad the Republican men like men.

25,000 Illegal votes (absente ballet votes) were cast by republican right wing thugs in Florida in nov 2000, Black people were intimidated and threatened and disenfranchised in november 2000............. The dady Bush's appointed Supreme court Judges appointed Bush to the white house..

Evidence on th Video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gwdNIxecwY&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eelectgore2008%2Ecom%2Findex3%2Ehtml

"In California, undoc kids who score in the top 4% and get into the UC system could get onto the valued citizenship track, if they keep up the good work. In Texas it would be the top 10% who get into the UT system.
Work visa folks who enlist and serve in the military for many years honorably might get special consideration from me, the ultimate fair judge." -Mark

This is exactly the kind of stuff I'm talking about. Why can't people who work hard in this country attain citizenship? Maybe not only by military service (a little Starship Troopers for me), but working in other sectors, getting an adult education, doing community service, etc. Imagine if you developed some key benchmarks for citizenship and allowed 10,000 new citizens per year among those previously undocumented. A family or individual who met the benchmarks would have a sort of resume. Those best suited to take fullest advantage of the benefits of citizenship get them. You could have special consideration for undocs who get an education and use their visa's to work in needed fields, like teaching and nursing.

What are people afraid of if we allow more immigrants voting rights? A latino majority electing latino legislators? Oh, no! That would...a democracy! Terrifying.

Seriously, that way of thinking requires that we believe that people of a given color/ethnicity will only elect people of that same color/ethnicity. I'm sure we all know of at least one district or city in our home states or nearby states that has a representative of a different color than the majority of his/her voting population. I can think of a couple of former mayors of Baltimore and some Delegates in the MD legislature right off the top of my head.

And gore won the elction. What went on after was highway robbery. "If you can't win cheat". Gop model.

The clinton impeachment was gop justification to STEAL the government. What happened after the 00 elections was the practice (of stealing elections).

And the patriot act and stealing iraq oil is WHY tehy did it. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

The american people are on to you gop. The only thing saving your party right now are spinless democrats that are scared to go for the jugular. The dem's are the only thing keeping you gop'ers around. You better show some respect. If the dem's wanted to they could stamp out the republcian party, if they so choose.

Luck for the gop we are no longer a free country. Lucky for the gop we are a one party system. Two sides of teh same coin. If there was another (real)party in power both current parties would be gone right now.

Since his son's arrest it's apparant that Al Gore is not running.

Endorsements count very little anymore - can anyone name ten endorsements so far this year?

Avoiding the current senators who voted for the Iraq war he is left with few choices. Obama is the only top tier candidate and will probably get the nod from Gore by default (winnable??).

If "Big Al" is smart he will stay out of the endorsement game and maintain his position as the 2nd Ballot choice at the convention.

Considering Gore's newfound "hipness" (can't believe Gore and hipness can legitimately appear in the same sentence), I think he's going to go with Barack. Gore's trying to speak for a younger generation, and Barack is the best representation for that. And besides, they have the same alma mater!

And as far as significance, I don't really think it matters that much, but 2004 is certainly not indicative of 2008. The war is much more unpopular now across all demographics- and Gore is on the right side of that issue. 2004 was also pre-An Inconvenient Truth and Gore's newfound pop celebrity. In 2004, he was still an obscure has been who was still bitter about losing and could only get a few visiting professorships and speaking gig. His status and fate has certainly changed, especially amongst the base.

But, I'm still a guy hoping against hope that Gore decides to run!

"Monday September 10, 2007 09:25 EST
A one-day guide to war supporters and their enablers
As war cheerleaders and their enablers lay the groundwork for the glorious testimony of Gen. Petraeus, it is hard to recall a day so suffuse with war propaganda. Reviewing just a few selected samples illustrates how fact-free is the campaign to prolong this war. And the activities of today provide a very vivid guide for identifying those most responsible for launching this war and enabling its endless continuation, and for understanding how they behave.

Let us begin with left-wing, liberal war opponent Michael O'Hanlon, who today finds a home to write about the war in National Review -- long renown for publishing the works of anti-war liberals like O'Hanlon -- alongside Fred Kagan, Mark Steyn, Byron York and John Boehner. O'Hanlon, as usual, predicates his argument on the homage he pays to Gen. Petraeus, declaring in the first sentence: "General Petraeus is a straight shooter who does not and will not cook the books."

Citing his fellow surge advocate, NYT "reporter" Michael Gordon (who, in turn, featured O'Hanlon as his principal "expert" in his pro-war front page article this weekend), O'Hanlon argues:

Petraeus will argue that the overall situation has improved substantially this year. He will be right to do so, based on virtually any primary-source data I have seen.
Identically, John McCain and Joe Lieberman said in a Wall St. Journal Op-Ed today that it is "undeniable" that "facts on the ground in Iraq have improved."

Perhaps O'Hanlon, McCain and Lieberman have not "seen" this "primary-source data":

Seven out of 10 Iraqis believe the U.S. troop buildup in Baghdad and Anbar province has made security worse in those areas, and nearly as many say their own lives are going badly, according to a new poll conducted by ABC News, the British Broadcasting Corp., and the Japanese broadcaster NHK.

The poll reveals a disconnect between U.S. commanders' view of a steadily improving situation in Iraq and a bleaker outlook among Iraqis. . . . Fewer than one-quarter of Iraqis report that things in Iraq are going well, down from 35 percent in March, while the number of people who expect conditions to improve in the next year has declined precipitously.

When determining whether "progress" is being made, fewer things could be less relevant to our genius war scholars and our DC Establishment pundits than whether the Iraqis whom we have Liberated actually say they are more secure. Far more trustworthy are American War Supporters and Members of Congress who take week-long, highly planned jaunts to Iraq, spend every night protected in the Green Zone, spend their days talking to American military officials, and then return and declare Iraq to be Much Safer. That is much more reliable. But whatever else is true, the viewpoint of actual Iraqi is fairly compelling "primary source data" suggesting that Gen. Petraeus' sunny claims about Iraq are anything but "undeniable."

O'Hanlon and his friends -- in order to create a fictitious appearance of consensus concerning Gen. Petraeus' claims -- are deliberately ignoring all sorts of other evidence undermining Petraeus' assertions, literally pretending it does not exist, such as this superb article in the Washington Post several days ago by Karen DeYoung, which documented:

The U.S. military's claim that violence has decreased sharply in Iraq in recent months has come under scrutiny from many experts within and outside the government, who contend that some of the underlying statistics are questionable and selectively ignore negative trends. . . .

Others who have looked at the full range of U.S. government statistics on violence, however, accuse the military of cherry-picking positive indicators and caution that the numbers -- most of which are classified -- are often confusing and contradictory. "Let's just say that there are several different sources within the administration on violence, and those sources do not agree," Comptroller General David Walker told Congress on Tuesday in releasing a new Government Accountability Office report on Iraq.

Statements from O'Hanlon, Lieberman and McCain that Petraeus' claims of improved security are "undeniable" are patently false. Most Iraqis deny them, as do actual experts who are not invested in perpetuating the war and whose credibility has not been destroyed by years of false statements concerning the war.

Speaking of which, O'Hanlon -- in demanding that Gen. Petraeus be blindly deemed a "straight shooter" -- simply ignores the obviously critical fact that Petraeus has been making the same exact claims about Great Progress in Iraq for four straight years, only for events to prove those statements repeatedly to be inaccurate. O'Hanlon does, however, address one of the most incriminating actions Petraeus undertook -- namely, publishing a highly controversial and highly optimistic Op-Ed in The Washington Post just weeks before the 2004 Presidential election, in which Petraeus made one optimistic claim after the next about Iraq, proclaiming:

Now, however, 18 months after entering Iraq, I see tangible progress. Iraqi security elements are being rebuilt from the ground up. . . .

Iraq's security forces are, however, developing steadily and they are in the fight. Momentum has gathered in recent months. With strong Iraqi leaders out front and with continued coalition -- and now NATO -- support, this trend will continue.

O'Hanlon acknowledges Petraeus' Op-Ed, but literally decrees -- with no rationale -- that it should not be used to treat Petraeus' motives and statements with skepticism:
Some of Petraeus's critics will argue, as they already have, that he wrote an oped in the fall of 2004 that was too optimistic about the training of Iraqi Security Forces then -- and too closely timed to the American elections that November. To them, that suggests he was and is acting as an agent of White House spin. That oped may in retrospect have been somewhat too optimistic; I was wrong then myself in believing that a very vigorous training program we had created for the Iraqis would suffice to create a professional, dependable force. . . .

However, a possible misjudgment on this matter hardly shows Petraeus to be a spinmeister. If anything, it shows him to be human.

Absolutely. That Petraeus merely published an inaccurately optimistic picture of the war in Iraq at exactly the time -- and in exactly the venue -- most politically beneficial to President Bush's re-election prospects proves nothing. It certainly doesn't mean Petraeus' identical claims of Progess three years later should be viewed with skepticism. No -- O'Hanlon movingly tells us -- it only proves that Petraeus is "human." O'Hanlon here is invoking one of Washington's most cherished rules: for War Supporters, there is never accountability for their "mistakes" nor for their endless record of inaccurate statements.

And then, finally, we arrive at the co-dependent partners of our propagandizing war supporters -- the frightened, mindless Democratic Beltway class, always ably represented by The Washington Post's David Ignatius. They, too, are out in full force today, playing their war enabling role.

Ignatius bases his entire column on the trite and fact-free claims of an anonymous "leading Democratic Party strategist." Both Ignatius and his cowardly anonymous friend believe that President Bush is on his way to doing what Democrats want -- "announcing that he will begin reducing the number of U.S. troops in Iraq this year" -- and the primary challenge for Democrats is not to get in the way of the President by giving into their loudmouth radical base and thereby constraining the Leader. Here is the rationale for this brilliant position:

That's the smart Democratic strategy, he argues, to take credit for altering the course of the war. "We have to stop saying we're going to end the war, because we can't," the strategist cautions. But he fears that congressional Democrats, pushed by an angry base, will continue to schedule votes for funding cutoffs and troop-withdrawal dates. That may appeal to the base but not to the country as a whole, the strategist fears.
Do Democratic Beltway "strategists" ever do anything but "fear"? And is it even possible that Ignatius and the anonymous strategist coward hiding behind him actually believe this? For a full year now at least, one poll after the next has proven exactly the opposite to be true: namely, the overwhelming majority of Americans, not merely the radical unserious filthy leftist Move-On/Kos hippies, want a mandatory timetable for withdrawal.

The new poll from the NYT just this morning (.pdf) is just the latest example, demonstrating that Americans overwhelmingly (57-38%) believe "the United States should set a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq sometime in 2008." How is it possible for Ignatius to continue to be published asserting that only the "base," but not the country as a whole, favors this?

The common thread uniting war supporters like O'Hanlon and Lieberman and their enablers like Ignatius and his anonymous friends is a willful ignoring of any facts that interrupt their self-glorying Seriousness festivals. And along those lines, Ignatius, as he typically does, reveals the true illness underlying our Establishment's behavior here, as he describes the real group that ought to be Listened To:

Centrist Democrats and Republicans -- "the responsibles," as Charles Peters of Washington Monthly likes to call them. . .
This group is "responsible" all right -- responsible for the greatest strategic disaster in America's history, the endless empowerment of the President who unleashed it, and a disgustingly self-serving campaign to deny reality and ensure the war's continuation all in order to salvage their own egos and reputations. Today provides a truly superb picture of the fact-free warmongers, ideologues and extremists -- and their enabling Serious "centrist" comrades -- who are "responsible" for the grave damage done to our country over the last six years, with no end in sight.

-- Glenn Greenwald"

Big girls don't cry. Read or ignore. But no whining today, please.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/index.html

JEP, you're changing the subject. You said that it wouldn't have helped Gore to have worked with Clinton, because Clinton voters wouldn't have voted for Bush. I brought up a scenario in which some Clinton voters, lacking a Clinton endorsement, stayed home. And now you say that nothing Clinton did would have made any difference because the Republicans cheated anyway.

Gore lost the election. You can say he lost because of cheating and fraud, but the end result was that he lost. Fraud is only possible when the difference between the candidates is small. Even by the most Gore-friendly count of the Florida votes, the margin was razor-thin. A few hundred or thousand votes would have made a big difference for Gore, even if there was still fraud, because it would have made the fraud less meaningful.

Do you really believe that not a single Democratic voter stayed home because they weren't excited about Gore?

Andy R; you should be an historian, this a very concise description of a very complex party. And I agree completely with this assessment, it may seem like a simplification to some, but it really displays the Democrat's "narrow stance" versus the Republican's wide one.

We may have a bigger tent here on the Democratic side, but our ideological stance is noticibly less wide.

Chris, you should believe and embrace that paragraph, it's about as complete as anything we've read here.

"Also it should be noted that the whole Gore hates Clinton thing goes back to the fact that there are two groups of power brokers in the Democratic party, the Clinton/Kennedy group and the Jimmy Carter/Dean group. Gore is a Carter guy which is why Clinton signed him on in the first place. Obama and Edwards are both Carter guys too although Obama is really more of a Dean guy."

I have to add, though, that the ideological spread between these two groups (I call it the DNC vs the DLC) is not nearly as critical as the divide between the big money Republicans and the working class Republicans, best exemplified in the immigration debacle now going on in Congress.

I would think Gore would endorse anyone except Hillary. There is a dislike between these two families that goes back prior to 2000. I may be off a bit on the endorsement, but I think it could work both ways, in that Bubba is the most liked pol in the world, and he will have a great influence on the folks that would like to have a simular next eight years as they had when he was in office.

OH. and zouk. How is Kim doing these days, after all?

"In one sense, it is quite unhealthy in a democracy for such a large majority of Americans to so distrust the political and media establishment that they even believe in advance that war reports from our leading General will be nothing more than self-serving and misleading propaganda. But in another, more important sense, when a democracy's political establishment becomes as rotted and deceitful and corrupt as ours has become -- enabling the most unpopular President in modern American history to continue what is so blatantly a senseless war for years and years, in complete defiance of what Americans want -- the one encouraging sign is that a majority realizes how corrupt our establishment is and has stopped believing anything they say. "

Nobody but dittoheads beleive you people anymore zouk. You will need a lot more than you 10% to win this time. More people are voting now. The more peopel taht vote, the better for the dem's and worse for the GOP. You do succed it getting out your vote zouk. I'll give you that. Why though? Fear hate intolerance.

When more people vote, liek this year, the gopwill lsoe every time

Mr. Cillizza,

You are out to lunch and there you should stay. Your comment, "Gore largely ran away from the Clinton legacy, a tactic that ultimately failed."

If there is one thing that kept Al Gore from becoming President in 2000, it was he didn't start to distance himself from Clinton legacy soon enough.

In response to the questions you asked, at least to the first question, "...how much does a Gore endorsement matter...?" I think it will help the candidate Gore endorses a little bit, and it certainly won't hurt.

Your second question is a set-up! You are implying that an endorsement by Gore is the kiss of a political death.

Why are you toying with us? Go ahead and say it...you are a Hillary man just like the majority of those who are the Post's liberal columnists.

If there is anyone that can delivery the kiss of political death to Democrats in 2008, it will be the nomination of Senator Clinton as the party's candidate.

You gotta do somethign Zouk. You can't talk about your candidates and the issues. You can't talk about truth and what is really happening. So do what you do yo