Obama's drug use is not a rumor or an allegation. He wrote about it himself in his book.

A member of Hillary's staff merely said that the Republicans wouldn't let it go so easily. They would ask hard questions.

How many are calling for true tax reform? Anything less than Fair Tax is not viable reform.

vbhoomes wrote:
"Look up Gutter politics in the Dictionary and See; Hillary/Bill Clinton."

And while you're at it, please include these names: Karl Rove, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, Tom DeLay, Rush (drug-addict) Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, etc. ... Sorry, but when it comes to dirty politics, the GOP wrote the modern playbook. Deal with it, and own it.

bsimon, you're right, that guy is toast if HRC has half a brain. I'm sure he'll get the Vince Foster treatment soon - if I were him, I'd stay away from Ft Marcy Pk.
I hadn't heard the rumor before, and when I googled 'obama drug dealer', I got the Telegraph hit and Mother Jones; and I refuse to read Mother Jones, as they are so far out on the spectrum they think Nader is too conservative and the Soviet Union had too much free wheelin' capitalism.

You are so wrong about Mother Jones, poster. Obama is no more a drug dealer than George W. Bush is a voracious former coke snorter who once paid for a girlfriend to kill their unborn baby.
Gee, you don't like those kinds of 'rumors' about Bush? Then please quit re-hashing old, tired ones about the Clintons. We're sick of it.
By the way, here's how we sum up the GOP debate: 9-11, supporting the war, abortion, family values, 9-11, supporting the war abortion, family values, 9-11, abortion, family values ...
And what the hell was Keyes doing there? The man is a joke.
If this is the best the GOP can do, then we just might be stuck with Mrs. Clinton next year.

Huckabee is the real winner here. He entered the front runner in Iowa and left the front runner in Iowa. Romney was a loser here. He's behind in Iowa and did nothing to help himself. Also, Rudy & McCain are winners. They played to the New Hampshire crowd and let Huckabee remain with Romney's thunder. Romney didn't attack Huckabee b/c in a one on one debate, Huckabee would trash Romney. He couldn't do that, and prefers to attack Huckabee on the air where he has 3 times the resources of Huck and Huckabee can't respond to all of them with ad's of his own. I'm guessing Iowa voters can't be bought, and Huckabee will win Iowa. If that happens, New Hampshire will be very tough & interesting.

Hello America. The only guy who makes sense in that sad lot is Ron Paul. Is this journalist aware that there is a serious economic crisis and the only one who addresses those issues is Ron Paul. Printing money out of thin air (inflation tax), policing the world, etc.
If you go back to history, Winston Churchill right until before the war was considered by parliament (specially his own party) and the press as quixotic, eccentric and out of reality and all because what he said was the truth. He was a journalist for a newspaper and there was great pressure from the government and including the press to stop him from writing. When Germany invaded France he became prime minister because he was the only true leader who had been loyal to his principals and convictions and had the courage to face a very grim future for Great Britain. And lets not forget that the people loved him no matter what the press or the government said. Read: "The Last Lion Alone".
I believe Ron Paul is that kind of leader. What he says is the truth and people love him for that. His voting record in congress speaks by itself.
I believe he has a great chance of winning in the primaries because a lot people might like a candidate but that doesn't mean they will vote for him in the primaries. I believe every single Paulite will vote even if there is hurricane at 5. You'll see.
Fred Thompson a winner: give me a break, he opens his mouth and I fall asleep

drindl, thanks to the real estate bust in Austin in the late 80s I had five consecutive years in my life avoiding bankruptcy by working 80 hour weeks and never once taking a vacation.

We lost our farm when I was 11. Went through Jr. HS and HS on a few pair of jeans and a pair of chinos. Would have joined the Navy in '60 for the GI Bill if I had not had scholarships to both Yale and Rice and a job offer from ESSO that would have paid my way through engineering school as well, but at night.
-----------------------------------
I have voluntarily "saved" a half dozen folks from foreclosures in 40 years of practice - when I thought they really had good cases and were too broke to hire a lawyer. Lawyers do this all the time, all over America. Legal Aid does this for folks who cannot afford lawyers, as well.

I am not blind to the social problem or the
cost to the good credit of the United States, such as it is. But the social problem is very localized, and most pronounced in new subdivisions outside Phoenix and in central Florida, from what I have read. As local problems go, these may be big enough to require help from cities, counties, or states, if those political subdivisions think the problems are worthy of attention [in order to keep their property tax bases from collapsing, in order to keep their homeless populations from exploding, in order to get votes]. The market will resolve the issue for many in favor of renegotiated loans, for some by resales, but most of the remaining problems are local, and foreclosure is neither the end of the world nor the end of life's dreams. Renting is OK too.

off topic

Blarg,I was w-w-rong. When I clicked on the Edwards' story I got this:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/10/AR2007121001587.html

which is the third line title in the box and highly critical. I see it leads with the same puff as the others.

off topic

Blarg,I was w-w-rong. When I clicked on the Edwards' story I got this:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/10/AR2007121001587.html

which is the third line title in the box and highly critical. I see it leads with the same puff as the others.

Bill Shaheen: Brokering Middle East Peace? The Fix 26 Mar 07. This should answer most questions about where I have stood from the beginning.

vbhoomes & bisimon: Read my 10:38AM Post carefully and you can see this is the kind of thing I am talking about. I read the article quoting Mr. Sheehan, and found nothing about him accusing Obama of selling/dealing drugs, quite the opposite in FACT, the only thing he stated was the obvious questions that were likely to be asked of Obama by Repubs should he be the nominee. This is again another example of how the media are so against Hillary. The Trail, is a college paper from what I found in my search and nothing at all about this matter was anywhere in it that I could find.

Now everyone that ran their mouth, are they going to appologize for spreading lies and rumors?

clasy move. She should not go there. Move on. There's nopthing to see here.

"CLINTON PERSONALLY APOLOGIZES TO OBAMA OVER DRUG FLAPOn tarmac at Reagan Airport en route to debate, Clinton tells rival that negative, personal characterizations are not a part of her campaign.

Disavows comments by big-shot New Hampshire supporter Billy Shaheen
"

JK: I like Obama and if our side doesn't win, I would like to lose to him. But do not kid yourself, the majority of americans draw a big distinction between useing drugs and selling drugs. An african american drug pusher stands no chance of being elected. And that is how he would be betrayed. Politics can be ugly.

Mark in Austin, Thanks. It's nice to be missed. Biden is well-liked, but how will that translate in January?

Ah, the GOP debate moderated by Nurse Racheted.... boooooring.

Although Thompson had a great Reaganesque "I paid for this michrophone" moment when he wouldn't take Washburn's hand-raising medicine.

I expected Keyes to pass the plate at any moment.... All in all, a real Cuckoo's Nest gathering.

http://whathappenedtomycountry.blogspot.com

'how he glibly talks about poverty despite being so rich, '

why is this a problem? he was poor growing up, he lived the American dream, became well off by his own hard work.

why does the press or anyone or anyone else have a problem with this? jealousy?

if someone overcame a disability, say, and succeeded in life, and then advocated for victims of that disability, would that be 'hypocritical' too?

Is he supposed to live in a mud hut? where is the issue? i realy don't understand that.

Is Donald Trump a better man because he couldn't care less wheher poor people live or die?

"I hadn't heard the rumor before, and when I googled 'obama drug dealer'"

The gop, clinton included, has nothing on obama. They are trying to swift boat him. Only working with racists. First kindegarden. Now they are attackng one of his strong points, imo. The reason his admitance is a strong point, is it shows his honesty. Many americans have tried drugs in their life. Doesn't mean they are misguided evil people. Obama is trying to show the people that are stuck in the fog of drugs, that you can change. That they are wasting time. You only live once and to live in the fog only wastes time. Can say I disagree. I look up to the man. This admitance will Help many americans. But eh gop (clinton included) doesn't care about what is good for america. NEver enters their mind. The gop (clinton included) can only think about themselves.

Again, I look up to obama, as many young people do. Who here looks up to any other condidate running, either party? Who is worthy for our children to look up to? few and far between in politicans these days. Factor in Obama's integrity and intelligence, and you have the best african americasn candidate ever (electing him will close a evil chpter in our nations histroy. I think for good). I would love for little whites children to have a african american role model to look up to, though I'm white. To kill racism in america once and for all. This is bigger than obama, or any one man.

Obama is going to bring this nation together again. Those that would sabotge him for political gain need to be shown for what they are. Divide and conquer is not a political stadegy. Those that say it is are traitors, imo. If the gop manta is Divide and conquer, lie spin and discredit, does that make the party traitors? Tiem will tell I guess. The winners make the rules, right gop. The differance is the left follwos the rules that we create.

See a devastating video featuring the mother of the victim of Wayne Dumond

http://huckabeefacts.com/

"My daughter will not be home for Christmas."

Reading closer I see you are merly saying he is wrong. The "socialist" label is correct, albeit has no place when talking about the subject at hand. Sorry for the tone. I just want teh elderly to think for themselves. Not take up every single villain bill o'reilly and rush create in their mind to justify what they do for a living.

Huckabee looks like a winner in Iowa and South Carolina. Romney appears well ahead in New Hampshire. Depending on how close other candidates finish, I think that could spell the end of McCain and Thompson. Giuliani is ahead in Michigan, though, and losing Michigan would be a blow to Romney given his family ties to the state.

Should Romney only win NH before Tsunami Tuesday, I think his candidacy is in peril. He still does not have name recognition and isn't doing all that well in national polls. The longer the race stays a three-way contest with Huckabee, Romney and Giuliani, the better Giuliani's chances.

When its a bs debate, frontrunners always win.

I used to comment as "Justin" before, talking up Richardson's candidacy. How stupid! True, I've wavered a lot over this campaign. It took a while, as a college freshman, to determine which candidate I should go with. As the register said, Richardson is a pathetic panderer promiing no residual forces, and its ridiculous that he constantly rants about no troops in iraq at all and about being a governor. I really made a mistake here. He stole Biden's Iraq partition plan and shows that you can be both experienced and stupid. HE TRIED TO ARGUE THAT ROE V. WADE WAS ARGUED IN THE 80s. How can you serve so long and still not have learned anything. I'm also glad he's not running for the Senate. Reo. Tom Udall is a much better and more respectable candidate than Richardson could ever be. For the love of god, do not vote for Richardson.

Mark and JD. Parroting O'reilly and taking up his enemies. Be careful fascists. If you would sielnce the left for professing truths and doing the patriotic thing. What would stop me from silencing your lying propogandists for profit for doign the un-patriotic thing (traitors). Dividing the country for profit. Conflict of interest. Misleading the elderly.

Be careful. The street may have run one way for decades. Not no more. You fascist clowns will one day have to partice what youpreach. Be careful what you wish for. Once the finger is turned around what will FOx do, Rush , coulter, malkin. Be careful if you treasure your lying propogandist fascists. If you want them gone, by all means attack and silence kraugman. Silence the dixie chicks and everyone who is not a lock-step fascist republcain. Just know the street now runs both ways. Be careful what you wish for

Mark: I don't see the problem. The Edwards article is a puff piece about his life, just like the others. There's one critical paragraph on the first page, about how he glibly talks about poverty despite being so rich, but that's it. It's hardly a hatchet job. Maybe it's worse than the others, if they don't contain even one critical paragraph, but I can't get too upset over it.

Any voters horrified by youthful drug dabbling ought to be dead by now, or so it seems to me, who tried pot and coke a half century ago. The electability card is potent, but risks backfiring. That Mitt and Huck don't question the electability of a flagrant adulterer suggests they're aware of perils of attacking each other on nonissues that Hillary would do well to consider.

Nobody seems to understand the meaning of the word 'socialist' anymore. Let me help:

'a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.'

Do you really beleive that's what Krugman beleives?

OT, but I was researching and ran across this. I found it interesting:

'The experts fretted that terrorists might gather loose nuclear materials for a "dirty bomb" that could devastate an American city by spreading lethal radioactivity.

"This is a real threat, not science fiction," National Security Council staffer Richard T. Kennedy wrote his boss, Kissinger, in November 1972.

Rogers, in a memo to Nixon in mid-1973, praised the Atomic Energy Commission's steps to safeguard nuclear weapons. Rogers, however, also warned the president that "atomic materials could afford mind-boggling possibilities for terrorists."

Committee members identified commercial jets as a particular vulnerability, but raised concerns that airlines would not pay for security improvements such as tighter screening procedures and routine baggage inspections.

"The trouble with the plans is that airlines and airports will have to absorb the costs and so they will scream bloody murder should this be required of them," according to a White House memo from 1972. "Otherwise, it is a sound plan which will curtail the risk of hijacking substantially."

By 1976, government pressure to improve airport security and thwart hijackings had awakened airline industry lobbyists.

The International Air Transport Association said "airport security is the responsibility of the host government. The airline industry did not consider the terrorist threat its most significant problem; it had to measure it against other priorities. If individual companies were forced to provide their own security, they would go broke," according to minutes from one meeting.'

So 30 years before 9/11, the US government was aware f the dangers of what could be done with commercial aircraft. But no president ever did anything, because of pressure from lobbyists.
Doesn't matter who wins the election, because of our campaign finance system--which bears a strong resemblance to the Mafia, all of them are owned.

' I am always for enforcement of disclosure laws and borrowers who were deceived should sue. In state courts, not federal. There may not be a remedy for everyone. Why is it a federal responsibility to make one?'

If the Fed did not do its duty in enforcing disclosure laws, are they not then derelict in their responsibility? Shouldn't they then be responsible for cleaning up the mess they themselves caused, instead of forcing the taxpayers to foot the cost of state court cases? Guess you've never had any financial problems in your life, Mark--or you would understand that people who have lost everything don't always have the wherewithall to hire a lawyer.

And JD, you don't really beleive that Vince Foster crap, do you? That is so far out in Tinfoil Hat Land...

I agree Mark, it's not the Federal Government's job to save the banks from their risky behavior; it would only encourage more of it longterm. Same with people - if they screwed up, let them lay in the beds they made.

I also agree that any individual bank can act however they want, eliminating, forgiving, or novating contracts if it's in the best interests of the lender (and the homeowner agrees).

I don't read Krugman because I'm not going to pay NYT's silly little online registration fee. Plus he's wrong on most issues, IMHO. I will take your word that Krugman is for the fed bailout. Doesn't surprise me at all. He generally is against people suffering the consequences of actions, and wants an ever larger federal presence. He's a socialist.

Note that I'm not saying he's a bad guy; just incorrect.

lylepink: You are somewhat naive about politics my friend, Sheehan is a close confidant of the Clintons and would not done this without the Clintons go ahead. I agree nobody really cares about drug use a long time ago, but remember Novak;s column several weeks ago that a Clinton associate whispered they had something big on Obama. Sheehan said asked the question whether or not Obama also sold drugs, thereby making the media asked him that question. If he sold drugs, even in his youth, his candiancy is over. But do not reward Clinton for this oppo research. Vote for Joe Biden.

JD, Krugman writes today that the feds should bail out the borrowers. I do not think that is a federal responsibility.

As you read his column, you may or may not agree with his perception of the problems. But you must wonder how he jumps to the conclusion that the federal government should solve them.

As I have written before, in declining markets wise banks do not foreclose, they renegotiate. In rising markets, stressed borrowers sell. I am always for enforcement of disclosure laws and borrowers who were deceived should sue. In state courts, not federal. There may not be a remedy for everyone. Why is it a federal responsibility to make one?

Early tea break.

drindl, There are many neo-cons today, but most of them, including RG, started adult life as Wilsonian Democrats. Alan Keyes, an outstanding scholar and son of an Army Sgt., started adult life as neo-con as one could be before it was a term of art. Protested FOR the VietNam War at Cornell and was physically threatened. Roomed with Bill Kristol in grad school at Harvard and gave Bill more than he got from him. After his PhD, worked for and with Jeanne Kirkpatrick - another Wilsonian D turned neocon. So what does Keyes do? He becomes the outspoken anti-abortion guy. No other neocons I know ever became theocons because they used to be Wilsonian Ds and do not care about abortion.

AndyR, Keyes is very, very smart in that academic way - but he is the only public neo-theo I know and he is a peculiar duck in American politics.

I agree with those, including Rufus, who pointed out Huck's shining moment of an Obamaesque call to end polarization.

Blarg, the profiles are short, but Edwards received the only gutting. The others were all about how really terrific the candidate was. See if you agree. I do not agree with Edwards on substance on most issues economic so I am not being defensive of the former Senator here.

bsimon, you're right, that guy is toast if HRC has half a brain. I'm sure he'll get the Vince Foster treatment soon - if I were him, I'd stay away from Ft Marcy Pk.

I hadn't heard the rumor before, and when I googled 'obama drug dealer', I got the Telegraph hit and Mother Jones; and I refuse to read Mother Jones, as they are so far out on the spectrum they think Nader is too conservative and the Soviet Union had too much free wheelin' capitalism.

Fred can't be a winner when Huckabee didn't hurt himself. He's the frontrunner and he put together s solid - if unspectacular - performance. That means a winner.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

lylepink writes
"I have not heard anything about Obama being a drug dealer from anyone."

Lyle, over at The Trail, they have a detailed article on Shaheen's allegations. He's part of the Clinton campaign & the husband of a NH politician who's yet to endorse a candidate, but is a former Gov & Senate candidate in 08. Mr Shaheen caveats his comments by predicting that the GOP will sling the mud at Obama about drug use. Of course, he claims he's not making the allegation himself, but is merely predicting the GOP will do so. Of course, the media is dutifully picking up the story, helpfully writing headlines about the Senator's 'Drug Use' as though its a current thing, rather than a youth's experiments of 25+ years ago.

wHO THE HECK IS ALAN KEYES AND WHY DID HE TAKE OVER THE GOP DEBATE

HA HA HA.

That was a was of time last night. Thanks gop. Although I got a few laughs out of the new token candidate. I think the gop is sick of being called sexist racists.

So let the guy who has no chance talk all day. Takes time from the real gop candidates. They don't want talk anyway. They have thrown in the towel. To the people that do not see this, I don't know what to tell you.

I'm sure the democratic debate will be a real debate. I'm sure sure wha tyou call that last night. Other than a compleate waste of time.

i think both sides are rather pathetic. If Hillary is the dem nominee we deserve another eight years in the political wilderness. It's like you find a pile of dog turd on the sidewalk, and your challenge is to pick out the best looking turd without puking your guts out. Hillary certainly seems to be the queen of gutter politics/campaigning..

Huckabee better be careful whom he messes with--a Mormon website associate with his campaign hits back:

'Nothing incites discord more quickly than the dreaded Hitler card, which Ryan Bell plays at the pro-Romney Romney Experience, dedicated to explaining the candidate and his religion to an "underinformed world": "Do Mormons believe that Jesus and Satan are brothers? You can answer that with another question: Do evangelicals believe that Mike Huckabee and Hitler are brothers? ... The answer to both is the same: if you insist on making a few logical leaps and completely ignore what each group actually teaches, sure."

http://www.romneyexperience.com/2007/12/12/mormon-belief-regarding-jesus-and-satan/

'Hugh Hewitt, a big Romney booster, is appalled: "No word yet on whether the former Arkansas governor asked if the Jews killed Jesus or if Catholics pray to Mary as a god. When your campaign is in trouble, it is better to focus on the trouble and fix, not set it ablaze."

And the denizens of WiggyRightistan --chickenhawks, multi-nationals and neo-cons seem to be solidifying their support for Mitt. Many would prefer Rudy, but I hear a lot of people felt he just wasn't up to it after his perfromance with Russert.And time is running out.

I predict his numbers continue to fall, and Mitt wins in Iowa, with Huckabee second, although it will be close. I think Paul might be third.

vbhoomes: I have not heard anything about Obama being a drug dealer from anyone. His prior drug use as a young college student, or earlier, does not bother me in the least, and BTW, I do not like Wolfson or Penn, and I think Hillary made a mistake in hiring them, I sure would not have. The media is against Hillary as I have said so many times and all you have to do is look at how the slightest little thing is blown way out of proportion as to the relevance of the matter.

You forgot a loser, Chris: The country as whole.

We all lose out when a debate is just a bunch of pontifications rather than an actual "debate".

'for months, tension has been building between the 'Hillary' and 'Bill' parts of the team, say several people familiar with the situation.'

'several people familiar with the situation'-- and I suppose none of them have a name? do you call this 'journalism'? I think it used to be called' sleazy gossip'.

are folks this gullible, this credulous, that they beleive crap that runs in a hack rag like theTelegraph?

And this predictable gossip, which gets trotted out every 6 months or so, gets picked by what used to be a 'mainstream media' but is also mostly rightwing hack rags like the Telegraph.

when is someone going to write about Rudy's marriage [s]? It's a far more colorful story.

I hate to say it (as a Huckabee supporter), but in the terrible, awful, no-good format, Romney and Thompson looked best. Romney and Thompson gave crisper answers, had better rhetoric, and of biggest surprise, had better one-liners for quoting.

I agree, however, that Huck is a winner from the debate simply by coming out having suffered only one or two body blows (and defended both nicely). The Des Moines Register should be ashamed of itself for hosting such a waste-of-everyone's-time event - and for inviting the entertaining if loony Ambassador Keyes.

regarding the telegraph blog post, its also worth noting that the author reports on rumors of internal strife in the campaign & concludes that the Clinton marriage could be under stress. Tabloid 'journalism'.

I hope the Democratic debate is more interesting and that if Ms. Washburn is the moderator she won't bring back bad memories of my second grade teacher Sister Mary Grace("raise your hands..no,you may not have more time, answer the question--yes or no").

"circular firing squad?"

prolly hit himself or his boss in the foot, rather than the intended target. Living down to people's expectations is not a winning strategy for the Clinton campaign.

Whoa

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/foreign/tobyharnden/dec07/hillaryaidewasobamaadrugdealer.htm

circular firing squad?

Who won the Des Moines Register Republican Debate in Iowa?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1286

.

WOW: Just when you thought the Clintons could not get any lower, they are telling everybody that Obama used to be a drug pusher thereby making him easy kill for us republicans.

Look up Gutter politics in the Dictionary and See; Hillary/Bill Clinton.

Mark, which of the candidate profiles did you think was too harsh? I haven't been reading them.

This column summarize the debate very nicely:
http://www.slate.com/id/2179817/fr/flyout

'Giuliani's neocon roster includes Norman Podhoretz, a founding father of the movement; Charles Hill, a former foreign policy official for President Ronald Reagan and early backer of invading Iraq; Martin Kramer, an expert on Islam at Harvard University and staunch defender of Israel, and Daniel Pipes, director of the hawkish Middle East Forum.

The neoconservative label is used these days to describe an aggressive, go-it-alone approach to foreign affairs that provided President Bush with the logic for invading Iraq - a war 70% of Americans now oppose.'

I might add that the objectives of the Middle East Forum are to
'protect Israel and seek a stable supply and a low price of oil' -- in ohter words, endless war and occupation. To them, everything in Iraq is going according to plan--except for the low price of oil, which will happen once the US occupies every Middle Eastrn contrry.

Are you familiar with the Project for a New American Century?

'A neoconservative organization supporting greater American militarization, challenging hostile governments, advancing democratic and economic freedom, '

Dick Cheney began this org along with Doug Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, and Rudy's advisors. The plan, is for america to to hugely expand its military, and essentially, run the world.This is what Rudy wants to be --Master of the Universe.

I think Alan Keyes was there for some reason came up by the sponsor. What has me puzzled is what that reason might have been. Previous posters seem as dumbfounded as I am for this surprise appearance.

"How can you not make him (Ron Paul) a winner?"

Easy. Are his poll numbers over 10%? No. Does he still want to eliminate Medicare, the Department of Education, Social Security, etc etc? Yes.

I would call Keyes crazy, but that would be an insult to crazy people cause Keyes is just Stupid.

The fact that Huckabee wasn't attacked in this 'debate' shows that McCain and Guiliani have made the calculation that Huck's rise will eleiminate Romney and in the long run help them. I really don't know why Romney didn't take on Huckabee except that maybe doing it on stage would have been too harsh so they prefer to use the airwaves where his financial advatage can be brought to bear.

OK, all the other media perspectives appear to favor Romney. I'm surprised he isn't at least on your list of winners.

Hard to disagree with your take on Huckabee since it's what I said yesterday.

Thompson: too little, too late.

I don't understand why Keyes was there either. Suddenly he just appeared. Why, at this late date? did they want a black face? I'm sorry, but I can't see any other reason.

Mark, are you suggesting the Washington Post (or its reporters) might be harboring a bias towards candidates? But...but... that's impossible. We all know that WaPo is free of bias and is completely balanced in its politics.

Why was Keyes even in there? Is he even a candidate? In fact, why is anyone polling at under 5% allowed on stage? Even the underdog-lovingm little-guy-rooting Dems have stopped talking to Gravel, and only keep Kucinich around to be the butt of jokes.

Rudy is a neo, Mark. He's Cheney on steriods.

I wonder if perhaps the Des Moines Register will decline to endorse a candidate on the Republican side. It is such a muddle of flaws. Too bad this isn't Mr. Potato Head. You could make a serviceable candidate out of Mitt's looks, Huckabee's likeability, McCain's experience and Thompson's gravitas.

It is fair for me to expand what I said about Keyes. He is "somewhat peculiar" in that he is first and foremost a neo-con [who was never a Wilsonian Democrat in a former life], who has become known as the outspoken anti-abortion spokesman.

There are no other easily identified neo-theos, I think.

Keyes was a star at "college bowl" type contests at Clark HS, the Fort Sam Houston base secondary school in San Antonio. He was well liked and generally thought of as a congenial genius. His very peculiar politics mask something of a wasted talent.
-----------------------
The WaPo has now printed five candidate profiles. Four are softballs and one is a gut job. The difference in the approach, in which the reporters write "what's to like" in four, and "what I despise" in one, is stark.

I believe Fred was the favorite of a lot of us rank & file republicans early on but came aware he simply does not have the energy level to run for this office. He may have a lot of qualities we like but if he cannot put in 18-20 hour days, he woudn't stand a chance. Mitt had the energy and has done the best to solidify the 3 pillars of the republican base, thereby giving him the best chance to win in November.