<p>“real irony is that what they claim to be the negatives of Karl Rove (too divisive, too ideological) is exactly the course that they are advocating for the Democratic Party.”</p>
<p>I don’t think that, with Republican majorities in both House and Senate, he was either too divisive or too ideological. Just ineffective.</p>
<p>“The dems are bending over backwards to follow the nutroots into the far left fringe of the party dominated by the dailyKos.”</p>
<p>What nutroots are we bending over backwards to follow into the far left fringe? Hillary Clinton, the pseudo-Republican? Obama–If elected, I’ll attack Pakistan? Richardson, the “gayness is a choice, no, maybe not” guy? … Ah. You’re probably speaking of John Edwards, who admitted being wrong about invading Iraq, and who advocates aggressively for poor and disenfranchised Americans. (Here’s the cue to prattle on about $400 haircuts and outsized mansions.) Concern for the poor is an issue that apparently belongs to the “far left fringe,” because the radical right certainly doesn’t seem to give a flying hoot. … As far as I can tell, the only candidate who qualifies as far left these days is Kucinich, and I don’t see the Dems bending over backwards to follow him into fringe territory.</p>
<p>lets not talk about the nutroots on the right, now that’s one scary bunch that Bush and Rove bow down too- lets talk religion over science jsut for starters</p>
<p>Simple question: How any candidates showed up for the DLC conference? How many candidates showed up for the YearyKos conference? Does that tell you anything?</p>
<p>“well, many republicans weren’t even in the straw poll, so that vote was a joke, to take it seriouslly is like voting for a spice girl with no Posh Spice in the race”</p>
<p>So Guilliani is a spice girl ? Maybe. What other “serious” candidates weren’t in this so called joke vote? It seems that some of the serious candidates thought it was very significant, considering the resources that they dedicated to it. The fact that Guilliani wasn’t there probably hurt him a lot more than it hurt the winners, Posh or no Posh!</p>
<p>I guess any poll can be considered a joke if your desired candidate isn’t the winner, or if he/she refuses to play the game.</p>
<p>From post 30…By the way what ever happened to the frog march?</p>
<p>Who cares… this is not a kid’s game where you score by how mad you can make the other side…let’s hope the right wing will get over this silly child’s play and start thinking about what is best for America…</p>
<p>“Simple question: How any candidates showed up for the DLC conference? How many candidates showed up for the YearyKos conference? Does that tell you anything?”</p>
<p>I’m a Dem and a fairly liberal one, but YearyKos is barely on my radar at this point. Of course, it could be that I’m just an ignorant soul, or it could be that the candidates weren’t (yet) interested in a conference that so many are unaware of. … Speaking of which, I understand not one of the Republican candidates had the moxie to accept an invitation to debate gay issues. Not important enough, do ya think, or are they just cowards?</p>
<p>“let’s hope the right wing will get over this silly child’s play and start thinking about what is best for America…”</p>
<p>Yeah, sure … this is clearly the province of the right. When we stop hearing people like the Senate majority leader chortling about how the Iraq war will likely result in some additional Dem Senate pick-ups and when we no longer hear the House majority whip admitting that good news from Iraq will be bad for “us”, then we might start to believe that the left is sincere about what is best for the country. When the Dems decide to address the problems of the country rather than tie up the Senate and the House on childish “payback” hearings, we will know that they are ready to stop seeing how mad they can make the other side.</p>
<p>“Speaking of which, I understand not one of the Republican candidates had the moxie to accept an invitation to debate gay issues. Not important enough, do ya think, or are they just cowards?”</p>
<p>You mean like having the “moxie” to debate on Fox News - whose debate performance has been by far the best and most professional in the industry so far. This is just another example of the pandering to the dailyKos - the Kos kids create a big stink about debating on Fox and the Dems cave immediately. That’s a real courageous bunch. It’s funny, the Dem who comes across as the most whiny of them all, Joe Lieberman, is the only one with any spine to stand up against the nutroots.</p>
<p>Re: Post #33</p>
<p>It seems like the Democrats would like to vote for “none of the above too”.</p>
<p>This editorial sums up the Democratic Choices pretty well.</p>
<p><a href=“Thousand Reasons Magazín”>Thousand Reasons Magazín;
<p>One of my favorite lines: "Hillary Clinton. What can be said about her that hasn’t already been said? Hillary Clinton’s taken so much payola from lobbyists, she’s in more pockets than lint. " :D</p>
<p>From post 29 . Gerald Ford was a “Rockefeller” Republican and one could easily make the case for Nixon to also be in that camp. </p>
<p>Your information is not correct Reagan is just the person the right wing likes to claim started their winning run… Ford was an accident cause by the fact that Nixons original VP was a crook that was caught, and Nixon as we know resigned in disgrace so I understand why the right wingers dont read history correctly …</p>
<p>It takes a god to change the past, but any fool can misread and/or misunderstand it.</p>
<p>I wonder what kind of “good news” the House majority whip could possibly be concerned about?? Only five young American soldiers’ lives snuffed out by roadside bombs today? … Only a few thousand Iraqis, primarily civilians and children, slaughtered this month? Only a billion new America-hating terrorists created this year?? Only innumerable buildings destroyed, schools closed, cars blown up?? By golly, our monkey-man, testosterone-crazed, empty-suit president has sure done those Iraqi folks a huge favor. We deserve a gigantic sloppy kiss on our American lips for such solicitude.</p>
<p>Post 33…I like the word "Busheviks’</p>
<p>I was just reading about how worried and repulsed Barry Goldwater was by the direction the conservative movement was taking. He died in 1998 just as he was preparing to co-author a book to be called “Conservatives Without Conscience.” I think the growing influence of the hard-core religious right on the Republican party concerned him very much.</p>
<p>“It takes a god to change the past, but any fool can misread and/or misunderstand it.”</p>
<p>Unfortunately this applies to the future as well. I guess we can only hope then that the least foolish fool becomes our next President… ;)</p>
<p>Well said, 1sokkermom!</p>
<p>Please everyone the real story to the just past Iowa straw poll was the poor turn out .the day before the event the spokeswoman for the Iowa R party was predicting 40,000 participants they got 14,302</p>
<p>Still, I predict Mitt will be the last man standing for the Republicans when all is said and done. McCain is ancient history; Giuliani will never overcome his social agenda, nor his mistress-turned-third wife; Fred Thompson’s Reaganesque mystique will dissipate as soon as he opens his mouth–plus his trophy wife will hurt him. That pretty much leaves Mitt. The Mormon issue doesn’t have legs–not sexy enough.</p>
<p>Now back to Rove and the frogmarch….</p>
<p>the truly interesting speculation among those who have followed this case closely is that it may be Rove’s revised testimony that will be used by Fitzgerald to charge Cheney the day after he is no longer VP….</p>
<p>It will be very telling if Bush gives Cheney a blanket pardon just before they leave office, and in response Fitzgerald closes the Special prosecutor’s office quickly there after…</p>
<p>^ (Re Post #58) But, today’s big spin against Romney is that he is just TOO RICH. His net worth is around $250M. What we don’t know however, is whether this is hard earned, successful business money, smart investments, or graft. I wonder which spin the Clinton campaign will put on it ??</p>
<p>Yeah, and none of his 5 sons served this country in the armed forces. Did Chelsea? One of Romney’s sons is traveling around the country campaigning for his Dad in a Winnepago though. </p>
<p>Who actually gives a rat’s <em>butt</em>? I don’t.</p>