Hmm, America would seem to have a very large selection of imperial corporate candidates for the 2008 from both of the major corporate imperialist parties (GOP and DEM). Obama wants to bomb Iran and consider invadng Pakistan, Hillary and Obama both want to leave some troops in Iraq (around the oil wells?). I am not sure where John Edwards wants to keep American troops in the Middle East. Edwards voted to hand over Congressional war-making power to Bush; an act of cowardice and complicity.
Kucinich is one of the few candidates that actually wants to get all of our troops and all of our Hessian contractors out of Iraq.
The only Republican that has any integrity is Ron Paul (R - TX).
Posted by james k. sayre at August 2, 2007 03:11 PMOh, but Kucinich is short and kinda goofy.
Posted by Sharon at August 2, 2007 03:27 PMBut he's the only one for universal health care so he's my man!
I was just reading about the 81 year old woman who spent 7 days in the hospital getting skin grafts after being scalded by McDonald's coffee a few years back. I didn't know all those details, or that MickyDee's offered her a mere $800 for medical bills even though they'd settled with others for millions. Pissed her off so she sued.
I know this is extremely offtopic, but all the squealing about abuse of lawsuits (and those crafty lawyers like John Edwards), seems to be a call for universal health care: if folks medical bills were covered in most circumstances including tragedies, way fewer lawsuits. And who the hell publicized the McDonald's fiasco the way they did? At least with Pinto's, I believe everyone found out quickly that Ford knew there was a problem but still sent them out the door, hence big settlements. Or maybe that's the Firestone tire "accidents". Sorry I can't keep track but my point was Kucinich has good ideas even though he's short.
Ooooops change that "millions" to "thousands" though it probably added up to a couple million anyway.
Posted by Sharon at August 2, 2007 03:36 PMIt seems to me that the only way to get the '08 vote tallies within e-voting adjustment range is to energize the base. They have to be incredibly demoralized now.
Clinton as the nominee is just the ticket to get them motivated to contribute and participate. It's no wonder that Murdoch is throwing money her way, she is the preferred opponent for the GOP.
Posted by brisa at August 2, 2007 04:10 PMOf course it just might be Edwards has a legitimate point. News Corps is growing and influencing higher eschalons of readers with the WSJ acquisition. It is one thing to assume it will confine Rupert's ravashing conservatism to the Op Ed page; it will be another altogether if it intends to knock off the NY Times in the same way Fox News intends (and may have already) knocked off CNN. Maybe Edwards is thinking more broadly than sniping at Hillary.
Posted by gtash at August 2, 2007 04:32 PMI was commenting at another place, trying to figure the best Repug candidate. I likened it to looking for a trinket, three days later, that the dog ate. Nuggets in the lawn chocolate. But, then I saw her. Hillary is the best Rep candidate. She's Eisenhower/Nixon all over again. Public policies and departments, highly visible foreign policy, moderation, and a war she inherits and pursues! This is symbolic of the long strides away from normalcy that the Repugs have taken. Of course she's a Dem, I'm talking to lost normal moderate Republicans. Come home to Hillary.
Steve Soto has endorsed her. Would you, Steve, comment on this notion? I'm a Leftist, but will certainly support her. I'm pragmatic. She will need to suck up all of the moderate middle, and many of them are politically lost. Is there a campaign theme here?
Posted by Richard W. Crews at August 2, 2007 06:00 PM