Ok, all joking aside, they're not REALLY going to run Hillary, are they?

What have you got against Edwards?

Haircut! Haircut!

I wouldn’t presume to jump in line in front you, amigo.

And I just asked a question-- I didn’t make any assertions. I’d be interested in see what fraudulent behavior Giuliani is guilty of that rises about the run of the mill stuff we see from most politicians.

I’d probably rather see Edwards than Clinton, but the margin is slim.

I don’t like that when she comes out firmly on an issue, it always seems to be an issue I despise (like video game violence). When it’s an issue I care about, she pussyfoots (like gays in the military).

Two Americas,for one. I don’t cotton to class warfare.

We’ve had class war in America since 1980 at least, but only the ruling class has been fighting it. Time to remedy that.

Neither do we. We’d like it to stop.

Just a reminder, at this point the in the election of 2004 the Democrat who had raised the most money was . . . Howard Dean.


I disagree with your premise, but if I did agree with it I’d mention something about two wrongs.

What about his statements raises them to the level of “warfare”?

She wouldn’t be my choice, out of the Democratic candidates, but I think she has a better than even chance of being the nominee. She’s a very accomplished politician and a top-notch fundraiser. At ground level, she has her network in place. She’s the only female candidate, so she has the loving support of EMILY’s List.

In her appearances so far, she’s concentrating on being warm and expressive to shoo away that stuff about being a cold, shrill bitch.

She has been the punching bag of the noise machine for a long time, and she learned from it. Unlike the last two candidates we fielded, she knows how to stand her ground when attacked. She’s got, well, ovaries. Gore and Kerry were easy meat; no hangy-downs. They spent all there time dodging and dancing.

Her big weakness will be voters who believe the continuous mudslinging the rightwing noise machine has done since her husband was president. A lot of people out there will tell you sincerely that Mrs. Clinton is a thief, a murderer, a lesbian, and a commynist. Oh, and a Feminazi, too. :wink:

It is a fact that different social classes exist. It is a fact that they have some interests in common but some interests in conflict. What is “wrong” about the working class becoming conscious of those facts and fighting for its own interests, at least by nonviolent political means?

The whole idea that there are “two Americas”.


What? He’s telling the truth and you can’t wish it away.

OK, everybody, the Internationale, in the People’s key of “C”…

Well, there is some truth in that “one America” pays the taxes. However, I have a sneaking suspicion that he’s mixing up which one that is.

So, rhetoric designed to bring something to people’s attention is “warfare.” What does that leave for actual actions?

It strikes me as yet another attempt to make a scary word or phrase keep people from discussing underlying issues. “Class warfare!” “Socialized medicine!” “Unamerican!” “Terror!” “Death tax!” gasp, sob, faint

Would you mind telling us which lesbian coven you belong to?

What Hillary did brilliantly is run for senate in NY, anyone on the democratic ticket in NY, with or without a brain wins - it’s that simple. It was not a great achievement in that sense. Now getting the dem’s to run her was.

Of all the candidates to date, Hillary does have the best ability to create a firestorm of support for the Party candidate - the Republican Party that is. The anti-Hillary vote very well could be the deciding factor in the election.