No one who is serious about universal health care believes it can be accomplished without a mandate. Senator Obama can make all sorts of speeches about how much he wishes there were health coverage for more people, but unless we all have it, then you and I will always pay for the people who choose not to buy it. His suggestion the other day that people who show up at the emergency room without insurance will somehow be made to pay their back premiums is nothing short of hilarious. Now that's the sort of insurance I'd like to buy - wait until your house burns down, and then buy insurance to cover it. A fifth grader could see what's wrong with that idea.

"Prosperity and peace are in the balance...."

Is "balance" a euphemism for "toilet"?

Shuster is "a scrupulously honest and fair reporter" for going on TV to smear Sen. Clinton and her family? I say he's a nappy-headed ho. Fire him.

What exactly are we talking about here? I must have missed a step. Do the Hamasniks want to negotiate with Israel? The subjects at issue here, such as the captive soldier, are bilateral. Is there an open offer by Hamas to negotiate with Israel, of which I'm not aware? If they won't negotiate with Israel, to what purpose would the US negotiate with them? If the entire story here is that most Israelis would like to see their government negotiate, if negotiations were available, then why don't we worry about all this when the other side changes its tune, and the possibility of progress exists? Otherwise, it's a pointless exercise in rhetoric.

"Israel has been ruled by the paranoid right for too long"

That's what many Israelis thought before the Barak Administration. He tried every means to negotiate long-term peace, and the response from the Palestinians was the Second Intefada.

Thanks to anonymous for the citations on limited offers by Hamas to accept a temporary cease-fire in exchange for Israeli surrender to all their demands. Based on those articles, it seems that if the offer ever becomes a serious offer to negotiate, the Israeli government would be listening.

Greenwald is on topic with Chomsky. High praise, indeed.

If I found myself agreeing in any way with Noam Chomsky, it would be time to start searching for a suitable mental institution.

I chuckled at Obama's characterization of the 3:00 am ad as "throwing the kitchen sink." What was his Harry and Louise ad? The toilet?

"When everyone else is going nuts, the President needs to get cooler and cooler."

My question about Obama is, how could we possibly know how he will behave under pressure, since he has never had anything but a free ride through a charmed life. Clinton has been tested, Obama hasn't.

... she was "proud of America for the first time in [her] life".

I have no idea what the Obamanauts think they are talking about, when they say Clinton will stoop to blah blah blah. The Harry and Louise ad was WAY beyond anything the Clinton campaign has done. It made me wonder whom Karl Rove is working for these days.

It appears to me, based on comments here as well as elsewhere, that many Obama supporters, as well as the campaign staff, are hate-filled, angry people, who are looking to Obama The Beatific as their personal salvation. Another name for this phenomenon is psychosis.

Right on, I agree wholeheartedly. Furthermore, I suspect there is a pathology at work in people who adore the messiah-like Obama, and lash out in anger at her opponent. Facts: both are politicians, both are running negative campaigns. One has more experience, the other has more charisma. One is a white woman, the other is a black man. Aside from that, they are pretty identical. So let's all try to grow up, and deal with our mental problems in the privacy of our therapists' offices.

The Obama spin in here is getting me all dizzy. Clinton has said all along that she would make her best effort to get the troops out as quickly as possible. Obama was extremely clear that he would start the withdrawal immediately, and that this was a major difference with Clinton. Now it turns out that he was just taking a position that he hoped would get him elected, but that he doesn't really believe in. Must be that new politics of hope.

This is grasping at straws by the Obama camp.

First of all, his spectacular foresight on Iraq all happened before he was subject to the political pressures on a US senator. It was very easy for him to be against the war: it cost him exactly nothing.

Similarly, nothing has ever happened to this man except for a pleasant stroll through a charmed life. We have no way of knowing how he will behave in a crisis, because he has never in his life been in one. Hillary has been tested, Obama has not.

... and others. Thanks to all of you Obama supporters who agreed with me that he has never been tested. How could you not agree, since it's obvious that he never has. The best you all can come up with is "her neither", "blow job", "passenger seat", etc. The point is, Hillary has been through many fights, and is still standing. Obama has been in exactly: zero.

>>>> What fights are you referencing specifically that doesn't have to do with "blow jobs" or "passenger seat"? And how are those "fights" relevant to this election or make he a better candidate? And don't offer up the same old, tired sexist argument. <<<<

Well, how about UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE, for just one example. An issue that she fought hard for, lost, and I believe has figured out how to win this time. Obama, on the other hand has no clue and little interest. His stated position will never get us to a universal health care system, like the rest of the civilized world has. Furthermore, his borrowing of "Harry and Louise" from Karl Rove and Roger Ailes is nothing short of despicable. Talk about "will do/say anything to get elected". Which side is he on? Obama is the same as every other politico, only somewhat more charming and less experienced.

Yes, Hillary lost on health care in 1993. You're banking on Obama not making any rookie mistakes, but you know what? Everybody makes them (see: Samantha Power on invading Israel). Clinton, on the other hand, has been through it, and knows what she's doing. That's the whole point of Ready On Day One. The entire Democratic establishment (including most civil-rights era blacks), as well as world leaders, know and respect her, and that's not just from being a pretty face. Her campaign has been through plenty of adversity (running against the Messiah hasn't been easy), and she has been absolutely a rock through it all.

And, as always, you guys are still whining about Clinton, and can still say absolutely nothing about Obama's experience in a crisis - because, shall we say it again? - he has none.