I've given ample proof of a large multi-national corporation , the Carlyle Group, with political ties to Bush I and Clinton I, along with Rumsfeld and others, and $1.8 billon of borrowed Saudi money. That's a bank statement not a conspiracy.

You can check Wikipedia if you want. That's why they used to have a website, for the group itself, nobody ever bothered to check it. Went there once the counter was at like 40. Think they finally took the site down but they really didn't need to bother.

This in and of itself is not a problem. ExxonMobil is a large multi-national corporation. The problem comes when the same people who control the financial power of the corporation control the political power of the country. This is the concentration of too much power in too few hands. Precisely what the Founding Fathers (along with the Founding Mothers, Abigail Adams played a large role as will thankfully be shown in the new HBO miniseries John Adams) warned against and sought to protect us from. "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely." The Constitution is a living breathing document. It CAN be taken down. If George W. Bush has taught us anything it's this.

If you're always running for office chances are you wont' get caught. You can dismiss any charges during an election season as political and the rest of the time you can hide out well enough to dodge it. This is why politicians get so nervous when things go to trial. They're all lawyers and know this is the one place they CAN get caught. Hence Jack Abramhoff scaring the living daylights out of D.C.

There's a reason everyone who comes out of this says it's a dirty, illegal, immoral business. And then we want to pretend all of the current politicians aren't dirty.

What the Clintons and Bushes are attempting has NEVER been done before. If people honestly can't see the problem with having the same two families in control for 28 straight years (especially when they're now not ALWAYS counting votes in Florida in 2000 and Ohio 2004), which means you're not really running a democratic process than I can't explain it to you. Obviously you have your own beliefs, which you are fully entitled to, and I'm not saying they're not right. Just saying I've repeatedly explained the problems with 2 families cornering all the control in a political system. Where I will split hairs with everyone is this is precisely what a dynasty is. There is no other word for it, and to call it something else is disenguous.

This is what the Clinton campaign does, and they're just mad Dowd and others caught them early. They try to drive wedges between different groups. They triangulate, divide and conquer us to death.

They've clearly tried to pit women against African-Americans. Some of us caught them early. Don't know if our responses were helpful or well received, but have a feeling, like with all things, Clintonian better to catch them early and call them on it than let it fester.

Norman Hsu, Peter Paul, Bill Clinton and the uranium deal with the Communist dictaror. Hate to break it to Hillary but she'd best just concentrate on keeping her own scandals out of the limelight.

When they break which they inevitably will like all of her scandals (Vince Foster, White Water, Travelgate, Trooper Gate, etc., etc., etc) I would suggest she'll be in deep water once again, the territory in which she finds herself most comfortable. Good luck trying to get out of it this time.

Looks like Barack Obama has coattails. This means, what pretty much everyone already knew, with him at the head of the ticket we can easily sweep back into real, huge majorities in the House and Senate. This means passing real Democratic legislation for the first time since the 1960s. Change is in the air people! Let's get this train moving.

Hillary didn't bother to show up and vote on it at all the first time. Just thought everyone would like to know. And she was actually in D.C. campaigning, it was the week of the Potomac Primaries, and used the excuse she was too busy campaigning. Sad.

he's made his career going after others for hypocrisy and breaking minor, stupid laws. So now he's caught in one. Too bad.

Yes it is hypocritical to prosecute someone for what you yourself are doing. The only way this wouldn't be hypocritical would be if Spitzer started actively encouraging others to prosecute him.

Otherwise he feels that other's should be prosecuted for crimes he commits, but he shouldn't. That's hypocrisy.

for being dumb enough to do something like this in the first place. The reason the MSM latches onto it is because it's always the politicians who are most sanctimonious or willing to throw dirt at others who are always the dirtiest. Bob Barr, Bill Clinton, Elliot Spitzer.

All 3 have either:

A.) Been sanctimonious to the point of nauseum. (Bob Barr, Elliot Spitzer.)

or

B.) Excelled in throwing dirt at their opponents and using dirty politics to win. (Bill Clinton.)

Hence when they get it thrown back at them that's called karma. However they're all smart enough to prey on the American people's odd habit of feeling sorry for anyone caught in anything. Even if it is their own doing.

I maintained that both Clinton and Spitzer deserved to get caught, based on their own stances. Both destroyed countless opponents career, nastily, unnecessarily, and far beyond the bounds of usual politics.

Both went after others for what they were doing. Both continued to do what they were doing to the extent you almost have to question whether or not they wanted to get caugh.

To argue someone who built their career on sanctimony, moral outrage, and prosecuting others for minor crimes even when his own party told him not to, should not be felt sorry for now that he's caught in the same pattern of behavior he sent others to jail for being caught in. That's justice.