I can't speak for the rest of America, but I can tell you why I-- a dyed in the wool Democrat since I first walked precincts for McGovern and who would sooner cut off my left nut than vote for a Republican-- am disgusted with this Congress.

It's the courage, stupid. Or rather, the lack thereof. The vast majority of the folks in this country agree that this war is pointless, fruitless and not worth the lives spent thus far and this Congress-- a majority of them Dems elected with a mandate to end this bloody madness-- can't muster the stones to tell the mad dauphin "No More!"

All this finger-in-the-air-to-test-which-way-the-wind-might-blow triangulation hasn't lead to better poll ratings. How about you do what we pay you for and TAKE A BLOODY STAND ON SOMETHING!!!!

I'd settle for anything at this point. But stand tall for something and don't back down. Don't apologize, don't equivocate, don't waffle. Either stand tall or stand down and admit that the Republicans will rule forever because we can't summon the necessary backbone to do it.

“The enemy advances, we retreat; the enemy camps, we harass; the enemy tires, we attack; the enemy retreats, we pursue” -- Mao Tse Tung

What part of this is hard to understand? In a guerrilla conflict, OF COURSE the insurgents will flow away from a concentration of opposing forces. They're not there to commit suicide by fighting trained soldiers on equal terms, after all. It therefore naturally follows that where troop levels are highest insurgent activity is low, ergo the "surge" works in part. It also DOESN'T work, in that where force levels are low (and they can't be high everywhere, all the time) insurgent activity increases.

This is the nature of guerilla warfare and this is a lesson we've already been taught-- and which our leaders and our media appear to have conveniently forgotten.

represent all that's best and brightest in America today. That they and others like them will be sacrificed on the altar of political hubris because American POLITICIANS (and yes, I include the apparently fear-addled Democrats in that number)are too frightened to do what is morally right is a sickening legacy to bequeath posterity.

We've been through this all before. Do we need another 50,000 names etched in black granite in order to recognize our mistake? Have we, after all, learned NOTHING from our history?

End this war. Bring these heroes back alive to their homes and loved ones.

If Hillary could find it within herself to admit she for once made a wrong decision and apologizes for her role in enabling this godawful, bootless misadventure in Iraq. Oh, and likewise admit that maybe, just maybe, swilling from the lobbyist monies trough isn't necessarily a GOOD thing. I'm really already quite fed up with a "leader" who can't admit he was wrong and sees nothing harmful in kaotaoing to well-monied special interests. I don't know if our republic can survive any more such "leadership."

Even then, a negative opinion rating in the 40th percentile range has got to give one pause.

Am I misled by conservative propaganda? More like unwilling to turn a blind eye to the very real flaws that could cost our party yet one more general election.

Whoopee! Start planning that inauguration ball now!

Wait... what's the margin of error on this poll? And what percentage of the country have a negative image of Giuliani or Thompson? Perhaps more importantly, what percentage of all these negative imagers will actually come out to vote?

Hmm. Better put the ball gowns back in mothballs for awhile.

If the Dems want to follow this jerk's advice, can we just save a lot of time and money and concede the presidential race to the Right?

This guy's the anti-Karl Rove-- a winless, ineffectual, bungling moron. Combine his incompetence with Hillary's inherent ability to polarize and you've got the Titanic aimed right at the iceberg.

Full speed ahead to (yet another) electoral disaster!

So, let me get this straight...

A simple candidate for one party's nomination and their mere THOUGHTS are so trenchant, cogent and very, very meaningful that they shouldn't be SPOKEN lest the word of the omniscient one effects us weaker mortals and becomes the deed?

Jeez, how many ways can you spell hubris? Now I've got two-- Bush the dauphin and Hillary.

Great. Then let's just annoint the already (apparently) preordained candidate, in this case St. Hillary, who will then serve to demonstrate in true 21st Century Democratic Party fashion-- yet again-- that prowess in the primary polls is no proof of any ability in the general election.

The problem is, an awful lot of folks out there in the real world just plain don't like her. And some-- this author included, truth to tell-- have serious doubts about electing someone so completely unapologetic about her role in creating the current debacle in Iraq, so obviously afraid to appear effeminate and unmanly by ruling out nuking erstwhile allied countries to further this madness called the war on terror and so brazenly anti-progressive as to actually defend and justify accepting special interest monies. Bush Lite is an incredibly apt description for such shenanigans.

So, of course the Right is going to frame such an election around Hillary, a woman already disliked by many and distrusted by more. What else are they gonna run on? Their record?

The Democratic Party of the 21st Century has lived up to my expectations: Wherever the prospect of controversy or (shudder) conflict rears it's head, talk tough and then knuckle under.

Let's just change our name from Democratic to Amoeba-- spineless, brainless blobs of protoplasm of no use to anyone.

Lord above, do these fools WANT to remain the second-fiddle party forever?

Heretofore, I had thought that the leaders of the Democratic congressional majority were the most spineless creatures on the planet.

I shall have to revise my legislative taxonomy.