I've asked myself many times why I have enthusiasm for a major party candidate which I haven't had since....well, never. For a decade or more I've tried to describe my political leanings to friends as "libertarian-socialist" but would only get a puzzled look. "Is that liberal or conservative?" to which the answer is "Sort-of." There are things a government should provide its people and they should be ready to pay for (health care, security, infrastructure, meaningful trade agreements,etc.) There are things a government should not do to it's people (warrantless spying, fixed courts, turning over the economy to robber barons) Obviously a candidate can't use the "s-word" and not have heads explode so libertarian-paternalist it is!

Although she is a demigoddess in the pantheon of bush incompetents, an uninformed electorate (most of the country) plus an angry electorate (1/2 the democratic party by the time this mess is settled) could look at her and say "Hey, I can vote for experience, youth, change, Clinton, and Obama all at the same time!"

Pointing out what a disaster she has been to foriegn policy and domestic security will be met with cries of "Racist! Sexist!" Fortunately I think that is remote as the powers that be in the RNC will have much more problem with the fact she is a lady of color than that she is a lady.

My guess for McCain VP will be some white guy southern governor with Lieberman and even Clinton as the wild cards (or jokers depending upon the deck).

In the context, there is no other way to interpret the remark than Tiger and Barack are in the same box in this rube's brain. Not big racism...but small minded all the same.

As for Mathews comment, I saw him pushing that theme that the mistake is OK because it would be a "compliment" for young black men to be mistaken for Tiger Woods. Does Chris call all black men "Martin" and all black women "Oprah" so they won't ever be insulted?

As far as I know.

But sometimes he gives answers to questions that make no sense. In many cases it is because he hates wearing his hearing aid and wings the answer based on what he thinks he heard.

On the other hand, he isn't running for president.

Jeez. I've been trying to read all the articles from both Obama and Clinton supporters. I got as far as the line above and with ridiculous hyperbole like that, I think I can safely stop reading Walsh until there is only one candidate. And maybe afterwards.

Any one who has not read Mr. Brock's book "Blinded by the Right" really should. It provides insight on the reality of the "vast right wing conspiracy" including tidbits about people who are still figureheads in the movement (Kristol, Norquist, Coulter, Drudge).

a democratic convention where the attendees would be sporting purple bandaids (Perhaps prison stripes...he did get shot down after all) and waving sandals in the air while chanting "flip-flop, flip-flop"?

I can't either. Despite continuing shenagins in the endless primary season, it's still nice to hang out with grown ups.

I think it is her way of being "presidential" by declaring reality is what she and her people say it is. I mean, it's worked the last 7 years, hasn't it?

You insult Klingons, always a dangerous move by the way.

True, they tend to take more direct action that politics would suggest and negotiations are, ultimately, for Terrans. But they fight their own battles and would feel personal and family dishonor to have others go to war on their behalf.

You mean like Texas?

I would have thought the winner was the one with the most delegates. But that's just me.

How about Illinois...or did he "lose" that, too?

is not based on popular vote. Wish it was. Talk to President Gore about that.

In fact, while I was still in the Air Force and the Abu Gharaib scandal broke, in my mortification at what our country had become, I wrote that McCain should lead a coup to remove this embarassment from office (Repub majority at the time). I don't write fan letters anymore and I will vote for the democratic nominee whoever that may be.

He'll be bad as president, but not as bad as Bush. No one is as bad as Bush (except perhaps Cheney).

OK, you got me convinced. I hear the job of presidency is "hard work". In fact I hear it over and over again.

And lilybean, you kind of wandered a bit in the effort to squeeze in all the talking points. You should keep it simple like WES "Obama sucks and is a loser" or Cythera;s "Empty suit! Empty suit!"

I can't say the others are worse than Bush. People like Yoo and Rumsfeld are only able to inflict damage on the world while serving their masters. Lieberman may yet have an opportunity to do some real evil depending upon how his new BFF McCain does this year.

Cheney is not just the architect of some of this administration's worst but personally profited from it once it becomes clear how his "blind investments" did. Thinking of this administration makes me wonder about how Dante would have structured hell with all these sins unimaginable in earlier times.

We needed to crank up the gas tax so that it cost at least $4 a gallon and plough the revenue into a national health plan. I never envisioned that it would make a run for $4 without any significant increase in the tax. Yes the companies are making obscene profits and should have their own tax breaks rescinded. But oil is more than twice the cost that it was 5 years ago (wonder what's been going on over there) and consumption is up so there you go.

Maybe $5 a gallon now and put the money into infrastructure improvement...