I like Edwards.

Is he taking a cheap shot at Hilary? Eh. Maybe.

But then again Hilary needs to be hit. A lot. Whether those shots are "cheap" or not.

Hilary says all the right things her handlers tell her to say.

So did Bush.

Neither one has any intention of actually doing any of those lovely things they are saying right now.

Hopefully Edwards will be successful in showing the huge gap between what Hilary says she is going to do and what she actually does.

We don't need another Bush in office.

Anyone remember how Bush managed to memorize his "humble nation not interested in nation-building" talking points?

The question is do any of us really believe that Hilary is a hard-charging hell-raising Progressive that will be a champion for all working men and women throughout the world? Is she the Progressive that will stop Corporate America from waterboarding every last one of us if we're one day late on our subprime mortgage? Will she have the guts to stand up to Capital One? Will she stand up the insurance companies? Will she shut down the offshore tax havens?

*cough*bullshit*cough*

But just try telling that to the editors at Salon.

I guess love (obsession?) is blind.

Tim,

Just out of curiosity, do you really care about substantive issues, or just about politics?

Why do you even waste space on stuff like this? Hillary gave the politically correct answer on NAFTA. What a surprise. The Edwards campaign is getting desperate. What a surprise.

I thought it was odd that Hillary "laughed off" the question about the Perot-Gore debate, since I'm sure she and everyone in the Clinton administration was fully engaged in it at the time. But, on the other hand, so what? Most of us can only remember Perot's endless charts and have lost track of the point after all these years.

But the issue as you have framed it is about politics, not about NAFTA, and we're all pretty sick of politics. We'd like to see substantive discussions of actual issues from all the candidates, and we'd like the press to demand that and stop pandering to the political machines.

Well, I'd really like to see Edwards become the next president, but honesty compels me to say, yes, his campaign has gone astray here. They're like chickens scratching in horseshit for a scrap of oats. Hillary gave a full, well-informed, and sensible answer to that series of questions, and if she actually does what she says she intends to do concerning NAFTA, I'll be on my feet and cheering.

but Ross Perot was right about a couple of big issues, NAFTA and the national debt (I don't remember him talking about anything else). For some reason people still like to talk about him like he is crazy. Maybe he was, but he was also right.

Not what Hillary Clinton not remembering the debate over NAFTA back from 1993 but rather that she does not an economic policy that differs in the slightest from the Free-Trade agreements that have dominated U.S. policy since the Spanish-American War. Granted I wasn't alive during that debate and I was a mere 10 years old in 1993 but like hell I haven't read and studied those two serious debates.

Our economic policy abroad has had MAJOR impact on our domestic life. Toys from China, outsourcing, Wal-Mart, Andrew Leonard's entire blog.

Clinton's non-answer and chuckle was brought on because she supports the status-quo and does not have an economic policy. We do not need the status-quo right now.

that should read "not that Hillary Clinton does not remember"

That's your prerogative. But it's just boring and dull at this point. Just slap Hillary's picture up on the banner of the website and be done with it. We won't hate you. But we won't wonder anymore either. It's tedious already.

I loved Ross Perot because here was a guy that actually had DETAILS about his plans and DETAILS about what was happening in the world.

What are the details of John Edwards:

"I'm the son of a mill worker!"

Hilary Clinton?

"I'm your girl! Don't listen to the haters!"

Obama?

"We need a different kind of politics. You dig, baby?"

Detailed policy analysis? Detailed outline of policy for the future?

Nope.

Only Biden really seems to have a real clue -- but like the enternal "un-hip" Dad we all have who actually can fix anything in the house, he won't be the Dem candidate.

Instead we'll get stuck with one of the 3 Stooges who talk about how handy they are -- but can't actually do anything.

Hey, Anon 12:31, that was a rockin' post! I couldn't agree more. And I was very impressed with Biden last night. I am very much considering voting for him in the primaries, though I am still undecided.

And to answer Chris' rhetorical questions at the top of this thread...

The question is do any of us really believe that Hilary is a hard-charging hell-raising Progressive...

Yes!

...that will be a champion for all working men and women throughout the world?

Maybe not completely, but I think she tries to strike a fair balance between labor and management.

Is she the Progressive that will stop Corporate America from waterboarding every last one of us if we're one day late on our subprime mortgage?

Um, weeding through the hyperbole, yes.

Will she have the guts to stand up to Capital One? Will she stand up the insurance companies?

Stand up to them how? An emotion-laden but vague question. Insurance, especially medical insurance, liability insurance, auto insurance, YES! Other kinds, and what Capital One is about (credit card interest rates, perhaps, though my Capital One interest rate is very low), I haven't the foggiest.

Will she shut down the offshore tax havens?

No.

Hope that helps, Chris! ;-)

to post a inter-campaign email. DESPERATE!

Grieve - we can hear and read and Hillary laughed about millions of jobs lost via NAFTA! She also takes responsibility for NAFTA, so it's distrastrous consequences are part of her WH experience - the good and the bad.