I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
typo alert: August 8, 1991?
Er, do you mean August 8, 1991?
Which is why a Clark run isn't out of the question, no?
Dogpile on Atrios:
Don'cha mean August 91, 1991?
Once more with gusto:
August 91, 1899.
Dems can win on these issues:
Jobless pseudo-recovery
Desperate condition of State finances and slashing of public services
Trashing the fiscal outlook for the US federal government and threat posed to Social Security and Medicare
Quagmire in Iraq
Loss of trust in Bush over war rationale
Bush evasiveness over Saudis and his role pre-9/11.
Hark, do I hear a foot fall? Is that you, Wesley Clark?
BobNJ,
They also have to make clear that they are all about national security and not whimps on the subject, as Bush is saying (this is lie # 5,834, isn't it? I've lost count...)
How about Clark/Cleland?
HEY ATRIOS!
Don't you mean 1991?
Dogpile is kind of fun. Wampum has a great series of Friday Flashbacks where she runs articles from 1991 eerily reminiscent of articles today.
I say screw Iraq as an issue - the economy alone (plus a back-up card of the slashed funding of homeland security if Shrub persists in invoking the image of 9/11) will be more than enough to take this thing.
How many people can really, truly, honestly say that they are better off now than they were before his term started?
I remember. Sadly, so does Rove. What Does he have planned?
Anonymous:
Screw Eye-rack?!?!? Don'cha yew care fer Our Guys and Gals in Uniform? I bet'cha support The Dixie Chicks NOT the troops
BTW, Anonymous, is that one o' them Frenchie words?
I haven't heard anyone else say it, but I'd like to see Dianne Feinstein jump in as the late entry candidate. Although I like Dean, I think a Feinstein/Clark ticket would be outstanding. She's California's most popular politician, she's accumulated a lot of centrist votes recently (yes to tax cuts, yes to the war, yes to school vouchers) and I think she'd be a complete fund raising machine. As the late entry candidate, she would come free of all the Iraq war debate baggage. Having voted yes for the war and not been a controversial figure within the debate, she would have a much easier time establishing herself on security and Clark would sew that up for her. I also think that she'd be one of those rare things in national politics: a fresh face with lots of experience.
Maybe I'm alone in thinking this, but I can hope 
The media are now engaged in whacking every Democratic candidate who pops up his head. What gives them the right to offer their half-assed opinions on the probable success of any particular candidate vis-a-vis W.
They engage in this pointless conjecture, while ignoring the ramifications of the most massive cover-up in US history. Get off your knees, media suckasses, and do your goddamn job.
Town Drunk is usin' Frenchie words again!
mouse, you listed all the reasons not to vote for feinstein.
What gives them the right to offer their half-assed opinions on the probable success of any particular candidate vis-a-vis W.
Amendment I?
so let's give a hand for those guys who put their feet in early this time.
Vouchers -- centrist?? Go figger. Damn Frenchie words.
Does that cover half-assed opinions?
"I also think that she'd be one of those rare things in national politics: a fresh face with lots of experience.
"Maybe I'm alone in thinking this, but I can hope."
mouse | 08.02.03 - 11:05 am
I had to read this twice. You're talking prez candidate, not Calif. governor, right? I think you pretty much are alone. Not in your wildest dreams. No way. Are you kidding?
I detest the French, and never use
their fancy gayish language. They fuck up everything they touch.
Look at their piece a shit Eiffel Tower. It leans, like, two feet from the perpendicular. They were probably drunk on their piss-poor wine when they built it.
Samlex, while it does look like that, taken in the context of her overall voting record, these are only token gestures. Her record is much better than Lieberman and Edwards. In big picture terms she's in the same league as Kerry and Gephardt in my opinion. I think she'd be able to get the base excited, but with the advantage of looking less lefty to the independents. She'd completely clean up the female vote and would give those bored with politics the chance to go out and vote for something completely unique to date.
I'll just stand in the corner here with my little Feistein/Clark sign
D'oh, "Feinstein/Clark" even.
Another Bush vacation and fund raising paid for by the taxpayers. In the meantime our soldiers are dying in Iraq. I wonder if the "compassionate conservative" unelected fraud will take the time and have the decency to attend a single funeral for the men and women that he sent to die. Maybe even "hug" a mother?
A good point, especially for those who are using the "____ is unelectable" line. By this time in their campaigns, who thought that Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton were "electable"? How many even knew who they were?
I wish Clark would declare instead of grinning that cute grin. I must admit I admire any of the Democrats who have declared and are willing to take the heat, especially Dean who has been extremely creative in getting around the Bushco money machine. A Clark/Dean ticket would be my first choice though the ego thing probably precludes that.
About the resemblence between the two Bushes, I quote our Liar in Chief: "I've seen this movie before."
The premise of a Bush Presidency is to loot the Treasury and give their buddies IOUs for the resulting public debt rather than make them pay it. This involves a lot of people getting paid off, a lot of crooked judges installed, massive deployments of the military so that they break enough of their equipment, and capital markets going to hell. It takes us about three years to become a Second World nation and six to become a First World nation again after a Bush Presidency.
About DiFi- she doesn't look healthy enough to me and she has never struck me as a robust decision maker or able to persuade people to subordinate their interests to other ones.
Feinstein voted for the war despite the overwhelming opposition of her constituency. She rolls over for almost any Republican initiative. I'd vote for Lieberman before I'd vote for DiFi -- and I hope I never have to vote for Holy Joe.
Her record is much better than Lieberman['s]...
Damn, that is one strong recommendation!
There's a good piece on Clark up at Alternet right now:
http://www.alternet.org/story.ht...l?
StoryID=16527
On Tuesday, I wrote that "The RNC is caught in the clutches of hubris" using as my source a CSMonitor article where the RNC was envisioning a sweep of the '04 elections. Today, FoxNews released a poll showing
With Bush’s 47 percent "deserves reelection" number, it appears that some Americans approve of the job he’s doing even though they may not support him in the voting booth. Forty percent say the country would "probably be better off with someone else."
Only 47% of voters think Bush "deserves reelection". I know that polls at this point in an election cycle are pretty meaningless, but these numbers ought to warn every Republican that it is ridiculous to be talking about election "sweeps" in '04.
On Tuesday, I wrote that "The RNC is caught in the clutches of hubris" using as my source a CSMonitor article where the RNC was envisioning a sweep of the '04 elections. Today, FoxNews released a poll showing
With Bush’s 47 percent "deserves reelection" number, it appears that some Americans approve of the job he’s doing even though they may not support him in the voting booth. Forty percent say the country would "probably be better off with someone else."
Only 47% of voters think Bush "deserves reelection". I know that polls at this point in an election cycle are pretty meaningless, but these numbers ought to warn every Republican that it is ridiculous to be talking about election "sweeps" in '04.
did you say feinstein or swinestein? been there done that.
they own the media, they own the voting machines. the idea of voting for clarky is kinda sad, why do we need to perpetrate the war machine.
Feinstein, Lieberman, I could care less if they are Democrats.
They voted for the war and for the tax cuts. On those two issues alone, they might as well be Republicans.
Clarky said that Iraq was a huge blunder on the Diane Rehm (sp?) show. However, he also said that it would take five-ten years and a couple of more divisions to make sure that it didn't devolve into chaos. If you're of draft age, I think that would make you think twice.
erikconservative, I think you and I encountered one another at Atrios a while back. I found you a thoughtful conservative then, and the article you wrote a few days ago confirms that.
As a general rule, when one party starts to act as if it's about to take over the world (the hubris you note), it's just about the time they're about to get a whack over the head. I fail to see how Republicans can be anything but nervous about both the Iraq situation and, especially, the unimproving job climate. No incumbent party has ever held onto the White House in such economic circumstance, let along increased its Congressional membership. If there's not substantial change in the political wind within six-eight months, those GOP dreams can be turned on their head.
Lieberman voted against the tax cuts, so far as I know.
Perrier am be French fer piss.
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
