someone please tell me how this works....

to the college student who believes he or she should get a college education here in the US and then leave the another country because this country is doomed...You do not deserve to be considered a citizen in the US and if you want to leave this country please do so but do not use our tax dollars to fund your education....it is clear you do not need an education in the US..just leave now and don't come back.......you sadden me.

Yes, we do have another choice and it is the best choice any American can make to bring this country back to the status of a great Republic and a non-debted nation once again.THE CHOICE I AM REFERRING TO IS RON PAUL.Ron Paul is still in the running just like Obama ,Clinton and McCain are. It's just that MSM (Main Stream Media) has blocked out Ron Paul's candidacy because they are so very biased and afraid of Ron Paul MSM doesn't want any changes to this country because they control this country and everything you see and hear on television.If you want real change to this country change for the better than vote Ron Paul in November 2008.Even if you have to write his name in do it,it will be for the best of the entire nation.

On another reader forum recently, someone wrote, "... there are voters out there shallow enough to vote for someone based on whether they like their personality, rather than on what a candidate actually stands for." Strange, that worked well for Bush 2000 & 2004... and we ended up with a president "you could have a beer with", rather than one with an actual intellect.

Obama, however, has a great deal he "stands for," including an equality of *all* people to rise to their potential as "humans"... not just the poor, the black, or women, but also conservatives, the wealthy, foreign people, different religions, etc. This in hopes of overcoming the huge challenges we, as a species, face. He knows this is perhaps the only way forward, as humans begin to pay the price for our arrogance with the earth's resources. If we continue to act as opposing egotistical nation-states rather than "humanity", we, as a species, are all headed for global disaster.

Obama's premise is "Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you." Are we ready for America and its politicians to actually employ that sage advice?

how can anyone who is a terrible parent to his kids like obama who carries his kids to a church where they can learn racism and hate be a good president anyone who is a good parent would never vote for obama how can anyone teach their kids not to hate other races of people or be racist when they support one of the worst racist in american what kind of example are you setting for your kids when you support obama and his wife who are terrible parents no good parent teaches their kids to hate other people because of their race to me that is a form of abuse i carry my kids to a church where they are taught to love all people how could i support a man who teaches his kids to hate certain people how could he be a good president when he is not even a good parent good paents dont teach their kids to hate other people he is a terrible example of a parent to his kids when my kids ask about obama i just tell them the truth that he is a bad man and his church is not a real church and that obama is a confused man who doesnt know what he is doing

5/18/08
For over two years now all of us who try to pay attention to the political rhetoric coming from the mouths of these idiots vying to be America's next leader only goes to show that now more than ever Americans need "None of the Above" on election ballots for government candidates! I am neither, A Democrat, or a Republican and I am tired of the unconstitutional stronghold these two groups of people are placing American citizens under! With "None of the Above" we the true people of America can accurately express our dissatisfaction with all contenders and tell the Democrats and Republicans that their political offerings as candidates suck and they need to go back and listen to the people!

Whare is the American media?

MyDD :: Canadian Public Broadcasting Exonerates ObamaMar 5, 2008 ... Canada contacted the campaigns. Michael Wilson was not involved. ... Re: Canadian Public Broadcasting Exonerates Obama (2.00 / 2) ...
www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/5/3130/68401 - 42k - Cached - Similar pages

One Million Strong:: "Canadian Public Broadcasting Exonerates Obama""Canadian Public Broadcasting Exonerates Obama" | 3 comments ... As the video above tells it the Obama campaign never initiated a contact but the Canadians ...
www.onemillionstrong.us/showDiary.do?diaryId=937 - 32k - Cached - Similar pages

CBC Exonerates Obama- a day after the primary. - Democratic ...CBC Exonerates Obama- a day after the primary. ... that begins not with Obama contacting Canada, but nervous Canadians contacting the campaigns. ...
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=388x3103 - 44k - Cached - Similar pages

The Swamp: Obama a little confused about today's stateMar 7, 2008 ... CBC exonerates Obama. American media ignores the story. Hmmm .... By the way, it wasn't Mr. Obama's campaign that talked to Canada about ...
weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/03/obama_a_little_confused_of_w_s.html - 121k - Cached - Similar pages

A NAFTA stretch? - First Read - msnbc.comMar 10, 2008 ... Our ambassador to Canada has gone on record that the Canadian government is ..... Canadian Broadcast Corporation exonerates Obama ...
firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/10/752998.aspx - 81k

TO ALL SUPPORTERS OF HILLARY CLINTON: IN NOVEMBER EITHER VOTE FOR MCCAIN OR BOYCOTT THE ELECTION. IN 2012 HILLARY WILL GAIN THE WHITE HOUSE. HILLARY'S FORMER SUPPORTERS RUTHLESSLY KICKED HER TO THE CURB IN FAVOR OF OBAMA? LET'S SHOW THEM WHAT REAL RUTHLESSNESS IS ALL ABOUT!!

What surprised me more than the candidates we are left with is the censorship of the papers!

If the "screw 'em" article about the Southern working class, made in 1995 by HRC at Camp David in the presence of other think tank members had been made public, some of her loyal supporters MIGHT have taken time to pause. Certainly WVA and PA would have felt like fools.

Only the April l8th or 20th (Fri) Huffington Post carried the article. I emailed it to many newspapers but they refused to print it. Voters are not given the facts about the candidates.

I suppose they have forgotten her involvement in Whitewater, the criminal investigation (which luckily was deemed insufficient evidence anyway who would have had the nerve to indict their bosses wife), the taking of articles from the White House when she left, the high handed way she treated the lower level staff employees and her calling for the travel clerks to be fired.

Yes, she is someone we can really be proud of.

Unfortunately the candidates in 2008 are representative of contemporary America. We are a land filled with 'me first' interests, greed and patronizers of the rich.

The more money a candidate flashes, the more the electorate (voters) follow. (Speaking of electorates, we continue to elect our Commander-in-Chief with the Electoral College. In the future, that system could easily be controlled by an oligarchy or an autocrat).

As we head down the yellow brick road towards a global economic state, we will become a nation of super rich oligarchs (we're almost there) with the masses of us controlled by a camera police state. Do you think that's far-fetched? It's here already. In Great Britain, 60% of the population is under surveillance 24 hours a day. In Americas largest cities, surveillance with cameras exists already (NY's Super-Rich MAYOR wants cameras to be placed everywhere. Camera surveillance is being expanded under the guise of national security protocols. Bloomberg won't be affected by it, will he?

Millions of people cross our borders illegally from every country. Nothing is done (nor do our Presidential candidates propose a solution to stem the tide of CHEAP LABOR for employers.

NAFTA was an agreement made between rich American and Canadian manufacturing and agriculural conglomerates and rich Mexican (European-Spaniards by blood-which is closely maintained by class in Mexico and all Central and South American countries) landowners. The result of that inter-governmental agreement was that manufacturing facilities operating in the US and Canada closed. They were moved to Mexico where they were allowed to operate without any oversight. Pollution from their manufacturing and the low wages paid to Mexican workers is never discussed by American politicians. Attention is given to building a wall like the one in Berlin, while the rich owners bank their money in other countries.

George Bush was only an appetizer for the future menu to be served in America and many western nations. Globalization of financial institutions has enabled the richest families on this planet to centralize their power and control in EVERY country, regulating commodities market pricing and financial markets to a degree never seen before, globally.

The Dark Ages in Europe were not dark for the few rich families (Royalty,Nobility and Vassals)who owned and/or rented everything in Europe.

The rest of the population lived in complete servitude. Millions died of starvation and abuse.

Fast forward to 2008:

About 1/3 of the world's population lives without clean water or electricity. The wood they cut to provide warmth and fire for cooking is increasingly being lumbered by large international conglomerates to provide wood resources for the rich. This same 1/3 of humanity (about 2.5 billion people) have a life expectancy of about 45 years. (Genocide, diseases such as malaria and diptheria, HIV and AIDS, and tribal warfare sanctioned and enabled by rich investors from the US and Europe, who own large stakes in oil, gas, copper, diamonds, and a list too long for this blog.

When we talk about politics and political leaders today, we are speaking the same language that was used in 1860 in America.

SLAVERY SHOULD BE ABOLISHED. The difference in time between 1860 and 2008 is notable. Nothing has changed. The USURY rates have increased for resources purchased from the rich and the rest of humanity be damned!

If we do not address the gain of power by the rich in America through taxation and invest in technology to make this country a place for every human being who reaches its shores, we will become a nation divided by rich and poor without any hope for resolution without revolution.(NEVER GIVE UP YOUR GUNS!)

I am wondering whether I will find a post by a democrat supporter that doesnt toe the fourth estate's mantra of what a "mess" this country is in. We seem to get here every few years around the time the press wants to foist their latest wonderboy (or girl) upon us and "change" the world. I am truly baffled by the bipolar nature of most of my fellow country folk. When I speak to people about what exactly their troubles are they usually tell me "Oh, not me but people in general are suffering." I am no apologist for the policies of our government but I do have the sense to understand the tremendous inertia of the bureaucracy that is in place and as such expect no dramatic changes to take place no matter who takes the office. Taken as a whole with foreign policy excluded our situation is little different than 20 years ago. Gas prices and the attendant inflation are not something I want the government interfering in as the government has not ever in its entire history done anything efficiently or at less cost than free markets and the reality of our own policies of restricting drilling and production coupled with dramatic increases in foreign demand being the real factors behind the current prices I cannot see relief coming from any person in the White House. That being said I will paraphrase Douglas Adams and say that "anyone who is capable of getting themselves elected President shouldn't be allowed to hold the office". A philosophy I embrace as well as the firm belief that any lawyer that pursues public office does so from the belief that their ability to obtain power and hold it is limited in their profession and they must then pursue other avenues to feed the addiction. Noone who is in politics can achieve success holding on to idealistic values without sacrificing them at the altar of the idol of campaigning. I will gladly vote for the slick political machine of Hillary or the patriotic political veteran Mccain than take another unproven recent law professional at his word that he will do anything not utterly self serving and usher the slavering left wing socialists in congress into destroying our economic might and dismantling the military leaving my children vulnerable and living in misery created out of nanny-state proven failed policies that have not been successful in any guise in any place at any time in history. So, I digress, yes there are worthy individuals to hold this office up for grabs in November but the press and the two parties will never allow anyone that might be successful to upset the apple cart and change forever the tyrannical power grabbing they share among themselves alone.

Wow. The election is really heating up now. But these poll results are just insane...

http://www.votenic.com

Well, voter, it all depends on what you have to say about yourself. Arrogant jerk comes to mind.

They don't come custom-made, baby; you've got to pick it off the rack.

Yes! All three running for president are good. But why is it I want to vote for Robert Redford?

Hey, for the first time in a long time, I am actually excited about my candidate. The last 2 elections I voted Democratic but without a lot of enthusiasm. And both races had a wide range of options. So if you didn't get interested enough to decide who to support, or didn't work for your candidate enough, don't blame me. And if you did work hard but are disappointed, it's gotten you into the process, right! This is a real choice with real consequences -- let's not mess it up this year.

I love the empty posters that say "let me see Obama's accomplishments" He was editor of the Harvard Law review. What the hell did you ever get published? The man is obviously intelligent and if it's a choice between intelligent elite and a schlub who likes to drink and fight (Bush/McCain) then I think we've had enough of that personality disorder being in charge of domestic and foreign policy.

Is there a cure for my recurring nightmares, or must I wait until November?

On Monday, Wednesday and Fridays, I dream that Hillary is President.

On Tuesdays and Thursdays, it's Barack.

On Weekends, it's McCain

As Wolfman Jack used to say:

"LORD HAVE MERCY"

I am not so much critical about the candidates but I wonder if we really need FIVE MONTHS to decide between them.

This is assuming that Obama wraps it up in early June.

First of all ..
Get out a job description for being president and requirements for the job. Who would make good candidates? What is the hiring criteria? How will presidents be held accountable?

It is difficult to criticize someone for doing a lousy job when we don't chose based upon qualifications and we don't hold them accountable to a performance plan.

Why are we electing a president based upon domestic political affiliation, or personal positions on non-operational issues?

If you're going to make the president a politically elected position I suspect we are getting the presidents we deserve.
W

This country was founded by criminals and terrorist and nothing has changed.
WE THE PEOPLE always make the same mistake, we put our faith in the hands of the corrupt instead of doing things for our selves.
In the end this what we get for being lazy and wanting others to do the things we should have done for our selves.

This column takes as a "given" that the three left standing's "campaigning" is what got them there without looking critically at how the media very quickly sorted out "second tier" candidates and virtually eliminated most of the field from the eyes and ears of the American public. This is not a genuinely democratic process, particularly when the few corporate media outlets can quickly push people like Kucinich and Paul off the playing field without their voices being taken seriously, much less heard.

I hated guns
Never owned one
Never fired one

Until this administration showed it's ugly face, and turned itself into a dictatorship - and no one in congress did anything.

I wish a nuke WOULD go off in Washington, while both houses are in session, so that we could eliminate the scum in Government and their lobbyist - and get a legitimate fresh start.

Short of that, I am now armed to the teeth for a second american revolution, today's minuteman.

Ready and waiting.

I am ready

And your platitude to shield Obama would work equally well for the other two, in the name of fair play, which I'm sure as a journalist you would not want to violate.

Amazing that anyone would expect anything less than a huckster to rise in our presidential elections. One needs money, and lots of it, and you don't get that by being a choir boy.

The willing naivete among even the educated electorate is stunning. The Obama campaign correctly tied into the Oprah/Eckhart Tolle message of "a better you." Look at the bestsellar lists -- "You: The Owner's Manual." Everything is all about you, including Obama. He wants you to be your personal best.

It is the brilliant harnessing of the message of dozens of black male self-help personal training entrepreneurs. It is co-opting the traditional message of the black church (persistence and transcendence), via the conduit of angry mentor wright. The result is suspect.

We don't look for anything new, just the staunching of the bleeding of the last 7 years. Realistically, that is the best that can be hoped for.

John McCain is no war hero which is why he is known as "Songbird McCain" to many Veterans Organizations. As him why he made sure the rest of the POWs did not come home. Do your homework...he is not who he claims to be!

We are all Mexicans. The USA is now called North Mexico by mexicans.

"Hi, I'm Barack Obama and I am running for president. I cannot believe that in a nation of 300 million people, this is how we choose our leader, but I have no choice but to spend the next 18 months kissing every baby across this land of ours, coddling every interest group, speaking endlessly 16 hours a day, and eating every greasy kind of ethnic food put in front of me. But please, don't hold any of it against me. Rest assured I am a smart, level-headed individual, and hope to remain so on the other side. Wish me luck. And please, don't pay attention to anything I say until after the election."

Hopefully we WON'T have to pay attention to anything he says after the election, because he is unelectable. We are sick of being called racist by him, his campaign, and is bloggers, simply because we disagree with him.

Am curious why anyone from Mexico is not running for President here?

I agree. None of the above are capable of becoming president, much less leading the country. Hillary is toast, and once Obama becomes toast, which can't be much longer I think we will see some new candidates throw their hat in the ring. I can't believe this country will let McCain waltz into the white house once Obama is fatally weakened by the next scandal. It's time for Al Gore to enter.

Judge a person by the actions and opinions of their peers or long term associates to get a true picture of the "FACE BEHIND THE MASK".
Trust not the empty hollow words and BLUE-SKY promises made as they are worthless. Then put your judgement toward the approved, tested and 'EXPERIENCED' candidate for this important job.

McCain's POW experience doesn't relate to what the President does? McCain's POW experience precisely relates to the presidency. Both are all about character. To be given the opportunity to go home before the other POWs but refuse to leave them behind, and get tortured more for it, that's character.

I agree with Jay Carson's view in his article ("Clinton camp Chides NBC:" Washington Post, 5/8) that the parasitic media should stay out of the issue. Their endless discussions about whether she should stay in the race or not are full of disrespect for Senator Clinton - a staunch Democrat leader over many years - and their sneering comments brand them as misogynists of the worst order. What is wrong with giving her and her hard-working campaign and supporters some consideration as to when she decides to exit the race - even if you don't want to see her as the nominee? Someone SHOULD take media demi-gods and other hate-filled people to task for pushing their (non-objective) views forward at all costs. Clinton's wish to exit gracefully on behalf of the nation (if you anger her millions of supporters, how do you win in November?) and, indeed, the Democratic party in general, is in stark contrast to the glee with which these ignorant pundits (print and TV alike) greet her losses when they opine about how "delusional" she is in her efforts to continue her campaign. Her wish to let all the votes be counted (remember, these new states will vote in November also) before getting out will serve to benefit Obama and the Democratic Party's quest for the White House in the long run. She has pledged to actively campaign and support whoever the nominee is -- and lord knows Obama has profited from her being in the race 'lo these many months -- so let it be. Give her and her supporters the space they need, and allow them to continue to be a vital part of this highly democratic process. These pundits just want blood, and couldn't give a damn about the Democratic Party to begin with.

I'm really tired of Obama's supporters saying the whites are racists (as in W. Virgina) if they are voting for another candidate. HOW IS IT THAT THE BLACKS ARE VOTING FOR OBAMA OVER 95% AND YET NO ONE CALLS THEM RACISTS? If the shoe fits, wear it.

~

I get why some people don't want Obama or McCain.

But Team Clinton has PROVEN that they can do great things for our country.

Even if people don't like them, they should be pragmatic enough to elect them.

It is, after all, supposedly about competence.

With the Clinton's, you have 8 years of history to evaluate. It may not have been perfect, but it was good for most Americans.

It is not a personality/beauty contest.

~

Andres -- there was no call to bash ethnic food. Please. Some toleration and pluralism here.

As long as they stay away from the bangers and mash.

Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast! And more 40-weight for my clam cakes, Mom.

we are not to pay any attention to anything Obama, Clinton, or McCain say until after the election, why should we vote for any of them? The column is fun but doesn't answer the question.

I am saying that we are in such a hole as a nation right now, thanks to republican leadership, that it represents an seemingly overwhelming challenge to whomever is elected.

It would apply to anyone's specific campaign stump speeches democrat or republican.

I will not vote for someone who says they will do this or that (for reasons stated)but for someone who I feel will lead us in an entirely new direction and has the best opportunity to change the direction and way things are done in Washington.

I won't be trading in a buick clunker for another buick clunker, and that's what I see republicans offering, and what I think most americans also feel. Even republicans.

When was the last time a politician actually did what they said they would, when they were stumping?

Return of ethics and inegrity back in Washington (lewinsky) as Bush told us?
A uniter not a divider as Bush told us?

Great sound bytes - but here we are 8 years later, still asking "where's the beef?"

What's a voter to do? Vote third party!

What nonsense.

The candidates we have were foisted on us by the media and the powers that be.

Many candidates were not even allowed to debate after a certain point--with no real explanation given. To suggest that Obama, Hillary, and McCain are the best we have, even of those that actually received media attention, is ridiculous. These people were chosen for the people, not necessarily by the people.

Even the process of getting on the ballot is out of reach for most people, even rich ones, given the incredible costs and connections required to do so.

The two party system is a broken one.

The only reason that people think Obama is a posturing debutante or that McCain is a fraction of a viable candidate is because columns like this one say that they are.

Woburn, MA wrote :"You forgot to add that despite being the Republican Boggy Women, Senator Clinton successfully worked across party lines more than any other senator, and received praise from both sides as the best of her class in the Senator."

--------------

Actually McCain and Lieberman have successfully worked across party lines more than any other senator.. maybe if you mean any senator that joined when she did you may be right.. but there is no denying that McCain and Lieberman have both crossed party lines more than anyone.

Gary P.

You are saying that no plans are needed, because even though John McCain was the only one to give a plan, he will probably have to throw it out the window when he sees exactly what he will have to deal with in the office?

Well.. that being said.. why isnt that the case with Obama? when he realizes he can't give money to EVERY program he wants to. When he gets those intelligence briefings and says "holy Sh*t" and might not be able to draw down in Iraq.

You say that you would rather have someone who just has a few very broad ideas of funding everything and appeasing everyone in this country, but not someone who has laid out a plan and decisively knows what he wants to do?
And you say that you will only vote for a democrat? aren't we being a little naive and foolish here?

"but he turned down huge money in order to work for the oppressed in Ill. While Senator Obama doesn't have alot of experience, the nation is looking for change."

He turned down huge money according to Michelle Obama.

The facts are: he worked as an associate attorney for a law firm for 4 years researching and writing memos. And, this is speculation, but I suspect his inability to think on his feet probably destroyed any hope of the kind of success John Edwards had.

Please show some evidence that he "turned own huge money". And also please show what he "actually" accomplished in his community work. As far as I can tell this "brilliant" attorney was not a leader and in total appears to have accomplished very little.

Stagecraft seems to be his forte.

The problems facing this nation are so significant and deep that any specifics that a candidate says they will do, are as rooted in fantasy and fairy-tale land as a beauty queen responding that she wishes she could end world hunger, when asked to speak. Very thoughtful and sweet, but entirely unrealistic.

When someone like McCain outlines his agenda and his "plan" or "strategy", I can only think of the beauty queen and world hunger, because the forces that tug on a president will always result in compromise of sorts that amounts to a watered down, mostly ineffective policy or position.

When people critizice Obama for not having disclosed "specifics " of how he will do this or that... It doesn't matter to me if he has or hasn't.

You see, I will not be voting for reasons based on specifics, but rather for direction of leadership. I will be voting for a democrat who I think best represent an opportunity to make a sharp and hard break from the disastorous path Bush has hijacked this nation down, and whom offers the best opportunity to shake up washington from the status quo of ineffectiveness into something that at least offers hope.

The republicans will now tell us that what you need in place of the Buick clunker you have, is another one. "Change you deserve"

No thanks

The answer is term limits for congress and Jesse Ventura for president.

I vigorously disagree with the cheap shot comments of 'jhbyer' concerning Senator McCain's time as a POW. The mud will stick to Democrats if they attempt to denigrate his heroic conduct. Don't go there!

It WILL take many presidents to restore the country to the place it was before Dubya flushed it down the toilet

Our political system is a circus. Presidential candidates pretend to have elaborate plans for everything. Hillary leads us to believe that she can magically enact sweeping healthcare reform if she becomes President. Not so- the Hacker plan, the basis for the Clinton, Edwards & Obama healthcare plans is flawed at its core- Congress won't buy it. Public insurance, e.g. Medicare can't compete with private insurance because Congress insists on doing favors for insurance companies. Also the Hacker health plan states that the Public insurer would set costs so that the overall cost of healthcare increases only 0.5% more than GDP. That is politically impossible. Download the 2008 report of the Medicare trustees and you'll see that Medicare costs increased 21% in 2006 because of the Prescription drug give away to Big Pharma and 8.5% in 2007, while GDP increased 6.3 and 4.6%. Edwards at least admitted that the plan would require hundreds of billions of dollars of new revenue, but ducked the question of how costs would be controlled after start-up.

So Congress is our biggest problem, not the flaws in our Presidential candidates. Almost all incumbents are re-elected. No matter who is President, corporations will own the best Congress that money can buy. Until something is done about Congress and incumbency, the country will continue its degenerate slide; the combined military + Homeland Security budget will gobble up more and more of our tax dollars. Obama can't deliver on his promises unless Congress changes. McCain doesn't care and Hillary just wants to get elected no matter how much racial hatred she stimulates.

It really doesn't make any sense to vote. The republicans are certain that the only way they will remain in power is to cheat, which is what they know how to do best. It appears as though republican backers DIEBOLD, maker of voting machines, has already determined the 2008 Presidential election results:

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/diebold_accidentally_leaks?

EUROPE, CHINA, RUSSIA, SAUDI ARABIA, AND SOUTH AMERICA ARE WATCHING YOU

THE WORLD IS WATCHING AMERICA'S 2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.
THE WORLD IS WATCHING AMERICA'S 2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.
THE WORLD IS WATCHING AMERICA'S 2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.
THE WORLD IS WATCHING AMERICA'S 2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.
THE WORLD IS WATCHING AMERICA'S 2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.
THE WORLD IS WATCHING AMERICA'S 2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.
THE WORLD IS WATCHING AMERICA'S 2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.

AND THE WORLD WILL JUDGE IF AMERICA IS SUITED TO BE ITS MORAL LEADER.
AND THE WORLD WILL JUDGE IF AMERICA IS SUITED TO BE ITS MORAL LEADER.
AND THE WORLD WILL JUDGE IF AMERICA IS SUITED TO BE ITS MORAL LEADER.
AND THE WORLD WILL JUDGE IF AMERICA IS SUITED TO BE ITS MORAL LEADER.
AND THE WORLD WILL JUDGE IF AMERICA IS SUITED TO BE ITS MORAL LEADER.
AND THE WORLD WILL JUDGE IF AMERICA IS SUITED TO BE ITS MORAL LEADER.
AND THE WORLD WILL JUDGE IF AMERICA IS SUITED TO BE ITS MORAL LEADER.

The World is watching how a self professed Christian Moral Nation handles its pivotal point in history during the 2008 presidential election.

Will AMERICA rise to the occasion with maturity, dignity, intellect and grace?

Or will AMERICA degenerate into word feces tossing evil hate promoters worthy of pre-WWII Germany?

This is a pivotal time in AMERICAN history.

Will AMERICA run a dignified 2008 presidential election?

Or will AMERICA allow Hillbillies to take over the media and orchestrate the message of hate that will shock the watching World?

A barrel of oil was $24 when Bush took office.

It's time for AMERICA to nationalize Oil and Energy Industries for National Defense.

Rich Oil billionaires and Wall Street (super-capitalism) selling out OUR COUNTRY THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA for their own selfish profits is unpatriotic and treason.

AMERICA belongs to AMERICANS and not to Wall Street sell-out super-capitalists who send trillions of OUR U.S. DOLLARS overseas in chase of the highest immediate return on their private investments. Greed does not work and greed is destroying OUR COUNTRY. Dependence on foreign oil and oil billionaire businessmen is destroying OUR COUNTRY.

Immediately nationalize oil and energy industries for U.S. National Defense. It's the intelligent thing to do. AMERICANS are collectively much more important than a handful of billionaire super-capitalists on Wall Street who have allegiance to no one, but their own private, selfish, destructive, and nation undermining capital gains.

Hillary does not appear very patriotic staying in a loss race strictly to gather more money to store in her $109,000,000 favor money chest that she and Billy received from South American cartels.

Is Hillary working for the Democrats?

Is Hillary working for All AMERICANS?

Hillary is working for herself and has become and unpatriotic joke.

McCentury McSame (Bush Part III) wants to continue Bush's failed policies.

McSame (Bush III) is not very smart and will go after Hillary's Hillbilly and pig farmers votes.

THE WORLD IS WATCHING HOW A SELF PROFESSED CHRISTIAN MORAL NATION HANDLES ITS PIVOTAL POINT IN HISTORY DURING THE 2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.

THE WORLD IS WATCHING.

There are choices, the media just refuses to cover them.

votenader.org

Being in a foul mood should not be confused with having a worthwhile topic for discussion [it hardly qualifies as an opinion]. Why did you choose to answer this pathetic letter?

The people in politics on the left are those who didn't want to work for a living so they majored in Political Science. They made a career of talking people to death and doing nothing. The democrat party has what it has.
NOT MUCH!! Anybody can run for President. Even Kucinich!! Where is he when the democrats need leadership? look at the whole field of options the democrats gave themselves this "year of the democrat".

There are wiser people in soup kitchens.

Telling, that you paired up making political choices with shopping at the mall. We've become a nation of table-pounding consumers, rather than active participants in self-governance.

You forgot to add that despite being the Republican Boggy Women, Senator Clinton successfully worked across party lines more than any other senator, and received praise from both sides as the best of her class in the Senator.

Senator Obama was the most sought after graduate of Havard Law School, but he turned down huge money in order to work for the oppressed in Ill. While Senator Obama doesn't have alot of experience, the nation is looking for change.

Senator McCain, who sadly has apparently gone nuts, vol. to stay a Prisoner of War in order to protect the POWs he lead.

If an election between a self-made and selfless man who could be the most inspiring leader of his generation and a war hero who steered his own course in the party of conformaty isn't good enough, I don't know what could be.

Great column IMO. Good comments too covering the full range from hope to despair. But I especially liked Fran's "... US governance could be described as the rule of venal sociopaths through the manipulation of xenophobic morons." Cool.

Running for president after Bush is going to be a task. I don't know if any one will be able to fix the mess he going to leave behind.

Thanks for stating the obvious Hillary was and is one smart lady - by far the best candidate out there in the last 8 years since her husband and would win the Presidency easily if we could overcome our bias against women in leadership roles.

McCain "calls things as he sees them".

No, he has reversed himself egregiously on many issues in order to get nominated. One of the depressing things about campaigns is the way the media, including Andres Martinez, push the oversimplified characterizations referred to by Stumped.

I'm glad you were even-handed and found ways to complement each candidate.

All the candidates have their pros and cons, none are evil, none are naive, and none are senile. Let's get beyond cartoon caricatures of our candidates. I'm getting tired of arguments that refer to McSame, Hillbilly, or Obambi. Out of a nation of 300 million, why are so many partisans such dunces?

I agree with the response wholeheartedly. These three individuals are indeed the best among us- maybe not morally but their strengths have caused them to stand above the rest of us. No one else has had the guts to make a bid for the White House (to begin) and then survive this long. They represent the epitome of the competitive will of the American people. Anyone we can list who we feel might be more qualified to handle the presidency didn't even have the fortitude to survive the campaign season.

I'm getting close to just siting home come election time. I keep on thinking it couldn't get any worse,i'm fed up with both parties. All this grandstanding is pathetic

Out of every two hundred mall stores ,195 are nails,pizza and computers-electronics,you dont need shoes there go to china mart. Kind of a dopey column but dont worry about Obama and the CFR,like everything else there are no conspiricies only great coincidences. Vote for Lar "america first "Daly of the chicago peoples party.

"...And please, don't pay attention to anything I say until after the election."

Of course, R's and WV D's are rigorously doing just that BEFORE the election. Ignorance is bliss!

If the polls are correct, the majority of Americans disapprove of the occupants of the White House and the Congress. As bad as Bush's numbers are, those for Congress are worse.

The real question we Americans should be asking is this, is the system created by the Founding Fathers capable of producing good government?

When 80 per cent of the public believes that the US government is headed in the wrong direction, and it points the finger at all three branches of government simultaneously, it is time to ask why we are burdened with a form of governance that 1) brings so much dissatisfaction, 2) repeatedly fails to provide the services we overwhelmingly want, 3) fails to hold officials and governments responsible for their incompetence, 4) fails to replace incompetent or corrupt governments promptly, and 5) produces a national legislature that takes for granted practices judged corrupt in every other aspect of American life.

The Founding Fathers' great experiment has failed. We are surrounded by democratic systems, parliamentary systems, that are better suited to the needs of a nation of 300 million people. If we must have a President of the United states, let her/him be a ceremonial figure. Let the president be someone we all love and want to represent us at funerals abroad and state dinners at home.

"Don't Even Bother to Vote", just give the Presidency to Obama.

That seems to be the liberal mantra.

Yes, I've felt like "is this the best we can do?" too. I think it's because the MSM focuses on the absolute worst of the candidates versus on their many, many stellar qualities.

This is the first time I've watched a nomination process so closely, and I must say, it is a shameful way to elect a President. Rather than wanting someone intelligent to lead us, SOME voters prefer a president who can shoot a gun, down whiskey and bowl. No wonder Bush became president and no wonder our country is in the mess that it's in.

"Hillary is an insufferable egomaniac; Obama is a posturing debutante; McCain is midway between senility and intermittent dementia. What is a voter to do?"

-- No Name Given

Insufferable? Well, the sensible solution is for Noname to learn to suffer a little -- Mrs. Clinton is worth the sacrifice.

Obama postures? I'm sure Noname's mother has asked her child umpteen times to do just what Obama stands accused of. She would add that good posture is not only necessary for looks but also for health.

As for McCain, the only thing to do is to avoid him like the third-term plague he is.

decide what the most important issues for you are, find out where the candidates have stood on this issue and what they intend to do and VOTE.
Just so you know, all three candidates support comprehensive immigration reform, which means America will get 60 million or more voters within the next few years, changing the face of politics of America forever.

Misrepresentation of facts,nothing else is what created the "undecided" voter and notion that the people have no choice. First off, the NAFTA leak was the creation of the Clinton camp, just part of the misrepresentation of facts...media, as usual made a mockery of it and tried to destroy Obama. Bill Clinton was in fact in Canada that weekend at a fund raiser for his Foundation...strange that no one is the USA media even mention it?? He was with his good buddy Giustra.
Choice of Candidates:
McCain...would bring about more wars, he wasn't even the first choice of the party leaders. His presidency would be much of the same Bush presidency..complete disorder and debt.
Clinton: she would bring in all the scandals, and back room deals. Her management of her campaign was a disaster...she is in debt. She gets emotional and plays the victim when she doesn't get what she wants...and has shown she can lie or do anything to win. She has almost destroyed her party in the process.
Obama: has shown himself as an intellgent, strong and fairly honest candidate. He has had one of the best run political campaigns I have witness in my nearly 40 years voting. He can unify and mobilze the country to bring forward and regenerate the principles long forgotten over the past 20 years.

If I were an American, I would be proud of the election process that just occured, both parties put up a good fight...and soon it will be time to vote for your President. What destroyed the public opinion was misreprentation of facts, this in turn brought about personal attacks. Now it's time to heal and go forward.
Claudia in NB Canada

VA_Lady at 7:13 a.m. today says it all and says it best.

If you missed it, read it. Smart analysis from her.

Otto von Bismark, in another time, age, and completely different context famously wrote:

"Politics is the art of the possible."

Politics, however, is also the art of compromise, and compromise is EXACTLY what we see in these three candidates. Above the local level, no one can get elected any more based on his or her personal, untainted, unmodified, doggedly stuck to beliefs. We have too many people, with too many highly fractionated beliefs. We need someone who can unite us while respecting our differences.

Each of these three can do that job. Everyone has to compromise some, and I believe that this is a good thing.

For most, though not all of the past 27 years, politics in the United States has been dominated by the Republican party, which has managed to so entrench itself (and burrow into) government that it has put itself in a position to utterly dispense with compromise, even within its own ranks.

They don't have to listen to anyone, or so they thought. We get to live with (and ultimately pay for, and with a lot more than money, we're sacrificing our futures, and those of our children) the results.

Now they find themselves not only the collective authors of a disaster, but FINALLY on the receiving end, as the have begun whining about their prospects, not just for the coming general elections, but if they're smart, for the indefinite future. Personally, I hope they all choke on the fumes of their misdeeds.

Example: A lunatic, and essentially unchallenged, still supported, and ultimately LOST and bankrupted war in Iraq.

Example: A "taxes are bad, public services should be free" deficit that will take until my as yet unconceived grandchildren, if any, are old, to pay off.

Example: A deranged federal energy policy, one which diverts food to fuel our insane personal transportation.

Example: An absolutely criminal VA, which rather than caring for Veterans is apparently deliberately "mis-diagnosing" PTSD in returning Iraq war vets in order to deny them benefits.

Example: A shameless Department of Justice, in which justice and fairness and honesty and integrity is utterly the LAST thing cared about. This crew wouldn't know integrity if it came up and kicked them in their collective rear ends.

Example: A "defanged, the free market can do no wrong, utterly toothless" FDA which allows drug companies to tell IT what is safe and effective. Fake Heparin, Vioxx, Celebrex, Vytorin, Avandia, and others. The Republican response to the resulting lawsuits? Well, if the FDA approves it, they say, no one should be able to sue.

Example: A national shame of a health insurance system that not only prices nearly half the people out of the market altogether, allows insurance companies to cherry pick insureds, and whose cost, now borne mostly by business, makes us increasingly uncompetitive in the world economy while leaving millions with no coverage at all, until they finally qualify for Medicare, or Medicaid, at which point it's too late to do much more than expensively palliate the results of illnesses we could easily have prevented or cured, had we stepped in earlier.

Example: A totally out of control financial sector, which now is firing the employees, who implemented the orders of "management" instead of the rogue management that created and profited from these policies. I note that I am not entirely sympathetic to the "canned employees" (detailed in todays NY Times): they happily aided and abetted in the swindling of American, and now have found out they are no better off than those they swindled. This is is an example of the chicken coming home to roost.

Example: A completely toothless CPSC, which first allows in uninspected, dangerous, and potentially deadly products, mostly though not entirely from China. Examples: Dog food that KILLS Fido (fake protein); lead paint in dolls (Mattel, and may they go under); antifreeze (poisonous) in children's teething rings (origin China.) And not a word said to the Chinese, who the Bush administration cannot afford to annoy.

Example: A President and Vice President, the former a deserter, the latter a draft dodger, who have the temerity to tell those of us who disagree with THEIR lunatic, and ultimately false, notion of "right" (note I do not use the word correct) that we are traitors. Excuse me? The only oath George Bush took (aside from when he was inducted, before he deserted) was to preserve, uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. He and his cronies have spent most of the past 7 years dismantling it, to his temporary advantage.

We need here is considerable ability to compromise, but it's going to be pretty hard for anyone who's been awake and sentient over the past 25 years to cut the GOP much slack, and their new campaign "Time for a Change" which suggests that what they are taking is some kind of mind-altering drug, is precisely on target. They have been; the agony of withdrawal has only begun.

Let's see:

The author's a cynic. At least he's informed and knows a bit about the filters his mind is fitted with.

Most of the commenters are both cynics and ill-informed about history.

What's saddest is the easy dismissal of 3 excellent candidates (McCain, Clinton, and Obama). Each candidate is miles above each of the dismissive commenters.

It's so easy to develop internet attitude. It's harder to watch for it, correct it, and face the world with hard-working fix-it optimism.

-- stan

When Obama gives a speech detailing his history with and membership in the CFR, when Obama asserts the rights of the American people over the rights of the State, when Obama offers to end the drug war and free countless thousands of his own people from teh worlds largest prison state, when Obama gets a clue about the economy and why the dollar is failing, THEN, maybe, I'll start to listen. Till then, for our own people that we lock up and our boys and girls we send to the meat grinder of war to assault sovereign peoples around the world(and for what?), for my future standard of living and that of my children, I will vote for REASON, not emotion. I will vote for Ron Paul.

Obama will bring CHANGE... Lets see... Never addresses the economy in any substantive way, never addresses the war in a substantial way, never addresses ANYTHING in a substantial way... but he makes me feel good. THAT must be the change his cult- I mean followers- want. A politician that says things so they can feel good. Forget about the prisons, the bombs, the banks, the military empire on the verge of collapse. But hey, we'll feel good when we send agents to murder throughout the world because Obama will have sent them and convinced us its CHANGE! WHHEEEEE!

Gore was ridiculed as "wooden" and his wife, Tipper, mocked for her uncool parental activism. Kerry was labeled French, and now Obama is a posturing debutante. The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our candidates, but in us voters.

We're told McCain's POW experience raises him above. Respectfully, no, it doesn't. Andres says he couldn't have done it, but that can't be true. McCain's heroism was accidental not willed. More to the point, it doesn't relate in the least to what presidents do. It's beside the point.

If I can bring the perspective of a non-US citizen to this discussion ...

As most Americans who have been paying attention will know, the image of the US overseas has been pretty unappealing since Vietnam. For a time post 9/11 many people felt a degree of sympathy and even goodwill towards the US, but George Bush squandered all of that, and the status quo ante returned. Amongst educated people, the argument was between those who thought America was full of evil, greedy, narrowminded sociopaths or ignorant, xenophobic morons. When George Bush wangled his way back into power in 2004, the debate pretty much came to a halt. Much of the rest of the educated world was too gobsmacked to find the words. People largely shook their heads in disgust or concluded that US governance could be described as the rule of venal sociopaths through the manipulation of xenophobic morons.

Since that time, people like Al Gore and now especially, Barack Obama have begun to undermine this view. West Virginia certainly gave aid and comfort to those holding on to the traditional view, and the ignorant bigoted 'swiftboat'-style campaigns against Obama remind us of all the things non-Americans think repulsive about the US, while every victory of Obama tells of the possibility of an America who could fly with the angels and play a part in a saner and more worthy world -- a world in which Americans everywhere could hold their heads up and declare that that most impressive preamble to the constitution amounted to more than mere words on a dusty old document.

This election is for you, for Americans, but please bear in mind that others will judge you by how this plays out. In the minds of many a victory for Obama would draw a definitive line under the Bush years and signal that America planned to begin being part of the solution rather than part of the problem.

Fran

Who ever wrote this is of bygone days. RUSH and all the NEOCONS days are over! They would rather us vote for no one instead of Change.

Clinton's basically said "something can happen" to change the election.

The only "thing" is her having him taken out. Look at her when she talks. It's like Bush talking about the war.

She's been told that she has nothing to worry about.

Papa Bush is on it. The CIA will attempt a hit.

I called it here first.

I am not going to vote, what a silly system to choose a president? Who wants a pissed off first day in office?

They all suck, but Obama most of all. He's so entrenched in the CFR and the establishment but lies to us about how independent he is. Yeah, he'll change things alright. The name on the white house stationary. Not much else.

Bush didn't beat us down enough. Lets vote for Obama and really hasten the collapse of the dollar.

Stupid, stupid Americans.

Obama is a once in an every so often gift to us. We had better be grateful for his patience in running this too long a campaign and putting up with Hillary.

Good Article.

You made up my mind.

Obama seems to stand out.

Thanks for the tip.

And you actually try to glamorize that canary McCain as being noble because he was a POW? Being a victim does not make anyone a hero, and from what I understand it was McCain's buddies getting tortured while he sang and sang to his captors before coming home to ditch his sick wife.

And Obama. What an empty suit. We can continue the failed policies of Bush while borrowing more money from China to send to poor people so that we can feel good about ourselves when the lessons of hyperinflation start sinking in.

Gotta love the bits of polarizing, raving commentary/response. The preface blows off HRC as an egomaniac, McCain as doddering, and Obama as a phony child... then the article paints HRC as formidably intelligent for giving a speech and studying law, and paints McCain as an enduring realist, and proceeds to whack at the inspiring, complete intellect of Obama, who actually seems to be the most popular.

However, one could hope for better grammar than "There have been plenty candidates with charisma aplenty but lacking intellect, and vice versa." Me too, think Obama plenty good... McCain real... and HRC, should stay a speechifying legal committee member. She's no Bill Clinton, and that's probably a damning compliment.

GO BARACK .....

After sixteen months of campaigning, of course they look bad? Is that what did it? The campaigning? Then that poses the question, why does Ron Paul look better with every day the dollar declines and the cost of oil rises? Could it be that he offered an option outside of the usual CFR candidates that don't represent the people? But no, the Washington Post wants to tell us the establishment candidates, pro-war, pro-prison state, pro-economic servitude all, are great choices, just tarnished from people getting too much time to get to know them. What a farce.

I wasn't dazzled by the candidates from the start. Their achievements and backrounds aren't what's important; None of them are presidential material. You can be really smart, but a dummy when it comes to doing something your'e not cut out for. You've got warmed over Bush, on the presidential side, it's like a 70's TV show; Maude with Elvis in tow, and Spock as candidates. McCain is a supposed to be a softer, kinder Bush; Clinton is far too divisive to be functional, and has her husband (Elvis); Obama is literally Spock. By the way, the quality of presidential candidates has been deteriorating since Roosevelt. Bush vs. Kerry? Both inferior. Sure, the tribalists on either side have their fun, but otherwise, it wasn't much of a choice.

I object to the last sentence! Surely, we should not pay any more attention to what our Presidents say after they're elected as what they said before.

Wow! Andr'es I would expect more from any journalist working for any news source especially a national news paper.

Either you have not done your research or you are deliberately misleading your reading audience!

Hillary Clinton falsely accused Obama of the NAFTA-Canadian. But the news did not report that. Obama has always been forth coming about his support for the market economy, but believes changes are needed so the treaties are fair vs free.

Elite? Barack Obama? He came from humble beginnings. His mother Ann, a single mom, had to depend at times on food stamps to feed Obama and his sister. Obama and Michelle recently (2 or 3 years ago) just finished paying off their college loans from his book royalties. Furthermore Obama turned down (6-figure) lucrative job offers to become a community organizer for $5,000 a year salary.

I suppose it depends on how one defines elite? If elite means well-educated, highly intelligent, then that is the type of person I want running the country.

If elite means wealthy:

Hillary and Bill Clinton are worth $125 million dollars

John and Cindy McCain are worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Her family owns Anheuswer-Busch Brewery.

Barack and Michelle Obama are maybe worth $1 million or less dollars

Insofar as experience: I do not think anyone has "experience" to be a president. It is a job unique to each person. Circumstances change constantly and each situation is different.

While I honour John McCain's service, how does crashing his plane, getting captured and then being held as a POW qualify as "experience" to be President? Plus he has been entrenched in the ways of Washington for too long. Furthermore McCain promised "more wars." He offers the same, a third Bush term, only on steroids. He is no moderate. He also admitted he knows nothing about the economy.

Considering both Cheney and former Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld had decades of "experience" along with the others in Bush's administration "experience" is not all that it is cracked-up to be. Look at the state of our country!

I want to elect the person who has the intuition, foresight, forethought, acumen, intelligence, and the judgment necessary for making decisions that effect the world community. Equally important the individual must have the courage to get us out of the absolute mess Bush & Cheney got us into!

Iam not looking for a president I want to have a beer with. I want someone whose intelligence exceeds mine. Someone who cares about the people, believes in social justice, is fair and forthcoming. Someone who will change the atmosphere in Washington and the country.

That someone is Barack Obama.

Obama is our best hope. I trust him. I may be disappointed, but it is his consistency that gives me reason to trust him.

Andr'es you need to do your homework. People expect honest, educated answers. Your readers deserve nothing less.

I am not American but a friend of the Americans. I love America no matter the challenges. I would like to see America take its place in the scheme of things in the world Politics.

If this is to happen, America at this point needs a President who can begin the process of healing. Every where you go from Cuba to Eastern Europe to Mideseat to Far East and back to Africa, there seems to be this need for 'healing'. Countries directly or indirectly have been wounded not necessarily because of anything wrong that America has done, but because of the ways and manner America has pursued its external poilicies. Some of these policies are great but implementation has left sour taste in peoples mouth almost everywhere in the World. Better and enduring results would have been achieved using tactical diplomacy......It is therefore time for America to begin to adopt new strategies starting with internal economic issues.

It is sad that a Country as great as America is sinking deep into debt....and sadly to China, which has not minced words about their determination to rule the World.

My analysis of the situation tells me that America needs a special breed of a leader at this point in time.... great leaders know where they are going and can carry their fellowers along. They successfully and safely take their fellowers to the dream land. America needs such a leader as a President at this point. My careful examination of the three presidential candidates at the moment tells me that Obama is the best choice America has at this crucial moment in their history. Good luck America in making your choice.

A. Martinez's article needs the following brief correction: In actuality Barack Obama epitomizes a manufactured, false image of a candidate, while the man underneath is an adept liar with a "selective" memory, close ties to terrorist and anti-American individuals, little experience or leadership ability, and, understandably, a low opinion of the average voter, particularly the blue-collar middle class and those less fortunate. Obama the candidate is the product of a massive public relations campaign and Martinez the reporter, like many others, apparently has swallowed the product hook, line and sinker. This is fine for the present; but were Obama to become president, America could be in deep, deep trouble.

It doesn't really matter one way or the other. None of them have a moral compass beyond what they think will get them more votes this time or next. Democratic style government is not designed to bring a people to greatness; it's for keeping them from robbing and killing each other. Any of the three will do well enough as our democracy sinks into mediocrity, which is exactly what democracies are designed to do.

As long as the bastards don't mess around with the bill of rights much we'll get along for another forty or fifty years.

cmsix

You have to ask why someone would want to run for president when they have to contend with a press that congenitally distorts and misinforms via a lack of expertise, knowledge, due diligence, laziness, and irresponsibility for what they report.

Like, for instance, a journalist reporting about a so-called "scandal" from several months earlier which was in fact not a scandal at all, but was thought to be so when the falsehoods started to circulate based on media stories. When the aide to the candidate in question did not request a meeting with Canadian officials--they invited him to meet with them, the topic of their meeting was not NAFTA--as reported; he was asked a question about it. When the advisor had been invited as an expert in his own right, not as a campaign adviser. When this ostensible scandal was in fact an actual scandal in Canada so much so that Liberals confronted the Canadian Conservative Prime Minister about it, and it was the subject of a debate in the Canadian Parliament because it was seen as a fake leak by the Conservatives to influence the American Presidential race.

So yeah, why run for President when a reporter can screw the story up a month and a half to 2 months after it had been cleared up? But by cleared up, that doesn't mean the media did a good job of correcting their earlier, mistaken reports. No. The reporters covering your campaign continually get things wrongs. Make issues of things based on false information, and then maybe don't even print/broadcast the simplest of apologies and corrections for their errors.

Why, o why?

Any American; Democrat, Republican or Independent would be ill advised to vote for McCain. He does not represent change or improvement from where the Bush administration has left our country. He is not the same McCain that Kerry spoke highly of. He is far from moderate today and will continue to play into the same special interests that Bush has. When you look at the issues and not the latest reporters opinions my word will ring true. As voters it is very difficult to avoid media bias, but I've found the internet to be the best ally for "untainted" information, but even there it is difficult. Best of luck in your search fellow voters...

You have to ask why someone would want to run for president when they have to contend with a press that congenitally distorts and misinforms via a lack of expertise, knowledge, due diligence, laziness, and irresponsibility for what they report.

Like, for instance, a journalist reporting about a so-called "scandal" from several months earlier which was in fact not a scandal at all, but was thought to be so when the falsehoods started to circulate based on media stories. When the aide to the candidate in question did not request a meeting with Canadian officials--they invited him to meet with them, the topic of their meeting was not NAFTA--as reported; he was asked a question about it. When the advisor had been invited as an expert in his own right, not as a campaign adviser. When this ostensible scandal was in fact an actual scandal in Canada so much so that Liberals confronted the Canadian Conservative Prime Minister about it, and it was the subject of a debate in the Canadian Parliament because it was seen as a fake leak by the Conservatives to influence the American Presidential race.

So yeah, why run for President when a reporter can screw the story up a month and a half to 2 months after it had been cleared up? But by cleared up, that doesn't mean the media did a good job of correcting their earlier, mistaken reports. No. The reporters covering your campaign continually get things wrongs. Make issues of things based on false information, and then maybe don't even print/broadcast the simplest of apologies and corrections for their errors.

Why, o why?

...well that's simple! Do what most American's are going to do - write in Ron Paul! That's a no brainer! -dixon cannon

...well that's simple! Do what most American's are going to do - write in Ron Paul! That's a no brainer! -dixon cannon

...well that's simple! Do what most American's are going to do - write in Ron Paul! That's a no brainer! -dixon cannon

Any American; Democrat, Republican or Independent would be ill advised to vote for McCain. He does not represent change or improvement from where the Bush administration has left our country. He is not the same McCain that Kerry spoke highly of. He is far from moderate today and will continue to play into the same special interests that Bush has. When you look at the issues and not the latest reporters opinions my word will ring true. As voters it is very difficult to avoid media bias, but I've found the internet to be the best ally for "untainted" information, but even there it is difficult. Best of luck in your search fellow voters...

Any American; Democrat, Republican or Independent would be ill advised to vote for McCain. He does not represent change or improvement from where the Bush administration has left our country. He is not the same McCain that Kerry spoke highly of. He is far from moderate today and will continue to play into the same special interests that Bush has. When you look at the issues and not the latest reporters opinions my word will ring true. As voters it is very difficult to avoid media bias, but I've found the internet to be the best ally for "untainted" information, but even there it is difficult. Best of luck in your search fellow voters...

paul weller's just jealous. Don't worry! It will all be over soon. Ha!

People are fed up with Republicans. And McCain won Republicans because even Republicans are fed up with Republicans and Democrats prefer him over the other loony-bin religious Republican freaks. Finally, some Christians are condemning groups for "'using faith' without regard to the Bible". They finally come forward saying, "When faith loses its independence, Christians become 'useful idiots.'" That sums up how Bush and the like have used these idiots to get the votes that Diebolt's computer chip couldn't rig.

Obama not qualified? On what basis? If I was married to a doctor, would I be automagically a medical expert? Clinton's an amazing person, but she has proven herself to be just another self-serving, cut-throat politician. She has run a more "republican" campaign than McCain (to his credit).

Obama is the "complete package". McCain is continuation of the ruinous administration who brought us to where we are today.

Let's shake things up and hope for some real change - it really can't get much worse.

Nice post. What on earth do people want? A freakin' second coming? (BTW, Obama ain't it.)

Hillary's as good as you'll get in any election, in any country.

This country is in the crapper. It doesn't matter who becomes President because the republican party always worries too much about other countries and the democratic party worries too much about the people. Direct Democracy is the only way. Those who care will vote and those, like me, who will make their lives in another country after college, will stay out of it all.

Best hopes when China controls America becuase of our debt to them...pretty much, they own us...I'd start learning chinese if i were you.

America stinks.

John McCain is so doddering I'm quite amazed he about to be nominated. But, on the other hand he is a Republican and they wrote the book, dictionary, and encyclopedia on looking backward, not forward. To me he will most likely be in advanced decrepitude by January and make the election rather moot, which might well put a religiously doctrinaire (veiled by a winning smile, of course) Mitt Romney in office.

I used to like Hillary's smarts, but the recent viciousness has completely turned me off to the Clintons, in spite of all their degrees and (tainted) years of experience. This all leaves one man who's still easily credible enough to win my vote. He's brilliant, he speaks to the future, he will engage our allies in a rational and more transparent way, and he will help us FINALLY bury many of our stereotypes and bigotries. There's more, but suffice it to say, "Works for me."

If noname thinks that candidates are lame try the following:
1. Why don't you run for president?
2. Any comparison to GWB justifies even my cat as a good presidential candidate.
3. Compare them to politicians from other countries.
4. Look into the mirror.

my viewpoint of Americans is one of self centeredness, complacency and ignorance. anyone ANYONE that could stand by W and justify ever having believed (or still believes) what he believes in speaks volumes about his followers. the average iq of americans must be about 98. with a constant media barrage of his failures i'm sure it's hard for someone with the attention span of a gnat to keep up. Americans are'nt interested in what someone has done only in what they'll tell you they can do and when caught lying the highest levels will walk away unscathed. but thats OK as long as they tell you they're American. the fact that the rest of the world has to deal with your arrogance only makes you smirk like the Vice President. when pressed about the poor neighbor you make your aggresive behaviour strangles any hope of having you as an ally. please close off communication with the rest of us. your company is no longer desired,

What other choices do we have, Mickey Mouse?

I don't think the candidates are any worse than any other year. Clinton and McCain are both very good candidates. The problem with Obama is that he is not qualified, has dubious connections, and a vague/ untrustworthy platform. He as though he is entitled to the presidency and his supporters are quite nasty and dismissive of people who they should be trying to form a coalition with. Clinton looks likely to lose, so the best candidate is McCain. McCain is an attractive , moderate candidate who will bring stability and positive bipartisanship. I am a democrat but have to flee the kookiness and nastiness the party has become. McCain has always been popular with Democrats and Kerry wanted him as his 2004 veep. McCain take us on a new path from the Bush era.

I would add that most intelligent people generally lack the ruthlessness or interest to be politicians; rather, they devote themselves in more productive ways!

http://klintons.com

Great column at the right time. Thank you. I especially thank you because I have been saying essentially the same thing to the several (not many) people I know who have followed this primary campaign all too closely and are so entirely saturated with every single thing and word being spoken that they can no longer think at all.
This 24 hour news cycle, during which nothing much, really, happens, becomes too much for some people. So, they read every single column, and columnist, and partisan on each side and pretty soon, they don't believe in anyone on either side.
Just too much input, I tell them. Step back, take a look at these people as human beings.
Could YOU have performed as HIllary has done in her life? Could YOU have risen above the odds facing Obama? Could YOU have survived in any way, or shape, or form being tortured in North Viet Nam?
Well, no, the people I know have not done anything even nearly as remarkable as this and, truth be told, they really are remarkable in their own professions and lives. They aren't just nobodies themselves.
But, they have in no way risen to the level of any of these Presidential candidates.
These people are remarkable Americans and it is only due to the politics of character assasination and the press's selling of conflict that so many people are discouraged about them.
Each of these people is remarkable and we should be proud that they have the guts to put themselves forward in the face of insult, humiliation, lies, etc. etc. and give us the opportunity to choose among the "best and the brightest."

Actually the NAFTA story was leaked when the Canadian Prime Minister's chief of staff spilled it unthinkingly to a bunch of reporters, but he didn't say Obama's campaign had been in touch to disclaim seriousness on NAFTA, he said Hillary's campaign had.

This has been in all the Canadian papers, but the news somehow never percolated across the border.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2008/03/05/4920341-cp.html
Embassy tight-lipped on whether NAFTA leak probe covers Wilson
By THE CANADIAN PRESS
'The CTV story reportedly orginated from (Canadian Prime Minister Stephen) Harper's chief of staff Ian Brodie, who told reporters in Ottawa that Hillary Clinton's campaign assured Canadian officials they need not worry about her NAFTA rhetoric.
There's been no explanation for why the focus shifted to Obama in the CTV report that went to air.'

Here's another:
The Toronto Star
http://thestar.blogs.com/politics/2008/03/tense-and-ugly.html
'Brodie apparently also told CTV that Hillary Clinton offered similar reassurances to Canada - that all this talk of NAFTA was just campaign rhetoric. So why did CTV only pursue the Obama angle?'

And another:
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/309924
'(Canadian PM Stephen) Harper announced Wednesday that he has asked an internal security team to begin finding the source of a document leak that he characterized as being "blatantly unfair" to Senator Barack Obama.'

Personally, I'm pretty sure both campaigns did it. But Hillary didn't get caught.

We might equally ask why anybody'd want to be a candidate, considering we're a bunch of insufferable egomaniacs, posturing debutantes, and senile old people. We're so ungrateful, we're lucky to have candidates.

McLizard, Shillary or SmoovB...

That's IT?

Direct Democracy