Just Don’t Know What To Do With Myself

In your March 24th issue you talk about lines from presidents, past and present. You attribute "nattering nabobs of negativism" to Richard Nixon but it was Spiro Agnew who said that in a speech in Des Moines, Iowa. JJanss from CA

Dear Illinois Voter, I'm sorry, but you have been mis-informed about the vote you are referring to. At issue was a bill to mandate care to pre-viable fetuses born alive." The first thing to note is "pre-viable." Fetuses below 26 weeks of age never survive, even with the best ICU care. Fetuses older than 26 weeks already have a law that mandates they be given medical care to save their lives. The bill you are referring to was promoted by the pro-Life camp and it was really quite clever. Had that bill passed it would have overturned Roe v. Wade, but only in the State of Illinois. It would have immediately been legally challenged by the pro-Choice groups and immediately struck down, since the Supreme Court has already ruled on that issue. Even though I am pro-Life, I could see how this bill was just a political ploy. It was designed to be used to smear the reputations of any politician who voted against it. It was not designed to protect the unborn, because the people who wrote it knew that the pre-viable fetuses in question would all die anyway. ??????This kind of thing is one of the reasons why Republicans like me are becoming disenfranchised from the GOP. Politics is not just some clever shell game that insiders play while we the taxpayers foot the bill for their power plays. We want our real issues heard and legislated for in effective ways.

Believe it or not, as a pro-Choice Christian I think I have gotten better legislature out of Barack Obama than out of my own interest group. Obama has taken the time to listen to the religious voice and made some modest compromises with us, like voting against late term abortion and against partial birth abortion, even though he still has supported a woman's right to reproductive freedom by voting in favor of early abortions. To me, this is a good compromise. I know he's liberal at heart, but he listens to the other side, and that is important to me. It's a brave new world for conservative Republicans when we look to liberal Democrats to help us with our issues. But I'm a pragmatist. I go with what works.

USVoter
Obama will lose the electoral college if he is the nominee. He will either get the states John Kerry got or less states. In any case Obama is a certain loser. When Southern whites mark their ballots in Ak, La, Ms, Ky, Tn, Tx, Mo, Al, Va, W Va, Fl they the whites will vote against Obama because he is black, hundreds of thousands will actually go out and vote against Obama in these states because he is black. Racists will vote against Obama in Iowa, Nevada, New Mexico. Take a look at the states John Kerry won in 2004 and see how right I am. Many whites including Republicans and Independents will actually go out to vote against Obama to make sure a black person loses the presidential vote. The media ignores this because the media is politically correct. No president who ran as a Democrat has ever won without winning at least 3 southern states in the electoral college since Grover Cleveland in 1900, except Lyndon B Johnson in 1964. Obama has won primaries in states that are Republican states that always give their popular votes pluralities and electoral votes to Republican candidates for President. Mathematics decides the outcome. There is no way that Obama will get enough votes to win any pluralities or electoral college votes in states like Kansas and Wyoming. Obama is a throw away vote in the primary, certain to lose the general election. Let us hope that Obama loses the Democratic primary.

I am totally disgusted with the media. We are in the mess we're in because the press did nothing to investigate or report on a current President who has done nothing but lie. If the Democrats were afraid of being called anti-American, traitors and anti troops for questioning this President and the Iraq War, then our journalists are reporting with a fear of being called The Liberal Press. Shame on YOU! DO. YOUR. JOB!!!!!!!

The title of this article, the slant, and the twist is simply disgusting. Almost nothing Bill Clinton has said has been factually incorrect. Almost every negative interpretation of what he has said has been horribly misconstrued and taken COMPLETELY out of context. Dan Abrams (msnbc) is the ONLY commentator I have seen in the whole damn country who has pointed this out, and drawn the only logical conclusion possible - that the media is badly biased against the Clintons.

Well, ok; the other possibility is that Americans, and especially American "personalities", are simply too ignorant, lazy, and stupid to understand the English language - or to do anything but repackage some other writer's garbage and pass it off as a nation-wide opinion - as this writer has done.

For every time that Bill has been factually off base, btw, Obama and his camp have one - or more - to match.

I like Bill Clinton, Hillary, and Obama, and will vote for either candidate in the general. But I will remain disgusted with the American media for years to come. Yep, good luck and good night. It's dark as hell, with no sunlight in sight.

the title of this article, the slant, and the twist is simply disgusting. Almost nothing Bill Clinton has said has been factually incorrect. Almost every inegative interpretation of what he has said has been horribly misconstrued and taken COMPLETELY out of context. Dan Abrams (msnbc) is the ONLY commentator I have seen in the whole damn country who has pointed this out, and drawn the only logical conclusion possible - that the media is badly biased against the Clintons. The other possibility is that Americans, and especially American "personalities" are simply too ignorant, lazy, and stupid to unserstand the English language.

For every time that Bill has been factually off base, btw, Obama and his camp have one - or more - to match.

I like Clinton (both) and Obama, and will vote for either in the general. But I will remain disgusted with the American media morons and whores for years after this election.

This country is in a mess ----time for a change----- we do not need the same old bell RINGING THE SAME SOUND.

Billary is dishonest. Obama came up,, with no connections, against all odds.. Do u honestly think Obama supporters will vote for Hillary after Billary injected race and completely lied about Obama? If someone betrays their values to get ahead,,, how can u trust them with the presidency. Do the math.. Hillary, minus Obama supporters versus republican that hate the Clintons = another republican in Office. TRUE change.. Obama 08

I watched online most of the items Newsweek included in its Clinton temper gallery. Given journalistic portrayals of these events???many stimulated by journalistic questioning???I was surprised at how ???un-angry??? Bill Clinton appeared to be in most of them. From watching those events, usually with more context than provided in the Newsweek Gallery, I would not classify the anger level of any of them as high as Newsweek did. I also have read comments from readers who attended the events journalists portrayed and, in the words of one reader, wondered after watching the videos ???what planet [the journalist] is on??? in portraying Clinton as angry or out of control.
Among Washingtonians John McCain appears to be more famous than Bill Clinton for losing his temper. (See, for example, the list at http://wealthmotor.com/tifi/?p=2102. Evidently the Romney campaign also posted such a list.). Since quite a number of those events appear to have taken place when C-SPAN or other cameras were operating, will Newsweek soon run a gallery about John McCain???s anger.

I watched online most of the items Newsweek included in its Clinton temper gallery. Given journalistic portrayals of these events???many stimulated by journalistic questioning???I was surprised at how ???un-angry??? Bill Clinton appeared to be in most of them. From watching those events, usually with more context than provided in the Newsweek Gallery, I would not classify the anger level of any of them as high as Newsweek did. I also have read comments from readers who attended the events journalists portrayed and, in the words of one reader, wondered after watching the videos ???what planet [the journalist] is on??? in portraying Clinton as angry or out of control.
Among Washingtonians John McCain appears to be more famous than Bill Clinton for losing his temper. (See, for example, the list at http://wealthmotor.com/tifi/?p=2102. Evidently the Romney campaign also posted such a list.). Since quite a number of those events appear to have taken place when C-SPAN or other cameras were operating, will Newsweek soon run a gallery about John McCain???s anger.

I watched online most of the items Newsweek included in its Clinton temper gallery. Given journalistic portrayals of these events???many stimulated by journalistic questioning???I was surprised at how ???un-angry??? Bill Clinton appeared to be in most of them. From watching those events, usually with more context than provided in the Newsweek Gallery, I would not classify the anger level of any of them as high as Newsweek did. I also have read comments from readers who attended the events journalists portrayed and, in the words of one reader, wondered after watching the videos ???what planet [the journalist] is on??? in portraying Clinton as angry or out of control.
Among Washingtonians John McCain appears to be more famous than Bill Clinton for losing his temper. (See, for example, the list at http://wealthmotor.com/tifi/?p=2102. Evidently the Romney campaign also posted such a list.). Since quite a number of those events appear to have taken place when C-SPAN or other cameras were operating, will Newsweek soon run a gallery about John McCain???s anger.

eddiewhere: You just admitted to the Clinton's wonderful abilities to lead our Country, wouldn't you like to go back to that??? It is also so ironic to me that all of Obama's supporters are crying about Bill Clinton making "legitimate" complaints about his campaign yet Obama capitilizes on every opportunity to diss Hillary!!! He is the one who started the character attacks in fact at the first Democratic debate. Hillary never said a single bad thing about Obama and she is above that still. YOUR candidate is the mud-slinger so stop crying, suck it up, and actually come up with a legitimate idea to "change our country!"

If people would stop letting media propaganda and scandel cloud their views, they would see that the obvious choice for a strong, smart, and determined leader that actually has a plan for her time in the White House, is Hillary Clinton!

WE owe a lot to the CLINTON's for what they did in the ninety's. THOSE were the BEST OF TIMES for the majority, RICH, MIDDLE CLASS and the least fortunate. Unfortunately scandal and nine eleven have overshadowed the CLINTON successes. I am voting for OBAMA because we need to overcome divisivness. We need our children to learn that working together to overcome obstacles is "the way to go". Racism, destroying individual character and being less than honest is a bad example to sen our children. THIS is why McCain and OBAMA would be the best candidates to represent America to the world and to our children. IF we allow our youth to learn that winning at all costs works, then we cannot complain in the FUTURE.
WE HAVE TO SEND A MESSAGE.

I wonder...I wonder why most of the media loves to hate the Clintons and insist in blindsiding the public?
Most of the media (sometimes even yourselves) kept mute with regard about the catastrophic blunders of the Bush administration; mute about the carnage he created in Iraq; mute about the bleeding of our tax / hard earned dollars in Iraq's war; mute about the concerns about millions of americans who lack health insurance; and I can go on and on.
Hillary Clinton is addressing all those issues...she is more than qualified to be our president and we are blessed with a man of his stature as her husband, where I'm sure if she were to ask his advice, he is wise and experienced enough to render it.
The media likes to sensationalize on trash...and wants the public to keep reading rubish which is so unbecoming of your publication...
Please makes us read intelligent material and something that is worth reading.

Evan Thomas is another newsie in love with Bill Clinton, it's not romantic, it's more in the nature of the man love that men had for Elvis. The media wants Bill Clinton back, even in the secondary role of first spouse because they know he will be, for all practical purposes, be on his third and then fourth term a president and it would add the tittilation factor so craved by the public and needed by the media. With the two Clintons as an administration there would be no need for a VP as he would have no voice and would be fortunate to even be allowed in meetings at the WHite House. A Clinton administration would be a literal dictatorship.

Even though Hillary Clinton stood by the old hound dogl, she still reminds most men of their first wife - the one with the kids, the house and the money.

Hillary Clinton reminds men of their first wife . . . the one with the house, the kids, and the money.