Back on Defense

Now, I do like Hillary, but I will be voting for John Edwards! I just can not believe that some are saying they would switch parties though. I mean I watch and listen to the republicans running and all I can do is laugh, they are all a joke. Come on Ron Paul, I mean I will admit he has come up with a few good running points, but this is a guy that has switched parties from independent to republican a few times and has run for president with different views each time. Romney, well lets see the man is only looking out for the rich, yes he has made all of his money on the corporations and one of the largest investors in america so anything other than him saying, I will be looking out for the interest of the big corporations money and my own is a lie. Huckabee, wow self proclaimed "America's Minister" give me a break! Then there is Rudy the self proclaimed "America's Mayor" HA HA! Before he turned 911 into his own reality tv show the people of New York wanted him out (Just look at his record). For those of you that still believe that a republican will be conservative with your tax money you are crazy. I mean come on the last congress that was majority and Bush wasted more tax money than any other in history. The only difference when it comes to spending tax money between the parties is where the money goes, Republicans hand it out to the large corporations and the dems hand it out to human services. We need a president that is willing to put his or her butt on the line to get america back on track for everyone. JOHN EDWARDS 2008

My analogy to Bush's claim that his foreign policies resulted in Iran's abandoning nuclear weapons production:

A dog barks when one walks by his house and every time someone walks by his house, he barks. Obviously the barking resulted in the passerby's decision to keep walking and abandon their idea to hurt his master.

Let the voters see her notes from when she was first lady. She has a lot of gall to criticize Obama for not being qualified to be pres. Lets nominate Laura Bush. She is as qualified as Hillary, and twice as classy, and there is no bitchy factor.

Hillary may me married to "Slick Willy," but she surely isn't Mrs. Slick Willy. Anyone can see right thru her. I backed her campaign for the first few months, but I am beginning to have my doubts about her leadership abilities. In fact, I may even change parties, as ridiculous as that may sound. Ron Paul is da man! I wish he had greater public support. He has all the correct answers as far as I am concerned. Even the "Huckster" from Arkansas is looking better in my eyes too. Remember, we had a HillyBilly from ARK once before and he turned out to be a good president. What this country doesn't need is Aunt Rudith from NYC, Hasbeen McCain or a Fred (where have you been) Thompson. I trust the American people will make a choice that will take us on a path different from this most horrible administration in the history of this great Nation.

dwehde: Clinton was impeached after a republican witch hunt into the whereabouts of his nether regions, you'll remember. That is not a character strike against his wife. What is a strike against her is her obvious political power ambitions. She is nothing but a power monger, and every action she has taken in her political life proves it. I wouldn't trust her to run a MOMS club, much less a country I love.

Dr. Ron Paul has the best answer, stop the war, bring our troops home from all over the world now and make our enemies or trading partners. Stop policing the world! Spend that money we waste on foreign aid on Americans instead! PEACE PROSPERITY AND LIBERTY. He???s crazy BUT THE ONLY HOPE FOR AMERICA! Join the revolution teaparty07

Hillary Clinton? All I see here is a politician. I don't think she has the answer to anything other than how to manipulate her way thru the democratic party. And something I don't understand, why is Bill Clinton revered so highly in politics today? Doesn't anyone remember that he was impeached? That's not too much to be proud of.

The most REAL THREATS sit in the White House and the former CNO's residense [which appears on no Google maps].... that is when the former's not on vacation and the latter isn't shooting his friends or having Dr. Frankenstein recharge his batteries!

Barack has the best answer. Surgical strikes on REAL threats, not more war propaganda. We don't need more war, but the reality is that there ARE real threats that we NEED to eliminate when given a clear chance without killing lots of civilians.

Why can't the pubic see that the real threat are the break-away republics of Russia(most notably the 5 Muslim States in Central Asia and the Ukraine)crime families in Eastern Europe and the technological advancement of China. Iran, Pakistan, India, all countries in Africa have no means of deploying a successful nuclear attack. Let's take care of the nuclear, chemical and biological weapons that already exis,t not on those that do not exist. I really do not want to mention Iraq, but we are taking are eye of the real threat.

zstroud,

I don't see any bias towards Clinton. I rather think that her front runner status has mainly achieved by mainstream media's overwhelmingly reporting on her and her alone.

Now, she started to receiving some real reporting about her, her supporters finally started to blame the mainstream media.

If you really pursue fairness, you should blame mainstream media giving so much attention on Hillary. It has made her so arrogant and exude with a sense of entitlement. She and her camp think by default she should be the nominee.

Meh, whoever is losing always complains about "media bias" (the Obama camp was saying that over the summer). I'd rather vote for the best candidate. So far, that's not Clinton.

Meh, whoever is losing always complains about "media bias" (the Obama camp was saying that over the summer). I'd rather vote for the best candidate. So far, that's not Clinton.

I agree with the other posts. How can this be called journalism? The biases against Clinton are not only unfair, they are a danger to the democratic process. Please take responsibility, and practice fair coverage of the candidates.

I totally agree. Where is the article explaining Obamas absenteeism, how about his pac fund or how about an article on the media bias against Clinton. If its a smear against her its news, if its a negative against another candidate its back page. the current media coverage makes me sick and I can only hope that Americans will see through this murky mess we call journalsim.

I'm with zstroud, and getting tired of it too. I can't watch Chris Mathews anymore he has lost his mind.