Fishin', how do you feel about us exploring the individuals exploring the declared candidates, for example, the support of Rep. Kennedy for Gep. and Senator Kennedy for Kerry?
I dunno about fishin', but what the heck, from my perspective the powerbase and Personal Partisan Support among The Party Hierarchy abets and emboldens any candidate-hopeful (A redundancy, but then most of that lot are ... every election). There are agendas behind lots of agendas ... what does which Kennedy hope to gain is a very good question. It's a critical decision for the kids ... picking not only who's coat-tails to latch on to, but the coat on the back of The Party Member The Kennedys intend to vault over in their own scrambles for the top. What does support and endorsement entail of them, and what obligations might they be expected to require of their rides?
This thread, a new thread, this thread split later on, confusing all of us .... it's all pretty much the same ... we'll unlikely be any less confused an any event.
timber
timber, do you figure the Kennedy's are splitting themselves between the two most viable candidates (in their opinion)? this affords them input into the campaign. What is Senator Kennedy's standing within the Senate? Is he highly respected? What about Rep. Kennedy; has he gained any respect in the House?
Rep. Kennedy Admits Depression
http://www.kersur.net/~mhci/patrickkennedy.html
NAPO gains increase for public safety officer's death benefit
http://apdea.org/newsletter/napo_news.html
Bill Would Fund Grants to Educate Health Professionals on Drug Abuse
http://www.healthinschools.org/ejournal/mar02_4.htm
Gusmao asks for US aid; lawmakers push sanctions on Indonesia
http://www.etan.org/et99b/september/26-30/29gusmao.htm
CANDIDATE ALERT CANDIDATE ALERT!!!!
I can't believe this.
This morning, the pundits were talking about NARAL's angry contention that John Edwards was not, in fact, chewing gum on the dias awaiting his turn to speak, but was manipulating in his mouth, one uncommonly large mint.
What?
The film was examined by pundits. They agreed it had to be gum. :wink:
The significance of NARAL's argument to this? I don't know.
Hope there's a print story.... Going off to see.
(It was gum.) :wink:
Already Been Chewed?
By Lloyd Grove
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, January 23, 2003; Page C03
Five years after cybergossip Matt Drudge rocked the nation by revealing President Clinton's relationship with a White House intern, he is trying to stir up a scandal about Democratic presidential contender John Edwards, North Carolina's senior senator. Drudge's shocking headline: "JOHN EDWARDS GUM-CHEWING ON NATIONAL TV IGNITES COMMENT."
Drudge reported on his Web site: "A C-SPAN camera zoomed in on Sen. John Edwards Tuesday night during a dinner marking the 30th anniversary of the Supreme Court's Roe vs. Wade decision -- as he was popping and chewing gum. . . . 'I couldn't believe John Edwards is running for President chewing gum on the stage on CSPAN!' one top TV producer e-mailed the DRUDGE REPORT."
As far as we know, such behavior is perfectly legal -- except, perhaps, in New York -- so we wondered what the big deal was. In any case, Edwards's press secretary, Mike Briggs, told us that his boss wasn't chewing gum but he "might have been" sucking on a mint.
The same brand favored by Monica Lewinsky? "I'm not going there," Briggs replied.
Meanwhile, Drudge missed the real story: Edwards rival Sen. John Kerry was spotted applying lip balm during Rep. Dick Gephardt's remarks. "I can confirm that his lips were chapped after three days in Iowa," Kerry spokesman David Wade told us.
Which takes nothing away from Kerry's deep and abiding love of all things Iowan.
Here it is. Should've known nutty Drudge had a hand, but it is all in the TV news. A humorous little aside. NARAL wasn't the objecter, it was Edwards' staff.
it all just gets more and more bizarre. next headline GWB farted in elevator, Senator Clinton adjusts bra strap while walking in Senate Office Bldg, there's hamburger all over the highway in Mystic Connecticut and big light in sky frightens minorities in the east.
Dean and Kerry seem comfortable straddling the fence ... the others appear to be busily stomping about in the mud, working themselves deeper into the mire with every footfall. Kerry still looks to me to be the strongest contender, though Dean is becoming more visible. Something that still bothers me about the Democratic Party is that while there is much they oppose, there is precious little they are uniform in proposing. It is fine to be against things, but one should balance that a bit by being for some other things. I detect little The Democrats unequivocally may be "For" apart from wresting power from The Republican Party. That's not much to hang a campaign on.
timber
Timber
Quote:. Something that still bothers me about the Democratic Party is that while there is much they oppose, there is precious little they are uniform in proposing. It is fine to be against things, but one should balance that a bit by being for some other things. I detect little The Democrats unequivocally may be "For"
I doubt that one will see a uniform platform coming out of the Democratic party until after the primaries and a candidate is chosen.
Dean straddling the fence? From what I've seen, he's very clearly outspoken against the war in Iraq, and always has been. In fact, I think he was a singular voice against for a while.
I know it is the nature of the political beast to look for negatives, but like Timber, I would like to see some positives presented. In fact, I love it when some "straight-shooting" members say, "Concerning this subject ( fill in), I find merit in the argument presented by the member across the isle."
I am interested in a candidate who is sincere about "working together".
"I am interested in a candidate who is sincere about "working together"."
Seems to me that's exactly how Bush represented himself, a moderate interested in bringing people together. Sounded good, which is why I voted for him. I feel as if I've been had. IMO, Bush almost immediately sold out to the radical right wing, militarily, economically, judicially, socially. (Rumsfeld, tax cuts that don't work, Ashcroft, stem cell obstruction)
It's almost impossible to know what a candidate will really do once elected. Guess it comes back to the whole trust thing. Who can we trust? (a rhetorical question)
angie, I had the foresight to see GWBush for who he really is when he was campaigning. My great shock was to see so many that were taken in by his "sweet" talk, and about "compassionate conservative." He did it again during his last SOTU speech. What frightens me more is how so many in this country are taken in by it. c.i.
I don't see the President as a bad man. Like Clinton, before him, he has to learn on the job. However, I am not comfortable with some of his team. And I have to wonder, how many men or women are truly prepared at the state level for the power players at the Federal level? Anyway, this thread deals with Democratic contenders.
Mapleleaf, If you consider GWBushies favortism for the rich, ignoring our environment, and talking from both sides of his mouth, I guess he's an okay guy. I just don't care for people like him that promotes his own agenda, ignores the pain of the middle class and the poor in this country, and wants to play cowbow at the expense of many innocent lives. c.i.
2/1/03
Entertainment - AP "
"the best possible hope for the Democrats because he's not afraid to lose,"
an interesting thought...
