Your generous
donations help keep
this site running.
Visa/MC/PayPal accepted.
This is another reason the story isn't getting much play in the media. They seem to be accepting the spin from the White House that "this Congress can't do anything but investigate and obstruct."
President Bush isn't going to back down, either. Even if a delegation from the Republican National Committee, with leading Republicans from the House and Senate, and even the ghost of Ronald Reagan marched down to the White House to "lay down the law" -- in other words, to tell him: "Mr. President, we will let you destroy your presidential legacy, but we will not allow you to destroy the entire national Republican party" -- even then, I just don't see Bush and Cheney backing down. Nixon, remember, did resign when faced with such a delegation from his own party, but I doubt Bush and Cheney will follow his example.
About the Filmmaker | Reprint Policy
This is an experiment in multimedia. If the above video player doesn't work, you can access this video at the YouTube site.
The Democratic debate would obviously be a race for second place, since Bill Clinton would wipe the floor with the entire field. Love him or hate him, you've got to admit Bill Clinton is one of the best politicians ever in the "debate" category. He would not only outshine everyone else, he would enjoy the hell out of himself while doing so.
As I write this, the United States Senate is many hours into a remarkable all-night session debating how to end the Iraq war. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has called this marathon session to highlight the Republicans' obstructionism on putting together a reasonable plan to end the slaughter of U.S. troops in Iraq. Republicans, of course, decried the all-nighter as merely a political stunt.
They're right. It is just a political stunt. But it's a doozy!
But they're going to be drawing out this immense stonewalling during an election year. Republicans are already despondent over their chances next year, and the prospect of this issue coming up over and over and over again (as it works its way through the courts) next year would absolutely terrify them.
In large part, this is due to the fact that every single story will draw the inevitable conclusion that Bush is trying to "out-Nixon" Nixon. Just what Republican candidates don't want to see, while trying to win elections!
I have to say, after seeing all his position papers, I agree with those people who would like to believe in the whole Obama dream, but are still waiting for some meat to be put on the bare bones -- what will the Obama dream actually be defined as? Count me among the many who are still waiting for the answer to that question.
On Iraq, Edwards supports the immediate withdrawal of 40,000 to 50,000 U.S. troops (down to 100,000) and then the complete withdrawal of all troops within 12 to 18 months. This may be a little timid, as the public clamor for withdrawal is growing. And it is true that Edwards holds no office currently, so he is free to say whatever he thinks about Iraq without having to back his stances up by voting for one bill or another. But you have to give Edwards some credit -- of all the people running who voted for the Iraq war in the first place, Edwards was the first one (by about a year) to come out and admit he had made a mistake.
But what if a half century, or even a full century (it all depends on how you define "heir apparent," apparently...) isn't long enough to hearken back in American history to find a more chaotic election? What if we have to reach back to the dim and distant past of 1825 for an equivalent event?
Since I've raised the question of what would happen if the presidential race were actually decided in the House, I will follow that thought out onto its limb and make a prediction how it will all turn out.
Biggest weakness : The media's focus on the gender issue. Hillary has to walk not just one tightrope, but many. It's all about how the media sees her -- if she is aggressive and decisive they scream "cold, calculating, dominating" and all of that -- and if she tries to show her human side or exhibit any charisma whatsoever, the media focuses on "she's appealing to the woman vote, she looks awkward, she'll never eclipse Bill." Seems she can't win. No wonder she hires so many consultants -- her campaign is "under the microscope" more than any other candidate, with the possible exception of Obama and the race issue. But this winds up (no matter which way she plays it) as a "weakness" to the media. Maybe not so much to voters.