he wanted to apologize, and did it. Anyone whose ever met Mudcat knows that he doesn't mix words and certainly doesn't say something unless he means it. He didn't address it toward anyone in particular, are you really taking this personally?
Well, in a perfect world issues would trump all (aside from the occasional past stint as a crack dealer or serial killer). Aside from that, issues still play an important role of course, but you make a good point. If you do talk about the issues but aren't effective, then it doesnt mean anything. That in mind, Edwards is still out front. His leadership commentary at the debate sums it up best. I know some won't agree, but that's my take.
From an Edwards supporter:
So theres a lot of hype, so what? Honestly, on the issues Edwards has consistently been viewed as ahead of the pack. To me, Obama and Clinton are great speakers, but do little to promise change in government. Sure, Obama can yell louder than any of the other candidates, making for good sound bites, but the White House needs more than a preacher. Hillary is spending more time defending her record as a revisionist (it runs in the family)-that she's her own master architect.
If you are talking about a story, you should link it-here's the link to the business week article that you mentioned (it should clear up the points that the author of the opinion piece read incorrectly.)
I just liked how Hillary and Obama (sitting senators) thought that the war would still be going on in January 2009. As skeptical as I am about Bush's intentions in Iraq, I dont think we'll be there until then. If theres one thing that ANYONE thats not associated with the Bush administration can do quickly, its begin to repair our international relationships. Sure, he could sit and watch and see if Congress passes bills about the environment, but the most important thing that will need to be addressed post-Iraq, will be picking up GWB's mess.
i dont think so, he's been raising money like gangbusters over the past few weeks. Hes started this new 'small change for big change' campaign and has still been keeping up a few large dollar fundraisers
jeromearmstrong Our Polarized and Money-Driven Congress: Created Over 25 Years By Republicans (and Quickly Imitated by Democrats http://bit.ly/ewXlXI #bblue
she did it in March too.
how long he waited to hear Edwards. No mention of the speech though... Ill check back soon.
How many exclamation points can you use in one comment?
he wanted to apologize, and did it. Anyone whose ever met Mudcat knows that he doesn't mix words and certainly doesn't say something unless he means it. He didn't address it toward anyone in particular, are you really taking this personally?
Well, in a perfect world issues would trump all (aside from the occasional past stint as a crack dealer or serial killer). Aside from that, issues still play an important role of course, but you make a good point. If you do talk about the issues but aren't effective, then it doesnt mean anything. That in mind, Edwards is still out front. His leadership commentary at the debate sums it up best. I know some won't agree, but that's my take.
Here it is.
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZxJgvnKW62E"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZxJgvnKW62E" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
If that were the case, you'd have to be uneducated to support education reform. give me a break.
So theres a lot of hype, so what? Honestly, on the issues Edwards has consistently been viewed as ahead of the pack. To me, Obama and Clinton are great speakers, but do little to promise change in government. Sure, Obama can yell louder than any of the other candidates, making for good sound bites, but the White House needs more than a preacher. Hillary is spending more time defending her record as a revisionist (it runs in the family)-that she's her own master architect.
If you are talking about a story, you should link it-here's the link to the business week article that you mentioned (it should clear up the points that the author of the opinion piece read incorrectly.)
object to. It will be fun.
come out on top, but with less than 200 votes no? Esp on Daily Kos where there are a lot of Hillary and Obama supporters
I just liked how Hillary and Obama (sitting senators) thought that the war would still be going on in January 2009. As skeptical as I am about Bush's intentions in Iraq, I dont think we'll be there until then. If theres one thing that ANYONE thats not associated with the Bush administration can do quickly, its begin to repair our international relationships. Sure, he could sit and watch and see if Congress passes bills about the environment, but the most important thing that will need to be addressed post-Iraq, will be picking up GWB's mess.
i dont think so, he's been raising money like gangbusters over the past few weeks. Hes started this new 'small change for big change' campaign and has still been keeping up a few large dollar fundraisers