I like Richardson. He stands on principals and has nice hair too. He should be President.

I don’t know about his hair being nice, but he’s not encumbered by all the Senatorial politics that envelope the front-runners.

He’s good. He’s not a Senator. He should be President.

Kudos to Governor Richardson for speaking out for the Constitution.

Updated DFA poll….Hillary is not leading:

http://democracyforamerica.com/

Internet poll of DFA members???? C’mon. Let’s be realistic! I think there is a lot of self-deception going on here about Hillary’s support. If you are going to change the polls down the round itb requires defeating her in the primaries in the early states and altering that momentum. Once she starts winning primaries she will be even harder to stop.

To defeat her may mean sacrificing one or more progressive candidates and consolidating quite early around one…and then convincing those “progressive” candiadtes that they need to withdraw BEFORE the primaries. That way progressives wouldn’t be sub-dividing their votes and efforts.

So here’s the tough question. Who do you tell to drop out before Iowa and New Hampshire? Dodd? Edwards? Feingold? Richardson?

And what if one of those candidates would run better against Hillary and Obama in a LATER primary?

Now we have to challenge some big names to withdraw their nominations of Hillary for her failure to stand up for the nation’s right to privacy. Now make her squirm.

Good idea. How would “we” go about doing that? Is it up to a candidate (or candidateS) to call for it?

I hate to buck the crowd here, but why exactly are we so gung-ho to hold the telecoms responsible for the illegal behavior of the Bush administration? If the freaking FBI comes in and says “we need this information by Tuesday and it’s a matter of national security” can you really blame the telecoms for not trying to take them to court? For crying out loud, THE FBI WORKS FOR THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, how far do you think you’d get?

If this was illegal, and it certainly was, then we need to impeach Bush and Cheney and put Gonzo behind bars, not punish Verizon. This is scapegoating.

IMHO.

i’m with you kevin. i still say they may not have the votes to impeach now, but they CAN start hearings. and those hearings will be an almost inadvertent heads up for the nation. During the clinton impeach fiasco people were riveted to the tube and learned something about the constitution, even though the context was totally missing. Imagine what could be done with this context! Now just when so many follks are starting to get it. I keep saying to everyone i know: i’m not voting for anyone who doesn’t support impeachment now, and i keep hearing from my dem reps lame excuses why they’re lame. When they break the law, a refresher course is needed for the nation that let them get away with it. No more dippy dems. At least i won’t feel like a cheap date again when the election’s over.

H. Clinton could nominate Joe Lieberman, as VP, or even Darth Cheney itself, and the Axiom of Automatic Support for the Least Worst demands that ‘progressives’ must go to the polls and pull the lever for the anointed (D) ticket.

(D) captured netroots will be in full sheepdog mode, trying to nip the flock back into the corral. Late October 2008 will be full of the frightened shrieks of the (D) party leadership, in a close race, cajoling the betrayed Left wing to just trust them, one more time.

TeddySanFran @ 73

Whenever Edwards makes a statement about a current issue that the Senate is considering, the chatterati — and some supporters of sitting Senators — say, “Well, that’s easy for Edwards to say, he gave up his Senate seat.” Any statement he made now on FISA telecom immunity or a filibuster would be greeted with the same chorus. He’s already made plain he plans to return America to constitutional principles when he’s elected.

I’m happy to continue to press sitting Senators to take a stand to join Chris Dodd’s hold and filibuster. Richardson’s statement is nice, but it’s sitting Senators who can really make this happen.

So the chatterati will complain. Big freaking deal. Edwards should still encourage his supporters to take action on FISA. His supporters will listen, and put pressure on their own representatives. Edwards can make a significant positive difference in the FISA debate.

If the reason Edwards isn’t acting is because he’s worried that the chatterati will criticize him, then he doesn’t deserve to be president.

I actually think the explanation is more mundane. Edwards isn’t focused on the FISA issue and he isn’t thinking creatively about how his supporters can make a difference on this issue, because he doesn’t see how it can help him.

It is short-sighted and deplorable that Edwards is thinking this way, but I don’t think it is necessarily out of fear of the chatterati, who will criticize him no matter what he does anyway.

Why don’t we wait and find out the real reason before skewering the man on what we or someone else THINKS might be the reason.

jc inOR @ 103

Ball’s in the court. Maybe a time for a ‘County Workers for Humanity’ or some such to form and issue a statement supporting the driver’s license measure? Just don’t use county time and resources like the phantom leafleters appear to be doing.

They weren’t phantom. Came straight from the county clerk’s office. And it was a petition.

Cheehhh, Solai. I wonder if the Clerk was authorized by the commissioners to do this. I guess they could take such a position, but would have to do so publicly. If an individual or private group is lobbying under the color of authority, I think that is grounds for sanctions. Either way, a statement by a few county workers, and preferably by one or more of their unions or committees thereof, should help draw the lines on this. Best of wishes, and I’ll be sure to follow this. Has it made the press? Once you get some more facts, maybe is should, along with some saner voices speaking to support the law enforcement people such as Spitzer favoring this. Stuff happening on this in Oregon, though I’ve got homework on this to do, too.