Check him out

http://www.richardsonforpresident.com

Go Hillary44 08! http://hillaryis44.org/

The Clintons are the dirtiest politicians since.. well... the current administration. Glad I moved overseas... looks like she will get the nod and get to the general elections. 4 more years of lies and ugliness.

That means spew, ralph, toss cookies, throw up, vomit, regurgitate, blow chunks.

Find a new term to criticize your opponents with, PLEASE!

Don't get me wrong, I want our trops home yesterday as well BUT those in charge can't guarantee such sweeping promises to the American general public in such simplistic terms.

How fast the troops depart from Iraq and most of them go home depends largely on how much essential equipment goes along with the withdrawal, according to most advisors.
"How quickly can the military move its 160,000 troops out? What about the 100,000-plus contractors? How many of the military's 45,000 Humvees and other equipment should be left behind for the Iraqi Army or destroyed? Which of 64 military bases should be closed? How does the military protect its main route out of Iraq toward Kuwait?"

Withdrawal from Iraq would be far from easy. A large number of armoured vehicles would have to be moved to the port of Um Qasr or Kuwait (and await transport home). Other equipment might have to be destroyed or handed to the Iraqi army.

Here's a candid look at "what it really means to pull out of Iraq" by Colonel Douglas Macgregor (retired), military analyst:

http://www.motherjones.com/interview/2007/11/iraq-war-douglas-macgregor.html

Another look at Obama's voting PRESENT in the IL State Senate.
http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2007/12/6659_yesterday_the_n.html

"The NY Times discussed Senator Obama's penchant for using a quirk of the Illinois Statehouse to sidestep contentious issues that might jeopardize his reelection chances. Is it a dirty trick or a proof that he's a smart cookie who simply knows how to be an effective politician?"

Taylor Marsh, at the Huffington Post is certainly steamed at Obama about it (and at Obama in general apparently from the tone of the piece). She's pretty sure he's a wolf in sheep's clothing using 'PRESENT' votes to focus more on ducking responsibility on serious issues than on dealing with those serious issues

"...Obama is continually talking about Clinton being a 'triangulator,' as do many of the Hillary haters. People talking about her calculations. I don't agree with all of her votes, especially on some foreign policy matters, particularly her Iraq war vote, but also Kyl-Lieberman. But when she's pushed she votes and puts herself on the line. She never votes 'PRESENT' when it matters. When pushed at YearlyKos on lobbyists she could have pandered. She didn't. She also took the heat, including boos. She didn't back down over Kyl-Lieberman either, even though it cost her in grumbling. It's what she believes, with Wesley Clark and Joseph Wilson backing her."

"Obama got a pass when going after her on Kyl-Lieberman, even though he voted for similar legislation earlier in the year, but more importantly, skipped the vote that would have put him on the record. He also has the exact same votes as Clinton on Iraq, and when Senators Kerry and Feingold offered legislation on the floor to redeploy, Mr. Obama made a speech against it. Not to mention that he never held a hearing on his own foreign relations subcommittee. He also skipped the MoveOn.org vote too. How convenient it is just not to show up and be counted. It's a lot easier. But it's not more principled, no matter your excuse. It's triangulating. It is also quite calculating. Because what better way to hit your opponent than to duck a tough vote where she was counted, and you'd been counted months earlier, then rail against her because no one is paying attention to the facts."

FINALLY TO RICHARDSON'S LATEST POSTURING:
"... hell hath no fury like a potential vice presidential candidate scorned."

Richardson 2008

Also, blindly supporting Bush is a pretty foolish thing to do. The freedom to speak up is one of those freedoms that you R's often speak of, but it's the first to go when you hear something you don't like. Here's a quote from a true patriot:
“The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all. I like a little rebellion now and then.”

Judging by the way you write, you read very little. You should try it sometime.

The young in America will have to live with the foul-ups of the Bush Administration and the bandaid that the next inept president will place on said foulups for the rest of their lives.

It's a scary time to be a young adult. My parents and grandparents' generations saw America grow and prosper and largely(not completely!) make a positive impact on the world, but the future is grim for my generation. We are at odds with two of our largest sources of petroleum(Mideast and Chavez-land)but corporate interests in the energy sector make sure legislation remains unchanged. We can't buy Cuban cigars, or even visit the island so near to our coast that, although closed, is a fairly transparent regime. However, the great American success story of all time, Wal-Mart, continues to keep the clandestine Communist China afloat by importing BILLIONS of poisonous plastic crap. Our manufacturing sector is going to crap because we care about the well being and safety of our workers and can't have a level playing field with third-world manufacturers who can make it cheaper by cutting corners.

At 27 years old, this is the third election that I've been able to vote in. Formerly liberal(as to not be associated with Bushtard), I believe the the Republican platform, in its truest form, promotes individual responsibility, individual prosperity, free and responsible markets, etc. Too bad all it cares about now is guns, God, and gays. The most fiscally irresponsible administration in history has blown up our deficit how much?

The first two times I voted "anybody but Bush", now I have to make a real decision. Ron Paul is the only candidate that I would even consider, yet he is chastised for actually knowing and believing the intent of the Constitution. The rest of them: I wouldn't spit i their mouths if they were dying of thirst.

I guess Bill found out he was out of the running to be Hillary's consideration for a potential VP.

OBAMA in '08!

BUT I WOULD FEEL BETTER INFORMED IF I
KNEW MORE ABOUT RICHARDSON. I WISH HE
HAD MORE MEDIA COVERAGE.

Over the course of the campaign, she has said she would end the war and bring everyone home; end the combat against nationalist groups but continue combat missions against Al Qaeda in Iraq; leave our new monster Embassy and all our new bases in place, while taking nearly everyone home but the thousands it would take to run and protect those sites, not pledge to get our troops out by 2013; and now pledge to get NEARLY everyone out in a year. That word NEARLY leaves a hole so big you could drive Bill Clinton's definition of the word "is" through it.

Hillary still won't tell us what her position is on Social Security reform; she has an everchanging position on Iraq; and she still hasn't apologized for her war vote or for her support for high-priced lobbyists to control Washington.

I'd have to vote for her against a Republican because they are truly crazy but will people really be inspired to vote for her and make the extra effort in the general? I doubt it. She's just another politician.

Obama '08!

Hillary is the clear winner; Bill Richardson should have shut his mouth to get something. Hillary has the best strategy and plan to bring out troops home Mr Richardson!
Hillary '08

GO MITT 2008!

Seriously, do you read anything about Hillary? She's in bed with her special interests as much as any Republican; she shared Bush's foreign policy until it became politically inconvenient to do so; she's far less experienced than Richardson, Biden or Dodd or even Obama (who has been an elected public servant longer than her); she's proven corrupt repeatedly over her time in the spotlight.

And why does everybody think that the fact that she is a woman is so important? We should be choosing people based upon their leadership skills, their competency and their honesty, not their chromosomes. Someday, the right person will be a woman. But this is one of the last female politicians in America I'd vote for.

If forced at gunpoint to choose between Republicans or Democrats, I would probably choose Democrats. But I will never EVER vote for Hillary, the socialist neoconservative – the worst combination possible. Sadly, most of the Republicans are as bad as her (barring Ron Paul.)

Clinton supported going to war with Iraq and still thinks she was right to vote for war. It's bad to make that mistake, but it's much worse not to realize you've made a mistake.

Holy c***, you don't honestly believe what you wrote? Do you really believe Hillary's changing views are a reflection of new information that was withheld from here? Wrong...she is a poll reader, like her husband. When there was a concensus to depose Saddam, she was a hawk. When the war dragged on and the monday morning quarterbacks got their nerve to speak up when it appeared there was popular dissention, they altered their views. That was when these idiots, including Hillary, started justifying there NEW position on the war by saying Bush lied to them as well as to the American people. In my book, that shows a complete lack of character, conviction and backbone. Hillary would not be a leader with conviction...she would lead by referendum. Not something I want to see in a President.

Perhaps you were referring to Iowa, as Tom Vilsack was a successful governor of Iowa, not Ohio.

As for Hillary's candidacy, I fear her presence on the ticket. Regardless of what Ivory Tower theorists may think, she is indeed a divisive force in American politics. Furthermore, her personal ambition is stronger than her committment to fair governance, in my opinion. She is far and away the most "hawkish" of the current Democratic field, and would be the most 'status quo' of those running for president.

Bill Richardson will not win the Iowa caucuses and his role in the campaign post-January 3rd will be as a running mate at best, Cabinet member most likely.

How is it that Vladimir Putin comes under so much scrutiny as he still clings to power in Russia. The SAME THING IS HAPPENING HERE.

But we have a democratic system here. Oh right. Skewed polls, biased media, illegal campaign donations, lobbyist control, spin, etc. all designed to sway voter opinion.

Can't wait for the Vote for Jeb in 16 campaign.

CNN is citing to 2 polls from polling groups they aren't even using as entry requirements to their CA debate. On the RCP average Richardson is still ahead of biden but it is certainly tightening between the two of them.

As for abandoning his campaign promise he said personal attacks this is a policy attack on clinton's ever changing triangulation on the war.

And despite the media trying to act like richardson would ever be considered for the clinton VP get serious. She will go with a white male most likely a domestic policy guy as she claims to have foreign policy experience. TO pull in a foreign policy wonk would be an admission of her own lack of experience there going into the general. Richardson might get a nod from edwards should edwards win but not from clinton or obama. Seeing as both clinton and bush have used him as a negotiator I don't think he has to worry that whoever the next president is at some point his phone will ring.

Clinton is looking real desperate. Doing edwards minimum wage adopting Richardsons out in a year she's desperately seeking number 2 switches to have any chance in iowa, possibly even worrying that the undecideds(clearly having rejected her) plus the sub 15% vote will form a coalition around biden or richardson pushing her into fourth.

Caucus' are scrums and it isn't unthinkable to see a 3-4 way low 20% finish. Clinton is scrambling and changing position this late means her internal polls are showing her things that are causing panic in the campaign.

Desperation seems to be her current theme.

Go Bill!!!!!

You can't blame Republicans as is the usual when her outright triangulation is exposed, so instead you AVOID what he says and AVOID what she has said and hammer him no matter what.

Changing your position from debate to debate, poll to poll and crowd to crowd is DIFFERENT than changing a position over a period of YEARS.

Some people see the difference and post without blinders on.

Biden and Richardson have FAR and away more REAL experience than anyone in either party and though both don't have the dough or the media shilling for them they won't win, but both would make a great cabinet member for either party.

And that's coming from a Conservative.

Might be really fun to elect Hillary just to watch all those negative speech mongers' heads explode

Watch: Ron Paul videos