David Brooks - 'If the Dems wanna win in November, they should elect Biden or Dodd'

I'm worried. I really am.

So much flip-flop on record on so many issues.

seems to take turns in the ring of fire, and when that candidate is in that ring, there numbers go down. They were talking about how Obama is there now; and how Hillary was there in the past.

McCain hasn't really been there yet...but he will be once we have our nominee.

I'm worried because people who are not involved in politics seem to think of McCain as the 'maverick':crazy: and they like him.
I am so glad that the DNC started going after him now and not waiting any longer.

and he vaporizes. No fun.

This can't help either:

Did the US Supreme Court Just Elect John McCain?
By Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
The Free Press

Wednesday 30 April 2008

The US Supreme Court has just dealt a serious blow to voters' rights that could help put John McCain in the White House by eliminating tens of thousands of voters who generally vote Democratic.

By 6-3 the Court has upheld an Indiana law that requires citizens to present a photo identification card in order to vote. Florida, Michigan, Louisiana, Georgia, Hawaii and South Dakota have similar laws. Though it's unlikely, as many as two dozen other states could add them by election day. Other states, like Ohio, have less stringent ID requirements than Indiana's, but still have certain restrictions that are strongly opposed by voter rights advocates.

The decision turns back two centuries of jurisprudence that has accepted a registered voter's signature as sufficient identification for casting a ballot. By matching that signature against one given at registration, and with harsh penalties for ballot stuffing, the Justices confirmed in their lead opinion that there is "no evidence" for the kind of widespread voter fraud Republican partisans have used to justify the demand for photo ID.

Voting rights activists have long argued that since photo ID can cost money, or may demand expensive trips to government agencies, the requirement constitutes a "poll tax." Taxes on the right to vote were used for a century to prevent blacks and others from voting in the south and elsewhere. They were specifically banned by the 24th Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1964.

more...

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/043008S.shtml

I was thinking about that same thing and wondering what number of the new registered dems are going
to be hurt by this.

grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!

as many as the Supremes might have dis'd. We're O.K. I do believe.

I think this protracted primary has been bad for business.

We needed Joe.

BUT I continue to hope that Bush will sink the GOPers chances.