Bill Moyers has an interesting piece today about the political parties and Congressional Democrats crying about Ralph Nader ["Where are the Democrats?"].
Sorry Dems, if you nominate Sen. Joseph Lieberman, you will lose again.
Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin is telling the peaceniks in his home state that he was tricked on Bush's Iraq policy ["Harkin: I was fooled on Bush Iraq plans"].
Umm, dah! This is similar to Harkin's ranting about the closed factories during his run for president in 1992 and then pulling a 180 and helping Clinton twist arms to pass NAFTA. And let's not forget Harkin raving about children working in sweatshops all over the world and even attempting to put a child protection act into GATT. But after failing to get his amendment passed, he voted for GATT anyway. Harkin voted with Bush because he was in a tight election with a Republican who was challenging his partiotism and like a spineless weasel he threw away his Constitutional right to declare war and supported "King" George W. He is pathetic.
Maybe this is why: ["New Poll Shows Bush Would Lose to Democrat in Election"]
The poll of over 1,200 voters last week found that 48 percent would pick any of the nine Democrats running versus Bush. The margin of error was plus or minus 2.8 percent. Strangely, the same voters support the president on the war but believe Bush should wait for the UN to pass a war resolution first.
The point? Who cares what you stand for if the polls say you will win anyway?
Novak: ["Playing Texas poker, Bush bets all on Iraq"]
A senior Bush official privately admits what his administration cannot declare publicly. The stagnant economy, a dagger aimed at the heart of George W. Bush's second term, will not immediately respond to the president's economic growth program. The economic engine will not be revived until the war against Saddam Hussein is launched and won.Who says conservatives are all bad? Thank you Mr. Novak for confirming everything we already knew.