Your Comments On...

The Other Democrats Weigh In

The good news for the nation's Democrats is that neither of the supposed front-runners for the party's 2008 presidential nomination, Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, stole the show when all 10 of the likely contenders spoke last weekend to the Democratic National Committee.
- By David S. Broder

Comments

Oh, David Broder, why do you say that few in the audience have sympathy for the military? Where is your evidence for this load of bull? Sympathy? How about the immense desire to take the military out of the middle of a civil war that we can not stop so that no more soldiers will come back dead or wounded and so that no more military families will have to attend funerals for their loved ones? Is that sympathetic enough for you? How about wishing that this administration would not have so recklessly sent the military into a predictable quagmire without the proper armor or a viable exit strategy? Is that sympathetic enough for you? How about wanting to see returning veterans get the care and benefits that they deserve? Is that sympathetic enough? Keep eating your cocktail weenies, David Broder. You are a shill and a disgrace and a stain on humanity.

By TasteTheCheesesteak | Feb 6, 2007 12:38:38 AM | Request Removal

Nothing is being done for New Orleans or any place else in this country because Iraq has sucked the oxygen out of every thing else. As though that werent enough, today the Senate Republicans in the Public Party...to answer Bush*s Texas idiosyncratic mumblings of Democrat Party...all fell in line behind King George and his troop escalation preventing the Democrats from having the necessary 60 votes to get past the procedural vote and get on to the no-confidence vote against Bush’s troop escalation. OK. So when do the gutless Democrats fall behind Sen. Feingold, the only person in the Senate showing leadership and ethical concern for the troops and other American citizens? When do they pull the spigot and End King George*s War in Iraq. NOW. When do they stop Bush from invading Iran with the same old rhethoric and nothing else that he used to invade Iraq. NOW. When do they use the money scheduled to *build schools, etc.* in Iraq to provide food, clothing, and health care for the disinfranchised in this country. NOW. When do they impeach the two headed hydra, Bush/Cheney, that thinks it was elected to be dictator...of the world. NOW. When do they use the information gleaned from the Scooter Libby trial against Bush/Cheney and add it to the other information of secret spying, corruption, treason, murder of over 3,000 Americans. NOW. When do they demand that the war crimes trials begin. NOW. When do they demand the same justice for Bush/Cheney/and gang that Bush/Cheney demanded for Saddaam Hussein. NOW.

By cyngbond | Feb 6, 2007 12:51:47 AM | Request Removal

I didnt see it the way you did at all when I watched the speeches on TV. I saw plenty of people nodding their heads in agreement with what Clark was saying, for example, although they were a subdued audience. I think those people care a lot about the troops. Its how people like Nancy Boyda got elected in Nov. She comes from a district with 3 military installations and a higher than average rate of veterans. Get used to it Mr. Broder, theres a different Democratic party than the one youre used to. They heard what Wes Clark was saying. Hes not a declared candidate, so the crowd there just didnt know quite how to respond other than to listen to his speech and digest his words. You really have to get out of DC more.

By bastet20 | Feb 6, 2007 1:05:05 AM | Request Removal

Duty, Honor, Country are exclusively military virtues? The party who just pushed and elected “The Fighting Dems” doesnt have sympathy for the military? The party of Webb, Rangel, Murtha, Kerry, ... let alone JFK and even George McGovern doesnt have experience with the military? Mr. Broder I really think you forgot the audience, party Pros who are every bit as concerned expanding their congressional majorities and strengthening the party as they are electing the next president. General Clarks DNC appearance was a why you want me to run speech. So what did the DNC hear? Everything you saw in 04 is still there only better. What you hoped to get with Kerry I deliver but better I still have my medals and the bullet holes to go with them so you can get on my boat. Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, North Korea? Been there - done that, got others to play and didnt lose anybody. Paid my dues and paid them everywhere. Expand the base? Heck lets expand the playing field, Ill play in the Blue, the Purple and the Red and have fun doing it. Ill do all that and do it while playing fair with others. Oh and by the way I look and sound just like a Real President.

By jdornisch | Feb 6, 2007 1:27:41 AM | Request Removal

One of the losers in the weekend oratorical marathon was retired Gen. Wesley Clark, who repeatedly invoked the West Point motto of Duty, Honor, Country, forgetting that few in this particular audience have much experience with, or sympathy for, the military. It is astonishing that a spokesman such as Mr. Broder would state that few in this particular audience have much experience with and sympathy for the military. Is he saying that Democrats are not patriots, and do not have friends and family in the military? I regard this as a huge insult. And if the people in the audience, including the media, dont have experience with and sympathy for the military, isnt it time for them to acquire such, in particular from a teacher such as General Clark? It seems to me that Mr. Broder is grasping for straws to find a way to criticize General Clark and the Democratic Party, and THAT is a losing proposition.

By EllenBedlington | Feb 6, 2007 1:47:53 AM | Request Removal

Under the cover of King George* War in Iraq, the governor of Texas has announced a fast track plan to get two dozen dirty coal burning smokestacks on line before a Democratic Congress legislates that the EPA, which has been virtually non-existent under George Bush, enforce existing pollution laws. This as the scientific community issued conclusive evidence of carbon-based causes of global warming. One thing this country should have learned from Johnson, Bush, Cheney, and all their cronies is how they got to be the way they are. They*re from Texas. It*s in the water. Will this country still be intact long enough in spite of this current Texas president to impeach him along with his vice-president and elect, hopefully this time, a reasonable, logical, presidential president who cares about the environment and the people who live in it? Will this country also send a message to Gov. Perry and other politicians of the same ilk that we*re tired of all the *stuff* and we*re not going to take it any more.

By cyngbond | Feb 6, 2007 2:13:02 AM | Request Removal

That is an absolute misrepresentation of how those attending the DNC meeting received General Clarks presentation. It was a serious and somber speech to an audience serious about the tragic misadventure led by President Bush, who is led by Vice President Cheney. Furthermore, General Clark should not be used in this cheap way, but respected for his leadership of the Kosovo war, where not one American soldier died. Perhaps Democratic presidents, like Clinton, are just smarter about war and peace than are Republican presidents, like Bush. After all, diplomacy took first precedence in the Balkans, unlike in Iraq, where the military is being misused and abused. At every Democratic event General Clark addresses, in every part of the country, he asks the veterans to rise and the non-veterans to acknowledge their service. There has never once been a moments hesitation in any Democratic audience nor was there at this one to the moments of prayerful silence for our thousands of war dead.

By Jerseycoa | Feb 6, 2007 7:56:48 AM | Request Removal

Funny that attendants at Clarks speech indicate that he received standing ovations several times for discussing the troops and their plight. Moreover, he invoked a moment of silence to reflect on our troops sacrifices. Why do national pundits believe that they can routinely misrepresent nice word for lie the facts about Democrats? Well, because if they do, they get promoted, feted, and published in the Washington Post, all while making millions from their corporate sponsors. But if they tell the truth, theyre relegated to being writers in the blogosphere. Broder knows which bread his bread is buttered on. And hes already received his forty pieces of silver for betraying the trust of his readers.

By lhensleigh | Feb 6, 2007 7:59:20 AM | Request Removal

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next »