Burns Strider, one of the Democratic Party’s leading strategists on winning over evangelicals and other values-driven voters, will join Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) as she prepares to launch her 2008 presidential campaign.

Strider now heads religious outreach for the House Democratic Caucus, and is the lead staffer for the Democrats’ Faith Working Group, headed by incoming Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.)....“In 2004 only one of the primary candidates had any staff member who was reaching out to religious constituencies and to voters,” said Amy Sullivan, one of the first liberal journalists to identify the importance of faith-driven voters to the future success of the Democratic Party, referring to one-time Democratic front-runner Howard Dean. “At this point it looks like perhaps not all but at least a majority of candidates in 2008 primary will have somebody on staff focused on religious outreach and religious strategy, and that’s a sea change in the space of four years.”

But this list, however loony-tunes it may be, does not begin to touch the craziness of the hardcore members of this cult. Back in November, I wrote a column on Clinton’s response to a question about giving driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants. My reward was to pick up an e-mail pal who has to date sent me 24 lengthy documents culled from what he calls his “Hillary File.” If you take that file on faith, Hillary Clinton is a murderer, a burglar, a destroyer of property, a blackmailer, a psychological rapist, a white-collar criminal, an adulteress, a blasphemer, a liar, the proprietor of a secret police, a predatory lender, a misogynist, a witness tamperer, a street criminal, a criminal intimidator, a harasser and a sociopath. These accusations are “supported” by innuendo, tortured logic, strained conclusions and photographs that are declared to tell their own story, but don’t.

So the "finding" comes out of precisely nowhere. Of course if the mandate succeeds, it will increase coverage, with most of the cost coming from the people paying those mandatory premiums rather than the [other] taxpayers. But the claim that it will actually succeed is based on nothing but an assumption. And yet no reasonable reader of Krugman's column would understand that.

OK...I hear from Republicans, over and over again...Obama has no experience. Lets examine that shall we?

Eisenhower, Rep Pres...NO Federal Experience outside being a wartime Commander of the Military. 0 days in the house, 0 days in the Senate, 0 days as a Gov, 0 days as a Rep at the state level. NO EXPERIENCE.


Kennedy, John: 6 years as a House Rep, 7 as a Sen. 13 years Fed Exp.


LBJ: 12 yrs in TX House of Rep, 12 years as a Sen, 2 years as VP..14 years Fed Exp.

Nixon: 3 years CA House of Rep, 3 yrs CA Senator, 8 yrs VP..11 yrs Fed Exp

G Ford: 24 years House of Rep, 0 as a Senator,...24 yrs Fed exp

J Carter: 4 yrs as GA Gov, NO FED EXP

R Reagan: 8 yrs CA Gov...NO FED EXP

G H W BUsh: 4 yrs TX Representative in the House, 2 yrs Ambassador, 1 yr CIA Dir, 8 yrs VP...Extensive Fed Exp

B Clinton: 11 yrs Gov of AR, NO FED EXP

GW Bush: 5 yrs Gov of TX, NO FED EXP


So, in the past 55 years, we've seen 10 different men in the White House. 6 Rep and 4 Dem.

Of the 6 Reps, 3 had ZERO Federal Experience.
Of the 4 Dems, 2 had ZERO Fed Experience.

Isnt that odd? Fully 50% of the Presidents elected in the past 55 years from each party, had NO EXPERIENCE. So tell me, how does Sen Obama's, 7 years in the IL State Senate and 2 years Senator from IL, making him more qualified apparently than half the people elected in the past half century....DISQUALIFY him as "lacking the necessary experience"?

That two-faced BS is the "party line crappola" I referred to. I called it crap, because that is precisely what it is. Cripes, Reagan is the current "poster child" for the conservative movement, and he had no experience at the Federal level. He'd been a DJ, an actor and a Gov. So how is someone with more Federal experience than he deemed to be "unqualified due to lack of experience"?

If Republicans would be honest they'd admit that they ROYALLY screwed this country over in 2004 when they recoronated King George.(TX for ex WILL vote for whomever the Reps nominate. They hate McCain, but I'll wager the Rep nominee carries TX 70-30 in the presidential election. Hell, if the Rep party nominated Satan, he'd carry Texas. These dipsh*ts wouldnt vote for a Democrat even if the Rep candidate swore he was gonna start a war with China, India, Japan, Mexico AND Canada. Long as he upheld the 2nd Ammendment, thats the primary force for getting TX in your pocket. 2nd, is claiming you'll ban abortion. Even though such a ban would violate established law. Oh yeah, the 3rd criteria....ban homosexuality entirely. This state is SO bassackwards when it comes to social concerns. But then, in my view, thats pretty much the Republican party platform..live your life the way we tell you to, and you'll be free to live your life as you choose. So long as you choose what we say to.)