Hillary's concession speech.

[silverscreenselect]

If Bob Barr gets into this race, it will hurt McCain more than mixing up any ethnic groups or commenting that the economy isn't his strong point.

I had to google him. Former congressman from Georgia, now seeking the Libertarian nomination? How would he have more of an effect than any other Libertarian nominee?

Bob Barr has been writing an editorial column in The Atlanta Journal for a year or more (he quit when he started exploring a presidential run). He is a former US Attorney who has genuine conservative credentials, but he is very much opposed to Bushco's trashing the Constitution in pursuit of the "war on terror." He also is not a super religious conservative either. And he has a lot of government experience, unlike the fringe sorts who usually become third party candidates.

I can see Barr getting votes from disgruntled conservatives who don't like McCain. However, I can also see Hillary supporters going to him if they can't bring themselves to vote for Obama (Nader is not a choice for most Hillary supporters who still view him as costing the Dems the 2000 election).

If Barr does run, I might vote for him as a way to strengthen the Libertarian party, which in the long run will be more harmful to the Republicans than the Democrats. However, if the election in Georgia were to appear at all close, I'd vote for McCain over Obama.

[ToLiveIsToFly]

If Bob Barr gets into this race, it will hurt McCain more than mixing up any ethnic groups or commenting that the economy isn't his strong point.

I had to google him. Former congressman from Georgia, now seeking the Libertarian nomination? How would he have more of an effect than any other Libertarian nominee?

People outside of his immediate family have heard of him.

Wasn't he the first guy that Larry Flynt nailed with his million dollar reward?

[peacock2121]

Bob Barr got on my radar during the Clinton impeachment process. I think he looks like Hitler. I started calling him little Hitler back then and do so to this day.

He is a weasel.

[NellyLunatic1980]

It's amazing what can change over the course of 6 months.

Me, December 2007: "If Obama doesn't get the nomination and Clinton wins it, I'll happily vote for her in November."

Me, February 2008: "If Obama doesn't win the nomination and Clinton wins it, I'll vote for her in November."

Me, March 2008: "If Obama doesn't win the nomination and the superdelegates steal it for Clinton, I'll hold my nose and reluctantly vote for her in November."

Me, May 2008: "If Obama doesn't win the nomination and the superdelegates steal it for Clinton, I'll vote for Cynthia McKinney in November. Screw Hillary."

[NellyLunatic1980]

Bob Barr got on my radar during the Clinton impeachment process. I think he looks like Hitler. I started calling him little Hitler back then and do so to this day.

He is a weasel.

Yeah, he want to impeach Clinton over an extramarital blowjob while he himself has been divorced three times. Or is it four now? Not as slimy and hypocritical a bastage as Newtie Newt, but he's up there.

Although Barr has been more vocal about human rights in recent years, so he's not so evil anymore.

[Bob78164]

If Barr does run, I might vote for him as a way to strengthen the Libertarian party, which in the long run will be more harmful to the Republicans than the Democrats. However, if the election in Georgia were to appear at all close, I'd vote for McCain over Obama.

It seems to me you're being inconsistent. As I recall, your expressed rationale for your, shall I say, vigorous opposition to Obama's candidacy was your belief that it was somehow bad for the Democratic party and that a McCain Administration would be the cure for what ails the party. I can't say I follow that logic, but leave that aside.

It's clear that if the election in Georgia is at all close, Obama will have decisively proven that his candidacy is terrific for the Democratic Party. So why, then, would you vote for a Republican? --Bob

[NellyLunatic1980]

It's clear that if the election in Georgia is at all close, Obama will have decisively proven that his candidacy is terrific for the Democratic Party. So why, then, would you vote for a Republican?

Because he's bitter about Hillary losing something that she should've had in the bag six months ago?

[Thousandaire]

I guess it all depends upon what you want the eventual outcome to be. Voting for a third-party candidate is tantamount to giving the Republicans your vote. Although I would prefer to see Clinton as the nominee, the differences in their policies is slim, whereas the differences between either of theirs and McCain's is significant. I'm not willing to cut off my nose to spite my face, as it were.

I don't agree with this argument. I think people should vote as if the election were solely up to them.

That said, none of the third party candidates completely reflect my views either. I'll probably vote for McCain.

[earendel]

I guess it all depends upon what you want the eventual outcome to be. Voting for a third-party candidate is tantamount to giving the Republicans your vote. Although I would prefer to see Clinton as the nominee, the differences in their policies is slim, whereas the differences between either of theirs and McCain's is significant. I'm not willing to cut off my nose to spite my face, as it were.

I don't agree with this argument. I think people should vote as if the election were solely up to them.

And given the non-viability of third-party candidates, the choice comes down to the two major parties. So the question is, "Who do you want to be president - the Republican or the Democrat?" The decision should be based on many factors, but not sour grapes.

[TheCalvinator24]

Bob Barr got on my radar during the Clinton impeachment process. I think he looks like Hitler. I started calling him little Hitler back then and do so to this day.

He is a weasel.

Yeah, he want to impeach Clinton over an extramarital blowjob while he himself has been divorced three times. Or is it four now? Not as slimy and hypocritical a bastage as Newtie Newt, but he's up there.

Although Barr has been more vocal about human rights in recent years, so he's not so evil anymore.

I guess if the lie that the impeachment was about a blowjob gets repeated often enough, some people will believe it.

[PlacentiaSoccerMom]

I guess it all depends upon what you want the eventual outcome to be. Voting for a third-party candidate is tantamount to giving the Republicans your vote. Although I would prefer to see Clinton as the nominee, the differences in their policies is slim, whereas the differences between either of theirs and McCain's is significant. I'm not willing to cut off my nose to spite my face, as it were.

I don't agree with this argument. I think people should vote as if the election were solely up to them.

And given the non-viability of third-party candidates, the choice comes down to the two major parties. So the question is, "Who do you want to be president - the Republican or the Democrat?" The decision should be based on many factors, but not sour grapes.

I totally believe that Obama has a skeleton in his closet worse than Jeremiah Wright. I believe that the Republicans know what it is, they are going to wait for Obama to be the uncontested nominee and they are going use it and McCain will win the election.

[Thousandaire]

And given the non-viability of third-party candidates, the choice comes down to the two major parties. So the question is, "Who do you want to be president - the Republican or the Democrat?" The decision should be based on many factors, but not sour grapes.

That's why third-party candidates don't get more votes, people believe voting for them is a wasted vote. Voting your conscience is not sour grapes. As long as people only vote for Republicans or Democrats, that is the only choice we will have, which isn't much of a choice at all.

The two-party system is not an inherent part of our gov't. It isn't mentioned in the Constitution, and most founding fathers thought political parties were a bad idea.

[silverscreenselect]

I totally believe that Obama has a skeleton in his closet worse than Jeremiah Wright. I believe that the Republicans know what it is, they are going to wait for Obama to be the uncontested nominee and they are going use it and McCain will win the election.

Two words.

Larry Sinclair.

And not even Hannity will bring this one up, although it's gotten significant exposure in Puerto Rico already.

This has all the earmarks of an upcoming Matt Drudge exclusive.

[NellyLunatic1980]

Bob Barr got on my radar during the Clinton impeachment process. I think he looks like Hitler. I started calling him little Hitler back then and do so to this day.

He is a weasel.

Yeah, he want to impeach Clinton over an extramarital blowjob while he himself has been divorced three times. Or is it four now? Not as slimy and hypocritical a bastage as Newtie Newt, but he's up there.

Although Barr has been more vocal about human rights in recent years, so he's not so evil anymore.

I guess if the lie that the impeachment was about a blowjob gets repeated often enough, some people will believe it.

I'm sorry. Let me rephrase that. Barr wanted to impeach Clinton over lying under oath about an extramarital blowjob.

At least nobody died when Clinton lied.

[PlacentiaSoccerMom]

I totally believe that Obama has a skeleton in his closet worse than Jeremiah Wright. I believe that the Republicans know what it is, they are going to wait for Obama to be the uncontested nominee and they are going use it and McCain will win the election.

Two words.

Larry Sinclair.

And not even Hannity will bring this one up, although it's gotten significant exposure in Puerto Rico already.

This has all the earmarks of an upcoming Matt Drudge exclusive.

This guy?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVeFVtcdSYY

[earendel]

And given the non-viability of third-party candidates, the choice comes down to the two major parties. So the question is, "Who do you want to be president - the Republican or the Democrat?" The decision should be based on many factors, but not sour grapes.

That's why third-party candidates don't get more votes, people believe voting for them is a wasted vote. Voting your conscience is not sour grapes. As long as people only vote for Republicans or Democrats, that is the only choice we will have, which isn't much of a choice at all.

Voting for a third-party candidate out of conviction is one thing - it is a "wasted vote" but it is one cast with good intentions. Voting for a third-party candidate because "your" mainstream party candidate didn't get the nomination is sour grapes. That's how I view those who say that if Clinton is the nominee or if Obama is the nominee they would vote for a third-party candidate.

The two-party system is not an inherent part of our gov't. It isn't mentioned in the Constitution, and most founding fathers thought political parties were a bad idea.

Absolutely correct but useless in reality. The two-party system is too entrenched in the American psyche to be changed at this date. IMO, of course.

[Rexer25]

I totally believe that Obama has a skeleton in his closet worse than Jeremiah Wright. I believe that the Republicans know what it is, they are going to wait for Obama to be the uncontested nominee and they are going use it and McCain will win the election.

Two words.

Larry Sinclair.

And not even Hannity will bring this one up, although it's gotten significant exposure in Puerto Rico already.

This has all the earmarks of an upcoming Matt Drudge exclusive.

Are you serial?

You cannot be serious

Alberto Gonzalez has more credibility than this Sinclair guy.

[silverscreenselect]

Absolutely correct but useless in reality. The two-party system is too entrenched in the American psyche to be changed at this date. IMO, of course.

The two-party system is entrenched because third parties don't want to do what it takes to make them viable. A couple of them, like the Green and Libertarian have more or less coherent political platforms, but they are not willing or able to organize at the local level and start winning local and state house races.

Even at the federal level you rarely see any third party candidate making a serious run at a House seat (Ron Paul is a libertarian but he runs as a Republican). Imagine if the Libertarians (or any third party) could gain 10-15 seats in Congress. They could then be in a position to get some concessions from one of the major parties (a chairmanship here or there) in exchange for their votes for House Speaker.

But they don't want to do that. It takes time and work and money and usually a bunch of losses along the way. So instead they put up a figurehead running for President who gets 2-5% of the vote and gets to appear on a handful of network news shows, or, worse, they are stuck with an academic unknown who gets zilch of the vote.

[mellytu74]

sss --

You mean the Larry Sinclair who flunked two polygraph tests?

That felon?

Who cannot come up with the name of either the alleged limo driver or alleged limo company?

Because, ah, maybe they don't exist?

[Rexer25]

sss --

You mean the Larry Sinclair who flunked two polygraph tests?

That felon?

Who cannot come up with the name of either the alleged limo driver or alleged limo company?

Because, ah, maybe they don't exist?

Ah, c'mon mel, give Sinclair a break. You're eating into his 15 minutes of infamy.

[tlynn78]

c'mon mel, give Sinclair a break. You're eating into his 15 minutes of infamy.

Anyone besides me hear a very faint rendition of "Dueling Banjos" in the background of this guy's YouTube video?


t.

[silverscreenselect]

sss --

You mean the Larry Sinclair who flunked two polygraph tests?

That felon?

Who cannot come up with the name of either the alleged limo driver or alleged limo company?

Because, ah, maybe they don't exist?

Ah, c'mon mel, give Sinclair a break. You're eating into his 15 minutes of infamy.

I find Sinclair's story somewhat questionable. However, no one seems to have followed up on his accusations to see if there's any corroboration because they don't want this to generate any publicity. You can bet the Republicans have checked up on it and if there's any proof, backup or similar pals from Obama's past, they will uncover them and will release the story when it suits their purposes.

[eyégor]

Absolutely correct but useless in reality. The two-party system is too entrenched in the American psyche to be changed at this date. IMO, of course.

The two-party system is entrenched because third parties don't want to do what it takes to make them viable. A couple of them, like the Green and Libertarian have more or less coherent political platforms, but they are not willing or able to organize at the local level and start winning local and state house races.

Even at the federal level you rarely see any third party candidate making a serious run at a House seat (Ron Paul is a libertarian but he runs as a Republican). Imagine if the Libertarians (or any third party) could gain 10-15 seats in Congress. They could then be in a position to get some concessions from one of the major parties (a chairmanship here or there) in exchange for their votes for House Speaker.

But they don't want to do that. It takes time and work and money and usually a bunch of losses along the way. So instead they put up a figurehead running for President who gets 2-5% of the vote and gets to appear on a handful of network news shows, or, worse, they are stuck with an academic unknown who gets zilch of the vote.

Third parties in America fail because of the same reason they form - they have a highly specialized agenda. Historically, the two major parties have covered broad constituencies, even up to this day. Third parties are generally made up of 'true believers' who can't (or won't) bend to further their agenda down the road. Aunt Sadie wanting a noise ordinance in East Buttcheek isn't anywhere near the Green's radar (but probably is on the Libertarian's). The major parties can reach down to these little issues, disenfranchising the third parties before they can get any traction on the local level.

[Rexer25]

sss --

You mean the Larry Sinclair who flunked two polygraph tests?

That felon?

Who cannot come up with the name of either the alleged limo driver or alleged limo company?

Because, ah, maybe they don't exist?

Ah, c'mon mel, give Sinclair a break. You're eating into his 15 minutes of infamy.

I find Sinclair's story somewhat questionable. However, no one seems to have followed up on his accusations to see if there's any corroboration because they don't want this to generate any publicity. You can bet the Republicans have checked up on it and if there's any proof, backup or similar pals from Obama's past, they will uncover them and will release the story when it suits their purposes.

Somewhat questionable? What was your reaction to The Jonestown massacre? Somewhat troubling?

To misquote Steve Martin, desperation is not pretty.

[mellytu74]

sss --

You mean the Larry Sinclair who flunked two polygraph tests?

That felon?

Who cannot come up with the name of either the alleged limo driver or alleged limo company?

Because, ah, maybe they don't exist?

Ah, c'mon mel, give Sinclair a break. You're eating into his 15 minutes of infamy.

I find Sinclair's story somewhat questionable. However, no one seems to have followed up on his accusations to see if there's any corroboration because they don't want this to generate any publicity. You can bet the Republicans have checked up on it and if there's any proof, backup or similar pals from Obama's past, they will uncover them and will release the story when it suits their purposes.

sss--

I don't know. How many polygraphs can the guy flunk?

Can't that be played both ways?

1) Tell me, Senator McCain, how long did you commit adultery with your current wife before you divorced your first wife?

2) And what kind of drugs were they that Cindy stole again?

3) And how IS Vicki Iseman doing?

4) And, Senator McCain, exactly how sorry were you that you couldn't go to Joseph Bonano's birthday party? Any other Cosa Nostra ties you aren't telling us about?

5) And, Senator McCain, tell all of us blue-collar Catholic voters in Western Pennsylvania exactly how and why you sought the endorsement of John Hagee (footage of the two hugging followed by footage of Hagee calling the Catholic Church the "great whore"). And exactly why did you think that would endear you to us?

6) Isn't it amazing that, given your 180 on ethics after your close call with John Keating, you had the foresight to write into YOUR ethics bill that use of corporate jets during campaigns is verboten. Unless, of course, that corporate jet happens to be owned by a family member. Like, say, your wife's family.

Taken individually, meh.

Taken together, I think some crafty 527 could put together a nice case that, say, HEY! Not only can't this guy keep Shia and Suuni straight, but I'm really not sure about his judgement in other ways, either.