Just like the Republican party, then.

Yep.

Well, wait - has it been proven to not work?  It just sounds bad on paper - helping poor people.  But, in fact, we know that top-down doesn't work.  Trickle down doesn't, in fact, trickle down.  When you give breaks to the rich, they do not take that money and create new jobs - in fact, in the 80s, when this "voodoo economics" as GHWB said before he joined the ticket, was put into place coincides with when corporations first started getting the idea of moving plants to Mexico where they didn't have to pay the workers as much.

No, I stand by my belief - the rich can take care of themselves - they need no help and no breaks.  That is what I believe in as a Democrat. 

As for bringing in Community Organizing - sure, why not?  There is a financial aspect to organizing - if he couldn't handle it at that level, it would reflect on his ability to handle it on the national level.

Kind of like... the way McCain keeps bungling his campaign, and cycling through various campaign managers and staff, and constantly reorganizing - sure, it's a refreshing change from Bush and his stubborn refusal to listen to anyone, but more to the point, it shows a serious lack of leadership and organization on McCain's part. 

In all fairness, none of you (that I can recall) brought any of these issues up, but... it's like the way the right wing media keeps bringing up various vague connections to Obama... ie - Hannity's screachy bleated oft-repeated, multiple times per hour, claim that, and I quote, since he bleats it the same every time "Obama is friends with an unrepentant terrorist!" - well, to begin with, it's not true, and it's being bleated in a manner in line with the old German playbook of repeating a lie enough times to make it true, but more to the point, to justify it, Hannity's reply is that we have to consider all parts of the candidate's background.  Fair enough.  let's look at all of Obama then.  Community experience and everything.  As well as McCain's.  Keating 5 scandal, "I hate gooks" comment, anti-MLK stance, insane temper outbursts, repeated statements that show he has no understanding at all of the situation in the middle east, etc..  All of it.

I'll note this about the Republican Party - they were very good about bringing all the factions together for a while - the decent honest Republicans who believe in a more conservative way to manage America, mixed with the Religious Fundementalists, Corporate Neo-Cons, and the bigots that the Dems lost when LBJ showed that he wasn't all bad.

But... it had to end someday - this is one of the many reasons I am sure that Obama will win - the various factions of the party are moving apart - while at the same time, the various factions of the Democratic party are coming together. 

I think Obama will win, but he'll really win if Barr enters the race.  Or if someone like Michael Savage enters the race on the Bigot ticket - runs a campaign about "Borders Language and Culture" or whatever sick shit he spews - then he'll capture a few wings of the party, while normal decent Republicans will stick with McCain.

Personally - I like the idea of having multiple parties, as in other countries - as much as the Republicans need to shake their bigots, fundementalists and nuts, the Dems also should shake off their nuts - I could live happy without ever having to deal with another Green Party nut, for example.  Let them all stew in their own filth dealing with their minor parties while the grown ups deal with the real issues.

It's best to towel dry them, I suppose, but yes, you are correct.

So John Edwards was first so stupid as to get an expensive haircut, then dumb enough to hire potentially controversial bloggers for his campaign, then pussy enough to fire them at the first hint of brown stuff meeting spinning thing, may very well have been cheating on his wife.

Might have been a decent, or good, or even great president.  But definitely the dumbest fucking candidate in recent memory.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080725/ap_on_re_us/immigrant_ki lling_students

More Micahel Savage fans, one presumes?

Well, wait - has it been proven to not work?  It just sounds bad on paper - helping poor people. 

It's not about whether or not to help poor people (come on...you're better than that type of simplistic good vs. evil argument). It's HOW to help them. The principle of teach a man to fish vs. give a man a fish.