Do you think the three way race will give Alan Schlesinger any chance at all?

"I think instead it's a defining moment for the Democratic Party, whose national leaders now have made it clear that if you disagree with the extreme left in their party they're going to come after you."-Tony Snow

This says it all.

Bring it on, Soros; bring it on...

You can just feel it in the air ---- the Bushbots are getting nervous. Very nervous. That sure smells a lot like fear in the air, doesn't it?

Everything Bush touches turns to crap: Iraq (too many examples to name), the economy (astronomical deficits), science ("intelligent design"), the Constitution (signing statements), New Orelans ("heckuva a job, Brownie"), and now Joe Lieberman. The list is endless. The man is a menace and he must be stopped.

Gore/Feingold 2008. You heard it here first.

I think what Tony says is true. It's interesting how we could take this and think about the Republican Party. Those of us who are very conservative do challenge those in our party who are more moderate and vice versa - I just don't think we have the mentality like the Democrats of "going to come after you." However, how are we going to handle the social issues during the mid-term elections as well as 2008??? Will we target defeat for those who are not as conservative in the Republican party on these topics? Regarding the issues of abortion, gay marriage, gun rights, etc...it's tough to find middle ground.

I think what Tony says is true. I think it is interesting how we could look at the Republican Party regarding this topic. We who are more conservative challenge the moderates in our party. I just don't think we have the same mentality as the Democrats of "going to come after you." How will the Republican Party handle the social issues, the Middle East, etc... during the mid-term and 2008 elections? Will the more conservative of us target defeat for the "not as" conservative folks? It's tough to find middle ground on abortion, gay marriage, gun rights, and helping Israel when she needs us, etc.....I understand why George Washington was against forming political parties - it's just by nature that we will "compromise" on things and not be as principled for the cause of the "party."

Will Hillary be next?

Has anyone asked the question as to why the "unifier" at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. feels the need to have his mouthpiece comment on partisan politics, especially from a primary?

Maf,
I think it's funny you say everything Bush touches goes bad and include Lieberman. Bush didn't campaign for Lieberman. Bill Clinton did.

"Will Hillary be next?"--Tired

Makes you wonder.

TEO - why not have Tony comment on a primary? It makes for great discussion - why not have Americans start talking about the issues this summer - you can be a unifier and at the same time challenge people to question their own values, where they "are" on things and start making up their minds on who to vote for...November isn't that far away....

The Democrats are becoming the party of Neville Chamberland, British Prime Minister, that declared "peace in our time".

And we all know how that turned out. Only difference is that some learned from that, others seem ready to repeat.

"Gore/Feingold 2008. You heard it here first."

sure, the result will be the same as Kerry/Edwards, you also heard that first

It is a defining moment, a sign that the democratic party is attempting a turnaround and is turfing out all the dead wood in favor of fresh candidates with fresh ideas. Exactly what they party needs in order to successfully vanquish the Repuglicans into another 5 decades of congressional obscurity. It took Democrats 50 years to lose control, it will take only 12 for Repuglicans. :)

This will be a head's up for Hillary, and Slick Willy who guides her every move politically. They will be thinking of 'two ways to stradle this DemocRat divide, in trying to be all things to all their voters. When they were in the Whitehouse, they did look at which way the polls were going each day, to decide on whether to go one way or the other.
Yep, these two will be looking into everything to
keep Hillary "looking like all things to all people in garnering future votes". Wonder if her opponents will have the balls to bring forth the question: "Whatever happened to ALL those secret
files (over l,000 I believe) that you and Bill kept on your enemies"?

These types of politicos, Eat their young, and are treacherous and ruthless.

This will be a head's up for Hillary, and Slick Willy who guides her every move politically. They will be thinking of 'two ways to stradle this DemocRat divide, in trying to be all things to all their voters. When they were in the Whitehouse, they did look at which way the polls were going each day, to decide on whether to go one way or the other.
Yep, these two will be looking into everything to
keep Hillary "looking like all things to all people in garnering future votes". Wonder if her opponents will have the balls to bring forth the question: "Whatever happened to ALL those secret
files (over l,000 I believe) that you and Bill kept on your enemies"?

These types of politicos, Eat their young, and are treacherous and ruthless.

Interesting that the Administration is picking this very moment to introduce legislation that would exempt it from prosecution for war crimes.
That's not something that people who are sure of holding onto power need do.

Sunshine,

I just question why our non-partisan tax-dollars are paying for partisan political commentary.

STH,

I was wondering when that little snippet was going to be brought up...I wonder how much coverage that little gem of a bill is going to get.

'Can't muster the political guts to remove us from the GCs, just take away their teeth'

Small Town,
The only sure things in life are death and taxes.
:}

"It is a defining moment, a sign that the democratic party is attempting a turnaround and is turfing out all the dead wood in favor of fresh candidates with fresh ideas."

Axis,
What's so fresh? Democrats smeared the war in 2004, and Americans didn't trust a Democrat to keep us safe. Democrats opposed Bush in 2004, and Americans as a whole believed in him by a 4 million vote margin. Dean got the Democratic base fired up but never could connect with the party as a whole. We've seen this material before, and to paraphrase Linda Rondstadt it doesn't make a red state blue. And the way you phrase your last sentence is telling ("It took Democrats 50 years to lose control, it will take only 12 for Repuglicans."). You're focused on Republicans losing rather than Democrats winning. The Democrats, just like in 2004 continue to be the party of pessimism and anger. There's no unifying, hopeful vision.

TSTH,
You're giving a bad name to small town hicks everywhere. Your argument could be applied to anything. Well, they wouldn't be doing that if they didn't think they'd die tomorrow. Again, this is a pessimistic world view. Optimists want to do things because they want to do them. They don't want to do them because they're afraid if they don't do them today, they might die or lose their position.
TEO,
It's funny to me that most liberals think Tony Snow doesn't answer enough questions, but you think he answers too many. Do you honestly think the reporters weren't interested in knowing what Bush thought about Lieberman's loss? Are you actually advocating that we do away with press briefings, or only limit them to the questions that you think are worth asking?

And why do we get held accountable to the GCs when our opponents don't? How many civilian marketplaces have been blown apart by insurgents or terrorists? How many Shiites have been marched off buses, identified, and then shot? Where's the furor over those violations? If they don't play by the rules, we are fools if we do. Let me rephrase that: More of our soldiers die and go to jail if we do.

What in the world are you all talking about? Is Snow really that stupid? The leaders in the party backed Lieberman.

But hey, even if the moron in the White House is right, how is that different than the Repuglikan party? If you are not a right wing religious extremist then you have no place in the current Repuglikan party. Need evidence? Look no farther than Jim Jeffords and John McCain.

Morris,

The point is that the POTUS is elected to be a person who represents ALL Americans, and when you have an administration who goes out of its way to make political hay, and about something as tertiary as a state primary race, and then try to prognosticate some political moral from it, is an affront to the entire idea of him being a "unifier". I could care less about Tony Snow, we all know where his bread is buttered; perhaps you should remember that when he speaks, he is speaking for the POTUS, and not some tirade on wing-nut radio.

Morris,

Regarding the GCs.

"And why do we get held accountable to the GCs when our opponents don't?"

--Because we are Americans, and they are terrorist criminals...perhaps we should ignore the Constitution when dealing with the really bad criminals, wouldn't that make things so much easier for our police?

The more we ignore the safeguards set-up for occupying forces, the less likely we are to win hearts and minds, which if you remember is the whole point in fighting a counter-insurgency.

Morris,

Regarding the GCs.

"And why do we get held accountable to the GCs when our opponents don't?"

--Because we are Americans, and they are terrorist criminals...perhaps we should ignore the Constitution when dealing with the really bad criminals, wouldn't that make things so much easier for our police?

The more we ignore the safeguards set-up for occupying forces, the less likely we are to win hearts and minds, which if you remember is the whole point in fighting a counter-insurgency.

Blind Eye wrote,
"The point is that the POTUS is elected to be a person who represents ALL Americans ..."
As usual, wrong!
The President represents the Executive Branch, (Article II Section I) the people are represented by the Legislative Brance.
Go away, troll!

TEO,
Regarding Lieberman's defeat, are you saying that it has little significance within the national political scene, and that it is in fact not sending a message about Bush or the war? Most libs think it means a lot more than that, and the MSM does too. Again, when Bush doesn't comment through his spokesman, he gets "political hay" from the left, and when he does he gets "political hay." As long as the conclusion is Bush is an idiot, you don't really care about anything else, do you? People like you are fragmenting the Democratic Party with their personal hatred.

But the way it's portrayed in the media is where their objectivism breaks down. If all they wanted to do is cover war and tragedy and analyze these things, they would talk as though the terrorists had the expectation to behave themselves in a certain way which they ignore. The media doesn't talk like that because that would imply responsibility for a moral code, even one so basic as to not kill those who disagree with your religious views.

To your example, when criminals make a habit of using the system, let's say by arguing as in the last term of the Supreme Court that everyone has a right to an insanity defense when it comes to matters of intent, the Supreme Court has the option to leave it up to matters of context, that is the states decide on a state by state basis if they want to allow such a defense. In the same way, the Geneva Convention can be applied when dealing with enemies who honor its standards, to those states we will extend its protections. But to extend all of the Geneva Conventions to terrorists who torture and behead our soldiers doens't reward good behavior, it rewards bad behavior. It says to the terrorists that doesn't matter how they treat us, we're going to treat them the same way we treat honorable states.

Do banks give the same treatment, same interest rates, same eligibility for loans to everyone regardless of how they've been responsible to money? Does our criminal system treat third time felons the same way it treats misdemeanor offenders? I don't want America to send our enemies the message that it doesn't matter how they treat our soldiers. It does, at least to me.