Instead of bashing anyone, why not just stick to the issues and how to approach and deal with them? Everyone who took a speech class in college knows that stooping to lobbing personal attacks is an old debate tactic that one resorts to using, when he/she doesn't have a valid argument, or anything meaningful or constructive to add.

I'm repulsed by politicians these days, because they degrade and insult each other, rather than offering ideas and/or plans to deal with the tough issues that face our nation.

They must think that basic American citizens are too stupid to notice the wool's being pulled over their eyes (or ears). Is the most qualified candidate REALLY the one who can throw the most insults and attack with the most viciousness? Has our society sunk so low that we can't have spirited argumentation and the emphatic sharing of philosophies, without the personal attacks and mean-spirited verbal lashings? The Founding Fathers must be spinning in their graves.

Sent by Beth Mason | 3:30 PM ET | 11-15-2007

Hillary can't win in the majority public's eye. She doesn't fight back, she's weak. She fights back, she's a Tomboy (a euphemism for a certain sexual preference).

She might as well sling mud cause the internet spinmakers have already been labeling her in all sorts of ways. Already the internet is chock full of the resurrected but stale Monica Lewinsky jokes.

The sad part for women in America, this will set women's rights back a couple of decades. Cause Hillary doesn't even have the support of that many women.

And the sad part for the Democratic Party that made some gains in the midterm....it's probably too late for the party to reverse field and put in a candidate who can put up a viable fight against the GOP in important issues like Iraq and Iran and the possibility of a nuclear confrontation in Pakistan and India.

fred call

Sent by fred call | 10:46 AM ET | 11-16-2007

I really don't get why so many American women dislike Hillary. She's experienced, competent and intelligent, the last two traits having been absent for the most part from the current administration for quite some time. I'll say this for Obama, he could probably beat Giuliani. Anyone who approves of what the Bush administration has done over the last seven years, by all means vote the GOP candidate. If you're a Republican who feels betrayed by the current leadership, remember that a Republican president in 2009 is essentially a stamp of approval for the neocons, Bush/Cheney et al. In the future, the only way any administration will think twice before going off to war on dubious evidence or straight-out lies, is if the GOP LOSES EVERYTHING in this upcoming election. It's like sparing the rod and spoiling the child. If the GOP isn't slapped real good in next year's election, they'll learn nothing and regret nothing. They'll also think nothing of going to war again in the future because they got away with it before, right? No consequences, no change in behavior. A people get the government they deserve. If the GOP keeps the White House, then Americans really do deserve for their country to come apart at the seems. There is no cure for stupidity if we refuse to smarten up.

Sent by John R. Otten | 2:41 PM ET | 11-16-2007

Sent by John R. Otten: I really don't get why so many American women dislike Hillary.

Well, John, maybe it's because women aren't as gullible as some would like everyone to believe.

Hillary Clinton: The Democrat who voted on the war issues like a Republican. But the difference is....ta da.....she's a woman??

And that's supposed to hide the fact that the only difference between the way Hillary Clinton voted, from the way George Bush voted, is that.....ta da....Hillary is a woman, again??

Ergo, every time Hillary Clinton is supposed to look as though she offers an alternative to the GOP is that....ta da.....she is a woman????

Being a woman is supposed to hide the unvarnished truth that Hillary Clinton supported the Iraq War every step of the way?? And now we are supposed to believe that Hillary Clinton is the opposite of George Bush???

Talk about your misogynistic stereotypes. Maybe women don't like Hillary Clinton because Hillary Clinton doesn't respect women. And female voters deeply resent that.

Take your pick. But, either way, the Democratic Party has genuinely dropped the ball for '08. This gender ploy will so badly backfire on the Democratic Party that the party will all but cease to exist in any form of political parity.

fred call........(a lifelong registered Democrat male who is deeply disappointed and insulted by the Democratic Party's attempts at cheap political legerdemain).

Sent by fred call | 9:16 AM ET | 11-17-2007

Ok I got the part that Hillary, like a majority of the congress and the American people, put her trust in the president that he was telling the truth. Especially after all the talk about mushroom clouds and various political strong-arm/alarmist tactics and the questioning of the patriotism of all who might dissent. So I understand that her primary flaw was putting her faith in George Bush and Dick Cheney and the neocons. She obviously didn't show very good judgement on that but then again, most Americans can say the same thing.

But now please explain how Hillary "doesn't respect women." You throw that out there as if it's a fact without anything to back it up. It seems counterintuitive that Hillary doesn't respect what she is. Sounds kind of like something Rush or O'Reilly might say in between wiping the foam from their mouths.

As far as 2008 is concerned. My bet is that anger at the GOP about things like yellow-cake lies and traitorous acts like divulging the name of an undercover CIA operative by the very people who claim to be such superior patriots (and no prosecutions for that?) will keep the Dems very much alive no matter who they run.

Sent by John R. Otten | 4:29 PM ET | 11-19-2007

Sent by John R. Otten: But now please explain how Hillary "doesn't respect women." You throw that out there as if it's a fact without anything to back it up.

Well, John, the only fact I can readily rely upon is that I talk to women (and to men who are also Democrats). What can I tell you other than time after time after time they tell me they are either staying home, or they are so afraid of Hillary Clinton that they are voting Republican (ala the Democrats for Reagan period). And all I can say to the Democratic Party is, "You are in trouble, my friends."

But, John, let me tell you this from another point of view. Back during the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, when George Bush and Mitt Romney were standing together during the opening ceremonies.

You know, I asked people back then what was their first impressions of Mitt Romney. When it looked very much as though George Bush was tabbing Mitt Romney as a GOP future comer. You know what people said (both men and women)? They said Mitt Romney reminded them of JFK Jr., except he is Republican with a chance of winning the White House after Bush.

Then, John, there are a plethora or reminiscences about George Romney I could extrapolate upon, but I don't have the time here.

All I can say is vote your conscience. I would never take that away from anyone. I vote reality. I even picked Jimmy Carter over Gerald Ford. That's how lucky I've been at predicting national elections.

fred call

Sent by fred call | 4:57 PM ET | 11-19-2007