Any chance yet that we can all agree on an Edwards/Kucinich Ticket --- ????

[defendandprotect]

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. What we "agree" on is irrelevant.

Somebody needs to get nominated first, then that person will choose a running mate. And the running mate could be someone who isn't a candidate right now.

[defendandprotect]

11. "Irrelevant" . . . ?? Not sure . . . but think we need to look ahead . . .

Kerry was a loser with public opinion --- he got the nomination ---

I think how we all feel here is some indication of what the public is thinking and considering --- don't you?

Additionally --- very little attention is given here to the VP ---
and since a while back we've had VPs in stronger positions for the next round than perhaps
was the norm before that ---

Also -- we had LIEBERMANN who could have walked in the door with Gore --- !!!!

So -- if we're going to have a possibly more viable VP --- and think of CHENEY!!! ---
then I think we should be giving some consideration to that ---

and asking around . . . if you know what I mean . . .

[upi402]

2. Yep, the good looker and the lawyer

I'm down with that


FTBSITTTD
311

[defendandprotect]

12. And, I think the average height works --- ????

[MuseRider]

3. Why are people

trying to pair those two up, K and E? I can't see it at all.

[skipos]

9. Yeah, when have they ever paired up on anything?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/19/elec04.prez.edwards.kucinich/index.html

[MuseRider]

20. LOL

Keep going with that. For goodness sakes, that was a long time ago and you would think that they were the only candidates to ever try anything like that. It was a caucus, that is what they do in caucuses. Whatever.

[defendandprotect]

13. Speaking for myself, I see them as the two LEAST likely to betray us ----

[radiclib]

4. Wow

What an awesome poll:eyes:

[NoPasaran]

5. I agree it's not happening in my reality.

[johncoby2]

6. I just threw up in my mouth......

Are you that pollyanna?

[defendandprotect]

14. What do you mean "pollyanna" . . . ????

[johncoby2]

18. I would have said naive, but didnt know how to spell it.

[rwheeler31]

7. I will stick with Edwards Obama until it cannot be.

[Reno.Muse]

10. That ticket has always been my fav

[Neshanic]

8. Edwards yes, the other guy, no. Sorry, just no.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. Kucinich/Edwards, yes. Vice-versa, no.

[dysfunctional press]

16. i could grok to that...except for one thing-

i really like dennis and all...and he's got an INCREDIBLY HOT wife...and yes he's correct on most of the issues...BUT- the ufo thing aside, he's POISONED himself as a viable national candidate by coming out in favor of banning handguns for private citizens...i'm not a gun-guy or an nra member- but i do know that that issue is still political SUICIDE.

sorry dennis...how about edwards/clark or even edwards/obama?

[Lilith Velkor]

17. Shirley, you can't be Sirius.

We gave the role to Gary.

[tom_paine]

19. Once again, a DU Poll shows clearly that many of Sen. Clinton's minions are paid

How do they make so much noise, when they are such a small minority of us?

Actually, anyone who has studied the New Totalitarianism and the New Way of Propaganda KNOWS how they do it.

With friends like that, eh?

[robcon]

21. Evidence, Tom Paine????

Or are your conspiracy theories meant to be evidence-free?

[tom_paine]

22. Oh robcon, you actually responded to a post of mine.

Finally found something you could successfully tear down? Cool. Well, I have to agree with your comment, generally.

I have to agree with you that I have no ironclad evidence. Ironclad evidence of corruption, for many reasons, usually decreases in concert with the moral and political decay of a nation.

Ever heard of Samizdat? Google it up if you haven't.

Yeah, I could just imagine you making that same comment in the 1978 Soviet Union.

"Evidence, tomski_painski? All your conspiracy theories about people being dragged away to Gulags at night are evidence-free. I have seen no investigations, nothing in the newspapers, nor on TV. The best you give me are these greasy-stained mimeographed sheets printed up by God Knows Who in their basement, and you expect me to believe there's more truth in THAT than in all our Soviet TV, radio, and newspapers? Absurd."

I do apologize about the realities of living in a totalitarian nation (or, as in our case, a nation rapidly trending away from liberty and Constitionality to the New Kinder and Gentler Totalitarianism, which I call BushPutinism after it's Founding Fathers).

I apologize for the shitty quality of Samizdat. I apologize that our Mainsteram Media is only good for Britany stories, and couldn't uncover it's own ass with a flashlight and a tweezers.

But I must say, for all the times I have posted to you with lengthy and detailed posts, some with evidence that even went well beyond untrustworthy Samizdat.

And every time...silence, silence, silence.

For all those things, you finally choose to respond to THIS?!?

I was making an assertion for which I admittedly have no hard evidence. OK then, Now what?

I guess you'll have to wait for another weak post like my previosu post to try to take a shot at me, because over time I have given you ample chance for rational discourse, and you haven't taken me up, not once.

After all this, THIS is your best? OK, I concede your point. I made an assertion, and as we all know, no one anywhere on this wide Earth makes assertions based on circumstantial evidence and no one anywhere on this Earth has EVER been convicted on circumstantial evidence alone (if there was enough of it).

You know how long I have waited to have intellectual discourse with you, rob, primarily because you do bring a fresh and uncommon perspective (at least on DU) that I always though would be interesting. At least, that's what I thought.

That is why, over the years, and I have continued to try and engage you.

And now this, a weak, short, pointless post from you. I sure did expect better from you than to wait until I had a post you could jump in and make a quick cheap shot without thinking about it.

Happy to provide. :hi: Plus, you were right (I'll say it again) that I was making an assertion and I have no hard evidence for that assertion.

You got me, rob. Oh, and I do apologize for trying to engage you in discourse all these years. I had no idea that this was all you could bring to the table.

Sorry. I won't make that mistake again.

[robcon]

23. Never asked for ironclad evidence, or hard evidence, or proof..

Just evidence. Any at all? Any?????? Is that too much to ask before making an assertion?

I didn't think you had any.

[tom_paine]

25. Ask and ye shall receive...

http://payperpost.com/

It exists. It is real. It is a functioning and moneymaking business.

Now, tell me I have no evidence that Sen. Clinton's staffers are using this strategy.

Tell you what, robbie, you put out the $5,000 cash for the private detective agency to track this down and confirm or deny it by infiltrating Sen. Clinton's campaign, THEN you bitch about how there's no evidence.

Better yet, take that $5,000 and assemble it into a lovely basket of gifts for a "journalist". When you give it to them, imply there is more where that came from. Maybe the love of bath products or small cheeses can induce them to go and find out for you, to do their jobs.. They will dust off their investigative strategies like they were Ed Murrow in 1953.

[flvegan]

24. I'd rather Kucinich/Edwards, but I'd take that ticket.