One reason I am suspicious of the Clintons is their connection to

Blair. During Blair's reelection bid, Bill Clinton visited UK and gave an address to the Labor Party Convention at which he praised Blair skyhigh.Even after Blair's association with Bush and their joint pretexts for the invasion blew open, Clinton has rarely expressed any negative feelings about Blair. Or for that matter about the War.

If this was a Republican, I can understand this reticence.But coming from a guy you need to hit on the head to stop speaking, it is more than a little odd.

I also remember that Clinton carried out the bombings of Iraq after the first Gulf War with his partner in crime, Blair, when it was militarily unnecessary.

What gives?

the whole corrupt government thing.

and i think he has betrayed the democrats in several instances. also during both gore and kerry campaign, he said things supporting bush that were uncalled for made me trust him less. as has hillary

i supported clinton because of what repugs did to him

Both Clintons has given Bush HIGH praises for their "War on Terrorism". Hillary gave W. accolades on Larry King for taking action in Falujah. I guess Billy boy owed Blair praises for his part in the Easter Peace Agreement, which is still in negotiation.

Operatives are running promotionals for presidential run for both Billy boy and wifey Hillary, to test the waters - like we need another Dynasty occupying the oval office.

Well my message to any operatives reading this board, that i'm mad as hell at the Democratic party and it's mealy mouthed, lilly livered message and agenda to wooh RIGHT WING CONSERVATIVES and passing that off as "Moderate". Lieberman was a NO GO for Gore, and that selection had Clinton fingerprints all over it.

Hillary's support for Kurick was stupid and an indication of just the kind of party politics the Clintons are willing to trade away just to appear like they are willing to cooperate in a "non-partisan" fashion.

I know about the funding issue and I'm not dismissing it. But this is exactly the kind of thing the Clintons are willing to support if they think for a moment they might curry favor. It's whoring, it's prostituion and it's disgusting.

Besides, I'm still freaking ticked off with the further FCC deregulations, adding insult to injury to Reagan's abolishing the Fairness Doctrine giving rise to the hate radio and the right wing propaganda machine we call the media today. And don't even get me started on the WTO and NAFTA.

arrrrggghhh.

I didn't like him as a conservative years ago. Now I don't like him as a liberal. There's something about Clinton that I just can't like. He gives really good speeches and has a likeable personality, but that's about all I like about him.

He bombed Iraq in 1998 for the false reason of Hussein kicking out inspectors.

He endorsed sanctions.

He signed the Defense of Marriage Act.

He was big on state's rights when it came to abortion.

He was too quick to try to get us into a war with Haiti years ago.

At the risk of not sounding politically correct, he has been accused by way too many women of harassment or something else. I do not believe that all of those women are lying. As a strong feminist, I will not back down on this one, even if Clinton did throw women a few more bones than the Republicans.

Clinton was however more to the left than most Republicans, which is why I would feel forced to vote for him if he ran again. In reality though, I think he's the best Republican president we've ever had.

I hope nobody takes this the wrong way. I support the Democratic Party. I'm very progressive. I just don't think that Clinton has met the criteria for being a good progressive.