me a damn thing about where she stands on issues. Basically, it says that she is a nice person and plays well with others. Great, she passed Kindergarten. Until I truly hear her on the issues, and see what what she stands firm on and what shes wishy-washy on, she sounds like republican lite.

I'm sick of hearing - put a woman in the White House! Democrats need to change the views of the mostly white, homophobic, uneducated, religious people down here in the South and carry some Red States for change. Let's use some power to educate Southerners. I'm from the South, I can't even believe that ANYBODY down here EVER votes Republican! Republicans don't have anything to offer Southerners, but they feed on their lack of knowledge.

I hope Howard Dean does take the message to all 50 states. It is time to stop letting 18 - 20 states decide this election. If the democrats came down here with a message, I think the South would be listed in the Blue next time. I'm trying down here but definitely need lots of help!

Since Social Jusitice issues are my cause
I look to where the rubber meets the road.

This is not intended to bash but to inform.

Lincoln voted with Bush to pass that terible
Medicare Bill.
Now it was announced on Capital Gang she is
one of the Dems to watch. She and three
others--Baucus Wyden and Conrad --OH yes,
Lieberman are working with the Republicans
to cut a deal on SS.

Even Paul Begala said if these people give
Bush cover on this bill--they should not be
reelected to the Senate.

May I respectfully disagree with trying to
select a potential Candidate based on
geography and these shallow characteristics.

Our Party and the Media have not gotten it
yet. As the Heritage Foundation and
the Republican Think Tanks tell us--Conviction
Politics are here. Here is why Bush won.
As far as I am concerned he is wrong on
practically every issue. Yet he wins
with people voting against their own
interests.Why??? Bush has convictions--
He honestly believes that stuff we
think is downright wrong. Bush is willing
to take risks. How many times have
we stood and watched in amazemnt as he
plows straight ahead ignoring calls from
the Media and others. He gives a strong
impression that he believes he is right
and and is going to do the right thing
irregardless of what others think.
Many in the country are jarred from
Terrorism and all the unsettling changes
in our own country--economy etc.
No matter what we think, he comes across as a
take charge guy who has the convictions and
strength to lead. It is much deeper
than "likeablity". The likeability helps
but it is Convition Politics that
helps him win. He learned this from
his EvangelicalVoters 2 years before
he became President. These voters see
most politicians as talking out of
both sides of their mouth--no convictions.

They will go with a person who has the spine
to stand up and do what he thinks is
right--even if they do not agree with
you on the issues. A set of core values
and a spine is what people are looking
for.

A Democrat who hops over to the Republican side
on an issue like SS does not exactly
fill the bill.

Sorry to be such a downer on this topic but
I have had it with certain of our leaders.

to get across for so long.

Sure it is scary. What is more scary to
me is Our Party's apparent cluelessness.

IMO, we can only start winning when
we stand up with the courage of
our convictions to say "You are
Wrong, Mr President." Show we
believe something based on principle.
AND WE WILL NOT WAIVER.

Our party it appears to me has
gotten entwined in the Beltway
Bubble and listen to the Media
rather than their own conscience.

What people do not understand
is--I am showing my age--
there was a point in our
history when children were
taught "Have the courage of
your convictions." We were
actually graded on it.
People of traditional leanings
believe if you have Convictions
you have a set of principles
which guide your conscience.
If you have courage you will
stand up to adversity to defend
these principles. Leaders must
have these . Traditioanal
does not equate with religious.
Some people seem clueless here.
You can be a Liberal and appreciate
tradition. This must emphasized.
Our party is too quick to say "Me TOO"
rather than saying with a strong
voice --Just a minute--let us think
this through. As a result they
inadvertantly say Republicans are right,
we will make it a little less harsh.

But... it's intended to get a qualified candidate of "presidential timber" out there to talk about. All we hear is Hillary, Hillary, Hillary. Then some mention of Bayh or Warner. Well, there are some "sleeper" candidates out there who could get "hot" in '08. Think Clinton was thought off in '88 for '92? Especially after his LONG and BORING nominating speech... lol

If you want to know where Senator Lincoln stands, it's all easily available. My understanding... she's not liberal, but more moderate. And that comes from making her state her central focus. So, most don't label her as someone who intentionally positions herself on the spectrum, but as someone who is rather independent and does what is best for Arkansas. She's comfortable with and relates to small town and rural America. And she knows how to "talk values" in a comfortable, not fake, way.

As for "another woman" comment... her name isn't being put out their because of her gender. It's out there because she is charismatic, from the South, able to get re-elected in a red state, and a damn fine public servant. If you match up her "political" qualities to other mentioned candidates, I would contend she would be a much stronger and better candidate than the ones always mentioned.

Again, I posted this so people can keep an eye on her. The more great candidates willing to step forward for the nomination in '08, the better.