Posted by lookup (anonymous) on February 5, 2008 at 10:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Yes we can! Huge turnout for the local Democratic caucus.... Much diversity in age, color, ethnicity! Together we can make a difference!

Posted by DJrocksthemic (anonymous) on February 6, 2008 at 8:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)

True, it was amazing that they didn't rent a big enough space to hold all the caucuser's. And it was raucus, good for any young people that were there to see what politics can be.

Posted by methusla (anonymous) on February 6, 2008 at 10:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

What I know is, everyone thinks Bill Clinton was a liar, well I believe that Obama makes Bill Clinton look like a choir boy when comes to not telling the truth and if Obama is nominated as the Democratic candidate for president, Then I don't know for sure who I will vote for, possibly Ron Paul or I will write in some-one and vote for them.

Posted by CAFEmporia (anonymous) on February 6, 2008 at 6:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Methusla... Good heavens, sir, I do not comprehend your problem. I don't think "everyone" thinks Bill Clinton was or is a liar. I cannot see where Barack Obama could be understood as one, either. You are making accusations which do not seem to be backed up by anything at all except your dislike of Islam and since Obama is Christian, how does that work? You think that since Obama knows someone who is a friend of a Muslim man - Farrakhan - Obama must be a bad guy? That is just odd.

The Caucus was a good one. Obama won in Emporia and all across Kansas. It seems hopeful that he will be the party nominee and the next president. That feels good to me.

Posted by gabby (anonymous) on February 7, 2008 at 8:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

CAFEmporia....

It all depends on what your definition of "is, is".!!!!

Methusla, Bill Clinton proved he has a problem with telling the truth...not sure where Obama stands, yet..on anything.

I can't vote for Hillary, because the thought of 2 President Clinton's (present and former) in the White House, at the same time, is frightening to me.

I won't vote for anyone that has the name of Bush or Clinton or Kennedy, for office again. I think one Presidency, per family, is enough.

I am a Life Long Republican, that is bitter and angry over what is happening to our party. I would never vote for McCain for President.(too many reasons to list).and Ron Paul isn't an option either. No comment, on the Huckabee (McCains buddy) or Romney..(who, is the lesser of all evils, to me).

So, I guess, I will just NOT VOTE...and I'll just be one of those peope that whines and complains all through the next 4 years (hopefully not 8), and you can tell me you won't listen to me, because I didn't VOTE.

Besides, what is this Caucusing about? I've never done it, and I don't understand it. Where's my absentee ballot? I'm new to Kansas.

Don't even get me started on term limits, for the rest of Washington....If the President of the United States, can only serve for 8 years....then, no one else should be able to serve longer.

Don't bother lecturing me....I've made up my mind. :-)

Good Morning everyone. :-) Have a nice day! :-)

Posted by create (anonymous) on February 7, 2008 at 11:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey Gabby, Good to hear you won't be voting. That makes my vote worth more. Sorry you don't understand the system of the caucus. It is fully explained every year during the Iowa caucuses so I won't waste time with it here. Whatever you do, don't learn anything new and always remain in your rut where it is safe.

Posted by methusla (anonymous) on February 10, 2008 at 11:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Does anyone on here remember the great one who absolutely convinced all of you gullible people that he was the right man to lead this country into prosperity, etc.
Well in case you have forgotten who this man was, it was the great compassionate conservative, George W. Bush, who turned out to be nothing more than a golden tongued, deceiver and wolf in sheeps clothing.
I tryed to warn every American during this mans' campaign in 1999 and again in 2003 that this man was lying and deceiving everyone, but alas, gullibility and money won out in the end.
As for the question as to who is the right person to lead this country, I don't have a clue. McCain, do we want another four years of a Bush style administration ?
Barrak Obama, who knows enough about him to make an informed decision?
Huckabee, This man doesn't seem to have a clear direction for the country, does he?
Hillary Clinton, again she sounds sincere and has a somewhat feesible plan for the country, but again can she accpmplish the goals she has set?
And with the huge amounts of free lobbyist and special inerest money that will be thrown at whomever is elected to the highest office in the land to buy their policy and law making, the real question is who will be running the country and making policy and law, the president, congress or whoever can buy the most political power ?
Now you see, it is going to take an exceptionally strong willed and an incredibly honest, non-greedy and un-corruptible person do what is right for all Americans and not just who can pay him, her or them the most money.

Posted by methusla (anonymous) on February 10, 2008 at 8:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Gabby-Can you honestly and truthfully tell me that Bill Clinton did not leave this country in better shape when he left office than George W. Bush will leave this country when he leaves office, I really don't think that you or anyone else on this forum can say that.

Posted by gabby (anonymous) on February 11, 2008 at 9:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)

methusla, It's a matter of opinion. I think the question is-
is Congress leaving our Government in better condition when PRESIDENT George W. Bush leaves office, than they did when President Bill Clinton left office?
Which only goes to prove- listen to all the candidates make promises, promises, promises, and then vote the same political leaders back into office in Washington again, and see how much things change.

Our President is handicapped unless he has a Congress that supports him.
Oh wait, I forgot- they are busy- saving us from our athletes lieing about using steroids!

Excuse me methusla, but, have you heard anyone (other than Mr. Romney) talk about the lay offs of jobs in our country? Did you hear Obama say that he supported continuing the influx of Refugees from Africa? (I did)

Has anyone said what they will do-if or when- we are attacked by terrorism again? With an election coming up and the terrorist attacks in England, and Pakistan and other countries, in an attempt to influence their elections, I would worry more about what might happen to influence our elections.

I listen to the good news coming from Iraq, and I feel sad that we have lost so many of our soldiers. and, I will never say that they died in vain.
I do not believe we should "cut and run", from Iraq.

Methusla, our world is changing. It's time we all realized that.
Emporia isn't even safe anymore. It's 2008..the 21st Century.
We haven't been attacked in 7 years...Thank you President George W. Bush.
I pray our next President can stave off any further terrorist attacks.

Posted by methusla (anonymous) on February 11, 2008 at 10:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)

gabby- First of all the people who attacked the U.S. were not Iraqi, the majority of the terrorists who attacked the U.S. on 9/11 were Saudi, etc, it has never been proven that there were any Iraqis' involved at all. Further-more G.W. Bush went to war in Iraq with the excuse that Iraq was somehow involved in 9/11 and that there were WMDs' being stockpiled in Iraq, also no solid proof that WMDs' ever existed in Iraq. So now if you still believe that good american lives are not being lost for nothing go right ahead and believe that. I for one believe that G.W. Bushs war was and is a sensless show of greed and power, and that is all it ever was and will be.
After all George W. Bush has no sons being killed or maimed by IUDs', etc. in Iraq. No you cannot convince me that the war in Iraq is nothing more then a war of Power and Greed.
I agree that the world is changing, but have you or anyone else really asked yourself why !
Ask yourself.
Is the world changing because of the U.S. foreign policy?
Is it because greed and power is the most prevailant mind set today ?
Is it because of human and religious belief and persection?
I believe that it is a combination of many things, also it just may be the beginning of End Of Days !
I am sure I don't know or have any solid answers as to how to fix things, but I do have some ideas as to how to fix the illnesses in the U.S. and none of the current candidates, I believe have even thought of the ideas that I have.

Posted by gabby (anonymous) on February 11, 2008 at 11:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)

methusla, I've heard all that you wrote about Iraq, and the war, but, President George W. Bush did not send our troops over there on his own. Democrats and Republicans supported him, with information that was deemed credible at the time.
However, methusla. Do you watch the news? Do you see what our troops have done over in Iraq? The GOOD??

I understand there are military that will argue against our being in Iraq, but, it seems to me the majority of the military support our presence.

It's time that we all start showing our support and greatfulness for what our military has done for Iraq.
There are people, that I believe, do not want us to succeed in Iraq, because, they are afraid it will effect our elections in a way they don't want. I believe that!

Notice the media isn't covering it as much, since we have started to make a positive difference over there. No stories unless, there's an explosion someplace.
Forget the new homes being built, the businesses coming back, and the schools starting up again.

I am proud to be an American, I am proud of what we have done for Iraq,and I am proud of what our Military has done.
I will pray that whoever becomes our next President, doesn't cut and run.
They didn't follow us home from Viet Nam, but they sure as H*ll well follow us home from the Middle East.
The terrorists are everywhere - they hate US- and they will fight us wherever we are,-even on our own turf.

I didn't say the terrorists were Iraqi's, methusla, but, there are terrorists IN Iraq.

I believe that you asked me if the world was a better place now than it was when President Bill Clinton was in office, and to be honest, it may not be, but, I cannot blame President Bush for that, without blaming President Clinton, as well. (if you've paid attention, you know that much of what has happened with the G.W. Bush administration, was conceived in the Clinton administration).

methusla, every President has made mistakes. History will clear it up for us.

My disappointment in our country is the way we talk about our Presidents.
I notice that you, and some others don't even refer to President Bush as, President.
I have heard people say they HATE our President
I hear our current leaders in Washington say hateful, spiteful, personal things about President Bush.
I can't believe how disrespectful some of the current candidates for office are toward President George W. Bush.
Yet, they whine, and cry, if their opponents say anything disrespectful to them.
and, we say we don't want them being mean, to each other?

I was raised to believe that the office of President of the United States was to be respected. Our Flag was to be respected, and, our Military should be supported, always!

Posted by roger (anonymous) on February 12, 2008 at 4:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Yes,congress supported the war because of the intelligence provided at the time. I did too. But since then we have heard how the intelligence was twisted and fabricated by the Bush administration to drag us into a war. I consider that treason. I was raised to believe that a person can form their own opinion as to what is right even if our presidents administration is calling everyone a traitor who disagrees with them. We have succeeded in Iraq. Time to leave. We aren't cutting and running. We are not responsible to be a police force for the world. President Bush may be responsible for a lot of Iraqs problems. Too bad. We have our own problems. If Iraq has a problem let them start war crime procedings for President Bush and his cronies. Maybe Clinton lied to cover up a sexual impropriety but he didnt get thousands of people killed for his lies. When President Clinton left office our country was dramatically better than it is now. It wasn't perfect but it wasn't nearly as bad. As for putting another Clinton in office, Hillary is only a Clinton by marrage. Sure she has some wild plans for our country but they don't include getting thousands of people killed just to make a few of her rich freinds richer. I bet she has no plans for no bid contracts for billions of dollars for her vice presidents old company. If she spends trillions of dollars on health care at least it will stay in our country. I'm sure whoever gets elected will make some mistakes. I don't think Bush's bad decisions were mistakes. I think they were deliberate. I think he meant for Osama to escape. I think he knew that the intelligence that he used to go to war in Iraq was wrong. I think he twisted it to his own evil purposes. I don't hate Bush but I think history would be well served if he was tried for war crimes and hung like Saddam was. Would I vote for Mccain who wants to continue Bush's policys? Of course not. We can't afford another 4 years of these failed policys.

Posted by gabby (anonymous) on February 12, 2008 at 5:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

@ roger- I've seen some of your remarks lately and you really are angry. You are,sadly, not alone in your thinking of the present administration, roger.
I was asked by methusla if I thought the country was better off now than it was when President Bill Clinton left office, and I said that many of the policys and issues we have today were conceived during President Clinton's term. I was not referring to Monica Lewinsky.

Posted by jayhawker (anonymous) on May 25, 2008 at 1:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Roger: I know that you are merely repeating the drumbeat of the national media that President Bush fabricated intelligence prior to the war with Iraq. If it is true that the intelligence was fabricated, it was not Bush who did it. This same intelligence was deemed accurate by President Clinton, the governments of France, Germany, et. al, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy, John Edwards, John Kerry, et. al, both before Bush came to power and after. The intelligence information was wrong; that does not mean that Bush lied. If he did, then so did all of the others, and more, listed above. It is fair to disagree with the President because you are entitled to your opinion; however, you are not entitled to your own facts.

Posted by methusla (anonymous) on May 26, 2008 at 10:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

jayhawker- You are totally wrong about Clinton deeming the Iraqi intelligence being totally accurate, if you will remember he deemed part of the intelegence accurate, not all of it, particularly the intelligence about WMD, he did not agree with the intelligence about WMD because the intelligence investigators themselves could not agree whether there was a stock pile of WMDs' in Iraq, therefore he didn't think it necessary to go to war with Iraq.
I am thinking that G.W. Bush went to war in Iraq because of the threat that Sadam Hussein made to have G.W. BUSHs' father George H.W. Bush killed and the fact that Bush and all of his wealthy Republican friends, congressmen, senators and vice president realized that Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world, therefore Bush wanted revenge for the threat against his father and profit for himself and his greedy, wealthy supporters.
After-all jayhawker don't you think that there are enough problems in this country to straighten out, instead of sacrificing good men and womens lives for someone elses greed and profit, we need to fix our own problems before trying to straighten out the rest of the worlds problems.
Just one other comment. Don't you think it a little odd that a terrorist attack (by foreign nationals) on and in the U.S. didn't take place until after George W. Bush became president, this fact has bothered me ever since 9/11 !

Posted by jayhawker (anonymous) on May 26, 2008 at 12:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Methusla - You are simply incorrect. Senators Clinton, Kerry, et. al made speeches on the Senate floor immediately before voting to authorize force against Iraq in which they stated that the intelligence, for years, had confirmed that Iraq had WMD. In fact, they had been used against the Kurds. Your other points indicate that you subscribe to conspiracy theories that are so unreasonable on their faces that they require no response. Some day we will look back on this era in American history and say that we should have listened to Bush. He is the Harry Truman and Abraham Lincoln of our time. Like Lincoln and Truman, he has remained loyal to his convictions even in the face or constant and unrelenting berating. I wonder how many of us (myself included) would have the courage and backbone to stand up for what we believe is best for our country, when so unpopular, as did these three great presidents.

Posted by methusla (anonymous) on May 26, 2008 at 9:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

jayhawker- What I said quite clearly was that President Clinton at the time deemed only part of the intelligence coming out of Iraq during his administration was accurate, he did not agree nor deem accurate the intelligence about WMDs, because even the intelligence gathering people and forces in Iraq who were searching for WMDs could not agree with one another about the existence of WMDs in Iraq at the time, therefore President Clinton was wise enough not to go to war with a country with no solid proof.
It was only after George W. Bush was elected president and he and the republican controlled congress started misleading the Nation and bullying those who disagreed with them into believing that Iraq possessed WMDs, George W. Bush and the republican controlled congress didn't have any real proof or excuse to go to war until after 9/11, which provided an excuse to push this country into an unjust, revengeful, greedy war against a country who had absolutely nothing to do with the 9/11 attack. It has been proven that all of the terrorists that took part in the 9/11 attack were mostly Saudi not Iraqi, so why go to war against a country who had nothing to do with any attack on or inside the U.S..
As far as I am concerned Bush and his cronies are nothing more than greedy, power hungry, dictators of the worst kind.
Yes I do not like Bush and his cronies, because of what they have done to this once great country and its people.

Posted by methusla (anonymous) on May 26, 2008 at 10:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

jayhawker- To put George W. Bush in the same catagory as Abraham Lincoln or Harry Truman is not only idiotic but ludicrous as well.
Neither George H. W. Bush nor George W. Bush have the fore-sight nor common sense of either Abraham Lincoln or Harry Truman.