When we were suffering through grad school in New Mexico we ate a lot of canned beans, rice and tortillas, and eggs. And froze leftovers.

Not enough fresh veggies for sure, but better than the garbage she ate.

Education about food would be a good start.

I agree.

I’m not one for conspiracy theories but when you look at the whole process by which we select our national leaders and see the crop of idiots, yahoos, egomaniacs, morally and ethically-challenged or mentally unbalanced people who have sought office and received millions of dollars from donors for doing so it’s hard to imagine what natural, non-conspiratorial system could result in things being this bad.

But the truth is that this is what the American people seem to prefer! As Cindy Sheehan said, (her son…) “Casey died for a country which cares more about who will be the next American Idol than how many people will be killed in the next few months while Democrats and Republicans play politics with human lives”

Does she have a problem with that?

This is the same US public where only 1 person in a THOUSAND can name all five rights guaranteed under the First Amendment, but a quarter of them can name all five Simpson’s characters! It’s the same US public that couldn’t find Baghdad on a map before the war but they were glued to their TV sets to watch us bomb the city during the invasion. This is the same US public that can’t even balance their own checkbooks and are up to their ears in credit-card debt and buy half-million-dollar houses with 5% down on an IT-worker’s salary, and we expect them to be concerned about balancing the federal budget?!

Is Hillary Clinton really the most skilled and qualified person in this country of 300 million people to lead us for 4 or 8 years? Wrong question. This is America. “Skills” are something for Chinese and Indian engineers to worry about. If we need skills we can import them. “Qualifications” don’t matter when you’re politically well-connected by family or financial donors. The American public may not know art but they know what they like, and what they like is a slick reality TV show. Who get voted off the island or into the White House is all the same to them as long as it’s entertaining.

???

I see that you’re still not one to let facts or data infuence your postings.

I’ve never voted for any Bush. Check out my blog (http://www.peterography.com) if you want to see my views about GWB.

For the record I almost never vote in Presidential elections because I live in Massachusetts where your vote has no influence on the outcome, although I once cast a symbolic vote for Nader and another time a symbolic vote for the LP candidate just to strike a political balance. Furthermore my Congressman routinely runs unopposed so I have no role to play there, either. The People’s Republic of Massachusetts is a one-party state anyway – except that we don’t even have the freedom to vote “nyet” in Congressional elections.

Big Government Conservatism is a non-starter from the word go. People don’t want Big Government at all, but if they must have it, they prefer the traditionally Democratic variety. We can only hope that Democrats will at least steer the massive ship of state away from violent entanglement with the least stable regimes on Earth. It’s not like we actually need to worry about middle eastern oil. Unless the whole place goes up in smoke, they’ll sell it to us, and U.S. imperialism does more to fan the flames than anything else. If we must throw a trillion dollars at something, throw it at biofuels R&D.

It’s pretty scary the choices that are lining up on either side and what the voter will have to face. At the moment John Edwards looks best. Would democrats put Clinton up? I don’t think she has a chance. But I would vote for Hillary Clinton (reluctantly) to prevent any of the Republicans running at the moment, each a more frightening choice.

I want a president who….

here

http://www.gregpalast.com/hillarys-mother-fing-tour-business/

[quote]Then, in 2000, in a deposition by the Justice Department, the President changed his tune. Investigators confronted the President with this: on June 20, 1994, Hubbell met with Hillary. Two days later, James Riady, the Asian billionaire Entergy partner, met with Hubbell for breakfast. Just a few hours later, Riady returned to the White House, then met again with Hubbell, then made two more treks to the White House. Two days later, a videotape shows the beginning of another meeting in the Oval Office between Clinton and Riady — but oddly, before they talk, the tape goes blank. Two days after that, Hubbell gets his $100,000 through a Riady bank.

Lying to journalists is a venal sin, but lying to the Feds is perjury. In his deposition, the President’s denial transformed into amnesia. He couldn’t remember if Riady mentioned the payment. Then, the President slyly opened the door to the truth. “I wouldn’t be surprised if James told me,” Clinton said. Neither would I.

What did Riady get? The Flotus herself, says Nolanda Hill, forced Brown to accept the appointment of Riady’s bag man, John Huang, as a Commerce Department deputy. According to records of calls the Guardian obtained via the Freedom of Information Act, Huang’s first order of business was to wheedle his way into confidential CIA briefings on Indonesia and China, then call Riady and his Entergy partners.

The same day Riady met the President, documents show he called on a Clinton crony at the top of the department’s Export-Import Bank. “We just came over from the Oval Office,” is a nice way to provide assurance of the ‘political connection’ required for help. These and other Riady team meetings at Commerce are marked ’social’. Yet, shortly thereafter, the department agreed to promote and fund the Riady-Entergy China venture.

Influence is not a victimless crime. Riady and his minions’ visits to the White House (94 times!) included successful requests for the President to meet Indonesian dictator Suharto and to kill negative reports on East Timor and working conditions in Indonesia. Timorese and Indonesians paid for these policy flips with blood.

[/quote]

OK good point. I may still be feeling tremors because I voted for Nadar in 2000. Not that what happened was his or my fault…

after that health care fiasco, hillary has become politicaly cautious to a fault.

intestinal fortitude will be a NECESSARY asset in the next presidency..as well as experience.

who’s got it?

Does HRC support the law to privatize Iraqi oil, which some suggest will require a long-term–Korean style–US military presence to protect production and transportation facilities and personnel? If the answer is yes, is not her talk of ending the war just more empty rhetoric?

Now, why is Kucinich, one of the few who had (and has) the guts to go against the current, invariably dismissed as a fringe candidate?

who came off v. poorly, both as a rhetorician and in terms of his actual expertise, on Bill Moyer’s show about the decisions leading up to the war,

into a lineup with Gerth, Chafee, et al . . . ..