In all honesty, the ONLY person I can vote for in 2008 ...

[NanceGreggs]

… is ME.

I am the only one who agrees with myself one hundred percent. I have NEVER said anything I disagree with – and if I ever did, I would tend to give myself the benefit of the doubt and allow for clarification.

There is not a single question that will ever be asked of me that I won’t answer completely to my own satisfaction. I have never given myself reason to doubt my own integrity, nor cause to hold my past experience up to scrutiny and find myself wanting in any way.

Myself and I are convinced that we are one hundred percent correct in our positions in every aspect of political policy, from foreign affairs to domestic improvement.

I am in total agreement with myself at all times, and realize that I am the only candidate who will never stray from my own firmly-held beliefs.

I will always do what I think needs to be done, in exactly the way I think it should be handled.

I will never disappoint myself with a remark that I find untoward. I will never utter a single word that is not an unwavering endorsement of my every thought, my every goal, my every ideal.

Let’s face it, my friends. Unless you are planning to run yourself, you are never going to find a candidate who possesses every virtue, every talent, every position on every issue that is a total reflection of what you believe.

That’s the bad news.

The good news is that we have a fine crop of candidates to choose from. While they may vary in look, in style, and in background, they each bring something to the table that has substance and value, something worth assessing in our own context, on our own terms.

We are we all free to choose who we support, and are equally free to extol their virtues when we think they have said something noteworthy, done something truly positive in our cause, or demonstrated their ability to stand up for what we believe in.

The really good news is that come what may – or come who may in the months ahead – we are all on the same side.

At least we are choosing our favorite candidates on the basis of who we find to be most reflective of not only our own ideals, but the ideals of our party.

The Republicans, on the other hand, have to choose from among the candidates least likely to be investigated and/or indicted over the coming year.

Let’s try and respect each other’s opinions – not only because that’s a healthy part of the process, but because respecting the opinions of others is synonymous with being a Democrat.

And isn’t that how we all wound up here in the first place?

[Cabcere]

1. Based on what I've seen of your posts here...

I'd vote for you. ;) Excellent post, NanceGreggs! :hi:

[ElizabethDC]

2. Excellent post! n/t

[The Magistrate]

3. Hear Hear, Ma'am!

"A vote for me is a vote for you!"

[Rusty MacHenry]

6. It's somewhat right with what your saying

But I did find a candidate that agrees with my views and i'm not ashamed of supporting and that man is John Edwards.

[NanceGreggs]

10. Welcome back, Rusty MacHenry!

Glad to hear from you again. There's certainly no 'shame' in supporting John Edwards -- just as there is no shame in supporting any of the others at this juncture.

And that's my point.

[NanceGreggs]

12. THAT, sir, is the campaign slogan of the CENTURY! n/t

[tblue]

4. I still think you should get hired as someone's speechwriter

[CaliforniaPeggy]

5. You are spot on, as usual.......

BTW, I love love love your sigline........

Is it something you wrote? Or is it a quote from somewhere else?

It made me tear up...

[NanceGreggs]

13. The sig-line is my own (incredibly inadequate) homage ...

... to the Good Miz Molly. I fear her likes will never grace us again ...

[CaliforniaPeggy]

16. I got that........

But I must disagree with you on it's being inadequate...

Anything that brings a tear to my eye is far from that...

Thank you for it.

I am writing it with proper attribution of course, in one of my little blank books...

I want to remember it ......

[Booster]

18. Oh yes they will. There's a little bit of Molly in every one of your

rants and you only get better and better.

[frankenforpres]

7. good post n/t

[Skink]

8. Self vote pandering.

[NanceGreggs]

14. God-damn-it-all-to-hell ...

... I thought I was being so subtle.

[JeffR]

9. She's right. Just this morning she chopped down a cherry tree out back.

I'm voting Nance.:thumbsup:

[NanceGreggs]

15. If only the cherry tree in question ...

... had been in our backyard and not someone else's, we wouldn't be facing imminent litigation.

If only I were running as a Republican, such a slight transgression would be in my favor ...

Edited to add: Yeah, right, it was Bill Clinton who chopped down the neighbor's cherry tree -- yeah, that's the ticket.

[MonkeyFunk]

11. I would vote for my dog, too....

he seems to agree with me on all issues.

[NanceGreggs]

19. If my dog could vote ...

... I wouldn't stand a chance. While we agree on Iraq, transparency in government, and accountability on the part of elected representatives and administration appointees, the sleeping in the middle of the bed issue continues to be a sore point.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

17. I could never survive my own scrutiny

My past couldn't bear it, my present looks none too good, and I don't have high hopes for my future. I am, after all, human. Which isn't saying much from the start.

But humans are the only item on the slate, and I wouldn't vote for an angel anyway. Those suckers creep me out.

[NanceGreggs]

20. "Those suckers creep me out."

Ain't that the truth.

[Mind_your_head]

21. OMG! You're actually suggesting that I have to THINK

about each candidate and about what they say and then what they DO? And I have to keep a little track of whether they indeed follow thru? That their deeds (voting, in most cases) reflect their words?

Oh no....no, no, no......that's just WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too much work/effort. That's why we're a republic, right? (republic, I *know* this :-) ) *scratching head*

We elect other people to represent out best interests :-) ~ but WHEN THEY DON'T DO THAT (represent our best interests, and INSTEAD, pursue THEIR own interests at our VERY DEAR COST).....then..........

What do we do?

:think:

[Norrin Radd]

22. I'd vote for you, but only if you include "Free Pizza Fridays"

as part of your platform.

[NanceGreggs]

23. Well, here's the deal, Progs Rock ...

If I ran as a Democrat, Free Pizza Fridays would be pretty much a given.

If I ran as a Republican, pizza would also be FREE every Friday -- however, due to privatization of Free Pizza Fridays, while the pizza in question would be free of charge, all toppings on said pizza will cost $5,000 each.

Please place your FREE PIZZA order with halliburton.freepizza.com no later than midnight. Please be advised that pizza crust is now considered a 'topping' and will be charged for.

All prices are F.O.B. and remember our delivery policy: "Same century or YOU DON'T PAY!"

Isn't privitization a wonderful thing for the economy?

(Don't forget to say the secret password (Cheney) for a .0006% discount on the oregano!)

[Norrin Radd]

24. And we'd have to wash it down with Helliburton water.

:puke:

[NanceGreggs]

25. Well, that'll cost extra ...

... but I guess you saw that coming.

[Breeze54]

31. Too funny and true!

Thanks again for giving me a much needed smile. :)

K & R'd

:kick: for the OP!

[A Simple Game]

32. Is the oregano considered a topping?

If so, at 5000 dollars it had better be the GOOD oregano and a lot of it, if you know what I mean!

Another great post NanceGreggs.

[wiley]

26. Well, I don't know.

I was thinking Wes Clark, but...maybe.

[bklyncowgirl]

27. Frankly, Nance, I want someone smarter than me.

You'd think that wouldn't be hard to find but watching the candidates as they maneuver and bloviate I'm beginning to wonder.

Maybe ME FOR PRESIDENT isn't such a bad idea.

[AtomicKitten]

28. Word.

Thank you for your level-headed assessment. You would be an awesome guest at one of my dinner parties to yak about politics.

For an emotionally draining, really unedifying conversation about politics, I could just call my uber-Republican, faux Christian mother.

We really are on the same side here if not sitting in the same pew in this church of politics. Amen.

On edit: K&R

[MethuenProgressive]

29. "respect each other’s opinions"? on DU?

That would be a welcome change!

[babylonsister]

30. Hey, Nance - I'd vote for you.

:thumbsup: Nice post!

[rosesaylavee]

33. Another great post, NG

and spot on. Hope everyone rereads this OFTEN in the coming months. Hope we all remember to respect each other's POVs as well as remember to engage our senses of humor as 2008 primaries grow nearer.

K & R

[KT2000]

34. Love that!

You said what needed to be said - and very well.

[Morgana LaFey]

35. Disappointing

the very first time I've ever read anything from you I found truly disappointing.

It plays into some undeserved criticisms and downright taunts by those DUers who can't stand another DUer criticizing any nationally prominent Dem (and esp. presidential candidates) at all, calling those of us who DO find something to criticize "purists" who are too immature, basically, to accept that there is no such thing as perfection.

It's particularly insulting since those of us who have been voting for freakin' ever have been holding our noses for about that long.

Let’s try and respect each other’s opinions

Ehhh, not when those opinions are intended to insult me. Thanks anyway.

[NanceGreggs]

36. Sorry, but I don't think I understand where you're coming from ...

This post was in response to all of the "He/she just said something I can't live with ever" threads - my point being that the ONLY way you're ever going to find a candidate who agrees with you 100% of the time is if YOU yourself are the candidate. Otherwise, there are going to be comments made, actions taken, policies supported that are going to disappoint. That's just the way it is - and we all have to weigh what we perceive to be the positive traits against the negative traits, and support/vote accordingly.

As for criticism of each candidate at this stage, that's part of the process -- it's not only expected, it's healthy discussion. But it seems to veer off too frequently into, "If you support Candidate A, you're an idiot," or, "If you don't support Candidate B, you obviously don't know what's going on." That kind of discussion is, IMHO, pointless and disrespectful of the opinions of others.

Just because you don't agree with someone else's perception about a candidate doesn't make them WRONG, nor you RIGHT.

Just sayin' ...

[Morgana LaFey]

37. I confess

I'm stunned. For all the sophistication you inject into your writing, you're apparently not that sophisticated after all.

With your astonishing lack of basic "customer service" orientation, you've turned a temporarily annoyed fan into a rather more permanent antagonist by (a) refusing to acknowledge my point (not agree with -- acknowledge), and (b) insisting that yes, you really DO intend to lecture me/us (DUers) and you really DO think you have the right to do so.

:shrug:

Okay, whatever works for you. But here's a clue: telling DUers how you think they ought to behave at DU probably isn't your best subject.

Just sayin'...

[NanceGreggs]

38. I started with reply to you with ...

"Sorry, but I don't think I understand where you're coming from ..." because I REALLY don't understand. And if you feel I didn't address your point, it's because I am still not understanding it -- and maybe that's just me. And I think we might be talking at cross purposes.

You spoke in your original post about being insulted -- which I exactly what I am talking about. There's a difference between saying, "I think Candidate A is an IDIOT, and doesn't know he's talking about," and saying, "I think you're an idiot for supporting Candidate A."

It's as simple as that. I saw a few posts the night I started this thread where people were talking about leaving DU entirely because they'd been insulted by others when they talked about supporting a certain candidate.

I'm not telling anyone what to do - I am just trying to remind people that although any discussion about politics is apt to become heated, insulting someone who disagrees with your choice doesn't achieve anything worthwhile.

[Vickers]

39. Some folks are plumb itching to be insulted.

Don't sweat it.

Love,

Vickers

[DFW]

40. I read through this and.......

I didn't see where Nancy was trying to lecture anybody.

It just seemed like a combination of common sense and stating
the obvious. Beyond the fact that the year between now and when
the party's nominee will either be already decided, or be
narrowed down to two or three candidates, is a glacial age in
politics, she just tried to say that no one candidate is likely
to be 100% acceptable to any one of us (and great for you if one is).

One thing is for sure: holding your nose or not, pick Obama, Clinton,
Edwards, Richardson, Gore, even Biden or Dodd, and pit any one of them
against the choice from column B: Giuliani, McCain, Hagel, Brownback (ugh!),
or even Jeb, and it becomes pretty obvious that we MUST support the Democratic
candidate next year. Wasn't 2000 enough to demonstrate that WHATEVER the
outcome, a Republican president will be worse, and probably far worse
(or, in the case of 2000, unimaginably worse)?

If there are still any Naderites out there maintaining that it was quite
irrelevant if Gore or Bush got elected in 2000, you can make a fortune
selling whatever it is you're on to clinics looking to ease traumatic
pain, and make patients oblivious to what's going on with them.

[NanceGreggs]

41. Very well said, DFW ...

We often have to 'settle' for a candidate who is not our own idea of perfection, but the important thing is to VOTE for the DEMOCRAT when all is said and done. The alternative, as you've so clearly stated, would be disastrous.

BTW, your last paragraph is BRILLIANT!!!

(And thanks for sticking up for me. I really don't understand what MLF is taking issue with -- maybe I'm just having one of my dumb days.)

[DFW]

42. Well, I'm not a regular on the board (day job, etc.), but...

from what I've seen, you don't need anyone to stick up for you.

I did have trouble seeing what problems some on the board were
having with your post, though. Maybe I'm having a dumb day as well.
We're not on daylight saving time over here yet, that could be the problem.