Senator Clinton should remain a senator.

[Jack Sprat]

No offense to her campaign, but it does seem like they are taking 2 sides of every issue and committing to practically nothing. Thankfully, we have other candidates who are not reluctant to stand for what they believe in.

Bring the troops home.
Scrap Nafta and bring back U.S. manufacturing and jobs
Repeal the tax deferments
Provide national health care for all citizens.
Make college affordable again.
Investigate the Bush Crime Family and don't give any pardons.

[Erika]

1. Hillary is doing great!

She's a thousand times better than the GOP has to offer!@

[MissMarple]

2. You will get no argument from me on that.

We need more than capability, we need inspiration....and the competence.

[oldgrowth]

3. She is not on our side!!She would keep us in Iraq past 09

Clinton: U.S. troops needed in Iraq beyond 2009
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- If elected president, Sen. Hillary Clinton said, she would likely keep some U.S. forces in Iraq in a supporting role after 2009 because America has "a remaining military as well as a political mission" that requires a presence there.

However, in an interview with The New York Times published Thursday, Clinton said the American troops would not play a role in trying to curb sectarian violence.

Rather, they would be positioned north of Baghdad to combat terrorists, support the Kurds, counter any Iranian moves into Iraq and provide logistical, air and training support to the Iraqi government "if the Iraqis ever get their act together."
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/15/clinton.troops/index.html

[JDPriestly]

4. Regardless of how qualified they are to be president,

Clinton and Obama should stay in the Senate. It would be disastrous if either of them were to be replaced by a Republican senator. Just disastrous. They are both excellent senators. I'm happy to see so many good candidates, and I think their candidacies increase the usefulness of the primary campaigns in terms of giving voters a chance to decide the direction the party should take from 2008 on. But, we can't afford to lose either of them in the Senate.

[Hippo_Tron]

5. Both come from dark blue states with Democratic Governors

[karynnj]

10. Why would they be replaced by Republicans?

I don't know the law in NY or IL, but both have Democratic governors and both are pretty blue states. So whether there would be a special election or the Governor appoints a replacement, they will very likely be Democrats. Also, the Democrats stand to pick up several seats in 2008 because there are far more vulnerable Republicans up for re-election than Democrats. (Any vulnerable Democrats in this cycle would have lost in 2002 - when Bush was still at 70 - 80 percent approval and they played the terror card and likely cheated.)

My guess is that your real reason is that you support Edwards or Richardson.

[zulchzulu]

12. Bingo

Both Senators in Illinois and New York would be replaced by Democrats since both have Democratic governors, so that dog don't hunt.

[Hippo_Tron]

6. And what candidate is willing to do all of this?

[PhilipShore]

7. I agree

I would prefer voting for someone that has -- principles and values -- rooted in the principles peace and non-violence.

• Outlaw wars
  
• Outlaw all guns and hunting
  
• Outlaw the death penalty
  
• Outlaw Global warming
  
• Outlaw all pollution
  
• Reduce the military budget by 95%
  
• Forgive all debts, Domestic and International
  
• Free health care for all humans
  
• Free preventative health care for all humans.
  
• Free health care for all animals, etc.
  
• Welfare for all in this country
  
• Increase International welfare spending
  
• Change the Department of Defense's name to the Department of Non-violence
  
• Remove all troops from all overseas bases.
  
• Transform all branches of the Armed Forces to non-violent institutions
  
• Close down the CIA, and transfer all spy operations back to the Army
  
• Close down the NRA
  
• Make verbal or written expressions of hatred toward others a crime
  
• Only a all paper ballot National voting system
  
• Only public funding of elections
  
• No News coverage or advertising allowed for candidates
  
• Close down McDonald's,etc. because it is a health hazard
  
• Increase the budget for Legal Aid Services
  
• Eliminate all corporate ownership of the media
  
• Tax only corporations, and the middle Class and the Rich
  
• Banks could charge no more then 2% interest on loans
  
• Insurance companies would be shut down, and the government would provide Insurance
  
• Close down the Federal Reserve Bank
  
• Outlaw all lobby groups
  
• Outlaw all advertising
  

[JNelson6563]

8. Very extreme

It's almost as though a reich-winger was asked to explain Dem views.

Julie

[PhilipShore]

11. Liberal Democrats are different then Democrats

As can be seen of my ideal laws for a liberal democracy -- both Democratic (DLC, Blue dog, Reagan Dems) and Republican politicians have ignored, and turned upside down the basic values of liberalism in America.

I am not a lawyer though; perhaps, a lawyer could explain it better.

[SaveElmer]

9. I agree...until...

She is elected President!