The American Spectator

/p> p> HILLARY INTERRUPTUS br> Re: Lisa Fabrizio’s Hillary and Obama : /p>

Since 1960, those Democratic Party presidential nominees who were not incumbents or the vice presidents from the previous administration had one thing in common: They had never sought the presidency before.

Kennedy, McGovern, Carter, Dukakis, Clinton and Kerry had never run for president before the election cycles in which they got the nomination. In every case, the Democrats sought out a new face to present old ideas.

p>I believe that Obama will win the Democratic nomination. He fits that model, while Hillary does not (her having been “co-president” with her husband makes her seem like yesterday’s candidate). Thus, having Hillary Clinton talk about healthcare isn’t novel (and evokes one of the greatest failures of the Clinton administration), while having Barack Obama present it makes it seem novel, and a party which seeks the appearance of innovation without actually offering any must present novelty in lieu of substance. br> — Mike Harris br> MAJ, USA /p>

The Iowa caucus is much ado about nothing. If the people of Iowa were serious they’d have a real primary and not tea parties and house meetings to make such an important decision as to who will represent their respective parties. Since 1972 when the caucuses began winning Iowa (Muskie, none of the above, George H. W. Bush and Tom Harkin) seems to be a harbinger of defeat for the candidate “lucky” enough to garner a “win” so I hope RINO Mike Huckabee does extremely well and this Bill Clinton wannabe’s hopes are dashed in plucky little New Hampshire and points South.