Since it’s after 1:00 and nothing has been posted on the blog all day, I thought I should post something. I’m actually working on a post about my DC vacation but it’s taking me awhile. I thought I would make the following observations on the news of the day:
Hamas will do something really bad if they don’t get their 1,000 prisoners. What I found interesting about the article was this:

Hamas political leaders have said they have no control over the group’s armed wing.

If the political wing can’t control the armed wing then why would Israel broker any kind of treaty with the Palestinian Authority? They can’t guarantee peace, what would be the point?
Carville thinks that Hillary can win in 2008 because:
1.She won in NY when no one thought she would
2.Has high poll numbers
3. Yes, her negative numbers are high but so are the other nationally known Democrats
4. She survived the Republican attack machine unscathed what else do they have(she won’t be swifted boated)
5. Bill Clinton is an asset
6. The intense support (i.e. she’s raking in a lot of bucks)
7. She should win Kerry’s states and the fact that she’s a women will galvanize women to vote
In response:
1. Yes, NY is such a bellwether for the rest of the nation. If you can win there, you can win anywhere?
2. Yes, and we all trust the polls this far out of the race
3. Yes, that’s a good reason for optimism, she’s just as disliked as all of our other possible Democratic candidates

4. But wait until they hit the public with her hatred of the military during her years in the White House — can you really trust this women as Commander and Chief? That would really make for good copy.
5. Yeah, I can’t wait until he campaigns for her and the Lord willing I’ll have a blog (man, oh, man I can’t wait). Yes, I believe he’s an asset…to the Republicans.
6.Yes, the rich liberals love to support her and she will have plenty of money. But money can’t turn a sow’s ear into a silk purse — no amount of money will get this woman elected.
7. I don’t think this country would vote for a woman during a time of war . And I’m not sure women will vote for a women president at all (this is based on observations I’ve made when I was working about how women react to women as managers). Liberal women might but I don’t think conservatives would (escially this woman). If someone like Margaret Thatcher ran, then maybe America would vote for a woman in times of war. But she would have to prove that she was prepared to be tough and make the hard decisions (like Thacher did). And this is a maybe because I still have my doubts 🙂
Jimmy Carter doesn’t think we should have secrets. I started to read it and then thought, “I really don’t feel like yelling at my computer this morning.” Doug read it and told me that Carter doesn’t even mention the war on terror. I’m so glad this man is not our president.
Mexico has their own disputed election, but it doesn’t look like they will have to count chads. The apparent loser said that he will accept defeat. It appears that the Mexican politicians aren’t gaming their system they way our politicians do here.
Updated to add: after debate from a commenter and some thought, I’ve amended my position on women voting for a woman.
More from Beliefnet and our partners