So if a woman/person supports something she's a protitute or they're pr tituting themselves? So you couldbe seen as a postitute to the US mlitary, because you support it?

Nothing Hilary does surprises me. She is just an arrogant woman who has no qualms whatsoever putting down our military and of course, President Bush and VP Cheney.

The woman has no shame, is immoral and is content in living in "la-la-Land" with her husband.

I have always personally felt Hillary will do her own self in with inappropriate language. She has had this tendency over the years. If she said this privately at a party to her circle of friends, and it was some how leaked to the public, I say that it would not be harmful. But using it as public discourse tool doesn’t, IMO make her look professional.

Amy, it might be best if you rightwingers would post a list of individuals that can and can't be "attacked". We on the left realize that you folks on the right are free to attack anyone that you folks desire without having the full weight of the U.S. Senate condemning your actions, but we on the left need to know what our limitations are so that we can be more respectful to the hyper-senstive dispositions of Politically Correct conservatives.

one day, you will look back and see that Dick Cheney, and our friend Donald Rumsfeld let this country, our president and the Iraqi people down in a big way.

Journalists are *supposed* to be unbiased. The infobabe who introduced the Hillary clip was giddy. Call me a ho for our country and the military if you want. I don't care.

It's not about dissent; it's about tact. Hillary Clinton and the rest of the Democrats are those kids you went to elementary school who had no manners and made you ask yourself, "What do their parents teach them at home?"

Hillary is applying for the position of President of the United States. She ought to have some dignity. If she does become president, however, I'll be glad to do to her as she's done to us.

It's not about dissent; it's about tact.

Tact??? Are you kidding me. Yesterday, while Bush was expressing his disgust, he referred to the DemocratIC party as the "Democrat party."

It is a political epithet among Republicans, that by referring to the Democratic party as the Democrat party, is an act of disrespect and a lack of tact.

Well, as a Republican that's news to me. I interchange Democrat and Democratic with no disrespect intended. I think you're listening to too many conspiracy theories.

"Elementary school " language: I forgot to add this. Hillary's remarks remind me of Hugo Chavez's elementary schoolyard style of communication. Maybe Hillary, Mahmoud and Chavez will all get together and put on an elementary school play, full of elementary schoolyard style of communication. In this way, they can show their linguistic skills.

"Democrat party."

"It is a political epithet among Republicans, that by referring to the Democratic party as the Democrat party, is an act of disrespect and a lack of tact." --Pedro Queso

How so? Look at the facts!

We do not live in a Democracy. The framers of the Constitutions, the founders of this country used the word republic and “not” democracy; the word had been used for 2000 years – so this was not “intended for the USA.”

Federalist Representative Republic --- that is the official name of the United States of America’s government. I do not see Democracy in there, do you? Yes, Bush does have speech problems – but everyone has noticed that – except for the slow-ones.

I cannot refute your claim, I have never investigated it. But if it has occurred, there is an explanation – just given above.

No democrats in the Democrat(ic) Party? In fact, it's considered a sign of "disrespect" to say so? Wow. Who knew?

We do not live in a Democracy. The framers of the Constitutions, the founders of this country used the word republic and “not” democracy; the word had been used for 2000 years – so this was not “intended for the USA.”

Cal, this has NOTHING to do with my comment.

But, what you say is very true. However, we use democratic principles to elect our leaders and pass legislation.

No conspiracy, Amy. Please read this article for an explanation of this epithet.

Considering that article appears in wikipedia (strike one) and was at least partially authored by DU (steeeerrriiiiike two!) it is dubious at best.
How does a member of that party refer to them selves? Well let's just say I have yet to hear one refer to him/herself as a "Democratic".
Then again, Dems have their own list of "hands-off" icons. Jack Murtha, Bill and Hillary, Nancy Pelosi...so please don't come around acting like you're hard-done-by.

Wiki is fine for something’s, usually not related to hot-button issues such as politics, and religion. Otherwise, it makes no sense to have wiki as an “evidence tool.” Wiki now has full time administrators that are heavily bent on their own biases, and have editing privileges, and lock-down privileges. What started out as agrarian-like system has turned into a semi-authoritarian, bias, site. Wiki means “quick.” That is not a symbol one wants to use when arguing complex subject matter.

try to use something else.

Pedro,

"But, what you say is very true. However, we use democratic principles to elect our leaders and pass legislation."

no we do not use democratic principles. we use the democratic process to elect leaders and the use the same process to make decisions with. there is a big difference.

so, be careful of accusing others of misusing the English language when you are misusing it yourself.

j rob,
don't forget max cleland on that list.

"It is a political epithet among Republicans, that by referring to the Democratic party as the Democrat party, is an act of disrespect and a lack of tact."

Pedro, one more thing in regards to your link that you apparently did not read.

"Additionally, Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) repeatedly invoked the phrase "The Republic Party" on the floor of the United States House of Representatives in February 2007 while lambasting Congressional Republicans."

are you thencknowleging that Democrats are showing disrespect and lack tact?

Wiki is fine for something’s, usually not related to hot-button issues such as politics, and religion. Otherwise, it makes no sense to have wiki as an “evidence tool.”

Cal, it was not used as an "evidence tool." It was used as a means of giving some understanding to the epithet. Additionally, there are numerous links provided at the bottom of the article directing you to other sites related to the topic. Should I assume that you followed all of those links and found none of them credible enough for you? Did you even bother to click on the hyperlink I provided?

no we do not use democratic principles. we use the democratic process to elect leaders and the use the same process to make decisions with. there is a big difference.

Griper, out of all the things I have said in various threads here recently, you are going to scold me over the difference between principle and process? Looks rather petty , I must say. And not related to the topic of the thread either.

are you thencknowleging that Democrats are showing disrespect and lack tact?

If Amy didn't have her "Rules Of Engagement", I would waste no time being disrespectful and tactless to you and those that think like you. :)

Pretty funny...considering the media has made up stories to perpetuate the myth of Darth Vader. I laughed, and Clinton is laughable twit!

"If Amy didn't have her "Rules Of Engagement", I would waste no time being disrespectful and tactless to you and those that think like you. :)"

At least he's honest.

Well, now, anybody who has seen all six Star Wars movies knows that if anybody sounds like and acts like Darth Vader, it's Hillary Clinton. I mean, think about all the "common good" talk.

Have you ever wondered whose common good? It sure wouldn't be mine so I wonder about that all the time.

The whole thing sounded like a good bit of projection to me. For those who might not know what that is, the simple explanation is when a person attributes their own traits and faults onto someone else.

The thing that truly bugs me is the fact that they act like we're too stupid to know or figure out anything on our own. I may mistakenly have more faith in the average individual than most but, then, I grew up in a different era when personal responsibility meant something.

When we give attention to this sort of idiocy, we give credence to whatever the idiot does. It's childish and resembles nothing more than a schoolyard playground on Capitol Hill. Unfortunately, the only way to punish those "children" is to give them a time out and also, unfortunately, we can't do that until 2008.

I suggest ear plugs for the adults until we can herd the "children" back to their homes for well deserved "time outs".

Actually this latest nonsense from She-Who=Must-not-be-Named reminds me of the congressman who talked about "real Klingons" on the floor of the House.

I have no doubt, Pedro, that you would be as disrespectful as possible if you knew you wouldn't be banned. I'm not sure I'd brag about it.

The women is a menace and I cannot believe,despite the idiocy I see on a daily basis that Americans would be suicidal enough to vote her in as president.

I didn't realize Hillary was THIS bad until she started letting her guard down with some of these fundraisers, and particularly the Senate hearings, as with GEN Petraeus.

I have no doubt, Pedro, that you would be as disrespectful as possible if you knew you wouldn't be banned. I'm not sure I'd brag about it.

It was a joke. Did you pick up on the emoticon at the end of the sentence? Anyway, thank you for your low expectations of me.

"I didn't realize Hillary was THIS bad until she started letting her guard down with some of these fundraisers, and particularly the Senate hearings, as with GEN Petraeus."

Unfortunately, I remember too many little bits and pieces of the first time she was in the White House. While I get the info that there's a sizeable crowd who want to see her back in there, I have faith that there are some old school Democrats who don't.

Remember, this is only the primaries. Even if she becomes the Democrat candidate doesn't mean she will gain the White House for a third term.