Genie, again we have to agree to disagree.

If you were around during the time of Martin Luther King, the pundits and Dems were saying exactly the same thing about him as they are saying about Cindy today.

I disagree that those who are amoung the DLC are on the same side as Stanton, Debs, Ingersoll, King, Ghandi,Paine etc. There is a prevailing myth that there is a "centrist" position. This is propaganda by appeasers and enablers to the Right Wing. None of the people I mentioned would have been elected but that's not the point. The point is to do exactly what King did, challenge the prevailing authorities of the Right and Left. Remember that most of the Dems of the Fifties and Sixties were not in favor of Civil Rights. This includes Kennedy and Johnson, the latter, who lead the US into an equally false combat predicated on lies about the Bay of Tonkin.

The DLC Democrats may as well be Republicans because they are enablers for this pre-emptive illegal occupation of a foreign country and they support it by giving money to Bush. They will also confirm Chertoff which is the final straw that will break the Party's back. We need Cindy to counter this sell-out.   

Pelosi's votes to counter the Bush criminal takeover are meaningless as long as she and other Dems continue to support the Occupation and the Surge. This invalidates any of the seemingly good social reforms that they purport to advocate. I also remind you that Pelosi said that her first deed once elected in the first weeks of office was campaign finance reform. How is that working for the American people?

I see the weak-kneed Dems as enabling Karl Rove. The old cliche "actions speak louder than words" applies here.

If Cindy were to replace Pelosi, it would send a message that the Democratic Party had found a legitimate voice for Americans who mostly reject Bush's lies.

Frank Hamilton