Yesterday, I drove 60 miles from Kilgore to Mt. Pleasant to attend Boyd Richie's town hall meeting.  As I drove up US 271, I was curious as to what to expect.

As 2008 approaches, the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton will become a greater topic of discussion.  Yes, I know that she has her Senate re-election campaign in 2006.  But her victory in 2006 is a given.  

In 2008, an inevitable topic of discussion will be Bill Clinton and his role and impact on Hillary's campaign.  Inevitably, comparisons will be made between the two.  People may try to say that they are the one and the same.  They may say that this is "Clinton, Part III", with the same cast of characters involved in the campaign and the same philosophy.

Well, Bill will support his wife in 2008, for sure.  But here's the truth:  Bill and Hillary aren't the same person.  I'm not saying that they are polar opposites.  But neither are they carbon copies of each other by a long shot.

I was born in 1971.  I consider Bill Clinton to be the best President of my lifetime - hands down.  Before 2000, I thought that Richard Nixon was the worst President of my lifetime - hands down.

Then George W. Bush came along.  I have a new worst President of my lifetime - hands down.

During 2005, impeachment has been discussed often here on the blogs.  There are many passionate appeals for impeachment, so I figured that I would examine the politics of impeachment, beginning with Richard Nixon

Well, as we speak, the two top "stories" that are being covered on Anderson Cooper 360 are the remarks made by New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin and Hillary Clinton.

In Cooper's words, he's "keeping them honest"

Whatever...

Howard Dean is a prominent Democrat.  As such, he is a public figure who makes a lot of comments.  He says what's on his mind.  Wouldn't it be a bigger story if Dean was silent?

I wouldn't claim that I am always 100% in lockstep with what Dean says.  But in my case, that's true for any Democrat.  Nothing Dean has said is going to cause me to lose any sleep at the end of the day.   

And on the subject of Iraq, Dean's comments may not be completely "politically astute" but they have been correct on merit, as John Judis at The New Republic correctly pointed out at www.tnr.com.

January 20, 2006 is the 5th anniversary of the end of Bill Clinton's presidency.  It's not exactly a day that people will be taking note of, but it is an opportunity to revisit his legacy as it relates to how Democrats feel about him and how they have reacted to the Clinton era in the past 5 years.

I love Texas, but it amazes me how we can have a constitutional amendement to ban something that is already not allowed here:  gay marriage.

I support gay marriage, and the first step here in Texas is vote AGAINST Amendment 2.  Passage of this amendment will make it harder to implement gay marriage in Texas in the future.

We can't have that, and we can't afford it.

VOTE NO ON AMENDMENT 2!
AND PASS THE WORD!
WE NEED EVERY VOTE!

There really isn't much for me add on the tragedy of Hurricane Katrina.  The Bush administration has disgraced itself again, though this may yet be their worst disgrace...I've lost track.  Being poor and black means that you are treated like dirt by the GOP because you are not on their "to-do list."  They are just animals to them.  It's an outrage - plain and simple.  I don't have anything profound to add that hasn't already been said.

With that said, I putting in what I consider to be a relatively flippant diary.

It's easy to forget that once upon a time, Bill Clinton was not a distinguished ex-President living in New York as the husband of a sitting US Senator.  Rather, he was the longtime governor of Arkansas (1979-1981 and 1983-1992).

Then came 1992, and Clinton became President.  In the process, he ascended to the title of Arkansas' most accomplished political figure - if he hadn't already done so.  When one considers the fact that Arkansas gave the US Senate William Fulbright and Dale Bumpers, this isn't a distinction to be taken lightly.

With the presidency of Bill Clinton, however, the Arkansas Democratic Party was forced to enter a new era.  Filling the large shoes of Clinton would not be an easy task.

Living in Texas, it becomes easy to muse about Lyndon B. Johnson and George W. Bush.  I have had to suffer as with W. as a governor and a president since 1995, when I moved to the Lone Star State.  Right now, sadly, we are a red state.

But there was also another president from these parts that you may have heard of:  LBJ.  Anybody who has been to Dallas knows the LBJ Freeway.  And in Austin, there is a radio station named KLBJ.

Aside from being from Texas, LBJ and W. share something else that is quite sobering.  Under their respective watches, they brought the United States into long-term wars that did not go well, and had no end in sight.  In the case of LBJ, it was Vietnam.  In the case of LBJ, it was Vietnam.  In the case of George W. Bush, it is Iraq.

I have written several diaries about potential diaries in the past about potential 2008 presidential candidates.

This diary is not in the same vein, however.

Rather, this diary is about a Draft Movement.  A Draft Movement for Blanche Lincoln for President - 2008

www.lincoln2008.com

Also, please note.  This diary is NOT an endorsement for Blanche Lincoln.  I have no candidate for 2008 - it makes no sense 3 years in advance.

Still, I figured it would be a good opportunity to talk about Lincoln, and start some discussion on her future.

African-Americans are the most loyal group in the Democratic Party.  If you need any proof, look at the following "disappointment."  African-American voter turnout was high. Some 13.2 million African-Americans voted--a surge of 3 million from 2000--and about 90 percent voted for Kerry.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/specials/elections/chi-0411060172nov06,1,5014068.story?coll=chi-n ews-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

That said, there are the rumblings within the Democratic Party regarding the feeling that African-Americans have been taken for granted.  To be honest, I would be surprised if this wasn't the case, to a certain extent.  In this world, when you are trying woo new people, you tend to not pay enough attention to those who already "love you", so to speak.

So here in the year 2005, what is the status with regards to African-Americans and the Democratic Party?

This past November, Democrat Brian Schweitzer was elected governor of Montana.  It was a noteworthy accomplishment in a red state.  And amidst the gloom and doom that Democrats felt on November 3, this was a ray of sunshine.

There has been much discussion about the major setback of the Labour Party in the 2005 election.  Lost in the discussion was the fact that Labour won its 3rd consecutive election.  True, their majority was reduced from 167 seats to 67 seats.  However, Labour maintained a majority over 2 other major parties:  the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats.  The three consecutive victories can be attributed to "New Labour", led by Tony Blair.  

By contrast, in 2000, the Democratic Party, led by the "New Democrats", lost the presidency.  I truly believe that Al Gore won the election, but that's another story.  George W. Bush and the Republicans were now in the White House.

How did this happen?  Why was Labour able to succeed where the Democrats couldn't?

The position of DNC Chair is an important position but not a glamorous one.  At the end of the day, the Chair is accountable to everyone else, not the other way around.  He isn't going to get that much credit, but he will get blame.  And if the President is a Democrat, the DNC chair's influence is reduced significantly; the President is THE leader of the party.

With the emergence of Howard Dean this year as the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, a position that has previously been considered a thankless and obscure task suddenly has notoriety.  It is difficult to imagine higher profile candidate for the DNC Chair position than Dean, who is the 1st former presidential candidate to subsequently become the chair.  With this in mind, it is instructive to look back at recent DNC chairs and how it relates to today's DNC.

Over the last 10 years or so, I have been completely disillusioned by the music industry.  Perhaps it's getting older (I'm 33).  Perhaps it's the consolidation of the music industry into 5 major labels, which has led to a series of one-hit wonders, a lack of any creativity, and a lack of purpose (both on the personal and professional levels).

It is this lack of purpose that is on my mind as I watch the Live 8 concert on TV.  I grew up listening to bands such as the Clash.  The Clash were more than just a musical influence.  They talked about real things in their songs.  They were strident.  They were rebellious.  But more than anything, they had a sense of purpose.  And even in the difficult circumstances that accompanied many of their links, there was a sense of hope.  You could make a difference, even on your own.

4th in an occaisional series

Part I:  Al Gore for President -- 2008

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/5/16/194421/475

Part II:  John Kerry for President -- 2008

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/6/5/20305/17007

Part III:  John Edwards for President -- 2008

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/6/18/16554/6839

In 2006, Hillary Clinton will run for re-election for the US Senate with an eye towards the 2008 presidential election.

In 1998, George W. Bush ran for re-election as Texas Governor with an eye towards the 2000 presidential election.

In 2004, Hillary Clinton was quickly mentioned as an early front-runner for the 2008 presidential nomination soon after George W. Bush won his 2nd term as president.

In 1996, George W. Bush was quickly mentioned as an early front-runner for the 2000 presidential nomination soon after Bill Clinton won his 2nd term as president.

By 2008, Hillary Clinton will have served 1 full term as US Senator, her 1st elected office.

By 2000, George W. Bush had served 1 full term as Texas Governor, his 1st elected office.

Previously, I have posted two diaries on Karl Rove:

GEORGE W. BUSH: SO WHO'S REALLY IN CHARGE?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/5/1/113113/1396

KARL ROVE: HOW DOES HE SUCCEED?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/5/21/212253/037

In the 1st diary, I came to the conclusion that Karl Rove at # 1, followed closely by Dick Cheney at # 2, was the ultimate authorities in the Bush administration.  Bush himself was a figurehead and puppet who could easily be led and manipulated by the above two.

In the 2nd diary, I talked about how Karl Rove has succeeded in the political arena.