By lilmamzer, January 29: “... To Which I can Only Reply: So what…”

The main problem is not the American Jewish Committee (AJC) which is a normal organization representing an ethnic minority, the Jews. http://www.ajc.org/

It is the unofficial front for the militarist-expansionist Israeli state known as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) which is usurping Americans good will to extort as much cold hard cash and diplomatic priveleges and political promises and military support as it possibly can. http://www.aipac.org/

An examination of their websites clearly indicates that one (the AJC) is a community organization supporting the welfare of American Jews whilst the other (AIPAC) is a radical Zionist political organization promoting the welfare of the Israeli state regardless of the expense to the people of the USA and regardless of its support for terrorist activities and the persecution of minorities and its neighbours and threats of the use of nuclear WMD’s in the region.

BruSays:

You miss my point.  My point was that, like Obama, TK “flip-flopped” on his initial anti-war stance by funding the war at each turn (even moreso than Obama or Hillary).  As for your comment about the Bush administration being responsible for “cooking the books,” etc., if this is so, then why is Hillary lambasted for her vote for the initial resolution (which Edwards also voted for) AND for voting to continue funding it, while Obama does NOT get criticized for funding the war?

As for the Patriot Act, I bring that up simply as a “civil liberties” issue.  And given that Obama claims a mantle of principle on civil liberties, it seems odd that he would re-authorize the Patriot Act (as did both TK and HC), and NOT take a strong stand on the Real ID Act by showing up to vote against it.

Peace.

Maani,

Nice try, but your citing of TK’s voting record AFTER he voted against the initial run up to the Iraq Occupation falls flat. It was the Bush Administration that is fully responsible for cooking the books, cherry-picking the intelligence, and manufacturing evidence that has led to deaths of thousands and thousands innocent people…not Kennedy. And WTF does support of the Patriot Act have to do Iraqi Occupation deaths, for Pete’s sake.

So what? 

Chalmers Reveals The String-Pulling Cabal - AGAIN!!!! - By lilmamzer, January 29: “....pandering to minuscule Zionist Israel” ......LMFAO… it always comes down to the Jews…”

You make a calibrated reality-check an easy thing to do,  lilmamzer:-

Quote Haaretz - The AIPAC affair: Can the pro-Israel lobby recover?

As the American Israel Public Affairs Committee holds its annual policy conference this month, it can point with satisfaction to one of the closest relationships ever between the U.S. administration and the government of Israel.

The closer Israel and Washington have grown on policy issues, the more vociferous the charges of Israel’s critics that the Jewish state and its American Jewish supporters exercise too much influence over U.S. decision-making…..      Tue., January 29, 2008   http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ArticleNews.jhtml?i temNo=576759&contrassID=13&subContrassID=1&sbSu bContrassID=0

*
Also check for highlights - AIPAC Achievements:-

As America’s leading pro-Israel lobby, AIPAC works with both Democratic and Republican political leaders to enact public policy that strengthens the vital U.S.-Israel relationship. With the support of its members nationwide, AIPAC has worked with Congress and the Executive Branch on numerous critical initiatives—from securing vital foreign aid for Israel to stopping Iran’s illicit nuclear program…...... http://www.aipac.org/about_AIPAC/default.asp

Why succumb to the media driven conclusion that Obama and Hillary are worth a squabble? The policies they protend are exactly the same. These are the policies not of Bush, per se, but a set of policies set in motion over 40 years and sharpened over the last 30 as policeman of the world, with a trillion dollar military budget that grows year in and year out.

Ted is the liberal JFK never was. He’s lost in some notion of righteousness perhaps as pentance for his sins. Personally, I think this 300,000,000 pop. 2+ square mile acreage of land mass, and $10 trillion dollar whatevere it is, empire is beyond its last legs.

The transformation needed is not some guy thinking he’s JFK or MLK or RFK or Marlon Brando or whatever the myth is. And Hillary? It turns out she’s simply a very dull Obama.

Chalmers predictably writes:

”....pandering to minuscule Zionist Israel”

LMFAO!!!!!!!

Here’s a thread ostensibly about Teddy (The Drunk Driving Murderer) Kennedy endorsing Barack Obama, but with Chalmers, it always comes down to the Jews, who, from his paranoid beehive visions, sees them pulling the strings of the world.

I never thought I’d say it, but I do love you, bro. You make a calibrated reality-check an easy thing to do.

” You are a sickie chalmers…”

Uh oh, trouble in tin-foil-hat city….....

absurd non-sequitur

Actually Chalmers,

THIS from Ted Kennedy, is the absolute FIRST that I’ve heard from ANYBODY –including you- on Hillary’s achievements, even though I’ve been begging somebody to come up with some.

So, you can’t come up with any yourself, but yet you criticize Ted Kennedy when he does.

And, if you actually listened to the thing, he ALSO mentioned her efforts at health care, which I have always been willing to recognize as an accomplishment of sorts on her part, even though it eventually fell though. I don’t blame her for the fact that the overwhelmingly negative repug atmosphere in DC at the time, prevented her effort from reaching any fruition, and I did respect the fact that she tried to come up with something –that long ago- that we desperately needed then, that might have prevented the crises in health care that we have now.

So, why don’t any of you try to ever push those things on her behalf, instead of coming up with the always negative stuff that you do? Kill the messenger every time, but without ever replacing it with anything positive.

Nobody pays attention to Ted Kennedy anymore, eh? So why the hell is he still in Congress? I PAY attention to him, even though he’s not my own Senator. He’s one of the few who still speaks on behalf of the Democratic party..the party that used to represent the average Jane or Joe, and the principles and concepts of a democracy.

So, he gives your girl some salutes, credits her with some things that are at least important to some folks, (like women, since he did NOT restrict it to women outside of the US, as you’re suggesting in your post) and while I personally have not experienced any of these so-called efforts on behalf of American or any other women, at least he did say this. And, all you can do it knock that as well.

So ya know what I’ve figured out DC? If I gave you $10 million dollars in certified funds, you’d push it away, demanding that it be in $10’s and $20’s. Some people just can’t stand to have anything NOT to complain or otherwise bitch about.

Meantime, so far, Teddy here is the only one that’s come up with any accomplishments for Hillary, even if they don’t seem to amount to much, for a large portion of the American public…

You are a sickie chalmers…

Does Ted Kennedy influence anyone anymore - #By loveinatub, January 28: “...I really have to ask that question because the Kennedy “mystique,” if you will, most certainly DIED oh, nearly 30 years ago…”

“I feel ‘change’ in the air”  is hardly indicitave that “our country’s best days are still to come” . It is an outright delusion being intentionally perpetrated by the suits backing Barack Obama. What it means is that Kennedy, T. is one of the suits who has come forward to put his outdated imprimatur upon BO’s campaign and that not having a woman president disrupting their precious boys’ club is their main agenda.

Having successfull avoided John Kerry’s endorsement, will BO survive Kennedy’s? Perhaps if he had married a Shriver, things would be different, uhh? So much for the generation of snarling and growling politicians in the USA who have already brought us to the end of the world in climate change terms and about to face the end in a nuclear winter of their own making by their pandering to minuscule Zionist Israel.

Too bad for Hillary Clinton and John Edwards that “they are my friends”  and poor Hillary’s efforts have been consigned to “the rights of women around the world” . That means that she is welcome to her achievements in any country but the USA. So much for the sexist old bigot who has made himself into the Roman Brutus who is now shafting his “friends and colleagues” in his own party in this now blood-stained election.

The “fierce urgency of now”  from Kennedy’s “the candidate who inspires me”  is actually nothing more than the extension of the current military adventurism into wastefully hunting down the illusory phantom Al Qaeda and the already-deceased Osama Bin Laden by bombing innocent villagers in Northern and Western Pakistan. Thus, again, so much for the pretence of those who themselves have never been “to the top of the mountain”  but presume to trot out MLK’s rhetoric for their own disgusting uses.

Kennedy and his clan and those like him are themselves “trapped in the patterns of the past”, a typical boringly unimaginative and uncreative power-player ‘trapped in a suit’  just as his now sadly anointed protege already is in his own boringly outdated suit image of a previous century of Machievellian politics. This is NOT real positive change!

So much for the fantastic delusions of “the better angels of our nature”, whatever that is supposed to mean….... another way of saying ‘women still not wanted’, I guess.

troublesum, BruSays et al:

While TK opposed the initial resolution re Iraq, like both Hillary and Obama he has voted for each successive bill to continue funding the war, as well as for reauthorization of the Patriot Act (twice), and full support for Real ID Act funding (twice).

Peace.

If he had been president the US wouldn’t have carried out a policy which resulted in the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children.  Under the Bush the first the US refused all medical aid to Iraq.  It was the first time in our nation’s history that we refused aid to a country defeated in war.  Clinton continued that policy along with around the clock bombing for eight years.  The result was a half million casulties, mostly children.

By troublesum, January 28 at 6:20 pm

He never killed 500,000 children.

Mary Jo was someone’s child.

Ted killed her.

Your absurd non-sequitur defense can’t change the fact that he’s a killer on the loose, and has never paid for his crimes.

You can play all the math games you want, but at the end of the day, Alcoholic Ted is a murderer, and has never paid for his crimes.

It was Ted who wanted NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND so bad he compromised the life out of it making it the worst education bill every passed by any Congress since the launch of public education.

Ted doesn’t like Bill. That and a buck will get you a cup of coffee and USA drifts further and further into the sinkhole.

JFK is mostly myth at this point, a wonderful tale of yore that should be just that, no prescription for where this country is today. We need real change not an escape to a passed Chamelot (does Caroline even remember? or know?).

Neither the Dems nor Repubs care to figure this out.

Every time Ted Kennedy hits the headlines big, out come the “Mary Jo Kopechne” historians. While I’m not a huge fan of Ted Kennedy, I do love my pocket calculator.

So, let’s tally up the people whose deaths can be attributed to Ted Kennedy:

Total: 1
Now, just for the fun of it, let’s tally up the people whose deaths can be attributed to George W. Bush:

  3940   (U.S. troops in Iraq)
  307   (Coalition forces in Iraq)
1,001   (Non-military contractors)
40,000   (Est. of Iraqi security/civlian deaths) 

Total: 45,248  

...and that’s using the VERY conservative 40,000 Iraqi estimate.

I’m not saying it’s a sure bet that those who are against Ted Kennedy are automatically pro-Bush, but I think I’d take it to the race track anyway.

He never killed 500,000 children.

LMAO

Good one.

The man is a killer and has never had to pay for his crimes.

Another of Hillary’s foreign policy advisors: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lK_QshS2EW8
Another policy Obama could change.  Hillary won’t.

Don’t forget to “ENDORSE” Mary Jo Kopechne !

How about Monica Lewinski?  Has anyone in the press interviewed her on the subject?

NOW I WONDER WHO MARILYN MONROE WOULD SUPPORT. IF WE ARE GOING BACK 40 YEARS LETS INCLUDE ALL OF THEM..

On the involvement of Bill Clinton and Richard Holbrook (Hillary’s foreign policy advisor, Bill’s national security advisor) in the genocide in Indonesia and East Timor:  http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/28/the_democrats_su harto_bill_clinton_richard
They supplied arms and military personnel for the genocide, knowing full well what it would be used for.  Maybe this is the kind of thing Obama will change.  It is not the kind of thing most Americans want their country involved in.  It won’t change under Hillary.

This is comedy.

Washington’s biggest (and I don’t mean his waistline or hanging jowls) insider endorses the self-proclaimed “outsider”.

My advice to Obama: Don’t let this lush drive you home - ever.

(Read with a sportscaster affect)

The Clintonistas strike first. Lets see what the Obamanites come back with. Ladies and Germs, it should be interesting to see how much more the Democrats and their constituents can tear the party apart. Sure makes for good ratings, perhaps a movie!(end sportscaster affect.)

Happy State Of The Bunion Day!

I really have to ask that question because the Kennedy “mystique,” if you will, most certainly DIED oh, nearly 30 years ago!

As for whether this endorsement will have much effect, we’ll “cross that bridge when we come to it…”  LOL.

Peace.