Top Leaderboard, Site wide
July 14, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

The Right to Resist




S Street Rising
Gays in the Military


Truthdig Bazaar
Human Smoke

Human Smoke

By Nicholson Baker
$19.80


Henry James Goes to Paris

By Peter Brooks
$19.95

more items

 
Report

What’s at Stake in Iowa

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Dec 28, 2007

By E.J. Dionne, Jr.

DES MOINES, Iowa—The assassination of Benazir Bhutto came as a brutal reminder of the gravity of the decision Iowa’s voters will be rendering in their caucuses next Thursday night. Its impact may be felt most powerfully by Democrats who have been thinking less about issues than about the style and quality of leadership they are seeking from their next president.

    All of a sudden, the politicians’ endless loop of television advertisements took on a new and somber significance. During “Good Morning America’s” coverage of Bhutto’s murder, up popped a Hillary Clinton ad where the message over grave music is that the moment “demands a leader with a steady hand who will weather the storms.” No kidding.

    A short while later, there is a Joe Biden commercial that looks as if it had been produced precisely for this moment. “We don’t have to imagine the crises the next president will face,” intones a very serious voice. Indeed not.

    Clinton, of course, is hoping that the chaos in Pakistan will fortify her relentless arguments about the importance of experience. Biden’s refusal to back away from his insistence that this should be a foreign policy election seems shrewder now than it did last week. Indeed, Biden has been warning not for months but for years that the United States faces its gravest challenge in Pakistan.

    The television pictures from Pakistan ratified that Biden was no Chicken Little. He noted on Thursday that he had “twice urged President Musharraf to provide better security for Ms. Bhutto and other political leaders.” Biden was suddenly relevant—to television bookers for sure, but also, perhaps, to voters.

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
    David Axelrod, one of Barack Obama’s senior advisers, acknowledged that the events in Pakistan could well shake the campaign. But he insisted that they validated Obama’s original judgment that the war in Iraq was the wrong battle at the wrong moment. Obama, he said, would be happy to reopen the debate on “judgment” in foreign policy.

    Still, Iowa’s Democrats work to their own rhythms. Foreign policy differences—indeed, almost all issue differences—have had very little to do with the battle here.

    Instead, said Axelrod, the rhythm of this campaign has been defined by “three different approaches” to the presidency laid out by Clinton, John Edwards and his own candidate.

    Clinton’s argument, he said, is that “she’s been around the block,” a not quite charitable way of characterizing Clinton’s claims that her experience readies her for the coming battles for change that all Democrats devoutly wish to wage.

    “The Edwards campaign is ‘Storm the Bastille,’ ” said Axelrod, a colorful description of the former senator’s fierce attacks on drug companies, oil companies and all others who would stand in the way of reform. This is appealing to the many Democrats who are in a fighting mood.

    But Obama is running as the candidate who can transcend the old fights. In offering his own closing argument at a Masonic hall here Thursday, he poked fun at Clinton’s recent embrace of change as her own magic word. No, said Obama, change “has been our message when we were down, and our message when we were up. And it must be catching on because ... everyone is talking about change.”

    Clearly but obliquely referring to Edwards, Obama preached that anger won’t cut it, either. “There’s no shortage of anger and bluster and bitter partisanship out there,” Obama said. “We can change the electoral math that’s been all about division and make it about addition.”

    Thus has a wide Democratic consensus defined the choice here as among three different change agents: one tough and experienced, another forceful and angry, the third sunny and inspirational. Biden stands outside their fight, listening to his own drummer.

    Democrats have been in this place before. Writing to his friend Newton Minnow about the 1960 nomination battle among John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson and Adlai Stevenson, the veteran New Deal lawyer James Rowe wondered what all the commotion was about.

    “As long as the available mechanism is the Democratic Party, and the troops to command are Democrats, I do not think there would be much difference between the three men,” Rowe wrote. “This is the reality and all the sound and fury of ‘liberalism’ and ‘moderation’ which all of your gentlemen indulge in are mere chimera.”

    But in Iowa this late December, the differences among today’s three leading Democrats seem real enough, and all the more so now that the world has brutally forced its way into Iowans’ already agonized deliberations.

    E.J. Dionne’s e-mail address is postchat(at)aol.com.   

    © 2007, Washington Post Writers Group


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By Zennie62, January 1, 2008 at 6:31 pm Link to this comment

Something else missed.  Clinton’s screw up regarding Pakistan:

http://zennie2005.blogspot.com/2008/01/dennis-kucinich-tells-iowa-supporters.html

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, January 1, 2008 at 5:59 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Oh Shit… The New year is starting out on a sour note… I agree with Cyrena… Great post Rage, and just populist enough to resonate!

Down with the plastic made in China candidates from both parties…

Report this

By cyrena, January 1, 2008 at 2:35 am Link to this comment

Robert,

In all fairness, balance, and honesty, I think you ‘missed’ the –boob flashing- because it simply is NOT relevant to the overall argument that Rage puts forth. It may seem politically incorrect, and even offensive to those who hassle the ‘small stuff’ but it has nothing at all to do with the guts of what is important to America –as a society and a political body- in the 21st Century that we are living. Or, more concisely; the environment in which we are ATTEMPTING to live, though it’s more like a hard core struggle for survival for the MAJORITY of us. And, that’s the bottom line. So, ‘boobs flashing’ aside, Rage does indeed make that bottom line very clear.

As for Goldwaterism, the only real thing that can be said in favor of that ‘elitist’ ideology, is that it didn’t completely DISTROY the majority and the middle class, but rather ‘allowed’ it to exist, and even become the backbone of what was –only temporarily- a more socio-economically balanced society. It was STILL an elitist ideology, and the neoconners have destroyed any of the supposed ‘compassionate conservatism’ that the repugs MAY have once represented. So, I can’t honestly see anything for us to ‘thank’ you all for, though I’m not necessarily interested in ‘punishing’ you either. wink We can save that for the neconners, who belong under the jail, for the rest of their time breathing air.

Meantime, Hillary represents all that Rage has outlined, as do the majority of all of the other repug candidates, which is exactly how we managed to get to this point anyway…to this very precarious point of an existence which threatens to completely fall apart, as it has already been in the process of a ‘speeded up’ decline, ever since the Coup of 2000, when the neoconners highjacked our country. But…it was coming long before that, in the advance of what rage properly describes as the ‘unregulated corporatocracy.’

Within the collection of those (from both parties) who have not only CONTRIBUTED to this destructive take-over, those like Hillary, and Giuliani, stand as main reasons for it. They aren’t the only ones, but we all know what the deal is, and we can’t survive another round of such. We just can’t. We’re barely, barely managing to hang on as it is.

And from a neocon, or even an old Goldwater elitist position, it would seem that the more intelligent among you, would actually realize this. I mean to say that at some point, do you not realize that the destruction of the middle class will bring you down as well? It’s really already visible. So, while the chief neoconners may have escape plans, that still leaves the rest of you to ponder what would be a continual decline, under the ‘leadership’ of the same that has brought us to this point.

Just some thoughts. Meantime, I promise to keep my own boobs from flashing in the process of any public discourse I might indulge in. wink

Report this

By cyrena, January 1, 2008 at 1:53 am Link to this comment

Rage,

This is the best piece I’ve read on this entire thread I think. And, I’m keeping it, and spreading it around.

I agree, and Happy New Year.

GREAT WORK.

PS, Has there been some indication that Kucinich would form a ticket with Richardson? Just curious, since I hadn’t seen anything like that.

It would be fine by me of course, since I would trust Kucinich to pick a good co-worker.

Report this

By rage, December 31, 2007 at 6:44 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Obama, who can’t win a debate, is the answer, huh?

LOL!

Based on WHAT!!? And, don’t say Oprah, or hand me any of that now-generational unity crap.

Report this

By rage, December 31, 2007 at 6:02 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“Clinton, of course, is hoping that the chaos in Pakistan will fortify her relentless arguments about the importance of experience.”

What experience?

She’s been a Goldwater Republican, a corporate lawyer, 1st lady to a governor, first lady to a President, and a lackluster abysmal failure as a Senator trying to translate her politician husband’s success into her own. So far, that’s shrilly translated into huge campaign coffers, boob flashing, desperate attacks on her opponent’s grade school homework, and the frequent flogging of her spouse, daughter, and mom for character references. Hillary has no more political experience than her opponents, in several cases, not nearly as much.

“Still, Iowa’s Democrats work to their own rhythms. Foreign policy differences—indeed, almost all issue differences—have had very little to do with the battle here.”

Duh?

Not just Iowa, but AMERICA!

America is fed up with these candidates’ rose-colored views of what is really important to us. We’ve been left behind by these self-inflated pinheads who presume to know what we think and how we feel, all while carefully hand-picking who among us they will deign to allow to voice their preordained questions. We don’t know these idiots, and we are certain that they do not know us. We couldn’t care less about their experience. WE DEMAND SOME DETAILS about how they are going to do whatever they plan to do to deliver us from our current bounds of Bush43 religio-fascist imperialism and hegemony. Screw all this specious triangulating around the death of Bhutto! What about us, WE THE PEOPLE who are their voting constituents? What about us who have lost our jobs to outsourcing? What about us who have lost our homes to sub prime predators and unchecked credit card usury? What about our falling standards of living, economy, education, healthcare, and retirement? What about us who are working two and a half minimum wage jobs, who are scratching just enough paper to disqualify for subsidized healthcare, utilities, housing, and food? What about us who were once the vibrant American middle class? What about us who are fighting and dying in a war hinged on lies and colonial imperialism that has wrought corporate supporters of several of their campaigns record windfall profits? What about that?

Yeah, our hearts go out to the family of former Prime Minister Bhutto and her countrymen. That notwithstanding, our Democratic Republic is on the verge of the same horrific collapse, with the tattering of the Constitution, the burning of our Bill of Rights, these invasive, oppressive Patriot Acts, and the loss of Habeas Corpus, thanks in full to a secretive collusive dictatorship that is no longer accountable to anyone for anything. What about that? Very few running to enjoy unchecked executive powers ever want to talk to us about that. Most of these candidates seem to get big attitudes whenever courageous journalistic souls manage to breach their politically erected force field to pose such needful inquests.

These candidates, particularly the Democratic “front runners,” all need to wake up and realize that America is sick of hearing their politically correct, professionally canned responses that most deliberately evade the very issues we deem to be important, all the time collecting huge piles of cash from the only voice allowed to speak in our representative government, the voice of the raging unregulated corporatocracy. We’re also tired of the corrupted forth estate telling us who the winner of the election is before we’ve been allowed to cast a single vote, as if the candidate whom the reprobate corporatocracy has blessed with endorsements and cash is the foregone conclusion. Can I vote before the propagandist lap dogs tell me whom the corporate military industrial complex plans to foist down my throat for raising the biggest campaign war chest?

Kucinich - Richardson 2008! For unadulterated truth spoken to power and actual experience!

Report this

By Expat, December 31, 2007 at 8:20 am Link to this comment

By Greg J., December 30 at 4:26 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

Greg, get a life.  You’re like a virgin who just had sex for the first time.  Wake up and smell the coffee!

Report this

By cyrena, December 31, 2007 at 2:11 am Link to this comment

Is this a joke, or has this Greg J person been in a coma for the past decade?

Like we didn’t already know this…

And actually, Edwards HAS done quite a bit for the little guy.

Report this

By Greg J., December 30, 2007 at 5:26 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

SHOCKING NEWS !!! Please google PNAC….check the videos….The Neo-Cons planned the Iraq, Iran, Syria invasion back in 1992…...Hillary is a part of the plan to continue the mission which is why she is getting more contribution funds from defense contractors (tank, guns, bomb manufacturers, etc.) than any other candidate including the republicans. DON’T BE FOOLED. A vote for Billary is a vote for war escalation !!!!!BEWARE OF BILLARY AMERICA !!!! Then google ‘clinton body count’.....then….‘ron brown’s death’.....SHOCKING NEWS !!! Hillary IS actually a Neo-Con….was even president of her college Republican Organization. Edwards is nice but just a rich con man….trying to cater to the poor (which he’s NEVER done a thing for)....while he gets $400 haircuts…..OBAMA IS THE TRUE ANSWER…..FOR THE RE-BIRTH OF AMERICA !!!!!!

Report this

By cyrena, December 30, 2007 at 4:48 pm Link to this comment

Jacks,

Thanks for posting this. If Barak thinks that the terrorists holed up in the mountains of Pakistan are responsible for the deaths of those on 9/11, then he’s more naive than I suspected.

Now, I’m not saying there aren’t some terrorists there, but I’m doubtful that any of them are singlehandedly responsible (if at all) for pulling off 9/11.

So, he would have done better not even going there. I’m wondering if he’s lost some of the ‘caution’ and prudence that he seemed to have, before he got sucked up into the nastiness of the competition?

I’m thinking (and hoping really) that we might get another choice, based on the bipartisan conference coming up, that is billed as a seminar for determining if there should be an independent on the ticket.

We’ll see. Right now, we’re getting nowhere fast. The Cabal that highjacked us 7 years ago has jacked things up so badly, that everybody has lost their minds, and this seemingly never-ending election cycle has only polarized everyone even more.

Something has GOT to give!!

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 30, 2007 at 3:29 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

David Boren of ZZOklahoma, although nominally a Democrat, voted for confirmation of Clarence Thomas, a revision of the Juvenile justice and delinquency prevention act that allows children as young as 12 to be tried as adults,he supported Reagan’s trickle down economics, and on top of this he’s a Washington DC native and a member of Skull and Bones…. doesn’t sound like an “outside bid” to this New Englander!

I’m interested to know what type of middle east foreign policy Bloomberg proposes…  I’m not sure we can trust this multi-billionaire with the keys to the larder!

Report this

By cyrena, December 30, 2007 at 1:24 pm Link to this comment

Dear All,
I’m pretty much plastering this everywhere, because it actually gives me a bit of hope. We’ll see where it goes.

Bipartisan Group Eyes Independent Bid
  By David S. Broder
  The Washington Post
  Sunday 30 December 2007

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/123007B.shtml

Report this

By cyrena, December 30, 2007 at 8:33 am Link to this comment

hazmaq

Let’s face it, “experience” has NEVER been an issue. If it was, we would never have got GWB, who had NO ‘experience’.

He was Gov of TX for a couple of years, and that’s because Karl Rove got him the job. And, the moron said at his own ‘inauguration’ for Tx Gov, that he wasn’t gonna be in the job ‘for long’. That was just the set-up to move him into the WH.

We all know that prior to that, he was nothing but a failed wanna be oil exec, and coke sniffing pretend cowboy. He never had a real job in his life, let alone any ‘experience’, and yet…that doesn’t seem to have ever come up in the political discourse.

So, Americans don’t care about ‘experience’. It’s just yet another diversion and political smear tactic. If anything, Obama actually DOES have a broader based experience (and smarts) for the job at hand, if in fact they were concerned about the overall operation of the government of “we the people”. He’s also far more visionary, and knows how to select the help required. But, in US politics, it’s never about that. At least it hasn’t been for a really long time.

Because, if it were REALLY about ‘experience’, they’d be looking much closer at Gravel, and Kucinich, and even Dodd or Biden. I don’t agree with Biden’s foreign policy at all, but any of them have more real experience than the alleged front runners. So, if it were REALLY about experience, and experience was even a big issue, we wouldn’t even see this sort of thing coming up. Americans are known for historical amnesia and petty partisanship. They only tote out things like ‘experience’ when it suits a political smear agenda.

We don’t even know how to judge ‘experience’ because we’re too stuck on superficial ideology.

Maybe it’s the Hollywood thing. I don’t know.

Report this

By dihey, December 30, 2007 at 6:15 am Link to this comment

The campaigns of the Democratic wannabes in Iowa remind me of Ben Franklin’s saying: “He who lives by hope dies with a fart”. All of them, except Kucinich and Edwards have been “paymasters” of the war in Iraq with the vain hope that the war might end some day. Are they to be rewarded with the nomination to run for our next president?

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 29, 2007 at 9:11 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Cyrena

“Meantime, the only reason she hasn’t made any ‘world changing’ decisions, is because she hasn’t had the opportunity.”

Exactly what I said… No experience!

Report this

By DennisD, December 29, 2007 at 8:40 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“Clinton, of course, is hoping that the chaos in Pakistan will fortify her relentless arguments about the importance of experience.”

I’m still waiting for a Hillhead out there to detail her experience and or qualifications for the position we call President otherwise known than as the Ultimate Corporate Handpuppet of America.

By Expat, December 28 at 3:25 am
By Conservative Yankee, December 28 at 5:23 am

I agree completely - well done!

Report this

By Expat, December 29, 2007 at 6:32 am Link to this comment

By Conservative Yankee, December 28 at 12:58 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

She’s not experienced, she’s used… there is a difference!

Wow!  Nicely put.  ‘Nuff said.

Report this

By Jacks, December 29, 2007 at 3:39 am Link to this comment

Why hasn’t the press mentioned that?  He said he would move our soldiers from Iraq to Pakistan and promised to violate the sovereignty of Pakistan, a powder keg, if Musharraf failed to root out terrorists.  The best situation for any hyper-sensitive state is mere stability.  Military action is, at best, destabilizing.  I don’t care for Hillary, but that doesn’t mean Obama is the Democratic candidate to vote for either.

Check it out:
“The first step must be getting off the wrong battlefield in Iraq, and taking the fight to the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan.”

“I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges. But let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.”
http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/the_war_we_need_to_win.php

Report this

By Jacks, December 29, 2007 at 3:34 am Link to this comment

Earlier this year, Obama co-sponsored S.970, Iranian Counter-Proliferation bill, which used the same language to denounce the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as terrorists and then he conveniently couldn’t be there to vote against the Iran bill Hillary voted for.

Report this

By weather, December 29, 2007 at 3:10 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

do you mean trade defict? pls. explain or direct me a site. Thanks

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, December 29, 2007 at 3:03 am Link to this comment

By weather, December 28: “This country is in a head on collision w/deflation. The Iraq war for Oil and Israel has been a horrible distraction that only held off this deflationary consequence….”

Then the “$US carry trade”. Nobody wants to think about what will happen then, uhh…....

Report this

By weather, December 29, 2007 at 1:54 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Don’t listen to the words, just follow the music.

Ron Paul is the one.

Report this

By weather, December 28, 2007 at 6:10 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

This country is in a head on collision w/deflation. The Iraq war for Oil and Israel has been a horrible distraction that only held off this deflationary consequence.

Ron Paul hits monetary policy change right between the eyes. He’s telling us alot of things we don’t want to hear - the other candidates have neither the courage or integrity to confront the other inconvenient truths

‘they’ll keep lying as long as we keep believing them’.

Report this

By cyrena, December 28, 2007 at 4:43 pm Link to this comment

Ya know, I think the scariest thing about Sue’s statement is that even if Hillary makes a ‘mistake’, at least she takes a stand.

And, I pointed this out to her (Sue) a week or more ago. If Hillary makes a ‘mistake’, that flattens the rest of us, (or the world) what the hell good does it do if SHE’S still standing?

Meantime, the only reason she hasn’t made any ‘world changing’ decisions, is because she hasn’t had the opportunity. She’s messed up enough other stuff though, that we have to make sure she doesn’t GET the opportunity.

Report this

By Jacks, December 28, 2007 at 2:17 pm Link to this comment

What?  Did you even bother reading his statement, “The War We Need to Win?”  He vowed to attack Pakistan if they had “actionable” intelligence and Musharraf wouldn’t (i.e. he would violate another nations’ sovereignty).  He did this to prove what a big boy he was after getting smacked for his diplomacy talk (which I agreed with, but he felt perhaps made him look weak).  How is that not inherently foolish considering it would just further destabilize the region?

Oh, and if Obama’s such an impressive leader why has he failed miserably to lead in the Senate?  Hell, he hasn’t even held a meeting in the one post of leadership he does have.  World leader?  Please.

Report this

By Jacks, December 28, 2007 at 2:13 pm Link to this comment

Why did this article insist on framing Clinton and Edwards with Alexrod’s words?

Obama’s previous statements on Pakistan (August: He’ll violate the sovereignty of Pakistan if Musharraf fails to act against terrorists; 2004: He’ll consider military action against Pakistan if, oddly enough, Musharraf is deposed) were irresponsible then and they reek of gross misjudgment, foolishness now.  This man doesn’t have a clue.  I am not a Clinton supporter—at all—but the reason why I don’t care for Obama is because he’s no better than her (check out their senate records, especially on foreign policy: they’re the same).

I can only hope Edwards wins in Iowa and appoints Biden (or Dodd) to his cabinet.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 28, 2007 at 1:58 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

122984 by Sue on 12/28 at 10:30 am

“Yes, Hillary’s expirience is a much better argument than his hope of change.”

I laugh every time I hear about “Hill-the=business-shills experience.” What experiance is that?

Has she made world-shaping choices?
What tough choices has she made (on a public level)
Is her “management style” superior to others in this race… how about an example?
Has she (as executive) balanced, or even worked on, a public budget?

Has she commanded a force of troops (as in National Guard?)
What relevant experience has this corporate whore, other than as a ‘money finder” for her troll-husband.

She’s not experienced, she’s used… there is a difference!

Report this

By cyrena, December 28, 2007 at 1:57 pm Link to this comment

#122971 by Greg Bacon

Oh Greg,

This is just TOO good. I love it. (also the only thing Sue got right in her post @ #122984 by Sue. The media.)

And yes, the buzzards are SO predictable. I noticed the first of it from an email ‘alert’ from CBS. It said, “Bhutto INJURED in attack at political rally” Now this was AFTER I’d already read on the feed, that she had been killed.

And of course I knew that it was only a matter of time, (minutes or hours) before al-Qaeda would get the blame. Sure enough, CNN came up with it, (in just under 24 hours)…Pakistan Official says al-Qaeda has claimed responsibility” (or something to that effect.) Of course there’s tons more.

So yep, it’s pretty much beyond amazing, (and even the alternative reality at this point) that this international Wizard of Oz –al Qaeda- gets to be the reason for everything. No doubt they’re responsible for global warming, the housing crises, the worthless US dollar, HIV, cancer, the homeless, the lead in the Chinese made toys, infant mortality rates, the rain, the heat, genetic cloning, homosexuality, heterosexuality, busted fire engines and dirty carpets.

And, oh yeah…they blew up the WTC and evaporated 4 commercial airliners too.

Did I miss anything that you hadn’t already covered?

All of this from a shadowy entity that nobody has ever actually laid eyes on, or spoken to, that sort of just comes up whenever an explanation for anything under the sun is required. They might even be responsible for the Sun itself. Matter of fact, they’ve been given the same powers as the god of the fire and brimstone variety. No proof. Ya just have to have ‘faith’. (in the bullshit, and the wizard of oz).

Report this

By Thomas Billis, December 28, 2007 at 1:13 pm Link to this comment

EJ if in 04 the American people did not realize that they had a chimp in charge of foreign policy what in the world makes you think they will understand the gravity of the situation now.If democrats were really serious about the interests of the American people they would have instituted impeachment procedeings against George Bush.It is never about what is good for the American people it is always calculations on how to get elected and how to con the American people into thinking you are the solution.By the way all these people who knew that the right place to wage war was in the Afghanistan Pakistan area voted like lap dogs to continue funding the wrong war because it was politically expedient.One more by the way.This credit you give the American people to understand world issues flies in the face of 40 percent still think Saddam Hussein had something to do with 911.Americans will still vote on who they want to have a beer with.

Report this

By Sue, December 28, 2007 at 11:30 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I still find it very amusing that Obama is still using the tired old argument when foreign politics arise that he was the only that didn’t vote on the Iraq war. He wasn’t there to, but he disagreed with voting a “yes” to it. It seems like it’s is his only desperate argument. Take notice that he doesn’t bring up too much about his NO SHOW for the vote on putting title to the Iranian national guards as terrorists. His voting record in the senate for most no shows in fact is at 37.9% to Hillary’s 23%.

My point is at least Hillary will vote for what she believes is right.  If it’s a mistake or not, at least she takes a stand!

Yes, Hillary’s expirience is a much better argument than his hope of change.  We all hope for a changed government, but, with the constant ever growing turmoil in the world, I prefer experience over change anyday.

Alert, the media don’t play fair politics. Don’t take anything you hear, watch or read to seriously from them either.

Report this

By Greg Bacon, December 28, 2007 at 11:02 am Link to this comment

Any of the presidential candidates that use Bhutto’s death as a photo op and campaign ad are like so many buzzards, eagerly circling the body below, waiting for the final death throes before descending and eating their fill.

However, the King Buzzard is FOX News.  They’ve told numerous lies in the last 24 hours about Bhutto’s death and still are able to pass themselves off as a “news” source.

First, they reported that BB was killed by a sniper using an AK47 assualt rifle.  The AK is known for spraying large amounts of bullets, not accuracy.

Then FOX reported that it was a lone gunman, using a handgun.

Then they reported BB’s death was due to the explosion.

Now, they are saying it was a bump to her head that caused the death.

Early on, without any proof, only hunches, FOX was blaming aL-Qaeda.

Lose your homework?  Blame aL-Qaeda

Did your favorite doggie run away?  Blame aL-Qaeda

Someone steal your car?  Blame aL-Qaeda

Who farted in the elevator?  Blame aL-Qaeda

Wife divorcing you?  Blame aL-Qaeda

Acne acting up?  Blame aL-Qaeda

Credit Card maxed out?  Blame aL-Qaeda

Report this

By hazmaq, December 28, 2007 at 10:22 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

If the ‘experience’ issue mattered to Iowans, why is Edwards up in the polls, or even in the race?  I don’t think John Edwards has ever had enough interest to have left the country for a vacation let alone to be a leader of the free world.

As for ‘experience’, how did that help Clinton decide to join with all the Republicans and vote against the Democrats, including Obama, who tried to place a moratorium on the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas.  Obama joined with Senator Feinstein to put that bill through because of the devastating injuries suffered by innocents for decades when those toylike bomblets are set off.

Only a hard line war monger would want to keep on using them. 
While a true leader would look to the bigger picture.

I believe Iowans are ready for a true ‘world’ leader.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, December 28, 2007 at 9:36 am Link to this comment

E.J. Dionne: the moment “demands a leader with a steady hand who will weather the storms.”

One might conclude that the decisions and the action will have happened by the day before January 3, 2008, if any action on the part of the USA or its puppets is to take place - although it might have more to do with the price of oil.

Barack Obama had already said something a few months back about wanting to bomb Al Qaeada in Northern Pakistan. I guess that will give him an edge now, uhh, even though it was a pro-Bush administration thing to say.

Report this

By 13 Martyrs, December 28, 2007 at 8:46 am Link to this comment

Unfortunately, I think the assassination of Bhutto will only show the shallowness of the presidential candidates who will offer nothing but platitudes instead of some meaningful insight to their views of foreign policy.

http://www.13martyrs.blogspot.com/

Report this

By Expat, December 28, 2007 at 7:24 am Link to this comment

#122915 by Conservative Yankee on 12/28 at 5:23 am
(Unregistered commenter)

Leftist crap. 

Hear the sound of two hands clapping, well said.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 28, 2007 at 6:23 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Leftist crap. 

Does anyone here believe that more than 20% of US citizens can find Rawalpindi on a map? Do they think that the assassination of yet another world leader is a “shock” to the US folks who still believe that half-way ‘round the globe is too far away to matter?

...and even if a few do “feel” the loss of Benazir Bhutto, do they not also feel a sense of fatality when considering that this is not the first time for murder of a Bhutto, nor the first time for this type of sectarian violence?

What disgusts me the most is our obvious (institutional) prejudice. Bhutto matters, but Pierre Gemayel of Lebanon who was assassinated, at almost the same time, last year, got almost no press in the US at all.

Sure, This incident may make a small difference, but considering the fact that the generic US citizen has a memory of about 15 minutes, the price of corn and wheat may figure more predominately by the time caucus participants vote… The biggest question is “Will it snow in Iowa on caucus day… My bet, if it does, Edwards in a landslide…without regard to “world events”!

ALSO does anyone buy the instant placing of blame even before Bhutto was pronounced dead?

Report this

By Expat, December 28, 2007 at 4:25 am Link to this comment

For these shameless shills, Benazir Bhutto’s assassination is a photo op and an opportunity to tout their alleged leadership ability in a world they want to control.  They are all crap.

Report this
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook