  |
 |
| |
|
|
|  Obama, Clinton and the WarPosted on Jan 29, 2008
It should mean a great deal to progressives that in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination Sen. Ted Kennedy favors Sen. Barack Obama over two other colleagues he has worked with in the Senate. No one in the history of that institution has been a more consistent and effective fighter than Kennedy for an enlightened agenda, be it civil rights and liberty, gender equality, labor and immigrant justice, environmental protection, educational opportunity or opposing military adventures. Kennedy was a rare sane voice among the Democrats in strongly opposing the Iraq war, and it is no small tribute when he states: “We know the record of Barack Obama. There is the courage he showed when so many others were silent or simply went along. From the beginning, he opposed the war in Iraq. And let no one deny that truth.” But that is precisely the truth that Sen. Hillary Clinton has shamelessly sought to obscure. Her supporters have accepted Clinton’s refusal to repudiate her vote to authorize the war, an ignominious moment she shares with other Democrats, including presidential candidate John Edwards, who at least has made a point of regretting it. It was a vote that has led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, 3,940 U.S. service members—five more on Monday—and a debt in the trillions of dollars that will prevent the funding of needed domestic programs that Clinton claims to support. And it doesn’t end with Iraq. Clinton has been equally hawkish toward Iran and, in a Margaret Thatcher-like moment, even attacked Obama for ruling out the use of nuclear weapons against Osama bin Laden. Clinton’s apologists include Gloria Steinem and too many other feminists, who should know better than to betray the women’s movement’s commitment to peace in favor of simplistic gender politics. It is disturbing, not because they conclude that Clinton is the best candidate, but because they refuse to challenge their candidate to be better. Does it not matter that Clinton’s key foreign policy advisers are drawn heavily from the ranks of the neoliberals, who cheered as loudly for President Bush’s war as did the neoconservatives? Are they not concerned that Richard Holbrooke, who exploited his experience and access to secret information during the Clinton presidency to back Bush’s Iraq invasion, is a likely contender for secretary of state should she win? Sandy Berger, a key Clinton adviser, played a major role in convincing Kennedy’s congressman son, Patrick, to vote for the war authorization against what the younger Kennedy said was the advice of his father and his own better instincts. According to a Knight Ridder report at the time, “Patrick Kennedy said the most persuasive arguments for attacking Iraq came from members of the Clinton White House,” including former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who is often described as the foreign policy expert closest to Hillary. Patrick J. Kennedy refuses to be burned twice and now supports Obama. Yes, if Hillary Clinton is the candidate, she probably will be better than the Republican alternative and, as Ted Kennedy made clear, deserving of our support. But isn’t it troubling that she can’t hold a candle to Sen. John McCain when it comes to fighting Pentagon waste or pushing for campaign-finance reform to curtail the power of lobbyists? Isn’t it disturbing that Sen. Clinton has received more money than any other candidate of either party from the big defense contractors, according to a report on the Huffington Post? Why have the war profiteers given her twice the campaign contributions that they sent to McCain, if not for the expectation that she is on their side of the taxpayer rip-off that has seen the military budget rise to an all-time high? It’s for the same reason that the bankers, Wall Street traders and other swindlers who produced our economic meltdown fund Clinton. Hillary Clinton has made “experience” key to her claim to the presidency and tells us she will do the right thing from “day one.” The reality is that her extra four years in the U.S. Senate hardly provides better experience than Obama’s eight years in the Illinois state Senate battling for progress with the nation’s most hard-boiled politicians. And if she lays claim to her husband’s presidency, then she must also take responsibility for caving in to big media with the Telecommunications Act, selling out to the banks with the Financial Services Modernization Act, and killing the federal welfare program—a political gambit that deeply wounded millions of women and children. Her political career began with the Senate and she hit the ground running, but, as her craven support for Bush after 9/11 shows, it was in the wrong direction. Previous item: Again, a Sudden Shift in the Campaign Winds Next item: Western Civilization: An Idea Whose Time Has Come Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. |
‘Collateral Damage’ Not Much Different from Targeted Killing
Email
Print
Share
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Ma.gnolia
Newsvine
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Yahoo
Jump to Comments
By thebeerdoctor, February 8 at 7:14 pm #
No, I have not forgotten the continuous punishment inflicted upon the Iraqi people during the Clinton years. I just try to not be too redundant. All of this can be found on my comments in The Huffington post.
Report thishttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/users/profile/thebeerdoctor
By joseph, February 8 at 3:19 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Let us not forget that in the Clinton era Iraq was subject to draconian import restrictions of food & medicines. Many Iraqy children suffered & died from from these Clinton / Albright policies. Ms. Albright was quite the feminist as she referred to these horrific results as just unfortunate casualties in a larger war.
Do we also forget that Clinton/Albright policies included numerous daily flights over Iraq, for years. Shouldn’t the information gleaned from these flights along with her inside foreign policy knowledge add some clairity in Hillary’s vote?
Did she know of the pre-war distortions of Bush/Chenny/Powell??
For some reason the Clinton’s wanted this war.
The Clinton’s have caused too much pain in the world. It’s time to turn the page and shed some light on this not so glorious Clinton Presidency.
Great article!
Report thisBy thebeerdoctor, February 7 at 10:44 am #
Thank you for your comments about the homeless and also about some of the positive legislative work performed by Mrs. Clinton. Although, as you are probably aware, I am not a great fan of the Clintons, it is good to be reminded that when it comes to the motives of human beings, it is not so simple as just right or wrong. In that sense I guess I should not be surprised that Mrs. Clinton is a calculating person with her own agenda. Is not that what a politician does? Again thank you.
“And the dealer tries to sell you that it is all black and white,
Report thisthank God it is not that simple in my secret life.”
Leonard Cohen
By Maani, February 7 at 9:34 am #
MMC:
“I am glad that Hillary supports the veterans of war she has helped to start.” As noted, her concern and actions long predate the Iraq war.
That aside, I agree with your comments whole-heartedly. Indeed, I’m not sure you caught it, but when I “revealed” myself as a minister, I noted that my primary ministry is outreach to and advocacy for the homeless, both in general and, more specifically, in my area. So I have also seen first-hand the degrading and dehumanizing effect that it has, both on vets and non-vets. And I work with both.
Yet I would go even further than your comments and say that, as a general matter, homelessness is arguably the single most unnecessary and correctable immorality in our country. And it is not just about money (though that is certainly an issue). It is about ignorance. And I mean that in the most literal definition of the word: i.e., the act of ignoring. I see people walk by the homeless as if they do not exist; the level of denial in our society as a whole is truly repugnant where homelessness is concerned. Some of my homeless charges tell me that a simple “hello” - i.e., an acknowledgement of their existence - can make their day even if they do not make a dime. Yet how many people - otherwise intelligent, even caring and politically “savvy” people - do this? From my experience, FAR too few.
Yes, we certainly need to “throw money at it” in a major way. But what is more important is not just acknowledging that the PROBLEM exists, but that the PEOPLE - AS INDIVIDUALS - exist. And where our vets are concerned, I would agree there is added layer of moral responsibility.
And yes, it WOULD be better “if we were not creating another generation of homeless vets.” It would be even BETTER if those who argue that “housing is a right” were heeded by our local, state and federal governments: there is no reason why ANY person should have to live in a box. Period.
Peace.
Report thisBy Maani, February 7 at 7:58 am #
MMC:
Re “I am...” Thank you sincerely for answering my queries about your military past. It was very instructive, and I get a much better sense of who you are, and why you feel as you do.
Before I answer your queries, I do have one of my own. While I accept your extreme disdain for Hillary based largely on her vote to give Bush the authority to use force in Iraq, I am wondering why all her good work on behalf of vets does not balance that out even a little. And note that her work on behalf of vets goes back to at least 1993, if not before.
As I noted, as First Lady she was the initial driving force behind investigations into what became known as Gulf War Syndrome. She fought tirelessly for vets in this regard, even helping draft and push through legislation giving them additional medical benefits. And note that this was a SERIOUSLY unpopular position to take, given that everyone from the Pentagon to the Republicans in Congress tried to shut her up and shut her down because they did not want to face recriminations for the Gulf War.
As well, in her first term as U.S. Senator from NYS, she not only fought against Bush’s budgetary cuts to V.A. hospitals, but co-sponsored a rider to the bill which would have INCREASED funding for them.
In early 2007, as the result of the DoD refusing to pay a soldier a promised $50,000 bonus for re-upping for a fourth tour because he had his legs blown off two months into the tour and thus “did not complete his contract,” Hillary not only personally helped this soldier get HIS bonus, but introduced legislation that would prevent the DoD from ever attempting that kind of shenanigans again.
These are just three of a number of ways in which Hillary has worked for vets for over 15 years, both long prior to her tenure as a Senator (and thus her vote for the Iraq resolution) and during.
Indeed, my roommate was in NH canvassing for Hillary for six days prior to the primary. One of the groups sharing the office was the VFW, who had vets and active duty members from all over the country - young, old, black, white, hispanic, male, female. My roommate asked them why they were supporting Hillary. One of them replied, “Because she is oine of the few members of Congress who gives a damn about vets.” Another, an active duty office, actually said he was seriously concerned about ANY other candidate getting elected: “None of the ones in the race right now have shown all that much concern for us. Not even McCain.” When asked about Obama, one old-timer sneered and said, “That f---er?” He actually sits on the Veterans Affairs Committee, but hasn’t done s--- for us. In fact, he has the worst attendance record on the committee. Don’t even know why he’s there.”
Admittedly, these are only three responses from among hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of vets. But they had no reason to lie; they were asked a straightforward question and gave a straightforward answer.
Again, I accept that nothing “excuses” Hillary’s vote on the Iraq war resolution. But certainly it says something positive that she has worked on behalf of vets for over 15 years, and that they apparently recognize that.
I will answer your queries in my next post. And I promise to provide as substantive an answer as I can.
Peace.
Report thisBy Maani, February 7 at 7:29 am #
Leefeller:
I’m not sure what you are getting at here. If you put your concerns in the form of specific questions, I would be more than happy to respond to you.
Peace.
Report thisBy Leefeller, February 7 at 6:20 am #
Mani you have been confused on many things, calling your self an evangelical left wing pastor is the ice breaker, and could be the start of your confusion. Christian’s supporting war takes the cake. Hypocrisy of Christians does not bother me it seems prevalent and expected, but what is confusing What happened to turning all four cheeks”?
Report thisBy Maani, February 6 at 9:36 pm #
MMC:
I’m confused. You are a vet. You were in the Marines. Did you fight in a war? If so, which one?
And if you did, did you only recently become opposed to war? If so, do you regret the killing YOU did for the masters who called the shots for whatever war you fought in?
I know those sound like combative questions, but I’m sincerely interested in knowing.
Peace.
Report thisBy antispin, February 6 at 9:04 pm #
The American electorate is not quite as bad as the MSM and all other manners of alphabet soup would have you believe.
But yeah, particularly worrisome are all these writers out looking for work - the DIA is no doubt having them spin new yarns: look for “The Flail of the Lord” at you local multiplex: “Jason the leader of an elite team of Blackwater mercenaries is nearly capitated by Mahmood when suddenly a Predator drone appears on the horizon...”
What was the drivel on NPR today? Some “Madood” in the “ungoverned” areas of Pakistan Afghanistan border is the new evil mastermind behind assassination and Tube bombings, etc? Give me a break. Can’t the Alpha people be a little more subtle? And the CIA...er, NYT guy who wrote “The Commission” is now saying Iran was behind 9/11?! Don’t make me chortle my guts out.
Report thisBy thebeerdoctor, February 6 at 7:01 pm #
All this pontificating about this stupid unholy war. It is hard for those opposed to all of this to understand the legion of people who think violence is a perfectly reasonable response to almost any problem. Why else would you call someone who kills another a hero? The flail of the Lord, the Christian Army, doing battle with the demon… the only thing new about this is how easily so many accept such banal drivel without question. So there is worry about the American body politic? I guess that is more important than the thousands of Iraq families killed.
Report thisRecently Ronald Reagan’s ghost has been conjured up by our elite front runner politicians. That very same movie actor President who said America did not lose Vietnam, it just wasn’t given permission to win.
By Franz Keifer, February 6 at 6:22 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
mrtibbs or Mr. Tibbs,
Interesting thoughts. I take it you have an anti-Kennedy jones? While watching the president’s State of the Union address I was wondering why Barack was all but sitting on Senator Kennedy’s lap. I would prefer a candidate without those ties but I fear Hillary would have perched gladly on that same knee if she had received the endorsement.
Fifty years of scandal and Kennedy continues to be the torch bearer for the Democratic Party? Barack preaches change and this alliance does nothing to convince me he is sincere. Yes, who is John Edwards backing? There’s an endorsement to be vying for. It is a shame that Edwards is out of the race.
Report thisBy Maani, February 6 at 4:41 pm #
For those with a sincere interest in the war and its potential aftermath, you might find the following two articles quite interesting. The first is fairly brief; the second is somewhat longer. Both are excellent.
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/print/200801/partisan-r etreat
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/print/200801/goldberg-m ideast
Peace.
Report thisBy M. J. Kopechne, February 6 at 1:17 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Ms Kopechne showed poor judgment being with a group of married men that night. No single men were present. No wives of the married men were present. Things that make you go hmmmmmm? I’ll say. Was she duped into attending such a soirée? Perhaps. Was she duped into remaining there into the wee hours when all prospective drivers had reached the saturation point of their respective livers? Perhaps.
Poor judgment or not, she did not deserve her fate. We on the other hand know a good bit about the cad-like nature of the man. Beyond that, we know that Ted was a C student at the Milton Academy and was only admitted to Harvard as a legacy. While at Harvard, he was expelled twice for cheating and after a brief military stint in Europe (not Korea, thanks dad!) he was allowed to return. Cheating and being allowed to return to Harvard sounds a bit strange, dont you think? Cited for reckless driving 4 times while attending law school at the U of Virginia and yet never had his license revoked. There was an infamous incident in 1987 where he was interrupted mid-coitus with a female lobbyist on the floor of a restaurant. The list of trespasses, drunken and sober, is seemingly endless and is mostly ignored on the grounds that this is a member of the American royal family.
I find Uncle Teds quote from the era of the Watergate scandal to be the pièce de résistance of his tumultuous career. Ted said the following from the senate floor: “Do we operate under a system of equal justice under law? Or is there one system for the average citizen and another for the high and mighty?”
Wow, that definitely left a mark. Who could argue with his very clear vision of our world? Not I. I pose to all who read this post one question. If you were in Teds shoes for any one of his faux pas, would you have been treated in kind?
He is a serial abuser of our system and common decency. No amount of good works or liberal legislation takes that away. This is a grown man that insists on being a spoiled child. Knowing this we have presidential candidates sidling up to him for support with the expectations that his endorsement will endear them to the populace. If such nonsense were the premise of a television show I dare say you would change the channel. Yet, Ted goes on.
Enjoy the fleas unregistered commenter JNagarya. By the way Ted shows no guts simply by our knowing his name, he shows plenty for having the audacity to show himself in public. You, unregistered commenter JNagarya, show yourself to be gutless for not calling him on it. My smearing the name Kopechne is laughable. If you do just a modicum of research into that incident you will understand why I say that. Nothing did more to smear the name than associating it with Ted Kennedys. What is smearing her name compared with what happened to her person? Glug!!! I don’t want politicians to be moral, I want them to be equal under the law.
Oh, you wanted my name. Call me unregistered commenter mrtibbs.
Report thisBy JNagarya, February 5 at 11:56 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
You’re obviously an ass with about as much “sensitivity” to Kopechne as you accuse Ted Kennedy of hiaving.
Now, jerk, show us you EVIDENCE for the string of UNevidenced assumptions/smears you assert in the following:
“By M.J. Kopechne, February 5 at 6:58 am #
“(Unregistered commenter)
“Re: Re: Bill WTF pal
“No sh*t! And he aint swimming either, glug!
“Not fond of the idiom: If you lie down with dogs, youll rise with fleas. are you Mike Mid-City? Perhaps youve never heard it before. Uncle Ted has spent his entire political career trying to prove he was not the self-centered, cowardly bastard that allowed his date to drown. Any other American would have had to do the same from behind bars and I dont mean on a Hyannis bar stool.”
You know as little about Ted Kennedy as you know about reality.
And have less guts than he: We know his name; you haven’t the maturity to give yours. Instead you smear even Kopechne with your vulgarity.
All of which wholly negates your liar’s pretense to being moral, as over against Kennedy.
Report thisBy PatrickHenry, February 5 at 3:28 pm #
Or Super fat Tuesday, a conjuction of events of pre-lentian frivolity and pick your leader, most likely the anti christ.
Report thisBy M.J. Kopechne, February 5 at 6:58 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
No sh*t! And he ain’t swimming either, glug!
Not fond of the idiom: “If you lie down with dogs, you’ll rise with fleas.” are you Mike Mid-City? Perhaps you’ve never heard it before. Uncle Ted has spent his entire political career trying to prove he was not the self-centered, cowardly bastard that allowed his date to drown. Any other American would have had to do the same from behind bars and I don’t mean on a Hyannis bar stool.
Who is Edwards supporting? Why don’t we know that? The two numbskulls left in the race should be courting him rather than “fat bastard”.
Report thisBy antispin, February 4 at 6:52 pm #
That’s revealing. Here’s the roll call (we miss you Paul Wellstone):
Grouped By Vote Position YEAs ---24
Report thisAkaka (D-HI)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Byrd (D-WV)
Chafee (R-RI)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Reed (D-RI)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Wellstone (D-MN)
Wyden (D-OR)
NAYs ---75
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE)
Bond (R-MO)
Breaux (D-LA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Campbell (R-CO)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carnahan (D-MO)
Carper (D-DE)
Cleland (D-GA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
Daschle (D-SD)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT)
Domenici (R-NM)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Edwards (D-NC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)
Fitzgerald (R-IL)
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (D-FL)
Gramm (R-TX)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Helms (R-NC)
Hollings (D-SC)
Hutchinson (R-AR)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Miller (D-GA)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Nickles (R-OK)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Santorum (R-PA)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-NH)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thompson (R-TN)
Thurmond (R-SC)
Torricelli (D-NJ)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
By jackpine savage, February 4 at 6:33 pm #
Here’s a link for you Truthdiggers:
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/02/02/6802/
It is well worth the read, unless you’ve managed to convince yourself that Sen Clinton is a woman of peace. (actually its probably more important for you folks, but you probably won’t read it)
Report thisBy M.J. Kopechne, February 4 at 5:16 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Glug, glug, glug, girgle, help me Ted,
Report thissploosh, spirtle, glug, if only you were as...glug, good looking as...glug, Bobby, sploosh, glug, and could swim like… cough, Jack, glug, glug!!!
By Dollar Bill, February 4 at 7:25 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
I have three words for Uncle Ted’s being an effective fighter for “gender equality”, Mary Jo Kopechne.
Report thisBy Dollar Bill, February 4 at 7:02 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Three words on Uncle Ted’s enlightenment, Mary Jo Kopechne.
Report thisBy yours truly, February 3 at 5:57 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
It Isn’t Who We Put In The White House
“What then?”
“It’s whether or not our next president ends the Iraq war plus turning things around here at home.”
“And why is this so?”
“Either we end the Iraq war or it’ll be the end of us.”
Report thisBy Maani, February 3 at 3:52 pm #
MMC:
Thank you for explaining what Obama was saying re the Sermon on the Mount. You are completely on point.
Doug:
I will not repeat what MMC said, except to say that it was YOU who obviously did not understand what Obama was saying. Nor do I see how he “ridiculed the very ‘higher truth’” of Christianity. Apparently, you do not KNOW what the “higher truths” of Christianity are.
For one, FORGIVENESS is among the HIGHEST truths of Christianity (along with love, compassion, humility and charity (of spirit)). Yet not even MMC seems to understand this, since he has harped obsessively on Hillary’ original vote for the resolution, showing not one iota of forgiveness.
Forgiving does not mean “condoning.” Jesus forgave the adultress ("He who is without sin, let him cast the first stone"), but did NOT condone her behavior ("Go, and sin no more."). Indeed, Jesus forgave even those who murdered Him ("Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do.")
True, Jesus did not support violent conflict of any type ("Put away thy sword; for he who lives by the sword shall die by the sword.") Indeed, He not only chastised his disciple for cutting off the centurion’s ear, but RESTORED the ear - despite the fact that the centurion was basically taking Him to His death.
Based on His life and ministry of love and peace, Jesus would certainly not have supported the war, pre-emptive or otherwise. But neither would He judge Hillary, Obama or anyone else for their votes - certainly not in the unforgiving manner of MMC and others here. Rather, He would forgive Hillary, Obama et al for their weakness, calculation, even cynicism, and look for them to learn from their mistake, move beyond it, and make better decisions the next time.
Peace.
Report thisBy Maani, February 3 at 3:36 pm #
RTI:
Actually, you might be right about all but NAFTA. According to Carl Bernstein (no Hillary lover he), Hillary was dead set AGAINST NAFTA and argued with Bill about it numerous times, quite angrily. She warned him particularly about the loss of American jobs. But since he was president, she did not feel comfortable challenging him publicly.
Peace.
Report thisBy Maani, February 3 at 3:33 pm #
Leefeller:
“If Obama did not vote to pay for the war, you would be yelling and screaming that Obama does not support the troops.”
Who is the “you” in this sentence? It certainly is not me, nor, I’m guessing, most people on these boards. The more accurate statement would be “If Obama did not vote to pay for the war, lots of people, including the right, would be yelling and screaming...”
But (and God forgive me, I am about to agree with MMC...LOL) does this justify a non-principled, wrong vote?
Peace.
Report thisBy Leefeller, February 3 at 9:38 am #
Who are you referring to Mike? My comment was tounge in cheek, this is the logic of the imbeciles supporting Hillary the war monger.
Since I have qualified myself as a moron, might qualify by saying an imbecile is a stupid moron.
Report thisBy Leefeller, February 3 at 7:48 am #
Lets see, your troops are fighting in a war you do not believe, so you make sure they do not get the funding they need to stay alive? Since you send they some money to survive, you are for the war.
If Obama did not vote to pay for the war, you would be yelling and screaming that Obama does not support the troops.
All facts speak the truth, Obama did not vote to go to war, once in it he supported the troops.
One weakness of both candidates is they have not said enough against the war. On the other hand they may have and the media is not getting letting us hear it.
Report thisSpecial interests control the news, so we have to work to find out what is really happening.
By racetoinfinity, February 3 at 1:54 am #
You wrote:
“And if she lays claim to her husbands presidency, then she must also take responsibility for caving in to big media with the Telecommunications Act, selling out to the banks with the Financial Services Modernization Act, and killing the federal welfare programa political gambit that deeply wounded millions of women and children.”
And - don’t forget - pushing through with fellow neoliberal Bob “Citibank” Rubin NAFTA, WTO, bad China trade policy. Reaganomics continued with Bill C.
Report thisBy dihey, February 2 at 2:03 pm #
According to the 1990 U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Campbell vs Clinton, when Congress approves funding for a specific war, even in the absence of a Congressional Declaration of War, that funding is equivalent to a Declaration of War. I am puzzled why the Clinton campaign does not mention this law of our land. After all, the Clinton in Campbell vs. Clinton was then President Bill Clinton. Whatever the reason may be, Senator Obama has on several occasions legally declared war on Iraq by voting for the funding of that war. He has not only been one of the paymasters for the war, he has thereby approved the conduct of the war for the duration of the appropriation. He cannot wash his hands in feigned innocence. He is co-responsible for Iraq from the time of his first vote but like an irresponsible child he refuses to admit his responsibility. Former President Clinton is absolutely correct. Senator Obama’s anti-war story is a fairy tale from the moment he entered the U.S. Senate.
Report thisBy Leefeller, February 2 at 9:17 am #
Hillary or Obama? Experience among a bunch of imbecile’s, would be a qualifier for the king or queen of the imbecile’s. Since our politicians are a gaggle of imbecile’s, Hillary is the more experienced so we should agree, as far as imbecile’s go, Hillary is the best choice.
Having fun, but the truth is in the pudding, we have a government run, controlled and paid off by special interests. Mark Twain ran for president using his humor to describe what he saw in government at the time, about 1907.
If you read the following paragraph it rings true today.
“My invariable practice in war has been to bring out of every fight two-thirds more men than when I went in. This seems to me to be Napoleonic in its grandeur. My financial views are of the most decided character, but they are not likely, perhaps, to increase my popularity with the advocates of inflation. I do not insist upon the special supremacy of rag money or hard money. The great fundamental principle of my life is to take any kind I can get.”
Mark Twain
Business in Washington.
Report thisBy Leefeller, February 2 at 8:44 am #
Why do you think I called him Chompers?
Report thisBy thebeerdoctor, February 2 at 6:18 am #
Thank you for your information concerning the Opera browser. The funny thing is, the only reason I had to change browsers was because the Mozilla Firefox Start came up in German! Worked to fix the blasted thing all day, even at one point switched to a complete open source operating system (Ubuntu) and even the pre-installed Firefox there came up in German. Eventually, about 8 hours later, that stopped. But when I tried to reinstall Firefox in Windows, it would only stay on the Add-on page, never going to the home page.
Report thisI have thought about this quite a bit. Was this the result of the cables cut in southweat Asia a couple of days ago. Or was this some kind of viral attack, not at Mozilla, but rather Google itself?
Anyway, I still use firefox… via opera. Again thank you.
By Douglas Chalmers, February 2 at 5:53 am #
#By kath cantarella, January 31: “Doug, chill out.... bag him without making stuff up.... Go read his autobiography...”
You’re starting to make me sick....
#By Maani, January 31: “Obama “anti-religious, anti-Christian?” I think not. Here is an excerpt from his speech to the Sojourners conference......” - Quote BO: “...if we scrub language of all religious content, we forfeit the imagery and terminology through which millions of Americans understand both their personal morality and social justice. Imagine Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address without reference to ‘the judgments of the Lord,’ or King’s ‘I Have a Dream’ speech without reference to ‘all of God’s children.’...”
Sorry, Maani, you’ve missed the point. Obama’s playing you all both ways with his words. First, he says sneeringly that Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount is “...a passage that is so radical that it is doubtful whether our own Defense Department would survive its application” (< http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPUe6T8RVXs>)
Then he comes up with some spiel about MLK and Lincoln and you just rush to believe it even though the two statements are quite opposite and don’t genuinely withstand scrutiny. Obviously, none of you are able to deduce anything as regards his methodology or his strategy.
He has ridiculed the very “higher truth” which supposedly inspired Christianity but you only see what you want to believe. BO is moving the nation to embrace a common destiny which is being carried out through his kind of Pied Piper play-acting. You are all so easily sucked into The Ring, uhh.
As I said, you can add that to “I don’t oppose all wars” and “the crucible of the sword” to make your own conclusions about how intrinsically evil this person really is. He doesn’t care what you belive in as long as you vote for him. He himself has no belief other than in himself and “I wanna be president”.
Also, as I said, you are very weak as an evangelical minister, Maani. Incompetent, even......
Report thisBy Expat, February 2 at 4:18 am #
^ and our country is crumbling at our feet. Our infrastructure is disintegrating, our economy is shot, jobs are disappearing, education is wont, and the health of our citizens goes down the drain. All we can see is black, white, woman, man, repub, dem. This should be a serious clue as to just how far we have fallen. Get behind the one of vision; at some point we have to crawl out of this crater of negativity and fight to get our country back from the bankrupt despots who have led us with the ring they put in our noses. Are you worthy of a free and just society?
Report thisBy cyrena, February 2 at 1:48 am #
Beerdoctor,
This thing with the log-in happened to me as well, when I changed browsers. (which is how I wound up with a new ID temporarily). I’m trying to remember now, how I finally fixed it.
Try this. Go to the home page at Truthdig from your Opera browser, just by putting in the standard address.
(like, don’t do it from your email, like as a response to a post). Then, you should be able to click on at the top, to either sign-in, or sign-out of truthdig. If you can ‘log-in’ then log in with your username and password. That should do it. If it shows that you are already ‘logged-in’ then log out, and then log in again, using your registered name and password. And, make sure you’re doing all of this with your Opera browser.
I think there is also an option that you can select to keep you ‘logged in’ and that makes it easier as well.
Try that, since I think that’s how I finally resolved the same problem that I was having, after I changed to the mozilla firefox browser. That IE thing is a pain in the ass.
Hope that works.
Report thisBy Don Fahrney, February 1 at 11:51 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
You got it all wrong. Why isn’t he a white man with a black father. Hey, we always know who our mother is but no proof who the father is, but that begs the question. Obama is a white man with a black father, how can it be any different.
Report thisBy Don Fahrney, February 1 at 11:51 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
You got it all wrong. Why isn’t he a white man with a black father. Hey, we always know who our mother is but no proof who the father is, but that begs the question. Obama is a white man with a black father, how can it be any different.
Report thisBy papeehara, February 1 at 8:32 pm #
THE REAL AUDACITY OF HOPE WILL BE WHEN OBAMA DONATES THE 32 MILLION TO THE POOR THAT HE IS BLEEDING OVER RATHER THAN HELPING THE FAT CAT CORPORATE TYPES GET RICHER.
Report thisBy Maani, February 1 at 2:17 pm #
H.M.:
Now THAT is a superb assessment! Thank you for your thoughts. I agree 100%.
Peace.
Report thisBy thebeerdoctor, February 1 at 10:45 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
“And the killers still run the country, and they count their money with their blood stained hands,
but lately I’ve been thinking that it’s time we took
a stand.”
Eliot Murphy
Note to truthdig: Although I am a registered member, your log in would not allow me in. Is this because I am using the Opera browser? Please make note.
Report thisBy A Khokar, February 1 at 9:04 am #
Bush and Cheney are guilty of numerous impeachable offences for repeatedly violating the Constitution and transgression of national and international law; as well as nonsensical war against Iraq, which has resulted in killing of some 4000 Americans and savagely butchering of 600,000 innocent Iraqis. This has been done without the declaration of war from American Congress as well as; it is in defiance of the U.N. Charter and in violation of international laws. The reckless disregard for life and property in foreign lands and constitutional law has been accompanied by the abuse of prisoners, including systematic torture, in direct violation of the Geneva Conventions of 1949.
The conduct and their barbaric policies have reduced the image of United States to a historic low, in the eyes of people around the world.
But have we really tried to peep behind the closed doors of White House and found the real forces at work; which tends these figures like Bush and Cheney to remain on their toes all the time. This may our hypocritical face not to reveal the truth; that it is, in fact the policy of American Adventurism at its play; a complex of deep seeded policies and the mind set of US; of securing US hegemony in the world; that is what which should matter us the most and a point of contention for all of us.
The divisive policies implied in execution through deception and fallacy by US is awful. The dismantling of sovereign states and to bring the havoc in the lives of millions and millions of defence less destitute people; to dislodge them and wipe them off from the face of earth; just in pursuance of US rapacious greed of her hegemonic hold in foreign lands are the crimes against humanity? American adventurism is strife; a matter of concern; a fearsome agenda concerning the future of the humanity on this planet.
Anarchy, mayhem in the house of adversaries and media manipulation to upkeep the climate of fear of terror, in our own society are the orders of the day. The evidence of government sponsored terror and how they use the fear of terror to control own society is found bursting out at the seams. This horrific climate is keeping the world in its grips, which can easily be visualised to stay for many more decades to come.
We find that US top political parties; Conservative as well as Democrats; all are in full agreement in pursuing this common dream of their hegemonic aspiration in the world.
Today it is Bush and Cheneys team and tomorrow we will have another set of figures; may they are Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton and their teams; we will find them pursing the same evil policies?
* The killers they dont change; only they change their faces and flags.
*What a strenuous journey that we tread; even the milestones and traversed spans; all travel with us.
-----------------------------
Report thisLove for all, Hatred for none
By Sodium, February 1 at 5:09 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Since the Declaration of Independence,US has been
ruled by Christian Anglo-Saxons.
I am a white American citizen,but I love to see the Executive Branch being made as follows:
President:A Muslim American.
Vice-President:A Jewish American,as long as that double
crossing Joe Lieberman is excluded.
(Note:the above two positions can be reversed according to the wishes of the people)
Secretary of Defense:A Hindu American.
Secretary of State:A Buddhist American.
This way,we may overcome the power of the Military
Report thisCongressional Industrial Complex and have a peaceful
world for a change.Enough greed and enough of the
Anglo-Saxons craps.
By Honolulu Mike, February 1 at 3:36 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
As NY’s newly elected junior senator what would the chances of Hillary Clinton’s reelection have been had she voted against the authorization for use of force in Iraq? And why was it up to her to lead the charge against the authorization? Why doesn’t anyone ask McCain if he would vote for the authorization knowing what we know now.
In the upcoming election when it is likely the Dem. nominee will be facing super-hawk McCain, it is very true that a female candidate (or a black former hippie candidate for that matter) cannot look weak on defense & national security issues—especially if the dirty bomb scenario plays out right before the election next Nov.
I’m back to my original thinking that a Clinton / Obama ticket is the way to go this year. Barak will be in early 50s 8 years from now, and should be able to help the Dems. hold the White House for another 8 years. For an interesting view from a Civil Rights organization about Obama’s credentials and credibiltiy on racial justice issues, visit the http://www.fair.org website and download the podcast of this week’s program.
I’m losing patinece with lefties and the Clinton bashers who deliberately forget the fact that the Republicans gave Clinton’s admin. hell from day one because they felt he had no right to deprive GB I of his God given right to a second term. From the “don’t ask don’t tell” trap, to the oppostion to Clinton’s cabinet appointments (remember Lani Guinear?)to the humiliating way they shot down the Clinton healthcare reform effort the punishment was merciless, and few Dems. rushted to the Clinton’s defense. After the Repub. take over of control of Congress 2 years into Clinton’s term it was all downhill. They and did everything possible to deny Clinton a second 4 years. When he was victorious, becoming the first Dem. president to win a second term since FDR, the the VRRC began looking frantically for a way to block him from achieving anything of major importance in his second term, and of course the Lewinsky “bimbo-gate” impeachment coup fit the bill perfectly.
Hillary will have no reelection obsession, I predict, having already made history by becoming the first female President. She will feel compelled to make few of the Faustian compromises Bill Clinton was forced into; and with a supportive Barak Obama as her VP, I think we could be looking at one of the greatest presidental administrations in generations.
Report thisBy cyrena, February 1 at 12:30 am #
Seeing as how the ‘button’ for the nukes is far more ‘involved’ than the voting button on the Senate floor, I don’t have a problem.
Actually, there are ‘codes’ and a complicated protocal involved in ‘pulling the nuclear switch’ or even giving the order. It has to come from more than just the president, which is probably the only thing that has saved us so far. (Imagine the drunken shrub lurching around anywhere near the activation point)?
As for the wrong voting buttons, based on your example, none of us should ever allow a single vote cast in Florida to be considered for ANYTHING other than toilet paper.
Report thisBy kath cantarella, January 31 at 10:42 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Obama, though he may not be your choice, is a good candidate. Even the Republicans will find it hard to bag him without making stuff up.
Go read his autobiography ‘Dreams From My Father’. (The man is an excellent writer, too. He’s so good he’s starting to make me sick...)
Report thisBy Tony Wicher, January 31 at 9:52 pm #
I get “page not found” when I click it.
Report thisBy Leefeller, January 31 at 7:15 pm #
Do not know if you guys heard his wife, but Obama is married to one great lady. She was just on Cspan and made a great speech.
Followed Mid Mike City and donated to the hope for change cause, Obama, it feels good.
Feel the spark in the air.
Report thisBy Maani, January 31 at 7:11 pm #
JR:
ROFLMAO! That’s as good as anything Borowitz has come up with so far…
Peace.
Report thisBy Maani, January 31 at 7:10 pm #
Andy:
Though you are likely to encounter much negative response to this (particularly suggestions that somehow voting records don’t matter all that much), thank you SO much for this. I have been saying this since day 1, and have either been ignored, ridiculed or dismissed.
Bless you.
Peace.
Report thisBy Maani, January 31 at 7:07 pm #
Cyrena:
“Actually, Ive even gone beyond the complete idiot indication, but Ive been trying to clean up my act.”
Jeez. I hope you’re not doing this on MY account...LOL. (No, really, I’m (hopefully) laughing WITH you...)
Peace. (Truly!)
Report thisBy cyrena, January 31 at 6:21 pm #
Tony, I keep trying to tell you this. (about him being a dunce). I dont know why you persecute yourself by even looking at anything he posts, or trying to respond logically.
The thing about Obama being a Muslim has been around for over a year. I started getting it via the standard right-wing trash machine, cheap propaganda e-mail, at least that long ago, and from people that I knew. (they didnt know any better, and thats how that stuff starts to circulate).
It was so ridiculous, claiming that he was only recently converted to Christianity, (I wouldnt care whether he was or not) and that he had attended a madressa in Indonesia, (pre-school maybe?) and that he was gonna convert the U.S. to Islam.
Right, a black kid born to a white mother in Hawaii, raised in Kansas, (of all places) who began the guts of his career as a civil rights lawyer doing grass roots work in the black communities of the southside of Chicago. PUHLEESE .
Now, like I mentioned, this has been floating around the Internet, (the Muslim story) for a long time. If Chalmers is only just getting around to it, it just proves how desperate he is. (not that we hadnt already figured that out).
Still Tony, Im glad you were able to get it from him directly, and make your own deductions the dunce corner.
I dont think its gonna make any difference on his end, but its always good to keep him exposed for the dunce that he is. (kindly word dunce- and far more diplomatic than I)
Actually, I’ve even gone beyond the ‘complete idiot’ indication, but I’ve been trying to clean up my act.
Besides, at this point, who could have missed it?
Report thisBy Leefeller, January 31 at 5:55 pm #
Your opinion may be correct, only the election will tell, but I believe women, many women do not like Hillary for many different reasons.
I will vote for Obama, he offers something that most of those left running do not, hope and change. Tuesday will be an indicator. Bigots will vote for the KKK on the Republican ticket.
Hillary is the first choice of the special interests, where does Obama fit in the grand scheme of things?
Report thisBy antispin, January 31 at 4:22 pm #
I agree with Mr. Scheer’s sentiments up to this one: “Yes, if Hillary Clinton is the candidate, she probably will be better than the Republican alternative and, as Ted Kennedy made clear, deserving of our support.”
I don’t think I can hold me nose hard enough. Yes McCain and Romney are bloody awful, but at least people know that. Some people seem to think that HRC is some kind of children’s advocate, or something. She’s more of an advocate for child labor. She’s a freakin’ Corporate lawyer, fer cripes’ sake! She was raised Republican, married a Republican (Alan Greenspan ought to know http://www.newshounds.us/2007/09/18/alan_greenspan_bil l_clinton_was_the_best_republican_president_weve_had_in_a_w hile.php) and has war-mongering Republican types on her staff (see child muderer Madeleine Albright’s 60 Minutes http://youtube.com/watch?v=lK_QshS2EW8 .)
Now that Kucinich is out, I have no place to go.
Winter time is coming
All the sky is grey
Summer birds aren’t singing
Since you went away
Since you’ve been gone, end of the season
Winter is here, close of play
I get no kicks walking down Saville Row
There’s no more chicks left where the green grass grows and I know that
Winter is here, end of the season
My reason’s gone, close of play
I just can’t mix in all the clubs I know
Now Labour’s in, I have no place to go
You’re on a yacht near an island in Greece
Report thisThough you are hot, forget me not
I will keep waiting until your return
Now you are gone, end of the season
Winter will come any day
Back in the scrum on a wet afternoon
Down in the mud, dreaming of flowers in June
End of the season
End of the season
By jerry reyes, January 31 at 4:03 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
As an Illinois State Senator, it’s been reported that Obama pushed the wrong button on at least 6 different occasions when voting for some important bills. He acknowowledged the mistake, apologised on the floor of the Senate that his intent was to vote the other way. Now tell me , can I trust this guy to push the right button in case of a nuclear emergency?
Report thisBy Tony Wicher, January 31 at 3:39 pm #
Re Douglas Chalmers, January 31 at 11:35 am #
I just watched that UTube link, and I can’t believe what a dunce you are. I saw that Obama speech when it happened and of course I agreed with every word of it. That video was made by somebody so illiterate he can’t even spell “believe”. This rumor the right wing is spreading about Obama being a Muslim is so stupid that only a complete boob could give it any credit. From now on, that’s the department I’m putting you in.
Report thisBy thebeerdoctor, January 31 at 3:26 pm #
Check this out:
Report thishttp://www.cnn.com/video/politics/2008/01/30/sot.paul. huckabee.iraq.cnn
By Tony Wicher, January 31 at 3:12 pm #
Re Douglas Chalmers, January 31 at 11:35 am #
The fact is Obamas anti-religous anti-Christian speech in which he refers to Jesus Sermon on the Mount which he derides as ...a passage that is so radical that it is doubtful whether our own Defense Department would survive its application !!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPUe6T8RVXs You can add that to I dont oppose all wars
-----------------------------------------------------
Chalmers,
So what’s “evil” about that? “Anti-Christian”, yet? My God, Chalmers, now you sound like a closet Limbaugh dittohead. Do you oppose all wars? I don’t. Does that make me evil? All Obama meant was that if the Sermon on the Mount is taken literally, we wouldn’t have an army or a defense department at all. Maybe that would be the best thing, but it’s obviously not a viable political position.
Report thisBy Tony Wicher, January 31 at 3:03 pm #
Hillary is no “fighter”. On the contrary, she is an obedient, docile corporate Democrat.
Report thisBy Fade, January 31 at 2:57 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Why I won’t for Obama:
Barack Obama wants a U.N. Security Council resolution on the Gaza Strip to mention rocket attacks on Israel.
The Democratic presidential candidate in a letter sent Tuesday to Zalmay Khalilzad, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, urged the United States not to allow the resolution to pass unless it notes the rocket salvos.
The Security Council is in emergency session this week considering Israel’s blockade of Gaza.
“All of us are concerned about the impact of closed border crossings on Palestinian families,” wrote Obama, a U.S. senator from Illinois, in his letter to Khalilzad. “However, we have to understand why Israel is forced to do this. Gaza is governed by Hamas, which is a terrorist organization sworn to Israel’s destruction, and Israeli civilians are being bombarded on an almost daily basis.”
971 Palestinian children killed by the ISRAEL GOVERNMENT in official operations are less important than 6 israeli citizens killed by palestinian individuals.
This is change?
Report thisBy Andy, January 31 at 2:46 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Here via Fact Check are the VOTING recordS Obama and Clinton compared.
First via Talking Points Memo:
http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/03/compare_and_cont rast_hillary_obama_and_liebermans_votes_on_iraq.php
Second on Clinton website:
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/files/pdf/20080115_votes.pdf
Once you compare you will see there is NOT a dime’s worth of difference in their VOTING records.
Report thisFollow the votes not the rhetoric.
By johndoraemi, January 31 at 2:31 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
“Ron Paul says he agrees with practically everything the John Birch Society stands for. BOTH are far-right-wing lunatic fringe. Paul is more of the same Bush*tonomics.”
Can you approach these issues any more shallowly?
Paul will end the war. No other candidate will even express the possibility of doing so.
Paul will scale back the empire, and will close those 700+ military bases (if he isn’t assassinated).
Paul will cut waste and corporate welfare, overhaul the federal government (which has more than $2.3 Trillion unaccounted for at last announcement in 2001).
Paul will END THE DRUG WAR and release all non-violent drug related prisoners.
Paul will do a hell of a lot to impose fiscal responsibility and cut down on an insane global empire of mass murder with impunity.
You should be so lucky as to have Paul in. Maybe a few “right-wing” “fringe” ideas would do you good, so long as you’re casting your approval for FASCISTS.
If this is the “left” in this country, we are doomed. They offer nothing but FASCISM, ENDLESS WAR, ECONOMIC COLLAPSE, IMPERIALISM, DICTATORIAL DISDAIN FOR THE LAW, UNACCOUNTABLE ACCUMULATING POWER.
Dime’s worth of difference?
Report thisBy Maani, January 31 at 2:29 pm #
Alex:
You said, “They tried to appeal to her intellectual side by asking If you knew then what you know now, would you still vote for the war?
Actually, that is EXACTLY what Hillary said when the brouhaha about her vote became front page news; that “If she knew then what she knows now, she would not have voted for it.” Thus, while she has refused to “apologize” for her vote, she has qualified that with exactly the words you use.
Peace.
Report thisBy Maani, January 31 at 2:26 pm #
Doug:
Obama “anti-religious, anti-Christian?” I think not. Here is an excerpt from his speech to the Sojourners conference in Washington, D.C. in June 2006:
“If we truly hope to speak to people where they’re at - to communicate our hopes and values in a way that’s relevant to their own - we cannot abandon the field of religious discourse. Because when we ignore the debate about what it means to be a good Christian or Muslim or Jew; when we discuss religion only in the negative sense of where or how it should be practiced, rather than in the positive sense of what it tells us about our obligations towards one another; when we shy away from religious venues and religious broadcasts because we assume that we will be unwelcome - others will fill the vacuum, those with the most insular views of faith, or those who cynically use religion to justify partisan ends...More fundamentally, the discomfort of some progressives with any hint of religion has often prevented us from effectively addressing issues in moral terms. Some of the problem is rhetorical - if we scrub language of all religious content, we forfeit the imagery and terminology through which millions of Americans understand both their personal morality and social justice. Imagine Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address without reference to ‘the judgments of the Lord,’ or King’s ‘I Have a Dream’ speech without reference to ‘all of God’s children.’ Their summoning of a higher truth helped inspire what had seemed impossible and move the nation to embrace a common destiny.”
This does not sound particularly anti-religious or anti-Christian to me.
Peace.
Report thisBy Hammo, January 31 at 2:08 pm #
As Scheer notes, Obama seems to many as a better candidate than Hillary Clinton, for several reasons.
Whether we like it or not, one of the major challenges facing Obama is the fact that his dad was black and Obama is so-called “mixed-race.” If this can be dealt with in Americans’ minds, we will make significant progress.
Food for thought in the article ...
“Mixed-ethnicity Americans face challenges”
AmericanChronicle.com
January 31, 2008
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/50835
Report thisBy Edmond S. Sibel, January 31 at 1:27 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
If Iowa and South Carolina are any indicators, I don’t think this election will be decided by old white men. I have a large family that largely vote for Bush the first time. Now, my 83 year old father is the only one left who supports the Republicans. Add to that my 3 nephews and neices now of voting age who will vote Democratic. If, (a big IF) there is fair and transparent elections here for a change, they will never hold a majority again.
Report thisBy frank67, January 31 at 1:16 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
The Republicans are in so much trouble that Powell,s and Loy’s dog Asta could defeat them!
Report thisBy benL, January 31 at 1:00 pm #
I find it troubling to read anyone say Obama is just as electable as Hillary.
You seem to ignore the fact that while Obama has gained the respect of numerous members of both parties as well as indepents, the Clintons are among the most hated people in America.
If John McCain is the republican nominee, Hillary is assured to lose in a landslide! Why in the world would any independent or undecided voter choose Hillary, when John McCain beats her claim of experience, and comes off as more personable, and less divisive.
On the other hand, can you imagine the result of an Obama v. McCain general election? McCain, while he has the supposed “experience”, is a dull speaker, uninspiring, and old. Obama would look like a greek god next to the frail McCain. Not to mention the boost that any democrat will get in the general election given the job Bush has done.
Age, not race, will be the biggest demographic divide for Obama to overcome in the general election. In both Iowa and South Carolina, the only demographic Obama lost was the age group.
And even if race does play a factor in the general election unlike it has in any democratic primary so far (except possibly Nevada with the Latinos), Obama is assured to regain the votes he loses among racists through the independents and first time voters who have come out in masses in these first four primaries.
Report thisBy Alex, January 31 at 12:44 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Many will not remember that “Code Pink”, a pro-woman, anti-war group hounded Clinton at speeches and listening sessions in 2005-6 trying to get her to admit she made a mistake in voting for armed conflict in Iraq. They were trying to appeal to her feminine side, by saying that women don’t start wars. They tried to appeal to her intellectual side by asking “If you knew then what you know now, would you still vote for the war?” Her answer that she will continue to vote for the interests of her constituency (implying 9-11), was as vague and condecending then, as it is clear that she plans to vote for wars in the future now (no matter what her handlers tell her to say). To say she had to be overly tough because she’s a woman is only an excuse. She wouldn’t admit to making a mistake then, she won’t admit to it now, because she is not the peace-oriented woman that many feminists would like her to be. The sooner the feminists realize that all women are not peace-oriented, the sooner the Dems will choose the more peace oriented candidate on the ballot.
Report thisBy Douglas Chalmers, January 31 at 11:35 am #
#Re: Fact or Fiction Hey guys - #By Mike Mid-City, January 31: “Until we get money out of the temple of government, it (the government) is a consort to money. This is pretty much the definition of fascist government according to F.D.R. Having corporations able to influence elections gets us Blackwater..... When did we as a people start to allow these folks… Our Armed Forces are not combat ready. We have spent the last 30 years building up the most expensive, debt generating, military in history. What do we have to show for it...”
#By thebeerdoctor, January 31: “Peace is not an option, it is the only answer.... Report this...”
The fact is Obama’s anti-religous anti-Christian speech in which he refers to Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount which he derides as “...a passage that is so radical that it is doubtful whether our own Defense Department would survive its application” !!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPUe6T8RVXs You can add that to “I don’t oppose all wars” and “the crucible of the sword” to make your own conclusions about how intrinsically evil this person really is.
Support the troops? In what, Mike Mid-City? Yet another never-ending war??? Yes, Obama WIll give you one, uhh!
Report thisBy dj, January 31 at 11:13 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
There is no strength or commitment in saying you are against a war when you have no role in making it possible or not possible then repeatedly voting to continue it when you do have a role. The word for this, what Sen. Obama has done, is hypocrisy.
Report this