Amy: I love you but did you really have to keep repeating the footage of Clinton’s student council soundbite celebration speech last night? She is almost as painful to listen to as Bush--although with Bush there is some perverse repulsion-attraction to his freakshow idiocy, while Clinton is just common pedestrian blather. What bothers me though, Amy, is the way you have adopted the MSM’s deception of suggesting that both sides are equally participating in “scorched earth” tactics, when it is the sort of whispered truth that an increasingly desperate Clinton singularly has used gutter tactics in her kitchensink bottomfeeder approach in appealing to ignorance and fear. It is sad that you have glossed over this and is a loss to us all that you did not condemn it in a clear voice. 

When the NAFTA story first broke I distictly recall that both campaigns were implicated, but that news was quickly buried and it became Hillary’s NAFTA battering ram in Ohio (despite the trade policy was a signature of the Clinton years she boasts of as her experience). If anyone were to reveal this info on a politainment talk show, they would be shouted down, dismissed, or the quick cut to commercial would block it out:

Report: NAFTA-Gate Leaker Said Hillary’s People Were Reassuring Canada, Too By Eric Kleefeld - March 5, 2008, 11:33PM

The NAFTA-Gate controversy has taken another turn, one that could potentially boomerang back on Hillary Clinton after initially damaging Barack Obama.

The Canadian Press—Canada’s domestic equivalent of the AP—is reporting that the original source of the leak was Ian Brodie, chief of staff to Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper. And as it turns out, Brodie’s original conversation with reporters focused much more on Hillary as the candidate whose people were reassuring Canada that the anti-trade rhetoric was all just campaign talk.

“He said someone from Clinton’s campaign is telling the Embassy to take it with a grain of salt,” said one participant in the conversation. The source added, “someone called us and told us not to worry.”

Hillary’s people were able to use NAFTA-Gate very effectively in questioning Obama’s honesty in the Ohio and Texas campaigns, ultimately pulling off some decent wins. But if this thing doesn’t die down, and the focus turns from Obama over to Hillary, they could very well see the story come back to bite them.

Link: http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03…

From: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.2008…

In addition she now claims she brokered peace in Ireland as well--but who is calling her out on that loud and clear? Please, the media succumbed to her “poor me” whining that she wasn’t getting fair media treatment after her plans of waltzing to the throne were stalled. Media fairness in the cynical Clinton worldview is the same way they view the Democratic party as their personal vehicle, if the media isn’t engaging in character assassination of their opponents, their threats, their enemies, it isn’t doing their job.

When Amy talks about Bush and Cheney being arrested on sight in Vermont, I get visions of a very inebriated GWB behind the wheel of a secret service car with Cheney in the back strangling a goat. George is yelling, “Whoo! Where the hell are we?” as he swerves back and forth until he slams into a tree in Brattleboro. Both are simultaneously arrested, put on trial and sentenced. Ah, fantasy.

Goodman should know better than to offer tripe like this.  Because the reality is that NO state is any more a “bellwether” for ANYTHING than any other state.  The entire claim is a red herring.

If she wants to make claims about Vermont’s system of democracy, that’s fine.  But suggesting that its conclusions should or do hold any more weight than any other state is just plain silly.

Peace.

Amy’s right of course. It really is all about the war.

The economy goes south ... because of the war.

The dollar loses value ... because of the war.

Gas costs more, food costs more, everything costs more, because of the war. Even some wealthy and privileged are feeling a pinch, because of the war.

And we have not yet realized the pain of dealing with shortages, but they will come.

Still all the fear and discomfort pale into insignificance when a loved one is lost, because of the war.

Who shall we thank for this heinous, horrible, inexcusable and immoral war? Bush? Cheney? Halliburton and all the war profiteers?

No. We need to thank a weak and shortsighted congress and all their equally weak and shortsighted excuses for having encouraged an amoral administration and a greedy corporate empire to have their war.

Had they said no, all the stuff that followed would have been clearly impeachable, even to them. And maybe someone in congress would have justifiably stepped up and demanded this administration be stopped.

Maybe not. They still don’t seem to grasp their responsibility.

Still, that’s where the blame belongs. On those who bought the lie, then sold it to their constituents. A criminal becomes ten times more dangerous when the law say’s to him, go ahead ... do whatever you want. We wont stop you.

There really is no excuse.
It really is all about the war.

At least & at last the people somewhere in America are finally taking official action against the crimes of Bush/Cheney.  Our elected officials in Congress, that should be trying them both with letters of impeachment, are too ‘chicken’ to do their Constitutional duty or are in collusion with this corrupt Executive branch and any whom have not supported impeachment should be ousted from public office ASAP.

There should be city, county, & state resolutions of this ilk in every state in the union!  Also in every country of the world, for that despicable cretin from Crawford, Texas and his purely evil partner in crime deserve the world’s wrath as well.  Bush/Cheney are the worst ‘war criminals’ of this century and deserve to be tried by the International Court of Justice...and then taken away for immediate EXECUTION!  Paul Hammond - Chiang Mai, Thailand