Home » Blog » Presidential Primary: On The War
Blog for America
Presidential Primary: On The War
However, her Iraq vote was not only wrongheaded. It was also cynical. She made it without taking the time to do critical background research, work that would have revealed doubts about Saddam's alleged weapons of mass destruction among U.S. intelligence agencies.
A 90-page National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, the consensus of the 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, was made available to all members of the Senate, but apparently she didn't bother to read it. (It's a classified document, but senators were permitted to read it at two secure locations on Capitol Hill.)
For a policy-maker who prides herself on preparation and a mastery of detail, that was a curious lapse — suggesting she had made up her mind to cast a vote that would armor her against charges she was too soft to be commander-in-chief. In other words, she, like many others, sent young Americans to war to boost her political fortunes. That's not the only mistake Clinton has ever made, but it is the most damning.
On Oct. 26, 2002, in the midst of a campaign for the U.S. Senate, he gave a speech in Chicago opposing the invasion of Iraq.
While Obama rightly acknowledged that Saddam Hussein was "a bad guy," he also pointed out, "Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States or to his neighbors. ... I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences."
Passed on without comment.
NOTE: All correspondence to Gov. Howard Dean must go through the DNC, not DFA.
Your Name: Your Email Address: Your State: Your Zip Code: Subject: Message for DFA Chair Jim DeanCandidate Endorsements
Local DFA Groups and Events
DFA Training Academy
Financial Contributions
Tech Support - DFA-Link
Tech Support - Blog for America
Tech Support - Other Message: Join the mailing list? Yes No
You can also contact us by phone at 802-651-3200 or snail mail at:
Democracy for America
PO Box 1717
Burlington, VT 05402
LMAO Paine - you're too much
Thank you, Denise. I am too much at times. In fact, when I am frustrated I am too much to take for myself, but you know I am making the point others have made.
Yes, others. I recall...hnmmmph, was it so recent as last night when none other than Puddleriver*in*WV was consoling all (and herself) with
*relax, folks...all is well or soon to be.*
WHY?
Because HQ "promised."
I do' know, call me a fool.
Too cool.
Remaining Grateful Dead members reunite for Obama concert
Three surviving members of the Grateful Dead - Mickey Hart, Phil Lesh and Bob Weir - will reunite at 7:30 p.m. Monday at the Warfield in San Francisco for "Deadheads for Obama," a concert to support Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.
http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_8143395?nclick_check=1
Morrissey - Mute Witness http://hypem.com/track/477948
Your poor witness
Crying so loudly on the floor
Oh, well, she's only trying to tell you
What it was that she saw
She is only trying to tell you
What it was that she saw
Now see her standing on the table
With her small arms flailing
And you feel such compassion
In your soul for
Your mute witness
Still testing the strength
Of our patience
Oh, well she's only trying to tell you
What it was that she saw
She is only trying to tell you
What it was that she saw
Now see her pointing to the frisbee
With a memory so fuzzy
And her silent words
Describing the sight of last night
4 A.M. Northside, Clapham Common
Oh, god, what was she doing there ?
Will she sketch the answer later ?
Well, I will ask her
"Now dry your tears, my dear"
Now see her mime in time so nicely
It would all have been so clear
If only she had never volunteered
"Your taxi is here, my dear"
Thanks for the heads up sm - right in my backyard.
Paine, perhaps the 1000th time will be the charm. There is no way the blog would be like this if we were still Dean for America.
Ambidextrous:
Morrissey - Irish Blood, English Heart Play Stop POPUP Favorite
Irish blood, English heart, this I'm made of
There is no-one on earth I'm afraid of
And no regime can buy or sell me
I've been dreaming of a time when
To be English is not to be baneful
To be standing by the flag not feeling
Shameful, racist or partial
Irish blood, English heart, this I'm made of
There is no-one on earth I'm afraid of
And I will die with both my hands untied
I've been dreaming of a time when
The English are sick to death of Labour
And Tories, and spit upon the name of Oliver Cromwell
And denounce this royal line that still salute him
And will salute him forever
what I want to know is, is the blog fixed?
12:47 am est
A day late, but still heartfelt...
Happy Birthday Joan in Fl (2/1)
btw, very weak and iffy connection so if I disappear...
Hey there Thankful!
Happy birthday Joan - hope it was a good one :)
Hey Denise and Paine! I have one bar and it comes and goes :-( My trip was all good except for between Rochester and Buffalo ~ yikes. If I can't get a connection here tomorrow, I'll go to the library midday... so far everyone I've talked with here in the burbs is clueless about the election other than the snippets they here on the news. How is anyone to make an informed decisionif they don't get factual info?
my last in reference to 1000 More Fools
LOL, yeah I'm in Chitown, but I always list time est cuz it's blogtime.
Well, T2T4, Greenich Burlington mean time is the standard.
:-D well, of course, I operate on my own time, but nonetheless list Burlington time for posts. Spent most of the time since arriving late Tues night catching up on much needed sleep. and eating to try to put a couple pounds on. Going up to visist the 'rents and my older sister tomorrow...
1:02 am est
Bill Maher is on now - gonna watch it and then sleep - and then sleep some more.
Night all :)
Night Denise ♥ Sweet ones atcha.
1:06 am est
Happy Groundhog Day :-)
1:11 am est
What's it 10pm, Denise?
lol at the last Paine ~ my mom won't allow that name to be mentioned in her house. Nice to see you on so late :-)
Ah, Jane's the one that's unmentionable. All's hangin' here. In wait and see mode...
what's to mind?
1:33 am est
I didn't take it literally, lol.
Uh oh, not sure this is going to refresh this time/next time... will post agian if possible but if not...
hugs and sweet dreams atcha Paine
♥'s to all
Kindness is free!
cool, it posted
1:42 am est
music's always good. as good as poetry slams, haiku, and recipes :-)
Night Paine. Pumpkin time here, too.
good morning's to Judy and Monica :-)
♥'s and Kindness...
1:54 am est
BMT?
Carville and Matalin are on MTP again Sunday. I won't watch. That reminded me of some of the quotes of his in the past.
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1800
Here is one that is really ugly:
"The Democratic constituency is just like a herd of cows. All you have to do is lay out enough silage and they come running. That's why I became an operative working with Democrats. With Democrats all you have to do is make a lot of noise, lay out the hay, and be ready to use the ole cattle prod in case a few want to bolt the herd."
Carville is going to need a taser not a prod, to keep me in line. floridagal.
Printable version Anti-war grouping supports Obama A leading anti-war movement in the United States has opted to back Barack Obama for the presidency. MoveOn.org claims to have 3.2 million members, and said it would start a campaign immediately to persuade them to support the senator from Illinois.
Mr Obama has won more delegates than Mrs Clinton from the Democrats' contests so far, but polls suggest Mrs Clinton will have the edge in the states that vote on Super Tuesday.
Super Tuesday could be decisive for the Republicans, as in many states the winner of the contest takes all of the delegates on offer.
In the Democratic race, however, states award their delegates according to the proportion of the vote won - meaning the tight battle could continue for weeks.
'Desperate for change'
MoveOn said 70% of its members had backed Mr Obama over 30% for Mrs Clinton.
"Our members' endorsement of Senator Obama is a clear call for a new America at this critical moment in history," said MoveOn executive director Eli Pariser.
He says MoveOn's goal is to bring "progressive values" to Washington,
"Seven years of the disastrous policies of the Bush administration have left the country desperate for change."
Mr Pariser said America needed its next president "to end the war in Iraq, provide health care to every American, deal with our climate crisis, and restore America's standing in the world".
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I would go further and say an end to the War Party's control of budget and foreign policy, a new green economy growing a respose to the threat of warming, and a health care system actually focused on health rather than expensive treatment doled out through a labyrinth of payers. I'd go further. That is a modest list. But I do agree with MoveOn that Barack Obama is more likely to complete that list.
Good morning, everybody
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYATbsu2cP8
Hillary knows better. She has experience.
No the blog is not fixed. Offer it up for the people being killed in Iraq.
Whenever I suggest in comments on KOS that the invasion of Iraq to gain bases and a listening post in the Middle East during the Clinton Administration, that suggestion is forcibly rejected. The script that it was all Bush Two''s idea and the logistics of moving men and materielle and planning the lay-out of the bases and their location was all accomplished in less than two years is the "official" story and they're going to stick with it.
How many people are kicking themselves for not grabbing the bull by the horns and removing Saddam and moving onto the southwest Asian mainland during Clinton? How many are regretting that they let him piddle around with periodic air strikes? How many are arguing that it could have been done cleanly and gotten over with, if they'd acted sooner?
When are we going to talk about the air war? When are we going to talk about the Air Force assets, the strategic command, the domination of cyber space, the dominion of the U.S. over all the earth?
Confession isn't just good for the soul, it's a necessary antecendent to making a change in one's behavior. We cannot remove the Air Force from its bases in Iraq until they are admitted.
5:01 AM EST
The blog she posted correctly.
BTW, I noticed in yesterday's Keith Olbermann comment that he referred to needles in hay-stacks that hadn't been made yet. LOL
I found that I used the haystacks in a post on Hannah, entitled "A Little Kerfuffle" and then I found this on the web
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJ__ubDz_Xk
enjoy!! I've added it to the Hannah post from last August.
hello all. just popped in to bestow some loving blessings on the blog. as across the country, some divisions have formed here as this race has progressed. I've read so many stories lately of mothers and daughters, brothers, sisters, best friends being on opposite sides re: HRC vs. BHO. some are handlng it very well - others are building mean verbal bridges that are dividing those once close. then we have the corpmedia whores - pounding the drum that this will tear the dem party apart and lead to another loss in November.
WE MUST PROVE THEM WRONG. please, I feel we must step back and ask ourselves before speaking/blogging - is this how I really feel, will this make my country safer, the ill better, the hungry, well-fed? will this bring the troops home, protect our freedoms, restore our Constition to it's full level of respect? amid all the things that need to be fixed, is my passion creating divisions that may never be healed? will I NOT vote for the eventual dem nominee if it's not my guy/gal? is my anger, or disappointment or intuition going to allow the republicans to have 4, perhaps 8 more years to destroy all we love and believe in??!!!
LOVE AND BLESSINGS ON ALL OF US. it's going to be a tough 9 months and we need to be wary as the intensity of this all heats up. if a Democrat becomes POTUS this time, it will still be just the beginning of the fight. let's have a tempered passion for the dem contest and save our burning passion for the general election. take nothing for granted. together we will prevail - apart we will not.
well, I'm off to watch the Dog Show - a wonderful way to start a Saturday! I'll leave the news and commentary for later...
hope you all have easy weather and a fine day - and as our dear friend says:
remember, kindness is free.
let's have a tempered passion for the dem contest and save our burning passion for the general election
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~have to disagree somewhat as this is a life or death struggle for the fifty state plan and bottom up politics, passionless people don't vote
do agree, carborate in a little love
Whistlepig Pome
Time, tide and spring
a month with a heart
in the center
Small things checking for sun
already spring
before we're ready
More rain than snow
more sun more shine
clouds white sky blue
Winter hearts doffing mittens
toes tingle to be free
sap runs rises
Our hearts already warm
as butter on a biscuit &
raspberry jam
come, come
jjl
2/2/08
Nowhere for the Democratic Wing to go
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_joe_quee_080201_alone_on_the_left_wi.htm
Once upon a time the Democratic party had a left wing - not in the European sense, as communism has never flourished here and socialism has barely taken root; but by American standards, presidential candidates such as George McGovern and Teddy Kennedy in the 70s and early 80s were pretty far left. (Kennedy, whose contributions to his country surpass those of his more famous bothers, remains uncompromisingly liberal, but represents Massachusetts, America's most liberal state.) This led to electoral disaster and a Republican golden age, interrupted only by Jimmy Carter's bewildering presidency and ended when Bill Clinton pulled the party back to the centre of the spectrum, where it is today. Of the candidates on the hustings this year, only Kucinich is even vaguely of the left. And now he has pulled out, lacking the cash to go on and worried that he might lose his congressional seat.
Viable leftwing candidates in the US are now spotted less often than UFOs. And creatures in UFOs would have a better chance of getting invited to the debates.
Elizabeth Holtzman takes down the specious arguments against impeachment.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_elizabet_080202_judiciary_committee_.htm
What then is the justification for taking impeachment "off the table"? Congressional leaders don't defend the administration, nor do they contend that its actions are unimpeachable or less serious than Nixon's. Instead they argue there is no time, or that impeachment proceedings would distract the Congress from other work, or divide the country. The subtext seems to be fear that impeachment could undermine Democratic election prospects in 2008.
But even these "pragmatic" arguments are wrong. Let's take them one at a time:
Insufficient time. In the case of Nixon, the House officially instructed the Judiciary Committee to act in early February 1974. The committee finished voting on articles of impeachment July 29, less than six months later. No presidential impeachment proceeding had taken place for almost 100 years, so the committee had to start from scratch, analyzing the Constitution and developing procedures for the impeachment inquiry. Now that the relevant legal spade work is done and a road map for proper impeachment proceedings exists, Congress might conduct them even faster than in 1974.
Distraction. During Watergate, the impeachment inquiry didn't prevent Congress from getting its work done. In fact, the House Judiciary Committee also worked on other matters during impeachment, just as the Senate did during its impeachment trial of former President Bill Clinton.
Divisiveness. True, President Clinton's impeachment was a highly partisan process that divided the country - because most Americans didn't support it. They believed his conduct was reprehensible, but not an impeachable offense. Impeachment therefore had negative repercussions for the Republicans who instigated it.
Nixon's impeachment united the American people. The process was bipartisan, demonstrating this wasn't just a Democratic ploy to undo an election. The fairness of the process, the seriousness of purpose, the substantial evidence - all gave the public confidence that justice had been done. This reinvigorated the shared value that the rule of law and What then is the justification for taking impeachment "off the table"? Congressional leaders don't defend the administration, nor do they contend that its actions are unimpeachable or less serious than Nixon's. Instead they argue there is no time, or that impeachment proceedings would distract the Congress from other work, or divide the country. The subtext seems to be fear that impeachment could undermine Democratic election prospects in 2008.But even these "pragmatic" arguments are wrong. Let's take them one at a time:
Insufficient time. In the case of Nixon, the House officially instructed the Judiciary Committee to act in early February 1974. The committee finished voting on articles of impeachment July 29, less than six months later. No presidential impeachment proceeding had taken place for almost 100 years, so the committee had to start from scratch, analyzing the Constitution and developing procedures for the impeachment inquiry. Now that the relevant legal spade work is done and a road map for proper impeachment proceedings exists, Congress might conduct them even faster than in 1974.
Distraction. During Watergate, the impeachment inquiry didn't prevent Congress from getting its work done. In fact, the House Judiciary Committee also worked on other matters during impeachment, just as the Senate did during its impeachment trial of former President Bill Clinton.
Divisiveness. True, President Clinton's impeachment was a highly partisan process that divided the country - because most Americans didn't support it. They believed his conduct was reprehensible, but not an impeachable offense. Impeachment therefore had negative repercussions for the Republicans who instigated it.
Nixon's impeachment united the American people. The process was bipartisan, demonstrating this wasn't just a Democratic ploy to undo an election. The fairness of the process, the seriousness of purpose, the substantial evidence - all gave the public confidence that justice had been done. This reinvigorated the shared value that the rule of law and preservation of democracy are more important than any president or party.
Stonewalling such widespread public sentiment is itself divisive, leading at least half the country to feel their concerns about upholding the Constitution are being ignored. Only a serious airing of evidence in hearings would heal the split.
Undermining election prospects. When the impeachment process began, Nixon had just been reelected in one of the largest landslides in history. Few, if any, worried about whether impeachment was a political winner for Congress or the Democrats. Public opinion simply forced Congress' hand when Nixon fired Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox. After the Judiciary Committee conducted impartial hearings and voted on impeachment, Congress' approval ratings soared. Republicans were swamped in the November 1974 elections.
Whether or not they bring electoral rewards in 2008, impeachment proceedings are the right thing to do. They will help curb the serious abuses of this administration, and send a strong message to future administrations that no president or vice president is above the law
sequence?
lovely puddle
Pelosi was in the room Huron John and complicity is why Impeachment is off the table, especially when evidence could be used in court at the Hague. see how easy it was to roll her on more tax cuts for business
afraid of what
their shadow?
voters pop up
vote republican, hide
sixweeks,months,years more
of bitter winter? what do they see
those that live in the dark
afraid
I hear lots of trial lawyers and supporters are pushing for John Edwards as AG - how hopeful and refreshing! just imagine what he could do... if any democratic President wants to make real change then every agency and department in this country needs a John Edwards to lead and inspire it. who will pull the best cabinet together - Hillary or Barack? watch closely and think hard - this is important, people! ;)
thanks for the pome puddle! lovely...
The Great Depression cost Republican President Herbert Hoover his jobWhen the economy is in trouble, it rarely bodes well for the party in power.
Republican President Herbert Hoover was blamed for the 1929 Great Depression, leading to a landslide victory for Franklin D Roosevelt and ushering in an era of Democratic reform that lasted for a generation.
The most popular Republican president of recent times, Ronald Reagan, was elected in 1980 over his Democratic incumbent, Jimmy Carter, after inflation soared to a record high during the oil crisis.
Economy puts Republicans at risk By Steve Schifferes
Economics reporter, BBC Newshttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7215351.stm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Carter was stuck with a deficit caused by Republicans failing to pay for a war. The next President will have to deal with stagflation. same cause complicit Democrats
69.
department in this country needs a John Edwards to lead and inspire it. who will pull the best cabinet together - Hillary or Barack? watch closely and think hard - this is important, people! ;)
thanks for that Jo.
John Edwards would indeed make a great AG or anything else he wanted to do in an OBAMA administration.
Hillary would bring the same old cronies we had in the last century. Not that all of them were bad, it's must that we need the new in. Make a clean break of it.
who will pull the best cabinet together - Hillary or Barack?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jo
Hillary, for the goals of her administration. There are some really talented people in in a holding pattern on K Street
I have no doubt if elected Clinton would run a tight ship. the question is who is steering not the deck hands
paying the end of the months bills I just passed last winters utility and fuel costs
is winter over yet?
Edwards floated as AG is patronizing I would sure hope Obama doesn't do it from his HQ's
If Obama gets above 45 % for Tuesday who the panicked Clintons go to for money the week after will tell the tale of the cabinet.
Joan*In*Florida, hope you had a great birthday.
GHD (aka Ground Hog Day) today -- shadow ? no shadow ? inquiring minds want to know
mainefem, looks like a repub primary (or is it a caucus ?) today in ME
my wife got a call last evening from a very young girl from the Hillary campaign, asking her who she'll be voting for next Tues here in MA; my wife responded "none of your business"
drats, forgot the sequence time stamp
9:01 AM EST
Joan*In*Florida, hope you had a great birthday.
GHD (aka Ground Hog Day) today -- shadow ? no shadow ? inquiring minds want to know
mainefem, looks like a repub primary (or is it a caucus ?) today in ME
my wife got a call last evening from a very young girl from the Hillary campaign, asking her who she'll be voting for next Tues here in MA; my wife responded "none of your business"
Been a colder winter here, too. With luck, a shorter one.
9:06 am EST
Phil the AG post was floated by Edwards' trial lawyer friends. I haven't heard anything from the Obama camp about it - Barack is on record that it is premature to be speaking of a cabinet and that he is making no deals, as others have suggested. do you think they are being patronizing, too?
AG Edwards?
By Matthew Mosk
John Edwards for Attorney General?
That's an idea that has been gaining currency among some of his closest supporters -- U.S. trial lawyers who gathered this weekend in Puerto Rico for an annual winter conference.
"I sure would hope there will be a role for him," said Gibson Vance, a Mongtomery, Ala., trial lawyer who has been a longtime friend and supporter of Edwards. "He would be a heck of a tough attorney general. Think about it."
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/01/28/premature_maybe_ag_edwards.html
If Obama gets above 45 % for Tuesday who the panicked Clintons go to for money the week after will tell the tale of the cabinet.
so you think Hillary has it in the bag?!
9:11 AM EST
77.Phil Specht
Sat, 02/02/08
Reply to this
paying the end of the months bills I just passed last winters utility and fuel costs
is winter over yet?
Edwards floated as AG is patronizing I would sure hope Obama doesn't do it from his HQ's
+++
Phil -
Haven't you realized yet that a lot of what gets stated here are individual bloggers' hopes and not something official ?
But if you are so inclined, you can check out http://www.barackobama.com/index.php and see for yourself.
9:14 AM EST
borrowing from the best of Edwards's campaign:
Closing Income Gap Tops Obama’s Agenda for Economic Change
By DAVID LEONHARDTPublished: February 2, 2008WICHITA, Kan. — Senator Barack Obama says the top priority of the next president should be to create a more lasting and equitable prosperity than achieved by either President Bush in the current decade or even Bill Clinton in the 1990s.
...
John Edwards campaign was about governance. he would have overturned the unconstitutional executive orders before he left the Capitol on Inaugaration Day. The AG doesn't get Congress to pass laws reversing decades of economic injustice or ignoring basic needs like health care for all. Since Obama has had ample opportunity to spell out how he would take on entrenched special interests (oh yes actually he has ... "seat them");or the unitary executive bull, it is someones dream he would have an AG do it for him. I'll reserve judgement til after the FISA vote. Of course John Edwards would make a great AG he would have made a great President.
Phil - I didn't intend to be patronizing to JE - I have always had and shown a lot of respect for him. I just didn't support him for POTUS. I do feel he would be fantastic as AG or a number of other positions and I'm not sure why you feel it's patronizing for me to feel that way.
If Obama gets above 45 % for Tuesday who the panicked Clintons go to for money the week after will tell the tale of the cabinet.
so you think Hillary has it in the bag?!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
no if Obama gets above 45% on Tuesday (which is an eight point gain from yesterday) he can make it a competition state by state the rest of the way to the convention
Tuesday is mainly a test of where Edwards supporters go since they were such a large (now undecided) cohort
It is one thing for an Edwards supporter to muse about what John does next (your link), another for an Obama supporters, and a delicate issue.
of course John Edwards would make a great AG, Jo, why wouldn't you think that, I'm just commenting on the way floating such an idea from the Obama camp would seem opportunistic and would be unwise
here on the blog we speak our minds
Phil Specht
Sat, 02/02/08
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
LOL Phil...............its 9.30am..........agreed, but judging by the way many Obama supporters here on this very blog treated Edwards supporters and at time humiloated and ridiculed them, if thats any indication the way it went aroud the counry, can you really blame Edwards supporters telling Obama supporters to take a hike(to put it politely)................also it will be ironic that Obama may pay the price in edwrads supporters staying home............the Obama clan, in their fervor, excitement and tenacity for their candidate may have ushered in his doom at the voting booth.............if I I were them id be doing some serious butt kissing to edwards people and fast..
People dont forget...............
I do expect Clinton to get over 50% on Tuesday, but in no way does a 52-48 split hand her the nomination. it will mean that Obama has to beat his January fundraising in Feb. to pull ahead in March.
Phil - please click to read Obama's positions on lobbying and ethics - you do know his background on combatting corruption in IL, right? when you say 'seat them', I think you imply a different role than any corp would actually have in the process.
I expect the Pats to win and the Giants to beat the spread. if you don't bet it doesn't matter
Obama's small donations are just fans showing their appreciation and buying a round, Clinton's large ones are bets.
here on the blog we speak our minds
thank goodness we do. do you think perhaps your anger at Obama and all of his support has you being a bit irrational in pointing the patronizing finger, Phil? did you attack anyone's motives when Biden or Richardson dropped out and we postulated what cabinet positions they would be good for?
I read that article this morning and it excited me to think of JE as AG so I popped over here to share that excitement. if I can't state that here without drawing fire then I guess this is truly a much different blog than it used to be.
Obama has a very good ethics platform Jo, I was just pointing out that the AG can only be as aggressive as a President lets them.
I hold two strikes against Clinton, her vote on Kyl-Lieberman, and what the Clinton Justice Department did when Tyson took over the pork industry (and thinking back to 1990 and 91 when Bill was campaigning around the country in Tyson's personal jet. with the likes of Tyson "seated at the table" do you perp walk them before or after they get up
I have no doubt that Bush Clinton Bush Clinton would be more of the same.
I'm an Obama delegate.
why do you think I am attacking you when I am offering cautionary advice to Obama people Jo?
DISASTER SCENARIO--2008
http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/linkframe.php?linkid=51016
At this point, the most likely--but hardly guaranteed--outcome to the 2008 elections is John McCain winning the Presidency over Hillary Clinton, while Democrats make decent gains of 10-15 seats in the House and 3-5 seats in the Senate. If this comes to pass, the failure to win the Presidency will be squarely placed on several major pillars of the progressive movement. MoveOn.org will be blamed for losing Iraq. Howard Dean will be blamed for the Michigan and Florida situations. Progressive activists in the blogosphere and on the ground will be blamed for pushing the party too far to the left, dividing the party, and denying Hillary Clinton an earlier nomination that could have helped her against McCain.
The central cause of this scenario is timidity on Iraq. John McCain would not be the Republican nominee, and neither Clinton nor Obama would be losing to him, if Iraq had not been taken off the table and if the "escalation is working" narrative had not taken hold. And yet, if this scenario comes to pass, the Democrats who allowed that narrative to take hold will find their relative power increased, while we will find ours relatively decreased. In a very real sense, this has already happened, given the strained relations both MoveOn.org and Howard Dean have with congressional Democrats. Not only has Iraq been taken off the table, but our two strongest voices within the establishment are being taken out of the equation.
The simple truth is that, starting with the explosion of blogosphere traffic during the invasion of Iraq and with the rise of Howard Dean's presidential campaign in 2003, over the past five years, the rising and declining fortunes of the contemporary manifestation of the progressive movement have been inextricably tied to winning and losing the Iraq debate nationwide. Right now, because we are losing that debate, we are losing pretty much every other fight, too. Until we start winning that fight again, our fortunes will not reverse. As long as the Iraq war continues, winning that debate must always be our number one priority.
Obama's small donations are just fans showing their appreciation and buying a round,
they are the 2008 version of Dean's 2003 donors - they are the grassroots of our country, so for you to minimize them now is to minimize all you have supported here since Dean for America opened that dam. it's very sad that you are so bitter about Obama and now have so little faith in the grassroots.
I'm not angry at the Obama supporters, in fact I am one now. I'm angry about the two hundred thousand homeless vets.
9:47 AM EST
I just heard on my local news that the Massachusetts Army National Guard is only at 42% readiness rate, due largely to commitments in Iraq. If a disaster happens here in MA, well ...
Thanks George.
Thanks Hillary.
why do you think I am attacking you when I am offering cautionary advice to Obama people Jo?
because you told me I was being patronizing. if it was a caution, it didn't sound that way to me. thanks for the clarification! ;)
Jo
the only way Obama wins is if he submerges his current support into the grassroots movement and swells it, not the other way around, and the current one wants peace first and foremost
we have War Party in McCain and War Party lite in Clinton, Obama as War Party lightest doesn't get it done
so Phil thanks for that and I am off - the sun is out for the first time in a bit and I have the day off so need to go soak up some of that good energy.
Newish thread
Add your comment
(to reply directly to a comment, click the reply icon for that comment)Post closed to commenting
Videos of some of the 64 House Healthcare Heroes standing strong for a public health insurance option
Congressman Emanuel Cleaver
Congressman Lloyd Dogget
Congressman Keith Ellison
Congressman Bob Filner
Congressman Phil Hare
Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey
Congresswoman Maxine Waters
Blog for America
-
1 Turncoat Senator vs. 410,649 Americans
By Mary R on Nov 19, 2009 3:06 PM EST -
Send a message they can't miss
By Mary R on Nov 17, 2009 12:00 PM EST -
Will the real Democrat please stand up?
By Mary R on Nov 11, 2009 2:03 PM EST -
3 Million and Counting
By Mary R on Nov 6, 2009 12:47 PM EST -
Is Sen. Nelson listening to Nebraska?
By Mary R on Nov 6, 2009 12:31 PM EST
Recent Blog Posts
-
Dreams wow gold
By wow gold w on Nov 22, 2009 3:17 AM EST -
the Psychobiology talk about the pc wow gold game
By wow gold w on Nov 21, 2009 11:39 PM EST -
Spring Trend 2009 Abercrombie & Fitch
By Abercrombie F on Nov 21, 2009 9:44 PM EST -
Vacationing?
By Phoenix V on Nov 21, 2009 2:07 PM EST -
Bags And Shoes Gucci or Louboutin
By Buy l on Nov 21, 2009 2:37 AM EST
-
By Susan Rowe on Feb 2, 2008 12:13 AM ESTDean is first!