"I’m really troubled by his questioning the sincerity of Obama’s opposition to the war.
Obama has been there from the start, opposing this war." --Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), saying Bill Clinton's comments about Obama are
'too personal' and called on Clinton to refrain from attacking Obama’s integrity, Link
It's "too personal" to question his integrity on the war?
I have a question:
What did Obama do to try to stop the war in 2002?
What did Obama do to try to stop the war in 2003?
What did Obama do to try to stop the war in 2004?
What did Obama do to try to stop the war in 2005? (He voted for more war funds)
What did Obama do to try to stop the war in 2006? (He voted for more war funds)
What did Obama do to try to stop the war in 2007? (He voted for more war funds)
For years, I've been saying, "At some point, somebody is going to run for president
but where is that person right now? Why don't they stand up to Bush right now?"
Is it enough to say "I was against the war" and give a few speeches about it?
Why didn't Senator Obama use the filibuster?
He claims he wanted to stop the war, but not enough to stand up?
"Oh put a sock in it, Dick.
No one's been quicker to apologize under GOP pressure than you...
Ii'm about fed up with the entire cadre of dem leadership in congress,
a bunch of spineless dogs. i can just picture you holding obama's hand
and defending him against the repub noise machine when they do a
on his butt. Come back after you've learned to standup for yourself first, Chump."
-- db531 Link
When the Tonkin Gulf incident took place in 1964, I was a journeyman CIA analyst.
As a current intelligence analyst responsible for Russian policy toward Southeast Asia
and China, I worked very closely with those responsible for analysis of Vietnam and China.
Out of that experience I must say that, as much as one might be tempted to laugh at the
bizarre theatrical accounts of the incident involving small Iranian boats and U.S. naval ships
in the Strait of Hormuz, this is nothing to laugh at.
How can our president speak so glibly about 10 more years in Iraq?
He must not remember Vietnam.
"I understand that leaders are supposed to lead. Yet, I have never seen
lead her fellow Democrats in a successful challenge of
President Bush. Never. That's a pretty awful record...
That's the real criticism that should be leveled against Hillary Clinton.
Yet I have
almost never seen anyone make this point on TV. Part of the
reason for that is
because Obama and Edwards did no better
in their time in the Senate. So, they
are embarrassed into an awkward silence on the matter.
The reason I hold Senator Clinton to a higher standard, other than the fact that
she has been there longer, is that she had the biggest name recognition and
could have led her fellow Democrats -- but chose not to. Instead she chose
accommodation and capitulation. That's a record worth criticizing, if anyone
ever got around to it."
That's pure horseshit.
They can't come up with a legitimate reason to hate her so they fabricate one.
If you're going to hate someone for appeasing Bush, what about Reid and Pelosi?
What about Robert Byrd, who's been there since the Civil War?
What about Kennedy and Kerry and Biden and the other old-timers?
Hillary is the one person in the senate who couldn't speak up, yet they
lay all this at her feet because Arianna has a BIG loan she needs to pay back.
(Rumor has it Arianna borrowed $7M to start her hate site, and everyone
knows hating the Clintons is the biggest cash cow in politics.)
This is a Karl Rove tactic: You take that which you are MOST guilty of
and then accuse your opponent of it - that's classic Karl Rove.
Why didn't Senator I-was-against-this-war-from-the-start fight it?
I'm not letting go of this one -- sorry. The New York Times has -- for the third time, now
-- printed a truncated version of Hillary's controversial quote about Martin Luther King in
a piece running in Sunday's paper.
Adding to the absurdity, this time the paper did it in an article that was about whether
her words had been distorted. Seriously. The piece is entitled, "Clinton Accuses Obama
Camp of Distorting Her Words."
Presumably an article about this subject would contain Hillary's actual quote, to allow
readers to make up their own minds about what she meant. But this is how The Times's
Adam Nagourney and Patrick Healy characterize the comments:
This was what Mrs. Clinton said on Monday: “Dr. King’s dream began to be realized
when LBJ passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It took a president
to get it done.”
At a later stop, she said that her remark had not captured what she had sought to portray.
Actually, this isn't what Mrs. Clinton said on Monday, which is pretty bizarre, considering
that The Times began that paragraph with, "this is what Mrs. Clinton said on Monday."
The full quote -- what Hillary really said -- is right here.
Could I get an Obama backer to write in and tell me how you're confortable with
Obama when the unprincipled bastards like the New York Whore Times,
MSM and FOX News and Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly are all pulling for the guy?
Don't you wonder why they'll do anything to stop her?
The Republican borrow and spend economy is finally catching up with us
payment on the credit card is due. Bush has
added 5 trillion dollars
to the national debt.
They funded the wars and
tax cuts for the rich with borrowed money. But Republicans
the concept that debt has to be repaid. They think they can just borrow
and spend forever.
People don't realize the real cost of the war. It means that they won't
be able to send
their kids to college. It means that parks will close.
It means that China and Saudi Arabia
will own more of our country and
that they will be able to influence our laws. It means
that fewer people
will be able to afford homes. It means that fewer people will get health
care. It means that old people will die homeless and in poverty. It
means veterans will be
put out on the street. It means lower wages,
higher prices, more crime, and the death of
the American dream.
San Bruno, CA.
If only the Democrats could learn to fight back.
The Fascist dogs call us the "tax and spend" party,
but the GOP spends money they don't have, which is worse.
If we could just get the scared Democrats to speak the truth.
"Bill Clinton is correct in that we don't really know who Obama is. His legislative
track record is embarrassingly inconsequential, so there's not that much to examine
in the way of accomplishment even if the media wanted to. I chalk up his popularity
to two factors. One, a segment of the voting public is treating this important matter
as if it were an American Idol contest. Obama is perfect for the Shallow Vote, who
like nothing more than a great stage performance and being part of the herd."
-- Gnu Link
Can anybody tell me what Obama stands for?
Please don't send me links - do your own thinking.
And don't say "change," because everyone but Bush wants change.
If you plan to vote for Obama, shouldn't you know what he stands for?
Obama and Edwards would have been considered right-wing
Democrats 15 years ago.
The voting record and policies of all the
major candidates lies within a very narrow window.
This is how far the
debate has shifted -- Clinton triangulation wins you temoprary
at the expense of long-term political viability.
There would have been no need for triangulation if the Democrats
had backed their president instead of throwing him to the GOP wolves.
The idiots cost themselves 14 years of congressional power with that great strategery.
differentiates Clinton from the other
candidates is that she will
more of the same right-ward drift in our discourse and politics.
This is lunacy.
How could you know that?
I think, once she's elected, she's going to do what she thinks is best.
If the vote was indeed hacked in NH, which seems possible,
mean that Clinton = Tony Blair in a skirt?
Why would you insult her that way?
If there is evidence that the NH vote was hacked
a full investigation should begin immediately.
Are you comfortable with her campaign tactics?
Do you think it's OK to
sink to any level to win?
You didn't mention anything specific, so it's hard to answer.
But I'll say I want a nominee who really wants to win.
In 2000 and 2004 we had candidates who would accept victory
if offered to them, but both seemed to not want it bad enough to work for it.
What do you mean by "any level?"
What has she done (besides winning) that angered you?
Bart, I must admit, you have changed my opinion quite dramatically.
You're absolutely right in saying that Hillary had to at least embrace the war hawk
movement because as a woman, she does not want to be portrayed as weak.
As a New York elected official, she must cater to her constituents.
But the real reason she must take her positions is because of the stupidity of the
American people. If you or any of your readers want a prime example, during the
New Hampshire primary, I heard Chris Matthews (Bloated gasbag) talk about how
Reagan's victory was a blue-collar revolution, how the Democrats lost significant
blue collar support that instead favored the fake cowboy.
The sad thing is-the gasbag was right. Reagan-the man who personally contributed
more to the death of organized labor than any other American figure, who thought
that some of the biggest problems facing America were capital gains taxes, was elected
with significant middle-class blue collar support. All one has to do to see the effects of
Reagan's economic policies is take a walk through the streets of Flint, Michigan.
So when you have blue collar workers voting for Reagan and Democrats voting
for Nader, can a person blame Hillary for lying? She has to save people from themselves.
Joe, thanks for that - probably :)
You're right about the stupidity of the voters.
They're the most easily fooled bunch of morons you'll ever find.
But you failed to mention what "lies" Hillary has told.
"Just how beneficial is it that Kerry is standing on stage with Obama?
I fail to see where Kerry's endorsement gives Obama much of anything
other than a reminder of yet another blown election and a meek candidate
who couldn't call out one of the worst presidents ever. How long will it take
before Kerry puts his foot in his mouth again?" -- Chris in Paris, Link
When Kerry had a chance to save America from Bush, what did he do?
How could we have been so stupid?
I blame Iowa, where we traded Dean for this loser.
I have a theory.
The whore media is designed to sell us what it wants us to buy,
not what it
thinks we want to buy. The whore media is a comprehensive
effort, organized over years by the CIA and other
with secret budgets, to benefit their right-wing benefactors.
Show me I’m wrong. Please.
You may be right.
So why are they desperate to get Obama elected?
Since this is an election year, the debate over how to stimulate the economy is
inevitably tied up with politics. And here”s a modest suggestion for political reporters.
Instead of trying to divine the candidates” characters by scrutinizing their tone of voice
and facial expressions, why not pay attention to what they say about economic policy?
Recent statements by the candidates and their surrogates about the economy are revealing.
Take, for example, John McCain”s admission that economics isn”t his thing.
“The issue of economics is not something I”ve understood as well as I should,” he says.
“I’ve got Greenspan”s book.”
His self-deprecating humor is attractive, as always. But shouldn’t we worry about a
candidate who’s so out of touch that he regards Mr. Bubble, the man who refused to
regulate subprime lending and assured us that there was at most some “froth” in the
housing market, as a source of sage advice?
McCain, among other problems, is too old to be president.
We can't afford another asleep-on-the-job Commander in Chief.
"If I were running for office at this point, I'd be saying,
'Vote for me. I'm gonna be an agent for change.'
You can't run for office and not say, 'I am an agent of change.'" -- the boy some call President, Link
Note: If you're not the incumbent, of course you're running on "change."
Hell, even Bush can figure that out.
Hey dumbass, let me ask you something...
WHERE does it say the Navy lied in this news story?
Nowhere. Not one part of this news story even suggests that the Navy lied,
"got caught lying", or that it "tried to provoke" by fabricating voiceover and
claiming it came from Iran. That would be an impossibility without ship's
crew knowing about it, and they would tell someone
You are a lying, sorry piece of shit. Always have been, always will be.
You have proven all that talk about your alleged respect for the military to be bullshit.
Hey Monkey, see if you can get one of your human friends
to turn on a TV or open a newspaper so you can catch up.
Thank you, God, for not giving me chiefscrmneagle's brain
"I don't understand why some affluent progressives are so hostile to Hillary.
They criticize her on cosmetic grounds, as though we're all still in high school--
"she's too stiff, she too boring, she too ambitious, blah, blah, blah." But she has
devoted her entire political life to the cause of people who need help. She bridges
the gap between the powerful and those who are struggling. The real proof of
is in who actually votes for her. The republicans hate her so much precisely
because she threatens them with real, affirmative, assertive change. Obama gets
the support of the trendy and the affluent. I think of him as the iPhone of politics
--a marketing phenomenon, looks good, but doesn't really work so well..."
-- Chiron, Link
Note: This story is from a site that's been known to lie.
Excerpt: Researchers seeking new treatments for heart disease managed to grow
a rat heart in the lab and start it beating.
"While it still sounds like science fiction, we've hopefully opened a new door
in the notion that we can build these tissues and one day provide options for
patients with end-stage disease," said Dr. Doris Taylor, director of the Center
for Cardiovascular Repair at the University of Minnesota. 'We're not there yet,
but at least now we have another tool in our tool belt.'"
I saw our next president yesterday on Meet the Press with Fat Head.
It reminded me of the first Ali-Liston fight. In this case Fat head (Liston)
was boring in, trying to throw hay makers with film clips of portions of
things that Bill or Hillary has said or asking the same question 3 or 4 times.
Each time our next president artfully danced away with a jab or two and
then followed up with a punch of her own. Fat head had to be shaking his
fat head in disgust over not laying a glove on her.will
"Dr. King's dream began to be realized when LBJ passed the Civil Rights Act
when he was able to get through Congress something that Kennedy was
hopeful to do,
the president before had not even tried, but it took a president to get it done."
-- Hillary, "attacking" Dr King, according to Obama's people, Link
"I think (Obama's people are) taking it way too far. I think Barack understands clearly
what she was saying. Nobody believes either Hillary or Bill would say anything that would
denigrate either Obama or Martin Luther King. A backlash may occur when people see
that Obama is allowing his PR people to let out the notion that Hillary did not respect MLK.
And to me, Barack knows better than that. And why he would let his people (say that)
shows to me either he’s not in control of what they’re saying, or he’s allowing them to say it
knowing he’s wrong."
-- BET founder Bob Johnson, Link
In poker, they call than an "over bet," meaning there was no reason to go that far.
If it was 2 weeks till the election and Obama was behind by ten points, then maybe
you thriw a wild "Hail Mary" pass like that, but not this far out when the race is about even.
Obama is playing with fire if he's trying to turn blacks against the Clintons.
Why is it all right with the media that Obama's campaign has accused Hillary
of having a hand in the death of Bhutto; and have lied on her even about
interview on Meet the Whore with Tim Russert.
She said the president signed the legislation for equal rights after Martin Luther King
worked so hard for equal rights. Now they say it's racist because she supposedly said
"it took a WHITE president to get this into law." The last time I heard about a
getting passed, it was signed by whomever the president was. Obama is getting pretty
handy with distorting the facts
Everything is taken out of context that the Clintons say. People are pretending to be
with the Clintons because of their racial remarks, when they know damned good
that the Clintons have never been racist. I'm beginning to think that the only
are going for Obama is so they won't
appear to be racist, and they're looking for that next vote.
If I said that Obama has charisma, I'd probably be accused of being a racist. After all, when
one congressman said he was clean cut and articulate, the
goody two shoes trouble makers,
said he was being racist. What in the Hell do they want anyway? Tell me, and I'll just roll over
to try and get along.
The votes here at my house are going to for Hillary, simply because she is the best qualified
candidate; and one hellava fighter. My husband was cheering her on Sunday morning as
she kicked Russert's ass.
Marian in Missouri
I wish Russert had been better so Hillary could've hit his fastballs farther.
Senator Clinton tore buttplug Russert a new one Sunday morning.
What a pleasure to watch a bright, skillful and experienced Democrat candidate
stop him at every out of context quote and mis-characterization he could muster.
She did it without being over-combative or shrill. I want to see more of this.
It's no wonder Republicans want to run against Obama.
Court: American torture is 'expected' It is when a dirty Fascist dog steals the White House
"A federal appeals court Friday threw out a suit by four British Muslims who allege
that they were tortured and subjected to religious abuse at Gitmo, a ruling that exonerates
Pentagon officials. It appeared to be the first time that a federal appellate court has ruled on
the legality of torture since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
The court rejected other claims on the grounds that then-Attorney General John Ashcroft
had certified that the military officials were acting within the scope of their jobs when they
authorized torture, and that such tactics were 'foreseeable.' "It was foreseeable that conduct
that would ordinarily be indisputably 'seriously criminal' would be implemented by military
officials responsible for detaining and interrogating suspected enemy combatants,'' Circuit
Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson wrote in the court's main opinion."
Hey Karen, if Bush wants to do away with elections, is that "foreseeable," too?
Below is an email I sent in response to his latest outrageous attack Sen. Clinton.
Dave in Illinois
I think your attacks on Sen. Clinton are baseless and unfair. What basis do you have
to claim her response to various questions is her inappropriately playing the gender card?
Unlike your previous well thought out analyses of political topics such as the Iran Contra
fracas and the Downing Street fiasco, your attacks on Sen. Clinton seem personal and
devoid of any real factual basis for the claims you are making.
Either get back to substantive fact based reporting or I will not be visiting your site again.
Dave in Illinois
I would be OK with his attacks if they were fair, but they're not.
Odd that after all these years he'd succumb to such nonsense.
"Prankster' may have taunted Navy in Gulf
I'll bet his initials are "Dick Cheney" Link
A threatening radio message at the end of a video showing Iranian patrol boats
swarming near U.S. warships in the Persian Gulf may have come from a prankster
rather than from the Iranian vessels, the Navy Times newspaper has reported.
A video and audio of the Jan. 6 incident in the Strait of Hormuz featured a man
in accented English saying "I am coming to you. ... You will explode after ... minutes."
The Navy Times quoted several veteran sailors as speculating the transmission
have come from a radio heckler known as "the Filipino Monkey."
Terrell Owens’ bottom lip was quivering, his voice wavering.
While his teary eyes were hidden behind dark sunglasses, he couldn’t hide
his disappointment — or his loyalty to quarterback Tony Romo — after the
Cowboys’ 21-17 playoff loss to the New York Giants on Sunday.
“This is not about Tony. You guys can point the finger at him, you can talk
about the vacation, and if you do that, it’s really unfair,” Owens said, his voice
choked with emotion. “It’s really unfair. That’s my teammate. That’s my quarterback.
You guys do that, it’s not fair. We lost as a team. We lost as a team, man.”
I was hoping I could hate them for one more week,
but they couldn't even handle that Eli Manning boy.
"Bush was visibly moved as he toured the site, said Avner Shalev.
"Twice, I saw tears well up in his eyes," Shalev said.
At one point, Bush viewed aerial photos of Auschwitz taken during the WWII
by U.S. forces and called Rice over to discuss why the American government
had decided against bombing the site, Shalev said. ...
"We should have bombed it," Bush said, according to Shalev."
Butt Monkey, if we'd bombed Auschwitz, we might've killed your Grandfather.
If you ever get some free time, Google Auschwitz +prescott bush
But before you do, take a trip to the bathroom and roll one and make a sandwich
because you're going to be reading how the BFEE came to power ALL DAY.
Prescott Bush was a Nazi collaborator who funded Hitler
when the fascist mass murder could not find any backers.
And even after the war was over, Bush continued to
launder escaped Nazi assets well into the 1950s.
No wonder his grandson acts like Hitler.
Our motto for this year is - "No Anti-Bush Site Left Behind". So - if you have an anti-bush site and you are choking on hosting fees or dealing with threats - let us know and we'll help keep you online.
We also have that strongest server side spam filtering on the planet.
Check out Marx Mail for info on how you can have a Spam Free Email Account.