her judgment was to trust George Bush to do the right thing.

I think that Hillary thought – like the neocons – that Iraq just might be a cakewalk.

If she opposed it, and it turned into a cakewalk (as indeed it appeared to be in first two weeks), she would have been labeled as the weak liberal pussy the neocons always knew her to be. She couldn’t take that chance.

Gore/Clark

This is the Hillary thread. I’ve honored that FDL rule. Do you feel I need to understand “how FDLers view that” in order to somehow adjust what I say to conform to the FDLer way? Where have I heard that before?

No myrtle, you’d figure out how really unpopular Hillary is at FDL relative to other Dems. The “code” for us is that we will support the Democratic candidate for President. We understand that we have to mobilize at the grass roots. That’s the only way to exert influence over vichy dems such as Lieberman and Hillary.

FDL was huge behind Ned Lamont and Hillary screwed him and helped get Lieberman re-elected in the general. One of the ways they beat Lamont was by asking, “are you a Bill Clinton Democrat or an Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson Democrat?” Hillary never once stood up and called bull-sh*t. That’s another reason, I want to be so careful about issues of ethnicity. When you bash “us” for being pro-Hillary, you just show how little you know about this blog’s history.

This is the Hillary thread. I’ve honored that FDL rule. Do you feel I need to understand “how FDLers view that” in order to somehow adjust what I say to conform to the FDLer way? Where have I heard that before?

Here’s a thought: You share what you think. I’ll share what I think. All the “FDLers” can share what they think. Wow, we might learn something from each other…on this topic.

Just a thought…

Your cognitive skills are slipping. The entire little debate we’re having is about what Hillary’s position(s) are.

And she has been hand in glove with A*P*C from the gitgo. And she has been a supporter of the war from the gitgo, until she saw which way the wind was blowing.

And now, she wants to have it both ways, which is to say, she refuses to say the invasion, and her vote supporting it, were a mistake.

And she wants to do this, while she’s getting pounded by most of the progressive wing of the democratic party.

As I’ve said, she has a habit, a very REPUBLICAN habit, of not answering questions relating to the specifics of the war, and of her support for it, for at least 4 years.

I don’t hate her, and I’m sorry that she saw fit to NOT join the 21 democratic senators who had the courage and intelligence to vote against the invasion. And even sorrier that she still won’t unequivocally eat her vote, as Edwards has done.

Of him, I’m not in his corner yet, but what he’s saying, generally has more smarts and courage about it, than ANYTHING Hillary Clinton is saying.

I’m sorry to have to tell you this, but your attempt to tar me with the “anti-semite” brush IS right-wing sleaze, and I don’t care how long you’ve been here. :o)

It’s one of the favorite talking points that the GOP uses against people who object to the inordinate degree of control which Isreal exerts over our foreign policy in the mid-east.

It was Lawrence Franklin, the Air Force Reserve Colonel, who pleaded guilty to passing a classifed Presidential Directive about U.S. policy toward Iran to the American-Israel-Public-Affairs-Committee (A*P*C) which Wilkipedia calls “the foremost pro-Israel lobbying organization in the U.S.”, while he was working for the Defense Department.

On January 20th of 2006, he was sentenced to 12 years and 7 months in prison, and fined $10,000 dollars.

Just by way of establishing my “anti-semitic” credentials:

Franklin was a policy analyst for UnderSecretary Douglas Feith, and Deputy Secretary of Defense, Paul Wolfowitz.

Of whom you may have heard. :o)

Franklin was passing the information to Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman.
Rosen was AIPAC’s then-policy director, where he had worked for 23 years. As of last June, Rosen had been indicted for receiving classifed material. I don’t know what the disposition of that was, but he was fired by A*P*C. Weissman was the senior Iran Anylyst for A*P*C. He was under investigation and was also fired.

From Wilki:

“According to the NY Times, Franklin was one of two U.S. officials who held meetings with Iranian dissidents, including Paris-based arms dealer Manucher Gorbanifar, a key figure in the Iran-Contra scandal. These pentagon-approved meetings were brokered by neo-conservative Michael Ledeen, of the American Enterprise Institute, who had also played a part in Irangate…”

Okay, John:

Here’s Hillary, speaking at the A*P*C Committee meeting on February 1st of this year:

“I am so honored to be here and once again to speak on behalf of the causes and concerns that we share.
And there is no doubt that A*P*C is at the forefront of efforts to advocate on behalf of Isreal. And on behalf of the shared interests and security that form the unbreakable bond between our two nations.

I thank you for supporting A*P*C. Because as active citizens, you are serving an essential function; when you advocate, when you lobby, when you speak out on issues that matter to the Jewish community and to Israel you are speaking also on behalf of issues that are important to the larger community of Americans.”

Me: and she goes on to just generally give the kind of speech that politicians give when they’re sucking up.

No serious democratic politician at the national level in America wants to piss off ANY large bloc of voters, and Edwards has done his share of courting the Jewish vote, but he also had the temerity to rock the boat in a speec he made in Hollywood in January of this year, when he said:

“Perhaps the greatest short-term threat to world peace is that possibility that Israel would bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities”.

I think that’s a very courageous and very honest thing for a presidential candidate.

I also happen to think it’s true, what do you think, John. :o)

P.S. http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com has this list of contributions to democrats from A*P*C.

1st figure–last run for office.

2nd figure–total over entire career.

Dodd–$38,250/$221,178.

Biden–$2,500/$101,007.

Hillary–$37,118/$56,118.

Edwards–from 2004 to current; N/A; with a
footnote that says his blogsite states
that, as of Feb. 4th, 2007, he’s
never received contributions from
A*PAC.

Edited **************** and released by Mod

so it’ll be a 3rd party or no vote in ‘08 if the Demos are suicidal enough to nominate her.

Those are both votes for your “Rethugs.”

Hoss, thanks for putting it out there and up front.

No more bullshit, Gilliard SAID so.

No more bullshit.

Gimme my country back.

HRC goes. She HASTA GO!!!

And every Dem on the planet better be pushing her off the plank, or yer gonna curse us for 8 years and ruin any chance this nation has to recapture the republic we usta know.

Harumph.

Myrtle, I apologize for the KKKarl.

Myrtle, cost push inflation refers to the price of crude oil and gasoline. As the cost rises, so does inflation. That erodes everyone’s standard of living, especially the poor. As I stated above, people vote their pocketbooks and barring another 9/11, I think it’s going to be a landslide for Democrats. As I mentioned before, if you had read the Sestak thread, you would understand how FDLers view that.

Trashing Hillary does nothing to elevate Edwards imo.

Do you see the anti-Hillary talk here as “trashing” or as an honest critique?

I don’t see anyone bashing her because she isn’t pretty or because she’s stupid or because she’s too short or because she’s female or because of anything except her personal qualities which relate to presidential behavior and her policy positions which indicate her thinking.

If America wants out of Iraq then is it fair she should say she’ll get us out, but what she really means is we’ll stay there in the permanent bases forever?

If America wants health care reform, but she’s tried and failed already should we be stuck with no reform for another 4 or 8 years?

If America wants stronger Unions and better pay for the less well paid among us, then should we accept a president with anti-union credentials?

If Americans won’t elect a Massachussetts Liberal (even if she is from New York and isn’t so Liberal), then why is it unfair to suggest someone from a little further South?

Just tell us where we’re ‘trashing’ her!