If you look at the candidates (both R and D), not according to their policies, but how they’d ‘cooperate’ with the business world, you’d find Hillary, Biden, maybe Dodd and even Obama pretty far to the right, along with all the Republicans. THAT’s why Edwards isn’t liked by Big Money and his electability is why they fear him.

But, if a Hillary admin. is as bad a follow-up her predecessor as Bush II was to his, then everyone, including Big Money will suffer.

I wonder, does Hillary do these things to make a down payment to corporations and the VRWC or does she really believe in her votes? Does she really believe in anything except becoming ‘the first woman American president’?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..66842.html

The discussion on the Israeli Palestinian conflict is finally shifting, after close to 60 years of being terribly lop-sided

A statement by Mike Gravel who challenged Hillary at the last debate sbout her vote for the Kyl
Lieberman amendment
https://israel.indymedia.org/newswire/display/7548
/index.php

Another perspective on the Hillary yes vote
http://fray.slate.com/discuss/…..69509.aspx

Senator Webb would be wise to drop the cover for Hillary and move forward with his amendment without her. Get Biden, Dodd’s, and Obama’s support for an amendment that would put the brakes on an unnecessary and immoral attack on Iran before it is unleashed. John Edwards would sign on.

Stop giving Hillary more room to wiggle, she has shown her true self with her vote for the Kyl/Lieberman vote (if her vote for the 2002 war resolution) had not been proof enough.

Obama and Clinton on Iran. The MSM is giving Edwards the squeeze, not sure what is up with that?

Why is Hillary laughing when serious questions are asked. I think it does demonstrate a disdain for others.

http://www.examiner.com/blogs/…..-Goes-Dean

She can not have it both ways.
http://irannuclearwatch.blogsp…..erman.html

I notice that most of the posts supporting you are from the same anti-Hillary people.

Her support for Webb Bill has been praised by Olbermann and blogger Taylor Marsh.

It’s sad that you think you would go unchallenged by these same dittoheads here.

Eli @ 60

Jill @ 49

Maybe I’m missing something here, but isn’t the Webb amendment a step in the right direction? Aren’t we looking for Congress to make a statement opposing war with Iran? And if we are trying to do that, shouldn’t responsible and realistic legislation include exceptions for retaliation in the event of an attack? I know we’ve all become skeptical of any claims by the Bush Administration, but I expect that’s not what Webb is including the language for. He’s a veteran who knows that there are times that a government has to respond.

This bill would take us from a status quo where the president *already* requires congressional approval to start a war, to one where Congress explicitly states that he can start a war without them if certain conditions are met.

Conditions that a thoroughly dishonest president can simply declare he’s met, and head right off to war with no further interference.

It’s a trojan horse.

SnarKassandra @ 318

nobody kicked him out. visit him on his blog.

He doesn’t seem to have had any activity on any of his blogs for more than a week (Sept. 24).

Plus, all his blogs have the same blurb about “not allowing comments”.

I’m just guessing but it seems he’s gone to ground for a while.

We’ll just have to wait and see if he re-surfaces.

He’s had two new posts on Ravings for a day or so now . . .

if you want i can tell some of you on facebook

Mz. SnarkK, if you could do me a favor, would you tell Al The Spook this Larue misses him terribly, is reading his blogs, and also misses being able to comment on them, too . . . in return I would send you virtual pics of virtual big honkin warm fresh baked chocolate chip cookies with m&m’s in them . . . and some melted marshmellow goo on top, now that I think about it. And a glass of fresh moo’d milk from the barn, too . . *G*