I thought Obama like Hilary wanted to keep a residuail force of several thosand troops in Iraq.
If that is true then the writers Strike will force more people to pay attention to the issues. This will hurt our *cough* frontrunners and the GOP! ZED!

The Iran resoution saying Iran supports terroism doesn’t matter unless Bush attacks Iran in which case Hilary is sunk.

So Attaurk you ever read the “Ottoman Centuries” I want more classical books discussed on FDL. Forget the new we must understand the past to not repeat it!

Bush will attack Iran and he will point to this law as his excuse he has NEVER shown any hesitation before.

Just look at his signing statements! Which we Dems have to stop NOW!

“The Iran resolution was rewritten to avoid any suggestion of military force precisely because Senate Democrats don’t want to make the same mistake twice”

They already did. The Senate was kind enough to label the Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist group. So if we invade Iran to attack the Revolutionary Guard we are just fighting the terrorists, right?

No new authorization needed to fight the terrorists…

Suckers

Smgumby @ 6

“The Iran resolution was rewritten to avoid any suggestion of military force precisely because Senate Democrats don’t want to make the same mistake twice”

They already did. The Senate was kind enough to label the Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist group. So if we invade Iran to attack the Revolutionary Guard we are just fighting the terrorists, right?

No new authorization needed to fight the terrorists…

Suckers

Fine I am correted

The bottom line is both Obama and Hillary both dropped the ball on the Iran vote, each in their own special way, mind you.

They both blew it. Period.

Wow we got our own show here or what?

Smgumby @ 9

Wow we got our own show here or what?

Not entirely. Good morning, Attaturk, tcu, and Smgumby. I’m not enamored of either Hillarity or Obama from a foreign policy perspective.

Smgumby @ 6

“The Iran resolution was rewritten to avoid any suggestion of military force precisely because Senate Democrats don’t want to make the same mistake twice”

They already did. The Senate was kind enough to label the Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist group. So if we invade Iran to attack the Revolutionary Guard we are just fighting the terrorists, right?

No new authorization needed to fight the terrorists…

Suckers

makes for legal cover for excursions into iran too.

btw, i like new post time

Mornin’ tw3k. Watch out for that strong java this morning.

I’ll bet Jokeline, Prissy Plantaine, and Casey Stengel have pretty bad headaches todsy.

Good morning pups!

Bilbo @ 12

Mornin’ tw3k. Watch out for that strong java this morning.

I’ll bet Jokeline, Prissy Plantaine, and Casey Stengel have pretty bad headaches todsy.

Morning!

lol, yeah, strong coffee, not so much sleep *g

egregious @ 13

Good morning pups!

morning

Goodmorning Egregious!

Thanks again attaturk, for the superlate/superearly posts. This is the time of day when late late night was getting stale.

As was pointed out at the time of the vote, how in the world are the Dems going to condemn Bush’s possible actions in Iran after this?

Terrorists in Iran are “hurting the troops”.

What would the weak Dems have Bush do? He will “support the troops” over the objections of the Defeatocrats if he must.

He will invade Iran. It is the only way to continue to “support the troops“.

So my question is:

If the Dems are not going to stop the next war, and in fact insist on giving Bush cover for it, what are WE (the people) going to do to stop it?

morning!

Good morning, pups. It’s MoDo and Friedman in the NYT. They are both focusing on the Middle East today. MoDo says President Bush and Condoleezza Rice have been consistently culturally obtuse on the Middle East, even with a pricey operation designed to keep them in the loop, and Mr. Friedman says to build a durable peace in the Middle East, it takes a shared agenda, a willingness by moderates to work together to support one another and help each other beat back the extremists.

http://mgpaquin.wordpress.com/

The coffee, tea and hot chocolate are ready, and I’ve got a selection of bagels with LOTS of cream cheese. Have a great day.

How do we get to push back against the Right unless we get some representation, some fairness doctrine, some editors who are willing to stand up for the truth?
I just saw another MSM talking head proclaiming the surge was working on CNN yesterday.
Hmm the Brits leave the south killings go down, the Madhi army declares a cease fire the killings go down.
But are the numbers broken down to geographical areas to reflect this.
Do the MSM hand puppets check these facts!
I think all the MSM reporters should pay a specical SURGE tax to pay for this war!

If the Dems are not going to stop the next war, and in fact insist on giving Bush cover for it, what are WE (the people) going to do to stop it?

Unfortunately, teh People are far from monolithic wrt this issue. I think all we can do is continue to call attention to the misinformation and lies that politicians and much of the MSM put out. Maybe in the long run we’ll chip away enough to actually change things on a bigger scale. Hope so anyway.

And selise is up and running!

Things Come Undone @ 2

The Iran resoution saying Iran supports terroism doesn’t matter unless Bush attacks Iran in which case Hilary is sunk.

it matters to the voters that still need to decide which candidate will best serve the democratic idiology

hillary giving bush and cheney their wet dream means she still doesn’t get it and that makes me want to vote for someone else

oboma also makes me want to vote for someone else

kuscinich picking ron paul as a rumming mate also makes me want to vote for sommeone else

so they are narrowing the field for me

before hillary anounced I thought she would make an excellant president but I didn’t think she was electable

now I think she is electable but I think she’s gonna make a bad democrat

still a great president as compared to any republican candidate and great as compared to any republican president that has served in my lifetime

but not a great democratic candidate

here’s a very interesting point;

if hillary wins, she will almost definately be the best president in my lifetime, she will have the oportunity to undo what bush has done and even if she doesn’t undo it all she will undo some or most of it

that will catapult her to ‘great’ status even though she will undererform as compared with just about anyone but obama

in any event I want a president that impeaches this administration even after they leave office

morning smgumby!

vCards are a cross platform way to share contact data - the kind you use in your email or address program (they work on pcs, macs and some cell phones - with a variety of email/address programs).

you can download the folder and pop them into your email program - and voila! you have the phone, fax, email, snail mail and website of every senator.

the idea is to make contacting your congress critters easy (especially by fax) when christy asks us to lobby on behave of some specific bill/action.

i’m now working on doing the same for the house of representatives.

OT. The Washington Post finally got around to reviewing Naomi Klein’s Shock Doctrine this past weekend. Here’s the excerpt posted on her Website.

If Thomas L. Friedman has acquired the reputation of being the English-speaking world’s foremost cheerleader of globalization, Naomi Klein has established herself as its principal naysayer. With the publication seven years ago of No Logo, in the wake of the anti-World Trade Organization protests in Seattle, Klein demonstrated that the “just do it” triumphalism of Nike and other global brands masked serious inequities and injustices. Her new book, The Shock Doctrine, takes the argument an important step further. Neoliberal capitalism, she argues, thrives on catastrophe: Not only are fortunes made from the misfortunes of the masses, but the global dominance of free-market capitalism is built on the infliction of disasters on the world’s less fortunate.

perris @ 23

Things Come Undone @ 2

The Iran resoution saying Iran supports terroism doesn’t matter unless Bush attacks Iran in which case Hilary is sunk.

it matters to the voters that still need to decide which candidate will best serve the democratic idiology

hillary giving bush and cheney their wet dream means she still doesn’t get it and that makes me want to vote for someone else

oboma also makes me want to vote for someone else

kuscinich picking ron paul as a rumming mate also makes me want to vote for sommeone else

so they are narrowing the field for me

before hillary anounced I thought she would make an excellant president but I didn’t think she was electable

now I think she is electable but I think she’s gonna make a bad democrat

still a great president as compared to any republican candidate and great as compared to any republican president that has served in my lifetime

but not a great democratic candidate

here’s a very interesting point;

if hillary wins, she will almost definately be the best president in my lifetime, she will have the oportunity to undo what bush has done and even if she doesn’t undo it all she will undo some or most of it

that will catapult her to ‘great’ status even though she will undererform as compared with just about anyone but obama

in any event I want a president that impeaches this administration even after they leave office

So who is left?
I myself am all kinds of confused I know who not to vote for but not why to vote for any Dem except that they are not a GOPer.

Bilbo @ 25

OT. The Washington Post finally got around to reviewing Naomi Klein’s Shock Doctrine this past weekend. Here’s the excerpt posted on her Website.

If Thomas L. Friedman has acquired the reputation of being the English-speaking world’s foremost cheerleader of globalization, Naomi Klein has established herself as its principal naysayer. With the publication seven years ago of No Logo, in the wake of the anti-World Trade Organization protests in Seattle, Klein demonstrated that the “just do it” triumphalism of Nike and other global brands masked serious inequities and injustices. Her new book, The Shock Doctrine, takes the argument an important step further. Neoliberal capitalism, she argues, thrives on catastrophe: Not only are fortunes made from the misfortunes of the masses, but the global dominance of free-market capitalism is built on the infliction of disasters on the world’s less fortunate.

big mistake on that revue;

they aren’t only using catastrophy to inflicttheir influence on “the worlds less fortunate”…that makes it us against them

they use catastrophy to inflict their influence on EVERYONE and that makes it them against US

a HUGE differance

egregious @ 13

Good morning pups!

Good Morning Egregious:)

Wow. I missed the bit about Kucinich suggesting Ron Paul as a running mate. That’s pretty shocking given the supposed divergence of their views. Guess it’s all about the politics of “getting elected”.

Things Come Undone @ 26

perris @ 23

it matters to the voters that still need to decide which candidate will best serve the democratic idiology

hillary giving bush and cheney their wet dream means she still doesn’t get it and that makes me want to vote for someone else

oboma also makes me want to vote for someone else

kuscinich picking ron paul as a rumming mate also makes me want to vote for sommeone else

so they are narrowing the field for me

before hillary anounced I thought she would make an excellant president but I didn’t think she was electable

now I think she is electable but I think she’s gonna make a bad democrat

still a great president as compared to any republican candidate and great as compared to any republican president that has served in my lifetime

but not a great democratic candidate

here’s a very interesting point;

if hillary wins, she will almost definately be the best president in my lifetime, she will have the oportunity to undo what bush has done and even if she doesn’t undo it all she will undo some or most of it

that will catapult her to ‘great’ status even though she will undererform as compared with just about anyone but obama

in any event I want a president that impeaches this administration even after they leave office

So who is left?
I myself am all kinds of confused I know who not to vote for but not why to vote for any Dem except that they are not a GOPer.

I am hoping a hero will rise

I don’t know who that hero will be but remember kerry came from nowhere to win our spot, I think the same will be true for edwards or some other hero

I am hoping a hero will rise

Has Tom Friedman ever been right about anything? Lets withdrawl all the troops now the Friedman Unit is over
That and I want Namoi to be Secretary of the Treasury.

Amen Perris@30 Amen!

perris said:
“before hillary anounced I thought she would make an excellant president but I didn’t think she was electable

now I think she is electable but I think she’s gonna make a bad democrat

still a great president as compared to any republican candidate and great as compared to any republican president that has served in my lifetime

but not a great democratic candidate”

Change “before she announced” into “back in 2001″ and you have summed up my feeling exactly in regards to HRC.

I have my doubts about how much of the Bush monstrosities she would “undo”. Would she give up the power Bush has grabbed? Would Obama for that matter?

This is where Dodd shines. I think he might.

We need to talk about what we want an end to the Iraq war, A Mike Moore aproved heathcare plan and help for all the people losing their homes ( and not help for the banks that made the stupid loans).
Now which Dem is willing to make a stand?

I want someone who will affirm what America is supposed to stand for.

Someone who states that “unitary executive” is a fancy term for “dictator”, or “decider”.

this is gonna sound pretty shallow comming from me but I’m gonna post it anyway

edwards needs a hairdo

he can’t get away with that kids hairdo if he wants to be president

he needs a comb back

sorry, it’s a shallow statement and it doesn’t make him a better candidate but it makes him more electable

he should start with a crue cut and then go to straight back as it grows, this will make it look like it wasn’t a “makeover”

edwards right now is the best hope for a progressive on the ticket but he needs to do some marketing changes

Bilbo @ 29

Wow. I missed the bit about Kucinich suggesting Ron Paul as a running mate. That’s pretty shocking given the supposed divergence of their views. Guess it’s all about the politics of “getting elected”.

i think it’s actually has more to do with trust and that they are the only two with anti-imperialist foreign policies

Oh. My. Freaking. Lord.

A million pundits would have their heads explode in unision if Edwards did ANYTHING drastic with his hair.

24/7 Cable News Coverage.

selise @ 37

Bilbo @ 29

Wow. I missed the bit about Kucinich suggesting Ron Paul as a running mate. That’s pretty shocking given the supposed divergence of their views. Guess it’s all about the politics of “getting elected”.

i think it’s actually has more to do with trust and that they are the only two with anti-imperialist foreign policies

ron paul is anti government though, he wants no public bridges, parks, beaches, roads, water works, nothing but the armed forces should be government

you don’t elect to government someone who hates government

Smgumby @ 38

Oh. My. Freaking. Lord.

A million pundits would have their heads explode in unision if Edwards did ANYTHING drastic with his hair.

24/7 Cable News Coverage.

that’s why a crew cut fits the ticket

he would march into a local 5 dollar barber shop or go where our soldiers get their hair cut

what a great statement, go to talk to the troops and get a hair cut while there

then just go to straght back and start to look like the man that he is instead of a boy with great hair

he woudl

Given the GOP’s fear of Hilary and their low chance of being elected we should highlight to the GOPers all the extra power Bush will be giving Hilary as president.
Does Newt want Hilary to FISA in on hs phone calls to his current girlfriend? (you know he has one its his pattern) and then releasing it to the press?
How about Ann Coulter and her drug dealer (again we know she has several)?

Hey perris.

I’m gonna get the morning zed.

I’m just sayin…

perris @ 39

selise @ 37

i think it’s actually has more to do with trust and that they are the only two with anti-imperialist foreign policies

ron paul is anti government though, he wants no public bridges, parks, beaches, roads, water works, nothing but the armed forces should be government

you don’t elect to government someone who hates government

yeah, i’m not voting for him. but i get the attraction - when the system is so very rotten it is human nature to want to tear it down and start over… but i don’t think that’s why he and kucinich are friends - i think they have a similar anti-imperial world view (although they have very opposite domestic policy preferences)… and i think they have learned to trust each other (and not members of their own parties)

Smgumby @ 42

Hey perris.

I’m gonna get the morning zed.

I’m just sayin…

do I get more then my share?

No I don’t think you do. Actually recently I probably have gotten more than my fair shair.

But it is such a nice way to start the day.

selise @ 43

perris @ 39

ron paul is anti government though, he wants no public bridges, parks, beaches, roads, water works, nothing but the armed forces should be government

you don’t elect to government someone who hates government

yeah, i’m not voting for him. but i get the attraction - when the system is so very rotten it is human nature to want to tear it down and start over… but i don’t think that’s why he and kucinich are friends - i think they have a similar anti-imperial world view (although they have very opposite domestic policy preferences)… and i think they have learned to trust each other (and not members of their own parties)

I have no problem with their frinedship but if they get the adminstration that makes ron paul the president after kusinich as the vice president he has a leg up on when the president is finnished with their two terms

and the vice president will influence the president and will influence the media to their way of thinking

Did Kucinich really say this about Paul?

Apparently so. At least he is “thinking about it”.

** so sayeth the google **

Imagine what a Dem House, Senate and White House will do to the MSM who want to keep their broadcast liscenses.
Especailly after all Bush’s signing statments. Rush, Tweety, Pumpkinhead, Tucker , Lou Dobbs etc axed.
The 30%ers discover that the 70% don’t care and start listening to Jane on the 10 o’clock news!

Smgumby @ 47

Did Kucinich really say this about Paul?

i don’t know, but take a look at what paul said about kucinich.

I can see Kucinich’s and Paul’s commonality wrt foreign, but good grief, where do we go on issues like national health care, social security, etc with a Kucinich/Paul presidency? Not that it’s ever going to happen.

Smgumby @ 47

Did Kucinich really say this about Paul?

he did

I doubt he would actually do it but just saying it means he doesn’t understand or appreciate the role of government or better put, the danger of free reign for corporations…corporate anarchy is my new term just invented on this thread

so I rewrite

he doesn’t understand the role of government or the danger of corporate anarchy

hehe

that works, we should start using that term to describe corporate influence on our law…”corporate anarchy

But if Kucinich/Paul ran as an independant ticket. (not gonna happen, I know)

Who’s party would be cannabalized then?

Smgumby @ 47

Did Kucinich really say this about Paul?

Cleveland Plain Dealer.

Things Come Undone @ 49

Imagine what a Dem House, Senate and White House will do to the MSM who want to keep their broadcast liscenses.
Especailly after all Bush’s signing statments. Rush, Tweety, Pumpkinhead, Tucker , Lou Dobbs etc axed.
The 30%ers discover that the 70% don’t care and start listening to Jane on the 10 o’clock news!

yep. just look at how speaker pelosi has ripped joe klein a new one over his lies in TIME magazine about her and her caucus wrt fisa legislation.

/snark off

off to coffee shop, will see all upstairs once Smgumby @ 47 gets the zedunofitzeroo

what is a smgumby?

a small gumby?

Well said Selise!

OT, but otherwise passed on without comment:

Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, house

Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, Senate

Perris mean.

:)

Smgumby @ 53

But if Kucinich/Paul ran as an independant ticket. (not gonna happen, I know)

Who’s party would be cannabalized then?

that gets the republicans since nobody democrat knows much about kucinich accept for progressives and we also know about ron paul and wouldn’t vote for him

that ticket gets no democratic votes in my opinion

selise @ 55

Things Come Undone @ 49

Imagine what a Dem House, Senate and White House will do to the MSM who want to keep their broadcast liscenses.
Especailly after all Bush’s signing statments. Rush, Tweety, Pumpkinhead, Tucker , Lou Dobbs etc axed.
The 30%ers discover that the 70% don’t care and start listening to Jane on the 10 o’clock news!

yep. just look at how speaker pelosi has ripped joe klein a new one over his lies in TIME magazine about her and her caucus wrt fisa legislation.

/snark off

We are so getting rid of do nothing Nancy and Harry this election they won’t be in the leadership, unless they end the war now!

Smgumby @ 59

Perris mean.

:)

not being mean and din’t have the snark on, I was taking a guess…I call my self little boy at times I was thinking it’s a name you gave yourself

what does it mean?

selise @ 43

perris @ 39

ron paul is anti government though, he wants no public bridges, parks, beaches, roads, water works, nothing but the armed forces should be government

you don’t elect to government someone who hates government

yeah, i’m not voting for him. but i get the attraction - when the system is so very rotten it is human nature to want to tear it down and start over… but i don’t think that’s why he and kucinich are friends - i think they have a similar anti-imperial world view (although they have very opposite domestic policy preferences)… and i think they have learned to trust each other (and not members of their own parties)

I think Ron Paul is gaining support because he’s not lying to people. All the rest (including most dems) are saying what they think will get them elected. Kucinich and Paul are the idealists. They know what they believe and that’s what they’re telling you. And, for what it’s worth, I would enjoy debating Paul. He’s honest and would present his side fairly. The opposite view would also be debated the same way. None of the political lies to appease the base.
OTOH, I could never debate someone like Mitt. You could show him the truth in black & white and he’d still deny it.
I’m not getting my point across. I can tell. But I’ve had discussions with nutjobs and it’s impossible to convince them because they just deny reality. Mitt, Rudy etc are like that. I need Digby to explain what I mean.

S is my wifes first initial

M is my first intial

Gumby is a tattoo I have on my…

It’s a tattoo I have.

“…five years ago…”

Hokey smokes! When will it all end?

Things Come Undone @ 61

selise @ 55

yep. just look at how speaker pelosi has ripped joe klein a new one over his lies in TIME magazine about her and her caucus wrt fisa legislation.

/snark off

We are so getting rid of do nothing Nancy and Harry this election they won’t be in the leadership, unless they end the war now!

is that fair? i mean speaker pelosi is a busy person - she’s had to force rep. stark to humiliate himself and apologize for saying mean (but true) things about president bush and she’s had to condemn moveon for saying mean (but true) things about petraeus.

compared to the important work of defending bush and his hack general - there just isn’t time to defend the entire dem caucus from small things like lies in TIME mag.

/snark off

selise @ 55

Things Come Undone @ 49

Imagine what a Dem House, Senate and White House will do to the MSM who want to keep their broadcast liscenses.
Especailly after all Bush’s signing statments. Rush, Tweety, Pumpkinhead, Tucker , Lou Dobbs etc axed.
The 30%ers discover that the 70% don’t care and start listening to Jane on the 10 o’clock news!

yep. just look at how speaker pelosi has ripped joe klein a new one over his lies in TIME magazine about her and her caucus wrt fisa legislation.

/snark off

We have to scare the 30%ers into stopping Bush’s power grab by pointing out that Bush is paving the way for Hilary their ultimate nightmere to have these powers.
We need to point out that as long as the war is going on they will lose the Presidency, and more seats in the House and Senate than they would if the war ended tomarrow..
We need to point out that we Lefties want this to happen because…it is all part of my diabolical Plan Bahaha!

Solai

I think I understand what yer sayin, and so far as I can tell, both Kucinich and Paul have an integrity that bars any chance of occupying the White House.

solai @ 63 -

i think i get it, and i agree. there’s just not enough intellectual honesty in politics - seeing it (or thinking we see it), even in someone we disagree with is refreshing.

p.s. another thing kucinich and paul agree on is civil liberties (no torture, fair trials, etc)

DFH’s both of em!

selise @ 66

Things Come Undone @ 61

We are so getting rid of do nothing Nancy and Harry this election they won’t be in the leadership, unless they end the war now!

is that fair? i mean speaker pelosi is a busy person - she’s had to force rep. stark to humiliate himself and apologize for saying mean (but true) things about president bush and she’s had to condemn moveon for saying mean (but true) things about petraeus.

compared to the important work of defending bush and his hack general - there just isn’t time to defend the entire dem caucus from small things like lies in TIME mag.

/snark off

Can we force a vote to remove her from Speaker of the House before the election? Do we have the leverage, clout , blackmail? If she goes we have to her little Rahm too!

OK, now go upstairs and bask in my zed.

Good morning.

democracynow.org just began. Naomi Wolf will be one of the guests. She was on Brian Lehrer on wnyc yesterday http://www.wnyc.org/shows/bl/episodes/2007/11/27 and scroll down until you see the “Losing Democracy” heading.

Give W’s mangling of Ohlmert’s & Abbas’s names, I guess W didn’t even pull off his photo op.

Smgumby @ 70

DFH’s both of em!

Smgumby, lol, I think I’m going to enjoy reading your comments.

Good morning.

democracynow up. Naomi Wolf is going to be a guest. She was also on Brian Lehrer on wnyc yesterday http://www.wnyc.org/shows/bl/episodes/2007/11/27 and scroll down until you see the “Losing democracy” heading.

Given how W mangled Ohlmert’s & Abbas’s names, I guess he didn’t even get a successful photo op. And Ohlmert had to pull him out from behind the podium to stage it better. What a farce.

Smgumby @ 64

S is my wifes first initial

M is my first intial

Gumby is a tattoo I have on my…

It’s a tattoo I have.

thanx, love the origin of everyone’s handle

Naomi Wolf’s up on democracynow.org

S. 1959 Will Label Us All as Terrorists! Take Action to Stop It!

We cannot allow them to sneak in and pass this Unconstitutional bill in silence without debate, like the House did! RTR wrote this and it should be viewed by anyone who has ever written that this administration and their globalist agenda is wrong for the country!

http://willyloman.wordpress.co.....o-stop-it/

Dammit! All of these Democratic candidates have labeled the Iranian Government and its military “Terrorists”.

Edwards did it at the Herzliya Conference in January and in a speech before AIPAC last year.

Edwards said “Iran threatens the security of Israel and the entire world. Let me be clear: Under no circumstances can Iran be allowed to have nuclear weapons….The Iranian president’s statements such as his description of the Holocaust as a myth and his goals to wipe Israel off the map indicate that Iran is serious about its threats.

Once Iran goes nuclear, other countries in the Middle East will go nuclear, making Israel’s neighborhood much more volatile.

Iran must know that the world won’t back down. The recent UN resolution ordering Iran to halt the enrichment of uranium was not enough. We need meaningful political and economic sanctions. We have muddled along for far too long. To ensure that Iran never gets nuclear weapons, we need to keep ALL options on the table, Let me reiterate – ALL options must remain on the table.

The war in Lebanon had Iranian fingerprints all over it…Hezbollah is an instrument of the Iranian government, and Iranian rockets allowed Hezbollah to attack and wage war against Israel.

I cannot talk about the war last summer without referring to the Syrian role in destabilizing area. Syria needs to be held accountable….It can start by not harboring terrorists and ending its nefarious relationship with Iran.

While Iran is the greatest threat now, but just as alarming is the one on your doorstep. Hamas, with Iranian support, doesn’t make any mistake of its intentions to wipe out Israel, and repeatedly makes calls to raise the banner of Allah over all of Israel. Israel made many concessions. Many settlers gave up there land in order to advance peace.

[Iran] is the foremost state sponsor of terrorism. If they have nuclear weapons, other states in the area will want them, and this is unacceptable.

As to what to do, we should not take anything off the table. More serious sanctions need to be undertaken…I would not want to say in advance what we would do, and what I would do as president, but there are other steps that need to be taken. Fore example, we need to support direct engagement with Iranians, we need to be tough. But I think it is a mistake strategically to avoid engagement with Iran.

As to the American people, this is a difficult question… What is going on in Iraq…(s) the American people reticent toward going for Iran. But I think the American people are smart if they are told the truth, and if they trust their president. So Americans can be educated to come along with what needs to be done with Iran.”

Now just what intelligence did Edwards have that indicated that Iran was supporting terrorists in Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas? Well the same Intelligence that attributed all these actions to the Al Quds (”Jerusalem”) Force of Iranian Revolutionary Guard. So when he called the Iranian Government a State Sponsor of Terrorism, he is also referring to it working through the Quds force.

And don’t expect much more than Bush with Edwards pandering to AIPAC. He is totally antagonistic to the Palestinians and considers Sharon a courageous hero. I think his experiencing a suicide bombing just outside his accomodation at the King David Hotel has forever tainted his ability to see things in any other way.

Edwards also refuses to negotiate with the Iranians unless the precondition the talks with statements that they will recognize Israel and no longer support groups opposed to the Israeli occupation. He also has a number of other unilateral “pre-conditions”. Such demands are what in the Senate would be called a “poison pill”. So he says he will negotiate, that negotiating with Iran is critical, but then says that he won’t unless the Iranians agree to do things that no one in their right mind would expect them to do unless it were a part of actual negotiations!

This of course will lead to “not taking anything off the table”.

At least Clinton and Obama don’t make such extreme demands in regards to the terms to meet with the Iranians regarding nuclear technology.

And Obama, dear Obama, had co-sponsored an even more aggressive resolution of Gordon Smith S. 970 that called the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a “terrorist force”.

http://pundits.thehill.com/200.....-on-obama/

In both S.970 and the weaker Leiberman-Kyl Resolution there was the clear statement that the resolution in no way authorized the President to undertake any military action against Iran. In addition a separate resolution, sponsored by Senator Webb, co-sponsored by Clinton, that specifically precluded any military attack on Iran without a specific Congressional Resolution authorizing it.

BTW While Obama and Clinton both would continue to have US forces in Iraq…so would Edwards. He said that he would keep between 3000-5000 troops there to defend the Vaticanate, Reconstruction workers, and Humanitarian staff.

Then he would keep several brigades just over the border in Kuwait “on call” to re-enter the country to “fight terrorists”, prevent the civil war from spreading outside the country, and to deal with ethnic cleansing. I think anyone who really believe that these Strike Forces would not be establishing bases in Iraq (perhaps calling them “forward operating camps” to avoid the use of the name “base”) is just fooling themselves.

Bilbo @ 29

Wow. I missed the bit about Kucinich suggesting Ron Paul as a running mate. That’s pretty shocking given the supposed divergence of their views. Guess it’s all about the politics of “getting elected”.

It was not Kucinich…it was presumably his WIFE. And apparently it was a Paul supporter that “suggested” it and Mrs. Kucinich simply said that he would “consider it”. The video of this showed up first on Paul sites and was really played up.

I’m a Kucinich supporter, and would appreciate any votes from Paul supporters in the Democratic Primaries from those who are registered Democratic, but are followers of Pope Ron Paul. But it would be disingenuous to say that Kucinich intends to run as an Independent if he doesn’t win the nomination. And it would be equally disingenuous to suggest that he’d take Paul, or any other Republican, on as a running mate if he DOES win the nomination.

perris @ 40

Smgumby @ 38

Oh. My. Freaking. Lord.

A million pundits would have their heads explode in unision if Edwards did ANYTHING drastic with his hair.

24/7 Cable News Coverage.

that’s why a crew cut fits the ticket

he would march into a local 5 dollar barber shop or go where our soldiers get their hair cut

what a great statement, go to talk to the troops and get a hair cut while there

then just go to straght back and start to look like the man that he is instead of a boy with great hair

he woudl

Yeah it would get 24 hour coverage…and focus things on superficialities rather than issues yet again. Hair, hair, hair! Yuck!

Smgumby @ 48

Apparently so. At least he is “thinking about it”.

** so sayeth the google **

I think Elizabeth Kucinich was sort of flummoxed by the question. She pauses in an awkward way right after the question and tries to recover by pointing out some of the “positive” things about Paul.

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/68745/

I wonde who RawTV Las Vegas reporter is?

Digby’s got a thread up, titled “Don’t call Colin”, with a link to a NYT piece about how Clinton is planning on salvaging what’s left of Colin Powell’s political career.

Here it is:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.....-diplomat/

Digs rightly; make that OH-SO-RIGHTLY!!! disses this bullshit for what it is.

I say, rather sarcastically:

What’s not to like?

It looks like two political whores, playing john for each other.

Powell gets rehabbed…

Hillary gets bush’s former SecState to endorse her…

The rest of us get to puke while this gruesome twosome goes soixante-neuf.

It will be interesting to see what kind of mental and linguistic backflips her followers will perform to expiate THIS.

If this doesn’t finish off what support she has left from progressives, and anyone ELSE who believes that pulling the trigger on Iraq was the worst foreign policy decision since Vietnam, then there is no hope for us.

John Edwards and Obama should be all over it, in their speeches in Iowa and New Hampshire. If they aren’t, methinks this entire election; primaries and general, are nothing but one big shuck.

Hell, I don’t know. Is Powell even IN on it? His people are saying “no comment” just now.

Whatever. Powell needs to be standing tall in the Hague; not jetting around as some kind of ambassador-at-large.

I would ask: “Hillary: what the fuck are you thinking???” but we already know that, from her willingness to climb into bed with Rupert Murdoch and FauxNews.

One more thing: could we please-god not hear any more about Clinton’s political savvy?

Tanbark @ 83

Digby’s got a thread up, titled “Don’t call Colin”, with a link to a NYT piece about how Clinton is planning on salvaging what’s left of Colin Powell’s political career.

Here it is:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.....-diplomat/

Digs rightly; make that OH-SO-RIGHTLY!!! disses this bullshit for what it is.

I say, rather sarcastically:

What’s not to like?

It looks like two political whores, playing john for each other.

Powell gets rehabbed…

Hillary gets bush’s former SecState to endorse her…

The rest of us get to puke while this gruesome twosome goes soixante-neuf.

It will be interesting to see what kind of mental and linguistic backflips her followers will perform to expiate THIS.

If this doesn’t finish off what support she has left from progressives, and anyone ELSE who believes that pulling the trigger on Iraq was the worst foreign policy decision since Vietnam, then there is no hope for us.

John Edwards and Obama should be all over it, in their speeches in Iowa and New Hampshire. If they aren’t, methinks this entire election; primaries and general, are nothing but one big shuck.

Hell, I don’t know. Is Powell even IN on it? His people are saying “no comment” just now.

Whatever. Powell needs to be standing tall in the Hague; not jetting around as some kind of ambassador-at-large.

I would ask: “Hillary: what the fuck are you thinking???” but we already know that, from her willingness to climb into bed with Rupert Murdoch and FauxNews.

One more thing: could we please-god not hear any more about Clinton’s political savvy?

Well, she did say someone “like” Colin Powell. And I guess that would mean “not Colin Powell”, but someone “like” him. Of course, then she would need to explain what aspects of Colin Powell she finds beneficial. I doubt that it would be the things like his performance at the UN, or his failure to blow the whistle on the Bush Administrations “stove-piping” of intelligence information.

After all, she has said that Bush lied to Congress about Iraq…and one of the major communicators of those falsehoods was COLIN POWELL.

But I doubt you’ll hear much from the Obama Campaign…Powell is one of his foreign policy advisors.

CinnamonApe:

One slight difference. When it was crunch time on the Republican-Guards-as-Terrists bullshit, Edwards didn’t give bush what he wanted, and Clinton damn sure did.

Well, Cinnamon: Let’s hear it; did her flacking Powell as a good american, and as a potential member of her putative administration, work for you?