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.

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.

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?

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?

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!

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.

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.

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/