Originally, back in Feb. of 2007, for Hil, it was a 90 day deadline to start pulling troops out.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/new…..850511.htm

Then, by September of last year, Hillary said she “would not make any pledges regarding a U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq.”

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3639881

That has obviously changed. (with some help from John Edwards.)

Now, here she is, 13 DAYS ago, with Russert, on MSNBC, as she says that on the first day of her presidency she will being planning and will being withdrawing troops within 60 days. :o):

http://hotnewstimes.blogspot.c…..in-60.html

Now, Mui, I’m all in favor of bringing our troops home, but when someone is bouncing around like this, I have to think that she’s not saying anything out of conviction, but is very tailoring the message to fit the situation.

She has never expressed the outrage for what bush has done to Iraq and to us, that is due. In point of fact, she has never risked one scintilla of political capital to get out front of the criticism of the war, or of bush. How could she? Unlike John Edwards, she has consistently refused to unequivocally apologize for her part in helping bush gin up the quagmire.

She “discovered” how bad the war was, as the mid-term polls forced her to do it.

She, much more than either Obama or Edwards, is nothing but republican-lite on the war, on attacking Iran, and on getting control of the fatcat lobbyists whose money she’s been taking for so long.

Norman Hsu, who has been indicted for bogus fundraising, gave her $850,000 in funds. At first, when he was indicted, she only returned 35k, but when the story started getting legs, she decided that it would be best to return it all.
To whom, we don’t know, since Hsu was using bogus names as “donors” for a lot of it, to get around the restriction on how much someone could donate. At any rate, his trial is probably going to start up in the middle of the campaign, and I hope you don’t think the GOP won’t drag her into it, if nothing else, as a witness.

Would you like to talk some more “accuracy” about Hillary? :o)

Thanks, Mui. I’ll try to be.

Hillary, along with Utah republican Senator, Robert Bennett, INTRODUCED the damn bill.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01887.html

How’s that for “accuracy” starters? :o)

When did Obama say he would keep troops in Iraq?

Last debate “to protect the embassy.” (with some wiggle room I suspect. Obama is vague enough always, more so than Hillary and always gives himself wiggle room.)
His policy was the same as Hillary. You can get the transcript.
Yes Hillary has been doing a lot of me toos with Edwards. That’s the beauty of Edwards.

Of course I don’t think flag burning should be a fed crime. I am insulted you would think so. But Hillary wasn’t alone. We can look up the roll call vote. That’s easy and you can see how many congresscritters besides Hillary latched opportunistically onto that piece of shat legsilation. I don’t see Hillary as a “nazi” but I certainly see others that promoted that legislation as walking the fine line of fascism.

Last but not least. The DLC likes both it’s frontrunners. Both of them are triangulators. Howie Klein has linked to an article about the DLC/Harold Ford pushing Edwards out and cackling about it. They’re pleased about both Obama and Hillary. Do you know why that is?

Which is it, with you? :o)

Hell, let’s cut to the chase. Is there any rightwing position, any piece of bush’s bloody policy that Clinton could support, or at least, countenance, that would have you defenders of her, bailing?

Richardson was the democrat who was most definitive about getting us out, and after him, Edwards. And then, Obama.

Hillary, as she’s been doing a LOT, is following John, with a chorus of “me too!’s”

For all of them, it’s getting like a damn dutch auction:

Of the three left,

She starts out by refusing to set a timetable at all.

Then, when Edwards says “all the combat troops out in a year” (depends on what you mean by “combat”, John.) Hillary starts talking about 6 months, the last I heard; but we keep hearing the “Responsible withdrawal” from her. And since bush is already “responsible” for about a million dead Iraqi’s (ALL of whom had jackshit to do with 9-11, I would like to hear SOME candidate point out) it would be nice to see her talk about our “responsibility” to let the Iraqi people decide their own future. And incidentally, what to do with their oil, because, that is, of course at the very crotch of the matter.

Mui, I’m glad you don’t agree with Hillary on that stuff. Really. I never know just how far her defenders will go with her; sometimes I think she could be campaigning in an SS Madchen outfit, and they would be sobbing about blue dresses and Chris Matthews.

Bottom line; she’ll turn a potential landslide for us, into a cliffhanger. We can’t risk it. Just can’t. Too much riding on this election to nominate the great Triangulator.

Cassie, methinks you’re a Clinton supporter, who, after last night, has gone halfway back in the closet. :o)

If you think that Bill Clinton going into a VERY red state, and talking about an “eloquent, youthful, Afro-American” is not a dog whistle, then you aint never heard one. I’ve listed so many of Clinton’s disgusting idiot lurches to the right, that this is just one more of them, and I’m not going through the roster again. (In your little screed, you didn’t trouble yourself to discuss ANY of them. :o) )

But, the same questions apply to you, that apply to her other supporters:

Do you think that flagburning should be made a federal crime?

Think that Obama was “too far to the left” when he spoke out against the death penalty years ago? Was he too far left when he spoke out for “socialized medicine”, as Hillary has accused him of doing?

Again, these are classic republican accusations. They have been used to HAMMER democrats and progressives for decades. Do you think that we should be dumbshit enough to support a candidate who parrots them, and to award her the democratic nomination simply because a substantial part of the american electorate despise she and her husband?

I’m not into risking this election to put a bandaid on your, or Hillary’s political bruises from the 8 years Bill and she were in the white house, and while we’re on the subject of how unfairly persecuted they were, let me point out again, that she willingly hied herself down to FauxNews’ big 10th anniversary birthday bash to schmooze with the people who were doing some of the worst of the persecuting.

Edwards is not perfect; none of them are. But John is the only one who’s accurately naming the source of most of the things that are wrong with our country, which is the amount of control over our government which corporate america exercises. That nitty-gritty position, nearly by itself, gets him my support.

I freely grant you, he may be lying, as may any of them. But he hasn’t taken a dime from AIPAC, and Hillary’s sure as hell taken from them, and regularly appears before them to tell them what a great job they’re doing, as they work their asses off to keep us in Iraq, and to GET us into Iran.

We pays our money and we takes our chances. And I’ll take my chances, first, with John Edwards, and if he can’t make it, then with Barak Obama, instead of a candidate who is callous enough and cynical enough to parrot the bushCo obscenity that the Iraqi government, hiding out in the green zone from the hell-on-earth that bush, with Hillary’s help, have made of their country, “isn’t doing enough”.

We are NOT going to hand Hillary, and Bill, the nomination, as ass-salve for the wounds they received at the hands of the republican’s. If Bill had had the brains to keep his fly zipped, they wouldn’t have BEEN skinned like a rabbit. It WAS unfair, and as someone who voted for Bill twice, I was angry about it, too, but it’s too late to do anything about that, and what you and the rest of her supporters now need to do, is get up in the morning, look in the mirror, and speak one word to yourselves, so that you can have at least that degree of honesty.

“Electabilty”.