SA 4882. Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. LEAHY) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill H.R. 5631, making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, and for other purposes; as follows:

At the end of title VIII, add the following:

Sec. 8109. No funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act my be obligated or expended to acquire, utilize, sell, or transfer any cluster munition unless the rules of engagement applicable to the cluster munition ensure that the cluster munition will not be used in or near any concentrated population of civilians, whether permanent or temporary, including inhabited parts of cities or villages, camps or columns of refugees or evacuees, or camps or groups of nomads.

Didn’t anyone read it?

Good post, except that you missed the elephant in the room. The context for the vote was the wake of Israel’s war on Lebanon in summer 2006. Just to spell it out, this was about Clinton demonstrating fealty to the Israel lobby. Obama is imperfect, but he didn’t cave to them on this one.

BTW women who vote for Hillary because she’s a woman are IMHO mistaken. That’s as bad a reason as voting for Obama because he’s black. Since I am neither black nor a woman, perhaps I do not understand the longing that makes gender and race a determining factor. Nevertheless they shouldn’t be.

“If she knew then what she knows now, about land mines…”

Pert’ good coffee-spew! :o)

When some of the people on here first began to put up tough questions about how “progressive” Clinton was, there were posts complaining about it. How we were “tearing the party apart”. For a while, the talking point was…that we were “using republican talking points”.

Which made no sense at all. NO one on here was accusing her of being too far left. It has been the other way around. Siun’s courageous thread about Clinton’s vote against banning the use of cluster-bombs in civilian areas, is the most recent example.

Also, I believe it was Jane who offered some criticism of her, in her thread about Clinton agreeing to a “debate” on Fox, on the 12th of this month. No “republican talking point” there, I don’t think. :o)

It’s tough for some people to face the truth: Hillary Clinton is disliked by progressives. She has minimum support from them, but her followers keep trying to buffalo the progressive blogs where she does so poorly, into supporting her, and, if not to stifle legitimate criticism of her, then to try to inhibit it.

They don’t want to talk about her electability, nor about her record on Iraq. Often, those of us who bring up those subjects, and sometimes post links to show what we’re talking about, especially with regard to Iraq, and to how much or how little she might be able to capitalize on the issue which is hanging over republican heads like a sword, are called “misogynists” for doing it. It’s the cheapest of cheap shots.

It is also very dis-unifying. :o)

This call for UNITY has led us all to debating which of two candidates is less manipulated by The United Corporate States Of America’s Board Of Directors.

Any more of this unity and they’ll put us in them pens in the desert.

It’s this kind of unity that’s ruined this country and siphoned the money and control up to the 1%. And it contunues to to do, too . . . this UNITY, that so called progressive’s clamor for. I find it a SHRILL unity.

Like yon Cassius, it hath a lean and hungry look about it.