Thursday, March 27, 2008

McBush on Iraq: The Same Old Thing

Why a vote for John McCain is a vote for a Bush 3rd Term:

Trouble viewing this video? Click here.

Monday, March 24, 2008

Iraq: 4000 Service Members Dead

To Whom it May Concern:
As I sit in my cushy apartment in the “war zone” fiddling through the endless bulletins of a fictitious world named “MySpace”, I open one entitled "4000 Service Member Dead" by my friend and testifier at Winter Soldier, Jason Washburn.

Suddenly, the walls around me are papery thin and not so cushy. Something has come to remind me of the pseudo “bubble” of materialism, capitalism, imperialism, and apathy that the last eight years have so gallantly bread: “Stay indoors….isolate yourself…keep shopping….turn your head and support corporate media”.

When is it enough? When will all of us become so angered that we will demand answers, accountability, and an end to senseless violence? When will the apathy dissipate?

Perhaps we should just smile and give our superficial condolences, explaining to this young man’s family that his death is all in the name of….wait, what was it about?

I encourage all of you to turn off your televisions, put down your Newsweek, stumble blindly to your computers and type in Watch the testimony. Maybe it will be enough to force all of you to take accountability and furthermore, action. After all, when will we grow tired of funerals and folded flags?
--J. Michaels

Sunday, March 23, 2008

Hillary's NAFTA Lies Kill All of Her Credibility on Trade

John Nichols, The Nation, reports:
"When it comes to the essential test of the trade debate, Clinton has been identified as a liar -- a put-in-boldface-type 'L-I-A-R' liar.

What is the proper word for the claim by Hillary Clinton and the more factually disinclined supporters of her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination -- made in speeches, briefings and interviews (including one by this reporter with the candidate) -- that she has always been a critic of the North American Free Trade Agreement?

Now that we know from the 11,000 pages of Clinton White House documents released this week that former First Lady was an ardent advocate for NAFTA; now that we know she held at least five meetings to strategize about how to win congressional approval of the deal; now that we know she was in the thick of the manuevering to block the efforts of labor, farm, environmental and human rights groups to get a better agreement. Now that we know all of this, how should we assess the claim that Hillary's heart has always beaten to a fair-trade rhythm?

Now that we know from official records of her time as First Lady that Clinton was the featured speaker at a closed-door session where 120 women opinion leaders were hectored to pressure their congressional representatives to approve NAFTA; now that we know from ABC News reporting on the session that "her remarks were totally pro-NAFTA" and that "there was no equivocation for her support for NAFTA at the time;" now that we have these details confirmed, what should we make of Clinton's campaign claim that she was never comfortable with the militant free-trade agenda that has cost the United States hundreds of thousands of union jobs, that has idled entire industries, that has saddled this country with record trade deficits, undermined the security of working families in the US and abroad, and has forced Mexican farmers off their land into an economic refugee status that ultimately forces them to cross the Rio Grande River in search of work?

As she campaigns now, Clinton says, "I have been a critic of NAFTA from the very beginning."

But the White House records confirm that this is not true.

Her statement is, to be precise, a lie...."
Continue reading.

Saturday, March 22, 2008

Project Vote

In 1992, Barack Obama led Project Vote, a massive voter registration drive in Chicago:

Join us. Help register new voters: CLICK HERE to get started.

Clinton Friend Involved In Passport Breach

Coincidence? Or something more sinister?

Capitol Hill Blue reports:
"A State Department official in charge of the department during two of the three breaches into the passport files of Sen. Barack Obama has a direct tie to Bill and Hillary Clinton and department officials are investigating whether she furnished information to Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign.

Maura Harty was in charge of the Bureau Of Consular Affairs during the first two breaches of Obama's passport. Former President Bill Clinton appointed her to an ambassadorship during his Presidency.

Harty retired last month from the State Department. She joined the State Department in 2002 after serving as ambassador to Paraguay for two years of Bill Clinton's Presidential term. Sources within the State Department told Capitol Hill Blue this morning that revelations of the first two passport breaches surfaced only after Harty left her State Department job."
Photo Credit: Maura Harty is State Department Photo (Capitol Hill Blue)

If Obama Must Explain Wright, McCain Must Explain Rev. Rod Parsley

McCain Spiritual Guide Accused Govt. of Enabling "Black Genocide" | Video | AlterNet:
"In largely unnoticed speeches, Rev. Rod Parsely has compared Planned Parenthood to the KKK and Nazis, claiming it targeted blacks.

This past week, Sen. Barack Obama's pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, has taken an exceptional amount of heat in part for comments that suggested the U.S. government had introduced AIDS into black communities.

But it turns out he's not the only religious confidant to a presidential candidate who thinks the state has targeted black populations with death and disease.

Reverend Rod Parsley of the World Harvest Church of Columbus, Ohio -- whom Sen. John McCain hailed as a spiritual adviser -- has suggested on several occasions that the U.S. government was complicit in facilitating black genocide...."

Also See:

  • The Republican Right's Moonie Problem:
    "You don't get to watch Moon's 'hateful' and 'anti-American' remarks being replayed endlessly on CNN and Fox.

    A number of folks -- notably Ezra Klein and Glenn Greenwald -- have already pointed out quite adroitly that while the media have had little compunction about whipping up a phony controversy about Barack Obama's "pastor problem", there's almost nothing that white evangelical pastors can say that might bring down similar approbation. John McCain's "spiritual advisers" Rod Parsley and John Hagee really are only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to this...."

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Obama Delivers Speech on 5th Anniversary of Iraq War

FAYETTEVILLE, NC—On the fifth anniversary of the war in Iraq, Senator Barack Obama offered a clear contrast between his foreign policy vision and that of John McCain, emphasizing the need to end the war in order to confront the emerging national security challenges of the 21st Century. Obama spoke at Fayetteville Technical Community College, a short distance from Fort Bragg and Pope Air Force Base. Fort Bragg is home to the 82d Airborne Division and the U.S. Army Special Operations Command, members of which have seen multiple deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan.

In his remarks, Senator Obama drew stark distinctions between the leadership and judgment he offers and the kind of leadership that led us into Iraq—and fails to comprehend the consequences of our involvement there:

"Just yesterday, we heard Senator McCain confuse Sunni and Shiite, Iran and al Qaeda," Senator Obama said. "Maybe that is why he voted to go to war with a country that had no al Qaeda ties. Maybe that is why he completely fails to understand that the war in Iraq has done more to embolden America's enemies than any strategic choice that we have made in decades."

Obama was introduced and endorsed at the event by Paul "Bud" Bucha, a former Army captain awarded the Medal of Honor in 1970 for heroism in Vietnam.

Senator Obama outlined the threats that have festered while the U.S. has remained mired in Iraq, a war he opposed from the start. Obama will immediately begin to bring an end to the war and refocus our military and diplomatic efforts on 21st-Century security challenges. As President, Obama will:
  • End the war in Iraq, removing our troops at a pace of 1 to 2 combat brigades per month;

  • Finally finish the fight against the Taliban, root out al Qaeda and invest in the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan, while making aid to the Pakistani government conditional;

  • Act aggressively to stop nuclear proliferation and to secure all loose nuclear materials around the world;
    Double our foreign assistance to cut extreme poverty in half;

  • Invest in a clean energy future to wean the U.S. off of foreign oil and to lead the world against the threat of global climate change;

  • Rebuild our military capability by increasing the number of soldiers, marines, and special forces troops, and insist on adequate training and time off between deployments;

  • Renew American diplomacy by talking to our adversaries as well as our friends; increasing the size of the Foreign Service and the Peace Corps; and creating an America's Voice Corps.
Watch a video excerpt:

For a complete transcript of speech click here.

Click Here for a full fact sheet.

Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Barack Obama : "A More Perfect Union"

Barack Obama delivered a historic speech today in Philadelphia, laying out a fundamental path by which America can work together to pursue a better future.

Historically, the greatest leaders have had the vision to help us transcend our differences and act on the basis of our shared hopes and dreams -- for the benefit of all. Barack Obama is proving daily that he has the potential to be just such a leader. The question is, do we deserve the faith he has put in us to get beyond our differences in order to realize our common dreams. Or do we choose the divisive, pessimistic, petty-politics of the past offered by Hillary Clinton?

For a complete transcript of Senator Obama's speech Click here.

Also See:

Senator Obama on the State of the Economy

Senator Barack Obama today released the following statement on the state of the economy.

The news coming from Wall Street today has confirmed our fears that the financial fallout from the mortgage crisis would spillover into the wider economy. Months ago, I went to Wall Street and said that our capital markets could not function without the confidence and trust of the public. I said that Wall Street could not succeed while the rest of America struggled. Now, as the Federal Reserve does its best to bring stability to the market, we must focus on what we can do to restore the public’s confidence in the market and help the millions of Americans who are worried about their jobs, their homes, and their financial future.

History will not judge President Bush kindly for his failure to act in a way that could’ve prevented or alleviated this economic crisis. There have been few Administrations so out of touch with the concerns and the struggles of working Americans and so beholden to the lobbyists and special interests who blocked any kind of regulatory oversight of the financial sector. Whether it was subprime lending, credit cards, or bankruptcy laws, Washington has allowed these special interests to prevent sensible policy that could have prevented the most serious effects of the current predicament.

Nowhere has the failure been more pronounced than the President’s refusal to address the plight of homeowners and Main Street businesses that lie at the heart of the turmoil right now. After months of inaction and half-measures, the President traveled to New York last week to say that there is a danger in doing too much and implied that doing nothing would be preferable. His principle policy to address the financial crunch that now threatens millions of Americans with foreclosure and thousands of businesses with bankruptcy is to extend his tax cuts for the wealthiest few. It’s a policy so divorced from the reality facing the American people and the American economy that it would be laughable if it weren’t so frightening.

At this moment, we must come together and act to address the housing crisis that set this downturn in motion and continues to eat away at the public’s confidence in the market. We should pass the legislation I put forward with my colleague, Chris Dodd, to create meaningful incentives for lenders to buy or refinance existing mortgages so that Americans facing foreclosure can keep their homes. This is not a bailout for lenders or investors who gambled recklessly, and it is not a windfall for borrowers. It is a fair and responsible way to help stem the foreclosure crisis.

Many other steps will be required to reverse this downturn in the weeks to come. It will require the efforts of those in the financial community; of the Federal Reserve; of Congress, and the White House. And it will also require a renewed confidence that we can meet this challenge. We are the United States of America, and each time we have faced moments of adversity in the past – some much greater than this – we have summoned a spirit of cooperation and innovation to emerge stronger and more prosperous than we were before. But it will take work, it will take time, and it will take leadership that recognizes that we are all part of the same economy, and that economy must work for every American in order for America to prosper in the 21st century.

Obama Wins in Iowa -- Again

ABC News reports:
ABC News' Teddy Davis reports: Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., saw his delegate lead over Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., grow by 10 on Saturday when Iowa Democrats took the second step in picking national convention delegates.

Obama's gains at Saturday's county conventions came from successfully wooing Iowa Democratic Party activists who had previously backed former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., as well as picking up the support of some Iowans who had backed Clinton during the Jan. 3rd precinct caucuses.

As a result of Saturday's county conventions, Obama gained nine delegates, Clinton lost one, and Edwards lost eight delegates. Moving up by nine while Clinton moved down by one gave Obama a net gain of 10 over his rival for the Democratic presidential nomination.

The delegate allocations changed from Jan. 3 because delegates' presidential preferences are allowed to change prior to the springtime state party convention.

To highlight the significance of Obama netting 10 delegates at Saturday's low-profile Iowa county conventions, Obama campaign manager David Plouffe issued a statement juxtaposing it with Clinton's high-profile win earlier this month in Ohio's primary.

"With all of the results in," said Plouffe in a statement whose accuracy was confirmed by the Iowa Democratic Party, "Sen. Obama earned 25 delegates, while Sen. Clinton earned 14. Sen. Obama netted 10 delegates tonight."

"For comparison purposes," he added, "Sen. Clinton netted nine delegates in Ohio” by winning that state's primary on March 4.

Overall, Obama now leads Clinton by 189 delegates, according to an ABC News estimate. In all, Obama has 1,614 delegates, including 1,407 pledged delegates and 207 superdelegates. Clinton has 1,485 delegates, including 1,240 pledged delegates and 245 superdelegates. A total of 2,025 delegates are needed to earn the Democratic presidential nomination.

Sunday, March 16, 2008

America, The Sick

Uncle Hillary

Why won't you release your tax returns, Hillary?

Trouble viewing this video? Click Here.

Obama in Plainfield, IN: 'We have to come together'

MUST SEE. This is leadership:

Trouble viewing this video? Click Here.

Background and Partial Transcript:

Before taking questions, Barack reminded the crowd of the speech Bobby Kennedy gave in Indianapolis, right after the death of Martin Luther King, nearly forty years ago...
Some of you were alive when this speech was given... He was in a crowd mostly of African Americans. And he delivered the news that Dr. King had been shot and killed. And he said, at that moment of anguish, he said, we've got a choice... in taking the rage and bitterness and disappointment and letting it fester and dividing us further, so that we no longer see each other as Americans, but we see each other as separate and apart and at odds with each other. Or we can take a different path that says we have different stories, but we have common dreams and common hopes. And we can decide to walk down this road together. And remake America once again. And, you know, I think about those words often, especially in the last several weeks - because this campaign started on the basis that we are one America. As I said in my speech at the convention in 2004, there is no black America, or white America, or Asian America, or Latino America. There is the United States of America.

But I noticed over the last several weeks that the forces of division have started to raise their ugly heads again. And I’m not here to cast blame or point fingers because everybody, you know, senses that there's been this shift...

We’ve got a lot of pent-up anger and bitterness and misunderstanding. But what I continue to believe in is that this country wants to move beyond these kinds of divisions. That this country wants something different. And so –
The crowd interrupted the speech and began to chant: "Yes we can! Yes we can!" Barack continued:
I just want to say to everybody here that as somebody who was born into a diverse family, as somebody who has little pieces of America all in me, I will not allow us to lose this moment, where we cannot forget about our past and not ignore the very real forces of racial inequality and gender inequality and the other things that divide us.

We have to come together. That’s what this campaign is about. That’s why you are here. That’s why we're going to win this election. That’s how we're going to change the country.

Also See:

  • A New Hope | Jann S. Wenner | Rolling Stone

    "Rolling Stone Endorses Obama: The tides of history are rising higher and faster these days. Read them right and ride them, or be crushed. And then along comes Barack Obama, with the kinds of gifts that appear in politics but once every few generations. There is a sense of dignity, even majesty, about him, and underneath that ease lies a resolute discipline. It's not just that he is eloquent — with that ability to speak both to you and to speak for you — it's that he has a quality of thinking and intellectual and emotional honesty that is extraordinary...."
  • The Machinery of Hope : Rolling Stone:
    "Inside the grass-roots field operation of Barack Obama, who is transforming the way political campaigns are run..."

US IMAGE ABROAD: How can we improve America's standing in the world?

Dr. Steven Kull, director of, appears on International focus at the University of Wisconsin Milwaukee to discuss the image of the United States in the World:

Saturday, March 15, 2008

The Shocking Truth About Barack Obama

Time for the season's first Google Bomb/Viral Email:

Subject: The Real Truth About Barack Obama!

As enthusiastic volunteers in the Barack Obama campaign for the Presidency, we have put together a list of facts about Barack so that you will know the truth about him. Please follow the links we have included for documentation of these facts. If you value the truth as we do, please spread this information via email, blog, or any other means, to everyone you know.

  1. Did you know that Barack Obama is a devout Christian? He has been a member of the same United Church of Christ congregation for 20 years, and was married there to his wife Michelle in 1992.
  2. Did you know that Barack Obama often leads the US Senate in the Pledge of Allegiance?
  3. Did you know that Barack Obama is a strong friend of Israel and has spoken out strongly against anti-Semitism?
  4. Did you know his grandparents from Kansas were part of the "Greatest Generation?. His grandfather served with Patton's Army during World War II, and his grandmother, a real "Rosie the Riveter", worked in a bomber assembly plant back home.
  5. Did you know that Barack Obama was opposed to the war in Iraq from day one, before we invaded, even while he was running for the Senate, and knowing his opposition might be politically unpopular?
    "I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world and strengthen the recruitment arm of al Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars." --Barack Obama, 2002
  6. Did you know Obama favors transparency over secrecy in our government? Did you know that Obama worked with Republican Senator Tom Coburn to pass one of the strongest government transparency bills since the freedom of information act? He's calling it Google for Government and you can see the results at Sen. Obama has also released his own tax returns for public review.
  7. Did you know that after graduating with honors from Harvard Law School, Barack practiced civil rights law and also taught Constitutional Law for 10 years at the University of Chicago, one of the nation's best law schools, where he was consistentl y rated by his students as one of their best instructors? Did you also know that he was the first African-American elected pres ident of the prestigious Harvard Law Review?
  8. Did you know that Barack Obama is an outspoken advocate for women's rights and has been a principled defender of the civil rights of women?
  9. Did you know that despite the grueling schedule of running for President, Senator Obama remains a devoted family man, making time to do things like pick out a Christmas tree with his wife and two young daughters, or hurrying home to spend Valentine's Day with them? Did you know he hasn't missed a single parent-teacher conference while running for President?
  10. Did you know that Barack Obama has a stellar environmental record, including having the highest rating from the League of Conservation Voters (96%) of any Presidential candidate, Democrat or Republican?
  11. Did you know that Barack Obama has been an elected legislator longer than Senator Clinton?
  12. Did you know that Barack is a member of all of these Senate Committees: Foreign Relations; Veteran's Affairs; Health, Education, Labor & Pensions; Homeland Security and Government Affairs?
  13. Did you know that Senator Obama has sponsored or co-sponsored 15 bills that have become law, and has introduced amendments to 50 bills, of which 16 were adopted since he joined the Senate in 2005?
  14. Did you know that Senator Obama sponsored legislation working together with Indiana Republican Senator Richard Lugar, to keep Americans safe by keeping dangerous weapons out of terrorist hands? The two senators also visited the former Soviet Union to inspect the decommissioning of nuclear weapons. Sen. Lugar said of Sen. Obama, "He does have a sense of idealism and principled leadership, a vision of the future."
  15. Did you know that Barack Obama is the only candidate running for president who voted against using cluster bombs in Iraq and the only candidate who supports banning the use of landmines?
  16. Did you know that, as an Illinois state senator, Barack Obama succeeded in passing legislation requiring the videotaping of police interrogations, gaining the respect and support not only of fellow legislators but that of the police, who had initially opposed the legislation?
  17. Did you know that Theodore Roosevelt, Grover Cleveland, Ulysses S. Grant, John F. Kennedy, and Bill Clinton were all younger when they took office than Barack Obama will be?

During election season many emails are circulated about the candidates. Some are true, some aren't. It's often difficult to determine the truth. We encourage you to visit the following non-partisan sites that do a good job of fact checking the candidates.

Source: Daily Kos; thanks for the heads-up go out to The Richmond Democrat and Random Musings.

Posted in response to the various hate emails circulating on the internet.

Labels: ,

Iraq: Winter Soldier Testimonials


Learn about the reality of the Iraq War

-- it's impact on Iraq, the Iraqi people, our military and their families -- from those who have served in Iraq.

Also See:

Friday, March 14, 2008

The Fallacy of Hillary's Sisterhood

Of late, the media is fond of referring to Hillary's "Sisterhood" -- those women who fanatically back Hillary because, well, because she's a woman--at least biologically speaking. (The fact that she seems to be the worst kind of woman -- one who is attempting to emulate the worst, most selfish, most dishonest, most divisive qualities of her male counterparts, doesn't seem to enter into their equation.)

My own view is that no election should be decided on the basis of race, gender or religion, but rather, by determining who has the leadership skills necessary to change the country in the most productive and positive ways. Who has a vision for change, articulated in an honest, inclusive, inspirational message backed by solid, relevant policies? And who has an old school Washington destroy-your-opponent political strategy (lies, smears, swift-boating) to win at all costs (dividing the party and the country) for his or her own political gain at the expense of uniting and inspiring the country to change for the common good?

To me, the choice is pretty obvious. One candidate understands that American's are sick and tired of the divisive, corrupt, power-hungry Washington politics of the last 16 years (where the political promises of both Bill Clinton and George Bush were almost entirely unrealized) and has done his best to raise the bar along with our hopes. The other has become the negative embodiment of everything she professes to want to change. Tough choice? Given that their polices, with minor differences, are nearly identical, I think not.

The following post comes from a fellow political fanatic with some strong feelings on Hillary Rodham Clinton. She makes some points worth noting:

Why This "Middle Aged" Woman is NOT supporting Hillary Clinton

"I am ashamed of my peers.

I used to be a Hillary Rodham Clinton fan, back in the 90's. Incensed at what was being said about the Clinton's stirred me to my very soul. I became more and more activated and vocal about the "raw deal" that the Clintons were handed in the 90's. The 2000's have been a nightmare during which I have seen things that really disturb me to the point of wanting to become one of the 'silent majority'.

So many Dems voting for the Iraq war, (including HRC, and her excuse about being persuaded by Bush and the threat of WMD really is a hoot considering that HRC was in the White House with access to 8 years of information about Saddam. For her to be fooled by Bush when I, who wasn't in the White House and wasn't privy to all of the info and people that she had access to is pathetic.) Hillary's subsequent votes and stances were very hawkish and she really never admitted that going to Iraq was a horrible mistake until years after we were in, when it was quite obvious to anyone with an IQ over 100 that it was a horrible, horrible decision) followed by her hawkish, identical-to-Iraq vote on Iran and her missteps on the Bankruptcy Bill.... Sure, everybody makes errors, but combining those errors with the media announcing that HRC would most certainly win the Democratic nomination-- two years before she even committed to running--set off alarm bells.

Why would the media do that knowing full well that in politics things can change overnight? Why did practically all of the pundits say this over and over again for 2 years? What did they know that we did not? Where was their information coming from? Before one Primary was run, before HRC announced her candidacy, the media had her running and winning the Democratic Nomination for President? How the heck do our votes count with that being rammed down our throats for years? Were they trying to get us all used to the idea? Much like Bush sold us Iraq? Were the powers-that-be driving this news story to get us all over sticker shock? I mean, haven't the American People accepted all kinds of atrocities since Bush got in office? We must all be on valium (maybe put in the water) by accepting all of the blatant infringements on our rights without rioting in the streets. They know how to get us to "accept" things that we ordinarily would never have accepted a couple of decades ago.

Then there is Bill's new buddy Poppy Bush, golfing together, doing humanitarian things together, sitting together at wakes and I ask, where is Jimmy Carter? Isn't Jimmy Carter a Democrat? Don't we get crucified on this board [Democratic Underground] and sometimes thrown off for "appearing" to promote or accept Republicans? But when Clinton somehow strikes up a new friendship with Poppy.... not Jimmy Carter, we all say, "isn't that nice?" While his son the POTUS is responsible for taking us to war on false pretenses, destroying our economy, taking away our rights....

Hillary's behavior since Obama's candidacy started threatening her chances to merely waltz into the White House has pushed me completely over the edge. I don't care that she could be the first woman in history to become POTUS. She would be as much an embarrassment to my sex as she is presently an embarrassment to my sex. Why? Because I thought that we would be better than that. I thought we that we were as capable if not more so than any man to be POTUS. Clinton has changed me from being a supporter and admirer in the 90's to being embarrassed and angry with her in 2008 -- no small task, believe me-- this is one change of mind that I didn't anticipate....

Bush and Clinton, Clinton and Bush - come on, I didn't just fall off of a turnip truck, I wonder though, why did so many of my peers?"

Thursday, March 13, 2008

Hillary's Fictitious Adventures Abroad

FactCheck has found "some exaggerations in Clinton's claims of foreign policy experience." It sure took them long enough. Her lies and exaggerations have been ongoing and rather blatant, to say the least.

Following is FactCheck's summary conclusions:
"On March 6 Hillary Clinton claimed that, unlike Barack Obama, she and likely Republican nominee John McCain have "cross[ed] the commander-in-chief threshold." In a CNN interview the day before, Clinton had listed five foreign policy accomplishments. We can't determine how much behind-the-scenes work Clinton did while first lady, and she certainly took an active interest in foreign policy when her husband was president. Moreover, her time as first lady plus her longer Senate career do give Clinton more foreign policy experience than Obama. But the public record of her actions shows that many of Clinton's foreign policy claims are exaggerated.
  • Clinton claims to have "negotiated open borders" in Macedonia to fleeing Kosovar refugees. But the Macedonian border opened a full day before she arrived, and her meetings with Macedonian officials were too brief to allow for much serious negotiating.

  • Clinton's activities "helped bring peace to Northern Ireland." Irish officials are divided as to how helpful Clinton's actions were, and key players agree that she was not directly involved in any actual negotiations.

  • Clinton has repeatedly referenced her "dangerous" trip to Bosnia. She fails to mention, however, that the Bosnian war had officially ended three months before her visit – or that she made the trip with her 16-year-old daughter and two entertainers.

  • Both Bill and Hillary Clinton claim that Hillary privately championed the use of U.S. troops to stop the genocide in Rwanda. That conversation left no public record, however, as U.S. policy was explicitly to stay out of Rwanda, and officials say that the use of U.S. troops was never considered.

  • Clinton's tough speech on human rights delivered to a Beijing audience is as advertised, though Clinton herself has been dismissive of speeches that aren't backed by solutions."
For more, see: Hillary's Adventures Abroad

Keith Olbermann: Special Comment on Clinton & Ferraro

"This Is Not a Campaign Strategy, This Is a Suicide Pact"

Trouble viewing this video? Click Here.

For a complete transcript, Click Here.

Also See:

Jackie Mason: "On Hillary"

Trouble viewing this video? Click Here.

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Hillary and the Politics of Disappointment

Paul Loeb (The Huffington Post) writes:
"When Democrats worry about Hillary Clinton's electability, they focus on her reenergizing a depressed Republican base while demoralizing core Democratic activists, particularly those outraged about the war, and consequently losing the election. But there's a further danger if Hillary's nominated--that she will win but then split the Democratic Party.

We forget that this happened with her husband Bill, because compared to Bush, he's looking awfully good. Much of Hillary's support may be nostalgia for when America's president seemed to engage reality instead of disdaining it. But remember that over the course of Clinton's presidency, the Democrats lost 6 Senate seats, 46 Congressional seats, and 9 governorships. This political bleeding began when Monica Lewinsky was still an Oregon college senior. Given Hillary's protracted support of the Iraq war, her embrace of neoconservative rhetoric on Iran, and her coziness with powerful corporate interests, she could create a similar backlash once in office, dividing and depressing the Democratic base and reversing the party's newfound momentum...."
Paul Rogat Loeb is the author of The Impossible Will Take a Little While: A Citizen's Guide to Hope in a Time of Fear, named the #3 political book of 2004 by the History Channel and the American Book Association. His previous books include Soul of a Citizen: Living With Conviction in a Cynical Time. See

Also see:

Obama Receives Endorsement of Flag Officers from Army, Navy and Air Force

Obama Receives Endorsement of Flag Officers from Army, Navy and Air Force
"Citing his judgment and ability to lead, admirals and generals from the United States Army, Navy and Air Force that together have served under the last nine Commanders-in-Chief today announced their endorsement of Senator Barack Obama for president.
In offering their endorsement, the generals and admirals recognized Obama's judgment to oppose the war in Iraq before it began, his respect for the Constitution and rule of law, his leadership on behalf of America's servicemen and women and his ability to conduct the diplomacy necessary to restore America's standing in the world.

"Those of us who have served, worn the cloth of our nation, and gone into harm's way know that to be successful we must have the strongest sense of trust in our Commander in Chief. We must be confident that he or she has listened to the best possible advice, that he or she has garnered the best possible information from all possible sources, that he or she has analyzed and weighed all the possible consequences and outcomes, and that he or she has made the decision to exert military force as a last possible resort," said Admiral (Ret.) Robert "William" Williamson (USN). "Of this I am certain: Senator Obama will do all of those things and much more to ensure the safety and f reedom of our citizens, our allies, and coalition partners. He has all the great qualities and attributes required to carry out the most difficult duties of the Presidency....."
Video: Portion of a Speech in Chicago upon receiving the endorsement of Army, Navy and Air Force Flag Officers on 3/12/08.

Complete Transcript of Speech:
It is my privilege to be joined by some of the distinguished generals and admirals supporting my campaign. They have defended the American people and stood up for American values with honor and distinction. Between them they have served nine Commanders-in-Chief, and I look forward to continuing to draw on their counsel throughout my campaign and beyond.

As as a candidate for the presidency, I know that I am running to be Commander-in-Chief – to safeguard this nation's security, and to keep our sacred trust with the men and women who serve. There is no responsibility that I take more seriously.

This is something that I've talked about throughout this campaign. Because I believe that any candidate for President must present the American people with a clear vision of how we will lead. There are real differences between the candidates, and important issues to debate – from ending the war in Iraq, to combating terrorism, to devising new strategies and new capabilities to confront 21st century threats.

But recently, we've seen a different kind of approach. Instead of a serious, substantive debate, we've heard vague allusions to a "Commander-in-Chief threshold" that seems to be about nothing more than the number of years you've spent in Washington.

This is exactly what's wrong with the national security debate in Washington.

After years of a divisive politics that uses national security as a wedge to drive us apart, how much longer do we have to wait to bring this country together to confront our common enemies?

After years of being told that Democrats have to talk, act and vote like John McCain to pass some Commander-in-Chief test, how many times do we have to learn that tough talk is not a substitute for sound judgment?

After years of a war in Iraq that should've never been authorized, how many more politicians will appeal to the American peoples' fears instead of their hopes?

This moment – in this election – is our chance to put an end to a divisive politics that has done nothing to keep America safe, or to serve our men and women in uniform as well as they are serving us. Because the real Commander-in-Chief threshold doesn't have to do with years tallied up in Washington, it has to do with the judgment and vision that you will bring to the Oval Office.

On the most important national security question since the Cold War, I am the only candidate who opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning. This judgment was not about speeches, it was about whether or not the United States of America would go to war in Iraq. Because we did, we took our eye off al Qaeda; we have lost thousands of lives and spent hundreds of billions of dollars; our military is overstretched; and our security and standing has been set back. So don't tell me that the decision to go to war was just a speech, because it was far more than that to the men and women who have served – and continue to serve heroically in Iraq.

When I spoke out against the war, I said that I was not opposed to all wars. In fact, one of the central reasons why I opposed going to war in Iraq is that we had yet to finish the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban. That remains true today. That is why I have consistently called for an increased commitment to Afghanistan, and why I called last August for at least two additional combat brigades to support our mission there. And that is why I will end the war in Iraq when I am President, and focus on finishing the job in Afghanistan.

I will never hesitate to defend this country and our critical interests. That is why I am the only candidate who has made it clear that we cannot tolerate any safe-haven for terrorists who threaten America. But we must also use all elements of national power to combat the threats of the 21st century, and that means deploying the power of American diplomacy before we deploy our troops. That is why we must be willing to talk to the leaders of all nations – friend and foe.

The threats we face are increasingly unconventional, and they call for new approaches. I have worked on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to combat the challenges of the 21st Century – securing loose weapons and nuclear materials from terrorists; working to stop ethnic killing and genocide in Africa; and investing in our ability to combat epidemic diseases like avian flu that can be deadly at home and sew instability abroad.

And one theme that I hear in talking to military officers – whether generals and admirals, or the mid-level officers who will lead tomorrow's military – is that we need new capabilities to respond to this century's new threats.

We must maintain our overwhelming conventional advantage – and I will. We also need to increase the size of our ground forces by 65,000 soldiers and 27,000 marines to relieve the strain on our troops, and to increase our capacity to put boots on the ground. We need to invest in capabilities like civil affairs, foreign languages, and training foreign militaries, so that we can confront nimble enemies. We need to give our civilian agencies the ability to operate alongside our military in post-conflict zones and on humanitarian missions. And we must inspire a new generation of Americans to serve their country, in the military and in a civilian capacity.

And let me be very clear: when I am Commander-in-Chief, I will seek out, listen to, and respect the views of military commanders. Under this Administration, too often we have seen civilian control turned into an expectation that the uniformed military will be punished if they tell the President what he needs to know, rather than what he wants to hear. When I am President, the buck will stop with me, but we will restore trust and open dialogue between the military and civilian leadership.

Finally, it is the sacred obligation of any Commander in Chief to give the men and women who have served the care and support they have earned. That is what I have tried to do on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee – working to improve care and benefits for wounded warriors and their families, and to enhance screening and treatment for PTSD and Traumatic Brain Injury, the signature wounds of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

As President, I will ask myself every day whether I am serving our troops and veterans as well as they have served America. That means only sending them into harm's way when we absolutely must; providing them with a clear mission and the equipment they need to do the job; standing by them when they come home; and helping them live their dreams after they leave the service.

Like the men who have joined me on this stage today, my story is only possible in America. It is the story of my grandfather, who marched in Patton's Army; and my father, who crossed the globe to be a part of the dream that my grandfather defended. An America that secures its people, and stands as a light of hope for the world.

That is the America that I will defend as Commander-in-Chief, drawing on the counsel of military commanders and the courage and conviction of the American people. An America where we meet the challenges of the 21st century with sound judgment, clear plans, and a common purpose.

Monday, March 10, 2008

The Audacity of Hillary

  • Did Clinton Win Ohio on a Lie? (ICH)
    Paul Rogat Loeb (Commondreams) writes: "Suppose someone in the North Korean government released a false story that shifted a key American election. If Bush were negatively affected, we might be bombing Pyongyang by now. But this just happened with what Hillary Clinton called “NAFTAgate” Without it, she might never have won Ohio, or her margin would have been minuscule. But as a Canadian Broadcasting Company story reveals, practically the entire story was a lie, one that played so central a role in Clinton’s Ohio victory as to thoroughly taint any claim she raises about a swing state mandate...."
  • MUST READ: Hillary Clinton, Not So Good on Genocide (AlterNet):
    Marc Cooper (Huffington Post) writes: "Obama adviser Samantha Power exposed the Clinton administration's indifference to genocide -- she got the boot for stating it on the campaign trail...."
  • The Monster Mash
    Maureen Dowd (NYT) writes: "If Barack Obama thinks Hillary Clinton has cut him down to size lately, he’d better imagine what his life would be like as the Clintons’ vice president...."
  • Why Is Saturday Night Live Shilling for Hillary Clinton's Campaign? (AlterNet)
    "It's weird. Weird like....well, Pat Buchanan praising Hillary Clinton...."

  • Obama and the Bigots
    Nicholas Kristof (NYT) writes: "The ugliest prejudices in this campaign season are not directly about race.... It’s about religion...."
  • It's Over for Hillary
    Dick Morris & Eileen McGann ( write: "The real message of Tuesday's primaries is not that Hillary Clinton won. It's that she didn�t win by enough.

    The race is over...."
  • Clintons Push a Hillary-Obama Ticket (
    "Hillary and Bill Clinton are again teaming up on Barack Obama -- this time saying the first-term U.S. lawmaker, whom they have derided as inexperienced, would be a strong running mate on a Democratic presidential ticket headed by the former first lady...."
  • Obama Not Qualified for Commander in Chief, OK for VP (
    "After touting Barack Obama as a potential vice presidential running mate, Bill and Hillary Clinton have created an eruption of outrage in the liberal blogosphere....
  • Gary Hart: Breaking the Final Rule (The Huffington Post)
    "It will come as a surprise to many people that there are rules in politics. Most of those rules are unwritten and are based on common understandings, acceptable practices, and the best interest of the political party a candidate seeks to lead. One of those rules is this: Do not provide ammunition to the opposition party that can be used to destroy your party's nominee...."
  • Confronting the Kitchen Sink
    Bob Herbert (NYT) writes: "...We have seen election after election in which candidates have won by fanning the anxieties of voters. Elect me, or something terrible will happen to you!

    That is now the Clinton mantra, which is a measure of how grim our politics have become...."
  • BILLORY-GATE: Attorneys argue whether Hillary Clinton should be in lawsuit:
    "An attorney for a former Hillary Clinton supporter says the Democratic presidential contender should be reinstated as a defendant in a lawsuit because she allegedly violated campaign finance laws during her bid for a Senate seat in 2000...."
  • "Monster"-Gate: the Clintons Get Away with a Slur, While Respected Obama Aide Forced to Resign (AlterNet)
    David Corn (Mother Jones) writes: "The Clinton people do deserve chutzpah points for trying to turn this nothing-burger into a full-course feast...."
  • Hillary Clinton - The Hillary Clinton Project and Wiki
    Everything you never wanted to know about Hillary....
  • Hillary Unmasked (
    Dick Morris & Eileen McGann write: "The real Hillary Clinton stood up at the Democratic presidential debate this week: angry, sarcastic, stubborn, secretive, arrogant, mired in the past, victim of the media, and still firmly convinced that she is uniquely entitled to the Democratic Party nomination and the presidency...."
  • MUST READ: Clintons to face fraud trial
    WorldNetDaily reports: "While Hillary Clinton battles Barack Obama on the campaign trail, a judge in Los Angeles is quietly preparing to set a trial date in a $17 million fraud suit that aims to expose an alleged culture of widespread corruption by the Clintons and the Democratic Party...."

Monday, March 03, 2008

Pregnant Pause

Dontcha think that, if you're going to put yourself out there as the one who should be commander in chief, that (just a suggestion here) you might want to be able to answer why? -- Charleston dem, Daily Kos

Hotline On Call:
It was, in this reporter's opinion, the most interesting moment in today's Clinton campaign phoner with reporters. Responding to the release of HRC's new TX TV ad, which asserts in no subtle terms that only she has the experience to deal with a major world crisis, and, relatedly, to keep your children safe, Slate's John Dickerson asked the obvious question:

"What foreign policy moment would you point to in Hillary's career where she's been tested by crisis?" he said.

Silence on the call. You could've knit a sweater in the time it took the usually verbose team of Mark Penn, Howard Wolfson and Lee Feinstein, Clinton's national security director, to find a cogent answer. And what they came up with was weak -- that she's been endorsed by many high ranking members of the uniformed military.

Take a Listen here ...
Great video take on the call:

"Bill Clinton Endorses Obama"

This is exactly what Bill Clinton said in 2004... but what are the Clinton's saying now?

The Shocking Video Hillary Does NOT Want You To See!

Vote for Hillary at your own risk. This is exactly what the Republicans will be dredging up should she win the Democratic nomination -- and it's why she will lose in the general election, giving us 8 more years of Bush policies.

THINK before you vote.

Part I

Trouble viewing this video? Click Here.

Part II

Trouble viewing this video? CLICK HERE
Hillary! Uncensored, the unedited trailer that has been ranked #1 video in Google Top 100 in the World, debuted as a 1 hour documentary on YouPerView on November 5, 2007. Copyright T2P Media Inc. Presented by Equal Justice Foundation of America.

Refer to Hillary Clinton Accountability Project - - for link to DVD and other evidence of the frauds Hillary directed to win her senate seat


Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Then, there's the Clintons...

The Roughcut Trailer for "Hillary! Uncensored - the Documentary."

This is the video that's been buzzing around the blogs for the past few months, becoming one of the most viewed on Google Video. It shows the Peter Paul side of the issue, which involves allegations that Hillary Clinton has committed numerous federal election law violations, has lied about them to cover them up, all culminating in what might be felonious conduct on her part. Paul makes a strong case here. Will the media continue to do its best to bury what might be the largest election fraud in US history? Stay tuned...

This is the most shocking expose on the blatant corruption surrounding Hillary Clinton. Includes exclusive home videos of Hillary to expose the illegalities that elected Hillary to the Senate and the obstructions of justice that keep her there. The full documentary, at ( and ( will be released on November 1, 2007 by Equal Justice Foundation of America - CONTRIBUTE TO EJFA, NON-PROFIT WHISTLEBLOWER FOUNDATION - EventUUID=2A54FEC2 .

TO ADVERTISE AND PUBLICIZE the ONLY documentary that dares to expose the evidence of Hillary's misconduct to the American people - Banned by the Mainstream Media!

Equal Justice Foundation of America

A Wake-Up Call for Hillary

This is a MUST READ for all those voting -- especially those who are as yet undecided -- in Tuesday's primaries:

Maureen Dowd, in yesterday's Times op ed, nails Hillary's abysmal campaign failings:
"Hillary Clinton keeps trying to dismiss Barack Obama’s appeal as
emotional. But behind that ethereal presence he’s a wonky lawyer, just like Hillary...."
Continue reading.

Other Must-Reads:

  • Begrudging His Bedazzling | Maureen Dowd | New York Times

  • A Nominee? Or a Debacle? | Bob Herbert | New York Times

  • A Card-Carrying Civil Libertarian | Jeffrey Rosen | New York Times

  • Truthdig | Underestimating Obama:
    "The Reagan metaphor explains why Hillary Clinton was in trouble from the moment she failed to knock Obama out of the race in Iowa. During the last two months, Democrats in large numbers have reached the same conclusion that so many Republicans did in 1980: Now is the time to go for broke, to challenge not only the ruling party but also the governing ideas of the previous political era and the political coalition that allowed them to dominate public life."
  • Truthdig| Bill Boyarsky | Obama and the Jews

  • Obama and Israel | Nicholas D. Kristof | New York Times Blog
    ...I did come across a speech by Obama the other day in which he, very carefully, did show some of the leadership I yearn for. It was to a Jewish audience in Cleveland, about Middle Eastern issues. He started off trying to allay suspicions by emphasizing his support for Israel’s security. But in response to questions, he also called for a more open and constructive dialogue about Israel and the Palestinians — a position that will get him no votes and may cost him some. It was a breath of fresh air. I recommend the full speech and Q/A, but here’s some of what he said....
  • FLOTSAM & JETSAM: The real divide on Hillary Clinton
    ...It is hard to get Democrats to focus on this problem, but consider this: The Justice Department's and other investigatory files on the Clinton years are currently fully under the control the Bush administration and will be until Inauguration Day.

    Bluntly put, the Democrats are walking into a huge trap....
  • Meet the Carlyle Group and Hillary's Connections | Elizabeth Berry's Blog:
    Draw your own conclusions. The Carlyle Group are listed among Hillary’s supporters. David Marchick is the name of the person associated with the contribution to her campaign. Less than a year ago the Carlyle Group named David Marchick Global head of Regulatory Affairs for Carlyle saying that his new position will provide government affairs, regulatory and strategic advice.

    Mr. Marchick worked on Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign and served in four departments – the White House, USTR and Departments of State and Commerce – over seven years in the Clinton Administration. Among other positions, he served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State and while at the White House, helped coordinate the Administration’s efforts to secure passage of NAFTA and the creation of the World Trade Organization....

Sunday, March 02, 2008

Rumor: Obama Mulls Hagel for Cabinet

According to
Sen. Barack Obama is already plotting the makeup of his Cabinet, and it includes two prominent Republicans.

According to the Sunday Times of London, Obama has his sights set on Sens. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Richard Lugar of Indiana. Hagel has been an outspoken opponent of the Iraq war, and Lugar is the ranking GOP member on the Senate foreign relations committee.

Senior advisers told the Times that Hagel is being considered for the secretary of defense post, and Lugar as secretary of state.

Obama would only say to the Times: "Chuck Hagel is a great friend of mine and I respect him very much."

Larry Korb, a defense official under President Reagan told the Times: "By putting a Republican in the Pentagon and the State Department you send a signal to Congress and the American people that issues of national security are above politics."
Photo Credit: Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., left, and Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., take part in a debate on an Iraq war resolution. (AP/Dennis Cook) The bipartisan war on Bush | Salon News