One of the suggestions Clinton’s campaign has made is the appointment of a US diplomatic envoy, to shuttle between Afghanistan, and Pakistan, an on site presence to help iron out and negotiate difficulties between those countries, and “Iraq’s warring parties, too.”

Holbrooke, with experience in Bosnia, would, according to TIME, make an excellent candidate, the man able to accomplish this mission.

(As would Mr Wilson, no doubt).

Clinton has opened a door to a civilized, workable solution, US brain power as muscle to bring about some control, as opposed to this mess of military and mercenary jello we now see in the Middle East, courtesy of Bush.

Perhaps NATO does not want to contribute more in terms of troops and money because the Bush administration is so incompetent, as evidenced, well, everywhere.

Would you invest in Cheney’s Pentagon team, Cheney’s corrupt Pentagon?

Of course not.

Now imagine Obama in charge of this operation.

Why do people take him seriously?

Because he makes them feel so hopeful.

Just don’t mention real work, ok?

After all her bragging about her experience in the White House, she realices that she fell asleep during the process in which her husband ran for two elections? Sorry but I don’t buy that.

What I see is a candidate who has lost, and is trying to do anything possible to revert that result.

Not too long ago, Larry said that what counted was the delegates. Now what counts is the popular vote. For me, trying to change the rules in the middle of the game equals cheating

As for the voters of Mi and Fl, they should have voiced their oposition BEFORE the election took place. And if necesary they should have boycotted the election.

“”It’s clear, this election they’re having is not going to count for anything,” Clinton said Thursday during an interview on New Hampshire Public Radio’s call-in program, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/11/AR2007101100859_pf.html

Now she wants to count the delegates and/or the popular vote?? Either she was lying then or she is cheating now!

Please recommend this post and add a comment

Obama’s Moral Relativism by Sarana

BTW, I am looking for Hillary disavowing perjuror-in-chief, but can’t seem to find any.

The RW Corporations that own the MSM DO NOT want a Democratic President and all their talking heads have been given orders to get Obama the Dem nomination so they can easily get McCain elected in November.

Last Night on Sean Hannity’s show, he said there’s MORE damaging information out there about Obama and he will stay on it. I suspect we’ll see the most damaging things AFTER Mr. Hope is the Dem nominee.

The type of courage you displayed with Saddam is something that I simply cannot envision BO displaying, based on the way that he has chosen to run his campaign, if for no other reason. It is a good yardstick to use I think in selecting a leader to view what they would do had they been in your shoes.

I can however see Sen. Clinton being as courageous as you were in dealing with Saddam.

Thank you for taking issue with the ridiculous assertions of Orlando Patterson. Even more ridiculous, he was on Chris Matthews show talking about it recently. I restrained myself mightily from hurling something at the TV.

BO uses race to attempt to distract from the fact that he is totally unqualified to serve this country in the capacity of president.

I hope another door opened for your wife and family when the criminality of this administration closed the other. I was very pleased to get the news that S. Libby was disbarred citing moral turpitude. He deserved far more than that for the personal damage to you and your family and the damage he did to national security.

Look it’s a bird, it’s a plane…it Condi calling BO saying, “Sorry for letting this go public, but I never knew, after all it’s not like you have much in there…unless it had to do with that secret trip you took to _______ after meeting with Auchi…

Is Friday yet?

Inspite of the growing unpopularity of the Vietnam War (1,000 U.S. deaths per month - not per year)Nixon was re-elected by an enormous landslide.

The reason was that most voters chose someone they felt could be a CIC. In McGovern’s case he was a man who had foreign policy experience and was even a decorated WW II military officer. But he simply did not inspire confidence

In Obama’s case he has zero as you articulated. Hs nomination would result in a far worse landslide than either McGovern or Mondale

Also, any idea why Bill Richardson threw his friends, the Clintons, under the bus to board the Titanic?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/mar/10/usa.comment

Now a big page in the Obama playbook - stifle and silence the will of the people in FL and MI.

Often times, when questioned about Obama’s experience or lack of it, the reply is, ‘there’s people now with experience, and look what that got us…so maybe it’s better to have an outsider with less of the wrong experience’.

This is the gist of what I hear from those of the phone-in callers on C-Span who support Obama.

It seems there’s a fundamental divide between those who value the fever of inspirational speech, versus those who are looking for an action plan.