The most fascinating thing to me is the tone of the article. The NY Times seems much more exercised over the "partisanship" in the Senate Intelligence Committee than it does by the fact that we were, ya know, like, lied into an endless war and stuff.

http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4995731&affil=wabc

It's from Good Morning America on Wednesday morning.
I watched this and thought to myself... this is the nice, kindest, most uplifting piece on Hillary in the last 15 years.

And I was pissed off. It's like when people die, it's the only time people find something nice to say about them.

Hell, Nixon was praised and Reagan was given a royal funeral.
It makes me angry when you can only say something nice about someone when they are gone.

Where were these types of reports when she was running? The whole MSM is the main reason Hillary's message never got out there because they were so busy trying to bring her down.

By the way, Hillary WAS NOT running for a third Bill Clinton term, like some stupid woman in the piece said... Hillary was running for her own Presidency.

She's smarter than either Obama or McCain. And as usual, the smart girl is pushed to the back for a bunch of boys. How many woman have been used to help bring up new men in a corporation, only to be pushed out and/or marginalized so the boys get their power back.

Will Obama stop the war?

One of the most important reason for his success is the belief among millions of supporters that he alone among the major candidates is committed to stopping the war on Iraq and charting a radically different course for U.S. foreign policy. But is Obama really the anti-warrior he is made out to be?

PEOPLE WHO believe Barack Obama will end the occupation of Iraq are likely in for a rude awakening. Despite talking about withdrawal from Iraq, his plan would keep troops in the country for years to come, likely well beyond his potential first term.

In addition to the mercenaries and private contractors, that would leave tens of thousands of troops involved in so-called counterinsurgency operations. That's the same rationale the Bush administration uses for keeping troops in Iraq. Other troops would stay for "training" operations. This, too, is the Bush argument: we'll stand down as the Iraqis stand up.

Take the issue of troop levels. Obama's Web site says, "Obama will increase the size of ground forces, adding 65,000 soldiers to the Army and 27,000 Marines." What do we imagine the purpose of those troops will be? To provide housing for homeless people? To teach children who are illiterate? To wipe out malaria and easy preventable diseases that kill millions of children ever year?

No, those troops will be charged with protecting U.S. corporate interests globally, preserving "stability," protecting and training dictators aligned with the United States, and suppressing any struggles that threaten the interests of U.S. rulers and elites.

What worries me now is that this wonderful site talkleft.com is now going to be for Obama and while McCain doesn't look appealing, I'm outweighing and researching the differences between both, behind the curtain of BS, it's no different  McCain before 2000 was more of a moderate.  He wanted his presidency so bad that he lined up with the Republicans and voted their way.  However, I don't buy it, he has been talking about greener technologies and I believe it.   Listening to Obama unrehearsed talk and what he has always stood for is the real him. Obama doesn't have much to stand on.  He rarely had interviews and when he did, he sounded more like a Republican.  Obama doesn't have much of a voting record with the exception of the one he stole from Clinton.  

Taxes is another issue.  I think taxing to better our country is important but not now when payroll hasn't increased with inflation that adding more tax would kill us off instead of drowning and coming up for air.  Obama's plans show a big tax increase.  We can't afford it now!  It will only lead to more homelessness and more ppl getting on fed. govt. aid which in turn will result into even more taxes.

Listening to Obama unrehearsed talk and what he has always stood for is the real him.

So, what's the difference between his plan and McCains? McCain offers tax credits which are virtually useless if you're in college, disabled, unemployed, didn't file a tax return or a child.

Link

I plan on voting for him but I doubt he'll be a dominant topic of my posts here. When he is the subject of my posts, it will probably be to urge him to do something.

For example, if I didn't have to leave for the jail right now, I'd be writing a long post on why he should choose a criminal defense attorney for Attorney General and how disappointed I will be if he picks career prosecutors for important posts in his Administration.

Does that sound like cheerleading to you? It's a given that McCain will do those things, but I plan to use Obama's promise of change to make specific requests on how to bring it about.

A secret deal being negotiated in Baghdad would perpetuate the American military occupation of Iraq indefinitely, regardless of the outcome of the US presidential election in November.

The terms of the impending deal, details of which have been leaked to The Independent, are likely to have an explosive political effect in Iraq. Iraqi officials fear that the accord, under which US troops would occupy permanent bases, conduct military operations, arrest Iraqis and enjoy immunity from Iraqi law, will destabilise Iraq's position in the Middle East and lay the basis for unending conflict in their country.

You'd think it would all be about Obama now.

This is an amazing feeling -- like the last time I took off pantyhose, never to wear them again. :-)  I suppose the time will come when I have to struggle into them again, just as there may (but it's far less likely) come a time when I have to vote for a "lesser evil" Dem again.  But that will be even more of a struggle.

This is driving my Obama-mad and diehard Dem family members crazy.  It's making them work even harder on me, while it's making me care not at all about what they say anymore.  I just point to the huge holes in their arguments, without investing emotionally at all anymore.  I just have my fun with them, as some of them have so enjoyed having their fun with me over every attack on Clinton.

As an ardent Clinton supporter, I strongly support Clinton's statement that Obama's choice for VP is his and his alone. That is his right.

Do I think he should choose HRC? Maybe. But I think that will be a question for some cold, hard number crunching: he should choose the person that creates the strongest ticket for a victory in November, and that will require quite a bit of consideration.

I don't believe in the validity of the strong-arming argument of simply putting her on the ticket because of the nearly 18 million people who voted for her. I think the right decision will definitely include his reaching out to her supporters, and retuning his brand a bit to include the values most closely held by many of Clinton's supporters (eg reaching out to Rust Belt Americans on economic & job issues, where she proved stronger in reaching those groups) but not necessarily by offering her the VP spot.

I have been checking me e-mail ever so often, all day today, every chance I get, and I haven't received anything from the campaign mailing listserv. I did get letter this morning with the announcement.

I actually have the entire Saturday free so I most definitely can go. Only question is, where?

On a side note, my girlfriend and I have been a real funk since Tuesday. I guess you could say our mind was prepared for the inevitable, but our hearts and guts are still hanging on.

We are just so heartbroken, because for us, this was really our first, REAL presidential campaign, and we actually had a candidate that we truly loved and supported. Jess and I are still pretty sore, and our wounds are still fresh. It doesn't help that some of our closest friends, while mindful of the state we are in, cannot quite seem to take their joy down a couple of notches since their guy got the nom.

(We were Clark supporters in 2004, but back then, our hearts, minds and guts were in agreement that he was a long-shot; and then we held our noses and voted for Kerry/Edwards -- no offense to their supporters here, if any).

In his mind, folks who know these things say, she is competent, qualified, young, and he can envision working with her for eight years.

He goes on to say she is a "youngish 60".

PHEW

Link

Thank you Hillary, thank you, thank you, thank you!  Don't saddle yourself to this wagon!