Comments on: Be Wary Of Clinton's War Record

The Nation: Candidate’s Hawkishness, Exaggerated Experience Deserves Greater Scrutiny

[truthspeake2]

OBAMA 2008...

[truthspeake2]

OBAMA 2008...

[feelfree1]

"CBS_Oliver" and "veteran71" nail it.

[user168-2009]

Who else can flock with LIAR BILL except but LIAR HILLARY? The pair''s motto: if truth does not fit into my agenda, reinvent truth.

[sophielhu]

It must soon become a global elite imperialist policy aimed at benefiting elites around the world - even at the expense of regular Americans.
-----------------------------------------------
Internet is a good place to share information and meet friends. I recently found
a nice web site called pubspa.com where you can meet friends who have same interest in beauty care, massage, wellness and spa treatment. You can also share blog, video, game, photos, etc with people from all over the world. Unlike other online dating sites where you have to pay membership fee, this site is totally free. I already made several interesting friends there.

[croft777]

Robert Shceer is probally an Obama supporter or a republican. Theres no proof in any of this. Many people believed it when Bush said that Sadam had weapons of mass destruction. Many agreed to the war in Iraq.This is just Clinton bashing, thats all. Shes a dedicated lady, and she supports the people. Her work since the 1970''s prove this. I read these articles and am amazed that so many people take it seriously, I take it with a grain of salt. It won''t change my mind either way on voting for Hillary. I can read people and I know Obama is a racist, regardless of what people say, there would be know reason for Hillary to play the race game, she would know that it would hurt her in the long run with the African Americans who her and Bill have always supported. Obama on the other hand would gain all the African american votes. He knows what he did. He says one thing, then says people took it out of contest, we know what he meant. When he jabbed Clinton with the Republican bull ***, it was obviously a bash on Bill and his term in ofice. Bill did a great job as a president, and my opinion counts.

[nearl4511]

Time to give the Party back to hte people.

End Superdelegate system now.

[nearl4511]

Funny thing about Superdelegates.

Really robs the party of the ability to throw out the entrenched and connected. Unless of course they also are so tired of the annointed ones that they support change too.

I too am suspicious of Hillary''s corporate and military positions. But mostly, I want to end the succession business for the Bush and Clinton families. Time for some one else PLEASE.

[Harpersage]

You know, I read all this *** about Hillary being this and that and all I can think of is the big money in washington is really worried--that would include "Kennedy" that they just might have to cut back on the easy life and give back to the middle-class for a change. Plus! if she gets the presendency they won''t be able to bully her into doing things their way. Hillary, you go girl, you do have a large following out here and we will strike when it counts!!

[paris1969]

"betray the women''s movement''s commitment to peace in favor of simplistic gender politics

....... shame on THe Nation for spewing these types of assumptions ... if someone wrote that blacks betray the civil rights movement in favor of simplistic race politics .. the Nation would be aghast! ...

[alanrobisch]

The Clinton''''s have never been advocates of either policy. They have held to the traditional democratic parties defense wing objectives of maintaining a strong military and emphasizing the importance of negotiation & alliance building to attain foreign policy objectives.

This policy was best formulated by republican president Teddy Roosevelt in: "Speak softly but carry a big stick." Ironically, it has never held much sway in the modern republican party.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by p-syrus at 05:37 PM : Jan 30, 2008

Fascinating since carter reduced the size of our army after vietnam and reagan enlarged it and then clinton reduced the size of the army. Strong military weird if you ask me. Eisenhower did not take us to war nor did nixon nor did reagan and GWHB did with the agreement of most of the world to evict iraq from Kuwait.

It was on kennedy and Johnson''s watch that the vietnamese war started.It was during Truman''s watch we fought in Korea. FDR WWII woodrow wilson WWI.

Puhleeze don''t make unjustifiable statements. Nixon and GWHB were two of our best presidents as diplomats.

[cbs_oliver]

Hillary seems to be committed to the use of US military and economic capabilities as weapons to compel people and their governments to do what world elites prefer.

Her approach will not long remain a US imperialist policy aimed at benefiting American citzens.

It must soon become a global elite imperialist policy aimed at benefiting elites around the world - even at the expense of regular Americans.

We see this policy at work already.

I suspect that Hillary will continue it.

[p-syrus]

she is actually a crypto-conservative on matters of foreign policy

Posted by alanrobisch2

Absolute nonsense!

Traditional conservative foreign policy combines isolationism with being the strongest military power in the world.

Neo-conservative foreign policy emphasizes the use of that military power to obtain strategic foreign policy objectives.

The Clinton''s have never been advocates of either policy. They have held to the traditional democratic parties defense wing objectives of maintaining a strong military and emphasizing the importance of negotiation & alliance building to attain foreign policy objectives.

This policy was best formulated by republican president Teddy Roosevelt in: "Speak softly but carry a big stick." Ironically, it has never held much sway in the modern republican party.

[alanrobisch]

While Hillary is generally labelled a "centrist", she is actually a crypto-conservative on matters of foreign policy, which means that Democrats in the primaries will be faced with a choice of having a 2-conservative election if she wins Super Tuesday. Will enough Democrats have the clarity to see this? Can they see through the bogus feminism issue to the really critical matter, her militarism? We can only hope...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by razzl at 03:56 PM : Jan 30, 2008

You mean that someone who doesn''t support cut and run is a militarist and btw what is a militarist?

[bwessels]

Sums up our unease with Hillary pretty well. From a progressive''s standpoint, she is troubling. Possibly more "corporate" than a Republican contender, McCain.

[Razzl]

If McCain becomes the GOP nominee, you can be sure that the final campaign will have to be one of clearly expressing ideas, because there will be no question of attacking character or experience. The Democrat will have to speak clearly and believe in what they say, reassuring the public that they have a vision they can put in play. Does that sound like Hillary? Her playbook is the doctrine named after her hubby Bill called "Clintonism", which is about deliberately obscuring one''s beliefs in order to offend the least voters, which the Clintonites mistakenly believe to be largely conservatives (but opinion polls show they are not, even if they don''t like the "liberal" label).

While Hillary is generally labelled a "centrist", she is actually a crypto-conservative on matters of foreign policy, which means that Democrats in the primaries will be faced with a choice of having a 2-conservative election if she wins Super Tuesday. Will enough Democrats have the clarity to see this? Can they see through the bogus feminism issue to the really critical matter, her militarism? We can only hope...