“I’m a mom, and my son is going to get deployed in September, and we better have a real clear plan for this war,” she said. “And it better not have to do with oil and dependence on foreign energy.”
This is the best article on the subject of how to handle Afghanistan and Pakistan: Obama falls victim to propaganda.
“Is Obama beginning to fall under the influence of the same military-petroleum complex that guided Bush’s imperial-minded presidency? Could Pakistan become a disaster for the Democrats as Iraq was for Republicans?”
I no longer think that Obama is fit to be a president. He will be a good representative for the powerful. He will not be a leader. He is a politician, not a statesman.
“Her commercial juxtaposes his quote with Republican policies Obama has never advocated.” – From http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-clintonad24jan24,1,2506800.story
The Clintons should be ashamed of themselves for doing something so mean. If there is a contest for meanness, they will win handily. But this one is not.
What we should be concerned with is not to let the president change anything about the country on the basis of his faith or his believe.
Whether the president is pro-life or pro-choice should not have any impact on whether the people can have abortion or not.
The following is from: “Past holds key to Democratic future” on Guardian Unlimited
One little-mentioned split occurred on a proposal to restrict Pentagon spending on cluster bombs, which explode and scatter thousands of tiny weapons over a vast area. Those small bombs are prone to going off years after a battle, sometimes killing and maiming Middle Eastern children who mistakenly trigger them. Israel came under fire from the UN and international human rights groups for its use of cluster bombs during its 2006 war with Hizbullah forces in Lebanon. In the autumn of that year, with memories of the conflict still fresh, several Democrats sought to limit US defence spending to cluster bombs that would not be used in civilian areas.
While they praised the moral case for shielding civilians from combat weapons, opponents argued that curbing spending on cluster bombs would tie the hands of US military leaders.
“In an extreme situation, the commander must be able to use all options to shape the battlefield to protect our forces and those allied with us,” Republican senator Ted Stevens said at the time.
“Restricting the deployment of cluster munitions could severely hinder aviation and artillery capabilities and reduce the commander’s capability to wage war successfully,” he added.
Obama voted in favour of limiting use of the bombs, while Clinton and 69 other senators opposed the spending limits, defeating the proposal.
Whether the former first lady cast her vote to avoid a perceived rebuke of Israel or because of the Pentagon’s resistance remains unknown: Clinton did not speak during the senate debate and did not issue a statement afterwards, according to her website.
Lobbying reform has become a point of bitter contention between the two Democratic frontrunners, with Clinton undercutting the ethics bill that Obama helped to pass and now claims as an achievement. As Clinton has pointed out, the ethics measure does contain wiggle room that allows members of Congress and their aides to continue attending parties thrown by lobbyists.
Yet Clinton helped to defeat two reform proposals that would have strengthened the bill she now disparages. The New York senator opposed an amendment that would have blocked members of Congress from paying salaries to their family members through their campaign committees. Obama endorsed the failed effort.
Clinton also resisted two attempts, both sponsored by Obama, to establish an “office of public integrity” in the Senate. The integrity office, a cause céelèbre for government watchdogs, would independently probe ethics complaints against senators. Current law empowers members of Congress to oversee ethics compliance, but few follow through when asked to police the behaviour of their colleagues.
The Obama camp has brought up Clinton’s past praise for the ethics bill in an attempt to paint her current criticism as politically motivated, but no mention has been made of her opposition to neutral ethics investigations.
Meanwhile, McCain joined Obama as a sponsor of both plans for the integrity office. If Clinton’s Democratic opponent does not seize on her vote against the reform, her possible Republican opponent may well decide to use it against her.