Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

My point is, like Clinton's it is a rumor.

Posted By: Lydia on 2006-09-07
In Reply to: How do you know it is.. - Lurker

Why put so much stock in these rumors......because you want to believe the rumors. 


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

She has a point about Clinton. SM
We had a porn star for president!   Big deal.  Who cares.
But the point is, what Clinton did with his...
anatomy and poor choices did not affect his Presidency...a major percentage of Democrats will tell you that. If it did not affect him I would not expect it to affect McCain, and if you felt like Clinton was a good President in spite of it, why would you think McCain would not be?
And Bill Clinton let 800,000 people die in Rwanda. So what's your point? sm
You bleeding heart liberals make me sick.  
Maybe the rumor was right
When I saw the news I remembered my earlier post here regarding my friend's son (who is on active duty in Iraq) predicting the next war would be in Pakistan.  Interesting coincidence causing my half-awake brain to fill with paranoid "was this staged by our own govt as a new excuse for a new war" conspiracy theories, LOL.  I better get some caffeine and clear out the cobwebs.
That is a rumor, and did you ever think...
what effect it is going to have on that 16-year-old when she hears that kind of thing, finds out she has been made political fodder?
rumor has it

has malodorous feet... can anyone confirm this?


I heard a rumor
From a friend with a son in Iraq, who supposedly told her that Pakistan is the next targeted place for war.  Supposedly it would be considered a "new" war and as such would give Bush a loophole to stay in command of the armed forces as "commander in chief" for an extra year....I'd never heard of this so I don't know if my friend is nuts or what.  Is there such a provision that if a president starts a new war in the last year of his term he gets to hang out an extra year to supervise it?
Unfortunately he did say it - not rumor - and not funny!
This is not rumor or heresay, this is fact. People who dislike Obama so much will not want to believe it, but as unfortunate as it is, it is true. And yes, it is true that Hillary called Bill many names equal to the "c" word (and right in front of Chelsea and others as they stood on the stairs in their mansion), and on multiple occasions used the "F" word toward the secret service. These were not unsubstantiated rumors you seem to think are funny (lol), these are hard facts, and nothing worth laughing at. It is also unfortunate that in this day and age too many people let the swear words fly out of their mouth as their everyday language, and worse is when they don't respect their peers or spouses enough not to use that kind of language towards them (especially in front of other people). As for McCain admitting to it? Give me a break...of course he's not going to admit that especially in light of the election coming up. Also don't you think it's a bit odd that if it wasn't true she (Mrs. McCain) sure is not denying it and if it were untrue both he and his wife would be coming out stating these were rumors they are not true, lies put out by my competitors, blah, blah, blah. But they are not denying it, they are doing everything they can to keep that out of the news and avoiding the issue. So leads one to assume they wish it never happened.

As for people speaking in anonymity....it has come out that people will not go on the record for fear of retaliation. It's similar to this board here. People will remain anonymous because they get attacked a lot.
You have no proof that this is a rumor!
Hoping something is not true doesn't make it so! Did you see the pictures? Her daughter looked much more pregnant that Palin did!
Prove to me that it is a rumor!!!
.
Because the rumor factor has taken this to mean
nm
There is a rumor going through the press that........ sm
Rahm Emanuel turned him in. I'm not reporting this as fact because I haven't checked it out yet, but I have seen that mentioned.
Apparently yet another rumor

First clue should have been that it was filed by someone with a "Stop Obama" relationship.  Second would be that it wasn't covered by every television news outlet with breaking news interruptions into regularly scheduled programming.


Shots Fired at McCain-Palin Bus? (UPDATED: No Reports to Police or Campaign)




Update: The McCain campaign hasn't heard anything about the report of a bus being attacked. This makes the following report seem highly unlikely. Neither Raton police nor state police have received reports about such an incident.


The blog item below was posted by Mark Williams, former talk-radio host turned spokesman for Our Country Deserves Better PAC, a group committed to working against an Obama quest for the presidency. He has been on the group's Stop Obama tour, which arrived in Raton about a day after a McCain/Palin bus came through, he said. Williams said he heard the story from several residents of Raton, who said the bus had a shattered window when it arrived in town, and that it had been shattered by some kind of shot during its trip up from southern New Mexico, but he never saw the bus.


A Raton Police spokesperson, who said he's been on his phone all day long with reporters, said if the incident happened, it happened far south of Raton. Several calls to offices south, such as Chavez County Sheriff's Department and the Roswell Police, however, turned up nothing. Looks like this one is firmly in the debunked rumor pile for now, and not likely to move anytime soon.


A report from New Mexico:

We learned at this morning’s Stop Obama Rally here that the McCain/Palin Straight Talk Express came through town yesterday. It arrived with a window shattered by a .22 caliber weapon. It had also been hit by an unknown number of paint balls from a paint ball gun or guns. There were reportedly no injuries and neither candidate was on board.


Get ready for the media saturation! The wringing of hands, the concern about "incitement," the indictment of Obama and Biden for daring to criticize McCain and Palin in such a way that would drive their supporters to this.


This is a false rumor
Check out emails like this that you get on snopes.com.  If you go to snopes website and type in AIG bailout congress pension you will get the real truth.  So many emails I get are totally false I never forward anything until I check it out on snopes. 
I do not believe anyone is trying to start a rumor. Just something we noticed.
and hopefully it is nothing serious. but it was noticeable.
Hey, the rumor mill is back!! (sm)
Here's a question for ya.  If Bush is tried for war crimes and is found guilty, does that mean that Obama has *palled around* with war criminals?  He has been to Bush's house recently....LOL 
This is an unfortunate email rumor that is actually a hoax
nm
Heard the same blather from the Oreilly rumor factor
the NY Times, Rasmussen, Gallup, etc., all in response to his dive in the ratings, taking third place behind KO and RM on MSNBC and AC on CNN. "They MUST be rigged," he blustered in protest. You don't like polls? Fine. Check out the electoral map.
http://election.princeton.edu/electoral-college-map/
It's hunting season here. We have no problems getting ammo. Sounds like a silly rumor to me. NT
.
Care to post the right fringe rumor rag conspiracy theory link
I am not into solving prevarication puzzles. Further comment might be forthcoming if you spit out precisely what you are trying to say here.
I think BB has a point here in that the main point on the board is political discussion, and let'
face it, there is SO MUCH going on right now, changes, problems, disasters, and so much debate on what should/could be done, but so many tims the political discussion disintegrates in a finger-pointing, name-calling exercise, spouting religion all over the place. Yeah, our spiritual beliefs are dearly held and we would all strive to be the best we can be, and do whatever we can whatever the ideology is, but sometimes I wonder, since we have a board EXPRESSLY for Faith isuues, where relgious debates/discussions/forums, etc are welcome, why does THIS board have to be turned into RELIGION BOARD PART II, especially if one ideology wants to dominate or ridicule/condemn those who come on here for lively inteligent discussion, debate of issues in Congress and in our lives, and just want their beliefs held separately? CNN is not EWTN or any other Christian network, and there are constant informative, bright, lively, balanced discussions from all over the political spectrum on the credentialed news stations, as well as C-Span, but they are not constantly hiding behind a cross, rosary, bible, star of David, or whatever....can we not strive to do the same and put religious debate on the Faith board?? Just a thought to ponder, MHO, it might work beter, who knows?
is the the starting point or the end point for the middle class?
x
I answered your post point-by-point and
all you can come up with is a lame tit-for-tat? Can you provide some sort of substantive response that would argue against the point I am trying to make here? Of course not.

Please show me what part of my post reflects bigotry or ignorance? I have made a few statements based on my own life experience, rather than the hook-line-and-sinker method of forming my world view. Then the impotence of your suicide bomber reference was buried under concrete evidence of informed, researched and factual data that would suggest an oppressed, occupied, half-starved population does not have the upper hand when it comes to defending themselves against Israel's US-bankrolled arsenal of pain, misery, death and destruction. They are just a tad out-gunned, wouldn't you say?
I answered your post point-by-point and
all you can come up with is a lame tit-for-tat? Can you provide some sort of substantive response that would argue against the point I am trying to make here? Of course not.

Please show me what part of my post reflects bigotry or ignorance? I have made a few statements based on my own life experience, rather than the hook-line-and-sinker method of forming a world view. Then the impotence of your suicide bomber reference was buried under concrete evidence of informed, researched and factual data that would suggest an oppressed, occupied, half-starved population does not exactly have the upper hand when it comes to defending themselves against Israel's US-bankrolled arsenal of pain, misery, death and destruction they employ in order to "secure" themselves.

The Palestinians are just a tad out-gunned, wouldn't you say? This might just account for the lop-sided fatalities/injuries ratios between the Israelis and the Palestinians. In closing, it is worth noting that even with the advantage of all those terrorist toys and tools our tax dollars have bestowed upon them, security and peace of mind just seem to be further and further beyond their reach. Wonder why that is?
If your point is that it was 7 years ago, that's not much of a point is it? sm
Not long ago at all in the scope of things. The point is that the same thing could and probably would happen here. 9-11 happened 7 years ago too....I guess that couldn't happen again, huh?
I get your point, but my main point is -
why should the government be allowed to tell people what they can and can't eat? Everyone says the government is too involved in our business anyway, so if they should stay out of one part of our lives, they should stay out of all parts of our lives!
clinton
You mean wonderful super intelligent President Bill Clinton and his lovely super intelligent lawyer wife, Hiliary?  So much better than the dufus warmonger and Stepford wife in the WH right now..Jerks, both of them, backward thinking monsters, Bush and Stepford.
clinton
I think Clinton should have been impeached. He is to be a role model? Please, what kind of a role model is that cheating on his wife.
No on Clinton as VP

No way can Obama offer VP to Queen Hillary.  He should remember what happened to JFK (with Johnson being involved).  What a better way for the Queen to annoint herself to the presidency by getting rid of him.  Don't put it past her either - just remember Ron Brown, Vince Foster, Eric Fox, Sandy Hume, Danny Casolaro, Ronald Rogers, John Wilson, Gandy Baugh, Mary Mahoney, Suzanne Coleman, Judy Gibbs, Gary Johnson, Kathy Ferguson, Bell Shelton, Sally Perdue (didn't mysteriously die but was told if she didn't keep her mouth shut they would break her legs), Jon Walker, Johnny Franklin, Ed Willey, Barbara Alice Wise, Jerry Parks, C. Victor Raiser, L.J. Davis, Herschel Friday, Ron Brown, and the list goes on and on an on....


So no, I would not put it past either of them that something would happen and she would swear herself in as the anointed queen.  Lets just hope Obama has more sense - which I believe he does.


Clinton

Where do I start?  I love Bill Clinton.  Hs is very intelligent, he can talk about anything and knows what he is talking about.  He did what the first person posted.  He was impeached but he could not be removed from office because he was impeached for was not govenment and it has to pertain to the government to be removed from office.  He was not born with a silver spoon in his mouth and he earned everything he got.  He has worked very hard.  Funny, but I get the same sick feeling in my stomach whenever I see George Bush's face on TV and the man cannot even speak so how he can do anything else.   The trillion dollar debt, people with no jobs, and the list goes on and on.  Put us in a war we had no business being in.  He has never done anything on his own that turned out good.  Whatever he did was with the help of his father or someone else doing it for him.   He will not return to Crawford, they are going to build a house, but I forgot the location, and he will not be traveling around the world working to get meds for  AIDS patients, starving  children, etc.  Maybe he can help bring back other countries to like us again like they used to until Bush told just about everyone of them he did not need their help and made them angry with us.  I could go on and on but I am tired and going to bed. 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


This has been going on even when Clinton
was in office.  This has been going on for years.  Shoot, I lived in Arizona for 25 years and illegals were everywhere.  Finally, Arizona will NOT hire anyone that is illegal.  The companies have to hire people who show BC and if the employees do not, they are not hired.  So most illegals moved to other states.  Also the companies are audited and have to show proof that each employee is legal or the company will be fined.  Arizona has border patrol that runs along Mexico and Arizona and that should have been up years ago.  Even tried putting up border control when Clinton was in office, but everyone ignored her plea until a few years ago.  Also work for a company that outsources to India.  This has been going on for years and years.  When the O takes over, he will probably sell our country out and will be worse.  He says he will help the the middle class yet cause electricity rates to skyrocket and so on.  I do not trust O with ANYTHING.  He is a smooth talker, the ones I do not trust.  If McCain wins, at least I know he will try to make our country safe from nukes of Iran.    
Again I will say it. Clinton and his
cronies cooked the books. There was no surplus. It came out after an audit after Bush got in office.
I really do wonder how Clinton will
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,480126,00.html

U.S. Obtains New Evidence of Iranian Nuclear Intrigue

Friday, January 16, 2009


Iran Presidency Office

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad inspects the Natanz nuclear plant in central Iran.

WASHINGTON — U.S. security and law-enforcement officials say they have fresh evidence of recent efforts by Iran to evade sanctions and acquire metals from China used in high-tech weaponry, including long-range nuclear missiles, the Wall Street Journal reported Friday.

Iran's efforts are detailed in a series of recent emails and letters between Iranian companies and foreign suppliers seen by The Wall Street Journal. Business records show one Iranian company, ABAN Commercial & Industrial Ltd., has contracted through an intermediary for more than 30,000 kilograms (about 66,000 pounds) of tungsten copper — which can be used in missile guidance systems — from Advanced Technology & Materials Co. Ltd. of Beijing. One March 2008 email between the firms mentions shipping 215 ingots, with more planned.

The United Arab Emirates has informed the U.S. that in September it intercepted a Chinese shipment headed to Iran of specialized aluminum sheets that can be used to make ballistic missiles. A month earlier, UAE officials also intercepted an Iran-bound shipment of titanium sheets that can be used in long-range missiles, according to a recent letter to the U.S. Commerce Department from the UAE's Washington ambassador.

Evidence of Iran's efforts to acquire sensitive materials also is emerging from investigations by state and federal prosecutors in New York into whether a number of major Western banks illegally handled funds for Iran and deliberately hid Iranian transactions routed through the U.S. One focus of the inquiries is the role of Italy, including the Rome branch of Iran's Bank Sepah and Italy's Banca Intesa Sanpaolo Spa. Banca Intesa said it is cooperating in the inquiries.

Iran Produces Enough Uranium to Build Nuclear Weapon

The developments could present President-elect Barack Obama with an early test in responding to what many Washington security officials now say is a rapidly growing threat to the region, including U.S. allies Israel and Saudi Arabia.

All of the high-performance metals Iran has been acquiring also have industrial uses such as commercial aviation and manufacturing, making it difficult for intelligence agencies to be absolutely certain how the materials are being used.

"We can't say we know it would, or would not, be used for military purposes," said proliferation expert Gary Milholland of the nonprofit Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control, noting that broad economic sanctions on Tehran led by the U.S. mean Iran has to go to unusual lengths to find high-grade materials for industrial use as well as weapons.

Still, he added, "There doesn't seem to be any real doubt or debate whether Iran is going for the bomb or whether Iran is using front companies to import things. Everyone agrees on that around the world."

Officials at the International Atomic Energy Agency said they believe Iran could have enough fissile material for an atomic weapon sometime this year, though it would need to be further processed into weapons-grade uranium. That assessment was echoed Thursday by Central Intelligence Agency Director Michael V. Hayden. U.S. and European governments have grown increasingly alarmed in recent months at the speed they believe Iran is developing ballistic-missile and nuclear capabilities. Last year the United Nations Security Council, which includes China, formally imposed sanctions on Iran's military and most of its banks for nuclear proliferation activities.

A spokesman for Iran at its U.N. mission in New York declined to comment. China "has been strictly implementing" U.N. proliferation sanctions on Iran, said a spokesman for the Chinese foreign ministry in Beijing. The export of restricted items such as high-grade metals, which include specialized aluminum and titanium, is prohibited, he added.
Wow, Clinton
Probably had Monica hiding under the desk. LOL. Sorry, could not resist.
No, Clinton just used

the Oval Office (that I pay for) and ''company time'' to get Lewinskyed on a regular basis.  He may even have gotten a Lewinsky on Fathers Day, who knows?


I believe it is called Fathers Day for a reason.  Obama went golfing on the sacred day, and I don't think Michelle and the kids were with him.   On Fathers Day, it's Daddy that gets the gifts, otherwise it would be called Family Day or Wife and Children's Day or something else. 


Some men give their wives a day at a spa for Mothers Day...should she be required to spend all day with Hubby and kids instead?  Technically, I think the honoree gets to spend their time the way s/he chooses on that day.


Sanford having his trist in Argentina was quite bad enough, do you really have to pile on with Fathers Day as well? 


Well, how did you feel about Clinton
get a B.J. just outside the Oval Office and then lying under oath about it?   Oh, but that was his personal life though...
Yes, Clinton lied, and I

thought it was terrible when he did.


But Clinton's lies didn't result in a war.  Clinton created a surplus.  Bush squandered it all and created a huge deficit with his war. I'm amazed that you can't see the huge difference between the two lies.  Bush's lies are placing every single American in danger of a terror attack because he refuses to do anything about the borders.  This is here.  This is now.  Why don't you care about TODAY and the futures of your children and their children?  We're living in the most dangerous era that America has known, yet you're more concerned about the sexual practices of a former President?  I truly don't understand your way of thinking.


 


Clinton's Lies
Clinton made his worst mistake by not taking Osama bin Laden when he was offered to him on a silver platter by the Sudan. In case you have forgotten, he was major planner and money man of 9-11. Had Bill not been afraid of the political fallout...he might have been able to stop 9-11. And when it all comes out about Able Danger...he is finished and so, hopefully, is his wife, as far as politics are concerned. And the surplus you drone on about was a PROJECTED surplus, if spending was frozen for the next 10 years. Like THAT was going to happen. Sheesh.
Clinton/Bush

Again, GT brought the whole subject up about presidential integrity.  I just wanted to see GT's feeling about what Clinton did, but of course, GT justified Clinton's lies which was what I fully expected.  Again, Bush hasn't been proven to lie.  Like I have said several times before on this board I will be the first to cry uncle if Bush is proven to have lied by investigation and that doesn't include accusations and conjecture by liberal politicians, grieving mothers, or leftist bloggers.


Clinton/Bush

Again, GT brought the whole subject up about presidential integrity.  I just wanted to see GT's feeling about what Clinton did, but of course, GT justified Clinton's lies which was what I fully expected.  Again, Bush hasn't been proven to lie.  Like I have said several times before on this board I will be the first to cry uncle if Bush is proven to have lied by investigation and that doesn't include accusations and conjecture by liberal politicians, grieving mothers, or leftist bloggers.


Well, are they back up since the Clinton adm.

You used the word now, so I assume they are still at these levels and maybe even lower.


The point was that while everybody is again noticing poverty and thinking that Bush had done a dismal job in fighting poverty.  The numbers just don't back that up.  While there are some people living in poverty because of life circumstances beyond their control MOST are there because of bad life choices.  You can throw all the money you want at it, but until morality is advocated and pushed for in this country then you will always have poverty.  Jesus even said you will always have the poor among you.  Now, is that a reason not to try and do something about poverty?  No, but just throwing more and more money their way through higher taxation of the work force will not fix it either.  It will only make more people classified as poor. 


WHATever and thank you, Bill Clinton
with a thriving economy, an honest attempt at protecting our environment, and peace.

can we forget about clinton?
When you need a punching bag, bring up Clinton..If in doubt, bring up Clinton, if a republican is being investigated, bring up Clinton.  Who cares about Clinton.  He is not in office, however, Delay, Frist and Rove are all working in the govt.
When Clinton did this did you have a problem with it
When he tracked financial records of terrorists during his admin.: See below.
******

From the August 28, 1998, edition of the Washington Post in an article entiteld “Bin Laden’s Finances Are a Moving Target; Penetrating Empire Could Take Years” by John Mintz:

Last week, President Clinton announced the addition of bin Laden’s name to a list of terrorists whose funds are targeted for seizure by the U.S. Treasury. Clinton aides said one of their goals is to locate bin Laden’s bank accounts and make him so radioactive in the eyes of global bankers that they won’t handle his funds. Some U.S. officials also suggested they could drain his accounts using highly classified means of information warfare involving electronic networks.

“We want to take financial action against him,” a senior administration official said. “The objective is to take down the infrastructure.”

Bin Laden’s money is the key to his power, U.S. officials say. He needs his fortune to pay his thousands of Muslim followers, bribe officials and plan terrorist strikes.

“If you go after his money, you’ll hurt him,” said Larry Johnson, a former CIA official and now a security consultant. “You need cash to make his system run.”

The United States has never launched such a financial attack on terrorists. In 1995 Clinton banned U.S. financial institutions from dealing with several dozen suspected terrorist individuals and groups, and Americans from donating funds to them.

But until last week the U.S. Treasury, which continually updates this list of “sanctioned” terrorists, never placed bin Laden on the list, despite the fact that the U.S. government had identified him since 1995 as the world’s leading terrorist paymaster. A senior administration official said the government’s understanding of his role “was evolving.”

So we’ve been going after bin Laden’s financing and the al-Qaeda money network for eight years now. But that doesn’t really blow the whole case open about the Bush administration’s “secret program.” This does:

The CIA and agents with Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network also will try to lay tripwires to find out when bin Laden moves funds by plugging into the computerized systems of bank transaction monitoring services — operated by the Federal Reserve and private organizations called SWIFT and CHIPS — that record the billions of dollars coursing through the global banking system daily.

Call me crazy, but that looks pretty gosh darn similar to what the New York Times and Los Angeles Times are freaking out about and calling a Bush administration “secret program.”

This isn’t news. This is just an attempt by these two newspapers and the associated reporters to “expose” the Bush administration’s attempts to keep this country safe from terrorism and root out those who would do us harm. The ACLU, the Democratic Party, and the “netroots” will proceed to go bananas about a program that’s been tracking bin Laden and al-Qaeda financial transactions for eight years–and was established under none other than Bill Clinton.
This is what Clinton was impeached for:
This is what he was impeached for:



The House voted 228 to 206 to approve proposed Article I of Impeachment (Perjury before a Federal Grand Jury), and voted 221 to 212 to approve proposed Article III of Impeachment (Obstruction of Justice).

And he was guilty of both. His impeachment had nothing to do with cigar dates with MOnica Lewinsky, though it should have...it had to do with lying under oath before a grand jury, and obstructing justice. Against the law in ALL 51 states. Also, he broke his presidential oath of office to uphold and defend the laws of the United States all to pieces. But that is okay, because he is Bill Clinton? How is it you liberals check any moral values you might have at the door whenever it suits you?
Clinton and Somalia...
The article was clear, and in military circles the truth is known. When Blackhawk Down happened, Clinton, instead of doing the right thing and stamping on Al Qaeda when he had the chance, chose to run. Al Qaeda was emboldened by that, and were left alone to grow, plan, etc. They felt they scored a great victory in Mogadishu, and in fact, because Clinton ran, they did. You say the country would not have supported a war in the middle east before 9-11. Perhaps not. The people might not have supported a war in Somalia either, as there are some people, like yourself, who believe war is never the answer. As I have said ad nauseam, until the enemy shares your belief (which will never happen), we must defend ourselves or be overtaken or having our cities turn into East Baghdad. They cannot defeat us in a real war, and they know this. I personally do not feel we should accept having 3000 people murdered. Had we smashed them in Somalia, we probably would not have had the issues we now have in Iraq, because the *insurgency* is fueled by Al Qaeda and we all know that. The rank and file Iraqi people would have had no idea how to put forth a guerilla war. Point being...Clinton's administration, or he himself, bear a great burden of responsibility for what we now face. AL Qaeda did the same thing in Somalia they are doing in Iraq now...arming and training. And we had the chance to stop it, and our President chose not to. Sudan offered bin Laden to Clinton later, and again he chose not to take it. You choose to take Bush to task for Iraq. I continue to take Clinton to task because I think he is more wholly reponsible. Not because he is a leftist or a Democrat, but because he made a decision based on keeping his political popularity than on doing what was right at the time for the security of this country. Anything else Clinton did, while reprehensible, pales in comparison to that as far as I am concerned. However, that is past, there is nothing I can do to change it. I do, however, resent the fact that the left totally dismisses all that and instead pounces on Bush for at least trying to do the right thing for this country, regardless of the political consequences. But, that takes moral courage, and something Bill Clinton never had and never will have

What I see regarding staying in Iraq is trying to finish what Clinton should have finished in Somalia. And not to abandon those rank and file Iraqis who desperately do want freedom. The insurgents do not speak for the majority of the Iraqi people. The majority of the Iraqi people are almost like children...they have no clue how to fight or defend themselves because they were so oppressed for so many years. It is those people who will be hurt horribly if we go now. But you seem willing to abandon them to it. That is what I do not understand. For someone who professes compassion, I don't know how you justify that. It could be that we are never able to do what we want to do and at some point need to withdraw. I am willing to give Petraeus a chance. I prefer to look at it like he does...stop looking through the rear view mirror and look out over the hood...and let's win this thing. He still believes it can be done. I have a great deal of respect for him, and I think he deserves the chance, and the Iraqi people deserve the chance, to see if he can.
I know it, if it comes up between clinton and McCain I just
i don't know which one would truly be worse.
Clinton vs Bush

Clinton gave us 8 years of peace and prosperity DESPITE the opposition of the neocons throughout his administration.  Bush failed over and over again DESPITE having party control of both houses.  The leadership ability simply speaks for itself.  Looking forward to Hill and Bill in charge again. The neocon fanatics have destroyed themselves by their own hand. So be it.


 


 


Clinton v Obama

Anyone know anything about Jimmy Carter? Most  people (even Republicans) agree that he was/is an exceptionally good man, maybe the most moral man in recent years. From what I have read, though, he was not a 'beltway insider" and therefore not able to get anything done.


Having said that, I thing Obama is a good man and I think Hillary is bascially a good woman. However I am afraid Obama will be another Jimmy Carter, a truly good man who is unable to be very effective.


Just my thoughts!


thank you senator clinton!

for backing Obama:


 


http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vbXkuYmFyYWNrb2JhbWEuY29tL3RoYW5rc19teXNwYWNl


FYI Hillary Clinton
She is from Chicago. She started her life as a Republican, like her father. Believe it or not, she was a volunteer in Barry Goldwater's campaign. Bet he is rolling in his grave.

It does not matter what they call themselves, they are different flavors of the same bad ice cream. Democrat or Republican, they are controlled by the men behind the curtains and the wealthy establishment whose agenda they are promoting. If they cannot get you to pick their (CFR) candidates through their media, they use Diebold to hack the vote electronically.