Political Punch

Wowzer,
Seems to me some dont get the picture. This is not "a math game". Nobody is God, so stop thinking you can pull out troops, when in fact, we have no clue what will take place in Iraq, no more than we do Afghanistan. Look at Afghanistan now people!! We need more troops there. To the smarty pants that wants to be a math teacher and think you can come up with a reason to mathematically withdraw troops,well, lets just say,You have no idea on what may happen from 1 moment to the next there, yes I mean -moment-, and it takes a long time to have only 1 brigade withdrawn from there, it is a DANGEROUS place to LEAVE, and I mean just to leave.I for 1, took my last injuries leaving that country, and many of our soldiers killed leaving there. Wake up, as this is "a war", not some little x-box game or math quiz! You cannot predict the future and obviously Al-Qaida has been reforming some stronger ways to use against not only us, but their own people, and any country that does NOT believe in THEIR ways. Before you go thinking this is some type of a way to take a few brigades and divide them up and bring so many home within a certain amount of time, remember each MOMENT, not day, but MOMENT that ANYTHING could happen there, as well as many other places. This has been my whole point with Obama, and anyone else that thinks they can give timetables.You can NOT give a time table.

To get a clearer picture of Obama go to his church's website and view the basic tenents of his church and Rev Wright. Then follow up on Rev Wrights comments on black liberation theology by doing a web search. Look at them all....don't cherry pick.

"Power and Keane are two smart people giving their own opinions about what Obama and Clinton might do.

And they're both probably shooting a lot straighter than either of the candidates, who are trying to appease voters who want US troops out of Iraq yesterday."

Dear JPT:

You missed a fundmental and already stated difference: Mrs. Clinton didn't promise she will get all troops out immeidately, she said there is a US interest for some troops to defend in Iraq. Obama had proudly promised a 16 months timeframe, made it a big core deal of his campaig, and accused Clinton not to have a hard exit. So what is the contradiction between Keane and Clinton here?

Well, we all know that once you are in a situation/position, you assess the needs and best approach of that particular time.

We Regular People do that in our Regular Lives.

Most certainly the President evaluates matters such as withdrawal of troops as to what is happening during that particular time frame.

Nothing is exact . . .

As Samantha Powers, who called Hillary Clinton “a monster,” the disgraced Mr. Obama's foreign policy expert also told BBC, Mr. Obama has no hard and fast policy about withdrawing from Iraq, that it may change, depending, we don't know what; although Mr. Obama has been telling a very different story, if you listen to him speak. Just like his economic adviser Mr. Goodsbee said to the Canadian officials a very different story about NAFTA. Mr. Obama's campaign is full of fictions, confabulations, contradictions, confusions and populated of people who are learning on the job just like Mr. Obama is going to do as president. Can we really afford this sort of amateurism?

Hillary will pull out of Iraq as soon as possible in a planned, methodical way, after taking all factors into consideration. She has the experience and knowledge to get the job done. Obama just doesn't have the experience or knowledge in foreign policy. He should not make campaign promises he probably cannot keep.

Nobody knows what Obama will do including Obama. If he doesn't keep his promises he will give a good tele - evangelistic speech and proclaim that all is well.

I think Clinton knows she cannot pull out massive amounts of troops at once, and she has said that after 60 days of assuming office she will begin pulling out 1 platoon per month. So this is maximum 40 soldiers per month, and it is to her credit and wisdom that she has never promised a hard date for pulling out all troops. She is very much more aware of the differences in history, culture, and mentality of the society inside of Iraq. This is very naive on Obama's part, as if he annuonces a hard date there will be Al Qaeda lying in the weeds making their own plans for that date. Also he has recentlty criticised the current Iraqi government for their lack of initiative to take over their own country and insteqd rely on the US, as if they do it on purpose. This also shows his naivty for the culture and conditions of Iraq, making it sound as if it is so simple to move out. I am not a Clintonite or an Obama hater, actually a Republican that is considering to vote Democrat this time. I will never vote for Obama because he is too naive and inexperienced. So as someone who is more objective, I myself have been puzzled at the support Obama has received and wondered why Hillary did not attack him and make a bigger issue long ago about his lack of experience. I do not think it is 'going negative' to place an ad questioning his experience and ability to be commander in cheif. I question it and I do not think it is negative to put the same question into the minds of others. While I do think he is getting softballed by the media, I do not listen to the media or Hillary Clinton to form my opinion. I downloaded and analyzed both Clinton and Obama's entire voting record from congress.org Obama has a 34% 'not voting' record in 3 years as a US senator. When he is voting, his votes on many issues such as Iraq, healthcare, immigration, veterans are the opposite of what he speaks. I am sorry I just see that he is irresponsible, and to me seems like he wants the title and fringe benefits that go along with the title. He does not especially inspire me when I listen to him. I think he sounds like a televangelist. He is just as much 'old washington' politics, and even more so, but even if he wasn't, he will be a lone sheep amongst all of the wolves, and so I am not sure that he is the Messiah that will save Washington. He needs to get over himself and wait until he is ready. So for me it is either Hillary or McCain.

For all the Hillary and Obama lovers. you CAN NOT just start pulling troops from Iraq. It doesn't work that way. If anyone was truly interested in the PROGRESS that is being made in the Middle East you would take the time to listen to the SOLDIERS. Not politicians.
My brother has served in two wars is a decorated war hero and is still has shrapnel in his body from his time in Iraq. He has served this nation for 22 years and continues to serve. DO NOT believe the media hype. Listen to what your soldiers are saying.

If you must consider the views of the international community, I believe that Hillary has this war stance- America first, policy position that simply makes America the world's enemy. We've had enough of presidents which make America seem like a psychophantic killer on a rampage. The time has come for America to choose hope...not only for their sakes but also for the sake of the rest of the world

The person who could best run this country would never carry a district-J.F.K. said that,it has never been more true Tell them what they want to hear.
Hilary says she will end our need for foreign oil/yeah by grinding the economy to a halt

About the only politician you could trust to get us out of the mideast is Ron Paul and you see what the political machines , defense/war industry and establishment press did to him.

McCain was a prisoner and patriot but all that did was apparently make him a bit unstable and harbor a desire to crush his enemies (Nuke Nam?) and the thought of endless oil wars seems to suit him just fine.

Obama is another sweet talking would be socialist dictator (now you can see how Hitler mesmerized citizens) who plays on race only slightly less than Clinton.

Clinton is a good old boy socialist politician who wants power again and like Obama, will say (and do) whatever it takes to be crowned.

The powers that be control the political and election process (he who counts the vote decides the winner) and the government has been taken over and the Constitution is nothing more than toliet paper to them.

It will take more than words to take the country back from the socialist/Fascists wolves who wear the Red White & blue.
Course the govt' schools have brain washed the majority so little resistance is had from the sheep and the govt' mouthpiece press has not helped the cause of freedom here or abroad or course.

All to soon we will all pay for the sins of the powers that be while the oil turns red and the world uses the dollar for toilet tissue and citizens are told to eat cake.

The dream of the revolution lives on.

Hilary can't keep her own house straight,(cheating husband), Obama is young, and Cain may still be suffering from being a p.o.w. But the one thing about this war is that as long as I've been alive the middle east has never been stable. We make little deals here and there or flex a little muscle to keep that almighty oil flowing this way. This war is no different. Now we just have a good cover as to why we're there. Meanwhile, our country suffers at home, unemployment,unhunger, crime, homeless, etc. Keep it up and we'll have our own third country right here before long. Another observation to look at is that in WW 1 & WW2 the countries we help there helped us to help them. They didn't just sit back and watch us die day in and day out. The reality is that no matter how much we help someone out there, there is always people that don't like us. The middle east has been at war of some kind for centuries. Why do we think that suddenly we're going to change that? Ego?? Also to our troops, keep your spirits up but also remember, you swore to protect our freedom not someone elses. Where are their young men and women to help with this fight? I am a navy vet and have family there in deeper than may ever know, I believe in helping the unfornate but I do NOT do it at the cost of our country, because when this country needs REAL help, who's going to help the U.S.?

Helllllooooooo America !!
Wake up please! I myself served the nasty imminent danger area of the Diyala Region of Iraq 2004(under "THE BIG RED 1")HOOAH! GREAT..Now to get to the seriousness of all the debate on the subject & more..If you have not served there (or any other war) than 1st off I feel, you should NOT be running this country period.
I don't care if you served stateside or overseas.My point is simple.If you do not knnow from experience, than you do not know and therefore have no right to make a judgement upon what we should do,how it is,how it should be or bring the boys home!! Haha..That line really cracks me up, when we had & have thousands of wonderful females,serving as we do just like other races.
I do not care who you are, and most of us do not care, when serving next to you, if you are of male or female or purple, black, white,yellow or what color or what branch of the Armed forces. We are NOT ONLY in Iraq,we are in over 100 other countries.Wow-a wake up for some eh?
If you would wake up each morning (no matter what country you live in)& realize the true facts:"WE ARE FIGHTING TERRORISM", NOT Iraq & Afghanistan!! You are not God,dont make false statements of what you plan to do or will do as Clinton & Obama do.
They cannot make any commitments to withdraw or do anything else on the war on terrorism no matter where it is fought and if it entails withdrawal of troops, or sending more in.Why? Oh come on, we cannot predict the future, just as we could not predict the day of 9/11. Oh, did that one hit home? It should!
So, thank your vets each day, and yes, to include John McCain (he DOES know and stands strongly on his beliefs and his "wisdom & experience" as a veteran),so who is best fit to include the Boeing problem? McCain is. He caught the bad guys doing wrong and did you forget that it in no way shape or form has hurt the taxpayers with the big billlions it "would have", IF they were NOT caught.
So, yeppers, blame McCain, is all they say, when in fact, if McCain had not stopped it, you may not be able to feed your family right now,due to the taxes it would have cost taxpayers.
Oh, and while we are on the subject of who is the best candidate; why do we not remember who else must have enough experience, and wisdom to control things when they do get out of hand for national or international disasters. Hope you lay down tonight peacefully and think about that really in depth.I served for your right for fredom as all my sister and brother in arms have and our forefathers of the past, so you have the right to speak your opinion as do I, and I will respect such, but when you cnanot speak the words without the knowledge,then maybe some should rethink their remarks and promises that cannot be kept, because the future is not here yet.
How about "I will vote, for the one who has the wisdom, experience, & the knowledge", and also for the taxpayers, and the many other things that have all been proven through experience.

Barack Obama plans to "remove one to two combat brigades per month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq in 16 months." Some troops will be kept to protect our embassy and diplomates. If al-Queda builds a base within Iraq, he will keep some troops in Iraq or nearby to deal with that. For argument's sake, let's go with two per month.

According to wikipedia, as of Dec. 2007 we have "around 154,000 troops" deployed in Iraq, and this latest number reflects the additional troops sent as part of the surge plan. It goes on to note that "an additional 30,000 troops are deployed in the Gulf region."

Generally, an army brigade consists of 3,000-5,000 troops. For argument's sake, let's just call it 4,000.

So, let me get out my slide rule and do the math: 154K/8K=19mos+1wk. So, if he leaves (3.25*4K=) 13K troops in place, he'll be about on target. That should be enough to protect our embassy and personel, and give the Iraqis something to shoot at on a clear day.

But, we all know what's going to happen no matter who is elected President. Congress is going to turn it into a three ring circus and decide for themselves what the draw-down should be anyway. It's happened before, and so far, it's politics as usual.

I have know doubt in my mind that McCain would be the wiser choice of the three leading candidates. The man is a former navy fighter pilot who spent quite a bit of time as a POW in the Vietnam war. So he is no stranger to warfare and to go through all that misfortune proves to me that he loves this country and wants to make things better for us. He also has over 30 years of experience in politics to offer as a candidate(much more than obama). He lets it be known that there is no feasible way to pull us troops out anytime soon. that would, in fact, make things worse. Iraq would be in turmoil. He doesnt say one thing and then turn around and say another-like hilary and obama on troop withdrawals. all you people are out of your mind to think that we can just pull out and end this right now. there is way too much to take care of that the american public in general is naive of. and yes of course troops are dying in Iraq...hello its a war! nobody forced me or any other troop to sign the contract; we signed it of our own accord. to pull us out now would mean to me that my friends and brothers died for no reason and that a country went through a great ordeal just to be denied its sovereignty and handed over to terrorist organizations to take control of and plot the next 9-11. wake up people, we cannot just be isolated anymore, foreign policy is a must. Do not forgot what has happened in the past: 9-11-2001, 12-7-1941.

i would also like to state that i would be proud and honored to serve under John McCain as commander in chief.

People bash Hillary without understanding what she has said. At the first debate Hillary was the only person to say that you can't just pull all the troops out of Iraq. We have interests that must be protected.

She has asked for a detailed plan on removing our troops and it has not been made ready. Her plan is to give the joint chiefs 60 days to prepare a plan, then decide how to execute it.

It's exactly why she is ready to lead from day one. She's the only person on the first debate to get this question right.

As a Canadian I am embarassed and mortified at the interference of some of my fellow citizens and government officials in the US elections process. Even if the claims about Obama were true, and they are not, it would still have been wrong to make any public comment. One thing democratic countries do not do is involve themselves in their neighbour's internal business. At least my government has issued an official apology to Senator Obama and his campaign, and so it should.

While NAFTA is an international treaty we have both signed, it does contain cancellation clauses with notice. If a future US government wanted to invoke that option if the treaty was not renegotiated, then Canada would look at that and consider our response at the time. As is the case in the United States, our own experience with NAFTA has been mixed, with some businesses and industries benefitting heavily, others seeing little or no change, and still others hurting because of the deal. Certainly, not all Canadians are supporters of NAFTA in its present form.

However, all that is for the future...

If you watch this clip from the oldest and most venerated Cdn. TV networks, you will see that Obama's explanation was substantiated.

Unlike the American press who do not make the distinction that the Cdn. Consulate in Chicago approached a Professor of Economics for a meeting, the Canadians have.

The Globe & Mail in Canada has QUOTED Harper's top aide as stating that it was the Clinton campaign who called to reassure the Cdn. gov't.

MEMOgate, as the Canadians might call it, won't be going away any time soon.

I checked out the Bloomberg piece, Jake and it doesn't say much of anything; much less prove anything.

Senator Obama has always said that he will surround himself with people who may not always agree with him but he will listen.

Most academics are proud of their own area of expertise and may be a bit naive about newspapers or media that ask them to get together for one thing (Powers was/is on a book tour in England).

In my opinion, regarding Iraq, her answer was a feasible and educated one. How can one declaratively answer a hypothetical, future tense without sounding ridiculous?

It might have been better had she pulled out a crystal ball and waved her hands over it.

Whoever wins the White House will have a vastly different Iraq than we have now.

Powers remarks did NOT distort Obama's position but she is educated enough to know that as Obama has stated, he retains BOTH the responsibility and the right as commander in chief to do what is in the BEST interests of the American people.

To end the war give the citizens of Iraq hand held fire power and let them defend their own country. Let it become what ever it turns to be. There will be no Al Qaeda. We always have to tinker with things and screw them up. Why not let nature take it's course by giving advisors and ammo. After all every time we go to war with a country we kiss and make up in 25 years. We buy sneekers from Vetnam. I wonder what Iraq will make when we start buying from them? Burkas!! perhaps? I can't wait!!!

obama on the iraq war pullout word for word of the insurgents.Time table so they the insurgent know they are safe from the us forces.Islam politics us president, surely wakeup young people

The only candidate that has promised to end the war is Ron Paul.

This is all nonsense.

We know that we cannot pull-out over night under any circumstances and under any administration- no matter if it is the Democracts or Republicans.

It is the intentions, the judgement and the direction of a candidacy that is paramount in the campaign season.

Voting for war (Clinton & McCain) vs. no intentions of pulling out (McCain) vs. pulling out (Obama) are the 3 points of views and most importantly judgements of want is right to do-- we are dealing with.

I think we as American should keep in our minds that all people are equal before God. I moved here seven years ago from africa with my friends . many of them joint the army three years later. now they are in Iraq. we all defend this country regardless of being a black or women. This message is for those who think America is not ready for black or women president. what is wrong with Barack Obama, or Hillary Clinton if any of them qualify he or she can be a president. it is like we all go war whenwar come. why not particular people who said these words fought the wars. that why we think God bless America because a nation without racism is bless by God.
Thank you all fokes, may God keep America bless for every nert generations

I think we as American should keep in our minds that all people are equal before God. I moved here seven years ago from africa with my friends . many of them joint the army three years later. now they are in Iraq. we all defend this country regardless of being a black or women. This message is for those who think America is not ready for black or women president. what is wrong with Barack Obama, or Hillary Clinton if any of them qualify he or she can be a president. it is like we all go war whenwar come. why not particular people who said these words fought the wars. that why we think God bless America because a nation without racism is bless by God.
Thank you all fokes, may God keep America bless for every nert generations

Here we go again. You have a candidate in Obama talking tough on an issue of Iraq while his senior adviser is saying to a foreign press, BBC, what will really happen when Obama becomes the president. This is the same thing that happen in Ohio about NAFTA. There is a pattern here that is very troubling.

I believe the Obama camp is relying on Obama being able to give one of those "plagiarized", inspiring speeches to confuse his followers which will make them forget what he had promised in the campaign.

George Bush is a Havard man, so is Obama. These policy advisers are all Havard educated people.

Get the drift?

Obama's change I just don't get. He has sorounded himself with X-Clinton advisors. He makes a big deal for a little speach he gave on not agreeing with the war, but did not even have the privledge or the responsability to vote. He has also been endorced by everyone that voted for the war like the likes of Ted Kennedy that we all know why he was never albe to even run for Prez, and the looser like Keary who tried to get elected and we all know why he lost..did it have something to do with his war hero status that was not true? How about Lewis who switched and fliped floped from Clinton to Obama becasue Obama is black, for the blacks have enve been threatening others to do the same. (With Friends like this who needs enemies) We really need to admire Stephanie Tubb Jones, wow, what a great lady, her words of loyalty and friendship. Like she said, a Politician only has his/her word and if we can not have loyalty and keep to ones commitment then we have lost. So what change is Obama talking about???

A third party of some sort,,would probably be a great relief...The Dems and Repubs could then have someone else to blame for they're failures...someday this country might just have an indepent party,,god knows we need one...

I'm just looking for curly and larry, so we can gather with the other stooges who think hillary or obama could actually run this country. If either of these two get in office look for America to fall. Go Mccain!!

Regarding the fact there was no nafta meeting between a Clinton aide and Canada--to have run a story saying there had been where there was none is horrible. The press is so quick to get the latest story out there, they don't do any fact checking on their own.

There was one between an Obama aide and Canadian official though--even though Obama intially denied this. At least the press got the facts right for that story, but then to claim Clinton did the same which wasn't true, that's just bad reporting.

when are the american people going to wake up to reality that the usa which i love dearly has lost so many values that my parents and grandparents pocessed and i blame politicians both democratic and republicians im neither political or religious nor liberal or conservative i believe we need a third party in this country and call it the common sense party i tired of hearing these candidates promise this or that do we need some changes of course we do national health insurance ,get out of the war, fair equital tax system that doesnt penalize success,trade system and tort reform that encourages jobs to stay in america ,move toward more indepedence from foreign oil but this requires enviromental consequences,better education in usa is overall dismal its all about whos got the best football team its digusting where our common sense values have gone so who do i think should be president i have yet to see someone with the guts to tell the truth that these are the things we need to do and to be helpful we have to do them all in a reasonable time frame and we all have to be on the same ship or noyhing will ever change

to Ladyvoter;;;and the rest of you,,

Al Qaeda is clearly in Iraq already, and have been in Iraq for some time,(years)..If Sen.Obama would take the time to visit the troops on the ground as both Sen.Clinton has and Sen.McCain have, and actually see whats going on in that country,,then and only then he might realize at what is at stake there..Just look back in time, with our country during the revolutionary war,,France came to our aid to help secure our freedom from british rule..Now its our turn to help those less fortunate in Iraq,,they too need our help in securing they're freedoms..To many Americans have taken "Freedom" for granted..Their is a price to be paid for Freedom,,unfortunately, American,French,German,Canadian,British and the rest of the Nato Alliances are paying that price through the lost of their finest...I have had the Honor of fighting in both Afghanistan and Iraq, with some of the finest fighting men and women of our united forces and that of Nato,,so before you say that I don't know what I'm talking about,,I DO..Freedom isn't Free...
There is alot at stake in Iraq,,and no, it isn't about the oil as some would think..Just think, if either one of the candidates force an immediate pullout,,think about all those people who have helped American & Nato forces,,they would be seen as collaborators,be executed and the country would surely be in turmoil...To think you could just pull troops out is ludicrous at best..and the to re-insert them?? Those that did help us before, wouldn't trust us to help us again..the casualty rate would be two fold in trying to regain lost ground..and we;d be worst off on the second attempt and it would cost the taxpayer that much more....finish the job and lets move on..I think alot of our politicians and Military advisors have learned a valuable lesson here,,,don't bite off more than you can chew and Never underestimate your opponent...take care and may the best candidate win...god bless America....a soldier

just as we have heard from previous candidates on every issue that has been used in every presdential election for the last 100 years, change, change to what, and how, always be leary of change, this country is in for a rude awakening, maybe a change as such as our founding fathers done to rid itself of the controls of our English brethen, this might be the cleansing we really need.

Any campaign promise is just an intention based on conditions of the moment. If the Iraqi's were to manage thier country effectively, then we could withdraw our troops. Probably won't happen, even if it does, if Iran were to start acting in an agressive manner, it would be foolish to withdraw troops who could be viewed as a possible reaction force or deterrent. What the dems. really have to worry about with Clinton going negative and dirty (as usual), is alienating the youth vote who may see it as just "politics as usual", and keep in mind that a lot of the independants who voted for Obama only voted for the dems. because they had somebody other than Clinton. Then there is the way Bill tried to inject race, and Hillary's dismissal of the black vote in the southern states. If youths, blacks, and independants leave the dems. in Nov., (especially if they go rep.), then it will really hurt thier chances of winning!

I AGREE WITH DADDY BEE. AS HILLARY SAID, WE ARE JUST GETTING WARMED UP, THOUGH THE WORDSMITH IS ALREADY SWEATING UNDER THIS LOW HEAT.

HEY GUYS, OBAMA CAN RUN BUT SOON HE AINT GONNA HAVE SOMEWHERE TO HIDE. SINCE WORDS MATTER SO DEARLY FOR HIM, WE PRAY WORDS DONT FAIL HIM. FROM ONE BLUNDER TO ANOTHER, IT STILL APPEARS LIKE IT'S MORNING STILL ON THIS DEM CAMPAIGN.AND HRC IS SURE WITH THE MOMENTUM FOR THE FINAL PUUUSH. WHAT'YA THINK GUYS?

Somebody called the Democrats liars? Republicans have told more lies than any previous administration, count them! How many, just on Iraq alone? And they were big ones, like Iraq will pay for the war, weapons of mass destruction, terrorists will invade America...how? An ocean divides us! They have no Navy! No airplanes! Think about it. As for Bill Clinton, he did a great job! So what if he lied about sex. What man hasn't? Bush has lied about so many things, important things, it's incredible.

General Keane is incorrect about Hillary Clinton's ability to act responsibly when it comes to the military and international affairs. Her actions in regards to Iraq was a real world test of her ability to act responsibly and she failed - miserably.

Mr. Obama tells us how much words matter. Now he is saying that words do not matter. He says that he is against Nafta tells the Canadians he is not. Says that he will get us out of Iraq in 16 mo. Now says that he is not sure if he can do it. Says that he wants a positive campaign but waites almost 24 hours before he does anything about it. When asked about it today instead of repeating his pledge to fire anyone engaged in such activity he says I am not going to get caught up in a knife fight. It appears that words do matter and most of all it matters if you keep your word and over the past few days sadly we have come to see that his word can't be trusted!

America doesn't need a black president neither a woman president. America needs a President to stay in Iraq untill it is possible to leave, to punch Iran when neccesary, to leave economy to its own path, to resist changes too fast occurance. It is a hard job. The old McCain could stand it though people wouldn't like it at all. Obama (don't call him Osama - note, the Am crowds are as easy agitatable as muslim crowds) and Hillary aren't good to withstand crowds humm.

Some of you guys are so lost, you believe everything that you read in the news. Hillary is nothing more than an extention of Bill the down low Clinton.

Are we so quick to forget all of the non-since that this country went through with one Clinton.

And what about the second Bush? How quickly we forget as Amercians. I for one have not forgotten all of the lives that were lost during 911.

I want to end this sinceless 5 year war that should have never been started. I have family members over there and I want them home NOW..

We can not win a war like this. The best thing that we can do is help rebuild Iraq and save face to live another day. This is not the war we need to be fighting. We need to build up or troops and protect our homeland.

Hillary Clinton can never be trusted. She is a low as they come. Open your eyes and see that every thing that comes out of her mouth is a lie. She started the NAFTA stories, because she knows that people will believe any and everything they hear.

Hillary Clinton is a rumor monger, she only cares about her cause and that is to be the first female president of the United States at any means necessary. She will say and do anything to get back in the White House. It sounds to me that she is still a Goldwater girl with all of the praises she gives to John McCain.

Democrates you better wake up before the Fox gets into the chicken coop again. Just look at George W. Bush.

Hillary is a monster and wolf in sheeps clothing.

Wait a minute!!! A loss of Hilary for me is a gain for 4 years of John MCCain so any of you that love the talking Obama...go ahead...make a choice that you think is wise and I will make one that is actually smart!!!I know a lot more women that will make this choice too...so really think before you vote for change...because a change will happen for the good of those that don't lie!!! Obama lied and he is hiding a lot of things..he has proven that...GO HILARY!!!!

triax, you must be naive to think that Obama's policies are merely his own. All these candidates (and the president) need advisers who are experts on their respective fields to give the candidate/president information on the best solutions for every situation. When that candidate is elected he will have to surround himself with all these advisers because they're the experts. He will listen to all of them and then ultimately make a decision. This is especially important for Obama because he'd still have a lot to learn.

At least with Hillary she already has an idea of the ins and outs of the process. People belittle her role when she was in the white house but it was actually widely known that Bill Clinton consulted her more than he did Al Gore. They would "often bounce ideas off each other" (quote from Bill Clinton interview from years ago). She was no ordinary First Lady. She knew the issues and learned a lot about them. Why do you think Bill famously touted during his 1992 campaign that it's going to be a co-president, people will be getting "2 for the price of 1"? Of course when people equate her role to that of a doctor's wife who obviously is not qualified to practice medicine, it's obviously not right because the job of a president (mostly decision-making) cannot be compared to that of a doctor because those are 2 different skills. The wife of a businessman who knew the ins and outs of the business is probably a better comparison.

obama has less experience but sounds as if he is perfect, hilary is for real

It is sad to hear older people put down. Older people have lived a life of continual change. It is nothing new to them. They have dealt with it quite successfully and will continue to do so with dignity and knowledge gained through those experiences. Most of the younger generation do not really have a good concept of what change is all about. There is much to be said for a lifetime of dealing with change and the experiences that come with it. Change for change sake is not a good thing. You would do well to learn from the older generation and respect the life time of experience they represent. Life is continual change and adaptation to that change as well as helping bring meaningful change about.

Lynn, you're reaching. Hillary never said that McCain will be a great commander-in-chief, she said "I will put forward my lifetime of experience, Senator McCain will put forward his lifetime of experience, Senator Obama will put forward a speech he made in 2002"... that does not equate to saying that McCain will be a great commander-in-chief (talk about twisting words). Her point was that she's the one who can go toe-to-toe with McCain if he starts touting his experience.

Wait...McCain is the false prophet...Dont vote!!

What worries me about Clinton is that she thinks John McCain would be a great commander in chief. That means she thinks it is okay for him to want to stay in Iraq for 100 years to avoid "surrender." What does that tell us about Clinton's commitment to withdrawing from Iraq. I don't trust her. She is getting all Joe Lieberman on us.

It is Clinton's involvement in NAFTA with Keith Olberman and Howard Fineman.

Seah and JJ: When and where did Barack Obama say that Ohio was "a little job"? I'm really interested. Can you cite a reliable reference and a date?

If you people actually believe the withdrawal promises than your in the 3rd grade

All of the fire and brimstone they threw at the republicians was to get elected--nothing more. They know the surge worked and they know they are not gonna leave Iraq in turmoil---the only people that dont know that are the fools that follow them

You watch. They will will find some way to blame the Republicans for their own lies.
Just look at the Dem campaign. Obama thinks the super dels should go to the majority canidate(because it helps him) and one thinks they should not(because it helps her)
That is exactly what they do to the Republicans. Whatever they think--I'll think the opposite--because it serves ME

Its April fools all year long

geevill: what does mccain say about troops in iraq? what's his current position? i've listened to him state four different positions.

and beyond iraq - what's his plan? he believes in transparency and democracy, so why haven't we seen his plan to go around nato and the un? why does that arch-liberal Pat Buchanan say that [McCain] "... will make George Bush look like Ghandi?" (Business and Media Institute, 2/07).

i like mccain - i just don't get to hear what he actually stands for because the media doesn't ask him hard questions - they are too busy taking his perks and riding his bus.

Press coverage on the Powers gaff implies that Samatha Powers is Obama's main foreign affairs advisor. She is not. He has at least 23 - ranging from former top-level Clinton White House staff, to former military commanders to humanitarian-types like Powers. Clinton has about an equal number and so does McCain. McCain has several unrecon-structed neo-cons. They include Max Boot, who stated "... America should turn its attention to Iraq. It will probably not be possible to remove Saddam quickly without a U.S. invasion and occupation--though it will hardly require half a million men ... we will probably have plenty of help from Iraqis, once they trust that we intend to finish the job this time." (Weekly Standard 10/15/01) and Bill Kristol who stated, "There's been a certain amount of pop sociology in America ... that the Shia can't get along with the Sunni and the Shia in Iraq just want to establish some kind of Islamic fundamentalist regime. There's almost no evidence of that at all. Iraq's always been very secular." Fresh Air, 2003.

Not guys I would choose for their sound vision or advice. His foreign affairs team also had several regular vets (nice) and a few very, very old men (over 80). Clinton has a comparable mix, except she was actually able to grab an advisor who has been to Iraq - outside the green zone.

Does "best case scenario" really mean "Dream on America." I clearly remember Barack Obama saying he would be able to withdrawal troops from Iraq within a 16 month period. Now we are learning that Susan Power, Barack Obama's foreign policy adviser, who resigned today, in order for the campaign not to have to announce that she was fired, was talking to the BBC too. It seems she is telling them that Barack Obama's public statements during his campaign do not match his real plans. What else is new? Why is she discussing these plans with the BBC at all?

Hillary Clinton has stated that she would begin withdrawing troops within 60 days of her taking office. I heard her mention 1 to 2 brigades a month. I know she has mentioned that troop withdrawal must be done responsibly and carefully. She has not given an exact timetable, but is clear on her intent to end this war.

Also, I don't think it's fair to equate the opinion of Samanta Power (a foreign policy adviser to Obama --- at the time of the interview) to General Jack Keane. (Ret.) He is not Hillary Clinton's foreign policy advisor and is not involved in her campaign at all. It seems everytime Barack Obama gets into trouble over something, the media tries to negatively involve Hillary Clinton in some way. How long will the media try to cover for him?

There is one superdelegate that carries more weight that all others, the one that the media does not talk about. Its Israel stupid, your vote does not count people.

Like it or not Hilary will win, and she will be the next president of the united states of israel.

Clinton's fraud trial has already begun:
"While Hillary Clinton battles Barack Obama on the campaign trail, a judge in Los Angeles is quietly preparing to set a trial date in a $17 million fraud suit that aims to expose an alleged culture of widespread corruption by the Clintons and the Democratic Party."

Read full article:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=56868

And what about her top adviser?:
Mark Penn is not just a heavy hitting PR person, he's an uscrupulous PR person, giving advice to clients such as the tobacco industry, instructing them on how to target inner city minorities via smokers rights groups, blackwater on how to effectively respond to questions from the 911 commission, and advising subprime lending groups on how to move forward with their agendas and deflect fallout.

http://www.prwatch.org/node/6213

Voters need to educate themselves before casting their final vote.
Obama '08

She was an advisor, those were her opinions on Obama's policy - not, I repeat NOT Obama's policy. He is going to stick to the plan, but realistically if the plan and situation changes so it's ABSOLUTELY DANGEROUS to do this, he will obviously deviate. Samantha Power gave her opinion, and it is just that - her opinion! Not Obama's!

I'm appalled by the "little jobs" comment from Obama. I had not heard that. No wonder he lost Ohio so badly.
Maybe the white side of Obama's genetics is linked to Leona Helmsley, you remember the "little people comment" regarding taxes, sounds similar to me. Maybe Obama is the King of Mean and we are just now finding out. After all his wife has already said that Americans are mean, especially when they seek the truth about her MLK imitator husband.

"Bring Our Troops Home: Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq."

All the times we were told to go to Obama's website. Well he is lying on his website. What do you Obama supporters have to say now?

Obama, has said He was against NAFTA and then come back and said it was just rhetoric. So He lied to the people.

War - He said he was totally against it
Did he lie about that too! then he said 90 days. What is his story today?

Can't believe anything the man says
He denied his friends, then he claimed them.

I do not think he knows what he wants.

Shame That the American people are subject to his games.

Mr Obama is on a mission, to make history and for his own cause and goals.
Not America or American people.

We did believe one thing he said, when he told Ohio people to take the little jobs. Because thats what was needed of them.

Shame on you Mr Obama

It's no surprise that Obama's act is slowly crumbling. When you position yourself as the "messiah" there is no place to go but down, unless you actually are the Messiah, then we can all watch as you ascend up into the heavens. O's position on Iraq has always been questionable. He didn't vote for it and he would end it upon becoming president. Just not reality, and more idealistic O talk. The Iraq war is real, and the candidate who inherits that mess better be clear on what that means. Obama knows he would disappoint, he already wrote it in his book, he's no change agent, he just wants the presidency just like Hillary does. At least Hillary is openly fighting, the old fashioned way and Obama still wants to pretend he's nice. Obama is living in a fantasy. Just listen to the wife, the wife always tells more about the man than the man himself and the same can be said about Hillary. She's thoe one who held the Clinton family together when times were tough. Bill Clinton knows he owes Hillary. I think Hillary's vote on Iraq actually is a good thing, should she become the nominee. If she had voted the other way, people would say that as a woman she's afraid to authorize military force. Who knows by 09, Iraq may in a new state that no one could predict.

Democrat Presidents have started every single war except the Afghanstan/Iraqi-Eternal War On Terrorism, which was started by President George W. Bush with the support of the Democrat party's elitist leaders. Senator Hillary Clinton will start a war with Iran, and Senator Barrack Husein Obama will trigger War III, by deserting the state of Israel to Muslim Invaders, since he is a secret Muslim Agent of Osama Ben Laden.

All of their plans are "Best Case Scenarios"...just as McCain's is...this is a non story...but I am surprised How Hillary is tempting the NAFTA thing have they read the news reports in the past couple of days? Hillary's name was brought up first but for some reason wasn't reported...hmmmm.