We have already had 8 years of an inexperienced person in the Oval Office.The nation & world.....

can't afford to wait for another leader needing foreign policy training ...this is not that time.

and that's just a fact that too many of us are forgetting about.


The World Can't Wait.

Hillary Clinton can hit the ground running she is the one for these days!


.

been). That's why I disagree with the party leaders' decision not to really go after them now.

They should have been JAILED by the end of 1994, instead Dems were turning over keys to Congress to the GOPs then and Bushies were planning their return to WH in 2000.

THAT could NOT have happened if we had a Dem president who was interested in truth and open government as a priority. Nope - he had too many cronies to protect himself on all those dealings starting with his TOP benefactor in Arkansas - Jackson Stephens. GHWBush's partner in many of the criminal activities since the 70s.


You think truth just happens? HONEST DEms put their careers and lives at stake to uncover the crimes that Bill swept under the rug for Poppy.


http://consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html


Why do YOU want the coverups CONTINUED for BushInc? Don't even PRETEND accountability is a concern for you and then urge other Dems to support the Clintons who covered up the MOST for BushInc throughout the 90s.

from your link: Secrecy & Privilege

do you really think that Obama is going to persue * and his crimes? he has been given a brand new broom from his backers and will sweep bush*s crimes under that same fucking carpet. of course he is! he is of the same mold or else he wouldn't be where he is now! he is one of them.

you made your choice and i have made mine and one of them will be The New WH Sweeper

"....scene in spring 1994 when a guest at a White House social event asks Bill Clinton why his administration didn’t pursue unresolved scandals from the Reagan-Bush era, such as the Iraqgate secret support for Saddam Hussein’s government and clandestine arms shipments to Iran.

Clinton responds to the questions from the guest, documentary filmmaker Stuart Sender, by saying, in effect, that those historical questions had to take a back seat to Clinton’s domestic agenda and his desire for greater bipartisanship with the Republicans.

Clinton “didn’t feel that it was a good idea to pursue these investigations because he was going to have to work with these people,” Sender told me in an interview. “He was going to try to work with these guys, compromise, build working relationships."

But I'm positive that Hillary won't.

but have come to the conclusion tha obama will probly be the nominee
i expect the nov race to be closer than obama supporters think....and then come my biggest concern...that due to the divisive nature of this primary....and the country in general
obama will be rendered ineffective

Their policies just suck.

You want him for 4 more years? I'm sure he will be happy to oblige.

immediately I thought about creating chaos! Please tell me you are not referring to his days in the beautiful sate of Texas's house of the Governor? That is a position that is largely a do nothing job. He just shows up a few times a year. Kind of like his presidency.

and fictional nonsense?

Obama does have experience. He is not george bush or remotely like him. Obama has 8 years in the Illinois Senate and 3 years in the U.S. Senate. He'a a Constitutional scholar. He's worked on the ground as an activist. He's a brilliant guy. That's hardly the profile of bushy. And experience is not the only factor in deciding who to vote for- at least for me. Hillary's poor judgment weighed heavily in my decision not to support her in the primaries.

And if Hillary can't win the primaries, she shouldn't be the nominee. Let's see how she does in March and April. If she can't pull off BIG wins, she's done.

he was governor of texas for a term and a half....he has an mba
he had a reputation as texas gov for working with democrats....
all that shit reads real good in a bio....but that's all it is....he mostly didn't have a track record with a high enough profile to alarm the masses...
as of right now all obama has is a bio...he may turn out to be the greatest president
of all time....but right at this moment nobody has any real idea how he'll govern..
he hasn't been doing this long enough to have a track record that can be relied on to illuminate anything......

and more hope.........and more change.......oh, we got hope, and change......and if I listen to John Edward's speeches enough, I can speak for 10 minutes on my own, and then have some more hope.........and more change.


I don't mean to be rude, but an easy half of Obama's (and about 1/3 of Hillary's) whole persona is lame sloganeering and he's going to ride this American Idol style election straight to the nomination. With Edwards out, I still can't decide which of these two I'm going to support. Thankfully, living in NC, my vote doesn't count for anything in the primaries. I never even got a chance to vote for the person I want in office.

But I swear, if I hear anybody say "I think we've hit on the right message" one more time I'm gonna scream. Keep that sort of talk for the media and marketing guys. It makes you sound like you're market testing and not actually believing in what you are saying.

A constitutional Scholar?....The instruction manual for my last receiver was 5 times thicker than the constitution, the amendments and the articles of confederation, combined. That in no way prepares a person for the big seat. Save the cool aid for the weak minded. I am more qualified than Obama, and I mean that sincerely.

Congratulations.

You have proven your ignorance beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Work hard to overcome it or your ignorance will become stupidity.

Like the DUzy, only for stupid people.

with you. I was never one of those who caught Obama fever, I tended to look at experience and issues.

Obama is a brilliant man who will surround himself with brilliant people. Of course, he was never First Lady and in some minds that makes a difference.

but he got beat by the dim witted idiot....the dim witted idiot won 2 terms....apparently dim witted and mean beats brilliant every time.....still trying to figure which direction the rw will attack obama from

.. close the deal. She should have walked in to the Whitehouse without breaking a sweat with her name recognition. She has run a terrible campaign, what makes you think she would run the Whitehouse any better?

The campaign is a testing ground, you can learn so much about her leadership, and she really hasn't done a good job.

Sorry. The results speak for themselves.

on her much vaunted experience aside from First lady of Arkansas and the US.

Seven years in the Senate most of which consisted of going along with Bush to get along and get ahead...

Sheesh: the Patriot Act, IWR, her ongoing support for the war, no standing up for habeus corus or speaking out against Abu Ghraib and Gitmo...

Some fighter HRC is!

http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/281249,CST-NWS-OBAMA03.article

Sen. Barack Obama said Friday the use of military force should not be taken off the table when dealing with Iran, which he called "a threat to all of us."

Speaking before a pro-Israel crowd at a downtown hotel, Obama also repeated his call for a phased pullout of U.S. troops from Iraq and strongly backed a strong U.S. relationship with Israel.

Earlier in the day, the Republican National Committee took aim at Obama, issuing a research memo aimed at highlighting the Illinois freshman senator's lack of experience on foreign affairs.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/281249,CST-NWS-OBAMA03.article

Sen. Barack Obama said Friday the use of military force should not be taken off the table when dealing with Iran, which he called "a threat to all of us."

Speaking before a pro-Israel crowd at a downtown hotel, Obama also repeated his call for a phased pullout of U.S. troops from Iraq and strongly backed a strong U.S. relationship with Israel.

Earlier in the day, the Republican National Committee took aim at Obama, issuing a research memo aimed at highlighting the Illinois freshman senator's lack of experience on foreign affairs.

Hillary has NO executive experience.... none.

Saying that her 8 years as first lady qualifies her to be President is the equivalent of saying that Tiger Woods' wife is capable of winning the US Open.


The White House janitorial staff has the equivalent "Presidential experience" as Hillary.... proximity to the Oval Office in a ceremonial role does NOT count as "experience".

Hill's campaign seems unfocused, uncompetitive, and unable to contend with a changing dynamic.

Didn't she even plan for the possibility that super T wouldn't win it for her?

If that's what experience has gotten her, then I'm not impressed with the nature of her experience.
It seems her greatest experience is in claiming to be experienced.

Didn't know her campaign was out of money, apparently failed to READ the memo penned by a senior advisor which warned her of the potential delegate scenario which has now come to pass, and then did NOT consult with her advisors before lending her own campaign $5M? That's someone who can lead from Day 1? Yeah sure--but what's she going to lead us into? The ground because that's exactly what her "leadership" or more correctly, lack thereof has done to her own campaign. If you think that is "Leadership" then you must be a HUGE fan of W.

big trouble. I'll take my chances with Obama.

And if she's so hot on foreign policy, why'd she vote for this war? Seems her experience didn't help there. As for experience, Dick Cheney has it, too. Look where that got us.

from a hick state. Oh, yeah, we did that.
His name was Lincoln.

that makes me not want to vote for Hillary. And I like her.
But you've provided the perfect example of what I DON'T want.
More overhyped inferences and triangulated meanspiritedness.
It just doesn't serve your candidate well at all.
No the world won't wait.. the world will leave this sort of BS behind.

Sorry.
She can do better than this. We all know that. So?

They can each hit the ground running. We're very fortunate in that way.

george bush had a cabinet and connections filled with plenty experience (rumsfeld, for one, served with nixon), and he had plenty of experience being the dirtbag he's been given his family history. he has not run the White House as though it were the office of the leader of the free world; he's run it more like a excessively powerful and corrupt corporation as its CEO. his foreign policies were not of ineptitude so much as they were about profit and power grabs.

please don't compare barack obama's potential, or as you see it lack thereof, to george w bush's disgraceful, murderous, corrupt cabal. while you may not be directly doing so, it is unfair to say that george's dumbdumb ruse could be compared to barack obama supposed lack of experience.

:eyes: talking points indeed. i'm so tired of clinton supporters calling everything one cites with regards for reasons to not vote for hillary "rw talking points," as if obama's age is a truly valid attack.

I fear he will fill it the same way bush did. Obama will get nothing done because no one will work with him (just like Carter). He already is behind in getting us universal health coverage (by not mandating all must be insured and allowing some to opt out). We will be talking about universal health care again when the next election comes along.

like she has been so close before? Come on folks stop fooling yourself into thinking that UHealthcare with Mandates is going to fly with Republicans and Red State Dems. There HAS TO BE SOME MEETING IN THE MIDDLE ON THIS.

that everyone pay is not universal health coverage. assuring that every person in the united states has health coverage no matter if they make 6 figures or 0 is universal.

hillary's plan as of yet would require us to pay into private insurance co's, which is more or less a big profitable scheme for them, and without an opt out in that case, ppl who could not afford it-eg those in the middle class who make enough that they don't qualify for assistance and yet not enough to pay for additional insurance would be indebted/enslaved to big companies with the power to garnish.

the human body is not a car, and its maintenance is entirely different, and so is its insurance coverage. her plan is far from perfect. both plans are plans in the raw. neither is what i am basing my vote on.

as for your opener, you apparently did not read what i wrote. bush was not lacking in experience, at least not the kind he needed to get what he and teh guys wanted. he had no intentions of running the office of president the way it was intended. he had no intentions of defending the constitution. he had no intentions of paying any attention to it.

he treated the office as a corrupt corp, and everything that office has done has been carefully choreographed and in the works for decades. power grabs, blood stained profits- they've been more successful than ever, or perhaps just bloodier, and they used their many years of experience with corruption to do so. it is absolutely unfair to parallel the potential of an obama presidency to that of a malicious bushcabal.

Before Hillary was a senator (BTW I was in NY at the time and the move was a strategic one) what exactly had she done in politics up until that time?

I am not going to dis-credit her work prior to that, but her whole Mantra against Obama has been experience and we KNOW she is talking politics. Obama was an Illinois senator for 7 years and a washington senator for 4 know. Hillary, while older, has only really played the political game for 8 years.

What Clinton does have is the "First Lady" years where she did a lot of good work, however it is not fair to say that Obama is not experienced when they both have been in politics per se for about the same amount of time. I firmly believe that most of the people backing Hillary are not doing it b/c of her record but because they know that Bill comes with the package.

gave her personal relationships (friendship) with almost every leader in the world. That is a HUGE advantage over Obama.

However, it is these very "friendships" (lets not kid ourselves, washington relationships are the important ones here) that can prove to be problematic when it comes to favors and such.

I hate to say it but some torch Obama on his obvious quasi,semi relationship with Rezko; what about those Clinton relationships with the Saudis as we have seen, or the whole Kazakhstan issue. It may be a huge advantage for Clinton but not really advantageous for you and me.

distruction? Yes it is..... So why do we keep throughing money at it? Ask both candidates? They keep voting for it. So in truth, if you keep voting to fund a war you tell people you didn't vote for, are you not, just as guilty? Just curious! Let's ask the family's who's familys are shipped home in the dark of the night.

if he'd been in the senate. One will never really know. If he had aspirations to run for president...he definitely would have voted for the IWR or he would have been considered soft on defense. No way he could allow that to happen. Obama is using this false issue to his advantage.

the same kind of lack of judgment HRC exhibited in the vote that resulted in the murder of over a million innocent Iraqi's.

And she still can't admit it was a mistake.

Next.

Hillary had her chance.

For me, she blew that chance by voting for the war. I know that lots of others did as well, and I understand. However, Hillary was merely pandering to the right after winning her Senate seat.

is hardly rhetoric. Grow up.

"Squawk! I'm A Parrot!" "Squawk! IWR IWR" "Squawk! She Voted She Voted IWR IWR" "Squawk"

you're just repeating clinton talking points.

what exactly makes hillary "ready to lead on day one" if she's already demonstrated her critical lack of judgement?? is marriage to a former president a prerequisite for the job?

lots of us got the war vote wrong, but it WAS a mistake. and she can't admit it. shame on her.

As opposed to "squawk! inexperience! squawk! day one?!"

You're not exactly a font of original thought, ED.

She'd be on the ground running...into another goddamn war.

or anywhere else, unless we count WalMart.

just as I heard "my role there is to provide the vision, the grunt work is for others to do..."

yesterday, together with his pals Coulter Rove and Rush
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4522714

...is experience?

Maybe Pickles Bush should run. She can tinkle teacups with the world leader's wives too.

You can vote for the warmonger who wants to make burning the US flag a federal crime. That smells Repug to me.

what other white house experience does Hillary have? Remember, we have been warned that she is not running on Bill's record!

That's for damn sure.

I'm not saying Obama does, but to assert that Hillary has foreign policy experience because she was First Lady for eight years is laughable . . . and she certainly hasn't distinguished herself in that arena while in the Senate . . .

the hard truth is that neither candidate has the kind of experience, foreign policy or otherwise, needed to heal the deep wounds that BushCo has inflicted on this nation and the planet . . . I'm not sure that anyone does -- but I'm damn sure these two don't . . .

Maybe it should be me?

Experience we turned it from a clear and precise definition into a moniker for someone who slept in the white house. How Orwellian

Obama is not lazy.

Bush is intellectually weak. Obama is one of the brainiest out there.

There is no way Obama would ever be as pig ignorant and lame as Bush.

Mz Pip
:dem:

because the new prez will have so much of Bush's shit to clean up, that they won't be able to accomplish anything else!
Hopefully, Hillary will be up to the task.

Please read this link

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/12/opinion/12brooks.html?_r=3&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

And what is Hillary's experience, really? One year with the Children's Defense Fund, a career corporate attorney, First Lady in Arkansas and D.C., and her time in the Senate.

Obama's career of working as a community organizer, as a civil rights attorney, lecturer in Constitutional law, 8 years in the Illinois State Senate, and now 3 years in the U.S. Senate has much more depth and diversity.

All else being equal, I confidently and proudly cast my vote for the "new kid" as you are trying to paint him.

Gobama!

Hillary has to much baggage

What we need is a fresh start

Even "experienced" people can and do make very destructive choices. It's better to be right than simply experienced.

And sorry, being First Lady doesn't count.

Bush's problem is not lack of experience, it is lack of intellectual curiosity and narcissisim.

Might as well go all the way.

Or maybe Dodd or Richardson?

ran a snow cone stand, for that matter. I do know she was in charge of health care reform back in the early nineties, and since we all now have sterling, universal health care that is the pride of the world and the crown jewel of the first Clinton administration's accomplishments I guess credit does need to be given were credit is d- oh, wait....nevermind.

Give me a break. Senator Obama is as ready for the job as any candidate running this year.

Yes, definitely the one for these days....

:sarcasm:

nothing. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

They were due to the pack of scumbags he brought into the office with him, and that he was a sleazebag to begin with.
There is NO legitimate comparison between EITHER of our candidates and Bush. Please don't lower the level of discourse that far.

Everybody requires on the job training.

so governments will start out pretty evenly.

I think they'll give Obama a little leeway at the beginning, and from what I can see, he learns fast.

On the other hand, Hillary's been in government in the Senate and as a First Lady. They wouldn't be as patient with her thinking she should know better....mistakes won't be overlooked as easily as with Obama.

She will be hobbled by her husband. Half of america will be wondering what the Clenis is up to, where its going, what its been "up" to. I have never seen so many men fascinated by 1 man's d**k. At least Obama doesn't have that baggage.

Something's not matching here....

This is a cheap shot.

and you should know better. DICK CHENNEY had plenty of experience... was he a fresh of breath air?