Law School Discussion

Off-Topic Area => Politics and Law-Related News => Topic started by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on August 20, 2007, 09:47:16 AM

Title: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on August 20, 2007, 09:47:16 AM





h l i a r y







http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=qggO5yY7RAo
Title: Re: ...Hillary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Butters Stotch on August 21, 2007, 07:47:04 AM
(http://employees.oneonta.edu/farberas/arth/Images/ARTH200/Work_of_art/obsession_ad.jpg)
Title: Re: ...Hillary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: bt on August 21, 2007, 08:07:50 AM
RONALD WILSON REAGAN IS THE DEVIL


(http://debbyestratigacos.mu.nu/archives/Ronald%20Reagan.jpg)
Title: Re: ...Hillary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on August 26, 2007, 08:36:48 PM
...



Moore: I've Been Served
by Josh Grossberg
Sun, 29 Jul 2007 09:05:40 PM PDT
 
Maybe Michael Moore isn't paranoid, because it sure seems like the government really is out to get him.

The firebrand filmmaker says he has been served with a subpoena by the federal government for a trip to Cuba for his hit health-care documentary, Sicko. The Treasury Department confirmed two months ago that it was probing Moore's visit to Cuba, during which he was accompanied by some ailing 9/11 rescue workers.

Appearing Thursday on NBC's Tonight Show with Jay Leno, the Oscar winner said he had just learned backstage that he had been served with an order compelling him to testify about his sojourn to the communist nation.

"I haven't even told my own family this yet," Moore said. "I was just informed when I was back there with Jay that the Bush administration has now issued a subpoena for me, going after me for helping these 9/11 rescue workers."

"No, no, for going to Cuba, not for helping them," chimed in Leno.

In March, the Fahrenheit 9/11 helmer and a trio of first responders who had fallen ill after working around ground zero traveled to the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay to demand the same quality health care that administration officials publicly promised was being given to suspected Al Qaeda terrorists held there.

After getting no response from U.S. authorities, Moore and his traveling companions subsequently received free medical treatment from Cuban doctors, which the 53-year-old helmer depicted in Sicko, ostensibly to point out the failings of America's health-care system.

"I didn't go there like Cameron Diaz, to get a tan," quipped Moore. "I was there to help them, and now I'm going to face this further harassment from the Bush people. Aren't they busy with something else?"

In May, the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control, or OFAC, sent a letter to Moore requesting information about the trip, which it claimed was not approved. (Under the U.S. government's comprehensive trade embargo, American citizens are forbidden to work in Cuba unless granted an exception.)

Moore shot back with an open letter to U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, calling for an end to the investigation and accusing the White House of playing politics by using a government agency to try to silence him.

He also stated he informed the OFAC in October about the Cuba trip, asserting that as a journalist, he qualified for an exemption to the travel ban, a point he reiterated with Leno last week.

"A journalist can go, and this is a work of journalism," said Moore. "And frankly, the larger point is being missed here. The point is that first of all, can we all agree we should take care of our 9/11 rescue workers?"

The statement elicited cheers from the studio audience.

Moore's attorney, David Boies, could not be reached for comment.

According to Reuters, Boies was contacted by a representative of the U.S. Department of Commerce, who requested the name of a person to accept the subpoena on Moore's behalf.

Aside from his burgeoning offscreen problems, Moore dropped another bombshell to Leno, saying that Harvey Weinstein—whose Weinstein company is distributing Sicko and who's also one of Hilary Clinton's biggest Hollywood supporters—asked Moore to cut scenes criticizing the Democratic presidential candidate.

The reason? Because Moore called out Clinton for purportedly accepting the most campaign donations of any senator from lobbyists representing the same private insurers and drug companies she's railed against in the past.

Moore refused, and Weinstein eventually backed down. The director also announced on The Tonight Show that the Weinstein Company has agreed to donate 11 percent of Sicko's box office to help ailing 9/11 workers who have been ignored by the Bush administration.

Title: Re: ...Hillary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on August 31, 2007, 03:00:29 AM
who's already scrubbin' up the money she's taking??? 



h l i a r y









771
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Butters Stotch on September 03, 2007, 08:14:39 PM
That's it!  I'm voting Repube!   ::)
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on September 09, 2007, 12:54:46 AM
Fatally Flawed Candidate: a candidate who has a pre-recognized persona of negativity by populous poll.

a. people associate hillary with sideling up to bush as exemplifying questionable and failed leadership in backing him with her IRAQ WAR vote.

b. the clintons...hillary in particular have had a shady and "slippery people" history with the james and susan mcdougal arrests... the missing document scandal...travelgate...and lets not forget vincent foster either.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on September 09, 2007, 01:11:29 AM












h l i a r y








...more bush?





Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on October 06, 2007, 04:52:15 AM
how much more "on the lam"  money could clinton be holding?
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: The Dude Abides on October 07, 2007, 11:45:42 AM
Not a dime's worth of difference between hilary, bush, etc.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on October 07, 2007, 04:47:40 PM
then you not mind if dem elected, eh?
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: The Dude Abides on October 08, 2007, 10:02:50 AM
I may just cast my vote for Ron Paul. He'll be in New York this coming Saturday for a rally in Union Square. Now he, my friend, has some radical ideas. None of the mainstream candidates even take a position on the big issues. They prefer to wear flip flops. Mitt Romney is possessed and appears not have a single flaw, Hilary has to march in step with her big corporate donors and lobbyists, it goes on and on. I liked the Rudy Guiliani from 1994, especially when had that radio show and actually took a stand against people. Now, he is just as mediocre as the rest of the Republicans. Maybe I'll jump on the Obama bandwagon, since he is not the establishment candidate. What happened to the Truman Democrats?
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on October 11, 2007, 07:38:33 PM
I may just cast my vote for Ron Paul. He'll be in New York this coming Saturday for a rally in Union Square. Now he, my friend, has some radical ideas. None of the mainstream candidates even take a position on the big issues. They prefer to wear flip flops. Mitt Romney is possessed and appears not have a single flaw, Hilary has to march in step with her big corporate donors and lobbyists, it goes on and on. I liked the Rudy Guiliani from 1994, especially when had that radio show and actually took a stand against people. Now, he is just as mediocre as the rest of the Republicans. Maybe I'll jump on the Obama bandwagon, since he is not the establishment candidate. What happened to the Truman Democrats?

as far as the public party choice paul seems to want to put the genie back in the global market bottle...that will not happen...isolationist..

huckabee is smoothe as silk...yet no dirty "clintonesque" money...this will finally bury her...huckabee needs a media boost.

thompson...don't know much about him yet...

giuliani...literally cleaned up ny from dinkins time and before...seriously...that is a fact {economic growth-public safety and security} ...he really did help on 911 and proved his solid leadership on that day...he went to so many firefighter funerals...but he was just a mayor.

mccain is old politico like clinton, bush, romney, dodd, gore...but different and independent...like some of my thinking...the torture bill of his was good...aye liked him...he could easily beat clinton...but obama might give him a run for his money...

romney...um...his pandering is so transparent.


as far as dems go:

obama...really wants to change the system and seems like he can roll with the punches...not the old bush clinton dodd gore romney edwards group...he IS different.


biden...like his iraq thoughts...knows the successes and admits them. ;)  he knows the kurds will be a nation on paper one day...they already are a friend of america...they basically run north iraq...a huge success...biden aye like.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on October 12, 2007, 04:11:04 AM
julie not surprised you scared of woman.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on October 14, 2007, 11:12:02 AM
julie not surprised you scared of woman.

bluewarrior not surprised you would back a laughable first lady "pop-candidate".

...only a fool would vote for laura bush, barbara bush, nancy reagan, rosalynn carter or ladybird johnson.

oh yeah. you are a fool.


dipshite!

Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on October 18, 2007, 09:03:37 PM
surely you meant say only fool would vote for drubk and cokehead.

and who continue support him when he clearly live down to potential that clearly indicate, hmmmmmm?
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on October 21, 2007, 09:19:51 PM
surely you meant say only fool would vote for drubk and cokehead.

and who continue support him when he clearly live down to potential that clearly indicate, hmmmmmm?

stay with me here, bobby...

laura bush, ladybird johnson, barbara bush, nancy reagan, rosalynn carter and hiliary clinton would never get my vote.

just because you peddle lsat prep tests does not make you a lawyer..

but maybe a doochebag. :D :D :D

if you are mentioning bush because you are jealous that he is STILL running the show...too bad...bush served and is serving his purpose...and guess what...you and your ilk could NOT and will do NOTHING to stop him...

...you are a loser...face the facts.


ps...you should stop drubking, yourself. ;)
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on October 22, 2007, 06:58:15 AM
gump's purpose?  you mean show that even "recovering" drunk and cokehead can retain support of 24% of americans?
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on October 25, 2007, 10:07:20 PM
gump's purpose?  you mean show that even "recovering" drunk and cokehead can retain support of 24% of americans?


don't taze me, bro...


buster, yo' bluster has been busted...now you fluster?

Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on October 26, 2007, 09:13:28 AM
back from your internship w/ pkk?
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on October 27, 2007, 02:38:37 AM
don't taze me, bro...

we know...you hypocrite who support WARMONGER like liary...we know.




Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on October 27, 2007, 04:32:11 AM
you not get any more warmongier than your boys, forrest and pencildick.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: TJDevlin on October 27, 2007, 07:02:04 PM
Julie, I think you take Star wars to a different level. Change your name to Yoda! ;D
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on October 28, 2007, 12:07:24 AM
 :D :D  bustifern is a big star wars fan...references it quite a bit...fern himself reminds me of jabba the hutt...
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on October 28, 2007, 12:09:14 AM
you not get any more warmongier than your boys, forrest and pencildick.

don't taze me, bro...

we know...you hypocrite who support WARMONGER like liary...we know.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on October 28, 2007, 06:15:15 AM
if clinton warmonger, what gump?

for that matter, what you?
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on November 02, 2007, 03:00:15 AM
aye'm asking you.

Is hiliary a warmonger?

you can't answer that question. 8)
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 02, 2007, 04:07:44 AM
is next week's weather nice?

probably, as today there hurricane.

anywzay, you like warmongers.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on November 02, 2007, 11:45:46 PM

hiliary is a WARMONGER...?



more bush...


now you tell me...do aye want her in power?
muuhuuhuhuhuhahahahahahhahhah hahhahhahhahhahahhaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!


but how could YOU vote for a warmonger who said she will continue american war in iraq?




Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 03, 2007, 02:56:15 AM
for real-life warmonger who pretend be evil star wars general, you sure pretend be for peace lately.

people who screwed up our government got no cred whatsoever.  better swim back trini.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on November 03, 2007, 10:45:30 AM


hiliary is a WARMONGER...



Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 03, 2007, 04:39:11 PM

hiliary is a WARMONGER...



lie repeated still lie.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on November 03, 2007, 08:16:28 PM

hiliary is a WARMONGER...



lie repeated still lie.





yeah, yeah...that's one way she lies.





                       
why "julie" so stoopid?







when julie change name to SHITEHEAD?...it fits you, bluster...  :D :D :D :D
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on November 03, 2007, 10:19:59 PM
watch this video...it is so true...repeating her lies still make them lies.. ;)


http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=qggO5yY7RAo


ironically, you seemed to have summed it all up in one line, shitehead.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 04, 2007, 02:58:00 AM
you have any idea how big dipshit you?

hrc not my first choice among democrats, but she infinitely better than any your warmongering buddies.

glad see you remain terrified her.  you should be.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on November 04, 2007, 09:37:03 PM
you have any idea how big dipshit you?

hrc not my first choice among democrats, but she infinitely better than any your warmongering buddies.

glad see you remain terrified her.  you should be.

you mean obama...huckabee...richardson ...giuliani...romney...those guys DID not vote for the war

clinton mccain edwards dodd biden  ALL voted for war...and according to you: ALL ARE WARMONGERS...



hey stoopid...don't you know how presidents are elected?

plus...a senator status ain't gonna cut it...unless you are kennedy.

we elect GOVERNORS, dipshite...

pick up a history book once in a while.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 05, 2007, 04:33:39 AM
who support end of war and who not?

play all games want.  come '08 election, all become clear, fartface.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: TJDevlin on November 05, 2007, 05:09:03 AM
Julie,

Words spoken like a true scholar, especially the fartface comment. I think that compliments your character perfectly.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 05, 2007, 05:49:55 AM
Julie,

Words spoken like a true scholar, especially the fartface comment. I think that compliments your character perfectly.

oh, julie love all "compliments," you little scholar you.

numbnuts.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: TJDevlin on November 07, 2007, 06:52:42 AM
Julie,

Once again you are correct I should have spelled it "complements." Nothing gets passed by you, now does it? I respect that.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 07, 2007, 06:55:35 AM
Julie,

Once again you are correct I should have spelled it "complements." Nothing gets passed by you, now does it? I respect that.

nope, nothing get "passed" julie at all.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: TJDevlin on November 07, 2007, 08:57:41 AM
Not this time lovey. I know I am correct on this one. Passed is the way to go.

"Those how cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" -Santayana
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 07, 2007, 09:35:10 AM
only if you think "passed by," which inherently redundant, better than "past." 

surely you not mean that julie "failing" rather than "passing" all comments, as that so objectively inane as beneath real discussion.

better luck next time.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: TJDevlin on November 07, 2007, 11:28:26 AM
only if you think "passed by," which inherently redundant, better than "past." 

surely you not mean that julie "failing" rather than "passing" all comments, as that so objectively inane as beneath real discussion.

better luck next time.

Julie,

As for inane topics for discussion, I am not sure that your shallow references to Hilary Clinton and belittling comments can justify anything but inane. Your subjective perception on what would be considered beneath real discussion is only a perception. Your ability to differentiate between pronouns and verbs; and the ability to spell correctly baffles me because you struggle to write in complete sentences. Interesting...

I would love to hear one of your topics above real discussion!     
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 07, 2007, 12:39:41 PM
what your incoherent question again?
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: TJDevlin on November 08, 2007, 09:07:09 AM
I love victory!
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 08, 2007, 10:50:26 AM
that not even question.

"mission accomplished," eh, numbnuts?
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: TJDevlin on November 08, 2007, 12:25:29 PM
Julie,

all jokes aside, I love your sarcasm. You have drawn me to this board.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 08, 2007, 12:29:44 PM
sarcasm?
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 09, 2007, 04:01:15 AM
you not answer question, dickwad.

that because you big supporter of war, but hope paint own stripes on opposition.  not going work.

you gump's boy,  enough said.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on November 09, 2007, 07:08:40 AM
who support end of war and who not?

play all games want.  come '08 election, all become clear, fartface.

so...let me get this straight...you think Clinton supports the end to the war???

the war that she voted for and the war she said won't be over until her first term has ended???

how stoopid can you be? dumbnuts?




why you not know hiliary warmonger?
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 09, 2007, 09:09:27 AM
julie know you support war, and that all julie need know your credibility.

care denounce war?

not think so.  now go kill self.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on November 10, 2007, 07:58:35 PM
...listen, blusternutz...aye know you are stoopid...and even shall we say...delusional...


AYE am NOT running for office,


although hiliary has iN-credibility...regarding the fact: julie not know that hiLIARy support war, and all julie need know is her wishy-washy at best credibility...

and after all...HILIARY  biggest WARMONGER running for office.



...gotcha yet...again.  :D :D :D :D 8)


get me dumbnutz?



julie know you support war, and that all julie need know your credibility.care denounce war?

not think so.  now go kill self.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 11, 2007, 05:57:53 PM
guess you forgot, rather conveniently, about all those republican warmongers--not few of whom running president.

that because you suport war and always have.  anyone who read this can see you not willing reudiate war.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on November 16, 2007, 12:18:00 AM
1980,,,yawn
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 16, 2007, 05:15:36 AM
you...yawn.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on November 18, 2007, 08:59:06 PM
Clinton’s lack of respect for Latin America
 By Tom Barry


“A great nation must command the respect of others,” writes Hillary Clinton in the new issue of Foreign Affairs. But what about showing a little respect? In her infatuation with U.S. power and the transcendent “American idea”, she forgets that international cooperation is not just about winning respect, it’s also about respecting other nations.


In her outline of her foreign policy agenda, titled “Security and Opportunity for the Twenty-first Century”, Clinton laments that the Bush administration “has squandered the respect, trust, and confidence of even our closest allies and friends.” As president, Clinton promises to introduce America to the world, and to demonstrate that the “United States is committed to building a world we want, rather than simply defending against a world we fear.” That world, says Clinton, will be “a world of security and opportunity.”

But Clinton’s cursory review of Latin America policy won’t win much respect in Latin America. In the one paragraph devoted to Latin America in her 18-page essay, Clinton focused more on U.S. fear of new political developments in the region than on ways to increase human security and opportunity.

According to Clinton, the Bush administration neglected “at our peril” the new political developments in Latin America. Without naming names, Clinton asserts, “We have witnessed the rollback of democratic development and economic openness in parts of Latin America.”

Rather than applauding the new willingness of an increasing number of elected governments to tackle the structural obstacles that have marginalized the poor and indigenous populations, Clinton evokes a picture of a region threatened by retrograde forces. Blaming the Bush administration for its negligence, Clinton implies that a more engaged U.S. policy could have obstructed the rise of democratically elected left-center governments, such as those in Venezuela, Bolivia, and Ecuador.

“We must return to a policy of vigorous engagement: this is too critical a region for the United States to stand idly by,” asserts Clinton.

But what kind of “vigorous engagement” is she talking about? Past forms have included intervention in national elections, financial and military support for illegal opposition movements, propaganda campaigns to carry the message of pro-U.S. forces and vilify others. Any “return” to policies like these is not likely to be regarded kindly in Latin America. With few positive examples to cite recently, U.S. engagement to protect “critical” U.S. geopolitical and economic interests has too often been synonymous with intervention.

Priorities in the region, according to Clinton, include supporting the “largest developing democracies in the region, Brazil and Mexico”; deepening “economic and strategic cooperation with Argentina and Chile”; and combating “the interconnected threats of drug trafficking, crime, and insurgency” in Colombia, Central America, and the Caribbean.

After establishing this aggressive agenda for U.S. involvement in security issues, she concludes, “We must work with our allies to provide sustainable-development programs that promote economic opportunity and reduce inequality for the citizens of Latin America.”

In short as president, Hillary Clinton’s Latin American policy would likely be very similar to that of the Bush I, Clinton I, and Bush II administrations before her -- with the only notable difference being that her administration may take stronger measures to counter governments that dare to determine their own trade, development, and foreign policies.

In laying out her policy, she fails to mention the need to overhaul the monumentally flawed Cuba policy, and in fact has said elsewhere that she wouldn’t lift the trade embargo until there is a “democratic transition.” Apparently she has no intention of modifying the strategy of the failed drug wars either, even though U.S. policies of drug interdiction, drug eradication, and counterinsurgency have not slowed the flow of illegal drugs and have caused enormous problems of displacement and environmental destruction.

Candidate Clinton offers a U.S. policy that promotes economic opportunity to reduce inequality. But her solutions -- economic “openness” and foreign aid -- are the standard formulas that have increased inequality and prompted the search for alternatives among the nations she criticizes for “rolling back economic openness” in an effort to provide basic needs to their citizens.

While the Washington political establishment is stuck within a narrow band of policy options, Latin American nations, particularly in South America, are experimenting with new policies aimed at setting their nations on sustainable development paths. Establishing national control over energy resources, sponsoring agrarian reforms, and breaking free of the economic reforms imposed by the international financial institutions are among the policies that have antagonized the Bush administration.

To win the respect of Latin Americans, Clinton doesn’t need to endorse these policy alternatives. But she does need to respect the right of Latin Americans to set their own directions.

When President Franklin D. Roosevelt set out to build cooperative relations in Latin America after three decades of imperial interventions and occupations, he promised that his “policy of the good neighbor” would be founded on “mutual respect” and self-determination. While the FDR administration did not always follow its own good neighbor principles, it did go a long way to building respect for the United States and a culture of cooperation in the Americas.

Clinton asserts that respect can be won by a leadership that “draws on all the dimensions of American power” and reestablishes the authority of the “American idea.” But to regain respect for U.S. leadership, whether in Latin America or elsewhere, the United States will need to return to basic good neighbor principles. Rather than relying on its power and ideas that have largely lost credibility in the hemisphere, she needs to let Latin Americans set their own policy agendas. Some new thinking is long overdue, but Hillary Clinton isn’t offering it.

Clinton fails to recognize that the United States must acknowledge that U.S.-Latin America relations are imperiled much more by U.S. arrogance and its misdirected “engagement” than by negligence or inaction in the face of imagined threats to U.S. interests. Moving forward, the foundation of improved relations and sustainable development in the Americas must be “mutual respect.”

If Clinton wants respect for U.S. foreign policy, then she will need to show more respect for our southern neighbors. As a start, Clinton should tell Latin Americans that she respects their right to decide for themselves what is needed to ensure “security and opportunity.”

Tom Barry is a senior analyst with the Americas Policy Program (www.americaspolicy.org) of the Center for International Policy

Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 20, 2007, 04:49:54 PM
yawn.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on November 23, 2007, 07:44:54 PM
Thursday November 22, 01:53 AM

U.S. presidential race tightens-Reuters poll

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. 2008 Democratic presidential race has tightened, with Barack Obama gaining on front-runner Hillary Clinton six weeks before the first contest, according to a national Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday.

Among Republicans, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani expanded his national lead over second-place rival Fred Thompson, the former senator and Hollywood actor, as voters begin to focus on the race for the White House.

"This race is just beginning, let alone all over," pollster John Zogby said.
 
 

Clinton led Obama 38 percent to 27 percent in the new poll, a 10-point fall from her 46 percent to 25 percent lead last month. The drop followed a month of attacks on the New York senator from her rivals and a heavily criticized performance in a late-October debate.

Former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina remained in third place, climbing four points to 13 percent. All other Democratic contenders scored in low single digits, including New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson at 4 percent.

About 14 percent of Democratic voters nationwide are still uncertain of their choice as the first contest approaches in Iowa, which kicks off the state-by-state battle to pick candidates for the November 4, 2008, presidential election.

The poll was similar to several other national and state surveys showing Obama, a first-term Illinois senator, gaining on Clinton, the senator from New York who has led most polls all year.

"Clinton had a bad couple of weeks and as a front-runner she's a target for everyone, she's treated almost as the incumbent," Zogby said.

The Reuters/Zogby poll was taken November 14-17, sandwiching the November 15 Democratic debate in Las Vegas, Nevada, where Clinton gave a stronger performance and fired back at her rivals.

In the Republican race, Giuliani widened his lead over Thompson to 14 points, 29 percent to 15 percent, compared to last month's 28 percent to 20 percent lead.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee jumped over former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney into third place. Huckabee had 11 percent, with Romney and Arizona Sen. John McCain at 9 percent.

A growing number of Republicans, 21 percent, said they have not made up their mind, leaving room for more changes in the field. The shifting numbers, after months of a relatively static race, could indicate voters around the country are beginning to pay attention to the 2008 race, Zogby said.

"There is a real fluidity to both races," he said.

Clinton led Obama by at least 20 points among voters age 35 and older. Obama's strength was with younger voters, leading Clinton by more than 30 points among voters between the ages of 18 and 34.

Obama, who would be the first black president, led by 14 points among black voters. Clinton, who would be the first woman president, led by 18 points among women. They were virtually tied among men.

Giuliani, who has taken heat from social conservatives for his support for abortion rights, led the Republican contenders among voters who described themselves as conservative with 28 percent. Thompson was second among conservatives with 13 percent.

Among those voters who described themselves as "very conservative," however, Thompson and Huckabee led Giuliani. Thompson drew support from 28 percent of those voters, with Huckabee at 22 percent and Giuliani at 19 percent.

The telephone poll surveyed 545 likely Democratic primary voters and 503 likely Republican primary voters, with a margin of error of plus or minus 4.3 percentage points for Democrats and 4.5 percentage points for Republicans.

(To read more about the U.S. political campaign, visit Reuters "Tales from the Trail: 2008" online at http://blogs.reuters.com/trail08/)

(Editing by David Wiessler)

Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 24, 2007, 04:48:44 AM
funny when republicans try pretend they democrats.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on November 24, 2007, 11:59:12 PM
Poll: Obama Takes Lead In Iowa
By Greg Sargent - November 19, 2007, 5:13PM
The new Washington Post/ABC News poll that Dems have been talking about today has finally been released -- and it finds that Obama has edged into a lead over Hillary in Iowa, though the race remains close.

Obama has 30% of likely voters, while Hillary has 26% and Edwards has 22%.

The poll shows that Obama has marginally increased his standing since WaPo's last Iowa poll in August, which found Obama at 27%, with Hillary and Edwards at 26%.

But various findings in today's poll suggest that rival criticism of Hillary might be working. Obama is ahead of her by 2-1 as the most honest and trustworthy candidate. And 55% say that "new ideas" is more important to them in a candidate, while 33% pick "strength and experience." Obama has argued that he's the race's true change agent, while Hillary counters that only she has the strength and experience to realize real change.

Key fact: Obama is running even with Hillary among Iowa women, 32%-31%.

Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on November 25, 2007, 12:28:34 AM







:




....hiliary gonna give slippery willy a public 'time out'



Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 25, 2007, 05:10:23 AM
whoever nominated going win.  and julie figure either abolish your job giving blowjobs at pentagon.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: El_Che on November 27, 2007, 04:11:12 PM
Um.....President Bush just said "they need to realize their aspirations IS key to them moving forward blah blahblah......seriously, is it 2008 yet? At least no matter which party wins, they'll have a grasp on the english language.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on November 27, 2007, 04:33:19 PM
yes, gump king of subject-verb disagreement.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on December 01, 2007, 07:18:55 PM
Um.....President Bush just said "they need to realize their aspirations IS key to them moving forward blah blahblah......seriously, is it 2008 yet? At least no matter which party wins, they'll have a grasp on the english language.


that really burns you doesn't it.

 :D :D :D :D

it is funnier than a president who gets b.j's. in the oval office...and then gets caught.

hey, get over it...bush served his purpose, now...so you SHOULD concentrate on 08...aye thought most democrats have been doing that for a few years.


hell...al queda will be glad to see bush gone as well...and that is a fact. ;)

Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on December 01, 2007, 07:21:29 PM
yes, gump king of subject-verb disagreement.

aye thought hanks did a better job in his tv hit: "bosom buddies".
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on December 03, 2007, 04:20:13 PM
you must found show quite arousing.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on December 06, 2007, 07:52:48 PM
Hillary in attack mode as Obama takes lead


By Alex Spillius in Washington
Last Updated: 2:59am GMT 06/12/2007



Hillary Clinton has moved into attack mode against her main rival Barack Obama after a poll put him ahead in Iowa, where the first caucus to decide the Democratic Party's presidential nominee is held in less than a month.

Full coverage: US election 2008
Speaking on the campaign trail in the Midwestern state, the former First Lady said "Now the fun part starts," before launching into a character assassination of Mr Obama, a first-term senator from Illinois.

   
Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have been resorting to personal attacks

 
"How did running for president become a qualification to be president?" she demanded. "This is not a job you can learn about from a book."

Mrs Clinton sneered at Mr Obama for dodging difficult votes on abortion and gun control when he was a state senator and mocked him for a lack of experience and over-reaching ambition.

"So you decide which makes more sense: entrust our country to someone who is ready on day one … or to put America in the hands of someone with little national or international experience, who started running for president the day he arrived in the US Senate," she told an audience in Clear Lake, Iowa.

The 46-year-old senator has previously suggested that Mrs Clinton feels she has a right to the presidency after eight years as First Lady and six as senator for New York, and claimed he only decided to run for the White House relatively recently.

The row between the two rivals reached its low point when the Clinton campaign issued a press release quoting an essay written by Mr Obama at the age of six at nursery school in Indonesia, entitled "I want to become president".

Phil Singer, a Clinton spokesman, said the essay proved his words were hollow. "Senator Obama's relatives and friends say he has been talking about running for president for at least the last 15 years. So who's not telling the truth, them or him?" he said.

With the battle for the 2008 nomination sliding towards open warfare, Mr Obama's campaign set up a website on Monday, Hillary Attacks, chronicling "baseless attacks" on his record and character and appealing for donations to strengthen the campaign. Mrs Clinton's advisers maintain that they are merely responding to weeks of personal criticism by Mr Obama and John Edwards, the third-placed contender, who have portrayed her as a dissembler and a centrist who not only voted for the Iraq war but refuses to apologise for doing so.

   

 
The former First Lady still tops national polls, but has seen a seven-point lead in Iowa eroded over the past two months.

Much of her appeal to voters has been the aura of "inevitability" around her well-disciplined campaign, which has been engendered by her experience, command of the issues and eloquence.

But many pundits think her lack of personal rapport with voters means her support is much wider than it is deep.

If that starts to slip, then an Obama win in Iowa could give him the momentum for victory in New Hampshire and other states that vote soon afterwards.

advertisement
Although Mr Obama's three-point lead in Iowa is below the margin of error, he is seen as the candidate with the momentum behind him, prompting Mrs Clinton to change course.

• George W Bush has said that he misses being on the campaign trail for the presidency apart from the respiratory infection he said he caught from a reporter covering his 2000 campaign.
 
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on December 07, 2007, 04:56:51 AM
oh, nightmares you must have.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on December 07, 2007, 09:29:37 PM
...well hiliary slip sliding away.... :-\


obama...richardson...kucinich ...thompson...huckabee...giul iani...romney: NOT WARMONGERS.

none of these guys voted for the war in iraq...one of them may be the new commander in chief...


while booing warmonger HILIARY is appropriate for you...none of the above voted for the war, either...so perhaps you should consider some of those who are NOT warmongers.


aye know how stoopid you are...so here list of some of WARMONGERS who voted to authorize continuation of operations in iraq...

john mccain
hillary clinton
joeseph biden
christopher dodd
john edwards

by your own word...you hate warmongers...if you blindly vote democrat...you could be voting for a WARMOMGER...

not you see how hypocritical you are??? :D :D :D

 




Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on December 08, 2007, 01:30:11 AM
Clinton slips against Republicans, Obama attacks by Stephen Collinson
Tue Nov 27, 11:56 AM ET
 


WASHINGTON (AFP) - A new poll Monday showed Hillary Clinton losing a general election to all potential Republican White House foes, in a new sign that fierce political attacks may be harming her 2008 campaign.

But the Democratic front-runner insisted she would win the party presidential nod, and warned she would take on her newly aggressive opponents head-on, just 38 days before Iowa's leadoff caucus nominating contests.

The Zogby International hypothetical 2008 matchup, reversing months of Clinton dominance over the Republican field, came as her camp battled in an ugly new spat with her top Democratic rival Barack Obama.

The Illinois senator meanwhile said chat show queen Oprah Winfrey would sprinkle showbiz stardust on his campaign in a three-state swing in December.

He also issued a sarcastic appraisal of Clinton's claims of top level political experience, during her eight years at husband Bill Clinton's side as first lady between 1993 and 2001.

"Senator Clinton is claiming basically the entire eight years of the Clinton presidency as her own, except for the stuff that didn't work out, in which case she says she has nothing to do with it," Obama said in an ABC News interview to be broadcast later Monday.

He compared conversations between the former president and his wife with his own talks with his own spouse.

"I don't think Michelle would claim that she is the best qualified person to be a United States senator by virtue of me talking to her on occasion about the work I've done."

The Clinton campaign hit back hard, driving home her argument that Obama would need "on the job training" in the White House.

"Considering that Senator Obama was a state senator just three years ago, he is the last person to be questioning anyone's experience," said Clinton spokesman Phil Singer.

"If he is elected, he would have less experience than any American president of the 20th century."

The Zogby poll reopened a simmering debate in the Democratic presidential field over which candidate has the best chance to beat a

Republican in the general election showdown in November 2008.

In hypothetical 2008 matchups, it showed Clinton trailed Senator John McCain 42 percent to 38 percent, ex-mayor of New York Rudolph Giuliani by 43 percent to 40 percent and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney 43 to 40 percent.

She also lagged behind former Arkansas Republican governor Mike Huckabee by 44 to 39 percent, and former Senator Fred Thompson by 44 to 40 percent.

Clinton's top Democratic challengers Obama and John Edwards however would still beat their hypothetical Republican rivals in potential 2008 contests, the poll showed.

In July, Clinton held a five point lead in the same poll over Giuliani, edged out McCain by two points and had a clear lead over other contenders.

A Rasmussen poll last week had Clinton also falling behind Giuliani in a November 2008 matchup and narrowly beaten by McCain.

An average of all previous similar polls however gives Clinton a narrow lead over possible Republican candidates, and the former first lady still leads most state and national polls.

An ABC News/Washington Post poll last week in Iowa however gave Obama the slimmest of leads over her and former vice presidential nominee John Edwards.

Clinton has repeatedly portrayed herself as the most electable Democrat after years standing up to what she calls the "Republican attack machine."

"I have absorbed a lot of attacks, my opponents have basically had a free reign," she told CBS News in an interview on Monday.

"After (being) attacked as often as I have from several of my opponents, you can't just absorb it, you have to respond."

Clinton also dismissed the idea that one of her rivals could deprive her of the Democratic nomination. "It will be me," she said.

The Zogby poll was conducted online among 9,150 likely voters across the United States between November 21 and 26, and carried a margin of error of plus or minus one percentage point.

Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on December 08, 2007, 05:06:15 AM
you so stupid, not know zogby online polls notoriously inaccurate.

but that never stop clinton-haters.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on December 09, 2007, 01:42:08 AM



...psssssssssssssssssssssssss ssss




the philadelphia plunder:

hillary's pillory can be traced to her philadelphia pander plunder.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on December 09, 2007, 04:14:16 AM
that sound air going out your fascist balloon.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on December 15, 2007, 12:07:23 AM
didn't hiliary vote for war...isn't she a warmonger?
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on December 20, 2007, 09:57:25 PM
wow...bluewarriors group got christmas card from hiliary, today...she thinks we are going to support her...guess again...funny politics.... :D :D :D
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on December 21, 2007, 06:38:37 AM
psssssssssssssssssssssssssss.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on December 22, 2007, 10:09:01 AM
putz.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on December 26, 2007, 03:48:46 AM
still keeping your drug-dealer hours, julie see.

julie guess that only way republicans can make money.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on December 26, 2007, 08:13:54 PM
:D :D :D :D...looks like you're right about hiliary's campaign.

psssssssssssssssssssssssssss.





'Calculating' Clinton gets friendly as Iowa fails to feel the love


Suzanne Goldenberg in Iowa and New Hampshire
Saturday December 22, 2007
The Guardian


Roger Tilton had been wrestling with his conscience for five months by the time he stood up on the gymnasium floor of a college in New Hampshire and confronted Hillary Clinton.
"I have two daughters and they both want me to vote for you as president," he began. His friends supported Clinton. "They say that you are warm and sincere and funny, smart, brilliant, intelligent." But Tilton, a financial adviser, was torn. "I like your programmes but there is still a disconnect for me, he said. "Sometimes I think you come on cold and politically calculating."


He added: "There is a disconnect."
Clinton's smile stayed fixed, but her jaw clenched slightly. "Well your two daughters sound very smart to me," she said. She ran through her CV and her standard complaint that she is judged far more harshly than others in the race for the White House. "I can't be anything other than what I am. I'll do the very best I can," Clinton said.

Tilton was unconvinced and in that exchange - a not untypical encounter for Clinton as she campaigns in New Hampshire and Iowa - lies the dilemma confronting many Democratic activists.

They respect Clinton's intellect. They admire her performance in the debates. They realise she has grown into a formidable candidate. But it is difficult for them to commit to a candidate who not only voted in favour of the war on Iraq in 2002, but has refused to express contrition, or any deep emotion, about that choice. The unease is deepened by Clinton's vote last September for designating Iran's Revolutionary Guards a terrorist entity.

That frustration with Clinton now threatens her chances of winning the Democratic nomination. With just 12 days to go before the Iowa caucuses on January 3 and the start of the primary season, Clinton has made a strategic shift in her campaign to try to persuade reluctant voters to like her and trust her.

It's a tough fight. Opinion polls in Iowa show Clinton in a dead heat with Barack Obama and John Edwards. Some Democratic county officials predict Clinton could be relegated to third place, a finish that could damage her in the New Hampshire primary five days later, and ultimately cost her the nomination.

The new Clinton, as revealed during the last week in Iowa and New Hampshire, is a very different woman than the cerebral creature who first hit the campaign trail. "It has moved much more towards a 'please like me' kind of pitch," said David Redlawsk, who teaches politics at the University of Iowa and is the director of its Hawkeye poll. "I think it's an effort to stem a perceived drop in support among women."

That's the public stage. Behind the scenes, campaign operatives have been waging a ruthless smear campaign against Obama and, to a lesser extent, Edwards. In recent days, Clinton aides have tried to raise doubts about Obama's overweening ambition (he wanted to be president when he in kindergarten); his character (he tried drugs when he was a teenager); his commitment to principle (in the Illinois senate he frequently voted "present" to avoid taking sides on an issue); and, within the past 24 hours, his knowledge of world affairs.

So far as the people of Iowa and New Hampshire are concerned, however, the campaign wants their eyes fixed on positive images of Clinton as daughter, mother, and friend.

In one campaign ad, Dorothy Rodham, 88, confides she would vote for Clinton even if she wasn't her daughter, saying "she has empathy for other people's unfortunate circumstances".

Other ads show Clinton sharing a joke with her daughter, Chelsea, and wrapping presents, such as universal healthcare, for voters: Clinton as Santa.

In election meetings, she is introduced by ordinary people offering up examples of everyday kindness - "the Hillary I know". Clinton is making herself more available for questions; she has gone canvassing door-to-door in a working-class neighbourhood of Manchester, New Hampshire.

All of this effort is aimed at winning back the women who have drifted from Clinton during the past six weeks. The most recent polls suggest that Obama has caught up to Clinton and eliminated her advantage among women voters.

Many defected for reasons like Tilton's - they just don't trust her. Anne Seltzer, an Iowa pollster, argues that women expect more candour from candidates. "There are questions of manipulation and secrecy and that is a real problem for women, who tend to be appreciative of frankness," she said.

Some women admit it was painful to realise they may not vote for Clinton. "I used to say to people that whenever a woman runs for president - even if it's Elizabeth Dole [who ran for the Republican nomination in 2000] - I used to say I've got to do it," said Laurie Moore, who works in the education department at Iowa State University. "I'm thinking more carefully about it now ... Maybe it's Hillary, and maybe it isn't but I don't think that just because she is a woman automatically warrants my support."

Clinton started her campaign last January with a nearly two-to-one advantage in support from women. She performed especially well among lower-income women, those without a college education, and women in their 50s and up.

The campaign moved to exploit that advantage. There were Moms for Hillary and block parties for Club 44 - another women's group patronised by Geraldine Ferraro, the Democratic vice-presidential candidate in 1984, and Madeleine Albright, the former secretary of state. For Iowans, there was the website yougogirl.com offering advice to newcomers about the caucus system, and the now requisite house parties.

Clinton also had what was presumed to be an invincible political machine. She had strategists, pollsters and field organisers whom she had known since her husband's run for the White House in 1992. In terms of presidential politics, this campaign is the fifth generation.

But the Clinton machine was not built for Iowa, where the state's lead in the primary calendar has produced a breed of voter that expects and demands personal attention. Bill Clinton bypassed the state in 1992 because Iowa senator Tom Harkin was running and the southern governor figured he had no chance against a local. Some on his wife's staff thought she should skip Iowa as well.

Instead, Clinton figured her best strategy was to campaign almost as if she was already the Democratic nominee. She played it safe, sticking to carefully controlled situations. Although Clinton made several trips to Iowa over the summer - including the state fair in August that has become a ritual for candidates - the campaign offered few opportunities for Iowans to really get to know her.

Clinton was happy to pose for photographs flipping pork chops on a grill, but she was just not available to Iowans for conversations about her political beliefs, or what she might do as president. In her election meetings, Clinton typically took three questions from the floor; Edwards averaged closer to 10. Clinton went for weeks at a time without holding a single press conference; some candidates hold three or four a day.

The campaign also initially failed to calibrate their message to voters who pride themselves on making informed decisions. Eileen Willingham, a Spanish translator in Iowa City, was turned off Clinton when she attended a house party for women voters in October.

"I found it anti-intellectual, frankly," she said. "It was all about how Hillary is a real person. She has a belly laugh. She is a person of faith - things I didn't care about. I wanted to know about issues. They wanted to tell me what a fabulous human being she was."

Even so, the approach appeared to be working until the end of October, when Clinton made her first stumble in a campaign debate, hedging a question on immigration. In early December, a poll in the Des Moines Register gave Obama a slight lead in Iowa for the first time.

Obama's advantage - the poll gave him 28% to Clinton's 25 and Edwards's 23 - was statistically insignificant, being within the margin of error. But it was predictive. Clinton's double-digit lead in New Hampshire vanished, and Obama began to gain on her in the other early-voting state of South Carolina.

She has 12 days left to come back. If she does, in Iowa and New Hampshire, it will be because of her retuned political machine, and because of women such as Barbara Dennett, a mother of six and a schoolteacher from Newton, New Hampshire. "I just so believe in her for what she is doing for social concerns in this country," Dennett said. "I just want her to be a little more like me - in the peace movement. I want her to give us every reason to vote for her."

Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on December 26, 2007, 08:52:13 PM
Some W.H. hopefuls skip reading key Iraq report
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A new biography's suggestion that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton didn't personally read a key intelligence report before her 2002 vote to authorize war in Iraq has raised eyebrows, but Clinton was not alone.

Clinton did not read the 90-page, classified National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, which summarized the reports of U.S. intelligence agencies, but was briefed on it several times, a spokesman told CNN.

The book, "Her Way: The Hopes and Ambitions of Hillary Rodham Clinton," is by Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta Jr. It is one of two upcoming biographies of Clinton, the former first lady turned New York senator.

She is one of four current and former Democratic senators now seeking the presidential nomination who voted for the October 2002 resolution that authorized President Bush to use force in Iraq, clearing the way for the invasion the following March. Two Republican senators who are now presidential hopefuls, John McCain of Arizona and Sam Brownback of Kansas, also voted in favor of the resolution.

Like Clinton, a spokesman for McCain told CNN his boss was briefed on the document "numerous times, and read the executive summary." A spokesman for Sen. Christopher Dodd said the Connecticut Democrat did not read the document, either.

Efforts to contact other lawmakers for comment were unsuccessful Monday.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on December 27, 2007, 09:36:24 AM
and, of course, that report--produced by gump administration--seriously incorrect.

only real question how much due incompetence rather than duplicity.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on December 28, 2007, 08:38:25 PM
"incompetence rather than duplicity??"  you are such a puzzy...just admit it...we all see it...people tell you all the time.


bullshite...you think people don't smell incompetence???  nobody is buying it, and you stink!  fernboy need bath. :D :D :D

nytimes just showed us clinton has no gut for details...she is sounding board...not interested in nitty gritty of policy making...

she has a bigtime padded resume...she is OLD POLITICO and fuching lazy...she puts on a minstrel show when she visits the south...she is a phony and thank god people are starting to realize it...you're going to get president romney, my man.


don't you know:

in your mind hillary clinton, john edwards, joe biden, and chris dodd did not vote in favor of the iraq resolution...

and that incompetence to you...but hiliary goes WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY beyond incompetence...nytimes has exposed her flawed resume...the first lady has no clothes.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on December 29, 2007, 08:26:53 AM
yes, yes:  george w. bush, scholar-president.

who buying that?
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on January 03, 2008, 11:34:48 PM
hiliary clinton's lies are catching up to her...she better start engaging ordinary folks and drop the secretive behaviour...or it is over...and with obama momentum...

just start calling her Hiliary Curtains


huckabee gets some bluewarrior invisible post support!!! aye bump him by just thinking about him...no post necessary... chuck norris also a big part of huck success. :D :D :D
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on January 11, 2008, 07:18:43 AM
how your boy huckleberry do in new hampshire, by way?

but least he kicked grandpa fred's heinie.

woo-hoo!
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: The Dude Abides on February 14, 2008, 07:44:36 PM
RIP - HRC. Change is in the air! The Latinos are fired up because you asked Patti to step down, black congressional leaders that once supported HRC are now wavering, even changing their minds, shocker. If she does not win Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas by substantial margins, she's toast. Plus, the Democrats cannot afford a repeat of the 1972 convention, in which George "the Biggest Loser" McGovern was nominated through backroom dealings. Surely the party wishes not for the nominee to be decided on the vote of some 800 superdelegates. Who would dare overturn the will of the citizenry after the debacle in 2004? How ironic if it came from the Democrats. Too bad the Republicans need Hillary to win because she has a record that has been thoroughly vetted unlike Obama. On a positive note, HRC promised no new scandals if she were elected to the White House. How refreshing to hear her utter such words. What's Billo doing?


By the way, have the two of you decided to meet in person yet?
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on February 24, 2008, 03:33:29 PM
...hrc is going down...

you are right...she bett
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on June 03, 2008, 10:16:07 PM
...a great torrent of work...but OBAMA did it!!!

hiliary is out...but not after seriously damaging democratic party's shot at the white house...

...a shame she couldn't have gotten out sooner.

now it will be another 8 yrs. before they can make a go at it. :-\

...thank god mccain is an independent!
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on June 04, 2008, 05:25:45 AM
go back your republican pimps.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on June 04, 2008, 07:37:48 PM
go back your republican pimps.

and you continue to not get it...
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on June 05, 2008, 12:44:27 PM
oh, julie get it.  and julie making it go away.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on June 05, 2008, 07:46:30 PM
u not get it...obama and aye have a great deal in common forensically speaking. ;)

...and mccain is an independent...in either case...with the "liary" out of the race...aye am happy. 8)
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on June 07, 2008, 10:28:55 AM
above see now? turd?
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on June 07, 2008, 10:56:16 AM
you have very, very little in common with bho.

better go check on your she-goat.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on June 11, 2008, 09:40:20 PM
h.r.c.........r.i.p.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on June 12, 2008, 04:19:33 AM
fu
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on June 13, 2008, 01:15:03 AM
h.r.c.........r.i.p.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on June 13, 2008, 03:19:14 AM
e.i.e.i.o.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on June 28, 2008, 11:00:48 PM
mission accomplished...


px.o.rsta 8)
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on June 29, 2008, 08:32:58 AM
but your mission not get caught by immigration.
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on June 29, 2008, 07:21:21 PM
yawn....
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on June 30, 2008, 05:02:53 AM
quickly:  hide in this dumpster!
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on July 02, 2008, 08:36:56 PM
...yawn...
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: Julie Fern on July 03, 2008, 04:43:04 AM
"what mean, social security number have more than six digits?"
Title: Re: ...Hilliary Rodham Clinton...the truth behind the L's.
Post by: ! B L U E WAR R I O R..! on July 26, 2008, 06:47:07 PM
hiliary done...broke...now if she would only campaign for obama...but she won't


px.o.rsta 8)

my work in regard to her failed presidential run is done she was exposed as the pathological liar, which we recognize now.{she was her own undoing to a point}...thanks to indigos and independents who helped keep her out.