In opposition to dumb wars

The fact that Barack Obama was opposed to the Iraq invasion from the start (back when many Democrats were giving Bush the authority to invade) was a major reason that I was first attracted to his campaign. I just came across this speech he gave in October 2002 at a rally to stop the invasion.

The best line he gives: "I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars."

And then there's this paragraph:

"You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, through an energy policy that doesn’t simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.

Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair.

The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not – we will not – travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain."

If you want to dig deeper in comparing the foreign policy future of this country under Obama or Clinton, just look at who is advising them now on foreign policy.


Substance please...

Yes, millions of Americans knew that the sudden change in direction to Iraq was phony and "dumb". And we didn't have access to the state dept or intelligence. I still haven't made up my mind between HRC and Obama, mainly because it's pretty foggy when you try to really see what their positions are. Obana makes a big point about how he's against the lobbyists, but meantime he has over 140 million? Let's do some basic math. He said he has mostly small donors. Well if one million gave $25, that's only 25 million. He doesn't have a million donors, so that tells you there is another $100+ million from somebody who is pumping 'big' money into his campaign. Are they just being charitable? No, I believe they have IOUs to be paid later. I do know what I'm going to get with Hillary, from being in the public eye for so long a time. But she owes big time also. The political blogs are saturated with these 'spin' postings. Too bad we can't get some real substance. When the ge comes, I'll vote for one of them, but not feeling good about it.

The War

I think truthfully there aren't a lot of differences in substance between Obama and Clinton. One of the clear issues that IS substantial was the war support by Hillary and the opposition by Obama.

Remeber that in October 2002 public opinion was overwhelmingly still behind the White House in the post 9/11 era - including on Iraq. Too many Democrats were timid and went along with the administration's war plans for fear of being called soft on terrorism.

Obama did not even though he was preparing for a run for the U.S. Senate.

Open Secrets is a good place to look for some of those answers.

Here is Obama's page, with numbers as of 12/31/2007. Here is Clinton's page, with numbers as of the same date. It appears that Hillary has taken a LOT more money from PACS and that most of Barack's money has come from individuals, just as the Obama campaign has claimed. Personally - that alone would make me lean toward Obama.

Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

As a Democrat, I'm thrilled to

be having a hard time making a choice between these two. Either one is the antidote to Bush and a huge new precedent waiting to be set in electing a woman or an African-American. That's exciting!

I wouldn't fault them too much on the fund raising issue...this is after all the lousy path we all have to go to pay for these obscenely expensive campaigns at this point if we want to be "electable"...if it weren't...I'd be voting for John Edwards.

This has become, for me, a really weird election.

On the Republican side we have a man who, by all reasonable measure and personal suffering, ought to be opposed to continuing an ill-concieved war. We also have a Republican bass-playing populist who is also a bit of a religious nutcase. I think of him as a snake with wings...really odd. They both scare the heck out of me.

On the Democratic side we have a woman who appears to have a good handle on many of our difficult problems but that few trust to do what she says...and whose previous years in the White House were marked by scandal of all sorts...and where she gained a reputation for being a real bitch in private.

Then there's obviously intelligent man with great oratorical skills...whose past is truly largely unknown to us...and whose singular claim to fame is his opposition to the Iraq war...befuddled by his continued support for spending to keep the war going. And, while his web-site talks about his position on items of interest, his speeched focus on hope and change without much concrete indication of exactly what change he hopes to bring about and how.

Soo...I'm in a really low spot now. I'll vote for whoever wins the nomination, but without much enthusiasm.

Stan Bozarth

'bout that BITCH accusation

I've heard all kinds of politicians being accused of having bad tempers, but for some reason, it's a crime with added marks when the politician is female.

I personally don't give a rat's ass if a politician has a bad temper in private.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing
-Edmund Burke

I suppose most of you can imagine how many times

I've been called a "BITCH". I kind of wear it as a badge of honor, and I have a feeling, Brunette, that you do, too. Somewhere I have a mug that says "B.I.T.C.H. - Babe In Total Control of Herself."

Strong women with strong opinions always get called that. Always. Always. Always. It's to the point now that when someone calls me that, I want to say, "yeah, what else ya got?"

Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Calling all Beeotches ~

I can call my friends "bitches," and my friends can call me "bitches," but it's kind of like the "n" word with African Americans. It DOES matter who is wielding the word.

I get a big kick out of the "angry grrl" handle, and know 'zactly what you mean about the 'tudes you encounter.

Angry grrl, you need to join me and Linda at a bar someday. You know we'd have a joyous bitch-fest. Betsy, you come on too.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing
-Edmund Burke


Angry grrl, you need to join me and Linda at a bar someday. You know we'd have a joyous bitch-fest.

I'd love to! And any other BlueNC women with 'tude are welcome as well. :)

But seriously, back to the bitch/anger thing -- seems like part of the problem is being raised Southern. A proper Southern woman will take a lot of crap from someone before finally exploding. We're raised to always be polite, so essentially, we'll be polite to you right up to the point that we're mad enough to kill you, then BLAM.

I'm pretty danged Southern

I know my mother was reared in whole "lady" business. Despite my birth and life-long residence in the South, I never bought into the idea of being polite until I was pushed to anger. People tend to know where I'm coming from sooner rather than later in a conversation. Of course, in my book, it's more civil to let a person who steps in mud know what you're thinking early on than it is to mask it until the person is neck-deep in quicksand. (WHICH IS WHY, SAM, I'm TELLING YA, don't go using the "B" word if ya ain't in the club -- and no, ya ain't in the club.)

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing
-Edmund Burke

The definition of bitch

has nothing to do with anger/temper...per Webster it means "malicious, spiteful and domineering woman" and I don't use the word frequently because I don't know many people...male or female, that fall into the malicious, spiteful and domineering category...or have a reputation for such.

Everyone can have a bout of bad temper...

Stan Bozarth

I don't think any definition . . .

. . . is going to change the way the use of the word is perceived.

I think it's probably smarter for guys to stay away from using the word.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing
-Edmund Burke

Definition and connotation

are two different things.

Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Advice taken...


Stan Bozarth