.... any candidate's race or skin color, or such. But what the hell is so great about Hillary? In what way is she better than Edwards? If there are 100 "product advantages," I think she would be lucky to be stronger on two of them. Just my opinion.
.... will try to "overlook" any possible scandal involving Clinton. I am convinced that the big media likes her, maybe because they think she might continue the occupation. Maybe war sells newspapers. But am am not yet convinced that this is a big-time scandal. It might be merely a smallish blemish. I will have to watch the 'net news closely for more on this one.
I gave you a zero, since you said zero's don't matter. Found I couldn't change it back to "None", so I gave a "2". Zeros do matter. I hate to give zeros. Sometimes obnoxiousness rates a zero, I guess. But It is not very good to throw them around, since people here invest a lot of effort to write up all this stuff.
Many people are still perplexed by exactly what moved Bush-Cheney to invade and occupy Iraq. In the 27 September issue of the New York Review of Books, Thomas Powers, one of the most astute watchers of the intelligence world, admitted to a degree of bafflement. `What's particularly odd,' he wrote, `is that there seems to be no sophisticated, professional, insiders' version of the thinking that drove events.' Alan Greenspan, in his just published memoir, is clearer on the matter. `I am saddened,' he writes, `that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil.'
While Hennessy, Matson, Friedman and Bryson discussed green technology, the subject of America's operations in Iraq was also a hotly debated topic. Abizaid, who was formerly the Commander of the United States Central Command, quickly established a connection between the two topics.
"Of course it's about oil, we can't really deny that," Abizaid said of the Iraq campaign early on in the talk.
It is a devastating epiphany to understand that the U.K. has essentially forsaken its share of the Iraqi Oil booty by pulling out of the occupation! There can be only the conclusion that the entire blood-for-Oil game has been totally lost. And the Brits and MI6 are not exactly asleep at the switch.
Gore has a huge climate change campaign. Bur Edwards is pushing for a wide range of crucial social issues that no one else is really addressing. The climate change issues will be dealt with no matter who wins, since there is no alternative. The social problems may never get adequate treatment if we don't get Edwards. Really, I have become disturbed about the way candidates other than Edwards act as if the issues of social injustice are not very significant.
Who, other than Edwards (or Kucinich) will really work hard to address our crucial social issues?
... are almost systematically zeroing the comments of non-Clinton supporters on some entries. This is beginning to really make me hate Hillary! You can zero this, but I've been here for well over two years, so I probably won't just go away.