The Incremental Revolutionary
But Obama has his own adjustments to make. After his Iowa win, Obama thought he could ignore Team Clinton's challenges and stay above it all, sticking to his grand themes of hope and change. But in the aftermath of New Hampshire, he realized he was going to have to answer the Clinton campaign's charges. "Former president Clinton has continued to mischaracterize my record … and we're going to have to call him on it," he told National Public Radio. "You know, the press has already pointed out that he's wrong about this, but he keeps on repeating it." For better or worse, Barack Obama is starting to sound like a candidate for president.
With Sarah Kliff
© 2008
Loading Menu
Member Comments
Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 07/02/2008 8:21:46 PM
Comment: Nins: Why are you peddling BS trotted out by a pack of leftwinged rags? General James Simmons,not only did not cancel such a display,but produced it before reporters of several news services including CNN,NBC,Agence France Presse,REUTERS,the AP,ABC,and others on Nov.17,2007. Indeed,why would Iranian Supreme Council Member Ayatollah Khamenei agree that such arms were indeed,flowing to Iraq in his Nov.18,2007 meeting with Nuri al-Maliki of Iraq? You are presenting only half-truths with regards to Irans nuclear program. The IAEA not only acknowlages that Iran is making enriched uranium,but as late as last month,acknowlaged that Iran was ''only two years away from a nuclear weapon.Perhaps less.''[Remarks,Muhammed El-Baradei June 20,2008,AL-ARABIYA]. The IAEA recognizes that Iran now has plutonium,along with its acknowlagement that its large numbers of centerfuges ''could produce enough material for one bomb in six months to one year'',hence El-Baradeis newest worries. At this moment,Iran refuses to allow full inspections by the IAEA.
Posted By: Nins @ 07/02/2008 7:17:20 PM
Comment: Why did the US military cancel a news conference where they were going to display the "Iranian" weapons they found in Iraq? Because there WERE NO IRANIAN WEAPONS to display. Here are links supporting the fact that the weapons found in Iraq did not come from Iran:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_05/013695.php
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/05/fire_next_time.html
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2008/05/iraq-the-elusiv.html
NOT TO MENTION that the Untied States itself has had a notable role in arming the insurgency. When the US dissolved the Iraqi Army, that flooded Iraq with weapons. More recently the Pentagon admitted that it had lost track of a third of the weapons distributed to Iraqi security forces in 2004-05, totaling 190,000 assault rifles and pistols that are currently on the streets of Iraq. The British paper that published this article got it's information straight from the US Government Accounting Office's public website: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/pentagon-admits-190000-weapons-missing-in-iraq-460551.html
Ask yourself, why would America want to pretend that Iran is pushing weapons in Iraq, when actually WE (the USA) has flooded Iraq's streets with weapons? Because Bush wants to declare war on Iran, and just like the fake "WMDs" in Iraq, he needs something to frighten Americans, so he comes out with this BS about Iran killing US soldiers in Iraq. He has also said that Iran is making nuclear weapons, but recent inspections have found NO EVIDENCE of nuclear weapons in Iran. JUST LIKE how repeated inspections found NO EVIDENCE of WMDs in Iraq. The reports of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN inspectors and nuclear experts at the Institute for Strategic and International Studies (ISIS) all agree that Iran DOES NOT have nuclear weapons. The IAEA report states that Iran only has "low enriched uranium, not the highly-enriched uranium necessary to produce a bomb." The ISIS reports states "It is important to note that they do not encompass the full scope of work required for a comprehensive nuclear weapons program. Missing is theoretical work on nuclear weapons, uranium metallurgy, and the development of a neutron initiator." http://www.yirmeyahureview.com/articles/2008/iaea_report_on_iran.htm#_ftn9
In case you think the idea that Bush wants to bomb Iran is reactionary, you should know that John Bolton, former US Ambassador to the UN, recently told FoxNews that he can "definitely envision Bush bombing Iran before he leaves office." By bombing Iran, Bush makes it more likely McCain will be elected. But can the US Treasury, can the US economy stand more war? Even if we could afford it, we don't have the manpower in uniform. You know what that means: draft and conscription. Vote for McCain. Watch your children come home in body bags. Watch America go into a Great Depression.
Posted By: dking312 @ 07/02/2008 2:26:23 AM
Comment: You goofy silly, folks who still act and look like dinosaurs in our space age.
You people who can't get off of that.