Yes, but look at Dana Milbank's WaPo article today and it focuses almost exclusively on Sen. Obama's seven minutes. We heard that if Sen. Clinton did the same everyone would be jumping up and down in protest, but she did, and no one seems to have noticed.
Posted by RollaMO at September 12, 2007 08:19 AMSteve-
Please man, you will not solve the iraq problem by asking tough questions or pretend that you look tough. I am no fan of Hillary but she looked tired yesterday after coming back from the 911 anniversiry in NY, and she can't change the course of Iraq at these hearings.
Be reasonable, man. Democrats have one choice and one choice only: stop funding the war. will they do that? Will see.
Posted by john at September 12, 2007 08:37 AMThe reason it was pointless to ask the two men any questions early on because they just gave LONG-WINDED answers ...taking up a senator's time!...it was so obvious!
Hence the low-key BUT masterful set of fact based pointers made by a Senator on 9/11....and that stupid move-on ad....
As they say, while the repugs cannot win in 2008, it is very likely that dems will lose due to that move on stupidity..
As you see on the senate floor, now they have to deal with stupid amendments by cornyn etc about that ugly ad...when they should be doing other stuff...
yes...give them enough rope and the stupid extreme leftist will hang up themselves....
Posted by mp at September 12, 2007 08:45 AM
Such hearings do little to push forward a real debate in this country about Iraq...
We're still debating Iraq?
Let me help you; Iraq ain't coming to an end on Bush's watch. He will hand it over to Hillary to deal with in January, 2009.
The question is, will Hillary deliver on her rhetoric and end this mess after she's sworn into office or, will she stay the course?
Posted by Christopher at September 12, 2007 08:53 AMmp:
I never did like MoveOn and their tactics. I signed on when they opened for biz but more and more MoveOn looks like bunch of idiots. We can fight for our beliefs and all that but running stupid ads is not an option. Now Rethugs will try to link MoveOn to the dems in Congress.
Posted by john at September 12, 2007 09:02 AMVery understated but she laid it out pretty well.
Posted by Daryl at September 12, 2007 09:16 AMmp: "As they say, while the repugs cannot win in 2008, it is very likely that dems will lose due to that move on stupidity.."
put away your lace hankie, the overwhelming majority of Americans didn't even see the Move On ad, and who knows how many who did see it actually objected to it
Posted by Gay Veteran at September 12, 2007 09:21 AM"the public will never have the debate about Iraq and a way forward that our military men and women deserve." I don't want a "debate" about Iraq. I don't think that over 60% of the other citizens in the country want a "debate". What is there to debate? We invaded a country for no reason and now occuppy it, costing us thousands of US lives and Billions of US Dollars. That is plain enough, isn't it? Are we to debate whether invading and occupying country's at will is a sound US Policy or not. Are we to debate whether we should stay there and keep slaughtering Iraqis, killing GI's and blowing billions of dollars (mostly funnelled into no-bid contracts or sheik's pockets). Do we really need a "debate" to answer these questions? I doubt it. Now, if you'd like to debate the wisdom of electing self-serving blabbermouths like Lieberman, nuts like Cheney, and blowhard do nothings like many leading Democrats...I'll sign on for that.
Posted by T2 at September 12, 2007 09:32 AMIf you want a little history lesson Nixon was going to end the Viet Nam War when he ran in '68. We finally got out when Ford was president. You can't go by anything they say during the campaign especially Hillary who supported the occupation.
Posted by JohnT at September 12, 2007 09:40 AMgay vetern and john:
I hope you are right.....but let us agree that we do not need that type of behaviour from any group associated with the dems!
On an another note: Did anybody notice the "freudian" slip of tongue...by General petraeus during the foreign relations hearing...he sub-consciously referred to Iraq as "home"...."when I get back home....or rather Iraq...and stop in London"....
While I can overlook this slip, there is something that is worth stating. General Patreus is known to be something of a student of "lawrence of arabia"...Lawrence, the British commander/adventurist in his later days started considering iraq/mesopotamia as his home too!....
Posted by mp at September 12, 2007 09:44 AMI rather like Jon Robin Baitz"s Pack Up the Moon.. take on the MoveOn ad.
Posted by Marie at September 12, 2007 11:53 AMSteve, whatever. You saw her, right? I don't care what she said, exactly, it was how she said it -- cravenly using weasel words and photo ops, with a finger in the air to make sure that she was choosing to go with the political winds, and quietly to make sure no one heard her actually criticize the war. The Post piece was about how craven they ALL were. How you could draw out a positive about Sen. Clinton from that is beyond my ability to understand. C'mon, Steve, I think your regret over the endorsement maybe showing up thru rationalizations.
It's your site, of course. I like your site. I enjoy your site. I respect it. But this endorsement? I don't agree with it.
Posted by Brian Bell at September 13, 2007 04:05 AM