I didn't realize Elizabeth Warren was so pro-military. Did you guys?

[Cali_Democrat]

Another DUer mentioned that she recently helped to prevent the Pentagon from canceling an unneeded battlefield communications program. She wanted to preserve jobs at a defense company in Massachussettes:

http://www.warren.senate.gov/?p=news&id=227

She also voted for the defense authorization act which authorized well over $600 billion for defense:

http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/113/senate/1/284

Also, all her brothers have served in the military.

I didn't know this.

She also opposes the legalization of marijuana.

http://senate.ontheissues.org/Senate/Elizabeth_Warren.htm

[blkmusclmachine]

1. Hmm.

[yeoman6987]

36. I am pro-military

I am very pro-military. What I am not is pro-Military Complex. You can support the military and still want to see it cut down to a reasonable level. The military is in the constitution so we will always have one. However, the fat cat companies that lobby Congress on military issues need to go.

[Adrahil]

42. Yes!

The defense of our country is vital. And a strong military is extremely important. BUT... we spend way too much on military adventurism, foreign bases, we have a broken procurement system, and reply way too much on contractors. IMO, a great deal of that could be cut and directed to NASA and research science grants.

There is an anti-military strain in progressive circles which is misplaced and I'll-advised.

[Squinch]

45. ^^^^This. The article that is cited as showing her to be "pro military" is

one about her touring a plant that makes a communications system that the military will use. That type of thing is not the problem.

[pangaia]

55. What does 'pro-military' mean to you?

[yeoman6987]

61. Great question

Pro-military to me (and only my opinion) is to support the 18-year old "grunt" that goes out and does what he or she is told. It is all about the troops for me. The huge military complex has nothing to do with those that join and supports the United States. That is pretty much bottom line for me. I want to get rid of the over bloated contractor and businesses of the military.

[pangaia]

63. Looks like we are in agreement.

I would also prefer to shrink the military by A LOT.. really A LOT.
I could go on and on about that but.
Thanks for responding.

[yeoman6987]

64. Thank you and have a great weekend!!

I do not have a problem with the military being cut by a lot either.

[cthulu2016]

2. concern noted, thanked for, etc.. n/t

[Cali_Democrat]

3. Your thoughts on her policy positions? nt

[Cha]

4. Senator Warren is Perfect, CaliDem.. leave her alone...

It's only President Obama who must be slammed. Forget putting any blame for anything on repbublicons-teabaggers. The President carries everything on his back.

Thanks Obama.

Do not get me wrong.. I love Senator Warren and the President.




Coyotl http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4453623

[Cali_Democrat]

5. I'm with you, Cha. I like both Warren and Obama.

There does appear to be a double standard, especially among folks who try to use Warren to attack Obama.

[Cha]

7. "Double Standard"?! When it comes to the President?!!!!

surely you jest? rolf

".. especially among folks who try to use Warren to attack Obama." Yeah, the divisive bullshit is getting way beyond old.. and it's not going to fly during the 2014 campaign season whenever the heck that is official.

I appreciate your calling out the blatant double standard, Cali. I don't think Senator Warren would approve of being used this way. Call me crazy.

[delrem]

6. Oh dear, 3rd-way has finally learned how to be subtle.

That will surely change things.
Myself, I've always believed that Elizabeth Warren was a Buddhist pacifist who spent at least two hours in meditation on the lives of each fly she accidentally killed. So I'm totally aghast at your news! Aghast, I say!

[Cali_Democrat]

8. I myself would consider Warren to be pragmatic

Her voting record in the Senate indicates this. She also voted for the recent budget compromise. She's practical and that doesn't indicate that she's a member of third way.

That's just silly.

[delrem]

12. Well, as unsubtle as it might seem, for some ....,

no, I never suggested that Elizabeth Warren was a member of third way.

[Cali_Democrat]

13. The budget was actually a straightforward compromise

Sure it funded the government at basically sequestration levels, but it also dealt a blow to Republican efforts to take hostages.

Sometimes you have to compromise in order to move legislation forward and govern. Warren understands this and that's why she's a good Senator.

Government is about governing.

[delrem]

18. What's your point?

[pangaia]

58. humm.. why do you ridicule Buddhists?

And what school of Buddhists in particular?

[delrem]

88. Why did I mention Buddhists?

Easy: because I wanted to set myself up for your ridiculous cross-examination.

[pangaia]

93. Oh. I see.

[SomethingFishy]

9. Wow, nope, I had no idea...

I guess we should take her out back and shoot her.

[RobertEarl]

10. Her economic stand is head and shoulders above

Deal with it.

[Cali_Democrat]

14. I feel military spending and economic issues go hand in hand

It's hard to ignore the fact that so many Americans are struggling while we spend hundreds of billions on defense. It just doesn't seem right.

[delrem]

19. Well, they do in the US, Cali_Democrat.

It's about all that the US has left.

[unhappycamper]

65. Yup:

[JDPriestly]

11. Most of our legislators agree with her.

At least she did not vote for the War in Iraq as did so many of our other Democratic senators. And don't tell me that they weren't voting for the War in Iraq. I saw a video with Hillary speaking ot members of Code Pink some of whom had been to Iraq and warned her about what that war would mean. Hillary was rude to them. I know sometimes Code Pink can be very rude, but they were not rude on the video I saw of them talking to Hillary about staying out of the Iraq War.

Elizabeth Warren is just on the same page as most of the rest of the legislature on this.

[Cali_Democrat]

15. Hillary essentially lost the nom because of that vote

It really dealt a blow to her chances in 2008 and it will continue to haunt her if she chooses to run again.

[Victor_c3]

17. I could overlook that vote for Iraq if she actually admitted her mistake and showed remorse

Hillary basically said "I have nothing to be sorry for" when she was asked about her vote on the war on Iraq during the 2008 election cycle.

Really? Hillary Clinton has nothing to be sorry for? How about her part the deaths of roughly 5,000 American Soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians for a war that was based on lies and had nothing to do with our national defense?

As a disabled veteran that was produced by that war, I take her comments very personally.

[Sunlei]

39. I agree with you.In 2008 the republican machine used that 'vote' to make Obama rise to the top

I don't think republicans expected Obama to be so darn good & Mrs. Clinton (once she lost primary) to continue to work with Obama. And palin to be so horrible. If they ran someone like C. Powell instead of Palin and cheated for a couple percent votes more, Rs could have won.

[MADem]

21. How could she?

It's easy to not vote for something when you aren't sitting in Congress.

[JDPriestly]

49. Some Democrats found that courage and wisdom.

Hillary did not although the Code Pink women begged her based on their information from a visit to Iraq.

She showed very, very poor judgment with that vote. And she has never admitted how wrong she was.

In the Senate, the 21 Democrats, one Republican and one Independent who courageously voted their consciences in 2002 against the War in Iraq were:

* Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii)
* Jeff Bingaman (D-New Mexico)
* Barbara Boxer (D-California)
* Robert Byrd (D-West Virginia)
* Lincoln Chaffee (R-Rhode Island)
* Kent Conrad (D-North Dakota)
* Jon Corzine (D-New Jersey)
* Mark Dayton (D-Minnesota)
* Dick Durbin (D-Illinois)
* Russ Feingold (D-Wisconsin)
* Bob Graham (D-Florida)
* Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii)
* Jim Jeffords (I-Vermont)
* Ted Kennedy (D-Massachusetts)
* Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont)
* Carl Levin (D-Michigan)
* Barbara Mikulski (D-Maryland)
* Patty Murray (D-Washington)
* Jack Reed (D-Rhode Island)
* Paul Sarbanes (D-Maryland)
* Debbie Stabenow (D-Michigan)
* The late Paul Wellstone (D-Minnesota)
* Ron Wyden (D-Oregon)

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Six House Republicans and one independent joined 126 Democratic members of the House of Re[resentatives in voting NAY, on October 11, 2002, to the unprovoked use of force against Iraq:

Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii) Tom Allen (D-Maine) Joe Baca (D-California) Brian Baird (D-Washington) John Baldacci (D-Maine, now governor of Maine) Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisconsin) Gresham Barrett (R-South Carolina) Xavier Becerra (D-California) Earl Blumenauer (D-Oregon) David Bonior (D-Michigan, retired from office) Robert Brady (D-Pennsylvania) Corinne Brown (D-Florida) Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)

Lois Capps (D-California) Michael Capuano (D-Massachusetts) Benjamin Cardin (D-Maryland) Julia Carson (D-Indiana) William Clay, Jr. (D-Missouri) Eva Clayton (D-North Carolina, retired from office) James Clyburn (D-South Carolina) Gary Condit (D-California, retired from office) John Conyers, Jr. (D-Michigan) Jerry Costello (D-Illinois) William Coyne (D-Pennsylvania, retired from office) Elijah Cummings (D-Maryland)

Susan Davis (D-California) Danny Davis (D-Illinois) Peter DeFazio (D-Oregon) Diana DeGette (D-Colorado) Bill Delahunt (D-Massachusetts) Rosa DeLauro (D-Connecticut) John Dingell (D-Michigan) Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) Mike Doyle (D-Pennsylvania) John Duncan, Jr. (R-Tennessee)

Anna Eshoo (D-California) Lane Evans (D-Illinois) Sam Farr (D-California) Chaka Fattah (D-Pennsylvania) Bob Filner (D-California) Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts) Charles Gonzalez (D-Texas) Luis Gutierrez (D-Illinois)

Alice Hastings (D-Florida) Earl Hilliard (D-Alabama, retired from office) Maurice Hinchey (D-New York) Ruben Hinojosa (D-Texas) Rush Holt (D-New Jersey) Mike Honda (D-California) Darlene Hooley (D-Oregon) John Hostettler (R-Indiana) Amo Houghton (R-New York, retired from office) Jay Inslee (D-Washington) . . . .

http://usliberals.about.com/od/liberalleadership/a/IraqNayVote.htm

[MADem]

53. And so she will remain forever unforgiven.

That's an old list--there are a shitload of dead people (Byrd, Kennedy, Inoye) on it, but only one (Wellstone) gets "the late" in front of his name.

Time to get some new material. The perpetual outrage machine is winding down on that score.

[PowerToThePeople]

60. No it is not.

The perpetual outrage machine is winding down on that score.

We will never forget. That is what brought most of us here.

[MADem]

71. What brought most of us here was a stolen election.

A guy named Gore got ripped off by a guy named Bush.

[PowerToThePeople]

79. mmm

Your handle is not that old. A few months older than mine. I was certainly lurking and reading the board at that time, just had not signed up to post yet.

This was well beyond the stolen election stage and well into the illegal war stage of the lost decade.

[MADem]

80. I signed up from my workplace days after this site went live.

Always stayed signed in. Forgot my password and lost access to my email account. I wrote to Skinner, explained my predicament, and he allowed me to begin again with a new account. I don't even remember my old user name.

I remember DU1 well, though I didn't post much.

But I remember what brought me here, and what brought most people here. It had to do with a guy in cowboy boots who was born in CT but pretended to be from TX.

[PowerToThePeople]

83. ok.

There are probably many different "generations" of DUers here.

I think I heard about DU listening to Air America Radio. I checked it out and loved it.

[JDPriestly]

68. If that were Hillary Clinton's only huge mistake, she would be forgiven.

But someone who gets paid $400,000 in a week for giving speeches to bankers is not someone who is on the side of the foreclosed and forgotten. And for that Hillary will pay.

Think of it. What is she saying to the bankers in her speeches and on the receiving line? Do you not expect someone with a cell phone to tape her comments and then put them on YouTube should she be nominated?

Not even Hillary Clinton can serve both working Democrats and grabbing bankers. It's just impossible. You can't serve two masters as I believe i recall that a very wise man said.

I will leave eit at that. Hillary cannot serve two masters. She is either on the side of the Walton Family or on the side of the Walmart workers who need a big raise. She cannot straddle that one. No one could. Sooner or later, Hillary has to decide what side she is on.

[MADem]

70. Now you begrudge her the fee people are willing to pay to hear her speak...?

If she were male her fee would probably be a hundred grand more.

I think you're recycling tired old right wing talking points, that are so old they're pathetic. You're embarrassing yourself at this point. You have to flail all the way back to when she was the most junior member of Sam Walton's board (and she convinced him to build one of the first environmentally responsible "big box" stores in the nation...but never mind that, it doesn't fit your narrative).

She was an outstanding SECSTATE; she'll make a superb President, and she'll be on the side of We, The People.

[JDPriestly]

72. She was an excellent Secretary of State, but Kerry is even better.

My talking point is far form right-wing. I am criticizing Hillary Clinton because she is soft on big business. The major problem in our country today, the reason that ordinary Americans are so deeply in debt is the disparity in wealth.

Obama and the Clintons have embraced "free" world trade without changing the tax code and other laws to insure that the big bonuses made by companies that import cheap goods from overseas and sell them at high cost here in the US and in other developed nations would go in a balanced and fair way to all Americans and not just to those profiting directly from that trade. Until the country finds economic equilibrium, we should not be entering into trade agreements.

I note that Hillary is talking a lot to bankers but not so much to rank-and-file grass-roots Democrats. That is a very interesting fact. She is accumulating a huge war chest. I know that the stalwarts of the Democratic Party are bowled over by her fundraising capacity. But what we don't know is what she is offering in exchange for those large donations. Normally, you don't get something for nothing when you deal with corporate leaders. We shall see what kinds of deals she has made. Because you don't get $400,000 in donations in one week from bankers for standing up for higher wages, more infrastructure investment, more money toward public schools and more income equality.

[MADem]

74. Her "huge war chest" is coming from small, individual donations.

Don't let facts get in the way of your narrative, though.

That outrage just has to be stoked, I guess.

https://www.readyforhillary.com/

[JDPriestly]

94. The point is to get the best candidate and to make sure that candidate can and will win.

I really think we should be looking at alternatives other than Hillary Clinton.

Elizabeth Warren is my favorite, but there are other possibilities. The Republicans are no doubt hoping for a Clinton run. They will revive every cockamamie conspiracy theory they have on her. Do we really want to go have to fight those battles?

She has a past. Like it or not that past has all kinds of negative memories associated with it.

I've seen lots of polls showing Democrats will support Hillary Clinton. But can she draw that rare Republican thinking of a change? And how is her appeal with independent voters who tend to watch the tabloids for their news?

I think a fresh-faced Wall Street reformer who is capable of dealing with the economic challenges that we now face is a better bet.

[MADem]

95. We have a difference of opinion as to who the best candidate is.

EW is not running. The swooning fans will just have to hold their horses. She has pledged to serve out her term, which ends in 2018. Those of us in MA who appreciate her service are grateful. If she is to do "good" vis a vis Wall Street, the Presidency isn't the place to do that. Fed Chair, OTOH, is where she could make change--and a Democrat like HRC could put her there.

Anyone with experience "has a past." No record, no past, no track record--all that means no knowledge of how the candidate will perform when the shit hits the fan.

As for HRC, it's not big money, it's small money that is going to pull her out and bring her home.

[Walk away]

78. Didn't Biden also vote "yes" in 2002? No one ever seems to bring that up.

Oh, I forgot! He's not Hillary.

[MADem]

97. You got it in ONE!

Well done, you!

Some people are more easily forgiven than others.

[treestar]

56. But most of our hair on fire left does not

and if they do not throw her under the bus for this, they just prove they are using her to support their ODS. No double standards here.

[former9thward]

84. "At least she did not vote for the War in Iraq "

She was not in Congress to vote on it yes or no.

[Victor_c3]

16. I realize that this is something that I'm probably overly sensitive to, but I don't like the term

"pro-military" being used to describe anyone for voting to spend money frivolously on military programs and who has family who has served in the military.

As a veteran, I'd consider myself to be very pro-military. It certainly doesn't mean that I'd send troops into wars that have nothing to do with our actual defense and it also doesn't mean that I'd vote to waste money on military programs that we don't need.

A different term needs to be come up with that doesn't make it so easy for people to point to the left and say "See there! They hate America!!".

And since when did the fact that a politician has direct family members in the military become a thing to scorn? If anything, that would make them look at potential military action a little more carefully before committing troops to a fight. I would argue that the willingness of the America public to send our troops so willingly into Iraq was precisely because so few people actually have skin in the game. Had more politicians actually had sons and daughters in the military in positions where they would actually see combat, I bet that Iraq would have never happened.

[delrem]

23. The word is "hawk", meaning "pro war".

The other issue is a MIC that badly needs to be reigned in, regulated by auditors whose goal is transparency in working for the national well being.

But there's a crazy situation in the US where continuous war is coupled with continuous MIC contracts to supply weaponry to proxy/puppet/dictatorships - esp. now the ME where US backed dictators spend their nation's oil wealth to buy US arms and protection. A situation which *requires* a state of continuous war, terror, and fear, which *requires* the destruction of countries along sectarian lines so the wars are sectarian and have no conclusion.... It's a pretty fucking awful thing that the US MIC is orchestrating, and has been orchestrating for decades. Fixing it will require an entire restructuring of the US economy - and that won't happen willingly. In fact the opposite is happening as US war is increasingly privatized (like the US prison system, etc.) and the war dependent corporations are increasingly powerful, pulling more of the strings and determining more of the future of US warfare. A thing that people rarely talk about is how the privatization of war, which is concluding an accelerated trajectory in the US, means that issues of war are increasingly out of hand.

[tblue37]

54. When the only jobs available in a district are provided by defenss contracts

or private prison companies, the a senator or representative who wants to have a chance of being elected must vote to keep those jobs.

If the GOP would let a jobs bill through that focused on building or repairing infrastructure (much needed in this country) then people could find jobs that didn't require shoveling endless amounts of money to the MIC and maintaining a state of perpetual war or to prison companies and imprisoning more and more people.

[delrem]

89. Why does the GOP have absolute control?

[MADem]

20. Why is this a matter of "concern?" You do know that Democrats serve in the military, don't you?

In fact, the hostile attitude of a very small minority of people on the left gives the Democratic Party a bad rep on this issue. A lot of us who have been lifelong Democrats have served, and there's nothing wrong with it.

John Kerry served in the military--is he evil? How about Tammy Duckworth? Is she to be excoriated as well?

John Kennedy served. Shall we throw his memory under the bus?

Al Gore served. So did Max Cleland and Daniel Inoye and Frank Lautenberg.

Charlie Rangel. Ed Markey. Jack Reed. Jim McDermott. Tulsi Gabbard. John Conyers. Tom Harkin....are these "bad" Dems?

As for EW, the bottom line is this: All Politics is Local. And weed in MA is decriminalized already. If the citizenry ever gets round to voting on a legalization referendum, she's not going to do a wet hen and object on a federal level, regardless of her stated position.

Adults can change their minds. Adults can compromise. Adults can look at a situation and say "What's my job, here?"

EW is an adult, and EW's job is to represent US--and by "US" I mean people like me, who reside in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. She's OUR Senator--we put her in the gig, and she serves US.

Which is what more senators should do!

[delrem]

24. ..."on the left". bullshit bullshit bullshit leftist baiting phrasing.

[MADem]

25. Spare me your faux outrage, and do try READING contextually.

So eager you were to cry Bullshit that you missed this bit:

....very small minority of people.....

Reading is fundamental. Now have a nice day.

[delrem]

26. I didn't a miss a bloody thing.

[MADem]

35. Yes, you did. nt

[Sunlei]

41. you're so right about Mrs. Warren. Some politicans listen to 'the people' at the local level....

Even the big dogs, President Obama and VP Biden listen to the little people. Takes a lot of communications, calls, emails, petitions. They listen to reason, they help, they get the issue in bills & passed. They do not run to the press and toot their horns over the hundreds of smaller good things they do for 'the people'. Forever grateful to the 'big dogs' who listened and made things better.

[NBachers]

22. OK, Cali_Democrat, that does it! Elizabeth Warren is OFF MY LIST! DO YOU UNDERSTAND ME?

OFF MY LIST!

[madrchsod]

27. she`s not running for president is she.

she votes like any other senator that wants to protect their state`s economy. so what if her brothers served in the military? i have family members that have.

can`t you come up with something better than this?

[CFLDem]

28. And this is why she will make a great VP

for President Hillary.

Wow, just writing that gives me a thrill up my leg.

[delrem]

29. You figure she'll give HRC and the third-way cover?

[CFLDem]

30. She's doing an excellent job now. nt

[delrem]

31. Who? Third-way HRC?

[CFLDem]

32. No Warren.

Publicly she's a good balance for HRC by seemingly pulling the administration to the left, but in reality I think she would be a great enabler.

If she plays the game this well now, she should be a shoo-in for the WH. Almost reminds me of a young BO. 😂

[delrem]

34. Well, aren't you a peppy one!

Truly delightful, you are.

[Adrahil]

46. I'd personally love to see that. Nt

[Cha]

33. "Opposes Legalization of Marijuana"!! Say it ain't so!

that's it... she's off my list.

"•Opposes the outright legalization of marijuana. (Apr 2012)"

She supports Medical Marijuana..

Warren backs medical marijuana ‘with the right restrictions’

"Massachusetts Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren (D) said Monday that she favors legalizing medical marijuana, provided the law has “the right restrictions” to prevent people who aren’t actually sick from getting the drug."

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/09/24/warren-backs-medical-marijuana-with-the-right-restrictions/

We've come a long way since Dean blocked a medical marijuana bill as governor of Vermont..

"C. "Last year, Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean blocked a medical marijuana bill from becoming law when he was governor of Vermont. The bill would have protected seriously ill patients from arrest if they are using medical marijuana with the approval of their doctors. Knowing this about Howard Dean, are you much more likely, somewhat more likely, somewhat less likely, or much less likely to vote for him in the Jan. primary election, or would it make no difference?"[/]

http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.additional-resource.php?resourceID=000149

"On October 5, 2003, the day after the Great Midwest Marijuana Harvest Festival in Madison Wisconsin, me and my friend, New Jersey medical marijuana activist Jim Miller, husband of the late Cheryl Miller, an MS patient who passed away in June 2003, 32 years after diagnosis, attended a large Dean rally at the Kohl Center on the University of Wisconsin-Madison campus. News reports put the crowd at over 5,000. Dean, who blocked a medical marijuana bill as Vermont governor, had a position on medical marijuana that earned him a grade of "F" from a New Hampshire pro-medical marijuana group."

http://www.drugsense.org/dpfwi/dean_10.5.03.htm

[Adrahil]

47. With you again!

Lots of us evolve on this issue. 3-4 years ago I would have probably opposed outright legalization. But I've changed my mind. Grown ups sometimes do that. The political climate also matters.

[bemildred]

37. Glad you got caught up with all that. nt

[Laelth]

38. k&r for Elizabeth Warren.

It's fine to be pro-military, just as most liberals are pro-service, pro America, and pro labor. The military combines all three. Our military personnel are government employees, serving their country. Nothing wrong with that.

As for MJ, I bet she'll support full legalization within 5 years. Just a hunch.

-Laelth

[Adrahil]

48. I think you're right on her stance.

I think like gay marriage, this is an issue that will see a rapid shift in public opinion, and therefore in the political climate, allowing politicians to shift their positions.

Look at Obama. I think he always supported marriage equality. But he had to be a careful in how he expressed that over time.

[nenagh]

40. I read that the House and/or the Senate could be lost to Republicans in 2014.

A negative OP such as this, written about a popular Senator, may just reduce the enthusiasm of Democratic voters to turn out and vote.

I find that depressing.

[Jefferson23]

43. Her record has not been a secret, do you think this is a surprise? n/t

[beachbum bob]

44. reality being what it is, I rather be pro-military than head in the sand

mentality. The world is filled with evil and you can not reason or negotiate with evil. Its not a kum bay ya world. Never has, never will. Sociopaths and psychopaths will NEVER go away. My respect for Warren just ticked up a couple notches.

[sendero]

50. I'd rather have someone who is pro-military..

... and sane on economic issues than have someone who is pro-military (because they virtually ALL are) and a fool/liar/toady-for-the-rich on economic justice issues.

So yeah, so what?

As for her stance on marijuana, she probably just needs to be educated.

[MannyGoldstein]

51. EW is dead to me. Dead.

Regards,

Purity-Left Manny

[Laelth]

52. LOL. n/t

-Laelth

[treestar]

57. She should be.

If there was any consistency, that is. But she is only a cudgel to use against the President. Very clever how you usually pick Democrats. Problem is, they are Democrats, and bound to end up doing something "third way."

[MannyGoldstein]

59. Like remember when I hated on Candidate Obama for

not supporting Medicare for All, for being against legalizing marijuana, and for thinking there was some reason for being in Afghanistan?

Strange, I don't remember it either.

But, deep in my heart, I'm sure that the hate was there.

[think]

69. Don't forget to set your hair on fire for the TPP.

[DCBob]

62. Not really pro-military.. just facing reality and doing what has to be done.

[Dawson Leery]

73. +1

[Iggo]

66. Yeah, she's the worst!

Hillary 2014!!!

[Chorophyll]

67. I'm shocked, shocked to learn that a US senator is "pro-military,"

or that she wanted to preserve jobs in a state she represents.

I did know about her brothers, thanks.

[libdem4life]

75. Elizabeth has not yet been nationally vetted. It's a whole new world. Lots will come out and she

will be directly challenged on issues that she has had no need to speak on...to the entire nation, not just to Congress. At least there are not likely to be scandals they can rut out.

But as she gains national recognition, the pressure will be on to make a stand on any number of issues. The press will be merciless once she outs herself nationally, even a VP spot with Joe Biden (my ideal ticket), then its no hold barred. So best it all start coming out now.

I think as VP she would have an opportunity to effect many issues, without the burden of the Presidency...which I don't think she's ready for. After VP, she's got a chance to go for it, IMO.

[elleng]

76. 'Pro-military' means what?

Hopes to enable it to do the jobs we ask it to do well? I'm for that.

[Dawgs]

77. I've been saying for years that the military is nothing more than a jobs program.

That's why many Democratic politicians continue to support it.

[whatchamacallit]

81. Achievement Unlocked!

[whatchamacallit]

82. Achievement Unlocked!

[former9thward]

85. Another supporter of corporate welfare.

Yet another example of how the MIC has a stranglehold on the government.

[solarhydrocan]

86. .

How does the US extricate itself from Afghanistan?

Brian Schweitzer: "With helicopters, tomorrow"

[Pholus]

87. Wow. A long time ago. Of course, I would expect you to not be as well informed.... nt

[L0oniX]

90. Why all the hate?

[hrmjustin]

91. I am a Hillary supporter but I love Warren as well.

[kelliekat44]

92. She is pro-military and anti-war, maybe? nt

[NYC_SKP]

96. Her brothers DID WHAT????

[freshwest]

98. The wheels on the bus go round and round... n/t