Clinton will change our future for the better ...

[Maribelle]

While it is tempting to think we can achieve change but avoid conflict if only we believe enough, we know, deep down, that real change requires more than hope. It always has. César Chávez devoted his life to that fight. That is why the union he and Dolores Huerta pioneered endorsed Clinton. Bobby Kennedy gave his life in that fight and his children have endorsed her, too. They showed us that fighting together for meaningful change is noble, not passe.

Like them, Hillary Clinton has fought for positive change all her life. Millions of children have health care because of her tireless work in the face of special interest opposition. Thousands of soldiers and veterans have the services and dignity they deserve because she fought for them when they could no longer fight for themselves.

To achieve real change as president, she has done her homework and earned the deep respect of military leaders here, world leaders in 80 countries and of Republicans and Democrats alike. Unlike Obama, she can use this critical political capital, established trust, staggering depth and breadth of knowledge and hard-won wisdom to deliver on the promises she has made while keeping America and the world safe.

Hillary Clinton, as America's first woman president, will boldly fight for you and with you to deliver meaningful change that will make your future, that of your children and grandchildren, and of this country and the world not just different, but better.

It is what good mothers and great leaders do. That is why Texans should cast their vote for Hillary Clinton on Tuesday.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/outlook/5584383.html

[Maribelle]

1. No Apology Needed - - as found in the comments section of the above

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/article/view/?id=1336

No Apology Needed
New York Times
David Brooks
Far be it from me to get in the middle of a liberal purge, but would anybody mind if I pointed out that the calls for Hillary Clinton to apologize for her support of the Iraq war are almost entirely bogus?

I mean, have the people calling for her apology actually read the speeches she delivered before the war? Have they read her remarks during the war resolution debate, when she specifically rejected a pre-emptive, unilateral attack on Saddam? Did they read the passages in which she called for a longer U.N. inspections regime and declared, "I believe international support and legitimacy are crucial"?

If they went back and read what Senator Clinton was saying before the war, they'd be surprised, as I was, by her approach. And they'd learn something, as I did, about what kind of president she would make.

The Iraq war debate began in earnest in September 2002. At that point Clinton was saying in public what Colin Powell was saying in private: emphasizing the need to work through the U.N. and build a broad coalition to enforce inspections.

She delivered her Senate resolution speech on Oct. 10. It was Clintonian in character. On the one hand, she rejected the Bush policy of pre-emptive war. On the other hand, she also rejected the view that the international community "should only resort to force if and when the United Nations Security Council approves it." Drawing on the lessons of Bosnia, she said sometimes the world had to act, even if the big powers couldn't agree.
She sought a third way: more U.N. resolutions, more inspections, more diplomacy, with the threat of force reserved as a last resort. She was triangulating, but the Senate resolution offered her a binary choice. She voted yes in order to give Powell bipartisan leverage at the U.N.

This is how she's always explained that vote, and I confess that until now, I've regarded her explanation as a transparent political dodge. Didn't everyone know this was a war resolution? But now, having investigated her public comments, I think diplomatic leverage really was on her mind. I also know, from a third person, that she was spending a lot of time with Powell and wanted to help.

On Nov. 8, 2002, the Security Council passed a unanimous resolution threatening Saddam with "serious consequences" if he didn't disarm.
The next crucial period came in March 2003, as the U.S. battled France over the second Security Council resolution. Clinton's argument at this point was that inspections were working and should be given more time. "It is preferable that we do this in a peaceful manner through coercive inspection," she said on March 3, but went on, "At some point we have to be willing to uphold the United Nations resolutions." Then she added, "This is a very delicate balancing act."
On March 17, Bush gave Saddam 48 hours to disarm or face attack. Clinton tried to be critical of the Bush policy while being deferential to the office of the presidency. She clearly had doubts about Bush's timing, but she kept emphasizing that from her time in the White House, she knew how unhelpful it was for senators to be popping off in public on foreign policy.

At one press event in New York, she nodded when Charles Rangel said Bush had failed at the U.N. But when reporters asked Clinton to repeat what Rangel had just said, she bit her tongue. On March 17, as U.S. troops mobilized, she issued her strongest statement in support of the effort.

Clinton's biggest breach with the liberal wing actually opened up later, in the fall of 2003. Most liberals went into full opposition, wanting to see Bush disgraced. Clinton -- while an early critic of the troop levels, the postwar plans and all the rest -- tried to stay constructive. She wanted to see America and Iraq succeed, even if Bush was not disgraced.

When you look back at Clinton's thinking, you don't see a classic war supporter. You see a person who was trying to seek balance between opposing arguments. You also see a person who deferred to the office of the presidency. You see a person who, as president, would be fox to Bush's hedgehog: who would see problems in their complexities rather than in their essentials; who would elevate procedural concerns over philosophical ones; who would postpone decision points for as long as possible; and who would make distinctions few heed.

Today, the liberal wing of the Democratic Party believes that the world, and Hillary Clinton in particular, owes it an apology. If she apologizes, she'll forfeit her integrity. She will be apologizing for being herself.

[dkf]

3. So why didn't she vote for the Levin amendment?

I have never heard her answer.

[Maribelle]

9. Hitting refresh every 30 seconds so you can jump all over any post positive for Hillary?

:applause:

[dkf]

14. I read practically every thread period. So sue me.

[Maribelle]

30. You couldn't possibly have found the post, read the first,read the second and responded in 2 mins

Who do you think you are kidding?

[rodeodance]

18. that poster will not start his own thread---is just purposely rude.

[GarbagemanLB]

4. A rethug article supporting Clinton/attacking Obama! A first!

[Maribelle]

5. I guess you read it word for word, so give us the exact line that attacks Obama.

y'all a little pissed that I beat you (collectively) at your own (collectively) game? :rofl:

[rodeodance]

17. Read the comments and WEEP---they support her!!

[JimGinPA]

6. Thanks For That Overview David, But I'd Prefer HerTo Apologize...

:eyes:

[rodeodance]

19. too bad

you will have a long wait---find some pillows.

[JimGinPA]

22. I Believe I Only Need To Wait Until Wednesday - Then It's Back To The Senate For Her

:applause:

[rodeodance]

25. The dollar store has a sale on for Crystal Balls--yours has a big crack in it.

[JimGinPA]

29. We'll See. The Good News Is When She Drops Out Your Spamming Stops

:applause:

[rodeodance]

32. ha ha---playing that card again---You just live in a bubble and do not like opposing views.

[Forkboy]

37. And you embrace differing views?

:rofl:

[JoFerret]

48. oh bugger off

If Obama wins - great
If Clinton wins - great

[Maribelle]

7. It seems the hate brigade is out in full force, so quickly! lol

Not too transparent are they?

[bigtree]

8. It's amazing that they have almost noting positive to promote about their candidate

. . . except for his position in the horse race and how much money he has to spend.

[rodeodance]

23. I know--very little of any substance about him by his supporters. And when we do

stuff about clinton--as you do-from the trail---well, the stinky flies swarm in.

[rodeodance]

34. I think this is one of best essays I have seen on whey Hillary needs not grabble.

[Why Syzygy]

2. As soon as she drops out. n.t.

[ExtraGriz]

10. i hope it goes til june

why not let everyone have a chance to vote this year, its democracy in action.

[OhioBlue]

11. Bush Clinton Bush Clinton isn't change n/t

[rodeodance]

12. What a lovely endorsement coming out Houston TEXAS—so nice to see.

[rodeodance]

13. Ho HO----NO obama supporters in the Comment section yet either. te he

[indimuse]

15. thank you Maribelle

Texas for Hillary...my cuz lives in Austin....HUge Hillary support and LOVE!

[emilyg]

28. Great!.

[Maribelle]

31. No - thank you!

I love that image!

[indimuse]

40. thxs..she's beautiful.

:hi:

[rodeodance]

16. ** comments talk of 2 issues important to TX--HRC supports:

And it can't hurt to remind everyone that on two very important issues to Texans and Americans, Hillary has the right positions.

On energy, while she agrees with Obama on creating a green economy, with many jobs focused on developing cleaner energy and promoting conservation, she also recognizes the immediate dependence on oil, and is willing to develop more sources in the Gulf of Mexico, using the best environmentally sensitive methods available. This would help to reduce (we can never eliminate) our dependence on 11 million barrels of foreign oil a day.

She also is supportive of continuing the manned space program. Obama would put a five-year moratorium on it. This would of course hurt JSC, but worse, I am sure we would be standing by while other countries continue. His desire to channel that money into education is admirable, but an entire generation of scientists and engineers were inspired by the lunar landings. The benefits of the manned space program include not only immediate benefits of innovation and technology, but the intangible benefits of inspiration, making us want to achieve, and making us feel good about being human. We would NEVER have a space program if we stood around waiting to have a few billion extra dollars to spend. It will ALWAYS have to be something we CHOOSE to invest in. We are not a poor country. This is a matter of our priorities. JFK, whom Obama is frequently compared to, would certainly not agree with him on this issue.
3/2/2008 11:35 AM CST

[rodeodance]

26. She also is supportive of continuing the manned space program. Obama would put a five-year moratoriu

[sendero]

36. I didn't know that..

... now I'm even more for Obama. NASA needs to be reset.

[rodeodance]

20. REC

[AX10]

21. K/R

We want Hillary!

[RBInMaine]

24. Yeah, "change" like taking money from corporate PAC and

lobbyists. Just the kind of "change" we need.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

27. Obama takes corp money and has corporate lobbyist working as Top Advisers on his campaign......

that makes him both a HYPOCRITE AND A LIAR

[rodeodance]

33. Good article---Obama and the DLC

Obama claims he isn't the "establishment candidate" but has had the backing from and pushing from the DLC and Center For American Progress since 2006.

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2006/11/0081275

[Maribelle]

41. I was surprised by the Center For American Progress

I still don't get that one.

[sandnsea]

35. All she's done so far is enabled Bush

I don't know why anybody thinks she'd be so drastically different when she votes for Kyl-Lieberman and thinks the solution to health care is to mandate people to buy insurance.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

38. She sure changed the future of those men, women and children in Iraq

not to mention our soldiers and our economy.

[Forkboy]

39. We're heading off a cliff either way, it's just a matter of what speed we do it at.

Both Obama and Hillary will slow that headlong charge, but not by a lot. This world needs something that no candidate can offer and win with here in America, and as such, not much will change other than the decorations.

They'll both be a Hell of a lot better than that fuckstick McCain though. Not only will he NOT stop us from going over a cliff, he wants to put the pedal to the metal.

[zulchzulu]

42. Thousands of soldiers are dead and buried BECAUSE of Hillary and others

SCHIP was done by Ted Kennedy and Orin Hatch and Hillary Clinton has stolen that effort for her own.

Name me ONE BILL that Hillary authored that was passed.

[ecstatic]

43. She's gonna make ALL of our dreams come true

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxtN0u23Tdc

[OnceUponTimeOnTheNet]

44. How the hell I kept my dinner down after watching your link

amazes me.
That thing is beyond ridiculous.

[JVS]

46. Jesus! That video makes Hillary4UandMe look like Hendrix at Woodstock

[Dinger]

45. Kickypoo (nt)

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dysfunctional press]

49. if you think that the dlc candidate is going to improve things for the working person...

you are in for a very rude awakening, should she become the potus.
remember this post if/when your jaw drops at the policy decisions she makes.