qm, I don't know why I even bother, but as long as you are willing to set 'em up, I'm happy to knock 'em down.

War: OK, Clinton's Bosnia vs. Bush's Iraq. Which one turned out better? FDR was also pretty good in the war dept.

How to unite the country: Bringing our boys home, restoring our civil rights, patching up the economy and health care would be a great start. Although Republicans have been recently successful at selling their brand, when you look at the actual issues, the American public is actually pretty liberal. Beyond this, the governmental circus of 'rule by fear' is likely to leave town once the libs come to power, which is always good for a country's morale.

Diversity: I'm not sure what I could say to help a person out who throws around terms like 'hemophiliac poo-pushers', but here goes. You don't need to fear blacks, gays or muslims anymore, qm. That fear is the glue that keeps your mind closed and your ideology in dark ages. There are many a good arguments to be made about political correctness run-amok, but until you have developed a basic respect for all races, sexual preferences, etc., your opinion is baseless. Many in your party are growing up out of this phase; maybe you should consider joining them.

Beyond this, I never hear your rhetoric stray from the standard far-right talking points. I mean, I suppose it's possible that you've thought out each and every issue on your own and just happen to be perfectly in lock step with the republican thought patrol, but to the casual observer, you seem to be a patchwork of other peoples ideas.

Do you have any unique thoughts or ideas that separate you from the flock?

>> ^Tofumar:
"remember, this "misstatement" has been repeated often in several different contexts--differ markedly. At one point while talking about this she actually insinuated that she had to shield the little girl with her body.

This vid has no such claim, and watching the others on the sift I saw nothing as extreme as you describe, I would appreciate a link, since from the videos I don't see it.

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3/26/10234/1725/937/484182

- Associated Press, 3/17/08

"Everyone else was told to sit on their bulletproof vests," Clinton said. "And we came in, in an evasive maneuver....There was no greeting ceremony, and we basically were told to run to our cars. Now, that is what happened."

"I certainly do remember that trip to Bosnia, and as Togo said, there was a saying around the White House that if a place was too small, too poor, or too dangerous, the president couldn’t go, so send the First Lady. That’s where we went. I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."

"[S]he evoked foreign battlefields, recalling a trip to Bosnia as first lady, when the welcoming ceremony ‘had to be moved inside because of sniper fire.’ She said she had traveled to more than 80 countries and was ‘on the front lines’ as the United States made peace in Bosnia and Northern Ireland and helped save refugees from ethnic cleansing in Kosovo."

"I was the first, you know, high-profile American to go into Bosnia after the peace accords were signed because we wanted to show that the United States was 100 percent behind the agreement. We wanted to make it clear to the Bosnians of all backgrounds. Plus we wanted to thank our American military and our allies for a great job. So, we landed in one of those corkscrew landings and ran out because they said there might be sniper fire. I don’t remember anybody offering me tea on the tarmac."

>> ^Tofumar:
"Remember, we are talking about being shot at by a friggin sniper.

This is not what I hear. She recalls being told to move out of an area due to the threat of sniper fire, no sound of bullets, no bodies falling by her side, just "it's not safe to be here, please get to your transport", that does not sound terribly memorable to me, and may have actually happened after the greetings caught on tape.

I am not asserting that she is unfailingly honest, I think there is ample evidence against such a position. I just don't see this being any sort of smoking gun.

>> ^Tofumar:
"If the premise of your campaign is that your duties as first lady helped to make you the candidate of experience, then this kind of resume padding is important.

I see that, I just don't associate having a false aggrandized memory with dishonesty.

It is entirely possible that she remembered the story she told, we just happen to have enough video of the event to disprove it. People do this all the time, all memories are actually memories of memories, with some noise creeping in every time you recall it. If she actually thought her version happened it would not make her crazy, or a lier, it would make her normal.

I think she is flailing, and grasping at straws in a desperate attempt to win the nomination despite the fact that she has basically already lost, but I don't really think this story is indicative of anything that has any real bearing on the substance of the campaign.

>> ^Tofumar:

Extremely well put

I was going to post this earlier, but saw this: http://www.videosift.com/video/Hillary-Clinton-Lies-About-Her-Bosnia-Trip

Joedirt just posted something similar as well. I suppose this one is the parody version, so maybe its still not considered a duplicate.

Already sifted, well sort of. Not the exact same clip, but same subject.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Hillary-Clinton-Lies-About-Her-Bosnia-Trip

Clam down MG, Eklek is from Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Canada (French-speaking), Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Chile, Colombia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Estonia, Faroes, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Greenland, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, Indonesia, Iceland, Italy, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Moldova, Netherlands, Norway, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, South Africa, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, Ukraine, Uruguay, Venezuela, or Vietnam, so it's okay for him/her to use this convention.

I asked the internet.

where were these people demonstrating when the army and serbian militia were killing innocent people in Bosnia and Croatia? serbs were always a minority in kosovo anyway, less than 10%, and most of them are gone now (since 1999), only some 100.000 remain in the northern enklaves. they'll just have to swallow it up and move the fuck on.
and as my friends from belgrade and novi sad tell me, the country is pretty much divided along those lines - the young urban population that just wants to move on and want serbia to eventualy join the EU on one side, and the nationalists, who want to "liberate" kosovo with AK's on the other...

i have a buddy in bosnia that's going to love this.

>> ^bamdrew:
If you're concerned about the safety of our country, educate yourself, your friends and your family on the local, state, and federal election candidates (their voting records, their funding base, their previous employment, etc.). A well informed, highly participatory citizen is a patriotic citizen; an anti-government militia member, in this day and age, is typically just a misguided person with an agenda.


To be fair, nearly every totalitarian state that has emerged in the Western world in the 20th century came from a democracy where the citizenry was overwhelmingly "well informed, highly participatory", from Spain pre-Franco to Weimar Germany. They were not, however, well-armed.

And to whomever made the comment about the unlikely nature of a slightly armed, poorly trained populace resisting a modern military... Chechnya? Bosnia? Uh... Iraq?

Bosnia. Another tragic, baited, and carefully orchestrated route acquisition.

Hey BlueBalls, you really really do GW a disservice by using his name. You are one ignorant 'Merikan. You are so astonishingly stupid when it comes to immigration, I can't make heads or tails of it.

First of all, most illegal are not even from Mexico (in states not bordering Mexico). You look at northern states that have huge illegal populations (all working in food and retail ships), and they look "Mexican" to an ignorant fuck like you, but in fact are not. Then you have huge populations of "approved" legal residents that the INS has designated by city. Most INS branches has two countries and those branches get all people from, say Somalia, or Bosnia, etc. Those schools, often in smaller towns, have the same problem you cite about second languages. And these are "approved" legal resident aliens. So what's your issue there? "Learn English you "others"!"

Some day you have to realize this cousin-fucker concept of "others" is just racism and xenophobia. You know this country was founded by many "illegals" who were yearning to be free.

I fight for the rights that are described in the Bill of Rights. Basic human rights, not basic American rights. No where does the Constitution (especially the Bill of Rights) claim that the Government can treat non-citizens differently from those who were born on US soil. It is an ideal of how a fair, good, and noble gov't can act in exchange for us allowing it to exist (an necessary evil).

Who do you think was in the park in L.A.? It's not about checking to see if there are illegals, but rather how many people lost their right under the First Amendment to assemble? You;re arguement is that most people there that day were illegals so the cops can beat and kill them, since they are sub-human... But my issue is how many citizens had their CONSITUTION RIGHTS stolen by riot gear thugs shooting "less-lethal" weapons as innocent, peaceful citizens. And you approve of this because some of those people are from Mexico. I hope and pray that you choke on your Taco Bell and die with pico de gallo foaming from your nose.

Forget Nazi 1933. A nuclear attack on Iran would put the current regime in the Nazi 1944 category.

Unless there is stronger evidence, though, the current state of affairs is that GWB had about as much to do with bombing the Towers as Saddam Hussein.

Even though I disagreed with it in 2002, 2003, and now, I don't know that the Iraq invasion is absurd. I can still see good, non-absurd "humanitarian hawk" reasons for sending ground troops into nations like Iraq, Sudan, Rwanda, Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Unfortunately, this empty Admin. based their invasion on those reasons only to cover their ass once the fearmongering and foolish, foolish preemptive war doctrine failed to work.