Clipmarks
blueridgefollowshare
4-19-2008 5:16 PM407 views
blueridge says:
They both shilled for neocon propaganda, contrary to the most recent National Intel Estimate which says that Iran has been deterred on nukes, and Hillary proposed a middle east "umbrella" (read NATO-like alliance) for military intervention, very similar to McCain's.

There is no real choice, in foreign policy, or big spending, in the 3 candidates. WARS will continue, and here is the evidence. Both shill for Israel blatantly. (Hillary: 'Oh Israeli Lobby--please let me be President, listen to my hawkish war speak on defense of Israel and against Iran, despite the lack of evidence!')
1 Comment   | Add a Comment
4-19-2008 6:38 PM
blueridge
and the ABC debate ignored it, and so did the headlines after the "debate":

OLBERMANN: After 24 hours of letting this sink in, how in the world is this not the headline out of that debate last night?

MADDOW: This is the greatest burying the lead story we have yet in the campaign. I mean, the question to be asking is two fold: Number one, why would something like this advance American interests? To make our military, our troops, the bomb that any country can throw into the square in the Middle East whenever they to. As you said, we will get involved whenever anyone start fighting each other in the Middle East.

It is hard to imagine a conception of American interests broad eno...
Login to Comment.  Not a member yet? Sign up





Embed This Clip In Your Site...


OK