While you people fight over your candidates, CNN says there is no difference between them

[proud2BlibKansan]

LOL!

Suzanne Malveaux (sp?) on CNN just said there's no difference between Obama, Edwards and Hillary. They all have the same health care plans and they all want to end the war in Iraq as soon as possible.

So quit your fighting, people!! Watch CNN and don't worry, be happy!! :woohoo:

[Naturyl]

1. CNN lies.

Any more questions?

[proud2BlibKansan]

3. Tell me something I don't know

[MethuenProgressive]

29. They're RIGHT! So support Bill Richardson!

www.billrichardson.com
www.theDiferenceOnIraq.com
:kick:

[Sparkly]

2. There really aren't any big differences in their positions and policy proposals.

Especially considering the fact that legislation gets worked out in Congress.

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. There is on Iraq

[Saturday]

5. And there's a difference on health care too!!

Hillary wants universal coverage and Obama has no mandate for ALL to be covered. You don't have to be in it in his plan. Bad idea.

Edited to remove my n/t

[proud2BlibKansan]

7. I thought Hillary was supporting mandatory coverage

That's not the same as universal health care.

[Saturday]

8. Sorry, that's what I meant. I said it wrong.

Hillary's is mandatory, Obama's is not.

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. And who pays for it?

Isn't Hillary's plan pretty much the same as Mitt's plan in Mass?

[Saturday]

17. I believe Mitt's plan was mandatory...

like Hillary's. Mitt's plan was a Democratic Plan he never even proposed himself. He just signed it because the MA senate and house was Democratic. Who will pay for it? The same people that pay for bush's war. You and me.

[Sparkly]

10. I agree, but I think that'd be worked out in Congress.

I don't see how the cost can be kept low without making it mandatory. I'd think (or hope!) Congress would catch that and iron it out.

[Sparkly]

9. What do you see as the difference?

All would take troops out of the Iraq civil war asap.
All would leave some forces in the region to guard the embassy and to combat Al Qaeda if necessary.
All would take an international approach to diplomacy and political strategy.
All would have no permanent bases in Iraq.

Where's the difference?

[proud2BlibKansan]

14. When did Hillary say troops out asap?

Last I checked she was saying the troops would be there until at least 2013.

[Sparkly]

16. Common misunderstanding.

Two different things involved: first, the military involvement in Iraq's civil war. ALL are calling to get our troops out of that asap.

Second, a much smaller level of forces with a different and very limited purpose -- not to "clear and hold" or "defeat the enemy" or whatever the hell we're doing there now, but to guard our embassy and to be ready to move in, if necessary, to go after Al Qaeda.

All three of them are saying the same things about that.

[proud2BlibKansan]

21. Bringing the troops home is my #1 issue - ALL the troops

I also don't support that Taj Mahal embassy. Hillary does.

[Sparkly]

24. None of these three are saying ALL the troops....

DK is the only one, I believe.

I think they'd all guard the embassy, too -- not just Hillary.

[proud2BlibKansan]

27. Hence, the reason I support Kucinich

:)

[madrchsod]

6. yes there`s not alot of difference

the difference is how they will accomplish their goals. nothing much will happen unless the senate has over 60 democrats or the ability to work with the republicans to get bills passed

[Sparkly]

13. Preferably the former!

Which is why Thursday's turnout in Iowa is so encouraging! If we can get high Democratic turnout all over the country, we'll increase straight Democratic ticket votes and get a good majority in Congress, too (I hope!).

[still_one]

12. haven't watched CNN since 2000, or for that matter any of the standard MSM

If I need "television" news which provides a more balanced approach I watch Bloomberg

You post just conviences me that I would have been wasting my time watching the CNN crap

Most news in this country is not to provide information, but entertainment

What Congress should be doing is overuling the FCC for allowing even more media take overs

Of course I expect Congress will do just what they did after the 2000 election to ensure accurate voting, NOTHING

[proud2BlibKansan]

15. I watch at the top of the hour sometimes to get the news

but I am usually disgusted enough to turn the channel after about 5 minutes.

[still_one]

19. At least that makes sense, because you don't have to listen to their dribble commentary

What I like about Bloomberg is very little comment or opinon is given by their news commentators or interviewers

When I saw the Utube excerpts from the Micahael Moore interview on his movie SICKCO, and saw not only the misrepresentations coming about the film, but comments associating Moore with Hugo Chavez, that told me where their agenda comes from, and it isn't the public

[proud2BlibKansan]

22. And they flipped on that issue

[Honeycombe8]

18. All the candidates support the Dem. Party Platform, or they are supposed to.

That's why they belong to that party. That is also required in order for them to get money from the party.

So in that sense, they all agree ideologically.

The devil is in the details, of course, and HOW they transfer those general believes and values into practical policies is where the difference lies.

And there is a difference of the importance of various issues among them. For one, oil dependence may be the top issue, while healthcare may be the top issue for another.

But they are all Democrats, and therefore, attest the same ideology. Just like the GOPers.

[proud2BlibKansan]

23. "Just like the GOPers"

Then how do you explain Ron Paul?

[Honeycombe8]

30. He is a Libertarian who changed his party affiliation temporarily to run. nt

[Silent3]

20. I wouldn't say "no real difference" but...

...all of our candidates are a whole lot closer on the issues than you'd think going by the flames wars at DU. :)

[Evergreen Emerald]

25. There is little difference between them on nearly every issue

The difference is personality. The difference is experience. The difference is what the media can hype and what the media can attack.

The candidate's handlers are all the same people that have been in our system for years. Obama has Clinton's rejects, Edwards has Axelrod whose been doing it for years. Clinton as well.

There is no "Change" there is no "difference"

[surfermaw]

26. CNN talkers with a forked T.

Edwards is after corporations just like CNN..that is why he isn't getting coverage, and should tell the nation that Obama and Hillary is going to let the corporate world walk all over the average citizens as they are now sending our jobs out of the United States. and yes the republican are rambling they are against immigration, that is a bare faced lie, they are the ones that started letting illegals work in the Untied States that should be as evident as looking at your own face in the mirror, Corporations are the very ones that are benefiting form Illegal working in the U.S, we give them free health care. Corporation are getting off scot free. and Corporate world is REpublicans

[MethuenProgressive]

28. That's why we should support Bill Richardson

www.theDifferenceOnIraq.con is another.