I am tired of the false declaration that Hillary's and Obama's positions are nearly identiical.

[stevietheman]

Yes, their positions on _domestic_ policies are nearly identical. No question there.

But people keep forgetting the _VAST_ differences between them on foreign policy.

Everyone knows about the IWR vote, but what about Obama's willingness to open communication with our nation's enemies (certainly a bold new direction for our nation) versus Hillary's status quo of shutting down communication with them (a la Bush and previous presidents).

On top of these clear differences, Obama would be a President that the world would probably have a much easier time identifying with. He speaks a language they largely understand. He would be seen as a healing president by many around the world. He indeed would be the clear antidote to George W. Bush, if not America's unchecked military industrial complex, so despised around the world.

Thus, I am very tired of hearing that these two candidates are the same on policy matters.

They, clearly, are not.

[MH1]

1. Also transparency, open government and citizen engagement

Obama has made these key points of his platform (although the M$M can't be bothered to comprehend the concepts, much less report about Obama's positions in that area). I have not seen similar from the Clintons. To me that is a BIG difference.

[Kittycat]

4. This is a big deal to me (along with the war).

But I'm tired of secret government.

[Drachasor]

7. Me too, I've been planning on making a new thread on it

Haven't gotten around to it yet.

[Yes We Did]

9. That's my big one!

Obama is so quick to release information. He doesn't hide anything. He has done two huge interview sessions where nothing is off the table.

In the mean time we're still waiting for Hillary's tax returns.
...maybe she doesn't want us to see all that Saudi money. Or her other OIL moneys.

[grassfed]

2. Cluster Bomb Clinton

Cluster bombs and landmines are particularly terrifying weapons that wreak havoc on communities trying to recover from war. They are fatal impediments to reconstruction and rehabilitation of agricultural land; they destroy valuable livestock; they disable otherwise productive members of society; they maim or kill children trying to salvage them for scrap metal.

Over 150 nations have signed the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty. In the autumn of 2006, there was a chance to take a step in the right direction: Senate Amendment No. 4882, an amendment to a Pentagon appropriations bill that would have banned the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas. Amendment No. 4882 was an easy one to vote against: Who'd want to risk accusation of "tying the hands of the Pentagon" during a never-ending, global War on Terror? As is so often the case, there was no political cost to doing the wrong thing. And there was no political reward for doing the right thing.

But Senator Obama did the right thing.

Senator Obama of Illinois voted IN FAVOR of the ban.

Senator Clinton of New York voted AGAINST the ban.

Analysts say Clinton did not want to risk appearing "soft on terror," as it would have harmed her electability. Amendment Rejected.

http://www.stopclustermunitions.org

[backscatter712]

3. The big difference is I don't believe Hillary anymore when she makes policy statements.

She lied to us about NAFTA. She lied to us about mountaintop removal mining. She blew smoke up our asses about Iraq.

So she's in the same mental category that I put George W. Bush - that of pathological liars.

So what's the point in looking at her stated policy positions if I don't know if her statements are truthful?

[Dogmudgeon]

5. Did you EVER believe Hillary? At all?

Didn't think so.

--p!

[backscatter712]

6. A few months ago, I believed her.

but now that she's been caught in multiple bald-faced lies, her credibility's in the toilet.

Hey, I call them how I see them.

[Dogmudgeon]

8. " ... multiple bald-faced lies ... "

At NO POINT since 1992 has Hillary NOT been accused of "multiple bald-faced lies".

From Republicans.

From Lefties.

From the Press.

Most of the Democrats have stood behind her. That ended when she dared to run against Obama.

But that's campaign stuff. It will be over in a few months, or less. History is more telling. Every one of these "bald-faced lies" throughout the years has been subsequently debunked and usually shown to be propaganda.

She was, at one time, proved to be involved in Wicca. And abusing Chelsea. And that she was sleeping with Vince Foster, and telepathically commanded him to take his own life. And holding secret feminist cigar parties. That she and Bill had a sadist-to-masochist relationship. Every lurid fantasy imaginable.

But they were THEIR fantasies, not OURS.

Today the target is Hillary. Tomorrow, who knows? Maybe YOUR favorite candidate. It's likely -- this is the new "normal" for us.

I call them how I see them, too. And the fact that this kind of malicious gossip has come to the Democratic party is not something that gives me any hope at all. It strongly "speaks to" a party and a nation intent on self-destruction.

--p!