Interrogator Shares Saddam's Confessions: No WMDS! /CBS 60 minutes
Saddam Hussein confesses about not having any WMDs and disliking who he labeled a "fanatic" Osama bin Laden. In his first television interview, FBI Agent George Piro tells Scott Pelley how he won the confidence of Saddam Hussein and got the truth out of him in a seven-month interrogation.
CBS article @
From Information Clearing House (ICH ): a new reputable study released of the death-toll in Iraq is now apporoximated at one million US Invasion And Occupation Killed One Million In Iraq
----------------
And from The Huffington Post George Lakoff claims in his commentary that there is a real difference between Barack Obama's position on the Iraq War and Hillary Clintons and that all in all Obama is the real deal who is a real progressive who wants to get America back on the right path and not merely continue with the ' Status Quo '.
As he points out in his article What Counts as an "Issue" In the Clinton-Obama Race?,January 30, 2008
Obama understands the importance of values, connection, authenticity, trust, and identity.
But his vision is deeply progressive. He proposes to lead in a very different direction than Reagan. Crucially, he adds to that vision a streetwise pragmatism: his policies have to do more than look good on paper; they have to bring concrete material results to millions of struggling Americans in the lower and middle classes. They have to meet the criteria of a community organizer.
The Clintonian policy wonks don't seem to understand any of this. They have trivialized Reagan's political acumen as an illegitimate triumph of personality over policy. They confuse values with programs. They have underestimated authenticity and trust.
So do the pundits who pose the questions in the debates.
This nomination campaign is about much more than the candidates. It about a major split within the Democratic party. The candidates are reflecting that split. Here are three of the major "issues" dividing Democrats.
First, triangulation: moving to the right -- adopting right-wing positions -- to get more votes. Bill Clinton did it and Hillary believes in it. It is what she means by "bipartisanship." Obama means the opposite by "bipartisanship." To Obama, it is a recognition that central progressive moral principles are fundamental American principles. For him, bipartisanship means finding people who call themselves "conservatives" or "independents," but who share those central American values with progressives. Obama thus doesn't have to surrender or dilute his principles for the sake of "bipartisanship."
The second is incrementalism: Hillary believes in getting lots of small carefully crafted policies through, one at a time, step by small step, real but almost unnoticed. Obama believes in bold moves and the building of a movement in which the bold moves are demanded by the people and celebrated when they happen. This is the reason why Hillary talks about "I," I," "I" (the crafter of the policy) and Obama talks about "you" and "we" (the people who demand it and who jointly carry it out).
The third is interest group politics: Hillary looks at politics through interests and interest groups, seeking policies that satisfy the interests of such groups. Obama's thinking emphasizes empathy over interest groups. He also sees empathy as central to the very idea of America. The result is a positive politics grounded in empathy and caring that is also patriotic and uplifting.
For a great many Democrats, these are the real issues. These real differences between the candidates reflect real differences within the party. Whoever gets the nomination, these differences will remain.
It is time for the press, the pundits, the pollsters, and the political scientists to take these issues seriously.
and so it goes
GORD.
No comments:
Post a Comment