Oh yes, the politics of political destruction is okay when it's MoveOn or another Soros-cide shill for the DNC. But if the Republicans retaliate, it's SO HURTFUL!!!!

Time for Bill to go on Oprah & whine to his constitency—the brain-dead females who love John-boy Edwards.

I lost it on your comment where you say "mangos for jobs and nukes in India."

Are you asserting that India acquired nuclear weapons under W's watch?

No, Chip. Maybe if you were a little well versed in current events, you'd have some clue as to what I'm talking about. Your great leader gave India the motherload, and what did we get? Imported mangos.

Here's a link:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-03-02-nuclear-pact_x.htm

…and how about his wonderful trip to China to negotiate against the trade deficit. What did he come back with? Nothing. In fact, Bush has NEVER been able to negotiate a deal beneficial to us on any level. So, in addition to being the worst President we've ever had, he's a lousy salesman, a terrible negotiator.

Still support him? Of course you do. The ignorant is always easily manipulated.

Clinton and the democrats that are now in the forfront of the party are the reason I have elected to look more closely at other candidates. It is the steady run of double standards and flip flopping on issues as well as refusing to take a stand solidly and openly that causes my disdain. I have checked the recordes that are publicly open and researched the criminal,political, and personal histories of almost all of them. I now know why they want to controll the media and the judicial systems. Their just as guilty of destroying this country as are their counterparts. They take money from criminals, and some have commited crimes themselves, and with a controlled justice system sweep theirs under the rug and raise a nuclear explosion over their opponents discretions. Knowing CNN to be one sided and unbalanced in the media I doubt that this will be given a review or posted

I just love Bill Clinton-such an intellectual. He has hit the nail right on the head. I would take a million Bill Clintons and Hillary Rodham Clintons over anyone running for President today. With all the crap, lies and bull$#@% that Bush has put this country through, he should have been impeached long ago. Bill Clinton had one manly indiscretion in the White House and lied about it, and many people in the USA think he is the worst thing created by mankind—what an ignorant country—-forgive and truly see what is good and just for this country.

Jon in Seattle who claims Democrats are happier sexier wealthier, etc.

Have you seen the Code Pink people ?

If I had time I'd check spelling of Dem posters vs. Republican posters on this blog to disprove your point, but I've got to go have sex.

The story of Swift Boat mouthpiece Larry Thurlow that I mentioned at 3:03 p.m. today settles claims that the Swifties were always truthful in their statements. It is possible that Kerry has something to hide. It is also possible that after the election he wasn't interested in pursuing a long lawsuit that wouldn't change the election.

Let's take a different approach and think things through. Let's assume that Kerry is the totally useless, bumbling incompetent who claims medals he didn't deserve just like the Swifties claim. Then why should we care about Kerry when there are far, far more important elements that Bush supporters intentionally ignor? Think about it - if Swifties charges are true, this is one of the most condemning charges ever against the United States Navy. What Navy morons promoted him? What Navy morons gave him a ship to command? What Navy morons made him responsible for the lives of the crew? What Navy morons rated him better than half the other swift boat commanders? What Navy morons awarded him medals without any investigations? What Navy morons served with him and then, with one exception, stood by him during the Swifties charges? What Navy morons let him and those rated lower than him remain on duty? What Navy morons would want to appear with other Swifties who weren't rated as good as him?

Those who trash war hero Kerry should worry about the implications of their charges instead. Was the U.S. Navy full of morons at all levels as their charges indicate?

"The difference is that your presidential candidate also wants to implement expansive social programs like universal health careThe difference is that your presidential candidate also wants to implement expansive social programs like universal health care"

David…. the age is actually 67 already for those in my age group (late 30's). Lets see… health care for all Americans $ 110 billion…. Iraq war $ 500+ billion right now.

I think I would rather support Americans and make a healthy American workforce that save Iraq thank you very much.

I believe Democrats have become totally desensitized to CRIME (Clinton screwing around with lover in Oval Office.) Clinton telling LIES to America, "I did not blah blah blah. DEMOCRATS HAVE NO MORAL COMPASS.

I have to disagree with Roger in Charlotte. If Petraeus is cheerleading for the Administration, rather than offering objective information, he deserves to be called out for his political grandstanding, uniform or not. I have the greatest respect for our men and women in service, but I don't expect them to be superhuman. They are prone to the same failings as everyone else.

It appears - and the jury is still out on this, unless you're a big fan of Gen. Fallon - that he may be slightly partisan. That would call his judgement into question.

republicans are not bitter the dems are bill was a good prez but he is the reason we are in the mess we are in he could have killed bin laden and the twin towers would still be standing. republicans and democrats suck

If Colin Powell can be taken advantage of by this administration, General Petraeus certainly can be.

Lastly, as a military wife, trust me when I tell you there are LOTS OF POLICTICS that TAKE PLACE AS AN OFFICER.

The pathetic slams on Clinton from the Bush worshipers display how ignorant they are. They chant about lying to the country about a private affair, while their pitiful little ex-drunk president commits treasonous crimes and acts that are tantamount to murder and embezzlement of billions of dollars funneling into the pockets of his political hacks. The only reason Bush isn’t in prison is because his crimes are covered up by the republican’s loyal unwillingness to serve the people, but instead choose to serve their overwhelming allegiance of self enrichment. The mindless followers of Bush are just as responsible as ‘Junior’ is for having started an unnecessary war that put us in danger and caused the genocide of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. All this to feed his egotistical self image and uncontrollable love of power. Here’s a scenario of justice; put a democrat in a foxhole under fire with Kerry and a repug in a fox hole with Bush then see how much smearing of war heroes comes out of that one. You might want to include a box of diapers so Bush doesn't skank up the foxhole while his loyal repug is changing his pants.

I think the president is missing a crucial difference. The attack ads he was using as examples were attacking politicians. If you're a politician you know you are going to be a target by one side or another. Gen. Patraeus is a serving member of the military and though no one is totally apolitical at his level he is not deserving of being treated as one of the professional politicians.

First of all you are a very combative poster to this forum.

It's called "debating the issues". Look back at the posts I've responded to and explain how I'm the one who's combative.

Sigh…I can see that no one here is capable of honestly addressing the issues at hand, so this will be my last post about it.

1) Bill Clinton's claim that Republican outrage over the MoveOn ad stating that Gen. Patraeus was disingenous.

His "proof"? He offers none. NONE. Instead of directly addressing why Republican outrage was disingenuous, he changes the subject - a classic case of throwing out red herring arguments. It's absolutely no different than the old "he didn't rape her…look at how she dresses!" argument.

But what should we expect from the guy who's married to Hillary "There was no affair, it's a Right-Wing Conspiracy" Clinton?

2) A political ad about Max Cleland that was supposedly dishonest.

I have directly challenged his assertion with facts about both Cleland's military service and voting record. The political ad that ran about Cleland was attacking his voting record, not his patriotism. If you can prove otherwise, please do so.

And while you're at, please explain how it's relevant to the MoveOn ad controversy in the first place.

3) The claims of the SBVT that John Kerry is no war hero.

You claim it's not fair to make assumptions about how a defamation case against the SBVT would have played out. I don't have to make assumptions. Kerry was too scared to take the case to court. That tells me everything.

You claim that defamation is "difficult" to prove in court. I say, why don't you tell that to the Hollywood celebrities who are constantly suing magazines for libel and defamation…and winning.

If the SBVT were lying, Kerry could very easily have sued them for defamation of character. And in court, SBVT would have had to prove the their claims were accurate. But in their efforts to do so, they would have been able to get access to ALL of Kerry's military records and they would have been able to call Kerry supporters to the stand to testify under penalty of perjury about Kerry's actions in Vietnam. And that is what Kerry was terrified of happening.

And, oh by the way…please explain how it's relevant to the MoveOn ad controversy in the first place.

Bottom line: another dishonest, "pay no attention to them because their Republicans" Democrat regurgitation from St. Clinton. But hey, why shouldn't they keep using the same playbook? It's not like the leftist media are ever going to actually challenge leftist politicians on anything.

Paul NY,

You wrote, "Just because a someone is a general in the army means everyone should listen to them blindly without questioning them? But at the same time you think it is ok to attack someones war record becaue they are running for office? You do not make any sence."

Paul, no - just because a General is testifying is not cause to accept every word or recommendation. THAT is why he is called before Congress - so our elected leaders can hear his testimony, question him, and come to a determination of how things are going.

However - for Moveon.Org to create the ad - calling the General a traitor, buy the space with the NY Times - all before the General gave one word of testimony is just plain wrong.

John Kerry, on the other hand, GAVE his testimony to congress 35 years ago - telling of attrocities commited by other US Vets and embellished his statements. John Kerry was running for the office of President and suggesting he was the BEST candidate and used his military record for political purposes. Those (Vets) opposed to Kerry had every right to challenge him, his statements, and to share THEIR opinions.

Honestly… if you can't see the difference - if you think non-military rich liberals personally attacking the patriotism of a 4-star General is the same as Vets crticizing John Kerry… then we can simply agree to disagree.

Patrick, the national debt has increased because of spending more than taxpayers pay in. When a democrat takes office the war in Iraq won't suddenly just go away. Those tax dollars are still going to be spent. The difference is that your presidential candidate also wants to implement expansive social programs like universal health care. They talked about increasing taxes on gasoline to pay for global warming. They want to put restrictions on energy production to cut back on emmissions and require renewable engery, which is VERY expensive so expect your electric bill to go up.

Tax and spend. That's the democratic moto. Who cares who gets hurt in the process.

As it is now you start drawing SSI at 65. The democrats, based on what they said during the debate, want to up the age to 67. That's $14,952 a retired person will not have because of the democrats if they get their way.

If Hillary gets into office it won't be just the republicans whining and you won't be savoring any of it.

"This is the same Bill Clinton who oversaw the slaughter of 5000 Iraq children every month through Sanctions."

Exactly how did he "oversee" this… the sanctions were imposed by the U.N.

Saying that… I could say… that Bush has overseen the slaughter of over 150,000 Iraqis… and 7,000 U.S. citizens (9/11, military losses).

So that makes Bush the larger mass murderer… and he was more directly responsible.

Republicans… so easy to defeat in any logic battle.

Way to go President Bill Clinton! Once again proving that leadership goes beyond politic kindergarten games and hits the already week Republicans between the eyes. The truth hurts. I do beleive Donald Trump is correct in saying that Bush is a liability to this country and to his party. The smartest, wealthiest, sexiest, happiest people in the world are Democratic and as the world now watches the last dying days of the Republican party, it pierces our ears a bit from their screams and nashing of teeth as a result of their inhumanity and indecency to the least of these in and outside our country. Their downfall is providence.

This is the same Bill Clinton of "Welfare Reform", Nafta, the same Clinton, who 1n 1993 called unemployment insurance "an unfair tax on business" who oversaw the slaughter of 5000 Iraq children every month through Sanctions. It amazes me that Liberals have a positive opinion and that conservatives have a negative opinion of him.

"Be careful what you wish for. I hope you were paying attention to the democratic debate. Your income taxes are going to increase"

Thats going to have to happen anyway since there is this thing called the national debt which you republicans will never talk about. BTW you've increased it over 3 trillion dollars while Bush has been in office.

"you won't be able to draw on social security until you're 67."

This is already the case so whats your point?

"All losers"

Agreed… problems still won't be solved… but it will be fun listening to republicans whine for the next four years about Hillary… I will savor every minute of it.

Former President Bill Clinton is assuming the role of the kettle calling the pot black. There is no meaner machine for personal smearing than the national leadership of the Democratic party. The Gen Petraeus smear is unforgivable, intellectually dishonest, and dishonors every present and past American serviceman in the Armed Forces (of which I am one). MoveON has been characterized by dishonest, deceptive and destructive behavior since its founding. If they succeed in bringing down America, they should be the first to suffer the consequences of their irrational march to destroy the world's premier democracy– those consequences would be no longer having those of us who put out lives on the line and purchase MoveOn's opportunity for abuse with our blood and lives to shelter them from their cowardly attacks.
David Gillis

I don't care what your party affiliation - we all must recognize when enough is enough and human decency is violated. The Patraeus ad was the worst and our expectation for editors is to ensure viceral and negative advertisements (not free speech) gets reviewed before they make it into their respective rags - it clearly wasn't. As for fmr pres Clinton - the absolute wrong guy to be talking on this topic as he tried given his past history actively and viciously discrediting anyone who stood in his way or dared tell the truth. "Have you forgotten …?"

The Republican Party
Crimminals
Pedophiles
Adulterers
Or is it the The Repugnent Party

Finally, Bill Clinton as attack dog. Go get 'em, Bill. They certainly deserve it.

People here are slamming everyone for being a Liberal or a Conservative. This is the genious of the Rove strategy- divide and conquer. If everyone is fighting among themselves, they have less power to change anything. Forget that the president is Republican, forget that he's a Christian. Look at his actions. He has lead the country to a war after failing to finish a more important war (Afghanistan), he has massively overspent our budget, and has pulled the people of the country apart. When voting for the next candidate, do us all a favor and cover the parts that show their party affilition with masking tape, now make your vote based on their merits, as it should be.

John, your job went to India because of foreign policy Bill Clinton signed into law, namely NAFTA.

Corporate America saw manufacturing firms taking advantage of the global market place. It wasn't long before the tech industry started following suit. Some financial research groups predict that 3.3 million high tech jobs will be outsourced to an overseas country.

Ross Perot, whom everyone loved to laugh at, prophetically predicted the mass exodus of jobs from the United States when he said NAFTA would create a "giant sucking sound."

You can't blame Bush for sending your job overseas. It started long before he got into office.

I don't think the republicans are going to bring the troops home sooner, but then I don't subscribe to the cut and run mentality.

Social security would not be an issue at all if the past presidents, including Bill Clinton, had not raided the fund to pay for pet projects. I'm not defending what Bush has done but all you people who keep saying Clinton was the best president in history should actually do a bit of research.

He has no place calling other politicians names. He's just as bad as the rest of the lot.

Chris Haynes:

Rvastar; your OPINIONS prove nothing. Way to go rvastar, the rvaster, the rav! Cool name you rvastar! You deserve a cookie for creativity (for the name and your "facts".

Wow! So many words to say absolutely nothing! Well done, chris Haynes!

As I said before…long on indignation, short on facts.

To Wynter:

The report "was" damaging.

Really, Wynter? In what universe?

Is the "damaging" report responsible for the upswing in polling numbers that's occurred over the last few weeks for General Patraeus? President Bush? The Surge? The Iraq War? The War on Terror?

Is the "damaging" report responsible for the utter collapse of Democrat anti-war efforts and resolutions?

You mean that "damaging" report?

Now look who is attacking a distinguished veteran? The man served and didn't lose his legs by using a can opener wrong.

How - exactly - does telling the truth about a) the manner in which Cleland sustained his injuries (as opposed to Democrat obfuscation on the matter in order to score political points) and b) his voting record on national security matters (abysmal) equate to "attacking" him?

"rvastar, you are so gone at this point I don't think there is anything to respond to."

well, you didn't logically respond to anything in the first place, so why should your inability to frame an argument here be a surprise?

"Anyways, it was stated in another comment that your so full of it. Read this comment by Hooligan"

They admitted under grilling from Admiral Crowe that they, dare I say it, LIED!!!

Really? They did?

Prove it.

And while you're looking that non-existent "fact", why don't you take a stab at answering my question from earlier? A question non of this threads lil' leftists want to touch?

Why would an "honorable" war veteran like Kerry - who, thanks to his marriage to Mrs. Ketchup, has unlimited funds at his disposal - allow people like Thurlow [and McNeill and Hoffman] to publicly slander and defame him in the worst possible way and do absolutely nothing about it?

Hmmm, Wynter?

James, Phoenix AZ :

Just because a someone is a general in the army means everyone should listen to them blindly without questioning them? But at the same time you think it is ok to attack someones war record becaue they are running for office? You do not make any sence. A mouthpiece for the whitehouse who is testifying before congress about a war we were lied to about , shouldnt be blindly followed either.
You cant treat one differently from the other because of political alliances.
About Clinton:
He cheated on his wife , he didnt invade a country on false information , illegally wiretap his own citizens , or put his unqualified buddy in charge of fema causing a natural disaster to turn into a national crisis.

Sam, what is like to go about you day-to-day life with 5% of the facts from FOX News?

Mm Hm. Get 'em Bill. Them self-righteous indignant, hypocrite Republicans just can't stop hating. Well, when Hillary becomes president, they will cry in their beers.

This is Grade A comedy, thanks CNN.

I agree 100% with the former president and I'm glad that someone is speaking out on this issue. It's sad that people will allow themselves to be blinded by the Republican tactics. Clinton was the best. The great economy, budget surplus, job market and low gas prices was paramount over his private life. I'll take that anytime.

Very good Bill! Where are the guts of the other Democrats?

Yes, Bill, those darned rascally Republicans "smeared" you.

You didn't really lob cruise missles at Muslim nations to distract an investigation of the fact that you were doing the Hokey Pokey with the hired help, did you?

Because you really DIDN'T perjur yourself, did you? Those eeeeeeevil Republicans MADE you lie under oath, right?

Those villainous Republicans (cue "Snidely Whiplash" music here), why, they MADE you tell other people to lie under oath for you, didn't they.

I know they're sneaky, those eeeeeevil Republicans…. tricking you into committing perjury and tricking you into suborning perjury.

I'm a little confused, though… how can eeeeeevil, dastardly Republicans, pullers-of-the-strings in all sorts of sinister kook conspiracy theories, simultaneously be window-licking, crayon-chewing, knuckle-dragging imbiciles?

I mean, make up your minds… either Bush is Hitler or he's a rider of the proverbial short bus. But he can't be both.

Rvastar

First of all you are a very combative poster to this forum. Frankly, I feel that if we want our politicians acting with more decorum, respect and bipartisanship, we posters need to do the same.
On the Max Cleland issue, He was awarded the Silver Star and the Bronze Star for valorous action in combat, including during the Battle of Khe Sanh on April 4th, 1968. Though he may have been disabled by his own errant grenade that fell off while he was getting off a helicopter, he is still a war hero for the medals that he earned. So what if he might have been going to get some beer 4 days after the Battle of Khe Sanh (I’d be doing the same thing), when he was injured. That doesn’t make him less of a hero for his honorable service in ‘Nam.
As for the Kerry issue, sorry but that isn’t fair to make an assumption about the supposed outcome of a case that was never waged in court. Defamation of character is notoriously difficult to prove in court. The main problem with proving defamation of character is the protection of free speech guaranteed by the First Amendment. Of course, if he had brought a libel suit against SBVT, I imagine the conservatives would howl about how he was being a sore loser. In the end, the facts haven’t changed; SBVT still told lies about Kerry to impugn his military record.

Ryan, if SBVT aren't lies, site some examples please.

Bill Clinton is one of the best presidents in our history…a breath of fresh air to hear him speak, especially compared to the blundering idiot that is our current president. Every time George Bush speaks, it makes me ashamed to be an American.

Ryan in IN -

Maybe if you weren't so busy writing your hateful comments, you would see the sarcasm in Tom from MA's comments because regulars here know he's a conservative. As much as I usually disagree with his comments, I'll give him an 'A' for effort for even fooling a like-minded buddy with sarcastic humor.

Also, you say in 34 years you've never met a liberal who makes sense. Wow, what kind of places are you hanging out in? With your one way rhetoric, what reasonable person would even want to have a conversation with you?

I'm an independent who would mostly be defined as "liberal" (because I care about more than just myself), but I still listen to other points of view and will sometimes concede a point from a conservative. You might want to try opening up your mind a little bit. Open discourse is better than repeating the same crap over and over again.

That goes for everyone!

Republicans do have double standards. Sen. John McCain-R, a prisoner of the Vietnam war, has been slandered and even Pres. Bush never stood up for him. Unfortunately, our brave military personnel are being used as political pawns. Until we Americans develop unity and respect for our own, we can't expect the same from other countries.

these pubichairlans or too busy playing footsies in toilets to be taken serious!! my god!! please vote democrat!!

Ryan Indianapolis …

The CLINTONS are pure evil

So is Bin Ladin; last time please answer since you know what you are talking about ….

Why did a republican give weapons to an evil man like Bin Ladin?

Please log off..

Ryan

Perhaps you need to go back and reveiw your history at the young age of 34 I doubt if you have lived mucj of it. I was sitting on the tarmac at Fort Campbell when the Iranian Embassy was seized, I was deployed to a forward base in Germany when Charlie Beckworth made his attemp at rescue of the hostages. Swift Boats attacked John Kerry's military record, by claiming it was falisied, the same record that they proclaimed showed that President Bush had completed his military obligations proclaiming it as proof. Kerry had individuals taht served with him standing by his side, have they found anyone that ever servived with our President. And Reagan and Bush gave weapons to bin Laden, he was fighting the Russians in Afganistan, after all the enemy of of my enemy is my friend right, the same reason that our government backed Saddam right up to the day he made the error of invading Kuwait. Son one of us needs a sever leason in American history.

Pay attention to Bill Clinton's arguments - as in points in a debate, not as in shouting match.

Then watch how Wolf Blitzer spins it (as shown crooks and liars dot com).

Blitzer does his own distracting by treating Clinton's words like a tirade, then turning the conversation toward the grudge match of Hillary vs. the neo-cons!

SHAME ON WOLF BLITZER.

SHAME ON CNN.

Shame on anyone who makes ad hominem attacks on Bill Clinton because his logic can't be refuted.

Here is a Response to rvastar from Wynter… enjoy.

1). "This was classic bait and switch — focus on that as opposed to focusing on what's happened," the former president said."
rvastar states:
The point of the supposed "bait and switch" that Clinton's talking about would be to divert attention off of a damaging report from Gen. Patraeus' ("the surge has failed") and focus instead on the MoveOn ad.
The only problem is that the report wasn't damaging…quite the opposite. Why would the Republicans want to avert attention from something that positively supports their interests? So Clinton's rhetoric is completely meaningless. Got it?
Response:
– The report "was" damaging. The comments by the senators demonstrated that. MoveOn's ad simply pointed out that the messenger, albeit an honored military general, still is voicing Bush's talking points. See Katie Couric video to see what I mean. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9XXUyWTA1g). The issue of whining about the ad is a diversion to take the focus off of the message that we are still bogged down in Iraq.
2)."These are the people that ran a television ad in Georgia with [former Sen.] Max Cleland — who lost half his body in Vietnam…"
rvastar states:
Talk about "disingenous" and a "bait and switch"!!!
The only reason anyone's ever heard of Max Cleland is because of the Dems "disingenous" attempts to fool the American people into thinking that they actually support the military. They would roll him out at every Dem event, saying "look at what this Democrat sacrificed in Vietnam and how horribly >the evil Republicans have impugned his sacrifice with that ad!", implying that the horrible wounds he'd suffered were the result of combat and that the ad was questioning his patriotism.
The part they conveniently left out was that Cleland wasn't injured in combat, but by picking up a hand grenade that was lying on the ground while he was on his way to drink beers with his buddies. And the purpose of the ad in question was to make the very sound - and true - point that, in the wake of 9/11, Cleland voted 11 time against Homeland Security measures because his union supporters were unhappy with some of the provisions. IOW, Cleland was all for increased homeland security…as long as it didn't interfere with the donation checks.
Response:
- Now look who is attacking a distinguished veteran? The man served and didn't lose his legs by using a can opener wrong. Here is how he lost them…
On April 8, with a month left in his tour, Cleland was ordered to set up a radio relay station on a nearby hill. A helicopter flew him and two soldiers to the treeless top of Hill 471, east of Khe Sanh. Cleland knew some of the soldiers camped there from Operation Pegasus. He told the pilot he was going to stay a while. Maybe have a few beers with friends.
When the helicopter landed, Cleland jumped out, followed by the two soldiers. They ducked beneath the rotors and turned to watch the liftoff. Cleland reached down to pick up the grenade he believed had popped off his flak jacket. The blast slammed him backward, shredding both his legs and one arm. He was 25 years old…
3). "But it was okay to question [Massachusetts Sen.] John Kerry's patriotism on a blatantly dishonest play that had dishonest claims by people that didn't know what they were talking about."
rvastar states:
Poor, innocent, denigrated, John "Lerch" Kerry! Those mean "Swift Boat" ad people were lying about him! Then you'd think that this noble warrior would want to clear his name, right?
Wrong. All he had to do was file suit for libel and defamation of character, but he didn't - in fact, he let the statue of limitations on defamation run out in all the jurisdictions that he could filed suit, including the long, 3-year statute of limitations for doing so in Massachusetts.
Why? Because he knew he'd get hammered in a court room where lying is illegal and you can't count on the leftist media to carry water for you. Witnesses would actually be deposed under threat of perjury…makes them a little less certain in their selective "recollections".
Response:
rvastar you are so gone at this point I don't think there is anything to respond to. Anyways, it was stated in another comment that your so full of it. Read this comment by Hooligan.
You have heard that the Swift Boat vets were "outed" two years ago by ONI, right?!
They admitted under grilling from Admiral Crowe that they, dare I say it, LIED!!!
They cut up $330,000 to produce a commercial. All funded by the friends of the program in Texas, headed up by none other than T. Boone Pickens, who funded McCain's assassination in South Caroline in 2000.

Rvastar; your OPINIONS prove nothing. Way to go rvastar, the rvaster, the rav! Cool name you rvastar! You deserve a cookie for creativity (for the name and your "facts".

I for one can't wait for the much beloved Hillary Clinton to ascend to her rightful throne and here is why:

She has more experience than everyone else on every subject (Biden and Richardson were never first lady).

She would never pardon criminals.

She would never hire a felon for Chief of White house security that would end up getting his hands on FBI files on those mean Republicans.

She would stop any politician from investing $1000 and making $100,000 overnight as that would be insider trading.

She will stop the Shrub from stealing gifts from the WH on his last day.

She will not stand for all of the US attorneys being fired for political reasons.

There will not be a list of people that will say she raped or had affairs with her.

She would not stand for the secret serviceman being told to "Shut the bleep up and don't even look at me".

She loves GQ magazine and restaurants that have her daughters picture hanging.

She respects women that stay home and bake cookies.

She detests women that stand by their man even if they cheat.

She would not fill her travel office with corrupt friends by firing good, hard working people.

She has always been against the war.

She reads all reports that are important.

She checks into major donors, unlike other campaigns.

She TOTALLY believes in gay rights.

Her love for illegal immigrants, as ALL of them are just here for work.

She will not stand for our embassies being bombed, our ships or our World trade centers; she will treat them as terrorist acts and not criminal ones.

She will defend us even if her decision is not popular.

If she ever goes in front of a grand jury, she would never say "I don't recall" 100 times.

She will be the best duster in the history of the WH, and no billing records will show up years later as the place will be spotless.

She will explain how she was named after famed beekeepers Sir Edmund Hillary and why.

I love this woman, and there is no reason why any sane person would not vote for her and that wholesome, truthful husband who would make a great ambassador that would bring more women into the political theatre.

Bush sucks.

January 2009 can't get here fast enough.

Posted By Tom Dedham, Mass : September 27, 2007 1:21 pm

Tom,,

You are completed nuts dude,,,everything you wrote was a complete lie,,I thought it was a joke when I read it,,,Go do your homework or go play some video games , this blog is for adults. The CLINTONS are pure evil

Ryan in Indianapolis,

again I ask … why did Reagan give weapons to Bin Ladin??

Joe Biden was right last night. Every "Christian" Republican should read Matthew 23 & see what Jesus had to say about hypocrites.

To Dean in Boston:

You have heard that the Swift Boat vets were "outed" two years ago by ONI, right?!

They admitted under grilling from Admiral Crowe that they, dare I say it, LIED!!!

They cut up $330,000 to produce a commercial. All funded by the friends of the program in Texas, headed up by none other than T. Boone Pickens, who funded McCain's assassination in South Caroline in 2000.

nice crowd you support!

Posted By Hooligan, Everywhere, America : September 27, 2007 11:47 am

Total LIE LIE LIE LIE,,,,Swift Boat for Truth was exactly that the TRUTH,,,John KERRY was and is A BIG TIME Fraud,,,I have never understood why the liberals get their panties in a bundle about this,,,I know the truth hurts but deal with it.

David,

My taxes, never were decreased, because GWB let my IT job go to India, now I make pennies, but I can at least buy safe toys from China for pennies ???
Do you think a republican is going to bring troops home sooner? How about we try now. Who brought us there in the first place??
Lastly, social security ?!?!?!??? That calls for a triple — Ha Ha Ha — so sad

Hey Ryan in Indianapolis,

Maybe you should be the one shutting up. If Ronald Reagan would have done his job when we lost almost 300 marines when Hezbollah attacked our barracks in the 80's, maybe we would not be fighting them in the middle east right now. Instead like a coward, he withdrew our troops after the attack.

Posted By sanderson : September 27, 2007 11:26 am

No moron that was caused by another incomptent democratic president Jimmy Carter, remember the guy that got pushed around by IRAN his whole presidency. I am sorry your memory of history is so bad and you run away from the truth like a typical liberal. Is there any liberals out there that have any common sense???? I am 34 and still never found one, Bill Clinton is PATHETIC

HE ONLY "SMEARS" OFFICE INTERNS

Thank you Bill Clinton - you were one of the Greatest Presidents of all time and I thank you for speaking your mind about the slime-ball Republicans and what they are worth. Most will be jumping off bridges when Hillary wins next year!

Posted By John: "If the republican presidential "hopefuls" reply to issues like the republicans in this forum, it will be a true blow out!! Ha Ha Ha - losers!"

Be careful what you wish for. I hope you were paying attention to the democratic debate. Your income taxes are going to increase, your hopefully elected president is not going to pull out of Iraq until 2013, and you won't be able to draw on social security until you're 67.

If you get your way and a democratic president is elected it won't be just the republicans that are losers. We will all be losers.

Sorry, to James, Phoenix AZ –

World War II: 400,000 Americans died - FDR (Dem)

I guess we should have let Hitler win? Is that how you feel?

Nice.

For rvastar or anyone who might care about the truth:. The not so Swift Boat Veterans were most vocally fronted by Larry Thurlow who repeatedly denounced Kerry for getting an award when there was no enemy fire. Investigation showed that Thurlow had been awarded a Bronze Star for his actions during the same incident. Thurlow's citation includes several phrases indicating hostile fire such as "despite enemy bullets flying about him" and "enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire", and speaks of fire directed at "all units" of the five-boat fleet.

Bush supporters can continue to support Thurlow who was willing himself to accept a medal for what he says were lies and the president who refuses to condemn lies against true military heroes. Hopefully, they will continue Bush's search for one person in the world who can verify that he actually served in Alabama. Can anyone send an example where Bush actually says he served in Alabama? All he ever says is a repeated canned line that "I completed my obligations" which could include the real possibility that Daddy pulled strings to get him out. I have yet to see him say he served in Alabama. Please look. I want to know the truth.

Looks like someone did not like my opinion. Right on Clinton, the Democrates did not fire the first volley, and few Republicans raised concern over attack ads going their way. As for the Swift Boat organization, excuse me, it was a pure smear campiagn against a real war hero, don't like his politics fine, but don't attack his military war record, at least he has one. As to someone having a right to voice an opinion, that's right and it goes two ways, in the days of Vietnam there was no man that had more of a right than John Kerry, now that said, if this nation can not start having a political discussion without nonfactual smear campaigns, that are controlled by the two major parties, and denied at the same time by the two major parties we are going to implode.

In our society where the ends often justify the means and unsubstanciated accusations fly unchecked, my hope is that our citizens will take the time needed to help provide the information needed to distinguish between lies and truth and take such actions as are necessary to elect honest and upright people who will then regain trust and thus help us discern the best course of action for our country on any given issue.
Lacking this, I fear our democracy's future and the future of our world.

Bottom line — the republicans are in big trouble, and will lose. The blank empty comments from the republicans in this forum underlines that. They have been so brain washed with silly slogans from their silly leaders they really have nothing constructive to say. If the republican presidential "hopefuls" reply to issues like the republicans in this forum, it will be a true blow out!! Ha Ha Ha - losers!

The fact that Bill has a tarnished reputation for honesty doesn't diminish the validity of this comment. Frankly, Hillary's greatest asset in terms of electability is her ability (coupled with Bill's) to stand up to negative attacks from the Republicans. Let's face it– there's nothing new that the Republicans can throw at her. Neither of the Clintons is a saint, but say what you will– they are both incredibly intelligent, rational, and shrewd. The Clintons' deceptions in the past pale in comparison to the outrageious lies that undergird the current administration and broader Republican agenda. Keep it coming Bill.

Wild Bill! Where you been hiding, you old sly dog, you!

Everyone! Sing with me! This the old Wild Billy Clinton song! Razzle Dazzle!

"Give 'em the old razzle dazzle,
Razzle Dazzle 'em.

Give 'em an act with lots of flash in it,
And the reaction will be passionate.

Give 'em the old hocus pocus,
Bead and feather 'em.
How can they see with sequins in their eyes?

What if your hinges all are rusting?
What if, in fact, you're just disgusting?

Razzle dazzle 'em,
And they;ll never catch wise!

Give 'em the old Razzle Dazzle,
Razzle dazzle 'em.

Give 'em a show that's so splendiferous,
Row after row will crow vociferous.

Give 'em the old flim flam flummox,
Fool and fracture 'em.
How can they hear the truth above the roar?

Throw 'em a fake and a finagle,
They'll never know you're just a bagel.

Razzle dazzle 'em,
And they'll beg you for more!

Give 'em the old double whammy,
Daze and dizzy 'em.

Back since the days of old Methuselah,
Everyone loves the big bambooz-a-ler.

Give 'em the old three ring circus,
Stun and stagger 'em.
When you're in trouble, go into your dance!

Though you are stiffer than a girder,
They'll let you get away with murder.

Razzle dazzle 'em.
And you've got a romance!

Give 'em the old Razzle Dazzle.
Razzle dazzle 'em,
Show 'em the first rate sorcerer you are.

Long as you keep 'em way off balance,
How can they spot you've got no talent?

Razzle Dazzle 'em,
Razzle Dazzle 'em.
And they'll make you a star!

Yee Haw!!! Ain't nobody like Wild Bill.

He's the guy you wish you'd have had leading your bachelor party, you just don't want to leave him alone with any of your female relatives (wife, daughter, grandmother, etc.).

Clinton's statements make complete sense and are supported by the facts.

Chris Haynes, I refuted this above at 1:11p. Prove me wrong.

…and from the other side of your mouth you say they swiftboat ads questioning a war heros record are fine.

Paul NY, I refuted this above at 1:11p. Prove me wrong.

Notice how Republicans and people on here who attack Clinton, repeatedly attack the person instead of the issue at hand…what Clinton said here, love it or hate him as person, is right and factual.

Peter, I spoke to each of Clinton's points and refuted them at 1:11p. Prove me wrong.

Give 'em hell Bill!

I'm with Bill 100% but watch the republicans turn his statements around and try to use them against Hillary's campaign.

Quoted for truth:
Notice how Republicans and people on here who attack Clinton, repeatedly attack the person instead of the issue at hand. As a non-party affliated voter, I am still appreciative of the democrats ability to address the issues. Grow up people, what Clinton said here, love it or hate him as person, is right and factual. And it has nothing to do with his term in office, whatsoever.
End Quote:
It's quite comical that the people that attack the former President in such a manner, it reminds me of a debate that Mr. Clinton addressed the issues and questions posed to him, while Dole would dance around and turn his answer in to a mud slinging comment rather than answer the question posed to him. It's still the same old song and dance with the Republicans.

Paul from NY,

You wrote, "Just like most republicans you speak from both sides of your mouth. You say the moveon ad was wrong for questioning the general , and from the other side of your mouth you say they swiftboat ads questioning a war heros record are fine.
Typical republican thinking."

Typical democrat tap-dancing on your part. Ignore the facts (Gen Petreaus not a politician, Swift Boat were comprised of mainly Vets challenging Kerry) to support your view.

And it was a "vast right wing conspiracy" that made up the rumor about Bill and Monica, right Paul??

The whole political system..and the politicians have gone to hell in an hand basket. Statesmanship is dead…
the country is divided over lies and if we don't change we will be headed for another civil war.

This is why George Washington warned us about political parties.

Steve H - Arizona,

Posting the same erroneous statements TWICE won't make it any more correct.

You wrote,
Nixon: Cambodia
Reagan: Iran/Iraq War, Iran/Contra, arming the Taliban
Dubya: Iraq

If you really want to delve into history, Stevie:

Vietnam: 60,000 Americans died - started by JFK (dem), escalated by Johnson (dem), ended by Nixon (rep)

Korean War: 53,000 Americans died - Harry Truman (Dem)

World War II: 400,000 Americans died - FDR (Dem)

World War I: 100,00 Americans died - Woodrow Wilson (Dem)

Gulf War (Kuwait/Iraq): 500 Americans died - Bush #41 (Rep)

Afghanistan/Iraq: 4000 Americans died - Bush #43 (Rep)

From where I stand, Stevie, Democratic Presidents have started more wars and gotten more Americans killed. History does hurt - democrats.

Boy, he sure is aging better than Dubya. With every year, he gets more articulate, and W gets less so.

Petraeus is a General in the US Armed Forces. Not a politician running for office.
President Clinton's comparisions to political campaigns make no sense at all.

Notice how Republicans and people on here who attack Clinton, repeatedly attack the person instead of the issue at hand. As a non-party affliated voter, I am still appreciative of the democrats ability to address the issues. Grow up people, what Clinton said here, love it or hate him as person, is right and factual. And it has nothing to do with his term in office, whatsoever.

Wow, I can't wait to see the posts on here when Hillary finally does become president. Conservatives will be crying themselves to sleep.

My god, he is good and says so well with courage.

He has been the best president in my 40 yrs in america.

You uneducated sheep of the right attack President Clinton with rhetoric, lies, and ridiculous accusations straight from the mouths of Coulter, Limbaugh, and Hannity. Its disgusting. Reading the books of those people don't give you a perspective to stand on, they just make you sound completely stupid and bitter. Please, please get a life. As for the MoveOn.org ad, they have a right to free speech and can exercise it how they feel. Read the ad. What they said wasn't untrue. I am an independent and I see exactly where they are coming from.

Tell it like it is Bill! Finally a democrat who is calling them on their BS. Too bad he can't run again.

Further, why did the republican Reagan give Iran weapons, while at the same time give Saddam weapons to fight Iran? I guess there's something about republicans giving weapons to our enemies, then having another republican spend a trillion dollars, (just wait) to fight the same enemies. Duh!

I wouldn't claim either party. People who do are pretty much saying that other people do their thinking for them. Drink the Kool-aid and babble. This country is slipping into the sewer and politically myopic morons are helping the slide.
If we don't get some changes, starting with term limits, this county won't exist in 50 years. Personally I am hoping for a helluva good plague. I am an optomist but it is going to take a catastrophe of major proportions to wake this country up.
I can give a perfect example. 30 years ago we had a gas crisis. Temporary measures that were implemented were dropped as soon as the crisis passed.
Today we have a 100 million vehicles that get less than 20 miles a gallon.
We hear about alternative power sources, bio fuel, ethanol, electric cars et al. How about people selling their behemoths and buying cars that get decent mileage? We have been trying to pass a gas tax in Minnesota for the last 15 years and our current governor, in the fine tradition of the
eunuchs who have a stranglehold on the governship of this state, chooses not to risk alienating the auto unions and auto manufacturers by supporting a gas tax. Longon bridges falling down. Oops. That should be Minneapolis bridges falling down. The soap opera continues.

James, Phoenix AZ :

Just like most republicans you speak from both sides of your mouth. You say the moveon ad was wrong for questioning the general , and from the other side of your mouth you say they swiftboat ads questioning a war heros record are fine.
Typical republican thinking.

Typical 'Clintonese'.

To James from Phoenix:

Let's look at history a bit, shall we?

So, you say Clinton lies?

I would take a lying Democratic president over Republican ones that kill innocent people and destroy a countries infrastructure in the name of their "foreign policy."

Nixon: Cambodia
Reagan: Grenada, arming Saddam Hussein (killing innocent Iranians with US weapons, Iran/Contra, arming the Taliban (some of those weapons were used against US troops)
King George I: Panama
King George II: Iraq

History hurts, doesn't it?

Steve,

I lost it on your comment where you say "mangos for jobs and nukes in India."

Are you asserting that India acquired nuclear weapons under W's watch?

Have a good day,

We have gone from having a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford for president to a man who frequently cannot create simple sentences at an elementary school level. We have actually reached the point where the official White House transcript of Bush's speech yesterday is no longer accurate and had to be grammatical altered to avoid making him look like a moron.

One last thing about lying, at least you'll know that Bush and his people will never lie because he refuses to let any of them testify/talk in the first place.

Hurry 08 !!!!!!

Sam Richards, a fellow North Carolinian: This is the type of ignorance that I expect from a citizen of a state that is continually fooled by the Republican party. Clinton's statements make complete sense and are supported by the facts. Like the saying goes, "I think, therefore I am Democrat (or anything other than Republican)."

James

Here we go again:

“… But I challenge any Republican, conservative, neocon nutjob or any other Bush supporter to deny the facts behind Clinton's statements."

The SVBT do have the right to challenge another vet, but not to lie about it to sway the electorate. You still haven’t denied the facts behind Clinton’s statements.

Tracy McClain

People who are against the war aren’t trying to make the USA fail, because in their eyes we already have failed. Our presence over there has helped to foster a sectarian civil war. We were misled on the reasons to invade Iraq and deposed a dictator who had nothing to do with 9/11. We need to take a step back and fix the problems here in this country before we can tell others how to run theirs; we are not the world police.

Your statement: “Don't you love your freedom and our American way? It is one thing to be a Democrat, but to turn on your own countrymen…at a time of war, I'd say that is in the lines with treason. Piss on your silly little agendas…the thing you need to ask yourself is "Do you want to live in an Islamic state?”

More of the same old GWB line, “if you’re not with us, you’re against us”
You see, believe it or not Tracy, the world is not black or white, right or wrong at all times; there are in fact many gray areas. It is my constitutional, God given, and patriotic right to question the actions of my government when I see something that is either wrong or an injustice. I will not be blindly led down a path to war without finding out what the reasons are. You see some of us actually feel that Petraeus is a lap dog for this war mongering administration and that is not treason. I’d rather see us spend more money going after OBL as opposed to being in the middle of a civil war. I’ve gone on record in these blogs condemning the Moveon.org ad saying that it was poorly phrased. You can view some more of my comments here.

Pathetic Clinton haters.

That man had more relevance as a President than this train wreck of a human being you pathetically support today.

Proud of George Bush? Proud of how he has ruined our reputation worldwide? Proud of how he has set us back strategically against the real terrorists with his selfish, self-absorbed detour into Iraq? Proud of how he has not been able to cobble even the slightest economic advantage from any foreign country EVER (mangos for jobs and nukes in India).

Go ahead. Support this idiot and show the rest of us just how ignorant and unpatriotic all of you are. Actually, we've known that for a while.

To Ryan in Indianapolis..

<<>>

Actually, wasn't the republican Reagan the one who dealt with the terrorist by giving them weapons to fight the USSR? These are the same Reagan "allies" who brought down the WTC. Why did a republican give Bin Ladin weapons?

Yeah, yeah, blah blah. More of the "he said, she said, they said, we said" Dr. Seuss politics.

Take an event that you find displeasure with, construct a conspiracy theory that the Tom Clancy or John Grisham readers will believe as plausible to back it up. Say these are the FACTS and point to the manufactured paper trail.

Half of the populace will believe you, the other half will call you on it, then, they'll sit and argue for years about who is more corrupt.

Meanwhile back on the ranch.

I like hearing what comes from the candidate's mouths. The frontrunner ducked and dodged every hard question thrown her way in last night's debate. That's far more telling to me than any attack ad or vote 'yes' to condemn anyone with a bad ad, vote 'no' to condemn a "subset of anyone" for one of those ads.

Why the divergence in her vote? So the HillPraisers can say she stood by her friends and didn't duck out on them?

It's really sad when we arrive at a place where semantics trump principle at every turn and every level of government.

As a taxoayer, I'm not satisfied.

Have a good day,

Right on, Bill. I do admire your courage to taking a stand, where few people dare to do.

On the other hand, few people can say it so well, with a convincing historial perspective. This tells you that experience does count in politics.

Bait and switch… That calls to mind a little story about a man, an intern and a few missiles aimed Osama.

The Clintons wrote the book on smear… even the Hollywood communists contend with that!

I am 68 years old and I can truely say Bill Clinton has been the greatest President in my lifetime. I grew up on a farm and Republcans are like horses wearing blinders, they can't see the entire picture.

I for one can't wait for the much beloved Hillary Clinton to ascend to her rightful throne and here is why:

She has more experience than everyone else on every subject (Biden and Richardson were never first lady).

She would never pardon criminals.

She would never hire a felon for Chief of White house security that would end up getting his hands on FBI files on those mean Republicans.

She would stop any politician from investing $1000 and making $100,000 overnight as that would be insider trading.

She will stop the Shrub from stealing gifts from the WH on his last day.

She will not stand for all of the US attorneys being fired for political reasons.

There will not be a list of people that will say she raped or had affairs with her.

She would not stand for the secret serviceman being told to "Shut the bleep up and don't even look at me".

She loves GQ magazine and restaurants that have her daughters picture hanging.

She respects women that stay home and bake cookies.

She detests women that stand by their man even if they cheat.

She would not fill her travel office with corrupt friends by firing good, hard working people.

She has always been against the war.

She reads all reports that are important.

She checks into major donors, unlike other campaigns.

She TOTALLY believes in gay rights.

Her love for illegal immigrants, as ALL of them are just here for work.

She will not stand for our embassies being bombed, our ships or our World trade centers; she will treat them as terrorist acts and not criminal ones.

She will defend us even if her decision is not popular.

If she ever goes in front of a grand jury, she would never say "I don't recall" 100 times.

She will be the best duster in the history of the WH, and no billing records will show up years later as the place will be spotless.

She will explain how she was named after famed beekeepers Sir Edmund Hillary and why.

I love this woman, and there is no reason why any sane person would not vote for her and that wholesome, truthful husband who would make a great ambassador that would bring more women into the political theatre.

Bush sucks.

January 2009 can't get here fast enough.

Kudos to Bill Clinton for blasting the Republicans.
Move on.org was right to question Patraeus, he's just another Bush "yes" man.

Nice to hear someone call the Republicans out. And by the way, compared to the present, what did we, as a nation, have to worry about while Clinton was President? Was his private life that important? If so, shouldn't we worry about a conviction for DUI and very average grades in college? Tell me what is so exemplary about our present President's private life. Perhaps it's the record he has for taking vacation days. How high do you want to set the bar? Someday we'll look upon the 90's with wistful fondness.

Here are the questions nobody's asking: Were the facts in the ad accurate? What are our leaders doing to address the issues raised in it? Why is MoveOn.org being demonized for demanding accountability?
No, Republicans don't want to talk about that. Instead they play the "righteous indignation" card. Kill the messenger. Distract from the real issues. Anything to avoid answering tough questions and having to admit they were wrong.

So what I'm taking from this article is that Mr. Clinton is saying the democrats are no better than the republicans. In other words Bill says the republicans ran these smear advertisements so the republicans shouldn't complain when the democrats do the same thing.

Just because the republicans ran these type of ads doesn't make it right for the democrats to run them. Instead of taking the higher ground the democrats wallow in the same muck with the republicans and Bill is saying it's okay. So Bill, if the republicans jump off a cliff will you please jump off with them…and take your wife?

At no time does Clinton say the Petraeus ad was wrong. Instead he says the republicans do the same thing so they shouldn't complain. Way to lower yourself to the lowest denominator Bill.

To James in Phoenix and the other Republican nutjobs:

So Clinton lies, eh? Well, I'd rather have a Democratic president that lies than Republican ones that kill innocent people in the name of their "foreign policy":

Nixon: Cambodia
Reagan: Iran/Iraq War, Iran/Contra, arming the Taliban
Dubya: Iraq

Ouch, History hurts, doesn't it?

It's great that the best President of my lifetime (34 years) have spoken out against these Republicans. I can hardly wait to watch O'Reily, Hannity and the others cry tonight. I'm looking for good ole Newt to even make an appearance. Bill is Public Enemy No. 1 to the Republicans.
Can you say distration tatic? Would all the republicans just be honest with themselves and admit that the condemnation of Moveon is just an attempt to divert everyones attention from the failed policy in Iraq while they sceme on a way to attack Iran. I have come to grips that we are in Iraq for the long haul, it doesn't matter what the next two presidents does. I just hope that 15 passes by quickly before this maniac madman and his Republican cronies decides to attack Iran. Republicans like Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity are already playing it up and pushing for the attack.

Clinton is dead on, the Republicans just want to keep distracting the public from the real facts. The truth is that the ad was fine. It's not libelous. It's not wrong. Thank God for the First Amendment.

I miss Bubba. So what if he wanted a little love on the side? When he lied, nobody died.

But I challenge any Republican, conservative, neocon nutjob or any other Bush supporter to deny the facts behind Clinton's statements.

I'll give it shot, Ernie.

"This was classic bait and switch — focus on that as opposed to focusing on what's happened," the former president said."

The point of the supposed "bait and switch" that Clinton's talking about would be to divert attention off of a damaging report from Gen. Patraeus' ("the surge has failed") and focus instead on the MoveOn ad.

The only problem is that the report wasn't damaging…quite the opposite. Why would the Republicans want to avert attention from something that positively supports their interests? So Clinton's rhetoric is completely meaningless. Got it?

"These are the people that ran a television ad in Georgia with [former Sen.] Max Cleland — who lost half his body in Vietnam…"

Talk about "disingenous" and a "bait and switch"!!!

The only reason anyone's ever heard of Max Cleland is because of the Dems "disingenous" attempts to fool the American people into thinking that they actually support the military. They would roll him out at every Dem event, saying "look at what this Democrat sacrificed in Vietnam and how horribly the evil Republicans have impugned his sacrifice with that ad!", implying that the horrible wounds he'd suffered were the result of combat and that the ad was questioning his patriotism.

The part they conveniently left out was that Cleland wasn't injured in combat, but by picking up a hand grenade that was lying on the ground while he was on his way to drink beers with his buddies. And the purpose of the ad in question was to make the very sound - and true - point that, in the wake of 9/11, Cleland voted 11 time against Homeland Security measures because his union supporters were unhappy with some of the provisions. IOW, Cleland was all for increased homeland security…as long as it didn't interfere with the donation checks.

"But it was okay to question [Massachusetts Sen.] John Kerry's patriotism on a blatantly dishonest play that had dishonest claims by people that didn't know what they were talking about."

Poor, innocent, denigrated, John "Lerch" Kerry! Those mean "Swift Boat" ad people were lying about him! Then you'd think that this noble warrior would want to clear his name, right?

Wrong. All he had to do was file suit for libel and defamation of character, but he didn't - in fact, he let the statue of limitations on defamation run out in all the jurisdictions that he could filed suit, including the long, 3-year statute of limitations for doing so in Massachusetts.

Why? Because he knew he'd get hammered in a court room where lying is illegal and you can't count on the leftist media to carry water for you. Witnesses would actually be deposed under threat of perjury…makes them a little less certain in their selective "recollections".

Bottom line, Ernie, you're the typical leftist…long on indignation, short on facts.

It takes one to know one. Bill Clinton is the master of these kind of politics. Bill and Hillary are masters of deception. They try to appeal to the masses but don't really care for them. So many people are dumb enough to believe them. Power and position is their only concern. They are definitely a politician.

None of us need to look hard if we are determined to find hypocrisy in our politicians or ourselves so for some readers that have already made up their mind, it’ll always be easier to attack the messenger and ignore the message. At a time when the majority of Americans have serious doubts about Bush and his plans in Iraq, the patriotic thing to do is to listen and consider opposing views and try to ignore sound bites from biased mouth pieces. Double-checking Petraeus’ testimony for sugar-coating at a time of war is the right thing to because it is our duty as Americans to demand and get the truth. Unlike the Swift Boat campaign, this is not an attempted character assassination. This is a group of Americans attempting to keep those in charge honest when it matters most.

Whether you like Clinton as a person or his performance as president or not, what he said about those Republican attack ads is completely true. Changing the subject by attacking Clinton's character is something I teach my high school students NOT to do when writing persuasively. Stick to the topic at hand, don't bait and switch by attacking your opponent's character.

Facts: Rove's number one tactic to get Republicans elected has been to lie and smear as hard and as often as possible. He started a movement that Republicans are trying to continue. When Democrats try to hit back hard, they get attacked for being unpatriotic (or basically attacked for disagreeing with a Republican- that's not allowed, you know). Saying that to disagree with a Republican or any official in power (in this case a general) is tantamount to wanting the enemy to win is ridiculously unfair and I would hope that the voters would get tired of hearing that attack. It is attempting to make people shut up if they disagree with major policies, even ones that were a bad idea to start with and have caused huge numbers of casualties with no end in sight. Oops, I just said something negative about a policy. I guess I hate America and want terrorists to win! That's the argument we are hearing from Republicans.

The Republicans have won too many elections based on lies and myths smeared all over TV and in print. It's time the Democrats start hitting back just as hard. All I ask is that they don't start stooping to the low levels of Republicans by making up lies about their opponents. But then again, I ask myself: would it be worth it to have people I trust more in office, even if they used dirty methods to win an election? I have a hard time answering that. I don't want it to have to come to that, but the Republicans play so dirty, that it might be the only way to beat them.

There were reasons to believe that Patraeus was towing the party line, performing as a Bush lackey. Their numbers were doctored by being carefully selected. Who hasn't already heard about the number of insurgent deaths being underestimated in his report because they didn't count gunshots to the front of a person's head as an insurgent attack?? They counted it as a simple crime of murder to skew the numbers. That alone is reason to say that the general's facts were false and selected to provide a more positive view of the war's recent progress. Therefore, the ad had merit.

Clinton is right about one thing - this kind of dirty politics has to end. If it doesn't, we will be weakening ourselves internally. We can have a reasonable dialog about the issues without sending out the attack dogs, be they Republican, or Democrat.
It's a shame to see that some Democrat-leaning organizations have now mastered Karl Rove's obnoxious and ugly techniques of avoiding the issues while debasing the worth and character of an opponent. Shame on the Republicans shame on the Democrats, but mostly, shame on us.

"1. Ads against John Kerry and Max Cleland were against politicians running for office. General Petreaus is NOT a politician running for office. He is the Commanding General of our Iraq Forces that was in Washington to provide an update and directly answer the questions of Congress. "

Ummm…. so what! Are you saying it is not OK to question our leaders? I don't care if he is Emperor of the Universe…. a lacky of the administration is still a lacky.

In response to Bill Clinton as the best President ever, how about FDR? He led us through World War II? How about Reagan? You may not like his Conservative beliefs, but he brought down the Soviet Union and started Treaties to dismantle Nuclear Weopons.

Let's look at what Bill Clinton did. He led us to an Econ