Hillary is running to "renew the promise of America"...?

[Contrite]

Now, tell me, what does that mean? Obama says we "need change in Washington". I agree. But what kind of change is he talking about?

Why are these people so damned non-specific in what they stand for?

[TwilightZone]

1. Considering that pretty much everything needs to be changed, why be specific?

:)

[Kiouni]

8. basically I like the color of the house and now

through out the shit inside!

[rocktivity]

2. "Change in Washington" works for me

Things had damn well BETTER change in Washington, and I think it's safe to presume that Obama wants to change them for the better!

"Renew the promise of America" sucks like a black hole, however--too much along the lines of "prosperity is just around the corner", "a chicken in every pot", and "forty acres and a mule." It has the DLC's fingerprints all over it. It's time to start DELIVERING on those promises!

:headbang:
rocknation

[patrice]

3. Because we're the ones who are supposed to tell them.

Remember a guy called Howard Dean? We ARE trying to change what's going on.

[Contrite]

5. Did you see my avatar?

I'm a Deaniac from way back and I know Howard has always said it's up to us. BUT he also said that Democrats need to stand up for what they believe in. I just want them to say something SUBSTANTIAL, that's all. Howard at least was specific when he campaigned. You KNEW what he stood for and what he didn't! You knew he stood AGAINST the war in Iraq and FOR universal health care coverage, for instance. You knew he stood for a balanced budget and against telling people what they can and can't do in the bedroom. And he had a GREAT message: Taking Our Country Back!

[patrice]

12. Didn't look; I should stop multi-tasking all of the time.

I refer to myself as a Deanocrat. There were a bunch of us here; immediately began MeetUps when that started; went to Iowa; stuck together (for the most part) and worked for Kerry.

Yep. They've got to stop being afraid of Corporate Media (get the word out by the web). They've got to start respecting our ability to handle the truth - even when we don't like it - by working harder to honestly explain and illustrate things such the IWR Yeas.

Obama showed some of what I want to see in this regard with his response to Australian PM Howard's remarks about him recently http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x187031
I going to be watching him and hoping for more of the same.

[Contrite]

15. Yes. I liked his response too. It showed strength. n/t

[scarletwoman]

4. "renew the promise of America" -- Is that like refinancing your house? (nt)

[Dr Fate]

6. She can start by apologizing for and then promising not to support fake wars ever again.

That would be an excellent way to "renew the promise"- to honestly admit that you supported a war based on lies and to promise not to do it again.

I like the talking point just fine- but she needs to come clean as to her own promise keeping before she holds the entire country to such a high standard.

[oasis]

16. Visualize how America will look in 2010 under a Clinton adminsistration. America will be well

on the way to repairing its ruptured domestic and foreign policies.

I am confident that the team Clinton is the only one equal to that task.

The Iraq fiasco was a product of Bush's lies, and Bush's incompetence.Hillary's vision for America's future has little to do with that.

[Dr Fate]

21. Under a another DEM administration besides Clinton would be even sweeter.

If Bush is such a liar and so incompetent, then why in the world was she for a war with him as Chief to begin with?

Did Hillary people just get the memo that Bush lies and is incompetent? Too bad she couldnt see that when she handed him a blank check. I could.

I am confident that other good DEMS besides Hillary can run the show just fine. How do I know she wont show poor leadership again- in a way worse than trusting an idiot like Bush on Iraq?

I'd say Hillary's "yes" vote was pretty incompetent and misguided.

America's future has a lot to do with having leaders that will make the right choices, or at the least ones who own up to them when they make mistakes.

[oasis]

23. Years ago, I bought a "lemon" from a smooth car salesman. My family never asked me to apologize(nt)

[Dr Fate]

24. Did you have an entire political base begging you not to buy it? LOL! Bush="smooth?"

Because almost the entire DEM base, except the ones who were stupid enough to trust Bush, wanted her to oppose the war in all of it's bogus "stages." She ignored us and sided with Bush and the media instead-while her DLC folks smeared us as a bunch of crazies.

LOL! So Bush is now the "smooth" salesman in an effort to defend Hillary's poor judgement? Who knew? LOL!

I'm sorry- but trusting Bush- a known liar and a bumbling idiot with a war is not like accidently buying a bad car from a "smooth salesman."

Hillary had time to return the "car" after she knew Powell was lying-well before the war.

Did she?

Is Hillary planning on winning or hiding the ball with these with bad analogies- or is she going to come clean as to her support for Bush's war?

[ThomCat]

7. Because if they don't promise anything specific

they can't be held accountable when they don't deliver.

[Greyhound]

10. You got there first.

Will there ever be some point at which we realize that those that seek power, generally with few exceptions, don't do so for our benefit?

[MonkeyFunk]

9. because

announcement speeches aren't recitals of specific policy initiatives. Visit their websites to learn more.

Speeches are to inspire existing supporters and gain new ones.

[Contrite]

11. Hmmm. It did nothing for me. n/t

[MonkeyFunk]

13. that's fine

when you find a candidate who recites a laundry list of specific policy ideals in his announcement speech, go vote for him.

[Contrite]

14. I did. He's the DNC chairman now. n/t

[zulchzulu]

17. Carville Le Renégat thinks "renew" and "promise" are market-tested faves

I say we renew the promise to investigate why Carville Le Renégat snitched the Kerry campaign secrets to his skank biotch on Election night, this f*cking up the election results in Ohio.

[Contrite]

18. A big AMEN to that one. n/t

[IndianaGreen]

19. How about restoring habeas corpus and the Constitution?

Even a rightwinger like Bob Barr recognizes that we have slipped into tyranny!

Published on Sunday, February 11, 2007 by the San Francisco Chronicle

Privacy or Protection?

Loss of privacy threatens civilization

by Bob Barr

While probably more often remembered for his prescient warning that America must beware the too-powerful "military-industrial complex," former five-star general and president of the United States, Dwight D. Eisenhower, also possessed a deep understanding of the folly of over-reliance on government power to deliver security to a populace.

In 1949, three years before his election to the presidency and while serving as president of Columbia University, Eisenhower dryly remarked that if security were the ultimate goal of Americans, then "prison ... they'll have enough to eat, a bed and a roof over their heads," should be their abode of choice. While not as memorable as Patrick Henry's "give me liberty or give me death" speech in 1775 that helped spark a revolution in freedom that echoed through the ages, Eisenhower, too, clearly understood that complete security -- if it ever might be secured -- could only be attained at the cost of freedom itself.

America, for its first two and a quarter centuries, inherently understood that a measure of the price paid for freedom is a certain lack of security -- a degree of risk, as it were. While in prior times of peril our nation back slid in its understanding of this principle of liberty, and allowed government to seize power to the extent fundamental freedom was threatened -- the Alien and Sedition Acts early in the 19th century, the suspension of habeas corpus in the Civil War era, the "Red Scare" and the "Palmer Raids" in the time of World War I, the internment of Japanese Americans in World War II -- in each instance, corrective action was taken.

The terrorist attacks of 2001 and the resulting and unprecedented power grab by the federal government in its drive to bring "security" to an America frozen with fear over another such attack, for the first time in our nation's history threatens to permanently enshrine the notion that security trumps freedom.

http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0211-22.htm

[Contrite]

20. A seminal piece. Thank you for sharing it. n/t

[Imagevision]

22. If Obama could make a move to expose Cheney, his popularity would

put him in the white house, the majority of the American people want to see someone heavy (not Scooter) to finally be held accountable and it's justifiably
expected with Bush's illegal lead up to the Iraq war. Too many died for manipulated intelligence!

[Contrite]

25. If Obama would make the right stand on the Middle East

THAT would be splendid!

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/dec/20/obama_on_israel_palestine_same_old_same_old