Clinton Is Victor, Defeating Obama; McCain Also Wins - New York Times

Clinton Is Victor, Defeating Obama; McCain Also Wins - New York Times

Clinton Is Victor, Defeating Obama; McCain Also Wins - New York Times

Each field of candidates in the USA Presidential primaries have established two leading voices. In Iowa, the moral aspirations of each side prevailed but in New Hampshire a harsher reality was reflected. Obama and Hukerbee appear to share commitment and charm. They appear to represent the more optimistic side of things.

Clinton and McCain reassure those who still feel security is paramount. This is the pessimistic side. The "realists". They enter office believing America is under threat and continue losing much money with military adventures to "protect Americans".

The trouble with an apologist following a monster is the actions the monster took are not reversed but diluted - they continue to rust away the foundations of security, albeit in more rationale doses. Until eventually it becomes too expensive, and then they stop. It is the money involved that makes change a more likely democratic solution.

Change only usually occurs by doing something different. It is not that there are singular right answers to the problems the new president will face in 2009. Bush and Cheney have until them to continue to excercise their beliefs; ergo, an impeachment hearing may not just defeat such efforts, but it would turn US politics on its head. But for good reason. Impeaching Bill Clinton was political. Would impeaching Dick Cheney could help Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama be more evenly matched and thus give Americans a better democratic choice?

Clinton Is Victor, Defeating Obama; McCain Also Wins - New York Times

Clinton Is Victor, Defeating Obama; McCain Also Wins - New York Times

Clinton Is Victor, Defeating Obama; McCain Also Wins - New York Times

Each field of candidates in the USA Presidential primaries have established two leading voices. In Iowa, the moral aspirations of each side prevailed but in New Hampshire a harsher reality was reflected. Obama and Hukerbee appear to share commitment and charm. They appear to represent the more optimistic side of things.

Clinton and McCain reassure those who still feel security is paramount. This is the pessimistic side. The "realists". They enter office believing America is under threat and continue losing much money with military adventures to "protect Americans".

The trouble with an apologist following a monster is the actions the monster took are not reversed but diluted - they continue to rust away the foundations of security, albeit in more rationale doses. Until eventually it becomes too expensive, and then they stop. It is the money involved that makes change a more likely democratic solution.

Change only usually occurs by doing something different. It is not that there are singular right answers to the problems the new president will face in 2009. Bush and Cheney have until them to continue to excercise their beliefs; ergo, an impeachment hearing may not just defeat such efforts, but it would turn US politics on its head. But for good reason. Impeaching Bill Clinton was political. Would impeaching Dick Cheney could help Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama be more evenly matched and thus give Americans a better democratic choice?