she'd begin the process to impeach the nihilist-in-chief. He's murdering our guys and gals even as we speak. She's buying time with her double speak...

...you have to ask yourself, does she have a real plan or a real position, or does she just not want to get booed?

Is Salon becoming a propaganda vehicle for Hillary? Sure seems like it.

Her position on Iran is just like her pre-war position on Iraq. "All options must be kept on the table." She won't admit she made a mistake on Iraq because she remains a middle east hawk. I'd like a choice beyond least worst.

If the choice the big money is going to give us is Hillary vs some Republican wingnut, Mr. Bloomberg might make a sensible pragmatic alternative.

I think in my own head, when I think of H. Clinton, I've gone from "BOO!!!" to "boo." It's a big change.

(such as it remains), she can't begin impeachment of Bush. That's reserved to the House. She can vote to convict him, should it ever come about, but she can't get the ball rolling herself, in any official capacity.

(Yes, she could be exerting her influence to get someone in the House to do it and the House leadership to follow through. I'm talking about direct roles not influence.)

And I'm so freaking tired of hearing about how Hillary got booed there. She did get booed, briefly, during one part of her speech. But she also got loud applause during other parts of her speech. The applause was much louder and more sustained than the boos. Yet all I ever hear about is Hillary getting BOOED. I'm not even a big Hillary but an eyewitness, I'm here to set the record straight.

Jane Hamsher was there & wrote about the Senator's speech ("The Ladies of TBA")

http://www.firedoglake.com/

I trust Jane's description a little more than these other guys'.

Anybody who could stay sane in that household could certainly run the insane asylum known as the White House.

Frankly, she and all her ilk-- and by ilk I mean every other gutless Dem who voted to enable the witless squandering of American blood and treasure on this misconceived and immoral war-- sicken me beyond belief. I am so weary of these bend in the Republican wind, spineless masters of the kowtow behaving as if they were acting on some courageous principle back then by knuckling under and allowing this woodenheaded dauphin to have his splendid little war. The blood on his hands stains theirs just as much. Perhaps more so, because they knew better.

Had I my way, she'd have not only been booed off the stage, but out of the public limelight altogether. That she is now the frontrunner for my party's nomination makes me ashamed to be a Democrat. Mark my words, I can see it now as though it's already been written, if she wins the nomination, she will lose in the general election and likely pull this party down with her. She is THAT polarizing to the bulk of American voters.

The "Take Back America" confab was all things Democrat—a rehearsal of the same stale mantras they have been promising Americans for a decade. Maybe the electorate has acquired wisdom with the approval rating of both congress and the president hovering in the twenties.

The Democratic choir sang their simple subject sentences of Benediction: Blessed be health care reform, improvement of education; protection of the environment and the provision of national security.

Several of the presidential aspirants pledged they would continue America’s imperialist occupation of Iraq which will surely continue to stoke the fires of discord in the Middle East. However, they know that at home Jingoism and fear are great mechanisms of control. Our Iraq policy makes one pause for it’s a fundamental example of the extent to which both parties will go to impose U.S.- Euro globalization.

The Democrats agenda, like their “electoral coalition,” is as old and useful as the Edsel. The base of their support is drawn from a moribund labor movement, a stale environmental bureaucracy, along with the out of date civil, women and gay rights rhetoric which were appeasing when initially uttered in the 1980’s. The gay community is pandered to for money but distanced from as Election Day nears.

Democrats are patting themselves on the back for their “victory” at the polls last year, and the "Campaign for American’s Future," a real misnomer,the host of the wing-thing, is claiming they have defeated the “vast right wing conspiracy” while the latter charges there is a “vast left wing conspiracy. The descriptive “left wing” is about as apt as Marxism is to Stalinism. Rather, opinion manipulators utilize techniques designed to tell the voters what they want by the framing of so-called issues in opinion polls, the mainstream media and the Internet. Why not inspire a serous critique of American society.

Why is there no discussion among Democrats which addresses employee ownership of corporations?

Why aren’t Democrats advocating a policy which addresses the unconscionable income disparity that exists in this country?

Why are Democrats advocating a health care proposal that will result in a three tier system of care: one for the poor, another for the privately insured and another for the well-heeled?

Why doesn’t a single Democrat have the courage to discuss means testing upper and middle class tax subsidies, including, mortgage interest, property, sales and capital gains tax deductions?

Why isn’t Social Security already means-tested?

These questions are all very simply answered since the Democrats are as much a protector of the status quo as the Republicans. Like the GOP their contributors compose the companies and executives of U.S.-Euro global conglomerates. Generally, these mega-corps hedge their bets and contribute to both parties. There is no tacit understanding of this “arrangement” it is as overt as it can be. How much will Democrats receive in contributions from defense, health care, pharmaceutical companies, big agriculture, big tobacco and a plethora of other interests that would fill a pocket dictionary?

Quid pro quo politics is the mother’s milk of what we euphemistically call “public” policy.The Democrats, like one of their main supporters, George Soros, support a politics of stasis, a state devoid of political and socio-economic evolutionary change.

Instead, Democrats mimic the political strategies of Republicans by seeking support from evangelical Christians and tempering their support of contentious social issues based on a fear to challenge religious medieval thought, or the theocratic fundamentalism spewed as truth in Christian mega-malls. There are some Democrats who have gone so far as to temper their support of the theory of evolution.

Americans need to ask themselves what they want from a political party. Do they want campy little pop culture commercials which demean us and our politics? It seems Hillary Clinton believes the public wants a celeb-culture of Paris Hilton or Lindsay Lohan watch.

Democrats railed against Richard Mellon Scaife, the scion of the Mellon banking family, who has contributed millions to right-wing organizations. Today, the Democrats have their own version of Scaife, George Soros. Soros is one of the richest men in the world. Our economic system has rewarded him with an overabundance of wealth. However, was Mr. Soros satisfied by the legally obtained wealth he accumulated that wasn’t enough. Instead, he engaged in illegal insider-trading because his greed required even greater satiation.

The Left is not moribund. In Germany “Die Linke” has formed a coalition to tackle the right wing policies of Angela Merkels Christian Democratic Union. Similar political movements are taking hold not only in Europe but in Latin America as well.

These political parties are predicated on education. Their goal is to teach critical thinking skills rather than to manipulate their fellow-countrymen into a state of quiescence brought about by a commodity culture that not only is used as a propaganda tool to sell useless products but politicians as well. The totalitarianisms of the last- Century failed but whether a gulag is physical deprivation or mental manipulation in the end doesn’t matter.

Commoditization and concurrent propaganda has ripped asunder the notion of public, private space and community. If self-worth is measured solely by the accumulation of commodities and wealth, or a nano-second of personally demeaning YouTube video. When recognition is measured by Goggle hits and the Internet is used as a social pressure valve where critique and thoughtful analysis is swept away into the black hole of cyberspace stasis will mean the end of history.

Our society is in desperate need of transformation. This revolution should not only challenge our economic order but spark the realization of our full human potential.

The latter is the greatest fear and greatest threat to the status quo and the politics of stasis upon which it feeds. "Take Back America" is just another insidious slogan not unlike “Wonder Bread helps build strong bodies twelve ways” or do you suffer from “correctile-dysfunction.”

Hillary & the Sopranos: Penultimate Example of Political Kitsch