It was JFK who eventually sent 50,000 troops to Vietnam, which made it an American war. It was JFK who agreed to Diem''s assassination, which further made it our war. There is no evidence of JFK trying to get out.

Incorrect, incorrect and incorrect. Check some real books.

During JFK's term in office he raised the number of advisers in Vietnam from the hundreds up to 16,300 advisers. Former General and Diplomat Maxwell Taylor had frequently said JFK felt ground troops in Vietnam was not the right thing to do. The escalation happened after Kennedy's assassination. (Schlesinger, Demma)

JFK was appalled and disgusted by Diem's assassination, according to Maxwell Taylor and others. The CIA encouraged Vietnamese generals and led them to believe that they had the US's support in the matter without consulting Kennedy or his administration.(Karnow)

There is indeed evidence that Kennedy was interested in getting out, specifically a conversation with the Canadian Prime Minister.(Schlesinger)

In fact, you can go to "Vietnam War" on Wikipedia and see the footnotes and the literature they link to. Now you may not like Wikipedia, but the article is cited with very good sources, and you can get the pertinent information with reading the entire books cited. Schlesinger, Karnow and Demma are all considered very good authors and historians.

Dam skylark, almost everything you write is factually incorrect! You are espousing wingnut talking points! Are you listening to Rush Limbaugh again?

You state that it would be good to have a leader worth following.

Fine, be a sheep and follow Obama.

Chant endlessly that you are "Fired. Up. And. Ready. To Go." because you feel the "Fierce. Urgency. Of. Now."

Why do you think Hillary's pointing to the endorsement of Kathleen Kennedy Townsend and her siblings is somehow lame?

Is it because they didn't endorse the empty suit that is Obama?

As to endorsements, I'll take the endorsement of Hillary by Delores Huerta of the United Farm Workers any day of the week

over those of Teddy Kennedy, Kerry et al.

Josie Ortez

I have yet to hear one word of explanation from Obama's cult

followers as to why he endorsed Joe Lieberman over Ned Lamont, a true progressive in the 2006 senate race. Hillary indeed may have also endorsed him, however, she's not the one yammering

about how anti war she is and how she got it right.

Why did Obama sign on to Cheney's energy bill? Any explanations?

Josie Ortez

Hi, I'm a different Anonymous. We're on the same side in this fight, so I want to tell you where you can find Obama's civil rights policies:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/civilrights/

Don't add fuel to the lie that he doesn't have a plan. Furthermore, he is against waterboarding, as a form of torture. Heck, even John McCain is against waterboarding. Hillary Clinton refuses to take a stand.

Here's Obama on waterboarding: “I have been consistent in my strong beliefs that no administration should allow the use of torture, including so-called ‘enhanced-interrogation techniques’ like waterboarding, head-slapping, and extreme temperatures." Source: October 29th campaign statement.

Here's McCain on waterboarding: Waterboarding is "torture, no different than holding a pistol to his head and firing a blank" and can damage the subject's psyche "in ways that may never heal." Source: Newsweek, Nov. 21, 2005.

Here's Hillary on waterboarding: According to the Washington Post in October 2007, "[s]he said that while she does not condone torture, so much has been kept secret that she would not know unless elected what other extreme measures interrogators are using, and therefore could not say whether she would change or continue existing policies."

Here is her explanation, in her words: "It is not clear yet exactly what this administration is or isn't doing. We're getting all kinds of mixed messages," Clinton said. "I don't think we'll know the truth until we have a new president. I think [until] you can get in there and actually bore into what's been going on, you're not going to know."

Translation: She's with Cheney, Gonzalez, and Yoo on this one.

I see your logic comes from the Hillary "If he used Ronald Reagan's name in a sentence he must be a supporter" school.

It's more definition by negation than "fawning support" or however it was that you so charmingly phrased it; I am a pragmatist who desperately wants to win in November. Obama is a huge compromise candidate for me. He doesn't go far enough about ending the war. He doesn't speak enough for me about restoring the Civil Liberties that the current administration has frittered away with signing statements and with a packed Supreme Court. But at the very least, Obama can win in November. And he didn't vote for the war in the first place.

Have you seen her negatives? Have you seen the number of Democrats who can't stand her?

Ted Kennedy would probably have a better chance nationally than she is going to have.

When was the last time they had to turn people away from a Hillary appearence?

My opposition to her candidacy is based on one fact:

Hillary cannot win the General Election.

And grow up and attach a name to your opinions.

Kathleen Kennedy Townsend has a different view than uncle

Ted, see her comments about her father in her announcement.

" While I admire Senator Obama greatly, I have known Hillary Clinton for over 25 years and have seen first hand how she gets results. As a woman, leader, and person of deep convictions, I believe Hillary Clinton would make the best possible choice for president. She shares so many of the concerns of my father. Hillary has spent a lifetime speaking out on behalf of the powerless and working to alleviate poverty, in our country and around the world. I have seen her work up close and know she will be a great President. At this moment when so much is at stake at home and overseas, I urge our fellow Americans to support Hillary Clinton. That is why my brother Bobby, my sister Kerry, and I are supporting Hillary Clinton.