Senator Obama VS Senator Clinton

[Ghost]

Right firstly the UN isnt some "out there" organization. America is part of the UN, its not like they are going to this weird group of people that judge the US. The UN is all the constituent members ie the countries that make up the UN, of which America is one. And in fact the biggest supporter of the UN according to your earlier post stating they contribute the most.

In terms of breaking a contract, there is no other party with the UN charter. The UN charter was written by the united states and other member countries. Its not these guys and those guys, you wrote it, we wrote it.

The UN condemned Iraq but it didnt authorize the use of force. THis was the correct choice. The UN did the right thing and had the US + UK followed the UN the war would not have happened. America + UK ignored the UN and fought a war illegally under the UN charter.
You can square it however you like, america + UK made lots of statements and was wrong.

If America and the UK had stuck to the UN process, we would not be in this mess.
So yes the UN isnt that effective. Probably because no one sticks to their own contracts.

[Ghost]

Yeah but you arent following why i said what i did.
I said that the contracts laws, its a treaty but ok, the contracts laws state the war is illegal. If you pull out of a contract the contract is dissolved. This contract has not been pulled out of and still stands. in fact the US is still using it today. So it hasnt given up on the contract and still, demonstrably, stands by it.
Had they pulled out of the UN and gone to war then it would be a different story, and the ethical debate would rage.

The point i was making with the right and wrong was in relation to comments about the UN being ineffective. SO i pointed out that had we followed the UN route we wouldnt be in the mess we are in now. Which is the whole point the UN was set up in the first place really.

[Hardball]

Since Mike started a new thread I can now mention Hilliary's Statement about being under Sniper fire in Bosnia. LOL Wow, how can you misquote something like that?

[Ghost]

Since Mike started a new thread I can now mention Hilliary's Statement about being under Sniper fire in Bosnia. LOL Wow, how can you misquote something like that?

LOL yeah that was good, to me, you could see she was lieing when she was telling it, she wanted some of hte glory mccain was getting.
I mean FFS

CAn you imagine. "now we are sorry 1st lady, youll have to run because theres a sniper, so just run as fast as you can and keep your head down."

Yeah right, as if they would have just said run, she would have been jumped by body gaurds or not even let out of the plane, the way she made it sound was she was being shot at before she even got out and they just told her to run. She made that up, Obama and McCain can pounce on that now. Not that its worth much but they could.

[Hardball]

Yea, in military circles they call people who make up stories, wannabees. LOL

[Ghost]

Yea, in military circles they call people who make up stories, wannabees. LOL

yeah that sounds about right in this case, just watched it again on CNN a little while ago and you can so tell she is lieing and that she knows it. You can just tell by her face and tone, like a kid saying they didnt do it.

[Ghost]

Actually the UN charter is an implementation of International Law.
The UN enforces law through the international court of justice. Or at least it attempts to.

In my opinion the UN is in principal a good idea, its only 50 years old so its still getting together but some parts of it are solid and i think it can improve if we would all start respecting it instead of pretending it doesnt exist. It has many, many faults, but the laws are real and there is a real court and it can make real judgements. and rightly so in my opinion.

[jubaji]

If you dont answer properly .

You saw the answer, right?

[jubaji]

But then, a DI like you likes to make assumptions about people, right?

................................ wow

[jubaji]

Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq.

Britain. Basra.

[jubaji]

Press Iraq’s Leaders to Reconcile

Wow, pressing and engaging. Brilliant. That'll do it.

[jubaji]

Obama will launch the most aggressive diplomatic effort in recent American history to reach a new compact on the stability of Iraq and the Middle East.

Wow, planning to launch a diplomatic effort; quite an accomplishment.

[jubaji]

Obama believes that America has a moral and security responsibility to confront Iraq’s humanitarian crisis

Wow, he must be happy we overthrew a hated and feared despot and that our aim is to secure Iraq rather than allowing it to be an adjuvant to terror and instability in an important part of the world.

[Hardball]

Poll: Clinton's negatives reach new high
Posted: 10:48 AM ET

Clinton and Obama are tied in the latest poll.
(CNN) – The increasingly charged Democratic race for the White House appears to be hurting Hillary Clinton significantly more than Barack Obama, a just-released poll suggests.

According to a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, the New York senator's personal approval rating has dropped markedly, and those that hold a negative view of her have reached 48 percent — the highest in that poll since March 2001. Just 37 percent now have a positive view of Clinton — down from 45 percent two weeks ago.

The new poll comes at the end of one of the most hostile months in the Democratic presidential primary race, during which surrogates for both campaigns resigned after uttering controversial statements, and controversy swirled around Obama over past statements by his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright.

But despite fears by some of Obama's backers that the Wright controversy would take a toll on the Illinois senator and his presidential hopes, the new poll shows his approval rating has remained virtually unchanged at 49 percent. Only 32 percent of Americans give him a negative approval rating.

Meanwhile, in head-to-head matchups Clinton and Obama remain deadlocked for the nomination, each drawing 45 percent among Democratic voters. Both are also statistically tied with John McCain in matchups: Clinton is two points behind the Arizona senator while Obama is two points ahead — both within the poll’s margin of error of 4 percentage points.

[Hardball]

Sorry about the double post but I found this interesting.



Pledged delegates up for grabs, Clinton says
Story Highlights
Sen. Clinton, again, says pledged delegates are not bound to election results

Clinton: 'Every delegate ... is free to make up his or her mind however they choose'

Democratic strategist says the timing of the comments is no accident

Among pledged delegates, Obama leads Clinton 1,413 to 1,242

From Rebecca Sinderbrand
CNN
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- For the second time in three days, Sen. Hillary Clinton told reporters that the pledged delegates awarded based on vote totals in their state are not bound to abide by election results.

It's an idea that has been floated by her or a campaign surrogate nearly half a dozen times this month.

Sen. Barack Obama leads Clinton among all Democratic delegates, 1,622 to 1,485, in the latest CNN count. Among pledged delegates, Obama leads Clinton 1,413 to 1,242.

"Every delegate with very few exceptions is free to make up his or her mind however they choose," Clinton told Time's Mark Halperin in an interview published Wednesday.


"We talk a lot about so-called pledged delegates, but every delegate is expected to exercise independent judgment," she said.

Clinton's remarks echoed her Monday comments to the editorial board of the Philadelphia Daily News.

"And also remember that pledged delegates in most states are not pledged," she said Monday. "You know there is no requirement that anybody vote for anybody. They're just like superdelegates."

Clinton also made similar comments in a Newsweek interview published two weeks ago.

The last time a major candidate lobbied pledged delegates to switch sides was at the 1980 convention, when Ted Kennedy's campaign tried to recruit delegates who arrived at the convention supporting eventual nominee Jimmy Carter.

After that battle, the Democratic Party altered a provision that required pledged delegates to support the candidate they had arrived at the convention to back.

Clinton advisers have cited the altered rule, which dates to 1982 and says only that pledged delegates "shall in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them."

The same year, The Democratic Party created a new category of delegate -- the so-called "superdelegates" -- party leaders and elected officials who are free to support any candidate they wish, regardless of vote totals in their home states.

Some states require their delegates to support the candidate they are pledged to but most do not.

Earlier this month, Clinton adviser Harold Ickes first raised the prospect that pledged delegates were not legally bound to vote as election results indicate -- an idea that has drawn sharp criticism from supporters of rival Obama. Watch more on the candidates' dust up »

"Despite repeated denials, the Clinton campaign has again admitted that they will go to any length to win," Obama spokesman Bill Burton said again Wednesday.

The Clinton campaign has said that they had not been planning to try to actively convince the Illinois senator's pledged delegates to switch sides and would not do so in the future.

But on a conference call with reporters Tuesday, Ickes defended Clinton's Monday remarks and repeated his view that pledged delegates were free to switch their allegiance at any time.

"I think what Mrs. Clinton was trying to make clear was that no delegate is required by party rules to vote for the candidate for which they're pledged," said Ickes.

"I mean obviously circumstances can change, and people's minds can change about the viability of a particular candidate and that's permitted now under our rules ever since the 1980 convention."

He added that although the rules permitted them to campaign pledged delegates to switch sides, they had not engaged in such an effort.

The timing of the latest round of comments was not an accident, according to veteran Democratic strategist Hank Sheinkopf.

"It keeps them in play. It makes party players understand that they're serious, and they'll stay in the game," Sheinkopf said.

He added that party insiders were likely to view the threat merely as a bargaining chip by an extraordinarily seasoned political team.

Clinton spokesman Phil Singer dismissed the criticism entirely.

"I don't think she floated that idea. I think she was repeating the idea," he told reporters Monday. "Simply stating a fact I don't think is a cause for hysteria."

All AboutHillary Clinton • U.S. Presidential Election • Barack Obama • Democratic