This article seems to think that Obama is no better than anyone else on foreign policy. Thoughts?


Barack Obama provides no alternative to Hillary Clinton, in terms of imperial-minded foreign policy. This is doubly regrettable since Clinton herself provides no substantive alternative to the neoconservative philosophy of the Bush administration.

As with Clinton and the other "respectable" contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination, Senator Obama has consistently voted to fund the war and has opposed an immediate withdrawal of American troops. While state legislator Obama opposed an immediate war with Iraq in 2002-03, he did not do so on anti-imperial or noninterventionist grounds. He opposed the war at a time when the idea was relatively unpopular, especially among his Chicago constituents. He later backpedaled somewhat from his public opposition.


Jeff Taylor: The Foreign Policy of Barack Obama

__________________
STUPIDITY Is The Deliberate Cultivation Of Ignorance

TRUTH exist, only a falsehood has to be invented.

Please Visit My Blog http://studiesandobservations.blogspot.com/

Not surprising, which is why I say that Obama/Hillary/Edwards/RudyMcRomson - one more reason why you're getting the same candidate.

__________________
"The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom."
Isaac Asimov

Well that sucks! I guess I'm becoming more of a Ron Paul man with each passing day.

I disagree. I think there is a huge difference between this administration's policies and what a Democractic presidency would look like. I think its a guarantee that no matter which Democrat ends up in the White House our involvement in Iraq, at least, militarily will come to an end. If only because of polls! But it will get done. GITMO will close. Illegal wire tapping will not be conducted. And perhaps Ruth Bader Ginsberg won't be so lonely anymore!

Going from one extreme of Bush's pre-emptive strike involvement in the world to the other with Ron Paul's isolationism is not a great idea, in my opinion. Plus, I am rather concerned about Ron Paul's following. He is attracting many people with questionable beliefs - I do not mean this against you personally in anyway - but historical revisionists are embracing him rather enthusiastically due to his very biased anti-Israel stance. I am not sure that is a group I would want endorsing me.

Wouldn't Dennis Kucinech (sp?) be a better choice? At least American Nazis like David Duke aren't endorsing him.