OT: McCain is going to win
I dont even know if OT is allowed here anymore, but I'm going old school!
Anyways, yeah, title.
McCain takes 5 point lead in reuters poll:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUKN1948672420080820
The money race..liberal media has told is it's a massive advantage for Obama. Oops, looks like they were doing what they do best, lie:
http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/archive/2008/08/19/the-2008-money-race-stil-closer-than-you-think.aspx
Next we have real clear politics electoral map with no toss up states, which for the first time shows McCain +10
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=10
Now lets touch on the polls most of which would give Obama a 2 to 6 point lead..lets just say I do not trust them. Due to Obama being black and the supposed public tendency to support a black candidate when polled but not in actuality because of fear of being perceived as racist, and the usual liberal bias in the polls run by the liberal media. Combine these two and at any given time I feel McCain is sitting with several points in hand not reflected in polls.
Then we get to the factor of it all comes down to a few swing states, Ohio, Florida, Pennslyvania, Virginia, Colorado, and Michigan. I feel that due to Hillary Clinton running very well in these states, McCain has an edge there.
Finally I feel like Obama is not very bright, therefore his campaign, probably run by a bunch of affirmative action unqualified minorities, has made mistep after mistep, compared to a savvy McCain campaign, and I feel confident that will continue. Latest case in point, Obamas veep frontrunners. As I understand it, Joe Biden and Katherine Sebelius. All I can say to that is..wtf? Joe Biden, no, really?
592 comments
|
6 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Either McCain or Obama
will be a monumental improvement over the current administration. I haven’t decided which one to vote for yet, but I’ll be walking out of the voting booth with a smile either way. The Bush years have been an unrelenting disaster on nearly every issue, large and small.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
That comment really annoys me
it is just a waste of space…you didn’t really provide anything worthwhile to the thread. And you had to start it off too.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
I don't see
How that’s a waste of space. I’m going to go out on a limb and guess tball just showed more neutrality than anyone else in this thread will (myself included).
Plaschke: Scioscia, the former Dodgers catcher, is the model manager who has created an atmosphere of winning.
Junior:It's that simple. Mike Scioscia brings a Glade Plug-In labeled "Winning™" into the clubhouse and everyone who breathes it in gains 15 points in average.
I know
that’s why it bothers me…I like controversy.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
Unlike most folks
I am really waiting to read the candidates’ policy proposals and positions before voting. I haven’t devoted the time to it yet, that’s why I’m not advocating one or the other right now.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
I was teasing around with you
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
candidates
Their proposals will be full of money we don’t have and can’t afford…
"The rich think they are privileged so rules don't apply to them, and the poor think they're entitled and so rules don't apply to them." The rest of us are screwed.
i liked it better...
… when you where at the bottom of the tank shark.
typical sharky post… no logic, only goes with the stories that back his OPINION, and is completely contrived out of typical “i only see the facts i like” conservatives.
Finally I feel like Obama is not very bright
now i ask, WTF? Seriously?…
I blame it not on Ron Washington, but on society. Society is to blame. And Ron Washington. ~Ken Tremendous on Ron Washington sac bunting in the 11th vs LAA
+1
If you’re not going to add to the conversation with your own educated opinions or conclusions, then don’t post a bulletin. It’s simple.
And no, “Finally I feel like Obama is not very bright, therefore his campaign, probably run by a bunch of affirmative action unqualified minorities, has made mistep after mistep” does not count as an educated or unbiased conclusion.
its sharky
its a given that some stuff is gonna be kind of out there…lol
is anyone gonna read obama nation? or have they read it?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 8:18 AM CDT up reply actions
Nope, not planning too
The guy who wrote it is about as unbiased as Sharky.
All the book does is preach to the choir.
i realize how bad this sounds
but i kind of agree with something o’reilly said…
if obama didnt HELP corsi with the book i wouldnt be interested.
as it is with MOST political books you have to take it with a grain of salt but im interested in reading it…and of course its preaching to the right/middle…the goal of a book is to make money (too bad pelosi’s book has been sucking it up haha)
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 8:42 AM CDT up reply actions
"Not very bright"
I don’t think Obama handled himself last week in the pseudo-debate very well at all.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
Actually, his problem
may be that he’s too smart and tries too hard to answer questions thoughtfully. In a campaign, short, concise answers are best. He needs to refine his thoughts and boil them down to quicker answers. That’s just a good principle for writing and speaking, and it’s definitely good campaigning in the tv age.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
hey i agree (even as a conservative) with this statement a LOT
He needs to refine his thoughts and boil them down to quicker answers
he needs to have better, more concise answers.
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions
Then that would be mean he isn't smart
if he was too smart he would realize such a simplistic solution and exercise it.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
Nope
It means he’s being too cerebral about it. Over-thinking. He needs to dumb things down.
Two statements below, roughly paraphrased from Rick Warren’s question about abortion.
Obama: Well, I believe when you really consider all sides, we need to start getting together with all those who can make a difference and agree to reduce the number of abortions through any number of policy means…
McCain: Life starts at conception. End legalized abortion NOW.
Their (and your) political leanings aside, to which one did the audience respond better? Obama arguably gave the more intelligent, thought-out response, but McCain gave the one to which he knew his intended audience would respond most favorably.
(OT: Visiting from HH, can’t wait to watch the AL West race next year—with a few good arms the Rangers will be a heck of a lot more intimidating than Choakland and Starbucks [not as if they’re not already…]!)
Light Up That Halo!
Disclosure: Not a supporter of either canddidate at this point
Considering the tone and location of the debate/discussion, I don’t think Obama handled himself poorly. If McCain ever agreed to a debate conducted at and by the ACLU, I don’t believe he would handle himself with anywhere near the same class and skill as Obama handled himself with in an arena full of conservative Christians who have already decided for whom they will vote.
by robert_d_wilfong on Aug 20, 2008 4:36 PM CDT up reply actions
Heh
nice analogy. The campaign does seem to be taking its toll on both. I remember thinking early on that Obama was incredibly smooth, but now the strain is showing. McCain has gotten better at the same time, and as usual, the GOP has the candidate more likely to give the concise, homespun answers that resonate with most folks.
When will the Dems stop putting forth Adlai Stevenson? When will the GOP start producing great presidents and not just great candidates? (No, Reagan was not that great)
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
hmmm....
Obama, Columbia undergrad degree… thats not a good school at all
Harvard Law degree, first black editor of the prestigous Harvard Law Review…
But Im sure he just glided through all of that school, probably barely passed, no biggy.
Its time...
by FormerLSBUser on Aug 20, 2008 11:03 AM CDT up reply actions
its sharky…
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 11:05 AM CDT up reply actions
Um, yah
It’s pretty obvious that was all affirmative action.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
by thedirkatron on Aug 20, 2008 1:47 PM CDT up reply actions
Proof?
I’m not endorsing affirmative action here (pretty cynical of its excesses) but I don’t see the basis for this being “obvious” here or even present to begin with.
Light Up That Halo!
And you receive
an F in online sarcasm detection.
by brettgardner on Aug 23, 2008 2:48 AM CDT up reply actions
Not being very bright
didn’t hurt Bush’s election attempts, and Obama is head and shoulders smarter than that nitwit ever was.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
"Obama is head and shoulders smarter than that nitwit ever was."
No, he isnt.
Obama is dumb, he makes a lot of gaffes and cant think on his feet very well (at best he held his own in the Democrat debates).
It’s just fun to watch the savvier Repubs/McCain campaign outmaneuver the dumb Dems/Obama campaign strategically.
im actually very interested to see the debates
and see if obama actually does as well as everyone seems to think he does or if mccain holds his own.
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 8:43 AM CDT up reply actions
Yes,
Magna Cum Laudes at Harvard law are often dumber than C students like Bush.
Bush may be the dumbest president this country has ever had. I’m struggling trying to think of one dumber. Maybe in the 1800s.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
are you kidding me
most of what ive read online say that bush is in the middle of the pack when it comes to intelligence/IQ
the dumbest president EVER? …give me some more info thats NOT based on your opinions
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 9:02 AM CDT up reply actions
so you REALLY think hes the dumbest president ever?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 9:20 AM CDT up reply actions
I can't think of any objectively dumber
since WWII. Haven’t thought too much of the preWWII ones. Maybe one of the prewar republicans like Coolidge was dumber.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
give me some information regarding that
i want to see FACTS not opinions
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 9:25 AM CDT up reply actions
Facts...
like school grades?
Come on, if you don’t think Bush is dumb then you haven’t listend to the guy speak.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
come on, if you think you can grade how smart someone is by speaking you dont understand intelligence
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 21, 2008 7:39 AM CDT up reply actions
If someone says
it was a very good idea to invade Iraq before we finished the job in Afghanistan, I am giving them a low grade.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
ha
I blame it not on Ron Washington, but on society. Society is to blame. And Ron Washington. ~Ken Tremendous on Ron Washington sac bunting in the 11th vs LAA
by ivysafety39 on Aug 21, 2008 10:39 AM CDT up reply actions
Dumb
Gee, I think I can get a blow job from a fat intern in the Oval Office…..that’s pretty dumb, in my opinion.
"I would like to extend to you an invitation to the pants party. The...party. With the...with the pants. Party with pants?"
by BrickTamland on Aug 20, 2008 9:48 AM CDT up reply actions
Yet
the Democrats consider him a beacon of light. Pathetic.
"I would like to extend to you an invitation to the pants party. The...party. With the...with the pants. Party with pants?"
by BrickTamland on Aug 20, 2008 9:48 AM CDT up reply actions
hmm
having an extramarital sexual encounter in the Oval office is worse than killing (like their dead) thousands of innocent people???
Good reasoning you’ve got there Brickdouchebag
"For those booing me. Take that, beeep." - Ramon Vazquez
show me some stats
killing THOUSANDS of innocent people?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 9:52 AM CDT up reply actions
George Bush killed thousands of innocent people?
I’m confused. When did he do that? I thought that is what they did to us.
"I would like to extend to you an invitation to the pants party. The...party. With the...with the pants. Party with pants?"
by BrickTamland on Aug 20, 2008 9:56 AM CDT up reply actions
Truman
I guess you would say that about Truman as well? I’m sure the country of Japan would agree. What would you say 8legsof you’re a pussy?
"I would like to extend to you an invitation to the pants party. The...party. With the...with the pants. Party with pants?"
by BrickTamland on Aug 20, 2008 9:58 AM CDT up reply actions
in 1945 the count
was OVER 220,000
+ however many thousand died from radiation exposure
this included 3200 japanese american citizens
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 10:08 AM CDT up reply actions
So you would have advocated
invading Japan instead? Costing 3 or 4 times as many Japanese lives and a few hundred thousand American casaulties as well?
Truman’s decision on how to best END a war with Japan was IN NO WAY anything like the decision to START a NEW WAR in Iraq.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
I dont think
that was the argument. The argument was regarding killing innocent people, not who started or ended what. Truman killed, by far, more innocent people.
"I would like to extend to you an invitation to the pants party. The...party. With the...with the pants. Party with pants?"
by BrickTamland on Aug 20, 2008 10:21 AM CDT up reply actions
Hmm...
I think it is a mistake when people try to tie World War II into the current world situation.
Frankly, WWII was not a good time to be an “innocent person.” Pretty much every country participating in the war, with the exception of the US, thanks to two oceans, had many, many innocent civilians die. Add in the difficulty I have in labeling citizens of Japan “innocent” when their empire invaded and slaughtered millions of truly innocent Chinese for no reason other than for fun. WWII was a bad time, and not a valid comparison.
However, I think that in general, wars result in innocent lives lost, and ideally most wars wouldn’t have happened. Intelligent people can disagree about Bush without calling him a mass murderer. He isn’t Hitler or Stalin or Hirohito.
i agree with you in principle
but 220,000 civilians killed trumps basically anything anyone can say i think.
bad time or not, say 20,000 military people were killed thats still 200,000 civilans killed.
However, I think that in general, wars result in innocent lives lost, and ideally most wars wouldn’t have happened. Intelligent people can disagree about Bush without calling him a mass murderer. He isn’t Hitler or Stalin or Hirohito.
+1000000000000000000000
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions
@KOKing & Brick
I don’t understand how people can still defend Bush’s decision to invade Iraq. Please enlighten.
by robert_d_wilfong on Aug 20, 2008 4:42 PM CDT up reply actions
arguement
is about if bush has killed “thousands” of innocent civilians
truman was brought up and someone said that it was a mistake to compare the two
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 21, 2008 7:40 AM CDT up reply actions
i supported the invasion under the original information.
i do not think it was a good idea to have the most volotile leader in (probably) the world be in an area that explosive but thats not a good enough reason to go in and invade the country.
the fact of the matter is that we are there now and if we pull our troops out tomorrow (all of them) the country will be in a worse situation then before.
(the arguement above was that bush killed “thousands” of innocent civilians btw not the invasion of iraq)
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 21, 2008 10:27 AM CDT up reply actions
I believe
a Volatile leader who has fought a war with Iran before is exactly who you want next to Iran.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
so a leader
who supports suicide bombers in israel (25k per family), who has used WMDs (chemical or biological? dont remember) on iran and has invaded kuwait is GOOD to have in the middle east?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 21, 2008 1:36 PM CDT up reply actions
I suppose you prefer
Iraq knowing they have nothing to worry about from anyone when developing nukes? Its not real surprising they turned it up a notch right after the invasion of Iraq.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
they should know that israel has no problem
with striking at their nuclear sites, i bbelieve they did so in the late 80s
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 21, 2008 1:49 PM CDT up reply actions
Predictable Neo-Con drivel
If someone who is allegedly trustworthy comes to you and tells you that someone is going to break into your house tonight, what are you going to do?
The information provided by the administration was, at best, incomplete and at worst, chock full o’ lies.
Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Cheney are bereft of any moral integrity and three of the more evil people in our great country.
by robert_d_wilfong on Aug 22, 2008 1:12 PM CDT up reply actions
Bush killed more Americans
by getting us into Iraq by lying to the Americans and the World about WMDs and ties to AlQaida than Alqaida did on 9/11.
US Deaths in Iraq 4144
US Deaths on 9/11 2974
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
If I'm not mistaken
It is the insurgents and the terrorist organizations who are killing our soldiers. The enemy. Whether you agree with why we are there or not, to say Bush KILLED INNOCENT PEOPLE is just stupid.
"I would like to extend to you an invitation to the pants party. The...party. With the...with the pants. Party with pants?"
by BrickTamland on Aug 20, 2008 10:04 AM CDT up reply actions
What insurgents and Terrorist organizations
were in Iraq before we moved in? Was there some hotbed of insurgency and terrorism we didn’t know about?
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
Just because...
We did not find WMDs (which according to military intelligence friends of mine were moved during the time Saddam was stalling the weapons inspectors, but who knows?) doesn’t mean that Iraq was not involved or associated with those organizations. I was not in Iraq. I was not friends with Saddam, so technically I do not know his associations. But to think that you do know all of the details of the innerworkings of the Iraqi government is extremely arrogant.
This is a no-win conversation. There is about a 98% chance that we don’t know the entire story. The difference between you and me is that you actually think you know everything. If you do, then congrats.
"I would like to extend to you an invitation to the pants party. The...party. With the...with the pants. Party with pants?"
by BrickTamland on Aug 20, 2008 10:15 AM CDT up reply actions
Oh
and Go Rangers.
"I would like to extend to you an invitation to the pants party. The...party. With the...with the pants. Party with pants?"
by BrickTamland on Aug 20, 2008 10:17 AM CDT up reply actions
OK. I'm sorry, but this really bothers me.
I don’t like to get involved in these types of things anymore, because it’s childish, but this is asinine.
“Just because…We did not find WMDs (which according to military intelligence friends of mine were moved during the time Saddam was stalling the weapons inspectors, but who knows?) doesn’t mean that Iraq was not involved or associated with those organizations.”
The United States engaged in a war because Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. We now know that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction. To call this anything more than a war based solely on false pretense is not just insulting to our intelligence, it’s insulting to the total badasses over there fighting this war for America.
There is absolutely no excuse for this war. It’s coming out now that the evidence was very shaky at best, and it makes Bush seem awful eager to jump into an international conflict.
The bottom line is that there is no reason for the United States to be in Iraq. If you really want to argue that the United States needed to remove Saddam Hussein, you’re playing into the government’s hands by justifying the death of thousands of brave Americans by changing the reason we’re there.
The United States has thousands of its citizens in harm’s way, for what appears to be no defensible reason. That is a failure of leadership, that is a failure of government, and that is a failure of the ideals upon which this country was founded.
Aside from that, I have no opinion.
"One man, five scoops." -- shroomer
but
they did have WMD’s. I know so. They simply moved them…
"You can't reason with your heart; it has its own laws, and thumps about things which the intellect scorns." - from A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court, by Mark Twain
by dstar442005 on Aug 20, 2008 11:03 AM CDT up reply actions
Probably Not
Most of the intelligence used to justify the war didn’t come from CIA or intelligence services at the DoD directly. A White House team was sent to the Pentagon to do what Sharky does: pick out what looks good and leave out the rest. There were other opinions within Army and Navy Intelligence as well as CIA but somehow that information never made it to the public. Go figure.
I ask you, why would Iraq move their WMDs when they could’ve used them against the American convoys rolling toward Basra and Baghdad, preventing or at least delaying the fall of the regime? It doesn’t make sense. If they would’ve had them they probably would’ve used them, and the fact that they had actually used them before in the 1980s suggests that they would.
by Black Francis on Aug 20, 2008 4:24 PM CDT up reply actions
so your saying iraq NEVER had WMDs and there was ZERO evidence that they had WMDs before we invaded?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 11:06 AM CDT up reply actions
They had them at one time
…and that time wasn’t 2003.
by Black Francis on Aug 20, 2008 4:19 PM CDT up reply actions
its been answered
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 21, 2008 7:40 AM CDT up reply actions
umm
saddam hussein:
genocide
killed 100,000+ kurds
killed betweeen 60,000 and 150,000 sunis
you dont consider his gov’t a terrorist organization?
from CFR
What type of terrorist groups did Iraq support under Saddam Hussein’s regime?
Primarily groups that could hurt Saddam’s regional foes. Saddam has aided the Iranian dissident group Mujahedeen-e-Khalq and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (known by its Turkish initials, PKK), a separatist group fighting the Turkish government. Moreover, Iraq has hosted several Palestinian splinter groups that oppose peace with Israel , including the mercenary Abu Nidal Organization, whose leader, Abu Nidal, was found dead in Baghdad in August 2002. Iraq has also supported the Islamist Hamas movement and reportedly channeled money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. A secular dictator, however, Saddam tended to support secular terrorist groups rather than Islamist ones such as al-Qaeda, experts say.
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 10:20 AM CDT up reply actions
You mean
the Saddam Hussein that Ronald Reagan gave $2 Billion in economic and military aid to during their war against Iraq? That guy? Reagan gave the money to Saddam after he committed the atrocities that he was hung for.
I can’t keep all the stories from the right wingers about Saddam straight. Our good buddy in the late ’80s, and the evilest dictator ever in the ’00s.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
And why did Reagan give economic
and military aid to Hussein back then?
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
Because at the time
Iran was a threat to destabilize the region.
Somethings never change.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
Exactly
strategies change….and you have to act based on the present.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
Like Russia invading Georgia.
Luckily for them, their invasion of Georgia is every bit as legal as the US invasion of Iraq, so they really don’t have to give a damn about our whining. Maybe they need to start teling folks they were sure Georgia had WMDs.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
actually no
much different situation.
breakway provinces + russian “nationals” + putin = invade georgia.
if you think that you can compare iraq and georgia you simply do not understand the background of the ussr/russia/georgia. there is MUCH more to the situation than you seem to understand
putin called the fall of the soviet union the worst “geopolitical disaster” of the 20th century. putin almost RIGHT after he gained power started centeralizing power. the party in power in their version of the legislature is not a party based on politics or issues, it is a party that was created to back putin.
to say they are the same is foolish.
its like saying that the invasion of georgia is like all the times the japanese tried to invade korea in the past…
the geopolitical background for both countries is VASTLY different
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 21, 2008 7:48 AM CDT up reply actions
It doesn't matter the background
Russia just copies the US formula. Once the US descends into illegal international conduct, and ignores the Geneva convention, then the US can’t whine when others do it.
Russia just needs to copy our approach.
Lie to the world about your reasons.
Don’t get UN approval.
Invade.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
yes the background ALWAYS matters.
or else every single invasion is exactly alike…
the UN is a joke (and this is from someone who knows way too much about it)
you REALLY think the background doesnt matter for an area?
so again, the russian invasion of georgia, the russian invasion of parts of china throughout history, the historical japanese invasion of korea, the british and french wars over america/land are ALL the same?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 21, 2008 8:07 AM CDT up reply actions
From an international legal standpoint
Both the US invasion of Iraq and the Russian invasion of Georgia are illegal. The Russians would have a better chance of their war being legal, if they make some bullshit excuse about acting “in self defense” of “georgian terrorists”, and I’m surprised we haven’t heard that excuse yet.
Whether or not the UN is a joke, they are the only standard of international law. When we flout international law, it shouldn’t be surprising when folks laugh at us and flout international law.
The Bush administration pushes the standard that might makes right, well they got it. With our military tied up in Iraq and Afghanistan, Russia knows there isn’t a damn thing we can do about it.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
since direct military action is all we have ever taken against the russians, right?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 21, 2008 8:30 AM CDT up reply actions
well, since they have the energy
and are willing to use it as a club, we may be in for another 40 year cold war, because we guaranteed there is no such thing as International rule of law, under Bush.
Might makes right and 19th century Imperialism are the rules set out by the Bush administration. Russia would be stupid not to grab anything that helps them out economically or militarily.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
Iraq
not allowing UN weapons inspectors into their country was also illegal….
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
and
sanctions weren’t being lifted in response. So what.
Sanctions were obviously working.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
are you KIDDING me?
sanctions were working?
since saddam had SO much respect for the UN…right?
there is def. no way to get around those sanctions…the UN might invade with their army < /sarcasm>
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 21, 2008 9:37 AM CDT up reply actions
Yes,
sanctions were working.
There were no WMDs produced since sanctions started. What part of that do you not understand?
We could have locked them down with sanctions for decades longer.
Sanctions were far preferable to destroying any pretense of international rule of law, and becoming a thug nation ourself, with zero moral sway in the world.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
cahill
look at the bottom
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 21, 2008 10:22 AM CDT up reply actions
a thug nation?
your anti-american rhetoric is sickening.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
What would you call a nation
that sanctions torture, starts illegal wars, and repudiates the Geneva convention?
We’ve done all 3 of those under Bush.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
He's not criticizing
the country, just the idiots who have been running it. Seems very patriotic to me.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
Russia will Defend Russia Interests to the End
The only purpose to Nato, the reason it was founded, was to oppose the Soviet Union and Russia, that is still what they do, since they are letting every crappy ex-Soviet state that wants in to Nato join. The U.S. is trying to encircle Russia with Nato Countries.
They were promised that these states would not be put into Nato by Bush I, and Clinton.
They lied.
What we will get with John McCain is World War III.
The Russians are not going to be pushed around anymore, and sure won’t let those crappy ex-soviet states get away with anything.
So, you have to ask, are those crappy ex-soviet states worth getting into World War III, because that is what will happen with John McCain, the Cold War Warrior
I think when the U.S. missiles are put in to Poland, there will be a military reaction. Will the U.S. react back?
Remember the Cuba Missle Crisis, this is that in reverse.
World War III becomes a reality.
John McCain may become the last American President if elected.
by SanDiegoKev on Aug 22, 2008 11:48 AM CDT up reply actions
and we thought sharky was bad
World War III becomes a reality.
John McCain may become the last American President if elected.
lol
The Russians are not going to be pushed around anymore, and sure won’t let those crappy ex-soviet states get away with anything.
HA
just a question but when do you think russia has been pushed around since putin was in power? lol
I think when the U.S. missiles are put in to Poland, there will be a military reaction. Will the U.S. react back?
and if you think russia will attack poland you are OUT of your mind.
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 22, 2008 12:53 PM CDT up reply actions
we'll see
Unfortunately, when you have unstable presidents such as Mikheil Saakashvili backed up by Nato, anything could set off an explosion.
I think every Ex-Soviet allowed into NATO was pushing Russia.
So, how far do you push them?
It’s not like the Russians are putting military hardware in Mexico and Cuba.
We are drawing a circle around them, and at some point, shit is going to start, and John McCain is just the man to do it.
Well, recent history suggests
if there is a Republican in the whitehouse, there will be a war somewhere. Just hope its a smaller one, and not so much a bigger one.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
No more
Mention of the fact that Democratic Presidents have the absolute advantage in time spent in conflict?
by brettgardner on Aug 22, 2008 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions
The Reaction to Poland
According to Russian news sources, Russia has commensed talks with Syria about putting missiles in Syria. see what I mean?
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost2FJPArticle2FShowFull&cid=1219218598194
Each action gets a reaction till you get an explosion.
John McCain is a big thinker unlike Bush, and will make a big war.
You cannot expect to encircle russia with hostle countries, and not expect something bad to happen.
What demands?
I haven’t noticed them moving troops into mexico or cuba yet. What Bush is doing, is pushing their borders. That’s not too bright. McCain will make a 7th Cavarly charge in to who knows where, and bang bang…when the hurly burly’s done, when the battle’s lost and won…Shakespeare
by SanDiegoKev on Aug 23, 2008 11:53 PM CDT up reply actions
I agree
that McCain is too hawkish on this, but the international community needs to do a bit more than wag their fingers at Russia, which is all they’ve done thus far.
I personally don’t feel any compulsion to care a lot about Georgia and don’t see it as vital to U.S. interests. And I don’t see why it should be part of NATO. I’m disappointed that BOTH candidates are essentially saying the same thing about this.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
Yes
So am I, I am not impressed with either candidate. They both need to understand the cold war ended some time ago, and the Soviet Union doesn’t exist anymore. Even, yesterday, the new U.S. ambassador to Russia, John Beyrle, said:
“In an interview with the Kommersant, the U.S. Ambassador to Russia, John Beyrle, confirmed that the Russian response to Georgia’s attack on South Ossetia was legitimate.”
ah so change cant happen in 10 years?
10 years ago russia was headed towards democracy, guess thats still correct…right?
10 years ago economic oligarchs held the power in the economy, including essentially a monopoly on oil…thats still correct in russia, right?
in the late 80s, the other superpower in the world was the USSR…is that still a country?
no one EVER changes in ten years…right?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 10:38 AM CDT up reply actions
In Reaction to NATO
Russia has become more defensive in it’s posture, and may have scaled back democratic reforms somewhat. They are too busy reacting to NATO expansion and NATO threats.
NATO needs to go, it’s only point is hostiltiy to the Russian Federation.
It is an anachronism.
The EU is more able to deal with modern issues then NATO.
no
I am just immune to certain types brainwashing. IT seems every place in the world’s business is America’s Business, and really it’s not. Have you ever been outside of Texas, the USA or do you get your world view from CNN ?
by SanDiegoKev on Aug 24, 2008 12:00 AM CDT up reply actions
I agree that
not every place in the world is America’s business. In fact, I think the U.S. should be a lot less involved in many places. But that’s a long way from saying Putin can do whatever he wants, or that NATO should be disolved.
So far the international community has done nothing about this longstanding conflict. I think McCain is nuts wrong about this issue, and Obama is simply echoing. The U.S. does not need to ever consider a military option about Georgia. But all anyone is doing right now is wagging their fingers.
It is somewhat disingenuous of Bush to complain about this, considering the U.S. penchant to invade random places. But the U.S., UN, the G-8 and everyone else should be complaining about this.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
I agree
If NATO is going to have a modern purpose to stop aggression around the world, they need to stop using it like it’s still a cold war deterrent.
There is no point in adding all the ex-soviet countries, whatevers. The only point of that, is aimed at Russia. Russia itself would have more value as a NATO member then all those countries combined.
Saddam was a Sunni
He didn’t slaughter Sunnis. You mean Shias.
Last week I took a pleasure trip. I drove my wife to the airport.
by Brian Thomas on Aug 20, 2008 12:19 PM CDT up reply actions
yes sorry...my bad
thought i posted a comment to xav_imran
typo
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 12:21 PM CDT up reply actions
lied?
so these guys are liars too? they all said that iraq had WMDs…
joe lieberman
tom daschle
john kerry
harold ford
tom lantos
tom harkin
arlen specter
madeline albright
sandy berger
barbara boxer
robert byrd
wesley clark
jacques chirac
bill clinton
hillary clinton
william cohen
john edwards
dick gephart
al gore
jim jeffords
ted kennedy
carl levin
patty murray
nancy pelosi
scott ritter (un weapons inspector)
john rockafeller
henry waxman
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 10:12 AM CDT up reply actions
None of those
presented evidence, they just went along with it. They are indeed guilty of not questioning enough. Of course, if they had, the GOP would have just questioned their patriotism. It seems that trying to ascertain the validity of a call to war means you are automatically a hater of freedom.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
they went along with it
of course, an easy out
so lets get this straight
BUSH lied but these guys didnt? even though they are quoted most of them multiple times as saying that saddam had WMDs?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 10:22 AM CDT up reply actions
Bush didn't present evidence either...
what’s your point?
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
Sure he did
using intelligence that he was given….He didn’t make up the intelligence.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
Ron Suskind begs to differ
Last week I took a pleasure trip. I drove my wife to the airport.
by Brian Thomas on Aug 20, 2008 12:21 PM CDT up reply actions
Intelligence that went through
Doug Feith , or, “The Dumbest Fucking man on the Planet” according to General Tommy Franks.
Hire people to tell you that there are WMDs in Iraq, and its no surprise they tell you there are WMDs in Iraq.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
when do you think they got rid of them?
where do you think they went?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 1:35 PM CDT up reply actions
They never existed.
The intelligence was fabricated, and any pieces of intelligence that didn’t support that hypothesis were discarded. Witness the outing of Valerie Plame as a CIA agent when her husband dared to tell folks that the stories of Yellowcake were a load of shit.
This administration hired folks to screen intelligence, and made up a case for going to war in Iraq out of whole cloth. There was no factual basis for the war. However, folks like Rumsfeldt, Feith and others had been urging war with Iraq since the late ’90s, and they stitched it together and pushed ith through.
They cynically used 9/11 to get the war they had been lobbying for. That is why folks like Colin Powell, Scott Mclellean and other have turned their back on the administration.
Those are the jackasses, criminals, and thugs the Republicans staff their executive branches with.
Thats why George Bush’s administration is responsible for more American Deaths than Usama bin Laden.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
are you saying iraq NEVER had WMDs?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 2:05 PM CDT up reply actions
Not after
the first Iraq war, no.
There is not a shred of proof anywhere that these mythical devices ever existed.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
where do you believe they went?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 2:11 PM CDT up reply actions
Whereever stuff goes
that never existed. The island of broken toys? Unicornland? You got me.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
by DJCahill on Aug 20, 2008 2:22 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
ok but you are saying that they had them before
and during first gulf war.
thought you were saying they were never there…my bad.
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions
Before the First gulf war
they had stocks which were destroyed by the UN after Gulf War 1. There is absolutely no evidence that there was any WMD production after Gulf War 1.
So, I have no idea what you are asking. Did you assume after Gulf War 1 we let them keep their WMDs?
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
i thought you were saying they NEVER had WMDs i was misreading what you had to say.
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions
Terrorist attacks since 9/11
0. Enough said.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
Partly right
Terrorist attacks inside the U.S. since 9/11, 0. That’s nice, but it sure doesn’t make the war on terror a success by itself.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
Well I meant within the US
however I guess i should have stated that. Nobody said it makes the war on terror a success by itself. But you have to admit that statistic is pretty damn impressive considering how big america is and really how vulnerable we are.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
And furthermore
it is NOT enough said. Has bin Laden been caught and Al Qaida defeated yet? Are you really confident that the intelligence apparatus has been sufficiently reformed and rejuvenated since they dropped the ball leading up to 9/11? Has anyone except for a cab driver been brought to justice yet?
There is a long, long list of unfinished business nearly 7 years after.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
Obviously it's a difficult
mission considering you are going after people not a country or a government…There has been a lot of progress made. To think that that isn’t the case would be crazy.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
It's especially difficult
when you start a new war on top of the one you’re already unsuccessfully fighting. Brilliant strategy, I can’t believe they haven’t caught bin Laden yet. Hey, at least we got Saddam!
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
Number of times I've been mauled by a gay tiger since I bought these new boxer shorts:
0.
Wanna buy a pair of boxer shorts that’s proven to protect against gay tiger attacks?
The 40 Trumps All!!!
by thedirkatron on Aug 20, 2008 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions
haha
I was thinking something along those lines, but yours has a little more zing.
by Black Francis on Aug 20, 2008 4:36 PM CDT up reply actions
Actual number of terrorist attacks since 9/11
>> 0
Plus, if you’re only talking about terrorist attacks in the US, that’s also wrong.
It is NOT zero.
http://counterterrorismblog.org/2008/08/no_attack_in_the_us_since_911.php
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2005/10/no-terrorist-attack-on-us-soil-since.html
http://krishna109.newsvine.com/_news/2008/08/17/1756079-no-attack-in-the-us-since-9-11-
And this is the problem with politics now a days.
People keep repeating the same WRONG information and more people believe it. And it becomes tough to actually get the CORRECT information out there.
In addition, it is more likely that the lack of major terrorist attacks in the US is due to SECURITY RESTRICTIONS put in place at airports and public venues.
The Iraq war is likely very low on the totem pole for reasons of why terrorists have not successfully pulled off a major attack in the US.
It makes no sense to imply that it is the primary reason for the low amount of attacks in the USA.
R
you are a moron
absolute idiot.
to me, abortion is not a religious issue, it's a common sense one...
DJCahill is the dumbest person ever.
Hey, i can do it too! What fun!
to me, abortion is not a religious issue, it's a common sense one...
You sound silly
Why is Bush dumb?
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
Better question...
what has he done to make you think he is smart?
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
He won the White House twice...
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
Yeah that was all Bush...
even you know Rove was Bush’s brain. Come on.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
So Rove is better than
all the Dems…You still lose.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
No...
You said someone sounded silly for suggesting Bush is dumb. I asked what has he done to make you think he is smart. Your answer is Rove is better than all the dems? How do I lose? You have yet to answer my question. I can provide you with numerous examples of why Bush is dumb.
So again, what has he done to make you think he is smart?
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
So Bush won the white house twice because
he had Karl Rove behind him? So Rove tricked America into voting for a dumb person twice?
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
people act like bush is a complete idiot…yet many who have actually spent time with him disagree…i can find articles if need be.
and if ANYONE thinks you can measure how smart someone is by how they talk thats just effing DUMB. my mom is a speech patholegist. she has worked with MANY children who have had speech impediments yet still been brillant (both at the time/age level and later on in life)
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 21, 2008 7:50 AM CDT up reply actions
Clearly America likes how he speaks
or they wouldn’t have re-elected him….SLC Ranger is just a delusional liberal.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
Yes I'm delusional and dumb...
you two are clearly the brilliant ones around here.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
are you guys kidding
Obama is head an shoulders smarter than Bush.. If you think that McCain is a better choice than Obama, you’ve got another thing coming.. I weep for the day that McCain (if he does) takes office.. This country is going to hell in a hand basket..
"Water covers 2/3 of the world, T-New's got the rest"
its sad that...
…the ONLY thing the republicans are really good at is winning elections… they certainly can’t govern, manage the economy, or run a war worth a damn…. but they can win an election… lame
I blame it not on Ron Washington, but on society. Society is to blame. And Ron Washington. ~Ken Tremendous on Ron Washington sac bunting in the 11th vs LAA
Yep
They are good at borrowing money, kicking it back to their friends, and leaving the country with a huge debt. I’m not sure anyone in the world is better at that sort of corruption.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
Do you ever have any refutation
other than calling someone a liberal?
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
nope.
thats his game. resort to name calling and move on to another topic.
I blame it not on Ron Washington, but on society. Society is to blame. And Ron Washington. ~Ken Tremendous on Ron Washington sac bunting in the 11th vs LAA
remind me how many presidents
have left office with a budget SURPLUS?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 9:05 AM CDT up reply actions
Clinton, for one.
Didn’t take long for that douchenozzle to turn it into record deficits though.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
Meh
Clinton didn’t do anything to cut deficits, he just benefited from a roaring economy=increased tax revenue at the same level of taxation at the time.
The idea that Democrats are somehow more fiscally responsible is laughable on it’s face, anyway. California is the most liberal state in the union and has record deficits. On the other hand Texas is doing pretty well in that dept…
Arnold Schwarzeneggar.
Republican Governor.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
Arnold
What party is he a member of?
Hint: It’s not the Democrats.
He’s all yours.
"I dont care to debate with a troll." - Sharky
AHAHAHAHA
Nuff said.
Anyways I said California is the most liberal state in the union, which it is.
No joke that place is probably going to slide into the ocean one of these days.
Love to hear Micheal Savage rant against “San Fransicko”.
California is a wasteland..run by liberals..
Wow
what the fuck is wrong with you? You really need to let go of all your anger towards life. You’re going to have a heartattack! Does any of your spewing change ANYTHING? No, except rile people up and create a miserable place in life.
"For those booing me. Take that, beeep." - Ramon Vazquez
California
is a disaster. It is what happens when you run a state economy the way the federal government runs itself. With the difference that California cannot print money.
We’re taxed at one of the highest rates in the nation (with taxes likely going up this year), yet the roads and schools are subpar; utilities are sky-high. Fires break out and cities and the state can’t coordinate where to send the water-copters and planes sit on runways. Not to mention that all the major local governments are corrupt (San Diego and LA particularly).
It is hard to blame Arnold alone – but its pretty much everyone in Sacramento’s fault. The state spends too much money.
Umm
Bush also benefitted from a roaring economy through the first 6 years of his tenure but managed to put up huge deficits in that time.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
Can't dispute facts with Sharky...
all he will do is say those facts are “leberal rhetoric”.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
Funny
that reasonable spending and good governance lead to peace and prosperity.
We’d hate to see more peace and prosperity, so vote for the party of pointless War and massive deficits, vote Republican!
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
Ok Cahill
What great things did Clinton do to lower deficits? Besides benefit from Reagan and HW Bush’s great leftover economies rescued from Carter?
BTW, funny you’re still railing against Republicans over the war, while remaining silent at just how right I was about the Derms tacit support of same.
You’re inconsistent, to say the least. You’re not even against the war, just Republicans, clearly.
Actually, the credit for the surplus
should probably go to the elder Bush and the Democratic congress who raised taxes. Imagine that, more revenue means a balanced budget. The Laffer curve is just a laugher. The elder Bush was screwed by his own party despite doing one of the smartest things a president should do: make a difficult decision and compromise.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
Hm.
Well, actually it’s a little more complicated than that. The budgets he sent to Congress were aimed at balancing the budget. The economy was going so well that they actually accomplished a little bit more than that for a while.
There was increased revenue, in part because of strong economic performance and partly because the tax structure was NOT the same. We can’t continue to cut taxes and spend more and more. Look at what’s happened to the value of the dollar, which is responsible for a big portion of the increased price of gas at the pump, which is in turn one of the major drags on our economy right now.
Anyway, during the Clinton years we actually started to spend less on the day-to-day operations of the federal government thanks to advancements in technology and its implementation (Al Gore headed up a program called Reinventing Government that he should’ve talked about more in 2000). Welfare reforrm (in spite of its hidden costs) helped out. So did the end of the Cold War and the continuation of George HW Bush’s downsizing of the military.
I know you’re not one for nuanced opinion, but to say that Clinton — the President of the United States — had nothing to do with cutting the deficit is just plain stupid, Sharky.
by Black Francis on Aug 20, 2008 4:47 PM CDT up reply actions
give me more names
before you bitch and moan about
borrowing money, kicking it back to their friends, and leaving the country with a huge debt
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 9:21 AM CDT up reply actions
Reagan and Bush
what other names do you need? Bush added almost 4 Trillion to the US debt, and Reagan added almost 2 Trillion. Borrow and spend and keep the country afloat through deficit spending has been the Republican formula for almost 30 years.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
how many presidents have not
[borrowed] money, [kicked] it back to their friends, and [left] the country with a huge debt
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 9:30 AM CDT up reply actions
Considering
Bush, Bush, and Reagan are responsible for 78% of the 9.6 Trillion debt in this country. Clinton inherited massive deficits from Bush the older and somewhat smarter, and left the country with budget surpluses.
This is all public record info, look it up. Republicans talk a good game about small government, but when they get in power, its all about borrow and spend.
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
Bush inherited
a shitty economy from CLinton…what’s your point?
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
read this
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1240270/posts
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
Bush inherited an economy
in very good shape. There were some clouds on the horizon, which he, the Fed, congress, etc. did absolutely nothing of consequence to avoid. He is not solely to blame — no president ever is on the economy — but he is hardly blameless. By the same token, Clinton does not deserve much credit for the good economy he handed to Bush.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
crap, here we go
you can’t use Free Republic as a source in a political debate any more than a liberal can use Daily Kos. Anyone who uses either of those sites as a reference in any debate loses all credibility.
Plus the fact that article was written in 2000 and was trying to predict the future. You show me an article writtin in 2007 that says the economy already crappy when Bush took office and you’ll have a point.
I’m not saying you’re right or wrong, but learn to use credible sources.
Grieve: The Yanks have struggled so far. - Lewin: Yeah, cry me a bag of money.
ElectricOkra.com
you do understand
its an article from the NY Daily News, written by a writer from the AP…
Bush Did Inherit a Bad Economy
NY DAILY NEWS
12/04/2000
Martin Crutsinger, AP
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 11:25 AM CDT up reply actions
yeah, saw that
but the link that supposedly goes to the article goes nowhere, so I can’t verify that… and my point about it being written in 2000 and trying to predict the future still stands.
It’s an Op-Ed peice from before Bush took office. It has no relevency now. Using it in a debate 8yrs later is just lazy.
Grieve: The Yanks have struggled so far. - Lewin: Yeah, cry me a bag of money.
ElectricOkra.com
you think that its a made uparticle?
really…REALLY?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 11:32 AM CDT up reply actions
never said it was made up
just said that the link to the article was dead.
That was quite an assumption there.
Grieve: The Yanks have struggled so far. - Lewin: Yeah, cry me a bag of money.
ElectricOkra.com
but the link that supposedly goes to the article goes nowhere, so I can’t verify that… and
ill find the story on wayback machine when i get home to confirm it for you…
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 11:38 AM CDT up reply actions
again
where in that quote do I say the article was made up? You made that illogical jump, not me. I was just pointing out that the website had a broken link to the article it was reprinting. You made the assumption that I thought it was all one big lie.
You should stop, take a deep breath and then come back later. You’re swinging at windmills here.
Grieve: The Yanks have struggled so far. - Lewin: Yeah, cry me a bag of money.
ElectricOkra.com
your the one who rails against free republic
despite the fact that i think the 3? times links have been posted they have linked to news stories…
so i cant post stories from national review that link to other articles because they are known to be biased, correct?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 11:49 AM CDT up reply actions
Not really
I was pointing out that even in 2000 it was stated that whoever inherited the White House, Dem or Rep would inherit a bad economy.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
Yes, I read the article
the only issue is that the economy didn’t end up being as bad as was predicted in the article when Bush took office. It was trying to predict the future. We can look back and see that it was wrong, or we can go back and use it to try and prove an invalid point.
I’m sure I can find articles from 2000 somewhere that predicted that whomever was going to take office in 2000 was going to inherit sunshine and rainbows. 8yr old articles trying to extrapolate what would happen have no relevence here.
Grieve: The Yanks have struggled so far. - Lewin: Yeah, cry me a bag of money.
ElectricOkra.com
You didn't read the actual content in the link did you?
LOL
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
LOL
yes I did if you had actually read my post.
Sheesh. I wasn’t talking about your position, just your source. Are you honestly going to attack me not knowing my actual position on the subject because I urged you to use better sources?
Think about that for a minute.
Grieve: The Yanks have struggled so far. - Lewin: Yeah, cry me a bag of money.
ElectricOkra.com
No
what’s wrong with the source? It is NY daily news.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
and an AP writer....
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 11:38 AM CDT up reply actions
so the next time someone
pops up an AP article that makes Bush look like an orangutan, you won’t have a problem with it, right? Because it’s the AP, right?
sheesh
Grieve: The Yanks have struggled so far. - Lewin: Yeah, cry me a bag of money.
ElectricOkra.com
you bash the source
free republic
even though its a NY daily news written by an AP writer
not one of the users from free republic
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 11:50 AM CDT up reply actions
You aren't paying attention to what I'm saying at all, are you?
for the record, I think the article was right. I just think it was a BAD SOURCE AND DOESN’T HELP YOUR ARGUMENT.
I was trying to help you, but if you insist on being this way with everyone who doesn’t say “ZOMG YOU’RE SO RIGHT” then you’re not going to win many debates.
You have to make sure your sources are good, not an 8yr old Op-Ed piece that was trying to say what was going to happen not what actually happened.
Grieve: The Yanks have struggled so far. - Lewin: Yeah, cry me a bag of money.
ElectricOkra.com
I am paying attention
you questioned my source…and now you realize that the source actually wasn’t New republic.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
oh for fucks's sake
I realized that from the very beginning. Read my first post. The reason I called out the Freepers and the Kosheads is becausae they pick and choose articles that agree with them and take other things out of context and you can’t trust anything you read there. They used a NY Daily News article from 2000 to try and prove that Bush was doing a great job before the 2004 election. It was irrelevent then and it’s irrelevent now.
Grieve: The Yanks have struggled so far. - Lewin: Yeah, cry me a bag of money.
ElectricOkra.com
It's relevant now
because someone here said he didn’t inherit a poor economy.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
+1
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 11:50 AM CDT up reply actions
Agreen is actually trying to make a point
misguided though it is. But you’re just being an irritant. Go away.
Grieve: The Yanks have struggled so far. - Lewin: Yeah, cry me a bag of money.
ElectricOkra.com
you seriously need to stop right here
The article said that whomever took office would inherit a slowingeconomy, not that he did inherit it. Can you see the fucking difference?
Try and understand this. It’s not a news article. It’s an 8yr old Op-Ed piece that says what the writer thinks will happen. It CANNOT be used as asource of what did happen.
I’m trying to help you here and all you’re not listening at all.
Grieve: The Yanks have struggled so far. - Lewin: Yeah, cry me a bag of money.
ElectricOkra.com
Reagan is different from Bush
When Reagan came into office, the economy was really in shambles, and his tax cuts were necessary to bring the country out of what almost was a depression. The spending went up because Reagan saw an opportunity to kill the USSR by crippling their economy with defense spending. It was a smart move, and it worked. The price the US paid in deficit was worth freeing the people of Eastern Europe and Russia. (yes, the post-Soviet era could have been better, but that is a different story)
For Bush II, 9/11 was a major national event, which mandated a defense response in Afghanistan and even if not Iraq, would have boosted the military nonetheless. The problem was that Bush still wanted to further cut taxes and up spending in other areas. Yes, defense is a priority after a terrorist attack. But to pass the expense of it off to the future while continuing to prop up the economy with tax cuts and low interest rates was poor economics.
Good thing
Most of the country is run by Democrats who rack up huge deficits, corruption scandals, and kickbacks to their rich friends.
And oh how they love the Iraq war., Could Sharky have been righter on that? One year later and it went exactly as I said..Democraps didnt do a damn thing to end the war..
Iraq
If you’re looking for something to crow about concerning a Republican administration, Iraq should be at the very bottom of your list. It had nowhere to go but up.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
I'm ambivilant about Iraq
What I do know is it’s a source of great increase of government power as well as making a lot of people dependant on government spending, and I have correctly called the fact Democrats will do nothing to end it since they love those two things.
Neither party
is good at cutting spending, ending huge government programs, or clean on corruption and backscratching. Neither party. You should admit that both parties are basically the same on most of that kind of stuff. The GOP has paid huge lip service to cutting government spending for 30 years, but somehow has increased it massively instead. They have zero credibility on this issue.
And on increasing government power, there I think the GOP does have a huge edge on the Dems. The centralizing of power in the executive branch during the last 7 years may end up being the most memorable thing about the Bush administration.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
Please
Clinton did more of that than Bush ever did. You just never hear about it since he did it in service of liberalism.
Do you know what a compromise is?
Let’s just say both parties suck, the system is fucked and get on with our lives.
didnt end it
despite having full control of both houses
hmmmm
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 9:22 AM CDT up reply actions
Smartness
doesn’t dictate how effectively someone runs a country
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
shocking!
are you sure if you dont have IQ of above 180 you cant be in leadership? </ sarcasm>
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 10:39 AM CDT up reply actions
The Democratic party is not bright....
They couldn’t pull it off in 2004 and now they are losing this election? The GOP owns them, it’s embarrassing.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
biden
like i read/heard somewhere yesterday…give the guy two weeks and he is guaranteed to make a dumb comment
Mr. Biden is equally skeptical—albeit in a slightly more backhanded way—about Mr. Obama. "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy," he said. "I mean, that’s a storybook, man."
But—and the "but" was clearly inevitable—he doubts whether American voters are going to elect "a one-term, a guy who has served for four years in the Senate," and added: "I don’t recall hearing a word from Barack about a plan or a tactic."
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
also some interesting stuff on biden
great site by nate silver (of baseball prospectus fame)
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/do-voters-like-joe-biden.html
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
nate's conclusion
I understand that there is more to picking a VP than favorable/unfavorable ratings — elections aren’t won by out-nicing the other ticket. There is no doubt that Biden would perform well on the talk show circuit, and that he’d assuage the concerns of a certain number of older, foreign-policy-focused voters. That might be enough to make him a worthy choice. But I don’t think he’d quite as appealing to the electorate as the conventional wisdom seems to hold.
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 8:04 AM CDT up reply actions
further conclusion from todays post
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/biden-new-trick-for-old-fogeys.html
In any event, based on my 99.99% uninformed aggregation of information and intuition, I’d probably place the candidates into something like the following tiers:
1. Biden, Kaine
2. Sebelius, Clinton
3. Bayh, Reed, Other
thoughts:
-interesting he has bayh in the 3rd category
-i think he takes biden…which he will probably regret after he pops off. biden is more likely to pop off with a dumb one-liner than mccain…and thats pretty impressive
-i think there is zero chance he takes sebeilus
so who do yall think ends up as the veep selection for obama?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 8:23 AM CDT up reply actions
I voted for Charlie Hough
"Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states" - Barack Obama
by LSBUser on Aug 20, 2008 8:27 AM CDT up reply actions
More likely to pop off a dumb one-liner than McCain?
That’d be a lot.
Unfortunately, the press hasn’t been paying attention for whatever reason (whether it be pro-McCain bias or Obama-mania or whatever).
R
yea i know
but look at his quotes on the ’net
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 21, 2008 7:50 AM CDT up reply actions
His site is great
Biden is Obama’s best pick, IMO, and he’s a fun guy to watch, even if I don’t agree with him on everything. He’ll make the next 3 months entertaining at least. unlike Bayh, who’ll make me fall asleep
yea im a big fan of 538 as well
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 11:51 AM CDT up reply actions
also regarding mccain veep-stakes
As speculation grows around who John McCain will select as his vice presidential running mate next week, Republican National Committee officials said Tuesday that McCain is no longer considering former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge.
Several sources at the RNC told FOX News that in the last 36 hours, senior McCain advisers and aides have told RNC officials that McCain "got the message" last week that choosing a running mate who supports abortion rights would not be helpful.
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/19/rnc-mccain-wont-choose-abortion-supporting-running-mate/
fwiw – from RNC not from mccain
also in article:
(National Review Editor Rich) Lowry said he thinks the safest choice for McCain is Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, whom he described as "kind of dull" but a reliable choice to satisfy the Republican base.
so basically i think its down to
-romney (problem is that hes a mormon – and like something i read on national review regarding a pro-choice running mate, it just comes down to how much conservatives can stomach mccain/whoever his choice is…or how much they wont vote for obama. interesting choice because he is a businessman, has huge fundraising potential and knows economics, something mccain self-professes to know know much about)
-lowry (dont know a lot about him…)
-huckabee (darkhorse – would be interesting b/c it locks up evangelical voters imo + huckabee is fairly well liked by the base IIRC. read in the last few days where someone said the VP part of the ticket should be for evening things out – well huckabee and the others would probably meet this requirement. this is the most interesting of the 3 choices imo just from my perspective – the effect he could have on voting at least…)
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
Electoral-vote.com
Sharky, you check the site electoral-vote.com as an extra resource. They take the polls from the past week and show the electoral map. They currently have Obama 264, McCain 261, and Virginia too close to call. The blogger has some liberal leanings but he tries to keep the front page objective.
Signature! I don't need no stinking signature!!
From what I recall
That site is way too heavily liberal.
I believe they had Kerry winning right throught in 04
yeah
And the guys rant after Kerry lost was bit comical. Still he has some good features and is now following Senate and House races.
Signature! I don't need no stinking signature!!
by DerekSTheRed on Aug 20, 2008 9:20 AM CDT up reply actions
Real Clear Politics General Election:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html
8/04 to 8/19:
obama: 44.9
mccain: 43.7
obama: +1.2%
real clear politics electoral college:
electoral count: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=5
obama: 228 (solid: 183) – 45 leaning
mccain: 178 (solid: 139) – 39 leaning
toss up: 132
electoral count (no toss up states): http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=10
mccain: 274
obama: 264
Pollster.com averages: http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/08-us-pres-ge-mvo.php
obama: 45.7
mccain: 43.2
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
McCain
Well, now we definitely know Obama’s going to win.
Because Sharky came on here several times last year, and said at various times that Romney, Huckabee, and Fred Thompson would all win the Republican nomination, but none of them did.
It’s pretty clear to me that his predictive powers are lacking, to say the least.
"I dont care to debate with a troll." - Sharky
Well, uhh
No.
Also I never said those things, you guys just put a bunch of words in my mouth.
The only one I actually said would win at one very early point was probably Thompson…
who to be fair
led in the polling for a while before he declared
then was a HUGEEEE flop
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 9:22 AM CDT up reply actions
Really?
Here’s two comments you made about Huckabee previously:
http://www.lonestarball.com/2008/1/8/20314/76259#2700615
“Huck takes Mich and SC, he’s going to take Florida then. You look at the Florida polls he’s already right near the top, now add the momentum of a Mich+SC win and it would be over in Florida. and I think he’s then relatively unstoppable with all that momentum into super Tuesday. That is how I see things shaking out.”
http://www.lonestarball.com/2008/1/8/20314/76259#2700589
“Huckabee is going to win. Just watching his press conferences, it’s so obvious this guy is a winner.”
Remember, there’s a search function on this site. You might want to keep that in mind before trying to lie your way out of another point.
"I dont care to debate with a troll." - Sharky
HAHAHHAH
and WE HAVE A WINNER!
I blame it not on Ron Washington, but on society. Society is to blame. And Ron Washington. ~Ken Tremendous on Ron Washington sac bunting in the 11th vs LAA
Of course, Sharky will never respond to this now.
He’s been caught.
"One man, five scoops." -- shroomer
We called him on that shit before...
and he ignored it.
Sharky is a grade A assclown.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
more biden quotes
On McCain:
Biden, on a post-debate appearance on MSNBC, October 30, 2007: "The only guy on the other side who’s qualified is John McCain."
Biden appearing on The Daily Show, August 2, 2005: "John McCain is a personal friend, a great friend, and I would be honored to run with or against John McCain, because I think the country would be better off, be well off no matter who…"
On Meet the Press, November 27, 2005: "I’ve been calling for more troops for over two years, along with John McCain and others subsequent to my saying that."
On Obama:
Reacting to an Obama speech on counterterrorism, August 1, 2007: "‘Look, the truth is the four major things he called for, well, hell that’s what I called for,’ Biden said today on MSNBC’s Hardball, echoing comments he made earlier in the day at an event promoting his book at the National Press Club. Biden added, ‘I’m glad he’s talking about these things.’"
Also that day, the Biden campaign issued a release that began, "The Biden for President Campaign today congratulated Sen. Barack Obama for arriving at a number of Sen. Biden’s long-held views on combating al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan." That release mocked Obama for asking about the "stunning level of mercury in fish" and asked about a proposal for the U.S. adopt a ban on mercury sales abroad at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing.
Assessing Obama’s Iraq plan on September 13, 2007: "My impression is [Obama] thinks that if we leave, somehow the Iraqis are going to have an epiphany" of peaceful coexistence among warring sects. "I’ve seen zero evidence of that."
Speaking to the New York Observer: Biden was equally skeptical — albeit in a slightly more backhanded way — about Mr. Obama. "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy," he said. "I mean, that’s a storybook, man."
Also from that Observer interview: "But — and the ‘but’ was clearly inevitable — he doubts whether American voters are going to elect ‘a one-term, a guy who has served for four years in the Senate,’ and added: ‘I don’t recall hearing a word from Barack about a plan or a tactic.’"
Around that time, Biden in an interview with the Huffington Post, he assessed Obama and Hillary Clinton: "The more people learn about them (Obama and Hillary) and how they handle the pressure, the more their support will evaporate."
December 11, 2007: "If Iowans believe campaign funds and celebrity will fix the debacle in Iraq, put the economy on track, and provide health care and education for America’s children, they should support another candidate," said Biden for President Campaign Manager Luis Navarro. "But I’m confident that Iowans know what I know: our problems will require experience and leadership from Day One. Empty slogans will be no match for proven action on caucus night."
Also that night, Biden said in a campaign ad, "When this campaign is over, political slogans like ‘experience’ and ‘change’ will mean absolutely nothing. The next president has to act."
September 26, 2007: Biden for President Campaign Manager Luis Navarro said, "Sen. Obama said he would do everything possible to end the war in Iraq and emphasized the need for a political solution yet he failed to show up to vote for Sen. Biden’s critical amendment to provide a political solution in Iraq.
December 26, 2006: "Frankly, I think I’m more qualified than other candidates, and the issues facing the American public are all in my wheelbarrow."
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NGRhNzJlMWY5NjdiNzhjMTRkYjMzNjYwOGJmYzNjMTY=
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
What's your point?
Biden said negative things about Obama when he was running against him? I don’t think that’s a suprise.
Nothing pithy here. Please move long.
no no
just some quotes from biden – hes an interesting character to me
TONS of foreign policy experience, lots of experience and the guy i think that ends up as the veep
he also has/had interesting views on iraq:
basically they were kurds in the north, sunni? in the south w/ cut of oil money and shi’ia? in the middle w/ oil money
fwiw may be shi’ia and sunnis swapped…dont remember 100%
hes a facinating character and im kind of interestedin him. clearly wouldnt bump me to the obama side but still intereted in the guy…
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 9:39 AM CDT up reply actions
who do you think he has to pick?
imo biden balances the ticket – foreign policy experience + experience PERIOD.
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 10:24 AM CDT up reply actions
It contradicts everything he's said about bringing change to Washington
Doesn’t make any sense at all. Unless he plans on insulting his supporter’s intelligence along with dooming his presidential bid.
so you think
he can win the race with 2 guys who have basically no national experience?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 11:12 AM CDT up reply actions
at least kaine has SOME real leadership experience on the state level
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 11:13 AM CDT up reply actions
Well...
Picking a veep who supported the Iraq war, or at least the surge, would probably give McCain more ammo to question Obama’s intelligence/reasoning skills/political agenda. I don’t know very much about the possible veeps so I don’t know who I would prefer. I would definitely prefer a state governor over another senator.
re:
Finally I feel like Obama is not very bright
Of course, he’s a Liberal.
to me, abortion is not a religious issue, it's a common sense one...
The so-called conservative party
has absolutely nothing to crow about right now. They’re not even conservative.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
You must have missed the title of the thread
the Republicans are winning….
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
McCain may well win the election
he’s a smart candidate for this cycle (he is considered the anti-Bush of the party, even if he really isn’t). And Obama’s strengths are all also negatives to some people.
I think Obama is a strong candidate, but he’s risky. And the Democrats didn’t need to be risky this year – playing it straight would have been a guaranteed victory.
That said, the Republicans will lose seats in the house and senate – and it’ll be a very, very powerful Democratic mandate no matter who wins. The Republicans are in bad shape. They are corrupt, free-spending bureaucrats who are everything that the average conservative disdains.
whipping?
Real Clear Politics General Election:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html
8/04 to 8/19 average:
obama: 44.9
mccain: 43.7
obama: +1.2%
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 11:52 AM CDT up reply actions
off topic
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 10:24 AM CDT up reply actions
Hahaha
not funny.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
I know
it was somewhat funny but I like when Sharky’s stirs the pot around here.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
I will say this.
If a troll has to post an obviously inflammatory diary, I’m glad it’s Sharky.
"One man, five scoops." -- shroomer
Yeah
but also I dont think Sharky comments enough anymore to be considered a troll.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
He's like LSB's "troll emeritus".
Comes around every once in a while, draws an audience, we all clap, he goes back to his McMansion.
"One man, five scoops." -- shroomer
You mean he goes back
to work at McDonalds.
“You want some fries with that?”
What's the secret to a long life? "I masturbate a lot"-Ernest Borgnine. http://www.bestweekever.tv/2008/08/14/icymi-ernest-borgnine-reveals-his-secret-for-everlasting-youth/#onepage
…really? no need for that.
quite honesly, as far right wing as sharky is…your pretty far left wing as well…maybe the equilivant of sharky but on the left? lol
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 10:44 AM CDT up reply actions
at least in this thread
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 10:44 AM CDT up reply actions
You, sharky
and a few others here seem to think anyone to the left of Genghis Khan is liberal. Anyway, being liberal or conservative is not in itself a bad thing, though the GOP has succeeded in somehow making liberal a dirty word lately. I really wish the GOP was conservative, instead of simply paying lip service to controlling the size and scope of government. They are only conservative socially, while being nearly indistinguishable from and equally incompetent as the fiscally challenged Dems on budget and governance.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
Wow you sound like a really
jealous liberal…don’t be mad because your party isn’t good at their job.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
jealous liberal?
i dont get why everyone thinks that just because bush stole the election of 04, that democrats dont know how to do their job.. If they were in office for the past 4 or even 8 years, this world would be a different place.. and im gonna say a better place. just because there is a larger section of the country that believes in different things does not make them right.. This is the reason i hate politics.. to quote chris rock “anyone who makes a decision on an issue before he hears the facts is a moron.” the two party system we have does not work because it puts people living in the same area against each other, with the basis on the difference, in my opinion, not totally but definately on religion. Im a firm believer in the way this country was founded on separation of church and state.. under bush, this was definately not the case.. im not saying religion is bad, but to use a fictional book in order to divide a nation (or world) is troubling and has no end in sight
"Water covers 2/3 of the world, T-New's got the rest"
Just because Bush stole the election in 04?
what was his approval rating then? And he still won. And now McCain is beating Obama…the Dems are clearly inferior to the GOP when it comes to running a presidential campaign. It’s as simple as that. As for bible being fiction, I also believe that but I’m not sure how you can debate that with someone and you know this so you’re just trying to piss people off by saying that. Stop being overemotional when you write…
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
that wasnt my point
Im just saying that there is a large contingency of poitics that has more to do with location than actual politics
"Water covers 2/3 of the world, T-New's got the rest"
What do you mean?
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
first off i appoligize for the bible comment
upon thinking about it, not the right course of action.. I just think that first off, politician say what they think you want to hear.. im tired of the way this country is split up and the dissent that leads to hatred.. we are all americans, there has got to be a better way to decide how we are all gonna live.. i have no trust in the government to give me the truth and that is a really sad state of events… i dont have any solutions to the problem, i just hope at some point, someone smarter than i am can
"Water covers 2/3 of the world, T-New's got the rest"
how did he steal the election in 2004?
2000 I can see – that was essentially a tie solved by a tiebreaker that ideally wouldn’t have been used – obviously national elections are not precise enough to determine within 0.1 percent. (it’s like those Olympics gymnastic judges)
2004 was pretty much a convincing victory for Bush. There may have been some questionable issues in some places, but there are everywhere, and in the end probably don’t help one guy or the other (again, the electoral system in this country is probably only precise within 0.5%). I guarantee you that both Kerry and Bush got illegal votes, as I guarantee you that everyone gets illegal votes in elections.
Kerry was a bad candidate, and really so was Gore. The problem with the Democrats is that they are beholden to the liberal wing of their party, so they don’t nominate guys (or women) with a legitimate chance of winning. Obama is a special case, because of his charisma.
I have never seen you win an argument with anyone.
Last week I took a pleasure trip. I drove my wife to the airport.
by Brian Thomas on Aug 20, 2008 12:31 PM CDT up reply actions
I didn't mean he actually stole it
I mean that the Dems were big time favorites going into that election and they couldn’t win it.
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
I can't believe
how often I state a middle of the road position here and get called a liberal. I often bash both parties’ incompetence, but get called a liberal. I often complaing about how the GOP isn’t conservative enough for me, but get called a liberal.
Amazing.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
That's the beauty of the GOP
Anyone that’s not a right wing conservative is a damn dirty liberal. And thanks to Limbaugh and to a lesser extent Fox News, they’ve made “liberal” a dirty word. It was really sort of brilliant how the GOP and their mouthpieces turned the very notion of any “democrat” into “liberal”; i.e. some godless unpatriotic homosexual. Additionally, the press is all “liberal” and can’t be trusted. Only Fox News tells the truth.
I’m serious when I say that I’m impressed with how the GOP has created this sweeping ideology that’s blindly accepted.
Nothing pithy here. Please move long.
So, why run from being a liberal?
to me, abortion is not a religious issue, it's a common sense one...
I wouldn't run from it
is I was a liberal. I am liberal on some social issues, much more conservative on most fiscal issues. These days, according to the GOP, that makes me a liberal.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
I concur
I consider myself a moderate, but every time I disagree with any Republican point of view, I’m considered a flaming liberal.
Whereas whenever I disagree with a Democrat, we actually discuss the issue.
This attack mentality of Republicans against ANYTHING which might show that they’re wrong has worked in the short-run, but I really think people are starting to get tired of this “you either agree with us completely or you’re against us” mentality.
Unfortunately, I don’t think Obama is taking advantage and hammering McCain at some real gaffes and blunders that he’s made.
It’s making this election uncomfortably close.
R
you think that cahill
is middle of the road?
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2008 11:33 AM CDT up reply actions
Haven't seen enough of his ideology...
to say he’s middle of the road.
OTOH, I can pretty much classify you and Agreen07 as strong right-wingers.
It’s hard to determine, because Republicans keep saying everyone to the left of them is a liberal.
R
i will agree
that i am conservative, yes.
am i right wing? helllll no.
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 21, 2008 7:52 AM CDT up reply actions
Pardon me for asking
but what’s the difference?
R
Republican conservatives..
Republican conservatives (generally speaking) are conservative on moral issues but not necessarily on economic issues.
Think gay marriage — that is a “moral/religious/social” issue. They are very conservative here in that it was illegal in the past, and should stay illegal.
Then think economic issues, tax breaks — Lowering taxes to increase revenue is considered liberal economic thought.
The real issue is that the “left/right” argument makes politics seem like a single dimensional realm, when really it should be considered, at minimum, as two-dimensional.
The Republicans and Democrats fight to keep it this way with conservatives at one end and liberals on the other, because otherwise you would need 5 parties — one for the middle, and one for each of the 4 corners.
With a two party system, and a single dimentional line (right or left), a third party doesn’t make sense. So long as you can sell it like that, a third party will have difficulty forming until the two parties are truly identical… at which point it’s still a two party system anyways.
wrong
anyone who votes like a liberal or has the same views as a liberal is a liberal.
to me, abortion is not a religious issue, it's a common sense one...
Same goes for a conservative...
if you vote conservative and have conservative views then you’re conservative. The difference is that the “liberal” media hasn’t turned the term “conservative” into a dirty word like it has done with the term “liberal”.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
eh
conservative is a dirty word too. You’re just more sensitive to one than the other.
Right now, you aren’t doing yourself any favors by labeling yourself as either conservative or liberal. “Moderate” and “independent” are the real winners in the media right now.
My problem is with the glorification of the “independent” voter. Am I supposed to think more of someone because they can’t make up their mind or are so insecure in their beliefs that an ad or two will change their minds? If you are a liberal or conservative, and know what you believe, then I have respect for you. When you’re a wishy-washy moderate who picks based on some ad you see two days before election day, well, I think you’re a problem.
Disagree...
I think conservative is seen as a “good” word by many. McCain and many of the other republican nominees have gone out of their way to show how they are “conservative” and what to be viewed as so. No dem wants to be seen or viewed as “liberal”. They avoid that term like the plague.
Your first point is correct though. I’m more sensitive to the term liberal. It drives me nuts that “liberal” is seen as a bad thing.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
well
it is seen by a good word to conservatives, of course. Among liberals, is “liberal” considered a bad word? Not really. But that is because McCain is widely considered a moderate. So unlike most elections, he is having to run to his right rather than towards the middle. Obama, on the other hand, doesn’t have to gain liberal street cred, so he is wisely trying to act moderate in the race.
Also, I think part of it has to do with “liberal” meaning different things to different people, so even someone who is liberal on some issues is likely conservative on others. A true “liberal” isn’t that common, whereas true “conservatives” are more common. So if 80% of people consider themselves conservative on some issues, whereas only 50% consider themselves liberal on some issues, then it is smarter to vocalize your conservative tendencies
I have no problem...
with the word conservative. If someone truly is conservative then they should not have a problem with that label. I have no problem with the liberal label. I don’t feel either one should be seen as “dirty words”.
In response to below, I think your point is valid, but I think the media plays into it as well. One of my biggest problems with the dem party is that they have no backbone. If the dems did get rid of the people that made the term “liberal” look like a bad thing it would greatly improve the situation.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
also
I do agree that the term “liberal” has been co-opted by a bad image (stems from thoughts of half-dressed people at Woodstock, the’68 dem convention, hollywood actors visiting North Vietnam and now Iran, michael moore, cynthia mckinney). Generally, the type of people most vocal that they are “liberal” are not what your average American wants to relate to.
I would disagree that this is the media’s fault. Rather, I think that the Democratic Party and rational true liberals have done a bad job of forcing the wacko’s out of their party. For example, the Republicans made it clear that Pat Buchanan and David Duke weren’t welcome, the Democrats should do the same with the people that make “liberal” look bad. You know who they are – get rid of them.
Come on, homey
“My problem is with the glorification of the "independent" voter. Am I supposed to think more of someone because they can’t make up their mind or are so insecure in their beliefs that an ad or two will change their minds? If you are a liberal or conservative, and know what you believe, then I have respect for you. When you’re a wishy-washy moderate who picks based on some ad you see two days before election day, well, I think you’re a problem.”
I think that is a pretty poor summary of an independent voter. You sounded like Huck there, broheim.
I’m a indomoderatabertarian. Not really, I just thunk that up 5 secs ago, but still. I like some conservative principles, some liberal. Socially, I’m very liberal. Fiscally, I’m moderately conservative. Some crime I’m more open-minded about than others. Regarding foreign policy, I’m of the but-out-buttinsky school of thought. Same with firearms and gun control. Corporate regulations? I’m da mayor of Buttinskyville.
By your implication, I’m a thoughtless, spineless dufus that blows with the wind.
Not so, my friend. And I don’t think that is a fair characterization of most moderates. I’d actually assert it is just the opposite, that the hard core at both ends are the ones that are more likely to be a little arrears in the critical thinking department.
Last week I took a pleasure trip. I drove my wife to the airport.
by Brian Thomas on Aug 20, 2008 8:41 PM CDT up reply actions
Thanks
I was going to post a lot of the same thoughts in response to this bad characterization of independents stolen from some bad comedian’s routine.
To use JBImaknee’s argument, I think less of those who ARE members of one of the two major parties. Instead of making up their own mind based on policies and character, they vote and think like the party hacks tell them to.
Moderates are most certainly not “wishy-washy”. The world is not black and white, it is mostly gray. The biggest problems facing the country will not be solved by simplistic soundbite answers. They will require complex solutions and compromise. Looking for candidates of either party that are willing to roll up their sleeves and work with the other party for the good of the country is not being wishy washy or insecure. It is you who are insecure.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
I wasn't saying all moderates are wishy-washy
One can have a set of opinions that differ with both parties. That is fine, admirable, and probably describes most of us
But the media does glorify the “independent voter” as if there is something inherently better about that. And people say “I haven’t decided who to vote for yet” condescendingly, as if there is something wrong and shallow with agreeing too much with either side. That is my problem with it – the glorification of being “undecided” (I admit should have used that word, not "moderate").
The problem is
that as a person who likely holds views that sometime agree with one party and sometime agree with the other party, you have to figure out which issues are the most important to you at that time, and most of the time the figuring out takes time.
There really isn’t any alternative to the two major parties, unfortunately, where you KNOW that one of the parties agrees with you on most issues. So, it takes us, moderates, independents, a longer time to figure out who to vote for.
For me, it’s been relatively easy, but I can see how some moderates and independents take a longer time to sort through it.
Of course, what with McCain’s complete flip-flop on seemingly everything EXCEPT the Iraq War (which I disagree with), it’s become very easy for me to support Obama (though I have some concerns there also).
If the choice had been between the McCain of 2000 and Obama, it would definitely have taken me some time to try to choose.
R
Not sure
What the problem is with “flip-flopping”.
by brettgardner on Aug 21, 2008 6:57 AM CDT up reply actions
and dont forget about obama's flip-flopping as well lol
people SO often tend to say look at mccains or obamas but never at both haha
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 21, 2008 7:54 AM CDT up reply actions
I would hope
that both men would be eager to change their positions if new information or analysis warranted doing so. I absolutely abhor charges of “flip-flopping” from either party.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
i agree
but ppl often say “oh, look at mccains flipflopping!” or “obama flipflopped on X issue”
and ignore the other candidates
+1 on new info changing opinions
Every pitch thrown to Josh Hamilton is recorded as an E1. -- clark
by knockoutking on Aug 21, 2008 10:23 AM CDT up reply actions
well, there is flip flopping
for good reasons as information changes, and then there is being stupid about it.
Hillary supported the war at first, and then says that we should be out of there because we aren’t doing any good and the justification wasn’t what she had been led to believe. You may not agree with her, but she didn’t “flip flop” – her information changed, so her view changed. Bid deal
John Kerry’s flip-flopping was less justified, however, and probably deserved the ridicule it got. Saying things like “i voted for the war before I voted against it,” besides being just a stupid thing to say, wreaks of hedging your bets politically, so it comes across as someone who is afraid to take a stand for fear of angering people. Which itself indicates poor leadership.
No...
It indicates how the Senate actually works, which most people haven’t the time or inclination to care about. That’s not his fault.
by brettgardner on Aug 21, 2008 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions
Nothing
As long as there’s a logical reason behind the flip-flopping.
McCain’s flip-flops seem to have been almost solely political expediency.
http://howinsaneisjohnmccain.blogspot.com/2008/03/mccain-never-met-position-he-didnt-like.html
Obama’s “flip-flops” for the most part have not been actual flip-flops, but nuanced positions which weren’t articulated by the media because it didn’t make a good sound bite.
The major one that I agree Obama flip-flopped on was campaign financing.
But when it comes to number of flip-flops not to mention core issue flip-flops, McCain blows Obama out of the water. But I don’t expect right-wingers to see things outside their red-colored glasses.
R
x
“Political expediency”
Still trying to figure out what’s wrong with that.
by brettgardner on Aug 21, 2008 4:13 PM CDT up reply actions
The problem
with Political expediency, is that there’s no long term plan in place. If you flow with the winds of what is currently popular, you’re not looking to fix any of the MANY long-term issues that this country has.
It’s the reason why Social Security, Medicare, etc. continue on and on despite the developing realization that eventually, somebody’s going to get screwed by the system.
It’s the way that the current Executive Branch manipulated the Legislative Branch to allow them way more powers than they are allowed.
R
Like
Social Security, Medicare, Health Care, School System, National Debt, Immigration Reform, Employee Retraining, Energy Dependency, Environment Issues
And now that I’ve repeatedly answered your questions, here’s a question of my own.
Why is Changing your mind a good thing if it’s SOLELY for political expediency?
R
Well
I never said it was a good thing.
And I should have been more clear—“like what?” was regarding your last sentence.
None of those things you’ve listed are under control of the executive, unless you tie in the President’s budget with the national debt.
by brettgardner on Aug 22, 2008 8:18 AM CDT up reply actions
Executive power
The increase in use of signing statements, executive orders, withholding evidence and refusing to testify or appear in congressional hearings under the ever-extending umbrella of “executive privilege”, the entire idea of all that has gone on at Guantanamo and the way they’ve handled arrests and trials of “noncombatants”, off the top of my head.
Bush and Cheney show an incredible disdain for checks and balances and a lot of impatience with due process.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
But
None of those things were the result of manipulation of the Legislative, they just flow from a philosophy Bush has (unitary executive).
That’s not to say that any of those things are “right” or “wrong”, but they didn’t come from manipulation.
by brettgardner on Aug 22, 2008 11:39 AM CDT up reply actions
Come on
That’s a load of crock.
You’re implying it by saying:
"Political expediency"
Still trying to figure out what’s wrong with that.
Stop playing semantics and actually talk about an issue. While I like to hear myself speak, I also like to discuss other people’s viewpoints too.
I do NOT like be subjected to a pseudo-interrogation and then when I ask what your viewpoints are on topics, you refuse to say anything of substance.
While questioning of other’s viewpoints is valid and can contribute to the conversation, if you refuse to provide your own viewpoints, it seems like you’re just trying to “catch” someone with an “a-ha” moment where you can refute whatever semantic argument you can find.
While that might be good for “debate,” it’s horrible if you’re actually trying to gain insight into a topic.
I’m not going to respond to you, until you provide your viewpoint as well, as there’s no point to me trying to supply some person who seems to get his jollies from trying to find semantic arguments to “disprove” others’ points of views.
R
nothing wrong with that
you need someone to get you your breakfast, lunch, and dinner…
to me, abortion is not a religious issue, it's a common sense one...
by Longhorn on

by 