My point is that Obama is nothing like McCain. McCain want to be in Iraq for 100 years Obama wants to get them out as soon as possible. McCain will refuse to meet with Iran where Obama is open to doing so. McCain doesn't want universal health care where Obama wants to institute a program. Not as extensive as Hilliary's plan but if shes VP she may get her way anyways. McCain is the definition of a warmonger where Obama will only use force if necessary.
To me the Twiddle Dee and Twiddle Dum reference is dishonest. You can say vote Nader, hell more power to you. Hell I will even drive you to the booth, but your candidate will not win. I never hear any anti McCain rhetoric from Nader supporters. Its always anti Obama. And if you keep bringing down Obama like you brought down Gore we are staring at President McCain.
Where have you seen anything pointing to Obama wanitng the troops out as soon as possible? And is McCain saying he wants to keep them there longer than what he thinks is needed. That wouldn't make any sense.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
i also love how nader and his supporters have given a complete free pass to the republicans and McCain with their constant focus on Barack Obama
i think the last 50 threads by kabong and abook have been anti obama
Right. And I'll say it for the trillionth time.... no one here is even supporting McCain so why do we need to start threads about him? How is that productive? Yay, we all agree. It's not a hard point to grasp.
Here:
McCain Sucks!
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
you are clearly underestimating Mccain and the republicans in this election, as are most people. he has a serious shot at winning this thing.
and as far as preaching to the choir, did you miss the constant debating and bashing of Bush on here the last 5 years? that wasnt preaching to the choir? "they" were not saying it was preaching to the choir then? they are simply follwoing the Nader playbook which is attack the democrats at all costs
When we posted about Bush there were people here supporting him. I'm sure you remember HHKC, Staceb10, cincy, drew263, barroomhero and so on.....So we actually had room for debate and not just all of us agreeing Bush sucks like we do now....thus the reason no one hardly posts about Bush anymore. Are you following me yet?
Name me the McCain supporters, please.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
it isn't so much as the people are the same as the way things operate won't change ... america is run as a corporation by corporate interests now - democrat or republican - it doesn't matter, policies will still be dictated by corporate interests and that is where the similiarities exist ... will obama change the US imperialist actions? ... hell no ...
those things haven't changed no matter who's in the white house blue or red ...
Exactly!
And win or lose...I'm not supporting a system I know is bullshit any longer. It certainly isn't my fault the majority of people still buy their crap...if and when they finally realize what a fraud the 2 major parties are...I'll be here waiting and will not even say I told you so.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
"Later I was introduced to Nader's closest adviser, his handsome, piercingly intelligent 30-year-old nephew, Tarek Milleron. Although Milleron argued that environmentalists and other activists would find fundraising easier under Bush, he acknowledged that a Bush presidency would be worse for poor and working-class people, for blacks, for most Americans. As Moore had, he claimed that Nader's campaign would encourage Web-based vote-swapping between progressives in safe and contested states. But when I suggested that Nader could gain substantial influence in a Democratic administration by focusing his campaign on the 40 safe states and encouraging his supporters elsewhere to vote Gore, Milleron leaned coolly toward me with extra steel in his voice and body. He did not disagree. He simply said, "We're not going to do that."
"Why not?" I said.
With just a flicker of smile, he answered, "Because we want to punish the Democrats, we want to hurt them, wound them."
There was a long silence and the conversation was over.
Milleron's words are so remarkable they bear repeating: Ralph Nader ran so he could hurt, wound, and punish the Democrats. His primary goal was not raising issues, much less building the Green Party. He actively wanted Gore to lose. Where did this passion to punish come from? "
Nader's nephew isn't Nader and we all speak out sometimes in a manner that doesn't actually articulate our stance as best we could have.
But progressives have every right to be pissed at the Democratic party. They have been taking their votes for granted, ignoring their issues and continuously shifted more to the center and adopted the policies of the Republican party with each passing year. They are a sorry excuse for an opposition party...seeing as how they hardly offer any. And they should be replaced with people who will do something about progressive issues instead of pandering to special interests while only giving the rest of us broken promises. I wouldn't mind seeing them go down myself and be replaced with a much stronger party that actually gets something done.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Where have you seen anything pointing to Obama wanitng the troops out as soon as possible? And is McCain saying he wants to keep them there longer than what he thinks is needed. That wouldn't make any sense.
Barack Obama and John McCain clashed Sunday over Iraq war policy and the economy as the Democratic party aimed a new attack against McCain with an advertisement questioning a remark he made over keeping troops in Iraq for up to 100 years.
In an interview that aired Sunday, Obama praised the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, for the progress he has made in taming sectarian violence there, but said he would set the goal of removing troops in Iraq even if Petraeus — who was nominated this week to take charge of U.S. Central Command — recommended against it.
“I think Petraeus has done a good tactical job in Iraq. I think as a practical matter, obviously, that’s where most of the attention has been devoted from this administration over the last several years,” Obama said on “FOX News Sunday.”
Asked what he would do if Petraeus recommended against withdrawing troops from Iraq — an Obama campaign pledge — Obama said “it would be stupid” not to listen, but in the end, he would keep the goal of withdrawing troops.
10/31/2000 (****)
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
Barack Obama and John McCain clashed Sunday over Iraq war policy and the economy as the Democratic party aimed a new attack against McCain with an advertisement questioning a remark he made over keeping troops in Iraq for up to 100 years.
In an interview that aired Sunday, Obama praised the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, for the progress he has made in taming sectarian violence there, but said he would set the goal of removing troops in Iraq even if Petraeus — who was nominated this week to take charge of U.S. Central Command — recommended against it.
“I think Petraeus has done a good tactical job in Iraq. I think as a practical matter, obviously, that’s where most of the attention has been devoted from this administration over the last several years,” Obama said on “FOX News Sunday.”
Asked what he would do if Petraeus recommended against withdrawing troops from Iraq — an Obama campaign pledge — Obama said “it would be stupid” not to listen, but in the end, he would keep the goal of withdrawing troops.
Hmmm, I could have sworn you were one of the ones complaining about the lack of context given for Obama's quotes on Iran. I could be wrong.
"You know, John McCain wants to continue a war in Iraq perhaps as long as 100 years."
--Sen. Barack Obama, Lancaster, PA, Town Hall meeting, March 31, 2008.
The charge that John McCain wants to wage a "100-year war" in Iraq has become a recurring theme of the Obama campaign. The candidate has made the claim several times on the campaign trail, as has Susan Rice, one of his top foreign policy advisers. McCain has never talked about wanting a 100-year war in Iraq. But he has talked about a prolonged U.S. military presence in Iraq, similar to the stationing of U.S. troops in Germany after World War II or in Korea after the Korean war.
The Facts
Take a look at what McCain actually said in Derry, N.H., back in January. Cutting off a questioner who talked about the Bush administration's willingness to keep troops in Iraq for 50 years, McCain said "Make it a hundred." He then mentioned that U.S. troops had been in Germany for 60 years and in Korea for 50 years, and added, "That's fine with me as long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed."
And win or lose...I'm not supporting a system I know is bullshit any longer. It certainly isn't my fault the majority of people still buy their crap...if and when they finally realize what a fraud the 2 major parties are...I'll be here waiting and will not even say I told you so.
only an idiot woud think Obama and McCain are the same.
Then there are a lot of very intelligent idiots out there that are lying.
well...they look different...they talk different...they have different pastors.
When it comes to the war on terror...no difference.... Well one guy has said he'll talk a little more first...like bow down please...but bow down or we will bomb you unles you obey us.
Iran will be denied the right to have nuclear power and they will have to suck it up or perish, and the occupation forces will spread, and the situation will escalate.
Hope you're good with a rifle.
so there's your bottom line...no two ways about it.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
"Later I was introduced to Nader's closest adviser, his handsome, piercingly intelligent 30-year-old nephew, Tarek Milleron. Although Milleron argued that environmentalists and other activists would find fundraising easier under Bush, he acknowledged that a Bush presidency would be worse for poor and working-class people, for blacks, for most Americans. As Moore had, he claimed that Nader's campaign would encourage Web-based vote-swapping between progressives in safe and contested states. But when I suggested that Nader could gain substantial influence in a Democratic administration by focusing his campaign on the 40 safe states and encouraging his supporters elsewhere to vote Gore, Milleron leaned coolly toward me with extra steel in his voice and body. He did not disagree. He simply said, "We're not going to do that."
"Why not?" I said.
With just a flicker of smile, he answered, "Because we want to punish the Democrats, we want to hurt them, wound them."
There was a long silence and the conversation was over.
Milleron's words are so remarkable they bear repeating: Ralph Nader ran so he could hurt, wound, and punish the Democrats. His primary goal was not raising issues, much less building the Green Party. He actively wanted Gore to lose. Where did this passion to punish come from? "
didn't post this earlier but wanted to point out this passed over post...the entire article was a very interesting read. sure, it's the past.....but it still was interesting and i had not seen it when originally published.
Anyhow, it is a bit easy to say "I'm was right!" when you don't even pick a dog in the fight and you only say they both suck!
Almost as bad as not realizing that's it's not even an official dog fight in the first place...
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Comments
Where have you seen anything pointing to Obama wanitng the troops out as soon as possible? And is McCain saying he wants to keep them there longer than what he thinks is needed. That wouldn't make any sense.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Right. And I'll say it for the trillionth time.... no one here is even supporting McCain so why do we need to start threads about him? How is that productive? Yay, we all agree. It's not a hard point to grasp.
Here:
McCain Sucks!
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
When we posted about Bush there were people here supporting him. I'm sure you remember HHKC, Staceb10, cincy, drew263, barroomhero and so on.....So we actually had room for debate and not just all of us agreeing Bush sucks like we do now....thus the reason no one hardly posts about Bush anymore. Are you following me yet?
Name me the McCain supporters, please.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Exactly!
And win or lose...I'm not supporting a system I know is bullshit any longer. It certainly isn't my fault the majority of people still buy their crap...if and when they finally realize what a fraud the 2 major parties are...I'll be here waiting and will not even say I told you so.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Nader's nephew isn't Nader and we all speak out sometimes in a manner that doesn't actually articulate our stance as best we could have.
But progressives have every right to be pissed at the Democratic party. They have been taking their votes for granted, ignoring their issues and continuously shifted more to the center and adopted the policies of the Republican party with each passing year. They are a sorry excuse for an opposition party...seeing as how they hardly offer any. And they should be replaced with people who will do something about progressive issues instead of pandering to special interests while only giving the rest of us broken promises. I wouldn't mind seeing them go down myself and be replaced with a much stronger party that actually gets something done.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/04/27/dnc-ratchets-up-attacks-on-mccain/
Barack Obama and John McCain clashed Sunday over Iraq war policy and the economy as the Democratic party aimed a new attack against McCain with an advertisement questioning a remark he made over keeping troops in Iraq for up to 100 years.
In an interview that aired Sunday, Obama praised the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, for the progress he has made in taming sectarian violence there, but said he would set the goal of removing troops in Iraq even if Petraeus — who was nominated this week to take charge of U.S. Central Command — recommended against it.
“I think Petraeus has done a good tactical job in Iraq. I think as a practical matter, obviously, that’s where most of the attention has been devoted from this administration over the last several years,” Obama said on “FOX News Sunday.”
Asked what he would do if Petraeus recommended against withdrawing troops from Iraq — an Obama campaign pledge — Obama said “it would be stupid” not to listen, but in the end, he would keep the goal of withdrawing troops.
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
Hmmm, I could have sworn you were one of the ones complaining about the lack of context given for Obama's quotes on Iran. I could be wrong.
"You know, John McCain wants to continue a war in Iraq perhaps as long as 100 years."
--Sen. Barack Obama, Lancaster, PA, Town Hall meeting, March 31, 2008.
The charge that John McCain wants to wage a "100-year war" in Iraq has become a recurring theme of the Obama campaign. The candidate has made the claim several times on the campaign trail, as has Susan Rice, one of his top foreign policy advisers. McCain has never talked about wanting a 100-year war in Iraq. But he has talked about a prolonged U.S. military presence in Iraq, similar to the stationing of U.S. troops in Germany after World War II or in Korea after the Korean war.
The Facts
Take a look at what McCain actually said in Derry, N.H., back in January. Cutting off a questioner who talked about the Bush administration's willingness to keep troops in Iraq for 50 years, McCain said "Make it a hundred." He then mentioned that U.S. troops had been in Germany for 60 years and in Korea for 50 years, and added, "That's fine with me as long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed."
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/04/mccains_100year_war.html
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
you are a righteous babe ...
gracias, mr. righteous canadian dude
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Of course... McCain's "old skool", and Obama is all about change.
Just weird how they both go about it in much the same way...
Then there are a lot of very intelligent idiots out there that are lying.
well...they look different...they talk different...they have different pastors.
When it comes to the war on terror...no difference.... Well one guy has said he'll talk a little more first...like bow down please...but bow down or we will bomb you unles you obey us.
Iran will be denied the right to have nuclear power and they will have to suck it up or perish, and the occupation forces will spread, and the situation will escalate.
Hope you're good with a rifle.
so there's your bottom line...no two ways about it.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
even flow? is the only righteous canadian dude!
Anyhow, it is a bit easy to say "I'm was right!" when you don't even pick a dog in the fight and you only say they both suck!
didn't post this earlier but wanted to point out this passed over post...the entire article was a very interesting read. sure, it's the past.....but it still was interesting and i had not seen it when originally published.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
Almost as bad as not realizing that's it's not even an official dog fight in the first place...
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")