Obama Lies to get Nomination?

Im still here

Now that Obama has won the Nomination the word Change hasnt been mentioned that often. Now it's all about Unity. Honestly, I call Bullshit....... Seems to me that maybe Obama has had a few too many meetings with AIPAC.

Now to me a Band's views on Politics mean something to me and Pearl Jam and Incubus have both endorsed Obama. I really wonder what they are thinkin of Obama now.

What happened to the Immediate Withdrawal of Troops from Iraq?????????

I CALL BULLSHIT!!!!!!!!!!!!

mca47

So what has he lied about and said that has changed since before his winning the nomination?

fuck

Seeing as how you say Bonnaroo sucked, I'm thinking Obama's not the only liar.

All kidding aside, yes, Obama does suck, and he will bring no real "change."

Oh, by the way, I'm thinking Ed is endorsing obama not so much because he really believes everything, but because he doesn't want McCain to win... kinda like how PJ supported Kerry in 04...

although who knows, maybe Ed does genuinely believe that Obama will bring some change...

Im still here

mca47 wrote:

So what has he lied about and said that has changed since before his winning the nomination?

Watch the newz once in awhile, he just said he didnt know if he could withdraw the troops within the first 16 months.......

He's not sure now.....

Big surprise.....

joshua3800

You run for CHANGE to get a nomination and you run to UNITE to brign together a party that has forgotten what matters in an election. WIN. It doesn't matter how, just win. I hate Republican views but they know how to run campaigns. They dont worry about the nominee, they just win.

Anyone who believed Obama would take every single soldier out is a moron. You have to keep anti terrorism, humanitarian and peac keeping troops there. Its not a matter of choice anymore. Bush was an idiot and sent us there and now we have to protect what we've done.

It's a shitty thign that will be dropped in Obama's lap, but the military forces will be more like Isarael or Saudi Arabia and i am fine with that. (For Now)

I am not a huge fan of Obama's policies. On the surface they may be to much reaching, but i am attracted to the promise of a better idea. He has a better idea for the future i see or want to see happen.

Tome, it's simple.. More of the same = Mccain. You wnat somethign different, then vote Obama. He may not do any better, but he will take us in a completely different direction and that's what i like.

My favorite thign about Obama is his focus is American values here, not everywhere else.

Stay the course guys and girls. It's an amzing thign we can make happen. We just ahve to be strong ewnough to se eit through and smart enough to see passed the bullshit and focus on whats really at stake.

He has huge ideas and i am voting for him because i want to have his back while he tries to get this country back to somethign to be proud of.

It's gonna be close and if Mccain wins, maybe it's time to look somewhere else as the greatest country in the world and somewhere else to raise our kids and see Pearl Jam. I hear there Italy shows were amazing.

PEACE

mca47

Im still here wrote:

Watch the newz once in awhile, he just said he didnt know if he could withdraw the troops within the first 16 months.......

He's not sure now.....

Big surprise.....

Well, it seems you just caught the sound bytes.
No, what he said was that he's still planning on his phased withdrawl but also indicated that if something comes up, if things change the timeframe might be different.

Im still here

Obama is definitely the lesser of the two Evils.........

Sad but I've voted the Lesser of two Evils for the last 10 years, maybe my entire life........

really sad

:(

Im still here

mca47 wrote:

Well, it seems you just caught the sound bytes.
No, what he said was that he's still planning on his phased withdrawl but also indicated that if something comes up, if things change the timeframe might be different.

I CALL BULLSHIT!!!

ledvedderman

mca47 wrote:

Well, it seems you just caught the sound bytes.
No, what he said was that he's still planning on his phased withdrawl but also indicated that if something comes up, if things change the timeframe might be different.

Oh no! What a liar! What's he thinking saying it is possible the plan might change depending on what is happening on the ground?

ledvedderman

Im still here wrote:

I CALL BULLSHIT!!!

his stance is still consistent with what he said in the primaries...which means it is not a lie.

fuck

joshua3800 wrote:

Anyone who believed Obama would take every single soldier out is a moron. You have to keep anti terrorism, humanitarian and peac keeping troops there. Its not a matter of choice anymore. Bush was an idiot and sent us there and now we have to protect what we've done.

Do you think mercenary armies like Blackwater can be classified as "peace keeping troops?" If so, then you really have a lot of reading to do. And Obama said that he's going to keep hired armies like Blackwater in Iraq... for atleast 2 years... of course, his supporters ignore that...

It's a shitty thign that will be dropped in Obama's lap, but the military forces will be more like Isarael or Saudi Arabia and i am fine with that. (For Now)

What if it were Iran? Would you be fine with that?

I am not a huge fan of Obama's policies. On the surface they may be to much reaching, but i am attracted to the promise of a better idea. He has a better idea for the future i see or want to see happen.

Tome, it's simple.. More of the same = Mccain. You wnat somethign different, then vote Obama. He may not do any better, but he will take us in a completely different direction and that's what i like.

What? That makes no sense. So you don't like Obama's policies... in fact you just admitted he may not do any better... but you just like that he promised to take us in a "different direction?" You've gotta do more than that to guarantee my vote... Policies are what are actually going to be placed into effect, NOT false promises... vote on a candidate whose policies you agree with... not someone who promises to take us in a different direction, although he won't do any better (if that makes ANY sense...)

Im still here

ledvedderman wrote:

his stance is still consistent with what he said in the primaries...which means it is not a lie.

More War

can't bite the hand that feeds, huh?

Obama's War Chest (Donations, hahahaha)

what a scam........

first it was immediate withdrawal

second it was within 16 Months

Now it's, well we're not sure when, but we promise we will

this is fukin bullshit

Ed was right: Corporations rule the Day........

ledvedderman

Im still here wrote:

More War

can't bite the hand that feeds, huh?

Obama's War Chest (Donations, hahahaha)

what a scam........

first it was immediate withdrawal

second it was within 16 Months

Now it's, well we're not sure when, but we promise we will

this is fukin bullshit

Ed was right: Corporations rule the Day........

When did Senator Obama ever call for an immediate withdrawl? I don't know about you, but all I have ever heard from him, back 4+ years is "we need to be as careful getting out, as we were careless getting in". "Careful" does not equal an immediate withdrawl.

MrBrian

I don't blame Obama for his lies, he knows that the American voting public will eat up anything it's given...and most of the American voters are looking fatter than ever.

Im still here

he is now the Democratic Nominee

there is a large portion of the Democratic Party that wants an immediate withdrawal

plus just to please you

"Let me be clear: There is no military solution in Iraq and there never was,
The best way to protect our security and to pressure Iraq's leaders to resolve their civil war is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops. Not in six months or one year - now," the Illinois Senator said.

09/12/2007

you go find the 20 sources you want, he said it

anotherclone

Im still here wrote:

"... immediately begin to remove our combat troops..."

I know I'm butting in here, but you have kind of have posted your own answer.

He's not saying he will do a full withdrawal at once...he says "begin" to remove the troops. He's not saying he's going to remove them all at once.

Same thing ledvedderman mentioned...he's talking about being careful.

mca47

anotherclone wrote:

I know I'm butting in here, but you have kind of have posted your own answer.

He's not saying he will do a full withdrawal at once...he says "begin" to remove the troops. He's not saying he's going to remove them all at once.

Same thing ledvedderman mentioned...he's talking about being careful.

Stop making sense!

ledvedderman

Im still here wrote:

"Let me be clear: There is no military solution in Iraq and there never was, The best way to protect our security and to pressure Iraq's leaders to resolve their civil war is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops. Not in six months or one year - now," the Illinois Senator said.

I put the key word in your quote in bold...

Im still here

anotherclone wrote:

I know I'm butting in here, but you have kind of have posted your own answer.

He's not saying he will do a full withdrawal at once...he says "begin" to remove the troops. He's not saying he's going to remove them all at once.

Same thing ledvedderman mentioned...he's talking about being careful.

"Not in six months or one year - now"

C'mon...........

He's moving toward the center, he needs Hillary Voters who would rather die than vote for him

keep the War going, it makes Corporate America lotsa money

He needs to look strong against a Republican Warmonger

sad thing is he's a Warmonger too

looks like we'll have War for the next 20 years with Obama

and 100 years with McCain

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

it's completely insane to see the changes in Obama once he won the Nomination

is that the Change he was speaking of?

hahahahahahaha

mattcozea

The only thing that surprises me is that people are surprised when politicians lie or change their stance in order to win.

Abookamongstthemany

mattcoz wrote:

The only thing that surprises me is that people are surprised when politicians lie or change their stance in order to win.

What surprises me even more is that people continue to accept this bullshit and eat it up.

Im still here

mattcoz wrote:

The only thing that surprises me is that people are surprised when politicians lie or change their stance in order to win.

it is a surprise when he ran as the CHANGE Candidate

it is a surprise when he ran as the break the mold, no more status quo Candidate

sad thing it was all lies form a Charismatic Man

fuck

_outlaw wrote:

Do you think mercenary armies like Blackwater can be classified as "peace keeping troops?" If so, then you really have a lot of reading to do. And Obama said that he's going to keep hired armies like Blackwater in Iraq... for atleast 2 years... of course, his supporters ignore that...

and it happens yet again!

Abookamongstthemany

_outlaw wrote:

and it happens yet again!

It's all they ever do.

Or maybe some will start posting about how Blackwater isn't so bad afterall.....now that Obama supports them, that is.

Its Evolution Baby

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

It's all they ever do.

Or maybe some will start posting about how Blackwater isn't so bad afterall.....now that Obama supports them, that is.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeremy-scahill/obamas-blackwater-proble_b_89061.html

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/10/obama_goes_after_blackwater.html

Obama does not support Blackwater. He has sponsored a bill to make private contractors held up to the same standards as our military.

The only reason contractors are necessary is bc of the Bush Administration's poor planning and not having enough allied forces to fight the war. This has caused them to employ the private sector who do not have to abide by US laws currently. Obama wants them to be able to be tried under US law should another incident where 17 civilians are killed again like this past September.

It was also stated in the Huffington Post article that Obama wouldn't rule out the use of private forces, but he would not use private forces if they continue to go unsupervised.

So believe what you want but Obama is clearly not a fan of Blackwater.

fuck

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080317/scahill

Abookamongstthemany

_outlaw wrote:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080317/scahill

As usual...he says one thing to the voters on the campaign trail and another when he is pressed for actual answers.

Its Evolution Baby

_outlaw wrote:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080317/scahill

You literally posted the same article that I posted above. He does not support Blackwater the way you make it seem. Here are some quotes from the article, Italics are my opinions:

"If Barack Obama comes into office next January and our diplomatic security service is in the state it's in and the situation on the ground in Iraq is in the state it's in, I think we will be forced to rely on a host of security measures," said the senior adviser. "I can't rule out, I won't rule out, private security contractors." He added, "I will rule out private security contractors that are not accountable to US law." I feel you you stop reading at won't rule out. The key phrase to me is they want to start regulating the forces.

Here's one that argues your point better but still shows that he's no fan: "The irony is that it was Senator Obama who sponsored a bill in February 2007 defining a legal structure to prosecute State Department contractor crimes in US courts. Obama staffers say they will "fight like hell to get it passed." But it may not pass before the next President takes power. Even if it does and Bush signs it, serious questions will remain unresolved about how contractor crimes can be monitored effectively. The senior adviser acknowledged that Obama could find himself in a situation where, as President, he continues using forces he himself has identified as "unaccountable." The Obama campaign, in other words, may have painted itself into a corner."

And why is Blackwater even employed: "Obama campaign and Senate staffers characterize this as an inherited problem with no good alternatives. "We are in a situation where, because of bad planning and a series of disastrous policy choices by the Bush Administration, we're forced to rely on private security contractors," says the senior adviser. "What we're focused on at the moment is getting the legal architecture in place that will hold these guys accountable to the same standard that [applies to] enlisted US military personnel."

He clearly is no fan of private sectors but Bush got us into this mess and its our responsibility to leave Iraq as carefully as we can. Bush made a collosal error in judgment going into Iraq, but it would be even worse if we left and Iraq fell into complete Chaos.

Abookamongstthemany

Its Evolution Baby wrote:

You literally posted the same article that I posted above. He does not support Blackwater the way you make it seem. Here are some quotes from the article, Italics are my opinions:

"If Barack Obama comes into office next January and our diplomatic security service is in the state it's in and the situation on the ground in Iraq is in the state it's in, I think we will be forced to rely on a host of security measures," said the senior adviser. "I can't rule out, I won't rule out, private security contractors." He added, "I will rule out private security contractors that are not accountable to US law." I feel you you stop reading at won't rule out. The key phrase to me is they want to start regulating the forces.

Here's one that argues your point better but still shows that he's no fan: "The irony is that it was Senator Obama who sponsored a bill in February 2007 defining a legal structure to prosecute State Department contractor crimes in US courts. Obama staffers say they will "fight like hell to get it passed." But it may not pass before the next President takes power. Even if it does and Bush signs it, serious questions will remain unresolved about how contractor crimes can be monitored effectively. The senior adviser acknowledged that Obama could find himself in a situation where, as President, he continues using forces he himself has identified as "unaccountable." The Obama campaign, in other words, may have painted itself into a corner."

And why is Blackwater even employed: "Obama campaign and Senate staffers characterize this as an inherited problem with no good alternatives. "We are in a situation where, because of bad planning and a series of disastrous policy choices by the Bush Administration, we're forced to rely on private security contractors," says the senior adviser. "What we're focused on at the moment is getting the legal architecture in place that will hold these guys accountable to the same standard that [applies to] enlisted US military personnel."

He clearly is no fan of private sectors but Bush got us into this mess and its our responsibility to leave Iraq as carefully as we can. Bush made a collosal error in judgment going into Iraq, but it would be even worse if we left and Iraq fell into complete Chaos.

I couldn't care less what he is a fan of. The point is he is willing to use Blackwater.

fuck

Its Evolution Baby wrote:

You literally posted the same article that I posted above. He does not support Blackwater the way you make it seem. Here are some quotes from the article, Italics are my opinions:

"If Barack Obama comes into office next January and our diplomatic security service is in the state it's in and the situation on the ground in Iraq is in the state it's in, I think we will be forced to rely on a host of security measures," said the senior adviser. "I can't rule out, I won't rule out, private security contractors." He added, "I will rule out private security contractors that are not accountable to US law." I feel you you stop reading at won't rule out. The key phrase to me is they want to start regulating the forces.

Here's one that argues your point better but still shows that he's no fan: "The irony is that it was Senator Obama who sponsored a bill in February 2007 defining a legal structure to prosecute State Department contractor crimes in US courts. Obama staffers say they will "fight like hell to get it passed." But it may not pass before the next President takes power. Even if it does and Bush signs it, serious questions will remain unresolved about how contractor crimes can be monitored effectively. The senior adviser acknowledged that Obama could find himself in a situation where, as President, he continues using forces he himself has identified as "unaccountable." The Obama campaign, in other words, may have painted itself into a corner."

And why is Blackwater even employed: "Obama campaign and Senate staffers characterize this as an inherited problem with no good alternatives. "We are in a situation where, because of bad planning and a series of disastrous policy choices by the Bush Administration, we're forced to rely on private security contractors," says the senior adviser. "What we're focused on at the moment is getting the legal architecture in place that will hold these guys accountable to the same standard that [applies to] enlisted US military personnel."

He clearly is no fan of private sectors but Bush got us into this mess and its our responsibility to leave Iraq as carefully as we can. Bush made a collosal error in judgment going into Iraq, but it would be even worse if we left and Iraq fell into complete Chaos.

That's just complete bullshit though.

Obama said he'll make sure they start following US law, but he won't hold them accountable on their previous actions??

And why is he increasing their funding, which you so conveniently decided not to copy from the articles?

He's 'no fan' but he is forced to use it? you know that's complete bullshit. Of course, you have to use them for a while once you get into office, you can't pull them out in January, but Obama is determined to keep Blackwater in Iraq for atleast 2-3 more years... also, the second paragraph you copied completely supports my point. It doesn't matter if "he's no fan", the point is that HE'S NOT DOING ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

Abookamongstthemany

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ipZ8Hch_FhY&feature=related

http://youtube.com/watch?v=kIjbxeAtLOo