I did not realize that military experience was a necessity for a president? :lol:Of course the vast experience in military and foreign affairs of Hillary and Obama is better.
I did not realize that military experience was a necessity for a president? :lol:Of course the vast experience in military and foreign affairs of Hillary and Obama is better.
both have said that they are leaving Iraq but not the areaSo were the intelligence agencies of almost every Western European power. What is even funnier is the vast amounts of people who will think either Clinton or Obama will actually change anything. We already hear how they both will keep troops in Iraq yet their rhetoric is anti-war.
however, it is the drain of the war that has led to major economic issues. Speak with Sen Chuck HagelThis might be the biggest myth in the world, that the administration (any for that matter) has this much power over the economy. Sorry, Greenspan and his ridiculous post 90's policies had more to do with it. This was the same man (and fed bank) that faciliated the boom of the 90's (along wiht the internet). The fed controls the economy more so than any President does and its been the same man for almost 20 years (up until 2006).
Yes I didObviously you didnt live through the majority of the Cold war.
Does not have to beNaive.
I think that is is a tad biased, no?Sometimes, reality gets in the way. This also correlates to the economic issue as the majority of the surplus was because of Clinton cutting military budgets, not some grand economic plan. His "commitments to education, social security, medicare, and programs for the poor" were for the most part a collosal failure.
On certain issues. However his stance on the war is short sighted and very, very ultra conservativeFunny because the extreme right hate him because he actually works with liberals and he appeals to many democrats. Seems you statement is quite wrong.
Yes, in a time of war where troops are abroad, it would be foolish to elect someone who has vast experience in that area.I did not realize that military experience was a necessity for a president? :lol:
b/c he has experience in Vietnam means he is qualified as president? :thumbsup:Yes, in a time of war where troops are abroad, it would be foolish to elect someone who has vast experience in that area.
Wrong..both have said that they are leaving Iraq but not the area
however, it is the drain of the war that has led to major economic issues. Speak with Sen Chuck Hagel
You're 32. You didn't. The height of the Cold War was not the 80's and 90's.Yes I did
Thats your own problem, not mine.Does not have to be
Actually, no its not form a historical persepctive. Nobody said Bush fixed it nor improved it, but that Clinton's policies for the most part failed. In other words, more of the same because its not the President that determines economic policy for the most part.I think that is is a tad biased, no?
Funny, he held the same viewpoints as the Clinton administration pre war which we all know was a very, very, ultra conservative administration.On certain issues. However his stance on the war is short sighted and very, very ultra conservative
:toofunny:Of course the vast experience in military and foreign affairs of Hillary and Obama is better.
b/c he has experience in Vietnam means he is qualified as president? :thumbsup:
I totally forgot that during the Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr. Clinton years we didnt have troops anywhere?:wtf:
Well at least some experience and a clear record and clear policies should be a necessity. But not for emotional leave your brain at home Obama voters. They get really riled up with his emotion grabbing rhetoric. They dont need to question where he stands or what proof there is of his abililty to accomplish his large promises for change. The only thing Obama is good at changing is the emotions of the bleeding heart libs.I did not realize that military experience was a necessity for a president? :lol:
No need to be condesending slick, I think we are all well aware of his qualifications. In terms of military experience, so have much more than others, but that does not mean they are qualified.He's been a Senator since 86 after being in the military for his whole life Einstein.
Reagan and Bush were both military men. Jimmy Carter's Presidency was characterized by Iran taking hostages and an sever oil shortage. The current war plan was drawn up by the Clinton administration. Care to try again?
Wrong..
"Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton foresees a “remaining military as well as political mission” in Iraq, and says that if elected president, she would keep a reduced military force there to fight Al Qaeda, deter Iranian aggression, protect the Kurds and possibly support the Iraqi military."
"At that debate Obama said that he could not guarantee that all troops would be out of Iraq by the end of his first term. Obama qualified that answer today, as he has in previous town halls in New Hampshire and Iowa, by saying that he would keep troops in Iraq for diplomatic, humanitarian and counterterrorism purposes."
Wrong. A housing bubble and suprime debt of the major financial institutions has caused ecenomic issues (along with European and Asian financials that invested in the US). The height of the war "2002-2005" showed record GDP and economic boom. The federal reserve hasn't dropped the fed funds rate in the last year because of the war. Get your facts straight.
You're 32. You didn't. The height of the Cold War was not the 80's and 90's.
Thats your own problem, not mine.
Actually, no its not form a historical persepctive. Nobody said Bush fixed it nor improved it, but that Clinton's policies for the most part failed. In other words, more of the same because its not the President that determines economic policy for the most part.
Funny, he held the same viewpoints as the Clinton administration pre war which we all know was a very, very, ultra conservative administration.
Cut and Run, Cut and run.. Thats not a political solution to an existing problem, its a gutless and cowardly decision to run awayt from the problem without solving it and it will harm this country and the middle east for decades.No need to be condesending slick, I think we are all well aware of his qualifications. In terms of military experience, so have much more than others, but that does not mean they are qualified.
McCain serving in Vietnam and being a Senator dont necessarily mean he is or isnt qualified, however when his stance on the war is what it is, IMO he is not!!
No need to be condesending slick, I think we are all well aware of his qualifications. In terms of military experience, so have much more than others, but that does not mean they are qualified.
I rest my case.McCain serving in Vietnam and being a Senator dont necessarily mean he is or isnt qualified, however when his stance on the war is what it is, IMO he is not!!
New York Times.before you give quotes you might want ot look for sources! Just a piece of advice Also I guess the difference of non combat troops and combat troops is lost on you?
I also understand the cyclical nature of the economy, however the presidents spending is pertinent
The governments purse goes through Congress, not the President.I also understand the cyclical nature of the economy, however the presidents spending is pertinent
Its not very difficult to dupe those that are primarily driven by their intense anti war emotions.New York Times.
Yes, dealing with a terrorist threat requires non combative troops.
Seriously, for someone who says Bush duped you, you sure make it easy for the others to do so as well.
Denial seems to be a big problem with the American public...on both sides.
if you want to blame the dems for leaving then blame the neocons for going in the first place, all based on lies and false informationCut and Run, Cut and run.. Thats not a political solution to an existing problem, its a gutless and cowardly decision to run awayt from the problem without solving it and it will harm this country and the middle east for decades.
Cut and run is the most politically pathetic position I have ever seen. I guess Democrats want to relive the glory days of vietnam. Quite pathetic that one of America's lowest points is the high point of the democratic party. Further proving that if its bad for America, its good for Democrats.
no problemYou are correct. Didn't mean to be and I'm sorry about that.
you are entitled to your opinion however I disagree entirelyIt means they are more qualified to deal with a military situation vs someone that is not.
just remember 9-11 and Iraq are tow ENTIRELY different things.Its not very difficult to dupe those that are primarily driven by their intense anti war emotions.
A large majority of 911 conspriacy freaks are the result of boiling anti-war rage combined with an inability to comprehend the complexities of our world. Their emotions start to lead their brain and their convoluted and delusional views of the world and history reflect it. Unfortunately a large percent of Ron Paul and other anti war candidate supporters can be described in the same manner.
They lied? Not according to your democrat buddies. Please remember the facts here. Saddam intentionally radiated the perception that he possessed WMD. Every intellignece report from countless independant countries said the same thing. The same poeple fighting us in Iraq are part of the group that planned 911. If we cut an run they will establish their base and use Iraq to plan future 911's all over Europe and the US.just remember 9-11 and Iraq are tow ENTIRELY different things.
HAHA me too. Romney is the most patheic flip flopping piece of garbage I have ever seen in politics. What makes it even sweeter is the fact that pathetic gutless and soulless flip flopper spent millions of his own dollars for nothing! HAHA Rot in hell flip flopper Romney.I'm so happy romney dropped out today
He was the only candidate I liked.... I am a bit out of the loop though and can only get most of my political info these days on AM radio (due to school)I'm so happy romney dropped out today
There is no way that flip flopping piece of crap gets invited onto the ticket by McCain. EVERY single other GOP candidate absolutely despised Romney because of his insincere conservatism, flip flopping and the lack of a single ounce of integrity in his body. Romney has changed his position on every single issue and essentially only stands for what he thinks will get him votes. I am appalled that my party did not see right trough him. I honestly can barely call myself a republican any more with all the support Romney got. He is the least genuine politician I have ever seen and he will never be VP or President.Romney may end up as the VP candidate by dropping now. McCain was so far ahead that there was no chance for either of the other two to get the nomination. Crazy ass Huckabee is still in the race tho.
couldn't agree more. i have referred to him as the republican john kerry for quite some timeThere is no way that flip flopping piece of crap gets invited onto the ticket by McCain. EVERY single other GOP candidate absolutely despised Romney because of his insincere conservatism, flip flopping and the lack of a single ounce of integrity in his body. Romney has changed his position on every single issue and essentially only stands for what he thinks will get him votes. I am appalled that my party did not see right trough him. I honestly can barely call myself a republican any more with all the support Romney got. He is the least genuine politician I have ever seen and he will never be VP or President.
I bet Rudy Giuliani gets the VP nod.Romney may end up as the VP candidate by dropping now. McCain was so far ahead that there was no chance for either of the other two to get the nomination. Crazy ass Huckabee is still in the race tho.
I agree with you for the most part, but far right republicans dislike Huckabee nearly as much as they do McCain. Most of this is because they are brainwashed by Rush and other talk radio idots. The person that will be nominated will most likely not a big name. Kind of like Cheney. No one really knew who he was.There is speculation that Huckabee will be McCain's running mate. He did his job and stole votes for Romney, and I think Romney did the respectable thing to drop out to unite the Republican party. However, Huckabee is a strict conservative and McCain's views are moderate. All I gotta say is that I hope the Dem nomination goes to Clinton. I dont like her, but this will allow almost all conservatives and most independents to vote McCain. Obama has the influence to sway these votes in his direction.
About the war: We are doing great things in Iraq. My dad and some good friends all have been there and report the importance of our presence. We havent heard any news there lately because the surge is working. The media will only report negative news with Iraq. We must also consider that the president knows a lot more than US citizens about what is happening overseas. I would love for a Dem to be elected then realize we cant leave iraq.
Romney "flip flopped" on two issues: gay rights, and abortion. That's less a flip flop and more an obligatory change in position all republicans take before running for national election.Flip flopping Romney
You're completely out of your mind. People LOVE to get free things, and considering that 80%+ of the tax money comes from the top 4-5% of tax payers, people aren't THAT afraid of taxes--they just think that it's coming from the rich. Its become very apparent that American citizens are more than willing to give up freedoms for "free stuff" over the past couple of decades.No Dem stands a chance over McCain. This country does not want a retreat in Iraq, higher taxes, more regulation or socialized health care.
I'd say this is the likely case. Huckabee played the devils part to do "God's work" in his eyes by doing whatever he could to get the "Mormon" as far away from the office of presidency as he could.There is speculation that Huckabee will be McCain's running mate.
Wow, I couldnt get past the ridiculous part about Romney not being a flip flopper. :toofunny:Romney "flip flopped" on two issues: gay rights, and abortion. That's less a flip flop and more an obligatory change in position all republicans take before running for national election.
Aside from that, the republicans of this nation just threw out the ONLY candidate from either major party that actually addressed issues with specifics, issues with which he was obviously well-versed considering he could have an impromptu discussion on the topics without "advisers", etc., and still put together very powerful and convincing arguments.
The ignorance and bigotry of the republican right (obvious mis-trust in his "mormonism") was very apparent this time around when a substance-less person like John McCain can win primaries and a religious zealot like Mike Huckabee was sitting in the race just to siphon off votes from the only intelligent and substantive candidate from either party because he despised his mormon beliefs.
You're completely out of your mind. People LOVE to get free things, and considering that 80%+ of the tax money comes from the top 4-5% of tax payers, people aren't THAT afraid of taxes--they just think that it's coming from the rich. Its become very apparent that American citizens are more than willing to give up freedoms for "free stuff" over the past couple of decades.
Socialized healthcare will be a disaster, yet, someone capable of doing so must present a strong case to the American people as to WHY it will be a disaster for the American people and why people shouldn't want so-called "free" healthcare. McCain can't do that.
And, to top it off, you obviously aren't familiar with your own candidate. McCain has been working with Governor Schwarzenegger on policies that will "reduce our carbon footprint". These policies essentially will lead to an additional 50 cents/gallon on gas and 20% increase in energy bills. He also wants to repeal the Bush tax cuts.
He is also in favor of more regulation--look up McCain Feingold. On top of it, his "immigration advisor" worked directly under Vincente Fox (ex-Mexican president). He wants to slam our doors right open. This is the idiot who tried to see his Amnesty bill as comprehensive "reform". Sure, you couldn't become a "citizen" under his bill unless you pay a $3,000 fine and learn to speak English, however, you can essentially stay indefinitely with the Z-Visa proposed in his bill which is indefinitely renewable.
I MAY vote for McCain on the basis of healthcare and a lesser of two evils with regards to tax alone. If it weren't for those two things, I'd probably throw my vote away to a third party candidate.
The environment is a tough one for sure. But you and mrs gimpy want to have kids, how bad do you want it to get in their lifetime? Us alone working on our carbon footprint does nothing unless we can get china and india to also join in, but us refusing to do anything doesnt help. An increase in gas cost also will spur more investment in the private sector to finding alternatives which will reduce our dependence on middle eastern oil, which is a good thing.And, to top it off, you obviously aren't familiar with your own candidate. McCain has been working with Governor Schwarzenegger on policies that will "reduce our carbon footprint". These policies essentially will lead to an additional 50 cents/gallon on gas and 20% increase in energy bills. He also wants to repeal the Bush tax cuts.
agreede, kinda crazy ticket, but it will get the missing evangelical vote. I still think they lose regardless. A possible Obama/Biden ticket would be interesting (just a rumor I hear)huckabee is kind of scary given his insanity and mccains age
I kind of think the reverse. the only possible ticket that the dems have that could beat it is the obama/hillary combo either way. it would take the 2 together. Mccain's only weakness is the potential that he doesn't get huge core republican turnout. With huckabee, he would. The problem is that with an obama/hillary ticket, so would the dems. Either of them alone with just about any other vp candidate would loose a lot of the independents.agreede, kinda crazy ticket, but it will get the missing evangelical vote. I still think they lose regardless. A possible Obama/Biden ticket would be interesting (just a rumor I hear)
I agree, I think he is the dems only chance, Hillary on her own will loseI honesty think if Obama wins the the Dem ticket, nobody will stop him (and he won't have Hillary on the ticket).
This is very similar to 1992 where as much baggage as Clinton had, he represented change and people voted on that more than any other issue.
Obama is getting a LOT of independent white vote, is picking up Latino vote, dominates African American voters, and attracts a ton of moderates EVEN though he is liberal. Looking at voter turnout even in red states he won, I think he will basically crush anyone on the right.
And I'm a Republican....
You sound like idol John McCain... many words used, little said.Wow, I couldnt get past the ridiculous part about Romney not being a flip flopper. :toofunny:
Wow, honestly I feel bad for anyone that doesnt have the ability to see right through Romney for being what he is: The most pathetic lying flip flopping political hack I have ever seen. This guy has no integrity, no belief system and will say anything to get a vote. Romney is a joke and if you think he has one ounce of integrity well the joke is on you. HAHAH Romney not a flip flopper. Oh yeah he just changed his position. :toofunny:
I'll get back to you on this and you McCain comments. And boy it will be fun to compile all of his gutless flip flops and pathetic and arrogant, dishonest statements he has made.
The effects of increased CO2 on global climate change are so ridiculously speculative, its not even funny. We don't even know if the effects will be positive, negative, or detrimental--to date we only have positive effects to note: 1) increased crop yields directly related to increasing CO2 around the world. The most publicized "negative" effects were polar glacial melting. Much of that region has been re-freezing rapidly! (Arctic Sea Ice Refreezes at Record Pace After Record Melt - Arctic Sea Ice - thedailygreen.com).The environment is a tough one for sure. But you and mrs gimpy want to have kids, how bad do you want it to get in their lifetime?
So, he flip-flopped? In all honesty, if he flip flopped and will honestly take that position, I can give a rats ass what his position was prior. All I want is that the good of the country, not the good of politicians seeking power for their "party", is put first. If that has to come in the form of a flip-flopping jelly-spined idiot, I'm fine with it as long as the end result is there.Mccain only wanted repeal the bush tax cuts because they weren't offset by lowered spending. He has pledged to make them permanent but also to reduce federal spending to make them breakeven.
You're probably right. And, Obama scares me personally. But, he does have what the ignorant masses love to see/hear: charisma, and a promise of "change" for the better. People don't see through BS, and people don't ask questions, hell, people don't even require substance--they're stupid!I honesty think if Obama wins the the Dem ticket, nobody will stop him (and he won't have Hillary on the ticket).
This is very similar to 1992 where as much baggage as Clinton had, he represented change and people voted on that more than any other issue.
Obama is getting a LOT of independent white vote, is picking up Latino vote, dominates African American voters, and attracts a ton of moderates EVEN though he is liberal. Looking at voter turnout even in red states he won, I think he will basically crush anyone on the right.
And I'm a Republican....
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
2008-2012 transformation + recent 5 months | Pics | 8 | ||
Are 5/2008 exp. Thyrotabs crazy? | Supplements | 3 | ||
off season 2008.. | Pics | 3 | ||
2008 usapl equipped bp ranking | Powerlifting/Strongman | 2 | ||
The Henry Rollins Show - The Corruption of Election 2008 | Politics | 0 |