Barack Obama record of accomplishments! Congress

[jreeves]

Bush and Cheney.

Really Bush and Cheney gave congressional intelligence briefings? That's news to me....

 

[Article 15]

Perhaps I was not clear enough well so be it, as it wont change your mind anyway. but here we go again. John McCain voted with the Republican Party in THIS SESSION 88.3% of the time. thats a little less than your man Obama. Further from 2001 to present John McCain has voted Republican 81.1% of the time to help you out some (congressional record). Hardly an ardent Bush supporter, however, if you read the Daily-Kos, watch MSNBC, or any number of the misinformation outlets that are out there I can see where you might get your talking point from. As for missing votes during the election cycle, thats NOT the point im making here. I will give you the raw numbers to satisfy your need to know which i'm sure wont disuade you one bit. John McCain has missed 407 votes in the current congress , so as you can see the majority of his votes missed in his long career are in this congress while running for congress. The point though is this.

I have the raw numbers ...

And his record falls in line with the narrative ... John McCain 2008 isn't the John McCain of old ...

Barack Obama was elected in 2004 and took office in 2005 and announced his run in 2007 . So his Senatoral experience was two years before he began to run for office which I fault neither candidate for missing votes while running, but I do say this. to claim the US Senate as one of your strengths and run on that record with such a narrow record you would almost have to take his overall missed votes into his career as a Senator because he has not been there long enough to amass any record at all. His record also flys in the face of his statement of reaching across party lines, and working with Republicans when in fact John McCains record is much more accomplished in that area than his.

I agree with the points you make here ... McCain's record of crossing party lines is well known ... too bad he's sold it out for a chance at the big job.

 

[jreeves]

Bush and Cheney were.


FOXNews.com - Britain's Government Told It Must Disclose Iraq Intelligence Memos - International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News

Uh...that would be the wrong country right?

 

[Inferno]

Really Bush and Cheney gave congressional intelligence briefings? That's news to me....

Read post 20 in this thread I posted the story and the source there I added it to the initial post after. I forgot to add it at the time.

 

[jreeves]

I have the raw numbers ...

And his record falls in line with the narrative ... John McCain 2008 isn't the John McCain of old ...




I agree with the points you make here ... McCain's record of crossing party lines is well known ... too bad he's sold it out for a chance at the big job.

Kind of like MCcains push for the surge right, when he suggested Bush had executed the war poorly by not having enough troops?

Maybe we should look at Bush's energy policy act of 2005? MCcain voted no, Obama voted yes for tax breaks for Big Oil....

 

[Inferno]

Uh...that would be the wrong country right?

What Do I Know?: Downing Street Memo for Dummies

The downing street memo right here Bush Cheney and Blair on the fiasco in Iraq and WMD's that they knew didn't exist before the war started. All the links i have posted so far are about this memo.

Bush Cheney and Blair.

 

[Article 15]

Kind of like MCcains push for the surge right, when he suggested Bush had executed the war poorly by not having enough troops?

And where was John McCain before the poor execution of the war?

He's a day late and a dollar short ...

Obama was right on Iraq.

Maybe we should look at Bush's energy policy act of 2005? MCcain voted no, Obama voted yes for tax breaks for Big Oil....

Hmm ... it looks like both candidates have flip flopped on this issue ...

 

[jreeves]

And where was John McCain before the poor execution of the war?

He's a day late and a dollar short ...

Obama was right on Iraq.



Hmm ... it looks like both candidates have flip flopped on this issue ...

Actually, Mccain almost immediately stated there wasn't enough troops. Obama stated he doesn't know how he would have voted had he would've been in the Senate.

So now their votes doesn't matter, afterall we could just claim they flip flopped...

 

[Article 15]

Actually, Mccain almost immediately stated there wasn't enough troops. Obama stated he doesn't know how he would have voted had he would've been in the Senate.

After the invasion of which McCain had a hard on for ...

So now their votes doesn't matter, afterall we could just claim they flip flopped...

I didn't say they didn't matter ...

I said both candidates have flip-flopped on energy ... is that an untrue statement?

 

[jreeves]

What Do I Know?: Downing Street Memo for Dummies

The downing street memo right here Bush Cheney and Blair on the fiasco in Iraq and WMD's that they knew didn't exist before the war started. All the links i have posted so far are about this memo.

Bush Cheney and Blair.

Ah yes, making copies then destroying the originals make this particularly credible.

 

[jreeves]

]After the invasion of which McCain had a hard on for ...[/B]


I didn't say they didn't matter ...

I said both candidates have flip-flopped on energy ... is that an untrue statement?

Obama doesn't even know how he would have voted, so what is the difference between him and MCcain on that?

Yes it is an untrue statement, Mccain still opposes tax breaks for Big Oil. While Obama?? He has had so many positions when it comes to energy, who the hell knows what his positions happen to be at the moment.

 

[Article 15]

Obama doesn't even know how he would have voted, so what is the difference between him and MCcain on that?

That Obama was right and McCain was wrong ... Obama said he doesn't know how he would have voted looking at the same intelligence everyone else did ... but he knew it was an unwise war and a mistake to get into the war ...

All the while McCain was pushing for the war and it wasn't until things started to come up sour that he piped up and said something.

"I don't think you're going to have to see the scale of numbers of troops that we saw, nor the length of the buildup, obviously, that we had back in 1991."
-John McCain Dec. 2002

Yes it is an untrue statement, Mccain still opposes tax breaks for Big Oil. While Obama?? He has had so many positions when it comes to energy, who the hell knows what his positions happen to be at the moment.

And McCain on drilling and ethanol ...

McCain has gotten twice as much money from big oil than Obama ...

Obama has clearly flip-flopped on the issue of taxation of the oil companies ... lose the tax breaks and proposes windfall taxes.

In the end I believe both candidates will explore every possible avenue toward energy independence.

 

[Navy1960]

Another day out there in the , I can't convince you and you can't convince me land, but ahh still we all try don't we? That's the point, to find some common ground someplace. However, Article 15 I think and this is just and editorial here based on experience, that regardless of how we got into the Iraq War now!, We are there, so today we have and admittedly so on both sides made tremedious progess there in giving the country back to it's citizens and giving them a chance at having a democracy. This well it's George Bush's fault, Dick Cheny, et al. seems to always leave out the fact that Congress and among them your candidate for VP voted for the Iraq War Resolution. Now the democrats after reading public opinion polls have now gotten a sudden mental lapse ? you tell me? Congress gets the same intelligence briefings the president gets and so are you meaning to imply that the democrats in congress are in colusion with George Bush? then based on that logic then should not your party be held equally responsibile? As for George Bush being the somehow magic architect of all this let me cite you a few examples.

President Bill Clinton " I believe that Iraq is trying to amass and secure weapons of mass destruction and therefor under U.N. madate have authorized the attack last night on Iraq" 1998 <<< hmm I had no idea George W. Bush had that much unfluence back then.

Now lets get with reality here, Iraq given the chance can be secure, and I think that John McCain as a former Navy Officer with first hand experience knows what happens to a nation that has a congress , that forces a withdrawl of forces in conflict and what it does to out standing in the world.

 

[Article 15]

Another day out there in the , I can't convince you and you can't convince me land, but ahh still we all try don't we? That's the point, to find some common ground someplace. However, Article 15 I think and this is just and editorial here based on experience, that regardless of how we got into the Iraq War now!, We are there, so today we have and admittedly so on both sides made tremedious progess there in giving the country back to it's citizens and giving them a chance at having a democracy. This well it's George Bush's fault, Dick Cheny, et al. seems to always leave out the fact that Congress and among them your candidate for VP voted for the Iraq War Resolution. Now the democrats after reading public opinion polls have now gotten a sudden mental lapse ? you tell me? Congress gets the same intelligence briefings the president gets and so are you meaning to imply that the democrats in congress are in colusion with George Bush? then based on that logic then should not your party be held equally responsibile? As for George Bush being the somehow magic architect of all this let me cite you a few examples.

President Bill Clinton " I believe that Iraq is trying to amass and secure weapons of mass destruction and therefor under U.N. madate have authorized the attack last night on Iraq" 1998 <<< hmm I had no idea George W. Bush had that much unfluence back then.

Now lets get with reality here, Iraq given the chance can be secure, and I think that John McCain as a former Navy Officer with first hand experience knows what happens to a nation that has a congress , that forces a withdrawl of forces in conflict and what it does to out standing in the world.

Bluntly speaking the war we got wasn't the war that was sold ... and it's pissed off a lot of people. It's been 5+ years in what was supposed to be "less than 6 months." Hundreds of billions of dollars in what was supposed to, "pay for itself." You can't expect the public to just swallow all of that and not call foul when it is most certainly due. Our leaders failed us miserably. None of that was supposed to happen. Yes, tremendous progress has been made but this comes after Iraq was torn apart by a loose civil war. Tens of thousands of innocents were killed and hundreds of thousands displaced. Admittedly, the Democrats do share some of the blame for getting us into the war but I remind you that the Senate vote for the AUMF was far from unanimous ... 23 Senators voted against it ... and Barack Obama had the foresight to see what was coming. The media as well deserves some of the blame ... they were too enamored with a shiny new war to do their jobs. And yes, Joe Biden voted for the war but if it weren't for men like Joe Biden who passionately spoke against the failed policies of Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld ... and the mandate from the voters in November 2006 we would still be "staying the course."

Bill Clinton talked a lot of trash and liked to lob missiles into Iraq but he wasn't foolish enough to commit to a land invasion and occupation of Iraq. H.W. Bush (and at one time Cheney) were equally wise in leaving the invasion idea off the table. They knew what they would be getting themselves into had they invaded. At some point Cheney lost his wits and put aside everything he knew about Iraq's internal makeup and promoted this fallacious war.

Iraq has a chance to be stable but for who? It is now a once secular country with a Constitution based on Islam. It is ruled by a Shia majority that is friendly with Iran's Shia theocrats, the true victors of this war. Iran's influence over the Iraqi government and the region has only grown. Do you think that makes Israel feel any more secure? I doubt it ... they've been clamoring for an attack on Iran for some time now. Or perhaps the Saudis who just saw an Iranian allied Shia gov't propped up on their borders? It's no accident that they are buying missile defense systems from us.

John McCain doesn't want to leave Iraq, and IMO its because he knows that the US presence there is what's holding the country together and when we leave whether it be tomorrow or 100 years from now the proverbial shit is going to hit the fan there. And he's willing to burn our economy and sacrifice the lives of our brave men and women to keep the hole plugged.

No thanks.

 

[Navy1960]

I'm curious, based in the logic there, so your soultion would be to what? abandon Iraq an let them fight it out and let Iran have complete control if the region all based on the premise that your mad at George Bush and Dick Cheney who by the way I am not a fan of. yoru statment seems to be that Iraq is not chums with Iran "thats bad" for US and Israel, then go on to say the solution is to abandon the region because John McCain made mention of the fact. "Like Korea, and after WW2 the United States may have to maintain a presence in the region to keep the peace? No thank you, your solution has been tried before and it took this country almost 15 years to recover from it. Further, could it be possible that S.A. might just be purchasing "missle defense" which by the way your candidate wants to cut!. because of Iran's nuclear ambition, or perhaps the number of Iran's missle tests in the region may have given them pause? Perhaps?

 

[Article 15]

I'm curious, based in the logic there, so your soultion would be to what? abandon Iraq an let them fight it out and let Iran have complete control if the region all based on the premise that your mad at George Bush and Dick Cheney who by the way I am not a fan of. yoru statment seems to be that Iraq is not chums with Iran "thats bad" for US and Israel, then go on to say the solution is to abandon the region because John McCain made mention of the fact. "Like Korea, and after WW2 the United States may have to maintain a presence in the region to keep the peace? No thank you, your solution has been tried before and it took this country almost 15 years to recover from it.

My statement is that Iraq and Iran are NOW chums and will become closer thanks to this war ... prior to they were bitter enemies.

I will repeat my opinion of John McCain's view on Iraq:

John McCain doesn't want to leave Iraq, and IMO its because he knows that the US presence there is what's holding the country together and when we leave whether it be tomorrow or 100 years from now the proverbial shit is going to hit the fan there. And he's willing to burn our economy and sacrifice the lives of our brave men and women to keep the hole plugged.

My solution is a timely, withdrawal from Iraq and let the chips fall where they may.

Further, could it be possible that S.A. might just be purchasing "missle defense" which by the way your candidate wants to cut!. because of Iran's nuclear ambition, or perhaps the number of Iran's missle tests in the region may have given them pause? Perhaps?

Not the missile defense the Saudis bought ... we spend billion upon billions more in defense then many of our "closest" competitors combined, bringing up that my candidate wants to "cut" missile defense is weak ... we are MORE than covered and I suspect you know it.

Of course Iranian nuclear ambitions gave them reason for pause ... that and the new found Iranian ally in Iraq. Iran's nuclear ambition would have been a lot easier to deal with and wouldn't be such a huge concern had we not kneecapped our ability to handle it by going into Iraq in the first place. THAT is what caused the massive instability in the region. THAT is what catalyzed the Iranians nuclear ambitions. It wasn't the "Iranians being the aggressors," ... that's a too simplistic of a way to look at it. A simplistic view of the Middle East is dangerous and leads to huge blunders: Iraq.

 

[gowhite08]

Senator Obama didn't vote against going to war with Iraq?

I thought that's what he was beating Senator Clinton over the head with to win the primary.

That he voted against the war and she voted for it.

In the words of Rudy, "if you don't have the facts, you have to change them."

 

[jreeves]

That Obama was right and McCain was wrong ... Obama said he doesn't know how he would have voted looking at the same intelligence everyone else did ... but he knew it was an unwise war and a mistake to get into the war ...
All the while McCain was pushing for the war and it wasn't until things started to come up sour that he piped up and said something.

"I don't think you're going to have to see the scale of numbers of troops that we saw, nor the length of the buildup, obviously, that we had back in 1991."
-John McCain Dec. 2002



And McCain on drilling and ethanol ...

McCain has gotten twice as much money from big oil than Obama ...

Obama has clearly flip-flopped on the issue of taxation of the oil companies ... lose the tax breaks and proposes windfall taxes.

In the end I believe both candidates will explore every possible avenue toward energy independence.

Really

From the July 27, 2004, Chicago Tribune article:

Barack Obama, who will deliver the keynote address at the Democratic National Convention, said Monday that he believes the Iraq war will be the deciding factor in the presidential contest, but that he does not think there is a great difference "on paper" between presumptive Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry and President Bush on the issue.

Instead, Obama, the U.S. Senate candidate from Illinois, said he believes the Bush administration has lost too much credibility in the world community to administer the policies necessary to stabilize Iraq.

"On Iraq, on paper, there's not as much difference, I think, between the Bush administration and a Kerry administration as there would have been a year ago," Obama said during a luncheon meeting with editors and reporters of Tribune newspapers. "There's not that much difference between my position and George Bush's position at this stage. The difference, in my mind, is who's in a position to execute."

KURTZ: Just to provide some context, Rachel Maddow, the former president referring to two interviews that Obama gave in 2004. One, he told The New York Times he didn't think the case for war had been made, but he didn't know how he would have voted had he had access to classified information at the time, because he was not in the United States Senate. And one with the Chicago Tribune which he said there wasn't much difference between his position and George Bush's position on the war.


Media Matters - Kurtz misrepresented Obama&#39;s 2004 remark on Iraq war stance


Obama has stated that he would propose windfall profits taxes on oil companies. That has been tried before, less domestic production of oil and more foreign oil, isn't that just what we need?
You do realize that the true measure of a candidate isn't what he says in the process of an election right? The measure is when both candidate's had the choice to weigh in, Obama voted for tax breaks for Big Oil and Mccain voted against it.

 

[Navy1960]

Article 15,

We are in agreement on one thing, I agree in a timely withdrawl from Iraq, thats after the situation is secure, and we have turned the security completely over to Iraqi Forces, and keep a fast reaction force there, and yes that means a base there. I am NOT of the "let the chips fall where they may type" as I think withdrawl without the situation completly stable and planned will do nothing but assure a return trip back to the region, with even more loss of American lives and and even larger presence.

Iran is the largest state sponser of terrorism in the world and has been for some time. They began down that path during the Carter Administration in 1979 and we all know what happened then. They provide training, technical support, material and weapons, to several groups all over the world and have for some time. your post as I read it earlier I thought was just making reference to the missle defense purchase by S.A. , I am completely aware of the Saudi's military hardware purchases in the last several years as well the reason for them. you are partially correct on Iraq in that the Bathist that controlled Iraq i.e. Saddam Huessien were bitter rivals for many years, but as you know they have always been closely aligned with the Shia in iraq as Iran is 89% Shia.
So it is a not an easy solution to be left to fall where they may at least until that time when we as a country are not so dependant on the energy that comes from that region.