Food for thought

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Tiger, Mar 2, 2008.

  1. Tiger
    Offline

    Tiger Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2008
    Messages:
    68
    Thanks Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6
    Was Obama a phenomenon or was he a con.

    What voters need to know. The facts, the cards he plays. He is not Martin Luther King, with Martin Luther King's dream. I doubt very much that Martin Luther King was Mulatto.

    The changes Obama speaks of is not necessarily what you think, or want it to be. If the troops come back, the consequences will be the same, as you see here regarding the little wars on drugs, gangs, etc. What happens when someone goes out to fight against it.

    They fight and go home, and suddenly a drive by. Your innocent children get hit. Your loved ones may be fighting in the war and you want them back, but at what cost to you and your home. Why bring the predator to your nest to kill you and your young. Even in the wild the mother knows it's not smart to run home to their young. They know the predator will follow their scent back to them. They stay and fight even to the end to save their young!

    If we act out of fear of losing our loved ones to the war in Iraq, not stopping to think about the outcome it will create. We will do the unthinkable. Can you put a time limit on when you will have finished and won the war on drugs?

    Before 911 we still had planes hijacked, They still kidnapped and killed our people with demands to release prisoners, how many years ago? Do the research. It's still happening, but there not here. The actions of the enemy speaks for itself.

    Obama can read a speech written out for him, but who will write down what to do for our nation? If a solution is needed we will have to wait for someone to write out the solution.

    He wont have a teleprompter to help him, when we have a national emergency. He can't even perform a quick response in any of his past debates. You have been conned by the worse con man the world ever seen. By playing the cards that he knows some people will be blinded by.
    -------------------------------
    Don't Believe Anything You Hear, and Only Half of What You See!
     
  2. Detmurds
    Offline

    Detmurds VIP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2007
    Messages:
    246
    Thanks Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Ratings:
    +31
    He is a boot-camp Senator who has no plan to fix a single thing!
     
  3. jreeves
    Offline

    jreeves Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    6,588
    Thanks Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +315
    http://www.imao.us/archives/009710.html
    My Solution to Iraq Is to Never Have Gone There
    An Editorial by Senator Barack Obama

    Iraq continues to be a serious problem, and the Bush administration has done nothing but increase the problem and cause unnecessary deaths. It is a mess, but I have a solution: I would never have gone there.



    The Iraq War will be a big problem to inherit, but it would not be if we hadn't have gone there. That's why that is my solution. People ask me, "Won't leaving Iraq now be abandoning the Iraqi people?" Well, it wouldn't be abandoning them if we hadn't had gone there. "What about a civil war?" others ask, to which I say there would be no civil war if Saddam were still in charge because we didn't go to Iraq. As you can see, not having gone to Iraq easily solves all these problems.


    "I do have experience: Experience at not going to war." As for Al Qaeda in Iraq, I don't think they would be a problem if we hadn't had gone. Maybe they already were there and working with some support from Saddam, but I still think not having gone there is a risk worth taking. You may worry about all the terrorists there and whether they have intentions for attacking America, but you wouldn't if we hadn't had gone.


    Senator John McCain questions whether I have experience enough to deal with Iraq, but the fact is that he's old. No one faints at his rallies... unless they forgot their heart medication because they're as old as he is. And I do have experience: Experience at not going to war. That's why not having gone to Iraq is the perfect solution for me. It's one I'm uniquely able to espouse and have been consistent on. Years ago I said we shouldn't invade Iraq, and that is still my solution.



    A few have said that not going to Iraq isn't a solution anymore since we already have gone there. I hear your concern and I have three words for you: Hope. Change. The future.



    That's right: The future. And not just any future; a future where we look forward and say, "We shouldn't have gone to Iraq."
     
  4. Tiger
    Offline

    Tiger Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2008
    Messages:
    68
    Thanks Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6
    ROFLMAO!!! Thak was good.:rofl:
     
  5. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770

    I happen to agree with Obama on this particular point, but not as a "solution." What's done is done and can't be taken back, nor is wishful thinking that doesn't take reality into account solve a damned thing.

    But I said then, and still maintain Saddam was the lesser of two evils. We should have left him alone and contained rather than create the sectarian warfare and power vaccum between Arabs/Sunni and Persians/Shia all fighting for chunks of Iraq.

    So, for whatever else I don't agree with Obama on and am willing to not vote for him for, his beign against invading Iraq is not one of them.
     
  6. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,584
    Thanks Received:
    5,906
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +9,009
    His ignorant claim that we can just leave is beyond stupid. We can not CHANGE the fact we invaded. There is NO HOPE if we tell our allies we will abandon them. The future is bleak if we abandon our allies and give terrorists what they want.
     
  7. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    I realize we can't just leave and so does he. He's playing to a crowd and they're sucking it up without giving it any real thought.

    That's the part that just kills me. It appears NO ONE is really thinking at all this election. Not from either side.

    Just can't wait to have to live with the results.:rolleyes:
     
  8. Paulie
    Offline

    Paulie Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    31,606
    Thanks Received:
    4,856
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +15,485
    Yeah, I can't help but think that this election cycle, voters are exponentially dumber than usual about how they're making choices.

    It's almost as if people have completely forgotten that politicians lie and pander for votes. With McCain and Hillary, you have clear and concise verifiable information concerning their records that ultimately indicates dog crap, and with Obama you don't have ANYTHING to go on except his word. And since when has a politician's WORD meant anything but DOG CRAP?

    The worst part is, that every election cycle, there are more candidates then just the one's that the media shoves down your throat. It's just that a large majority of people will only vote for someone they hear the media talk about, because that means that they "can win".

    It's sad, and that's why this country continually gets the absolute shittiest of human beings elected to so many public offices. The establishment uses our own stupidity and lack of critical thinking AGAINST us.
     
  9. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    This country gets the shittiest of elected officials because we have been accepting the shittiest of human beings, on both sides of the aisle, and voting for them just to keep what we considered even shittier individuals out.

    So do we withhold our votes out of displeasure with what we're offered as happened in 2006 which the Dems have been calling a "mandate" and "will of the people" ever since? Note that in those two years the big-talking Congress has accomplished nothing worthy of notice except an investigation into the use of steroids by a private enterprise; which, is clearly out of their bounds.

    Or do we vote for someone like McCain just because he supposedly wouldn't be as bad as Hillary or Obama?

    I quit supporting the Democrats in 1980 when it was clear the party was no longer in touch with any clear-thinking, moderate individuals. I have no qualms about doing the same to the GOP.

    As far as I'm concerned, NONE of the current top three represent a damned thing I believe in.
     
  10. jreeves
    Offline

    jreeves Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    6,588
    Thanks Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +315
    Everything is much clearer in hindsight, yes in hindsight it was a mistake to invade Iraq. I do believe though that the justification was there.

    In Obama's 2002 speech, he basically agreed with all the assertions made by the intelligence communities. Saddam had chemical and biological weapons and that he had ambitions to acquire nuclear weapons. He also stated that Saddam was a butcher. He stated after all that though he wouldn't launch an attack against Iraq.

    Knowing that Saddam wouldn't have hesitated to use WMD's, because of his history with WMD's, I don't think he was right. If he had stated that intelligence reports were wrong. Then, yes his stance in my opinion would have been well founded.

    Also, in 2006 when Obama was interviewed he stated that if he was privy to the intelligence reports perhaps he would have voted for authorization of the war in Iraq. He said at the time he was only running for a U.S. Senate seat.

    I believe that Bush wouldn't have invaded Iraq, if he knew what he knows now about the extent of Saddam's WMD program. I mean that's only my 2 cents.
     

Share This Page