The ..2012.... Political thread
-
jaipur:
You do understand that furloughs are working *without* pay?? that means those folks take home less money. Yet, folks like you still want the same services??? Public sector workers, just like private sectors, have been laid off as well. I keep hearing that many, like you, want public sector workers to do "401K plan". I do find that comical, particularly here in Massachusetts. Like other states, not all mind you, public sector workers don't get social security like private sector workers do. While I do understand private sector frustration, I would think it would be helpful that what public sector workers get isn't the panacea they would like to believe.
btw, I wouldn't be so upset with cameras....the UK has many, many more of them.
-
President Obama just said (paraphrasing) 'war is not always about national security, but about protecting our interests'...what are your thoughts on that??? He's not even on 'my team' and I would applaud that except he's a hypocryte in saying that - but at least for once, it's the truth...Do you folks over on the extreme left suddenly see Obama in the same light as Bush, or are you going to try to justify what he said?
-
An Impeachable Offense according to: Joe Biden
-
Some people stand up for their personal or nationalist interests only. Did you guys miss the part about international?
-
SurSteven:
Some people stand up for their personal or nationalist interests only. Did you guys miss the part about international?
International effort - does that include Russia & China?
-
SurSteven:
Some people stand up for their personal or nationalist interests only. Did you guys miss the part about international?
Could be Obama's personal interest to - I notice that many of these 'rebels' are actually Al Queada
-
Andy_Shofar:
SurSteven:
Some people stand up for their personal or nationalist interests only. Did you guys miss the part about international?
International effort - does that include Russia & China? If not the use of the term "international" is not proper
Are you saying that the russians and the chinese should stop acting as nationalist as our own american republicans and conservatives do? If you do...I agree!
-
rich n:
President Obama just said (paraphrasing) 'war is not always about national security, but about protecting our interests'...what are your thoughts on that??? He's not even on 'my team' and I would applaud that except he's a hypocryte in saying that - but at least for once, it's the truth...Do you folks over on the extreme left suddenly see Obama in the same light as Bush, or are you going to try to justify what he said?
So, you believe that Bush didn't twist facts to justify that b.s. Iraq war? Most liberals are keenly aware that the whole thing was horse-puckey. And now, even Rumsfeld's book validates that.
-
audi:
rich n:
President Obama just said (paraphrasing) 'war is not always about national security, but about protecting our interests'...what are your thoughts on that??? He's not even on 'my team' and I would applaud that except he's a hypocryte in saying that - but at least for once, it's the truth...Do you folks over on the extreme left suddenly see Obama in the same light as Bush, or are you going to try to justify what he said?
So, you believe that Bush didn't twist facts to justify that b.s. Iraq war? Most liberals are keenly aware that the whole thing was horse-puckey. And now, even Rumsfeld's book validates that.
Bush put forth 18 reasons to the UN for approval of taking military actions against Iraq. You guys focus on one (WMDs) for your entire argument against. Turns out he was largely right in his reasoning. And as far as WMDs are concerned, it's the liberals who twist that into specifying 'Nuclear threat' when in fact, WMD is a blanket term which includes biological and chemical warfare...a tactic which has long since been proven that Saddam utilized...The number of deaths who's blood fall on Saddam's hands run into the hundreds of thousands (re: Afghanistan war)...But...feel free to continue to distort the truth
-
Well, that clears it up. Now I can rest comfortably, knowing that all those thousands of dead service-people and citizens didn't die in vain. "PHEW!"
-
audi:
Well, that clears it up. Now I can rest comfortably, knowing that all those thousands of dead service-people and citizens didn't die in vain. "PHEW!"
I think you missed the part where I mentioned the guy you're defending has the blood of hundreds of thousands on his hands...we lose a scant few (by comparison) and yet you still justify your opinion???? Wow
-
rich n:
audi:
Well, that clears it up. Now I can rest comfortably, knowing that all those thousands of dead service-people and citizens didn't die in vain. "PHEW!"
I think you missed the part where I mentioned the guy you're defending has the blood of hundreds of thousands on his hands...we lose a scant few (by comparison) and yet you still justify your opinion???? Wow
There were no easy solutions when he took office. The guy I'm defending was among the Senators who voted against going in the first place.
-
audi:
rich n:
audi:
Well, that clears it up. Now I can rest comfortably, knowing that all those thousands of dead service-people and citizens didn't die in vain. "PHEW!"
I think you missed the part where I mentioned the guy you're defending has the blood of hundreds of thousands on his hands...we lose a scant few (by comparison) and yet you still justify your opinion???? Wow
There were no easy solutions when he took office. The guy I'm defending was among the Senators who voted against going in the first place.
That was the mantra several years ago - now that time has passed, it looks like he's as aggressive-minded as the guy you don't like who preceded him. His speech last night was something that GW could've given...almost good, if not hypocritcal. He lied about one thing (actually misled because technically, it wasn't a lie)...when it comes to the number of US Troops in Iraq, he claims there are 100,000 have returned home (carefully worded on his part)...what he doesn't say is that there are 100,000 who have gone to take their place...everything he said he wasn't going to do (in terms of foreign politics and war), he was done. Unfortunately, he has held to his word in regards to domestic affairs, much to the chargrin of this country:-(
-
-
rich n:
audi:
rich n:
audi:
Well, that clears it up. Now I can rest comfortably, knowing that all those thousands of dead service-people and citizens didn't die in vain. "PHEW!"
I think you missed the part where I mentioned the guy you're defending has the blood of hundreds of thousands on his hands...we lose a scant few (by comparison) and yet you still justify your opinion???? Wow
There were no easy solutions when he took office. The guy I'm defending was among the Senators who voted against going in the first place.
That was the mantra several years ago - now that time has passed, it looks like he's as aggressive-minded as the guy you don't like who preceded him. His speech last night was something that GW could've given...almost good, if not hypocritcal. He lied about one thing (actually misled because technically, it wasn't a lie)...when it comes to the number of US Troops in Iraq, he claims there are 100,000 have returned home (carefully worded on his part)...what he doesn't say is that there are 100,000 who have gone to take their place...everything he said he wasn't going to do (in terms of foreign politics and war), he was done. Unfortunately, he has held to his word in regards to domestic affairs, much to the chargrin of this country:-(
show where you got your info. or is this just your opinion of the # of troops in Iraq :
-
mustangsally10:
rich n:
audi:
rich n:
audi:
Well, that clears it up. Now I can rest comfortably, knowing that all those thousands of dead service-people and citizens didn't die in vain. "PHEW!"
I think you missed the part where I mentioned the guy you're defending has the blood of hundreds of thousands on his hands...we lose a scant few (by comparison) and yet you still justify your opinion???? Wow
There were no easy solutions when he took office. The guy I'm defending was among the Senators who voted against going in the first place.
That was the mantra several years ago - now that time has passed, it looks like he's as aggressive-minded as the guy you don't like who preceded him. His speech last night was something that GW could've given...almost good, if not hypocritcal. He lied about one thing (actually misled because technically, it wasn't a lie)...when it comes to the number of US Troops in Iraq, he claims there are 100,000 have returned home (carefully worded on his part)...what he doesn't say is that there are 100,000 who have gone to take their place...everything he said he wasn't going to do (in terms of foreign politics and war), he was done. Unfortunately, he has held to his word in regards to domestic affairs, much to the chargrin of this country:-(
show where you got your info. or is this just your opinion of the # of troops in Iraq :
Away with the past - you guys have much more to fear (in the future/present) defending the very things you claim you hated in Bush Shall we refer your defense as "Dancing along with the Prez" :
-
Britons fear Libya becoming another Iraq -poll Tue Mar 29, 2011 * Seven of 10 Britons fear Iraq-style conflict * Almost half disapprove of the intervention LONDON, March 29 (Reuters) - Seven out of 10 Britons think coalition forces enforcing a no-fly zone in Libya could get sucked into another Iraq-style conflict, a poll showed on Tuesday. complete article: http://af.reuters.com/article/libyaNews/idAFLDE72S08220110329?sp=true
-
Andy_Shofar:
Britons fear Libya becoming another Iraq -poll Tue Mar 29, 2011 * Seven of 10 Britons fear Iraq-style conflict * Almost half disapprove of the intervention LONDON, March 29 (Reuters) - Seven out of 10 Britons think coalition forces enforcing a no-fly zone in Libya could get sucked into another Iraq-style conflict, a poll showed on Tuesday. complete article: http://af.reuters.com/article/libyaNews/idAFLDE72S08220110329?sp=true
Republicans were in office when we got involved in Iraq. Are you saying that Republicans make more war than Liberals and Democrats do?
-
mustangsally10:
rich n:
audi:
rich n:
audi:
Well, that clears it up. Now I can rest comfortably, knowing that all those thousands of dead service-people and citizens didn't die in vain. "PHEW!"
I think you missed the part where I mentioned the guy you're defending has the blood of hundreds of thousands on his hands...we lose a scant few (by comparison) and yet you still justify your opinion???? Wow
There were no easy solutions when he took office. The guy I'm defending was among the Senators who voted against going in the first place.
That was the mantra several years ago - now that time has passed, it looks like he's as aggressive-minded as the guy you don't like who preceded him. His speech last night was something that GW could've given...almost good, if not hypocritcal. He lied about one thing (actually misled because technically, it wasn't a lie)...when it comes to the number of US Troops in Iraq, he claims there are 100,000 have returned home (carefully worded on his part)...what he doesn't say is that there are 100,000 who have gone to take their place...everything he said he wasn't going to do (in terms of foreign politics and war), he was done. Unfortunately, he has held to his word in regards to domestic affairs, much to the chargrin of this country:-(
show where you got your info. or is this just your opinion of the # of troops in Iraq :
LOL - as I mentioned before, the deception is amazing. Obama is pulling the wool over your eyes because he's handing the dirty work over to US civilian authorities (the kind who shoot guns) and right now, the combination of US military and civilian forces exceed 200K (i.e. the ratio of military to civilian forces have flip flopped). Although this is pretty common knowledge, I thought offering you this info directly from a left favoring publication while trying to deceive you into believing 'we're pulling out' would be most appropriate http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/19/wo...ithdrawal.html
-
SurSteven:
Andy_Shofar:
Britons fear Libya becoming another Iraq -poll Tue Mar 29, 2011 * Seven of 10 Britons fear Iraq-style conflict * Almost half disapprove of the intervention LONDON, March 29 (Reuters) - Seven out of 10 Britons think coalition forces enforcing a no-fly zone in Libya could get sucked into another Iraq-style conflict, a poll showed on Tuesday. complete article: http://af.reuters.com/article/libyaNews/idAFLDE72S08220110329?sp=true
Republicans were in office when we got involved in Iraq. Are you saying that Republicans make more war than Liberals and Democrats do?
Here's a question for you - which party is responsible for the only use of nuclear weapons (i.e atom bomb) against an enemy in all of history?