Chief Douche Bag

[Danzig]

it's like choosing between turd sandwich and douche bag. obama no doubt is smarter.
neither one has managed to do much of anything good for the country, so what does it matter anyway?

Originally Posted by Danzig

it's like choosing between turd sandwich and douche bag. obama no doubt is smarter.
neither one has managed to do much of anything good for the country, so what does it matter anyway?

He still has time to make things better.

There aren't many scenarios where I see him making a bigger mistake than Iraq. Only a daddy's boy like Bush would f.uck up that bad.

[gales0678]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

He still has time to make things better.

There aren't many scenarios where I see him making a bigger mistake than Iraq. Only a daddy's boy like Bush would f.uck up that bad.

Blame Bush for Iraq all you want , he never would have gone if the US Senate did not give him a overwhelming majority vote

The current Vice President and Secretary of State both agreed with Dubya and the current in fact in her speech said it was the right thing to do for the commander in chief and that she knew what Bush was going through becuase she hap spent 8 yrs on the other side of Penn ave and sometimes you have to make decisions without all of the facts and information available.

I wonder how many of you would have voted agaisnt the 1st gulf war back Bush Sr 's term...........well i know one senator who did ...........it's the current VP

You can't have it both ways , Joe Biden blew the 2 biggest votes in his senate history , yet Obama is smart for picking Uncle Joe as VP with his stellar record

Picking Biden who is a supposed expert and got both Iraq WAR votes wrong , makes Obama pretty smart hey?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by gales0678

Blame Bush for Iraq all you want , he never would have gone if the US Senate did not give him a overwhelming majority vote

The current Vice President and Secretary of State both agreed with Dubya and the current in fact in her speech said it was the right thing to do for the commander in chief and that she knew what Bush was going through becuase she hap spent 8 yrs on the other side of Penn ave and sometimes you have to make decisions without all of the facts and information available.

I wonder how many of you would have voted agaisnt the 1st gulf war back Bush Sr 's term...........well i know one senator who did ...........it's the current VP

You can't have it both ways , Joe Biden blew the 2 biggest votes in his senate history , yet Obama is smart for picking Uncle Joe as VP with his stellar record

Picking Biden who is a supposed expert and got both Iraq WAR votes wrong , makes Obama pretty smart hey?

you mentioned gulf one....no one was against it. iraq brought that on themself when they invaded kuwait. that was probably the highest point for the u.s. in years-that coalition was quite an achievement. you might want to go back to all that happened during that time, and see the reaction when bush sr suggested taking down hussein then. and why we didn't invade iraq then. what changed in the years since then, i don't know (nothing did)? bush jr ignored everything in his rush to connect iraq to 9/11, or to something, and invade. it was an astronomical blunder. the reason the senate bit is that bush and his minions sold everyone hook, line and sinker on why to invade. it was a huge lie. we elect these people to make crucial decisions. they may not always be the most popular decision. but they should be the right one.
question: when in history has a president of this country asked for a war vote and not gotten it?

before you go to war, you're supposed to make sure that it's a righteous war, also that it's a winnable war, and that it will leave you in a better position than you were before. can you say any of those fit iraq or afganistan?

[gales0678]

Originally Posted by Danzig

you mentioned gulf one....no one was against it. iraq brought that on themself when they invaded kuwait. that was probably the highest point for the u.s. in years-that coalition was quite an achievement. you might want to go back to all that happened during that time, and see the reaction when bush sr suggested taking down hussein then. and why we didn't invade iraq then. what changed in the years since then, i don't know (nothing did)? bush jr ignored everything in his rush to connect iraq to 9/11, or to something, and invade. it was an astronomical blunder. the reason the senate bit is that bush and his minions sold everyone hook, line and sinker on why to invade. it was a huge lie. we elect these people to make crucial decisions. they may not always be the most popular decision. but they should be the right one.
question: when in history has a president of this country asked for a war vote and not gotten it?

before you go to war, you're supposed to make sure that it's a righteous war, also that it's a winnable war, and that it will leave you in a better position than you were before. can you say any of those fit iraq or afganistan?

i don't disagree with a lot of what you say , but , edwards has come out and said he made a mistkae when he voted for the authorization , kerry , biden , clinton , schumer . etc etc have not said that

senior leaders in the senate of the democratic side voted agaisnt the war ..byrd and kennedy come to mind , why didn't theses junior democratic senators listen to the elders in the party who as it turned out knew better

blame bush all you want , but if the democratic senators follwed kennedy and byrd and he only had a slim majority he probably wouldn't have gone

as for the minions selling this theory , hillary clinton's speech when she voted totally nullifies that theory , she lauded herself is a strong willed independent women who had been on both sides of the aisle penn ave and knew that decisions had to be made that were going to be tough and sometimes had to be "gut"calls

kerry was on the armed forces comittee , he saw all the reports for over a decade and knew what the deal was

these key democrats , the current VP included , all came to their own opinions and even cited data that they looked at prior to bush even being president

As for the 1st gulf war , there was a vote , and the current vp , voted against operation desert storm ....brilliant guy that joe , hey barack

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by gales0678

i don't disagree with a lot of what you say , but , edwards has come out and said he made a mistkae when he voted for the authorization , kerry , biden , clinton , schumer . etc etc have not said that

senior leaders in the senate of the democratic side voted agaisnt the war ..byrd and kennedy come to mind , why didn't theses junior democratic senators listen to the elders in the party who as it turned out knew better

blame bush all you want , but if the democratic senators follwed kennedy and byrd and he only had a slim majority he probably wouldn't have gone

as for the minions selling this theory , hillary clinton's speech when she voted totally nullifies that theory , she lauded herself is a strong willed independent women who had been on both sides of the aisle penn ave and knew that decisions had to be made that were going to be tough and sometimes had to be "gut"calls

kerry was on the armed forces comittee , he saw all the reports for over a decade and knew what the deal was

these key democrats , the current VP included , all came to their own opinions and even cited data that they looked at prior to bush even being president

As for the 1st gulf war , there was a vote , and the current vp , voted against operation desert storm ....brilliant guy that joe , hey barack

thing is, a lot of congresss members voted for the war because they felt their constituents wanted it. voting by poll numbers, rather then going by what they knew. now, some people think that's how congress is supposed to do, vote for their majority. but the voters don't necessarily have all the facts, or understand who had what to do with 9/11, and who didn't. most importantly, most voters didn't understand the power vacuum it would create by removing iraq from the picture. now voters know who amadinejad(sp) is, and wonder why iran feels they can throw their weight around. it's because of us, that's why. they wonder why we're broke. the wars, that's why. no one thought about the far-reaching implications. bush 2 thought we'd sweep thru iraq and win in a week, since that's what bush 1 did. completely different scenario from the first war to the second over there.

[gales0678]

Originally Posted by Danzig

thing is, a lot of congresss members voted for the war because they felt their constituents wanted it. voting by poll numbers, rather then going by what they knew. now, some people think that's how congress is supposed to do, vote for their majority. but the voters don't necessarily have all the facts, or understand who had what to do with 9/11, and who didn't. most importantly, most voters didn't understand the power vacuum it would create by removing iraq from the picture. now voters know who amadinejad(sp) is, and wonder why iran feels they can throw their weight around. it's because of us, that's why. they wonder why we're broke. the wars, that's why. no one thought about the far-reaching implications. bush 2 thought we'd sweep thru iraq and win in a week, since that's what bush 1 did. completely different scenario from the first war to the second over there.

blame bush all you want that's fine , the current vp of the united states who was choosen by the president voted for the war if he was snookered by the minions than he isn't fit eneought to be VP and obama should know that

just his "no" vote on the 1st iraq war should have disqualified uncle joe from any executive office

obama for picking this guy shows his lack of intellingence plain and simple

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by Danzig

you mentioned gulf one....no one was against it. iraq brought that on themself when they invaded kuwait. that was probably the highest point for the u.s. in years-that coalition was quite an achievement. you might want to go back to all that happened during that time, and see the reaction when bush sr suggested taking down hussein then. and why we didn't invade iraq then. what changed in the years since then, i don't know (nothing did)? bush jr ignored everything in his rush to connect iraq to 9/11, or to something, and invade. it was an astronomical blunder. the reason the senate bit is that bush and his minions sold everyone hook, line and sinker on why to invade. it was a huge lie. we elect these people to make crucial decisions. they may not always be the most popular decision. but they should be the right one.
question: when in history has a president of this country asked for a war vote and not gotten it?

before you go to war, you're supposed to make sure that it's a righteous war, also that it's a winnable war, and that it will leave you in a better position than you were before. can you say any of those fit iraq or afganistan?

Iraq yes: Afghanistan no!

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

Iraq yes: Afghanistan no!

iraq was not a righteous war. nor are we better off than we were before we went in.

Afghanistan is a waste of time as well.

If you can't do what you please in Pakistan then what's the point?

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by Danzig

iraq was not a righteous war. nor are we better off than we were before we went in.

Well...I'd feel better about it if we could find the 8.7 billion missing from the Defense dept!

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Danzig

it's like choosing between turd sandwich and douche bag. obama no doubt is smarter.
neither one has managed to do much of anything good for the country, so what does it matter anyway?

Well that's a different conversation. People are trying to conflate what they think about his policies and leadership with how smart he is, which is why every time someone in here earlier said "well, I'm not so sure he's smarter," they would back it up with "well, I'm not better off than I was 19 months ago" and "OIL SPILL!"

Neither of which have anything whatsoever to do with whether he's smart of not, which is completely why Coach is owning this thread, because he's apparently the only one who can keep the conversation straight.

Really though, if there's a soul out there who legitimately thinks that there is even the slightest chance that Dubya is smarter/more intelligent than Obama, they should get their head checked. Policies are one thing to disagree with, but the actual intelligence conversation should be pretty one and done.

And his leadership has been pisspoor since about 3 weeks into office, so I'm essentially sick of him too at this point.

I am extremely disappointed with his foreign policy. I was naively hoping he would bring our troops home and let Iraq and Afghanistan eat cake.

Americans can be conditioned to embrace peace. Shocking, I know.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

I am extremely disappointed with his foreign policy. I was naively hoping he would bring our troops home and let Iraq and Afghanistan eat cake.

Americans can be conditioned to embrace peace. Shocking, I know.

I'm extremely disappointed in quite a bit, the least of which is what you're talking about. If he's going to compromise his chances of getting re-elected, I wish he'd at least have gotten a healthcare bill with some teeth passed, I hate the wars which up to this point have been no different than his predecessor, just today he moved to expand the government's ability to willy-nilly get information on people with nothing more than the stroke of a pen, and he's languishing behind on very simple campaign promises that I care about very much.

Basically, he sucks, but he's still not the anti-Christ, and he's still at least marginally better than what came before him.

As I mentioned somewhere (not sure if it was here), after the Shirley Sherrod clowncar extravaganza, he should be happy the election is not being held today -- because I'd go vote for local politicians and leave the President spot blank. I have no desire at all to go vote for someone who is only a sliver better than any generic Republican counterpart. If I wanted someone who was going to do all the things I didn't want them to do, I'd have voted for McCain in the first place.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Well that's a different conversation. People are trying to conflate what they think about his policies and leadership with how smart he is, which is why every time someone in here earlier said "well, I'm not so sure he's smarter," they would back it up with "well, I'm not better off than I was 19 months ago" and "OIL SPILL!"

Neither of which have anything whatsoever to do with whether he's smart of not, which is completely why Coach is owning this thread, because he's apparently the only one who can keep the conversation straight.

Really though, if there's a soul out there who legitimately thinks that there is even the slightest chance that Dubya is smarter/more intelligent than Obama, they should get their head checked. Policies are one thing to disagree with, but the actual intelligence conversation should be pretty one and done.

And his leadership has been pisspoor since about 3 weeks into office, so I'm essentially sick of him too at this point.

If I'm making a bet on who has a higher IQ, I'll take Obama no doubt.

They still both suck as presidents, Obama to me is like G.W. Bush II, still as much in love with spending as the last guy, and both have no clue about what the fucl< they are doing.