Obama supporters. I have one question

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2558898
* Controlling unnecessary spending for unproven technology is bad, how?
* I tried to explain to you, how the private sector and the government can project manage EVM and they can fund initial R&D dollars. However, that doesn't lend it's self to your position point, but doesn't change the facts of viability...
P.S. - That's a very good video you linked too

FAVORS IN FINE PRINT: Defense spending bill packed with $11.8B in earmarks.
I guess EARMARKs you and McCain are okay with?

*Because, by default, no technology is "proven" until it is tested in the heat of battle. How can you prove a missile dfense system is going to work for sure until nuclear warheads are screaming towards the USA? If we followed this mentality we'd stil be using woolen uniforms painted red and standing in line on the battlefield... That is, of course, if we were allowed to spend money on that new untested "gunpowder" thingy.
*Again; R&D is the lifeblood of a strong military. I'm all for funding it with my tax dollars long before I'm for funding UHC or SS, etc.
* I hate earmarks.. McCain is the only candidate who has said he will cut them. Pelosi promised she would if she ever became Speaker of the House....

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2558931
There have been people arrested for plotting attacks.
And the Former Director of the CIA attributes many of those arrests with intel taken from the battlefield or from prisoners captured in Afghanistan and Iraq (where Al Qaeda is).
If they have been arrested and not successful doens't that kind of illustrate the point that we are safer?

Or is your argument that we are just lucky.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2558938
No I am not, but to do it on this forum... takes away from what he did... They use him and his sacrifice to justify the war and to shield attention away from the lack of progress in Iraq. Yes, things are better... but the surge was not as successful as what they had hoped, it also doesn't take into account the cease fire and the role that insurgents have played in reducing the violence...as noted there has been another spike of violence and they are calling for more.
If you want to honor a soilder... do it in an honorable way... don't use him to further your cause.
First, you haven't provided any evidence whatsoever that the president coodinated with a Democratic Investigative panel to schedule the two events at the same time.
Second, Out of the 18 benchmarks laid out last year before the surge how many have been met?
Third, Why the heck do you think Sadr asked for a cease fire?

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2558949
You forget alot... the Clinton campaign raised issues of race first...Obama actually stayed out of conversation about race because he didn't want to be viewed as the black candidate... his campaign didn't start this... And in regards to his vote record... What is far left? Define that. The whole thing is stupid.
When you compare him and Clinton... Their vote record only differs by 2 votes..which is probably like 0.1- 0.5% difference. So this whole thing about him being the most left candidate is stupid .. You all get so caught up on things that don't matter.
Rylan, first off, once again you don't know facts. Obama and Hillary have voted differently twice on Iraq... Not twice total for goodness sakes. Please, please, please look up things before you just repeat them. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101004_pf.html
The day Obama joined Trinity United and began to be mentored by "Rev." Wright he opened the racism door.
Far Left votes: "Overall in NJ's 2007 ratings, Obama voted the liberal position on 65 of the 66 key votes on which he voted; Clinton voted the liberal position 77 of 82 times. Obama garnered perfect liberal scores in both the economic and social categories." http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2559530
Rylan, first off, once again you don't know facts. Obama and Hillary have voted differently twice on Iraq... Not twice total for goodness sakes. Please, please, please look up things before you just repeat them. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101004_pf.html
The day Obama joined Trinity United and began to be mentored by "Rev." Wright he opened the racism door.
Far Left votes: "Overall in NJ's 2007 ratings, Obama voted the liberal position on 65 of the 66 key votes on which he voted; Clinton voted the liberal position 77 of 82 times. Obama garnered perfect liberal scores in both the economic and social categories." http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/
The two vote difference thing again. I wonder which Blogama site is throwing that out. I already threw out a link in this thread demonstrationg that is a lie. I guess a blogger is more reliable than the Washington post among other sources.

 

[zman1]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2559530
Far Left votes: "Overall in NJ's 2007 ratings, Obama voted the liberal position on 65 of the 66 key votes on which he voted; Clinton voted the liberal position 77 of 82 times. Obama garnered perfect liberal scores in both the economic and social categories." http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/

Scooby posted this link before and prompted me to post the McCain story from it. So I'll do it again.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the only other senator whose presidential candidacy survived the initial round of primaries and caucuses this year, did not vote frequently enough in 2007 to draw a composite score. He missed more than half of the votes in both the economic and foreign-policy categories.
Maybe both Clinton and Obama will shift like McCain has over the years. Mccain has had the second highest one time score just behind Obama's one time high in 2007...
Code:
[pre]YearMccainObamaClinton
1981———
1982———
1983———
1984———
1985———
1986———
198783.5——
198882.3——
198985.3——
199082.5——
199181.8——
199284.5——
199374.8——
199489.2——
199570.2——
199675.3——
199771.5——
199868.3——
199967.7——
200061.7——
200166.8—76.3
200259.8—86.7
200362.2—88.8
200451.7—71
200559.282.579.8
200656.78670.2[/pre]

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2558931
There have been people arrested for plotting attacks.
Exactly...before the attacks happened. Thanks for proving my point that I have made previous in many threads. We are safer as we now prevent attacks before they happen on US soil instead of reacting after they happen.

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2558961
So this makes him corrupt? Because someone donates to his campaign. McCain has a many questionable campaign donations in his past including ones from his wife and their family that was over the allowed amount, which were than considered loans that he didn't pay back... not to mention the Keating 5. And what about Clinton? She and her husband have a long history of this as well. I think its you that is missing a " lick of sense" because as you mention these guys gave to everybody, and you ignore your own candidate's past and questionable contributions.
Now with Clinton... it has been report that Pres Clinton may have ties to Dubai, and that he has advocated/consulted for them through a third party and was paid something like $20 million. His payment was structured to appear as investment earnings..but the round #'s make it seem as if they are payment for services.
Your candidate is the one claiming he is flying high above the typical politician. it is NObama that has set the bar with his words...he appears unable to even approach clearing it based on his record, associations, and judgement.

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2558949
You forget alot... the Clinton campaign raised issues of race first...Obama actually stayed out of conversation about race because he didn't want to be viewed as the black candidate... his campaign didn't start this... And in regards to his vote record... What is far left? Define that. The whole thing is stupid.
When you compare him and Clinton... Their vote record only differs by 2 votes..which is probably like 0.1- 0.5% difference. So this whole thing about him being the most left candidate is stupid .. You all get so caught up on things that don't matter.
Yuo are correct..all Nobama did was use race at the slightest mention of a comment or action that could be tied to race by someone else for political gain. . It was ONLY after he was smoked out of his church did he begin to speak about it outside accusations towards others. .
Also...his pastor made several statements against the government past and present. Race was only part of his spiritual guide, "uncle", campaign committee member, friend, close associate and moral compass calibrator unity message.

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2557240
Any of you Pro-War people want to comment on this?
I'll enlighten you about staging an event. A personal friend of mine and NOPD officer of 20 years at the time was always part of the security team for presidential vists back in New Orleans. He shared some facts regarding Bill CLinton visits to the City. The ENTIRE vist would be staged by Hollwood directors. Often against objections from secreet service....the hollywood director would win out. Every stop...hand shake comment, etc ALL planned in advance and all STAGED. This was before and after any speech...all the rest was staged..right down to the sunlight cast on old Bill that would be flattering to his picture seen on TV.

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2558969
How do you know?
You can't see what is obvious?
Give some of us 20 years..as it took Nobama that long sitting in his pew to figure out Wright......and that was only after Rev Wright and the US Haters greatest hits played over and over on TV.

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2558949
When you compare him and Clinton... Their vote record only differs by 2 votes..which is probably like 0.1- 0.5% difference. So this whole thing about him being the most left candidate is stupid .. You all get so caught up on things that don't matter.
As others have pointed out...you once again have your facts wrong regarding the voting record. Nobama has a voting record indicating he is the most liberal US Senator. This is also supported by the moveon.org endorsemnet among others..far left orgs that hate the military and America. Memebrship in a church that delivers a hate America message, the commemnt I am proud of America for the first time in my adult life, ties to the Weatherbomber, etc, etc,etc all point to a radical liberal far left candidate.
Billary is not as far to the left as Nobama...but they both are in the same neighborhood.
I understand many Nobama supporters will ignore his record, associations and judgement..and simply refer to the gospel according to Nobama.
He has also campaigned for socilalist candidates as posted here..and managed to even beat that candidate plus Ted Kennedy with his number one liberal ranking for 2007.

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2559896
Scooby posted this link before and prompted me to post the McCain story from it. So I'll do it again.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the only other senator whose presidential candidacy survived the initial round of primaries and caucuses this year, did not vote frequently enough in 2007 to draw a composite score. He missed more than half of the votes in both the economic and foreign-policy categories.
Maybe both Clinton and Omaba will shift like McCain has over the years. Mccain has had the second highest one time score just behind Obama's one time high in 2007...
Code:
[pre]YearMccainObamaClinton
1981———
1982———
1983———
1984———
1985———
1986———
198783.5——
198882.3——
198985.3——
199082.5——
199181.8——
199284.5——
199374.8——
199489.2——
199570.2——
199675.3——
199771.5——
199868.3——
199967.7——
200061.7——
200166.8—76.3
200259.8—86.7
200362.2—88.8
200451.7—71
200559.282.579.8
200656.78670.2[/pre]
Zman..many of his here have pointed out we do not agree with McCain on all issues and with his voting record. However, of the remaining three he is closet to my positions on many key issues.
I'd have to take the space shuttle from where I stand in order to arrive at the place where NObama stands on key issues . Also, NObam got close to a 100% score in 2007...I see you did not include that year on your table.

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2559511
First, you haven't provided any evidence whatsoever that the president coodinated with a Democratic Investigative panel to schedule the two events at the same time.
I thought by now you would have caught on that facts have no place in NObama world.
It's all about words...that's it. Facts are ignored and nothing is needed to prove a point or a position.
The "issue" is probably running rampant on the moveon.org and the dailykooks hater websites.
How many times have you read...according to the Nobama website...he mentioned this in his speech, etc, etc.
Not too often do you read from a NObama supporter..accroding to his record... or based on his asscoaitions...or based on his past judgement.
Let's face it regarding NObama and all his negatives...he is a lucky guy...he is never in the right place at the wrong time. Many that have bought into that position regarding NObama do not live in a factual world.

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2558949
.. What is far left? Define that. The whole thing is stupid.
Already asked and answered several times and documentation provided.
I would define stupid as someone sitting in a pew for 20 years..and not even having a hint the pastor was a racist and hates America. Oh yes I forgot..he simply was never there during the hate rallies. Once again...the lucky guy strikes..never in the right place at the wrong time for a 20 year period.

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2557223
You probably think Rev King Jr was a racist too, since he spoke about racial injustice.
There's nothing wrong about speaking about it. THere is something wrong about supporting racism thrugh a 20 year membership in a hate/racist church...being smoked out of your pew..then lecturing the country on race claiming to be the champion for the cause. THe NObama campaign sat on the fence and waitied for someone to make even a slight comment about race...they pounced. Now that we know NObama participated in 20 years of the garbage...no one can question or accuse him of same.
Let Nobama lecture his pastor and convert him regarding unity and racism ...then he can lecture the rest of the country.
Regarding NObama and terrorism...let him start with his buddies the Weatherbombers...then he can talk to the rest of the country about terrorism and how he will work to eliminate it and keep us safe here at home.
Maybe he'll appoint Weatherbomber Ayers as head of Homeland Security.

 

[scubadoo]

Per the NObama campaign...he is "friendly" with these folks. They held a fundraiser, contributed to his campaign, served on a board together, gave speeches together, are currenty "friendly" per the campaign, and Nobama went to their house to seek their support when he ran for the CHiicago Senate. I found this article form 2001......
By David Horowitz
FrontPageMagazine.com | Monday, September 17, 2001
ON THE MORNING OF THE ATTACKS on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, along with a million other readers of the New York Times including many who would never be able to read the paper again, I opened its pages to be confronted by a color photo showing a middle-aged couple holding hands and affecting a defiant look at the camera. The article was headlined in an irony that could not have been more poignant, "No Regrets For A Love Of Explosives." The couple pictured were Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, former leaders of the 1960s’ Weather Underground, America’s first terrorist cult. One of their bombing targets, as it happened, was the Pentagon.
"I don’t regret setting bombs," Ayers was quoted in the opening line of the Times profile; "I feel we didn’t do enough." In 1969, Ayers and his wife convened a "War Council" in Flint Michigan, whose purpose was to launch a military front inside the United States with the purpose of helping Third World revolutionaries conquer and destroy it. Taking charge of the podium, dressed in a high-heeled boots and a leather mini-skirt – her signature uniform – Dorhn incited the assembled radicals to join the war against "Amerikkka" and create chaos and destruction in the "belly of the beast."
Her voice rising to a fevered pitch, Dohrn raised three fingers in a "fork salute" to mass murderer Charles Manson whom she proposed as a symbol to her troops. Referring to the helpless victims of the Manson Family as the "Tate Eight" (the most famous was actress Sharon Tate) Dohrn shouted:
Dig It. First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, they even shoved a fork into a victim’s stomach! Wild!
Embarrassed today by this memory, but unable to expunge it from the record and unwilling to repudiate her terrorist deeds, Dorhn resorts to the lie direct. "It was a joke," she told the sympathetic Times reporter, Dinitia Smith; she was actually protesting America’s crimes. "We were mocking violence in America. Even in my most inflamed moment I never supported a racist mass murderer." In 1980, I taped interviews with thirty members of the Weather Underground who were present at the Flint War Council, including most of its leadership. Not one of them thought Dohrn was anything but deadly serious. Outrageous nihilism was the Weatherman political style. As soon as her tribute to Manson was completed, Dohrn was followed to the Flint platform by another Weather leader who ranted, "We’re against everything that’s ‘good and decent’ in honky America. We will loot and burn and destroy. We are the incubation of your mothers’ nightmares."
It has long been a fashion among media sophisticates to ridicule the late J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI men who sought to protect Americans from the threats posed by people like Ayers and Dohrn in their "days of rage." But Hoover’s description of Bernardine Dohrn as "La Pasionara of the lunatic left" is far more accurate than anything that can be found in the Times profile.
Instead of a critique of this malignant couple and their destructive resume, the Times’ portrait provides a soft-focus promotion for Ayers’ newly published Fugitive Days, a memoir notable for its dishonesty and its celebration of his malevolent exploits. Ayers’ text wallows in familiar Marxist incitements and the homicidal delusions of Sixties radicalism, including a loving reprint of an editorial from the old socialist magazine Alarm! Written by Albert Parsons, one of the Haymarket anarchists, whom the Weathermen idolized:
Dynamite! Of all the good stuff, that is the stuff! Stuff several pounds of this sublime stuff into an inch pipe…plug up both ends, insert a cap with a fuse attached, place this in the immediate vicinity of a lot of rich loafers who live by the sweat of other people’s brows, and light the fuse. A most cheerful and gratifying result will follow. In giving dynamite to the downtrodden millions of the globe, science has done its best work.
Contd

 

[scubadoo]

In Fugitive Days, Ayers has written – and the Times promoted – a text that the bombers of the World Trade Center could have packed in their flight bags alongside the Koran, as they embarked on their sinister mission.
"Memory is a (delete profanity)," Ayers warns his readers, in the illiterate style that made him an icon of the New Left. It is as close as he gets to acknowledging that his account leaves World Trade Center size holes in the story of his criminal past. Among them is its second half, how Weatherman imploded in the year other Americans were celebrating the bicentennial of their nation. It imploded because the devotion of the terrorists to the bibles of the cause – Lenin, Stalin, Mao – eventually led them into a series of brainwashing rituals and purges that decimated their ranks. None of this is remembered in Ayers’ book. Nor is the passage of their closest comrades into the ranks of the May 19th Communist Movement, which murdered three officers – including the first black policeman on the Nyack force, during an infamous robbery of a Brinks armored car in 1981. Caveat emptor. The point of the omissions is to hide from others (and from Ayers himself) the real-world consequences of the anti-American ideologies, which took root in the Sixties and now flourish on college campuses across the country.

 

[zman1]

Originally Posted by ScubaDoo
http:///forum/post/2560046
NObam got close to a 100% score in 2007...I see you did not include that year on your table.
I just listed the detail from two PDF reports on the site. I imported the numbers into Excel from the two separate ones. I was going chart them with a 2-5 year moving average for McCain. The 2007 numbers weren't in those reports. However, I did say "Mccain has had the second highest one time score just behind Obama's one time high in 2007..."
P.S. You have to look for the PDFs on the site. The embedded link in the page is broke on the one you and journey linked. Also, that's why I had to use the CODE tags to keep from losing spacing after pasting it from Excel.

 

[rylan1]

Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2559896
Scooby posted this link before and prompted me to post the McCain story from it. So I'll do it again.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the only other senator whose presidential candidacy survived the initial round of primaries and caucuses this year, did not vote frequently enough in 2007 to draw a composite score. He missed more than half of the votes in both the economic and foreign-policy categories.
Maybe both Clinton and Obama will shift like McCain has over the years. Mccain has had the second highest one time score just behind Obama's one time high in 2007...
Code:
[pre]YearMccainObamaClinton
1981———
1982———
1983———
1984———
1985———
1986———
198783.5——
198882.3——
198985.3——
199082.5——
199181.8——
199284.5——
199374.8——
199489.2——
199570.2——
199675.3——
199771.5——
199868.3——
199967.7——
200061.7——
200166.8—76.3
200259.8—86.7
200362.2—88.8
200451.7—71
200559.282.579.8
200656.78670.2[/pre]
I'm trying to understand this...
Is this liberal vote scores for all 3 candidates?