Obama wins!

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2647019
Are you nuts? Why would I support yet another political war that has absolutely no merit? The American public was duped into the Iraq War, because it was initially cast as revenge for the attacks on 9/11. Then all of a sudden, it's to get a guy out of power that pretty much had the same attitudes as Gaddafi, who you seem not to worry about anymore. And Sadaam had no direct involvement with 9/11, and Bush knew it. But here we are, almost seven years from the anniversary of the falling of the WTC, and the guy that admitted to doing it is still out there laughing at us, planning his next attack. But for some strange reason, you think we're successful. Unless you can completely erradicate terrorism, you will not be successful. Period. You can fluff the stories of success all you want, but bottom line, it's a wash. Terrorism will still exist. It's just a part of life in the 21st century.
Sure Gaddafi backed down. The guy isn't stupid. He saw what "Get them WMD's" Bush did to Iraq. So he kindly complied... for now. We drop our guard and the guy will saunter right in and do what he's always done in the past.
So, diplomacy with people like that is useless?

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2647060
It is interesting that I found another blog whereby someone did research to find that at least five members of the Bonanno family made generous donations ($2,100 each) to the McCain campaign. Each member made a donation that was $200 less than the federal maximum on the same day.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/se...K&amt=a&sort=A
But of course that means nothing. I'm sure McCain doesn't stay in touch with the family.

Another excellent source.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2646020
...And you people think Libya has all of a sudden become this liberated country that's gonna play nice with everyone? I don't think journey would even believe that one...

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2647019
...
Sure Gaddafi backed down. The guy isn't stupid. He saw what "Get them WMD's" Bush did to Iraq. So he kindly complied... for now. We drop our guard and the guy will saunter right in and do what he's always done in the past.

I'm confused. Is your argument Tripoli did or did not back down? Cause, gotta be honest here, you're sending mixed signals.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2647019
Are you nuts? Why would I support yet another political war that has absolutely no merit?
Saddam broke the treay he signed after Desert Storm. He routinely fired upon allied aircraft. He violated 17 UN Resolutions and refused to allow unrestricted access to weapons inspectors. Without merit you say?
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2647019
The American public was duped into the Iraq War, because it was initially cast as revenge for the attacks on 9/11.
False. First off, I was never duped. Second, we didn't go to the UN and ask permission to get revenge. UN Resolution 1441 clearly states force would be used if inspectors were hindered any more.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2647019
Then all of a sudden, it's to get a guy out of power that pretty much had the same attitudes as Gaddafi, who you seem not to worry about anymore.
Tripoli allowed access to inspectors. Saddam restricted them. Kind of polar opposite in attitudes, wouldn't you agree?
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2647019
And Sadaam had no direct involvement with 9/11, and Bush knew it. But here we are, almost seven years from the anniversary of the falling of the WTC, and the guy that admitted to doing it is still out there laughing at us, planning his next attack.
Saddam supported terrorists. Al Qaeda had a presence in Iraq. Whether they were working together or not is not of particular importance to me. Saddam was supporting terrorists and was tellign the world he was stockpiling WMDs.
President Bush may have been "duped", but let's not forget every major Intel agency in the world was also "duped".
Originally Posted by bionicarm
But for some strange reason, you think we're successful.
Every day that goes by that our homeland is not attacked is a success in my book....
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2647019
Unless you can completely erradicate terrorism, you will not be successful. Period.
So what, the alternative is to do nothing? surrender?
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2647019
You can fluff the stories of success all you want, but bottom line, it's a wash. Terrorism will still exist. It's just a part of life in the 21st century.
Murder and theft have been around a lot longer. Should we fire the policemen?
Seriously, if you don't think we should be fighting terrorism, what is the alternative?

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2647483
I'm confused. Is your argument Tripoli did or did not back down? Cause, gotta be honest here, you're sending mixed signals.
Mixed signals? Journey, you seem to read into statements WAY too much, that they are confusing your brain. I am aware Gaddafi allowed the UN to do the inspection. If you want to call that 'backing down' then fine. What I'm trying to convey to you, and you don't seem to comprehend, is Gaddafi is not the innocent person you seem to portray him to be. You think that with his complaince to dismantling his WMD's, and his supposed contributions to thwarting terrorism, he's a changed man. That we're supposed to ignore all the atrocities he did year's ago and presume he'll never do them again. The only 'signal' I'm sending is "watch this guy like a hawk". Wake UP!!!

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2647248
Turning down a birthday invitation is a far cry from "mob figure attending a fundraiser at McCain's house".
As far as the Bonanno donations that just demonstrates the stupidity of people who take anything they read on a blog at face value (I include Obama is a muslim and wont say the pledge in that catagory). Crime Boss Bonannp had 4 kids, none of them are the donors listed and only the oldest sone was even part of the "family". .
http://www.nypost.com/seven/06182007...dan_mangan.htm
Reason I knew this and the "illegal campaign" loans were BS is that crap had been posted and exposed as phoney in another thread.

Ah, so just because it was a birthday invitation, there's no possibility he could have any association with the man of his family. Nice logic. The guy retired in McCain's home state. His father-in-law had known ties with the Mafia. So you don't think there's a remote possibilty McCain couldn't know or associate with any of these individuals?
So you did a complete family history on the Bonnano family to come to that conclusion? Where does is say these donors were his kids? Wake up and smell the roses. You just don't want to believe your beloved candidate is corrupt.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2647362
Another excellent source.

Actually if you bothered to look at the entire site, you would see that you can look at the entire contibution status of every single candidate, including Obama. Please provide me evidence where any data located on this site is false.

 

[vinnyraptor]

The Barack Obama Biography
Barack Obama (born August 4, 1961) is a U.S. Senator from Illinois. He is a member of the main Democratic Party. He has received international media coverage for his keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, delivered while he was still an Illinois state senator.
As a senior lecturer in constitutional law at the University of Chicago law school, Obama won the open Senate seat by defeating former ambassador Alan Keyes. He is the only African American who is currently serving in the U.S. Senate, and the fifth in the entire United States history and the third since Reconstruction. The 2004 U.S. Senate election in Illinois made history as the first Senate election to feature black nominees from both major parties. Obama won the election in a landslide, with 70% of the vote to Keyes' 27%. He is junior senator to Richard Durbin.
Obama is married to Michelle Obama, a Chicago native. They have two daughters: Malia Ann (born in 1999) and Natasha (born 2001).
His Early life
Barack Obama was born at the Queen's Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii to Harvard-educated economist Barack Obama, Sr., a native of Kenya, and S. Ann Dunham, of Kansas. Ms. Dunham is a distant descendant of Jefferson Davis, the first and only president of the Confederate States of America; she is also part Cherokee Indian.
At the time of Obama's birth, both his parents were students at the East-West Center at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. "Barack" means "blessed" in Swahili.
Of his years in Hawaii, Obama has written, "The irony is that my decision to work in politics, and to pursue such a career in a big Mainland city, in some sense grows out of my Hawaiian upbringing, and the ideal that Hawaii still represents in my mind."
When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father eventually returned to Kenya, and he saw his son only once more before his death in 1982. Ann Obama married another East-West Center student from Indonesia. The family then moved to Jakarta, where Obama's half-sister Maya was born (Obama has other half-siblings from his father's later marriages). When Obama was ten he returned to Hawaii under the care of his grandparents, and later his mother, for the better educational opportunities. He was enrolled in the fifth grade at Punahou School, a prestigious academy that once taught the Hawaiian royal family. He graduated with honors.
His College experience and career
Upon finishing high school, Obama studied for two years at Occidental College in California, before transferring to Columbia University in New York City. There he majored in political science, with a specialization in international relations. Upon graduation, he moved to Chicago, where he took up community organizing in the Altgeld Gardens housing project on the city's South Side. While in Chicago, he joined the Trinity United Church of Christ.
He left Chicago for three years to study law at Harvard University, where he was elected the first black president of the Harvard Law Review. He graduated Magna Cum Laude. While working one summer at a corporate law firm in 1989, Obama met Michelle Robinson, whom he married in 1992. Robinson is also a graduate of Harvard Law.
While in Chicago as a community organizer once again, Obama organized an aggressive voter registration effort that aided in the election of President Bill Clinton and Senator Carol Moseley Braun. The campaign registered over 100,000 voters. Soon after, his talents earned him a position at a local civil rights law firm, and he became a lecturer of constitutional law at the University of Chicago, where he served as a professor until his election to the U.S. Senate. Need i say more?
Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/2647028
I still contend I know the Constitution better than Obama. In the face of the 10th Ammendment why is he trying to take a power NOT enumerated?
Obama is an enemy of the 2nd Ammendment.
There is no "collective" in the Constitution. Read the 4th Ammendment
Need I say more?

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2647487
Saddam broke the treay he signed after Desert Storm. He routinely fired upon allied aircraft. He violated 17 UN Resolutions and refused to allow unrestricted access to weapons inspectors. Without merit you say?
For someone like you who appears to love war so much, I guess you can say he deserved to be acted upon. But AGAIN, that was not what American's were led to believe why we went to war. The ultimate goal was to capture Bin Laden.
False. First off, I was never duped. Second, we didn't go to the UN and ask permission to get revenge. UN Resolution 1441 clearly states force would be used if inspectors were hindered any more.
So you are the voice of the entire nation. So because you weren't duped, the other 300 million Americans in this country completely agree with you.

Think you need to do another survey...
Tripoli allowed access to inspectors. Saddam restricted them. Kind of polar opposite in attitudes, wouldn't you agree?
Hello McFly!! What did I say earler? Of course Gaddafi let them in. He saw what manical acts Bush performed just on the theory that Sadaam had WMD's. Tripoli openly admitted they had them. You don't think that if they didn't comply, Bush would do the same to them? Gee, if my neighbor's house just got blown to bits because they were suspected of 'maybe' having a bomb, and the cops came knocking on my door and said, "We think you may be harboring a bomb. We want to come in and check." You think I'm going to tell them "Go away" and close my door?
Saddam supported terrorists. Al Qaeda had a presence in Iraq. Whether they were working together or not is not of particular importance to me. Saddam was supporting terrorists and was tellign the world he was stockpiling WMDs.
President Bush may have been "duped", but let's not forget every major Intel agency in the world was also "duped".
Wow. This statement sounds as if you agree we shouldn't have bomb Iraq simply on the claim they 'may' have had WMD's.
Every day that goes by that our homeland is not attacked is a success in my book....
So what, the alternative is to do nothing? surrender?
Murder and theft have been around a lot longer. Should we fire the policemen?
What kind of analogy are you trying to make with this statement? Where did I imply we should 'fire' the military? I'm stating you're fighting a losing battle. You think that just being over there is deterring any attacks here in the US. All we're doing over there right now is putting a Band Aid on the wound we opened up when we attack their country. We did all this destruction, killed all these innocent people, and attacks are still occuring. Meanwhile, the man responsible for actual attacking US soil is still a free man. And you call that a success?
Seriously, if you don't think we should be fighting terrorism, what is the alternative?
You want to fight terrorism? Fine. Fight it where it counts. HERE IN THE US. Strengthen our borders. Take measures to perform proper Intel WITHIN OUR BORDERS to identify an catch potential terrorists. Sitting over in Iraq being human targets isn't going to keep terrorism out of the US. It is virtually impossible to erradicate every faction and every terrorist cell that is in the world today. Ain't gonna happen. And for some reason, you think our military presence in that region is going to completely quell any attempt to perform another terroristic attack on American soil. Well just go on living that dream. Honestly, I hope you're right. Being an agnostic, I'll even give you I pray that you're right. But also, I'm a realist. And being as such, I just live up to the fact that unfortunately another attack will happen. When and where, who knows.
peace.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2647642
Actually if you bothered to look at the entire site, you would see that you can look at the entire contibution status of every single candidate, including Obama. Please provide me evidence where any data located on this site is false.
Sure, you can use that, and I'll accept it for factual data, if you accept the swiftboaters, the heritage foundation, and some other right wing think tanks.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2647623
Mixed signals? Journey, you seem to read into statements WAY too much, that they are confusing your brain. I am aware Gaddafi allowed the UN to do the inspection. If you want to call that 'backing down' then fine. What I'm trying to convey to you, and you don't seem to comprehend, is Gaddafi is not the innocent person you seem to portray him to be. You think that with his complaince to dismantling his WMD's, and his supposed contributions to thwarting terrorism, he's a changed man. That we're supposed to ignore all the atrocities he did year's ago and presume he'll never do them again. The only 'signal' I'm sending is "watch this guy like a hawk". Wake UP!!!
But, you see, there is the contradiction you seem to be choosing to ignore.
I never, never said I trust Tripoli. I just stated, when facing destruction, they backed down. Therefore they were spared. Tripoli has handed over terrorists and paid hundreds of millions in reperations. Saddam, on the other hand, paid money to terrorists and refused to back down.
You seem to be willing to accept that Saddam could have been trusted, but we shouldn't trust Libya. That baffles me.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
For someone like you who appears to love war so much, I guess you can say he deserved to be acted upon. But AGAIN, that was not what American's were led to believe why we went to war. The ultimate goal was to capture Bin Laden.
I hate war. I'm a big fan of winning just wars. I'm also a fan of supporting our troops, our mission, and allowing 30 million people a chance at freedom and liberty.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
...So you are the voice of the entire nation. So because you weren't duped, the other 300 million Americans in this country completely agree with you. Think you need to do another survey...
Never claimed to be the voice of the entire nation.
I will speak, however, for those willing to read the actual UN Resolutions... Not one of the 17 Resolutions passed by the SC of the UN mentions "revenge" as you claim.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
Hello McFly!! What did I say earler? Of course Gaddafi let them in. He saw what manical acts Bush performed just on the theory that Sadaam had WMD's. Tripoli openly admitted they had them. You don't think that if they didn't comply, Bush would do the same to them? Gee, if my neighbor's house just got blown to bits because they were suspected of 'maybe' having a bomb, and the cops came knocking on my door and said, "We think you may be harboring a bomb. We want to come in and check." You think I'm going to tell them "Go away" and close my door?
Well then.. we agree the Second Gulf War served a purpose after all then, don't we... By wiping out Saddam we scared another terrorist nation into destroying their WMD program.
Mark one up for President Bush.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
Wow. This statement sounds as if you agree we shouldn't have bomb Iraq simply on the claim they 'may' have had WMD's.
Then please read it again as that in no way is what I said.
All Saddam had to do to avoid a war was to allow unrestricted access to the inspectors.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
What kind of analogy are you trying to make with this statement? Where did I imply we should 'fire' the military? I'm stating you're fighting a losing battle.
Policemen have been fighting "murderers" for thousands of years. Should we have them quit? After all, you seem to believe we can't win a war on terrorists after 6 years of fighting.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
You think that just being over there is deterring any attacks here in the US.
The past 6 years prove our fighting over here deterrs attacks on our homeland. Al Qeda has repeatedly threatened to "get revenge". They have limited resources, limited training facilities, and limited experienced leaders. By tying them down in Iraq and Afghanistan we prevent them from opening a concentrated front on our homeland.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
All we're doing over there right now is putting a Band Aid on the wound we opened up when we attack their country. We did all this destruction, killed all these innocent people, and attacks are still occuring. Meanwhile, the man responsible for actual attacking US soil is still a free man. And you call that a success?
First off, Saddam killed far, far more innocents deliberately, than we've killed accidentally. Second, those we are currently fighting right now in Iraq are terrorists and insurgents. I's not the Iraqi people fighting for their homeland.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
You want to fight terrorism?
Yes. In every corner of the world. In warfare, you only win when you are on the offensive. Holding up like 18th century Isolationists allowing terrorists to build training facilities across the world and probe our defenses at will allows far more successful attacks.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
Fine. Fight it where it counts. HERE IN THE US. Strengthen our borders. Take measures to perform proper Intel WITHIN OUR BORDERS to identify an catch potential terrorists.
Like FISA?
Originally Posted by bionicarm
Sitting over in Iraq being human targets isn't going to keep terrorism out of the US.
The past 5 years prove just the opposite.

Originally Posted by bionicarm
It is virtually impossible to erradicate every faction and every terrorist cell that is in the world today. Ain't gonna happen. And for some reason, you think our military presence in that region is going to completely quell any attempt to perform another terroristic attack on American soil.
That, of course, was never said by me. I just state that tying down your enemy in their own backyard restricts their ability to manuveur and apparently drastically reduces their effectiveness.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
peace.
Never. As you have said, their will always be terrorists and enemies of our nation and our ideals. The only variable is how we as a Nation choose to deal with them.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2647639
Ah, so just because it was a birthday invitation, there's no possibility he could have any association with the man of his family. Nice logic. The guy retired in McCain's home state. His father-in-law had known ties with the Mafia. So you don't think there's a remote possibilty McCain couldn't know or associate with any of these individuals?
So you did a complete family history on the Bonnano family to come to that conclusion? Where does is say these donors were his kids? Wake up and smell the roses. You just don't want to believe your beloved candidate is corrupt.
McCain turned down an invitation to a birthday party. It's not like he ever attanded a fundraiser at his house, refered to him as a friend, called him a moral or spiritual advisor, accepted campaign donations etc. from him
So like most other Obamites when shown to be wrong you start moving the target. Now instead of known mob figures held a fundraiser at McCain's home its his father in law once knew this guy or something.
I suppose reading sites like www.imabraindeaddemocratzombie.crap can give you all kinds oif usefull lies,,,,, I mean information to spread

And yeas, I did search on Bonanno's family. He became an orphan at 15 married at 31 had 4 kids etc.

 

[reefraff]

Lookie here, Mr. Clean and shiney has mob ties. (We are using the bionocarm standard here)
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/se...K&amt=a&sort=A
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/se...K&amt=a&sort=A

 

[reefraff]

Again using the Bionicarm standard
http://web.israelinsider.com/Article...tics/12745.htm
In kindergarten, Senator Obama wrote an essay titled 'I Want to Become President.'"Iis Darmawan, 63, Senator Obama's kindergarten teacher, remembers him as an exceptionally tall and curly haired child who quickly picked up the local language and had sharp math skills. He wrote an essay titled, 'I Want To Become President,' the teacher said." [AP, 1/25/07]
Three years later, in 1971, Obama enrolled in the Besuki Primary School, a government school, as Barry Soetoro, Muslim. In third grade, Senator Obama wrote an essay titled 'I Want To Be a President.' His third grade teacher: Fermina Katarina Sinaga "asked her class to write an essay titled 'My dream: What I want to be in the future.' Senator Obama wrote 'I want to be a President,' she said." [The Los Angeles Times, 3/15/07]
All Indonesian students are required to study religion at school and a young Barry Soetoro, being a Muslim, would have been required to study Islam daily in school.
He would have been taught to read and write Arabic, to recite his prayers properly, to read and recite from the Quran and to study the laws of Islam.
In his autobiography, "Dreams From My Father," Obama mentions studying the Koran and describes the public school as "a Muslim school."
"In the Muslim school, the teacher wrote to tell mother I made faces during Koranic studies."
According to Tine Hahiyary, one of Obama's teachers and the principal from 1971 through 1989, Barry actively took part in the Islamic religious lessons during his time at the school. "I remembered that he had studied "mengaji" (recitation of the Quran)" Tine said.

 

[reefraff]

Bionicarm standard propaganda Pt III
http://www.sodahead.com/poll/41508/
Senator Barack Hussein Obama, Governor Bill Richardson, Senator Hillary Clinton and Ruth Harkin stand
during the National Anthem. In this Time file photo, Barack Hussein Obama stands in clear violation of the
U.S. Flag Code, refusing to place his hand over his heart or pledge allegiance to the United States of America

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2647813
Bionicarm standard propaganda Pt III
http://www.sodahead.com/poll/41508/
Senator Barack Hussein Obama, Governor Bill Richardson, Senator Hillary Clinton and Ruth Harkin stand
during the National Anthem. In this Time file photo, Barack Hussein Obama stands in clear violation of the
U.S. Flag Code, refusing to place his hand over his heart or pledge allegiance to the United States of America

Are you on McCain's staff there reefraff? I've never seen anyone so willing to trash one candidate, and praise the other. What exactly is your agenda? You have so much hated for Obama it's scary. I hope the guy doesn't get elected. If he does, probably some McCain fanatic like you will do a Bobby or John Kennedy on the guy.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2647859
Are you on McCain's staff there reefraff? I've never seen anyone so willing to trash one candidate, and praise the other. What exactly is your agenda? You have so much hated for Obama it's scary. I hope the guy doesn't get elected. If he does, probably some McCain fanatic like you will do a Bobby or John Kennedy on the guy.
I think he is simply using your standard for valid information to produce issues with the candidate.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2647756
I hate war. I'm a big fan of winning just wars. I'm also a fan of supporting our troops, our mission, and allowing 30 million people a chance at freedom and liberty.
Never claimed to be the voice of the entire nation.
I will speak, however, for those willing to read the actual UN Resolutions... Not one of the 17 Resolutions passed by the SC of the UN mentions "revenge" as you claim.
Well then.. we agree the Second Gulf War served a purpose after all then, don't we... By wiping out Saddam we scared another terrorist nation into destroying their WMD program.
Mark one up for President Bush.
Then please read it again as that in no way is what I said.
All Saddam had to do to avoid a war was to allow unrestricted access to the inspectors.
Policemen have been fighting "murderers" for thousands of years. Should we have them quit? After all, you seem to believe we can't win a war on terrorists after 6 years of fighting.
The past 6 years prove our fighting over here deterrs attacks on our homeland. Al Qeda has repeatedly threatened to "get revenge". They have limited resources, limited training facilities, and limited experienced leaders. By tying them down in Iraq and Afghanistan we prevent them from opening a concentrated front on our homeland.
First off, Saddam killed far, far more innocents deliberately, than we've killed accidentally. Second, those we are currently fighting right now in Iraq are terrorists and insurgents. I's not the Iraqi people fighting for their homeland.
Yes. In every corner of the world. In warfare, you only win when you are on the offensive. Holding up like 18th century Isolationists allowing terrorists to build training facilities across the world and probe our defenses at will allows far more successful attacks.
Like FISA?
The past 5 years prove just the opposite.
That, of course, was never said by me. I just state that tying down your enemy in their own backyard restricts their ability to manuveur and apparently drastically reduces their effectiveness.
Never. As you have said, their will always be terrorists and enemies of our nation and our ideals. The only variable is how we as a Nation choose to deal with them.
Journey, you're a poster child for Bush. 'W' would love every American to have such fervor and admiration towards his policies like you. Unfortunately, that's not the case. I still believe you're dillusional in thinking keeping a presence over in the Middle East is going to put an end to terrorism. We're over there fighting insurgents and terrorists? I thought you said we were over there to start a Democracy, rebuild their ravaged country, and keep peace? Why aren't we concentrating our entire efforts hunting down Bin Laden?
You keep speaking of this UN Resolution. That's nothing more than your out for starting this war. Go back in history prior to 9-11-2001. How many Americans (not just you) cared about Sadaam, or were on Bush's bandwagon to go over there to stop his treatment of the Iraqi people, and to prove he had WMD's? After the first failed attempt, the first Gulf War, practically no one. We lambasted 'W''s daddy for not finishing the guy off then (Mr. Cut N' Run himself). Now move forward past 9-11. Americans were dying for revenge. Bush gets on TV and says he will find who did this, and they will pay. So he gets Congress to back him. But instead of keying all our defenses on Afghanistan to get Bin Laden, he does a 180 and goes after Sadaam instead. Americans are perplexed. Sadaam? What did he do in regards to 9-11? WE WANT THE BIN LADEN GUY!!! By then we bomb Bagdhad, and the rest is history.
Just keep fighting the good fight journey. I really hope your visions prove me wrong. That's one event I don't want to have to tell you, "I told you so"...

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2647873
I think he is simply using your standard for valid information to produce issues with the candidate.
No. The guy has some mission in life to make sure Obama doesn't get elected. It's getting to the point, I really don't care anymore. Like I've said before, Presidents are just blow-hard politicians that'll say anything to get elected. Once they're in, most of their promises never even make it to the Congressional floor. Just like the last Presidential election, we're in a no win scenario. These two candidates are just as bad as Gore and Bush. I just have a bad taste in my mouth for McCain because the guy is nothing more than a Bush clone. If he gets elected, we'll just see the same policies that have put this country on the verge of a Recession, and stuck in a war that's costing billions of dollars, not producing any quantitive results. Yea, yea, get on the Journey Bandwagon and refute that claim. So there's been no attack in the last 7 years. Prove to me us being in Iraq is actually the cause of that. You can't. How many years did Bin Laden's group take to come up with the 9-11 attack?
You actually think McCain will get us out of the hole we're in? My business is slowly losing customers on a daily basis. I have friends in the automotive industry that can't find a job, and most are losing their houses. Major cities in Michigan are turning into ghost towns. Gas is at $4/gallon, and shows no sign of dropping. The cost of food is up 20%, and medical expenses are even higher. Airlines are on the brink of bankruptcy, and now charge $15 just to put a bag on the plane, and $3 for a Coke that used to be free. Unemployment is at an all-time high. Gas prices have caused a trickle-down effect -
American car manufacturers can't give away their life-blood, rock solid vehicles, the SUV and truck. The Big 3 is about to shut down.
Heavy Truck 18-wheel drivers are about to pull over and give the keys to someone else who can afford to pay $800 to fill up the tank, and only make $200 for driving across the country to deliver the goods.
As stated above, airlines have started charging for things that were always taken for granted to be free, and have stopped flying to regional and low-use airports.
Tourist destinations are losing thousands of dollars because people can't afford to fly, or want to drive 15 hours to get there. This affects restaurants, hotels, and amusement park revenues.
Farmers can't afford to run their heavy equipment due to the high price of gas. They make pennies on the dollar in profit when they do.
The housing market has gone into the tank, and you can hardly sell your house for market value even if you wanted to.
I could go on, but you get the picture. So somebody tell me whether McCain or Obama can fix this. If not, who can?