Who is this guy Obama?

[USRufnex]

Yeah, Obama simply mispoke... Newsbusters.org?!?  LOL... no political agenda or axe to grind there.  /sarcasm

 [)]

[Hoss]

quote:Originally posted by guido911

Who is this guy Obama?  He's the guy that thinks the U.S. has 57 states...Oops, I mean 58 states counting Eau Claire:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/08/24/make-58-states-obama-adds-eau-claire-list

I'll change it up now...

[Crash Daily]

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

quote:Originally posted by Crash Daily

If Dims had anything to do with it, we wouldn't BE in a position to be winning in Iraq at this point in time. Now you want to take the flag and run with it? Idiots. This little stunt won't fly the flag. It's still under a Dim, you know, traitors, that tried to cost us the war.  It's hype and B.S. and you can only use it now because we didn't let you force America to lose the war. Your all a bunch of Jane Fond B*tch's.

Do you get paid for this crap?  Your boy Bushie is about to sign a "cut and run" deal, by the way; timetable of 2011 and everthing...the whole shebang!

Man, you must feel like an idiot; a complete and utter jackass.  It must be hard knowing that your war-hero Bush is turning his back on the troops.  But forget the troops, right?  Bush turned "traitor" on YOU; that's gotta be painful.  I mean, you stuck with him through thick and thin.  Geez, I mean, Bush is such a hypocrite.  To defend him now would just make you a hypocrite too, right?  You'd sound like a TOTAL moron if you said anything nice about that flag-burning cut-and-runner Bush, right?

quote:That does not make McCain wrong and B.O. right.

That's exactly what it does, you bucket-head.

Nice editing moron. You forgot to mention the fact that I M-E-N-T-I-O-N-E-D Iraq has every right to choose to have a timetable, even if we disagree. The Bush Admin, probably not expecting it to bite them in the @SS, made that clear years ago when you buffoons first started trying to cost America the war. You obviously read my post, so either you're a complete idiot or you intentionally left out the most important part, misleading and spinning this little post, ignoring the facts, as it appears you are quite good at. Which is it? There's no third option, you're a liar or an idiot. Which is it? My vote's on liar. As I said staying as long as it takes vs. trying to cost us the war. This current choice is Iraq's. When you trash on someone in specific, try to put those two corroded brain cells together and come up with a coherent argument.

I don't carry Bush's water either. I have plenty of problems with him and even more with McCain. When idiot Dim's give us no choice but to vote, by throwing supreme morons like Gore, Kerry and Obama at us, we haven't got much choice but to smell sh*t instead of eating it. Lieberman WAS the only sane man left in your Party. WAS. He's still way to left for me, but he's the only one that doesn't try to hide who he is and what he really stands for, that's actually close enough to the middle to be palatable. You should have nominated him when you had the chance. Bush would have been gone four years ago.

[USRufnex]

Obama was right on the Iraq war.... you are wrong.

I know right from wrong... you're just a right wing cartoon character buffoon who has no clue...

Idiot.  You are complete raving moron lunatic idiot.

Remarks of Illinois State Sen. Barack Obama Against Going to War with Iraq
| October 02, 2002

http://www.barackobama.com/2002/10/02/remarks_of_illinois_state_sen.php

Good afternoon. Let me begin by saying that although this has been billed as an anti-war rally, I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances. The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union, and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil. I don't oppose all wars.

My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton's army. He saw the dead and dying across the fields of Europe; he heard the stories of fellow troops who first entered Auschwitz and Treblinka. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil, and he did not fight in vain. I don't oppose all wars.

After September 11th, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this administration's pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again. I don't oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism.

What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income - to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics. Now let me be clear - I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history. I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars.

So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the President today. You want a fight, President Bush? Let's finish the fight with Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings. You want a fight, President Bush?

Let's fight to make sure that the UN inspectors can do their work, and that we vigorously enforce a non-proliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe. You want a fight, President Bush?

Let's fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells. You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, through an energy policy that doesn't simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil. Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair.

The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not -- we will not -- travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain.

[Hoss]

quote:Originally posted by Crash Daily

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

quote:Originally posted by Crash Daily

If Dims had anything to do with it, we wouldn't BE in a position to be winning in Iraq at this point in time. Now you want to take the flag and run with it? Idiots. This little stunt won't fly the flag. It's still under a Dim, you know, traitors, that tried to cost us the war.  It's hype and B.S. and you can only use it now because we didn't let you force America to lose the war. Your all a bunch of Jane Fond B*tch's.

Do you get paid for this crap?  Your boy Bushie is about to sign a "cut and run" deal, by the way; timetable of 2011 and everthing...the whole shebang!

Man, you must feel like an idiot; a complete and utter jackass.  It must be hard knowing that your war-hero Bush is turning his back on the troops.  But forget the troops, right?  Bush turned "traitor" on YOU; that's gotta be painful.  I mean, you stuck with him through thick and thin.  Geez, I mean, Bush is such a hypocrite.  To defend him now would just make you a hypocrite too, right?  You'd sound like a TOTAL moron if you said anything nice about that flag-burning cut-and-runner Bush, right?

quote:That does not make McCain wrong and B.O. right.

That's exactly what it does, you bucket-head.

Nice editing moron. You forgot to mention the fact that I M-E-N-T-I-O-N-E-D Iraq has every right to choose to have a timetable, even if we disagree. The Bush Admin, probably not expecting it to bite them in the @SS, made that clear years ago when you buffoons first started trying to cost America the war. You obviously read my post, so either you're a complete idiot or you intentionally left out the most important part, misleading and spinning this little post, ignoring the facts, as it appears you are quite good at. Which is it? There's no third option, you're a liar or an idiot. Which is it? My vote's on liar. As I said staying as long as it takes vs. trying to cost us the war. This current choice is Iraq's. When you trash on someone in specific, try to put those two corroded brain cells together and come up with a coherent argument.

I don't carry Bush's water either. I have plenty of problems with him and even more with McCain. When idiot Dim's give us no choice but to vote, by throwing supreme morons like Gore, Kerry and Obama at us, we haven't got much choice but to smell sh*t instead of eating it. Lieberman WAS the only sane man left in your Party. WAS. He's still way to left for me, but he's the only one that doesn't try to hide who he is and what he really stands for, that's actually close enough to the middle to be palatable. You should have nominated him when you had the chance. Bush would have been gone four years ago.

Lieberman's less than credible.  He got mad because his own state voted him out, dumped his party and registered Independent then waged war on his opponent and won.  He's not even a DINO anymore.  He might as well sign his name as an R because he's got McCain Brown Nose Syndrome.

Biden was a smart choice.  If McCain picks Lieberman OR Romney, then bye-bye base....

[Crash Daily]

If McCain doesn't pick a real Conservative, I'm back to not voting again. Lieberman was the Dims chance to get rid of Bush 4 yrs ago. We don't want him. He's no more a Republican than he was when he was a member of the Jackass Party.

Libs are all a bunch of loons and centrists, like Lieberman and McCain aren't much better. If he picks a centrist running mate, he loses the base and the Presidency. At least the total demise of this nation will belong squarely on the shoulders of the crazed lunatics that run it.

[USRufnex]

Spoken like a true Repub-tard.

[Hoss]

quote:Originally posted by USRufnex

Spoken like a true Repub-tard.

Did you really expect anything more from Crash?

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by Crash Daily

Nice editing moron. You forgot to mention the fact that I M-E-N-T-I-O-N-E-D Iraq has every right to choose to have a timetable, even if we disagree. The Bush Admin, probably not expecting it to bite them in the @SS, made that clear years ago when you buffoons first started trying to cost America the war. You obviously read my post, so either you're a complete idiot or you intentionally left out the most important part, misleading and spinning this little post, ignoring the facts, as it appears you are quite good at. Which is it? There's no third option, you're a liar or an idiot. Which is it? My vote's on liar. As I said staying as long as it takes vs. trying to cost us the war. This current choice is Iraq's. When you trash on someone in specific, try to put those two corroded brain cells together and come up with a coherent argument.

I don't carry Bush's water either. I have plenty of problems with him and even more with McCain. When idiot Dim's give us no choice but to vote, by throwing supreme morons like Gore, Kerry and Obama at us, we haven't got much choice but to smell sh*t instead of eating it. Lieberman WAS the only sane man left in your Party. WAS. He's still way to left for me, but he's the only one that doesn't try to hide who he is and what he really stands for, that's actually close enough to the middle to be palatable. You should have nominated him when you had the chance. Bush would have been gone four years ago.

Oh my gyad!

Your brain is hosed, man.  I dial ya an ambulance but I'm paralyzed by the spectacle of watching you unravel.

quote:Iraq has every right to choose to have a timetable, even if we disagree.

(Emphasis mine).  Who the f*ck is we?  You and McCain?  And the mouse in your pocket makes three.  

quote:...you intentionally left out the most important part...

Your posts have a most important part?  It sounds like word salad from a seizing Karl Rove:  Juggler Obama sane the only spin Lieberman bananapants? As long as it takes or 100 years, and problems hide middle stand idiot.
 

quote:(Leiberman's) still way to left for me.

Dude, Franco was too left for you.

[TulsaSue]

Considering that a strong majority of Iraqis want U.S.-led military forces to immediately withdraw from the country, saying their swift departure would make Iraq more secure and decrease sectarian violence, according to new polls by the State Department and independent researchers, aren't we occupying an unwilling nation like Bush's buddy, Putin?

In Baghdad, nearly three-quarters of residents polled said they would feel safer if U.S. and other foreign forces left Iraq, with 65 percent of those asked favoring an immediate pullout, according to State Department polling results obtained by The Washington Post.

And his mini-me McCain wants to stay there for 100 years!!  I guess against their will . . .

"No way, no how, no McCain"


New navigation at http://obamascrapbook.com

[TulsaSue]

[guido911]

Here is a musical summary of Obama-isms over the past several months:

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/08/28/video-barack-obamas-greatest-hits/

I really believe this will make that scrapbook of yours TS.