President Barack Obama - Term 1 and 2 Thread

General Intelligent Discussion & One Thread About That Buttknuckle

Moderator: Andrew

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Mon Nov 16, 2009 9:03 am

strangegrey wrote:Laughable that you fire a shot into the 'opinionator' battle, with a link from mediamatters. Hardly objective sourcing, eh? :roll:


I really don't get the problem with MM.
Newsbusters has been doing the same thing on the right for years.
Neither watchdog site alters the audio or the footage.
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16057
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Postby Monker » Mon Nov 16, 2009 10:11 am

hoagiepete wrote:Can't have it both ways...bitch about GW going off on his own and then discredit UN and the multiple, and that is MULTIPLE, violations Iraq committed. I can 't believe how many people have selective memory.


I have very good memory from that time. I was one of the few people who spoke against the decision to invade Iraq....and did so from the start. It was a bad decision - the worst decision of any president in my lifetime.

Those that use terms like calling the decision to go to war based on "lies", it is mass murder, etc. have no sense and should just simply be ignored.


No. Those words, and many others, should have been used BEFORE THE WAR even happened.

If they truly believe this shit, why DID GW invade Iraq


Cuz he's an idiot doing what the neo-conservatives around him were advising him to do.

and why did Congress, including the Democrats that want to re-write history, approve it?


Because they were idiots more worried about reelected and being 'unpatriotic' then they were about this country making correct decisions. As far as I'm concerned, NOBODY in congress who voted for this war should ever hold public office again.
Monker
MP3
 
Posts: 12648
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm

Postby Monker » Mon Nov 16, 2009 10:13 am

strangegrey wrote:
Monker wrote:No, I get a good laugh from those people. And, you should get a laugh from FOX and their opinionators...since they are really only 'opoinion' programming and not news - ACCORDING TO FOX:

http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200910290044


Laughable that you fire a shot into the 'opinionator' battle, with a link from mediamatters. Hardly objective sourcing, eh? :roll:


Don't care where it was from...I did a search on for the clip, cuz I knew exactly what I was looking for, and they had it available. What, you are saying they edited to make it biased or something, LOL.
Monker
MP3
 
Posts: 12648
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm

Postby strangegrey » Mon Nov 16, 2009 12:11 pm

You should care about your sources....ask Dan Rather about that mistake...

Regardless, take a look at who's bankrolled Media Maters and then get back to us....
there's enough independence there to make Vince Foster look like Roger Clinton...

Regardless, last I checked, dissent != opinion

It's OK for MSNBC to run smear campaigns on GOP party members, but as soon as Fox questions the judgment of someone in this administration, they're opinionating?

Rediculous...and the fact that you support such an objective opinion with support from Mediamaters takes whatever platform you think you may have been firing from, and turns it into a ride at disney land..... :roll:
User avatar
strangegrey
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3622
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:31 am
Location: Tortuga

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Mon Nov 16, 2009 12:51 pm

strangegrey wrote:Regardless, take a look at who's bankrolled Media Maters and then get back to us....
there's enough independence there to make Vince Foster look like Roger Clinton...

It's funded by leftists, ranging from George Soros to Rob Reiner.
I fail to see how a progressive website being funded by like-minded progressives should come as a surpise to anyone.
The partisan likes of Richard Mellon Scaife and Rupert Murdoch have been bankrolling right wing media ventures for years now.
Big deal.
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16057
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Postby Monker » Mon Nov 16, 2009 3:59 pm

strangegrey wrote:You should care about your sources....ask Dan Rather about that mistake...


No I shouldn't. I'm not a journalist, just a nobody poster on an internet forum. If you think you are more then that, then you have a head that needs deflating.

It's OK for MSNBC to run smear campaigns on GOP party members, but as soon as Fox questions the judgment of someone in this administration, they're opinionating?


Oh, please....FOX SAYS THEY ARE OPINIONATING. That is the whole point. What a hypocrisy they are for going on against Obama and then when the administration fires back, FOX's OFFICAL response is that they should know the difference between news and an editorial...and then go on to detail their 'news' hours...which does NOT include "FOX and friends", O'Reilly, Hannity, Beck...According to *FOX*, THEY ARE INFOTAINMENT. How hillarious.

Rediculous...and the fact that you support such an objective opinion with support from Mediamaters takes whatever platform you think you may have been firing from, and turns it into a ride at disney land..... :roll:


LOL...I support replying to what I said instead of making up stuff as you are doing above. As I said, I was looking for the Daily Show clip...II don't care who is hosting it. Of course, you don't want to reply to that...cuz it makes fun of FOX. Instead you would rather switch that out for the crap you are spoewing now.
Monker
MP3
 
Posts: 12648
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm

Postby hoagiepete » Tue Nov 17, 2009 1:17 am

I've said it before here...I had buddies and son's of friends stationed in Kuwait during the Clinton administration. There were plans to invade Iraq back then, but for what ever reason, Clinton didn't pull the trigger. GW didn't just make this all up to be "his war."

Again...selective memories forget this and the fact that Iraq continued to thumb their nose at the UN.
hoagiepete
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1610
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 10:16 am

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Tue Nov 17, 2009 1:51 am

hoagiepete wrote:I've said it before here...I had buddies and son's of friends stationed in Kuwait during the Clinton administration. There were plans to invade Iraq back then, but for what ever reason, Clinton didn't pull the trigger. GW didn't just make this all up to be "his war."

Again...selective memories forget this and the fact that Iraq continued to thumb their nose at the UN.

Nobody said regime change was new to Washington.
Before they were even in the Bush White House, many of the same NeoCons wrote to Clinton to get Saddam out. (http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm)
Clinton went the sanctions/bombing route, not invasion.
To act as if Bush was carrying out the legacy of Clinton and not his own is pretty lame.
If that were truly the case, why did Bush pull the WMD Inspectors out after they reported finding nothing?
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16057
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Postby Rockindeano » Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:30 am

hoagiepete wrote:I've said it before here...I had buddies and son's of friends stationed in Kuwait during the Clinton administration. There were plans to invade Iraq back then, but for what ever reason, Clinton didn't pull the trigger. GW didn't just make this all up to be "his war."

Again...selective memories forget this and the fact that Iraq continued to thumb their nose at the UN.


That is a spin on a spin. The Bush Admin went to Iraq for what reason? WMD's? Oops. Capitalism in the Middle East? Yeah ok. End the dictatorship of Saddam? Well, that's a .333 Batting average, good in baseball but not in political warfare. They threw Iraq in during the muddied waters of Afghanistan, people were still wrapping themselves in red, white and blue flags and Bush knew he had the majority of the nation behind him. He had Powell lie, which ended Powell's political career, and off we went, on a poorly planned mission. Wait, I thought that mission was accomplished? Oops again. :oops:
User avatar
Rockindeano
Forever Deano
 
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:52 am
Location: At Peace

Postby hoagiepete » Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:03 am

Rockindeano wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:I've said it before here...I had buddies and son's of friends stationed in Kuwait during the Clinton administration. There were plans to invade Iraq back then, but for what ever reason, Clinton didn't pull the trigger. GW didn't just make this all up to be "his war."

Again...selective memories forget this and the fact that Iraq continued to thumb their nose at the UN.


That is a spin on a spin. The Bush Admin went to Iraq for what reason? WMD's? Oops. Capitalism in the Middle East? Yeah ok. End the dictatorship of Saddam? Well, that's a .333 Batting average, good in baseball but not in political warfare. They threw Iraq in during the muddied waters of Afghanistan, people were still wrapping themselves in red, white and blue flags and Bush knew he had the majority of the nation behind him. He had Powell lie, which ended Powell's political career, and off we went, on a poorly planned mission. Wait, I thought that mission was accomplished? Oops again. :oops:


Sorry. There was no spin in my comments. Just facts. Someone care to prove me wrong? Why would I make that shit up?

I am not a supporter of the war or its outcome. I just do not believe it was made up to give GW his jollies or whatever. Again...why would they do it?

With this...I am done. Reason, facts and common sense gets lost in this debate.
hoagiepete
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1610
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 10:16 am

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:13 am

hoagiepete wrote:I just do not believe it was made up to give GW his jollies or whatever. Again...why would they do it?


Plenty of Bush officials have already peeled off and and squealed.
I've listed a few of them here already.
Believe them or not, but don't pretend they don't exist.
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16057
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Postby hoagiepete » Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:32 am

The_Noble_Cause wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:I just do not believe it was made up to give GW his jollies or whatever. Again...why would they do it?


Plenty of Bush officials have already peeled off and and squealed.
I've listed a few of them here already.
Believe them or not, but don't pretend they don't exist.


One last plea...why? Did he believe it was for the good of the country or not?
hoagiepete
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1610
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 10:16 am

Postby Rockindeano » Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:42 am

hoagiepete wrote:
Rockindeano wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:I've said it before here...I had buddies and son's of friends stationed in Kuwait during the Clinton administration. There were plans to invade Iraq back then, but for what ever reason, Clinton didn't pull the trigger. GW didn't just make this all up to be "his war."

Again...selective memories forget this and the fact that Iraq continued to thumb their nose at the UN.


That is a spin on a spin. The Bush Admin went to Iraq for what reason? WMD's? Oops. Capitalism in the Middle East? Yeah ok. End the dictatorship of Saddam? Well, that's a .333 Batting average, good in baseball but not in political warfare. They threw Iraq in during the muddied waters of Afghanistan, people were still wrapping themselves in red, white and blue flags and Bush knew he had the majority of the nation behind him. He had Powell lie, which ended Powell's political career, and off we went, on a poorly planned mission. Wait, I thought that mission was accomplished? Oops again. :oops:


Sorry. There was no spin in my comments. Just facts. Someone care to prove me wrong? Why would I make that shit up?

I am not a supporter of the war or its outcome. I just do not believe it was made up to give GW his jollies or whatever. Again...why would they do it?

With this...I am done. Reason, facts and common sense gets lost in this debate.


Aww don't be done Pete. Just debating here.

One reason Bush wanted into Iraq is Saddam. I am sure he wanted his ass for the reason hussein launched a scud and almost killed his dad. Bush said this once on a televised press conference in his early years as president. Something to the fact, " well, he did almost kill my dad."

Also, the Iraqi job was supposed to be easy. Clinton said it was, as well as a majority of military brass. Go watch Blackhawk Down. That was an accurate depiction and the verbiage in that movie is fully factual. One on the the ground commanding General said to the effect about Somalia, "This isn't Iraq you know" meaning, this(Somalia), is a bit more complicated, versus Iraq being swift and decisive. Hell, the Surge worked. That proves right there that the original planning was subpar or basically poor. Rumsfeld does not look good here. He along with Wolfowitz were the architects of the Iraqi war.
User avatar
Rockindeano
Forever Deano
 
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:52 am
Location: At Peace

Postby hoagiepete » Tue Nov 17, 2009 5:32 am

I just grow weary of the blame and terms like "lied", "murder", etc heeped on one guy.
hoagiepete
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1610
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 10:16 am

Postby Rockindeano » Tue Nov 17, 2009 5:38 am

hoagiepete wrote:I just grow weary of the blame and terms like "lied", "murder", etc heeped on one guy.


Well let's face it. Had he been honest and told the nation he wanted to go into Iraq for retribution against Saddam, you think the country would back that shit? Hell no they wouldn't. They backed Res 1441, the WMD myth. The admin knew there was enough blurred vision regarding proof wmd's were there, but they wouldn't possibly send in their own kids based on that weak intel.
User avatar
Rockindeano
Forever Deano
 
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:52 am
Location: At Peace

Postby Behshad » Tue Nov 17, 2009 5:51 am

hoagiepete wrote:
The_Noble_Cause wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:I just do not believe it was made up to give GW his jollies or whatever. Again...why would they do it?


Plenty of Bush officials have already peeled off and and squealed.
I've listed a few of them here already.
Believe them or not, but don't pretend they don't exist.


One last plea...why? Did he believe it was for the good of the country or not?


Did he care if it was the good for the country or not is the question that most of us can answer ;) :twisted:
Image
User avatar
Behshad
MP3
 
Posts: 12584
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:08 am

Postby lights1961 » Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:08 am

Rockindeano wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:I just grow weary of the blame and terms like "lied", "murder", etc heeped on one guy.


Well let's face it. Had he been honest and told the nation he wanted to go into Iraq for retribution against Saddam, you think the country would back that shit? Hell no they wouldn't. They backed Res 1441, the WMD myth. The admin knew there was enough blurred vision regarding proof wmd's were there, but they wouldn't possibly send in their own kids based on that weak intel.


EVERYONE incld KERRY CLINTON and REID backed the WMD RES 1441... I still wonder where the WMD's went? my opinion was that the WMDS were there... we just fooled around so much for YEARS before any action was done... and the WMDS would have been easily moved to another country... Syra to Iran maybe??? just asking...
Rick
lights1961
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5362
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 7:33 am

Postby Rockindeano » Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:11 am

lights1961 wrote:
Rockindeano wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:I just grow weary of the blame and terms like "lied", "murder", etc heeped on one guy.


Well let's face it. Had he been honest and told the nation he wanted to go into Iraq for retribution against Saddam, you think the country would back that shit? Hell no they wouldn't. They backed Res 1441, the WMD myth. The admin knew there was enough blurred vision regarding proof wmd's were there, but they wouldn't possibly send in their own kids based on that weak intel.


EVERYONE incld KERRY CLINTON and REID backed the WMD RES 1441


Doesn't make it right now does it?

Obama didn't back it.
User avatar
Rockindeano
Forever Deano
 
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:52 am
Location: At Peace

Postby Monker » Tue Nov 17, 2009 10:02 am

hoagiepete wrote:I've said it before here...I had buddies and son's of friends stationed in Kuwait during the Clinton administration. There were plans to invade Iraq back then, but for what ever reason, Clinton didn't pull the trigger. GW didn't just make this all up to be "his war."

Again...selective memories forget this and the fact that Iraq continued to thumb their nose at the UN.


That is such a BS argument. Having a 'plan' and actually doing it are two different things. It's Bush's "war", like it or not.
Monker
MP3
 
Posts: 12648
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm

Postby Monker » Tue Nov 17, 2009 10:06 am

hoagiepete wrote:I just grow weary of the blame and terms like "lied", "murder", etc heeped on one guy.


If he's president, it's his responsibilty. If he refuses to take responsibility, then he's not much of a president.
Monker
MP3
 
Posts: 12648
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm

Postby Monker » Tue Nov 17, 2009 10:10 am

lights1961 wrote:
Rockindeano wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:I just grow weary of the blame and terms like "lied", "murder", etc heeped on one guy.


Well let's face it. Had he been honest and told the nation he wanted to go into Iraq for retribution against Saddam, you think the country would back that shit? Hell no they wouldn't. They backed Res 1441, the WMD myth. The admin knew there was enough blurred vision regarding proof wmd's were there, but they wouldn't possibly send in their own kids based on that weak intel.


EVERYONE incld KERRY CLINTON and REID backed the WMD RES 1441... I still wonder where the WMD's went? my opinion was that the WMDS were there... we just fooled around so much for YEARS before any action was done... and the WMDS would have been easily moved to another country... Syra to Iran maybe??? just asking...


Any WMD's that existed were either used against other Iraqi's or the Iran war. The guy was a dictator at war with Islamic fundamentalism. This guesswork of 'where did they go?' is just stupid.
Monker
MP3
 
Posts: 12648
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm

Postby Monker » Tue Nov 17, 2009 10:11 am

Rockindeano wrote:
lights1961 wrote:
Rockindeano wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:I just grow weary of the blame and terms like "lied", "murder", etc heeped on one guy.


Well let's face it. Had he been honest and told the nation he wanted to go into Iraq for retribution against Saddam, you think the country would back that shit? Hell no they wouldn't. They backed Res 1441, the WMD myth. The admin knew there was enough blurred vision regarding proof wmd's were there, but they wouldn't possibly send in their own kids based on that weak intel.


EVERYONE incld KERRY CLINTON and REID backed the WMD RES 1441


Doesn't make it right now does it?

Obama didn't back it.


EXACTLY...and that is why I would support him over any of the above.
Monker
MP3
 
Posts: 12648
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm

Postby artist4perry » Tue Nov 17, 2009 11:30 am

You know this thread doesn't change much from day to day. Libs hate conservs......Coserves bash libs...........

I think the only thing I would every be shocked by is if I came on here and saw RockingDeano in a pic hugging Rush Limbagh...........you know you love him ........secretly of course............. :wink: :lol: :lol: :P :twisted:
User avatar
artist4perry
MP3
 
Posts: 10462
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 12:42 am
Location: Running around in the vast universe that is my imagination. Send help!

Postby RedWingFan » Tue Nov 17, 2009 1:18 pm

Monker wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:I just grow weary of the blame and terms like "lied", "murder", etc heeped on one guy.


If he's president, it's his responsibilty. If he refuses to take responsibility, then he's not much of a president.

You mean like Obama's AG saying he made the call to bring Gitmo detainees to NY and put them on trial here? Giving terrorists access to a buffet of government information.

The AG laid down the law at told Obama how it was going to be. Right!!!
Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
User avatar
RedWingFan
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7868
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Michigan

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Tue Nov 17, 2009 1:27 pm

RedWingFan wrote:You mean like Obama's AG saying he made the call to bring Gitmo detainees to NY and put them on trial here? Giving terrorists access to a buffet of government information.

The AG laid down the law at told Obama how it was going to be. Right!!!


Alot of constitutional lawyers (some that supported Clinton's impeachment) said the same thing, even before Obama ran for President.
I'm sure Obama agrees with Holder's decision, but there's no proof he influenced his judicial interpretation.
Now the American Conservative Union, Americans for Tax Reform, and former Libertarian candidate Bob Barr, have come out to back the NY decision too.

http://washingtonindependent.com/67881/ ... a-on-gitmo
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16057
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Postby JasonD » Tue Nov 17, 2009 1:36 pm

.
.

Image

Image
User avatar
JasonD
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 2477
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 8:33 am
Location: Detroit, Michigan

Postby treetopovskaya » Tue Nov 17, 2009 1:46 pm

JasonD wrote:Morality Based Political Test:

http://www.moral-politics.com/xpolitics ... hoice=Long


omigawd i voted for kerry!! }:C)
User avatar
treetopovskaya
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3071
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 4:58 pm

Postby JasonD » Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:14 pm

treetopovskaya wrote:
JasonD wrote:Morality Based Political Test:

http://www.moral-politics.com/xpolitics ... hoice=Long


omigawd i voted for kerry!! }:C)


I fall into the Socialism category, but that's probably no surprise to anyone except myself. I always thought of myself as a liberal. :D
.
.

Image

Image
User avatar
JasonD
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 2477
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 8:33 am
Location: Detroit, Michigan

Postby Lula » Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:33 pm

here is my breakdown :lol:

1. System: Liberalism, Socialism
2. Ideology: Capital Democratism, Social Democratism
3. Party: Democratic Party
4. Presidents: Jimmy Carter
5. 04' Election: John Kerry
6. 08' Election: Barrack Obama

Of the 577,455 respondents (10,344 on Facebook):

1. 8% are close to you.
2. 31% are more conservative.
3. 18% are more liberal.
4. 28% are more socialist.
5. 11% are more authoritarian.
User avatar
Lula
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4561
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: santa monica

Postby Monker » Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:56 pm

RedWingFan wrote:
Monker wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:I just grow weary of the blame and terms like "lied", "murder", etc heeped on one guy.


If he's president, it's his responsibilty. If he refuses to take responsibility, then he's not much of a president.

You mean like Obama's AG saying he made the call to bring Gitmo detainees to NY and put them on trial here? Giving terrorists access to a buffet of government information.

The AG laid down the law at told Obama how it was going to be. Right!!!


Again, a bunch of hocus pocus BS from Republicans who have to offer this country other then 'be afraid'. Yeah, the US prison system is just full of 'government information'. What an idiotic comment.
Monker
MP3
 
Posts: 12648
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 12:40 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Snowmobiles For The Sahara

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests