Obama

[Fordowner]

McCain's views on our role as the world's police makes it impossible to look past any of his redeeming qualities. Spending money we can't afford on a futile war is the biggest problem we face, of the 3 in the race now McCain is clearly the most problematic.

 

As John Young states so well

Remember when even Republicans talked of having an exit strategy from Iraq?

 

John McCain wants none of that. As he said recently, American troops in Iraq "a hundred years" does not offend his senses.

 

If the Democratic nominee doesn't remind voters of McCain's statement every half hour from August through November, then he or she isn't trying.

 

McCain touts himself as a budget miser and the opposition party as big spenders. America is spending $10.2 billion a month on Iraq and Afghanistan. It has spent $492 billion on Iraq alone. See www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home

 

All of it is money America doesn't have. Or if it does, it is money siphoned away from the future obligation that we say we won't be able to meet under Social Security.

 

Yes, let's do this for a century or so.

 

Barely reported in recent weeks was a brazen and dictatorial move by President Bush. Admittedly, Bush has made so many such moves it's easy to lose count and lose interest. But here goes:

 

In signing the Defense Reauthorization Bill into law, Bush appended a "signing statement" saying he chooses not to enforce language forbidding the establishment of permanent military bases in Iraq.

 

This is an issue U.S. Sen. James Webb, another Democrat who fought in Vietnam, has taken so personally as to threaten legal action.

 

He has joined Sen. Hillary Clinton and others in pushing for a bill to prevent Bush from negotiating a permanent military-to-military relationship with the Iraqi government without Congress signing on.

 

It is sad to see McCain, who should have useful perspective from Vietnam, adopting the Vietnam-era argument that we must "fight them over there or we'll have fight them here."

 

The "them" in Iraq is never defined. How many of "them" are insurgents who resent having a foreign army occupying their country or who have blood oaths against the invaders who killed their kin and dismantled their government?

 

As for those we might consider al-Qaida or rank-and-file terrorists: Rest assured that occupation of Iraq, as with Israel's occupation of Palestine or the Soviets' one-time occupation of Afghanistan, can only guarantee more terrorists, a never-ending blood spiral.

 

President Bush has said that this election is about continuing "peace and prosperity" in our land. With five years of war, with volunteer soldiers held hostage beyond their agreed-upon hitches, with costs so staggering and crippling, for anyone to say such a thing is beyond silly. And that was our president saying it.

 

Peace? Prosperity? Listen, folks. You get what you pay for. We are paying for war. Well, actually, we're tapping our children's line of credit to pay for it.

 

 

John Young writes for the Waco Tribune-Herald. E-mail: jyoung AT wacotrib.com

[snooter]

McCain's views on our role as the world's police makes it impossible to look past any of his redeeming qualities. Spending money we can't afford on a futile war is the biggest problem we face, of the 3 in the race now McCain is clearly the most problematic.

 

As John Young states so well

Remember when even Republicans talked of having an exit strategy from Iraq?

 

John McCain wants none of that. As he said recently, American troops in Iraq "a hundred years" does not offend his senses.

 

If the Democratic nominee doesn't remind voters of McCain's statement every half hour from August through November, then he or she isn't trying.

 

McCain touts himself as a budget miser and the opposition party as big spenders. America is spending $10.2 billion a month on Iraq and Afghanistan. It has spent $492 billion on Iraq alone. See www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home

 

All of it is money America doesn't have. Or if it does, it is money siphoned away from the future obligation that we say we won't be able to meet under Social Security.

 

Yes, let's do this for a century or so.

 

Barely reported in recent weeks was a brazen and dictatorial move by President Bush. Admittedly, Bush has made so many such moves it's easy to lose count and lose interest. But here goes:

 

In signing the Defense Reauthorization Bill into law, Bush appended a "signing statement" saying he chooses not to enforce language forbidding the establishment of permanent military bases in Iraq.

 

This is an issue U.S. Sen. James Webb, another Democrat who fought in Vietnam, has taken so personally as to threaten legal action.

 

He has joined Sen. Hillary Clinton and others in pushing for a bill to prevent Bush from negotiating a permanent military-to-military relationship with the Iraqi government without Congress signing on.

 

It is sad to see McCain, who should have useful perspective from Vietnam, adopting the Vietnam-era argument that we must "fight them over there or we'll have fight them here."

 

The "them" in Iraq is never defined. How many of "them" are insurgents who resent having a foreign army occupying their country or who have blood oaths against the invaders who killed their kin and dismantled their government?

 

As for those we might consider al-Qaida or rank-and-file terrorists: Rest assured that occupation of Iraq, as with Israel's occupation of Palestine or the Soviets' one-time occupation of Afghanistan, can only guarantee more terrorists, a never-ending blood spiral.

 

President Bush has said that this election is about continuing "peace and prosperity" in our land. With five years of war, with volunteer soldiers held hostage beyond their agreed-upon hitches, with costs so staggering and crippling, for anyone to say such a thing is beyond silly. And that was our president saying it.

 

Peace? Prosperity? Listen, folks. You get what you pay for. We are paying for war. Well, actually, we're tapping our children's line of credit to pay for it.

John Young writes for the Waco Tribune-Herald. E-mail: jyoung AT wacotrib.com

complete bullshit...dumbass reporter 60 years ago would have written that we had really no interest in ww2....thats complete liberal bullshit...ahhhh our poor children...i bet the spaz has never once given anything to a local foodbank which does help children and the poor...i am so sick of liberals who think they are elite...another elitist scum media article......i thought about wiping my ass all over that article...but that would be self defeating..id have to clean my own shit off the puter screen

[TStag]

This contest is really simple:

 

- Mcain = more war in Iraq, more dead US and British Soldiers, worsening relations with the rest of the world.... you guys want allies to help fight the war on terror right?

 

- Clinton(s) = more free trade with China.... That'll help your car industry NOT! Also is she in or out of Iraq? Ditherer me thinks.....

 

- Obama = Rest of the world will talk to the USA again, troops home in US and Britain, money can be spent elsewhere. People like the dude. Reminds me of Kennedy another absolute beginner....

[MarkFive]

This contest is really simple:

 

- Mcain = more war in Iraq, more dead US and British Soldiers, worsening relations with the rest of the world.... you guys want allies to help fight the war on terror right?

 

- Clinton(s) = more free trade with China.... That'll help your car industry NOT! Also is she in or out of Iraq? Ditherer me thinks.....

 

- Obama = Rest of the world will talk to the USA again, troops home in US and Britain, money can be spent elsewhere. People like the dude. Reminds me of Kennedy another absolute beginner....

 

Whomever wins is going to have a number of advisors with prior experience. Its very easy to say "I'm going to do this" until you get down to the details.

 

Isn't it more that the U.S. isn't talking to other countries right now than the other way around?

[Edstock]

complete bullshit...dumbass reporter 60 years ago would have written that we had really no interest in ww2....thats complete liberal bullshit...ahhhh our poor children...i bet the spaz has never once given anything to a local foodbank which does help children and the poor...i am so sick of liberals who think they are elite...another elitist scum media article......i thought about wiping my ass all over that article...but that would be self defeating..id have to clean my own shit off the puter screen

 

Such erudition; you must have been your graduating class' valedictorian, assuming you graduated, which, judging by the prose, is not certain.

 

But instead of playing handball with your doo-doo, how about giving us some solid, logical reasons why the article is "another elitist scum media article"? Instead of rupturing yourself with outrage, give us some real reasons why it's "another elitist scum media article".

 

I don't think you have what it takes to do that, but a surprise is always possible.

[twmalonehunter]

Great...Bush runs as moderate and says he is not nation builder, and turns out to be big spender, very conservative in social views and action, and nation builder of highest order. Now we have another inexperienced guy who has never run anything let alone a big state government, and he is going to bring fiscal sanity and get us out of Iraq and keep that region safe? Why don't we just take some low level Ford manager and make him CEO of Ford while we are at it. Bill Clinton may be an asshole, but he did run this country for 8 years and it wasn't as f--ked up as it is now. Electing Obama President is one, huge gamble. And it will take four long years to get him out if the screws up and makes things worse. I personally am not willing to take the chance.

 

 

Yeah dumbass, things were great under Clinton. The entire economy was a mirage, a bubble that burst before he left office, remember the recession. U.S. interests both at home and abroad were attacked by terrorists numerous times with no substantial response by Clinton, all leading up to 9-11.

 

Don't get me wrong, I have not been happy at all with some of Bush's decisions, I think the people he has had planning military operations in Iraq have made major mistakes and cost American lives, but this is a fight that needs to be fought now, not later. It's a shame politics have not allowed us to fight the war the way it needed to be fought in order to win. You know terrorists don't deserve the same rights as U.S citizens!

 

So in closing, don't give me that Bullshit about how much better things were with Clinton, it was all smoke and mirrors while he was getting blown in the oval office. And God help us if Mrs. Bill, or Obama for that matter, win the Whitehouse.

[snooter]

Such erudition; you must have been your graduating class' valedictorian, assuming you graduated, which, judging by the prose, is not certain.

 

But instead of playing handball with your doo-doo, how about giving us some solid, logical reasons why the article is "another elitist scum media article"? Instead of rupturing yourself with outrage, give us some real reasons why it's "another elitist scum media article".

 

I don't think you have what it takes to do that, but a surprise is always possible.

 

your write... too colage degrrees has left myself with one infallable fact...you cannot debate a brain dead liberal...they know eeverything..

[ray101988]

your from canada..we know your loving support views on socialism.heres a teddy bear so you feel warm and fuzzy...see your socialistic government in ottawa has made you feel better

 

Your posts make me wonder if you have ever done research on politics or the current presidential candidates' stances on the important issues you are blabbering on about...

[Edstock]

your write... too colage degrrees has left myself with one infallable fact...you cannot debate a brain dead liberal...they know eeverything..

 

Do you have a comprehension problem? You're not alone. Here's "another elitist scum media article" that describes your problem.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...id=opinionsbox1

 

But you are right, you cannot debate, because this isn't a debate, capice? I asked for rational, logical points in support of a particular point, that a newspaper article was deemed by you to be "another elitist scum media article".

 

Instead, I get name-calling: "a brain dead liberal"

 

I'll re-fresh your short-term memory: I asked for "some real reasons why it's "another elitist scum media article"."

 

See if you can stop calling names and answer.

[Furious1Auto]

Uh, wow. The sheer amount of ignorance and racism in this thread astounds me. :reading:

Now wait a min. I see a little hipocracy, based on the responses I can tell who is white and who is black on this thread. I'm color blind when it comes to our future, but it seems fishy that when Black people pull for solidarity they do it in for advancement of the people. But when the same issue is raised by a person that is not black the word racism comes out! Now if no one wants race to be an issue than no one should bring it up at all. I would like to see a Black man or woman as president, but not just for the sake of their gender or race! Like Dr. King, I have to agree with their veiws on the issues to give them my support. Lets not use the same tired arguement over race and entitlement to decide the next 4 years of our life!

Edited February 16, 2008 by Furious1Auto

[ray101988]

Now wait a min. I see a little hipocracy, based on the responses I can tell who is white and who is black on this thread. I'm color blind when it comes to our future, but it seems fishy that when Black people pull for solidarity they do it in for advancement of the people. But when the same issue is raised by a person that is not black the word racism comes out! Now if no one wants race to be an issue than no one should bring it up at all. I would like to see a Black man or woman as president, but not just for the sake of their gender or race! Like Dr. King, I have to agree with their veiws on the issues to give them my support. Lets not use the same tired arguement over race and entitlement to decide the next 4 years of our life!

 

I agree, race should not matter. Election should be based off an individual's merrit and political policies. At the moment I agree more with Obama's policies and I would much rather seem him succeed than any of the other candidates because I do not agree with many of their political views.

[snooter]

Your posts make me wonder if you have ever done research on politics or the current presidential candidates' stances on the important issues you are blabbering on about...

 

well thats the problem....current candidate stances are really not yet known....mccain you might argue is a known...osama omamma will soon have to produce substance and not just blabber on about the future avoding specifics of his proposal...i doubt he even belives the stuff that he proposes...hitlery we know about...

[kyle]

Well, at least I know that a couple people here get how things work, or how they should.

 

Great comment.

[ehaase]

I have always voted Republican, but I will probably support Obama over McCain for the following reasons: (1) the Iraq War was a mistake from the beginning and needs to come to and end; (2) we need to end the Bush tax cuts because of the enormous budget deficits and imminent retirement of the Baby Boom and (3) we need health care reform. I don't agree with most of Obama's other opinions, but I don't think the country can afford four more years of the Bush policies.

[kyle]

I have no idea what you posted nor do I really care. Regardless, I am pretty impressed by how you handled it all. Koodos to you for that.

 

Apology after apology. Even when some can not voice their disagreement or concern in a mature fashion. We need more like you on here!

 

Good job!

 

Peace and Blessings.

 

 

I agree.....nice way to handle yourself.

[TStag]

Whomever wins is going to have a number of advisors with prior experience. Its very easy to say "I'm going to do this" until you get down to the details.

 

Isn't it more that the U.S. isn't talking to other countries right now than the other way around?

 

Is that what your being told? As a European I'd say most counteries in Europe are ignoring US pleas to get involved in the war on "terror" largely because Irag appears to have had little to do with fighting Terrorism. A lot of people in the EU are fed up of being told this "your either with us or against us" crap. Most counteries like Italy were with the USA on Afghanstan but Bush makes the US difficult to trust... so now they pull out and just leave the Brits and the USA. The British people feel they were decieved into fighting in Iraq by a son who simply aims to finish what his dad started. Why do you do that whole Dynasty thing? First the Bushes and now the Clintons? Doh

[MarkFive]

Is that what your being told? As a European I'd say most counteries in Europe are ignoring US pleas to get involved in the war on "terror" largely because Irag appears to have had little to do with fighting Terrorism. A lot of people in the EU are fed up of being told this "your either with us or against us" crap. Most counteries like Italy were with the USA on Afghanstan but Bush makes the US difficult to trust... so now they pull out and just leave the Brits and the USA. The British people feel they were decieved into fighting in Iraq by a son who simply aims to finish what his dad started. Why do you do that whole Dynasty thing? First the Bushes and now the Clintons? Doh

 

I'm from Canada. We aren't in Iraq. We are however in Afghanistan. We also still talk to the U.S.

 

The only real Dynasty that we had was built by Dodge off an extended K-car platform.

Edited February 17, 2008 by MarkFive

[MRZJ]

In Australia we are forced to vote,

No vote a hefty $150.00 Fine and a date in court

How about you 'yanks'?

I find giving up my time to go and vote a big inconvinience,

No LWB Ford in oz now,

Can I ship a panther?

[ray101988]

well thats the problem....current candidate stances are really not yet known....mccain you might argue is a known...osama omamma will soon have to produce substance and not just blabber on about the future avoding specifics of his proposal...i doubt he even belives the stuff that he proposes...hitlery we know about...

 

 

If you watch the debates or do some research online...its fairly evident what his views on almost every issue are. So I'm not sure why your saying they're unknown when they are known...

[MarkFive]

Obama blows his nose and the crowd applauds.

 

Obama Blows Nose

[Savetheplanet]

Last night's Democratic deebate in Texas was sponsored (once again) by polluting coal interests, whose laughable ads about pie in the sky "clean coal" littered CNN's debate coverage. Gee, what a surprise then that no questions were asked about global warming in the state that is the number one emitter of CO2 emissions.

 

 

The candidates practically inviited the question, both referred to proposals for greening the economy and seemed ready to differentiate their plans to address impending climate chaos. But they were never pressed by the panel to even elaborate on their green jobs proposals. Not a single question about how America could kick our oil addiction, or how we might rejoin the international commitment to address global warming. Nada.

 

Instead viewers were left with the coal industry's ridiculous ads part of a $35 million PR campaign by the coal industry, which further confuse Americans about King Coal's pollution legacy. When will CNN and other debate hosts ask the tough questions, or any questions about the biggest threat to the planet?

 

With the coal ad money pouring in, I'm not holding my breath. But every kid in America might have to start if Dirty Coal is allowed to pump even more CO2 into our choked atmosphere.

[timmm55]

Thinking of Snooter's tortured swearing rants and comments ,

he supports terrorists..he is in love with che gueverra...a former cuban terrorist.....under obama terrorists will have more rights then you

AND

complete bullshit...dumbass reporter 60 years ago would have written that we had really no interest in ww2....thats complete liberal bullshit...ahhhh our poor children...i bet the spaz has never once given anything to a local foodbank which does help children and the poor...i am so sick of liberals who think they are elite...another elitist scum media article......i thought about wiping my ass all over that article...but that would be self defeating..id have to clean my own shit off the puter screen.

I thought of comparing Obama to GWB (cheap shot that it is )

 

 

Obama:

"He went on to earn his law degree from Harvard in 1991, where he became the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review. Soon after, he returned to Chicago to practice as a civil rights lawyer and teach constitutional law. Finally, his advocacy work led him to run for the Illinois State Senate, where he served for eight years. In 2004, he became the third African American since Reconstruction to be elected to the U.S. Senate. "

 

Bush:

http://www.slate.com/id/2100064/

"The soft bigotry of low expectations means Bush is seen to outperform by merely getting by. Finally, elitist condescension, however merited, helps cement Bush's bond to the masses.

 

Closely related to this aggressive ignorance is a third feature of Bush's mentality: laziness. Again, this is a lifelong trait. Bush's college grades were mostly Cs (including a 73 in Introduction to the American Political System). At the start of one term, the star of the Yale football team spotted him in the back row during the shopping period for courses. "Hey! George Bush is in this class!" Calvin Hill shouted to his teammates. "This is the one for us!" As governor of Texas, Bush would take a long break in the middle of his short workday for a run followed by a stretch of video golf or computer solitaire."

 

I like McCain as a person, but his position on the war has me extremely worried. I like Hillary less as a person.........but she's tough as nails. She's not one to be messed with. I like Obama, he's intelligent, charismatic and charitable. We can't afford stupid again. Bush was enduring in a Mayberry RFD kind of way.....for awhile. Someone that simple becomes a pawn sooner or later. But thankfully no more Gomer's in the White House. I honestly think all three of them are good choices for President. And they all happen to be a minority: age, race or sex.

[MarkFive]

I like McCain as a person, but his position on the war has me extremely worried. I like Hillary less as a person.........but she's tough as nails. She's not one to be messed with. I like Obama, he's intelligent, charismatic and charitable. We can't afford stupid again. Bush was enduring in a Mayberry RFD kind of way.....for awhile. Someone that simple becomes a pawn sooner or later. But thankfully no more Gomer's in the White House. I honestly think all three of them are good choices for President. And they all happen to be a minority: age, race or sex.

 

Of everyone in the race that seems to be a front runner, I'm going to say I'm okay with whomever is chosen in the end.

 

I like McCain because he seems the less Republican of that side of the vote. Yes he says his stuff about Iraq, but the thing is he's going to have a field of advisers telling him otherwise. At least he doesn't come from Oil. On the plus side, he's coming across as tough.

 

Obama is the "new hope." IMO, people are so desperate from everything that has happened in the past they they want him to be the new "Messiah" of the political spectrum. People have to be careful. Is it about him or is it about what they have been through? No one is investigating what he is saying... The world is very different from the time that JFK took office.

 

I like Hillary. I'm sad to say that it seems that people just absolutely hate her - we are talking "hate" and not disapproval. Everything about her has been brought up in the news and yet she keeps prodding along. She has no baggage at all - its already been brought out. Every dirty scandal/trick in the books has been long brought up. I wish Canada had someone like her.

Edited February 23, 2008 by MarkFive

[Edstock]

But thankfully no more Gomer's in the White House. I honestly think all three of them are good choices for President. And they all happen to be a minority: age, race or sex.

 

Yes please, no more stupid.

[timmm55]

I like Hillary. I'm sad to say that it seems that people just absolutely hate her - we are talking "hate" and not disapproval. Everything about her has been brought up in the news and yet she keeps prodding along. She has no baggage at all - its already been brought out. Every dirty scandal/trick in the books has been long brought up. I wish Canada has someone like her.

 

Yep, it would be a rehash....big YAWN fest. The swift boaters would be cut off at the knees LOL.