Comments on: Obama Sharpens His Tone
Washington Post: As Pennsylvania Vote Nears, Clinton Criticizes Rival's Negative Turn
Add a Comment See all 308 Comments
- Why was Bush so scared to get Bin Laden, why distract the country with this rediculous and illegal war in iraq?
It''''s time to wake up people!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by concorde5 at 06:25 PM : Apr 21, 2008
Because bin Laden knew too much and Bush didn''t want him in custody! Bin Laden knows who actually committed 9/11, and he knows why they did it...that is, even if he''s still alive, which Mrs. Bhutto said he hadn''t been alive since 2003 when some Sheikh took him out! - Reply to this comment
- There are rogue nations all over the world, yet we leave them alone.
Given your logic we should attack Cuba, North Korea, Iran, Palestine, Pakistan, Russia and countless other countries.
Maybe if we weren''t so trigger-happy, 911 would never have happened. - Reply to this comment
- We are going broke fighting this senseless war. We have caused more problems than we have solved. Terrorism is on the rise, not the decline. What have we accomplished?
Absolutely Nothing. - Reply to this comment
- Whats the point in discussing anything if YOU don''t know the differnce between a civilzed country like the United States and a rogue vicious dictatorship like Saddam Hussein''s Iraq. We were not about to let him own half the world''s oil supply and destroy our Ally Saudia Arabia. I understand your ignorance and how the liberal have been brainwashed you to think "how dare the US have bombs and not them"
- Reply to this comment
- If Saddam was flying planes over the US, we would have shot at them too....
I don''t blame him.
He had no weapons, he was no threat, the iraqi people never asked for our help, we should have left him alone, we should have gotten Bin Laden (remember, the one who actually attacked us)
Why was Bush so scared to get Bin Laden, why distract the country with this rediculous and illegal war in iraq?
It''s time to wake up people! - Reply to this comment
- I''''''''m not a sexist or a racist and I used to like Hillary and Obama equally, but as the campaign wore on Hillary''''''''s " win at any cost " tactics and increasing negativity toward Obama seemed to hurt the Democratic Party to the point that it appeared she was helping the Republicans by doing their work for them. Besides, her "I''''''''m entitled to win " attitude really turned me off to voting for her in the primaries. I support Obama because generally his messages have been positive and, until recently, he has refrained from negative attacks on Clinton, but I can understand after constant assaults it was time to fight back.
Posted by davthewav1 at 06:01 PM : Apr 21, 2008
WHAT AN absolute lie, what part of being called a racist divisive btch who would say and do anything to be elected, didnt ring like a vicious vitriol attack to you that started the morning after she won NH.
Look I''m an Independent and have no problem with McCain in comaprison to Obama so if Dems pull off a fraud of a primary focused on party growth and not this country and steal 200 million from donors in the process for a fixed primary placing an extremist puppet on the Dem Throne and there is no Dem Party to speak of going forward. - Reply to this comment
- Even a rowdy Texan knows that we have pull out the bombers and strike aircraft now and then, to stop a building threat, such as the threat Saddam put on Saudi Oil fields when he Annexed Kuwait.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by JoeCoolSwat at 06:06 PM : Apr 21, 2008
Saddam, by his own admission wasn''t after the Saudi oil fields. He had plenty of his own.
Actually it''s the Saudi''s right now sending the insurgents into Iraq because King Abdulla is pissed over being screwed in the oil PSA agreements and putting pressure on Iraq not to privitize their oil.
Hussein was never a threat to the Saudi''s he was just pissed at the Kuwaiti muckluk. - Reply to this comment
- JoeCool......If you remember most of the country was actually against the first gulf war. It wasn''t until we were actually in the war before the country came around and supported it.
We had no right to invade Iraq in the first gulf war. But put that aside. Iraq was no threat to the US. What gives us the right to tell every other nation what they can or cannot do. We have no right to tell any nation what to do. We would never stand for another country telling us we can''t have weapons. We seem like hypocrites bullying our way around the world.
They either do what WE say or we bomb them. We sound like terrorists.
Given your logic, we should have bombed the soviet union. At least Reagan had the good sense to not adopt a dangerous strategy of preemption. - Reply to this comment
- Sorry that you are too young to see the whole picture militarily, but you have been fed these Liberal talking points of "no right to attack them..No threat to us..." etc. You don''t know what you are talking about and have been brainwashed by Michael Moore types.
- Reply to this comment
- Concorde...If you did not know, we actually went to war with Iraq in 1990, when they invaded Kuwait. In 2000''s Saddam Hussein did not abide by the cease fire surrender agreements of the Gulf-War-1, such as inspectors, no-fly zone, etc. He flaunted that and did not abide by the agreements, so we had all the rights in the world to Strike again. We were the winners of Gulf-War-1, so he does what we say or be gone.
- Reply to this comment
- And Rowdy - perhaps you didn''t see my earlier post. Here''s a link to a video of Hillary''s main man, Ed Rendell, praising Louis Farrakhan at a Nation of Islam event in Philadelphia.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=DXum_-8I1TA
I guess now Hillary will have to denounce Ed and totally distance herself from him, right? Sure, she will, because she certainly wouldn''t want to tell Obama he had to renounce Farrakhan, and then ignore Rendell''s remarks, would she? I mean, she''s so honest and everything. - Reply to this comment
- TalkLeft: Electability: Why Hillary Is More Likely to Beat McCain
RealClearPolitics: Elite Democrats Lose
Because of PC, race is the elephant in the room that no one is supposed to talk about, except to remark on how enlightening it is for America to have a black candidate for president. That is a huge story. But at some point the lens should focus past Obama%u2019s oratorical skills and his skin color to see who this man is who wants to lead our country. Obama is black by heritage but also a product of liberal elitism, which appears to drive his thinking.
What do Stevenson, McGovern, Dukakis, Gore and Kerry have in common? Historically, elite Democrats lose. - Reply to this comment
- Howdy Rowdy....But I don''t think anyone who has read any of your hundreds,(thousands?), of posts would mistake you as an Obama supporter anyway.
- Reply to this comment
- JoeCool.......We had no right to invade Iraq. Iraq has never been a threat to the US. They have never Attacked us. They have never threatened us. We had no justification Whatsoever in attacking Iraq.
People like you is why we have an absolute Idiot in the White House now. - Reply to this comment
- Since the finger non-issue is once again being brought up, I am once again posting the link of the side view of the very scratch in question - In case anyone even cares about this non-issue, here is the side view of the infamous "gesture". http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/4/18/1836
6/8260
With all the other important issues out there, you''re talking about this. - Reply to this comment
- The reason is that the Middle East is a hotbed of Radical Fundamentalist countries who are hell bent on destroying the U.S., U.K., Israel and other infidels. starting with Kadaffi, Iran, Afghan and so on. There are many countries in the Mid-east we may need to put a hurtin on, if they F with us.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by JoeCoolSwat at 06:03 PM : Apr 21, 2008
Actually those MIddle Eastern countries don''t give a RIP about the US if they''d stay out of their business and stop trying to exploit it.
It wasn''t terrorist that hit the WTC, it was whack job mercenaries using islamic extremists to do it. In other words, follow the money.
I''m not gonna live my life in fear of a few extremists half across the globe away in some **** ant country half the size of Texas. - Reply to this comment
- Even a rowdy Texan knows that we have pull out the bombers and strike aircraft now and then, to stop a building threat, such as the threat Saddam put on Saudi Oil fields when he Annexed Kuwait.
- Reply to this comment
- a couple of times mccain has attacked obama, but has yet attacked clinton. what''s the story or the motive of not attacking clinton?
Posted by erpcat. April 21, 2008 5:43pm
Because McCain is one of the FEW friends the Clinton''s have from their Whitehouse days. A great many of Clinton''s cabinet appointees have abandoned Hell-ery, for Barack. ie- Bill Richardson--Clinton''s UN Ambassador, Federico Pena--Clinton''s Transportation and Energy head, Robert Reicht-- Clinton''s Labor Secretary, and on and on and on...
McCain is attacking Barack,to help Hell-ery Rotten Clinton get the nomination. If he doesn''t win in November, he''d like for his friend to win. They''re both pale-faced LOSERS!!
EX-CLINTON SUPPORTER - Reply to this comment
- I''''m not a sexist or a racist and I used to like Hillary and Obama equally, but as the campaign wore on Hillary''''s " win at any cost " tactics and increasing negativity toward Obama seemed to hurt the Democratic Party to the point that it appeared she was helping the Republicans by doing their work for them. Besides, her "I''''m entitled to win " attitude really turned me off to voting for her in the primaries. I support Obama because generally his messages have been positive and, until recently, he has refrained from negative attacks on Clinton, but I can understand after constant assaults it was time to fight back.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by davthewav1 at 06:01 PM : Apr 21, 2008
Well, sorry, but I won''t vote for an anti-American shill on stage shooting his finger at his opponent on video acting like a cheap stupid class clown. - Reply to this comment
- The reason is that the Middle East is a hotbed of Radical Fundamentalist countries who are hell bent on destroying the U.S., U.K., Israel and other infidels. starting with Kadaffi, Iran, Afghan and so on. There are many countries in the Mid-east we may need to put a hurtin on, if they F with us.
- Reply to this comment
