obama and biden

[ricorico]

correct me if im wrong, but isnt one of the reasons Obama argues that McCain would be a poor choice for president because he voted for the war in iraq??


But then why did he choose senator Joe Biden as his VP, who ALSO voted in favor of the authorization for use of military force against Iraq in October 2002??

one word comes to mind....hypocrit

[2ez2brich]

Originally Posted by ricorico

correct me if im wrong, but isnt one of the reasons Obama argues that McCain would be a poor choice for president because he voted for the war in iraq??


But then why did he choose senator Joe Biden as his VP, who ALSO voted in favor of the authorization for use of military force against Iraq in October 2002??

one word comes to mind....hypocrit

The war was started on false pretenses. We went from Looking for Bin Laden....to hunting down Saddam. And Biden's vote came one year after. Lot had happened since the start of the war and Oct 2002.


Remember the attacks were in Sept 2001.

[ricorico]

Originally Posted by 2ez2brich

The war was started on false pretenses. We went from Looking for Bin Laden....to hunting down Saddam. And Biden's vote came one year after. Lot had happened since the start of the war and Oct 2002.


Remember the attacks were in Sept 2001.

False pretenses? like what? The war in Iraq wasnt about hunting down bin laden. It was about removing saddam from powder. OK, so we didnt "find" weapons of mass destruction, but they knew we were coming...and if youve been to iraq, you would know how easy if is to move across the borders there. Also, we DO know that he HAD weapons of mass destruction, because he was gasing entire villages.

we went looking for bin laden in in afghan, thats what Operation Enduring Freedom was about. Not OPeration Iraqi Freedom... You have your foreign conflicts mixed up.

But either way, its doesnt make sense that Obama is bad mouthing mccain for voting in favor of the war in iraq in 02, when he chose a vp that did the same thing hes hating on mccain for.

[Ulter]

What false pretenses? Are you kidding me?
You don't remember why we went to Iraq? You don't remember Cheney planting a false story in the NYT and then going on Meet the Press and quoting their story, which he gave to them in the first place? You don't remember Bush lying about WMD? You don't remember Bush having Powell tell the UN that there were WMD? We went there because Bush/Cheney concocked a story about Saddam putting together nuclear weapons and helping Al Qaeda. All of which turned out to be complete lies they told to the public, the UN, and congress.

[ricorico]

Originally Posted by Ulter

What false pretenses? Are you kidding me?
You don't remember why we went to Iraq? You don't remember Cheney planting a false story in the NYT and then going on Meet the Press and quoting their story, which he gave to them in the first place? You don't remember Bush lying about WMD? You don't remember Bush having Powell tell the UN that there were WMD? We went there because Bush/Cheney concocked a story about Saddam putting together nuclear weapons and helping Al Qaeda. All of which turned out to be complete lies they told to the public, the UN, and congress.

saddam was GASING WHOLE VILLAGES!!! In the military, those gases are considered weapons of mass destruction....may not be nuclear, but biological and chemical weapons fall into the same category....so, no, only part of your post hold water. Im not saying i totally agree with how he sold the war in iraq...but the fact remains..saddam was gasing villages.

hehe, ulter, we agree on almost everything until politics is brought up....then its like we are opposites...lol

[2ez2brich]

Originally Posted by ricorico

saddam was GASING WHOLE VILLAGES!!! In the military, those gases are considered weapons of mass destruction....may not be nuclear, but biological and chemical weapons fall into the same category....so, no, only part of your post hold water. Im not saying i totally agree with how he sold the war in iraq...but the fact remains..saddam was gasing villages.

Bush stood at ground zero and promised he would find those responsible. Then Bin Laden came out and claimed the dastardly deed....seven years later...and still no Bin Laden.

Then the hunt for WMD in Iraq was on. Do you recall whatever happened to this ?


SAddam has been gasing for years....and this has been known since Reagan's administration. Lot of tricky shiat transpired when efforts were directed at Iraq. for one....Cheney and Haliburton made out well. ...coincidental....or causation ?

Billions upon billions spent and lost.

[ricorico]

Originally Posted by 2ez2brich

Bush stood at ground zero and promised he would find those responsible. Then Bin Laden came out and claimed the dastardly deed....seven years later...and still no Bin Laden.

Then the hunt for WMD in Iraq was on. Do you recall whatever happened to this ?


SAddam has been gasing for years....and this has been known since Reagan's administration. Lot of tricky shiat transpired when efforts were directed at Iraq. for one....Cheney and Haliburton made out well. ...coincidental....or causation ?

Billions upon billions spent and lost.

i agree, the war in iraq is costly....but no, not billions....try trillions and trillions. All im saying is that, YES, saddam DID have WMD....nuclear? who knows, but chemwarfare IS WMD.
still none of the arguements explain obamas hyprcrital comments toward mccain.

[DrewDog]

obama = "change"
biden = epitome of Washington politican

something doesn't add up IMO

[sassy69]

Originally Posted by DrewDog

obama = "change"
biden = epitome of Washington politican

something doesn't add up IMO

This is exactly what we were just talking about .... contradictions all over the place, but all basically driven by market research & packaging for target segments. I'm still waiting to get past the pretty box & see if what's inside tastes good & doesn't give me indigestion.

[ricorico]

Originally Posted by sassy69

This is exactly what we were just talking about .... contradictions all over the place, but all basically driven by market research & packaging for target segments. I'm still waiting to get past the pretty box & see if what's inside tastes good & doesn't give me indigestion.

somehow i think indigestion is in the future either way lol. hehehe, analagies are fun

[J. Adams]

Originally Posted by sassy69

This is exactly what we were just talking about .... contradictions all over the place, but all basically driven by market research & packaging for target segments. I'm still waiting to get past the pretty box & see if what's inside tastes good & doesn't give me indigestion.

People don't seem to want to understand that though.

Not one of the candidates has yet to really show what they stand for.

[ricorico]

Originally Posted by J. Adams

People don't seem to want to understand that though.

Not one of the candidates has yet to really show what they stand for.

i think mccain has strong morals...Hes even openly gone against fellow republicans...while most politians stay loyal to their fellow party members, regardless of whether wrong or right.

[tytan]

Originally Posted by ricorico

i think mccain has strong morals...Hes even openly gone against fellow republicans...while most politians stay loyal to their fellow party members, regardless of whether wrong or right.

Anything to get elected right? McCain voted in agreement of President Bush 90% of the time! Sure he went against his own party at times. 100% for political moves.

[DrewDog]

Originally Posted by tytan

Anything to get elected right? McCain voted in agreement of President Bush 90% of the time! Sure he went against his own party at times. 100% for political moves.

thast 6% less then Obama.

I think the more interesting thing would be to see what the 10% of the votes were over, were they minor things or major policy items. there are tons of minor votes that could be driving that %age up