• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

This man didn't vote Obama, but he's glad he is there.

badaxemoo

Well-known member
It's possible to have not voted for Obama, but still be glad he was elected.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=6813984&page=1

I would never have voted for Palin, but would have been happy to have our first woman VP.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Glad he was elected ......why? The article seemed to be about race, hardly a consideration in voting. I didn't see anything on policy, history, experience, etc....
 

badaxemoo

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Glad he was elected ......why? The article seemed to be about race, hardly a consideration in voting. I didn't see anything on policy, history, experience, etc....

Watch the video.

Give him a call and ask him.

I imagine he feels a certain weight off his shoulders.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
badaxemoo said:
Sandhusker said:
Glad he was elected ......why? The article seemed to be about race, hardly a consideration in voting. I didn't see anything on policy, history, experience, etc....

Watch the video.

Give him a call and ask him.

I imagine he feels a certain weight off his shoulders.

He's happy because of Obama the individual or Obama the black man?
 

leanin' H

Well-known member
I am happy that we have come far enough as a country to elect a person of color to the presidency! :D But I am disappointed that we elected President Obama. He hasn't done very much to make me believe he is much more than a good speech giver and fund raiser. His leadership is very questionable. His executive orders are mostly harmful and counterproductive. And his Stimulus bill is full of pork, waste and irrational spending. He says we all need hope and not fear and then screams about catastropic concequenses if lawmakers don't toe the line! Those are my reasons for not following him down the trail to socialism and not a single one has anything to do with race! Sadly, i believe one of the main reasons a lot of people voted for him was race. And if we are EVER going to get past that EVERYBODY needs to quit looking at skin color! I have ignored most of what badaxemoo posts for awhile because I don't like your personal attacks but i wanted to put out one conservatives perspective! Thanks for the post! :D
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
"We voted for Obama because the Republicans brought about their own demise by spending America into debt for several generations and miring us in two wars, one of which was not well motivated nor well run."

Reader, I have to ask; Are FACTS ever considered before a liberal formulates an opinion?

Both of our military engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan were heavily supported by Democrats. You ought to do a little research on what they were saying. I can provide you with a clip from Hillary herself claiming that we had to get rid of Saddam.

I'll grant you that Bush was not a fiscal conservative, he isnt' a conservative in much of anything, but to say the Republicans are the ones who can't mind a checkbook is inaccurate, especially in light of the largest spending increase in the history of the country that your leaders are pushing right now!

BTW, I am NOT a Republican, either. I don't let party affiliation get in the way of facts and judgement.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
"We voted for Obama because the Republicans brought about their own demise by spending America into debt for several generations and miring us in two wars, one of which was not well motivated nor well run."

Reader, I have to ask; Are FACTS ever considered before a liberal formulates an opinion?

Both of our military engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan were heavily supported by Democrats. You ought to do a little research on what they were saying. I can provide you with a clip from Hillary herself claiming that we had to get rid of Saddam.

I'll grant you that Bush was not a fiscal conservative, he isnt' a conservative in much of anything, but to say the Republicans are the ones who can't mind a checkbook is inaccurate, especially in light of the largest spending increase in the history of the country that your leaders are pushing right now!

BTW, I am NOT a Republican, either. I don't let party affiliation get in the way of facts and judgement.

Who were given false info on why we were going in there- along with false info on what it would cost...
The Bush/Cheney/Rove crew threw out so much false info propoganda- along with incompetently ran the operation-conflicting "one hand doesn't know what the other is doing" statements-- that there is no doubt why the country turned against them....




"I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency." --Vice President Dick Cheney, on the Iraq insurgency, June 20, 2005 (Source)



"My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators." –Vice President Dick Cheney, "Meet the Press," March 16, 2003 (Source)
"F**k Saddam, we're taking him out." –President Bush to three U.S. Senators in March 2002, a full year before the Iraq invasion (Source)

"Ladies and gentlemen, these are not assertions. These are facts, corroborated by many sources, some of them sources of the intelligence services of other countries." –Secretary of State Colin Powell, testifying about Iraq's chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons capabilities before the United Nations Security Council, Feb. 5, 2003 (Source)
Which Powell later apologized to the world admitting he had been given false information- and "used" to make an excuse for Bush's invasion...



"Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed." –President Bush, standing under a "Mission Accomplished" banner on the USS Lincoln aircraft carrier, May 2, 2003 (Source)

"It's hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam’s security forces and his army. Hard to imagine." –Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, testifying before the House Budget Committee prior to the Iraq war, Feb. 27, 2003 (Source)


"We found the weapons of mass destruction." –President Bush, in an interview with Polish television, May 29, 2003 (Source)

"Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere!" —President Bush, joking about his administration's failure to find WMDs in Iraq as he narrated a comic slideshow during the Radio & TV Correspondents' Association dinner, March 25, 2004 (Source)

"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat." –Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, when asked about weapons of mass destruction in an ABC News interview, March 30, 2003 (Source)

"It's a slam-dunk case!" –CIA Director George Tenet, discussing WMD and the case for war during a meeting in the Oval Office, Dec. 21, 2002 (Source)


"
The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy, we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on, which was weapons of mass destruction, as the core reason." --Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, "Vanity Fair" interview, May 28, 2003 (Source)


We know he's been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons, and we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." –Vice President Dick Cheney, "Meet The Press" March 16, 2003 (Source)

"I don't know anybody that I can think of who has contended that the Iraqis had nuclear weapons." –Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, June 24, 2003 (Source)

"In Iraq, a ruthless dictator cultivated weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them. He gave support to terrorists, had an established relationship with al Qaeda, and his regime is no more." –Vice President Dick Cheney, Nov. 7, 2003 (Source)

"I am not going to give you a number for it because it's not my business to do intelligent work." --Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, asked to estimate the number of Iraqi insurgents while testifying before Congress, Feb. 16, 2005 (Source)

"Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties." —President Bush, discussing the Iraq war with Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson, after Robertson told him he should prepare the American people for casualties

A FEW MORE FROM THE BUSH/CHENEY/ROVE CREW
"I believe demolishing Hussein's military power and liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk."
- Kenneth Adelman, member of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, 2/13/02

"Support for Saddam, including within his military organization, will collapse after the first whiff of gunpowder."
- Richard Perle, Chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, 7/11/02

"Desert Storm II would be in a walk in the park... The case for 'regime change' boils down to the huge benefits and modest costs of liberating Iraq."
- Kenneth Adelman, member of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, 8/29/02

"Having defeated and then occupied Iraq, democratizing the country should not be too tall an order for the world's sole superpower."
- William Kristol, Weekly Standard editor, and Lawrence F. Kaplan, New Republic senior editor, 2/24/03

HOW MANY TROOPS WILL BE NEEDED?



"I would be surprised if we need anything like the 200,000 figure that is sometimes discussed in the press. A much smaller force, principally special operations forces, but backed up by some regular units, should be sufficient."
- Richard Perle, Chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, 7/11/02

"I don't believe that anything like a long-term commitment of 150,000 Americans would be necessary."
- Richard Perle, speaking at a conference on "Post-Saddam Iraq" sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute, 10/3/02

"I would say that what's been mobilized to this point -- something on the order of several hundred thousand soldiers are probably, you know, a figure that would be required."
- Gen. Eric Shinseki, testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, 2/25/03

"The idea that it would take several hundred thousand U.S. forces, I think, is far from the mark."
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 2/27/03

"I am reasonably certain that they will greet us as liberators, and that will help us keep [troop] requirements down. ... We can say with reasonable confidence that the notion of hundreds of thousands of American troops is way off the mark...wildly off the mark."
- Paul Wolfowitz, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, testifying before the House Budget Committee, 2/27/03

"It's hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam's security forces and his army. Hard to image."
- Paul Wolfowitz, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, testifying before the House Budget Committee, 2/27/03

"If our commanders on the ground say we need more troops, I will send them. But our commanders tell me they have the number of troops they need to do their job. Sending more Americans would undermine our strategy of encouraging Iraqis to take the lead in this fight. And sending more Americans would suggest that we intend to stay forever, when we are, in fact, working for the day when Iraq can defend itself and we can leave."
- President George W. Bush, 6/28/05

"The debate over troop levels will rage for years; it is...beside the point."
- Rich Lowry, conservative syndicated columnist, 4/19/06

WHAT ABOUT CASUALTIES?

"Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties."
- President George W. Bush, response attributed to him by the Reverend Pat Robertson, when Robertson warned the president to prepare the nation for "heavy casualties" in the event of an Iraq war, 3/2003

"Why should we hear about body bags and deaths? Oh, I mean, it's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?"
- Barbara Bush, former First Lady (and the current president's mother), on Good Morning America, 3/18/03

"I think the level of casualties is secondary... [A]ll the great scholars who have studied American character have come to the conclusion that we are a warlike people and that we love war... What we hate is not casualties but losing."
- Michael Ledeen, American Enterprise Institute, 3/25/03

HOW MUCH WILL IT COST?

"Iraq is a very wealthy country. Enormous oil reserves. They can finance, largely finance the reconstruction of their own country. And I have no doubt that they will."
- Richard Perle, Chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, 7/11/02

"The likely economic effects [of the war in Iraq] would be relatively small... Under every plausible scenario, the negative effect will be quite small relative to the economic benefits."
- Lawrence Lindsey, White House Economic Advisor, 9/16/02

"It is unimaginable that the United States would have to contribute hundreds of billions of dollars and highly unlikely that we would have to contribute even tens of billions of dollars."
- Kenneth M. Pollack, former Director for Persian Gulf Affairs, U.S. National Security Council, 9/02

"The costs of any intervention would be very small."
- Glenn Hubbard, White House Economic Advisor, 10/4/02

"When it comes to reconstruction, before we turn to the American taxpayer, we will turn first to the resources of the Iraqi government and the international community."
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 3/27/03

"There is a lot of money to pay for this that doesn't have to be U.S. taxpayer money, and it starts with the assets of the Iraqi people. We are talking about a country that can really finance its own reconstruction and relatively soon."
- Paul Wolfowitz, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, testifying before the Defense Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, 3/27/03

"The United States is committed to helping Iraq recover from the conflict, but Iraq will not require sustained aid."
- Mitchell Daniels, Director, White House Office of Management and Budget, 4/21/03

"Iraq has tremendous resources that belong to the Iraqi people. And so there are a variety of means that Iraq has to be able to shoulder much of the burden for ther own reconstruction."
- Ari Fleischer, White House Press Secretary, 2/18/03

HOW LONG WILL IT LAST?

"Now, it isn't gong to be over in 24 hours, but it isn't going to be months either."
- Richard Perle, Chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, 7/11/02

"The idea that it's going to be a long, long, long battle of some kind I think is belied by the fact of what happened in 1990. Five days or five weeks or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that."
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 11/15/02

"I will bet you the best dinner in the gaslight district of San Diego that military action will not last more than a week. Are you willing to take that wager?"
- Bill O'Reilly, 1/29/03

"It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could be six days, six weeks. I doubt six months."
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 2/7/03

"It won't take weeks... Our military machine will crush Iraq in a matter of days and there's no question that it will."
- Bill O'Reilly, 2/10/03

"There is zero question that this military campaign...will be reasonably short. ... Like World War II for about five days."
- General Barry R. McCaffrey, national security and terrorism analyst for NBC News, 2/18/03

"The Iraq fight itself is probably going to go very, very fast. The shooting should be over within just a very few days from when it starts."
- David Frum, former Bush White House speechwriter, 2/24/03

"Our military superiority is so great -- it's far greater than it was in the Gulf War, and the Gulf War was over in 100 hours after we bombed for 43 days... Now they can bomb for a couple of days and then just roll into Baghdad... The odds are there's going to be a war and it's going to be not for very long."
- Former President Bill Clinton, 3/6/03

"I think it will go relatively quickly...weeks rather than months."
- Vice President Dick Cheney, 3/16/03
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
OT, "Who were given false info on why we were going in there- along with false info on what it would cost... "

HORSECRAP. You're telling me that Democrat's only source of information is the White House? Why can't a damn liberal ever take responsibility for their own actions?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
OT, "Who were given false info on why we were going in there- along with false info on what it would cost... "

HORSECRAP. You're telling me that Democrat's only source of information is the White House? Why can't a damn liberal ever take responsibility for their own actions?

It is when you're using intelligence information to make your case for war- where as the CIA Director, Pentagon/Military intelligence, and Director of National Intelligence, work directly for and report directly to the Administration....And has been revealed post invasion- much of the info that Bush allowed out- and gave to Congress and the American people- was heavily censored, altered, and in some cases fabricated to support his war...

But when you have a bunch of dummies making comments like these- what else can you expect... :???: Lies like these- is what lost them the support of the American people....

"I believe demolishing Hussein's military power and liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk."
- Kenneth Adelman, member of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, 2/13/02

"Support for Saddam, including within his military organization, will collapse after the first whiff of gunpowder."
- Richard Perle, Chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, 7/11/02

"Desert Storm II would be in a walk in the park... The case for 'regime change' boils down to the huge benefits and modest costs of liberating Iraq."
- Kenneth Adelman, member of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, 8/29/02

"Having defeated and then occupied Iraq, democratizing the country should not be too tall an order for the world's sole superpower."
- William Kristol, Weekly Standard editor, and Lawrence F. Kaplan, New Republic senior editor, 2/24/03

"I would be surprised if we need anything like the 200,000 figure that is sometimes discussed in the press. A much smaller force, principally special operations forces, but backed up by some regular units, should be sufficient."
- Richard Perle, Chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, 7/11/02

"I don't believe that anything like a long-term commitment of 150,000 Americans would be necessary."
- Richard Perle, speaking at a conference on "Post-Saddam Iraq" sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute, 10/3/02

"I would say that what's been mobilized to this point -- something on the order of several hundred thousand soldiers are probably, you know, a figure that would be required."
- Gen. Eric Shinseki, testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, 2/25/03

"The idea that it would take several hundred thousand U.S. forces, I think, is far from the mark."
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 2/27/03

"I am reasonably certain that they will greet us as liberators, and that will help us keep [troop] requirements down. ... We can say with reasonable confidence that the notion of hundreds of thousands of American troops is way off the mark...wildly off the mark."
- Paul Wolfowitz, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, testifying before the House Budget Committee, 2/27/03

"It's hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam's security forces and his army. Hard to image."
- Paul Wolfowitz, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, testifying before the House Budget Committee, 2/27/03

"If our commanders on the ground say we need more troops, I will send them. But our commanders tell me they have the number of troops they need to do their job. Sending more Americans would undermine our strategy of encouraging Iraqis to take the lead in this fight. And sending more Americans would suggest that we intend to stay forever, when we are, in fact, working for the day when Iraq can defend itself and we can leave."
- President George W. Bush, 6/28/05

"The debate over troop levels will rage for years; it is...beside the point."
- Rich Lowry, conservative syndicated columnist, 4/19/06



"Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties."
- President George W. Bush, response attributed to him by the Reverend Pat Robertson, when Robertson warned the president to prepare the nation for "heavy casualties" in the event of an Iraq war, 3/2003

"Why should we hear about body bags and deaths? Oh, I mean, it's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?"
- Barbara Bush, former First Lady (and the current president's mother), on Good Morning America, 3/18/03
"I think the level of casualties is secondary... [A]ll the great scholars who have studied American character have come to the conclusion that we are a warlike people and that we love war... What we hate is not casualties but losing."
- Michael Ledeen, American Enterprise Institute, 3/25/03


"Iraq is a very wealthy country. Enormous oil reserves. They can finance, largely finance the reconstruction of their own country. And I have no doubt that they will."
- Richard Perle, Chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, 7/11/02

"The likely economic effects [of the war in Iraq] would be relatively small... Under every plausible scenario, the negative effect will be quite small relative to the economic benefits."
- Lawrence Lindsey, White House Economic Advisor, 9/16/02

"It is unimaginable that the United States would have to contribute hundreds of billions of dollars and highly unlikely that we would have to contribute even tens of billions of dollars."
- Kenneth M. Pollack, former Director for Persian Gulf Affairs, U.S. National Security Council, 9/02

"The costs of any intervention would be very small."
- Glenn Hubbard, White House Economic Advisor, 10/4/02
"When it comes to reconstruction, before we turn to the American taxpayer, we will turn first to the resources of the Iraqi government and the international community."
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 3/27/03

"There is a lot of money to pay for this that doesn't have to be U.S. taxpayer money, and it starts with the assets of the Iraqi people. We are talking about a country that can really finance its own reconstruction and relatively soon."
- Paul Wolfowitz, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, testifying before the Defense Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, 3/27/03

"The United States is committed to helping Iraq recover from the conflict, but Iraq will not require sustained aid."
- Mitchell Daniels, Director, White House Office of Management and Budget, 4/21/03

"Iraq has tremendous resources that belong to the Iraqi people. And so there are a variety of means that Iraq has to be able to shoulder much of the burden for ther own reconstruction."
- Ari Fleischer, White House Press Secretary, 2/18/03


"Now, it isn't gong to be over in 24 hours, but it isn't going to be months either."
- Richard Perle, Chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, 7/11/02

"The idea that it's going to be a long, long, long battle of some kind I think is belied by the fact of what happened in 1990. Five days or five weeks or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that."
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 11/15/02

"I will bet you the best dinner in the gaslight district of San Diego that military action will not last more than a week. Are you willing to take that wager?"
- Bill O'Reilly, 1/29/03

"It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could be six days, six weeks. I doubt six months."
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 2/7/03
"It won't take weeks... Our military machine will crush Iraq in a matter of days and there's no question that it will."
- Bill O'Reilly, 2/10/03

"There is zero question that this military campaign...will be reasonably short. ... Like World War II for about five days."
- General Barry R. McCaffrey, national security and terrorism analyst for NBC News, 2/18/03

"The Iraq fight itself is probably going to go very, very fast. The shooting should be over within just a very few days from when it starts."
- David Frum, former Bush White House speechwriter, 2/24/03
"Our military superiority is so great -- it's far greater than it was in the Gulf War, and the Gulf War was over in 100 hours after we bombed for 43 days... Now they can bomb for a couple of days and then just roll into Baghdad... The odds are there's going to be a war and it's going to be not for very long."
- Former President Bill Clinton, 3/6/03

"I think it will go relatively quickly...weeks rather than months."
- Vice President Dick Cheney, 3/16/03
 

badaxemoo

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
OT, "Who were given false info on why we were going in there- along with false info on what it would cost... "

HORSECRAP. You're telling me that Democrat's only source of information is the White House? Why can't a damn liberal ever take responsibility for their own actions?

It was a team effort.

In no way do I absolve the Democrats who voted for Bush's resolution.

However, can anyone honestly state that had Al Gore been President, we would have gone into war in Iraq?
 

badaxemoo

Well-known member
Mike said:
badaxemoo said:
Mike said:
No WMD's In Iraq? You sure?

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Iraq_WMD_Declassified.pdf

What do words like "assessed" and "most likely" mean to you?

What do words like "Recovered" mean to you?

So 500 rusting shells that contained degraded mustard gas and sarin and the assumption that some more could be found means that Iraq had an operable WMD threat in 2003?

I think not:

http://www.congressmatters.com/storyonly/2009/2/7/145039/1391/438/581

I think Bush implied they had operational weapons.

At a current cost of $1,300,000,000,000 for the war effort, how much did each of those 500 rusty chemical shells cost to recover?

Do you feel safer?

I certainly do.

I mean, if I had ever gone to Iraq and had been hiking around in the desert I could have stubbed my toe on one of those things.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
The Democrats who supported the war believed the administration's claims that Saddam Hussain

(1) had weapons of mass destruction

(2) was in cahoots with al-Qaeda

both claims turned out to be false. I believed both these claims. I thought that the administration knew them to be true. I also supported the war for 18 - 24 months. I always and continue to support our outstanding military who have been in harm's way sometimes because their civilian leaders have not given them what they needed to be safe and to win the war.

The Democrats and the people stood behind our President and the war for several years until it became clear that the war was a mistake to begin with and moreover was being badly conducted. It's good that they changed the way they are fighting this war and it has improved but it took years.

Have you ever heard the phrase "In it to win it"? Thats what you do when you go to war. There's only one acceptable way to end a war, and that's to win the damn thing.
 

badaxemoo

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
reader (the Second) said:
The Democrats who supported the war believed the administration's claims that Saddam Hussain

(1) had weapons of mass destruction

(2) was in cahoots with al-Qaeda

both claims turned out to be false. I believed both these claims. I thought that the administration knew them to be true. I also supported the war for 18 - 24 months. I always and continue to support our outstanding military who have been in harm's way sometimes because their civilian leaders have not given them what they needed to be safe and to win the war.

The Democrats and the people stood behind our President and the war for several years until it became clear that the war was a mistake to begin with and moreover was being badly conducted. It's good that they changed the way they are fighting this war and it has improved but it took years.

Have you ever heard the phrase "In it to win it"? Thats what you do when you go to war. There's only one acceptable way to end a war, and that's to win the damn thing.

Thanks.

But you forgot to finsih with "Now, boys, lets get out there and win one for the Gipper".
 

alice

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
It's easy to be brave when you sit in your banker's chair somewhere far from Iraq :)

Whose kids were in Iraq? Biden, Palin, Webb and that's about it.

Yes mam!!!!!!!

Alice
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
It's easy to be brave when you sit in your banker's chair somewhere far from Iraq :)

Whose kids were in Iraq? Biden, Palin, Webb and that's about it.

I'm not making a statement of bravado, I'm stating something that any soldier would tell you.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
If our friends and neighbors are going to risk their lives, I want to know it's in a war we could not avoid and that we fought all out with the right number of troops and good strategy.

Then fight the war at home, while the troops are diligently fighting abroad!

My colleague at work went out and bought his Army National Guard son and son's friend body armor because the military would not supply it. Thankfully, his son returned alive

Do you think that has anything to do with financing dogparks in California?

Give your head a shake, you want to give Obama a blank cheq, cause it was Bush's fault, but still want to beeotch about not having money to buy body armour.

Who's got their priorities screwed up!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Go to this website and read or watch "Bush' War" by frontline. I have watched it and it opened my eyes. Frontline may be liberal I do not know. I watch liberal and consertive shows that appeal to me and make my mind up. I do not let Rush Limbaugh wear my radio out.
 
Top