once again the jokes write themselves...

[sonickteam2]

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
  when he's merely a senator, he's "ahh, shucks, look what joe said," but he's the vp nominee. . .with the way y'all have been treating palin, i just assumed that you'd look at biden the same way. . .oh, darn it, there i go again.

Personally, i dont hang on every word Palin says. I dont like her, thats true, but while it may be correct what you said in general, it certainly doesnt pertain to me. I laugh at the idiotic things both of them have said.
 
   

 i don't think it can be any more clear. . .biden is talking about a military crisis. . .how would you propose that pakistan create an economic crisis for america?  ooooh, i hear pakistan has a great housing market, let's invest, surely they have plenty of money and wouldn't dare sell us smart capitalists phony mortgages.
 

isnt that what i said??
 
   

 i certainly hope that the left is prepared for obama not bringing the troops in iraq home, but keeping them in the middle east. . .as smackie and i argued before he left for his 2 month pilgrimage, both mccain and obama agree on afghanistan and pakistan- there are two disagreements, 1) mccain wants to finish iraq and leave it, hopefully stable in a few years; obama now wants to shift troops from iraq to afghanistan, but still leave a sizable force there for security for a few years and 2) obama is more willing to do stragetic attacks inside pakistan than mccain.  
 
 i read biden's statement to be exactly what you say it isn't. . .that he's asking for your trust that they have made the right decision to bomb somewhere; the only thing that's different between what biden said and bush is that biden is telling people they're gonna do it, but don't worry about it, TRUST US, we're gonna do the same thing, but we're different.  what's the line from "baba o'riley"- meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

again, i believe thats what i said it meant.
 
   I also hope that Liberals do not think the troops are coming home.  Personally, I am in agreeance with Obama that the US should focus on Afghanistan and Pakistan and less on Iraq, and I dont expect this crap in the middle east to be over by any means soon. or ever.
 
   I think a huge problem with the Iraq war, and i bet you can find a survey about it, is that Americans felt they were lied to about it. Biden is trying to say that we can't have that anymore, that America cant continue fighting wars against terrorists without its citizens support.  
 
   We are taking the same meaning out of his comment, we just feel differently about it. would you agree?

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by Arthwys:
     

Originally posted by Jaguar:
  Alright, I'm come clean.
 
 I'm voting for Arthways for president and Walkonby for VP.

For what do I deserve that particular honor?  Remember I'm the crazy that's voting Libertarian, not because Barr's great, he's kind of a douche, but because the Republican party has been the ignorant chest-beating party for a long time, and well, the Dems have their hearts in the right places, but are just plain wrong more often than not. [/b]

Because things I've seen you post previously are the closest to how I believe as oppossed to anyone else on this board. You just stated them much more eloquently.
 
 I'm seriously considering writing in Ron Paul but haven't decided yet for sure. One thing I do know for sure is that there is no fucking way in Hell that I will vote for either McCain or Obama as I fully believe they are a pair of puppets controlled by the very same evil master. Neither in anyway represent me. I will NOT give in.
 
 For those who believe this is a wasted vote, too bad. I must vote my heart and conscience and cannot for the life of me justify voting for either of the major parties. In my opinion, the only wasted vote is no vote at all. Then again, 'ol George Bush's cousin who owns the Diebold machines may just step in and rig the votes again.     :roll:

[Venerable Bede]

Originally posted by very sonick:
  again, i believe thats what i said it meant.
 
   I also hope that Liberals do not think the troops are coming home.  Personally, I am in agreeance with Obama that the US should focus on Afghanistan and Pakistan and less on Iraq, and I dont expect this crap in the middle east to be over by any means soon. or ever.
 
   I think a huge problem with the Iraq war, and i bet you can find a survey about it, is that Americans felt they were lied to about it. Biden is trying to say that we can't have that anymore, that America cant continue fighting wars against terrorists without its citizens support.  
 
   We are taking the same meaning out of his comment, we just feel differently about it. would you agree?

hmmm, that maybe true. . .what i think accounts for the differences is that you believe that obama's policy on the middle east will be different than mccain's.  i think they would basically be the same- but remember, this is all couched in biden's belief that somewhere forces are aligning to test obama, and that obama may do some crazy things, but don't worry, we will do them for the right reasons. . .now, if that's something you are fine with, then we do agree in our interpretations.  i just find it funny that in mccain, that's a negative, but in obama, that's a positive.

[sonickteam2]

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
   

Originally posted by very sonick:
  again, i believe thats what i said it meant.
 
   I also hope that Liberals do not think the troops are coming home.  Personally, I am in agreeance with Obama that the US should focus on Afghanistan and Pakistan and less on Iraq, and I dont expect this crap in the middle east to be over by any means soon. or ever.
 
   I think a huge problem with the Iraq war, and i bet you can find a survey about it, is that Americans felt they were lied to about it. Biden is trying to say that we can't have that anymore, that America cant continue fighting wars against terrorists without its citizens support.  
 
   We are taking the same meaning out of his comment, we just feel differently about it. would you agree?

hmmm, that maybe true. . .what i think accounts for the differences is that you believe that obama's policy on the middle east will be different than mccain's.  i think they would basically be the same- but remember, this is all couched in biden's belief that somewhere forces are aligning to test obama, and that obama may do some crazy things, but don't worry, we will do them for the right reasons. . .now, if that's something you are fine with, then we do agree in our interpretations.  i just find it funny that in mccain, that's a negative, but in obama, that's a positive. [/b]

we agree again.      I think that McCain is very capable of handling the situation in the middle east. I do think Obama could do just as well (or bad if you are a glass half empty person).  and i think both of them will handle things better than the current adminstration did in the past.
 
 Personally the issue on foreign policy is a wash for me when considering the candidates.  Does this mean i should have just kept my mouth shut on this issue?

[sonickteam2]

i also think that if McCain wins the election and this crisis happens (and it will no matter who gets elected) that Americans should stand behind their leader, to a certain extent of course.  questioning authority is cool sometimes but all the time, its obnoxious.

[walkonby]

but why me as vp?  to cause total chaos and destroy all things sacred about the position?  oh wait.  palin could still win.

[godsshoeshine]

the larger issue than how mccain and obama will continue to handle the botched situations in iraq and afghanistan is how they will handle new foreign policy obsticals that will emerge while they are in office. mccain loved the iraq war and still thinks the concept was good if the execution was poor. obama didnt like the iraq war to begin with and realizes that it was not a sound policy decision. for me thats the clear difference

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by walkonby:
  but why me as vp?  to cause total chaos and destroy all things sacred about the position?  oh wait.  palin could still win.

For one, you know about and maybe even understand Project Bluebeam. Secondly, you would provide a nice out of the box open minded balance to Arthways' very logical approach. A bit of checks and balances administration at the top.
 
 Have to admit that if some weird series of events happen (staged or otherwise), the thought of Palin as President scares me even more than MaCain or Obama.
 
 Have to leave for work. Later.

[Venerable Bede]

Originally posted by god's shoeshine:
  the larger issue than how mccain and obama will continue to handle the botched situations in iraq and afghanistan is how they will handle new foreign policy obsticals that will emerge while they are in office. mccain loved the iraq war and still thinks the concept was good if the execution was poor. obama didnt like the iraq war to begin with and realizes that it was not a sound policy decision. for me thats the clear difference

regardless of their beliefs, one of them will inherit iraq. . .whether obama opposed the war or not or mccain supported the war or not, becomes irrelevant. . .what matters is what are they going to do about it.  both of them, yes both of them, are going to keep some amount of troops in iraq. . .both of them are going to re-deploy troops in afghanistan.  short of obama deciding to evacuate from the middle east, however much he opposed the iraq war isn't going to make a lick of difference in the execution of whatever strategy either men choose.  believing that because he opposed the iraq war means he'll have a better understanding of what to do with iraq is unfounded.

[godsshoeshine]

thats not what i said at all

[Sage 703]

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
 regardless of their beliefs, one of them will inherit iraq. . .whether obama opposed the war or not or mccain supported the war or not, becomes irrelevant. . .what matters is what are they going to do about it.  both of them, yes both of them, are going to keep some amount of troops in iraq. . .both of them are going to re-deploy troops in afghanistan.  short of obama deciding to evacuate from the middle east, however much he opposed the iraq war isn't going to make a lick of difference in the execution of whatever strategy either men choose.  believing that because he opposed the iraq war means he'll have a better understanding of what to do with iraq is unfounded.

As he noted, this isn't what he said.  The point is about judgment in getting our troops INTO conflict.  Either of them has a mess on their hands in Iraq - but I believe Shoeshine's point was about what a potential president might do in the future as related to other potential conflicts.
 
 The candidates' respective stances on Iraq are simply not irrelevant - they're enormously valuable insights into what their views are on the appropriate uses of American forces.

[nkotb]

Uh, what?
 
   'Joe the Plumber' Backs Claim That Obama Would Bring 'Death to Israel'

[sweetcell]

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
 what's the line from "baba o'riley"- meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

minor aside: classic rock fail.  the line is from "won't get fooled again."  you expect boardees to take your opinions on policy seriously, when you can't even get THAT right?!?    :p  
 
 (joking, kidding, making a funny, no not serious, notice the use of smiley, etc...)

[Venerable Bede]

Originally posted by callat703:
  As he noted, this isn't what he said.  The point is about judgment in getting our troops INTO conflict.  Either of them has a mess on their hands in Iraq - but I believe Shoeshine's point was about what a potential president might do in the future as related to other potential conflicts.
 
 The candidates' respective stances on Iraq are simply not irrelevant - they're enormously valuable insights into what their views are on the appropriate uses of American forces.

i understand all that, i'm simply disputing the underlying logic that since obama opposed the war in iraq he has a better understanding of strategy and use of force than mccain, simply because mccain supported the war in iraq.  i don't understand how that makes any sense.  if anything, mccain very early on understood that bush's strategy was wrong. . .yet, that very same understanding of strategy and how to use force is immediately discarded because of his support of the war in iraq.
 
 it's one thing to support obama because you are against the war and so was obama. . .it's another thing completely to say that because he was against the war, he's able to make better choices about war than someone who was for the war.

[Venerable Bede]

Originally posted by sweetcell:
   

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
 what's the line from "baba o'riley"- meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

minor aside: classic rock fail.  the line is from "won't get fooled again."  you expect boardees to take your opinions on policy seriously, when you can't even get THAT right?!?     :p  
 
 (joking, kidding, making a funny, no not serious, notice the use of smiley, etc...) [/b]

oh, i can't believe i messed that up.  i had baby o'riley in my mind and transposed the endings.  ugh. . .