Oh My God...McCain could win if he picks Palin!!! - Page 41 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-31-2008, 06:13 PM   #601
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 09:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
then it's entirely appropriate to point out the fact that it's quite likely that she abused the executive power she was given

in order to exact revenge over a personal issue.
I have checked a bit more

and I am now more confident there is nothing to it

except a lot of wishful thinking by nervous, Obama supporters
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
Old 08-31-2008, 06:14 PM   #602
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 12:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
No one has anywhere near the experience that McCain has


i'm sorry STING, but John McCain has made it quite clear with his selection of the person he obviously felt was the most qualified individual to take his place should he become incapacitated that experience is most certainly irrelevant to the job description.

if Palin is the most qualified, then all of McCain's so-called experience, by his own admission, amounts to less than a hill of beans.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 08-31-2008, 06:15 PM   #603
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 05:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post

except a lot of wishful thinking by nervous, Obama supporters
Nervous, I thought they were rejoicing over McCain's "foolish" pick of Palin?
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 08-31-2008, 06:16 PM   #604
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 12:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
I have checked a bit more

and I am now more confident there is nothing to it

except a lot of wishful thinking by nervous, Obama supporters


considering this was going on well before anyone ever thought she'd be on the VP ticket (including herself),

i don't think this has much to do with "Obama supporters."
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 08-31-2008, 06:16 PM   #605
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 12:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
Nervous, I thought they were rejoicing over McCain's "foolish" pick of Palin?


i'm not nervous at all.

i'm just amazed you can post your support for her when she undercuts every single argument you've ever made for your preference for John McCain.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 08-31-2008, 06:16 PM   #606
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,234
Local Time: 11:28 PM
Someone should contact the investigators

and tell them to call it off

since you've concluded there's "nothing to it"
__________________
Diemen is offline  
Old 08-31-2008, 06:19 PM   #607
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 05:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
i'm sorry STING, but John McCain has made it quite clear with his selection of the person he obviously felt was the most qualified individual to take his place should he become incapacitated that experience is most certainly irrelevant to the job description.

if Palin is the most qualified, then all of McCain's so-called experience, by his own admission, amounts to less than a hill of beans.
Oh sure, and I guess thats even more true with the Democrats given who they picked to actually be President.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 08-31-2008, 06:33 PM   #608
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 05:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
i'm not nervous at all.

i'm just amazed you can post your support for her when she undercuts every single argument you've ever made for your preference for John McCain.

I do wish there was someone more experienced than Palin on the Republican ticket for VP. That being said, she is not unqualified to be President as you and others are claiming. I have never made the case that Obama was not qualifed to be President, just that McCain's experience made him a far better candidate than Obama. My support for McCain is also not just based on his experience but also his judgement which you so often refer to.

In 1991, McCain understood that Saddam's military had to be removed from Kuwait as soon as possible. Joe Biden in the biggest vote of his career at that point got it wrong, and voted against the use of military force that even the French were actively participating in. Joe Biden voted against the coalition that is held up as the standard for one by so many.

In 2002, Obama voted against removing Saddam from power with military force. Saddam would still be in power in Iraq today free of sanctions and the embargo, if Obama had been President in 2002.

Two enormously important issues that Biden first, and then Obama got wrong. No one knows how Obama felt about the first Gulf War at the time, but its most likely that he got that one wrong to and voted with the majority of his party against removing Saddam's military from Kuwait.

Obama not only said the Surge in Iraq would not work but that it would make violence in Iraq worse. Biden wants to split Iraq into three countries. Provided Palin has views that are the opposite of Obama and Biden on these issues, she in some ways is already more qualifed than either Obama or Biden to be President.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 08-31-2008, 06:41 PM   #609
ONE
love, blood, life
 
digitize's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Dallas and around the Texas Triangle
Posts: 13,962
Local Time: 11:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
I do wish there was someone more experienced than Palin on the Republican ticket for VP. That being said, she is not unqualified to be President as you and others are claiming. I have never made the case that Obama was not qualifed to be President, just that McCain's experience made him a far better candidate than Obama. My support for McCain is also not just based on his experience but also his judgement which you so often refer to.

In 1991, McCain understood that Saddam's military had to be removed from Kuwait as soon as possible. Joe Biden in the biggest vote of his career at that point got it wrong, and voted against the use of military force that even the French were actively participating in. Joe Biden voted against the coalition that is held up as the standard for one by so many.

In 2002, Obama voted against removing Saddam from power with military force. Saddam would still be in power in Iraq today free of sanctions and the embargo, if Obama had been President in 2002.

Two enormously important issues that Biden first, and then Obama got wrong. No one knows how Obama felt about the first Gulf War at the time, but its most likely that he got that one wrong to and voted with the majority of his party against removing Saddam's military from Kuwait.

Obama not only said the Surge in Iraq would not work but that it would make violence in Iraq worse. Biden wants to split Iraq into three countries. Provided Palin has views that are the opposite of Obama and Biden on these issues, she in some ways is already more qualifed than either Obama or Biden to be President.
If Barack had been President in 2002, we wouldn't be spending upwards of one-trillion-devalued-dollars that don't exist on a corrupt, useless war that has accomplished nothing more than frying our image in the middle east and allowing terrorists to recruit new people to their cause.

And regarding the surge, it was designed to allow for political progress to happen. You can kick all the terrorist ass you want to, but, in the end, it's all going to be useless if the Iraqi government continues to be in a state of complete disaster.
__________________
digitize is offline  
Old 08-31-2008, 06:47 PM   #610
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 09:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitize View Post
If Barack had been President in 2002, .
he would have to have been the Vice President
and Bush would have to have been incapacitated
for Barack to President in 2002 .
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 08-31-2008, 06:51 PM   #611
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2isthebest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vision over visibility....
Posts: 12,332
Local Time: 01:28 AM
It just keeps getting worse. If Cindy McCain wanted to start making herself a more known figure in her husband's campaign, rambling off statements that make her sound like a clueless idiot is not the way to go about it. I know she's an intelligent woman, from what I understand she has multiple degrees in Education, but this is ridiculous. Also, the only way Palin could sound less confident in her abilities would be if she actually just came right out said, "I don't know what the fuck I'm doing." At least then she'd be telling the truth.


Greg Mitchell: Cindy McCain on ABC Today: Palin Has National Security Experience Because Alaska Is Close To Russia
__________________
U2isthebest is offline  
Old 08-31-2008, 06:52 PM   #612
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 05:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitize View Post
If Barack had been President in 2002, we wouldn't be spending upwards of a one-trillion-devalued-dollars that don't exist on a corrupt, useless war that has accomplished nothing more than frying our image in the middle east and allowing terrorists to recruit new people to their cause.

And regarding the surge, it was designed to allow for political progress to happen. You can kick all the terrorist ass you want to, but, in the end, it's all going to be useless if the Iraqi government continues to be in a state of complete disaster.
US defense spending including spending on both the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan has been smaller as a percentage of US wealth than US defense spending was in the 1980s. Its only been 50% larger than the peacetime defense spending holiday of the 1990s.

It was necessity to remove Saddam given the threat he posed to vital US national security interest in the Persian Gulf. Waiting for Saddam to make the first move again after what he did in 1990 was not an option. The loss of Persian Gulf Oil supply could cause a worldwide economic depression as bad as or worse than the 1930s. Removing Saddam's removes the threat to something that is vital to the whole planet.

In addition, waiting to confront Saddam later, would have only increased the cost to the United States in terms of money and casaulties.

As far as the Surge it was designed to both reduce violence and allow for improvements in the political and economic progress to happen in the country. All of those things have happened. Iraq is doing very well economically and politically, especially relative to where it was two years ago. Substantial progress has been made on 15 of the 18 benchmarks set by the US congress. The Iraqi military and security forces have made tremondous progress and are providing security for 11 of Iraq's 18 provinces. This is a gradual process, and provided that the United States does not withdraw pre-maturely, it will achieve its post Saddam objectives in Iraq.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 08-31-2008, 06:57 PM   #613
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 06:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
I do wish there was someone more experienced than Palin on the Republican ticket for VP. That being said, she is not unqualified to be President as you and others are claiming. I have never made the case that Obama was not qualifed to be President, just that McCain's experience made him a far better candidate than Obama. My support for McCain is also not just based on his experience but also his judgement which you so often refer to.

In 1991, McCain understood that Saddam's military had to be removed from Kuwait as soon as possible. Joe Biden in the biggest vote of his career at that point got it wrong, and voted against the use of military force that even the French were actively participating in. Joe Biden voted against the coalition that is held up as the standard for one by so many.

In 2002, Obama voted against removing Saddam from power with military force. Saddam would still be in power in Iraq today free of sanctions and the embargo, if Obama had been President in 2002.

Two enormously important issues that Biden first, and then Obama got wrong. No one knows how Obama felt about the first Gulf War at the time, but its most likely that he got that one wrong to and voted with the majority of his party against removing Saddam's military from Kuwait.

Obama not only said the Surge in Iraq would not work but that it would make violence in Iraq worse. Biden wants to split Iraq into three countries. Provided Palin has views that are the opposite of Obama and Biden on these issues, she in some ways is already more qualifed than either Obama or Biden to be President.

A rather confused interpretation.

Biden was wrong in 1991 and 2003. (You are glossing over the fact that, as you well know, Biden was on your side of the fence in 2003).

Obama was right in 2003. No serious observer disputes this.

Your last sentence is so absurd it's impossible to take seriously.

I happen to think that Palin is extremely well qualified, but it's nothing got to do with her views on Iraq.

Edit: Actually, come to think of it, I'm not entirely convinced Biden WAS wrong in 1991.
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 08-31-2008, 07:04 PM   #614
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 05:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
A rather confused interpretation.

Biden was wrong in 1991 and 2003. (You are glossing over the fact that, as you well know, Biden was on your side of the fence in 2003).
I said Biden first was wrong, meaning his vote in 1991 and the Obama with his vote in 2002.


Quote:
Obama was right in 2003. No serious observer disputes this.
Except for Colin Powell, Kenneth Pollack, Michael O'Halon, and the majority of US military and national security experts who understood that the erosion of Sanctions and the weapons embargo plus Saddam's failure to verifiably disarm and comply with Gulf War Ceacefire agreement meant that it was a necessity that he be removed.



Quote:
Your last sentence is so absurd it's impossible to take seriously.
Only to those foolish enough to believe that Persian Gulf Oil supply would be more secure today with Saddam still in power.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 08-31-2008, 07:12 PM   #615
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 06:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
I said Biden first was wrong, meaning his vote in 1991 and the Obama with his vote in 2002.
As I said, you are glossing over the fact that Biden was on your side in 2003, presumably because it doesn't suit your narrative. However, to be fair to Biden, he subsequently acknowledged his error and repented of his vote, unlike Hilary Clinton (for example).

This is one of the reasons why I still hope Obama/Biden win, though I admire Palin, as she does appear to have GENUINE conservative credentials, as opposed to the fake conservative credentials of someone like Ridge or the Zionist fanatic Lieberman.
__________________

__________________
financeguy is offline  
 

Tags
john mccain, sarah palin

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com