MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
Uh yes-a black person doesn't disagree with Obama just because they're black? So they think with their skin color?
I now expect all of you to assume that it very well might be a Democrat in disguise whenever you see someone holding an offensive anti-Obama poster, and to not assume it's a conservative until you have been given proven, undeniable evidence.
My point is that it is now known that there are Obama supporters out there posing as conservatives to make them look bad. And the media will film them and run with it, and say "Hey, look at the conservatives comparing Obama to Hitler."
I'm not getting your point. Aren't you trying to have it both ways? Think about how you feel about all these protesters you're seeing on TV. Now, do you feel that exact same way- if not worse- about the people in that article? If not, that's unfair.
.
wow,
are you suggesting Sarah Palin is a plant?
wow,
are you suggesting Sarah Palin is a plant?
Anybody remember the media making a big deal of these 2002 protests, or implying that they represent the whole Democratic Party? I didn't think so...
Analysis: Press Largely Ignored Incendiary Rhetoric at Bush Protest - Political News - FOXNews.com
When Bush visited Portland, Ore., for a fundraiser, protesters stalked his motorcade, assailed his limousine and stoned a car containing his advisers. Chanting "Bush is a terrorist!",
A fourth declared: "CHRISTIAN FASCISM," with a swastika in place of the letter S in each word.
"BUSH: BASTARD CHILD OF THE SUPREME COURT." One sign read: "IMPEACH THE COURT-APPOINTED JUNTA AND THE FASCIST, EGOMANIACAL, BLOOD-SWILLING BEAST!"
Well, that's not very civil at all, now, is it?
Many of the people that voted for Dingell, the longest serving member in the House with a lot of power and seniority, who enjoys support from the NRA and many in big business
probably did not vote for or like Obama and his policies, they believe he wants to take their guns away and is not friendly to big business.
It is not a stretch at all that one could be pro Dingell and anti Obama.
Is it unreasonable to suggest that someone could be a supporter of Dingell and avid opponent of Obama?
I am not looking for a broader trend at all.
Only the couple in question, they showed up with anti-Obama signs.
1. they don't support the President or want him to succeed.
2. then after the rally they passed out pro Dingell literature.
like many in the area they may have a long term history with overall favorable view of the pork he is able to bring home.
Her?
I literally laughed out loud at work when I came across this. I love it so much:
You seem to be overlooking the fact that we were all told, including Bill Clinton and Mickey Mouse, that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and was ready to annihilate the western world. They swore to this fact up and down, claiming that they had visual proof and that they knew in which area these weapons of mass destruction were being held.
The truth, and it still is the truth 6 years later, is that these weapons never existed. That part, that monumental part, the reason why we were told we needed to send over our troops was the biggest lie of this century. We had no reason to go into Iraq. Bush's administration promised to hunt down those responsible for 9/11. Where is he? Where is Osama bin Laden? Saddam Hussein was not responsible for 9/11. I'm sure he wasn't crushed about it.
He was an asshole. But the world is filled with assholes.
Say what you will about GDP and deficits and profits, but this is the defining part of Bush's legacy. No one remembers Lincoln for... I don't know, animal welfare.
The truth, and it still is the truth 6 years later, is that these weapons never existed.
That part, that monumental part, the reason why we were told we needed to send over our troops was the biggest lie of this century. We had no reason to go into Iraq.
He was an asshole. But the world is filled with assholes.
yes
oh yeah Iraq is a reeeal threat to the US. what, did it take us all of like 4 months to beat them in the Gulf War? we lost like 100 troops, they lost something around 50,000.
no, but we didnt go into Iraq in '03 because they invaded Kuwait did we?
Now that's just silly. What's to stop us from invading Russia because there's some report out there that says Putin wants to destroy Michigan? Better to be safe than sorry!
We were all well aware of what happened on that Tuesday. Some of us kept it in mind so much that we weren't willing to sacrifice more American lives in a fruitless search that would further drive a wedge between us and the Middle East.
None of this, I mean none of this is reason for war. What happened in NY had nothing to do with Iraq, do you still think it does? You don't invade based on "better safe than sorry", or these people will be happy...
He didn't say that. He, and Rumsfeld, and Condi, and yes, even Powell got on our televisions and said that these WMDs were an imminent threat. This was not the truth.
Not the truth. Not the truth. Not the truth. Not the truth. Not the truth. Repeat that over and over please.
Well, the United Nations did not think so, which is why it passed strict resolutions against Saddam, after his unprovoked invasion of Kuwait, requiring that he verifiably disarm of all WMD or face military action to enforce that requirment.
It's funny how this had absolutely ZERO to do with my post and the context for which it was made, but any reason to mention the resolutions
Putin's Russia does not have, and is not violating any UN Security Council resolutions passed under Chapter VII rules of the UN requiring him to verifiably disarm of all WMD as a result of an unprovoked invasion that threatened the planets energy supply.
There is much more cooperation today between the United States and people in the Middle East than there was before the Coalition invaded Iraq.
Can you name another leader besides Saddam in modern times that has launched 4 different invasions and unprovoked attacks on 4 different countries, threatened the planets main energy supplies with siezure and sabotoge, officially annexed one of his neighboring countries, used WMD more times than any leader since World War I, murdered through his wars and rule of Iraq nearly 1.7 million people, continue to remain in direct defiance of 17 UN Security Council Resolutions passed under chapter VII rules of the United Nations, while keeping a military of half a million troops, thousands of tanks and armored personal carries, thousands of Artillery pieces, hundreds of combat aircraft and potentially thousands of stocks of WMD, plus short range Ballistic Missiles?
the number of people who will acknowledge that Bush did the right thing will continue to rise.
I'm going to address like three points because I really don't have the time or the "facts" sitting in a file ready to be copied and pasted.
Way to miss my point completely.
Maybe on a governmental level, since we've put in two leaders to our liking, but with the people... not so much. Not to say they hate us for our freedoms, but they don't want us there. We've created more problems than there originally were. Probably because of the leaders we put in that were to our liking.
No cause that's incredibly specific to Saddam. I can name you an Asian type leader of a small island in the pacific who has a lil' nickname and tested some short range missiles over some ocean on or around the July 4th holiday. Said individual is communist and really doesn't like the Japanese either.
Can you name me any other individuals who fit this description PRECISELY besides the Lil' Kim of North Korea?????
BTW, I love how you snuck the "potential" in there. Nice touch.