Obama VP- Joe Biden

apg

Well-known member
Dec 28, 2004
3,019
0
East Virginia
Mike_Rupp said:
I'll ask it again: did FDR give enough time to contemplate his decision to declare war on Japan and enter in a World War? This wasn't a regional conflict like those that you mentioned, but a World War.

There are several reasons why FDR didn't have to wait or ‘contemplate' entry into WW2. The first is that there was news of simultaneous Japanese attacks in Singapore and elsewhere across the south Pacific on December 7th. Despite Bush being given the intelligence briefing titled "bin Laden determined to attack US" weeks earlier, it wasn't entirely clear - initially - who was doing the attacking on 9/11. On 12/7/41, it was pretty damned obvious who was dropping the bombs.... Secondly, the Japanese ambassador was supposed to deliver a declaration of war prior to the actual Pearl Harbor attack. Though he was late delivering the message, Navy cryptologists had deciphered it nine hours earlier.

Mike_Rupp said:
Bush acted with restraint in Afghanistan and Iraq.

That Bush showed restraint is patently absurd on so many levels. Plans were being drafted by Cheney and Rumsfeld and the other micro-cephalics at the Defense Policy Board to invade Iraq long before 9/11. The only one to show actual restraint was Bush-the-Elder (and so much wiser), who feared impeachment if things went badly in Iraq. Writing in his diary on 12/20/90, about the impending war, Bush recorded his fears: "But if it drags out, not only will I take the blame, but I will probably have impeachment proceedings filed against me." Rightly so....

But the folks on the right continue to say absurd things because they think they can get away with it. The ethical troglodytes on the right apparently have no concept of reality, and can say the most absurd things without fear of contradiction ‘cause liberals have hardly ever called ‘em on it. Witness what McCain and Palin have been saying the past few days - things that have been clearly and can be proven demonstrably to be completely false. Yet they still say it. It's like they've never heard of audio or video tape... At the convention, Mitt Romney claimed "liberals don't have a clue," and backed that statement up by saying that the federal government right now is too liberal. "We need change, all right. Change from a liberal Washington to a conservative Washington." How clueless can one get?

So instead of contemplative thought, we get action - which is usually wrong-headed or misdirected. Bush has said many times that "he goes with his gut." Despite the international outpouring of support following 9/11, today, seven years later, Bush has squandered the goodwill of the world. The global opinion of the United States is lower than at almost any time in history. America's new posture was summarized in one, absurd sentence to Congress on 9/20/01: "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." (Some folks on this board use a similar bludgeon in response to any criticism.) So instead we invade Iraq rather than concentrating on the for-real threat in Afghanistan...and bin Laden continues to consume oxygen.

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Michael McMullen, warned Congress yesterday, "I'm not convinced we're winning in Afghanistan." Furthermore, he said the US is "running out of time" to succeed in Afghanistan and that sending in more troops will not necessarily guarantee victory. Yet McCain wants to stay in Iraq indefinitely....

But the absurdity exponentiates. McCain has also said that he knows how to take bin Laden down. "I know how to do it," he told his supporters several days ago. He's either lying simply to sound, well, presidential or - worse - he's blackmailing the electorate in order to win in November. Either way is despicable, but then fear has been the principle motivator for GOP campaigns ever since 9/11. "You must vote republican or this will happen again and you will die." Doesn't "then" count?

McCain promised a decent campaign, but if he does know how to get bin Laden, why hasn't he told someone at the CIA or maybe the Pentagon or W, at least? To know and remain silent is aiding and abetting the terrorists.
 

Mike_Rupp

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2004
3,604
0
Mercer Island, WA
So you are saying is that when Bush attacked Afghanistan in October 2001, approximately a month after September 11, that wasn't enough time for contemplation? Or is it just that Bush is too stupid to contemplate anything?

Landrovered, I'm glad to see that you answered the question yourself.
 

landrovered

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2006
4,289
0
Mike_Rupp said:
So you are saying is that when Bush attacked Afghanistan in October 2001, approximately a month after September 11, that wasn't enough time for contemplation? Or is it just that Bush is too stupid to contemplate anything?

Landrovered, I'm glad to see that you answered the question yourself.

The Bush response to 9-11 was to pursue Afghanastan and I agree with that BUT not 24 hours after the catastrophy, Iraq was already on the table as a lateral play for purely personal reasons that Bush himself can only explain.
 

p m

Administrator
Staff member
Apr 19, 2004
15,651
869
58
La Jolla, CA
www.3rj.org
Just lovely...
from NYTimes:
Mr. Obama knew what he was getting when he picked Mr. Biden as his running mate: A veteran of six terms in the Senate, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee and former chairman of the Judiciary Committee, an Irish Catholic with working-class roots, a guy who had twice been tested in the arena of presidential politics.

And a human verbal wrecking crew.

This is the fellow who nearly derailed his nascent presidential campaign last year by calling Mr. Obama bright and clean and articulate and who noted that you needed a slight Indian accent to walk into a Dunkin’ Donuts or 7-Eleven in Delaware.

The man who, reading his vice-presidential acceptance speech from a TelePrompter, bungled Senator John McCain’s name, calling him “George” (“Freudian slip, folks, Freudian slip,” he explained).

The man who, on the day Mr. Obama announced him as his running mate, referred to his party’s presidential nominee as “Barack America” and noted that his wife, Jill, a college professor, was “drop-dead gorgeous” but who, problematically, possessed a doctorate.

The man who has said he is running for president (not vice president) and who confused Army brigades with battalions. Who referred to his Republican vice-presidential opponent as the lieutenant governor of Alaska.

<snipped - Biden's misspeak regarded as his authenticity>

In Fort Myers, Fla., last week, he referred to the “Biden administration,” before quickly correcting himself to say the “Obama-Biden administration.”
“Believe me, that wasn’t a Freudian slip,” he said, laughing and crossing himself. “Oh lordy day, I tell ya.”
 

apg

Well-known member
Dec 28, 2004
3,019
0
East Virginia
Going after the thugs that perpetrated 9/11 ASAP was what was required. Invading a country that had no connection to 9/11, not so much....

On October 7, 2001, immediately before onset of bombing, the Taliban offered to try bin Laden in Afghanistan in an Islamic court. This was rejected by the US, and the bombing of targets commenced the same day.

A week later and well into an apparently effective bombing campaign, the Taliban offered to surrender bin Laden to a third country for trial, if the bombing halted and they were shown evidence of his involvement in the 9/11 attacks. This was also rejected by Bush, who declared "There's no need to discuss innocence or guilt. We know he's guilty."

So we *could* have had him...but invasion plans were already in the works for the real target, Iraq.
 

HunterAK

Well-known member
May 19, 2005
1,721
0
Anchorage Alaska
Are we gonna avoid talking about Biden some more on this thread or what? I know everyone wants it to be about Bush, we all clearly know this, but lets get some "straight talk" on Sen. Biden and how much of a fumbling moron he is, shall we?
 
Oct 27, 2004
3,000
4
On October 7, 2001, immediately before onset of bombing, the Taliban offered to try bin Laden in Afghanistan in an Islamic court. This was rejected by the US, and the bombing of targets commenced the same day.

This is interesting....Link?
 

MarkP

Well-known member
Apr 23, 2004
6,672
0
Colorado
apg said:
. . . That Bush showed restraint is patently absurd on so many levels. Plans were being drafted by Cheney and Rumsfeld and the other micro-cephalics at the Defense Policy Board to invade Iraq long before 9/11. . . .

After 17 UN resolutions, President Clinton declaring a policy of regime change in Iraq and intelligence developed by two administrations, your right, the planning started long before 9/11. I'm sure you will agree.
 

Bannon88

Well-known member
Nov 3, 2004
1,967
0
50
Columbia, IL
If Obama can't take care of one half-brother in his family, how the hell will he be able to take care of all the "brothas" in the US?

Obama makes like $4 million a year, and his half-brother lives on a roughly $12 a year. I guess postage would be too much for BHO.
 

MUSKYMAN

Well-known member
Apr 19, 2004
8,277
0
OverBarrington IL
Bannon88 said:
Obama makes like $4 million a year, and his half-brother lives on a roughly $12 a year. I guess postage would be too much for BHO.

oh come on where would it stop?

if he sent him $100 he would have to send the other siblings $100 as well:rofl:
 

apg

Well-known member
Dec 28, 2004
3,019
0
East Virginia
Chris-St Louis said:
This is interesting....Link?

Nic Robertson and Kelly Wallace (October 21, 2001). "U.S. rejects Taliban offer to try bin Laden". CNN.com. http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/10/07/ret.us.taliban/index.html

"Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over". Guardian Unlimited (October 14, 2001). http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/oct/14/afghanistan.terrorism5

And even more interesting is that Spain offered to broker a deal in the week before the start of our campaign in Iraq. Saddam was to go into exile - heavily compensated, of course - so there would have been no legitimate reason for the invasion to take place. Of course, the Bush administration rejected that, too. The decision to go to war had been made long before 9/11.
 

Bannon88

Well-known member
Nov 3, 2004
1,967
0
50
Columbia, IL
MUSKYMAN said:
oh come on where would it stop?

if he sent him $100 he would have to send the other siblings $100 as well:rofl:

If BHO becomes President, I imagine that the money won't stop flowing. Every "program for the poor", will be instantly funded and backed, an the influx of new applications for programs will be amazing.



Obama will be like an OG handing out turkeys in Harlem on Thanksgiving morning.
 

Blue

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2004
10,080
885
AZ
Hmmmm.....

Sarah Palin thread has 1,047 posts as of right now.

Biden has 197. (I even posted this thought here to help out old Joe.)

Granted, the Palin thread is about 5 days older....but I think the activity tells you something about the 2 VP contenders.
 

HunterAK

Well-known member
May 19, 2005
1,721
0
Anchorage Alaska
Blue said:
Hmmmm.....

Sarah Palin thread has 1,047 posts as of right now.

Biden has 197. (I even posted this thought here to help out old Joe.)

Granted, the Palin thread is about 5 days older....but I think the activity tells you something about the 2 VP contenders.

No shit. Half of the posts on here aren't even about him and completely off topic. Toronado has 10+ posts of Bristol Palin pictures. :)

Know why? Cuz Biden is a total boring, pontificating, racist, insensitive prick that doesn't deserve an intellectual debate between anyone anyways. IMO, he brings more of a negative draw to Obama then a positive one.

Palin is CLEARLY a more dominant VP choice than Biden. No one has come to Biden's defense on here and it's pretty clear why. He's an asshole with a temper who has somehow managed to stay a United States Senator. Imagine that! Delaware must be lacking leadership, big time!

It's hilarious to me how the media has barely addressed his existence for one, but for another they have barely highlighted his controversial faults, misquotes, fuck-ups, etc. AT ALL!

WTF?!? Doesn't anyone who's voting for Obama give a shit? This guy is the WORST!

Oh wait, I stand corrected again, Toronado did say he loved Biden. Sorry T.
 
Last edited:

MarkP

Well-known member
Apr 23, 2004
6,672
0
Colorado
So for all you women out there, either Discoweb, virtual or friends of . . . .

Obama's equal pay for a equal work propaganda- more lies.

Is McCain's Senate Office a More Lucrative Workplace for Women Than Obama's?
ABC News

. . . . Using the public information compiled on the Web site of the non-partisan group Legistorm, Murdock concludes that, on average, women in McCain's office are paid more than the men in McCain's office -- $1.04 for every dollar a man makes. Men in Obama's office make more than women do; female employees make 83 cents for every dollar made by male employees.

Murdock frames this as an issue of pay equity, but it's not really -- if anything, it's more a matter of a "glass ceiling." . . . .​