08 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderBut according the Cindy Sheehan, had you read your own article, Obama promised to bring home one combat battalion per month but has not done so. So in her mind she WAS voting for change which was promised. Of course, one battalion beats no one coming home and being there for a 100 years. Unfortunately for people like Cindy, the two party system only seems to offer the status quo. So if you don't fit the progressive two party system mold I suppose you have no representation in the US.
Obama actually campaigned on a platform of expanding the Afghan war; the differences between his position and McCain's there were nominal.
08 Jan 11
Originally posted by whodeyThat was Iraq, whodey. For both.
But according the Cindy Sheehan, had you read your own article, Obama promised to bring home one combat battalion per month but has not done so. So in her mind she WAS voting for change which was promised. Of course, one battalion beats no one coming home and being there for a 100 years. Unfortunately for people like Cindy, the two party system only seems to offer the status quo.
08 Jan 11
Originally posted by whodeyLiberal media blah blah blah blah.
Well it's nice to see that she has not abandonded the cause, however, the reason I had no idea that she was still out there protesting was the media does not blast me with her face 24/7. Unfortunately for her, the media seems to no longer care.
08 Jan 11
Originally posted by no1marauderYes I know it was Iraq. What I am saying, however, in her mind it was better to close down one war than keep both up and going with McCain, so in her mind Obama promised change which he lied about.
That was Iraq, whodey. For both.
So answer yes or no, did Obama lie about bringing home one combat battalion per month? If so, is it worth while getting angry about or is Cindy just ruffling feathers?
08 Jan 11
Originally posted by whodeyThe whole concept is BS, so there's no sense in responding to your partisan shill talking point.
Exactly. Blah, blah, blah, we hate "W", blah, blah, blah we love Obama. Why? Is it because of the color of his skin or are there significant differences between the two?
08 Jan 11
Originally posted by no1marauderA quick wiki search would show you that, in fact, every democrat in both houses supported the Afghanistan war with the exception of Barbara Lee, the only nay. The Iraq war was more divided but still had plenty of democratic support.
Whodey's pacifism toward the Afghan war was noticeably absent before November 2008. The Left has continued to oppose both conflicts from the beginning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Terrorists
08 Jan 11
Originally posted by whodeyWe've had this discussion here before. In my mind, he did lie. But his Iraq policy wound up being far superior to what McCain would have offered. And it was a "change" from what GW's policy was.
Yes I know it was Iraq. What I am saying, however, in her mind it was better to close down one war than keep both up and going with McCain, so in her mind Obama promised change which he lied about.
So answer yes or no, did Obama lie about bringing home one combat battalion per month? If so, is it worth while getting angry about or is Cindy just ruffling feathers?
08 Jan 11
3 edits
Originally posted by dryhumpThe Left does not equal the Democratic Party.
A quick wiki search would show you that, in fact, every democrat in both houses supported the Afghanistan war with the exception of Barbara Lee, the only nay. The Iraq war was more divided but still had plenty of democratic support.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Terrorists
But even at that an authorization to use force against terrorists who committed the 9/11 attacks is not a vote for an endless occupation of Afghanistan (a country not even mentioned in the resolution).
And a majority of Democrats (57😵 in Congress voted against the Iraq resolution while 97% of Republicans voted for it.
08 Jan 11
Originally posted by no1marauder
The Left does not equal the Democratic Party.
But even at that an authorization to use force against terrorists in Afghanistan is not a vote for an endless occupation of that country. And a majority of Democrats (57😵 in Congress voted against the Iraq resolution while 97% of Republicans voted for it.
The Left does not equal the Democratic Party.
Who is this "left" you speak of?
08 Jan 11
Originally posted by no1marauderDo you think Cindy Sheehan cares?
And a majority of Democrats (57😵 in Congress voted against the Iraq resolution while 97% of Republicans voted for it.[/b]
Two years later with Democrats fully in control America still resides in Iraq.
Really its like Obama's vote against raising the debt ceiling 4 years ago. He has no actual convictions about it, rather, it is mere political grand standing. It's people like you who buy into the partisan rhetoric when the painful truth is that both parties are up to the same things.
08 Jan 11
Originally posted by no1marauderWhat do you deem a progressive position? In addtion, what makes someone a card carrying leftist?
People who adopt progressive positions. There are some people in the Left in the Democratic Party, but the party itself has not been "leftist" for decades.
08 Jan 11
Originally posted by whodeyYour last sentence is an example of your brainwashed propaganda and your tendency to project unto others your own failings. I didn't vote for Obama and have voted for very few Democrats over the last 12 or so years.
Do you think Cindy Sheehan cares?
Two years later with Democrats fully in control America still resides in Iraq.
Really its like Obama's vote against raising the debt ceiling 4 years ago. He has no actual convictions about it, rather, it is mere political grand standing. It's people like you who buy into the partisan rhetoric when the painful truth is that both parties are up to the same things.