FROM 2012 INTO 2013 POLITICS THREAD

YankeeFan · Feb 14, 2013

cranberry said:

YankeeFan said:

cranberry said:

FYI, the "Bush Doctrine" was nothing more than a neo-con wet dream. Pre-emptive war! Regime change!
Click to expand...

How is Obama's policy any different? Drone strikes, Libya?
Click to expand...

No ill-reasoned, trumped up and costly ground wars combined with more effective counter-terrorism efforts. Huge difference in dollars and bodies plus improved American credibility abroad.
Click to expand...

U.S. law would have prevented Bush from targeting Saddam Hussein for assassination in the way Obama has been able to target terrorist leaders.

A Republican President would also have been attacked for waging an air war in the way Clinton did in the former Yugoslavia or Obama has in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Yemen.

He would have been savaged for killing non-combatants, while Obama is largely given a pass.

And, while Obama can support regime change in Libya or Syria, while keeping his hands clean, a Republican President would have been accused of "desalinizing" the region.

Hell, Bush was beat up for not "protecting the museums" in Iraq, a story that was largely overblown.

old_tony · Feb 14, 2013

BenPoquette said:

cranberry said:

YankeeFan said:

cranberry said:

FYI, the "Bush Doctrine" was nothing more than a neo-con wet dream. Pre-emptive war! Regime change!
Click to expand...

How is Obama's policy any different? Drone strikes, Libya?
Click to expand...

No ill-reasoned, trumped up and costly ground wars combined with more effective counter-terrorism efforts. Huge difference in dollars and bodies plus improved American credibility abroad.
Click to expand...

I cannot believei how in the tank some of you are for Obama. It's almost comical. "More effective counter-terrorism efforts" how? In what way? "Improved American credibility abroad" in what terms? This would be funny if it weren't so sad and pathetic.
Click to expand...

Apparently it helps our credibility when terrorists are allowed to over-run our embassies and kill our ambassadors.

Boom_70 · Feb 14, 2013

YankeeFan said:

cranberry said:

YankeeFan said:

cranberry said:

FYI, the "Bush Doctrine" was nothing more than a neo-con wet dream. Pre-emptive war! Regime change!
Click to expand...

How is Obama's policy any different? Drone strikes, Libya?
Click to expand...

No ill-reasoned, trumped up and costly ground wars combined with more effective counter-terrorism efforts. Huge difference in dollars and bodies plus improved American credibility abroad.
Click to expand...

U.S. law would have prevented Bush from targeting Saddam Hussein for assassination in the way Obama has been able to target terrorist leaders.

A Republican President would also have been attacked for waging an air war in the way Clinton did in the former Yugoslavia or Obama has in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Yemen.

He would have been savaged for killing non-combatants, while Obama is largely given a pass.

And, while Obama can support regime change in Libya or Syria, while keeping his hands clean, a Republican President would have been accused of "desalinizing" the region.

Hell, Bush was beat up for not "protecting the museums" in Iraq, a story that was largely overblown.
Click to expand...

I don't think there is any doubt that the national media is in the tank for Obama.

BenPoquette · Feb 14, 2013

YankeeFan said:

cranberry said:

YankeeFan said:

cranberry said:

FYI, the "Bush Doctrine" was nothing more than a neo-con wet dream. Pre-emptive war! Regime change!
Click to expand...

How is Obama's policy any different? Drone strikes, Libya?
Click to expand...

No ill-reasoned, trumped up and costly ground wars combined with more effective counter-terrorism efforts. Huge difference in dollars and bodies plus improved American credibility abroad.
Click to expand...

U.S. law would have prevented Bush from targeting Saddam Hussein for assassination in the way Obama has been able to target terrorist leaders.

A Republican President would also have been attacked for waging an air war in the way Clinton did in the former Yugoslavia or Obama has in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Yemen.

He would have been savaged for killing non-combatants, while Obama is largely given a pass.

And, while Obama can support regime change in Libya or Syria, while keeping his hands clean, a Republican President would have been accused of "desalinizing" the region.

Hell, Bush was beat up for not "protecting the museums" in Iraq, a story that was largely overblown.
Click to expand...

Funny, I haven't heard anyone chant "No blood for oil" or seen the running body count on CNN in, say, about a little over four years. Wonder why.

YankeeFan · Feb 14, 2013

Rahm running in 2016?

Maybe:

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel is said by well-connected Democrats to be considering with the idea of running for president if Hillary Clinton opts out of the 2016 race.

The 53-year-old Emanuel, who is busy raising money for his 2015 reelection campaign in the Windy City, has had discussions both over the phone and face to face in the past month with Democratic Party donors and fundraisers about a possible White House run, according to sources.
Click to expand...

Maybe not:

“I talk to Rahm almost every single day, sometimes more than once a day, and he’s never said anything like that to me,” said Democratic strategist Paul Begala, a colleague and friend from Bill Clinton’s White House. “This is the first I’ve heard of it. That doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.”
Click to expand...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/02/14/rahm-emanuel-toying-with-2016-presidential-run-sources-say.html

Boom_70 · Feb 14, 2013

BenPoquette said:

YankeeFan said:

cranberry said:

YankeeFan said:

cranberry said:

FYI, the "Bush Doctrine" was nothing more than a neo-con wet dream. Pre-emptive war! Regime change!
Click to expand...

How is Obama's policy any different? Drone strikes, Libya?
Click to expand...

No ill-reasoned, trumped up and costly ground wars combined with more effective counter-terrorism efforts. Huge difference in dollars and bodies plus improved American credibility abroad.
Click to expand...

U.S. law would have prevented Bush from targeting Saddam Hussein for assassination in the way Obama has been able to target terrorist leaders.

A Republican President would also have been attacked for waging an air war in the way Clinton did in the former Yugoslavia or Obama has in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Yemen.

He would have been savaged for killing non-combatants, while Obama is largely given a pass.

And, while Obama can support regime change in Libya or Syria, while keeping his hands clean, a Republican President would have been accused of "desalinizing" the region.

Hell, Bush was beat up for not "protecting the museums" in Iraq, a story that was largely overblown.
Click to expand...

Funny, I haven't heard anyone chant "No blood for oil" or seen the running body count on CNN in, say, about a little over four years. Wonder why.
Click to expand...

I have not seen Obama being called a criminal yet.

Also his Justice Dept lead by Eric Holder is one of the finest, most upstanding ever.

BenPoquette · Feb 14, 2013

YankeeFan said:

Rahm running in 2016?

Maybe:

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel is said by well-connected Democrats to be considering with the idea of running for president if Hillary Clinton opts out of the 2016 race.

The 53-year-old Emanuel, who is busy raising money for his 2015 reelection campaign in the Windy City, has had discussions both over the phone and face to face in the past month with Democratic Party donors and fundraisers about a possible White House run, according to sources.
Click to expand...

Maybe not:

“I talk to Rahm almost every single day, sometimes more than once a day, and he’s never said anything like that to me,” said Democratic strategist Paul Begala, a colleague and friend from Bill Clinton’s White House. “This is the first I’ve heard of it. That doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.”
Click to expand...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/02/14/rahm-emanuel-toying-with-2016-presidential-run-sources-say.html
Click to expand...

We all know Hillary is going to run, and she will win if every Republican on the national stage continues to go about his business like he has no testicles. The reason Ben Carson's speech was so well-received was because people were thinking, "Finally, someone stood up to him." If things continue the way they are, with clods like John Boehner and Eric Cantor in positions of power, we might as well not even have an election in 2016.

Baron Scicluna · Feb 14, 2013

BenPoquette said:

YankeeFan said:

cranberry said:

YankeeFan said:

cranberry said:

FYI, the "Bush Doctrine" was nothing more than a neo-con wet dream. Pre-emptive war! Regime change!
Click to expand...

How is Obama's policy any different? Drone strikes, Libya?
Click to expand...

No ill-reasoned, trumped up and costly ground wars combined with more effective counter-terrorism efforts. Huge difference in dollars and bodies plus improved American credibility abroad.
Click to expand...

U.S. law would have prevented Bush from targeting Saddam Hussein for assassination in the way Obama has been able to target terrorist leaders.

A Republican President would also have been attacked for waging an air war in the way Clinton did in the former Yugoslavia or Obama has in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Yemen.

He would have been savaged for killing non-combatants, while Obama is largely given a pass.

And, while Obama can support regime change in Libya or Syria, while keeping his hands clean, a Republican President would have been accused of "desalinizing" the region.

Hell, Bush was beat up for not "protecting the museums" in Iraq, a story that was largely overblown.
Click to expand...

Funny, I haven't heard anyone chant "No blood for oil" or seen the running body count on CNN in, say, about a little over four years. Wonder why.
Click to expand...

Maybe because Obama didn't start a trumped-up war?

Moderator1 · Feb 14, 2013

THIS LOCK IS NOT PERMANENT

Most of you have been very, very good about staying within the rules of this thread. A couple of you have been complete assholes even with the loosened rules of this thread. Had some complaints from people who don't complain just because, and they bear looking into so they will be looked into and dealt with and then we'll get back to business so those who are enjoying this thread and doing things the right way can get back to that.

Thanks for your patience and understanding.

YankeeFan · Feb 26, 2013

And, we're back...

dooley_womack1 · Feb 26, 2013

Conservatives are poopyheads.

Captain Obvious · Feb 26, 2013

Rush Limbaugh is ashamed of his country. Bill O'Reilly said Americans just want money for nothing, because no one wants to work for a living.

I shouldn't have tuned to FOX News for a few minutes today.

Log in or Sign up

FROM 2012 INTO 2013 POLITICS THREAD

YankeeFan Well-Known Member

old_tony Well-Known Member

Boom_70 Well-Known Member

BenPoquette Active Member

YankeeFan Well-Known Member

Boom_70 Well-Known Member

BenPoquette Active Member

Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

Moderator1 Moderator Staff Member

YankeeFan Well-Known Member

dooley_womack1 Well-Known Member

Captain Obvious Guest

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

FROM 2012 INTO 2013 POLITICS THREAD

YankeeFan Well-Known Member

old_tony Well-Known Member

Boom_70 Well-Known Member

BenPoquette Active Member

YankeeFan Well-Known Member

Boom_70 Well-Known Member

BenPoquette Active Member

Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

Moderator1 Moderator Staff Member

YankeeFan Well-Known Member

dooley_womack1 Well-Known Member

Captain Obvious Guest

Share This Page

Useful Searches