Right before Tim Russert collapsed and died, he was blogging about an October surprised against Barack Obama and had mentioned the website: TheObamaFile com
No matter what party you represent or belong to, no matter if your for Obama or McCain. You are completely fucking out of line for extorting the late great Tim Russert. To promote your half-ass, baseless smear-machine of a propogandist website.
Stop That Shit. Respect the man, his family, and his legacy.
What kind of twisted logic are you using? Does not being in "lock step with the war party" make you a Marxist, Socialist or a Liberal? I live in a college town where 90% of the residents opposed the war from the beginning. About 80% of the U.S. population would like to end the ill-conceived war now. Most people with a modicum of intelligence understand that war is almost always counter productive. What is your point cgh423?
easymike, my response was intended for Rustyshackleford who claimed that Obama and Hillary would continue the wars. (see below) I disagreee with that assertion because Obama's stance against the war does not support it. Thank you for your informed defense of Obama on this site. Peace.
There is such a thing as LYING. What has he done since in real terms? What funding bill did he oppose? Did he try to impeach the War criminals in office? Did he renounce his membership to the CFR? You are being fooled. Ron Paul was the right choice and in 2012 you will know it for sure.
Rustyshackleford08, I agree with you that Ron Paul is principled and decidedly anti-war, and for those reasons I understand how a person can support him. However, he is incredibly conservative on social issues; his anti-choice position alone is not consistent with his libertarianism and is not something I could support. Not only that, but he cannot win. Give Obama a chance. He is going to be a great President. But let's all try to get along and talk to each other. Peace.
I know he is anti choice but you will never find someone who is absolutely perfect but you have to look past those issues sometimes. You have to understand that Abortion is NOT number 1 on his list right now compared to the OTHER crap thats going on. You really should find out what the CFR is and AIPAC (they DO NOT defend Jewish interests) really is about. Obama is a part of that and its the same group thats been running the show for 100 years. Thats why things get worst.
Obama has no clue on the monetary problem America is in and he speaks in nothing but platitudes with no real plan. Ron is precise and he doesn't change unless something better comes up. Obama's rhetoric is all talk and no substance..the differences between him and Hillery are only superficial since its the same people behind the scenes. That being said the only reason I would pick Obama over Hillery is because its Hillery, if it were Angelina Jolie I would vote for her so sex doesn't matter.
The only reason why you think he can't win is because the CFR media (look it up) do not want him to win and they put those thoughts in your mind. Do not follow the pack or listen to MSM.
RustyS, do you mean the Council on Foreign Relations when you talk about CFR? If so, I am familiar with it and with AIPAC and I agree that those are a concern for America. I know about Paul. I like Paul because he seems so honest, but he is way too conservative for me on social issues. I could not vote for him hoping that he might not get around to elevating strict constructionist (Radicals in Robes) to the court who would then undermine progressive causes that have been ensconced in the law.
On the economy, Nobel Laureates In Economics Joseph Stigltz (2001) and Edmund Phelps (2006) endorsed Obama. Stiglitz called Obama's speech on the economy "Brilliant". And Hillary's comes the DLC which is like the Republican wing of the Dem pary. Many of the problems we face today come as a result of the "Republicanesqe" Bill Clinton. (media consolidation, elimination of the Glass-Stegall protections, NAFTA...) McCain on the economy is a joke by his own admission. Would you vote for McCain?
Joseph Stigltz must either be paid off or misguided. I don't know what got in this guys head. But anyway I would never vote McSame, Hillery or Obama. I would vote Ron, write him in or vote Libertarian. You have to let go of the progressive stuff for now and let US root out the corruption. There is so much to do we would not have time to touch a social issue. We need to get rid of CIA (criminals), "Homeland" security, Military in 130 countries, Iraq war, CFR/AIPAC and other lobbists.
Do you honestly think all that other stuff is in the top ten compared to this stuff? We are in a fascist state and people need to wake up to that. Our government is privatized and no longer does whats good for us. Decision making needs to be don't by the representatives not the lobbyists. Ron would send that message better than anyone. Why do you think they take him out of the debates and pile on him. They lie on both sides Dem and Repub about him. They are to in the same.
why do they keep getting away with this stuff,politics and religion and kids is child abuse ,,let kids grow up and then make informed decisions ,,instead of polluting kids minds before they are capable of understanding
We all knew this...it keeps coming out...media kept saying we were crazy..paranoid!
Now the liars are saying we can win this like it something to win!
we have lost morally,finacially,and instead of being the known as the great freedom hope, we are seen as a dangerous threat to any country that doesn't agree with us..they see our rights going in the toilet.
And this is just skimming the surface!
Things are fine on the ground because we are paying off both sides,it's election time.
The main point this makes is that McCain has the same bad "cowboy" judgement as Bush. Obama, who may not have the same on the ground experience as McCain, has the intelligence (Harvard) and stomach to look past starting a foreign relations disaster. We need Obama now more than this country has ever needed someone, for more reasons than I have room to type. OBAMA 08'
They'll likely be on their way home by January 2009 anyways because conditions on the ground will be favorable for their withdrawal as Iraq is more and more able to defend and govern itself.... no thanks to the Dems who tried to pull the rug out from underneath that process. Yes we can... win in Iraq... if we let our troops win that is.
McCain is an awful choice...so is Hillary and Obama. There are more then 2/3 choices elections in America...open your fucking eyes. And don't complain when our government sucks even more in a few years then it is now. You people are voting for these losers.
Which Kool Aid drinking Neocon wrote this bit of fiction for you WizKil? You obviously don't know what a "socialist" is and you have NEVER heard either Clinton or Obama advocate "Big Government", say that they "Hate America", want a "Redistribution of Wealth" or that they "Hate Capitalist". Only two legged mushrooms thrive in this kind of bullsh*t. Thank God all Americans aren't that stupid.
WizKil, where's the substance in what you spin? Where's the proof. If you want to see another Bush in the W.H by all means vote for him but don't spread total bullshit lies about others. Give proof & substance & stop being such a Bushite. Bush went to Saudi Arabia recently, PRETENDED to ask for relief at the pump. They got a NUKE deal & we got HIGHER gas prices. You support that? That is the enemy within! under Republican rule America is at it's worst. I would NEVER vote for a Republican again.
More fear-mongering from the weak-minded and fearful. WizKil has nothing else to say. No platform, no plan, no solutions. Just bullshit accusations and hysterics. Take a powder dude.
The truth is that you hear what you want to hear ...or maybe you just never developed listening skills. They have not said anything close to what you've espoused.
"Grampa" is way cooler 'cuz he knows who he is and is unapologetic about it. Obama is trying to be all things to all people. There's a difference between a "uniter" and a politician. Unfortunately Barak is just a super-slick politician. I prefer gramps.
McCain knows who he is scotchscotch? That's good 'cause not many of us can figure that out. He has changed his mind on just about every know issue and he thinks we can "win" the war in Iraq. He is as clueless about foreign policy, the economy or what America needs as George Bush I'd rather elect a broomstick. That, at least would be a change from the self-serving incompetence we are enduring.
Mike the genius: this ad is not propaganda, the US is not winning in Iraq and that it's impossible to do so, Barak Hussein's not a leftist and his economic & foreign policy clear and brilliant, there are just a few poorly organized radical militant Islamists and it's ok to cede Iraq's oil to them, etc..
One doesn't have to love Bush or McCain to recognize that they were correct on this one. As fucked up as they are on big government, they're way better than Barak..
"Winning" was off of the table the minute the "war" ended (remember mission accomplished") and the incompetent occupation began. If you think letting oil companies and other corporations dictate our foreign policy (or anything else) is a good idea then you deserve Bush the dim. It doesn't take a genius to know that the current foreign is one of the worst economic and security disasters in history. We've created more enemies, a ridiculous debt to China and lost allies. You've been duped.
BTW, you wouldn't know a team of leftists if nine of them bit you in the ass. Labeling Barak a Marxist, Socialist, Liberal, etc. is a Neocon trick to confuse the loosing 25% like you scotchscotch. Barak is a Centrist. I only wish he were a liberal as falsely accused. Then again any intelligent and sane person is to the left of GWB and his cadre of right wing radical corporatists.
Still trolling I see.Your exact opposite of truth efforts here are noted. I don't know if you are making any converts. I doubt it. People would have to be pretty stupid to believe your crap.
Based on his voting record, Barak Hussein Obama is consistently rated the most liberal senator out there. The New York Times, Washington Post, and LA Times have cited this fact. He's drifted towards the center, just as McCain must, in order to not be labeled a polarizer.
Yup, those sneaky neo-cons fooled me. easymike, thanks for waking me up and saving me from their evil transe.
Yup you keep regurgitating the BS. I knew about the erroneous National Journal survey quoted by corporate media and newsertainers when I made my statement. According to a respected vote study by political science professors Keith Poole and Jeff Lewis, which considers every non-unanimous vote cast by every legislator to determine his or her relative ideology, the National Journal's selection of votes is subjective. Try doing your own thinking and research scothscotch.
BTW among the votes Obama cast that purportedly earned him the Journal's "most liberal senator" label were those to implement the 9-11 Commission's homeland security recommendations, provide more children with health insurance, expand federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, and maintain a federal minimum wage. They even considered "liberal" his vote for "an office of public integrity that stood outside of the Senate, and outside of Congress, to keep an impartial eye on ethics problems.
Oh yeah ... all ads are propaganda scotchscotch. They are what creates dutiful consumers like you. The trick is to separate fact from fiction (you shouldn't by a hog by looking at its tail). The facts in this ad are compelling because they come from the horse's mouth.
What a joke. Anything to sell a book. There's a video out there that goes from 1998 - 2005 that shows virtually EVERY Democrats who is now against the war in actual footage of their support for the war and saying that Saddam was a threat. Get a clue liberals. You can't rewrite history and I'd also remind you that it isn't 2006 anymore in Iraq, it's mid 2008 and things have improved, A LOT!!!! So much so that we can soon begin to withdraw, from a position of victory, not defeat.
irtually EVERY Democrats who is now against the war in actual footage of their support for the war and saying that Saddam was a threat.
So you're slamming the Dems for voting on the war because they were LIED TO by your heroes?
Get a clue Whacko77.
You're part of the fringe 25% in Amerika that thinx Shrub is doin a good hob, maybe even part of the 16 %(!) of dipshits who poison the US and A who believe the sun revolves around the Earth too, I'd bet.
So when Pres. Bush was governor of Texas back in 1998 he was somehow manipulating CIA intelligence even then? DAMN! Ol' Bush really is an evil genius!
The joke is all of the BS that you consume and regurgitate from neocon manure spreaders and the fact deficient newsertainers. Do a little research on the context of the support shown in those videos. Many mistakes were made based on the propaganda disseminated by the mushroom breeders that you seem to support.
Things have improved in Iraq? Since when? Ask an Iraqi not a war mongering propagandist.
BTW Yakko77, at this point victory, defeat, surrender, etc. is just more bullsh*t rhetoric. There is no such thing possible in an incompetent and poorly conceived occupation.
It was poorly handled at first and was continuously handled poorly for too long which cost us dearly in blood and treasure. No doubt about it. However, ever since the Anbar Awakening and the surge, things have been getting better to a point that violence in Iraq is at a 4 year low. Despite our mistakes, we at least were trying to rebuild Iraq as all AQI ever did was kill and destroy everything and the Iraqis finally saw that civil war they were embroiled in was instigated by AQI, not us.
"Poorly handled" what an understatement. It was a bloody clusterf*ck. Violence at a four year low is not justification for staying. Nor is it a sign of success. The so-called surge paid certain factions to not attack others. How long will that last? The Iraqi infrastructure has been decimated. Our contractors and mercenaries continue to rip off the Iraqis and us. Our presence is and will continue to be disruptive. We need to instigate diplomatic measures in the region and get out, period.
Read Moment of Truth in Iraq by Michael Yon. He's the longest serving embedded journalist in Iraq. He goes over in detail the mistakes that were made and why it cost us so heavily (he was one of the first to actually use the term "civil war' to describe the situation so he is no Bush apologist). He also goes into great detail about how the situation was corrected through effective counterinsurgency techniques that should've been used from the start. It is NOT 2006 anymore.
It's not 2006, so what? We never should have invaded in the first place. Our presence is disruptive in Iraq and the region. We are not welcomed by most Iraqi citizens. MICHAEL WARE is one of the few reporters to establish contacts with the Kurdish Peshmerga and the Iraqi insurgency. He was the first mainstream journalist to report on the severity of the growing opposition Western coalition forces faced. What useful purpose is served by staying? Bush is just delaying to pass the problem along.
I agree that McWar would be a horrible choice, but the democrats are not the answer. Ron Paul is the most intelligent person running for office. He has the answers, but the American public is too lazy to really investigate the issues. They want their candidates handed to them and will vote for whoever promises the most. Ron Paul promises nothing except less war and more personal freedom. He is the only eal anti-war candidate.
"A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the many. I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of bankers. There are only 2 things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket." Gen. Smedley Butler
Clinton (Bill and Hillary), Kerry, Kennedy, Pelosi, Reid and all of the far left wing nut jobs ALL said the same thing. To his credit, Obama didn't go along. You have to give him his due on that one. The rest of them all suck just like every other politician. So you guys need to put the Olbermann kool-aid down!
Oh bullshit. Stop playing that turn it into the Democrats fault again. That shit is played out. What you have here the very mouth piece of the Republicans, a guy in the thick of it saying that the Republicans were lying...lying to Congress too. THAT is what the Democrats have been saying for years. You guys are like the Japanese they kept finding in the south pacific years after WW2 who wouldn't believe that the war was over. You're the nut job.
Excellent ad and well said earwulf! John McCain is nothing but a tool. The exact the kind of person Eisenhower warned us about in his speech on the military industrial complex.
FUCK mc cain (mc old).
Thesouthman 3 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
yea scott come see my videos!!
rasjahjah 3 years ago
Shock!
Right before Tim Russert collapsed and died, he was blogging about an October surprised against Barack Obama and had mentioned the website: TheObamaFile com
NBC/MSNBC removed the post minutes later
StellarMortem 3 years ago
No matter what party you represent or belong to, no matter if your for Obama or McCain. You are completely fucking out of line for extorting the late great Tim Russert. To promote your half-ass, baseless smear-machine of a propogandist website.
Stop That Shit. Respect the man, his family, and his legacy.
OBAMA '08
ILoveGoodFellas 3 years ago
waooo, where is McPAIN? pls vote HOPE. VOTE OBAMA 08.
vote2009 3 years ago
Obama and Hillery will continue the wars too. They serve the CFR and AIPAC.
Rustyshackleford08 3 years ago
Obama spoke out against going to war in Iraq. That alone is a challenge to your assertion. He obviously doesn't walk in lock-step with the War Party.
cgh423 3 years ago
What kind of twisted logic are you using? Does not being in "lock step with the war party" make you a Marxist, Socialist or a Liberal? I live in a college town where 90% of the residents opposed the war from the beginning. About 80% of the U.S. population would like to end the ill-conceived war now. Most people with a modicum of intelligence understand that war is almost always counter productive. What is your point cgh423?
easymike 3 years ago
easymike, my response was intended for Rustyshackleford who claimed that Obama and Hillary would continue the wars. (see below) I disagreee with that assertion because Obama's stance against the war does not support it. Thank you for your informed defense of Obama on this site. Peace.
cgh423 3 years ago
Sorry,
Mea Culpa.
Peace
easymike 3 years ago
There is such a thing as LYING. What has he done since in real terms? What funding bill did he oppose? Did he try to impeach the War criminals in office? Did he renounce his membership to the CFR? You are being fooled. Ron Paul was the right choice and in 2012 you will know it for sure.
Rustyshackleford08 3 years ago
Rustyshackleford08, I agree with you that Ron Paul is principled and decidedly anti-war, and for those reasons I understand how a person can support him. However, he is incredibly conservative on social issues; his anti-choice position alone is not consistent with his libertarianism and is not something I could support. Not only that, but he cannot win. Give Obama a chance. He is going to be a great President. But let's all try to get along and talk to each other. Peace.
cgh423 3 years ago
I know he is anti choice but you will never find someone who is absolutely perfect but you have to look past those issues sometimes. You have to understand that Abortion is NOT number 1 on his list right now compared to the OTHER crap thats going on. You really should find out what the CFR is and AIPAC (they DO NOT defend Jewish interests) really is about. Obama is a part of that and its the same group thats been running the show for 100 years. Thats why things get worst.
(cont)
Rustyshackleford08 3 years ago
Obama has no clue on the monetary problem America is in and he speaks in nothing but platitudes with no real plan. Ron is precise and he doesn't change unless something better comes up. Obama's rhetoric is all talk and no substance..the differences between him and Hillery are only superficial since its the same people behind the scenes. That being said the only reason I would pick Obama over Hillery is because its Hillery, if it were Angelina Jolie I would vote for her so sex doesn't matter.
Rustyshackleford08 3 years ago
The only reason why you think he can't win is because the CFR media (look it up) do not want him to win and they put those thoughts in your mind. Do not follow the pack or listen to MSM.
Rustyshackleford08 3 years ago
RustyS, do you mean the Council on Foreign Relations when you talk about CFR? If so, I am familiar with it and with AIPAC and I agree that those are a concern for America. I know about Paul. I like Paul because he seems so honest, but he is way too conservative for me on social issues. I could not vote for him hoping that he might not get around to elevating strict constructionist (Radicals in Robes) to the court who would then undermine progressive causes that have been ensconced in the law.
cgh423 3 years ago
On the economy, Nobel Laureates In Economics Joseph Stigltz (2001) and Edmund Phelps (2006) endorsed Obama. Stiglitz called Obama's speech on the economy "Brilliant". And Hillary's comes the DLC which is like the Republican wing of the Dem pary. Many of the problems we face today come as a result of the "Republicanesqe" Bill Clinton. (media consolidation, elimination of the Glass-Stegall protections, NAFTA...) McCain on the economy is a joke by his own admission. Would you vote for McCain?
cgh423 3 years ago
Joseph Stigltz must either be paid off or misguided. I don't know what got in this guys head. But anyway I would never vote McSame, Hillery or Obama. I would vote Ron, write him in or vote Libertarian. You have to let go of the progressive stuff for now and let US root out the corruption. There is so much to do we would not have time to touch a social issue. We need to get rid of CIA (criminals), "Homeland" security, Military in 130 countries, Iraq war, CFR/AIPAC and other lobbists.
(CONT)
Rustyshackleford08 3 years ago
Do you honestly think all that other stuff is in the top ten compared to this stuff? We are in a fascist state and people need to wake up to that. Our government is privatized and no longer does whats good for us. Decision making needs to be don't by the representatives not the lobbyists. Ron would send that message better than anyone. Why do you think they take him out of the debates and pile on him. They lie on both sides Dem and Repub about him. They are to in the same.
Rustyshackleford08 3 years ago
Hum...
I wonder if the Democratic controlled congress will pass yet another funding Bill for the Iraq war in the coming weeks?
vegasmoments 3 years ago
7 Stars and three thumbs up! McBush/McSame08! GOP= "Gas Oil Petrolium" or "Grumpy Old People"!
renijohn012270 3 years ago
why do they keep getting away with this stuff,politics and religion and kids is child abuse ,,let kids grow up and then make informed decisions ,,instead of polluting kids minds before they are capable of understanding
USoldOutCanadians 3 years ago
We all knew this...it keeps coming out...media kept saying we were crazy..paranoid!
Now the liars are saying we can win this like it something to win!
we have lost morally,finacially,and instead of being the known as the great freedom hope, we are seen as a dangerous threat to any country that doesn't agree with us..they see our rights going in the toilet.
And this is just skimming the surface!
Things are fine on the ground because we are paying off both sides,it's election time.
eyes open
beckpod1 3 years ago 2
The main point this makes is that McCain has the same bad "cowboy" judgement as Bush. Obama, who may not have the same on the ground experience as McCain, has the intelligence (Harvard) and stomach to look past starting a foreign relations disaster. We need Obama now more than this country has ever needed someone, for more reasons than I have room to type. OBAMA 08'
johnnycash1 3 years ago
THE INFOWARS MONEY BOMB HAS STARTED.
Funding a bigger megaphone to reach the masses.
Donate now at infowarsmoneybomb. com (remove space)
freedomsadvocate07 3 years ago
This video is quite powerful. It makes it point sharply and clearly.
jayraskin 3 years ago
This moron is sooooo toast.
noloolon 3 years ago
The Republicans are so going to lose the White House in January. :)
jurt00 3 years ago
Uhh.... You jackasses do know Obama or Hillary won't get us out of the war either, right? lol...
AllYourBase420 3 years ago
All you wingnuts are sounding desperate :)
animalnightlife 3 years ago
you jackasses do know that the only chance we have of bringing our soldiers home is President Obama, right?
stillcool 3 years ago
They'll likely be on their way home by January 2009 anyways because conditions on the ground will be favorable for their withdrawal as Iraq is more and more able to defend and govern itself.... no thanks to the Dems who tried to pull the rug out from underneath that process. Yes we can... win in Iraq... if we let our troops win that is.
Yakko77 3 years ago
No more Bush..... no McCain....
Dems for 2008!!!
AdrienneTrouble 3 years ago
Anyone that speaks truth to power is a patriot!
eekdog2005 3 years ago
How does Scott McClellan blasting Bush have anything to do with John McCain? This is propoganda you hypocrite
AsianNewsGuy 3 years ago
McClellan is the epitome of a Rat Fink!
Pelter1 3 years ago
"How Modern Liberals Think"
/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c
FreedomsPatriot 3 years ago
hahaha america sucks
ZeusOwnsYou 3 years ago
McCain is an awful choice...so is Hillary and Obama. There are more then 2/3 choices elections in America...open your fucking eyes. And don't complain when our government sucks even more in a few years then it is now. You people are voting for these losers.
PUGS1688 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Mrs Bill Clinton & Barack Hussein Obama
There is no difference between these 2.
Both are:
Socialist
Big Government
Hate America
Redistribution of Wealth
Hate Capitalist
LIARS!!
God help us if either one get elected
WizKil 3 years ago
Which Kool Aid drinking Neocon wrote this bit of fiction for you WizKil? You obviously don't know what a "socialist" is and you have NEVER heard either Clinton or Obama advocate "Big Government", say that they "Hate America", want a "Redistribution of Wealth" or that they "Hate Capitalist". Only two legged mushrooms thrive in this kind of bullsh*t. Thank God all Americans aren't that stupid.
easymike 3 years ago
Truth! Listen to what they say.
WizKil 3 years ago
WizKil, where's the substance in what you spin? Where's the proof. If you want to see another Bush in the W.H by all means vote for him but don't spread total bullshit lies about others. Give proof & substance & stop being such a Bushite. Bush went to Saudi Arabia recently, PRETENDED to ask for relief at the pump. They got a NUKE deal & we got HIGHER gas prices. You support that? That is the enemy within! under Republican rule America is at it's worst. I would NEVER vote for a Republican again.
UTBESUX 3 years ago
Truth! Listen to what they say.
WizKil 3 years ago
More fear-mongering from the weak-minded and fearful. WizKil has nothing else to say. No platform, no plan, no solutions. Just bullshit accusations and hysterics. Take a powder dude.
nothankyoumam 3 years ago
Truth! Listen to what they say.
WizKil 3 years ago
The truth is that you hear what you want to hear ...or maybe you just never developed listening skills. They have not said anything close to what you've espoused.
easymike 3 years ago
Invading Iraq was wrong and the US should withdraw all troops immediately. John McCain is a senile old man who has no credibility whatsoever.
buddyfreakinholly 3 years ago
"Grampa" is way cooler 'cuz he knows who he is and is unapologetic about it. Obama is trying to be all things to all people. There's a difference between a "uniter" and a politician. Unfortunately Barak is just a super-slick politician. I prefer gramps.
scotchscotch 3 years ago
McCain knows who he is scotchscotch? That's good 'cause not many of us can figure that out. He has changed his mind on just about every know issue and he thinks we can "win" the war in Iraq. He is as clueless about foreign policy, the economy or what America needs as George Bush I'd rather elect a broomstick. That, at least would be a change from the self-serving incompetence we are enduring.
easymike 3 years ago 2
Mike the genius: this ad is not propaganda, the US is not winning in Iraq and that it's impossible to do so, Barak Hussein's not a leftist and his economic & foreign policy clear and brilliant, there are just a few poorly organized radical militant Islamists and it's ok to cede Iraq's oil to them, etc..
One doesn't have to love Bush or McCain to recognize that they were correct on this one. As fucked up as they are on big government, they're way better than Barak..
scotchscotch 3 years ago
"Winning" was off of the table the minute the "war" ended (remember mission accomplished") and the incompetent occupation began. If you think letting oil companies and other corporations dictate our foreign policy (or anything else) is a good idea then you deserve Bush the dim. It doesn't take a genius to know that the current foreign is one of the worst economic and security disasters in history. We've created more enemies, a ridiculous debt to China and lost allies. You've been duped.
easymike 3 years ago
BTW, you wouldn't know a team of leftists if nine of them bit you in the ass. Labeling Barak a Marxist, Socialist, Liberal, etc. is a Neocon trick to confuse the loosing 25% like you scotchscotch. Barak is a Centrist. I only wish he were a liberal as falsely accused. Then again any intelligent and sane person is to the left of GWB and his cadre of right wing radical corporatists.
easymike 3 years ago
thedracle
Still trolling I see.Your exact opposite of truth efforts here are noted. I don't know if you are making any converts. I doubt it. People would have to be pretty stupid to believe your crap.
GreatSatan1 3 years ago
Are you calling me a Troll? I don't recall having a discussion with you but if I have said something that you dispute please say what it is.
easymike 3 years ago
easymike
My comment was addressed to "thedracle"
Don't be so sensitive. If the shoe fits however...........
GreatSatan1 3 years ago
Not sensitive greatsatan. I got an email notification from you, saw your post under mine and no thedracle in sight. No harm no foul.
easymike 3 years ago
Based on his voting record, Barak Hussein Obama is consistently rated the most liberal senator out there. The New York Times, Washington Post, and LA Times have cited this fact. He's drifted towards the center, just as McCain must, in order to not be labeled a polarizer.
Yup, those sneaky neo-cons fooled me. easymike, thanks for waking me up and saving me from their evil transe.
scotchscotch 3 years ago
Yup you keep regurgitating the BS. I knew about the erroneous National Journal survey quoted by corporate media and newsertainers when I made my statement. According to a respected vote study by political science professors Keith Poole and Jeff Lewis, which considers every non-unanimous vote cast by every legislator to determine his or her relative ideology, the National Journal's selection of votes is subjective. Try doing your own thinking and research scothscotch.
easymike 3 years ago
BTW among the votes Obama cast that purportedly earned him the Journal's "most liberal senator" label were those to implement the 9-11 Commission's homeland security recommendations, provide more children with health insurance, expand federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, and maintain a federal minimum wage. They even considered "liberal" his vote for "an office of public integrity that stood outside of the Senate, and outside of Congress, to keep an impartial eye on ethics problems.
easymike 3 years ago
Oh yeah ... all ads are propaganda scotchscotch. They are what creates dutiful consumers like you. The trick is to separate fact from fiction (you shouldn't by a hog by looking at its tail). The facts in this ad are compelling because they come from the horse's mouth.
easymike 3 years ago
..and this isn't propaganda??
scotchscotch 3 years ago
if Mcbush gets elected i will move to canada
notarypublic 3 years ago
Grampa is unfit to lead.
IDCL1 3 years ago
What a joke. Anything to sell a book. There's a video out there that goes from 1998 - 2005 that shows virtually EVERY Democrats who is now against the war in actual footage of their support for the war and saying that Saddam was a threat. Get a clue liberals. You can't rewrite history and I'd also remind you that it isn't 2006 anymore in Iraq, it's mid 2008 and things have improved, A LOT!!!! So much so that we can soon begin to withdraw, from a position of victory, not defeat.
Yakko77 3 years ago
irtually EVERY Democrats who is now against the war in actual footage of their support for the war and saying that Saddam was a threat.
So you're slamming the Dems for voting on the war because they were LIED TO by your heroes?
Get a clue Whacko77.
You're part of the fringe 25% in Amerika that thinx Shrub is doin a good hob, maybe even part of the 16 %(!) of dipshits who poison the US and A who believe the sun revolves around the Earth too, I'd bet.
ROOKTABULA 3 years ago
So when Pres. Bush was governor of Texas back in 1998 he was somehow manipulating CIA intelligence even then? DAMN! Ol' Bush really is an evil genius!
Yakko77 3 years ago
The joke is all of the BS that you consume and regurgitate from neocon manure spreaders and the fact deficient newsertainers. Do a little research on the context of the support shown in those videos. Many mistakes were made based on the propaganda disseminated by the mushroom breeders that you seem to support.
Things have improved in Iraq? Since when? Ask an Iraqi not a war mongering propagandist.
easymike 3 years ago
BTW Yakko77, at this point victory, defeat, surrender, etc. is just more bullsh*t rhetoric. There is no such thing possible in an incompetent and poorly conceived occupation.
easymike 3 years ago
It was poorly handled at first and was continuously handled poorly for too long which cost us dearly in blood and treasure. No doubt about it. However, ever since the Anbar Awakening and the surge, things have been getting better to a point that violence in Iraq is at a 4 year low. Despite our mistakes, we at least were trying to rebuild Iraq as all AQI ever did was kill and destroy everything and the Iraqis finally saw that civil war they were embroiled in was instigated by AQI, not us.
Yakko77 3 years ago
"Poorly handled" what an understatement. It was a bloody clusterf*ck. Violence at a four year low is not justification for staying. Nor is it a sign of success. The so-called surge paid certain factions to not attack others. How long will that last? The Iraqi infrastructure has been decimated. Our contractors and mercenaries continue to rip off the Iraqis and us. Our presence is and will continue to be disruptive. We need to instigate diplomatic measures in the region and get out, period.
easymike 3 years ago
Read Moment of Truth in Iraq by Michael Yon. He's the longest serving embedded journalist in Iraq. He goes over in detail the mistakes that were made and why it cost us so heavily (he was one of the first to actually use the term "civil war' to describe the situation so he is no Bush apologist). He also goes into great detail about how the situation was corrected through effective counterinsurgency techniques that should've been used from the start. It is NOT 2006 anymore.
Yakko77 3 years ago
It's not 2006, so what? We never should have invaded in the first place. Our presence is disruptive in Iraq and the region. We are not welcomed by most Iraqi citizens. MICHAEL WARE is one of the few reporters to establish contacts with the Kurdish Peshmerga and the Iraqi insurgency. He was the first mainstream journalist to report on the severity of the growing opposition Western coalition forces faced. What useful purpose is served by staying? Bush is just delaying to pass the problem along.
easymike 3 years ago
However, ever since the Anbar Awakening and the surge, things have been getting better to a point that violence in Iraq is at a 4 year low.
Parroting White House/Faux Noise points doesn't help. Despite our mistakes, we at least were trying to rebuild Iraq
Ummm - if you hadn't illegally invaded and DESTROYED the country, that wouldn't really be required, would it?
ROOKTABULA 3 years ago
this has been so obvious to anyone who is capable of critical thinking
now finally some republicans can start thinking for themselves and read this book instead of masturbating to what sean hannity has to say
mrgrieves9876 3 years ago
I agree that McWar would be a horrible choice, but the democrats are not the answer. Ron Paul is the most intelligent person running for office. He has the answers, but the American public is too lazy to really investigate the issues. They want their candidates handed to them and will vote for whoever promises the most. Ron Paul promises nothing except less war and more personal freedom. He is the only eal anti-war candidate.
landofthefreemyass 3 years ago
Ron Paul couldn't even get nominated in Nevada.
grazon 3 years ago
"A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the many. I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of bankers. There are only 2 things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket." Gen. Smedley Butler
Dacktyl 3 years ago
Clinton (Bill and Hillary), Kerry, Kennedy, Pelosi, Reid and all of the far left wing nut jobs ALL said the same thing. To his credit, Obama didn't go along. You have to give him his due on that one. The rest of them all suck just like every other politician. So you guys need to put the Olbermann kool-aid down!
jblakster 3 years ago
Oh bullshit. Stop playing that turn it into the Democrats fault again. That shit is played out. What you have here the very mouth piece of the Republicans, a guy in the thick of it saying that the Republicans were lying...lying to Congress too. THAT is what the Democrats have been saying for years. You guys are like the Japanese they kept finding in the south pacific years after WW2 who wouldn't believe that the war was over. You're the nut job.
watnabe 3 years ago 2
join the revolution!!!
akinfurno 3 years ago
Excellent ad and well said earwulf! John McCain is nothing but a tool. The exact the kind of person Eisenhower warned us about in his speech on the military industrial complex.
nystreetfighter 3 years ago
Great ad.
rjhunt14 3 years ago 3
Good to know that despite hating each others' guts Dean, Ehmannuel and Schumer are winning!
ystasino 3 years ago
john mccain the war mongerer from the double talk express
it derailed 8 years ago
realpointz 3 years ago 4
John McCain is, was, and always will be a tool of the war propaganda machine.
earwulf 3 years ago 10
McWarmonger is a jackass.
Neoconhater 3 years ago 6
Damn that's a good ad.
AnAmericanGentleman 3 years ago 7