U.S. Presidential Election 2008

Noted: And in this Worldwide economy and goods exchange, it would be in Americas best interests to have a presidential candidate that has the ability to appeal to the International community.

Repug Hypocrisy NOW!



Obama May Bring Criminal Charges Against Bush


Life is good today! (well, except that stupid lame quote crap from BMW!)

eurovol, when the power returns to the Repubs, ( I mean in the House and Senate) they could bring charges of treason against Clinton for selling secrets to the Chinese. You Dems are opening a can of worms.

Links and proof please? No more right wing bullshit without splaining yourselves. If Booosh had had proof, I am sure he would have done something by now.

Proof? what proof does yours side have that Bush did anything wrong? None!!

Bush et al concocted fabricated intelligence reports that convinced the UK and others to support their bogus invasion of Iraq and to send off US troopps to their deaths in said cause.

Soryy Bell THe Cat, those reports came from the British, not from the US

Well, yanksavage, the fact that Bush has been smacked down a few times by the Supreme Court is a bit telling.


What the Republicans are pushing this year, as in all recent elections, is a culture war. They pretend they're not, but they are. I think Obama is wise to remain out of that fray, even though it will probably cost him some votes. Here's a supporting opinion:

I listened to both conferences extensively (the joys of a 2 hour commute) and the differences were astonishing. I have to ask though. What does all this POW in Vietnam stuff have to do with one's ability to run a country? I mean EVERYBODY went on and on and on and on and on and on about McCain's struggles in the Hanoi Hilton and the horrific torture her suffered blah blah blah. It was painful to hear at times. I just don't get how that would qualify him to be president.

Is it a Repug thing?

The Dem conference was very well choreographed. Very well indeed. Almost too well if you ask me.

and yet, cinzia, the Dems are known for their class warfare. Bad rich people and all not paying their fair share of taxes, when in fact the rich pay most of the taxes.

That's all they've got, Crawlie.

In America, the inherent virtues of military service is the same untouchable subject as race, only you can go on and on about your military service, but not about how you're black. That's why they're also pretending that Sarah Palin has something to do with the Alaska National Guard.

We've seen on this forum time and time again that Toytowners who have served in the American military think they have the last word, by virtue of their service and nothing else.

@yanksavage: and yet we can assume that the rich people who should be paying more taxes are the same educated, elite, Democrats who would themselves be taxed more. Ya know, if the Democrats are all so fucking elite, while the Republicans aren't.

this thread sorta reminds me of grape stomp lady. whatever happened to her?

Appeal to the rest of the world to buy US products? No doubt no one will buy without Obama imploring them to.

The Obama claim he would try Bush is merely red meat for Democratic Party activists.

eurovol, you posted something that cmes from a blog that does not reference the alleged original source. Given the panoply of lies/misrepresentations that have been told about Palin, the original source verifying and showing the original and accurate context of the alleged remarks by Palin is necessary, especially since you are a president of a chapter of a Democratic Party organization.

cinzia, on some (perhaps most) military-related issues a person with no military experience or no life experience as a military dependent is likely to lack perspective.

As for the Democratic elite, they have no intention of paying more taxes- note that Obama wants to do things like raise nominal income tax rates which will have little to no effect. Same with cap gains for people holding munis or tax-advantaged real estate in places like Manhattan and San Francisco.

I don't think that is limited to just the US though cinzia. I have heard a couple of British make that same claim.

I guess you are right though. If that's all you have then so be it.

btw. Did anyone else hear that speech from that teacher who removed all of the desks on the first day of school? Talk about totally random and out of place. No relevance at all.

My nationalist aunt e-mailed me that story on the same day as the Huckabee appearance at the RNC. Huckabee used it repeatedly on the campaign trail.

Now, this aunt has 3 adult sons. How many of them have served in the military? Zero.

the reports were genuine but uncorroborated yet Colin Powell made it sound as if they were. And others did not come from the British at all.

sweet...

The French, Germans, Russians and Isrealis all reported the same. Sadam admitted before his death that he put the news out that he had WMD.

More BS. You better have chest boots.

You can't accept the truth eurovol

No, for the US to appeal to the rest of the world for their products/services/commodities. The Republicans would have you think America can run itself. Far reaching and hardly realistic.

It is not clear what you are saying, KK. Are you saying the US would have to ask for these things to be donated to us, or are you saying that no one would be willing to sell us goods, services, or raw materials without Obamessiah intervention? BTW, I believe US goods imports alone were worth something like 2 trillion USD in 2007, which does not exactly sound like an appeal to me, rather a lot of voluntary exchanges.

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/internatio...df/trad1308.pdf

Conq, I think KK is a true believer that only His Holiness the Obamamessiah can help the US. Praise the Obamamesiah

Russia, China and India are the rising economies of tomorrow and to varying degrees are hostile to US interests, at least in part because of the brinkmanship of the current US regime. It does not matter how big the US market is if it can't get a slice of these markets and the next president will have his work cut out building bridges.

Regarding China, without exports to the US they'd be dead in the water.

BTC, whether the US can export more to the BRICs has relatively little to do with who the next US President will be. At any rate, that is not what KK was saying.

Furthermore, India is absolutely not hostile to US interests. The hostility of the Russian state towards the US dates back at least to the Cold War.

I fail to see any brinkmanship by the US towards China and Russia, but that is a common and unsubtantiated refrain from a person who once posted something along the lines that it was the destiny of Russia to become part of his beloved EU. China sees the US as a geopolitical, economic and military rival, so I would expect less than loving feelings from that dictatorship.

keep kidding yourself ...

do you think Russia would be playing the games it is now if Bush had not been the incumbent president for the last 10 years riding roughshod over world opinion and ignoring the Russian position in the security council over and over and over again?

Don't mean to cut in Conq, but, the Russians are suffering from a hurt ego, that is all.

and who hurt that ego?

as I said, bridges need to be built and the US needs a president that can accomplish that

As if the Russians give a shit who's in the White House!?

And you feel that kissing Russian ass is the way to go? How would that help Georgia?

Running roughshod over the Russian ego at the UN Security Council? How, BTC, other than Kosovo, which they do not really care about other than to give NATO a hard time. By that standard, Clinton trampled all over them by bombing Serbia in 1999. What you seem to want is someone to kowtow to the thugs in the Kremlin and let them de facto resurrect the Soviet Union.

they used to before Bush and Cheney repeatedly snubbed them. You might remember that Russia saw itself as an ally of the USA when Clinton was the incumbent.

over Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Israel, Darfur. The US approach to the UN over the last decade has been staggering in its arrogance. It used to be the case that the securiuty council worked together over these issues.

That is a delusion, BTC. They still has Russian state interests in mind, only at that time energy prices were low and they needed IMF assistance. I remember when they abandoned their peacekeeping responsibilities in Bosnia in 1999 to rush into Kosovo. Some all, although it was absolutely the right choice in the 1990s to try to engage Russia, something that is largely impossible today.

Darfur? Are you crazy? Russia and China are a large part of the problem there. Everyone knows Russia is anti-Israel. Afghanistan?You are aware that Putin allowed the use of some Russian bases and had no problem with the use of Uzbek facilities? As for Iraq, you know the Russians were Saddam buddies, e.g., the defense of Baghdad was drawn up by former Soviet generals.

Frankly, BTC, your view of a united UN Security Council is for the most part great imagination. Instances of cooperation there between the US and Russia have been few and far between.

Not at all. Because the US relies heavily on the International community, I would rather like to see a president that takes the job seriously.
Behavior and Perception is a factor in that. In addition, the ability to conduct themselves in a manner appropiate to the Leaders of World Nations. These are learned skills mind you, and not everyone knows how to act appropriately. Case in point.
McCain and Palin.
Bush and Merkel.

Apart from the fact that we spent the entire decade trying to basically buy them off in order to bring them into the "international fold", the people in charge of Russia were completely different, or at least had geopolitical goals which were compatible with both Europe and the US.

No more than the Evangelicals/Conservatives are looking for McCain and Palin to save the Nation from ourselves ... while telling us the War In Iraq is God's will ...

Can I get an AMEN

And after 45 Million abortions later, the Obamamessiah thinks he has moral authority to lead a country. Oh yea, above his paygrade to know right from wrong.

Absolutely. Thank god for Roe v. Wade and the legislature that supports it. A woman's body, a woman's choice.

the choice to kill and you are thanking God for evil in the world? You are mixed up.

Are you a dude? And American?

Because if you are, when you start sprouting boobs and have the ability to conceive, then you can talk to me about a women's choice. Until then, we'll agree to disagree, because I'm not about to spout the virtues of womanhood and fertility, and the physiological impact of being forced to keep an infant you don't want, and the cost society must bear when Women's reproductive rights are not protected... if you'll clearly have no clue.

You and the rest of the Dems have no understanding of right and wrong. You are all about selfishness and cruelty.

If abortion is so cruel and unholy, why are you so 'FOR' going to war to have people killed. As long as it's convieced and born and raised, then you can send that young man or woman to war to have them killed? I don't get it.

Incoming!!

I'm not surprised that yuou don't get it. No respect for life or freedom. Just like a Dem

I'm a life long Independent actually. This time I happen to be voting Dem.

How could I ever tell?

You are just so off point it's not even funny. It just shows me you have no understanding of the American political landscape or structure, and definitely no clear understanding of what being a Democrate or a Republican is.

And it could just be that you're reacting to something else, who knows.