Obama Web site removes `surge' from Iraq problem

[daihashi]

Wow, it kinda sickens me seeing everyone on here ready to hump McCains leg, but puking the second Obama makes a change.

So the countless pro obama threads and obama fanatics don't bother you? Talk about hypocrisy....

And if the only change Obama is going to make is his stance on an issue then I'll more than happily puke all over him. Because that's the only change we're seeing thus far. Or maybe you didn't pay attention from the democratic primaries compared to the stuff he is saying now??

When you point you finger at someone you have 3 more fingers pointed right back at you :thumbsup:

[dragonrider]

I've stayed off the boards up until recently due to events here on canna dot com that just left a bad taste in my mouth.

Damn, ain't that the truth! I just spent a week off for mostly the same reason. Came back today, and almost immediately felt the nausea return.

[Psycho4Bud]

Damn, ain't that the truth! I just spent a week off for mostly the same reason. Came back today, and almost immediately felt the nausea return.

I hear ya....when your candidate of a lifetime switches his positions like this assclown has, I'd feel a bit sick myself. Hope ya get to feelin' better.

Have a good one!:s4:

[Psycho4Bud]

Everyone knew if you pump a shit ton of american soldiers somewhere, the violence will cut down there, but they don't stop, they go where the "cops" arn't, maybe Afganistan?

"I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse."........Obama

P4B, yes, Obama was against the surge (as am I, I still think we should have pulled out instead of digging ourselves deeper into the hole that is Iraq), is that a crime?

Violence is down by 80%, Al-Quada is almost a thing of the past, provinces have been passed over to Iraqi control, etc....

It's pretty clear that your just talking the left wing rhetoric instead of stating facts. Did ya know that we are down to pre-surge troop levels? LOL...I didn't think so according to your post. Hell, even ol' senile McCain knows that shit.

Have a good one!:s4:

[daihashi]

Diahashi, please keep your words out of my mouth, M'kay? You dont even know me you ass, dont call me a hypocrite until you read at least 5-10 post from me .
Anyone that ignores Obamas flaws is dumb as well, but in terms of sheer assclownery, McCain is leading.

Umm Here's what we both said.

Wow, it kinda sickens me seeing everyone on here ready to hump McCains leg, but puking the second Obama makes a change.

So the countless pro obama threads and obama fanatics don't bother you? Talk about hypocrisy....

And if the only change Obama is going to make is his stance on an issue then I'll more than happily puke all over him. Because that's the only change we're seeing thus far. Or maybe you didn't pay attention from the democratic primaries compared to the stuff he is saying now??

When you point you finger at someone you have 3 more fingers pointed right back at you

Show me where I put words in your mouth. I've read 5-10 of your posts.. The hypocrisy isn't in you itself, it's in the fact that it's ok for Liberals to do one thing but if a republican does the same thing he catches so much flack for it. Had Obama been in support of the surge you would be praising him as our wise sage and savior.

ps: I have read 5-10 of your posts (and more). I stand by what I said as I've said nothing wrong. I don't agree with your views and that's my right. :thumbsup:

[LegalizeTheGreen]

Wait P4B, so when we threw thousands of troops at a problem, it got better? Of course, lol, but when you say things like "Al-Queda is almost a thing of the past" it shows me that you are just talking right wing rhetoric. Al-Queda wasn't even in Iraq till we went there, and now you think that because there is a decrease in activity (although im pretty sure the situation is still shity over there) it makes everything all better? Because of the "Miracle Surge" we have decreased levels of violence, but you seem to think that it makes everything all better. If we had pulled our troops out, you know how much violence would be directed at them? 100% of 0. I am personaly glad that violence is down (who wouldn't be), and I'll admit, you seem to know more about the surge than me, but I'll say this again, if you think that the surge "solved" the problem, then I cant help but lol.

Diahashi, yes, you put words in my mouth, even if you didn't mean to. All I said was that it sickened me that it was ok for McCain to flipflop on his issues, but the second Obama made a change, you were ready to lynch the poor guy. Did I ever say anything positive about Obama besides defending him from you right wing nut jobs? No. I obviously prefer Obama to McCain, the same way you prefer McCain to Obama, but when you call me a hypocrite for that, I find your hypocricy ironic and sad. If Obama had been responsible for the surge, I would have slapped him too, because I am against us being in Iraq, and I am against anyone that wants to keep us there for even a second longer, even my sage and savior Obama (and thats assuming he was pro war, lol).

[daihashi]

You're way off the mark here and seem to just be trolling for a fight. So to remove any possibility of this let me address your needless defense 1 point at a time:

Diahashi, yes, you put words in my mouth, even if you didn't mean to. All I said was that it sickened me that it was ok for McCain to flipflop on his issues, but the second Obama made a change, you were ready to lynch the poor guy.

Here is what you said.. and here is my post that you claim I am putting words into your mouth

Wow, it kinda sickens me seeing everyone on here ready to hump McCains leg, but puking the second Obama makes a change.

So the countless pro obama threads and obama fanatics don't bother you? Talk about hypocrisy....

And if the only change Obama is going to make is his stance on an issue then I'll more than happily puke all over him. Because that's the only change we're seeing thus far. Or maybe you didn't pay attention from the democratic primaries compared to the stuff he is saying now??

When you point you finger at someone you have 3 more fingers pointed right back at you

Here I point out the fact that I DO NOT see you going into McCain threads to defend him when he gets attacked from the left because of his position on an issue, but when someone attacks Obama you come to defend him even going as far as to say:

it kinda sickens me seeing everyone on here ready to hump McCains leg

Which I found particularly odd because this thread wasn't about McCain at all, but rather it was about Obama's shortsightedness and the fact that he is obviously wrong on the surge. So wrong in fact that he removed anything related to it from his website.

Did I ever say anything positive about Obama besides defending him from you right wing nut jobs? No. I obviously prefer Obama to McCain, the same way you prefer McCain to Obama, but when you call me a hypocrite for that, I find your hypocricy ironic and sad.

Sigh.. You are completely wrong here. That is not why you are a hypocrite. You are a hypocrite for allowing Obama to do the exact same thing you accuse McCain of doing. Flip flopping on issues. I don't see you out there chastising Obama for flip flopping faster than a fish out of water.

You're allowed to prefer Obama, that does not make you a hypocrite but giving the man a free pass on what you accuse his opponent of doing does make you a hypocrite. Please read what people write before you jump the gun.

If Obama had been responsible for the surge, I would have slapped him too, because I am against us being in Iraq, and I am against anyone that wants to keep us there for even a second longer, even my sage and savior Obama (and thats assuming he was pro war, lol).

The fact is that we are in Iraq. Whether you want to be there or not there is nothing you can do that is going to change the fact that we are there NOW. With that said if Obama had devised a plan that directly resulted in making Iraq safer, reducing terroristic threat as well as the insurgents which indirectly allowed us to reduce our troops sooner than originally anticipated.. you would slam him?

That makes no sense.

And about Obama being pro war:



â??2/01/05: Obama was part of a unanimous consent agreement not to filibuster the nomination of lawless torturer Alberto Gonzales as chief law enforcement officer of the United States (U.S. Attorney General).â?�



â??2/15/05: Obama voted to confirm Michael Chertoff, a proponent of water-board torture... man behind the round-up of thousands of people of Middle-Eastern descent following 9/11. By Roll call 10.â?�



â??4/21/05: Obama voted to make John â??Death Squadâ?? Negroponte the National Intelligence Director. In Central America, John Negroponte was connected to death squads that murdered nuns and children in sizable quantities. He is suspected of instigating death squads while in Iraq, resulting in the current insurgency. Instead of calling for Negroponte's prosecution, Obama rewarded him by making him National Intelligence Director. Roll call 107â?�



â??4/21/05: Obama voted for HR 1268, war appropriations in the amount of approximately $81 billion. Much of this funding went to Blackwater USA and Halliburton and disappeared. Roll call 109 â?�



â??7/01/05: Obama voted for H.R. 2419, termed â??The Nuclear Billâ?? by environmental and peace groups. It provided billions for nuclear weapons activities, including nuclear bunker buster bombs. It contains full funding for Yucca Mountain, a threat to food and water in California, Nevada, Arizona and states across America. Roll call 172 .â?�



â??9/26/05 & 9/28/05: Obama failed and refused to place a hold on the nomination of John Roberts, a supporter of permanent detention of Americans without trial, and of torture and military tribunals for Guantanamo detainees.â?�

â??10/07/05: Obama voted for HR2863, which appropriated $50 billion in new money for war. Roll call 2 .â?�



â??11/15/05: Obama voted for continued war, again. Roll call 326 was the vote on the Defense Authorization Act (S1042) which kept the war and war profiteering alive, restricted the right of habeas corpus and encouraged terrorism. Pursuant to his pattern, Obama voted for this. .â?�



â??12/21/05: Obama confirmed his support for war by voting for the Conference Report on the Defense Appropriations Act (HR 2863), Roll call 366, which provided more funding to Halliburton and Blackwater. â?�



â??5/2/06: Obama voted for money for more war by voting for cloture on HR 4939, the emergency funding to Halliburton, Blackwater and other war profiteers. Roll call 103 .â?�



â??5/4/06: Obama, again, voted to adopt HR4939: emergency funding to war profiteers. Roll call 112 .â?�



â??6/13/06: Obama voted to commend the armed services for a bombing that killed innocent people and children and reportedly resulted in the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawiâ?¦ Michael Berg, whose son was reportedly killed by al-Zarqawi, condemned the attack and expressed sorrow over the innocent people and children killed in the bombing that Obama commended. Roll call 168 .â?�



â??6/15/06: Obama voted for the conference report on HR4939, a bill that gave warmongers more money to continue the killing and massacre of innocent people in Iraq and allows profiteers to collect more money for scamming the people of New Orleans. Roll Call 171 .â?�



â??6/15/06: Obama, again, opposed withdrawal of the troops, by voting to table a motion to table a proposed amendment would have required the withdrawal of US. Armed Forces from Iraq and would have urged the convening of an Iraq summit (S Amdt 4269 to S. Amdt 4265 to S2766) Roll Call 174 â?�



â??6/22/06: Obama voted against withdrawing the troops by opposing the Kerry Amendment (S. Amdt 4442 to S 2766) to the National Defense Authorization Act. The amendment, which was rejected, would have brought our troops home. Roll Call 181 â?�



â??6/22/06: Obama voted for cloture (the last effective chance to stop) on the National Defense Authorization Act (S 2766), which provided massive amounts of funding to defense contractors to continue the killing in Iraq. Roll Call 183.â?�



â??6/22/06: Obama again voted for continued war by voting to pass the National Defense Authorization Act (S 2766) for continued war funding. Roll Call 186 .



9/7/06: Obama voted to give more money to profiteers for more war (H..R. 5631). Roll Call 239 â?�



â??9/29/06: Obama voted vote for the conference report on more funding for war, HR 5631. Roll Call 261 .â?�



â??11/16/06: Obama voted for nuclear proliferation in voting to pass HR 5682, a bill to exempt the United States-India Nuclear Proliferation Act from requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. Roll Call 270 .â?�



â??12/06/06: Obama voted to confirm pro-war Robert M. Gates to be Secretary of Defense. Gates is a supporter of Bush's policies of pre-emptive war and conquest of foreign countries. Roll Call 272 â?�



â??Obama's voting record in 2007 establishes that he continues to be pro-war. On March 28, 2007 and March 29th, 2007, he voted for cloture and passage of a bill designed to give Bush over $120 billion to continue the occupation for years to come (with a suspendable time table) and inclusive of funding that could be used to launch a war with Iran. Roll calls 117 and 126 ...Obama's record shows a minimum of 20 major pro-war votesâ?¦â?�

You can look all these up for yourself. I don't feel like posting a link to each one and it's not hard to find the information.

But as you can see for being in office for such a SHORT time he sure has voted OFTEN in favor of war on quite a number of pro war votes.

:thumbsup:

[daihashi]

What I found pretty funny was how some of these votes are very contradictory to what Obama advocates for other things.

For instance on the enviormental issue. One of things Obama touched on was the need to cut/clean up yucca mountain but here you can see he clearly voted for more funding for Yucca Mountain.

Keep looking at the votes carefully and you'll see a number of places where he has contradicted himself.

A wolf in sheeps clothing is still a wolf.

[daihashi]

It's also interesting to note that Obama has done a complete 180 since he announced his candidacy in 2007.

Hrmmmmmmm... coincidence that he's suddenly so Righteous on his high horse right when he announces his presidential candidacy. He suddenly had a change of heart despite having a pretty solid pro-war voting record?

Odd don't you think?

[ralphbuick]

I don't think it's unreasonable to adjust your point of view. The surge has taken nearly twice as long as expected to make any identifiable difference, but I don't hear anyone picking Bush up on this. In January, the surge was a Fail. Straight out bad move. Only three of the 18 benchmarks had been met. And now it's all a success? Please. It's all propaganda, measured by the news channels. America lost the war a long time ago, and is simply fighting to maintain order. Even now, after more than one million Iraqis have died violent deaths as a result of the conflict, you are squabbling over how Obama picks over this? Ridiculous.