The choice is simple: Do you want a man who came from nowhere to graduate at the top of his class at Harvard Law, or do you want a man who got into Annapolis because his daddy was an admiral and then graduated 5th from the bottom?
Personally, I want a really smart guy in the white house. The last time we had a smart guy in there (Clinton and Gore were both Rhodes scholars), we had the longest and greatest period of peace and prosperity in our nation's history.
For those right-wingers who whine about big government and taxes, look what unfettered free market capitalism has gotten us. We just nationalized the largest insurance company in the world, and we are in the process of nationalizing our banks! This is called Socialism! The last country that nationalized its banks was Sweden -- an avowedly socialist country. The lesson is clear, if you don't want to live in a socialist country, vote for Obama.
That's the most ridiculous (well, one of the most) statements I've seen here. Clinton and Gore reaped the benefits of Bush Sr.'s Presidency - everyone (except you, obviously) knows that Presidential policy effects aren't seen until their second term - Clinton took over in what would of been his second term. And just what did Clinton and Gore do? They dismantled our National Security apparatus to the point that 9/11 happened. And don't you even try to pin that on W - He wasn't in office long enough to even start repairing the damage that Clinton and Gore caused.
The reason for the banks and insurance? Congressional Democrats who refused to vote on any reforms that negate anything that Bill Clinton did during his terms, including the repeal of the one safeguard put in place by Franklin D. Roosevelt (Glass-Steagall) to prevent the very thing that's happening now:
http://tinyurl.com/2r7mje
Read it if you can stomach the truth instead of propaganda lies. You can thank your "Rhodes Scholar" buddy Clinton for that - of course if you listen to he media and the Democratic spin, they had absolutely nothing to do with it, even though they've been in control of Congress for more years since WWII than the Republicans.
A lot of you have kept repeating Democratic propaganda by blaming Bush and the Republicans for the Fannie/Freddie fiasco. It was Clinton in '99 who repealed the Glass/Steagall act the fueled the meltdown - Clinton himself recently admitted on ABC that it was the Democrats who were to blame for it, not the Republicans. Bush himself 17 times during his administration has tried to get Congress to enact controls on Fannie/Freddie, and McCain has been a vocal critic as well of its mismanagement. Everyone seems to want to forget that the Democrats have been in control of Congress the last 2 years.
"The longest and greatest period of peace and prosperity"? What fantasy world have you been living in, Oz? You obviously fell asleep or skipped class during history that day, or skipped history altogether.
Here are some noteworthy dates in Clinton and Gore's "period of peace and prosperity":
October 3-4, 1993 - Battle of Mogadishu, Somalia - (portrayed in "Blackhawk Down). Clinton should've never authorized such a stupid mission, but that just shows what happens when a President with no military experience tries to play Commander in Chief. Of course Kennedy wasn't much better at the Bay of Pigs. The only experience Obama has is that he's the first candidate in history to have so many death threats against him that for the first time in its history, the Secret Service has asked the FBI for assistance because they can't track them all. So maybe he'll get "combat experience" after all.
June 26, 1993 - Clinton launches 23 Tomahawks at Iraq for the plot against President Bush (Sr), calling it "an attack against the country". Wars have been declared for less, but for Clinton, Tomahawks are good enough. No wonder Saddam laughed.
June 25, 1996 - Khobar Towers Bombing (accurately portrayed in "The Kingdom" for those of you who like movies rather than real history. This one at least gets it right.) Anyone who watches this movie and still believes we shouldn't be in the Middle East needs to take a long hard look at themselves in the mirror, or at the back end of a horse.
Aug. 7, 1998 - US Embassy Attack in Nairobi
Aug. 7, 1998 - US Embassy Attack in Tanzania
How does Clinton respond? By lobbing Tomahawks at unimportant suspected Al-Qaeda facilities. Wow, how "Presidential". I'll bet Obama would use his intellect to send a strongly worded letter of caution to his namesake Osama.
December 16 to December 19, 1998 - Operation Desert Fox, Clinton's 4 day bombing of Iraq to force regime change. Yeah, that worked...
March 24, 1999 - June 20, 1999 - Operation Allied Force - Clinton authorizes US forces to participate in NATO bombing of Yugoslavia (Kosovo), naming US General Wesley Clark as SAC NATO. Genocide (excuse me, "Ethnic Cleansing" - there's so much difference) is really "peaceful and prosperous".
October 12, 2000 - USS Cole Attack - Terrorists on an explosives laden raft come up to the Cole in Yemen, after the CO goes against his gut feeling and listens to his CMC and pulls into Yemen to refuel. Bad move.
Clinton/Gore rank with Carter/Mondale and Kennedy/Johnson as the absolute worst Foreign Policy administrations this country has ever seen. He could've launched decisive attacks that could've prevented 9/11, but true to liberal form, he held back hoping "diplomacy" would work.
And Gore - yeah , a real statesman. The only reason Kennedy was elected in '60 was because Joseph Kennedy bought enough votes for him to get him elected over Nixon. Nixon knew this, but even Nixon wasn't petty and low enough to whine and take it to the Supreme Court like Gore did. Democrats still whine about the 2000 election, even though the final vote tally was in Bush's favor. He clearly won, yet the Democrats and media would have everyone believe otherwise because they just can't accept and deal with the truth. Just like Fidel Obama and idolizers.
Oh, yeah, and Gore's "Inconvenient Truth"? The one "Inconvenient Truth" that Gore fails to mention in his great documentary presentation is the inconvenient fact that leftist environmentalists have played a huge part in Global Warming since they're the ones who have consistently argued for coal and oil based power plants for the past 30 years, and who've effectively shut down new construction nuclear plants in the US. Even the French are smart enough to know that Nuclear Power is a lot cleaner than coal or oil. And before you think you can argue with me about nuclear power, you should know I spent 6 years on board a nuclear powered submarine - don't even try.
Everyone blames Bush for having to invade Iraq or for the myth he lied about WMD in Iraq. However, it's amazing that the media or people like you fail to remember that in Clinton's '96 State of the Union address, he was the one that warned about Saddam's pursuit of nuclear weapons, knowing about the un-enriched Uranium yellowcake Saddam had. Funny the media didn't bother to report to he masses that Saddam's Uranium has been guarded from day one of our getting to it in the first days of the invasion, and only recently was removed from Iraq at the Iraqi government's request.
You know, what I'd really like to see is some actual intelligent arguments by people other than me who have actually been in government and the military, who understand the issues, rather than propaganda spouters who are so blinded by Fidel Obama that they just can't see him for what he really is. Whether you or anyone else on these forums like it, we're in a generational war - Bush understands this; Active duty and retired Vets like me understand this. Obama and the Democrats would rather extend a bouqet of daisies to those who would kill us, singing "Kumbayah" in the process with Daniel Baldwin and Obama leading the chorus. The Democrats have lied so much that you and others like you are so blinded by lies that you can't see the what the real truth is - or maybe you just don't want to see it.
Iraq isn't Vietnam, contrary to what the extreme anti-war left would have everyone believe. Vietnam was a mistake on many levels; we weren't blatantly attacked on our own soil yet Kennedy chose to escalate. Oh, that's right - another great Democrat. Seems Democrats are always there when wars begin and Republicans are there to finish them.
Did Iraq attack us? No, not directly, but we're in a new kind of war, the kind of war we invented over 200 years ago against the British. We of all people know how effective that kind of war is, and Bush was smart enough not to sit around and let what we did to the British happen to us. Al Qaeda's goal isn't a military victory over America - it's goal is the destruction of our economy.
You live in Oakland , and you should know what kind of commerce flows through Oakland and the Port of San Francisco. I wrote yesterday that the NSA had caught the Iranians testing a crude missile launch system by putting a truck based missile launch platform in the hold of a cargo vessel. Imagine such a ship sitting off the Cali coast and taking out San Francisco and Oakland with one warhead. Being from Sacramento, I probably wouldn't care if Oakland were nuked -I sure wouldn't care. But I bet you would, and you'd probably lay the blame on Bush for not stopping it. Oh, that's right - you couldn't blame him, because you'd be dead.
You people really need to start looking at and reading facts and stop listening to propaganda and media lies and repeating them. Most people my age learned that a long time ago during Vietnam.
You speak of a college degree as proof Obama should be President. I've worked with some of the best engineers in the Aerospace industry, and they're also the dumbest even though they obviously have high IQ's. Why? Because college (especially Harvard) doesn't teach common sense. College doesn't teach you what experience does, as is obvious by yours and many other statements here. If you had the experience behind you it's likely you woudn't so blindly follow this pretender like a rat following the Pied Piper. Obama has no life or professional experiences to draw on, only what he's been taught or read in a book. We're still technically fighting a war and you think someone with 3 years of government experience qualifies him to be POTUS? Palin has more experience than Obama does just by being Governor of the front line missile defense State in the union. Of course you probably didn't think about, and the media sure won't remind you.
And I won't even get into the fact that the only reason he became Senator is because a Judge was bought off and violated standing law by opening a child's file that eventually removed his only opponent in the Senate race. Coincidence? I hardly doubt it. Don't know who I'm referring to? Read Jeri Ryan's bio. (yes, Voyager Jeri Ryan).
And let us not forget that it was Clinton who happily signed NAFTA into law, so that my notebook and most everything else is made by slave laborers in China and India.
Yeah, go ahead and recite to me the great legacy of Bill Clinton. Let me get another wastebasket to puke in while you do.
Europeans frankly aren't qualified to comment or judge anything that goes on in America, just as we could care less about what happens across the pond. Speaking of that, I read recently where Britain wimped out to the terrorists and removed Holocaust teaching from British schools, saying that it "offended Muslims" since they don't believe the Holocaust ever happened. I guess the Brits don't care anymore about the Jews that actually experienced it, and they obviously care less about offending them. I always thought that the British had more guts than the French. Guess I was wrong - the Chunnel has really brought the French and British cultures together, hasn't it? Or maybe the Brits are just appeasers at heart like the French are. Who knew?
What hypocrites - and they have the gall to criticize us? The French hate Bush because unlike the French, who capitulate to everyone who holds a gun to their head, he was willing to take action before we were attacked again. Oh, and by invading Iraq we negated all of their contracts - and they actually have the gall to want in on the rebuilding process? Uh huh.
I expected more from the British though, but I guess the days when all it took was a few soldiers camping on the Falklands was enough for Britain to go to war are long gone. Strange how much 25 years can change a country. Guess the Brits are more afraid of the hadji's than they are the Irish. Yeah, they really treated those SAS guys from Bravo 2 Zero well, didn't they? Where have you gone, Maggie?
New Zealand - Hasn't counted for anything since it pulled out of ANZUS.
Australia - what a great country, and even greater people. No wonder they still hate Britain so many years and generations later. Obama would last about 5 minutes on a podium there before they sent him swimming on the Reef.
Oh yeah Tatty - as I remember, a Saudi owns Harrod's, and they own about as much of Britain as they do here in the States - except Britain's a lot smaller. In many ways.
Tungsten - BigJohn's generalizations are more accurate than the leftist propaganda being spouted here about Obama. There's a place that he and the Democrats and everyone who believe their lies should go to live - it's called Fantasy Island.
Everyone is so willing to blindly follow Obama and believe the mainstream media lies about Bush that we're in real danger of becoming a lot worse off if Fidel Obama is elected. The only reason the media is backing him is the same reason they backed Clinton in '92 - they realize how much of a screwup he'll be, and that makes more news, and more money for them. They've gotten as bad as the Democrats in that they don't care what it costs the country as long as they get what they want no matter what the cost.
Finally - Guess who the 3rd biggest recipient of Fannie/Freddie loans is?
Fidel Obama.
Old Monkey Brit gives me a case of the red ass, time to apply more powder
how the heck did you miss that? ACORN is a total mess and has been convicted several times for election tampering and barrack belongs to it.
