| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/10/2008 01:48:57 PM · #1 |
Similar to Nancy Pelosi's meeting with foreign leaders, Barack Obama thought he was already had the power to do this.
//washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/10/obama-sought-to-sway-iraqis-on-bush-deal/
EXCERPT:
At the same time the Bush administration was negotiating a still elusive agreement to keep the U.S. military in Iraq, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama tried to convince Iraqi leaders in private conversations that the president shouldn't be allowed to enact the deal without congressional approval.
Mr. Obama's conversations with the Iraqi leaders, confirmed to The Washington Times by his campaign aides, began just two weeks after he clinched the Democratic presidential nomination in June and stirred controversy over the appropriateness of a White House candidate's contacts with foreign governments while the sitting president is conducting a war.
|
|
|
|
10/10/2008 01:56:30 PM · #2 |
So we have a disputed hearsay report by a third party who did not hear both sides of the conversation, reported in what is generally considered to be a right-wing paper.
Yawn.
~Terry
|
|
|
|
10/10/2008 01:58:02 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
So we have a disputed hearsay report by a third party who did not hear both sides of the conversation, reported in what is generally considered to be a right-wing paper.
Yawn.
~Terry |
Typical |
|
|
|
10/10/2008 01:59:49 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Typical |
I couldn't agree more.
~Terry
|
|
|
|
10/10/2008 02:06:11 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Typical |
I couldn't agree more.
~Terry |
About your response? Good. You got that right at least. |
|
|
|
10/10/2008 02:07:12 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Typical |
I couldn't agree more.
~Terry |
About your response? Good. You got that right at least. |
I doubt that is what he was referring to.
|
|
|
|
10/10/2008 02:13:03 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Typical |
I couldn't agree more.
~Terry |
About your response? Good. You got that right at least. |
I doubt that is what he was referring to. |
If he agreed with me (as he stated), then he did. |
|
|
|
10/10/2008 02:15:35 PM · #8 |
| What nonsense. Schoolground antics and sticking your tongue out and going "nyah" isn't going to win you a lot of conversationalists. |
|
|
|
10/10/2008 02:16:18 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by Louis:
What nonsense. Schoolground antics and sticking your tongue out and going "nyah" isn't going to win you a lot of conversationalists. |
You hear him Terry? He's talking to you. |
|
|
|
10/10/2008 02:33:18 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Originally posted by Louis:
What nonsense. Schoolground antics and sticking your tongue out and going "nyah" isn't going to win you a lot of conversationalists. |
You hear him Terry? He's talking to you. |
Watch out, Terry and Louis -- your obviously tangling with a master debater. |
|
|
|
10/10/2008 02:54:38 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Originally posted by Louis:
What nonsense. Schoolground antics and sticking your tongue out and going "nyah" isn't going to win you a lot of conversationalists. |
You hear him Terry? He's talking to you. |
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
Using a variation of the time honored debating technique of "I know you are, but what am I?" Perfectly executed, HawkeyeLonewolf! Perfectly executed! |
|
|
|
10/10/2008 02:58:14 PM · #12 |
Hawkeye...wasn't this yours a few years ago:
"Who'll Stop McCain?"
by Kevin L. Kitchens
(Parody of "Who'll Stop the Rain" by Credence Clearwater Revival)
Long as I remember, the guy's been running round
Claiming to be conservative, but his message ain't too sound.
He was a POW, in case you had not heard.
And we wonder, we have to wonder: who'll stop McCain?
This ain't his first election. He's tried in years gone past.
Could never muster enough votes, to make his campaign last.
He thinks he's got a chance now. So he runs again.
But we wonder, we pray and wonder: who'll stop McCain?
The New York Times they love him. Because he's more like them.
A maverick they call him. But it's all just lying spin.
He sold us out with Feingold, his Amnesty was insane.
But we wonder, we've gotta wonder: Who'll stop McCain?
|
|
|
|
10/10/2008 02:59:21 PM · #13 |
| You all are underestimating Hawkeye again. He is doing his patriotic duty by once again spreading the meme that Obama "doesn't know his place" and is "uppity." These sorts of remarks fire up the "base". |
|
|
|
10/10/2008 03:42:43 PM · #14 |
The whole conversation doesn't matter. Hawkeye can rail against the world, but at this point there is no way, no how Barack Obama is not our next president (short of his assassination). The market collapse has guaranteed it. No party has held the presidency in an economic downturn, let alone a 30%+ market crash less than a month before the election.
It will not even be close. It won't be a 1984 Reagan landslide, but it will be called easily before the night is over. Of the 7 current battleground states, all 7 were won by Bush in 2004. While the surface inspection might think that is good for McCain, it's bad. It means the states which are within the polling margin of error are now pushed further into typical conservative strongholds. Of those 7 states, McCain leads in only one, Indiana. Indiana has not voted democrat since 1964. That's 44 years ago. McCain is barely winning there. Indiana should be a republican slam dunk.
Add on top the silly little tidbit that Obama is taller and that the taller candidate has won 19 of 27 elections in the 20th and 21st century and it's simply good night, game over, drive home safely.
Just stating the truth. The scary thing is this will be the first election since I naturalized in 1992 where I will have voted for the winner. I guess it means I'm finally on the hook. After January you can send complaints to achoo@WTF.com...
Message edited by author 2008-10-10 15:43:59. |
|
|
|
10/10/2008 04:02:28 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by wetland:
Hawkeye...wasn't this yours a few years ago:
"Who'll Stop McCain?"
by Kevin L. Kitchens
(Parody of "Who'll Stop the Rain" by Credence Clearwater Revival)
Long as I remember, the guy's been running round
Claiming to be conservative, but his message ain't too sound.
He was a POW, in case you had not heard.
And we wonder, we have to wonder: who'll stop McCain?
This ain't his first election. He's tried in years gone past.
Could never muster enough votes, to make his campaign last.
He thinks he's got a chance now. So he runs again.
But we wonder, we pray and wonder: who'll stop McCain?
The New York Times they love him. Because he's more like them.
A maverick they call him. But it's all just lying spin.
He sold us out with Feingold, his Amnesty was insane.
But we wonder, we've gotta wonder: Who'll stop McCain? |
Don't think it was a few years ago. That was during the primaries. Now he's our nominee and is a far superior choice to Obama. |
|
|
|
10/10/2008 04:03:37 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The whole conversation doesn't matter. Hawkeye can rail against the world, but at this point there is no way, no how Barack Obama is not our next president (short of his assassination). The market collapse has guaranteed it. No party has held the presidency in an economic downturn, let alone a 30%+ market crash less than a month before the election.
It will not even be close. It won't be a 1984 Reagan landslide, but it will be called easily before the night is over. Of the 7 current battleground states, all 7 were won by Bush in 2004. While the surface inspection might think that is good for McCain, it's bad. It means the states which are within the polling margin of error are now pushed further into typical conservative strongholds. Of those 7 states, McCain leads in only one, Indiana. Indiana has not voted democrat since 1964. That's 44 years ago. McCain is barely winning there. Indiana should be a republican slam dunk.
Add on top the silly little tidbit that Obama is taller and that the taller candidate has won 19 of 27 elections in the 20th and 21st century and it's simply good night, game over, drive home safely.
Just stating the truth. The scary thing is this will be the first election since I naturalized in 1992 where I will have voted for the winner. I guess it means I'm finally on the hook. After January you can send complaints to achoo@WTF.com... |
How do you know this? You work for ACORN? Planning to stack the deck for Obama?
Otherwise, anything's possible. The current polls have been demonstrated as false due to oversampling of democrats and blacks. It's closer than it appears.
Support America! Vote McCain/Palin! |
|
|
|
10/10/2008 04:06:12 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Otherwise, anything's possible. The current polls have been demonstrated as false due to oversampling of democrats and blacks. It's closer than it appears. |
I am more than happy to wager anything you think is within reason on that statement being wrong.
You can forget the polls and simply go with history. History is on the side of the party not in power when the economy goes sour. McCain is certainly not going to be the first to buck that fact. |
|
|
|
10/10/2008 04:13:31 PM · #18 |
| I have a expensive steak dinner waged with my father that Obama will win, he thinks McCain. I offered him to double up on the bet recently b/c he's still talking about a win for McCain and I really like a good steak, he declined...wonder why. Most cCurrent polls don't factor in people with cell phones, mostly young people who are more likely to vote for Obama. |
|
|
|
10/10/2008 04:15:12 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Otherwise, anything's possible. The current polls have been demonstrated as false due to oversampling of democrats and blacks. It's closer than it appears. |
I am more than happy to wager anything you think is within reason on that statement being wrong.
You can forget the polls and simply go with history. History is on the side of the party not in power when the economy goes sour. McCain is certainly not going to be the first to buck that fact. |
Then may God protect us.
Perhaps we'll be blessed in 2010 with another Newt Gingrich style "Contract with America" to put the GOP back in charge of Congress. That kept Clinton in check, though history has shown he was generally a selfish man who only did what was good for him. Obama appears to have more dangerous and deranged plans for this country.
It's very scary the people he has chosen to associate with. Add to that the lunacy of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi in change... Egads. |
|
|
|
10/10/2008 04:42:25 PM · #20 |
Lets chat about "associates" (I am so damn tired of this absolutely moot meaningless argument) but if the neocons want to go here lets go ...
Lets talk about ministers
Yes Obama has Wright (not actually a big deal in all truth to normal thinking people) howsabout Palin and Bishop Thomas Muthee (the witch hunter nutjob) or McCain with Hagee. (guess it is okay to call the Catholic Church a whore.
"Anti-Americanism"? What about the Alaskan Independence Party and the esteemed Ms. Palin. Remember, Ayers and his activities happened when Obama was 8. Palin and her hubby were active participants with a group that actively advocates secession. In my way of thinking her support of that organization is treason against the UNITED States of America.
Lets talk about Resko... right after we talk about Keeting.
got anything else ... these arguments by the 'cons are getting old
Message edited by author 2008-10-10 16:43:32. |
|
|
|
10/10/2008 04:43:33 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Otherwise, anything's possible. The current polls have been demonstrated as false due to oversampling of democrats and blacks. It's closer than it appears. |
I am more than happy to wager anything you think is within reason on that statement being wrong.
You can forget the polls and simply go with history. History is on the side of the party not in power when the economy goes sour. McCain is certainly not going to be the first to buck that fact. |
Then may God protect us.
Perhaps we'll be blessed in 2010 with another Newt Gingrich style "Contract with America" to put the GOP back in charge of Congress. That kept Clinton in check, though history has shown he was generally a selfish man who only did what was good for him. Obama appears to have more dangerous and deranged plans for this country.
It's very scary the people he has chosen to associate with. Add to that the lunacy of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi in change... Egads. |
As opposed to the folks McCain has associated with? Criminals like Charles Keating? Racists like Senators Helms and Thurmon.
Those are exactly the kinds of buddies that make a president.
How about cheating on his wife and dumping her for a rich little girl. Applying for a marriage license while still married to his 1st wife. Losing his temper and calling his wife a "cunt" in front of 3 reporters. The list goes on and on.
|
|
|
|
10/10/2008 11:24:30 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Otherwise, anything's possible. The current polls have been demonstrated as false due to oversampling of democrats and blacks. It's closer than it appears. |
I am more than happy to wager anything you think is within reason on that statement being wrong.
You can forget the polls and simply go with history. History is on the side of the party not in power when the economy goes sour. McCain is certainly not going to be the first to buck that fact. |
Then may God protect us.
Perhaps we'll be blessed in 2010 with another Newt Gingrich style "Contract with America" to put the GOP back in charge of Congress. That kept Clinton in check, though history has shown he was generally a selfish man who only did what was good for him. Obama appears to have more dangerous and deranged plans for this country.
It's very scary the people he has chosen to associate with. Add to that the lunacy of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi in change... Egads. |
As opposed to the folks McCain has associated with? Criminals like Charles Keating? Racists like Senators Helms and Thurmon.
Those are exactly the kinds of buddies that make a president.
How about cheating on his wife and dumping her for a rich little girl. Applying for a marriage license while still married to his 1st wife. Losing his temper and calling his wife a "cunt" in front of 3 reporters. The list goes on and on. |
Clinton cheated on his wife in the Oval Office (among other places) then lied about it but liberals seemed to think that had nothing to do with his ability to be President. Why is it different for McCain?
|
|
|
|
10/10/2008 11:33:31 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by sher:
Clinton cheated on his wife in the Oval Office (among other places) then lied about it but liberals seemed to think that had nothing to do with his ability to be President. Why is it different for McCain? |
Clinton never ran on a platform of personal integrity or made a big deal about his judgement. ;-) Plus, I think there's a little extra sleaze factor if you leave your wife because she's disabled and get another marriage license before you're divorced. |
|
|
|
10/10/2008 11:34:12 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by sher:
Clinton cheated on his wife in the Oval Office (among other places) then lied about it but liberals seemed to think that had nothing to do with his ability to be President. Why is it different for McCain? |
Dunno. It sure used to bother Republicans though. Has that all changed?
|
|
|
|
10/11/2008 02:46:35 AM · #25 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by sher:
Clinton cheated on his wife in the Oval Office (among other places) then lied about it but liberals seemed to think that had nothing to do with his ability to be President. Why is it different for McCain? |
Clinton never ran on a platform of personal integrity or made a big deal about his judgement. ;-) Plus, I think there's a little extra sleaze factor if you leave your wife because she's disabled and get another marriage license before you're divorced. |
Well it's easy to talk crap when you haven't walked a mile in someone shoes. I'm not a big McCain fan but everyone likes to throw and lob the stones on this issue. Does anyone really know what happen? Does anyone really know whether that accident didn't change his ex-wife, not just physically but mentally and emotionally? Who's to say that she wasn't a completely different person, not to mention himself after being tortured. People change after dramatic life changing events, both the imprisonment of McCain and the accident of his first wife. I find it funny that those who were in the felons for voting thread sticking up for folks who make mistakes in life and not chastising them for those mistakes the rest of their lives are in here chucking the stones about how sleazy he is when he has admitted that his greatest failure is his first marriage. I'm not excusing him for all his behavior, as he he stated that it's one of his biggest failures, but personal issues such as a marriages gone bad almost always have blame on both sides. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/18/2024 09:11:53 AM EDT.
