Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 30 of 30

Thread: Blacks think Hillary trying to destroy Obama in 2008 so she can run in 2012

  1. #16
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    33,488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmlok View Post
    There's a big difference between actual combat for tangible territorial and political stability, and mass destruction that leaves areas uninhabitable.

    Many people would argue the point that Israel is needed for tanglible territorial and political stability, and is worthy of defending.

    She said they would be defended. That's all. She didn't ask for first strike authorization against Iran.

    The US is an Israeli ally, that's our nation's policy.
    It's no longer a dog whistle, it's a fucking trombone


    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

  2. #17
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sweetie View Post
    ^lol. That's funny. That's like saying Germany is worthless just because at one time Hilter was their leader.
    We can't be definded by Bush and his dumbass war forever. With a new President comes new leadership. Things can get better, if the right person is elected.

    oops, i meant to add "in the middle east"

    Quote Originally Posted by witchcurlgirl View Post
    Many people would argue the point that Israel is needed for tanglible territorial and political stability, and is worthy of defending.

    She said they would be defended. That's all. She didn't ask for first strike authorization against Iran.

    The US is an Israeli ally, that's our nation's policy.

    actually, she already voted for that a little while ago.
    Last edited by Tati; April 25th, 2008 at 11:53 AM.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  3. #18
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    33,488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmlok View Post
    actually, she already voted for that a little while ago.

    The vote did not authorize anything. More media spin bullshit.

    Any action taken against Iran would still require the President to come before congress to seek that authority. Nothing changed with the bill.

    P.S. Obama skipped that vote....he doesn't want to be pinned down by an actual vote.
    It's no longer a dog whistle, it's a fucking trombone


    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

  4. #19
    Hit By Ban Bus!
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Back of Beyond
    Posts
    11,082

    Default

    Iran can't nuke Israel because Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons and Hillary knows it. This is a Republican lie because they've got a hard-on to do to Iran what they've done to Iraq. Oh, and you can add Syria to that mix as well.

    According to the Administration's own intelligence:

    No Iran nukes for at least ten years, according to NIE

  5. #20
    Elite Member Sweetie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Den of the roving cunty bitches
    Posts
    24,533

    Default

    I don't think that's correct, Sasha.
    According to the CIA site:

    "In December 2006 and March 2007, the international community passed resolutions 1737 and 1747 respectively after Iran failed to comply with UN demands to halt the enrichment of uranium or to agree to full IAEA oversight of its nuclear program."

  6. #21
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by witchcurlgirl View Post
    The vote did not authorize anything. More media spin bullshit.

    Any action taken against Iran would still require the President to come before congress to seek that authority. Nothing changed with the bill.

    In September, Hillary Clinton voted for the Kyl-Lieberman resolution on Iran. Several times since then, she has been forced to defend her vote against charges that she unwittingly authorized another Bush war. She says, not true, she only voted for "aggressive diplomacy" with Iran. She reiterated the phrase in a speech attacking Obama yesterday in Iowa. Personally, I never understood what she meant by "aggressive diplomacy." It sounds like something her top aide and Machiavellian pollster, Mark Penn, came up with.

    The problem Hillary faces is that George Bush and the Republicans have a different definition of aggressive diplomacy than what normal people mean by the phrase, and Democratic voters know it. Senator Clinton says she voted to give Bush the power to engage Iraq in diplomacy back in 2002, and we all know how that turned out. He abused the authority given to him, and took us to war based on a lie. That's how Bush defines aggressive diplomacy: He can do whatever he wants.

    I think that, politically, the NIE released yesterday could be worse for Hillary than for Bush. As John pointed out in an earlier post, despite having a press conference today, Bush wasn't held accountable for his warmongering lies about Iran. At the Democratic debate today, Hillary, however, had to answer tough questions about her Iran position.

    During the debate, Clinton said that the US' tough diplomatic approach was the reason for Iran stopping its nuclear weapons program. For that response, she got slammed by Joe Biden:

    Clinton said it's clear that pressure on Iran has had an effect — a point disputed by Biden.

    "With all due respect with anybody who thinks that pressure brought this about, let's get this straight. In 2003, they stopped their program," Biden said.


    When Hillary cast her vote for Kyl-Lieberman, she may have accepted Bush's promises that this time he wasn't going to bully his way into another war -- or she may have simply made a political calculation that voting for the authorization would make her look strong on defense, a useful credential for any Democrat, but especially for a woman trying to overcome a certain prejudice that still exists among some voters. But while the media is blindly in love with Bush, and Democratic voters long gave up on his serial lies, Hillary still has to face the voters -- Democratic voters. Her talk of "aggressive diplomacy" may be a good general election strategy, but it may already be backfiring with Democratic primary voters fed up with a party that never says no.

    AMERICAblog: A great nation deserves the truth
    Didnt dear ol Bush circumvent a number of things concerning congress for his last military advenure?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sweetie View Post
    I don't think that's correct, Sasha.
    According to the CIA site:

    "In December 2006 and March 2007, the international community passed resolutions 1737 and 1747 respectively after Iran failed to comply with UN demands to halt the enrichment of uranium or to agree to full IAEA oversight of its nuclear program."
    That's the same CIA that cooked all the intel for Iraq isnt it? Yeaaaaah.
    Last edited by Tati; April 25th, 2008 at 11:54 AM.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  7. #22
    Hit By Ban Bus!
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Back of Beyond
    Posts
    11,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sweetie View Post
    I don't think that's correct, Sasha.
    According to the CIA site:

    "In December 2006 and March 2007, the international community passed resolutions 1737 and 1747 respectively after Iran failed to comply with UN demands to halt the enrichment of uranium or to agree to full IAEA oversight of its nuclear program."
    It is correct, Sweetie. The NIE, or National Intelligence Estimate, concerning Iran nukes was leaked at the end of 2007. The NIE expresses the consensus of the 16 branches of the intelligence community, including the CIA. According to Time magazine:

    [the NIE] is sharply at odds with most of the candidates' (and the White House's) notion that Iran is rushing to build nuclear weapons, and even contradicts a 2005 NIE finding that Iran was working inexorably toward developing a bomb
    Time

  8. #23
    Silver Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    477

    Default

    I just hope we are not stuck with McCain getting in who is just like Bush. I am so worried. I will gladly vote for Barock or Hillary. Four more years of a Bush clone the country will suffer tremendously.

  9. #24
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    33,488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmlok View Post
    Didnt dear ol Bush circumvent a number of things concerning congress for his last military advenure?
    No, he had to have them vote on it.

    Those are the same votes that we hold against Clinton and McCain.

    I will not defend his lies or the ways he used intel, but congress still gets the vote authorizing military action. the ulitimate power still lies with them.
    It's no longer a dog whistle, it's a fucking trombone


    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

  10. #25
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    Shillary and McSame definitely get held to account for that. Way to go, dumbfucks.

    I also don't buy that "we were misled!" crap. Everybody else knew it was a scam.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  11. #26
    Elite Member Sweetie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Den of the roving cunty bitches
    Posts
    24,533

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmlok View Post
    That's the same CIA that cooked all the intel for Iraq isnt it? Yeaaaaah.


    You can't tell me that a terrorist country, one that has supported the taliban and wouldn't be afraid to use them, doesn't have some sort of deadly weapons, whether it be nukes or just massive bombs.

  12. #27
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    I dunno, whynot ask Saudi Arabia?

    Also, i didn't know a whole country could be terrorist.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  13. #28
    Hit By Ban Bus!
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Back of Beyond
    Posts
    11,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sweetie View Post


    You can't tell me that a terrorist country, one that has supported the taliban and wouldn't be afraid to use them, doesn't have some sort of deadly weapons, whether it be nukes or just massive bombs.
    Where have you been? It's been conclusively proven that Iraq possessed no WMD. Whatsoever. The IAEA, Scott Ritter, and many others were jumping up and down trying to tell them so.

    Have you ever heard of The Downing Street Memo?

    Iraq was a secular dictatorship. They hated religious nuts like the Taliban and Al Qaeda. There were. no. links. between them.

  14. #29
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    I think she might mean Iran..
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  15. #30
    Elite Member louiswinthorpe111's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Middle America
    Posts
    11,924

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sweetie View Post


    You can't tell me that a terrorist country, one that has supported the taliban and wouldn't be afraid to use them, doesn't have some sort of deadly weapons, whether it be nukes or just massive bombs.
    Well if that's the case, where do yo put Afganistan, Pakistan, Saudi, and a slew of other middle east countries? What puts Tran ahead of the others?
    RELIGION: Treat it like it's your genitalia. Don't show it off in public, and don't shove it down your children's throats.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Hillary is f*cking Obama
    By Chilly Willy in forum Laughs and Oddities
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: April 2nd, 2008, 12:08 PM
  2. Hillary Obama / Barack Clinton. Truly scary!
    By Cali in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: March 25th, 2008, 01:02 AM
  3. Would Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama agree to be on the same ticket?
    By pacific breeze in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: March 4th, 2008, 09:21 AM
  4. Barack Obama/Hillary Clinton Umbrella spoof
    By KristiB in forum Laughs and Oddities
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: February 23rd, 2008, 04:14 PM
  5. Barack Obama vs. Hillary Clinton... their records
    By *DIVA! in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: February 21st, 2008, 03:38 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •