A first(?) thread on 2008: McCain,Giuliani & the Republicans

Stupid Foreignervanian question to the Americans in this thread: Why is it that thinly sourced allegations of McCain sleeping with a lobbyist are a big ethical deal, when his "bo, bo, bomb bomb Iran" doesn't even rise to the level of a tiny ethical deal?

Talk about weird priorities ....

Americans ....

Thomas wrote:

Stupid Foreignervanian question to the Americans in this thread: Why is it that thinly sourced allegations of McCain sleeping with a lobbyist are a big ethical deal, when his "bo, bo, bomb bomb Iran" doesn't even rise to the level of a tiny ethical deal?

Talk about weird priorities ....

Americans ....

Is it a big deal when Obama says he'll invade Pakistan?

Thomas wrote:

Stupid Foreignervanian question to the Americans in this thread: Why is it that thinly sourced allegations of McCain sleeping with a lobbyist are a big ethical deal, when his "bo, bo, bomb bomb Iran" doesn't even rise to the level of a tiny ethical deal?

Talk about weird priorities ....

Americans ....

Is it a big deal when Obama says he'll invade Pakistan?

nappyheadedhohoho wrote:

Thomas wrote:

Stupid Foreignervanian question to the Americans in this thread: Why is it that thinly sourced allegations of McCain sleeping with a lobbyist are a big ethical deal, when his "bo, bo, bomb bomb Iran" doesn't even rise to the level of a tiny ethical deal?

Talk about weird priorities ....

Americans ....

Is it a big deal when Obama says he'll invade Pakistan?

I believe that both Thomas and myself have expressed deep concern re Obama's statement re invading Pakistan. So yes it is a big deal. Any more questions from the lunatic fringe?

dyslexia wrote:

nappyheadedhohoho wrote:

Thomas wrote:

Stupid Foreignervanian question to the Americans in this thread: Why is it that thinly sourced allegations of McCain sleeping with a lobbyist are a big ethical deal, when his "bo, bo, bomb bomb Iran" doesn't even rise to the level of a tiny ethical deal?

Talk about weird priorities ....

Americans ....

Is it a big deal when Obama says he'll invade Pakistan?

I believe that both Thomas and myself have expressed deep concern re Obama's statement re invading Pakistan. So yes it is a big deal. Any more questions from the lunatic fringe?

Compared to what McCain is saying about Iran, I don't even "worry" that much about what Obama said.

cicerone imposter wrote:

dyslexia wrote:

nappyheadedhohoho wrote:

Thomas wrote:

Stupid Foreignervanian question to the Americans in this thread: Why is it that thinly sourced allegations of McCain sleeping with a lobbyist are a big ethical deal, when his "bo, bo, bomb bomb Iran" doesn't even rise to the level of a tiny ethical deal?

Talk about weird priorities ....

Americans ....

Is it a big deal when Obama says he'll invade Pakistan?

I believe that both Thomas and myself have expressed deep concern re Obama's statement re invading Pakistan. So yes it is a big deal. Any more questions from the lunatic fringe?

Compared to what McCain is saying about Iran, I don't even "worry" that much about what Obama said.

So when Obama says invade Pakistan, thats OK with you.
But when McCain says bomb Iran, thats not ok with you.

Whats the difference in the two statements?
Both are running for President, both are advocating war with another country.

mysteryman wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:

dyslexia wrote:

nappyheadedhohoho wrote:

Thomas wrote:

Stupid Foreignervanian question to the Americans in this thread: Why is it that thinly sourced allegations of McCain sleeping with a lobbyist are a big ethical deal, when his "bo, bo, bomb bomb Iran" doesn't even rise to the level of a tiny ethical deal?

Talk about weird priorities ....

Americans ....

Is it a big deal when Obama says he'll invade Pakistan?

I believe that both Thomas and myself have expressed deep concern re Obama's statement re invading Pakistan. So yes it is a big deal. Any more questions from the lunatic fringe?

Compared to what McCain is saying about Iran, I don't even "worry" that much about what Obama said.

So when Obama says invade Pakistan, thats OK with you.
But when McCain says bomb Iran, thats not ok with you.

Whats the difference in the two statements?
Both are running for President, both are advocating war with another country.

The difference is that Obama was talking about going after Osama bin Laden - something that those of us on the left still care about. McCain is talking about starting a war with a country who hasn't attacked us and probably never will.

Cycloptichorn

nappyheadedhohoho wrote:

Thomas wrote:

Stupid Foreignervanian question to the Americans in this thread: Why is it that thinly sourced allegations of McCain sleeping with a lobbyist are a big ethical deal, when his "bo, bo, bomb bomb Iran" doesn't even rise to the level of a tiny ethical deal?

Talk about weird priorities ....

Americans ....

Is it a big deal when Obama says he'll invade Pakistan?

I believe that both Thomas and myself have expressed deep concern re Obama's statement re invading Pakistan. So yes it is a big deal. Any more questions from the lunatic fringe?

Just making sure the Stupid Foreignervanian is aware that all of America is shallow and easily amused.

Is it a big deal when Obama says he'll invade Pakistan?

nappyheadedhohoho wrote:

Is it a big deal when Obama says he'll invade Pakistan?

Yes, and as Dys noted, I'm on record saying so somewhere in the Obama thread. Call me a hippie if you want, but I like a president whose White House makes love, not war.

Thomas wrote:

nappyheadedhohoho wrote:

Is it a big deal when Obama says he'll invade Pakistan?

Yes, and as Dys noted, I'm on record saying so somewhere in the Obama thread. Call me a hippie if you want, but I like a president whose White House makes love, not war.

You'll be relieved to know that Obama has tried to say he didn't mean it. We're not sure if he changed his mind before or after he said he'd call the 'president' of Canada.

nappyheadedhohoho wrote:

Is it a big deal when Obama says he'll invade Pakistan?

Yes, and as Dys noted, I'm on record saying so somewhere in the Obama thread. Call me a hippie if you want, but I like a president whose White House makes love, not war.

So when Obama says invade Pakistan, thats OK with you.
But when McCain says bomb Iran, thats not ok with you.

Whats the difference in the two statements?
Both are running for President, both are advocating war with another country.

So when Obama says invade Pakistan, thats OK with you.
But when McCain says bomb Iran, thats not ok with you.

Whats the difference in the two statements?
Both are running for President, both are advocating war with another country.

Thomas wrote:

nappyheadedhohoho wrote:

Is it a big deal when Obama says he'll invade Pakistan?

Yes, and as Dys noted, I'm on record saying so somewhere in the Obama thread. Call me a hippie if you want, but I like a president whose White House makes love, not war.

And there's a reason hippies should not be in the White House, or in charge of the security interests of the US.

This, of course, is exactly what the US has done right this week.

In the predawn hours of Jan. 29, a CIA Predator aircraft flew in a slow arc above the Pakistani town of Mir Ali. The drone's operator, relying on information secretly passed to the CIA by local informants, clicked a computer mouse and sent the first of two Hellfire missiles hurtling toward a cluster of mud-brick buildings a few miles from the town center.

The missiles killed Abu Laith al-Libi, a senior al-Qaeda commander and a man who had repeatedly eluded the CIA's dragnet. It was the first successful strike against al-Qaeda's core leadership in two years, and it involved, U.S. officials say, an unusual degree of autonomy by the CIA inside Pakistan.

Having requested the Pakistani government's official permission for such strikes on previous occasions, only to be put off or turned down, this time the U.S. spy agency did not seek approval. The government of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf was notified only as the operation was underway, according to the officials, who insisted on anonymity because of diplomatic sensitivities.

Officials say the incident was a model of how Washington often scores its rare victories these days in the fight against al-Qaeda inside Pakistan's national borders: It acts with assistance from well-paid sympathizers inside the country, but without getting the government's formal permission beforehand.

It is an approach that some U.S. officials say could be used more frequently this year [..]

"Let me make this clear," Obama said in a speech prepared for delivery at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. "There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al-Qaida leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will."