55 replies [Last post]
CVC
CVC's picture
Offline
Grand Slam Challenge Winner!
Location: Kansas
Joined: 03/04/2006
Posts: 3587
Barack Hussein Obama and our troops

Thumbs up

SoCoKHntr's picture
Offline
Location: Pueblo Colorado
Joined: 12/18/2006
Posts: 1801
Barack Hussein Obama and our troops
JTapia wrote:
SoCoKHntr wrote:
JTapia wrote:
Whelland wrote:
All I have ever seen from you when questioned about your candidate or to show point of debate is silly tirades and condescending remarks toward others. You have failed to post a SINGLE positive fact about your candidates Voting record or stand on any of the issues in any thread on this forum, instead you simply point out what Bush, McCain or anyother Republican has did wrong or didn't do. You do your Liberal partisans a horrible disservice with your child-like outburst. In short you are a joke.

You lost all credibility with your PETA remarks. Talk about hypocrisy, you have the audacity to bring up silly tirades and condescending remarks???

You have offered nothing more then slanderous attacks and not anything of substance regarding policies and just run in occasionly to do a quick hostile childlike drive by.

I'm joke huh? Coming from a clown that remark really doesn't mean anything to me.

expatriate's picture
Offline
Location: Arizona
Joined: 10/26/2002
Posts: 3207
Barack Hussein Obama and our troops

Once again, when challenged to put up something of substance, SoCo tries to turn it around into an examination of the challenger's personal qualities.

Ho, hum. So predictable. There are a lot of rock throwers in the world, but few who know how to build.

SoCoKHntr's picture
Offline
Location: Pueblo Colorado
Joined: 12/18/2006
Posts: 1801
Barack Hussein Obama and our troops
expatriate wrote:
Once again, when challenged to put up something of substance, SoCo tries to turn it around into an examination of the challenger's personal qualities.

Ho, hum. So predictable. There are a lot of rock throwers in the world, but few who know how to build.

Can you dispute the following statements from my previous post? Are these not substantive? I do believe they are but you seem like you are avoiding them and choosing to call me a rock thrower.

Here they are:

5. Obama is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee on Europe. Afghanistan, as it happens, is not in Europe. Afghanistan is covered by an entirely separate subcommittee. Thus the attack on Obama for failing to hold a hearing on Afghanistan is non-serious. This does not mean that he should not have done so, as an eager beaver presidential candidate. Surely, McCain would have been opportunistic enough to do so.

6. ... But it turns out that McCain has missed every hearing for the past two years of the Senate Armed Services Committee on Afghanistan. McCain is the ranking Republican member of this very powerful committee. It's only in the last week that McCain has endorsed Joe Biden's -- and Obama's -- plan to send more US brigades to Afghanistan.

7. It's true that Obama hadn't been to Iraq for two years. McCain has been there a lot. There was the time last year when he toured a Baghdad market, declaring everything to be copacetic. As it should have been, with him wearing a bullet-proof vest, accompanied by a company of paratroopers and a flight of helicopter gunships. As most shoppers undoubtedly were.

8. Obama voted for troop funding on all but one occasion. When he decided to try to force the Bush administration to set a timeline for US troop withdrawal.

9. Obama's visit to the US military hospital in Germany was never, despite the statement in this ad, on his media schedule. He actually visited the US military hospital in Baghdad a few days earlier, sans media. The former head of the military hospital in Germany has denounced the ad, noting that Obama visited the military hospital in Baghdad with no fanfare whasoever.

10. Obama pulled out of the German military hospital visit when the Pentagon informed his military advisor on the trip, retired Air Force General Scott Gration, that only Senate staff could accompany him. This happened after all the Senate staffers along for the Congressional delegation visit to the Middle East had been sent home. Which meant that General Gration, a highly decorated Air Force veteran who is not a member of Obama's Senate staff, was effectively disinvited from visiting the military hospital at the well-known Air Force base at Ramstein.

11. While the TV ad says that McCain is always there for the troops, he actually opposed the new GI Bill authored by Obama ally Jim Webb, the former Navy Secretary-turned-Virginia Senator. Webb, as it happens, is an old friend of McCain, who has called him "a legendary fighting man," as befits the most highly decorated Marine combat officer of the Vietnam War. McCain lost badly in the Senate on Webb's new GI bill, but he and President Bush later tried to take some credit for its passage.

12. And with regard to always being there for the troops, it is interesting to note that McCain actually voted against $360 million for armored tactical wheeled vehicles for units deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan. And that McCain just held a big ticket fundraiser at the home of one of the country's largest defense contractors, Ronald Perelman, whose MacAndrews & Forbes holding company owns AM General, manufacturer of the HumVee. The HumVee became known in the Iraq War as a "Purple Heart box."

Offline
Moderator
Location: Florida,USA
Joined: 08/21/2003
Posts: 1585
Barack Hussein Obama and our troops
SoCoKHntr wrote:
JTapia wrote:
SoCoKHntr wrote:
JTapia wrote:
Whelland wrote:
All I have ever seen from you when questioned about your candidate or to show point of debate is silly tirades and condescending remarks toward others. You have failed to post a SINGLE positive fact about your candidates Voting record or stand on any of the issues in any thread on this forum, instead you simply point out what Bush, McCain or anyother Republican has did wrong or didn't do. You do your Liberal partisans a horrible disservice with your child-like outburst. In short you are a joke.

You lost all credibility with your PETA remarks. Talk about hypocrisy, you have the audacity to bring up silly tirades and condescending remarks???

You have offered nothing more then slanderous attacks and not anything of substance regarding policies and just run in occasionly to do a quick hostile childlike drive by.

I'm joke huh? Coming from a clown that remark really doesn't mean anything to me.

Awww Man you really got me there, heh heh heh.
Just couldn't do it huh?
My point is proven. You are way too easy.

Offline
Moderator
Location: Florida,USA
Joined: 08/21/2003
Posts: 1585
Barack Hussein Obama and our troops
SoCoKHntr wrote:
expatriate wrote:
Once again, when challenged to put up something of substance, SoCo tries to turn it around into an examination of the challenger's personal qualities.

Ho, hum. So predictable. There are a lot of rock throwers in the world, but few who know how to build.

Can you dispute the following statements from my previous post? Are these not substantive? I do believe they are but you seem like you are avoiding them and choosing to call me a rock thrower.

Here they are:

5. Obama is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee on Europe. Afghanistan, as it happens, is not in Europe. Afghanistan is covered by an entirely separate subcommittee. Thus the attack on Obama for failing to hold a hearing on Afghanistan is non-serious. This does not mean that he should not have done so, as an eager beaver presidential candidate. Surely, McCain would have been opportunistic enough to do so.

8. Obama voted for troop funding on all but one occasion. When he decided to try to force the Bush administration to set a timeline for US troop withdrawal.

I edited out everything that was not a position on policy or issues or was an attack on McCain just to show that even when chest out and a swagger in your step there are just 2 MINOR facts about Obamas positive voting record and/or political experience.

All I ask of you is to sell your candidate on the issues and not try and destroy the other on non issues. Are these the only 2 you can come up with? Even with those 2 you still resorted to criticizing McCain's actions.

Once again I ask....Please sell me Obama.
I don't care to hear about McCain's short comings or Obamas for that matter, Just Obamas stand on the issues and some political experience of substance and voting record in regard to the issues....well heck boy, any voting record would be a plus.
Are you up to it?....Is your candidate?

expatriate's picture
Offline
Location: Arizona
Joined: 10/26/2002
Posts: 3207
Barack Hussein Obama and our troops

Hey, I think we need to cut SoCo a break. It's not easy being a liberal today -- it's hard work and mentally challenging. For example:

- You need to believe that Vietnam experience was an incredibly important qualifier for president in 2004, but irrelevant (or even detrimental) in 2008.

- You need to believe that Ted Stevens needs to fry, but don't have a problem with the stack of cash in William Jefferson's freezer.

- You need to believe that global warming makes glaciers get bigger AND smaller.

- You need to think that a senator tapping his foot in the men's room is more important than a president getting a hummer in the Oval Office.

- You need to believe that it's not racist to give preference to someone based on the color of their skin.

- You need to believe that nearly 7 years without a terrorist attack is a sign that America is less safe.

- You need to ignore everything Al Qaeda did and published before 2003, and believe that they're violent because we're in Iraq.

- You need to believe that you're not surrendering if you tell your enemy that you're leaving the battlefield on a predetermined date regardless of conditions.

- You need to believe that the US had significant national interests at stake in Kosovo, but not in Iraq.

- You have to believe that Democratic administrations foster peace, despite the fact that wars begun under Democrat administrations have killed over 625,000 American G.I.s since the Civil War, as compared to more than 5,000 for Republican administrations.

- You need to believe that a Democratic presidential candidate with a solid anti-gun record won't enact anti-gun legislation if armed with a Democratic majority in both houses led by anti-gun legislators.

Offline
Location: Eatonville, Wa
Joined: 08/26/2007
Posts: 610
Barack Hussein Obama and our troops

I am humbled

SoCoKHntr's picture
Offline
Location: Pueblo Colorado
Joined: 12/18/2006
Posts: 1801
Barack Hussein Obama and our troops
expatriate wrote:
Hey, I think we need to cut SoCo a break. It's not easy being a liberal today -- it's hard work and mentally challenging. For example:

- You need to believe that Vietnam experience was an incredibly important qualifier for president in 2004, but irrelevant (or even detrimental) in 2008.

- You need to believe that Ted Stevens needs to fry, but don't have a problem with the stack of cash in William Jefferson's freezer.

- You need to believe that global warming makes glaciers get bigger AND smaller.

- You need to think that a senator tapping his foot in the men's room is more important than a president getting a hummer in the Oval Office.

- You need to believe that it's not racist to give preference to someone based on the color of their skin.

- You need to believe that nearly 7 years without a terrorist attack is a sign that America is less safe.

- You need to ignore everything Al Qaeda did and published before 2003, and believe that they're violent because we're in Iraq.

- You need to believe that you're not surrendering if you tell your enemy that you're leaving the battlefield on a predetermined date regardless of conditions.

- You need to believe that the US had significant national interests at stake in Kosovo, but not in Iraq.

- You have to believe that Democratic administrations foster peace, despite the fact that wars begun under Democrat administrations have killed over 625,000 American G.I.s since the Civil War, as compared to more than 5,000 for Republican administrations.

- You need to believe that a Democratic presidential candidate with a solid anti-gun record won't enact anti-gun legislation if armed with a Democratic majority in both houses led by anti-gun legislators.

Talk about building a strawman argument. If that was your goal well done! Now try to stick to the issues at hand and please refrain from reaching back to the Civil War.

Your a funny guy.

expatriate's picture
Offline
Location: Arizona
Joined: 10/26/2002
Posts: 3207
Barack Hussein Obama and our troops

I've been dealing with the issues at hand. I'm full of facts, and can weave the classic debate elements of logos, ethos, and pathos in an incredible array of combinations to construct arguments. I'm actually quite adept at analogy and metaphor, too. I just wish I had more time to get warmed up.

Unlike some people, I'm not a one-trick pony that resorts to questioning an opponents character as my only means of debate.

I suggest you look up the definition of "strawman", because I don't think you understand it. A strawman is a sham argument set up to be easily refuted. I don't think there's much in my post you can refute.

- Kerry bragged about his Vietnam service continually in 2004, and the Democrats made it a point to argue how his wartime service made him better able to be commander in chief than a former Guard pilot. But now the Democrats are bashing McCain's service as irrelevant because their guy has nothing.

- Republican rules knocked Stevens out of his committee positions, but Democrats haven't done squat about Jefferson. By the way, Stevens was indicted on 7 counts of false statements on financial disclosures; Jefferson was indicted on 16 counts, to include fraud, bribery, and racketeering.

- Global warming advocates have, in fact, used global warming to explain glacier retreats and advances.

- We saw nothing but defense out of the Democrats when it came to Clinton, because that was his "private life." And yet they yelled for Craig's head.

- Affirmative action programs boil down to giving advantage to someone based on the color of skin. Change "black" to "white" when examining a policy, and see what happens.

- Islamist anger has centered on western culture and the US for over 50 years -- historical fact.

- The lack of terrorist attack against America is the longest period of its type in decades -- fact.

- The Democrats insisted on setting a timetable for withdrawal in Iraq independent on conditions, thinking it would force the Iraqis to step up. If you announce to your enemy that you're going to leave the battlefield to him on a certain date regardless of what he does, it ain't victory. It's called surrender -- look it up in the dictionary.

- The US had no significant national interests in Kosovo, other than to stop genocide. But if you accept that premise as a national interest, then you have to accept that same premise as valid in Iraq. What was going on in Kosovo was not a threat to a vital strategic interest for the world, nor did it have potential to threaten a significant US ally.

- The death tolls are historical fact. Every Democratic administration since the Mexican War has used military force against a sovereign nation. The same doesn't hold true for Republicans.

- We've already debated Obama's anti-gun record. Look at the records of majority leadership in the House and Senate, plus the records of Democratic Judiciary committee leaders and membership.

Go ahead, if it's a "strawman" you ought to be able to easily refute it. But I doubt that you'll do anything but dodge and make some sort of condescending claim about my character.

Related Forum Threads You Might Like

ThreadThread StarterRepliesLast Updated
The Facts on BHOCVC1306/17/2008 18:55 pm
ShoesWhelland008/10/2008 09:05 am
Obama to Troops: "You make a pretty good photo op.&quotexpatriate311/25/2009 03:09 am
Humane Society endorses Barack Hussein ObamaWhelland2109/26/2008 22:16 pm
Nuclear energyWhelland108/12/2008 11:16 am