Hilary will destroy Iran

[Linkinbassist]

The proof is here:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7376741.stm

Seriously, does she never turn the '****' tap off?

[griftadan]

"It said the remarks were "a flagrant violation" of the UN Charter."

lol

[siva_chair]

Haha

[Gramlon]

There's a reason why female presidents aren't common.

Because women are stupid.

[Linkinbassist]

Thatcher was a Robot.

This, I am convinced.

[siva_chair]

Thatcher was a Robot.

This, I am convinced.

What a coincidence, so is Hitlery Clintron

[totah]

Don't call her Hitlery. She's not a fascist. Being an American politician is a dirty satanic fault enough without having to stoop to German fascism.

EDIT: And slightly related: my Iranian friend (who is an anarcho and hates all that is in power in Iran) told me that Ahmadinejad never said anything near like "wiping Israel off the map". What he said, in Farsi, was more like "erasing Zionism from the world", but not nearly as violent as it sounds; Farsi is a different language and has very different connotations to what in English are considered 'negative' words (like destroy, obliterate, erase). The whole thing about nuking Israel was completely pulled out of the CIA's arse, just like the Iraq WMDs bollocks, or this latest Syria talltale. If you can't see a similarity between what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan then you're an unattentive moron.

[siva_chair]

Don't call her Hitlery. She's not a fascist. Being an American politician is a dirty satanic fault enough without having to stoop to German fascism.

I can call her whatever I want because I am an American. What is she gonna do? Have the Gestapo come by my house?

I call her Hitlery because I think she pretty much wants to ban fun, so I call her a fascist.

[artra]

I can call her whatever I want because I am an American.

why does being American allow you to call her what you want ?

[rasputin]

why does being American allow you to call her what you want ?
Freedom of speech

[mph4ever]

shes doesn't mean any of it. shes just making sure she gets the jewish vote

surely america would never, under any circumstances other than her own national security, attack iran. would americans, the people, not the government or agencies, feel it justified to commit to war with iran and possibly syria in order to protect israel?

totah,
i like the interpretation, it really helps me understand more about the manipulation that is commonplace.

[rasputin]

shes doesn't mean any of it. shes just making sure she gets the jewish vote
Probably.
surely america would never, under any circumstances other than her own national security, attack iran. would americans, the people, not the government or agencies, feel it justified to commit to war with iran and possibly syria in order to protect israel?
It would be a very stupid thing to do, but so was invading Iraq.

[siva_chair]

why does being American allow you to call her what you want ?

The 1st and 2nd Amendments. :thumb:

[mph4ever]

It would be a very stupid thing to do, but so was invading Iraq.

surely an attack on israel would not justify war in the same way the iraqi war was justified

[rasputin]

surely an attack on israel would not justify war in the same way the iraqi war was justified
Yeah I wasn't trying to compare the two, sorry if I did accidently. I was merely pointing out that the US invading or attacking Iran would be a huge mistake.

[siva_chair]

Yeah I wasn't trying to compare the two, sorry if I did accidently. I was merely pointing out that the US invading or attacking Iran would be a huge mistake.

We should just fund and equip the huge number of people that hate the current regime in Iran. Apparently there is a lot of them.

[mph4ever]

Yeah I wasn't trying to compare the two, sorry if I did accidently. I was merely pointing out that the US invading or attacking Iran would be a huge mistake.

absolutely, massive.

i'd just like to know if there are any americans who could justify war with iran for israel's sake? hypothetically of course, since we know iran said something completely different in farsi

[siva_chair]

absolutely, massive.

i'd just like to know if there are any americans who could justify war with iran for israel's sake? hypothetically of course, since we know iran said something completely different in farsi

Well if Iran actually attacked Israel unprovoked I could see justification of it. Israel is our ally and one of the only democratic nations in the region.

[dei]

Democracy kills.

[Linkinbassist]

America know better than to step directly into Israel's regional politics bar the ceremonial 'OKAI I HEELZ PALESTIENZ!' trip at the end of a term in office.

Why would you just come out with 'Yeah, we could easily wipe Iran off the map if they stepped outta line!'? it makes no political sense. she's only gonna loose what little votes she has.

[south_of_heaven 11]

This just reinforces my idea that if I had to choose between Obama or Hillary, I'd choose Obama.

[Linkinbassist]

This just reinforces my idea that if I had to choose between Obama or Hillary, I'd choose Obama.

If i had to choose between hilary and getting hit by a bus, i'd take the bus.

[McP3000]

if i had to pick between hillary and obama, i would pick hillary because she would definitely lose the election to McMan

[Iskandar]

The 1st and 2nd Amendments.Unless your gun can talk, no, just the 1st. The 2nd covers something totally different.

[Det_Nosnip]

shes doesn't mean any of it. shes just making sure she gets the jewish vote
Not all Jews are Zionists. Most of the Jewish people I know would probably lose respect for her for the comments.
[/QUOTE]

Wow, so that's 2 major world leaders Hillary has already pissed off...and she hasn't event secured the nomination (nor shall she, hopefully). Evidently, she lacks Bill's tact...

[Otherside]

See, if the media were in anyway respectable, THIS kind of bullshit would be headlining instead of the Wright fiasco.

[JohnXDoe]

truth hurts i guess.

[mph4ever]

Not all Jews are Zionists. Most of the Jewish people I know would probably lose respect for her for the comments.


Wow, so that's 2 major world leaders Hillary has already pissed off...and she hasn't event secured the nomination (nor shall she, hopefully). Evidently, she lacks Bill's tact...

you think it is genuinely down to her lacking tact? if thats the case then things are looking pretty grim if she even got the nomination. put under severe pressure against the gop, fu'ck knows what she would come out with

if she is that tactless, wouldn't it be funny if she were president and then got caught blowing the knob off an intern, that would be hysterically historical

[JohnXDoe]

like Barack will never go to war lol



teh evil destroyer

<-------------------------



maybe "we would beat Iran in a war" is more honest then "we would obliterate them"

[Der Übermensch]

Don't call her Hitlery. She's not a fascist. Being an American politician is a dirty satanic fault enough without having to stoop to German fascism
Fascism =/= Nazi
Franco and Mussolini were both Fascists too. Mussolini was a Fascist when Hitler was just a ****ing Corporal.

[Smokey D]

It's reasonably clear that tactically the US would crush Iran if they did engage, but it's far less certain that it is in a position to enforce a peace especially if it was a war aimed at regime change. As has been mentioned, the war would destroy any support for the moderates in Iran, who are probably if anything in the ascendency at the moment. A war would be counter productive to US interests, expensive in material terms and difficult to effect with troop levels as they currently exist. Plus, Iran isn't stupid enough to attack Israel. I doubt there will be a war. This is just Hillary playing the tough on defence card because as a woman she has to be seen as extra willing to fight in the same way the Democrats had to be extra tough on communism.

[Akira]

Not all Jews are Zionists. Most of the Jewish people I know would probably lose respect for her for the comments.


This is true, but in a world where many seem incapable of separating Israel and Zionism from the Jewish people as a whole, supporting Israel is viewed by politicians as the surest way to the Jewish vote.

[Against Miik!]

Iran will probably get bombed before the next president comes into office so it doesn't even really matter.

[JohnXDoe]

^ heard on the news last night we are "planning"

a general came out and said it. he said we are always planning for something, however. like practice just in case. could be for anyone.
making up scenarios, working through them, scientific data about loss of life, possible outcomes, etc

i guess they gotta do something while waiting for....something to happen. or w/e it is they do in the Pentagon :confused:

[Against Miik!]

I don't doubt it. Iran, who is the second largest oil producer in OPEC, just started selling oil in Euros and Yen instead of dollars. If more countries begin to do this, it will make everybody's dollar reserves worth just that much less.

Iraq was planning on doing the same thing before we invaded.

[Smokey D]

It would be far far more costly to the US to attempt an invasion of Iran. It won't happen. An invasion would probably send prices above the $150 pb mark, with no guaruntee the US would gain political control of the country. Iran is like 3 times the size of Iraq and look at the trouble current troop levels are having there. In the absence of a draft which shall not be forthcoming, there can be no invasion.

[Against Miik!]

To costly? When has that ever stopped us? I mean, I wish you were right, but js...

[Smokey D]

Of course it's stopped you. Especially when there's no political capital to make up for the absence of actual caiptal.

[Against Miik!]

Political capital can be fabricated pretty easily.

[Smokey D]

Not easily enough in this case.

[Independent_CA]

Wow. Why do I get the feeling that no matter who replaces Bush, I'm gonna get activated and sent to Iran?

[Akira]

Because you're paranoid.

[J Rad]

surely america would never, under any circumstances other than her own national security, attack iran.

there was a point before bush ran out of time where he was talking about iran being his next target so yeah, we would

[mph4ever]

there was a point before bush ran out of time where he was talking about iran being his next target so yeah, we would


so do you think it could be set up now and even tentatively started since he running out of time?

would a situation like the threat of serious conflict with iran help the gop or dem candidates?

who do the jewish community traditionally vote for in presidential elections?

sorry, lots of questions, interested in lots of answers

[Akira]

If the administration can paint Iran as a serious threat, it will probably help McCain, but probably not all that much. If the administration actually attacks Iran on even the smallest scale, it will basically be giving the Democrat the keys to the White House.

[Linkinbassist]

i'd thing the Jewish community voted democrat, amirite?

[Against Miik!]

I'd think they would vote republican

Not easily enough in this case.

It's already happening actually.

[mph4ever]

If the administration can paint Iran as a serious threat, it will probably help McCain, but probably not all that much. If the administration actually attacks Iran on even the smallest scale, it will basically be giving the Democrat the keys to the White House.

so america would vote for a democrat woman or coloured guy instead of a vietnam pow vet in times of war, or perceived imminent war. wow, i would have thought the gop would be strongest but then i guess that the war has been going on long enough and peoples opinions are formed and toughened

[mph4ever]

i'd thing the Jewish community voted democrat, amirite?

would they vote for a bloke or a woman, if they are voting democrat?

[Akira]

so america would vote for a democrat woman or coloured guy instead of a vietnam pow vet in times of war, or perceived imminent war. wow, i would have thought the gop would be strongest but then i guess that the war has been going on long enough and peoples opinions are formed and toughened

Well the thing is that, and maybe I'm giving people too much credit, but people are becoming disillusioned with the GOP war machine. McCain has more credibility than Bush, but he's still a Republican.

[mph4ever]

this is going to be one interesting run up to the election

[Independent_CA]

Because you're paranoid.
Could be. Sometimes that's healthy though.

[Sunshine]

Wow. Why do I get the feeling that no matter who replaces Bush, I'm gonna get activated and sent to Iran?

Ohh, are you a reservist?
Get a sex change, and do what my mom did -- get pregnant.
It's not too bad, a less-than-honorable discharge [or whatever it's called]. It's not a dishonorable one, and you're free!

[Totally kidding, by the way, about the sex change.]

[okay]

if we go to war with Iran i ****ing swear i will ****ing go ****ing Ghandi on washington's ***

[J Rad]

well reservist or not we're all registered in the selective service program and those of us with training would be the first to activate and get a two week refresher course before shipping out

[Sunshine]

Well that's why you get pregnant NOW.
If you're pregnant enough [as in, 8 months] they won't send you, and you'll be OUT of the army, and NOT registered anymore, and therefore..you can't get sent without re-enlisting.
True story.

[J Rad]

i'd rather keep my penis and not have a baby

[Sunshine]

Which is why I added that I was kidding after the first response ^-^

[mattspurplepen]

haha man it seems McCain would be way more likely to support a new war than hillary or especially obama. I don't understand why people despise hillary so much when she's still more interesting/ has done more on a local level than mcCain, i mean sure its honorable to go to war and he deserves respect, but just because you serve doesn't mean you should be president. That seems to be the main character value that makes people support mcCain. It just seems reasonable that people would want something new opposed to a sequel to george bush, and even clinton will at least bring us away from corporate tax cuts/ bring troops home fairly soon(rather than 100+years) strive towards energy efficiency and maybe even some more affordable healthcare.
now all of those hopes could be totally wrong but at least democrats provide something to hope for, with mcCain its just the same thing with extremely wealthy people feeling good/

[siva_chair]

Unless your gun can talk, no, just the 1st. The 2nd covers something totally different.

No see you can say whatever you want if you have a gun, duh.

[Smokey D]

I'd think they would vote republican

Typically they vote left of their class interests.



It's already happening actually.

In a very vague way maybe but not enough to go to war.

[Independent_CA]

Ohh, are you a reservist?
Get a sex change, and do what my mom did -- get pregnant.
It's not too bad, a less-than-honorable discharge [or whatever it's called]. It's not a dishonorable one, and you're free!

[Totally kidding, by the way, about the sex change.]

Hahaha good suggestion.

[Linkinbassist]

I think America needs Obama.

You NEED Obama, America.

[siva_chair]

I think America needs Obama.

You NEED Obama, America.

No.

[JohnXDoe]

its funny how out of context everybody takes what she said. the question was IF Iran used a nuclear weapon (hypothetical) what would the American response be.

she said we would obliterate them in that circumstance.

anyone have any better ideas? should we hand them flowers if this were to happen?

pfft

[Linkinbassist]

No.

Yes.

its funny how out of context everybody takes what she said. the question was IF Iran used a nuclear weapon (hypothetical) what would the American response be.

she said we would obliterate them in that circumstance.

anyone have any better ideas? should we hand them flowers if this were to happen?

pfft

The problem is that it's completely undiplomatic and an all-round ****ing stupid thing to say when running for presidential candidacy...

Should could have easily just made it ambiguous and just said 'America has capable means to defend itself should a situation arise' rather than 'We could obliterate this specific country unprovoked comment!'.

There's more to diplomacy than 'Back off, ****er, I'm armed to the teeth'...

[JohnXDoe]

not the best choice of words, perhaps. and i understand how it can ruffle some feathers. but we're not in diplomatic stages with Iran atm so really no harm, no foul. and Hill will probably not even get the nom...so w/e

its just i see these dictators around the world...everyone wants a bomb it seems, and some of our planets more unstable countries, although friendly with the united states atm, do in fact have some. india and pakistan come to mind. which is fine, we have over a thousand or w/e...they have a few

but some leaders i have a feeling, legit and otherwise, really do think the bomb is there way to power and advantage in the world. sure it does afford some sort of power, but obviously they are not to be used. as in used...period. for any reason. they exist, yes. but to use one out of old grudges or to blow israel off the face of the map...this CANNOT happen. obviously...

i'm of the mind some leaders need to know and understand this. if a nuclear weapon is ever used by any nation, friend or foe, against another in an unprovoked manner yes, we will obliterate them.

maybe it could have been more diplomatic....but i don't mind that image floating around in the heads of some leaders who might think otherwise

[dei]

John, you don't really believe that he wants to blow Israel off the map.

[JohnXDoe]

who? threadstarter? of course not. but i think some are so desperate and confused (mentally ill prolly, as fanatics often are) they would if they could. or blow something off the map.

if someone who thinks like Bin Laden had a bomb instead of airplanes to use as bombs, i have no doubt if they could have delivered the payload NYC wouldn't even be there today. quite seriously. some people it seems think we have that coming and that would be a good thing for the world. i don't think so myself...

so let the world know, sure. drop one, you get dropped.

[mph4ever]

verbal deterrent

so you think that, no matter what the circumstances, if one nuclear weapon is used between two nations that the agressor gets obliterated? what if the victim hits back, do you obliterate them also?

[Iskandar]

No see you can say whatever you want if you have a gun, duh.Yet people who don't own guns have the right to free speech because of the 1st. That would imply that the 1st is not dependent on the 2nd.

[Linkinbassist]

not the best choice of words, perhaps. and i understand how it can ruffle some feathers. but we're not in diplomatic stages with Iran atm so really no harm, no foul. and Hill will probably not even get the nom...so w/e

She's running for the job to represent the entirety of America. I'd say it does matter. it shows intent.

its just i see these dictators around the world...everyone wants a bomb it seems, and some of our planets more unstable countries, although friendly with the united states atm, do in fact have some. india and pakistan come to mind. which is fine, we have over a thousand or w/e...they have a few

They want the bomb because they can't have it. The Bomb is limited (officially) to nations who already have it. So in essance, if you're not in the club now, you never will be. And tbh, i think Iran would never use a bomb; It's just too risky.

but some leaders i have a feeling, legit and otherwise, really do think the bomb is there way to power and advantage in the world. sure it does afford some sort of power, but obviously they are not to be used. as in used...period. for any reason. they exist, yes. but to use one out of old grudges or to blow israel off the face of the map...this CANNOT happen. obviously...

You do realise he never said that, right? and yes, you've grasped the concept of nuclear diplomacy. What do you think Korea was doing?! They start to 'build' a bomb for the intent that they have a bargaining chip with those with international power. it's the system we've used ever since the cold war started.

i'm of the mind some leaders need to know and understand this. if a nuclear weapon is ever used by any nation, friend or foe, against another in an unprovoked manner yes, we will obliterate them.

Again, that's how it would work, but no-one WOULD use one. if one shell hit Israel, Iran would be obliterated by the USA and they know this to be true. However, to openly state this is threatening and violates UN charter, as Iran rightly points out.

maybe it could have been more diplomatic....but i don't mind that image floating around in the heads of some leaders who might think otherwise

It SHOULD have been more diplomatic. What Hilary said was dangerous and irresponsible. Seriously, why anyone votes for her at all is beyond me...

[Akira]

Yeah, I really doubt Iran would use the bomb if they had it. They won't even launch a non-nuclear attack on Israel, because Iran would be gone in a matter of weeks. They want the bomb because Israel has the bomb.

The best solution: Israel needs to lose its nuclear arsenal. There is no reason the country needs nukes, considering that it has an extremely powerful army and the world's most powerful army supporting it.

[mph4ever]

i am at a loss to understand why america feels so obligated to defend israel. can anyone explain?

[Kage]

Yes.



The problem is that it's completely undiplomatic and an all-round ****ing stupid thing to say when running for presidential candidacy...

Should could have easily just made it ambiguous and just said 'America has capable means to defend itself should a situation arise' rather than 'We could obliterate this specific country unprovoked comment!'.

There's more to diplomacy than 'Back off, ****er, I'm armed to the teeth'...
Oh, right, gotta be politically correct!! God forbid a politician actually say something devoid of ambiguity.

[Akira]

i am at a loss to understand why america feels so obligated to defend israel. can anyone explain?

Because we need a democratic ally in the Middle East.

[mph4ever]

Because we need a democratic ally in the Middle East.

why? why is it so important that you risk national security and your kids?

[Linkinbassist]

Oh, right, gotta be politically correct!! God forbid a politician actually say something devoid of ambiguity.

I hate it, i do. But such is the nature of the job.

you wouldn't expect to let someone who worked with the disabled say on national TV 'We gotta care for the cause, lets face it, they're retarded', cause it's too politically charged.

so yeah, ambiguous is useful, but on other issues you can be more 'specific', just not when you threaten another nation's security.

[Iskandar]

Because we need a democratic ally in the Middle East.That and they're Jews so they're fulfilling Biblical prophecy by returning to their sacred land and wresting it from the control of the unwashed Mohammedan hordes.

[mph4ever]

That and they're Jews so they're fulfilling Biblical prophecy by returning to their sacred land and wresting it from the control of the unwashed Mohammedan hordes.


lol

[Iskandar]

I don't doubt that some top Republicans and conservative intellectuals think that way, even if they don't express it directly.

[mph4ever]

i don't doubt it either, but i would not pay them the compliment of call them intellectuals

[Linkinbassist]

That and they're Jews so they're fulfilling Biblical prophecy by returning to their sacred land and wresting it from the control of the unwashed Mohammedan hordes.

But it belonged to Palestine.

[Iskandar]

But it belonged to Palestine.Yeah but now there are 5 million Jews there and short of deporting or killing them all you're not going to get them to leave.

[mph4ever]

But it belonged to Palestine.

no it did not, they were only tenents

[VomitStainedCretin]

i don't doubt it either, but i would not pay them the compliment of call them intellectualsYou can still be intelligent and have absolutely no common sense. Or maybe that's just Dungeons & Dragons justifying splitting INT and WIS talking.

Jews say God told them they owned Canaan; God hasn't been available for comment lately but obviously the White House is taking the Jews on their word.

[Linkinbassist]

Yeah but now there are 5 million Jews there and short of deporting or killing them all you're not going to get them to leave.

Well, i think going from splitting a land to having the 'new kids' basically imprison the guys who were there is...well...wrong.

Plus, the Hebrews are a nomadic peoples. The creation of Israel makes no sense to me at all.

[mph4ever]

You can still be intelligent and have absolutely no common sense.

help me to think of one you would hold in this category that is not a puppet for the real agenda


Or maybe that's just Dungeons & Dragons justifying splitting INT and WIS talking.

love it


Jews say God told them they owned Canaan; God hasn't been available for comment lately but obviously the White House is taking the Jews on their word.

sure if god came along whilst i was hill walking and said "i promise you the land of virginia" do you really think virginians would let me take it because god said so ;)

[Iskandar]

Well, i think going from splitting a land to having the 'new kids' basically imprison the guys who were there is...well...wrong.Of course it is.
Plus, the Hebrews are a nomadic peoples.Well, that was because they were in exile from their homeland, and often subjected to hostility and persecution wherever they went.
The creation of Israel makes no sense to me at all.No, it makes sense. The ideology of Zionism took hold in the 1800s and had been growing since. When the British had control of the region of Palestine after WWII, it was offered to the Jews, the principle victims of the Holocaust.

[Seafroggys]

Kinda OT, but I have this strange feeling that very few of our ICBMs will actually work once used :p

[mph4ever]

No, it makes sense. The ideology of Zionism took hold in the 1800s and had been growing since. When the British had control of the region of Palestine after WWII, it was offered to the Jews, the principle victims of the Holocaust.

it still doesn't make sense

[Linkinbassist]

No, it makes sense. The ideology of Zionism took hold in the 1800s and had been growing since. When the British had control of the region of Palestine after WWII, it was offered to the Jews, the principle victims of the Holocaust.

Not really, Though i will agree that the holocaust coupled with the mass re-homing problems post-WWII meant that the UN and the British were under pressure to 'relocate' the Jewish population of Europe. suffice to say, Zionism peaked post-WWII simply because of these pressure.

it still, really, makes little sense...

[Iskandar]

I don't see how it doesn't make sense. A significant portion of the Jews had been actively campaigning for a state for over a hundred years; not to mention that the return to Zion had always been a goal of the religion.

[mph4ever]

I don't see how it doesn't make sense. A significant portion of the Jews had been actively campaigning for a state for over a hundred years; not to mention that the return to Zion had always been a goal of the religion.

no, not the reason, the solution.


The ideology of Zionism took hold in the 1800s and had been growing since. When the British had control of the region of Palestine after WWII, it was offered to the Jews, the principle victims of the Holocaust.

this doesn't make sense. i don't undertand why it ended with them getting a free country

[Independent_CA]

Kinda OT, but I have this strange feeling that very few of our ICBMs will actually work once used :p

Considering the size and importance of our military budget, I doubt that. This isn't the former Soviet Union.

[Linkinbassist]

Considering the size and importance of our military budget, I doubt that. This isn't the former Soviet Union.

I'd be more worried about the new equipment. The Pentagon format the tests to 'ensure success' so that anything that has billions of dollars of funding isn't 'wasted'.

makes you think...

[Der Übermensch]

No, it makes sense. The ideology of Zionism took hold in the 1800s and had been growing since. When the British had control of the region of Palestine after WWII, it was offered to the Jews, the principle victims of the Holocaust.
I'm going to have to agree with mph, no matter how distasteful I feel for it. That makes no sense. Well actually no. It's simply wrong. The British had control, and gave it up to the UN. The British were trying to stop Jewish immigration even after the war was over. Despite the Balfour declaration, they were trying to stop the creation of Israel, or at least of one that would dominate the native population. They knew what was going to happen, and at the last minute passed it off to the UN like Pontius Pilate washing his hands... The UN then tried to make everyone happy with the well intentioned, but badly planned '47 partition, which satisfied no one, so the Arabs/Palestinians then attacked the Jews, and the Jew's counterattacked and took most of the land the UN gave to the Arabs/Palestinians.

[beastman168]

Yeah but now there are 5 million Jews there and short of deporting or killing them all you're not going to get them to leave.
yeh...just look at the battle of masada

[The Chemist]

I don't understand why people despise hillary so much when she's still more interesting/ has done more on a local level than mcCain.

Because she's a ****ing liar. Like the whole thing about snipers. WTF. Sinbad called her on it. SINBAD. The moment a politician lies like that they should be removed from their party. Plus ,her campaign has done nothing but Fear-Monger about Obama.

[Linkinbassist]

Because she's a ****ing liar. Like the whole thing about snipers. WTF. Sinbad called her on it. SINBAD. The moment a politician lies like that they should be removed from their party. Plus ,her campaign has done nothing but Fear-Monger about Obama.

Agreed. She's making the democratic campaign nothing more than a mud-slinging match...

[JohnXDoe]

The moment a politician lies like that they should be removed from their party.
Barack Obama:

"I can no more disown him (Reverend Wright) than I can disown the black community"

oh wait

[TimJim]

oh burn

[mph4ever]

Agreed. She's making the democratic campaign nothing more than a mud-slinging match...

i would say they are only sharpening their skills for when the real campaigning starts post nomination. when the gop kicks into gear nothing will be sacred

[JohnXDoe]

^

its true. in fact this campaign (the democrats) is pretty much free of any "mud slinging"

since when does a little "negative" campaigning constitute slinging mud? for any candidate, including Barack because he and his campaign have done it from day one, to point out something "negative" about the other is fair game. this isn't "shake hands and kiss time." that will come after the nominee is chosen. until then i would say this is one of the more civil campaigns i've witnessed in recent memory. its not always issues oriented, but it never is. meanwhile we have to endure the all so noble Barack tell people "well, if they hit you long enough sooner or later you have to hit back"

oh ok poor Barack.

the dems don't want to destroy themselves, but unfortunately yes, we have two candidates many feel very passionate about. one will win the other will not, but voters will have to get past their own bs (forget the candidates bs) if they want to beat McCain in November. the notion the party is being split because of Hillary staying in the race is bs, also. she has every right motive to be in this race, has been campaigning for two years, and truth be known if Mich and Florida were counted may very well have the lead in the popular vote, if not delegates. as it is Barack won't have enough delegates to put him over the top, either. so it goes to the super delegates. thats just the way it works.

millions of people have voted for hilliary, why should she go away? she is a good candidate and should take this as far as she can. EVERYONE deserves to vote in this election, and the DNC is a POS for not counting Mich and Florida. so on we go....mud in hand :p

[Linkinbassist]

Barack Obama:

"I can no more disown him (Reverend Wright) than I can disown the black community"

oh wait

Can you read?

He's saying he can't disown his Minister or the community he grew up in.

[BridgeToSolace]

millions of people have voted for hilliary, why should she go away? she is a good candidate and should take this as far as she can. EVERYONE deserves to vote in this election, and the DNC is a POS for not counting Mich and Florida. so on we go....mud in hand :p

Except she's using those two states to pander for more votes.

She agreed to the terms of the DNC before the primary.

Not only does this include the super delegates that she is so desperately clinging to, it includes the exclusion of Florida and Michigan.

But after Hillary realized that she may not win, she needed a way to bolster her less-than-steller results. So she went against her word and starting sticking up for people. Of course Floridians are going to be unresponsive to the man who's framed as "The one not wanting us to vote."

The whole part agreed to the terms. The states new exactly what was going to happen if they front-loaded as much as they did. There are no "right" to vote in a primary. It's disingenuous and underhanded of Hillary to start "sticking up" for Michigan and Florida. There no way you can have anything resembling an fair vote there now.

If she can leave it up to the super delegates, she can shut the **** up about Florida and Michigan.

Oh, and she could go away because this back and forth is destroying the democrat's (and honestly her own) chances at winning the general election.

Democrats never miss and opportunity to miss an opportunity.

[JohnXDoe]

Can you read?

He's saying he can't disown his Minister or the community he grew up in.
well he has all but disowned his minister just a few weeks after saying he never could. and he did it for political reasons, make no mistake.

so is that a lie or just something he couldn't do before he saw it might hurt him politically?

i wonder what it is to Wright, his pastor and spiritual mentor? he gets Barack's personal support and then...whoops its gone because he thought he was free to speak about the man whom is like a son to him....and then....Barack takes it back.

what does the fact i don't know how to read have to do with understanding the lie in Barack's first statement about not being able to disown Reverand Wright?

Hey Barack, may as well disown the black community now, too. its the same damn thing as your lovely Reverend to you.

lies...lies...and more lies


/boots Obama from party lol

[Linkinbassist]

well he has all but disowned his minister just a few weeks after saying he never could. and he did it for political reasons, make no mistake.

so is that a lie or just something he couldn't do before he saw it might hurt him politically?

As far as i gathered, he denounced what he said but hasn't disowned him.

i wonder what it is to Wright, his pastor and spiritual mentor? he gets Barack's personal support and then...whoops its gone because he thought he was free to speak about the man whom is like a son to him....and then....Barack takes it back.

Refer to above.

what does the fact i don't know how to read have to do with understanding the lie in Barack's first statement about not being able to disown Reverand Wright?

because if you can't read, you can't interpret properly.

Hey Barack, may as well disown the black community now, too. its the same damn thing as your lovely Reverend to you.

lies...lies...and more lies

Hilary clinton claimed she flew into Serbia under gunfire, when there's film evidence that shows the contrary. if anyone's spouting 'lies, lies and more lies', it's Hilary. she's just a ****-spouting dong, and she looks like a lying cheshire cat in your avatar (Which, by the way, is gay).


/boots Obama from party lol

/Boots you in face lol

[JohnXDoe]

oh sure he "denounced" what he said. after he defended what he said earlier. pfft. i'm sure Reverend Wright see's it a little differently. perhaps a little more personally

refer to above

i don't have to know how to read to know what is as plain as the nose on my face

onoes Hillary told a tall tale about dodging bullets she's a vicious liar! and ur avatar is far gayer then mine but i won't mention it

/boots you in your tiny nuts lol

[Linkinbassist]

onoes Hillary told a tall tale about dodging bullets she's a vicious liar! and ur avatar is far gayer then mine but i won't mention it

/boots you in your tiny nuts lol

1) She blatantly lied. She lied completely outright...and her campaign team have released pictures of Obama wearing a turban to smear his campaign, and all Hilary could say was 'i can't keep track of my team'. She's an incompetent, ****-stirring bitch-queen.

2) Your avatar is Hilary Clinton. she looks like the 'after' photo of a bad facelift. 'I'm smiling because I'm a moron!' :thumb:

So yeah, please...die.

[Smokey D]

This argument shows how the continued presence of Clinton in the campaign, whatever right she has to be there, harms the chances of the Democrats from displacing GOP domination in the White House.

[Akira]

This argument shows how the continued presence of Clinton in the campaign, whatever right she has to be there, harms the chances of the Democrats from displacing GOP domination in the White House.

But dude, like, if we change around all the rules and then blast Obama for denouncing his racist minister, then Hilary's pretty much already the president of the world!

Every day this primary goes on is another free day for McCain. I wish I could say this would be over Tuesday, but judging by poll numbers here in Indy this is going to the floor of the DNC.

[mph4ever]

so this dnc thing, what happens? everyone who has a vote turns up and they vote for whoever they want as the candidate, nullifying all previous votes or is their tally going to the dnc carried forward

[JohnXDoe]

1) She blatantly lied. She lied completely outright...and her campaign team have released pictures of Obama wearing a turban to smear his campaign, and all Hilary could say was 'i can't keep track of my team'. She's an incompetent, ****-stirring bitch-queen.

2) Your avatar is Hilary Clinton. she looks like the 'after' photo of a bad facelift. 'I'm smiling because I'm a moron!' :thumb:

So yeah, please...die.
well well well...i see the truth comes out!

seems Obama has to deal with the race thing and Clinton has to deal with misogyny. but we won't talk about that, i guess

/dies
This argument shows how the continued presence of Clinton in the campaign, whatever right she has to be there, harms the chances of the Democrats from displacing GOP domination in the White House.
no well you see, despite my hyperbole i will most likely still vote for Obama in Novemeber if he gets the nom. so long as he continues to impress and doesn't fuk shi...up for himself.

its the Obama supporters that have a more, almost personal problem with Clinton. its silly. she can run the country fine and probably do as good or better job then Barack. hell even in debates HE has said they're really not that far apart.

and lets not forget who was in the race first. Hilliary Clinton, make no mistake, was going to be the first woman president of the united states. i'm sure Barack looked and thought "well, why not a black man, too."

he knew she was going to be the front runner and get the nom. some from his party even urged him not to run. too young, too soon, wait it out. we have our WOMAN. but he joined the race after her. why is it her presence that is damaging?

i'll tell you why? because of all the Obama fanboys (and girls) who saw he was "hot" early and is now not so hot. they need to get over themselves and vote for whoever is the nominee in November. and the same goes for Hilliary supporters when it comes to Barack. we don't have a candidate problem here, we have a voter problem. cast your vote for the Dem in November if you want "change."

that includes Clinton, who is not evil or an "incompetent bitch queen"

what a disgrace....

[Linkinbassist]

well well well...i see the truth comes out!

seems Obama has to deal with the race thing and Clinton has to deal with misogyny. but we won't talk about that, i guess

/dies



if you're trying to insinuate i'm a misogynist, you might as well walk away. But hey, it's not quite as bad as you pointing out that Obama is only running cause he saw a woman could do it, so why not a 'Black Man'.

Why do you yanks put so much emphasis on the fact that the candidates aren't white males?! it has nothing to do with anything. The only difference is that Barack Obama can hold his own in the public domain without looking like a total fool.

which Hilary Clinton does.

Everyday.

She just looks like a fool.

Barrage me with claims of Misogyny, please. It's just as bad as if i were calling you racist.

[BridgeToSolace]

but he joined the race after her. why is it her presence that is damaging?


1. The main person damaging Hillary Clinton's campaign is Hillary Clinton.

2. The main (or 2nd main, at least) person damaging Barack Obama's campaign is Hillary Clinton.

Hillary's is the damaging force here because her platform against Obama revolves around "He's not as good as me" rather than "I'm better than him."

She's got it into her supporter's heads that experience is incredibly important, and that Obama has none. So when Hillary loses the nomination and her supporters see that their nominee lacks the experience that she's made them think she has, they defect to McCain. She doesn't seem to realize that she's campaigning against someone that she would want to win in a different circumstance.

In the end, her campaign is damaging because she's putting her nomination ahead of the party's interest. More democratic Clinton supporters said that they would defect to McCain (or not vote) than Obama supporters if the opposite candidate won the nomination.

Her campaign is the more destructive one, no doubt.

[siva_chair]

Yet people who don't own guns have the right to free speech because of the 1st. That would imply that the 1st is not dependent on the 2nd.

Nor did I ever say it really was.

But you can still say whatever you want if you have a gun. Just because the 1st isn't really dependent on the 2nd doesn't mean the 2nd doesn't grant you the benefits of the 1st. :p

Besides, jokes are fun.

[BridgeToSolace]

But you can still say whatever you want if your gun is bigger than someone else's

Fixed.

[siva_chair]

Fixed.

That works too.

[VomitStainedCretin]

At least with Clinton/Obama slagging each other off now it'll leave less new material for a Republican smear campaign come November.

[siva_chair]

At least with Clinton/Obama slagging each other off now it'll leave less new material for a Republican smear campaign come November.

They've already got their Ministry of Comedy writing dirt for each of the potential candidates don't worry.