During Obama's Second Term, Will He...

[ELVIS]

But it's also a fraud like FORD has pointed out...

The voting machines are suspect no matter who wins...

[Satan]

But it's also a fraud like FORD has pointed out...

The voting machines are suspect no matter who wins...

Technically true, since there's no way to prove a vote either way. But since the electro-fraud machines are all owned by right wing Republican operatives (literally the Romney family themselves in one case) it is highly unlikely that they would be rigged to favor Obama, or any other Demoncratic candidate.

Well at least in the General Election. There's still some questions about the last two Demoncratic primaries in New Hampshire. But that would fall under the old "Nixon dirty tricks committee" designation. You rig the machines in favor of the Demoncrat who YOU want to see in November, because you think your guy will beat him. Or her, as was the case in the 2008 primary.

[Nickdfresh]

President Ego signed the Patriot Act just like Bush. President Ego has kept the war going just like Bush. President Ego is spending money at a very similar rate as the Bush Administration did. He and Bush are very similar in the way the act. Oh, and lets not forget Bush started Guantanamo to house terrorist and President Ego kept it open even though he stated he would close it in his first year in office. He's about to start his second term. Did he mean the first year of his second term and he misspoke?

Spouting some platitude and posting a picture along with it doesn't really change how similar they are when you start looking at facts and their actions in office.

Firstly, who the fuck is "President Ego?" What fucking president DOESN'T have an ego?

Secondly, you can stop with the bullshit on the wars and acting like Obama (Ego I presume) was or is just like Bush when Obama fully extricated our forces from that shithole called Iraq. Obama started no wars, and very much limited our presence in the Libyan Campaign, which is ultimately the most successful conflict we've had since almost no American troops are on the ground there and the Libyans themselves did the dirty work. And if you fail to understand what the fuck you are talking about, like usual, maybe you can read some Wiki entries on Iraq, or pick up Thomas Rick's excellent Fiasco. It's a nice read, well, not a 'nice' read. Then you might understand the differences between using mechanized, armored forces to blitz a country like Iraq while underfunding the poorly conceived, costly and manpower-intensive occupation on behalf of a hostile POS gov't of ex-militia terror thugs, and waging a counterinsurgency and counterterrorist campaigns or a very limited air campaign fought by a coalition on behalf of a popular uprising where few combat sorties were flown by U.S. pilots. It's a slight nuance that seems to escape literalist, linear thinking fellows as yourself. It is a distinction worth mentioning however...

Obama hasn't closed GITMO largely because no one wants their prisoners back. He has greatly reduced the population of residents and there have been efforts to actually discern who might be an actual terrorist and who was simply picked up and sold to the U.S. military in Afghanistan because they had been in the wrong place at the wrong time or pissed someone off. Unfortunately he did resign The (un)Patriot Act. But I doubt that really offends you much. But your posts come off in the redundant category of pissing and moaning about what Obama has failed to achieve, but then you piss and moan when he does achieve something, like Obamacare. But considering he's up against a Congressional Leadership that essentially pledged to get nothing done in order to insure his defeat, all while getting paid large government salaries in the big government they supposedly hate, you might actually offer up some criticism of them as well?

[Nickdfresh]

the war was not illegal...why do you say it was? Really, I want an explanation.

The war was winding down on Bush's watch, in large part because of the "surge." both bush and Obama can take credit for ending the war.

Funny, but you and Ed Schultz agree on something...

But the war wasn't really "winding down," as much as it was pissing itself out. "The Surge" certainly wasn't Bush's idea, and it was formulated almost exclusively by people who had been against the invasion of Iraq to begin with. And there's no way a hypothetical third Bush term would have completely withdrawn from Iraq...

[MUSICMANN]

Oh, I don't know, B...........maybe because.......






























He lied about the pretext that started the fucking thing

You mean the same Intelligent Agency and CIA that labeled the attack in Libya a protest were the same that said Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.

[Nitro Express]

It's going to be four more years of the same shit except with a big investigation on Bengazi and the Republicans trying to take Obama down with it.

[jhale667]

As soon as you drop the word inherited from your lexicon.






(like that? Been wanting to use the word lexicon for a while. Makes me sound smart. Thanks bro )

Don't thank me yet... It MIGHT have, had I actually used the word "inherited" in my post. Instead, it makes you look like a dummy trying to use a big word out of context. From the echo chamber.

[BigBadBrian]

Oh, I don't know, B...........maybe because.......

He lied about the pretext that started the fucking thing

Having a faulty pretext does not equate to an illegal war. Bush had approval from both houses of Congress, including from one Senator Joe Biden (though he lied his ass off in the VP debate and said he was against it ). Therefore, the war WAS NOT illegal. Case closed.

[kwame k]

So lying about the reason to go to war........lying to Congress and the American people, using the war to make profits for key members of your Administration is legal.

Gotcha, we should give him a medal or something

[kwame k]

Oh and having your VP's office out a CIA spy because you were pissed about her husband exposing the truth about yellow cake is cool to......by your way of thinking

[Satan]

Therefore, the war WAS NOT illegal. Case closed.

Spoken just like old Tricky Dick himself......

[kwame k]

You mean the same Intelligent Agency and CIA that labeled the attack in Libya a protest were the same that said Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.

Nice stretch..........Libya and Iraq are so similar. Give me a break.

Everyone knew there weren't no WMD's or better yet none that we didn't give him back in the 80's. The UN and every other intelligent agency on the planet said he had no weapons program, period. Spelled out in no uncertain terms.

Seems the same to me......misreading a protest in an area that was going through a civil war is the same as invading a sovereign nation and starting a war/occupation that lasted how long?

[ELVIS]

Everyone knew there weren't no WMD's

Oh really ??

[MUSICMANN]

Nice stretch..........Libya and Iraq are so similar. Give me a break.

Everyone knew there weren't no WMD's or better yet none that we didn't give him back in the 80's. The UN and every other intelligent agency on the planet said he had no weapons program, period. Spelled out in no uncertain terms.

Seems the same to me......misreading a protest in an area that was going through a civil war is the same as invading a sovereign nation and starting a war/occupation that lasted how long?

That's my point. I think Bush having a hard-on to invade Iraq was utter bullshit and wrong.



When it's Clinton's turn to get up in front and is called upon to testify about the Libya attack and what her and the president knew an when did they know it, will be no different. Both administrations after the fact have tried to throw the Intelligence Agency under the bus.

[ELVIS]

Technically true, since there's no way to prove a vote either way. But since the electro-fraud machines are all owned by right wing Republican operatives (literally the Romney family themselves in one case) it is highly unlikely that they would be rigged to favor Obama, or any other Demoncratic candidate.

Well at least in the General Election. There's still some questions about the last two Demoncratic primaries in New Hampshire. But that would fall under the old "Nixon dirty tricks committee" designation. You rig the machines in favor of the Demoncrat who YOU want to see in November, because you think your guy will beat him. Or her, as was the case in the 2008 primary.

It's silly how you think it's all one-sided...