Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakk
If that was an on-topic, honest question, I'd point out that voting against the (at the time) very popular "go to war in Iraq" was done by Obama at the very start.
|
Obama did not vote against the resolution to use military force against Iraq. The bill was passed October 2002. Obama was elected to the US Senate in 2004. Also, I would add that many Democrats who voted for the resolution were against it as soon as Bush used the unconditional authority given to the President. I don't know when Obama first made his views public, but I would bet it was after other Democrats made their views know.
I stand by my view, Obama has never really lead on any issue and he would never risk taking an non-populist position. If that is what you want in our next President, that is what we are going to get in Obama.
-----Added 11/10/2008 at 05 : 36 : 33-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by girldetective
Being respected in the world is a big deal, being able to work and talk with other nations, the World Bank, and so forth. To be trusted and taken seriously in the sciences and education, and so forth. I believe Obama will add to what trust is left. In fact, other nations are excited to see him elected.
|
Being "respected" is ambiguous, it has no meaning, it has no measure, it is not something you do - it happens as a result of long standing patterns of behavior, it is basically an empty campaign phrase. Obama's speeches are full of this kind of stuff.
If we want "respect" one thing we do is earn it through fulfilling our commitments. we made a commitment to Iraq if we let them fail how does that move us closer to his goal of being "respected". Personally, I think some nations want (pardon my French) to screw us up the a$$, and because we say no, then they say they don't "respect" us until we do what they want. If that is the kind of "respect" Obama wants he can have it, I don't accept that.
-----Added 11/10/2008 at 05 : 42 : 45-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
I can think of one very good reason why McCain has been less forthcoming on his transition team....
...if it is anything like his current campaign strategy/communications team:
|
It is funny, when McCain was a darling of the media, a victim of Bush (Rove), being a maverick taking middle of the road positions (remember his immigration plan or amnesty as everyone on the right called it?), he was loved by you folks on the left. Now, he is closer to Bush than Bush was to his own father.
The strange thing about this is I don't know what is worse, how quickly the left turned on McCain or if they just forgot. Which is it?