The Next President of the USA will be?

[Hermit_]

Kermit, do you really think that anyone is reading your WAY TO LONG pastes from the Obama web site? Next time, save the cyber space and just make a point. All you can do is TRY TO defend and twist Obama's now daily flip flop's.

However, I do get a genuine kick out of the names you call me. While I call you kermit, your list of names for me is about as boring as your constant covering up for your now superhero Obama.

SOOOOOOOOOOOO, here they are:

Pee Man, P-diddle, muh-boy, doofus, moron, numbnuts, bonehead, Rick, and my all time favorite...............P-Zero. How many more can kermit drag out of his cave???

You forgot "P-dribble", "Planet-Zero".. and a few others.

Nonetheless,.. your list is extensive enough to sufficiently

indicate to me that YOU have been reading my posts.

In reading my posts, I hope you've been appreciating that I've made good use of your "Pb derigable's poll's have come from more reliable sources then yours" claim. You know.. even though Pb and I had both used realclearpolitics.com as our source. [Hell-Ohhhh! ]

Priceless.

..aint it, P-Nut?

[Electrophile]

This act of yours is getting old.

[Hermit_]

"he served admirably as a prisoner in Vietnam"

Wow. Strong backhanded compliment.

That's pretty harsh.

If he didn't use family name and family connections when he was a POW, why would you suggest that of him ever?

POSER?

Poser with regard to his claims of having foreign affairs mastery. Its quite obvious he's rather clueless when it comes to international relations. He doesn't know Sunni from Shiite; he doesn't realize Czechoslovakia is no longer a country; he claims it's naive to negotiate with one's enemies. Yeah, he's a poser. He's a war monger wanna be Commander-in-Chief posing as a legitimate potential leader of a nation.. which he's clearly not fit to be. You know.. like George Bush. McCain doesnt know the first thing about diplomacy; what he knows is that he likes to.. "bomb, bomb, bomb.. bomb, bomb [fill in country of choice here]".. drop bombs. Literally.

McCain: "When you drop your bombs on the target and get back, you feel great."

What has he earned his military acclaim from? Certainly not on how performed in the Naval Academy,.. and certainly not on how many enemy targets he destroyed as a navy pilot,.. but rather on how he served and persevered under extremely harsh conditions as a POW. And make no mistake about it, I respect him for his courage and fortitude as a POW. But that's where my respect for him starts.. and ends.

Had it not been for his family's military name and history, McCain likely wouldn't have made it out of the Naval Academy at all.. something he barely accomplished anyway.. and certainly not based on his merit as a midshipmen,.. academically or otherwise. At the USNA he was renowned as a flake and a fuck-off.

Writes Matt Welch, April 2007, in his piece:

Be Afraid of President McCain

The frightening mind of an authoritarian maverick:

---------------------

"John McCains I, II, and III shared more than just a name and profession. Each was short for a sailor, quick to violent temper (especially when accused of dishonesty or of benefiting from privilege), and lousy in the classroom. (The future senator graduated 894th out of a Naval Academy class of 899, but that was only marginally worse than his father, who was 423rd out of 441.) One reason for the poor academic performance was that each McCain was a five-star binge drinker and carouser. Grandpa “smoked, swore, drank, and gambled at every opportunity he had,” Sen. McCain wrote in his 1999 memoir Faith of My Fathers. Dad, while more discreet, was an out-and-out alcoholic. John spent his teens and 20s constantly flirting with disciplinary disaster by breaking every drinking and curfew rule on the books, concentrating more on Brazilian heiresses and Florida strippers than on his aviating skills."

------------------------

Which might explain why.. as a navy pilot.. he lost more than his share of jets to crashes.

[Not including the incidents on the USS Forrestal or when he got shot down in Vietnam.]

Writes Carl Bernstein in his 1999 piece "John McCain: Nothing Left to Fear":

---------------

"As for John McCain III's years at Annapolis, "I hated the place, and in fairness the place wasn't all that fond of me either," he has written m his memoir, Faith of My Fathers, published in September. As Timberg notes in his book, McCain was a mess—"shoes unshined. late for formation, talking in ranks, room in disorder, gear improperly stowed." He devoured literature which had nothing to do with his course-work, but "I was adept at cramming for exams, and blessed with friends who did not seem to mind too much my requests for urgent tutorials." He was a jock and—as he acknowledges today—"a wild one" who developed a reputation for escorting one beautiful woman after another off campus. He and his fellow Annapolis revelers were known as "the Bad Bunch."

Always on the edge of flunking out, McCain finished fifth from last in his class. [John] Poindexter—the future national-security adviser—finished first. After graduation, McCain went out of his way to choose a naval career that was as different from his father's as imaginable. "Actually," he says, "I wanted to be a navy pilot, because I thought it was a pretty exciting life. I wasn't interested in being on a destroyer or a battleship or a submarine. I thought being a navy pilot would be a lot of fun. But that was the extent of my ambitions. It was not to reach higher rank or to advance up the ladder. I just thought it would be a great life, and it turned out indeed it was."

But it was also extremely hazardous. Flight school at Pensacola was a riot of hard playing for the young flier, whose Corvette was most likely to be found parked by a beach or at Trader John's, a strip bar. He dated a dancer nicknamed "Marie, the Flame of Florida" before moving on to advanced flight training in Corpus Christi, where his carousing and womanizing evidently took a toll on his flying. He found himself literally underwater after his training jet stalled and he couldn't make land. Knocked out as his plane smacked into Corpus Christi Bay, he regained consciousness on the bottom and struggled to the surface. While deployed in the Mediterranean in the early 1960s, he hit some power lines while flying too low over Spain. "I liked the squadron life," he recalls. "We'd be in port for a week, 10 days. I was single. I mean, it was wonderful. I was embarrassed to take my paycheck."

McCain also renewed a friendship with Carol Shepp, a divorced mother of two who had been married to one of his Annapolis classmates. A tall, attractive former model, she was exactly what Mc-Cain's friends agreed he needed—someone smoother around the edges than he but full of life. In July 1965 they were married. That fall he was flying back to Norfolk solo when the engine of his plane failed and he had to bail out just before it plowed into a tidal stand of trees. It was his third accident, but, miraculously, he floated onto a deserted beach with only minor injuries.."

-------------

Like I said before,.. McCain has risen way beyond that level which his incompetence would suggest he'd rise. It seems reasonmable to consider the posibility that his family name and his family's rich history of military service may have had something to do with that, doesn't it? Not unlike the very unlikely rise of GWB to the position of POTUS.. based mostly on the influence wielded by family name (and wealth) and the influence of family "cronies".. despite his being a total fuckup most of his life, ya know?

[beatbo]

So making jokes about his age and memory along with creating pictures of him on a walker are not personal attacks? I think that many would agree that these are about as personal as it gets.

age is a very important issue for a presidential election, zipperhead...

[Hermit_]

*Iraqi PM backs Obama troop exit plan: report*

Jul 19, 2008; BERLIN (Reuters) - Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki told a German magazine he supported prospective U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's proposal that U.S. troops should leave Iraq within 16 months.

In an interview with Der Spiegel released on Saturday, Maliki said he wanted U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraq as soon as possible. "U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes."

It is the first time he has backed the withdrawal timetable put forward by Obama, who is visiting Afghanistan and us set to go to Iraq as part of a tour of Europe and the Middle East. Obama has called for a shift away from a "single-minded" focus on Iraq and wants to pull out troops within 16 months, instead adding U.S. soldiers to Afghanistan.

Asked if he supported Obama's ideas more than those of John McCain, Republican presidential hopeful, Maliki said he did not want to recommend who people should vote for. "Whoever is thinking about the shorter term [*cough*Obama*cough*] is closer to reality. Artificially extending the stay of U.S. troops would cause problems."

---------------

Maliki supports Obama's Iraq plan. In one swoop, he just erased

any questions about Obama's foreign affairs acumen.

And in that swoop, he also.. very subtly, but clearly.. discredited McCain.

I'd say Obama's trip abroad is off to a mighty fine start.

Obama.. the right judgment,.. the right choice:

* Obama has the right plan on Iraq; a plan that has the backing of the Iraqi PM.

* Obama's plan for Afghanistan has been to send more troops in;

a plan McCain previously dismissed,.. but has since adopted as well.

* Obama said he'd talk to Iran. Bush and McCain called him "naive"

for that plan,.. and yet now the Bush admin is ready to talk to Iran.

* Obama has said he wouldn't hesitate to launch strikes into Pakistan if specific

al Qaeda targets were identified and the Pakistani govt refused to strike; a plan

that McCain mockedhim for, but a plan that today received praise from leaders

in Afghanistan.

"Iraqi PM backs Obama troop exit plan"

Can't wait to see how Bush, McCain,.. and the McCainiacs here spin this one.

Will McCain question Maliki's judgment?

Will McCain support.. or deny.. Iraqi sovereignty?

Will McCain agree with himself.. or will he.. flip (again)? -->

Here's what he said in *2004*:

QUESTION: Let me give you a hypothetical, senator. What would or should we do if, in the post-June 30th period, a so-called sovereign Iraqi government asks us to leave, even if we are unhappy about the security situation there? I understand it's a hypothetical, but it's at least possible.

McCAIN: "Well, if that scenario evolves, then I think it's obvious that we would have to leave because— if it was an elected government of Iraq— and we've been asked to leave other places in the world. If it were an extremist government, then I think we would have other challenges, but I don't see how we could stay when our whole emphasis and policy has been based on turning the Iraqi government over to the Iraqi people.

..By the way, could I— if we do it right, that's not going to happen, but we will be there militarily for a long, long, long time.".

Today may be looked back upon as the beginning

of the end for John McCain's presidential hopes.

[Pb Derigable]

Whats funny is that Obama plan for withdrawl looks better now, than it did a few months ago, because of a plan, he was completly against, and his rival complety supported it.

The guy can't quit his church for 20 years

Can't quit smoking.

but he can end the war in 16 months?

Give me a break.

[zeplinger]

I've never seen a presidential campaign quite like this one of Obama's! The organizations, meetups, house parties, and events that are happening all over are phenomenal. I'm having great opportunities to meet great people in my neighborhood and community, at last! I'm having the time of my life! Thank you, Obama!

[Hermit_]

The spinmaster strikes again!

Ok,.. I've removed all traces of my own assessments/opinions/predictions.

Now it's just the facts, ma'am. -->

*Iraqi PM backs Obama troop exit plan: report*

Jul 19, 2008; BERLIN (Reuters) - Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki told a German magazine he supported prospective U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's proposal that U.S. troops should leave Iraq within 16 months.

In an interview with Der Spiegel released on Saturday, Maliki said he wanted U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraq as soon as possible. "U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes."

It is the first time he has backed the withdrawal timetable put forward by Obama, who is visiting Afghanistan and us set to go to Iraq as part of a tour of Europe and the Middle East. Obama has called for a shift away from a "single-minded" focus on Iraq and wants to pull out troops within 16 months, instead adding U.S. soldiers to Afghanistan.

Asked if he supported Obama's ideas more than those of John McCain, Republican presidential hopeful, Maliki said he did not want to recommend who people should vote for. "Whoever is thinking about the shorter term is closer to reality. Artificially extending the stay of U.S. troops would cause problems."

and now a few questions..

of which I'd love to hear your answers, Summerbreeze:

Will McCain question Maliki's judgment?

Will McCain support.. or deny.. Iraqi sovereignty?

Will McCain agree with himself.. or will he.. flip (again)? -->

Here's what he said in *2004*:

QUESTION: What would or should we do if.. a so-called sovereign Iraqi government asks us to leave, even if we are unhappy about the security situation there?

McCAIN: "Well, if that scenario evolves, then I think it's obvious that we would have to leave because— if it was an elected government of Iraq— and we've been asked to leave other places in the world. If it were an extremist government, then I think we would have other challenges, but I don't see how we could stay when our whole emphasis and policy has been based on turning the Iraqi government over to the Iraqi people.

..By the way, could I— if we do it right, that's not going to happen, but we will be there militarily for a long, long, long time.".

Whatdoya think, Summerbreeze,..?

Will McCain question Maliki's judgment.. perhaps call him "naive" as he did Obama.. regarding his support for Obama's 16-month timetable for withdrawal of US troops beginning as soon as possible?

Will McCain respect Iraqi sovereignty and support a plan that includes a timetable for the withdrawal of US troops as established by the democratically elected Iraqi government?

Or will McCain dismiss (and diss) Iraqi sovereignty by continuing to push for a plan for US troops to be in Iraq "for a long, long, long time" contrary to the wishes of the democratically elected Iraqi government that US troops be withdrawn beginning as soon as possible?

Come on, Summerbreeze..

..WOW us with your (spin-free?) insights!

[edited for typo]

[zepyep]

Hi all,

Read to the end and see the connection !!!!!!

Subj: piano player in a whorehouse

When

President Truman retired from office in 1952, his income was substantially a

U.S. Army pension reported to have been $13,507.72 a year. Congress, noting he

was paying for stamps and personally licking them, granted him an 'allowance'

and, later, a retroactive pension of $25,000 per year

When

offered corporate positions at large salaries, he declined, stating, 'You

don't want me. You want the office of the president, and that doesn't belong

to me. It belongs to the American people and it's not for sale.'

Even

later, on May 6, 1971, when Congress was preparing to award him the Medal of

Honor on his 87-th birthday, he refused to accept it, writing, 'I don't

consider that I have done anything which should be the reason for any award,

Congressional or otherwise.'

We

now see others who have found a new level of success in cashing in on the

presidency, resulting in untold wealth. Today, many in Congress, too, become

wealthy while enjoying the fruits of their offices. Political offices are now

for sale.

Was

good old Harry correct when he made the following observation: 'My choice,

early in life, was either to be a piano player in a whorehouse or a

politician. And to tell the truth, there's hardly any difference. I, for one,

believe the piano player job to be much more honorable than current

politicians'.

I

WONDER JUST WHAT PRESIDENT TRUMAN WOULD THINK OF THE CURRENT POLITICAL

SITUATION

????

KB

[cryingbluerain]

*Iraqi PM backs Obama troop exit plan: report*

Jul 19, 2008; BERLIN (Reuters) - Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki told a German magazine he supported prospective U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's proposal that U.S. troops should leave Iraq within 16 months.

In an interview with Der Spiegel released on Saturday, Maliki said he wanted U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraq as soon as possible. "U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes."

It is the first time he has backed the withdrawal timetable put forward by Obama, who is visiting Afghanistan and us set to go to Iraq as part of a tour of Europe and the Middle East. Obama has called for a shift away from a "single-minded" focus on Iraq and wants to pull out troops within 16 months, instead adding U.S. soldiers to Afghanistan.

Asked if he supported Obama's ideas more than those of John McCain, Republican presidential hopeful, Maliki said he did not want to recommend who people should vote for. "Whoever is thinking about the shorter term [*cough*Obama*cough*] is closer to reality. Artificially extending the stay of U.S. troops would cause problems."

---------------

Maliki supports Obama's Iraq plan. In one swoop, he just erased

any questions about Obama's foreign affairs acumen.

And in that swoop, he also.. very subtly, but clearly.. discredited McCain.

I'd say Obama's trip abroad is off to a mighty fine start.

Obama.. the right judgment,.. the right choice:

* Obama has the right plan on Iraq; a plan that has the backing of the Iraqi PM.

* Obama's plan for Afghanistan has been to send more troops in;

a plan McCain previously dismissed,.. but has since adopted as well.

* Obama said he'd talk to Iran. Bush and McCain called him "naive"

for that plan,.. and yet now the Bush admin is ready to talk to Iran.

* Obama has said he wouldn't hesitate to launch strikes into Pakistan if specific

al Qaeda targets were identified and the Pakistani govt refused to strike; a plan

that McCain mockedhim for, but a plan that today received praise from leaders

in Afghanistan.

"Iraqi PM backs Obama troop exit plan"

Can't wait to see how Bush, McCain,.. and the McCainiacs here spin this one.

Will McCain question Maliki's judgment?

Will McCain support.. or deny.. Iraqi sovereignty?

Will McCain agree with himself.. or will he.. flip (again)? -->

Here's what he said in *2004*:

QUESTION: Let me give you a hypothetical, senator. What would or should we do if, in the post-June 30th period, a so-called sovereign Iraqi government asks us to leave, even if we are unhappy about the security situation there? I understand it's a hypothetical, but it's at least possible.

McCAIN: "Well, if that scenario evolves, then I think it's obvious that we would have to leave because— if it was an elected government of Iraq— and we've been asked to leave other places in the world. If it were an extremist government, then I think we would have other challenges, but I don't see how we could stay when our whole emphasis and policy has been based on turning the Iraqi government over to the Iraqi people.

..By the way, could I— if we do it right, that's not going to happen, but we will be there militarily for a long, long, long time.".

Today may be looked back upon as the beginning

of the end for John McCain's presidential hopes.

Maliki backs off Obama praise

Posted July 20, 2008 4:00 PM

by Katie Fretland

The Iraqi government has distanced itself from an interview published in a German magazine which stated Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's support of Sen. Barack Obama's 16-month timetable for the withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq.

Baghdad government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said in a statement that the publication, Der Spiegel, had "misunderstood and mistranslated" Maliki. Al-Dabbagh said the prime minister's comments "should not be understood as support to any U.S presidential candidates."

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics...liki_obama.html

Sounds like Maliki learning how to flip-flop just like his buddy BO..

[Pb Derigable]

All I will say is I predict a nail biter and perhaps an election even tighter than Kennedy/Nixon and Gore/Bush. This one will be very very close and there is no predicting the outcome at this point. If Obama were to chose the right VP he could win it easily and so could McCain. But the choice here may be more important than ever as the American public is not happy with either.

See i see it different. I don't think it will be close at all. Im not sure who will win, but i do think it does have alot to do with VP choices tho.

Either Obama keeps his lead of 5%. or McCain catches up and ties him, and once obama has to do hard core interviews, do more than 3 debates, and the american truly see who he is, he will drop, but only if McCain catches him. I have reasons that he will, but i also know reasons why he won't. It's all about how you play the game.

[Electrophile]

A game is all it is. Two unqualified individuals who are luckier than hell to even be the candidate's and we lose no matter who gets the job. Four years of either of them is more than I can stomach. But at least their power is very limited thank God. Yes God. Do you hear that Electrophile? God. In God I trust. Not in Obama or McCain. Or some young know it all like you think you are.

Gotcha. Gee, who do we know here who always used to say that about younger people here?

I KNEW I heard that song and dance before. Knew it.

BTW, I have no problems with God or people who believe in God. I have never said, intimated, inferred or otherwise stated that I did. I just don't think being religious should be a requirement to be President. So believe what you want, how you want. Doesn't affect me.

[Pb Derigable]

A game is all it is. Two unqualified individuals who are luckier than hell to even be the candidate's and we lose no matter who gets the job. Four years of either of them is more than I can stomach. But at least their power is very limited thank God. Yes God. Do you hear that Electrophile? God. In God I trust. Not in Obama or McCain. Or some young know it all like you think you are.

Yeah, i can do without mccain, but there is no way im going to let nancy pelosi run this country with her puppet Obama.

It's the lesser of two evils. If you have a choice between two fat chicks, you might as well dance with the one who gives good head.

[Lake of Shadows]

Yeah, i can do without mccain, but there is no way im going to let nancy pelosi run this country with her puppet Obama.

It's the lesser of two evils. If you have a choice between two fat chicks, you might as well dance with the one who gives good head.

I guess I agree. i hope that Muslim prick loses.

Is 'Muslim prick' another political party? Where was I when they announced that?

If you're referring to one of the candidates... as far as I know, neither of them are Muslim, and they both have pricks (presumably)... so you're half-right, regardless of the election's outcome. Not bad... good strategy.

[Hermit_]

Maliki backs off Obama praise

Posted July 20, 2008 4:00 PM

by Katie Fretland

The Iraqi government has distanced itself from an interview published in a German magazine which stated Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's support of Sen. Barack Obama's 16-month timetable for the withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq.

Baghdad government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said in a statement that the publication, Der Spiegel, had "misunderstood and mistranslated" Maliki. Al-Dabbagh said the prime minister's comments "should not be understood as support to any U.S presidential candidates."

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics...liki_obama.html

Sounds like Maliki learning how to flip-flop just like his buddy BO..

First of all,.. your "Maliki backs off Obama praise" title is pure spin on your part. You know, given that the actual title of Fretland's article is: "Iraqi spokesman calls interview wrong; Der Spiegel magazine stands by its interview with the prime minister." Nothing in the article indicates that Maliki was "backing off" having praised Obama's plan or having indicated that he agrees with Obama's plan.. agreement that he very clearly did express yesterday. [Nice try though, spinningbluerain. ]

Secondly,.. it's hardly "backing off" or "wrong" when the Iraqi spokesman's statement is merely a reiteration of what Maliki had said in the first place: that he was not recommending who people should vote for in the presidential election.. ie, that he was not supporting one US presidential candidate over the other. [see blue text above, and in article below.. the same article I posted yesterday]:

*Iraqi PM backs Obama troop exit plan: report*

Jul 19, 2008; BERLIN (Reuters) - Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki told a German magazine he supported prospective U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's proposal that U.S. troops should leave Iraq within 16 months.

In an interview with Der Spiegel released on Saturday, Maliki said he wanted U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraq as soon as possible. "U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes."

It is the first time he has backed the withdrawal timetable put forward by Obama, who is visiting Afghanistan and us set to go to Iraq as part of a tour of Europe and the Middle East. Obama has called for a shift away from a "single-minded" focus on Iraq and wants to pull out troops within 16 months, instead adding U.S. soldiers to Afghanistan.

Asked if he supported Obama's ideas more than those of John McCain, Republican presidential hopeful, Maliki said he did not want to recommend who people should vote for. "Whoever is thinking about the shorter term is closer to reality. Artificially extending the stay of U.S. troops would cause problems."

Finally,.. I find it interesting that you omitted 2 key parts of the article you posted:

1. The part (in the article title and in the body of the article) indicating that

"Der Spiegel magazine stands by its interview with the prime minister", and..

2 The part indicating that the statement issued by the "Baghdad government spokesman" didn't come until after the Iraqi government had received "a call from U.S. government officials in Iraq".. ie, someone acting at the behest of the White House. [see full article below].

The Iraqi government has distanced itself from an interview published in a German magazine which stated Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's support of Sen. Barack Obama's 16-month timetable for the withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq.

Baghdad government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said in a statement that the publication, Der Spiegel, had "misunderstood and mistranslated" Maliki. Al-Dabbagh said the prime minister's comments "should not be understood as support to any U.S presidential candidates."

The publication said in an article on its website that it stands by its interview.

Der Spiegel published an interview quoting the prime minister as saying, "U.S presidential candidate Barack Obama is right when he talks about 16 months. Assuming that positive developments continue, this is about the same time period that corresponds to our wishes."

The White House accidentally sent an e-mail to its extensive distribution list with a Reuters article about the Maliki interview.

The Washington Post's The Trail blog reports the Iraqi government statement came after a call from U.S. government officials in Iraq.

Any particular reason why you omitted those parts of the story, spinningbluerain?

..perhaps because those parts of the story didn't comport with your desired spin, eh?

Spin, spin, spin yourself a blue streak, spinningbluerain muh-boy,..

..but your spin simply does not make Malilki's own words go away.

Maliki: ""U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes."

Maliki: ""U.S presidential candidate Barack Obama is right when he talks about 16 months. Assuming that positive developments continue, this is about the same time period that corresponds to our wishes."

Pow! Straight from the Iraqi Prime Minister's mouth.

[cryingbluerain]

First of all,.. your "Maliki backs off Obama praise" title is pure spin on your part. You know, given that the actual title of Fretland's article is: "Iraqi spokesman calls interview wrong; Der Spiegel magazine stands by its interview with the prime minister."

Busy at work right now so I'll comment more on this later but they have obviously changed the title of the article:

Maliki backs off Obama praise: The SwampJul 20, 2008 ... Maliki backs off Obama praise · Obama: no doubts on readiness · Inauguration tix selling fast in Illinois · All the Fuss About Iran ...

www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/07/maliki_obama.html - 61k - 18 hours ago - Cached - Similar pages

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navc...ff+Obama+praise

[wanna be drummer]

I guess I agree. i hope that Muslim prick loses.

Well that doesn't make you sound like a douchebag or anything

[reids]

I think with the economy, dollar and all due to the mortgage crisis, war expenses, oil increased pricing, etc... the US will eventually cease to exist (and merge with Canada and Mexico as the North American Union). if that happens, it will become One of 10 global districts controlled by the 60 or so people (businesses) that really run the world's biz anyway. The shift of power from the US being the dominant country to the European Union has already taken place (ever since September 11th, 2001), the beginning of WWIII.

So, all this talk about Dems or Repubs is all One big smoke screen. It's really a One party system with the candidates pre-chosen anyway by the powers that be. Look at their backgrounds and you'll see for yourself. (what committees they belong to, who backs them, etc...) Otherwise, how can a junior senator get more backing power than the Former First Lady (unless she was told to concede). It hasn't been For The People By The People in ages... check out the Bildebergs, Tri-Lateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations, etc...

R

[Pb Derigable]

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/07/21/th...ouldnt-publish/

The response by McCain for the infamous Obama Op-ed about Iraq.

This was not accepted by the New York Times because it does not mirror Obama feelings.

By Sen. John McCain

In January 2007, when General David Petraeus took command in Iraq, he called the situation hard but not hopeless. Today, 18 months later, violence has fallen by up to 80 percent to the lowest levels in four years, and Sunni and Shiite terrorists are reeling from a string of defeats. The situation now is full of hope, but considerable hard work remains to consolidate our fragile gains.

Progress has been due primarily to an increase in the number of troops and a change in their strategy. I was an early advocate of the surge at a time when it had few supporters in Washington. Senator Barack Obama was an equally vocal opponent. “I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there,” he said on January 10, 2007. “In fact, I think it will do the reverse.”

Now Senator Obama has been forced to acknowledge that “our troops have performed brilliantly in lowering the level of violence.” But he still denies that any political progress has resulted.

Perhaps he is unaware that the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad has recently certified that, as one news article put it, “Iraq has met all but three of 18 original benchmarks set by Congress last year to measure security, political and economic progress.” Even more heartening has been progress that’s not measured by the benchmarks. More than 90,000 Iraqis, many of them Sunnis who once fought against the government, have signed up as Sons of Iraq to fight against the terrorists. Nor do they measure Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki’s new-found willingness to crack down on Shiite extremists in Basra and Sadr City — actions that have done much to dispel suspicions of sectarianism.

The success of the surge has not changed Senator Obama’s determination to pull out all of our combat troops. All that has changed is his rationale. In a New York Times op-ed and a speech this week, he offered his “plan for Iraq” in advance of his first “fact finding” trip to that country in more than three years. It consisted of the same old proposal to pull all of our troops out within 16 months. In 2007 he wanted to withdraw because he thought the war was lost. If we had taken his advice, it would have been. Now he wants to withdraw because he thinks Iraqis no longer need our assistance.

To make this point, he mangles the evidence. He makes it sound as if Prime Minister Maliki has endorsed the Obama timetable, when all he has said is that he would like a plan for the eventual withdrawal of U.S. troops at some unspecified point in the future.

Senator Obama is also misleading on the Iraqi military’s readiness. The Iraqi Army will be equipped and trained by the middle of next year, but this does not, as Senator Obama suggests, mean that they will then be ready to secure their country without a good deal of help. The Iraqi Air Force, for one, still lags behind, and no modern army can operate without air cover. The Iraqis are also still learning how to conduct planning, logistics, command and control, communications, and other complicated functions needed to support frontline troops.

No one favors a permanent U.S. presence, as Senator Obama charges. A partial withdrawal has already occurred with the departure of five “surge” brigades, and more withdrawals can take place as the security situation improves. As we draw down in Iraq, we can beef up our presence on other battlefields, such as Afghanistan, without fear of leaving a failed state behind. I have said that I expect to welcome home most of our troops from Iraq by the end of my first term in office, in 2013.

But I have also said that any draw-downs must be based on a realistic assessment of conditions on the ground, not on an artificial timetable crafted for domestic political reasons. This is the crux of my disagreement with Senator Obama.

Senator Obama has said that he would consult our commanders on the ground and Iraqi leaders, but he did no such thing before releasing his “plan for Iraq.” Perhaps that’s because he doesn’t want to hear what they have to say. During the course of eight visits to Iraq, I have heard many times from our troops what Major General Jeffrey Hammond, commander of coalition forces in Baghdad, recently said: that leaving based on a timetable would be “very dangerous.”

The danger is that extremists supported by Al Qaeda and Iran could stage a comeback, as they have in the past when we’ve had too few troops in Iraq. Senator Obama seems to have learned nothing from recent history. I find it ironic that he is emulating the worst mistake of the Bush administration by waving the “Mission Accomplished” banner prematurely.

I am also dismayed that he never talks about winning the war — only of ending it. But if we don’t win the war, our enemies will. A triumph for the terrorists would be a disaster for us. That is something I will not allow to happen as president. Instead I will continue implementing a proven counterinsurgency strategy not only in Iraq but also in Afghanistan with the goal of creating stable, secure, self-sustaining democratic allies.

[Hermit_]

.

I went to the source of the al-Miliki's comments in support of Barack Obama's Iraq withdrawal timetable plan, and in addition to finding the quotes he made CLEARLY in support of Obama's plan (in blue text below),.. I found another very interesting tidbit (in red text below).. one that's gotten ZERO media attention in the US:

*SPIEGEL INTERVIEW WITH IRAQ LEADER NOURI AL-MALIKI*

'The Tenure of Coalition Troops in Iraq Should Be Limited'

The situation in Iraq seems to be improving. SPIEGEL spoke with Iraqi Prime

Minister al-Maliki about his approval of Barack Obama's withdrawal plans and

what he hopes from US President Bush in his last months in office.

7/19/2008

[snip]

SPIEGEL: How short-term? Are you hoping for a new agreement before the end of the Bush administration?

MALIKI: So far the Americans have had trouble agreeing to a concrete timetable for withdrawal, because they feel it would appear tantamount to an admission of defeat. But that isn't the case at all. If we come to an agreement, it is not evidence of a defeat, but of a victory, of a severe blow we have inflicted on al-Qaida and the militias. The American lead negotiators realize this now, and that's why I expect to see an agreement taking shape even before the end of President Bush's term in office. With these negotiations, we will start the whole thing over again, on a clearer, better basis, because the first proposals were unacceptable to us.

SPIEGEL: Immunity for the US troops is apparently the central issue.

MALIKI: It is a fundamental problem for us that it should not be possible, in my country, to prosecute offences or crimes committed by US soldiers against our population. But other issues are no less important: How much longer will these soldiers remain in our country? How much authority do they have? Who controls how many, soldiers enter and leave the country and where they do so?

SPIEGEL: Would you hazard a prediction as to when most of the US troops will finally leave Iraq?

MALIKI: As soon as possible, as far as we're concerned. U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes.

SPIEGEL: Is this an endorsement for the US presidential election in November? Does Obama, who has no military background, ultimately have a better understanding of Iraq than war hero John McCain?

MALIKI: Those who operate on the premise of short time periods in Iraq today are being more realistic. Artificially prolonging the tenure of US troops in Iraq would cause problems. Of course, this is by no means an election endorsement. Who they choose as their president is the Americans' business. But it's the business of Iraqis to say what they want. And that's where the people and the government are in general agreement: The tenure of the coalition troops in Iraq should be limited.

Seems pretty darn clear to me that:

1. MALIKI SUPPORTS OBAMA'S PLAN for a withdrawal timetable , and

2. Maliki was not making an election endorsement, per se. [not explicitly anyway. ]

But that bit about "immunity" for US troops who have committed crimes

being a holdup to an agreement.. I gotta say,.. that's news to me!

Has anyone else seen that anywhere in the media previously?

[Hermit_]

.

*Gallup Daily: Obama Leads McCain by Six Points

Lead is among the largest Obama has held over McCain*

July 21, 2008

The current results also mark the first time in more than three weeks that McCain's share of the trial heat vote has not been in the 42% to 44% range. In fact, it matches a June 7-9 reading as McCain's lowest level of support since Gallup began tracking general election preferences in March.

-------------------

I look forward to seeing the Obama upward-McCain downward

trend continuing in the coming days, weeks, and months!

[Pb Derigable]

If McCain means a 3rd Bush term than you can say

Obama means a 3rd Iraq war . (What can be more Bush than that)

So Obama wants a 16-month withdrawal timetable (based on ground info)

But never says anything about winning the war.

So we can assume that he'll get the troops out without putting troops in danger (who gets to leave last)?

So we can further assume that he will leave if Iraq is not fit as long american lives are not in danger?(what about the poor civilians)

So if Iran runs through Iraq like a white castle hamburger and diplomacy does not work.

We can assume we would have to send troops back in to protect Iraq and Israel.

Because if we should not invaded the first place, we can't leave it in harms way.

So sending troops back could be considered a 3rd Iraq war.

Didn't we learn from past mistakes (Bush Sr.)?

Now we jump on Bush for saying the war would not be long and we jump McCain and Bush for not giving another timetable? But Obama is in the clear, even when he says, he'll base it on ground Intel? Isn't that what Bush and McCain is thinking?

Can we trust the community organizer (obama) to actually talk Tehran out of killing us and Israel, when we couldn't for the last 40 years and we invaded a country for supposedly no good reason right next door? Does Obama have pics of the leader of Iran or something?

Honestly

3rd Bush Term or

3rd Iraq War

So i could see in two years we can be out of there whoever is POTUS. So really, the question is who do we trust to make sure we don't have to come back there? Do we trust the guy who thinks our current plan is not working or the one who supported the plan which will lead to the victory of this war and the pullout in 2 years.

Obama may be right, but not because of what he did.

Yeah, 16 month timetable, before you go there and see for yourself. Thats Hope for you, not leadership.

I tell you what, if i was in the marines and was in iraq and Obama became president. I would just leave my shit there to save on fuel cost.

[Hermit_]

Note:

McCain's mistake/memory lapse/brain fart du jour:

*McCain: "..on the Iraq/Pakistan border"*

Asked by Diane Sawyer whether the "the situation in Afghanistan in precarious and urgent," McCain responded: "I think it's serious.. It's a serious situation, but there's a lot of things we need to do. We have a lot of work to do and I'm afraid it's a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq/Pakistan border."

------------------

Uhhh.. Johnny-John.. Mr so-called "foreign policy expert"..

what Iraq/Pakistan border are you referring to, muh-man?

D'oh!

Let's hope McCain was wearing his slippers with the mint-flavored

soles today, because.. once again.. he put his foot in his mouth.

[i bet about now you repubs are wishing you'd nominated Huckabee,.. eh? ]

[Pb Derigable]

.

*Gallup Daily: Obama Leads McCain by Six Points

Lead is among the largest Obama has held over McCain*

July 21, 2008

The current results also mark the first time in more than three weeks that McCain's share of the trial heat vote has not been in the 42% to 44% range. In fact, it matches a June 7-9 reading as McCain's lowest level of support since Gallup began tracking general election preferences in March.

-------------------

I look forward to seeing the Obama upward-McCain downward

trend continuing in the coming days, weeks, and months!

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content...l_tracking_poll

It's the same fucking story but reverse. it's bizaro polling

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

Monday, July 21, 2008 Email to a FriendAdvertisement

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows Barack Obama attracting 42% of the vote while John McCain earns 41%. That’s the lowest level of support measured for Obama since he clinched the Democratic Presidential nomination on June 3. Obama’s support peaked at 48% with data released on June 8, 9, and 10. During that same time frame, McCain’s support has remained steady in the 40% to 42% range (he’s had just one day a point below that range and two days a point above it).

When "leaners" are included, it’s Obama 46% and McCain 45%. With leaners, Obama reached 50% support in mid-June and was at 48% or 49% every day from June 13 until July 10. Since then, he has reached the 48% level just once while polling consistently at 46% or 47% (see recent daily results). Tracking Polls are released at 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time each day.

McCain is viewed favorably by 57% of voters, Obama by 53%. McCain is currently supported by 86% of Republicans and holds a modest--four percentage point—lead among unaffiliated voters. Obama earns the vote from 77% of Democrats (see other recent demographic highlights).

Obama is currently on a European tour designed to bolster his foreign policy credentials here at home. Currently, voters trust McCain more than Obama on both national security issues in general (53% - 39%) and on Iraq in particular (49% - 37%).

A growing percentage of voters also believe that most reporters are trying to help Obama win the election. Forty-nine percent (49%) hold that view while only 14% believe reporters are trying to help McCain. Other data shows that voters tend to think reporters are trying to make both the economy and Iraq seem worse than they really are.

Daily tracking results are collected via telephone surveys of 1,000 likely voters per night and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. The margin of sampling error—for the full sample of 3,000 Likely Voters--is +/- 2 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Results are also compiled on a full-week basis and crosstabs for the full-week results are available for Premium Members.

[Medhb]

If McCain means a 3rd Bush term than you can say

Obama means a 3rd Iraq war . (What can be more Bush than that)

So Obama wants a 16-month withdrawal timetable (based on ground info)

But never says anything about winning the war.

So we can assume that he'll get the troops out without putting troops in danger (who gets to leave last)?

So we can further assume that he will leave if Iraq is not fit as long american lives are not in danger?(what about the poor civilians)

So if Iran runs through Iraq like a white castle hamburger and diplomacy does not work.

We can assume we would have to send troops back in to protect Iraq and Israel.

Because if we should not invaded the first place, we can't leave it in harms way.

So sending troops back could be considered a 3rd Iraq war.

Didn't we learn from past mistakes (Bush Sr.)?

Now we jump on Bush for saying the war would not be long and we jump McCain and Bush for not giving another timetable? But Obama is in the clear, even when he says, he'll base it on ground Intel? Isn't that what Bush and McCain is thinking?

Can we trust the community organizer (obama) to actually talk Tehran out of killing us and Israel, when we couldn't for the last 40 years and we invaded a country for supposedly no good reason right next door? Does Obama have pics of the leader of Iran or something?

Honestly

3rd Bush Term or

3rd Iraq War

So i could see in two years we can be out of there whoever is POTUS. So really, the question is who do we trust to make sure we don't have to come back there? Do we trust the guy who thinks our current plan is not working or the one who supported the plan which will lead to the victory of this war and the pullout in 2 years.

Obama may be right, but not because of what he did.

Yeah, 16 month timetable, before you go there and see for yourself. Thats Hope for you, not leadership.

I tell you what, if i was in the marines and was in iraq and Obama became president. I would just leave my shit there to save on fuel cost.

Derigible, can you please define for me what 'winning this war' means to you?

Also, in an effort to be fair, I've been listening to more and more of McCains speaches and I'll be damned! I learned something new from him today! Pakistan and Iraq share a border! Who knew?! I'm sure I have a lot more to learn from this Foreign Policy Expert...I'll be sure to stay tuned!