Obama mischaracterization of medical bankruptcies

[Anne]

Both have accomplished the same thing: nothing.

No, in Vietnam we lost, and the communists won, in Iraq we changed the government of that country.

Please explain to us how the bulk of the economic stimulus plan falls into the category of 'entitlements'.
[/quote]

Maybe earmarks would be a better word for the stimulus plan, but I was referring to all of the other things he is proposing such as free college, more welfare, etc. Take your pick.

[Palehorse]

why is it that everyone forgets WHY we attacked Iraq?

It was spelled out by the Clinton Administration...CLEARLY!

Bush actually carried out what SHOULD have been carried out by Clinton....

It was voted upon ALMOST unanimously by the house AND the senate....

the UN agreed that military action was needed....

NOBODY ever said there was a direct connection between the two.............but, it was declared that Iraq WAS a threat..........and AFTER 9/11........President Bush did NOT take lightly to threats....and did what HE felt was best for this country........and EVERYBODY agreed until things got tough!...and THEN everybody turned against him....and started pointing fingers.

THAT is EXACTLY what happened....period.

(Bolded)- When did they do that Henry? As far as I recall the UN issued no resolution in support of the US initiative in Iraq; in fact I believe they came out against such action????

[Henry Hawk]

(Bolded)- When did they do that Henry? As far as I recall the UN issued no resolution in support of the US initiative in Iraq; in fact I believe they came out against such action????

1441 was a resolution that was adopted....unanimously by the United Nations Security Council on November 8, 2002, offering Iraq under Saddam Hussein "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" that had been set out in several previous resolutions (Resolution 660, Resolution 661, Resolution 678, Resolution 686, Resolution 687, Resolution 688, Resolution 707, Resolution 715, Resolution 986, and Resolution 1284).

what does FINAL mean in this case?............seriously?.......the security counsil gave saddam at least ten previous resolutions!!...Bush along with the UN...gave him ONE more!!...and Saddam blew it off AGIAN.....and President Bush ACTUCALY carried out the final threat.....the way one would expect!...it was voted upon by congress........Great Britain along with Spain AND others, that ACTION needed to be taken.....the UN is a joke!

[Palehorse]

1441 was a resolution that was adopted....unanimously by the United Nations Security Council on November 8, 2002, offering Iraq under Saddam Hussein "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" that had been set out in several previous resolutions (Resolution 660, Resolution 661, Resolution 678, Resolution 686, Resolution 687, Resolution 688, Resolution 707, Resolution 715, Resolution 986, and Resolution 1284).

what does FINAL mean in this case?............seriously?.......the security counsil gave saddam at least ten previous resolutions!!...Bush along with the UN...gave him ONE more!!...and Saddam blew it off AGIAN.....and President Bush ACTUCALY carried out the final threat.....the way one would expect!...it was voted upon by congress........Great Britain along with Spain AND others, that ACTION needed to be taken.....the UN is a joke!

I don't disagree that the UN is a joke. You already know my opinion of them; "paper tiger" and Saddam knew it.

However, your statement implied that they supported the military action utilized by the US and they did not. In fact the UN wanted to continue to pursue a diplomatic solution to the Iraqi issue, and was quite forceful in their communication of that fact to the POTUS and congress. . .

No need for the riding crop! 

[Exterminator]

why is it that everyone forgets WHY we attacked Iraq?

We haven't; we attacked Iraq because the administration intentionally lied and made them appear a threat.

It was spelled out by the Clinton Administration...CLEARLY!

Bush actually carried out what SHOULD have been carried out by Clinton....

Wrong.

It was voted upon ALMOST unanimously by the house AND the senate....

No, the House and the Senate voted not to take responsibility by usurping the Constitutional mandate for them to declare war.

the UN agreed that military action was needed....

No, they didn't.

NOBODY ever said there was a direct connection between the two....

Bullshit, Bush absolutely made that connection not once but several times.  You're either pathetically uninformed or a liar.

.........but, it was declared that Iraq WAS a threat....

Really?  How were they a threat?  They couldn't even hit us with a scud missile when we were 50 km away.

......and AFTER 9/11........President Bush did NOT take lightly to threats....and did what HE felt was best for this country...

No, Bush did what he thought was necessary to make himself feel better about having such a small dick.

.....and EVERYBODY agreed until things got tough!...and THEN everybody turned against him....and started pointing fingers.

Nope; it was clear to all thinking people long before we went into Iraq what was happening: Bush fully intended to invade that country regardless of the circumstances and no amount of Saddam jumping through hoops was ever going to change it. 

[Henry Hawk]

I don't disagree that the UN is a joke. You already know my opinion of them; "paper tiger" and Saddam knew it.

However, your statement implied that they supported the military action utilized by the US and they did not. In fact the UN wanted to continue to pursue a diplomatic solution to the Iraqi issue, and was quite forceful in their communication of that fact to the POTUS and congress. . .

No need for the riding crop! 

let me say it this way........to most of the logical thinking world.........."serious consequences" does NOT mean give them ONE MORE CHANCE!!..and THAT is what 1441 said!........to me, it was finally nice for the United States and Great Britian to stand behind a threat....and act upon it....

and if we would have had the SURGE immediatly after the initally attack it would NOT have lasted this long.

[Exterminator]

However, your statement implied that they supported the military action utilized by the US and they did not. In fact the UN wanted to continue to pursue a diplomatic solution to the Iraqi issue, and was quite forceful in their communication of that fact to the POTUS and congress. . .

Do you really expect for him to be able to understand that?

[Exterminator]

let me say it this way........to most of the logical thinking world.........."serious consequences" does NOT mean give them ONE MORE CHANCE!!..and THAT is what 1441 said!........to me, it was finally nice for the United States and Great Britian to stand behind a threat....and act upon it....

LMMFAO!  You are speaking for the 'logical, thinking' world?

...and if we would have had the SURGE immediatly after the initally attack it would NOT have lasted this long.

Oh, look...the dude who never even saw fit to put on a uniform and serve his country is now suddenly a brilliant military strategist!

[Exterminator]

No, in Vietnam we lost, and the communists won, in Iraq we changed the government of that country.

We deposed an Islamic theocracy and then the Iraqis voted to replace it with an Islamic theocracy.  I'm not seeing the big change.

[Henry Hawk]

We haven't; we attacked Iraq because the administration intentionally lied and made them appear a threat.

well, that is not what Clintons, Albright and practically ALL of the Clinton Administration AND congress felt...

Wrong.

RIGHT!

No, the House and the Senate voted not to take responsibility by usurping the Constitutional mandate for them to declare war.

well THEY got it wrong then...

No, they didn't.

they declared "serious consequences"..what was that supposed to mean after 10 resolutions?

Bullshit, Bush absolutely made that connection not once but several times.  You're either pathetically uninformed or a liar.

show me!........where exactly he connected Iraq AND 9/11....he always declared them (al qada) as a threat to the US and/or it's allies....

Really?  How were they a threat?  They couldn't even hit us with a scud missile when we were 50 km away..

again go ask Clinton's crew.......and Intelligence and Syria and .......really this list can go on and on....if you want me to...

No, Bush did what he thought was necessary to make himself feel better about having such a small dick...

wow!!! that was an extremely well thought out response....about the best you can come up with?..

Nope; it was clear to all thinking people long before we went into Iraq what was happening: Bush fully intended to invade that country regardless of the circumstances and no amount of Saddam jumping through hoops was ever going to change it...

he already jumped through at least 10 hoops (resolutions)...the only mistake Bush made, in my opinion, was he was lead to believe that this would be a quick invasion...in/out........and our intelligence miscaluclated our enemy.........and Bush SHOULD have demanded a SURGE right AFTER this was figured out.

[Exterminator]

wow!!! that was an extremely well thought out response....about the best you can come up with?..

I'm guessing you and he share that trait.

You're a liar, Henry, and too ignorant to see, even in retrospect, what a lying scumbag Bush is.  Birds of a feather...

[Anne]

We deposed an Islamic theocracy and then the Iraqis voted to replace it with an Islamic theocracy.  I'm not seeing the big change.

Who is the dictator in Iraq now, and please don't say something stupid like the US.

[Exterminator]

Who is the dictator in Iraq now, and please don't say something stupid like the US.

You're being obtuse.  The fundamentals of their government have not changed...by their own choice.

[Anne]

You're being obtuse.  The fundamentals of their government have not changed...by their own choice.

How can now haveing a dictator and electing their government be the same. They may choose to have the same laws and religion but they have the choice to change it if they wish. You are being obtuse.

[Henry Hawk]

I'm guessing you and he share that trait.

You're a liar, Henry, and too ignorant to see, even in retrospect, what a lying scumbag Bush is.  Birds of a feather...

Well, I am NO liar.....I'm sure I am ignorant in your eyes.....and Bush may or may not be a scumbag....but I tell you, I am glad he was my President in lieu of the alternatives that we had to pick from...

and THIS is from a guy who was SO successful, the best place he could find to live was on Van Buskirk?...In Anderson?...


Wow THAT was impressive...