Yeah and that is why Hannity refers to him as a community organizer. You guys do it to.
Toughen up, you are the ones who were dishing it out.

So because some othe right winger said something, I’m bound by it? That’s assinine.

Well, obviously H, you love people dying in Hurricanes, after all, Michael Moore cheered on a hurricane as a “gift from god”.

Furthermore, Hannity talks about Obama’s time as a community organizer, but he refers to him as Senator Obama.

Palin introduced herself as a PTA mom, a mayor, a governor, and a VP candidate. If we wish to talk about the first one she mentioned, it was VP candidate. You took two small sentences out of a huge speech, and VOILA, all that matters about her is the hockey mom. Yet she spoke two sentences about her role as a mother, and multiple paragraphs on governor. I’d take that as introducing herself as a governor more than a mom.

What Obama has demonstrated through both his initial opposition to the war and his support afterwards of it is that once you invade, you have to finish the job in a manner that is acceptable before you start pulling funds and troops.

Really? That’s not what I take out of it at all. He couldn’t make a stand against the war when it mattered…his first speech against the war was well into it. He campaigned for the Senate on ending the war, yet when he gets into Senate, he breaks his campaign promise. When asked how he would’ve voted if he’d been there, he says “I don’t know.” Then he has the balls to pull a 180 when he runs for office, and repeats the lie ad infinitum that he is the only consistant anti-war candidate.

Frankly, it makes no difference what Obama said – or claims he said – about the war. It only matters what he does about it. And what he has done is to consistently vote to fund it.

You have to fund a war so we have a chance to win PP. The important thing is when to pull the plug. And you can still fund the war while you pull the plug.

For some reason you have this strange idea that is you opposed the war, you must not vote to fund it once we have gone to war. That is a illogical conclusion on your part.

Sorry, but your argument makes no sense. Your syllogism is all wrong.

ToTheStars,

I have never seen you make an argument, I don’t know who you are, I have never seen your posts and you are essentially nothing to me.

Grow some balls, make an argument or shut yer trap because you are nothing but white noise to me.

OH MY GOD!!! Did anybody see this complete fool Sarah Palin flail her way through this interview?

HAHAHA!

Holy crap she is stuttering and blabbering buzzwords but saying nothing. She has NO DETAILS NO KNOWLEDGE, NO NOTHING!!!

Please admit this is a joke Republicans.

I am so tired of her parroting the words “multi-faceted solution”, “solutions and comprehensive long-term solution” and “were gettin into crisis mode here, that we are in”.

Sarah Palin is a flipping fool!!

Scary, Scary, Scary.

Kiss you booty goodbye Republicans!

Kenny,

You are wrong on the facts and I just typed out a complete response but it didn’t post.

So I will summarize this time. You argue;

That’s not what I take out of it at all. He couldn’t make a stand against the war when it mattered…his first speech against the war was well into it.

You are flat wrong!!! What will you say later about being that wrong???????

Delivered on Wednesday, October 2, 2002 by Barack Obama, Illinois State Senator, at the first high-profile Chicago anti-Iraq war rally (organized by Chicagoans Against War in Iraq) at noon in Federal Plaza in Chicago, Illinois; at the same day and hour that President Bush and Congress announced their agreement on the joint resolution authorizing the Iraq War, but over a week before it was passed by either body of Congress.

What did he say? Did he make a well thought out, intelligent prediction about the reasons he opposed this war?

Good afternoon. Let me begin by saying that although this has been billed as an anti-war rally, I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances.

I don’t oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income – to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.

Now let me be clear – I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.

He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

Obama was right, thoughtful and made an accurate prediction that showed knowledge good judgment and great leadership.

Thank you.

Obama was right, thoughtful and made an accurate prediction that showed knowledge good judgment and great leadership.

Good leadership? When your good leadership candidate asked his faithful followers to stop attacking Palin’s children what effect did his good leadership have? He can barely lead his followers to welfare checks and they’ve had several generations of training. He couldn’t lead hungry wolves to fresh killed meat.

Claiming he’s a good leader is the equivalent of claiming he’s a capable brain surgeon. Sounds good to a little Liberal pissant’s lying ass but it’s far from true. It’s kinda like Ellinas claiming ‘No tax free municipal bonds. Just the facts.’ Sounded great but it turned out to be a friggin’ lie.

Come on, Hannitized…..

The mocking, sneering tone she uses shows her arrogance, and the arrogance of the insulated left.

It’s not surprising that you would defend this clownette.

Why you people try to reason with insanitize is beyond me.

I can write things like this:

Yes, but will you? The NYT won’t hire you if you’re not willing to sound like a leftist twit who swallowed a thesaurus.

Reminds me of something I received in my inbox recently:

Funny you should post that, Doc…..after his last comment I just shook my head and decided not to play with him any more.

And anyway, the subject of the piece was the imbecilic and intellectually dishonest Maureen Dowd.

Nice strawman you have there. It would be a shame is something happened to it.

Oh, I am not that attached to it Pilgrim.

I could protect you from learning just how your logic failed for a fee.

That is ok. Tear it down, that should be interesting and fun to watch.

Even honesty challenged Leftys must have their fun..

And Mickey. You got me laughing again…

Did Obama oppose the Iraq war, yes or no?

At THE START he did, not from the start like you claimed, you lying piece of shit. You claimed he was against it FROM the start. OUTRIGHT LIE! It was easy for him to claim he was against what he wasn’t even able to vote for. Later he said he didn’t know where he stood on it, very close to where Bush was. Then he voted to fund it many times. We all saw what you claimed. We all know you lied and got caught. Then we all saw you lie to cover your lie. You’re a lying piece shit. A coward. A gutless waste of skin and oxygen. Bust most of a pathetic little pissant lying Marxist piece of shit.

BTW, I did challenge you, the only thing is you lack the honesty to admit I did, won, and beat you like a red-headed step-child, because you’re a PROVEN lying piece of shit who will be forever saddled with that name.

Bullstinkle,

You lying piece of kaka-doody, poo-poo pants. You didn’t make an argument to contradict anything ellinas said, you pooey fascist piece of shit.

QUIT LYING.

You won’t get much argument from me. Just because I agree with the guy on 80-90% of the issues doesn’t make him a genius. [Though if he agreed with me 100% of the time, that would be a sign of genius. ]

Like I’ve said before H,

YOUR A JOKE!!

Hannitized, I proved you are lying piece of shit many times.

Bullwinkle on September 24, 2008 at 07:13 pm

You didn’t prove shit, you lying piece of shit, you Robert108 jr, you think your shit don’t stink you lying old bastard?

The silence from Republicans on Palins interview with Couric is deafening.

How embarrassing for her and them. Sarah Palin is a joke.

So you were impressed with Palin’s performance and the substance of her answers?

BTW, I did challenge you, the only thing is you lack the honesty to admit I did, won, and beat you like a red-headed step-child, because you’re a PROVEN lying piece of shit who will be forever saddled with that name.

Bullwinkle on September 24, 2008 at 10:11 pm

Your description of your self, while 100% accurate, leaves out an important detail: You are not just anykind of shit. You are a dogshit turd.

Why you people try to reason with insanitize is beyond me.

I think it is more like giving him more rope. H demonstrates his want of reason with every post.

What are you talking about. The transcript has been around since 2002. Why don’t you just google it? I provided the wiki link. Did you even click on it?

To be honest, I hadn’t. I missed the link. I was always under the impression that that was his 2003 speech. Shrug, we all make mistakes.

Regardless, the rest stands. No media covered it in the one of the most liberal cities. No video exists. No one says they were there. We just have Obama claiming he made the speech, and HIS transcript (not a media transcript). If it happened, it’s the equivalent of me calling him a douchebag. Hardly a principled stand, and certainly not one that matters.

Here is a video of the first 17 seconds of the video of the speech. No media covered the rally because it was terribly unpopular to have it at this time.

Oh please. “The rest of the video disappeared, but this little snippet fell out of the tape, and we have it!” What a crock of shit. That was reshoot for a campaign ad.

But thank God Barack Obama spoke out when no one else would!
http://www.globalexchange.org/countries/mideast/iraq/invadeIraq082702.html
http://edition.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/09/04/iraq.asia.reax/index.html
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0210/18/se.03.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul40.html

There was no shortage of voices saying “don’t invade Iraq!” The idea that nobody from Illinois was brave is laughable.

Oabama was right and your only reaction is to deny it, because to accept it is far to harmful to your ideology.

I was simply showing that Obama wasn’t even remotely the anti-war guy you said. But he’ll he wasn’t right either. Ron Paul, who WAS a consistant and constant anti-war critic was also wrong. That Obama was a worthless coward who wouldn’t stand up for what he believed in, just makes him suck more. At least Paul is a principled man who is just wrong. Obama’s a liar and a jackass.

http://www.hillaryclinton.biz/news/news/fact_sheet_sen_obama_s.html

You have to fund a war so we have a chance to win PP. The important thing is when to pull the plug. And you can still fund the war while you pull the plug.
For some reason you have this strange idea that is you opposed the war, you must not vote to fund it once we have gone to war. That is a illogical conclusion on your part.

I don’t know about illogical, but it’s certainly a view Obama parroted before the election on occasion, and one he’s taken up since running for President.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/01/6786_desperate_in_nh_1.html

Just this week, when I was asked, would I have voted for the $87 billion dollars [in a war funding], I said no. I said no unequivocally because, at a certain point, we have to say no to George Bush. If we keep on getting steamrolled, we are not going to stand a chance.

So, even before being elected to the Senate he was a two faced schmuck. Now….even more so.

Pilgrim walks into a clothesline and calls it a joke. Then holds us responsible for not laughing.

Sorry Pilgrim, but your superior intellect must have gotten the best of us. /sarcasm

And of course it matters what Obama said about the war before it had begun. If more people thought like him before Congress approved the resolution we wouldn’t be in this mess and the Iraqi’s wouldn’t be getting killed in great numbers by the terrorist group Al Qaida.

Nice try PP.

The lying lefties are showing their desperation to somehow try to damage Sarah; they certainly can’t win on the issues.

You lying piece of poopy-doop, you piece of pooey little lying fascist piece of pooper-scooper!

Nothing like a literate liberal! Literally!

You post pictures of Michael Jackson and confuse whiny sarcasm with wit?

At last a leftie gets the point, even if only by accident.

Yes, I did, but deliberately. It’s what Dowd does on a regular basis. Don’t like the shoe on the other foot, do you?

Malkin is definitely her right wing equivalent

Turning a trick is not turning a phrase.

apocalipstick is excellent.

Dowd is mean, cruel and witty.
A newsprint Don Rickles.

She doesn’t let accuracy get in the way of
her writing.