I have a DREAM. Or maybe I don't. I guess it depends on who I'm talking to...

[Frozen Sooner]

oivKVWGE2mU

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2007/10/018851.php


As for the Dream Act, McCain told us that he would have voted against cloture (i.e., in favor of preventing a vote) because he "got the message" this summer that Americans want the border secured before we "go on to the rest." McCain would deem parts of the border secure when the governor of the relevant state so certifies.

Since McCain is clearly on record as to how he would have voted on the Dream Act cloutre motion, and since his vote was not needed to prevent cloture, there seems to be no basis for criticizing his departure for Iowa prior to the vote.

The DREAM Act, by the way, is a path for citizenship for illegal aliens who were brought to the US by their parents as children.

McCain co-sponsored the bill, but then said that he wouldn't have voted for it (had he shown up for the vote) to conservative bloggers, but in front of La Raza says that he supports it.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

I want out of NAFTA. or I don't. It depends on if I'm try to demagogue an issue to beat Hillary in the Midwest or if I'm trying to get the Canadians to like me.

[Soonrboy]

You mean he has FLIP-FLOPPED??? A republican that flip-flopped?? Can't be...just can't be true.

[Animal Mother]

Republicans pass laws against ideas they don't like.

Democrats move to the suburbs.

It's the only real difference between them.

Well, that and Republicans want my soul and Democrats want my money.

[Rogue]

Republicans pass laws against ideas they don't like.

Democrats move to the suburbs.

It's the only real difference between them.

Well, that and Republicans want my soul and Democrats want my money.

Heh! :D

Oh wait, you're serious. And right.

[Harry Beanbag]

ICE should have been there to escort the dreamer away in handcuffs.

[Okla-homey]

Nowhere near as scary as BHO stating today in a policy speech;
"if you work in America, you shouldn't be poor" justifying an increase in the earned income tax credit.

Think about that. He's saying it's government's responsiblity to ensure if someone works, they should not be poor.

That's almost as scary as BHO suggesting we put conventional forces in the northwest territory of Pakistan.

[olevetonahill]

Nowhere near as scary as BHO stating today in a policy speech; justifying an increase in the earned income tax credit.

Think about that. He's saying it's government's responsiblity to ensure if someone works, they should not be poor.

That's almost as scary as BHO suggesting we put conventional forces in the northwest territory of Pakistan.

He wants us Outta Iraq but say we Must win In Afganistan .wtf?

[Okla-homey]

He wants us Outta Iraq but say we Must win In Afganistan .wtf?

I'm tellin ya bro...the man is a buffoon. The only thing holding Paki together is their army. If we roll in with conventional forces, their army will have no choice but to confront us, and shut down our use of their port of Karachi. Then, 130 million Paki's will be screaming for US blood. And they have nukes.

The Paki army is quite content to let US covert forces and SOF air operate in the territories because they and we have plausible deniability.

But I wouldn't expect BHO to understand that. He's never been there. Has no military experience, has no clue about the situation, and has no idea about the strategic balance or diplomatic tightrope we walk with Paki. He probably doesn't understand that every bean, bullet, and spare part comes to Afghan via sealift via Karachi in Paki by rail to Afghan. We are logistically incapable of sustaining the war in Afghan by air. If we lose the Paki army, we lose that port of Karachi and all important line of supply to Afghan.

What's more, he's painted himself into a corner on Iraq. One day he says, everybody out of the pool. The next day he says, we'll see. Either way, things are going great in Iraq today. We pull out, and the whole thing spirals into a bloodbath the likes of Rwanda. And who will have that blood on his hands? BHO.

[olevetonahill]

I agree Bro, Ive said that In sainer times He Might be the best thing since sliced bread and shirt pockets .
But In time Of war I want a Warrior to lead .

[soonerscuba]

And who will have that blood on his hands?
BHO is not now, nor will he ever be responsible for blood in Iraq, a poison tree bears bitter fruit. I would hope that his administration is ready for the blame shift Republicans are going to try, judging by the way his campaign has worked, I would say so.

[Frozen Sooner]

Deflect deflect deflect.

John McCain is rapidly showing that he will say anything to anyone to get elected, but you won't address it.

[olevetonahill]

BHO is not now, nor will he ever be responsible for blood in Iraq, a poison tree bears bitter fruit. I would hope that his administration is ready for the blame shift Republicans are going to try, judging by the way his campaign has worked, I would say so.

Yes He will Responsible IF he GETS elected and If he Pulls Our troops out to soon , and that country goes Into Chaos , Yup He be responsible
Plus that will send the Entire region Into Chaos and then we Lose In Afganistan cause He Pulled out to soon .
Get a clue

[soonerscuba]

Yes He will Responsible IF he GETS elected and If he Pulls Our troops out to soon , and that country goes Into Chaos , Yup He be responsible
Plus that will send the Entire region Into Chaos and then we Lose In Afganistan cause He Pulled out to soon .
Get a clue
I simply disagree, I don't think that he will pull out as quickly as he would like, but the day is coming in which Iraqis must get off the American teet and stand as their own nation, if there is violence, it's the fault of the Iraqis and Bush, Obama will simply be acting in our national interest as opposed to fantasies about assassination attempts and Hussein and bin Laden toasting on 9/11.

I have said before that the one bright spot of the Bush administration is Afghanistan. I doubt that changes much in a BHO presidency.

[olevetonahill]

I simply disagree, I don't think that he will pull out as quickly as he would like, but the day is coming in which Iraqis must get off the American teet and stand as their own nation, if there is violence, it's the fault of the Iraqis and Bush, Obama will simply be acting in our national interest as opposed to fantasies about assassination attempts and Hussein and bin Laden toasting on 9/11.

I have said before that the one bright spot of the Bush administration is Afghanistan. I doubt that changes much in a BHO presidency.

I also want us Home from all those azzcrakastans
But Ive said it Before NO ****ING TIME TABLE ! That just gives the enemy incentive to wait till we go Home .
We need to stay as Long as Necessary to Make sure the Iraqis Can handle it . Then Get Home
If he gets elected and says We leave in 16 Months . Guess what? Those idjits will spend the next 16 months resupplying and rearming till we are gone then shat hits the fan. The its Kinda Like a Dominoe effect .
Like i said He may be the best thing in the world But a Warrior He aint !

[Frozen Sooner]

vet, the Iraqis have asked us for a timetable. The guys who we claim to be supporting want to know when we plan to get out.

[olevetonahill]

vet, the Iraqis have asked us for a timetable. The guys who we claim to be supporting want to know when we plan to get out.

Id say We will leave the MINUTE we are Confidant Yall can handle this crap and Not a Minute sooner .

[Okla-homey]

Deflect deflect deflect.

John McCain is rapidly showing that he will say anything to anyone to get elected, but you won't address it.

Have you considered the man realizes its impossible to "secure the borders" unless and until we decide to start shooting people who try to sneak-in? That's my position and I think that's his too.

I say its time to face reality and put these undocumented immigrants on the tax rolls. Period.

[Okla-homey]

I simply disagree, I don't think that he will pull out as quickly as he would like, but the day is coming in which Iraqis must get off the American teet and stand as their own nation, if there is violence, it's the fault of the Iraqis and Bush, Obama will simply be acting in our national interest as opposed to fantasies about assassination attempts and Hussein and bin Laden toasting on 9/11.

I have said before that the one bright spot of the Bush administration is Afghanistan. I doubt that changes much in a BHO presidency.

Oh stop it. The ROK is still on the American teat (defensively speaking with a US division and land-based USAF wings), and the "shooting" Korean War ended 55 years ago in July of 1953. Western Europe is still on the American teat and WWII ended 63 years ago in 1945. We still have a division on the ground and USAF bases there. Japan is still on the American teat (defensively speaking) too. We're in Iraq for the long haul. That's just the way these things work.

[Okla-homey]

vet, the Iraqis have asked us for a timetable. The guys who we claim to be supporting want to know when we plan to get out.

Fine. We tell them we leave when its time to leave. Or make something up. It really makes no difference. It's not about what they want. Its about what's best for the US. But they already know that. Those public requests for a timetable are to help ameliorate their electorate and make them seem like they are holding our feet to the fire. These are Arabs for goshsakes. They aren't stupid. They just gotta play to both sides of the tent.

[StoopTroup]

We haven't had a Warrior leading us Ronny Raygun.

[soonerscuba]

Oh stop it. The ROK is still on the American teat (defensively speaking with a US division and land-based USAF wings), and the "shooting" Korean War ended 55 years ago in July of 1953. Western Europe is still on the American teat and WWII ended 63 years ago in 1945. We still have a division on the ground and USAF bases there. Japan is still on the American teat (defensively speaking) too. We're in Iraq for the long haul. That's just the way these things work.
So, there is no difference between military installments left over from declared wars and providing the ground security for an entire nation that doesn't want us there and never attacked us (FWIW, I think Korea was a bad idea too)? I think a better comparison is Vietnam, but at least the threat of commies existed, Iraq and Vietnam would be pretty much identical if we went up the Mekong and nary a Red was found. I think the proof is in the pudding that Bush doesn't want us to change our daily lives, basically it's a war worth fighting, but not worth paying for to him.

This still doesn't change that fact that your nominee has core beliefs that are smothered and covered.