McCain says presence in Iraq for 100 years if necessary. Clinton on Rush

dawg

You all have heard from me that Hillary Clinton will do anything to get elected, she's already distorted Obama's record on NAFTA, while lying about the fact she's spoken highly of it. And now I hear her husband Bill, appeared on Rush Limbaugh... WTF? Rush recently said that Republicans should vote for Hillary to upset the party and Bill goes on his show? Good lord, the Clinton's will stop at nothing!

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_030408/home.guest.html

She voted for Bush's war because she didn't have the guts to do the right thing while there was pressure... because she would have had a hard time getting elected to the Senate again if she was perceived soft on terrorism, so she went along with this stupid war. As I've said, she'll say and or do anything to get elected. And it gets worse...

McCain, is now saying that the US may need to have a presence in Iraq for the next 100 years... to McCain, who foolishly voted along with Hillary to support Bush's war,seeing that the surge is having success has now clouded his judgment and and he now thinks we can help police Iraq forever. What will this achieve?

We need real leadership,we don't need leaders who pander to fear... this needs to stop sometime.

jaguarbass

Right on Dawg!

Gopher

I agree that the Clintons are going out of bounds, and it seems to have worked. That's what bothered me -- is that the voters actually believed the things the Clintons are saying. Now Obama is preparing to strike back, finally. I hope that doesn't work against him.

It may not matter, because even if Hillary wins most of the rest of the primaries, the margins are so small that Obama will likely get enough delegates to win the nomination (if the super-delegates don't cave in to the Clinton pressure).

As far as McCain's "100 years" quote, I think that needs to be put into a context -- in that American soldiers are present in many non-war zones like Germany and Japan. I don't know why the USA keeps a military presence for decades after the wars are over, but they do. And that would likely happen long after Iraq is settled.

IP_SEC

dont worry dawg. oil wont last another 100 years in Iraq. We'll leave the god forsaken place when the well dry up.

dawg

Thanks Jaguar Bass...

Gopher, I hear you about the Clinton's, but Obama will win outright Mississippi, probably by a large margin, he'll likely lose Pennsylvania but win Montana. He needs to toughen up cause the Clinton's will not play nice nor tell the truth.

I was a big Bill Clinton supporter until he lied to my face... saying he didn't have sex with that woman. All he had to do at the time was say "screw off, my private life is just that... private"... he thought he was a slick wilily.

Hillary, she acts the same. She wants to win and that's all she care about... If she were a leader she'd of not supported this war, and not lied about NAFTA. She wants to win and she'll say and do anything for that purpose.

I'm still waiting to hear a Hillary supporter say how the hades she has more "experience" than Obama when she was nothing more than the first Lady? She didn't even have security clearance while first Lady. She's trying to take credit for things in the White House that she had nothing to do with as first lady , which shows she's distorting her record... it sucks if you ask me, and like you, I can't understand how the public is so easily fooled.

dawg

Hey IP, how's it going bro?

That said, I thought you all might want to see what Obama's attack will be next, yes, you guessed it, Hillary's so called experience lie. Read this as it has NY times articles supporting it.

http://www.slate.com/id/2182073/

Now as I stated earlier, the Clinton team will do anything to get elected, lie, cheat, whatever... now Terry McCullough, her campaign manager is saying Michigan and Florida should have their campaigns counted even though Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan and all were told the votes didn't count in Florida so he didn't campaign much there. See what I'm saying?

hillbilly

The Clintons are ruthless politicians. I could see Hillary in a knife fight if it would get her elected.

I sort of like ruthless in a politician.. against someone like the old Soviets or some other bunch. Thats the one thing I dont see in Hillary. Her agenda is to get elected period.

iShe keeps talking about experience.. she was First Lady... but her spin staff trys to make it sound like she is Colin Powell or sombody for the love of Mike.

She knows a lot of dead people too... if you get my drift

~Hill

Pioneer Spit...oh, i mean Spirit

Uh, sorry, but, this thing in Iraq was never a war.

Don't get me started about young men and women getting maimed and killed over there in the 'house to house' quest for insurgents. . .the US just last week dropped bombs on a building in Somalia on a tip there was an al Qaida leader there. . .no risk and no loss for US or allied troops. Helllllooooo, doesn't the USAF have like theeeee smartest bombs in the Galaxy and we're still sending boys in with rifles and getting them killed?????

That's the real tragedy.

ColdRedRain

Re: 100 years. We still have troops in Cuba and it's been almost or over 100 years since the Spanish-American war was over. Leaving a base is nothing new and this is just Democratic spin to get the horn rim glasses wearing coffee drinking pseudo-intellectuals that listen to NPR in a tizzy.

Re: "Bush' war". Didn't billy boy also bomb Iraq? Where were the protests? Oh, I get it now, only Republican politicians are bad.

Re: Smart bombs: Now you're showing your real ignorance about weaponry, and which is why I'm truly scared for this country if the left does win this year's elections. "Smart" bombs aren't really that "smart". Also, getting rid of a target is much different than pacifying an entire country. You need troops on the ground to pacify a country, you just bombs to rid a target. Pacifying a country takes occupation, setting up a new government and finally, leaving a base there in case trouble arrives again. Much like we did in the aforementioned Spanish-American war, World War 2, the Korean War, Gulf War 1 and the Kosovar War (Which was a war, and not a police action. Sorry Clintonistas, your golden boy got us involved in a war.)

dawg

Coldredrain, you talk of intelligence and how scared you are of the left's ignorance, then compare Iraq to Cuba...LOL!!!!!

This is why I'm afraid of the right,they didn't get it before the war and don't get it now... democracies reflect the people in which they govern, I haven't the time to educate you about the people in Iraq this morning, how they're raised, the differences in religion... but I hope you don't vote if you actually believe what you wrote above is logical.

Then you act as if I made the statement about smart bombs... when you chide someone call them by name not a group-a collective "you".

Read McCain's words, hes not talking about a base like the one we have in Cuba... he's talking about an active role in securing Iraq, in keeping it secure.

Lastly, bombing Iraq is a damn far cry from a full scale invasion.... logic please! Talk to us with logic!

McCain says presence in Iraq for 100 years if necessary. Clinton on Rush

Share this