Senator Clinton Well Could beat McCain...

I belive she really could beat McCain, I dont think it would be a cake walk, or a 49 state victory... but she could win, in fact would be more likely to win.

She would invigorate the Democratic base as much as she would invigorate the Republican base against her.

The Democrats would have a canidate they were enthuastic about which is always better than a canidate they hate. eee the 2004 election if you do not belive that.

The Democrats hated Bush, but did not love Kerry. Bush won!

The Republicans hate Sen. Clinton, but do not love McCain.. Who wins?



I think she could beat McCain. Who knows at this point? Polls this far out are irrelevant.
 
i agree its a bit old with the mccain war monger tactic. that will wear out quick. its definitely fairy tail to a certain extent.

LOL

No, its not a fairy tale. He wants to escalate the war in Iraq, and he wants to go to war with Iran. How is this a fairy tale?
 
Sorry, history says different.

McCain will shift to the right .. AS HE'S DONE BEFORE WHEN HE GOES BEGGING FOR RIGHT-WING FAVOR.

Do you need me to post that history?

What is missing on the right is any enthusiasm to match the democrats.

And possibly the only thing I have ever agred with Limbaugh on is republicans are dumb to count on "anti-Hillary" to coalease their party.

McCain has no money and he can't do anything but take public financing.

He's EASY .. and he's a warmonger.

Superfreak believes that a guy who sings about bombing Iran, and who has promised more wars, and who has advocated staying in Iraq for a hundred years or more, is getting a bad rap as a war-monger by the lying twisting dems.

Talk about taking off on a delusional flight of fancy. SF took off months ago and hasn’t landed yet.

McCain is a Bush third term, period. That’s how he will be portrayed, and this has the rare (in a political campaign) and added benefit of being the actual truth.

McCain – FOUR MORE YEARS of BUSH.

Are Americans clamoring for four more years of Bush? Well, SF is.

But see, what they fear most is Obama, because sexism can play and laugh it up a bit more openly than racism these days. And when the R’s play that card, and they will, it’s going to be a bit more awkward for people like Superfreak to “hahhahaha” the race issue.

He’ll do it, don’t get me wrong. But it will be, you know, awkward for him.
 
LOL

No, its not a fairy tale. He wants to escalate the war in Iraq, and he wants to go to war with Iran. How is this a fairy tale?

Tell me Beefy... How does he want to "escalate" the war in Iraq? As for Iran, it is pure fear mongering and nothing more to say he wants to go to war with Iran.
 
Superfreak believes that a guy who sings about bombing Iran, and who has promised more wars, and who has advocated staying in Iraq for a hundred years or more, is getting a bad rap as a war-monger by the lying twisting dems.

Talk about taking off on a delusional flight of fancy. SF took off months ago and hasn’t landed yet.

McCain is a Bush third term, period. That’s how he will be portrayed, and this has the rare (in a political campaign) and added benefit of being the actual truth.

McCain – FOUR MORE YEARS of BUSH.

Are Americans clamoring for four more years of Bush? Well, SF is.

But see, what they fear most is Obama, because sexism can play and laugh it up a bit more openly than racism these days. And when the R’s play that card, and they will, it’s going to be a bit more awkward for people like Superfreak to “hahhahaha” the race issue.

He’ll do it, don’t get me wrong. But it will be, you know, awkward for him.

perhaps you should leave me out of your delusional posts. Or perhaps go about calling our troops murderers or something productive like that. Perhaps you could take another thread about plagerism and turn it into your fanciful "men who don't like Hillary are sexists" rants.

Bottom line... how about you simply fuck off.
 
Tell me Beefy... How does he want to "escalate" the war in Iraq? As for Iran, it is pure fear mongering and nothing more to say he wants to go to war with Iran.

He wants to put more troops in, and continue the fight for the next several generations. Perhaps in your book, that would be considered "scaling down", but for us English as a first language people, it is pretty clear that it is an escalation of the war in Iraq.

Read it right from McCain's site:

http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/fdeb03a7-30b0-4ece-8e34-4c7ea83f11d8.htm

Hear it from his lips:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFknKVjuyNk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg

Consider yourself, once again and roundly, skewered.
 
He wants to put more troops in, and continue the fight for the next several generations. Perhaps in your book, that would be considered "scaling down", but for us English as a first language people, it is pretty clear that it is an escalation of the war in Iraq.

Read it right from McCain's site:

http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/fdeb03a7-30b0-4ece-8e34-4c7ea83f11d8.htm

Hear it from his lips:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFknKVjuyNk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg

Consider yourself, once again and roundly, skewered.

I cannot access youtube from work, but I am familiar with his position on more troops. It is nothing but spin to suggest that more troops means an escalation of war. His position is exactly the opposite. That more troops will help bring more security and stability. Rather than pulling troops out which in his opinion would create greater instability and put the remaining troops/civilians in greater danger.

Consider yourself a spinmaster.
 
He's always been a supporter of a surge in Iraq and no intent on leaving anytime soon. As for warmonger McCain on Iran:

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/McCain_unplugged_Bomb_bomb_bomb_bomb_0419.html

Unplugged McCain sings 'bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran'

As I stated to Beefy.... supporting a surge in troops is to provide for greater security..... and eventually enough stability so that we might actually rebuild the infrastructure that has been destroyed.

REMOVING troops is what is going to prolong this war and cause greater instability in the region. (relative to today)

And oh yeah.... look, the McCain sang a song post again. Wow.... yep a very poor pandering moment and that means he wants to start a war with Iran. Gotcha.

Then Hitlary and Obama are war mongers too. For both of them have made statements with regards to dropping bombs without regard for borders.
 
Last edited:
As I stated to Beefy.... supporting a surge in troops is to provide for greater security..... and eventually enough stability so that we might actually rebuild the infrastructure that has been destroyed.

REMOVING troops is what is going to prolong this war and cause greater instability in the region. (relative to today)

You can give it any excuse that you want but its still an escalation. A vote for McCain is a vote for escalating US involvement in the Iraq cluster fck.
 
You can give it any excuse that you want but its still an escalation. A vote for McCain is a vote for escalating US involvement in the Iraq cluster fck.

Yes, it escalates the number of troops. There is a HUGE difference in escalating troop numbers and escalating the WAR. The larger troop numbers is intended to REDUCE the violence. To provide MORE stability and security.

You can argue whether or not it would work as only time would tell. But to act like suggesting troop increases is war mongering is just as idiotic as equating a dumb song to war mongering.
 
As I stated to Beefy.... supporting a surge in troops is to provide for greater security..... and eventually enough stability so that we might actually rebuild the infrastructure that has been destroyed.

REMOVING troops is what is going to prolong this war and cause greater instability in the region. (relative to today)

And oh yeah.... look, the McCain sang a song post again. Wow.... yep a very poor pandering moment and that means he wants to start a war with Iran. Gotcha.

Then Hitlary and Obama are war mongers too. For both of them have made statements with regards to dropping bombs without regard for borders.

We're talking about Iran. Stick to the topic and stop trying to throw out red herrings. If Obama has indicated that he supports escalating our involvement in Iraq or that he wants to invade Iran, please provide evidence to support your claims.
 
Yes, it escalates the number of troops. There is a HUGE difference in escalating troop numbers and escalating the WAR. The larger troop numbers is intended to REDUCE the violence. To provide MORE stability and security.

You can argue whether or not it would work as only time would tell. But to act like suggesting troop increases is war mongering is just as idiotic as equating a dumb song to war mongering.

Translation:

Willful ignorance is my middle name.
 
We're talking about Iran. Stick to the topic and stop trying to throw out red herrings. If Obama has indicated that he supports escalating our involvement in Iraq or that he wants to invade Iran, please provide evidence to support your claims.

We were talking about "war mongering". If "war mongering" to you is dropping bombs on countries without their permission, then just how is it different if Obama and Hitlary suggest dropping bombs in Pakistan and McCain sings a song about doing so in Iran??????

To your request for evidence.... show me evidence McCain wants to invade Iran.
 
translation...

I cannot argue that point so I will attempt to spin my way out of this.

Merely dismissing McCain's desire to stay in Iraq for 5 more generations, and his "Bomb Iran" commentary (which, when seen in context is an affirmation of a member of the audiences assertion that we should go to war with Iran) as spin is not arguing any point, it is merely sticking your fingers in your ears.

McCain wants more war, claiming otherwise is Cypressesque disingenuity.
 
Translation:

Willful ignorance is my middle name.
Translation:

We know he was simply remembering that idiotic song from back in Carter's day when those guys made that parody but we want to keep repeating it means he actually wants to do it even though everything he said right after he waived the memory off speaks of keeping restraint and working with diplomacy. We do this because it is politics. Of course if you are equally disingenuous we will eagerly tell you so with insults applying.
 
Merely dismissing McCain's desire to stay in Iraq for 5 more generations, and his "Bomb Iran" commentary (which, when seen in context is an affirmation of a member of the audiences assertion that we should go to war with Iran) as spin is not arguing any point, it is merely sticking your fingers in your ears.

McCain wants more war, claiming otherwise is Cypressesque disingenuity.

Talk about Cypressesque... did the resident idiot teach you this little spin move?

Show me where McCain has a "desire" to stay in Iraq for 5 generations... blah blah blah.

Does our keeping bases in Germany or Japan mean that all Presidents since WWII are war mongers?

Again with the song. yes, it was stupid of McCain to sing it. But to act like that is evidence of his desire to start a war with Iran is idiotic at best.
 
Translation:

We know he was simply remembering that idiotic song from back in Carter's day when those guys made that parody but we want to keep repeating it means he actually wants to do it even though everything he said right after he waived the memory off speaks of keeping restraint and working with diplomacy. We do this because it is politics. Of course if you are equally disingenuous we will eagerly tell you so with insults applying.

Must you always have your nose up Superfreak the war monger's butt? It doesn't do much for your claims of not supporting the Iraqi war at all.
 
Back
Top