Barack Obama, our next President

"The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep," Obama cautioned. Young and charismatic but with little experience on the national level, Obama smashed through racial barriers and easily defeated ... Read more
Whoopsy

Baltimore, MD

#976621 Sep 5, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
It's just embarrassing to the point of being humiliated to have a president that gets slapped around so much, and he keeps doing the exact same stupid things over and over again.
Now, he's going to escalate to war.
When will these ignorant Democrats realize Obama is an ignorant buffoon, and the most dangerous thing possible is to have him as president.
I can see a major war resulting from this very easily. All that is necessary is for Russia to protect their ally, like I'm sure there is an agreement between them to do.
More like fall ass backwards into an escalation. And can't tell the truth because they, and corp media have been, for years, labeling "kooky" everyone who has already surmised and stated what's up in Syria, what was up in Iraq, Egypt, Iran, Arabia... We do go way back.

So I see it this way. We strike. Russia acts to neutralize the threat to it's 30,000 personnel across Syria and attacks our ships, which will probably require authorization to defend themselves...you know where this is going...and we're left with 4 sunken cruisers, mad as hell, etc.

Simply not worth the risk. Oil, that is. Yep, I think the game is still the same.
Waxman

Windsor, CT

#976622 Sep 5, 2013
The New York Times just came out with a piece and a picture showing the Obama rebels in Syria executing soldiers which also violates the Geneva Convention.

Obama is an idiot.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/05/world/middl...

Democrats are idiots.

Since: May 11

Gettysburg, PA

#976623 Sep 5, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Who told you there is missile tracking showing the launch locations?
Who told you there is intercepted communications?
Have these people lied to you recently?
Oh I get it. Everyone is lying and you have to personally review the intel.

Then there are the videos showing the victims. Oh that's right it was all staged.

Pathetic
Whatever

Gering, NE

#976628 Sep 5, 2013
Egypt's message to the Pentagon

"Obama’s consistent support for terrorists is “crossing the red line."

Many agree with you.

Since: May 11

Gettysburg, PA

#976629 Sep 5, 2013
EXPERT wrote:
<quoted text>
"Iraq admitted, among other things, an offensive biological warfare capability, notably, 5,000 gallons of botulinum, which causes botulism; 2,000 gallons of anthrax; 25 biological-filled Scud warheads; and 157 aerial bombs. And I might say UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq has actually greatly understated its production.... Over the past few months, as [the weapons inspectors] have come closer and closer to rooting out Iraq's remaining nuclear capacity, Saddam has undertaken yet another gambit to thwart their ambitions by imposing debilitating conditions on the inspectors and declaring key sites which have still not been inspected off limits.... It is obvious that there is an attempt here, based on the whole history of this operation since 1991, to protect whatever remains of his capacity to produce weapons of mass destruction, the missiles to deliver them, and the feed stocks necessary to produce them. The UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq still has stockpiles of chemical and biological munitions, a small force of Scud-type missiles, and the capacity to restart quickly its production program and build many, many more weapons.... Now, let's imagine the future. What if he fails to comply and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made? Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal...."
So you are saying the President was lying?
Weren't those amounts from the early 90's? The statement says that there no current programs only that they could start back up.

Clinton was arguing for regime change, not invasion. No troops, no military commitment. No nation building.

Regime change.

I think when you decide to invade & put soldiers at risk, you best be sure.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#976631 Sep 5, 2013
Buy American or Drop Dead wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? Comparing the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand w/ Syria? Taking about an ignorant drama queen?
Let's see....

The Muslim Brotherhood uses Al Qaeda to invade Syria (some Serberian assassinates some Austrie-Hungary nobleman) and has a world super power friend (Obama) who declares war on Syria who also has a world super power friend (Russia) who declares war on Obama.

That's about exactly how World War I started, right?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#976632 Sep 5, 2013
Buy American or Drop Dead wrote:
<quoted text>
And the Austrian Hungarian empire was far from insignificant. It was one of the leading empires of the day my historically challenged friend
Really?
Where were they at the beginning of World War I? It seems they weren't even significant enough to be noticed.
I don't recall a single significant event in history that involved Austria-Hungary. Please tell us the history of Austria-Hungary's involvement in the world affairs.
No Surprize

Seminole, FL

#976633 Sep 5, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Weren't those amounts from the early 90's? The statement says that there no current programs only that they could start back up.
Clinton was arguing for regime change, not invasion. No troops, no military commitment. No nation building.
Regime change.
I think when you decide to invade & put soldiers at risk, you best be sure.
The condition is called Trauma Bonding, a disorder in which a deranged liberal chooses to remain loyal to their abuser.

It's the culture...

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#976634 Sep 5, 2013
Whatever wrote:
Who is Kerry using as his source for the claim rebels are moderate? Elizabeth O’Bagy. She is introduced as working for the Institute for the Study of War.
What is not disclosed is that she is the political director for Syrian Emergency Task Force, a group supporting the rebels.
SETF’s executive director is one Mouaz Moustafa. A Palestinian Arab, and was involved in the Libya war before he turned up in Syria. Supporter of Hamas.
It was ludicrous engough for Putin to proclaim Kerry a liar, using that exact word, to the world.

There is no civil war in Syria. Syria is being invaded by Al Qaeda, who is the military arm of the Muslim Brotherhood.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#976637 Sep 5, 2013
Whatever wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay continue to look idiotic, it was a helpful suggestion.
<quoted text>
What you failed to check was "left wing" drivel, fool. That is all you post.
it's your job to check it.
EXPERT

Redding, CA

#976638 Sep 5, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Weren't those amounts from the early 90's? The statement says that there no current programs only that they could start back up.
Clinton was arguing for regime change, not invasion. No troops, no military commitment. No nation building.
Regime change.
I think when you decide to invade & put soldiers at risk, you best be sure.
Was he lying?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#976639 Sep 5, 2013
Whoopsy wrote:
<quoted text>More like fall ass backwards into an escalation. And can't tell the truth because they, and corp media have been, for years, labeling "kooky" everyone who has already surmised and stated what's up in Syria, what was up in Iraq, Egypt, Iran, Arabia... We do go way back.
So I see it this way. We strike. Russia acts to neutralize the threat to it's 30,000 personnel across Syria and attacks our ships, which will probably require authorization to defend themselves...you know where this is going...and we're left with 4 sunken cruisers, mad as hell, etc.
Simply not worth the risk. Oil, that is. Yep, I think the game is still the same.
The Black Sea Fleet is right there. I guarantee you there are Russian submarines shadowing any US ship near Syria.
Russia can launch an air attack from the Black Sea as easily as we can launch an attack on Syria. I can see where Russians can be launching missiles at our ships within minutes of them launching cruise missiles.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#976640 Sep 5, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Weren't those amounts from the early 90's? The statement says that there no current programs only that they could start back up.
Clinton was arguing for regime change, not invasion. No troops, no military commitment. No nation building.
Regime change.
I think when you decide to invade & put soldiers at risk, you best be sure.
So, you think sailors on the ships launching the attack won't be attacked and killed? You really need to stop doing those drugs that make you hallucinate.
You are a moron. No wonder our government looks like its being run by the Three Stooges to the world.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#976641 Sep 5, 2013
Whatever wrote:
<quoted text>
So, you are against the war.
How many times do I have to say it....."I am not in favor of any military action that is not sanctioned by the United Nations or, at the very least, performed as part of a coalition of nations." IMO, we should never follow in the footsteps of George W. Bush.

Since: Aug 13

Bozeman, MT

#976642 Sep 5, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Syria had had a very active chemical weapons program for years. Please don't try to peddle that Sadam sent his to Syria because that would be dumber than sh*t.
I cannot prove Syria received chem weapons from Iraq, you cannot prove they didn't. Anything other than that would be pure political conjecture.

In other words, read your own words - especially the last three.
No Surprize

Seminole, FL

#976643 Sep 5, 2013
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
it's your job to check it.
That ugly picture of you on the internet LOL.. is spooky. sonicmoron standing there in a brown wall paneled trailer, all big eyed, puffy and ugly, showing your AMD computer... checked it.

It's the culture...
SHADOW

Boerne, TX

#976644 Sep 5, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
Have no fear. Barack will persuade Putin to join us on the side of AlQaeda.
Putin isn't afraid to call them "AlQaeda". O'bigears the great divider didn't fool Putin, just pissed him off.
Putin calling heinz kerry a Liar just because he can and he knows our boy isn't man enough to do anything about it.
The world is laughing at the would be man child chillin' in the White House.
SHADOW

Boerne, TX

#976645 Sep 5, 2013
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
How many times do I have to say it....."I am not in favor of any military action that is not sanctioned by the United Nations or, at the very least, performed as part of a coalition of nations." IMO, we should never follow in the footsteps of George W. Bush.
Sanctioned by the UN???? Why don't you go back where you came from commie.
No one should be telling the US what to do or not do. If you need that kind of thing move your muslim butt back over there where everyone thinks like that uSmsinceforever.
MOM

Waterbury, CT

#976646 Sep 5, 2013
The Crown family: investing in weapons, war ...and Obama Americans who went to the polls in 2008 believing that a vote for Barack Obama was a vote for peace, now face the prospect of a presidential election in which both major party candidates will be openly wedded to endless war, cold-blooded “targeted killings,” record military budgets, and the systematic violation of U.S. and international law.

The only gains people of conscience can make in national elections this year will be to elect more real progressives to Congress, people like veteran journalist and activist Norman Solomon in California and Wenona Baldenegro in Arizona, a Navajo who would be the first Native American woman in Congress. The corporate media have made sure that the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) remains the best kept secret in American politics as it has quietly grown from 6 members in 1991 to 76 members today. CPC co-chair Raul Grijalva was even named the “most valuable representative” in Congress in 2011 by the Nation magazine.

But no grass-roots movement can challenge the auction of the highest public office in the land in 2012. Since Lewis Powell wrote his infamous “Powell Memo” in 1971, big business has consolidated and expanded its control of American politics exactly as he urged it to do. American corporations divert small portions of their profits to public relations and advertising firms to apply the same techniques to politics that they use to sell the products of their commercial monopolies to the public, while Democratic and Republican Party leaders enthusiastically embrace their privileged role in a system that former President Carter has described as “legalized bribery.”

The Republican primaries have shed light on Mitt Romney’s vulture fund background and Sheldon Adelson’s legalized bribery of Newt Gingrich. On the other hand, there has been little scrutiny of the interests behind the person who is already governing the United States.

In 2008, Senator Obama out-solicited Senator McCain by more than two to one:$748 million to $354 million. Less than 10 percent of Obama’s funds were raised by trade unions and only 24 percent came from donors who gave $200 or less, compared with Ron Paul’s 39 percent and Dennis Kucinich’s 56 percent. Even George Bush raised 26 percent of his funds from small donors in 2004, so Obama’s much-vaunted reliance on small donors was a deceptive PR stunt, not a new paradigm in grass-roots democracy.
MOM

Waterbury, CT

#976647 Sep 5, 2013
Obama was the Candidate of the War Lobby Funded by the Crown Family

Crown Dynasty Generously financed Barack Obama Election Campaign Under U.S. federal law an ultra-rich person is not supposed to make a campaign contribution of more than $2,300 per election each year to any one candidate for U.S. federal office. Yet in recent years members of an ultra-rich Chicago-based family, the Crown Dynasty, have apparently been making individual campaign contributions of more than $2,300 per election each year to a federal candidate named Barack Obama. According to the Center for Responsive Politics web site, for instance:

On September 29, 2003, Paula Crown of Henry Crown & Company gave an individual campaign contribution of $9,500 to Barack Obama. Subsequently, Paula Crown gave another individual campaign contribution of $2,000 to Obama on June 2, 2004 and a third individual campaign contribution of $2,000 to Obama on February 24, 2005. Four days later, on February 28, 2005, Paula Crown also gave a $25,000 campaign contribution to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. The following year, Paula Crown gave another $25,000 campaign contribution to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee on June 15, 2006;

On March 25, 2003, Susan Crown of Henry Crown & Company gave an individual campaign contribution of $2,000 to Obama. Later that same year, on December 10, 2003, Susan Crown gave a second individual campaign contribution of $5,000 to Obama. A few months later, on March 11, 2004, another individual campaign contribution of $5,000 was given to Obama by Susan Crown. And the following month, an additional individual campaign contribution of $5,000 was given by Susan Crown on April 15, 2004 to Obama;

An individual campaign contribution of $12,000 was also given on December 10, 2003 by Renee Crown to Obama. The following year, an individual campaign contribution of $2,000 was also given to Obama by Renee Crown on June 2, 2004;

On March 10, 2004, an individual campaign contribution of $12,000 was given by Rebecca Crown to Obama. The next month, on April 15, 2004, Rebecca Crown also gave a $10,000 campaign contribution to the DNC Services Corporation;cont...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Amy 3-26 5 min Sublime1 47
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 17 min Beiber 185,836
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 23 min Ratloder 69,291
Dear Prudence 3-27-15 47 min Kuuipo 8
Word (Dec '08) 48 min Moon Rhythm 5,145
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr goonsquad 52,246
Ask Amy 3-27-15 3 hr Pippa 8
Chicago Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]