[kaaos]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

There's plenty of dirt coming from his own mouth lately.

I agree with what he said, those milatary lives were wasted needlessly.

[Littlefield]

Originally Posted by kaaos

I agree with what he said, those milatary lives were wasted needlessly.

Thats one stupid comment he said and he will say more . If it were not stupid he would not have
apologized for remark in Iowa campaign stop .

[Fidelista]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

I do believe we all know that the first spontaneous words out of one's mouth are generally the truth as a person sees it. I'm sure it really was a slip of the tongue...but I'm equally sure that is what he believes. Apology filed in circular disposal device.

NASHUA, New Hampshire (AP) -- Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is apologizing for saying the lives of the more than 3,000 U.S. troops killed in the Iraq war were "wasted."

During his first campaign trip this weekend, the Illinois senator told a crowd in Iowa: "We now have spent $400 billion and have seen over 3,000 lives of the bravest young Americans wasted." (Watch Obama announce his candidacy)

He immediately apologized on Sunday, saying the remark was "a slip of the tongue."

During an appearance Monday in Nashua, New Hampshire, he apologized again, telling reporters he meant to criticize the civilian leadership of the war, not those serving in the military.

"Even as I said it, I realized I had misspoken," Obama said. "It is not at all what I intended to say, and I would absolutely apologize if any (military families) felt that in some ways it had diminished the enormous courage and sacrifice that they'd shown."

Obama made his second visit to New Hampshire on Monday, following his speech Saturday announcing his candidacy in Illinois on Saturday and a visit to first-caucus state Iowa.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/....ap/index.html

You don't understand his real meaning?.
I see nothing disrespectful directed at our soldiers.
I can however see how his enemies might dishonestly try to make it seem so.
As far as waste , I would have taken it as a remark aimed at leadership.
After all , our losses can't be seen as a good or wise investment, unless one is in dreamland. >f

[LANMaster]

Originally Posted by kaaos

I agree with what he said, those milatary lives were wasted needlessly.

Then you must be quite disappointed in him for apologizing for making such a statement.

[Fidelista]

During an appearance Monday in Nashua, New Hampshire, he apologized again, telling reporters he meant to criticize the civilian leadership of the war, not those serving in the military.
He simply wanted to make it CLEAR to those who have lost loved ones , and those who are possibly too DUMB to understand his statement . They are out there . >f

[trekguy]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

Then you must be quite disappointed in him for apologizing for making such a statement.

You know exactly what he meant by his statement... but you will spin it anyway.

The apology was for anyone who took it the wrong way... and you know that, too.

[Wino]

Originally Posted by Fidelista

During an appearance Monday in Nashua, New Hampshire, he apologized again, telling reporters he meant to criticize the civilian leadership of the war, not those serving in the military.
He simply wanted to make it CLEAR to those who have lost loved ones , and those who are possibly too DUMB to understand his statement . They are out there . >f

It's kinda like Kerry's 'stupid' joke and ending up in Iraq. Everyone knew he was refering to Bush, but the right tried to make it something other than what it was. Same with Obama's statement. The lives lost in Iraq, on all sides, have been a needless waste IMHO. Anyone disputing that is a mindless coolaide drinking delusional Bush clone.

[GoneForNow]

Originally Posted by Wino

It's kinda like Kerry's 'stupid' joke and ending up in Iraq. Everyone knew he was refering to Bush, but the right tried to make it something other than what it was. Same with Obama's statement. The lives lost in Iraq, on all sides, have been a needless waste IMHO. Anyone disputing that is a mindless coolaide drinking delusional Bush clone.

I can't decide , have you become the apologist or the whore for the Democratic Party? Both men said what they said because it's what they believe. They both had to backtrack to be politically correct. Hoisted on their own petards.

EDIT: Found a great band that you'll like. Bet you don't listen to the end:http://www.therightbrothers.com/vide..._Was_Right.php

[Fidelista]

Originally Posted by Wino

It's kinda like Kerry's 'stupid' joke and ending up in Iraq. Everyone knew he was refering to Bush, but the right tried to make it something other than what it was. Same with Obama's statement. The lives lost in Iraq, on all sides, have been a needless waste IMHO. Anyone disputing that is a mindless coolaide drinking delusional Bush clone.

I agree! .
Instead of coming up with credible arguement for the war {pretty tough job }, the right-wing seems to rely on misrepresenting the truth----lies--BS --which this obviously is.
Anyone with common sense should be able to see this --its text book neo-con/right-wing tactic that we have suffering with for years. Twisting the obvious into fairytales.
Mr. Obama meant NOTHING disrespectful to our service people --and everybody damn well knows it. >f

[wizard1786]

The campaign strategy of Barack Hussein Obama, the lean and tall junior United States Senator from Illinois — to pose as a politician in the Lincoln tradition — is as absurd as it is apparent:

Some people don't learn from the mistakes of others.

Remember former Vice President Dan Quayle being told by Senator Lloyd Bentsen of Texas in the 1988 vice presidential debate that he was "no Jack Kennedy"?

Likewise, Senator Obama is no Abe Lincoln and he should not pretend to be Lincolnesque.

Abraham Lincoln said: "Human nature will not change. In any future great national trial, compared with the men of this, we shall have as weak and as strong, as silly and as wise, as bad and as good." Response to a Serenade, November 10, 1864.

Lincoln was right.

Senator Obama is weak and silly, and not good for America.

Of his early childhood, Senator Obama wrote: "That my father looked nothing like the people around me — that he was black as pitch, my mother white as milk — barely registered in my mind." As a teenager supposedly struggled to reconcile social perceptions of his multiracial heritage, he used marijuana and cocaine to "push questions of who I was out of my mind."

Hardly a confidence boaster.

Republican Lincoln, no quitter, would find the suggestion that Democrat Senator Obama is Lincolnesque ludicrous.

In 1864 the "big issue" was the war. The Democrats nominated General George McClellan, who had been relieved of his duties by Lincoln early in the war because he wasn't accomplishing much. McClellan ran on a platform calling Lincoln a "social tyrant" and calling the Emancipation Proclamation "a radical step that didn't address the problems inherent in freeing thousands of slaves."

Fortunately, Lincoln found the right general (Ulysses S. Grant) in time.

Today, almost nobody remembers what McClellan said in the presidential campaign of 1864. They remember Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation and his Gettysburg address, in which Lincoln rightly resolved that "these dead shall not have died in vain, that this nation under God shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth."

As a presidential aspirant in 1860, Lincoln declared: "Let us have faith that right makes might; and in that faith let us to the end dare to do our duty as we understand it." Address, Cooper Union, New York, February 27, 1860.

Senator Osama is not that daring (or caring).

As President struggling to preserve the Union, Lincoln called for unity and responsibility: "If there ever could be a proper time for mere catch arguments, that time surely is not now. In times like the present, men [he would add women today] should utter nothing for which they would not willingly be responsible through time and in eternity." Second Annual Message to Congress, December 1, 1862.

Senator Osama is not calling for unity and responsibility.

President Lincoln called for sacrifice: "Fellow-citizens, we cannot escape history. We of this Congress and this administration will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No personal significance or insignificance can spare one or another of us. The fiery trial through which we pass will light us down, in honor or dishonor, to the last generation. We say that we are for the Union. The world will not forget that we say this. We know how to save the Union. The world knows we do know how to save it. We — even we here — hold the power and bear the responsibility. In giving freedom to the slave, we assure freedom to the free — notable alike in what we give and what we preserve. We shall nobly save or meanly lose the last, best hope of earth. Other means may succeed; this could not fail." Second Annual Message to Congress.

Senator Obama would rather sacrifice the enormous investment already made in Iraq and accept the dire consequences of premature withdrawal.

President Lincoln's poignant prayer for peace contained a crucial caveat: "Fondly do we hope — fervently do we pray — that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said, 'The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.'" Second Presidential Inaugural Address, March 4, 1865.

Senator Obama wants to withdraw before the job is done.

President Lincoln famously said: "With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and orphan — to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves, and with all nations." Second Presidential Inaugural Address, March 4, 1865.

Senator Obama is opportunistically calling for being finished with the work in Iraq, not finishing it, and eschewing the "just and lasting peace" that can only follow if the work is finished.

He's just Barack Hussein Obama, not a Lincoln.

Osama knows it and Saddam would know it (if he was not dead).

From:
Michael J. Gaynor, born in New York in 1949, has been practicing law in New York for more than thirty years. A member of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, he is now a solo practitioner and admitted to practice in the New York State courts, the United States District Court for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

[linskyjack]

Please don't make duplicate posts---You already started a thread on Lincoln/Obama.

[poochee]

Originally Posted by Fidelista

You don't understand his real meaning?.
I see nothing disrespectful directed at our soldiers.
I can however see how his enemies might dishonestly try to make it seem so.
As far as waste , I would have taken it as a remark aimed at leadership.
After all , our losses can't be seen as a good or wise investment, unless one is in dreamland. >f

[kaaos]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

Then you must be quite disappointed in him for apologizing for making such a statement.

not really he is just playing the game of politics

[poochee]

Race doesn't give Obama edge in S.C.
By JIM DAVENPORT -- Associated Press Writer
Last Updated 11:30 am PST Thursday, February 15, 2007

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) Barack Obama may find that for black voters in South Carolina, being black isn't everything.

If there is a single state where being black holds the potential to boost Obama's chances to win the Democratic presidential nomination, South Carolina fits the bill.

Yet, Democratic voters and party officials here said the Illinois senator will have to do as much persuading as any other candidate to win the support of blacks, who make up about half the Palmetto State's Democratic voters.

"I'm looking for reality," said Tremaine Hendrick, a 20-year-old communications major at historically black Benedict College. "I want the truth. You've got to wait and see to learn actually who tells the truth. You can't determine that from what they're saying right now."

The South Carolina Democratic primary on Jan. 29, 2008 is wedged into the political calendar one week after New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation primary and one week before what could turn out to be a make-or-break mega primary on Feb. 5 of as many as a dozen states.

If Obama were to do well here, it could provide the momentum needed for success in the upcoming crush of primaries.

Black voters accounted for 49 percent of vote in the 2004 Democratic primaries in South Carolina. By contrast, exit polls showed 1 percent of New Hampshire's 2004 Democratic primary voters were black.

That year, former Sen. John Edwards garnered 37 percent of the black vote in his native South Carolina and won its primary. He faces tough competition for the black vote from Obama and New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, who will make her first campaign stop in South Carolina on Monday.

This week, Clinton picked up endorsements from two black political leaders in South Carolina who backed Edwards in 2004.

Other candidates already have made it a point to campaign in South Carolina's black churches and weigh in on the continuing controversy over the Confederate flag flying on the Statehouse grounds, the subject of an ongoing NAACP boycott. But Democrats said no candidate should expect total support from blacks here.

"The black vote is big, but it's not monolithic," said state Democratic Party Chairman Joe Erwin. "Anyone who thinks that because Obama is black that lops off a huge percentage for him is mistaken."

Obama is scheduled to campaign in Columbia on Friday afternoon - his first campaign trip to the state. The following day, he is to speak in Orangeburg at historically black Claflin College.

The biggest endorsement is House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, D-S.C. but Clyburn told The Associated Press this week that he will not endorse any primary candidate in 2008.

Democratic state Sen. Robert Ford - who helped mobilize black voters for Edwards in 2004, but has switched to Clinton - said Obama, a first-term Illinois senator, has a lot to prove. "The media made this guy bigger than life," Ford said. "This guy isn't tested and they made him a rock star."

Ford said one reason he's backing Clinton is that he's skeptical Obama can win the presidency and worries his nomination could hurt other Democratic candidates.

"Every Democrat running on that ticket next year would lose - because he's black and he's top of the ticket. We'd lose the House and the Senate and the governors and everything," Ford said.

He drew widespread criticism for his comment on Tuesday, and later apologized.

Besides the flag and whether candidates support the boycott, political analysts say black voters in South Carolina worry about the same issues as blacks elsewhere. Chiefly, those are the Iraq war, health care and wages, said Furman University political scientist Danielle Vinson.

She predicted Obama would earn firm voter support only after speaking to those issues.

Rest at:
http://dwb.sacbee.com/24hour/politic...12781014c.html

[bassetman]

Originally Posted by gbrumb

I can't decide , have you become the apologist or the whore for the Democratic Party? Both men said what they said because it's what they believe. They both had to backtrack to be politically correct. Hoisted on their own petards.

EDIT: Found a great band that you'll like. Bet you don't listen to the end:http://www.therightbrothers.com/vide..._Was_Right.php

Looks like recorded in a studio w/o an audience!

TRB=The Republican Boys?