Obama Bin Lyin' didn't vote for the Iraq war as he claimed @ the interview. The vote was in 2002. He got elected more than 2 years later. Link to the Roll Call Votes: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00237

Another one from the SaddleBack Ranch: Osama claimed that he went against party loyalty when he worked with John McCain with the issue of Campaign Ethics Reform. Read this letter from McCain to Obama in Feb 2006:

The Honorable Barack Obama
United States Senate
SH-713
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Obama:

I would like to apologize to you for assuming that your private assurances to me regarding your desire to cooperate in our efforts to negotiate bipartisan lobbying reform legislation were sincere. When you approached me and insisted that despite your leadership’s preference to use the issue to gain a political advantage in the 2006 elections, you were personally committed to achieving a result that would reflect credit on the entire Senate and offer the country a better example of political leadership, I concluded your professed concern for the institution and the public interest was genuine and admirable. Thank you for disabusing me of such notions with your letter to me dated February 2, 2006, which explained your decision to withdraw from our bipartisan discussions. I’m embarrassed to admit that after all these years in politics I failed to interpret your previous assurances as typical rhetorical gloss routinely used in politics to make self-interested partisan posturing appear more noble. Again, sorry for the confusion, but please be assured I won’t make the same mistake again.

As you know, the Majority Leader has asked Chairman Collins to hold hearings and mark up a bill for floor consideration in early March. I fully support such timely action and I am confident that, together with Senator Lieberman, the Committee on Governmental Affairs will report out a meaningful, bipartisan bill.

You commented in your letter about my “interest in creating a task force to further study” this issue, as if to suggest I support delaying the consideration of much-needed reforms rather than allowing the committees of jurisdiction to hold hearings on the matter. Nothing could be further from the truth. The timely findings of a bipartisan working group could be very helpful to the committee in formulating legislation that will be reported to the full Senate. Since you are new to the Senate, you may not be aware of the fact that I have always supported fully the regular committee and legislative process in the Senate, and routinely urge Committee Chairmen to hold hearings on important issues. In fact, I urged Senator Collins to schedule a hearing upon the Senate’s return in January.

Furthermore, I have consistently maintained that any lobbying reform proposal be bipartisan. The bill Senators Joe Lieberman and Bill Nelson and I have introduced is evidence of that commitment as is my insistence that members of both parties be included in meetings to develop the legislation that will ultimately be considered on the Senate floor. As I explained in a recent letter to Senator Reid, and have publicly said many times, the American people do not see this as just a Republican problem or just a Democratic problem. They see it as yet another run-of-the-mill Washington scandal, and they expect it will generate just another round of partisan gamesmanship and posturing. Senator Lieberman and I, and many other members of this body, hope to exceed the public’s low expectations. We view this as an opportunity to bring transparency and accountability to the Congress, and, most importantly, to show the public that both parties will work together to address our failings.

As I noted, I initially believed you shared that goal. But I understand how important the opportunity to lead your party’s effort to exploit this issue must seem to a freshman Senator, and I hold no hard feelings over your earlier disingenuousness. Again, I have been around long enough to appreciate that in politics the public interest isn’t always a priority for every one of us. Good luck to you, Senator.

Sincerely,

John McCain

-- Modified on 8/17/2008 7:18:25 PM

Care to show us the excerpt from the transcripts where Senator Obama said that he voted on the original use of force resolution against Iraq in 2002? I'm pretty sure I know which passage you read and total missed what he actually said.

Apparently you have no trouble with McCain's lies, inconsistencies and pandering.  McCain claimed to have a 25 year pro-life record and when asked when a baby’s human rights begin he said “at the moment of conception." However, McCain supports abortion in cases of rape and incest and also supports federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Apparently his position is that life begins at conception, but it's OK to kill embryos anyway.
The simple conclusion here: McCain believes that support for abortion and embryonic stem cell research is pro-life, or McCain is a pandering liar.

Obviously you're not, so here's the transcript:

Q. WHAT’S THE MOST SIGNIFICANT — LET ME ASK IT THIS WAY: WHAT’S THE MOST GUT WRENCHING DECISION YOU’VE EVER HAD TO MAKE AND HOW DID YOU PROCESS THAT, COME TO THAT DECISION?

A. WELL, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE OPPOSITION TO THE WAR IN IRAQ WAS AS TOUGH A DECISION THAT I’VE HAD TO MAKE NOT ONLY BECAUSE THERE WERE POLITICAL CONSEQUENCES BUT ALSO BECAUSE SADDAM HUSSEIN WAS A BAD PERSON AND THERE WAS NO DOUBT THAT HE MET AMERICA ILL.

BUT I WAS FIRMLY CONVINCED AT THE TIME THAT WE DID NOT HAVE STRONG EVIDENCE OF WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION AND THERE WERE A LOT OF QUESTIONS THAT AS I SPOKE TO EXPERTS KEPT ON COMING UP, DO WE KNOW HOW THE SHIITES AND THE SUNNIS AND THE KURDS ARE GOING TO GET ALONG IN A POST SADDAM SITUATION, WHAT’S OUR ASSESSMENT AS TO HOW THIS WILL AFFECT THE BATTLE AGAINST TERRORIST LIKE AL-QAEDA, HAVE WE FINISHED THE JOB IN AFGHANISTAN?

SO I AGONIZED OVER THAT AND I THINK QUESTION OF WAR AND PEACE GENERALLY ARE SO PROFOUND YOU KNOW WHEN YOU MEET THE TROOPS, THEY ARE 19, 20, 21-YEAR OLD KIDS AND YOU ARE PUTTING THEM INTO HARM’S WAY THERE IS A SOLEMN OBLIGATION THAT YOU DO EVERYTHING YOU CAN TO GET THAT DECISION RIGHT.

AND NOW AS THE WAR WENT FORWARD, VERY DIFFICULT ABOUT HOW LONG DO YOU KEEP FUNDING THE WAR IF YOU STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT IT’S NOT AMERICA’S NATIONAL INTEREST AT THE SAME TIME YOU DON’T WANT TO HAVE TROOPS WHO ARE OUT THERE WITHOUT THE EQUIPMENT THEY NEED. SO THAT ALL THOSE QUESTIONS SURROUNDING THE WAR HAVE BEEN VERY DIFFICULT FOR ME.

That's clearly a lie (read my original post of this thread for more info).

McCain is Pro-life, but I think supporting abortion for rape cases is right. Why would a woman have to be responsible for carrying an OBAMANATION(Abomination) in her stomach for 9 months...an OBAMANATION that she didn't want in the first place.

As for your accusation of McCain supporting embryonic stem cell research...I guess your comprehension skills are not up to par these days. McCain said it clearly in that interview that he'll rather support human skin cell research over stem cell. If you don't know what human skin cell research is(which I'm assuming that you don't)...here's the link.

http://www.healthday.com/Article.asp?AID=612519

IMO, I think Barry Soetoro was totally outclassed @ Saddle Ranch. Obamanation was clearly out of his league!

- Obama-speak works just great in rally settings.
- Obama-speak will work in a football stadium.
- Obama-speak will not work in a one-on-one debate with a REAL HUMAN BEING who has the vast experience that John McCain have had.
- There is no substitute for having done the work.
- There is no substitute for having traveled to 150+ countries, as John McCain has done.
- There is no substitute for having met world leaders on their turf, several times. For example, John McCain has PERSONALLY been to embattled Georgia several times. John McCain knows the country of Georgia. He knows its people. He knows its leaders. He knows its problems. He knows its fears and its dreams.
- Barack Obama cannot fake that kind of experience!
- And there is not enough time to even begin to learn how to fake it.

Barack Obama is out of his league!

***I sure hope that Osama Bin Lyin' wasn't serious when he said that he'll rely on his wife and grandma on important matters when he's in office.... :-P

-- Modified on 8/17/2008 11:54:28 PM

I don't see anywhere in the transcript, you've posted, where Obama said he "voted for" or against the Irag war. Opposing something is not equal to voting against it. A person can do both, but one can oppose something without voting on it.

Allowing an exception for cases of rape or incest is a pretty common stance among many who are pro-life. Nothing shocking about McCain's stance. Regarding stem cell research, the ONLY people who actually think that embryonic stem cell research is remotely related to abortion are genuine, honest to God, MORONS. Thanks for letting us know about your intellectual capacity.

Emryonic stem research employs leftover fertilized ova from fertility clinics, that would otherwise be discarded. It has nothing whatsoever to do with abortions. Only the truly moronic have made the Grand Canyon sized lead to connect the two for purely political purposes.

He is also a fucking idiot too!

The question was what was his toughest decision, and he mentioned opposing the war.  Actually, he didn't even have to make that decision.

He was not in the Senate at the time, so he didn't even have to vote on it.  All he had to do was follow the wishes of the precint that he was representing at the time in the State Senate.

It is not a tough decision to go with the desires of your district, especially if you don't have to even cast a vote on the matter.

I never equated stem cells with abortion but the pro-life community of the Republican Party does. Regarding the rape and incest exception for abortion, you can add any caveats you want but you can't claim a "25 year record of pro life" and be in favor of abortion.  You're also wrong in saying that rape and incest exemptions are a common stance among pro-lifers.  Those exemptions are not considered part of the Republican mainstream as they are excluded from the Republican Party platform on abortion.  So will McCain stick to his position or abandon it to support the party platform?

Did you read the link on my previous post? If you're interested to know why Skin Cell Research better than Stem Cell, then click on that link. If you don't know what Skin Cell Research is, then click on that link.

Neither one is "better" than the other. Both offer the potential to reveal life saving advances in medicine.

Several years ago, a study of the brains of meth addicts, surely one of those studies that are a waste of time, led to a major advancement in the understanding of Alzheimers. To date, more than half a dozen medications that have literally added YEARS and even DECADES to the lives of Alzheimers sufferers have been developed as a direct result of the orginal study. No one could have predicted that studying bran scans of meth addicts would provide such a breakthrough in Alzheimer's research. Likewise, no one can predict how stem cell research will advance medicine.

What we do know though, is that when those who haven't the wit to understand the science involved stand in the way of ethically sound research, people who might otherwise be cured or treated will continue to live lives of desperation, pain, and debilitation. Embryonic stem cells employ fertilized ova from fertility clinics that would otherwise be discarded. There is no "potential life" being destroyed. There is only leftover genetic material that has served its intended purpose and is now about to be discarded, which offers the potential to cure debilitating and fatal diseases.

No one, not Bush, not anyone, said stem cell research was illegal. Bush said the Feds wouldn't fund it. Colleges can, you can, private biz can. Go ahead. If it is so productive and going to produce medical miracles, private equity will line up to fund it.

Right now pro stem cell research people who want the gov't pay for this are saying, "we'll use only fertilized eggs that will be thrown out anyway". But how long before they'd argue, "why can't we fertiilze embryos and then use them?" Why can't we create life and destroy it to lengthen our own? Why can't we clone another person from ourselves and use him for spare parts? My body, my choice, my clone, right? Who is the gov't to tell me I can't?

Remember, anyone over the age of 50 has been down this road before. I was 24 in 1973 the idea that any abortion after the 1st trimester would occur was termed "unimaginable". Look where we are now. Until not too long ago the Feds were paying for partial birth abortions. That has nothing to do with religion. Before I get accused of being a religous nut, I am a former Lutheran haven't been near a church in 30 yrs but I don't confuse morality and religion.

It is interesting that, supposedly, life begins at conception so abortion is evil.  However, the people like McCain have reserved the privilege of determining exceptions to that broad assertion, namely; rape and incest.

It is curious that those particular fetuses are unworthy of life, but all others are.  Such a fetus is unworthy of life because (a) its father was a criminal rapist or (b) its mother and father were probably from the South (incest).

It is hypocritical to say there are two exceptions to the "rule" but only the exceptions those like McCain decree.  If there are two exceptions, why can't there be others?

"Why would a woman have to be responsible for carrying an abomination in her stomach for 9 months...an abomination that she didn't want in the first place?" (because of rape) ed.

(a) Why is the fetus the abomination?  It didn't do anything wrong.

(b)  Why is rape the only acceptable reason to not want to be pregnant and carry the fetus to term?


-- Modified on 8/20/2008 2:56:46 PM

John Kerry and Al Gore should stand out as prime examples that the American people do not want long, erudite, thoughtful answers.  If the answer is longer than six or seven words, most of the consistuency drifts and fades away.

It isn't a question of long erudite answers.  I specialize that in work regularly, filing legal arguments getting up to 400 pages.  Sometimes long messages can be meaningless.

"We are the change we have been waiting for." Wow, talk about a silly slogan.

"Above my pay scale." Hey, as president, you will be appointing people, namely Supreme Court Justices, who will earn half your pay scale.  If you don't know, they won't know at half the price.

No. Sometimes the answers just sound profound but are shallow.

True in many respects, but it is also true (I would say more commonly true) that most Americans start hearing the buzz of white noise in their heads if the statement by the candidate goes much beyond "I'll get you what you want" or "America!  Yeah!  Kick ass!!"

When you consider that the spectator sport growing most quickly in popularity is cars turning left all day, this isn't surprising.