Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: BAYH HAS BEEN CALLED AND TOLD IT'S AIN'T YOU BABE...NO NO NO IT'S AIN'T YOU BABE
Common Ground Common Sense > Online Café > 2008 Elections > 2008 Elections Archive
Pages: 1, 2, 3
tazvil04
QUOTE(RunsWithScissors @ Aug 20 2008, 06:26 PM) *
I don't trust any of them. My quandary is that my principle won't allow me to choose the lesser of two evils.

Oh and Taz: "Didnt we all want a free Iraq?" Are you kidding me? NO....most people with half a brain knew anything Bushco was involved in was going to be a big fat lie...which it was. It is not our job to "free the world". If that's the case then get ready for a millenium of nothing but war.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...either way it really doesn't matter. The winds of war are blowing. Whether this latest GARBAGE between Moscow and Georgia is something egged on by OUR sticking our noses in once again where they don't belong, ...think about it...scare the people so they'll vote for McCain....could see that one coming a mile away....OR whether it's an inexperienced yet dynamic junior senator who will have to depend on the established powers that be who are just the other side of the coin...either way...I don't see a bright side...you have to look beyond the rhetoric. I think we are screwed.

Don't drink the kool-aid.


Wait a second...did I say Bush's idea of a free Iraq -- or "a free Iraq"

I think I said the latter.

Do you support dictators regularly, or just in this one instance?

I agree it is not our job to free the world. But that does not mean that we can not have an opinion as Americans that we wished that Iraq would be a free and preferably democratic state (as our definition of freedom)?

And perhaps, after routing al Qaeda from around the world the international community might pressure Saddam Hussein to conduct free and democratic elections.

Of course we knew Bush's Iraq scheme was a sham.

No one denies that. But that was not what I said...
tazvil04
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Aug 20 2008, 03:07 PM) *
QUOTE(tazvil04 @ Aug 20 2008, 03:59 PM) *
QUOTE(RunsWithScissors @ Aug 20 2008, 12:10 PM) *
Just saw this...dont shoot me, Im the messenger:

Basically, hopefully it wont be Bayh

okay this guy doesnt like obama or bayh...so take it for what its worth to you


Potential Obama VP Is Pro-War, Pro-Patriot Act Neo-Con
Evan Bayh served with John McCain on neocon Committee for the Liberation of Iraq to propagandize for invasion in 2003

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Wednesday, August 20, 2008

RELATED: Keith Olbermann Needs to Take Obama to Task for His FISA Betrayal


The man who many are tipping to become Barack Obama’s running mate is a pro-war, pro-patriot act, Bilderberg member who was an honorary co-chair of the neocon Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, a group that aggressively propagandized for the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Ladies and gentlemen - meet Senator Evan Bayh.

“Top Democratic Party officials are expecting Sen. Barack Obama to select Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh as his running mate as early as midweek,” according to US News and World Report.

So exactly where do the sympathies of the Indiana Senator lie and do they jive with Barack Obama’s proclaimed platitude to be offering “change” in the upcoming presidential election?

According to Wikipedia (with source link to WhiteHouse.gov), “On October 2, 2002, Bayh joined President George W. Bush and Congressional leaders in a Rose Garden ceremony announcing their agreement on the joint resolution authorizing the Iraq War, and was thanked by Bush and Senator John McCain for co-sponsoring the resolution.”

Not only that, but Bayh served as an honorary co-chair of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq along with John McCain, Obama’s Republican adversary.

So. The Committee wanted a free Iraq. Didn't we all want a free Iraq? He was an honorary co-chair -- does anyone have any evidence he ever attended a meeting of the group?

As Talking Points Memo notes, “The Committee is a neo-con group that was formed to propagandize the country into war. It boasted such illustrious neocon members as Bill Kristol, former CIA director James Woolsey, and even McCain senior foreign policy adviser and Chalabi-bamboozler Randy Scheunemann.”

In a February 2006 interview with the Washington Post, Bayh “refused, as some of his fellow Senators already had, to renounce his support for the war”.

HRC did not do it until 2008 -- and we would have supported her for President...

Bayh also voted for the re-authorization of the USA Patriot Act in 2006.

Obama voted for a reauthorization of the Patriot Act.

The Senator is also a keen supporter of the pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC, having previously described his “lifelong affection for the state of Israel” at an AIPAC luncheon.

Obama has committed to defending Israel as much as anyone else has...

Bayh has warned that Iran is seeking a nuclear weapon, despite the National Intelligence Estimate having refuted this claim, and the Senator has also introduced sanctions against Iran, repeatedly denouncing the country with heated rhetoric on national television.

So? A lot of people have said that since the NIE. Do you deny that Iran is a threat?

Bayh is also a Bilderberg Group kingpin, having not only attended its meeting but also giving a keynote speech at their 1999 confab in Sintra, Portugal.

Gore has spoken at Bilderberg too.

So what does that mean?

Dashle, Dodd, Richardson, etc. they are all members too. So would you not vote for them as VP as well?


Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Bayh is nothing more than another pro-war, pro destruction of the constitution, elitist neocon scumbag. What makes him more dangerous is that he is - just like Obama himself - a wolf in sheep’s clothing, camouflaging himself amidst the mindless rhetoric of “change” while in reality representing nothing more than the status quo.


How many people thought Joe Lieberman was a good choice?

Graham, did you?

No.

But he helped deliver Floirda to Gore didn't he. Oh the Supreme Court took it away --- but he helped deliver Florida to Gore. No doubt about it.

Trust the candidate.



in 2000, I to be honest, never heard of Joe Lieberman except in passing
my first thought was that he was Jewish and it made me proud
But Joe in 2000 was not known to be JOe in 2008
He was a mole
either that or he just went bitter in 2004, when nobody wanted him
and in 2006, he lost

remember- in 2000 I wasn't into the conspiracies
It was only after 2000 loss that I knew Lieberman was pure scum


I agree. I had not heard much about him then either -- but LIeberman did serve his purpose. He helped in Florida. We trusted Al Gore. He made the decision. If Gore had become President like the people wanted, we might have looked at Lieberman much differently.

You have to allow the candidate the ability to choose who he wants.

And you also have to understand that his choice is for the Vice President, who is likely to only assist in shaping policy, but not setting policy.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2009 Invision Power Services, Inc.