eric hussein miami wrote:
Is this manly challenge supposed to make me forget you called me on name-calling and were guilty of the same thing?
That wasn't even a good try, Tommy.

Yes eric, I called you a kool-aid drinker. That refers to someone that tows the party line, no matter what. That is what I have gotten from all of you. You never disagree with anything your party says. I also called you brown-nose. You have your little group that calls people names and are disrespectful towards. It's like a tag team of scared little children. Yes I include you in the "group".

See that wasn't so hard. I explained why I "called" you boys those things AFTER your little tag team game. All three of you called me a bigot. That's quite different. I grew up as a minority. I know quite well what bigotry feels like. I lived it. I know what the ridicule of bigotry feels like. When I first experienced Jim Crow laws as a child, it sickened me because I know how that must have felt. It sickens me to hear bigotry towards Gays. It sickens me to here bigotry towards Hispanics. So tell me, why did you call me a bigot? What was it I said that makes me into a person I so much despise?

utocoman wrote:
Since Tommy will not pick up his shovel....

Here is a video on Rove

Send Karl Rove to jail.

http://sendkarlrovetojail.com/?utm_source=386136

And I would care, why? I don't drink Republican kool-aid. I don't believe everything they do is omnipotent. I have voted for Democrats in the past. I will continue to do so, anytime I agree with their take on issues. Karl digs his own grave, whatever he is or isn't guilty of doesn't concern me. Frankly, the far right elements in the Republican party sickens me even more than the far left of the Democrats. Mainly because I feel they have highjacked the ideals I believe in and made them something else.

I am not unaffiliated. I'm a registered Republican. I was a registered Democrat before that. I feel the Democratic Party changed. It was no longer of the vintage of JFK. Now I feel the Republican party has changed. But I'm hopeful those elements that I disagree with will be marginalized.

ThomasK wrote:
All three of you called me a bigot.
I'm assuming you are including me in that. Sorry Thomas, I never called you a bigot. Asking you if you are one is not calling you one. Here is what I actually said:

Truthhurts wrote:
So you don't like either candidate, but you continue to defend Bush, support McCain, and bash Obama. Why is that? If you don't like either, you should be bashing both (or keeping your mouth shut), but you only bash Obama. I'm beginning to think it is not a political thing with you...it's beginning to sound more like a racial thing to me.

Are you a bigot, TommyK?
A valid comment and question. You had said you did not like either candidate (and yes, you did say that, as we have established), you like to bash Obama and his policies, and I've never seen you say a word in the negative about McCain or any of his policies (other than he was not your first choice, which I do not consider negative) so the question in my mind was is it a racial thing? A valid question, given that you had said you liked neither but only attacked one. When someone says they don't like either candidate but only attack one, and that one happens to be black, it raises the specter of racism. The same would be true if Hilary was the candidate and you had said you liked neither candidate, but only attacked Hilary, then the specter of sexism would have been there.

If you'd quit sticking your foot in your mouth, it might not get stuck there so often. I'd suggest you measure your words more carefully in the future.

BTW, I cannot see where utocoman or Eric called you a bigot either. Perhaps you can point it out.

truthhurts wrote:
ThomasK wrote:
All three of you called me a bigot.
I'm assuming you are including me in that. Sorry Thomas, I never called you a bigot. Asking you if you are one is not calling you one. Here is what I actually said:

Truthhurts wrote:
So you don't like either candidate, but you continue to defend Bush, support McCain, and bash Obama. Why is that? If you don't like either, you should be bashing both (or keeping your mouth shut), but you only bash Obama. I'm beginning to think it is not a political thing with you...it's beginning to sound more like a racial thing to me.

Are you a bigot, TommyK?
A valid comment and question. You had said you did not like either candidate (and yes, you did say that, as we have established), you like to bash Obama and his policies, and I've never seen you say a word in the negative about McCain or any of his policies (other than he was not your first choice, which I do not consider negative) so the question in my mind was is it a racial thing? A valid question, given that you had said you liked neither but only attacked one. When someone says they don't like either candidate but only attack one, and that one happens to be black, it raises the specter of racism. The same would be true if Hilary was the candidate and you had said you liked neither candidate, but only attacked Hilary, then the specter of sexism would have been there.

If you'd quit sticking your foot in your mouth, it might not get stuck there so often. I'd suggest you measure your words more carefully in the future.

OK, I'll type real sloooowww. As far as McCain, I have no confidence, AT ALL, that he will work with Congress to control the budget. I don't have issues with his policies towards the war. I'm concerned about health care. I don't agree with the Democrats on this issue or the Republicans. They are both too extreme, in my opinion. So on healthcare, NO, I don't agree. Is that bashing enough? The economy, I'm with him on free trade, I haven't seen anything concerning the economy that I'm impressed with. Of course, I don't believe he or Obama can do much about it. The biggest thing they can do is to control spending, not raising taxes.

Still the title of this thread is in regard to Obama and the withdrawal time frame. That's what I started commenting about. I still find it rather odd that Obama was dead set against the surge in Iraq, which for the time being, has definitely worked. And he's so sure that a surge in Afghanistan is the answer. Maybe it is. Especially since it worked so well in Iraq.


How you can construe that I'm bigoted is pathetic.
McCain's in his 70's is he not. Since you can't bring yourself to say one single thing bad about Obama that must make you prejudices against the elderly, according to your logic. I wouldn't say that because it's illogical.

New York Times Spares McCain Embarrassment By Spiking Op-Ed

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/21/inew-york-timesi-spares-m_n_114117.html

ThomasK wrote:
Still the title of this thread is in regard to Obama and the withdrawal time frame. That's what I started commenting about. I still find it rather odd that Obama was dead set against the surge in Iraq, which for the time being, has definitely worked.
Let's talk about that. There have been several components to that. One is that we have had more troops there. One is that the insurgent groups, have, for the time being at least, called a truce (Iran has had a hand in that as well), and one is that the Iraqi's themselves have finally started to get their act together.

Obama's initial 16 month plan for withdrawl was based on the premise that Iraq's future is up to the Iraqi's, and that no pressure had ever been set by the Bush Administration for them to hurry it along. His position was not "We are out in 16 months, and the hell with them", but rather "They need to take control and be responsible for their own country, and we will establish a time line to get them moving". Would you expect students in a class to learn much if the teacher never set a test date, and in fact never said there would be a test at all? That was, and still is, the Bush-McCain plan in Iraq. No wonder they dawdled.

The Iraqi's are not stupid (look at the way they are playing hardball with Bush right now) and they no doubt realized that all of the Democratic candidates wanted out of Iraq, and that the election in the US was probably going to go that way. In that way, they were pretty much given that future "test date" quite some time ago. And guess what? They got busy.

You could say "No, it was our surge troops..that did it, nothing else." And you would be wrong. You certainly cannot prove that, for sure.

How you can construe that I'm bigoted is pathetic.
You've got yourself to blame for that one. Don't say you don't like either candidate, than attack only one.

McCain's in his 70's is he not. Since you can't bring yourself to say one single thing bad about Obama must make you prejudices against the elderly, according to your logic. I wouldn't say that because it's illogical.
Irrelevant and dumb example, since I never said I did not like either candidate like you did.