The left half of the nation woke up pleased to finally see a text message from the Obama campaign with Barack’s running mate choice. He chose Senator Joe Biden. Why Joe Biden? Well, it seems Obama has found someone to hopefully plug all of the holes in his sinking ship.
What has been the most common accusation against Obama as a Presidential contender? Inexperience. So, Barack has found him a vice-president with lots of experience. Biden is 65 years old and has been in the United States Senate since he was 30. Where else has Obama shown himself weak? Foreign relations. Biden has served as the head of the Senate foreign relations committee for some time now. Holes plugged, right? I’m sure that’s what Obama was thinking.
What about Biden voting in favor of the Iraq War? What about the message of change? As far as I can tell, Obama basically picked the closest thing to McCain he could find in a liberal democrat. There is absolutely nothing about Joe Biden that expresses changes. He certainly doesn’t have anything exciting about him. Isn’t that what Obama’s entire campaign is based on? Biden ran for president twice before and I’m guessing the majority of people who saw the headlines this morning thought, “Who’s Joe Biden?”
It’s not just the inexperience that people don’t like about Obama. Lots of people get excited every election for the candidate of “change”. They offer so much and make many promises. But in the end, it is the candidate who stands up for American principles that wins. Everyone thought Al Gore and John Kerry were sure things, but as the election drew closer, the numbers shifted. Ultimately, the majority of America wants a true leader who is a solid patriot. In this case, that’s not Barack Obama.
Dani (8)
Michael (7)
Randall King (7)
Ben (3)
Dianne (3)
Biden — the perfect foil for Palin!
Where is McCain’s patriotism to his country when he doesn’t think there is anything wrong with the economy?
What is your definition of a solid patriot? Someone who jokes and makes Beach Boy songs about bombing Iran, or wants to reinstate the draft, or doesn’t even know how many homes he owns?
Now, you are putting Obama down for picking someone to help strengthen his weaknesses? You think that’s not wise? I think it doesn’t matter what Obama does, you will automatically assume it is wrong. If he had picked someone more inexperienced, you would be dogging him for picking someone inexperienced rather than someone more experienced. I would think if I was going to do an important job and could pick someone to assist me, I would pick someone who makes up for where I lack. That’s called wisdom. It is very obvious that no matter what Obama does, you will be be complaining about it and putting him down. With you, he can’t win.
You speak of McCain as though he isn’t lacking anywhere and he’s perfect. It’s ridiculous.
Lastly, he picked someone as close to McCain as he could that is a liberal democrat? Would someone be similar to McCain at all if he is a liberal democrat??? What you are basically saying is that McCain is old, Obama picked someone who is old, therefore, he tried to pick someone like McCain…even though that person is mountains away from McCain’s actual political views.
I’m not putting him down for choosing Biden. I’m simply pointing at that even with Biden, he’s a terrible candidate for president.
As for McCain, I’ve openly disagreed with him on many occasions, but ultimately, he’s not looking to change the fundamentals of what has made America great. As far as I’m concerned, Obama despises, not the wrongs in America, but pure American principles. He is no patriot and he’ll not get my vote regardless of who his running mate is.
Someone who sends of American soldiers to die for an unnecessary war is not a patriot. Yet, I would guess you believe Bush is quite a patriot.
I’m not sure what “American principles” Obama violates. It seems that die hard McCain supporters focus on being against homosexuality, being against abortion, and being pro war…these are American principles?
Leslie, you have no clue what could have happened after 9/11 had we not gone to war against terrorism, and we were provoked into that war. What kind of message do you think we would have sent to all terrorists about America had we just written off all those murdered American lives that day as merely unfortunate losses and continued on with our lives as if nothing happened? If it upsets you that we don’t tolerate countries that harbor Al-Qaeda and like terrorists who constantly plot against us, then I, personally, am glad you don’t lead our nation.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but would I be correct to assume that if we were aiding terrorist groups that constantly plotted against, say France, that you support France against the U.S. because we would be in the wrong for supporting those terrorists? If so, then why are you so against our government for not tolerating it either?
Caleb, I don’t think anyone would argue that there needed to be a response to 9/11. What Leslie and most people are saying now is that the course of action that was taken was very very wrong. We did not go after anyone who was directly responsible for 9/11. Instead, we went after some country who had no WMDs — at least what we were to consider as WMDs, no some stupid shell casings or decades-old materials — and not only that, but we lost sight of Bin Laden, and allowed Al Queda into Iraq because of our veru presence there. We were provoked into a war with Al Queda, not with Iraq, which had no proven ties with Al Queda! Iraq didn’t harbor Al Queda, so you need to check yourself and get with the facts. We caused a lot of that mess over there that has let them in Iraq, and now forces us to continually spend billions of dollars there in the name of “freedom”.
Why are we still debating the motivations for the Iraq War? It’s a little late to not invade now. How about we focus on whether we’ve accomplished anything by being there and whether or not we should pull out now?
What we are debating what these American principles are that you think are so great and that McCain supports. Because both Bush and McCain are pretty “war happy.” I don’t see how these are solid American principles. I’m not against ALL war. But, there has not been the reservation or caution among many republicans that I would prefer to see.
And 9/11 and the reason we went into Iraq are unrelated. If we were going after the people responsible for 9/11, that’d make more sense. Instead, we put large amounts of resources into attacking another country.
I refer you to: http://jeremysarber.com/2008/08/25/tom-hayden-and-dreams-of-obama/
Eric, I just re-read my previous two posts and I couldn’t find anywhere where I had mentioned Iraq. Were you reading one of my posts on another article?
I’m not saying that we did everything correctly in the War on Terror. I’ve always pictured a war against terrorists without their own country to be a bit difficult, so I’ve not been surprised that we haven’t been perfect with it all. However, since you mention Iraq, the FACTS show that violence there is at an all-time low, and most American troops in Iraq are now in more of a “peacekeeping” role than “combatant”.
Caleb, you didn’t mention Iraq by name, but that is a coward’s way out since you were clearly referring to it. What other war have we been fighting after 9/11?
The FACTS also show that violence is down, but that was after years of turmoil and billions and billions of dollars spent and lives lost. We went in there under false pretenses, and our presense there only made things worse in that country for years, and has allowed Al Queda to slip in there and set up shop.
The past is past. Why would we leave now?
Eric, I wasn’t referring to Iraq in particular. Granted, most of the attention has been focussed on Iraq, but I’m talking about the bigger picture. We haven’t been tolerating Iran’s support of terrorists either. Maybe I should not have referred to the War on Terror. Instead I should have said the war on terrorism.
In regards to your comments about the recent conditions in Iraq, I’d like to ask Iraqis a few years down the road (if we stick this thing out) if they think the turmoil that you spoke of was worth the freedoms that they now enjoy.