McCain is more likely to bring Israel and Syria together, because he will support defense of both nations against terrorists - Syria fears Iran also
Thursday, May 15 at 9:28 AM Amy L. Geiger-Hemmer wrote ...
Bigcat: Do you mind telling me just "how" Obama will end conflicts other than running away from them?
Terrorists want to see a Democrat as President simply so they can walk all over them - because they know Democrats have no backbone for military matters.
Thursday, May 15 at 8:57 AM bigcat wrote ...
grasshopper,
we are supposed to take terrorists at their word then when it is convenient for Republicans? Terrorists hate peace...it's bad for business. The prospect of a peaceful resolution in the middle east is anathema to Islamic fundamentalists. Which candidate do you think is more likely to be able to bring about some sort of bilateral accord between Syria (the real terrorist state and threat) and Israel?
Wednesday, May 14 at 9:07 PM grasshopper wrote ...
oh, bigcat, you are so wise - you see the duplicity of the terrorists actually wanting John McCain to be President so he will defend Israel and Iraq against them, so they say good things about Obama - the depth of your wisdom, bigcat, is too deep to discern - we can only bow to your superior insight...
Wednesday, May 14 at 1:12 PM bigcat wrote ...
It is always intersting to watch Republican spin in action. If we follow your logic, Amy, should we then assume all assertions by terrorist groups and their spokesmen are truthful? How do you know Ahmed Yousef wasn't spreading disinformation? Amy, do you have powers of deduction and insight that could be beneficial to Homeland Security? The whole point is terrorists LIE. They may want Obama out because he will end conflicts unlike Republicans. Terrorists like war which McCain will continue.
Wednesday, May 14 at 9:23 AM Amy L. Geiger-Hemmer wrote ...
Bigcat: It is not a "spurious charge" that Hamas supports Obama. On April 20th on a New York radio station, Ahmed Yousef, the top Hamas political adviser, said "We don't mind, actually we like Mr. Obama. We hope he can win the election." That sure sounds like "support" to me. A terrorist group supporting a US Candidate for President - imagine!!! I don't think that is an "irrelevant point". And Bigcat, McCain never "attacked" Obama concerning this issue. Your claims are "spurious"...
Monday, May 12 at 9:50 PM DD wrote ...
bigcat is irrelevant and misleading- why does he bother?
Monday, May 12 at 5:43 PM ijeff wrote ...
Message to bigcat. McCain was responding directly to a question that was asked of him in. He didn't just bring it up. Anyway, why is it irrelevant? The Hammas endorsement relates directly to past statements Obama has made and by past, I mean last year! Why is that not relevant. Of course, Obama is changing his story now. As for bombing Iran, you liberals really have no sense of humor. Major story? Give me a break. I think most of us saw the video of it. What more do you want to "investigate"?
Monday, May 12 at 2:54 PM bigcat wrote ...
Mark Salter never did explain why McCain felt it necessary to attack Obama with the spurious charge that Hamas supports him. Why did John McCain bring up this totally irrelevant point? And when will the MSM begin investigating McCain's extremely cozy relationship with lobbyists and his past associations as a member of the KEATING 5? He jokes about bombing Iran and no major news outlets cover it? His spiritual advisor Rod Parsley spouts racist diatribe and no scandal?
Monday, May 12 at 12:10 PM Kurt/Elkhorn wrote ...
One thing I've noticed is the way candidates respond to issues. I applaud John McCain for speaking out when someone crosses the line or tries a cheap shot. This is good insight into how they will respond to world & national issues once elected-tact,integrity & cajonas to act. That's what separates the leaders from the rest. Now-think back to responses under pressure in the recent past!!!
Monday, May 12 at 6:24 AM Mary wrote ...
Good for the McCain campaign, not that it will change a single thing.
This content requires the latest Adobe Flash Player and a browser with JavaScript enabled.
Click here for a free download of the latest Adobe Flash Player.
Thursday, May 15 at 8:24 PM gh wrote ...
McCain is more likely to bring Israel and Syria together, because he will support defense of both nations against terrorists - Syria fears Iran also
Thursday, May 15 at 9:28 AM Amy L. Geiger-Hemmer wrote ...
Bigcat: Do you mind telling me just "how" Obama will end conflicts other than running away from them? Terrorists want to see a Democrat as President simply so they can walk all over them - because they know Democrats have no backbone for military matters.
Thursday, May 15 at 8:57 AM bigcat wrote ...
grasshopper, we are supposed to take terrorists at their word then when it is convenient for Republicans? Terrorists hate peace...it's bad for business. The prospect of a peaceful resolution in the middle east is anathema to Islamic fundamentalists. Which candidate do you think is more likely to be able to bring about some sort of bilateral accord between Syria (the real terrorist state and threat) and Israel?
Wednesday, May 14 at 9:07 PM grasshopper wrote ...
oh, bigcat, you are so wise - you see the duplicity of the terrorists actually wanting John McCain to be President so he will defend Israel and Iraq against them, so they say good things about Obama - the depth of your wisdom, bigcat, is too deep to discern - we can only bow to your superior insight...
Wednesday, May 14 at 1:12 PM bigcat wrote ...
It is always intersting to watch Republican spin in action. If we follow your logic, Amy, should we then assume all assertions by terrorist groups and their spokesmen are truthful? How do you know Ahmed Yousef wasn't spreading disinformation? Amy, do you have powers of deduction and insight that could be beneficial to Homeland Security? The whole point is terrorists LIE. They may want Obama out because he will end conflicts unlike Republicans. Terrorists like war which McCain will continue.
Wednesday, May 14 at 9:23 AM Amy L. Geiger-Hemmer wrote ...
Bigcat: It is not a "spurious charge" that Hamas supports Obama. On April 20th on a New York radio station, Ahmed Yousef, the top Hamas political adviser, said "We don't mind, actually we like Mr. Obama. We hope he can win the election." That sure sounds like "support" to me. A terrorist group supporting a US Candidate for President - imagine!!! I don't think that is an "irrelevant point". And Bigcat, McCain never "attacked" Obama concerning this issue. Your claims are "spurious"...
Monday, May 12 at 9:50 PM DD wrote ...
bigcat is irrelevant and misleading- why does he bother?
Monday, May 12 at 5:43 PM ijeff wrote ...
Message to bigcat. McCain was responding directly to a question that was asked of him in. He didn't just bring it up. Anyway, why is it irrelevant? The Hammas endorsement relates directly to past statements Obama has made and by past, I mean last year! Why is that not relevant. Of course, Obama is changing his story now. As for bombing Iran, you liberals really have no sense of humor. Major story? Give me a break. I think most of us saw the video of it. What more do you want to "investigate"?
Monday, May 12 at 2:54 PM bigcat wrote ...
Mark Salter never did explain why McCain felt it necessary to attack Obama with the spurious charge that Hamas supports him. Why did John McCain bring up this totally irrelevant point? And when will the MSM begin investigating McCain's extremely cozy relationship with lobbyists and his past associations as a member of the KEATING 5? He jokes about bombing Iran and no major news outlets cover it? His spiritual advisor Rod Parsley spouts racist diatribe and no scandal?
Monday, May 12 at 12:10 PM Kurt/Elkhorn wrote ...
One thing I've noticed is the way candidates respond to issues. I applaud John McCain for speaking out when someone crosses the line or tries a cheap shot. This is good insight into how they will respond to world & national issues once elected-tact,integrity & cajonas to act. That's what separates the leaders from the rest. Now-think back to responses under pressure in the recent past!!!
Monday, May 12 at 6:24 AM Mary wrote ...
Good for the McCain campaign, not that it will change a single thing.
Add a comment
Most Popular