Comments on: Don’t Be Fooled By Obama

By: Bill

Bill — Sat, 10 May 2008 10:48:18 +0000

You just provided it. He’s not anti-war and he’s not anti-MidEast meddling.

By: Paul

Paul — Sat, 10 May 2008 06:59:13 +0000

“Don’t be fooled by Obama. He’s no more anti-war or anti-MidEast-meddling than Clinton or McCain is.”

Not sure what you based this comment on. I’m sure you’ve read transcripts of his *2002* speech. Key points:

He is not opposed to all war.

He was supportive of efforts to “hunt down” those who actually were responsible for 9-11. Go after Bin Ladin, not Iraq.

He is opposed to “dumb war”.

War in Iraq classifies as a “dumb war”.

I am interested in any information on Obama you can provide that helped you come to your conclusion about Obama.

By: Bill

Bill — Thu, 08 May 2008 22:57:30 +0000

Who was it that said, “I don’t care who they vote for, as long as I pick the candidates?”

By: Brad

Brad — Thu, 08 May 2008 14:52:40 +0000

If you postulate that Obama is the same as all those lying warring machines that preceded him, then you are free to vote for his opposition, who vows to stay in Iraq for the next 100 years, or you can take a chance on someone who says they opposed that same war.

He may prove to be worse than Bush, however unlikely.

By: Bill

Bill — Thu, 08 May 2008 12:37:32 +0000

Timely article.

Warring as Lying throughout American History. It’s not a new phenomenon, politicians lying about being antiwar while campaigning, then conducting business as usual once elected.

In my mind, the burden of proof is on those who believe Obama is different. Time will tell …