Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (41053)	8/23/2008 12:22:43 PM
From: tonto	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224724

Obama has railed against Washington and Washington insiders during his campaign, but few people are more inside Washington than Biden, who has served in the Senate for 36 years (by comparison, McCain has been in the Senate for 22 years). Furthermore, Biden often has been a gaffe machine -- whether it was calling Obama "clean" and "articulate" (news that marred his presidential announcement in 2007) or stating in 2006, "You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent.” And there was that plagiarism scandal that knocked him out of the 1988 presidential race. Perhaps the biggest question: Just how well will Obama and Biden mesh? Has Biden been anybody's No. 2, ever? He's run for president TWICE for a reason (the first time Biden ran, Obama was just starting law school, by the way). Biden has an actual "boss" for the first time in his political career. Is he ready to ride shotgun? And is it a problem that Obama-Biden is a mirror image of Bush-Cheney from 2000? A charismatic, inexperienced nominee taps a more experienced, dare we say, arrogant No.2? In fact, there are a lot of Republicans who believe they can sell Obama-Biden as "the Audacity of Arrogance times two."

To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (41053)	8/23/2008 3:14:49 PM
From: koan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224724

Why did we take down Iraq when it was the counter balance to Iran? why did we take ut Iran biggest enemy and put in Iran's biggrswst friend, a shia controlled governement? Why? Sadam was sunnie and iran is shia; and While doing so bush took his eye off of Russia (where was the cia when russia invaded Georgia dn bush was sitting next to Putin and then went on vacation---again; and we will spend 3 trillion taking down Sadam so and we ground our military to dust and asked way to much of our military. Not very samrt militarily! Iran is shia and now Iraq is controlled by shia and iraq will work with Iran agaisnt us as soon as we leave. When we leave the shia will finish off the sunnie, alaign with iran and may go after the kurds to the north who are our best friends. Most of our friends in the middle east are sunnie e.b. Egypt, etc. That war made no sense at all. Militarily it made no sense, yet Mccain was always gung ho to go after Iraq. Obama was always against that stupid war even when it was not fashionable.