I think that Hillary & Hussein Obama are both Traitors.
Neither one cares about anything, except themselves, and turning this into a Communist Nation.
Edwards is just as bad. (But he, at least, is pretty and feminine.)
Hillary, Osama Obama, and Edwards all think that More dead soldiers, will get them More votes. That's all they care about.
2007-06-05 11:23:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by wolf 6
·
0⤊
3⤋
I think that they are patriots and want to bring the troops home. When Congress first passed the war authorization, they gave Bush the authority to take out Saddam and protect us against WMD. The first has been accomplished the latter was nonexistent. I was against the war from the start. If voting to cut off funds will end the death and carnage and bring home the troops, I would. Congress has the Constitutional authority to approve or disprove Federal funding. The current Congress was elected to use this authority.
BTW We get it. His middle name is Hussein. It's a common name. Continually SHOUTING it makes you look like a racist and alienates rational people.
2007-06-05 11:36:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by wyldfyr 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
Wow man you have to stop listening to hannity, rush, McCain propaganda and Fox news. Your right he was opposed to funding the troops with an Open blank Check and No conditions of With drawl. He is opposed to giving this administration money that cannot be accounted for. Do you know that most troops make enough money to qualify for welfare? Would you just send billions of dollars somewhere and hopes it just gets there or would you want some oversight. Obama didn't support it because there was no oversight. So if that's what you are blaming him for than that's your right. I am voting for a president that believes in Oversight and Regulation, Instead of No Oversight and Deregulation. I hope you don't Choke on that Apple!
2016-05-17 14:07:05
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
First off GROW UP. Stop with the Hussein Obama thing it makes you look like a bigot
Second there is a good argument that voting against the troop funding is actually saving their lives by forcing them to come home.
Not an idea I agree with but one that has merits.
2007-06-05 11:20:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by Thomas G 6
·
8⤊
0⤋
I second the grow up thing. It happens on both sides and I am pretty much on the conservative side. But I think its completely childish when I see Barack HUSSEIN Obama like you have typed.
Hillary voted for the war, so she is a flip flopping partisan.
Obama, well he didnt vote so I think he made a wrong decision.
2007-06-05 11:26:55
·
answer #5
·
answered by sociald 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
To me we are in deep doo-doo if either Hillary or Osama is elected President. By not funding the troops, the casualty count among the troops will soar because of lack of body armor or money for munitions. Oh, eventually the troops would have to come home but meanwhile several hundred more troops would have to die because of lack of logistic support.
2007-06-05 11:25:42
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Yes, I have an idea. What did you think when Bush voted against funding the troops with his veto.
What did you think when Bush sent our troops to Iraq with inferior equipment causing many to die needlessly?
What did you think when Bush sent our boys to fight with no clear plan for victory?
Any ideas?
2007-06-05 11:24:40
·
answer #7
·
answered by R8derMike 6
·
3⤊
0⤋
Why are you such a bigot?
Many conservative groups are funded in part by the Coors Dynasty, one of people in the family was named ADOLPH Coors.
ADOLPH Coors, a guy named ADOLPH funded the Conservative movement.
2007-06-05 11:24:59
·
answer #8
·
answered by ck4829 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Good. Why are we there? Saddams dead, not that he did any thing to us any way, Instead of new funding let's just send Bush there and tie him to a post. That should make them feel better.
2007-06-05 11:27:21
·
answer #9
·
answered by dharmabumma 1
·
3⤊
0⤋
I don't mind it at all until they take credit for it. Then that gets me mad.
2007-06-05 11:21:42
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋