It's just another Republican election year con game. Rewriting history like they did 4 years ago.

Is Bush's Secretary of State following Bush's policy?

Rice, Syrian Foreign Minister Discuss Iraq
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=9981575

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...042301877.html
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called on Iran not to boycott a conference next week of the major countries and parties with a stake in the future of Iraq, at which the United States and Iran would have an opportunity for senior-level talks.

So now you are trying to convince me that Bush has been conducting the same foreign policy that Barack Obama advises and been meeting without pre-conditions with state sponsors of terror like Iran and Syria. Does that mean Barack has been lying during his stump speeches when he says he doesn't want to continue with the "Failed Bush Policies" and that, unlike Bush, he would meet with our enemies like Iran and Syria? If all that is true, doesn't that mean electing Obama would really mean just a third Bush term? And then you accuse me of rewriting history?

Bush wouldn't lie! He's the President of the United States, and they couldn't possibly do anything sneaky or deceptive!

Originally Posted by cbwm

So now you are trying to convince me that Bush has been conducting the same foreign policy that Barack Obama advises and been meeting without pre-conditions with state sponsors of terror like Iran and Syria. Does that mean Barack has been lying during his stump speeches when he says he doesn't want to continue with the "Failed Bush Policies" and that, unlike Bush, he would meet with our enemies like Iran and Syria? If all that is true, doesn't that mean electing Obama would really mean just a third Bush term? And then you accuse me of rewriting history?

Your attempt is really futile to ignore the fact that Bush wanted negotiations with Iran and Syria. Bush is a failure and a liar. He lied when speaking at the Knesset.

Are you saying Bush's Secretary of State lied about wanting to negotiate with Syria and Iran?

Capt Quirk, Bush did it openly until the debate where Obama said he would speak with the head of any government. Then he did his 10 millionth flip-flop of his presidency and his blind followers were happy to cover up the facts.

Originally Posted by Feydakin

Here's the deal, oil execs are in the OIL business, why should they invest in anything other than that?? It's like expecting Microsoft to go out and develop a free open source operating system.

You couldn't be more wrong, and you didn't even resort to the Feydakin logical fallacy. What's up with that?

Completely flawed analogy. An oil company investing in something other than oil (it's called diversifying the revenue stream) would be like Microsoft making mice, keyboards, or even just software other than Windows and Office. All of these happen in the real world.

Originally Posted by joder

Your attempt is really futile to ignore the fact that Bush wanted negotiations with Iran and Syria. Bush is a failure and a liar. He lied when speaking at the Knesset.

Are you saying Bush's Secretary of State lied about wanting to negotiate with Syria and Iran?

Capt Quirk, Bush did it openly until the debate where Obama said he would speak with the head of any government. Then he did his 10 millionth flip-flop of his presidency and his blind followers were happy to cover up the facts.

You didn't answer any of my questions. Barack Obama is the one who has been campaigning on the idea that he would negotiate with Syria and Iran where Bush would not. Answer the question.. was he lying?

I see you gloss over the not so subtle subtleties in so far as the offer made by Condi had preconditions which clearly Iran and Syria did not comply with. So we can all speak from the facts, without all the distracting spin you've added, Bush never offered to meet with Ahmadinijad or Syria without preconditions. So in answer to my question, Obama wasn't lying. What he wants to do is different, naive etc.

Originally Posted by cbwm

I can tell this election is going to be full of laughter. Bush restates a policy in a speech in Israel the other day, a policy he has had unchanged throughout his entire term in office. I'm talking about the policy of not unconditionally meeting with state sponsors of terror(Iran, Syria, N. Korea).

These are your words from post #1. Bush is the one who wanted to negotiate with Iran and Syria and did with North Korea. N. Korea itself makes your argument foolish. Quit trying to change the subject.

Oh, I get it, your supposed to make an unreasonable demand so they won't talk to you. You can't talk to them (unconditionally) and tell them what you would like them to do on a matter and if there is no give and take stop until they meet conditions. You just want there to be SOME type of condition first. Useless drivel that was post Obama at the debate.

You should write Obama and share your wisdom with him. All this time he is claiming that his foreign policy is markedly different than Bush's. According to you, Obama like me, has missed the real issue at hand. I hope you don't plan to vote for someone who so clearly has it wrong.

I don't plan to vote for someone who caters to christian fundamentalists and their social conservatism.. So I'm not voting for McCain.

Yeah McCain flip-flops on his policies there too.

Originally Posted by joder

I don't plan to vote for someone who caters to christian fundamentalists and their social conservatism.. So I'm not voting for McCain.

Yeah McCain flip-flops on his policies there too.

By that definition, you wouldn't be voting for Obama either (unless you believed every word he speaks to west coast liberals and nothing else).

There has not been a good presidential candidate in my lifetime. I'm voting for the lesser of two evils. McCain is definitely the worst of the three.

So that means you will be voting for Obama who "caters to christian fundamentalists"(and whoever else he happens to be talking to)?

I said I WON'T be voting for McCain. Comprehend?

Of course, but I'm trying to reconcile two things you posted which don't seem to agree.

Originally Posted by joder

I don't plan to vote for someone who caters to christian fundamentalists

Originally Posted by joder

I'm voting for the lesser of two evils. McCain is definitely the worst of the three.

That leaves you voting for Obama who definitely caters to Christian Fundamentalists. I only point it out because it is a silly thing to say. Its like saying I won't be voting for the politician who panders or lies. This nation is filled with Christian fundamentalists of one sort or another(Many of them are black) and it will be very difficult to get elected if none of them vote for you.

So your saying Obama is going to appoint judges that will overturn Roe vs. Wade? Is against stem cell research?

McCain is a social conservative.

Originally Posted by joder

So your saying Obama is going to appoint judges that will overturn Roe vs. Wade? Is against stem cell research?

Of the two candidates, Obama is the idiot who stated he would qualify his judges based on issue litmus tests(legislate from the bench), and I am for Roe vs. Wade. One of many many issues about Obama that will come under the light of scrutiny once he begins to run against someone ideologically different than him. His polling numbers against Hillary and McCain have already started to fall now that the GOP is addressing him directly as the presumptive nominee.

Originally Posted by joder

McCain is a social conservative.

Surprisingly, something I also dislike about the man.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

You couldn't be more wrong, and you didn't even resort to the Feydakin logical fallacy. What's up with that?

Completely flawed analogy. An oil company investing in something other than oil (it's called diversifying the revenue stream) would be like Microsoft making mice, keyboards, or even just software other than Windows and Office. All of these happen in the real world.

Except, of course, those are all complimentary products, not competing designed to replace your core business..