Australia and Obama
 

"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
...

"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...
So which war monger are you rooting for?


Ron Paul.


You're a liar.


Really. Prove it.

Australia and Obama
 

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
...

"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
...

"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...
So which war monger are you rooting for?


Ron Paul.


You're a liar.


Really. Prove it.


Ron Paul is not a war monger, you claim to support him as a war monger.

Australia and Obama
 

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
et...

"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...
"I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges," Obama
said, "but let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those
mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike
again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to
take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable
intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf
won't act, we will."


So explain the lie.


You stated that "Obama has promised to invade Pakistan." That is a flat
lie, as your quote of his speech proves. "If we have actionable
intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf
won't act, we
will," is not a "promise" to invade Pakistan. Which you know. You are
deliberately misrespresenting Obama's position, which makes you a liar.


I did not state that Obama would unconditionally invade Pakistan.

promise:
1.. To make a declaration assuring that something will or will not be
done.
"If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and
President Musharraf won't act, we will,"


invade:


1.To enter by force in order to conquer or pillage.
2.To encroach or intrude on; violate:
1.. To overrun as if by invading; infest:
2.. To enter and permeate, especially harmfully.

"If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and
President Musharraf won't act, we will,"

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle2182955.ece

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTwUA...eature=related

So he said he is not going to go into Pakistan?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uw2XT...eature=related

Australia and Obama
 

"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
...

"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
...

"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...
So which war monger are you rooting for?


Ron Paul.


You're a liar.


Really. Prove it.


Ron Paul is not a war monger, you claim to support him as a war monger.


You are an idiot. Plonk.

Australia and Obama
 

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
et...


So which war monger are you rooting for?

Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is not a war monger.

You are an idiot.


Sums it up nicely.

Australia and Obama
 

"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
et...

"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...
"I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges," Obama
said, "but let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in
those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to
strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a
chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have
actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President
Musharraf won't act, we will."


So explain the lie.


You stated that "Obama has promised to invade Pakistan." That is a flat
lie, as your quote of his speech proves. "If we have actionable
intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf
won't act, we
will," is not a "promise" to invade Pakistan. Which you know. You are
deliberately misrespresenting Obama's position, which makes you a liar.


I did not state that Obama would unconditionally invade Pakistan.

promise:
1.. To make a declaration assuring that something will or will not be
done.
"If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and
President Musharraf won't act, we will,"


invade:


1.To enter by force in order to conquer or pillage.
2.To encroach or intrude on; violate:
1.. To overrun as if by invading; infest:
2.. To enter and permeate, especially harmfully.

"If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and
President Musharraf won't act, we will,"

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle2182955.ece

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTwUA...eature=related

So he said he is not going to go into Pakistan?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uw2XT...eature=related



SMACKDOWN!

Australia and Obama
 

"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
et...


So which war monger are you rooting for?

Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is not a war monger.

You are an idiot.


Sums it up nicely.


He couldn't stand it that you smacked him down so thoroughly in the "Obama
promising to invade Pakistan" discussion.

The liberal modus operandi involves three things:

1) remain ignorant of the facts as long as you can,
2) when someone points out the facts prove you are wrong then..
3) yell LIAR or...
4) run away.

--
Gregory Hall

Australia and Obama
 

"Gregory Hall" wrote in message
...

"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
et...


So which war monger are you rooting for?

Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is not a war monger.

You are an idiot.


Sums it up nicely.


He couldn't stand it that you smacked him down so thoroughly in the "Obama
promising to invade Pakistan" discussion.

The liberal modus operandi involves three things:

1) remain ignorant of the facts as long as you can,
2) when someone points out the facts prove you are wrong then..
3) yell LIAR or...
4) run away.

--
Gregory Hall


Actually it's "she," and I simply got tired of dealing with blatant
obtuseness. The fact remains that Obama has exactly the same policy
regarding Pakistan as McCain: IF terrorists are hiding in Pakistan; IF the
Pakistani government refuses to pursue them; and IF we have "actionable
intelligence" which gives us reason to belive we know where they are and
that a strike against them would be successful, we should act.

Now if you want to take that as a "promise" that we will "invade" Pakistan,
you go right ahead and do so. But it's a stretch at best. And to state that
Obama has "promised to invade Pakistan" while leaving out the fact that his
position is identical to McCain's is duplicitous and deceitful. In short, it
is a lie.

Just another "liberal" Ron Paul supporter.
Karin

Australia and Obama
 

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
...

"Gregory Hall" wrote in message
...

"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
et...


So which war monger are you rooting for?

Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is not a war monger.

You are an idiot.


Sums it up nicely.


He couldn't stand it that you smacked him down so thoroughly in the
"Obama promising to invade Pakistan" discussion.

The liberal modus operandi involves three things:

1) remain ignorant of the facts as long as you can,
2) when someone points out the facts prove you are wrong then..
3) yell LIAR or...
4) run away.

--
Gregory Hall


Actually it's "she," and I simply got tired of dealing with blatant
obtuseness. The fact remains that Obama has exactly the same policy
regarding Pakistan as McCain: IF terrorists are hiding in Pakistan; IF the
Pakistani government refuses to pursue them; and IF we have "actionable
intelligence" which gives us reason to belive we know where they are and
that a strike against them would be successful, we should act.

Now if you want to take that as a "promise" that we will "invade"
Pakistan, you go right ahead and do so. But it's a stretch at best. And to
state that Obama has "promised to invade Pakistan" while leaving out the
fact that his position is identical to McCain's is duplicitous and
deceitful. In short, it is a lie.

Should have know he was dealing with a female . . . My bad!

Extend your logic a little further, Sweetie, and you will see how absurd
your argument really is.

You contend it is a lie to leave out information that does not include
McCain's stance so let's run with that.

I can then say YOU are a liar because you left out the stances of Gloria La
Riva, Chuck Baldwin, Gene Amondson, Bob Barr, Thomas Stevens, James, Harris,
Cynthia McKinney, Alan Keyes, Ralph Nader, Brian Moore and Charles Jay who
are ALL running for President of the United States and are on the ballot at
this time.


Just another "liberal" Ron Paul supporter.
Karin

Ron Paul would have to be a write-in . . .

Are you sure YOU are informed enough to vote? I would think any sane woman
would be voting for Sarah Palin/John McCain.

--
Gregory Hall

Australia and Obama
 

"Gregory Hall" wrote in message
...

Ron Paul would have to be a write-in . . .

And?


Are you sure YOU are informed enough to vote? I would think any sane
woman would be voting for Sarah Palin/John McCain.

--
Gregory Hall

There is a strong possibility that John McCain would die within his first
term of office -- he's in horrible health. That means that Sarah Palin would
become President sometime within the next four years. Sorry, but I'm not
ready for a right-wing fundamentalist Christian theocracy. I also must
disqualify anyone from serving as president who cannot pronounce the word,
"nuclear."

Had McCain chosen a running mate who is qualified to serve as president, I
might have considered voting for him. As it stands, however, no.

Just another insane liberal Ron Paul supporter,
Karin