and don't argue politics with righties.

Thanks.

and participate, because 'not arguing politics with righties is how "Gore invented the internet" and the "Dean scream" happened. So with all due respect? Oh *HELL* NO. Maybe only add where it's actually helpful and not snarky next time?

Thanks.

It's hopeless. Righties are simply too far gone. Not salvageable.

Easier to go after people more down the middle.

and when you smack 'em down, while THEY will NEVER cede, I agree, common friends will. So far, I have FLIPPED...I mean FLIPPED FROM RED TO BLUE a little more than a baker's dozen just by smacking righties.

And it's always a surprise who comes over.

The only way to stop them is to put the facts in front of them and keep on hitting them with it and do not stop until the facts are the only thing left

How did your cheering turned out last night?

...

could not HANDILY win a debate against the elderly, the gaffe prone Joe Biden, then it is clear he is unfot for office. ANY office.

I still say it now, too. I also posted about it, and I am very sorry you missed the point, but YOU DID INDEED. And that'd be okay were it not specifically characterized.

We need a smiley for "went right the fuck over your head"

You're only hopping we are that stupid!

ran a 2 hour mile in preparation?

You. REALLY. Don't. Get. It.? All I can say is, "wow"

vote for war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Did not know this.

or did the Iraq war get steamrolled after the "war on terror" authorization?

That's what the whole controversy's been about.

Legally, this country shouldn't be in Iraq or Afghanistan without a war resolution voted upon by a majority in both Houses of Congress. Bush as CIC put the military in those countries and essentially asked for repeated funding for nonspecific military action in both countries. It's still a war notwithstanding the semantics or lack thereof.

the big pharma gift Med D, and the huge tax cuts. None of those huge spending policies were funded. And they are STILL adding to our spending and the deficit even today.

and voted FOR the Iraq war under Sonny Bush

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Joe_Biden#Iraq

Congress passed a resolution authorizing unilateral military action in Iraq in Oct. 2002. Biden voted for it.

The October 2002 authorization for the use of military force in Iraq was universally understood to be... an authorization for the use of military force in Iraq! It was carte-blanche to invade, for a regime that made no pretense whatsoever about the fact that it was going to invade Iraq, no matter what, with or without allies, whatever the UN or the weapons inspectors said, no matter how big the protests would get. Everyone knew what was coming, and there are no excuses. Everyone knew what they were voting for -- including the 23 senators who voted AGAINST.

(Chafee, Sanders and 21 Democrats, including Paul Wellstone, I believe the only one of the group up for reelection, who died soon after in that plane crash.)

as he also voted against the Bush tax cuts.

that paid for the war by rolling back the taxes on the top1% that became very well known through Kerry's unfortunate shorthand that was misused by the Republicans to imply he was a flip flopper.

It's best to get the exact quote first.

apologies for the cite, I'll quote the important bit so you don't have to click through

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-insinuates-he-didnt-vote-afghanistan-iraq-wars_654253.html

snip

“By the way, they talk about this great recession like it fell out of the sky–like, ‘Oh my goodness, where did it come from?’” Biden said. “It came from this man voting to put two wars on a credit card, at the same time, put a prescription drug plan on the credit card, a trillion dollar tax cut for the very wealthy.”

“I was there, I voted against them,” Biden continued. “I said, no, we can’t afford that.”

Then Sen. Biden voted for the Afghanistan resolution on Sept. 14, 2001 which authorized “the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.”

And on Oct. 11, 2002, Biden voted for a resolution authorizing unilateral military action in Iraq, according to the Washington Post.

that's the RW spin.

However, IMO it can also be read reasonably as Biden saying he voted against "them" (Repubs). we can't afford "That" ( the prescription drug bill on top of everything else on the card) especially since those things are the closest nouns to refer back to.

anyway it's just the RWers trying to tease scandal out of a locked cage. Nothing will come out of it.

we have had three primary seasons where various Democrats' votes on Iraq have been thoroughly discussed. Joe Biden's votes are well known, and Obama nominated him and he has been VP for 4 years. It makes no actual sense to be talking about Biden's vote now, except for one thing: it helps draw attention away from a very good point Biden made about the cause of the deficit.

If some antiwar person wants to make some point out of Biden's vote now, I will listen, but if the freaking Weekly Standard does, oh hell no. The Weekly Standard isn't just a RW rag, it is a neocon rag that played a major role in getting us into Iraq.

"It makes no actual sense to be talking about Biden's vote now, except for one thing: it helps draw attention away from a very good point Biden made about the cause of the deficit."

That's exactly what they want by posting this.

to increase taxes or something, to pay for those things.

There's no doubt in my mind that Biden wouldn't outright lie. The conversation was that they were talking about MONEY...I think.

...they were acting on intelligence briefings that claimed Iraq had WMDs. Colin Powell also made a speech to the UN discussing those findings. It was only later that it was discovered Cheney had forced the CIA to falsify data indicating that Iraq had WMDs when in fact they did not.

The vast majority of Congress did not read the background information that went into the intelligence summary. The facts in the background information did not suppport the findings presented in the summary.

By voting for the Iraq resolution Biden believed he was doing the right thing at the time. He has subsequently backed away from that position.

It was easy to learn that the "intelligence briefings" were bullshit and that Powell was full of bullshit. It was all over the foreign press and, in fact, all over this web site. You're not going to persuade anyone that Biden didn't know things that everyone on DU knew.

TWENTY-THREE SENATORS VOTED AGAINST THE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE USE OF MILITARY FORCE IN IRAQ.

They knew better. They weren't making these lame-ass excuses that they couldn't tell the obvious lies of the Bush regime were lies.

Respect those who voted against the resolution. One of them probably paid with his life.

No excuses for those who enabled what eventually turned into a genocidal murder, wounding and displacement of millions of people.

This is the preeminent international crime of the last 12 years and there is no excuse.

So, perhaps what people should look for is legislation that Ryan voted for and Biden voted against that had to do with funding the wars. I think Biden was sneaky here because, without searching for specific related legislation, I would be willing to bet Biden voted against a budget, perhaps a discretionary budget since the wars were kept off the regular budget line.

Now, do we have another big smile in store for us as Biden proves that a vote for authorization for action against terrorism wasn't a vote for war since the only voting avenue for Iraq itself was budget authorizations?

As far as Medicare D goes, he did vote against it because it didn't go far enough. I don't know if he also objected because it wasn't funded. (To be squeaky clean on the debate, it would need to be about the credit card.)

Afghanistan doesn't make a lot of sense to me since I think the American people supported it.

that Kerry famously was for before he voted against the Bush backed version that added it to the credit card. Biden, in 2004, said on one of the talk shows that he voted for the Bush version after the Biden/Kerry version was rejected.

So - Biden did push to get it paid for, but when that was not possible he did not cast the protest vote that Kerry did that he explained constantly.

Anyone who was not tuned into the tax cut and SS trust fund debates should look at the following slides from a presentation from Senator Conrad:

President Bush Promised to Protect Social Security

Briefly, (I have a class and have to leave) it shows a relationship between Bush induced tax cuts and the Social Security trust fund levels. The text of the presentation can be found at:

[link:http://www.conrad.senate.gov/pressroom/record.cfm?id=276810|Senate Floor Statement on President Bush's FY 2005 Budget and Its Impact on Social Security
]

So, the entire thing about paying for things other than entitlements is very important. The Dems saw long ago what "starve the beast" looked like as it unfolded. Running up big bills (wars and most expensive drug plan possible) was part of the plan. Today many working class buy the poison where they didn't before the giant deficits.

it takes a classic troll form.

Please help.

I whooped him with the credit card part, because that WAS what Joe Biden said.

Thank you for your *CONCERN*

voting to authorize the use of military action and spending actions to fund those actions.

Biden did in fact vote for the Authorization for the Use of Military Force, Senate Jt Resolution 23 in 2001 which simply gave Bush Congressional authorization to proceed with military action. Further he voted for the Iraq War Resolution about a year later.

But in Congressional action on how to fund these two "wars", he was a staunch advocate for finding funding for these actions and against simply excluding them from the budget, i.e. putting them on the credit card.

There is a large difference between voting for military action and turning around and then not providing funding through tax increases, changes to the overall budget, etc. Bush simply excluded the war spending from the budget. It was as if the spending wasn't really happening.

Had I been Biden I would have voted for action in Afghanistan. We had just been attacked by terrorists that were being given sanctuary by the Taliban. We asked the Taliban to hand OBL and his henchmen over so as to avoid war but they refused. But I would have asked for a defined time line and clear objectives. This has now been the longest war in American history (if you exclude the dubious "war on drugs".

But I would have not voted for the war in Iraq. I think Biden should have been smart enough to see through the charade that the Bush people and that asshole Cheney were pushing. But he voted for that action as well.

Authorisation of Military Force in Afghanistan, 14 Sep 2001: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00281

Authorisation of Military Force in Iraq, 11 October 2002: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00237

There is a big difference. Biden voted for spending once Bush Jr had troops in harm's way, which is the correct thing to do.

You are getting more and more obvious.

I do not suffer bullies very well

Hillary Clinton, for example.

But only because they believed Bush and Powell's lies about WMDs.

Assholes. They were all for both wars.

He said he voted against putting them on 'the credit card' that is, off budget and unfunded...same for Part D.
Funny that you were unable to understand that simple statement on your own.

Last edited Sat Oct 13, 2012, 09:03 AM - Edit history (1)

But those who wanted to run for president needed to show they had big peckers.

War! War!

we just plan to pay for wars with petty cash! Although, Pres. O is making use of petty cash using drone strikes in Yemen and Pakistan, including the killing of a US citizen in Yemen.

Stop all war!

Peace, Love and Freedom.

he said:

“...they talk about this great recession like it fell out of the sky–like, ‘Oh my goodness, where did it come from?’” Biden said. “It came from this man voting to put two wars on a credit card, at the same time, put a prescription drug plan on the credit card, a trillion dollar tax cut for the very wealthy.”

Bush gave us item A, Biden voted for that, but then Bush gave us an unfunded B and C - Biden voted against them, he said, no, we can’t afford that.

Them = "a prescription drug plan on the credit card, a trillion dollar tax cut for the very wealthy"

Since that is a core tenet of their agenda.

Wheres the money going to come from for all the prison cells, once every woman who takes the pill is under arrest for murder?

Get back to me when you get an answer.

put another layer of tinfoil over your skull, the evil waves are getting through. Seriously, who is talking about putting people in jail for using contraceptives? I thought the argument was having government provide free contraceptives versus you have to buy them with your own money, unless your insurance covered it. Did I miss something?

I should say I support Planned Parenthood. Family planning is important and PP plays an important role to reduce unwanted children who's parent(s) cannot afford or not capable to raise a child. Margaret Sanger's work was ahead of her times.

Just think of the good that could be done if we only gave PP an additional $500M a year.

The proposal to declare by fiat every fertilized egg the constitutional equivalent of a "baby" and protected by the 14th Amendment?

You really ought to pay more attention. Of course they're not advertising this aspect of it, however, all the major anti-choice organizations in this country are uniformly opposed to the birth control pill, and the majority consider it "morally indistinguishable from abortion".

See, they believe, rightly or wrongly, that oral contraceptives can function as an abortifacent- i.e., can block the implantation of an already fertilized egg in the uterine wall.

As such, oral contraceptives are- MUST BE- considered instruments of "murder", as are IUDs, etc.

Oh, they'll also cover up the indisputable fact that they want to prosecute not just abortion doctors, but women who have abortions. So - if the pill is a murder weapon, and women who "murder" their fertilized eggs are fair game... do the math.

And why do you suppose it's not even so much Roe v. Wade, but Griswold v. Connecticut that has chafed their legal shorts all these years?

The goal is to outlaw contraception. Always has been. You vote Republican, that's what you're voting for.