As opposed to Cheney, who was so 'right' on all his foreign policy assumptions, for example "They (the Iraqi's) will welcome us in the streets as liberators?
As opposed to Cheney who was so 'right on all his domestic policy assumptions, for example "Ronald Reagan proved that deficits don't matter'?
As opposed to Cheney who said to a Senator who disagreed with him about the Iraq War " You!" on the floor of the Senate Office building? And who, when asked about his use of that expression in public later explained "Well, it made me feel better".
Do you mean as opposed to the last REPUBLICAN vice-president?
No, I mean as opposed to Ryan...the current Republican candidate for Vice President.
Cheney kicked ass, though.
, he not only kicked ass, he shot it in the face!!!
The only thing you know or care about Paul Ryan is that there is an R next to his name.
That's not true but, you can believe what you like.
No, he shot a lawyer in the face.
By default she would be better than Biden.
Obama can't dump Biden for Hillary. Hillary wouldn't accept. None of the center-left Democrats close to Clinton would accept because they want Obama to lose. He could pick someone like Boxer or Hickenlooper but I don't think it would really give him a boost.
Not in Iraq, we didn't.... and it wasn't Cons utionally declared either....
Oh yes, that's right...his friend the lawyer.
What a terrific history the Republican Party has of selecting wondrous, truly wondrous vice-Presidents.
Oh, wait...Cheney picked himself!!
To late to change the ticket now. That would show weakness and be a disaster. I think if he would have switched in Hillary at an earlier point he would have won re-election in a landslide, as she is very popular right now, but that ship has sailed.
As it stands, Biden is not a liability. The "put ya'll back in chains" comment will play with the Fox News audience, but no one else will even know it occurred. Biden has been largely invisible for the last 4 years, and his only moment of importance will come at the VP debate, which should actually be interesting this time around, unlike the handicap match he had with Palin.
Try reading the Authorization for Military Force in Iraq sometime.
There are a long list of causes and it was passed by large bi-partisan margin in both houses of Congress (making it cons utional).
Carry on.
Republicans who don't accept the War in Iraq for the abortion it was
It's not too late but, I think Hillary would rather gouge her own eyes out than run on a ticket with Obama.
Oh, he's a liability.
Virginians know it occurred and, more importantly, Biden was taken to the wood shed, over his "They gonna put y'all back in chains" remark (during which he tried to effect a black southern accent a' la Hillary Clinton), by the one and only African-American Governor the State has ever had.
Former Democrat Governor Douglas Wilder had this to say:
Keep telling yourself he's invisible and unimportant; the mother er is a gaffe-o-matic. I hope he gets his ass reamed by Ryan at the debate.“Well, first of all it is divisive and certainly uncalled for,” Wilder said. “I don’t think the Obama administration needs that at this time. And, as you know, I have not been the most strong supporter of Joe Biden. And yet, we all know he’s gaffe-prone. But when you make a statement that says ‘They are going to put y’all back in chains,’ which means ‘I’m OK — not going to happen to me.’”
Wilder suggested that at some point, the Obama campaign and his apologists have to question just how much more of Biden’s gaffe they can withstand before it interferes with Obama’s mission.
“We’ll work through it, but ‘y’all’ would be in chains,” Wilder continued. “Slavery is nothing to joke about. And the history of this nation’s involvement with slavery is nothing to pass off in a joke. And so let’s give him the benefit of the doubt by saying, ‘Well, he didn’t mean all of it,’ and his apologists are already out there saying it. But you can’t continue to make gaffe after gaffe after gaffe and believe that it’s going to be supportive of what you and the president are trying to do.”
Cavuto suggested this could be an indication that Biden would be replaced with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. But Wilder doubted that would happen. He said the more important point was not to divide the country.
“[S]o the more important thing is don’t divide the country,” Wilder said. “We are not African Americans. We are Americans. We are not subjects that, who finally understand what the cir stances are. People will measure up and that’s why you need to reach out and talk to people as adults. Speak to them as equals — not ‘they’ are going to put ‘y’all’ back in chains. So that means you are separating yourself from y’all.”
Wrong.... Congress didn't vote to declare war, they voted to authorize Dubya to use military force at his discretion, which is uncons utional..... the only people who have the power to declare war is Congress, not the executive branch....
Of course, these are wasted words, as I'm arguing with the world's biggest Team Red homer, Mr. "Sarah Palin is a great American"..... if Congress pulled that now with Iraq and let Obama call the shots, though, you would be up in arms....
damn so chumpdumper reallly is hemann82?
Take it up with the Supreme Court.
I don't think this Congress is that stupid.
He is?
I mean...I am?
I thought I was Blake or CuckingFunt. This list is getting long.
Take it up with the Founders, who expressly delegated warmaking powers to Congress in the War Powers Clause....
Congress could have also issued letters of marque and reprisal first instead of rushing into a protracted war, but that wasn't even tried....
FYI, I'm also considered your understudy by some people since we both make fun of Alex Jones.
Should be pretty easy when Paul Ryan simply explains it's Obama's $716 billion in cuts and a 13-member, unelected Death Panel that's going to throw Granny from the cliff, not the Romney/Ryan plan to leave Medicare alone for those 55 and older.
Democrats are starting to realize they're losing the Mediscare argument.
The Democrats’ Growing Medicare Dilemma
I hear he's good with people -- unlike Slow Joe Biden.In the last few days, the Romney campaign has moved to dramatically change the terrain of Medicare politics, and it looks like the Democrats are beginning to realize how vulnerable they might be. Because of Obamacare, it is the Democrats who now plan to cut current seniors’ benefits (especially those in Medicare Advantage) and access to care (thanks to the IPAB) while still failing to avert the program’s (and the nation’s) fiscal collapse, and because Romney would repeal Obamacare and pursue a version of the Ryan-Wyden premium-support reform it is the Republicans who would protect current seniors’ benefits and make them available to future seniors while saving the program from collapse through market reforms. Through the candidates’ statements this week and through this new ad, Romney and Ryan have made clear they’re going to inform voters about this and force the Democrats to defend themselves on Medicare.
That won’t be easy for the Left, since the Romney campaign’s charges are true, and it is beginning to become apparent that the Democrats are totally unprepared for the coming fight. Their defenses so far fall into roughly three categories: Ryan did it too, the Obamacare Medicare cuts aren’t very serious, and finally what can only be called frantic distractions. Even as pure demagoguery (let alone as efforts at actual substantive arguments) all three are exceptionally weak defenses, and suggest the Democrats could be in serious trouble. Let’s examine each one.
The “Ryan did it too” defense is perhaps the most amusing of the three, as it succeeds in being simultaneously untrue, irrelevant, and an admission of the basic charge against the Democrats. Even as they call Paul Ryan a cruel and merciless budget cutter who cares not for the weather service and would gladly see children exposed to E. coli, the Democrats justify their taking $710 billion out of Medicare and spending it on Obamacare over the next decade by pointing out that Paul Ryan didn’t put that money back into Medicare in his budget. So if he had, would that have made their cuts unjustifiable? Well it so happens that he did. By repealing all of Obamacare’s spending, the Republican budget does not spend the money Obamacare took out of Medicare and thus those funds are used to extend the Medicare trust fund. And this point is hardly hidden in the Ryan budget. The budget do ent spells it out in its spending tables and also explains it in its narrative section, noting on page 54 that:
This budget ends the raid on the Medicare trust fund that began with passage of the new health care law last year. It ensures that any potential savings in current law would go to shore up Medicare, not to pay for new en lements. In addition to repealing the health care law’s new rationing board and its unfunded long-term care en lement, this budget stabilizes plan choices for current seniors.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
