Liar,liar.all dems fell for obamas lying ass

[KazDog]

Oh and.....Happy Thanksgiving

KAZ

[Jamaicanman]

Hey TOOL.....Your buddy Bush is who STARTED THE WAR IN IRAQ. Congress had to vote to approve. Of course they approved it, if you didnt vote for it at the time, you'd be labeled unpatriotic. Sheesh!

KAZ

So according to this logic, since the war is now unpopular, Congress would be called patriotic in they vote against?

[flarendep1]

So according to this logic, since the war is now unpopular, Congress would be called patriotic in they vote against?

JM,

Dems dont use logic.

[Jamaicanman]

Hey TOOL.....Your buddy Bush is who STARTED THE WAR IN IRAQ. Congress had to vote to approve. Of course they approved it, if you didnt vote for it at the time, you'd be labeled unpatriotic. Sheesh!

KAZ

Question bumped for Kaz since he is online.

So according to this logic, since the war is now unpopular, Congress would be called patriotic in they vote against?

[KazDog]

Question bumped for Kaz since he is online.

So according to this logic, since the war is now unpopular, Congress would be called patriotic in they vote against?

I don't understand your wording or your question and what it relates to. You mean if they voted against it??? And which congress, current or past?

[Jamaicanman]

I don't understand your wording or your question and what it relates to. You mean if they voted against it??? And which congress, current or past?

In some past posts, you had posted that the reason Congress had to vote for the war initially was because "they had to vote for it or they would be labeled unpatriotic". My question is, now that the war is MUCH more unpopular then it was initially, do you think that Congress would be labeled unpatriotic in they voted against it?

[KazDog]

In some past posts, you had posted that the reason Congress had to vote for the war initially was because "they had to vote for it or they would be labeled unpatriotic". My question is, now that the war is MUCH more unpopular then it was initially, do you think that Congress would be labeled unpatriotic in they voted against it?

Good question. Not sure. I doubt it. But hind sight is 20/20. No one knew at the time what the outcome was going to be. The backlash they would have received would have been initially. Many times, some members in Congress, not all members, will vote to show support for the president in situations like that. I think a lot of members at the time voted in favor as a show of support even though they had serious reservations. That's my opinion.

I guess I'm not sure what you're insinuating though...

KAZ

[Jamaicanman]

Good question. Not sure. I doubt it. But hind sight is 20/20. No one knew at the time what the outcome was going to be. The backlash they would have received would have been initially. Many times, some members in Congress, not all members, will vote to show support for the president in situations like that. I think a lot of members at the time voted in favor as a show of support even though they had serious reservations. That's my opinion.

I guess I'm not sure what you're insinuating though...

KAZ

No insinuating. I agree about the past Congress voting the way they did. I am sure many who were on the fence didn't want to be perceived as weak or going against the grain, plus you had a "go get em, kill em" mind set in the country. There was not too much thought imo about the lives, financial costs, etc.

But now the war is more unpopular, costs are being considered (wasn't on stimulus scam, but another topic) and I think many are at a point of fatigue and frustration. So my question, as originally posted, is do you think Congress would be viewed as unpatriotic if they voted against the war now after 8 plus years? Will there be enough votes, if any, against in your opinion?

[KazDog]

No insinuating. I agree about the past Congress voting the way they did. I am sure many who were on the fence didn't want to be perceived as weak or going against the grain, plus you had a "go get em, kill em" mind set in the country. There was not too much thought imo about the lives, financial costs, etc.

But now the war is more unpopular, costs are being considered (wasn't on stimulus scam, but another topic) and I think many are at a point of fatigue and frustration. So my question, as originally posted, is do you think Congress would be viewed as unpatriotic if they voted against the war now after 8 plus years? Will there be enough votes, if any, against in your opinion?

I guess your question is a little vague. Are you asking if they were to vote for the same war now, would they be considered unpatriotic?

Or, if they vote to send more troops into the current two wars we are fighting???

I'll answer both. If they had hind sight then no they wouldn't be considered unpatriotic. We all know these people vote with their constituents in mind or at least public opinion. Since public opinion is so against the war at this point, then I would have to say that they wouldn't be considered unpatriotic. At the time, people were up in arms about 911. Congressmen voting against the war would have been drilled and were still drilled even though they voted yes from what I remember.

Voting for the current wars or more troops into the current wars? I would say no. I think the general populous wants the troops out. The war in Iraq has become a debacle. Voting against it now that it's so unpopular wouldn't be considered unpatriotic. Again, I think 911 had to do a lot with congress voting for or against going to war. There isn't that same patriotic climate in the nation that there was then. If anything, people are sick of the government and its handling of a variety of issues.

Hope that answers it for you....

KAZ

[Jamaicanman]

I guess your question is a little vague. Are you asking if they were to vote for the same war now, would they be considered unpatriotic?

Or, if they vote to send more troops into the current two wars we are fighting???

I'll answer both. If they had hind sight then no they wouldn't be considered unpatriotic. We all know these people vote with their constituents in mind or at least public opinion. Since public opinion is so against the war at this point, then I would have to say that they wouldn't be considered unpatriotic. At the time, people were up in arms about 911. Congressmen voting against the war would have been drilled and were still drilled even though they voted yes from what I remember.

Voting for the current wars or more troops into the current wars? I would say no. I think the general populous wants the troops out. The war in Iraq has become a debacle. Voting against it now that it's so unpopular wouldn't be considered unpatriotic. Again, I think 911 had to do a lot with congress voting for or against going to war. There isn't that same patriotic climate in the nation that there was then. If anything, people are sick of the government and its handling of a variety of issues.

Hope that answers it for you....

KAZ

It does, and it was your 2nd answer I was looking for since I am talking about the upcoming vote to escalate the troop levels. I wonder what the final vote count will be going into a mid term election in 2010.

[KazDog]

It does, and it was your 2nd answer I was looking for since I am talking about the upcoming vote to escalate the troop levels. I wonder what the final vote count will be going into a mid term election in 2010.

I think they approve it. Just like they approved going to war when Bush went to Congress. However it would not surprise me if some Liberals vote against it. I doubt the Conservatives vote against it. Going to war and sending more troops are two different issues IMO though. With Bush claiming weapons of mass destruction and the need to stop Saddam and the Taliban, I think he was able to win the vote. I think Liberals know they need to show support for Obama or they will lose the confidence of the populous. That wouldn't bode well heading into the next election.

But He's asking for more in Afghanistan and not Iraq. His stance was long ago that pull out of Iraq and concentrate on fighting to get out of Afghanistan. I still think we'll see a pullout of Iraq in the next year or two. Afghanistan, that's a whole different animal. That place is a mess.

KAZ

[Spark]

Do you think this decision is Obama's only? Is not the leader of our soldiers telling us that we need more men and that we can win this war? And isn't congress and senators both Republicans and Democrats voting to increase the troops? If so then you can't blame it on Obama.

Then Monte I think that every senator and congressmen that voted to send more troops has to send at least one blood family member over there ... a son, brother, uncle, etc ...

[wayne1218]

Then Monte I think that every senator and congressmen that voted to send more troops has to send at least one blood family member over there ... a son, brother, uncle, etc ...

Damn Joe, that is brilliant. I wonder how much it would change the decision making in Washington?

[Jamaicanman]

Then Monte I think that every senator and congressmen that voted to send more troops has to send at least one blood family member over there ... a son, brother, uncle, etc ...

Like every one who votes for healthcare bill should be forced to be on it.

[grandmama]

Like every one who votes for healthcare bill should be forced to be on it.

not the same