Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Maher distorts Obama's Iraq war plans
factbeat.com — Maher implied that Obama wants to keep all US troops in Iraq.
jangophat80- 65 diggs
- digg it
- Gene04, on 03/10/2008, -1/+2Awww, I used to like Bill for his sadistic humor too :(.
- webcruiser, on 03/10/2008, -3/+4The title of the article actually is "Maher distorts Obama, Clinton Iraq War Plan" We democrats need to stop the biased editing. It serves no purpose and distorts the truth just like Maher did. I am going to digg the article because a lot of people watch Maher and take him at his word.
- chicofaraby, on 03/11/2008, -0/+7Well, hasn't Obama voted to fund the war crimes in Iraq every time it came up? Well?
- @nival, on 03/11/2008, -3/+1the reasoning he used is that if you know that the president won't end the war any time soon, do you let the soldiers pay for it by denying them equipment? Bush would keep the troops in Iraq even if they had to eat rats and beat insurgents with clubs, one thing is being against the war and other is to be against the troops. I despise the war but I wouldn't want the soldiers to get screwed over (even more). Is hard to take a position where you are against the war but support the troops at the same time, at the end, they also have families they are hoping to see soon. I really hope bush is brought to justice sooner or later.
- chicofaraby, on 03/11/2008, -0/+4weak sauce
Obama had the chance to vote against Bush's illegal war. He didn't do it. - V3n0M, on 03/11/2008, -0/+2If you ran a bakery with money you were borrowing from your folks, and they stopped giving you money for dough - you'd close the bakery.
- chicofaraby, on 03/11/2008, -0/+4weak sauce
- @nival, on 03/11/2008, -3/+1the reasoning he used is that if you know that the president won't end the war any time soon, do you let the soldiers pay for it by denying them equipment? Bush would keep the troops in Iraq even if they had to eat rats and beat insurgents with clubs, one thing is being against the war and other is to be against the troops. I despise the war but I wouldn't want the soldiers to get screwed over (even more). Is hard to take a position where you are against the war but support the troops at the same time, at the end, they also have families they are hoping to see soon. I really hope bush is brought to justice sooner or later.
- cashman57, on 03/11/2008, -0/+5It is pretty simple. Obama on the campaign says he has always been against the use of force in Iraq but when the time came for him to stand up and be a man of his word he instead joined the Republicans in a rare 100-0 vote to fund the use of force in Iraq.If the vote had been 99-1 with Obama dissenting he would have credibility on the topic but as it is today we see that a little political pressure caused him to cave.
We don't need a weak president who doesn't honor his campaign promise. - fromage81, on 03/11/2008, -0/+0You all are right. Obama has said many times in the past that he was against withdrawing from Iraq too hastily. but he did eventually change his mind and introduced legislation to withdraw US troops from Iraq.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ... - brjohnson789, on 03/11/2008, -0/+4Obama would "have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. ... He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats." This is from Obama's own website. Does anyone NOT see a big contradiction here? I mean, try to name the number of political leaders that when faced with an armed conflict decided to slowly withdraw instead of sticking it out. When a politician MAKES IT PUBLIC that he has some wiggle room to continue the conflict, you can guarantee that the conflict WILL continue.
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by