StrangeSox

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 11:18 AM) I just want to know what war Ryan thought wasnt part of the US national interest. Because he kept adamantly stating that he wouldnt do it, so I just wonder what historical war he was referencing. Somalia or other humanitarian causes were the context for that one.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 11:18 AM) No, my original post was that Obama kept wars going that Bush started WELL into his term. You love playing pretend with your facts. Enjoy that. I didn't comment on Afghanistan because Obama campaigned on increasing that war. Obama "kept" Iraq going by following the scheduled end of the war that all sides agreed to. Saying that he continued the war without noting that he was following the SOF agreement with Iraq for the scheduled end of combat operations and the draw down of troops removes a lot of context. But note that Biden's point was in relation to the deficit and paying for those wars. Bush's budgets pretended that those wars didn't exist and therefore they weren't accounted for in the budget and they certainly weren't paid for and Ryan went right along with that. That comment was centered on supposed budget-hawk Ryan only finding his budget-hawkery in January 2009 after being the budget leader under Bush.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 11:17 AM) Yes, a small contingent of only 10,000 troops. Regardless of your spin, which is exactly what you'er doing now, it's still an extension. And the only reason he couldn't? Bush. Actually because of the Iraqis.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 11:16 AM) He should also get credit for wanting to extend that war, which he did. Bush, however, gets credit for forcing Obama's hand not allowing it. So, how about we credit both, as we should? Instead of cherry picking facts that support your arguments? What, like your original post that strips away all of the context?

With a small contingent of troops well after combat operations had ended in the country.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 11:12 AM) You mean the deal made and signed by GW Bush. Obama ended the war over 2 years into her own term, BECAUSE of a signed pact by President Bush (fact). Obama asked them (Iraq) if we could leave troops there AFTER that deadline. Read the HuffPost article. Yes, that deal. He followed the plan that was agreed to by both sides to end the war. So, when I said he ended the war, I was stating a (fact). As the article you linked said, Obama's election allowed the Iraqis to push Bush for more concessions in late 2008.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 11:10 AM) And Obama was elected when? You're not very good with math, are you. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/26/o..._n_1032507.html Obama ended the Iraq war as was scheduled and planned and agreed to by both Iraqis and the US.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 11:06 AM) You cant really compare a war that Obama inherited. The right comparison would be between Bush/Iraq and Obama/Libya. That comparison doesn't make sense. We didn't invade Libya with ground forces and then set up shop there.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 11:07 AM) Sure he did, he just recently pulled back on it. And then extended the other one. What you just said, however, is an absolute lie. The Iraq War ended in December of last year as scheduled after a planned draw-down. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nation...yX1O_story.html

Obama did not continue the Iraq war.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 11:01 AM) Thank you, Biden...this is exactly the sort of thing that Joe can say that is more difficult for Barack....and what needed to be said. Biden performed a role similar to what Clinton did at the convention.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 10:53 AM) More fuel! http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/raddat...rch_654296.html A foreign policy journalist attended functions at the White House and the VP's house! BIAS!

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 10:41 AM) And really, even if the pomp and circumstance is bulls***, it's still not a smart thing to do because the majority of the country votes on who they like more, not what they actually stand for. So it was dumb of Biden to act like that, and it's being shown in the debate polls that he wasn't very relate-able/like-able. Opinions on that differ: http://themonkeycage.org/blog/2012/10/12/t...who-watched-it/ The media drives how the debates are seen in retrospect pretty significantly. The most notable case of this was one of the Bush-Gore debates where Gore had a comfortable win in the immediate post-debate polls, but after the media obsessed on his mannerisms (the sigh) for days, well, it turns out people thought Bush did better.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 10:39 AM) I love how thisis only the case when it's a democat being the asshole. Bush bringing his "texas gunslinger" style = terrible. Biden being a condescending, disrespectful career politician = no more fake decorum bulls***! Bush's style was dumb and funny but I don't care if it was "rude" to Kerry or not

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 10:32 AM) http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/20...nghazi_security And your line about Dems/Repubs looking different is bulls***. Biden could have been aggressive but respectful and it would have been fine. Instead he was smirking, smiling, laughing, throwing his hands in the air, i.e. being an asshole. This is a near universal criticism of his performance last night. There is no reason to be respectful of someone who is lying to your face. As I said with that Australian PM video I posted yesterday, we need less of this fake decorum bulls***, not more.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 10:27 AM) <!--quoteo(post=2715404:date=Oct 12, 2012 -> 10:25 AM:name=bmags)-->QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 10:25 AM) <!--quotec-->Sure you did. Because he did. Is there a difference between Al Gore saying one dumb thing and the reaction of the entire media as BS was talking about? It was overwhelmingly and quickly accepted that Obama performed poorly and was disengaged or uninspired or whatever other adjective you want to toss out there.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 10:18 AM) When Obama had an uninspiring performance everyone on the left skewers him including the entire MSNBC panel. When Ryan gives an uninspiring performance everyone on the right points fingers and makes excuses. Laughable. #hackgap

interesting statistic: ryan lied more than 82 times; Raddatz lead with a damaging question for Biden; relied on right-wing framing for unemployment rate (quoting the 6% number from the February 2009 report that didn't have accurate data for how bad the collapse was in the previous months); relied on right-wing framing when she said "medicare and social security are going broke;" and the one social-issues question was framed around religion. No mention of gay rights or immigration.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 09:07 AM) while Biden was allowed to get away with some just 100% false statements, especially regarding the embassy attack and the administration never knowing that he was requesting more security. btw I don't think that's completely accurate. link?

Ryan please provide specifics on your tax plan "we will be bipartisans and work with congress!" so no specifics then

I'm still surprised they'd go with "tragic car accident" in a debate with Biden.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 09:07 AM) She had them talk more about Afghanistan's economy than our own. I get that she's a foreign policy expert, so that's going to be the majority of her base of questions, but that was such a secondary topic. Other than that I thought she did a pretty good job with the specific questions. She did seem to follow up with Ryan a little more, pressing him for more concrete answers, while Biden was allowed to get away with some just 100% false statements, especially regarding the embassy attack and the administration never knowing that he was requesting more security. That's something she knows and she should called him on it. But whatever, she was fine. CNN's coverage btw was fairly pro-Ryan. Most of their panel save the one black democrat (who proudly pronounced his affiliation.....nice neutral political pundit on a roundtable) argued that on points it was probably a draw or a slight edge to Biden, but everyone agreed Biden came off like a jerk with the smiling and interrupting. But as I said last night, I think both sides got what they wanted - Biden calmed his base down, Ryan held his own and looked very competent. Win/Win. the media narrative on an aggressive democrat is going to be that he's a bully or a jerk, whereas an aggressive republican is bold and assertive.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 09:08 AM) the polls coming out show a Ryan with a close win in the debate. CNN put a little pro-Democrat spin on the numbers, but that can be expected. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/...an-48-biden-44/ Among supposedly 'undecideds' biden crushed it:

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 09:02 AM) he's a valued entertainer, media personality, and has a successful political commentary show. his formula is very simple, like much of FOX news; allinsist always and strongly, for decades, that your competitors are pro-Democrat, you are pro-Republican. No real competition for your viewers.

In response to Biden criticizing Romney's "Let Detriot Go Bankrupt" article, Ryan responded: RYAN: Mitt Romney’s a car guy. They keep misquoting him, but let me tell you about the Mitt Romney I know. This is a guy who I was talking to a family in Northborough, Massachusetts the other day, Sheryl and Mark Nixon. Their kids were hit in a car crash, four of them. Two of them, Rob and Reed, were paralyzed. [anecdote about noblesse oblige and paying for their college education] That's a pretty incredible non-sequitor.