Joe Biden Calls Bush Comments 'Bull****'

[Brad89]

The concept is called "initials". I occasionally call Senator Clinton "HRC" and President Bush "GWB"... Not sure why you have a problem with it. He is a convert to Christianity from Islam... What does it matter?

Why not talk about this in Israel? There aren't people in the Israeli Government who have suggested direct talks with Hamas, Hezbollah, and/or Iran?

Thanks for enlightening me, I had never heard of that concept. The problem I have with it is that USUALLY people who use it do so in order to highlight Hussein. If that wasn't your intent, fine.

And it's like Bang said, Bush made us appear divided on a global scale. If you can find the silver lining to that cloud, please show it to me.

I just can't wait for the election to be over with. I really hope whoever wins, whether it's Obama, McCain, or Clinton, that they can unite us.

[PeterMP]

Was Nixon an appeaser for going there?

Yes.

The question is what did he get out of his appeasing. In this case, he helped eliminate any chance that the Soviet and Chinese regimes would cooperate.

And to concede to the point that Mathews was making in the other video it was more than just visiting there:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972_Nixon_visit_to_China#The_U.S._at_the_People.27s_Republic_of_China

"At the conclusion of his trip, the United States and the PRC Governments issued the Shanghai Communiqué, a statement of their foreign policy views and a document that was to prove to remain the basis of Sino-American bilateral relations for many years. In the communiqué, both nations pledged to work toward the full normalization of diplomatic relations. The U.S. acknowledged the notion that all Chinese on both sides of the Taiwan Strait maintain that there is only one China and that Taiwan is part of China. Nixon and the U.S. government reaffirmed their interests in a peaceful settlement of the Taiwan question agreed by the Chinese themselves."

We gave them a guarantee that we wouldn't help/encourage a decleration of independence from Taiwan.

[Smoot Point Really]

Thanks for enlightening me, I had never heard of that concept. The problem I have with it is that USUALLY people who use it do so in order to highlight Hussein. If that wasn't your intent, fine.

And it's like Bang said, Bush made us appear divided on a global scale. If you can find the silver lining to that cloud, please show it to me.

I just can't wait for the election to be over with. I really hope whoever wins, whether it's Obama, McCain, or Clinton, that they can unite us.

Quick note: If you look at the ticker at the bottom of CNN, MSNBC, Fox, etc... They often use the candidates initials. You might be able to say that one of them has an agenda, but hardly all three could have the same agenda.

This is really a losing case for Democrats... They inserted themselves into this debate when they should've:

1) Assumed the President wasn't talking about them and then they could've framed their own views and the differences between their thinking and what others who might be construed as appeasers believe.

2) Showed support for the President and agreed that there are conditions that do need to be met, but we'd like to communicate those conditions more directly.

3) Gone back to the economic debate...

They have identified themselves with these appeasers simply because they took offense. This was a mistake and a debate they will lose the more they fight.

[NavyDave]

Biden the liberal guy who blocks any legislation that involves drilling, exploration, then blames the GOP for oil prices and refuses to point out anything positive the past 8 years??

He's an appeaser as well who doesn't want the facts to come out til after the elecetion.

[Kilmer17]

Not reading the whole thread.

But did Biden say anything when Dem leaders, ex Presidents, etc went to foreign countries and bashed Bush policies?

Hypocrisy, thy name is Liberal.

Im glad Bush is doing this. What does he have to lose? He should be on TV everyday talking about how bad the left has effed our country up over the last 2 years and what disasters they will bring if they get more control this fall.

[NavyDave]

Actually, I'll change my mind. Bush is a genius. Who else could take the Democrats when they are feeling disorganized, discouraged, and dis-united and bring them all together? Bush may yet heal the democratic party. Maybe he is right after all? Maybe he is a uniter and not a divider.

Yeah unite the appeasers to lie about what they have said and is on their websites.

Because NEO-Cons (code for Israel Supporters) are making the USA look bad in the eye of our Far left and Socialist friends around the world whose opinions are more important than our National Interests.

[NoCalMike]

So let me get this straight Mr. Bush...we don't "negotiate with terrorists/terrorist sympathizers" but we use tax payer money to pay off sunni militias and then claim "the surge is working" Ok I got it, so in summary

Negotiations - BAD

Payoffs - GOOD

[NavyDave]

What is scary is that even Hillary Clinton is/was smart enough to not follow appeasement line, knowing it would be the perfect propoganda to fuel Iran's dictator whose people see him as being isolated and bringing their nation down.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Not reading the whole thread.

But did Biden say anything when Dem leaders, ex Presidents, etc went to foreign countries and bashed Bush policies?

Hypocrisy, thy name is Liberal.

Im glad Bush is doing this. What does he have to lose? He should be on TV everyday talking about how bad the left has effed our country up over the last 2 years and what disasters they will bring if they get more control this fall.

who are we talking about?

[Burgold]

Not reading the whole thread.

But did Biden say anything when Dem leaders, ex Presidents, etc went to foreign countries and bashed Bush policies?

Hypocrisy, thy name is Liberal.

I think this is fair. I thought Carter, for example, made a horrible choice recently in going against U.S. policy. His cavalier decision and presumption was wrong headed. The idea of Talks wasn't necessarily wrong, but it was wrong to go in defiance of U.S. policy.

[Kilmer17]

who are we talking about?

Pelosi and Carter were top of my list. But there have been plenty of examples of Dems over the last 8 years going to foreign countries with their own agenda. And the likes of Biden didnt call their actions Bull****.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

I think this is fair. I thought Carter, for example, made a horrible choice recently in going against U.S. policy. His cavalier decision and presumption was wrong headed. The idea of Talks wasn't necessarily wrong, but it was wrong to go in defiance of U.S. policy.

I agree if we are talking about Carter, Carter made a mistake. A LOT of democrats said he made a mistake. I don't recall what Biden said if anything, off-hand, but Biden and Carter are not viewed similarly within the democratic party. In fact, Biden almost ran against the incumbent Carter in 1980 as a different kind of democrat.

I agree that Carter made a bad decision, but you can't link Biden to Carter is my point though.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Pelosi and Carter were top of my list. But there have been plenty of examples of Dems over the last 8 years going to foreign countries with their own agenda. And the likes of Biden didnt call their actions Bull****.

Well, here's what Obama said about Carter going to Hamas:

PITTSBURGH, Pennsylvania (CNN) — Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama told reporters that it was a “bad idea” for former President Jimmy Carter to meet with exiled militant Hamas leader Khalid Meshaal “without [Hamas] having recognized Israel or renounced terrorism or acknowledged previous agreements.”

“What we're seeing now is that even as President Carter suggests there is a breakthrough, you had some of the same old rhetoric coming out of Hamas representatives with regard to Israel,” Obama said during a stop at a Pittsburgh diner, referencing a statement made Monday by Meshaal that Hamas would not in fact recognize Israel.

“If we are clear about improving the day-to-day lives of Palestinians,” Obama said, “Then I think that will do more than anything to encourage Hamas to renounce violence, rather than simply sitting down with them.”

Pelosi did not meet with ANY TERRORIST organizations when she went abroad, which is a HUGE difference. She is the speaker of the house though, and as such she actually has a duty to be involved in foreign policy. Also, while there, she did not criticize anyone like Bush did. Not even close.

[#98QBKiller]

Wow I didn't anticipate so much Repub crying when I started this thread, let me offer some of you:

_____________________________________________

[81artmonk]

Gee, isn't this the pot calling the kettle black!!!! Rich, just Rich!!!

[WVUforREDSKINS]

What is scary is that even Hillary Clinton is/was smart enough to not follow appeasement line, knowing it would be the perfect propoganda to fuel Iran's dictator whose people see him as being isolated and bringing their nation down.

There is that coservative foreign policy knowledge showing up agian.

Iran doesn't have a dictator. Iran is a theocracy. The supreme leader (Ayatollah Khameni) chooses who will be able to run for the presidency and and then the people vote. It is limited because only the supreme leader (not sure if he is elected or not) can pick who runs the country.

Ayatollah khameni is the man behind the curtains in Iran.

That was an unfair shot just like this thread has become.

[NavyDave]

Bottom line The Democrats making the loudest noise are willing to embrace the idea of appeasement.

[TimmySmith]

I certainly think it is a step in the right direction for Obama, Biden and Pelosi to freely admit that they are in the same camp as the president about terrorism.

[NavyDave]

I certainly think it is a step in the right direction for Obama, Biden and Pelosi to freely admit that they are in the same camp as the president about terrorism.

Hmm so there will be preconditions now if Obama is to meet the Iranian leader?

Pelosi going to Syria was seen as undermining President Bush's policies

[Predicto]

Well, it is clear to me that "appeasement" is going to be the magic word in conservative talk show circles for a while. Kevin James sure picked up on it. :laugh:

I wonder if it will last to the election.

[twa]

I certainly think it is a step in the right direction for Obama, Biden and Pelosi to freely admit that they are in the same camp as the president about terrorism.

Yep, glad to see them embrace it.

Still ain't figured out why Obama (rather than McCain) felt specified.

TSF...you got any ideas on that?

Of course Biden in this case shows himself as someone of no control if he flies off the handle like that over unconfirmed rumors from reporters as well.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Yep, glad to see them embrace it.

Still ain't figured out why Obama (rather than McCain) felt specified.

TSF...you got any ideas on that?

Of course Biden in this case shows himself as someone of no control if he flies off the handle like that over unconfirmed rumors from reporters as well.

nice call out...

once again, someone who hasn't heard or read the entire quote from Biden.

I don't really know why McCain didn't think it was about him though considering he said we should sit down and talk with Hamas because of the "reality" of the situation.

Keep calling people names though, very effective.

[twa]

nice call out...

once again, someone who hasn't heard or read the entire quote from Biden.

Keep calling people names though, very effective.

Call out?...Calling names?

Weren't you the one that posted McCain's theory of negotiating with Hamas?

It would seem just as reasonable to assume Bush was referring to him as well.

As far as Biden...from your post

Ok, first off, if anyone actually heard the clip, or Biden say it, they would know that it was a question from a reporter in an elevator, who at the time told him what bush said:

His reaction was "that's bull****. that's mularkey..... if that's really true, that is a disgrace."

You think a Congressman should speculate like that from simply a reporters info?

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Call out?...Calling names?

Weren't you the one that posted McCain's theory of negotiating with Hamas?

It would seem just as reasonable to assume Bush was referring to him as well.

As far as Biden...from your post

Ok, first off, if anyone actually heard the clip, or Biden say it, they would know that it was a question from a reporter in an elevator, who at the time told him what bush said:

His reaction was "that's bull****. that's mularkey..... if that's really true, that is a disgrace."

You think a Congressman should speculate like that from simply a reporters info?

yes, well that's my point... McCain did say we should negotiate with Hamas: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09ATuxuebh0 tell me how video takes him out of context.

second of all, as to biden, I don't see how saying "if that's really true," is speculating. I dont really get your point at all though.

how do you like that, TWA (is that a call out or not)?

[Bang]

I apologize for the backhanded shot. I think we've all exchanged them here and it will only get worse leading up to the election.

I disagree that the holocaust denier in Iran is gaining credence or being strengthened just because some "useful idiots" want to try to reason with him without first requiring him to meet certain preconditions. Maybe we can send Sean Penn over there as our ambassador.

Whether it actually gives them credence in the world's eye is debatable, but it sure gives it to them in their own mind.

I also want to be clear, I view the regime in Iran as an enemy,, not the Iranian people. It is my belief that Iran can be resolved without violence, and from within their own structure.

~Bang