• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Romney: "Very Disappointing" For Obama to Politicize Bin Laden

Res Cogitans

Res Cogitans

Active member
Joined
Mar 24, 2012
Messages
268
Reaction score
83
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Romney: "Very Disappointing" For Obama To Politicize Bin Laden Death | RealClearPolitics

I'm kinda with Romney on this one--at least that it shouldn't be a matter of pretending that Romney WOULDN'T have done it. To me, that's just silly. Romney had the exact right response: "Any thinking person would have done the same thing."

On the other hand, Bush got re-elected (or elected) solely on the fact that a SECOND major terrorist attack didn't happen on his watch. That "achievement" was the entire basis for his election campaign.

Obama is at least tied to having played a crucial role in getting something important accomplished, as opposed to Bush's claim to fame which was not screwing up again (which he just managed to do in other ways).

In any event, its got to be as fair as Republicans somehow claiming not having ANOTHER 9-11 as their "achievement."

I still don't know how ANYONE bought that...
 
Last edited:
Res Cogitans said:
Romney: "Very Disappointing" For Obama To Politicize Bin Laden Death | RealClearPolitics

I'm kinda with Romney on this one--at least that it shouldn't be a matter of pretending that Romney WOULDN'T have done it.

On the other hand, Bush got re-elected (or elected) solely on the fact that a SECOND terrorist attack hadn't happened on his watch. That "achievement" was the entire basis for his election campaign.

Obama is at least tied to having done something positive, as opposed to Bush's claim to fame which was not screwing up again (which he just managed to do in other ways).

In any event, its got to be as fair as Republicans somehow claiming not having ANOTHER 9-11 as their "achievement."

I still don't know how ANYONE bought that...
Click to expand...


well it wa quite an accomplishment as GWB created the HSD to protect us, after having to regroup from Clintons failures on the first WTC bombing.. so thats why GWB was respected for doing the hard lifting to make us safer..unlike Holder and Obama who are doing the opposite..
 
The Seals certainly seemed pissed about it. It's not a campaign slogan. Besides, Bush was there for the start of the operation, and Obama was there for the completion. It's a MILITARY accomplishment, not something a president did halfway around the world.
 
Whereas Republicans were criticized for hinting at the political uses of 9/11 in their convention, this advertisement was far too in your face about it.
 
Fiddytree said:
Whereas Republicans were criticized for hinting at the political uses of 9/11 in their convention, this advertisement was far too in your face about it.
Click to expand...

9/11 was a national tragedy. Using it for political gain is totally different than using the death of Bin Laden under your watch as a political victory.
 
Fiddytree said:
Whereas Republicans were criticized for hinting at the political uses of 9/11 in their convention, this advertisement was far too in your face about it.
Click to expand...

HINTING? Either you are joking, or you have a pretty bad memory.

You've got to be kidding. Seriously. Right?
 
Last edited:
iliveonramen said:
9/11 was a national tragedy. Using it for political gain is totally different than using the death of Bin Laden under your watch as a political victory.
Click to expand...

maybe if Obama was a supporter of all that GWB did and the enhanced methods it would be palletable.. but this is horrid..Obama was a critic of every single move GWB did.. so for him to take credit..never mention all that the previous president did...is low class..but thats Obama..
 
Res Cogitans said:
HINTING? Either you are joking, or you have a pretty bad memory.

You've got to be kidding. Seriously. Right?
Click to expand...

Too bad Clinton was a failure..or the WTC would still be standing..

my memory is strong..many forget the first attack on the WTC
 
Last edited:
I hate it when politicians politicize stuff.

220px-Bush_mission_accomplished.jpg
 
pbrauer said:
I hate it when politicians politicize stuff.

220px-Bush_mission_accomplished.jpg
Click to expand...


I know..thats why the Dems are so disliked.. they take everything out of context to use as political fodder..
 
Warfare has become nothing but political bull****. Nobody actually gives a damn about what happens to Afghanistan, pretty much the sole reason we have stuck around is because nobody wants to be called a coward for leaving.

The truth is that killing Bin Laden is pretty much irrelevant at this point. It didn't solve the two biggest issues, namely Karzai's inability to lead Afghanistan and the growing instability in Pakistan. Sadly, such issues won't be addressed in favor of whoring out the war in order to score some domestic political points.
 
Travis007 said:
Too bad Clinton was a failure..or the WTC would still be standing..

my memory is strong..many forget the first attack on the WTC
Click to expand...

So let me guess.

9-11 was Bill Clinton's fault. It wasn't the fault of the President who was actually presiding when the event took place.

And I'm just gonna guess again and make it two for two: the economic collapse was Obama's fault.
 
Travis007 said:
maybe if Obama was a supporter of all that GWB did and the enhanced methods it would be palletable.. but this is horrid..Obama was a critic of every single move GWB did.. so for him to take credit..never mention all that the previous president did...is low class..but thats Obama..
Click to expand...

That's every election....remember President Bush criticizing President Clinton and "nation building"? Remember Clinton lobbing missles at Al Queda targets and Republicans calling it a political stunt? Is that low class?
 
Res Cogitans said:
HINTING? Either you are joking, or you have a pretty bad memory.

You've got to be kidding. Seriously. Right?
Click to expand...

That was the criticism back then, yes. The, what...15 minute or so campaign ad in the convention told a narrative that didn't outright say "Bush responded to 9/11....would John Kerry have?"

What liberals, myself included then, criticized was the hints that were put out in the films.
 
rathi said:
Warfare has become nothing but political bull****. Nobody actually gives a damn about what happens to Afghanistan, pretty much the sole reason we have stuck around is because nobody wants to be called a coward for leaving.

The truth is that killing Bin Laden is pretty much irrelevant at this point. It didn't solve the two biggest issues, namely Karzai's inability to lead Afghanistan and the growing instability in Pakistan. Sadly, such issues won't be addressed in favor of whoring out the war in order to score some domestic political points.
Click to expand...

Killing bin Laden WAS the big issue. Now it's just a question of how to get the **** out of there.
 
Res Cogitans said:
So let me guess.

9-11 was Bill Clinton's fault. It wasn't the fault of the President who was actually presiding when the event took place.

And I'm just gonna guess again and make it two for two: the economic collapse was Obama's fault.
Click to expand...

Yes...9/11 is Clintons fault.. thats pretty well established..if he had started the HSD after the first attack on the WTC, we would have been able to defend the country better , and Clinton passed on taking Osama out..

as far as the financial isues....you may want to look int Freddy and Fannie and when the economy turned...( hint, Pelosi took office) and Obama wants it to be worse for social re-engineering.. as per Saul Alinsky..
 
Last edited:
iliveonramen said:
9/11 was a national tragedy. Using it for political gain is totally different than using the death of Bin Laden under your watch as a political victory.
Click to expand...

Both are connected.
 
Travis007 said:
I know..thats why the Dems are so disliked.. they take everything out of context to use as political fodder..
Click to expand...

What is the context for having a huge celebration for a "Mission Accomplished"? What way was that celebration supposed to be taken, according to Republicans?
 
Fiddytree said:
That was the criticism back then, yes. The, what...15 minute or so campaign ad in the convention told a narrative that didn't outright say "Bush responded to 9/11....would John Kerry have?"

What liberals, myself included then, criticized was the hints that were put out in the films.
Click to expand...


well no more hints.. Obams is in a full blown end zone dance.. as he was the one kicking GWBs knees out for the enhanced methods...Obama is a no class ego maniac
 
Travis007 said:
well no more hints.. Obams is in a full blown end zone dance.. as he was the one kicking GWBs knees out for the enhanced methods...Obama is a no class ego maniac
Click to expand...

Says the sound-byte man of the month?
 
Res Cogitans said:
What is the context for having a huge celebration for a "Mission Accomplished"? What way was that celebration supposed to be taken, according to Republicans?
Click to expand...

again.. that banner was FOR THE CREW!!! They had completed a succesful and long mission... it was the DEMS that used that framed shot as fodder.. it was dispicable
 
Fiddytree said:
That was the criticism back then, yes. The, what...15 minute or so campaign ad in the convention told a narrative that didn't outright say "Bush responded to 9/11....would John Kerry have?"

What liberals, myself included then, criticized was the hints that were put out in the films.
Click to expand...

What about the several months of claiming that Kerry was "soft on terror"?

Or what about when Dick Cheney claimed that Obama being in office made it more likely that we would be attacked? How is Obama's ad (which I think is in bad taste) more over the top than ANY of that stuff?

Seems like par for the course political nonsense to me...

Although, personally, I expect more from Obama.
 
Travis007 said:
Too bad Clinton was a failure..or the WTC would still be standing..

my memory is strong..many forget the first attack on the WTC
Click to expand...


oh that's right.....according to you GWB apologists.....911 occurred on Clinton's watch...oh and Bin Laden was captured and killed on GWB's watch as well.......got it....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom