Is Barack Obama Lying?

Either Senator Barack Obama is lying about his record on abortion, or he has the worst memory of all time. In making this suggestion, I am not trying to be hyperbolic or unnecessarily caustic. It’s just hard to believe that his memory could be that bad.

In an interview with CBN after the Saddleback Presidential Forum, Senator Obama denied that he had ever opposed a law that would protect infants who survive botched abortions. Obama even went so far as to say that those who claim otherwise are “liars.”

“I hate to say that people are lying, but here’s a situation where folks are lying. I have said repeatedly that I would have been completely in, fully in support of the federal bill that everybody supported – which was to say –that you should provide assistance to any infant that was born – even if it was as a consequence of an induced abortion. That was not the bill that was presented at the state level. What that bill also was doing was trying to undermine Roe vs. Wade.”

I have looked at the Illinois bill in question, and Obama is not describing the bill nor his opposition to it accurately. It’s all a matter of public record, so don’t take my word for it. You can read the text for yourself. The Illinois law was written to protect babies who survive abortion procedures, and in 2003 Obama voted against it. He wouldn’t even let it out of the committee that he chaired. Obama claims that the Illinois state version was different than the bill that passed at the federal level. This is false. The wording of the 2003 Illinois bill (and amendment) was identical to that in the federal statute that he claims to have favored.

I can understand why Obama might be motivated to mislead voters about his record in the Illinois Senate. Babies who survived abortions were being left to die, and Obama made himself complicit in the nasty business. The law that Obama killed would have required doctors to treat those babies as persons whose rights are protected in law. Obama’s devotion to Roe v. Wade was so absolute and so radical, that he wouldn’t vote to protect these babies.

Obama is not telling the truth. And what’s worse, he’s doing so to cover up his abominable record. A person who is this radically committed to abortion rights should never be President of the United States.


  • Paul

    If liars should never be president of the united states, then can you please name me one single president that ever deserved the job?

    McCain’s been no prince in this situation either. Especially because you can essentially consider a flip flop in the middle of an election season to be a lie. At this point, save for his pro-life voting record, McCain can’t be counted on for ANYTHING.

  • John

    Denny, you never cease to amaze me with your extreme right-wing bent and demonizing posts regarding POLITICAL candidates you personally (key words) don’t like, acting so absolute in strict black/white categories like everybody who wouldn’t agree with you on every point is not a Christian. You’re just-war, so what if there were a law presented to you that opposed going to war with Iran, and you personally believed that we shouldn’t, but you thought it was really a polemic against just-war theory, then how would you vote? It’s a little something called “authorial intent”.

    Maybe a pro-just war person should never be a professor or dean at a Bible college. That’s about as anti-Christ as you get. Maybe a person who believes in omnicausality and that God predetermined from before time began who would go to heaven and hell (a monstrous view of God, no doubt) should never be a leader in any type of Christian community.

    Obama has put this nasty accusation to rest several times in the past, so much so that only radicals who close their ears whenever he speaks about it are the only ones who bring it up anymore. That’s enough, seriously.

    Specks and logs my friend (Jesus said that, the prince of peace, the one who said the peacemakers are blessed, not the Augustinian just-war proponents).

    Specks and logs

  • Nick

    Wow, it never ceases to amaze me how bizarre and hostile so many of the comments on this blog get. Talk about adventures in missing the point. And I don’t mean this because someone disagrees with Denny–I often do, and I haven’t even made up my mind on who I will vote for yet. But deal with the arguments of each actual posts, fellas, don’t constantly descend into these crazy ideological diatribes that just try to avoid the specific points Denny brings up here. SO, is there anything in this last post that is wrong? That’s the only issue.

  • Brent Hobbs

    Should we allow for the possibility that Obama never read one or both of them bills himself? He may only be going by what lobbyists/his campaign staff are telling him.

    Not saying that would get him off the hook. He would simply be amazingly incompetent rather than lying.

  • Truth Unites.. and Divides

    Denny: “A person who is this radically committed to abortion rights should never be President of the United States.”

    I couldn’t have said it better myself!

  • Daniel

    I don’t support bashing Christian leaders. But Denny, your posts (perhaps more so than JTs) lean far out to the right. Leaning is not a problem. An absence of generosity in reading and interpreting is.

    I took your advice and followed the links. The Illinois version includes this section which is absent in the federal version (lines 24-26):

    “(c) A live child born as a result of an abortion shall be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate protection under the law.”

    Now, I’m no legal specialist, but if Obama’s peeps told him that that clause was deeply problematic and might at some point trigger the reversal of a law which Obama supports, then why not take his word for it?
    Why call him a ‘liar’??


  • Darius

    As usual, John uses ad hominem attacks on Denny rather than actually addressing the issue. Thanks for trying, John, but you can take those tactics back to the playground, they don’t work here. Your hate-filled diatribes are not welcome here.

  • Barry

    Denny, great post. I hope that Obama gets cornered with what he has said–cornered in a big way, in a big forum covered by the drive-by media and he is seen by all to be what he is–either an abominable liar on this issue or simply abominable on the issue of abortion. Fact is, I see him as both. Thanks for staying on top of this.


  • Truth Unites.. and Divides

    Thanks for saying that Darius.

    Although unfortunately I have seen such ad hominem tactics used with lamentable effectiveness with those on the militant left and with those who are the gullible middle.

    Of course John’s blather doesn’t work with you or me or Denny, but sadly not everyone sees through such rhetorical excrement. Not even John.

  • Daniel

    Hmm, my first post apparently didn’t make it through.
    I just wanted to point out that lines 24 through 26 (small ‘c’) in the Illinois document are absent from the federal version of the bill. I’m no legal expert, but I think this is what made Obama dislike the bill.

    Denny–calling someone a liar is strong language. Putting a question mark after it doesn’t really soften the blow, you know?


  • gary

    I am no legal expert either, but does the presence, or absence, of lines 24-26 change anything? The federal version says basically the same thing in part C with regards to the abortion language: “As used in this section, the term `born alive’, with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced

    What strange times we live in when we have to enact laws like this.

  • Brian (Another)

    I believe that the amendment (of the Illinois bill) and Section (8)(c) of the fed bill are identical.

    Even if the amendment didn’t happen, I guess I’m not versed in legalese enough to understand how that would infringe upon mother’s rights (I believe that is the argument Mr. Obama is using, right?).

  • Jason

    Obama is clearly trying to muddy the waters of what exatly that Illinois bill was saying. Unfortunately for him, you can actually see the wording of the bill.

    Now some may be uncomfortable with calling someone a liar (of course those same people didn’t seem to mind Obama calling people liars…falsely, I might add), but what else do you call someone who is purposefully trying to mislead others and/or coverup something they did?? Umm, that’s basically the definition of lying.

    BTW John…you might want to read how Jesus, the Prince of Peace, intends to bring peace to the earth (Revelation 19).
    I’m not saying all war is just…but it’s hard to justify opposing ALL war as evil. But all of that is irrelevant to the issue at hand…try to stay on point.

  • Scott


    I’m on your side, politically speaking at least. I’ve decided not to read the blog anymore and certainly, on the occasions that I do, to refrain from making comments. I know this posts violates said policy, however, in the spirit of our faith, I encourage you to consider doing the same. Some battles are not worth the anger and/or frustration they produce. I disagree vehemently with the hard-line some take on here toward egals and toward the those on the left. That being said, you’ll save yourself a lot of time and energy of you steer toward other places. After all, it is Denny’s blog. He owes me nothing in what he posts and certainly not in the positions he takes. I think his stances are entirely translucent, but that’s his freedom and choice. I’ll go elsewhere and I advise you to do the same. It ain’t worth it my friend. People will only hear what they want to hear and, in my limited experience, those hardest to convince are those entrenched in the fundamentalism of the far right.

  • Darius

    “…those hardest to convince are those entrenched in the fundamentalism of the far right.”

    Most intellectually-dishonest comment of all time.

    “Addition by subtraction.”

    Funniest comment of all time.

  • Scott

    TUAD & Darius:

    If you can honestly tell me that your comments are in-line with Christian charity and NOT mean-spirited, then I’ll give them some consideration. Until that point, I’ll consider your comments as worthless and debase. You prove exactly the point I was making to John. Never once did I call either of you out as individuals. You made connections I was not trying to make. If the fundamentalist label offends you so deeply, then perhaps there’s a reason why. Darius, what did I say that was intellectually dishonest? Break it down for me. TUAD, there are dozens of blogs begging for you to leave. I can’t make comment about your faith, but if your comments and posting history are the sole of your labors, then I’m begging you to find some levity and perspective.

  • Darius

    Scott, this is what is intellectually dishonest about your comment: the idea that those on the Christian Right are more “entrenched in the fundamentalism” of their beliefs” than those on the Left. It’s a way to self-righteously pat yourself on the back like a typical liberal. “At least I’m more open-minded than the tax collector.. er, I mean, conservative.”

    Now that I’ve explained my comment further, pray tell where I was mean-spirited. I merely called John out for his ad hominem comments which added up to an exercise in missing the point. Your bias and twisted moral compass are showing, as you didn’t bother to rebuke the hateful guy but instead commended him and told him that the rest of us are the problem, not him.

  • John

    Scott said,

    “those hardest to convince are those entrenched in the fundamentalism of the far right”

    TUAD said,

    “Addition by subtraction”

    Darius said,

    “Most intellectually-dishonest comment of all time”

    “Funniest comment of all time”

    Amen Scott, I agree with you and believe the other posts that follow yours are evidence of your claim. This has certainly been my experience on this blog. I will certainly take your advice to heart. Thanks for speaking the truth Scott.

  • Truth Unites.. and Divides

    Denny’s Q: “Is Barack Obama Lying?”

    Denny in the body of his blog post: “Obama is not telling the truth. And what’s worse, he’s doing so to cover up his abominable record.”

    It would seem to me that you have answered your own question, Denny!

  • Paul


    it’s your blog, and you can say what you want.

    But, it makes you quite the hypocrite to call out the sins of the guy you don’t like when you won’t call out the sins of the guy you do (kinda) like.

    If you’re going to call Obama a liar, that’s fine (especially because it’s true).

    But if you’re going to then ignore McCain’s lies, then you’re just as bad as Obama.

    So, I’ll wait. Probably in vain, but I’ll wait anyway.

  • Mark Gibson

    When has McCain ever lied about his stance on abortion? Denny only asked if Obama was lying about his stance on abortion, nothing else. Is he suppose to call out McCain out on a lie that no one cares to read about?

  • jb

    Paul, in the interest of fairness DO, if you please, list a couple or three of McCain’s lies.

    BUT in doing so, can you avoid bringing up his treatment of his ex wife 30 years ago? We all know about that and he doesn’t deny what he did.


  • Ferg

    Thanks for the rational post. I await some responses to it.

    If I hear the phrase ‘ad hominem’ again!!!

    I’m glad I don’t have to vote in this election.
    God Bless Ireland!! :o)


  • volfan007

    I will not vote for Obama, or anyone else who believes in abortion, raising taxes, and goes along with the gay agenda.

    Obama is not a choice for me, nor for anyone in my family. I pray that he will lose the election, and if he wins, then I will see it as God’s judgement on America for all the sins that we’re involved in. I believe his winning is that bad. It would be akin to King Saul being picked to be King of Israel back in OT times. The Israelites got what they wanted, and they paid the price for it.

    I will reluctantly vote for McCain. I wish that I could vote for George Bush again. I really with that we a Ronald Reagan to vote for…but alas, we dont.


  • Ferg

    ‘if he wins, then I will see it as God’s judgement on America for all the sins that we’re involved in’

    from your point of view would you not just see him winning as too many people stupidly voting for the wrong guy?? Rather than putting it on God that he has picked Obama for you? It’s a harsh viewing of God me thinks.

  • Darius

    God clearly tells us that he raises up rulers and no one comes to power except by the will of God. Now, I wouldn’t go as far as David and say that it is necessarily God’s judgment if Obama wins (though it could be), it might just be God’s will for some other purpose (perhaps Obama will better set up the world order for the end times, or maybe Obama will fail so gloriously that liberalism will lose a lot of face and give us conservative leaders in the future).

  • Ferg

    Sorry, you’re right, it does fit in with your blueprint theology.
    It doesn’t fit with mine as I cannot reconcile the God of scripture with a God who would put Mugabe in power in Zimbabwe for his glory and so on.
    But, let’s not go down that road!!
    I understand were you’re coming from David and Darius.

  • jb


    I’d be interested in hearing about lies John McCain has told that Paul and others referenced. Do you have a couple/few that you could share?

  • Paul

    re: Darius in #31:

    “God clearly tells us that he raises up rulers and no one comes to power except by the will of God.”

    This is very true. And it’s also hilarious to see many really DUMB evangelicals (and I am excluding Darius from this) squirm when I remind them that Clinton was God’s choice as well.

    “Now, I wouldn’t go as far as David and say that it is necessarily God’s judgment if Obama wins (though it could be)”

    Maybe Bush’s presidency was a judgement upon America as well. Under his watch and policies, we’ve seen a situation where the incomes of the middle class American family, adjusted for inflation have gone down. We’ve seen jobs increase, but the average pay for those jobs go down. We’ve seen a housing boom where prices were pushed so high in metropolitan areas that few people could afford the houses that they were told were part of the American dream. We’ve seen the American dollar go from one of the most powerful currencies in the world to now being worth less than the CANADIAN dollar! I could go on. As for the person that wishes that they could vote for Bush a third time, I hope that you love your job in the oil industry.

    “it might just be God’s will for some other purpose (perhaps Obama will better set up the world order for the end times, or maybe Obama will fail so gloriously that liberalism will lose a lot of face and give us conservative leaders in the future).”

    Why do liberals always have to do a bad job? Obama is already setting himself up to be a very Clintonian president (look at how much he’s already swung to the right on gun policies, economics and his health care plan), and even if some of Clinton’s success has to do with the Republican Congress that he worked with, at least he worked WITH them a fair amount of the time. The 90’s were a pretty prosperous time in American history, like it or not, and I certainly think that Obama will have a better shot at recreating those times than McCain will.

    And I’d be willing to bet $100 right now that McCain’s presidency wouldn’t bring about any changes to existing abortion law anyway.

  • Darius

    The 90’s may have been FINANCIALLY prosperous, but in regards to our society, culture, and social issues, it was a woeful time (not that the years since then have been much better).

  • Paul


    I can’t really say I’ve seen much of a downturn in American society in my 33 years on the planet. It’s just ALWAYS been a cesspool. People have always been more concerned with money than with their neighbor. People have always been more concerned with how fashionable they are than with making sure that the down on his luck guy down the block even has a shirt.

    This is a country that’s always crowed about its Christian morals, and then almost never lives by them. If it’s not the opulence and greed that my generation has witnessed, then it was the oppression of the blacks, american indians and anyone else that wasn’t white.

    So, I can’t see how Obama (or Clinton) makes or made this place any worse than Bush or McCain.

  • Truth Unites.. and Divides

    Paul asks: “Why do liberals always have to do a bad job?”

    Excellent question Paul! And an excellent observation is embedded in your question as well.

    My hypothesis is that the underlying worldview which guides a liberal’s assumptions or presuppositions is a major factor as to why liberalism and its adherents do a bad job so often.

  • Paul


    are you considering blatant flip-flops in the middle of an election season lies? Because I am.

    At which point, McCain lied about…

    1) allowing torture of suspects.

    2) fighting the Bush tax cuts (which he was right to do in ’01 or ’02)

    3) environmental policy

    4) economic policy

    5) immigration

    6) gay marriage

    The guy is a bigger flip flopper than Kerry could have ever hoped to have been. Yet, I’ve yet to see the Denny post talking about McCain’s flip flops.

    Yet Denny is SOOOOOOO non-partisan.

    I’ll believe it when I see even ONE pro-life republican get slapped around the way he slaps Obama around.

  • CH

    I’m not going to vote for McCain for a number of reasons, if other Christians are going to that is understandable, but I cannot for the life of me understand how one who claims to believe that the Bible is the authoritative word of God, and claims to have a biblical worldview, could possibly vote for Obama.

    I ask this question with sincere curiosity and humility: why, if you are an “evangelical”, are you going to vote for Obama? Please be specific (no references to abastract notions of change :)). I really am interested in hearing the reasoning on this one. I won’t even critique your responses, I’m all ears on this one.

  • Truth Unites.. and Divides

    Darius: “Umm, TUAD, Paul is a liberal. He was asking why I implied that liberals always do a bad job.

    But your response was funny (and correct).”

    Oh. I thought Paul was having a overdue epiphany. And from that long-awaited insight, I thought he was genuinely asking a sincere and serious question. And so I responded with a sincere and serious answer.

    Upon review, I now see how comical it must have been, but I must say that I really wasn’t trying to be humorous.

  • Paul

    Matt, let’s put it this way…

    when it was really cool to be the Republican Maverick, McCain was that guy.

    but, when the WSJ, Fox News and James Dobson freak out because he’s the Republican Maverick, he has his road to Damascus moment and falls into line with all of the other Republicans. About EVERYTHING.

    You don’t want to call that lying? Okay.

    But then, at that point, anyone who criticized Kerry’s flip flopping is a massive hypocrite if they vote for McCain, because they’ll have just voted for what they disdained four years prior.

    four legs bad, two legs good.

  • Jim

    LOL…I just LOVE these comments. Seems some of you are still in a slumber, and give any credence to what politicians say today. The reality is, Barack would deny he’s black, if it meant him being elected the President. He’s a liar, McCain is a liar, Edwards is a liar, the Clintons are liars, etc. etc. You get my point. There are very few leaders left in this world, never mind the USA, who would stand behind their principles and die for them, if need be.

  • jb

    Paul, how did John Kerry get in this conversation? This was about Obama lying about his vote to let babies die after they’re born. Then you wanted to draw moral equivalence with Obama’s horrific stance on letting babies die to John McCain flip-flopping on such things as changing his stance to drill in Anwar.


  • Paul


    politics is a large subject. Trying to focus on one candidates flaws without mentioning another candidates flaws is bound to cause some consternation somewhere.

    All Denny has to do is point out McCain’s flaws as well, and I won’t have to.

  • Paul


    I don’t deny that Obama is lying.

    But tell the whole story.

    Make sure everyone knows that your favorite candidate is a lying lil cowpie, too.

    Denny’s silence on this is deafening, and it proves once and for all that Denny’s claim that he’s non-partisan is the biggest lie of all. If he’s pro-Republican party, he needs to come right out and say so. If he’s not, then he needs to be an equal opportunity offender.

    This might be his blog, but it’s my faith that he’s representing, and if he won’t represent my faith as one that hates ALL sins, and not just the ones committed by the people he doesn’t like, then I’ll make sure people see it anyway.

  • Lucas Knisely

    So you justify being disruptive to any discourse on here and submitting responses that are off topic and basically trolling by claiming that Denny is somehow misrepresenting, “your faith”?

  • Paul

    There’s no trolling to it, Lucas, and frankly, I’m offended by the charge.

    Have all of the discourse you want. But if you’re going to talk about political candidates lying, then talk about ALL of them lying.

    And if the topic is “this politician (that I don’t like) lies!”, then it is completely on topic to remind that person that their candidate misrepresents themselves too.

    Sorry if that doesn’t fit your one sided view of things.

  • Darius

    You do realize that Denny doesn’t really promote McCain, except as the only viable option left? He’s not here extolling the virtues of McCain, which might be wise to keep in mind before your next rant. I would understand your point if Denny was blindly telling us how great McCain is, but I haven’t really seen that on here. Everyone knows that McCain has his flaws, no one is denying it. But what is infinitely more important are Obama’s flaws, at least on certain issues.

  • Paul


    Obama’s flaws on ONE subject are more important.

    But the fact that McCain isn’t at all trustworthy doesn’t scare you?

    It scares me more than an Obama presidency scares me, frankly, because I know exactly what we’ll get with Obama (insert doomsday scenario from Darius 🙂 ), but we really have no idea what to expect from McCain.

    He hasn’t been honest thus far. And if people who call themselves Christians are knowingly going to get behind a serpent and not point out his flaws, well, then they’re just as bad as that serpent.

  • Truth Unites.. and Divides

    Lucas Knisely: “So you justify being disruptive to any discourse on here and submitting responses that are off topic and basically trolling by claiming that Denny is somehow misrepresenting, “your faith”?”

    A reasonable question.

    On a sidenote I do commend Lucas’s blog. I just went over there and read about 5 or so of his posts. They are well-written and thoughtful.

  • Darius

    I don’t really care if he panders a bit, all candidates do, even Obamessiah. I know what to expect from McCain, which is a lukewarm conservative who will not do almost anything out of partisan feelings but just what he feels is right. I would prefer that he was more partisan and ran off of some ideology, but still, he’s more likely to do the right thing than Obama.

  • Paul

    TUAD calling someone a troll?

    pot, meet kettle.


    see, that’s just it. Right now, he’s being the partisan hack, to get all of the other partisan hacks in line.

    So, what happens when he gets elected? Is he going to be the partisan hack, or is he going to be a man and realize that both sides have good things to offer (something that Clinton realized and never even occured to Bush)?

    I really have no idea. What I’ve seen of him thus far in the election cycle though is that he’ll follow poll numbers before he follows common sense or ideology.

    That’s about as scary as it gets.

  • Paul


    you’re comparing me to that guy?


    Just do me a favor. Actually, two:

    1) remember that yours is not the only viewpoint.

    2) remember that your viewpoint might not even be the right one.

    act accordingly, and hop off high horse.

    And buy my CD.

  • Truth Unites.. and Divides

    Paul: “TUAD, you’re comparing me to that guy?”

    There are some disturbing similarities.

    “Just do me a favor. Actually, two:

    First favor is done. I know my viewpoint is not the only viewpoint on Barack Obama and abortion. But I do think Denny, Darius, and numerous other Christians do have the right viewpoint on Barack Obama and his stance on abortion.

    “hop off high horse.”

    Not on a high horse. Therefore, nothing to hop off of.

    “And buy my CD.”

    Thanks for the offer. But no thanks all the same. Hopefully, many others will buy it for your sake.

  • Paul


    this is the last time that I will address you directly, so cherish it:

    1) the only similarities between John and I is that we are both liberals and we both speak English.

    2) Who says we’re only talking about Obama here? You parade your opinions about everything around here like yours is the only one that matters. The only thing you have right is that Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior. On everything else, you do entirely too much chest thumping and precious little reading or attempting to understand.

    3) If you’re not on a high horse most of the time, NO ONE is.

  • Darius

    Okay guys, cool it. Seriously.

    Paul, what “good things” have the other side offered Bush during his 8 years? I mean, seriously, the Democrats have only been about one thing: embarrassing Bush. They couldn’t care less about serving the public, which the most recent debacle over drilling has shown. I bet that’s why today’s new poll shows McCain with a pretty big lead over Obama (and an even bigger reversal), people are fed up with the Dems in Congress who are grandstanding rather than doing anything.

  • Paul



    enough with the REPUBLICAN/DEMOCRAT garbage. This is how they can roughly be defined…

    REPUBLICANS: closeted gay folk who self loathe, love babies and hate taxes…but they LOVE to spend way too much anyway.

    DEMOCRATS: for the most part on the national level, yammering morons who come up with one good idea in 10 years, and I can’t even remember what it is.

    When I say that both sides have good ideas, I’m not talking Republicrats, I’m talking right wing/left wing. And on that point, you’d disagree because every liberal ever is the walking epitomy of evil…

  • Mark

    I admired McCain when he stood up against torture–but then he caved in an reached a compromise with the president.

    It’s a hard choice: we have two life issues, war and abortion.

    McCain promises to stay in Iraq a hundred years, if that’s what it takes . . .

    Obama doesn’t like abortion but he wants to leave the choice up to the woman (he doesn’t mention the man who may be pressuring her).

    The just war doctrine is obsolete. If it was ever followed, it is no longer possible for it to be followed today. The US and allies targeted civilians in WWII. War has a logic of its own; it cannot be managed according to traditional just war doctrine.

    We can’t trust our elected leaders to tell us the truth–it doesn’t matter whether the current president lied or whether he was just incompetent; the reasons he gave for going to war turned out not to be the case; the warnings he ignored (that Iraq would fall into civil war) turned out to be true. Now McCain is saying the surge worked–so why do we have to occupy Iraq for a hundred years?

    So that’s my dilemma: I can’t vote for a pro-abortion candidate, I can’t vote for a war monger, and I can’t wash my hands and shirk my responsibility (so I can neither abstain nor cast a symbolic vote of protest for a third party candidate). So I have to choose one of the two; whether I think of it as choosing the best hope for America or the lesser of two evils.

  • Darius

    “… the warnings he ignored (that Iraq would fall into civil war) turned out to be true.”

    How is this true, Mark? The Iraq War is all but over, and much of the unrest and fighting that did occur was instigated by Al Qaeda. Thus, no civil war.

Comment here. Please use FIRST and LAST name.