Obama, you didn't solve the Syria mess. Someone else did that!
Quote: AZDuffmanReality is that the USA has to look out for our interests. Getting involved in a Syrian civil war is not one.
I agree with you. But Sheldon Adelson thinks more war in the middle east will help Israel.
Based on my personal opinion, this president and the people he keeps surrounding himself with (his administration) will eventually be written in history as one of the most damaging eras to our country of any past president. (Imagine any president making Jimmy Carter look good.)
Considering all the lies and deceit surrounding all the scandals he’s directly involved in, I really believe he’s in way over his head and always was from day one.
You can’t help but think any decision this administration makes is solely based on and whats best for party lines and not what’s best for the nation.
He never had any foreign policy agenda and still doesn’t today.
Personally, I think he just want’s to limp through the rest of his term and live the celebrity limelight.
Syria, be it right or wrong this administration can’t be trusted with that decision. Their record speaks for itself.
Quote: Buzzard" Considering all the lies and deceit surrounding all the scandals he’s directly involved in, I really believe he’s in way over his head and always was from day one. " Gee when I read this I thought this thread had been hijacked and referenced to Ronald Raegan.
My post as I stated in it is based on my personal opinion.
Maybe you got something there since Obama likes to compare himself to Reagan when it's good for him every chance he gets.
Quote: Buzzard" Considering all the lies and deceit surrounding all the scandals he’s directly involved in, I really believe he’s in way over his head and always was from day one. " Gee when I read this I thought this thread had been hijacked and referenced to Ronald Raegan.
Not sure how that would be. Reagan took an economy with double-digit inflation AND unemployment and turned it into a positive boom. Made patriotism fashionable again, and did more to end the USSR and Communism than any other POTUS.
Perhaps you were referring to Clinton?
From a historical perspective we can now just start getting a good read on Bush41. I predict Obama will get a big "what were they thinking?!" from people looking back on his regime years from now. Assuming the oceans do not boil away from global warming that is..............
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/10/17/157477/-List-of-Reagan-administration-convictions#
Quote: 4ofaKindConsidering all the lies and deceit surrounding all the scandals he’s directly involved in, I really believe he’s in way over his head and always was from day one.
Ronald Reagan?, I thought the thread was hijacked and this is about Nixon. What Obama scandal. People in Nixon's cabinet went to jail. Now that's a scandal. Who's in jail in the current admin? Now that's not a scandal.
Quote: terapinedRonald Reagan?, I thought the thread was hijacked and this is about Nixon. What Obama scandal. People in Nixon's cabinet went to jail. Now that's a scandal. Who's in jail in the current admin? Now that's not a scandal.
There are professional crooks and there are rookie crooks. How you end up usually depends on your past experiences.
Can you name the first 2 he brought home. This Vietnam Era vet can !
Quote: BuzzardCome on. Tricky Dick brought back Bobby Baker and Jimmy Hoffa. Can not understand how McCain was to be the Republican Savior and now he is a Pariah in his own party ? He had my vote until he chose a bimbo as his VP.
McCain a GOP savior? Har har har. He was picked by libs in open primary states. Palin was the only energy he brought to his campaign. I never believe anyone who spouts the nonsense that "they supported him until he chose her." Such a statement makes no sense as she was a conservative and he is and always has been democrat-lite.
Heck the only time he led was after he picked her and before the media began their mission to destroy her.
Quote: BuzzardGee , I thought the libs were Democrats . I considered his service to all of us first, but when his picked an inexperienced honey to succeed him at his age, that was it for me.
So you voted for an inexperienced, I won't make a slander like you did, for POTUS instead of just the running mate? And you expect me to believe that?
Quote: AZDuffmanSo you voted for an inexperienced, I won't make a slander like you did, for POTUS instead of just the running mate? And you expect me to believe that?
Yes. He does. And yes you do.
You may question the logic, or his motivations, or disagree with his vote, but questioning the truthfulness of what he says is not conduct becoming you.
Quote: BuzzardHey It was my vote. I don't have to justify it. I earned the right to vote any damn way I wanted.
Damn straight.
Quote: thecesspit
You may question the logic, or his motivations, or disagree with his vote, but questioning the truthfulness of what he says is not conduct becoming you.
I am questioning it because I have heard the same line from the Palin-haters for 5 years now. Nothing they say indicates they would have considered ever voting anything but Democrat but they say, "if not for her I would have voted for him!" Or they say, "she cost him the election" when the period right after he chose her was the only energy his campaign had and the only time he pulled into the lead.
It is usually about them not liking strong women who are not liberal. I just wish they would make a sensible argument and not expect me to buy the lamestream media lines.
Quote: AZDuffmanIt is usually about them not liking strong women who are not liberal. I just wish they would make a sensible argument and not expect me to buy the lamestream media lines.
I'm not sure what about a conservative woman being added to the ticket of a moderate/liberal man would make a liberal likely to vote for that ticket over two liberals. I can see how that would make them lean more toward the ticket containing two liberals.
Quote: RonCI'm not sure what about a conservative woman being added to the ticket of a moderate/liberal man would make a liberal likely to vote for that ticket over two liberals. I can see how that would make them lean more toward the ticket containing two liberals.
My point is that such a person would be voting (D) from the get-go. All the line of "independents liked McCain until he picked Palin" is nonsense. Those "independents" were liberals in open primary states who wanted the furthest-left, least liked by the party GOP candidate possible.
McCain lost because he did not wan to succeed. Palin actually put him in the lead for a few weeks, but his terrible debate performance showed he wanted to run more than win.
(Response is kind of a test.using my new tablet to do this.)
Quote: boymimboThe question I have, and is as relevant as the last 20 or comments on Syria have been, is: "Who's on first?"
THIRD BASE
Quote: terapinedA little off base here Az. Buzzard explains his reasoning for voting and you say wrong. Huh? Mindreader?
(Response is kind of a test.using my new tablet to do this.)
No, I am saying since after Bush43 was elected there has been an online epidemic of posters who claim they were life-long Republicans until Bush did blah-blah-blah. I don't believe any of them. Then also claim Reagan could not get the GOP nomination today and things have never been so far right and blah-blah-blah.
I've seen the show before.
Quote: AZDuffmanMcCain lost because he did not wan to succeed. Palin actually put him in the lead for a few weeks, but his terrible debate performance showed he wanted to run more than win.
Then Palin started doing interviews and talking and everyone saw what a lousy choice she was for VP.
According to Real Clear Politics, McCain had a lead for about a week in early September, after Mid September, the Republican support slowly declined while the Democrats increased (and seem to have picked up the don't knows at this time).
This about the right pattern for the change from 'oh, thats a brave and interesting choice' to 'she's not the person I want running the country'. You can claim that the media had a lot to do with that. But Palin was not the Republican saviour, and many in the party suggest it was a poor choice by McCain.
But you can interpret with a different story if you so wish. But complaining that people tell you they switched based on Palin's speeches as 'lamestream media' is the same old Republican story that the nasty damn media is to blame for every ill that happens to the party. And frankly, I find that at best an exaggeration of the situation in the US.
KB1
Other believe there will be no peace even then. I am one of them.
Quote: KB1The middle east is, was, and will always be a mess.I am afraid there will not be peace over there till Jesus comes back.
KB1
Maybe Obama'a administration has credible evidence that Jesus is coming back now, and maybe it's going to be somewhere in Syria. They just don't know where exactly in Syria. So they just want to drop bombs all over there, in hopes they hit him, so they don't have to face him...
Quote: thecesspit
But you can interpret with a different story if you so wish. But complaining that people tell you they switched based on Palin's speeches as 'lamestream media' is the same old Republican story that the nasty damn media is to blame for every ill that happens to the party. And frankly, I find that at best an exaggeration of the situation in the US.
The fact remains the media vetted Palin more in three weeks than they did Obama in two years. Obama went to a racist church and the media made a coordinated effort to change the subject (there is an email trail to show that.) McCain would not have won in any case, he didn't wan to win. Palin probably gave him a point or two, not cost him the election.
You can say I am "blaming the media" all you like, but ask yourself what the outcry would be if Hillary Clinton had been treated the way Palin was. Ask why feminists who say women can do it on their own defend Hillary, a woman who got everything she has based on her husband while he cheated on her, is held up as a role model while Palin, who made it on her own, is allowed to be made a fool of in the media.
If Tina Fey were doing satire about Hillary they would be calling for a boycott. Not saying Ms Fey should be censored, but I am pointing out reality.
The reason that Republicans lose elections is because they live in a "reality" that doesn't exist and it hurts them at the ballot box. But fear not!! The strong right arm of a holy God will save you from Hillary. So sayeth another Republican braintrust Michele Bachmann.Quote: AZDuffmanIf Tina Fey were doing satire about Hillary they would be calling for a boycott. Not saying Ms Fey should be censored, but I am pointing out reality.
In other news, God is right handed.