User avatar
By m.b.
#384669
why aren't you obama-supporting libtards railing against obama for medaling in other countries like you did when bush was in charge?

or is this bush's fault too?
User avatar
By Spudnik
#384675
but, but, but, but... but Bush!
User avatar
By unskunkable
#384678
Funny thing is that although the French initiated this little bit of contact it seems the news disagrees. All I heard last night was America, the British and THEN the French have started operations. We are now involved in a third Muslim country. I hate to say this but Obama actually tried to do this right by letting someone else lead the way. It won't matter though because the world DOES expect us to be the police. So what will happen? America will get blamed if anything goes south that's what.
User avatar
By m.b.
#384679
Lenny wrote:Gitmo Closed? Nope
two years of OJT taught him that ol' bush wasn't as dumb as obama thought he was.

obama owes bush an apology for smearing him on that during the campaign.
and he owes the people who elected him an apology for flat out lying to them.
User avatar
By m.b.
#384680
unskunkable wrote:So what will happen? America will get blamed if anything goes south that's what.
no we won't. bush isn't president anymore. obama will never be held accountable for anything.
User avatar
By canook
#384682
m.b. wrote:why aren't you obama-supporting libtards railing against obama for medaling in other countries like you did when bush was in charge?

or is this bush's fault too?
UN coalition > Coalition of the willing. BIG difference.
In your mind, is Obama right to be meddling (like gwb) or wrong?
By SOBF
#384688
http://articles.cnn.com/2002-11-15/worl ... s=PM:WORLD
UN coalition > Coalition of the willing. BIG difference.
In your mind, is Obama right to be meddling (like gwb) or wrong?
I guess it just depends on your definition of coalition......should we be in Libya....no... Reagan should have taken that puke off the map years ago and we would not be having this argument......
User avatar
By Lenny
#384699
Still no one can tell me who these so-called "rebels" are. Im guessing they arent too friendly to the good ole US of A.

Watch the other hand.
User avatar
By VTNZ
#384703
unskunkable wrote:Funny thing is that although the French initiated this little bit of contact it seems the news disagrees. All I heard last night was America, the British and THEN the French have started operations. We are now involved in a third Muslim country. I hate to say this but Obama actually tried to do this right by letting someone else lead the way. It won't matter though because the world DOES expect us to be the police. So what will happen? America will get blamed if anything goes south that's what.
Unskunkable- you are spot on. If the american media wants to spin it yankee doodle dandy style and put "us number 1!"; thats up to some of you to decide if thats the case, or just ratings grabbing spin. If we hadn't gone into Iraq, NONE of this comparison and 24 hr media reach arounds would be occuring. Lennys thread title would be " Libya, another...Grenada?" The American media wants to create controversy, thats the yank style news method; not facts, but postulating/speculating and whoever is the loudest with the most ridiculous opinions gets their say and the media gets their ratings. The equivilent of talk radio...

And FWIW, if we put ground troops in Libya, I'll have as much of a problem with it as I did Iraq....and will blame Barry full stop. But I really doubt he will.

The but,but ,but Bush stuff is funny...and somewhat stupid considering the title of the thread (I thought sarcasm was supposed to be in pink Lenny?), puts the comparison with a war he started when he was in office. You don't have to like the facts of the past.....but they're still the facts.
User avatar
By VTNZ
#384704
Lenny wrote:Just how I figured you'd react.

My Iraq comparison was in jest. Its not only the highly educated liberals who can see that there is a difference.

Why are we involved with Libya? Why?

Who are the rebels? I'd bet theyre not just freedom-loving blue-collar patriots.

Barry played this one brilliantly?? Thats good. At least you made it thru a post w/o a "teabag" comment.
If it's in jest, and you honestly believe yourself that its not a proper comparison, then why start a thread like this?
If you actually look thru anything I've had to say about Libya...you'll find I actually agree with your scepticism about involvement and rebels...
And yes, Barry did play it about as well as he could; he went thru the U.N., got approval (which whether you like the UN or not, gives him political ground to say "I didn't go in there with no support w/ guns blazing and cowboy hat riding high"); got other closer regional powers to lead the way.
How would you have played it Lenny? What would you have done? Easy to point fingers all the time. And if its doesn't have to do with teabaggers, there is no need to drag them into it. I'll bet ya $20 20% of the newly elected teabaggers couldn't tell you what continent Libya is located in. There....feel better?
User avatar
By blumpkin
#384718
[/quote]

I'll bet ya $20 20% of the newly elected teabaggers couldn't tell you what continent Libya is located in. There....feel better?[/quote]

I really like your recent posts down here VTNZ, you have your views but you are at least willing to admit when somebody else has a point. I have learned a few things from some of your posts as well.

I do wish that you would not jump on the "teabaggers are all stupid, gun toting, racist nut jobs" bandwagon though, because it is just not true. Both of the major parties in this country have sold themselves out to the puppet masters and are destroying this country with partisan bullshit.

All tea party stands for is "taxed enough already" one of the newly elected teabaggers you refer to is just a family guy who was running his own pizza shop before he got elected. He is not stupid, he is not a racist, he is not a gun toting whack job. He was a small buisness owner that just got sick of the federal government making it harder and harder to run a small buisness.

It is time for a third party in this country. Boehner is already proving himself to be as full of shit as Pelosi was, and she was seriously full of shit.

If the liberal elite want to keep pushing the idea that the tea party are stupid racists then bring it... Worked out great for NPR, their chief executive has recently joined the ranks of the unemployed, and the house just voted to cut thier fedreral funding.

This is the part where you tell me the tea party is having their strings pulled by the Koch brothers... :cool
User avatar
By VTNZ
#384722
Hey man, I totally hear what you're saying. I am now a resident of a country with 5 parties being represented in parliment...I like it! I would love to see a third party in the states...it may be the only way to change things for any good in the U.S. But here's the catch: the tea party (I'll be nice) is NOT set up as third party....not even close. It merely a factionalized % of repubs who WERE smart enough after 8 years on the 2000's to see Repubs don't make gov't smaller. But in the end, they will have to fall in line with the powerful establishment of R puppeteers. Thats why I was so impressed by Ron Pauls kid (brainfart on his first name) and what he said about R's in the last decade. But he is one guy, and you know what? I'll go all in in betting that he got REAMED by Boehner and co. for saying that!
So, they are really are just a wing of the R party...not a new one with a clear difference in philosophy. And that difference is needed to claim a third party status. And judging by all the signs of hate about Obama (yes, we had those for W.; but the Dems were the dems, not claiming to be someone different); the singular notion of the tea party (see this is why I have trouble calling them a party....they aren't!) just caring about taxation and fiscal responsibility is just not the facts on the ground. It's been hijacked by alot of other "interests" within the R party, and some of them are rather extreme to put it mildly.
Want an example of how they will fall into the classic two party political trap? That newly elected R congress...elected on fiscal responsibility, decided "hmmm, what a great time to give us an INCREASE in the congressional budget WHILE cutting the budgets of other things (like NPR; a paltry few million)". Now if the tea dude walks the walk, shouldn't the group of newly elected Tea folks have banded together, walked out on the house steps, called the media, and announced "We here stand united in saying we are concerned with the business as usual environment blurring our message. We as the tea party were elected on fiscal responsibility and less taxation. To that end we are voting NO on the bill #whateverthefuk that gives congress a raise and increased budget. We feel it would be dishonest and hypocritical of the tea party memebers of the house to say one thing and allow another...."


But as you can see....crickets are chirping. They are just like the rest! Both parties have no desire to see a third party. as for the koch's...meh. As with the congressional budget and how they sold their soul on that one, its not a stretch to think they can't be bought with those of power and influence contrary to their goal of making go'vt accountable and ultimately less taxed.... :cool
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 10
Roughfish swap (Heero backed out)

Mine are inbound via US post :wink

Thumbing Through Some SBSs

Reece’s Surface Assassin (variation) h[…]

it took you that long to come up with this? ni[…]

Few days late, but I'm pouring a sip for ol' Charl[…]

Subscribe to The Drake Magazine