Foreign Saboteurs

[moe]

When it comes to a Democratic president's foreign policy, Republicans often side with America's enemies.

If you study Republican behavior over the past quarter-century, you'll find that the image of conservative lawmakers standing resolutely for American strength and unity is a myth. Republicans support wars launched by Republican presidents. When Democratic presidents undertake wars or negotiations, Republicans generally attempt to sabotage them. In fact, Republicans often side with our enemies.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/04/republicans_siding_with_america_s_enemies_john_mccain_mitch_mcconnell_and.html

 

[MountainBill]

Most of our wars have been started under a democrat's watch


Including the next really big one.

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel


It is ironic that these wingnuts tout themselves as patriots yet do the things they do to sabatoge their freely elected government under a system they claim to revere. They are more idealists than patriots.

 

[EEResistable]

They are serving their masters, the banks.

 

[Wolf J. Flywheel]

Like Democrats creating the KKK or "Liberals" loving them some ..........

........... Islam while failing to realize that the religion oppresses women and tortures gays? That's not the "progressive" and "inclusive" line of thinking we are always told rests with Liberal Democrats.

I say "Liberal Democrats" because that party did not used to be as vacuous and brain-dead as it is at the moment.

Somewhere there must be a Harry Truman type of Democrat out there.

Somewhere.

You people that stick so vehemently to the Republican side or the Democratic side are so foolish ...... so utterly foolish. Believing that one party is "good" and the other party "evil".

It's one of many reasons that we are ..........

DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED!!!!

 

[moe]

Re: Like Democrats creating the KKK or "Liberals" loving them some ..........

lol just making stuff up and slinging mud, good times.

 

[Wolf J. Flywheel]

Typical backpedaling response devoid of a shred of antithesis.

Pretty much what everybody here has come to expect from you.

DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED!!!!

 

[moe]

Re: Typical backpedaling response devoid of a shred of antithesis.

lol ok support your KKK and liberal/Islam claims and never mind the rest of the usual nonsense you pad your posts with.

 

[Motown Mounty]

Yes, some examples of that are

(1) Signing "agreements" with enemy nations which will allow them to have nuclear weapons without Congressional consent.

(2) Taking rogue nations off of the Terrorists Nations List even though that nation still supports terrorism.

(3) Lying in order to obtain a Healthcare system valued at 1/3 of the nations budget.

(4) Unsustainable federal spending.

(5) Weakening the military.

(6) Covering up and lying about attacks on Embassies and the killing of an Ambassador.

(7) Wanting to "fundamentally change" something that you supposedly love.

(8) Making Executive Decisions regarding the US immigration policy without input from Congress.

(9) Decide that we need to "redistribute" our wealth much like the communists believe.

(10) Meets and greets The Muslim Brotherhood at the white house many, many times.



Yes, it's those types of things that really make people hate the Republicans.

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

Ignorant and/or disingenuous

I always get a kick out of looney toons such as yourself who claim that Democrats are complicit in institutional racism. Those jackasses, such as yourself, are apparently unaware of the reality of the evolution of the two political parties in this country over the last 50-60 years. The 1964 Civil Rights Act (a Democratic endeavor) is the reason the South is now Red.

As to islam, I don't know any liberals who "love them some islam". Again, the reality is we need Islamic countries' support in our ongoing efforts to combat terrorism. Why piss off the majority of the muslim world by crowing from the highest mountain top how we are at war with islam the way jackasses such as yourself demand the President do?

It's probably too complicated for you to understand these basic concepts. But it's easy to run your yap.

 

[Popeer]

Re: Yes, some examples of that are

Originally posted by Motown Mounty:
(1) Signing "agreements" with enemy nations which will allow them to have nuclear weapons without Congressional consent.

(2) Taking rogue nations off of the Terrorists Nations List even though that nation still supports terrorism.

(3) Lying in order to obtain a Healthcare system valued at 1/3 of the nations budget.

(4) Unsustainable federal spending.

(5) Weakening the military.

(6) Covering up and lying about attacks on Embassies and the killing of an Ambassador.

(7) Wanting to "fundamentally change" something that you supposedly love.

(8) Making Executive Decisions regarding the US immigration policy without input from Congress.

(9) Decide that we need to "redistribute" our wealth much like the communists believe.

(10) Meets and greets The Muslim Brotherhood at the white house many, many times.



Yes, it's those types of things that really make people hate the Republicans.

Yeah, keep spouting those Tea Party talking points.

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

The thing about these talking points is....


for every one point that has merit, they are overshadowed by the ridiculousness and outlandishness of the next 5. Chicken-littled.

 

[Wolf J. Flywheel]

Democrats are not complicit in institutional racism?

I hate to burst your bubble, little lady, but current "Democrats" ARE racist to the core and that includes attacks from African-Americans on other African Americans who aren't "black enough" (Tim Scott comes to mind) and that does not even address how countless Caucasians are discriminated against on a daily basis (some clear hate crimes) with not a single peep from the Marxist media or "leaders" (term used lightly) like Obama or Sharpton.

If you truly believe that the Democratic Party is not overflowing with bigots then you are a bigger muttonhead than the slack-jawed reputation that precedes you.

DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED!!!
This post was edited on 4/15 10:10 AM by Wolf J. Flywheel

 

[Motown Mounty]

See? That is exactly what is wrong with you liberals

First of all I am not a tea party person although I don't have anything against them. Secondly, liberals always seem to confuse facts with talking points. I don't need talking points, unlike most liberals I can think for myself.

These were 10 things I thought of very quickly. Why did you simply make a blanket statement trying to demean the poster but you didn't debate or refute any of the items? I know why, it's because that is exactly how liberals try to debate.

 

[Motown Mounty]

Re: The thing about these talking points is....

Did I have any items that were untrue?

 

[Motown Mounty]

LOL! Nice debating skills you have there **

q

 

[moe]

Re: LOL! Nice debating skills you have there **

Why did you simply make a blanket statement trying to demean the poster but you didn't debate or refute any of the items?

 

[Keyser76]

I thought he was posting Louie Gohmerts appointment book.


Or Bill O'Reillys show topics.

 

[Motown Mounty]

Hard to debate your "LOL!" posts**

q

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

Re: Democrats are not complicit in institutional racism?

 

[bornaneer]

You having a rough day.. You need to get a life or get on the links ASAP**

wvu

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

Really?


A couple things on that list have merit. A couple have kernels of truth but distort the facts. And some our outright lies. I don't have the time to rebut every one of them. But they are whacko talking points. And they consistently fool the fox news crowd.

 

[bornaneer]

"And some our outright lies." Yes, yes, like these....


- President Obama, speech to the American Medical Association, June 15, 2009 (as the health-care law was being written.)
"And
if you like your insurance plan, you will keep it. No one will be able
to take that away from you. It hasn't happened yet. It won't happen
in the future."

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt
limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S.
government can't pay its own bills. ... I therefore intend to oppose the
effort to increase America's debt limit."
[/URL]


- Then-Sen. Barack Obama, floor speech in the Senate, March 16, 2006


"While running for President, Obama had promised that, unlike Bush, he
would not have any lobbyists working in his administration. However, by
February 2010, he had more than 40 lobbyists working in his administration."

"In that interview in November 2008, Kroft asked Obama if he planned to
"take early action" to shut down Guantanamo. Obama replied, "Yes.""

 

[countryroads89]

Really?

The democrats get credit for WWI, WWII and the Korean War. I don't think there's much dispute over the validity of getting in those wars.

Vietnam started in 1955 - President was Dwight D. Eisenhower, R
Invasion of Granada, 1983 - President was Ronald Reagan, R
Invasion of Panama, 1989 - President was George H.W. Bush, R
Gulf War started in 1990 - President was George H.W. Bush, R
Somalia 1992 - President was George H.W. Bush, R
Invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 - President George W. Bush, R
Invasion of Iraq in 2003 - President George W. Bush, R

I disagree. Both parties have their fair share.

 

[Wolf J. Flywheel]

Once again (common theme in this thread) nothing to combat it with.

Like a live-alone 87-year old fighting off an armed intruder with a Nerf dildo.

On with your tedium.

 

[bornaneer]

All nut-jobs now accounted for.... I was worried about you**

wvu

 

[Motown Mounty]

Of course you don't have time**

q

 

[moe]

LOL! Nice debating skills you have there **

nm

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Re: Ignorant and/or disingenuous

Originally posted by RichardPeterJohnson:
The 1964 Civil Rights Act (a Democratic endeavor) is the reason the South is now Red.

So let me get this straight. It's your opinion that the south is Red because Dems sponsored the bill?

I'm so confused. Considering it was supported by 80% GOP in the House and 82% in the Senate. Where did the Dems check in at? 63% and 69%. So by your logic, the South decided to vote in the majority responsible for making it happen. Makes sense.

Welcome to Bizarro World, Doc will be our tour guide for the day.

 

[countryroads89]

So, is there anything in my post

that isn't accurate? I seem to be mature enough to throw blame on the Dems when appropriate but you always toe the party line and I'm the nut job?

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Re: Really?

Originally posted by countryroads89:
The democrats get credit for WWI, WWII and the Korean War. I don't think there's much dispute over the validity of getting in those wars.

Vietnam started in 1955 - President was Dwight D. Eisenhower, R (We sent advisers to train indigenous forces, war started after the Gulf of Tonkin)
Invasion of Granada, 1983 - President was Ronald Reagan, R (We didn't invade, we rescued hostages)
Invasion of Panama, 1989 - President was George H.W. Bush, R
Gulf War started in 1990 - President was George H.W. Bush, R
Somalia 1992 - President was George H.W. Bush, R (Peacekeeping effort to end the starvation on a biblical scale; Offensive operations were under Clinton)
Invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 - President George W. Bush, R
Invasion of Iraq in 2003 - President George W. Bush, R

I disagree. Both parties have their fair share.
Nitpicking here, but don't confuse operations with Wars. Clarified some of the other stuff.

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

Are you really that dense?


LBJsaid when he signed it that the Democrat party lost the south with that piece of legislation. Since then, it has been a consistent evolution of Dems switching to Repub. From Strom Thurmond back in 1964 to Richard Shelby a few years ago.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Re: Are you really that dense?

Originally posted by RichardPeterJohnson:

LBJsaid when he signed it that the Democrat party lost the south with that piece of legislation. Since then, it has been a consistent evolution of Dems switching to Repub. From Strom Thurmond back in 1964 to Richard Shelby a few years ago.

Well we all know LBJ is a bastion of integrity.

Say what you want Doc, the numbers I posted above don't lie and it doesn't agree with your logic train that the switch was due to the Civil Right Act. It is highly more likely that the switch occurred due to the drastic shift in the DNC towards more liberal policies, attacks on religion, and other factors. Dense is you trying to force your bullshit as fact.

 

[bornaneer]

Never bothered to read your first post... and what party ....

line did I toe? The comment that I made in this whole thread about content was to point out some proven outright lies that I asked RPJ about. Where is toeing the party line? You also must have missed my many posts in which I backed Obama in his handling of the Iraq war and my disgust with Bush for wasting American lives in a senseless war. You are the one who gets all bent out of shape whenever the dreaded R word is mentioned.

 

[Popeer]

Re: See? That is exactly what is wrong with you Rightists

OK, I'll play:

Originally posted by Motown Mounty:

(1) Signing "agreements" with enemy nations which will allow them to have nuclear weapons without Congressional consent. Nothing has even been agreed to, let alone signed.

(2) Taking rogue nations off of the Terrorists Nations List even though that nation still supports terrorism. I assume you're talking about Cuba, which has been a non-factor since its chief benefactor went tits up 20 years ago.

(3) Lying in order to obtain a Healthcare system valued at 1/3 of the nations budget. Huh? A third? That would be a tall order considering defense spending is over half and Medicare about a third, which, if your assertion were accurate would leave nothing for anything else.

4. Unsustainable federal spending. You do understand that the President can't spend one penny unless authorized by Congress?

(5) Weakening the military. I love this one. How, exactly?

(6) Covering up and lying about attacks on Embassies and the killing of an Ambassador. Debunked as many times as the birth certificate conspiracy, even by the GOP-controlled House Intel committee.

(7) Wanting to "fundamentally change" something that you supposedly love. I don't know what that even means.

(8) Making Executive Decisions regarding the US immigration policy without input from Congress. Hmm. You may have a point here, although I might argue that the unwillingness of Congress to even debate any of the reform bills - let alone vote on them (because God forbid one of them might pass) - could be considered input, as in "we're not doing anything."

(9) Decide that we need to "redistribute" our wealth much like the communists believe. Ford and Reagan believed that too, as well as both Bushes: The EIC was enacted under Ford and expanded under Reagan, Bush I (and Clinton) and Bush II.

(10) Meets and greets The Muslim Brotherhood at the white house many, many times. Yes, how dare he continue the policies of previous presidents?!!? Bush never met with them at the White House as far as we know, but he had plenty of contact with the Brotherhood.

 

[MountainBill]

Yea...leave out WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam became a ground


conflict with heavy U.S. casualties under LBJ. You are a moron sir.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Re: Yea...leave out WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam became a ground

Originally posted by MountainBill:

conflict with heavy U.S. casualties under LBJ. You are a moron sir.

I believe he was only calling out things he considered as GOP related conflicts. That's why there is no mention of Bosnia/Kosovo either.