Page 8 of 48 FirstFirst ... 67891017 ... LastLast
Results 351 to 400 of 2398

Thread: Former President Barack Obama

  1. #351
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,653
    Perhaps some more?

    Former President Bill Clinton:


    President Clinton: “We Have To Defend Our Future From These Predators Of The 21st Century. They Feed On The Free Flow Of Information And Technology. They Actually Take Advantage Of The Freer Movement Of People, Information And Ideas. And They Will Be All The More Lethal If We Allow Them To Build Arsenals Of Nuclear, Chemical And Biological Weapons And The Missiles To Deliver Them. We Simply Cannot Allow That To Happen. There Is No More Clear Example Of This Threat Than Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. His Regime Threatens The Safety Of His People, The Stability Of His Region And The Security Of All The Rest Of Us.” (President Clinton, Remarks To Joint Chiefs Of Staff And Pentagon Staff, 2 /17/98)


    President Clinton: “Earlier Today I Ordered America’s Armed Forces To Strike Military And Security Targets In Iraq… Their Mission Is To Attack Iraq’s Nuclear, Chemical And Biological Weapons Programs And Its Military Capacity To Threaten Its Neighbors …” (”Text Of Clinton Statement On Iraq Attack,” Agence France Presse, 12/17/98)


    Former Vice President Al Gore:


    Gore: “You Know, In 1991, I Was One Of Those Who Put Partisanship Completely Aside And Supported President Bush At That Time In Launching The Gulf War. And In That War, We Saw How Saddam Had Threatened His Neighbors And Was Trying To Get Nuclear Weapons, Chemical Weapons, And Biological Weapons. And We’re Not Going To Allow Him To Succeed.” (CNN’s “Larry King Live,” 12/16/98)


    Gore: “f You Allow Someone Like Saddam Hussein To Get Nuclear Weapons, Ballistic Missiles, Chemical Weapons, Biological Weapons, How Many People Is He Going To Kill With Such Weapons? He’s Already Demonstrated A Willingness To Use These Weapons …” (CNN’s “Larry King Live,” 12/16/98)


    Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY):


    Sen. Clinton: “I Voted For The Iraqi Resolution. I Consider The Prospect Of A Nuclear-Armed Saddam Hussein Who Can Threaten Not Only His Neighbors, But The Stability Of The Region And The World, A Very Serious Threat To The United States.” (Senator Hillary Clinton [D-NY], Press Conference, January 22, 2003)


    Sen. Clinton: “In The Four Years Since The Inspectors, Intelligence Reports Show That Saddam Hussein Has Worked To Rebuild His Chemical And Biological Weapons Stock, His Missile Delivery Capability, And His Nuclear Program. … It Is Clear, However, That If Left Unchecked, Saddam Hussein Will Continue To Increase His Capability To Wage Biological And Chemical Warfare And Will Keep Trying To Develop Nuclear Weapons.” (Sen. Hillary Clinton, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, p. S10288)


    Sen. John Kerry (D-MA):


    Sen. Kerry: “The Crisis Is Even More Threatening By Virtue Of The Fact That Iraq Has Developed A Chemical Weapons Capability, And Is Pursuing A Nuclear Weapons Development Program.” (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/2/90, p. S14332)


    Sen. Kerry: “If You Don’t Believe … Saddam Hussein Is A Threat With Nuclear Weapons, Then You Shouldn’t Vote For Me.” (Ronald Brownstein, “On Iraq, Kerry Appears Either Torn Or Shrewd,” Los Angeles Times, 1/31/03)


    Former Sen. John Edwards (D-NC):


    Sen. Edwards: “Serving On The Intelligence Committee And Seeing Day After Day, Week After Week, Briefings On Saddam’s Weapons Of Mass Destruction And His Plans On Using Those Weapons, He Cannot Be Allowed To Have Nuclear Weapons, It’s Just That Simple. The Whole World Changes If Saddam Ever Has Nuclear Weapons.” (MSNBC’s “Buchanan And Press,” 1/7/03)


    Sen. Edwards: “The Question Is Whether We’re Going To Let This Man [Saddam] Who’s Been Developing Weapons Of Mass Destruction Continue To Develop Weapons Of Mass Destruction, Get Nuclear Capability, And Get To The Place Where If We’re Going To Stop Him, If He Invades A Country Around Him, It’ll Cost Millions Of Lives As Opposed To Thousands Of Lives.” (MSNBC’s “Hardball,” 2/6/03)


    Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV):


    Reid: “The Problem Is Not Nuclear Testing; It Is Nuclear Weapons … The Number Of Third World Countries With Nuclear Capabilities Seems To Grow Daily. Saddam Hussein’s Near Success With Developing A Nuclear Weapon Should Be An Eye-Opener For Us All.” (Sen. Harry Reid, Congressional Record, 8/3/92, p. S11188)


    Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN):


    Bayh: “In My Opinion - And I Do, As You Know, I’m Fairly Hawkish On Iraq. I’m Inclined To Support Going In There And Dealing With Saddam. But I Think That Case Needs To Be Made On A Separate Basis - His Possession Of Biological And Chemical Weapons, His Desire To Get Nuclear Weapons, His Proven Track Record Of Attacking His Neighbors And Others.” (CNN’s “Late Edition,” 8/4/02)


    Bayh: “The Question Is, Do You Want Saddam Hussein Having Chemical Weapons, Having Biological Weapons, Possibly One Day Having A Nuclear Weapon? Do You Want To Have To Deal With That? And If The Answer Is No, Then What Do You Do About It And When Do You Do Something About It?” (CNN’s “Live Event/Special,” 12/1/01)


    Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE):


    Biden: “First Of All, We Don’t Know Exactly What He Has. … We Know He Continues To Attempt To Gain Access To Additional Capability, Including Nuclear Capability. There Is A Real Debate How Far Off That Is, Whether It’s A Matter Of Years Or Whether It’s A Matter Of Less Than That, And So There’s Much We Don’t Know.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 8/4/02)


    Gov. Bill Richardson (D-NM):


    Richardson: “The Threat Of Nuclear Proliferation Is One Of The Big Challenges That We Have Now, Especially By States That Have Nuclear Weapons, Outlaw States Like Iraq.” (ABC’s “Good Morning America,” 5/29/98)


    Former Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL):


    Sen. Graham: “I Don’t Know If I’ve Seen All The Evidence, But I’ve Seen Enough To Be Satisfied That There Has Been A Continuing Effort By Saddam Hussein Since The End Of The Gulf War, Particularly Since 1998, To Re-Establish And Enhance Iraq’s Capacity Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction, Chemical, Biological And Nuclear.” (CBS’ “Face The Nation,” 12/8/02)


    Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL):


    Durbin: “One Of The Most Compelling Threats We In This Country Face Today Is The Proliferation Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction. Threat Assessments Regularly Warn Us Of The Possibility That North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Or Some Other Nation May Acquire Or Develop Nuclear Weapons.” (Sen. Dick Durbin, Congressional Record, 9/30/99, p. S11673)


    Sen. Russell Feingold (D-WI):


    Feingold: “With Regard To Iraq, I Agree, Iraq Presents A Genuine Threat, Especially In The Form Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction, Chemical, Biological, And Potentially Nuclear Weapons. I Agree That Saddam Hussein Is Exceptionally Dangerous And Brutal, If Not Uniquely So, As The President Argues.” (Sen. Russell Feingold [D-WI], Congressional Record, 10/9/05, p. S10147)


    Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL):


    Nelson: “And My Own Personal View Is, I Think Saddam Has Chemical And Biological Weapons, And I Expect That He Is Trying To Develop A Nuclear Weapon. So At Some Point, We Might Have To Act Precipitously.” (CNN’s “Late Edition,” 8/25/02)


    Nelson: “Well, I Believe He Has Chemical And Biological Weapons. I Think He’s Trying To Develop Nuclear Weapons. And The Fact That He Might Use Those Is A Considerable Threat To Us.” (CNBC, “Tim Russert,” 9/14/02)


    Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV):


    Sen. Byrd: “The Last U.N. Weapons Inspectors Left Iraq In October Of 1998. We Are Confident That Saddam Hussein Retains Some Stockpiles Of Chemical And Biological Weapons, And That He Has Since Embarked On A Crash Course To Build Up His Chemical And Biological Warfare Capabilities. Intelligence Reports Indicate That He Is Seeking Nuclear Weapons …” (”Threats And Responses,” The New York Times, 10/4/02)


    Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA):


    Pelosi: “Others Have Talked About This Threat That Is Posed By Saddam Hussein. Yes, He Has Chemical Weapons, He Has Biological Weapons, He Is Trying To Get Nuclear Weapons.” (Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, p. H7777)


    Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA):


    Harman: “I Certainly Think [Saddam’s] Developing Nuclear Capability, Which, Fortunately, The Israelis Set Back 20 Years Ago With Their Preemptive Attack, Which, In Hindsight, Looks Pretty Darn Good.” (Fox News’ “The Big Story,” 8/27/02)


    Former Rep. Dick Gephardt (D-MO):


    “Gephardt Said He’s Seen ‘A Large Body Of Intelligence Information Over A Long Time That He Is Working On And Has Weapons Of Mass Destruction. Before 1991, He Was Close To Having A Nuclear Device. Now, You’ll Get A Debate About Whether It’s One Year Away Or Five Or Six.” (Morton M. Kondracke, “Gephardt Pushes Consensus Action Against Iraq Threat,” Roll Call, 9/23/02)


    Former Secretary Of State Madeline Albright:


    Madeline Albright: “Iraq Is A Long Way From [Here], But What Happens There Matters A Great Deal Here, For The Risk That The Leaders Of A Rogue State Will Use Nuclear, Chemical Or Biological Weapons Against Us Or Our Allies Is The Greatest Security Threat We Face, And It Is A Threat Against Which We Must And Will Stand Firm.” (”Secretary Of State Madeleine Albright, Secretary Of Defense William Cohen And National Security Adviser Sandy Berger Participate In Town Hall Meeting,” Federal News Service, 2/18/98)

  2. #352
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,653
    Maybe a final entry?

    Former Vermont Governor Howard Dean (D), appearing on “Face the Nation” in September 2002, said, “There’s no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat to the United States and to our allies.” In February 2003, during an address at Drake University, Dean said, “I agree with President Bush — he has said that Saddam Hussein is evil. And he is. (Hussein) is a vicious dictator and a documented deceiver. He has invaded his neighbors, used chemical arms and failed to account for all the chemical and biological weapons he had before the Gulf War. He has murdered dissidents and refused to comply with his obligations under U.N. Security Council Resolutions. And he has tried to build a nuclear bomb. Anyone who believes in the importance of limiting the spread of weapons of mass killing, the value of democracy, and the centrality of human rights must agree that Saddam Hussein is a menace. The world would be a better place if he were in a different place other than the seat of power in Baghdad or any other country. So I want to be clear. Saddam Hussein must disarm. This is not a debate; it is a given.”


    Dean, on “Meet the Press” in March 2003, said he believed that Iraq “is automatically an imminent threat to the countries that surround it because of the possession of these weapons.” Yet, in his now familiar flip-flop style, candidate Dean later declared, “I never said Saddam was a danger to the United States.”


    In the left-leaning New Republic, Ryan Lizza wrote: “Did Howard Dean actually support a war resolution giving Bush authority to attack Iraq? The answer is: pretty much.


    . . . Dean himself admitted . . . that he did indeed support (the Biden-Lugar resolution). . . . According to Biden-Lugar, all Bush had to do was ‘make available to the speaker of the House of Representatives and the president pro tempore of the Senate his determination that the threat to the United States or allied nations posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program and prohibited ballistic missile program is so grave that the use of force is necessary, notwithstanding the failure of the Security Council to approve a resolution.’ Isn’t this exactly what happened?”


    Gen. Wesley Clark, before he became an anti-war Democratic presidential candidate, testified on Sept. 26, 2002, before the House Armed Services Committee: “There’s no requirement to have any doctrine here. I mean this is simply a longstanding right of the United States and other nations to take the actions they deem necessary in their self-defense. . . . Every president has deployed forces as necessary to take action. He’s done so without multilateral support if necessary. He’s done so in advance of conflict if necessary. . . . When we took action in Kosovo, we did not have United Nations approval. . . . There’s no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat. . . . Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. . . . He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn’t have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we.


    “. . . I want to underscore that I think the United States should not categorize this action as pre-emptive. . . . This is a problem that’s longstanding. It’s been a decade in the making. It needs to be dealt with and the clock is ticking on this. . . . There’s no question that . . . there have been such contacts (between Iraq and al Qaeda). It’s normal. It’s natural. These are a lot of bad actors in the same region together. They are going to bump into each other. They are going to exchange information. They’re going to feel each other out and see whether there are opportunities to cooperate. That’s inevitable in this region, and I think it’s clear that, regardless of whether or not such evidence is produced of these connections, that Saddam Hussein is a threat.”


    Former President Bill Clinton, more recently, visited Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Manuel Durao Barroso in October 2003. The prime minister said, “When Clinton was here recently he told me he was absolutely convinced, given his years in the White House and the access to privileged information which he had, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction until the end of the Saddam regime.”


    John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.), ranking minority member of the Intelligence Committee, said on Oct. 10, 2002, “There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. . . . We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.”


    So, forget President Bush, Vice President Cheney and the pro-war “neo-cons.” Just listen to the Democrats. On the issue of the “unilateral” invasion of Iraq, they made a pretty strong case.

  3. #353
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wolfsschanze
    Posts
    7,554
    Quote Originally Posted by SRVFan View Post
    Maybe one more, and my personal favorite, Clinton himself saying Saddam had WMD's in 1998.

    Not to burst your bubble but back then, he did have them. Remember him gasing the Kurds? Chemical Ali? Thats why the UN placed sanctions on him, he got rid of what he had and agreed to inspectors. They never found evidence he had them again after that until Bush fake intel. Even the UN inspectors told Bush there were no WMD's and he invaded anyways.

  4. #354
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,653
    Quote Originally Posted by JefeStone View Post
    Not to burst your bubble but back then, he did have them. Remember him gasing the Kurds? Chemical Ali? Thats why the UN placed sanctions on him, he got rid of what he had and agreed to inspectors. They never found evidence he had them again.

    As a veteran who would know, there was still WMD's when we invaded. The media wouldn't cover it though. That's as dead serious as I can be. I'm not claiming to have seen them. I broke an ankle and didn't go, but I know of three warehouses my unit found full of chemical and biological weapons around Baghdad.

  5. #355
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,653
    Here's a few articles on the WMD's which were actually reported.

    http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=15918

    http://hotair.com/archives/2010/10/2...found-in-iraq/

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/interna...7pDf7AZ3RO9qnM

    But my main point is that BOTH democrats AND republicans voted to go to Iraq. The was was not unconstitutional. The approval was there. It was not there for Libya, thus making it an unconstitutional attack after the first 72 hours.

  6. #356
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,110
    I cannot have a discussion with somebody who actually believes there were WMD's in Iraq or who compares it to the situation in Libya.

    It was getting off topic, anyways. G'nite.
    "Death has come to your little town, Sheriff." -Dr. Loomis

  7. #357
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    4,580
    Quote Originally Posted by beep View Post
    I cannot have a discussion with somebody who actually believes there were WMD's in Iraq or who compares it to the situation in Libya.

    It was getting off topic, anyways. G'nite.
    Agreed. Bye now.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Casper, I love you so much baby boy... waking up with you in the house is a blessing every day! Thank you for filling our home and hearts with so much love, joy, laughter and ever so sweet Sammy smiles! We belong together! XOXOX

  8. #358
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,653
    Quote Originally Posted by beep View Post
    I cannot have a discussion with somebody who actually believes there were WMD's in Iraq or who compares it to the situation in Libya.

    It was getting off topic, anyways. G'nite.
    The soldiers quoted in the above links are lying? Just want to be clear on this.

    As far as Libya goes, you are the one who said Iraq was an unconstitutional war. I showed why it wasn't and why Libya was.

    But I suppose it is what it is...

  9. #359
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,110
    Quote Originally Posted by SRVFan View Post
    The soldiers quoted in the above links are lying? Just want to be clear on this.

    As far as Libya goes, you are the one who said Iraq was an unconstitutional war. I showed why it wasn't and why Libya was.

    But I suppose it is what it is...
    Better give Bush and Cheney a call. They both admitted there weren't. And I didn't say it was unconstitutional. Not everything revolves around what Americans think.
    "Death has come to your little town, Sheriff." -Dr. Loomis

  10. #360
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,653
    Excuse me, you are correct. You didn't say unconstitutional, you said illegal. Still damn hard to blame that on one party when both voted to go. You see, I believe the two-party system is screwing America more than anything. You are either one or the other, can't be both. We seriously need a good middle-ground party to rise up and deal with the BS from the other two.

    While I know there were not large stockpiles of WMD's, there were small warehouses found throughout Iraq. There were roadside bombs found with mustard gas and other chemicals in them. All it takes is a few simple google searches, and the information is there.

    I still stand behind the fact that Libya was an illegal war. Both parties questions Obama on it, and he didn't have congressional approval. That is what made it an illegal attack.

  11. #361
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,653
    Here are a few links in regards to why Libya was an illegal attack by Obama.

    http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...as_illegal_war

    http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obama%...onstitutional/

    Here is one with both democrats and republicans calling it illegal.

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...gal-libya-war/


    With that being said, I'm hitting the sack for the night. Goodnight.

  12. #362
    Rosebud666 Guest
    Some people obviously need to spend more time prepping for the end of the world.

  13. #363
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    21,891
    Ok, so many of you are trying to get underneath eachother's skin now? Stop. It accomplishes nothing, least of all conversation. Remember to stick to the topic instead of trying to stick it to other members. Maybe even treat others as you want to be treated. And remember that at the end of the day we are all just regular people having (or trying to have) a conversation on an internet forum.

    Equal to that is the fact that this forum is a part of Scott's business. As such, a contentious atmosphere is not good for business.

    Please keep these things in mind from here on out.


    Or I can get out the chainsaw and then we can do a whole bunch of stupid shit repeatedly. Your choice.

    (Dear new people;

    Yes, I'm kidding about that last part. Kind of. And people who've been here know that. I'm as serious as a heart attack about the rest of it though. Five years of breaking up the same fights repeatedly is why. Solutions, not problems. Conversation, not contention. This is what we need to achieve here. Carry on.)
    .

  14. #364
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,653
    CNN 'Fact Check's the DNC's claims of 4.5 Million jobs as stated...


    http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/05/politi...html?hpt=hp_c1

  15. #365
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Petaluma Ca
    Posts
    4,672
    Quote Originally Posted by cindyt View Post
    Go back and read a few posts up thread. She was kidding you, right, Kate?
    Yep

  16. #366
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,653

  17. #367
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Petaluma Ca
    Posts
    4,672
    Quote Originally Posted by SRVFan View Post

    You have made your stance VERY clear.
    But quoteing Breitbart???

    Seriously - I hope you are not trying to stir stuff up. I don't see any other point to your posts.

  18. #368
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,653
    Quote Originally Posted by shipmatekate View Post
    You have made your stance VERY clear.
    But quoteing Breitbart???

    Seriously - I hope you are not trying to stir stuff up. I don't see any other point to your posts.

    Not trying to stir anything up, just showing that it is hypocritical to call out Romney for how he made his money when the Obama's did it the same way. I also included an earlier link where CNN is calling out the Obama's, and they are generally pro-Obama. The fact of the matter is that BOTH parties do things the SAME way. They collect donations the same way, get the same tax breaks, and make their millions. That is why it is called politics.

    With that being said, I pose the same question to you, are you trying to stir stuff up? I don't see any points to your posts either.

  19. #369
    Bidmor Guest
    Israel National News reports that the U.S. may supply Israel with bunker buster bombs and re-fueling planes as a deal in exchange for Israel delaying any attacks upon Iran until after U.S. elections.
    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Ne...0#.UEaeDZbN2Q6

  20. #370
    Stu Pidasso Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by SRVFan View Post
    Not trying to stir anything up, just showing that it is hypocritical to call out Romney for how he made his money when the Obama's did it the same way. I also included an earlier link where CNN is calling out the Obama's, and they are generally pro-Obama. The fact of the matter is that BOTH parties do things the SAME way. They collect donations the same way, get the same tax breaks, and make their millions. That is why it is called politics.

    With that being said, I pose the same question to you, are you trying to stir stuff up? I don't see any points to your posts either.
    All your evidence just proves you're a racist.

  21. 09-05-2012, 05:09 PM
    Reason
    Dupe

  22. #371
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,653
    From CNN: In North Carolina, student insurance costs rise under Obamacare

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...are/?hpt=po_c2

  23. #372
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    The Sticks
    Posts
    37,601
    Don't quote posts that break the rules, especially if those posts have cards on them. Also, please do not post strings of comments. Put them all on one comment box. If you don't have room, edit.
    Last edited by cindyt; 09-05-2012 at 08:42 PM.
    GOD IS NOT DEAD





  24. #373
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    4,580
    Quote Originally Posted by SRVFan View Post
    From CNN: In North Carolina, student insurance costs rise under Obamacare

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...are/?hpt=po_c2
    Directly from the above link:

    In an interview with CNN, Ross said the Obama law - the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - is only a partial driver of the rising premiums.

    Obamacare regulations requiring enhancements in prescription drug coverage and preventive care account for 12% of the insurance cost increase on campuses here, UNC officials estimate.

    Most of the cost increase, however, is due to adjustments in coverage by the university's insurance provider, Chartis, after the company evaluated claims experience over the last year and a half.

    Ross pointed out that the price tag for UNC-provided insurance coverage is still considerably less than other private plans. He said the university system makes no money off the insurance plan.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Casper, I love you so much baby boy... waking up with you in the house is a blessing every day! Thank you for filling our home and hearts with so much love, joy, laughter and ever so sweet Sammy smiles! We belong together! XOXOX

  25. 09-05-2012, 08:04 PM

  26. #374
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,653
    Cindy, I think Stu was joking. The smiley face made me think so anyways.

  27. 09-06-2012, 10:34 AM
    Reason
    Disruption

  28. #375
    Bidmor Guest
    According to The Center For Strategic And International Studies, this is what a US strike on Iran's nuclear facilities would look like, as reported by Business Insider:
    http://www.businessinsider.com/this-is-what-a-us-strike-on-irans-nuclear-facilities-would-look-like-according-to-csis-2012-9

    Also, The Jerusalem Post reports of a "sharp exchange" between Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and US Ambassador Dan Shapiro over Netanyahu's frustration with Obama's Iran policy.
    http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPol...aspx?id=284180
    Last edited by Bidmor; 09-07-2012 at 10:53 AM. Reason: added Jerusalem Post story

  29. #376
    Stu Pidasso Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by SRVFan View Post
    Cindy, I think Stu was joking. The smiley face made me think so anyways.
    It was joke man.

    Bad luck for the prez that the job report comes out the day after his speech. trouble weighs a ton.

  30. #377
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,302
    After US. President Barack Obama has left
    his term in office.
    We would so love him to run for the
    Prime Minister of Canada.
    Carolyn(1958-2009) always in my heart.

  31. #378
    Bidmor Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by theotherlondon View Post
    After US. President Barack Obama has left
    his term in office.
    We would so love him to run for the
    Prime Minister of Canada.
    You can have him now, and we'll throw in Romney as a bonus. But wait, if you call within the next 30 minutes, you'll receive a second bonus of Biden and Ryan. Just mention promo code "clones". That's a big effin' deal! Operators are standing by.
    Last edited by Bidmor; 09-08-2012 at 02:22 PM.

  32. #379
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    5,571
    Romney 2012-13-2021. We can't live in another 4 years of communist Hell

  33. #380
    Rosebud666 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by pyt View Post
    Romney 2012-13-2021. We can't live in another 4 years of communist Hell
    I sincerely doubt that you know what life under a genuine Communist dictatorship is really like. If you cultivated a few friendships with people who experienced it first hand, I don't think you wouldn't bandy about the word "Communist" so casually. But it's always good for trying to wind people up, isn't it?

    I will renounce my US citizenship before I have to live under a President Romney. I mean it.
    Last edited by Rosebud666; 09-08-2012 at 03:00 PM.

  34. #381
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    The Sticks
    Posts
    37,601
    Except immigrants who have come to the US from a communist country, no one who lives here knows what kind of hell communism is. I don't know and I don't care to know. I'm 56 years old and I can remember freedoms we no longer enjoy today. And why is that? Because a few fuckers took advange--fishing, hunting, driving, you name it--and so laws had to be made to prevent and protect. Now some states require fingerprints on drivers license and an ID to vote. And those are just a few of the simple things. But I live free, because I obey the laws. If I lived in a communist country I couldn't claim that
    Last edited by cindyt; 09-08-2012 at 05:13 PM.
    GOD IS NOT DEAD





  35. #382
    endsleigh03 Guest
    Communist country?

  36. #383
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Mossy and wet
    Posts
    1,314
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosebud666 View Post
    I sincerely doubt that you know what life under a genuine Communist dictatorship is really like. If you cultivated a few friendships with people who experienced it first hand, I don't think you wouldn't bandy about the word "Communist" so casually. But it's always good for trying to wind people up, isn't it?

    I will renounce my US citizenship before I have to live under a President Romney. I mean it.
    Friendships? Heck, I have relatives who lived it.

  37. #384
    Rosebud666 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Maxster View Post
    Friendships? Heck, I have relatives who lived it.
    Then you know exactly what I mean. Living as I do within a few miles of the former border between East and West Germany gives me a different perspective on things.

    If I had a buck for every time Obama has been called a Communist, I could afford to build a time-space discombobulator to whisk some people away to Checkpoint Charley or the border station at Duederstadt - I'm just not certain which side of the line I would drop them on.

  38. #385
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,110
    Quote Originally Posted by pyt View Post
    Romney 2012-13-2021. We can't live in another 4 years of communist Hell
    Oh my god. The States aren't a Communist hell. It's a National Socialist hell! Get it right!
    Last edited by beep; 09-09-2012 at 06:24 AM.
    "Death has come to your little town, Sheriff." -Dr. Loomis

  39. #386
    Forever-27 Guest
    I think Romney has made a churched up use of the term communist. America isnt a communist nation. Its not a socialist nation either, but its quickly going in that direction. Since he took office the unemployment rate has stayed at 8% or higher. I guess this is the new norm. Despite three massive stimulas packages funded by me, you and everyone who pays taxes with no positive results. He has increased the national debt by about 6 trillion dollars, so in other words what took Bush 8 years to do to the debt Obama has done in less then 4 years.

    He acts like a dictator but in reality, hes not. He cant just go creating laws on the fly , Like the one he declared giving illegals , common criminals in the country when they arent supposed to be which is btw against the law, under the age of 30 amnesty. Threres a process to making laws according to our constution, course its painfully obovious he dosent care about that.

    Aside from buying the car companies, buying banks, nationalizing the college loan operations and his health care program , all this leads me to believe hes got something against the form of government we have always had here. He dosent like capitolism. In fact he hates it. Hes launched a all out assault on it. Since taking office more people have joined the wel fare rolls and are on government aid then under any other president. With all the money hes spent that we dont have, social security, medicare and welfare will all dry up. As it is even now, theres more people collecting from these programs then there are paying into them. Its just not sustainable. He should pay more attention to Europe where most every country is in financial ruin due to entitlement programs and unfunded liability. He keeps saying its getting better, knowing full well its not.

    Hes using the same practices that Carter used sum 30 years before him, micromanaging everything, creating new departments and new regulations almost daily. It didnt work for Carter and isnt working for obama.

    Romney was never my first choice or even in my top 10. All the candadates I wanted have dropped. Michelle Bachman, dropped- Herman cain, dropped, - Rick Santorium, dropped, - Newt Gingrich, dropped. So I dont see this as a vote for Romney as much as I see it as a vote against Obama.

  40. #387
    Taggerez Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by cindyt View Post
    Except immigrants who have come to the US from a communist country, no one who lives here knows what kind of hell communism is. I don't know and I don't care to know. I'm 56 years old and I can remember freedoms we no longer enjoy today. And why is that? Because a few fuckers took advange--fishing, hunting, driving, you name it--and so laws had to be made to prevent and protect. Now some states require fingerprints on drivers license and an ID to vote. And those are just a few of the simple things. But I live free, because I obey the laws. If I lived in a communist country I couldn't claim that
    No, no, you're basic rights are inalienable and lawmakers can't tweek them because some jackass crosses the line. Politicians (particularly of the Obama stripe) like to use excuses to curb you rights and steal your property.

  41. #388
    Rosebud666 Guest

    Things that I have "learned" from "patriot" radio

    Things that I have "learned" about US politics from listening to so-called "patriot" radio - just in the last three days


    Obama is a Communist bent on establishing a Marxist dictatorship.


    The Obama administration is conspiring with the United Nations to confiscate all of your guns.


    The Federal Highway Administration is erecting new, secret highway markers as guides for UN/Chinese/Russian invaders.


    There are already heavily armed Russian special forces lying in wait at secret locations within the continental United States.


    US foreign policy is dictated by the Israeli government.


    Recent catastrophic weather events are the result of clandestine cloud seeding and weather control.


    The international economic downturn that began in 2008 was the work of a cabal of major multinational corporations striving for world domination under the direction of Zionist Jews.


    The above statement is not antisemitic because "Zionist"/Israeli Jews are not really Jews. The only "real" Jews left are black and live somewhere in Africa.


    Vacinations are a plot by the pharmaceuticals industry to make people sicker so they will buy more medicine.


    Vacinations are a plot by the Zionst cabal to kill people and reduce the surplus population.


    The effects of a vacination can be reversed, but the only person who knows how to do it is a woman who has been stripped of her medical license, but still calls herself "Dr.".


    9/11 was an inside job.


    The Obama Administration is bent on getting more Mexicans into the US in order to boost demand for goods and services.


    FEMA is not your friend. Its main task is to set up concentration camps for dissenters. The first camps have already been built / are under construction.


    Modern geology and archeology are Zionist/Communist fronts whose sole purpose is to make us disbelieve the Biblical creation narrative.


    The Federal Reserve System is a Zionist/Communist/Satanic conspiracy.


    Freemasons are evil and cannot be trusted (gosh, so much for George Washington ).


    You need to buy lots and lots of gold now - but make sure not to buy "Jewish" gold! (What is "Jewish" gold? Does that mean it has been circumcised?)


    The Apollo 11 moon landing was / all of the moon landings were faked.


    Obama is Jewish.


    Franklin Roosevelt's family was actually Jewish - he took his orders from Zionists and that is why he got us into WWII.


    Did I mention that Obama is a Communist?

    If you fail to acknowledge all of the above as true, you are either stupid, in denial or in on the conspiracy.

    I could go on, but my stomach is starting to churn.


    Sorry if this offends anyone here, but if you sincerely believe two or more of the above:
    a) you may need to look into treatment for paranoia and/or are a very silly person
    b) I think you are probably not a very nice person to know.
    Last edited by Rosebud666; 09-09-2012 at 01:46 PM.

  42. #389
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    The Sticks
    Posts
    37,601
    Quote Originally Posted by Taggerez View Post
    No, no, you're basic rights are inalienable and lawmakers can't tweek them because some jackass crosses the line. Politicians (particularly of the Obama stripe) like to use excuses to curb you rights and steal your property.
    There are no basic rights to those things I mentioned. And I didn't cover everything, either. I just said laws are made because some people feel entitled and that is when rights become privileges which means you must go through a process, like fishing license fees, to fish, because some fuckers tried to fish the lakes empty, or hunting licenses fees, because some fuckers tried to kill all the deer.
    GOD IS NOT DEAD





  43. #390
    Rosebud666 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by cindyt View Post
    There are no basic rights to those things I mentioned. And I didn't cover everything, either. I just said laws are made because some people feel entitled and that is when rights become privileges which means you must go through a process, like fishing license fees, to fish, because some fuckers tried to fish the lakes empty, or hunting licenses fees, because some fuckers tried to kill all the deer.
    Or, like my grandma used to say when I shouted about my rights:

    "Rights come with responsibilities."

  44. #391
    Bidmor Guest
    No, it's not a communist state we're becoming...more on the other end of the spectrum we're being led into which is a corporate-fascist-police state, not unlike Hitler's Nazi government which was bankrolled in part for several years by American financiers...one was Prescott Bush (George W. Bush's grandfather) until the US government shut him down. Prescott's son, George H.W. "Poppy" Bush, was made Director of the CIA, then POTUS of course. Go figure.

    Thing is, a vote for Robney won't change anything. Did B.O. reverse any of W's general economic and war shenanigans? Nope. For all intents and purposes, Obama has effected a third George W. Bush term. Afghanistan is a permanent war. The recession that Bush started has continued and deepened under Obama. Gitmo is still open for business. The TSA goons are frisking grandma.

    Cast your vote for Robney or B.O. They're interchangeable.
    Last edited by Bidmor; 09-09-2012 at 02:59 PM.

  45. #392
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,616
    Thanks for that insightful post, Rosebud. I must admit, I've heard rumblings of quite a few of those accusations, but the Obama/Communist/Jew thing kinda made me chuckle. Well, actually, the whole post was entertaining.

    I just thought of something...if the people who believe all this bunk get diagnosed as mentally ill, THAT's Obama's fault, too! You know, cause he's conspiring with the drug companies to make us all sick. Dang, he's SNEAKY!

    Yes, the paragraph above is COMPLETE and Utter SARCASM. hehehe
    Last edited by Jenivere2011; 09-09-2012 at 02:58 PM.

  46. #393
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    The Sticks
    Posts
    37,601
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosebud666 View Post
    Or, like my grandma used to say when I shouted about my rights:

    "Rights come with responsibilities."
    Exactly. And in fact, it is your right to own property, but you must pay taxes on that property which turns that right into a privilege, and if you exercise your "rights" by not paying your taxes you will lose that property. Back in the early 80s my baby sister and her boyfriend lived way the hell out in the sticks with a self-styled preacheer, who did not believe in having hunting and fishing or driver's license, or paying his property taxes. About a week after my sister and her bf moved out sheriff's deputies went out there to evict him. He fired on them and they killed his ass. That is what self entitled inalienable rights will do if you overeat stupid.
    Last edited by cindyt; 09-09-2012 at 02:59 PM.
    GOD IS NOT DEAD





  47. #394
    Rosebud666 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Bidmor View Post
    No, it's not a communist state we're becoming...more on the other end of the spectrum we're being led into which is a corporate-fascist-police state, not unlike Hitler's Nazi government which was bankrolled in part for several years by American financiers...one was Prescott Bush (George W. Bush's grandfather) until the US government shut him down. Prescott's son, George H.W. "Poppy" Bush, was made Director of the CIA, then POTUS of course. Go figure.

    Thing is, a vote for Robney won't change anything. Did B.O. reverse any of W's general economic and war shenanigans? Nope. In effect, Obama has effected a third George W. Bush term. Afghanistan is a permanent war. The recession that Bush started has continued and deepened under Obama. Gitmo is still open for business. The TSA goons are frisking grandma.

    Cast your vote for Robney or B.O. They're interchangeable.
    Since you seem to be in the know, educate us please. Who is behind this massive corporate conspiracy?

  48. #395
    Bidmor Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosebud666 View Post
    Since you seem to be in the know, educate us please. Who is behind this massive corporate conspiracy?
    You're a good wordsmith and not bad at research either, so why not come up with a few facts and figures to show me the errors of my ways?

  49. #396
    Rosebud666 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Bidmor View Post
    You're a good wordsmith and not bad at research either, so why not come up with a few facts and figures to show me the errors of my ways?
    How can I show you the error of your ways if you don't tell us what you think?

    So you don't want to tell us who is behind the conspiracy? That's your right of course. But maybe it is because a lot of us wouldn't like the answer? Even in poker, you eventually have to show your hand.

  50. #397
    Bidmor Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosebud666 View Post
    How can I show you the error of your ways if you don't tell us what you think?

    So you don't want to tell us who is behind the conspiracy? That's your right of course. But maybe it is because a lot of us wouldn't like the answer? Even in poker, you eventually have to show your hand.
    Well we're not playing poker here. Your post #388 indicates your mindset and that's fine. You believe what you want to and I'll believe what I want to and shall we leave at that? Agree to disagree? I'll shake on that.

    I can leave you with an anecdote. Many years ago I was visiting looking over Michael Reagan's website and I came upon a page which contained his recollection of his father's encounter at the convention when he was nominated. Michael claimed that Ronald wanted Paul Laxalt (as I recall) for his running mate but another faction was pushing for George Bush, whom RR thought was too liberal and thus he would not consider Bush. This was still in the day of the nominee waiting until the convention to name his running mate.

    Michael was a young man at the time, sitting in his father's suite when in walked David Rockefeller, Walter Cronkite, and another man whose name escapes me. (Sadly, the web page I speak of disappeared later) Michael stated that the trio made it clear to RR that if he did not accept Bush as his veep, they would see to it that Jimmy Carter would be re-elected.

    Very reluctantly, RR was forced to agree because he couldn't abide another four years of Carter. Michael recalled that after the trio left, RR was beside himself...that he felt blackmailed...that his conservative agenda was now compromised because he not only thought Bush too liberal but also distrusted him, knowing Bush's background and connections. From that day on, Michael stated his father was worried that Bush would attempt some kind of coup to ascend to the presidency.
    Last edited by Bidmor; 09-09-2012 at 05:17 PM.

  51. #398
    Taggerez Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by cindyt View Post
    There are no basic rights to those things I mentioned. And I didn't cover everything, either. I just said laws are made because some people feel entitled and that is when rights become privileges which means you must go through a process, like fishing license fees, to fish, because some fuckers tried to fish the lakes empty, or hunting licenses fees, because some fuckers tried to kill all the deer.
    Laws are made because some people either pay to have something regulated, or someone wants to tell someone else what to do. Process is fine but getting to the point of what the process is about is a good idea, too.

    I have to say, I don't follow how paying property taxes turns property rights into a privilege. Property rights are inalienable and the most basic right we have. That the state imposes taxes on your property means the state is trying to cut itself in on your right. Afterall, if you don't pay your tax and the state can take your property as a result, you're just renting from them. Now that is quite a Marxist assumption indeed!

  52. #399
    graciehillfarm Guest
    I would vote for one of my dogs before I'd vote for Obama. I AM a registered Democrat and have been for several decades. For that matter, I was a liberal activist while I was in college. There is nothing pro-America about Obama. He actually frightens me.

  53. #400
    Rosebud666 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Bidmor View Post
    Well we're not playing poker here. Your post #388 indicates your mindset and that's fine. You believe what you want to and I'll believe what I want to and shall we leave at that? Agree to disagree? I'll shake on that.

    I can leave you with an anecdote. Many years ago I was visiting looking over Michael Reagan's website and I came upon a page which contained his recollection of his father's encounter at the convention when he was nominated. Michael claimed that Ronald wanted Paul Laxalt (as I recall) for his running mate but another faction was pushing for George Bush, whom RR thought was too liberal and thus he would not consider Bush. This was still in the day of the nominee waiting until the convention to name his running mate.

    Michael was a young man at the time, sitting in his father's suite when in walked David Rockefeller, Walter Cronkite, and another man whose name escapes me. (Sadly, the web page I speak of disappeared later) Michael stated that the trio made it clear to RR that if he did not accept Bush as his veep, they would see to it that Jimmy Carter would be re-elected.

    Very reluctantly, RR was forced to agree because he couldn't abide another four years of Carter. Michael recalled that after the trio left, RR was beside himself...that he felt blackmailed...that his conservative agenda was now compromised because he not only thought Bush too liberal but also distrusted him, knowing Bush's background and connections. From that day on, Michael stated his father was worried that Bush would attempt some kind of coup to ascend to the presidency.
    Michael Reagan is off his gourd, and it is good for his business to peddle tails like this.

    Even if we take this anecdote at face value, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The situation you describe sounds like ordinary strong-arm party politics to me, hardly evidence of a vast corporate conspiracy.

    The Rockefellers are, of course, to blame for everything and have been for a long time. I can deal with that.

    Now if you had thrown a few Rothschilds or other "Jewish robber barons" into the mix, then I would be crying foul and would be very disappointed in you indeed.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •