Page: 1 2 3 Next > Jump to:  Bottom  Last Post
 davidildo123
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 143 Posts
|
Friday, April 01, 2011 1:22:43 PM
A Canadian agreeing with me?!?! HOLY CATS!!!! Maybe it is time to reconsider my postion. ;)
"no amount of American lives can resolve the political disagreement that lies at the heart of someone else's civil war." -Barak Obama on Iraq
"if we waited one more day, Benghazi... could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world" - Barak Obama on Libya
|
|
 5Cats
Male, 40-49, Canada
16953 Posts
|
Thursday, March 31, 2011 3:34:06 PM
@davidildo is correct: this Libya action not only violates everything he campaigned on, everything he promised, the US Constitution; it violates the trust of all those who voted for him.
Thus the MSM spins night and day to put some lipstick on this PIG. (the pig = violation of trust, not Obama himself) |
|
5Cats
Male, 40-49, Canada
16953 Posts
|
Thursday, March 31, 2011 3:31:02 PM
Hey what about me ?!
Aww @Crackr! We're VFFs already, eh? (virtual friends forever, lolz!)
Awwwwww someone has a crush!
Perhaps @Zombunny, but it's a manly one! Like Vikings! Rrrrg!
Did they give command to that Canadian commander with the panty fetish?
Oh Lord! @madest! I sure hope not!! I mean, that guy was obviously from Quebec! (hopes that's true...) |
|
davidildo123
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
143 Posts
|
Thursday, March 31, 2011 2:51:19 PM
Gerry1of1
"a spin that is not qite a lie but not quite true"...that is funny cause it is kinda like your post. Not quite a lie, but not quite true....
Actually I think it is a bit more than that. He campaigned and sold himself as one who would never wage a war like this. It is a violation of what he said is a core belief..
"I will only send our troops into harm’s way with a clear mission"
"What I am opposed to is a rash war"
"making absolutely certain that it is because there is an imminent threat, that American interests are going to be protected, that we have a plan to succeed and to exit"
" I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. The world, and the Iraqi people would be better off without him. But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United Stat |
|
 Gerry1of1
Male, 50-59, Western US
25635 Posts
|
Thursday, March 31, 2011 7:31:17 AM
A politician was talking and put a spin on it that was
not quite a lie but not quite true...
This is newsworthy?
|
|
 madest
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
6407 Posts
|
Thursday, March 31, 2011 7:26:05 AM
Did they give command to that Canadian commander with the panty fetish? |
|
 zombunny
Female, 18-29, Eastern US
2524 Posts
|
Thursday, March 31, 2011 7:03:06 AM
"5Cats: @OutWest and @handys003 are fast becomming my BIF!
CrakrJak: Hey what about me ?!
hehehe"
Awwwwww someone has a crush! |
|
davidildo123
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
143 Posts
|
Thursday, March 31, 2011 3:22:08 AM
>I eagerly await the first "anti-Libya kinetic action peace protest"
Ya missed one in Chicago. We had a couple thousand protesters with a lovely chant that said something like, "give the money to education, stop war and occupation". It was pretty hysterical listening to the chant, where it seemed they picked "education", only because it rhymed with "occupation", and they were protesting everything. Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Israel,something about Wisconsin and there were even those lovely rainbow gay flags flying everywhere. People on the streets literally stopped to laugh at them while trying to figure out what they were actually protesting.
|
|
 CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
14374 Posts
|
Thursday, March 31, 2011 1:22:24 AM
5Cats: @OutWest and @handys003 are fast becomming my BIF!
Hey what about me ?! 
hehehe |
|
 last1in
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
261 Posts
|
Wednesday, March 30, 2011 9:14:20 PM
meh |
|
5Cats
Male, 40-49, Canada
16953 Posts
|
Wednesday, March 30, 2011 8:28:20 PM
...they handed over command to NATO and effectively to the Canadians as the general in command is now a Canadian General.
This is true, we Canadians are in command! Oh, small detail? That Gereral's NATO superiour? An American Admiral...
In plain terms: the current NATO commander (a Canuck) takes HIS orders from an American. Just fyi, the US is still 'in command'.
@OutWest and @handys003 are fast becomming my BIF! (best internet friends )
I eagerly await the first "anti-Libya kinetic action peace protest" AND @Baalth explaining his post... |
|
 OutWest
Male, 50-59, Western US
548 Posts
|
Wednesday, March 30, 2011 6:53:05 PM
LOL... Cats is on a roll. This "Executive Decision" was just what he needed.
It is fun to see how many of us here, wouldn't cross the aisle for a fact. And we wonder why our political leaders can't get anything accomplished in a bi-partisan manner.
Keep it coming Cats... love it when Politicians are exposed as marketing managers for their party. |
|
 handys003
Male, 50-59, Western US
2402 Posts
|
Wednesday, March 30, 2011 6:36:57 PM
@Durrell
yes under a Canadian Commander. However the bulk of the logistics still is from American firepower with final authority under that fleets commanders decision making. As it is with England's and Frances fleet commanders decision as well. Plus a huge chunk of change out of US taxpayers dollars. BTW which we really don't have to spend. Perchance since you got a sh*t load of oil. Why don't Canada just fund this whole show yourselves this time around. Tell you what I'll find a Canadian around here and buy them a drink for thanks. That should cover it. |
|
 SCfan
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
1665 Posts
|
Wednesday, March 30, 2011 6:29:18 PM
He is a hypocritical, lying, socialist piece of garbage. |
|
Durrell
Male, 18-29, Canada
136 Posts
|
Wednesday, March 30, 2011 6:01:43 PM
Woah on the first one, they handed over command to NATO and effectively to the Canadians as the general in command is now a Canadian General. |
|
handys003
Male, 50-59, Western US
2402 Posts
|
Wednesday, March 30, 2011 5:52:29 PM
Ah how when ones turns president they get caught in the 'Good old boy system" No matter what party. |
|
5Cats
Male, 40-49, Canada
16953 Posts
|
Wednesday, March 30, 2011 5:47:45 PM
PM, EO, _W_ @madest. At least you know (now!) that I am 100% correct! |
|
 SmilinSam
Female, 18-29, Eastern US
3603 Posts
|
Wednesday, March 30, 2011 5:04:40 PM
great minds think alike, unfortunate as that is  |
|
madest
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
6407 Posts
|
Wednesday, March 30, 2011 4:33:30 PM
It's called an executive order. Proving once again you're ignorant about American politics. |
|
5Cats
Male, 40-49, Canada
16953 Posts
|
Wednesday, March 30, 2011 4:32:32 PM
you're not from here and don't understand American politics.
Oh, and I suppose all those forign Unversity Professors who teach such things "don't know nothing about us 'Maricans" neither? You're fail is "just another point of your ignorance light" eh?
Wait, WTF does that even mean????? |
|
5Cats
Male, 40-49, Canada
16953 Posts
|
Wednesday, March 30, 2011 4:28:54 PM
@madest you clearly know nothing on this subject:
A Presidential Mandate must be re-signed by each new president to continue. Bush signed a PM, it was not a law passed by the houses. They COULD overturn it, with 2/3 vote I think, but they didn't.
All Obama had to do was NOT sign that bill and *poof* it's gone! Of course the next Pres could re-sign it and *poof* it's back!
If you make me go dig up the article (which is several years old now) I shall expect the prize @SmilinSam just won, only with YOU and YOU'RE paying for it!
Self-justification: the victory of fools... |
|
5Cats
Male, 40-49, Canada
16953 Posts
|
Wednesday, March 30, 2011 4:24:08 PM
(back to seriously mode)
vv I agree with you @SmilinSam:
Big Government = clusterf*ck
And there's nearly zilch any single human being can do about it, even if he/she is POTUS!
BUT in this one case: Obama is 100% personally responsible. HE gave the order, HE didn't ask Congress, HE made NCAA picks rather than explain himself to the American People.
Normally I'd agree that the POTUS is mostly a figurehead, but there are some things the Prez can do, or chose to not do, which could make a difference in 'the way things are'.
When Bush signed the Big Government Bailout, he could have chosen to "veto" it, but he didn't. I called him a knucklehead for his cowardice! (and several other words that rhyme with 'drat') |
|
madest
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
6407 Posts
|
Wednesday, March 30, 2011 4:23:17 PM
Cat5, President Obama did not "re-sign" Bush's ban on stem cell research. You stated he did as if it were fact. The fact is, Obama issued an executive order expanding stem cell research and subsequently, federal judge Royce C. Lamberth issued a temporary injunction stopping it.
The personal insult was justified because you act like an expert on American politics which is absurd on it's face because you're not from here and don't understand American politics. Besides that it's fun. |
|
5Cats
Male, 40-49, Canada
16953 Posts
|
Wednesday, March 30, 2011 4:14:08 PM
I knew this was submitted by 5cats before I even opened the comments. what do i win!?
@SmilinSam - You win a fabulous, all expenses paid (by you) DATE WITH @DAVYMID!!!! yayayaya!
(and good news! he puts out on the first date, eh?)
lolz! |
|
5Cats
Male, 40-49, Canada
16953 Posts
|
Wednesday, March 30, 2011 4:11:46 PM
You don't know what you're talking about. Obama tried to expand stem cell research but a federal judge put a hold on it.
Just another point of your ignorance light.
@madest is it ever possible you might, just one time, disagree with me without adding a personal insult? It belittles both you and your arguement, eh?
(NOTE: in before @madest cries: "you just insulted ME!!!!@!!" No I did not. I pointed out the effect his insult has on whomever reads it, not anything personal about him, m-kay?)
Meanwhile reality remains: 4 days after his famous "signing a bill that supports stemcell research" he re-signed the exact same bill Bush signed which the MSM raged over: that which refused Fed funding for many forms of SSR.
Perhaps the 'judge' you mentioned was refering to THAT BILL which OBAMA HIMSELF re-signed, eh? Ever think of that @madest? |
|
Page: 1 2 3 Next >
|
Back to Listing
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}