Obama Busted in What May Be the Crime of the Century…


fuhr52

New member
Keep Santa Clause in the political arena and you have a candidate hard to beat. Democrats will win elections until they run out of other peoples money to buy all the free stuff they hand out to buy votes. Isn't politics great? :sarcastic:
 

MI .45

MI .45
Fast and Furious was a Bush program, NSA spying started under Bush as well, 8 investigations into Benghazi, including those run by the Republicans in the House concluded that there was no wrong doing. (BTW 67 people died at US embassies under Bush, 241 Marines died in Beirut due to a single terrorist attack under Reagan)

The IRS scandal was not a scandal and the IRS person in charge of investigating political groups attempting to get tax free status, including liberal groups, was a Republican, and that investigation also cleared the White House. The actual job of that division of the IRS was to investigate non profits who might be faking their purpose to gain tax free status. The requirements of tax free status for political groups are very strict and there was a lot of fraud, so all she was doing was her job, and remember she was a Republican acting on her own accord.

So either you are ignorant of the facts involved in those fake scandals or are consciously bringing them up when you know they are non scandals and that Obama was cleared in all of them.

As for Obama being the Captain of the ship then I guess Bush is to blame for destroying the US and world economies in 2008, ignoring all the FBI and CIA warnings about the 9/11 attacks leading to 3000 deaths, invading Iraq under false pretenses causing the deaths of 4000 Americans, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and costing us $2 Trillion. (also creating ISIS, the military leadership of which is composed of former Saddam generals and Baath party officials) Further Bush put in charge of our emergency response dept, FEMA, a political crony who had no qualifications for the post and when Katrina hit was completely incapable of handling the crisis which lead to many unnecessary deaths (for comparison look at how Obama handled Hurricane Sandy, even Chris Christie praised him). Further Bush and Cheney gave consent for the US to torture people, and they might actually face charges in the international court. It is likely that you'll never see either of them leave the US because they face possihttp://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2012/sep/24/barack-obama/barack-obama-said-fast-and-furious-began-under-bus/ble arrest.

So what actual proof of Obama doing anything illegal or unconstitutional do you have? The fact is that if the Republicans could move for impeachment they would have, at the very least just to throw red meat to their base, but they can't because he hasn't. Obama taught Constitutional law, he knows it better than the vast majority of those in the House or Senate.

Fast & Furious was NOT a G.W. Bush program - his was similar called Wide Receiver but was shut down in 2007, 2 years before Obama took office. (Barack Obama said 'Fast and Furious' began under the Bush administration | PolitiFact Florida)

The Bush operation was smaller, was an attempt to accomplish something (misguided as it was), shut down after the tracked weapons fell off the grid (no tracking whatsoever with F & F and only shut down after the Border Patrol agent was killed with one of the guns that walked), and there was no obfuscation of the facts (unlike F & F where the admin did everything possible to bury the thing). Most of the mechanics of F & F was the exact opposite of the Wide Receiver program. (No, Operation Wide Receiver Does Not Excuse Obama Or Holder | Human Events)
Citing previous GOP administrations for committing their egregious acts does not make Obama's similar acts legal, moral, or just, especially when he actively campaigned against many of them. I do not advocate dismissing Republicans and tarring Democrats but to continue and even advance programs such as... NSA spying, an IRS that is suspect at best on many fronts during this admin (In your IRS diatribe above, if you're referring to Lois Lerner she is a registered Democrat - see paragraph 6: (Link Removed), and our involvement in more foreign conflicts does not put Obama on high moral ground.

As to Obama's teaching of Constitutional Law... Link Removed
Granted, he has not been impeached and he won't be no matter what. There is no way politically that the Republicans could ever bring BHO up on any charge without appearing racist or the mounting of a personal attack.
 

Farmhood

New member
It was rhetorical. It is obvious to any one who has studied presidential histories that Obama's slump in the polls is nothing unusual. Therefore, it is suspect when used as an argument for justifying the Republicans false sense that they have a mandate to try and run the political table. The Republican Party acts as if the President should just roll over and let them run the political agenda, that is far from the case. Especially when they still have to convince a democratic president to sign whatever legislation they can manage to pass. When they can win a Presidential election AND own the Senate and The House all in the same year, THEN they will have a clear mandate.

It was used because someone stated false numbers and they were proven wrong. All this other stuff you posted is really wierd... do you really live like this? Take a breather, your guy had his run now it's on to the next goofball to mess up America.

sinful nature is always hostile to God....
 

GryHounnd

Banned
It was used because someone stated false numbers and they were proven wrong. All this other stuff you posted is really wierd... do you really live like this? Take a breather, your guy had his run now it's on to the next goofball to mess up America.

sinful nature is always hostile to God....

So which goofball do you like? Jeb Bush? Mittens Romney? Rand Paul? Sarah "The Quitta from Wasilla" Palin? Mitch "Turtle Boy" McConnell? John "Hard Time" Boner?
 

FactsNotFiction

New member
Fast & Furious was NOT a G.W. Bush program - his was similar called Wide Receiver but was shut down in 2007, 2 years before Obama took office. (Barack Obama said 'Fast and Furious' began under the Bush administration | PolitiFact Florida)

The Bush operation was smaller, was an attempt to accomplish something (misguided as it was), shut down after the tracked weapons fell off the grid (no tracking whatsoever with F & F and only shut down after the Border Patrol agent was killed with one of the guns that walked), and there was no obfuscation of the facts (unlike F & F where the admin did everything possible to bury the thing). Most of the mechanics of F & F was the exact opposite of the Wide Receiver program. (No, Operation Wide Receiver Does Not Excuse Obama Or Holder | Human Events)
Citing previous GOP administrations for committing their egregious acts does not make Obama's similar acts legal, moral, or just, especially when he actively campaigned against many of them. I do not advocate dismissing Republicans and tarring Democrats but to continue and even advance programs such as... NSA spying, an IRS that is suspect at best on many fronts during this admin (In your IRS diatribe above, if you're referring to Lois Lerner she is a registered Democrat - see paragraph 6: (Link Removed), and our involvement in more foreign conflicts does not put Obama on high moral ground.

As to Obama's teaching of Constitutional Law... Link Removed
Granted, he has not been impeached and he won't be no matter what. There is no way politically that the Republicans could ever bring BHO up on any charge without appearing racist or the mounting of a personal attack.




MI 45, I appreciate that you are participating and are attempting to use facts and citable sources. This is how a discussion should be.


Operation Wide Receiver was started under Bush in 2006, That was the start of the "gun walking" program. The Phoenix ATF office enacted 'fast and furious' on their own as the policy of 'Gun Walking" was already established UNDER BUSH. None of the members of the Obama DOJ suggested using "Gun Walking". It was a local decision.

You're right Lerner is a Democrat, but the person who found the case and moved it forward was a "conservative Republican", as stated in the Washington Post (the same source you are using): "It’s also worth noting that a self-described “conservative Republican” manager told GOP investigators that he elevated the first tea party case to Washington for additional analysis. An inspector general’s timeline of the targeting actions listed an event on that same date, Feb. 25, 2010, as the genesis of the inappropriate IRS behavior." As there have been no determinations of actual wrongdoing, this is a dead issue.

As for Obama having taught constitutional law, according to the University of Chicago:

" UC Law School statement: The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer." From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School’s Senior Lecturers have high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined.

As for whether it's moral for Obama to have continued the NSA spying that started under Bush, you have to ask did he know about it. And let's assume he did. But his first responsibility is to protect Americans from physical harm. On US soil we lost 17 people due to terrorist actions, under Bush 3000. Personally I could care less about the government reading my emails, I don't do anything illegal, and to be honest I assume that all email or e communication is hackable, and by people far less concerned with my safety than the Feds.
But if you want to talk morals, at least Obama didn't torture people, and has attempted to close Gitmo. So yes he's not perfect and I don't agree with everything he does, but we are so much better off than under Bush. And that can actually be measured.
 

FactsNotFiction

New member
It was used because someone stated false numbers and they were proven wrong. All this other stuff you posted is really wierd... do you really live like this? Take a breather, your guy had his run now it's on to the next goofball to mess up America.

sinful nature is always hostile to God....

False numbers and proven wrong? If you're referring to my numbers regarding the polls I cited 2 recent polls Rasmussen and Washington Post/ABC that support my statement.
 

billt

Banned
MI 45, I appreciate that you are participating and are attempting to use facts and citable sources. This is how a discussion should be.


Operation Wide Receiver was started under Bush in 2006, That was the start of the "gun walking" program. The Phoenix ATF office enacted 'fast and furious' on their own as the policy of 'Gun Walking" was already established UNDER BUSH. None of the members of the Obama DOJ suggested using "Gun Walking". It was a local decision.

You're right Lerner is a Democrat, but the person who found the case and moved it forward was a "conservative Republican", as stated in the Washington Post (the same source you are using): "It’s also worth noting that a self-described “conservative Republican” manager told GOP investigators that he elevated the first tea party case to Washington for additional analysis. An inspector general’s timeline of the targeting actions listed an event on that same date, Feb. 25, 2010, as the genesis of the inappropriate IRS behavior." As there have been no determinations of actual wrongdoing, this is a dead issue.

As for Obama having taught constitutional law, according to the University of Chicago:

" UC Law School statement: The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer." From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School’s Senior Lecturers have high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined.

As for whether it's moral for Obama to have continued the NSA spying that started under Bush, you have to ask did he know about it. And let's assume he did. But his first responsibility is to protect Americans from physical harm. On US soil we lost 17 people due to terrorist actions, under Bush 3000. Personally I could care less about the government reading my emails, I don't do anything illegal, and to be honest I assume that all email or e communication is hackable, and by people far less concerned with my safety than the Feds.
But if you want to talk morals, at least Obama didn't torture people, and has attempted to close Gitmo. So yes he's not perfect and I don't agree with everything he does, but we are so much better off than under Bush. And that can actually be measured.

Use periods between your paragraphs to space them. Not your fault, it's this stupid software.
 

MI .45

MI .45
MI 45, I appreciate that you are participating and are attempting to use facts and citable sources. This is how a discussion should be.
An attempt to use facts? Interesting.


Operation Wide Receiver was started under Bush in 2006, That was the start of the "gun walking" program. The Phoenix ATF office enacted 'fast and furious' on their own as the policy of 'Gun Walking" was already established UNDER BUSH. None of the members of the Obama DOJ suggested using "Gun Walking". It was a local decision.

Bush stopped Wide Receiver in 2007 and was resurrected by the Obama DOJ as Fast & Furious. (http://documents.latimes.com/fast-and-furious-oig-report/)

You're right Lerner is a Democrat, but the person who found the case and moved it forward was a "conservative Republican", as stated in the Washington Post (the same source you are using): "It’s also worth noting that a self-described “conservative Republican” manager told GOP investigators that he elevated the first tea party case to Washington for additional analysis. An inspector general’s timeline of the targeting actions listed an event on that same date, Feb. 25, 2010, as the genesis of the inappropriate IRS behavior." As there have been no determinations of actual wrongdoing, this is a dead issue.

Finding a case and Lerner's "inappropriate IRS behavior" (my use) are two different issues.

As for Obama having taught constitutional law, according to the University of Chicago:

There is no question that Obama taught at U of C. Where is the "expertise" in Constitutional law? He does seem to ignore or overstep parts of his authority granted in Art. 2 of the Constitution.

" UC Law School statement: The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer." From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School’s Senior Lecturers have high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined.

As for whether it's moral for Obama to have continued the NSA spying that started under Bush, you have to ask did he know about it. And let's assume he did. But his first responsibility is to protect Americans from physical harm. On US soil we lost 17 people due to terrorist actions, under Bush 3000. Personally I could care less about the government reading my emails, I don't do anything illegal, and to be honest I assume that all email or e communication is hackable, and by people far less concerned with my safety than the Feds.
But if you want to talk morals, at least Obama didn't torture people, and has attempted to close Gitmo. So yes he's not perfect and I don't agree with everything he does, but we are so much better off than under Bush. And that can actually be measured.

If you do not mind being spied on by your own government who can potentially use the information for their purposes without your consent (let alone the 4th Amendment issues) - please enjoy the tyranny. I do not!
--
 

FactsNotFiction

New member
MI. 45,

"Wide receiver" was not the only "Gun walking" program under Bush. And as a program that had been used before the local ATF used it again because the Obama administration was pressing them to stop the supply of guns to Mexico. However no higher ups in the Obama administration approved of it. And with the exception of "fast and Furious" keeping the potentially corrupt Mexicans in the dark, the investigating committee spokesman Hill stated that there was no difference between Bush's program and F&F.

"Hill added that one difference between the 2007 incident and Operation Fast and Furious was that in the 2007 operation, "Mexican authorities were notified. However, in Operation Fast and Furious the Mexican authorities were deliberately kept in the dark."
Link Removed

Back to the IRS, no findings of actual wrong doing. So assume all you want but it's a done deal.

As for Obama's teaching credentials, if the University says he was a professor, he was. As for teaching Constitutional law specifically, well pretty much all of our laws are based on that, so we can argue endlessly about that point, but he WAS a law professor. And while you may want to rationalize that Congress won;t act to impeach him because he's black, that's really a stretch, they'd LOVE to impeach him. The problem is they don't have grounds, and if they attempt to impeach him and it appears that it's groundless then they have managed to shoot themselves in the foot. But if they had actual legal grounds they'd do it in a second.

Tyranny???!!!! Are you kidding me? if Obama was tyrant you'd be thrown in jail just for saying that. Sorry but I think you have no idea what tyranny is. And BTW was it tyranny when Bush was reading your email or just Obama?

There's a strange hypocrisy I see on the right. So 4 Americans die in Benghazi, and one LEO dies in F&F, and the right is up in arms. Yet when the Republican governors choose to not expand Medicaid under the ACA, even though it costs them nothing, and will provide millions of their constituents with life saving healthcare, but despite studies from Harvard that state that every year in those states between 7,000 and 17,000 of their citizens will die from lack of access to healthcare because of the refusal to expand medicaid and yet there's no outcry. Or when Bush ignores FBI and CIA warnings about "Al qaeda intent to attack America" and "learning to fly planes but not land them" and 3000 Americans die, how come he gets a free pass from the right. Or how about when Bush invades Iraq, under what turns out to be deceptive reasons and 4000 Americans die and that's ok with the right?

If you want to talk about scandals relating to who has questionable integrity, or more blood on their hands, the Republicans do not fare well. Oh and who thought it was ok to torture people?

However Obama providing 10 million Americans with life saving healthcare, while lowering health care costs AND the deficit, well that's just horrible.
 

billt

Banned
So 4 Americans die in Benghazi, and one LEO dies in F&F, and the right is up in arms. Yet when the Republican governors choose to not expand Medicaid under the ACA, even though it costs them nothing, and will provide millions of their constituents with life saving healthcare, despite studies from Harvard that state that every year in those states between 7,000 and 17,000 of their citizens will die from lack of access to healthcare because of the refusal to expand medicaid and yet there's no outcry.

So let me get this straight. You're comparing the refusal to expand a government freebie program, to shooting someone to death in cold blood? Typical communist liberal. Where there is no drama, you'll create it by claiming criminality in the manhandling of the utterly worthless and stupid. The next thing your ilk will be declaring, is if Medicaid never made it into law, our government would be guilty of mass genocide.

.

And again you're full of $h!t. I live in Arizona. Our Republican Governor at the time, Jan Brewer expanded Medicaid, as well as put the Obama Care Supplement into state law. I know because I've got both Obama Care and the Supplement. You need to change your handle to Bull$hit & Drama.
 

Farmhood

New member
These Liberals are so naive to think POTUS or any of these leaders care about them. They trot you out to further pad their retirement and you can't see it!
You defend them like they are for YOU bro. You are nothing more than a fish they caught one Tuesday afternoon and now they are showing you off...When they are done with you they will eat you.
You will be remembered as a good dump.

Silly Liberals

sinful nature is always hostile to God....
 

FactsNotFiction

New member
So let me get this straight. You're comparing the refusal to expand a government freebie program, to shooting someone to death in cold blood? Typical communist liberal. Where there is no drama, you'll create it by claiming criminality in the manhandling of the utterly worthless and stupid. The next thing your ilk will be declaring, is if Medicaid never made it into law, our government would be guilty of mass genocide.

.

And again your full of $h!t. I live in Arizona. Our Republican Governor at the time, Jan Brewer expanded Medicaid, as well as put the Obama Care Supplement into state law. I know because I've got both Obama Care and the Supplement. You need to change your handle to Bull$hit & Drama.


For the person who dies either due to cold blooded murder or dies because their governor doesn't want them to have healthcare does it really matter? They're still dead and their family still suffers what was a preventable loss. The difference of course being that the Governor is obligated to protect the lives and safety of his constituents yet is willing to see them die, whereas the terrorists are just insane.

Here's a link to Bankrate.com, that shows that 24 states with Republican governors HAVE NOT expanded Medicaid. So before you insult someone and make statements that embarrass you do a little homework. AZ is one of the few states with a Republican governor that has expanded medicaid. And congrats for having Obamacare, and enrolling in a "freebie" government program.

Map: Which States Are Expanding Medicaid? | Bankrate.com

Opting Out Of Medicaid Expansion: The Health And Financial Impacts ? Health Affairs Blog

Link Removed
 

FactsNotFiction

New member
These Liberals are so naive to think POTUS or any of these leaders care about them. They trot you out to further pad their retirement and you can't see it!
You defend them like they are for YOU bro. You are nothing more than a fish they caught one Tuesday afternoon and now they are showing you off...When they are done with you they will eat you.
You will be remembered as a good dump.

Silly Liberals

sinful nature is always hostile to God....

Again you post nothing with content, just your cynical attitude, and again you need to insult. I agree though that there are politicians who don't care about people, they're called Republicans. As for Democrats, they gave us the 40 hour work week, Medicare, Social security, safer working conditions, disability coverage, etc, etc.

It's funny that you think using the term "liberal" is an insult to a liberal, I rather doubt if you know what the actual definition of liberal is:

1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism, especially the freedom of the individual and governmental guarantees of individual rights and liberties.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression:
a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6. of or relating to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant:

Sounds good to me, I'm in great company. Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Madison, Paine, Lincoln, all liberals. You see the established form of government for thousands of years on most of the Earth was a monarchy. Shedding the monarchy and having a representational democracy and freedom of speech was down right radical. It was the loyalists to the monarchy who were the conservatives. Look it up.

As for Lincoln, freeing the slaves and banning slavery was pretty darn liberal.
Teddy Roosevelt was also a liberal. He even started a party called the progressive party, progressive is another term for liberal.

BTW you know the quote you have at the bottom of your posts? Well Jackson may have said that but the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli, written under president Washington, signed by president Adams and ratified unanimously by the Senate states:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims]; and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Mohammedan] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

Just thought you should know.
 
Again you post nothing with content, just your cynical attitude, and again you need to insult. I agree though that there are politicians who don't care about people, they're called Republicans. As for Democrats, they gave us the 40 hour work week, Medicare, Social security, safer working conditions, disability coverage, etc, etc.

It's funny that you think using the term "liberal" is an insult to a liberal, I rather doubt if you know what the actual definition of liberal is:

1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism, especially the freedom of the individual and governmental guarantees of individual rights and liberties.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression:
a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6. of or relating to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant:

Sounds good to me, I'm in great company. Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Madison, Paine, Lincoln, all liberals. You see the established form of government for thousands of years on most of the Earth was a monarchy. Shedding the monarchy and having a representational democracy and freedom of speech was down right radical. It was the loyalists to the monarchy who were the conservatives. Look it up.

As for Lincoln, freeing the slaves and banning slavery was pretty darn liberal.
Teddy Roosevelt was also a liberal. He even started a party called the progressive party, progressive is another term for liberal.

BTW you know the quote you have at the bottom of your posts? Well Jackson may have said that but the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli, written under president Washington, signed by president Adams and ratified unanimously by the Senate states:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims]; and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Mohammedan] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

Just thought you should know.

You go girl!


Link Removed
 

billt

Banned
For the person who dies either due to cold blooded murder or dies because their governor doesn't want them to have healthcare does it really matter?

I didn't have to read past this pure hog wash to get the idiotic context of your post. YES IT DOES MATTER. One is capitol murder, and is a CRIME punishable by death. The other is because a person, for whatever reason, isn't capable of taking care of themselves. Perhaps it's because they're too lazy. Or because they're too stupid. Or perhaps their financial priorities are screwed up. Or else because they would rather do street drugs than work. Or any or all of the above. Either way it is not a crime for which you can blame someone else, then turn around and punish them for. That's preposterous. Going by your stupid precedence, If I kill a guy in his 80's, I shouldn't have to serve much time because his life was almost over anyway.

.

There is no blueprint for a fair life you communists keep telling everyone they're entitled to. Look at Bill Gates, Steve Wozniak, or Paul Allen. Then look at idiots like Michael Brown. And you're going to sit there and tell me the difference between them is luck? Don't make me laugh. Are you going to start blaming politicians in and around Ferguson, Missouri, because Michael Brown turned out to be a worthless, violent a$$hole? And in the process, charge said politicians with crimes because they didn't provide him with enough handouts, so he wouldn't have to steal his cigars?

.

You Fantasy Land communists will never understand you cannot make life fair for everybody. People have different capabilities, just like NFL football teams. Some win the Super Bowl, while others finish dead last in their divisions. They do it because they just weren't good enough. And even if you give them #1 draft picks the following year. Many trade them away for short term gain, along with a quick buck. And in the process continue to falter with poor performance, season after season. Instead of taking what they were given and using it to cultivate a winning team. Some will even resort to blaming under inflated footballs for their crappy performance, instead of lousy defenses. The result is always the same, on or off the field.

.



Some people cannot be helped. We've been sending the Peace Corp to Africa for the last half century plus. What good has it done? You give these people seeds and they eat them instead of plant them. All they have ever managed to do is screw, starve, eat, and kill each other. If and when they can muster up enough energy to do it. The next generation repeats the cycle regardless of how much we try to educate them. And why? Because one is from a tribe the other doesn't get along with. Either way life goes on. Even the Bible says, "God helps those who help themselves". It doesn't say help themselves to handouts because they were idiots, who were required to take from other people who weren't idiots.
 
B

Bikenut

Guest
I didn't have to read past this pure hog wash to get the idiotic context of your post. YES IT DOES MATTER. One is capitol murder, and is a CRIME punishable by death. The other is because a person, for whatever reason, isn't capable of taking care of themselves. Perhaps it's because they're too lazy. Or because they're too stupid. Or perhaps their financial priorities are screw up. Or else because they would rather do street drugs than work. Or any or all of the above. Either way it is not a crime for which you can blame someone else, then turn around and punish them for. That's preposterous. Going by your stupid precedence, If I kill a guy in his 80's, I shouldn't have to serve much time because his life was almost over anyway.

.

There is no blueprint for a fair life you communists keep telling everyone they're entitled to. Look at Bill Gates, Steve Wozniak, or Paul Allen. Then look at idiots like Michael Brown. And you're going to sit there and tell me the difference between them is luck? Don't make me laugh. Are you going to start blaming politicians in and around Ferguson, Missouri, because Michael Brown turned out to be a worthless, violent a$$hole? And in the process, charge said politicians with crimes because they didn't provide him with enough handouts, so he wouldn't have to steal his cigars?

.

You Fantasy Land communists will never understand you cannot make life fair for everybody. People have different capabilities, just like NFL football teams. Some win the Super Bowl, while others finish dead last in their divisions. They do it because they just weren't good enough. And even if you give them #1 draft picks the following year. Many trade them away for short term gain, along with a quick buck. And in the process continue to falter with poor performance, season after season. Instead of taking what they were given and using it to cultivate a winning team. Some will even resort to blaming under inflated footballs for their crappy performance, instead of lousy defenses. The result is always the same, on or off the field.

.



Some people cannot be helped. We've been sending the Peace Corp to Africa for the last half century plus. What good has it done? You give these people seeds and they eat them instead of plant them. All they have ever managed to do is screw, starve, eat, and kill each other. If and when they can muster up enough energy to do it. The next generation repeats the cycle regardless of how much we try to educate them. And why? Because one is from a tribe the other doesn't get along with. Either way life goes on. Even the Bible says, "God helps those who help themselves". It doesn't say help themselves to handouts because they were idiots, who were required to take from other people who weren't idiots.
Careful.... you might confuse someone with the facts of life.
 

MI .45

MI .45
MI. 45,

"Wide receiver" was not the only "Gun walking" program under Bush. And as a program that had been used before the local ATF used it again because the Obama administration was pressing them to stop the supply of guns to Mexico. However no higher ups in the Obama administration approved of it. And with the exception of "fast and Furious" keeping the potentially corrupt Mexicans in the dark, the investigating committee spokesman Hill stated that there was no difference between Bush's program and F&F.

"Hill added that one difference between the 2007 incident and Operation Fast and Furious was that in the 2007 operation, "Mexican authorities were notified. However, in Operation Fast and Furious the Mexican authorities were deliberately kept in the dark."
Link Removed
How about this difference... over 200 Mexican citizens died from this administrations gun walking op.

Back to the IRS, no findings of actual wrong doing. So assume all you want but it's a done deal. I'm making no assumptions - it is a done deal no matter what.

As for Obama's teaching credentials, if the University says he was a professor, he was. As for teaching Constitutional law specifically, well pretty much all of our laws are based on that, so we can argue endlessly about that point, but he WAS a law professor. And while you may want to rationalize that Congress won;t act to impeach him because he's black, that's really a stretch, they'd LOVE to impeach him. The problem is they don't have grounds, and if they attempt to impeach him and it appears that it's groundless then they have managed to shoot themselves in the foot. But if they had actual legal grounds they'd do it in a second.

I DON'T dispute his teaching credentials. There will be no impeachment of Barack Obama legal grounds or not.

Tyranny???!!!! Are you kidding me? if Obama was tyrant you'd be thrown in jail just for saying that. Sorry but I think you have no idea what tyranny is. And BTW was it tyranny when Bush was reading your email or just Obama?

We have been living in a soft but advancing tyranny since the NDAA was authorized. You assumed that I was only referring to Obama.

There's a strange hypocrisy I see on the right. So 4 Americans die in Benghazi, and one LEO dies in F&F, and the right is up in arms. Yet when the Republican governors choose to not expand Medicaid under the ACA, even though it costs them nothing, and will provide millions of their constituents with life saving healthcare, but despite studies from Harvard that state that every year in those states between 7,000 and 17,000 of their citizens will die from lack of access to healthcare because of the refusal to expand medicaid and yet there's no outcry. Or when Bush ignores FBI and CIA warnings about "Al qaeda intent to attack America" and "learning to fly planes but not land them" and 3000 Americans die, how come he gets a free pass from the right. Or how about when Bush invades Iraq, under what turns out to be deceptive reasons and 4000 Americans die and that's ok with the right?

If you want to talk about scandals relating to who has questionable integrity, or more blood on their hands, the Republicans do not fare well. Oh and who thought it was ok to torture people?

However Obama providing 10 million Americans with life saving healthcare, while lowering health care costs AND the deficit, well that's just horrible.
--
 

Farmhood

New member
Again you post nothing with content, just your cynical attitude, and again you need to insult.




It's funny that you think using the term "liberal" is an insult to a liberal, I rather doubt if you know what the actual definition of liberal is:

What are you saying? I said LIBERAL. They are what they are!
What's really funny is first you say it's an insult then not an insult.

Please don't take this as an insult but I'm starting to think you may be a liberal progressive politician. yes? :)




sinful nature is always hostile to God....
 

FactsNotFiction

New member
I didn't have to read past this pure hog wash to get the idiotic context of your post. YES IT DOES MATTER. One is capitol murder, and is a CRIME punishable by death. The other is because a person, for whatever reason, isn't capable of taking care of themselves. Perhaps it's because they're too lazy. Or because they're too stupid. Or perhaps their financial priorities are screwed up. Or else because they would rather do street drugs than work. Or any or all of the above. Either way it is not a crime for which you can blame someone else, then turn around and punish them for. That's preposterous. Going by your stupid precedence, If I kill a guy in his 80's, I shouldn't have to serve much time because his life was almost over anyway.

.

There is no blueprint for a fair life you communists keep telling everyone they're entitled to. Look at Bill Gates, Steve Wozniak, or Paul Allen. Then look at idiots like Michael Brown. And you're going to sit there and tell me the difference between them is luck? Don't make me laugh. Are you going to start blaming politicians in and around Ferguson, Missouri, because Michael Brown turned out to be a worthless, violent a$$hole? And in the process, charge said politicians with crimes because they didn't provide him with enough handouts, so he wouldn't have to steal his cigars?

.

You Fantasy Land communists will never understand you cannot make life fair for everybody. People have different capabilities, just like NFL football teams. Some win the Super Bowl, while others finish dead last in their divisions. They do it because they just weren't good enough. And even if you give them #1 draft picks the following year. Many trade them away for short term gain, along with a quick buck. And in the process continue to falter with poor performance, season after season. Instead of taking what they were given and using it to cultivate a winning team. Some will even resort to blaming under inflated footballs for their crappy performance, instead of lousy defenses. The result is always the same, on or off the field.

.



Some people cannot be helped. We've been sending the Peace Corp to Africa for the last half century plus. What good has it done? You give these people seeds and they eat them instead of plant them. All they have ever managed to do is screw, starve, eat, and kill each other. If and when they can muster up enough energy to do it. The next generation repeats the cycle regardless of how much we try to educate them. And why? Because one is from a tribe the other doesn't get along with. Either way life goes on. Even the Bible says, "God helps those who help themselves". It doesn't say help themselves to handouts because they were idiots, who were required to take from other people who weren't idiots.


I see you're quoting from the Bible, I guess you consider yourself a Christian then. So very Christ like of you to stand by and watch other people die "because they're lazy ..... or stupid". I assume that you'd be ok, if someone you loved was hurt, and people just stood there and watched them die instead of calling for an ambulance? I mean, shouldn't your dying loved one be able to call the ambulance herself? Oh, she's unable to, cell phone batteries are out? Well she can ask one of the people standing around if she can borrow their phone and then call for an ambulance herself . Oh the people watching won't let her borrow their phone? Well I guess your loved one can ask them to call an ambulance on her behalf? Oh, they won't even call an ambulance for her. Oh wait, a cop car pulls up, now she feels better because it's his job, just like the governor's, to protect the people, surely he'll call for an ambulance, but he won't call for an ambulance either. Well I guess that stupid lazy loved one of yours should have made sure her phone was charged before she left the house.

And BTW I'm not a communist, and I'm pretty sure you don't even know what one is. I own a small corporation, I started my business almost 40 years ago. But the difference between me and and you is that I actually care about other people. I'm not selfish and inhumane, which is exactly how your last statement makes you come across. Seriously, I feel very sorry for you. You must be a very bitter and unhappy person. I know life is unfair, but we're supposed to be civilized, not animals, and helping another person isn't a matter of giving them some sort of gift they don't deserve, it's because it doesn't take much in life for any of us to be in trouble or in need, but the social contract we all make is that we take care of each other as best we can. If there is a heaven, and you're standing in front of St Peter, and he googles your last post, what do you think the odds are that he'll let you in?
 

FactsNotFiction

New member
What are you saying? I said LIBERAL. They are what they are!
What's really funny is first you say it's an insult then not an insult.

Please don't take this as an insult but I'm starting to think you may be a liberal progressive politician. yes? :)




sinful nature is always hostile to God....



I'm not a liberal politician, what I am is someone who has done well in life, who was taught to have consideration and care about other people. If you want to call having concern for others liberal then I am a liberal, but growing up we just called it, "the right thing to do"

BTW if you actually read the Bible, Christ is a liberal too.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,437
Messages
623,671
Members
74,276
Latest member
ForwardUntilDawn
Top