RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In

RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

popeye1250 -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 4:05:12 AM)
You guys can argue "left" and "right" all you want but this just demonstrates that we need to have job descriptions for anyone in government. We have them in the D.P.S. (dreaded private sector) We can't have people in government wandering off doing whatever they feel like doing.

subrob1967 -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 4:42:17 AM)
I can just imagine Charlie Sheen and the rest of the lefties here going apoplectic if Newt Gingrich tried this shit on Clinton. She did wrong, she's out of line, she's a fucking moron playing politics trying to make her party look better than the opposition.

meatcleaver -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 4:44:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 She did wrong, she's out of line, she's a fucking moron playing politics trying to make her party look better than the opposition. Er....isn't that the role of the political opposition in a democracy?

ToGiveDivine -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 7:12:29 AM)
FAST REPLY: Wow - Reading these posts I can see why our government doesn't work well - both sides calling each other names and no one is listening because they are SO convinced their side is absolutely right and the other side is absolutely wrong. When this country finally folds, we ALL are going to suffer because we could never work together.

puella -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 7:13:24 AM)
Hello rob.... Actually when Dennis Hastert was speaker of the House he went to Columbia and not only chit chatted with the officials there, he advised them to ignore the tricky bits about human rights in condition for them getting aid from the US which President Clinton had negotiated. I know you will have trouble believing that so here is the official National Security Archive link for ya ... about half way down.. As the end-use agreement was being negotiated with the Colombian defense ministry, a congressional delegation led by Rep. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) – currently Speaker of the House of Representatives who was then chairman of the House subcommittee on national security – secretly encouraged Colombian military officials to ignore human rights conditions on U.S. aid. (See Documents 52, 54 and 55) ...Hastert said he would to correct this situation and expedite aid to countries allied in the war on drugs and also encouraged Colombian military officials to “bypass the U.S. executive branch and communicate directly with Congress.” Upon learning of the delivery, U.S. Ambassador Myles Frechette sent this cable complaining that the shipment “will undermine Embassy’s efforts to negotiate an End-Use Monitoring (EUM) agreement.” According to Frechette, a previous shipment, which arrived in May during the visit of a congressional delegation led by House Speaker Dennis Hastert, a strong proponent for releasing the aid, convinced some senior Colombian military officers that they had the upper hand in negotiating EUM conditions and need only take a tough line and wait for [the U.S. government’s] insistence on human rights conditions to be overwhelmed by the pressure of events. As indicated in Document 52, the Hastert delegation also promised Colombian military officials that they would work to weaken or remove the conditions on aid then being proposed in the EUM agreement. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB69/

lockedaway -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 7:24:53 AM)
Dear Meatcleaver, in answer to your question "Er....isn't that the role of the political opposition in a democracy?", the answer is "No." When Wendell Wilke (republican) ran against FDR for President, Wilke refused to criticize FDR over the war. Wilke said publicly that maintaining a united front against our aggressors was crucial. In 1980 when Reagan (republican) ran against Carter, Reagan and Carter had a deal that Reagan wouldn't criticize Carter over the bungling of the Iranian hostage crisis. As you can surmise, Reagan could have crucified Carter over that issue but he didn't. It would have destroyed Carter personally and it would have been bad for our country. I understand, however, your asking that question. In the political climate we live in now, we are at the height of conflict between traditional conservatism and secular progressiveness. In the past 15 years, there is nothing that can be said that is beyond the pale. But when democrats say Bush is stupid or Bush is a war criminal (neither being true...I challenge anyone to graduate Yale, be a jet fighter pilot, be a governor, own and manage a football team, etc. etc. etc. If he is so stupid what have the rest of you done with your lives???????) all we do is embarass ourselves and show that we are a fractured nation in decline. I thought Carter was the biggest bungling fool that ever occupied the White House. When he was burned in effigy in Tehran, however, it made my blood boil.

lockedaway -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 7:33:24 AM)
That was a rediculous comment SM. "Bush is the poster child, etc. etc." Sure...every enemy to every country has the other's leader to epitomize that country. Wasn't Hitler our poster child? Wasn't Stalin Germany's poster child? For awhile, Brezshnev was our poster child. Carter was Iran's poster child. Were you awake when the Cole got attacked or for any of the other myriad attacks against U.S. interests during the Clinton Administration or are you just so blinded by hate for Bush that you can't view things objectively? Ok...we weren't fighting our current war on terror during Clinton but we were getting bombed all over the world. Now we are fighting in a semi-regional conflict and we are hunting terrorists and killing them where we can find them. Are you saying that is a bad thing? Ok...SM....are you actually saying that if we pull out of Iran and stop importing oil that there will be no more terrorism? Is that your position? Are you saying that we should let Israel be devoured by her enemies? Are you saying that if a democrat gets elected there will be no more terrorism perpretrated against this country? What are your bottom line positions on these issues?

lockedaway -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 7:37:54 AM)
Please read my post again. I never said she didn't have the right to go talk to the man. I said it was bad form and it did more harm than good. It portrayed the U.S. in a very bad light. It made us look deeply divided. It is like fighting within a family. It doesn't matter how much you argue with your brother but you don't bring it outside the house. If Pelosi wants to go to oval office and have a heated debate with the President....go for it. If she rants to rant and rave in the House....feel free. But for her to go to another country, an enemy no less, powerless to effect any changes, speaking without authorization from either the U.S. or Israel, covering her head........well.....she was a Goddamned Fool!

meatcleaver -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 7:59:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lockedaway Dear Meatcleaver, in answer to your question "Er....isn't that the role of the political opposition in a democracy?", the answer is "No." When Wendell Wilke (republican) ran against FDR for President, Wilke refused to criticize FDR over the war. Wilke said publicly that maintaining a united front against our aggressors was crucial. In 1980 when Reagan (republican) ran against Carter, Reagan and Carter had a deal that Reagan wouldn't criticize Carter over the bungling of the Iranian hostage crisis. As you can surmise, Reagan could have crucified Carter over that issue but he didn't. It would have destroyed Carter personally and it would have been bad for our country. I understand, however, your asking that question. In the political climate we live in now, we are at the height of conflict between traditional conservatism and secular progressiveness. In the past 15 years, there is nothing that can be said that is beyond the pale. But when democrats say Bush is stupid or Bush is a war criminal (neither being true...I challenge anyone to graduate Yale, be a jet fighter pilot, be a governor, own and manage a football team, etc. etc. etc. If he is so stupid what have the rest of you done with your lives???????) all we do is embarass ourselves and show that we are a fractured nation in decline. I thought Carter was the biggest bungling fool that ever occupied the White House. When he was burned in effigy in Tehran, however, it made my blood boil. The USA isn't even at war with Syria. The whole world is baffled as to why Bush won't engage in diplomacy but insists on calling everyone evil as though he has a direct line from god. As Churchill said, 'Jaw jaw is better than war war.' Bush's foreign policy since he has been in power has been an absolute disaster. He has given all the potential adversaries of the US a stronger hand by his refusal to engage in diplomacy and his belief that the military can solve political problems.

farglebargle -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 8:15:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 I can just imagine Charlie Sheen and the rest of the lefties here going apoplectic if Newt Gingrich tried this shit on Clinton. She did wrong, she's out of line, she's a fucking moron playing politics trying to make her party look better than the opposition. Explain the visits to Syria by Frank Wolf of Virginia, Joseph Pitts of Pennsylvania and Robert Aderholt of Alabama who werre in Damascus ahead of the visit by Speaker Nancy Pelosi ? Hypocrite Much? So it's ok for 3 REPUBLICANS to go to Syria LAST WEEK and have talks, but not for Pelosi?

farglebargle -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 8:17:57 AM)
quote: When Wendell Wilke (republican) ran against FDR for President, Wilke refused to criticize FDR over the war. Get back to me when Bush goes before Congress begging for a Declaration of War. At that point, perhaps this rises to that significance, but otherwise, your example is woefully incorrect.

farglebargle -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 8:19:21 AM)
quote: It made us look deeply divided. In case you're new here, that's exactly how a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC works. Unity is for Commies and Nazis. quote: speaking without authorization Oh, I guess in Nazi-Commie land Free Speech isn't a Right, but you need authorization firsts. I would suggest that you sir, have a problem with the founding principles of Freedom and Liberty.

lockedaway -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 8:30:34 AM)
The U.S. isn't at war with Syria...so what? Does that mean they are NOT an enemy? Does that mean that they don't back Hezbollah? Does that mean that they aren't funding or giving safe haven to terrorists? Does that mean that they aren't an Iranian puppet state that will assist Iran in any means necessary to keep the world's focus off of Iran's burdgeoning nuclear program? What are you saying??? Iran funnels fighters and weapons into Iraq to kill our people (the same as the Chinese did in Korea and the Russians did in Vietnam). What consequences ahve they suffered so far? None. Iran kidnaps British marines. What consequences ahve they suffered so far? None. Iran talks about wiping Israel off of the face of the earth. What consequences have they suffered so far? None. Iran is pretty damn scary WITHOUT the bomb. What are they going to be like when they have it? Bushes foreign policy has been a disaster???? What would yours be? Appeasement did not work for Chamberlain and it won't work for us. History has proven that time and again. Sure...the foreign policy has been majorly screwed up in the past 2 weeks. TERRIBLE in fact. The Brits should have given Iran a 24 hour deadline to return the marines. Iran would have backed down but if they didn't the Brits would bomb Iran's single fuel refinary and cripple the country with all military targets next and then Tehran to follow. The U.S., while the Brits were knocking out the refinery, would target Iran's nuclear program and destroy what we could. There....done. Oh sure, we would be dealing with that situation for years to come but Iran's nuclear development would be set back twenty years. I know....all of you cute little doves are going Nucking Futs over what I just said.

lockedaway -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 8:32:26 AM)
wow...try to read my post for a third time. She had the right to say what she said....you can't be so....whatever....to read the plain, 7th grade english used in my post. What did I say? I said it was bad form. Read it again....slower this time.

farglebargle -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 8:40:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lockedaway The U.S. isn't at war with Syria...so what? Among other things, it means it is UNLAWFUL to conduct any operations against Syria. If the executiv DOES anything without the funding of Congress, that means he's using money appropriated for other things. In other words, he LIED about what the money would be used for, then without Congressional Approval spent it for other purposes. Should that occur, that would be unlawful. SAME THING FOR IRAN, BTW. You want a War, go beg Congress for an Act of War. Otherwise, it's not worthy of wasting our Troops and our Tax Dollars on. quote: Does that mean they are NOT an enemy? Does that mean that they don't back Hezbollah? Does that mean that they aren't funding or giving safe haven to terrorists? I love that one. When the US stops harboring the terrorist Luis Posada Carriles, then maybe you can talk about other people, eh? quote: Does that mean that they aren't an Iranian puppet state that will assist Iran in any means necessary to keep the world's focus off of Iran's burdgeoning nuclear program? What are you saying??? Lookit the Bogeyman! quote: Iran funnels fighters and weapons into Iraq to kill our people (the same as the Chinese did in Korea and the Russians did in Vietnam). What consequences ahve they suffered so far? PROVE IT. You know, like with EVIDENCE, then you could perhaps find people GUILTY IN A COURT OF LAW. Then you can discuss Consequences. quote: None. Iran kidnaps British marines. What consequences ahve they suffered so far? In retaliation for the kidnapping of their own diplomatic staff, of course this is neglected in your representation. quote: None. Iran talks about wiping Israel off of the face of the earth. What consequences have they suffered so far? That's because REAL AMERICANS believe in something called FREEDOM OF SPEECH. Who the hell cares what some retard SAYS. quote: None. Iran is pretty damn scary WITHOUT the bomb. What are they going to be like when they have it? I expect if you're afraid of Iran, you're afraid of a lot of things. quote: Bushes foreign policy has been a disaster???? What would yours be? Appeasement did not work for Chamberlain and it won't work for us. History has proven that time and again. Sure...the foreign policy has been majorly screwed up in the past 2 weeks. How did you miss the commission of crimes against 18 USC 371 in the run up to the invasion and occupation of Iraq? If you can't do your job without needing to lie, then you can't do you job. Remember "Honesty and Integrity"?

SimplyMichael -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 8:59:17 AM)
How many people did we lose to terrorism under Raygun, under Clinton, and under Bush? Sorry, but the record of the right defending America SUCKS. The fucking Al Queda got their training from the CIA, Wahhabism got its start under Raygun as a way of getting the Saudis to drum up support for Afghanistan. Raygun ran when they blew up the Marines. How many were lost under Clinton? Don't pick Somalia, that particular mess over OIL was started by Bush Sr. Who by the way ABANDONED the Iraqis to be butchered by Saddam with the chemical weapons given to him by Raygun! As for Bush, how many die every day? How well did he protect us from 9/11? He fucking cut every anti-terror program in the US before 9/11! What was Rice going to claim was the big threat in her speach on 9/11? Rogue missles from South Korea... I firmly believe and have so stated that killing and bombing is an effective tool of foreign policy, I just don't think it is the only one. Invading Iraq was fucking stupid, invading Iraq without a plan was criminal, occupying Iraq and refusing to deal with reality hides treason in my opinion. So yeah, Bush has done more for our enemies than he has done for America our our few remaining allies, sorry but fucking Poland doesn't count for shit, neither does Italy. China and Iran are in stronger positions than ever. While I don't think Iran should be an enemy, China is and everything Bush has done has made us weaker in relation to them. We have less moral authority than every, we have less soft power than ever, we have fewer allies, our military is fucking worn out, the National Guard will soon be in shambles, our economy is in the tank, GDP is only high because of massive borrowing from other contries like China... Sorry but I would take Grant or Andrew Jackson, or even Hoover over these clowns.

meatcleaver -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 9:26:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lockedaway The U.S. isn't at war with Syria...so what? Does that mean they are NOT an enemy? Does that mean that they don't back Hezbollah? Does that mean that they aren't funding or giving safe haven to terrorists? Does that mean that they aren't an Iranian puppet state that will assist Iran in any means necessary to keep the world's focus off of Iran's burdgeoning nuclear program? What are you saying??? I'm sorry that the world is round and the US is surrounded by enemies but you've got to wake up from your nightmare, but you aren't completely paranoid. Under Bush, the entire world is an enemy of America. Hezbollah is a resistence group indigenous to Lebanon and wouldn't exist if Lebanon wasn't occupied by Israel. As a rightwinger (I take it you are), you must surely understand the right to self defence. Iran funnels fighters and weapons into Iraq to kill our people (the same as the Chinese did in Korea and the Russians did in Vietnam). What consequences ahve they suffered so far? None. Iran kidnaps British marines. What consequences ahve they suffered so far? None. Iran talks about wiping Israel off of the face of the earth. What consequences have they suffered so far? None. Iran is pretty damn scary WITHOUT the bomb. What are they going to be like when they have it? According to the British commander in Iraq, who said in today's paper, there is no hard evidence that Iran is funneling weapons and fighters into Iraq, just intelligence, the same sort of intelligence that said there were WMDs in Iraq. Bushes foreign policy has been a disaster???? What would yours be? Appeasement did not work for Chamberlain and it won't work for us. History has proven that time and again. Sure...the foreign policy has been majorly screwed up in the past 2 weeks. TERRIBLE in fact. The Brits should have given Iran a 24 hour deadline to return the marines. Iran would have backed down but if they didn't the Brits would bomb Iran's single fuel refinary and cripple the country with all military targets next and then Tehran to follow. The U.S., while the Brits were knocking out the refinery, would target Iran's nuclear program and destroy what we could. There....done. Oh sure, we would be dealing with that situation for years to come but Iran's nuclear development would be set back twenty years. I guess WWIII and the second coming is the Republican's answer to everything. I know....all of you cute little doves are going Nucking Futs over what I just said. No. What you say is entirely predictable for a rightwinger. You do know that the definition of madness is doing the same thing all the time and expecting a different result?

Dtesmoac -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 9:38:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cyberdude611 What I dont get is how Pelosi speaks for Israel. Pelosi has ZERO experience in international relations. *Based on the past two US presidential elections isn't this a pre-requisite for being elected President........perhaps thats her aim.*

SimplyMichael -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 9:47:04 AM)
Meatcleaver, just trying to keep our side honest. quote: Iran funnels fighters and weapons into Iraq to kill our people (the same as the Chinese did in Korea and the Russians did in Vietnam). What consequences ahve they suffered so far? None. Iran kidnaps British marines. What consequences ahve they suffered so far? None. Iran talks about wiping Israel off of the face of the earth. What consequences have they suffered so far? None. Iran is pretty damn scary WITHOUT the bomb. What are they going to be like when they have it? According to the British commander in Iraq, who said in today's paper, there is no hard evidence that Iran is funneling weapons and fighters into Iraq, just intelligence, the same sort of intelligence that said there were WMDs in Iraq. Of course Iran is smuggling in weapons, the only people surprised are the Bush's and their idiotic supporters. Of course Saudi's are now doing the same thing but on the side of the people MOST opposed to us.

luckydog1 -> RE: Pelosi's Madness Is Setting In (4/6/2007 9:58:25 AM)
Sorry, but the record of the right defending America SUCKS. The fucking Al Queda got their training from the CIA (nope, Cater started funding the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan. The mujahadeen later split, some went Al queda, and others were Northern Alliance. OS Carter is now "the right"?). Wahhabism got its start under Raygun as a way of getting the Saudis to drum up support for Afghanistan. (Nope Wahibinism goes back to at least the 18th century, nothing to do with Reagan, the right, or America at all). Raygun ran when they blew up the Marines. (Actually he bombed the hell out of the place and left as the congress demanded it, and was going to pull the funds. Sort of like today. The congress was Democrat controlled) How many were lost under Clinton? Don't pick Somalia, that particular mess over OIL was started by Bush Sr. (Clinton however completely changed the controll of the operation. He internationalised it, and gave the UN a say in how our troops operated.) Who by the way ABANDONED the Iraqis to be butchered by Saddam with the chemical weapons given to him by Raygun! ( Saddam manufactured his Chem weopons in country, they were not given by anyone, and again Bush stood down at the demand of the Congress controlled by the Democrats)

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125