The dictator....

lol...I've been here for a little over an hour and I'm already being called names! Thanks, sweetie!


You've earned it.....and we always make a point to give a pinhead his/her due....

Just pointing out the FACT that rallying behind the unemployed is not something new for the conservatives and obviously not because of "this" as you claim.
 
You've earned it.....and we always make a point to give a pinhead his/her due....

Just pointing out the FACT that rallying behind the unemployed is not something new for the conservatives and obviously not because of "this" as you claim.

:rofl2: :rofl2:

I love it that your avatar says 'you can't fix stupid'. Then your posts go on to demonstrate the proof of it.
 
:rofl2: :rofl2:

I love it that your avatar says 'you can't fix stupid'. Then your posts go on to demonstrate the proof of it.


I know it.....I try to fix it by correcting the liberals every time I see one of their stupid posts, but losing the battle.....
Its true, you just can't fix stupid.....but in one case, we can vote it out.....
 
You've earned it.....and we always make a point to give a pinhead his/her due....

Just pointing out the FACT that rallying behind the unemployed is not something new for the conservatives and obviously not because of "this" as you claim.

Are you a Republican? Be sure to convey your support of the unemployed to your representative!

Thanks to Republicans in Congress and their friends in state capitols, the chronically unemployed – five million who have been out if work for 26 weeks or more – are losing another strand in the already razor-thin lifeline that has kept them afloat.

As The New York Times reported Tuesday when House and Senate Republicans agreed to extend unemployment insurance coverage back in February, they attached a ton of onerous conditions Democrats didn’t like but had to agree to including reducing benefits and slashing eligibility. With time covered by the extension running out, it is unlikely the GOP will sign on for another 13 weeks since picking on the poor, the needy, and the disadvantaged is its calling card these days.

To make matters worse, several Republican-controlled states such as Florida and New Jersey are making it almost impossible for people to qualify for a benefit they paid for while working through payroll deductions that went to state UI coffers.

Conservatives hate unemployment coverage on general principles. After all, they reason, if someone can’t make it to the top then let’s kick them while they are down. Kevin Hassert of the Americsn Enterprise Institute told the Times that giving benefits for up to 99 weeks “creates an environment where people are subsidized to become a structural unemployment problem.”
 
The point is he wasn't manufacturing them. He wasn't building bombs. Lies, nothing but lies.

Sorry Pinhead....the point is not what we found out to be true after the invasion....the point is what we THOUGHT to be true before, that caused the invasion.....

Are you really that stupid not to understand the difference......I know Onecell is, but thought you might be a tiny bit smarter....

The NIE that the president relied on was wrong, but it was what our 16 intelligence agency's reported and what we believed AT THE TIME.....

Folks thought the world was flat at one time also....were those that said that, liars at the time ?....No of course they weren't...they just believed that..


One of their main informants was a guy known to be politically opposed to Saddam. That's the dude who was saying Saddam had travelling biological labs they couldn't find. And believing the earth was flat didn't involve invading nations. And Bush going on and on saying, "We'll find them" referring to WMD. And the mushroom cloud. And Saddam supposedly buying aluminum tubes which Joe Wilson said was nonsense. How often did the Bush boys mention that?

Do you want me to go on?


As the the amnesty, Congress can't deal with it if Obama insists on decreeing what the policy will be unilaterally....

and that line about
"American students can't find jobs now" is about as naive as I ever read.... bringing more workers into already bloated unemployed population is so

stupid that even you pinheads should see the folly of it....

Common sense should tell you that no jobs means less workers are needed and adding more is just a burden to those that must pay the fuckin' bills....

Food, housing, healthcare, school, etc, etc, etc......you need to get a clue and stuff that bleeding heart of yours up your rectum.....

Workers will be needed in the future. Deporting young, healthy people who have grown up and been educated here is sheer lunacy. Countries try to prevent that segment of their population from leaving.

Talk about getting a clue. :palm:
 
Blabo and his aging, racist ilk are dying out. Where will they find anyone narrow-minded enough to replace them in 21st Century America? How many "Young Republicans" are there?

Poor Blabo.
 
Blabo and his aging, racist ilk are dying out. Where will they find anyone narrow-minded enough to replace them in 21st Century America? How many "Young Republicans" are there?

Poor Blabo.

Are you gonna play your 'race card' every time you get called out pwned ala Onecell ?.....How desperate......no self esteem at all huh ?

Poor AssWipe Goober.....how predictable.....how pathetic....
 
One of their main informants was a guy known to be politically opposed to Saddam. That's the dude who was saying Saddam had travelling biological labs they couldn't find. And believing the earth was flat didn't involve invading nations. And Bush going on and on saying, "We'll find them" referring to WMD. And the mushroom cloud. And Saddam supposedly buying aluminum tubes which Joe Wilson said was nonsense. How often did the Bush boys mention that?

Do you want me to go on?

Talk about getting a clue. :palm:


No....I think you've proved you're pointless....

Aluminum tubes were confiscated in Jordan and AFTER the invasion they were determined to be for conventional 81-mm rockets and not for an 81-mm aluminum rotor uranium centrifuge as previously believed by the intelligence agencys of the US.

Wilson was in Niger to investigate allegations that Saddam was attempting to purchase yellowcake uranium....
a huge stockpile of concentrated natural uranium reached a Canadian port to complete a secret U.S. operation that included a two-week airlift from Baghdad and a ship voyage crossing two oceans...Saddam's yellowcake, 550 metric tons of it— the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment. Can you tell us WHERE he got it ?

Stop making a fool of yourself.....
Talk about getting a clue. :palm:
 
Last edited:
Maybe it has something to do with comments like "...jack-booted Arizona or Alabama thugs..."! :palm:

Ummm...yeah.

That would only be considered a personal insult if, in fact, you are a jack-booted Arizona or Alabama thug, in which case there would be a lot worse names to call you.

Try again.
 
Criminal enforcement is the domain of the executive branch and deportation decisions would fall under that authority.


Friday's directive is well within a president's usual authority.


It is unlikely that Obama's order could be challenged successfully in court. Presidents have broad executive power for such temporary orders and prosecutorial discretion.





http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/16/us-usa-immigration-idUSBRE85E0VA20120616
This Obama dictator bullshit will all be rectified in January.
 
I know it.....I try to fix it by correcting the liberals every time I see one of their stupid posts, but losing the battle.....
Its true, you just can't fix stupid.....but in one case, we can vote it out.....

Good God man, most people have given up peddling crap about what Bush did and didn't know, it was all revealed 4 years ago. I bet you are still insisting that all the WMDs ended up in Syria aboard 25 trucks!!

The Truth About the War

Published: June 6, 2008

It took just a few months after the United States’ invasion of Iraq for the world to find out that Saddam Hussein had long abandoned his nuclear, biological and chemical weapons programs. He was not training terrorists or colluding with Al Qaeda. The only real threat he posed was to his own countrymen.

It has taken five years to finally come to a reckoning over how much the Bush administration knowingly twisted and hyped intelligence to justify that invasion. On Thursday — after years of Republican stonewalling — a report by the Senate Intelligence Committee gave us as good a set of answers as we’re likely to get.
The report shows clearly that President Bush should have known that important claims he made about Iraq did not conform with intelligence reports. In other cases, he could have learned the truth if he had asked better questions or encouraged more honest answers.

The report confirms one serious intelligence failure: President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and other administration officials were told that Iraq still had chemical and biological weapons and did not learn that these reports were wrong until after the invasion. But Mr. Bush and his team made even that intelligence seem more solid, more recent and more dangerous than it was.

The report shows that there was no intelligence to support the two most frightening claims Mr. Bush and his vice president used to sell the war: that Iraq was actively developing nuclear weapons and had longstanding ties to terrorist groups. It seems clear that the president and his team knew that that was not true, or should have known it — if they had not ignored dissenting views and telegraphed what answers they were looking for.

Over all, the report makes it clear that top officials, especially Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, knew they were not giving a full and honest account of their justifications for going to war.

The report was supported by only two of the seven Republicans on the 15-member Senate panel. The five dissenting Republicans first tried to kill it, and then to delete most of its conclusions. They finally settled for appending objections. The bulk of their criticisms were sophistry transparently intended to protect Mr. Bush and deny the public a full accounting of how he took America into a disastrous war.

The report documents how time and again Mr. Bush and his team took vague and dubious intelligence reports on Iraq’s weapons programs and made them sound like hard and incontrovertible fact. “They continue to pursue the nuclear program they began so many years ago,” Mr. Cheney said on Aug. 26, 2002, adding that “we now know that Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons.”

On Oct. 7, 2002, Mr. Bush told an audience in Cincinnati that Iraq “is seeking nuclear weapons” and that “the evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program.” Saddam Hussein, he said, “is moving ever closer to developing a nuclear weapon.” Later, both men talked about Iraq trying to buy uranium in Africa and about the purchase of aluminum tubes that they said could only be used for a nuclear weapons program. They talked about Iraq having such a weapon in five years, then in three years, then in one.

If they had wanted to give an honest accounting of the intelligence on Iraq’s nuclear weapons, Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney would have said it indicated that Mr. Hussein’s nuclear weapons program had been destroyed years earlier by American military strikes. As for Iraq’s supposed efforts to “reconstitute” that program, they would have had to say that reports about the uranium shopping and the aluminum tubes were the extent of the evidence — and those claims were already in serious doubt when Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney told the public about them. That would not have been nearly as persuasive, of course, as Mr. Bush’s infamous “mushroom cloud” warning.

The report said Mr. Bush was justified in saying that intelligence analysts believed Iraq had chemical and biological weapons. But even then, he and his aides glossed over inconvenient facts — that the only new data on biological weapons came from a dubious source code-named Curveball and proved to be false.

Yet Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney persisted in talking as if there were ironclad proof of Iraq’s weapons and plans for global mayhem. “Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use them against our friends, against our allies and against us,” Mr. Cheney said on Aug. 29, 2002.

Actually, there was plenty of doubt — at the time — about that second point. According to the Senate report, there was no evidence that Mr. Hussein intended to use weapons of mass destruction against anyone, and the intelligence community never said there was. The committee’s dissenting Republicans attempted to have this entire section of the report deleted — along with a conclusion that the administration misrepresented the intelligence when it warned of a risk that Mr. Hussein could give weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups. They said Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney never used the word “intent” and were merely trying to suggest that Iraq “could” do those terrible things.

It’s hard to imagine that anyone drew that distinction after hearing Mr. Bush declare that “Saddam Hussein would like nothing more than to use a terrorist network to attack and to kill and leave no fingerprints behind.” Or when he said: “Each passing day could be the one on which the Iraqi regime gives anthrax or VX nerve gas or someday a nuclear weapon to a terrorist ally.”

The Senate report shows that the intelligence Mr. Bush had did not support those statements — or Mr. Rumsfeld’s that “every month that goes by, his W.M.D. programs are progressing, and he moves closer to his goal of possessing the capability to strike our population, and our allies, and hold them hostage to blackmail.”
Claims by Mr. Cheney and Mr. Rumsfeld that Iraq had longstanding ties to Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups also were false, and the Senate committee’s report shows that the two men knew it, or should have.

We cannot say with certainty whether Mr. Bush lied about Iraq. But when the president withholds vital information from the public — or leads them to believe things that he knows are not true — to justify the invasion of another country, that is bad enough.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/06/opinion/06fri1.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2
 
Last edited:
That's what a leader does, they LEAD. It's the same thing when ObamaCare was being negotiated and the Repubs kept stalling. In the end the Repubs were kicked out of class and told to stand in the hall, figuratively speaking. Now they can stall and whine and stamp their little feet and give speeches all day. A decision was made without them.

I suggest Obama send all the Repubs a copy of the original movie, "The Longest Yard". Alter the movie so the line spoken by Eddie Albert to Bert Reynolds repeats a few times. "To get along, you go along." :)

So why does he not LEAD on the issue of taxes by voluntarily paying his 'fair share'?
 
No....I think you've proved you're pointless....

Aluminum tubes were confiscated in Jordan and AFTER the invasion they were determined to be for conventional 81-mm rockets and not for an 81-mm aluminum rotor uranium centrifuge as previously believed by the intelligence agencys of the US.

Wilson was in Niger to investigate allegations that Saddam was attempting to purchase yellowcake uranium....
a huge stockpile of concentrated natural uranium reached a Canadian port to complete a secret U.S. operation that included a two-week airlift from Baghdad and a ship voyage crossing two oceans...Saddam's yellowcake, 550 metric tons of it— the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment. Can you tell us WHERE he got it ?

Stop making a fool of yourself.....
Talk about getting a clue. :palm:

Stop making excuses for them.

Oops, the tubes were the wrong ones. There were questions about the tubes and they chose to state one side.

Oops, the informant was a political adversary but they chose to believe him. Not only that, the guy was living the good life in Germany (if Irecall) off the proceeds of payments for the info. Paying a political opponent for information and then believing that information.

Look, the intelligence community may not be the brightest community but you're stretching it a bit, don't you think? When the informant was interviewed he admitted he couldn't believe that not only were they were paying him but that were repeating what he told them as if the info were proven facts. He'd be the fall guy when all this came to light. The question is who the hell would have believed him in the first place? He was the excuse needed to carry out the scam.

How many times did Powell and others say "our soures tell us" or "information we receeived"? That was their "get out of jail free" card. They had nothing! Absolutely nothing! Paying an unemployed political opponent and using whatever he told them as an excuse. What kind of intelligence gathering is that?

Are you naive or just stupid?
 
So why does he not LEAD on the issue of taxes by voluntarily paying his 'fair share'?

Ahhh, the same old question. If Liberals feel the wealthy should pay more taxes why don't they just pay what they believe is their fair share? Well, the reason is if the Liberals did that they wouldn't have the resources to counter the Repubs. It costs money to run ADS. The Conservatives would love nothing better than if the Liberals contributed more so they wouldn't have to contribute. Then the Conservatives could shout " class warfare" as the Liberals would have less money.

But you knew that. :)
 
Back
Top