RE: Impeachment?

RE: Impeachment? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

tazzygirl -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 4:23:39 PM)
Nearly 7 in 10 support air strikes in Libya, CBS News poll finds

rulemylife -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 4:28:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity So, you think Obama deserves to keep his worthless, meaningless crackerjack "peace prize" I take it quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail you shouldn't ever get up, it saps your brain beyond slobbering and breathing, makes you incoherent, loose with truth, illogical and .........well you are always wrong so... I've got a question for you. Do you think your credibility suffers when you quote three people to support your viewpoint that you have consistently denigrated?

Sanity -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 4:33:51 PM)
Ive got an answer for you, I really dont care what you and your ilk think about me. Its more of a compliment really when certain of you... types are hurling your very worst at me. But more directly, Im not quoting them because I agree with them, in some cases though I vehemently disagree with their political views I am forced to admire them for their consistency. To tell you the truth I havent decided how I feel about the bombing itself, I dont know who these rebels are and Im not sure what the mission is... But I do know that there are a lot of Obama supporters who would have been screaming for George Bushs and Dick Cheneys heads if this were they intervening in Libya quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife I've got a question for you. Do you think your credibility suffers when you quote three people that you have consistently denigrated?

DomKen -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 4:39:43 PM)
Sanity has apparently decided to try and play a passive aggressive game with his dancing around his trying to stir up 'discussion' about a topic he endorses but wants to try and avoid admitting to being in favor of. Unfortunately he's worse at it than certain other neo con posters on this forum. As a general note passive aggressive behavior is less than appealing in grand southern ladies and is downright pathetic in everyone else.

Sanity -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 4:45:50 PM)
Ah, a post from the KING of passive-aggressive, domken. The dems here have been playing a game of hijack, attack, deny, and derail for fifteen pages now, because they are and have been throughout the entire thread so afraid of their very own shadows that they absolutely will not dare to venture an opinion on the actual topic.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 4:55:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Ah, a post from the KING of passive-aggressive, domken. The dems here have been playing a game of hijack, attack, deny, and derail for fifteen pages now, because they are and have been throughout the entire thread so afraid of their very own shadows that they absolutely will not dare to venture an opinion on the actual topic. Obviously because they can't take a position consistent with prior posts without questioning Blowboy. This board has officially jumped the shark.

tazzygirl -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 4:58:29 PM)
quote: The dems here have been playing a game of hijack, attack, deny, and derail for fifteen pages now, because they are and have been throughout the entire thread so afraid of their very own shadows that they absolutely will not dare to venture an opinion on the actual topic. Ok. Do you mind restating what you feel is the actual topic?

DomKen -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 4:59:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Ah, a post from the KING of passive-aggressive, domken. The dems here have been playing a game of hijack, attack, deny, and derail for fifteen pages now, because they are and have been throughout the entire thread so afraid of their very own shadows that they absolutely will not dare to venture an opinion on the actual topic. opinion on the actual topic? I've read numerous people who are left of center state quite clearly they see no grounds for impeachment. I agree. Now why don't you stop pretending and say what you want to say, we all know you've been wanting to call for his impeachment since before he was sworn in.

Sanity -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 5:01:01 PM)
Rich understood the point of the thread back on page one, which makes me laugh out loud at some of the Dems who are still apparently struggling to get a firm hold on their first clue as to what its about quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic At least he is consistent, Tazzy. I bet Code Pink will be, too. A lot of others who jumped the bandwagon as a way to attack Bush... Not so much I suspect.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 5:07:53 PM)
Here is an interesting tidbit. (Accept apologies in advance if someone else has already mentioned it because I just got off vacation and damned if Im gonna plow thru 10+ pages of drivel). When Dubya bombed someone, gas went thru the roof. When Obama bombed someone, gas went down 17 cents a gallon.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 5:09:00 PM)
I have NO fuckin idea why. I'm just pointing it out.

Sanity -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 5:09:21 PM)
FirmhandKy nailed it down very "firmly" here quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Ok. Do you mind restating what you feel is the actual topic?

slvemike4u -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 5:37:49 PM)
Should I ever reach the point where I need rely on the more cognizant amongst us to explain thoughts and motivations ostensibly my own......I would just stop posting,but that's just me. Seems sanity is okay with relying on the explanations of others...perhaps he is just not qualified or able to make a sensible case...hence he leaves it to others.

tazzygirl -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 5:38:11 PM)
quote: If his agenda is to point out that most of the protest and complaints from the left were not really about Bush's policies (which Obama seems to have adopted wholesale), but about gaining political traction and destroying your nation for purely partisan political purposes, then his agenda is one that I support. As has been pointed out, if you protest and complain because of your convictions (even if I disagree with them), then I would place you in the "honorable" category of politicians and protesters. If you protested and complained about Bush, but are giving Obama a free ride for doing essentially the same thing, then I place you in the "hypocrite" and "selfish partisan" category. (Not necessarily "you" personally, Mike, but generically.) To be honest, I have questioned why we are doing this. I have also questioned those who felt Obama wasnt doing things fast enough. I have also questioned Bush and his decision to tell the country that we were going in because of WMD, yet he left Saudi get away scott free. quote: There seems to be a gaping hole of silence from many, both here on the boards, in the media, and within the ranks of our "elected statesmen" who protested - sometimes violently - about Bush's actions, but are "ho hum" about Obama's actions and policies: which are basically the same as Bush's actions and policies. ("Ho hum"? Hell, they are justifying and supporting those actions, now that it's Obama, and not Bush!) This particular incident (the use of US military forces against a "sovereign nation") simply highlights who the partisans and hypocrites really are. So, yes, Sanity's agenda is certainly worthy of discussion. As are the actions, words and agenda of anyone engaged in the political realm. I dont view their actions as similar. Can either you, Firm, or Sanity show me where I am missing the correlation?

slvemike4u -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 5:45:09 PM)
As I said pages and pages ago that whole train of thought depends wholly on some sort of moral equivalency being established between the two actions......since that can not sensibly be done....the whole damm house of cards comes tumbling down.

tazzygirl -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 5:49:06 PM)
But, mike, I am open to the attempt if someone is willing to put forth the effort.

slvemike4u -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 5:56:56 PM)
Well don't hold your breath waiting for sanity to do so....you will so sorely disappointed. On top of that I don't think such a case can be made.....But were sanity to try I would caution him not to make the same error he made oh so many pages ago.....whatever you do sane one ,please keep in mind Clinton never invaded Iraq.[:D].

Sanity -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 6:34:58 PM)
For that part of the argument, now this depends on intellectual honesty... go to the most logical source, which wouldnt be us. There are those however who we have been pointing to as consistent in their message, and one great example of such leftists would be the Code Pink people. Think of all the slogans that were thrown at Bush, billions for war but, uhm, how did that go... guns not butter? Something like that. "Bombing them isnt the answer, stop selling them bombs is". All that leftist antiwar rot, it used to mean something to everyone on the left but for most it was just a convenient tool for hammering away at the Republicans and once the Dems were in power that tool and those who really believed in the antiwar message were thrown away. Are we out of Iraq yet? Or Afghanistan? Gitmo closed? Are there "no more wars"? Or as Sarah Palin put it, hows that "hopey-changy thing workin' out for ya" quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl I dont view their actions as similar. Can either you, Firm, or Sanity show me where I am missing the correlation?

slvemike4u -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 6:51:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity For that part of the argument, now this depends on intellectual honesty... go to the most logical source, which wouldnt be us. There are those however who we have been pointing to as consistent in their message, and one great example of such leftists would be the Code Pink people. Think of all the slogans that were thrown at Bush, billions for war but, uhm, how did that go... guns not butter? Something like that. "Bombing them isnt the answer, stop selling them bombs is". All that leftist antiwar rot, it used to mean something to everyone on the left but for most it was just a convenient tool for hammering away at the Republicans and once the Dems were in power that tool and those who really believed in the antiwar message were thrown away. Are we out of Iraq yet? Or Afghanistan? Gitmo closed? Are there "no more wars"? Or as Sarah Palin put it, hows that "hopey-changy thing workin' out for ya" quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl I dont view their actions as similar. Can either you, Firm, or Sanity show me where I am missing the correlation? What part of the message are you not understanding....I and others keep repeating that we don't see where a case for equivalency can be made. You come back by citing Code Pink...a group that would probably have felt rightous decrying the U.S's involvement in WW II. Now as to President Obama continuing certain policies initiated by your favorite President.....I am sure you will be honest enough to admit that getting out of some situations is a hell of a lot more difficult than blundering your way into said situation. Much like you and this thread.....seemed like a good idea(to you I mean) when you started it....but now you find yourself knee deep in muck and you aren't nearly smart enough to find your way out. Free advice...when you find yourself in a hole....stop digging.

Lucylastic -> RE: Impeachment? (3/22/2011 6:53:40 PM)
You say that like there havent been anti war protests in the US since this started, but I guess you are only seeing what you want to. Im sure all the anti war protestors will be out if the troops get called in and yes, I will be joining them and just as pissed, but, not for the reasons you would. If you dont see the vast diference between 2003 and 2011 take your head outta your ass yanno Hope and Change is all fine and well, but hope is not a DONE deal, he isnt the messiah, however much you want him to be one, or at least be discovered to be the antichrist. The fact you actually pretend to believe what politicians say at election time and then expect the rest of reality fall by the wayside. so you can call him a liar and expect people to feel the same as you do, is on you no one else Now why not stop this smokescreen and ask some serious questions about this lame assed congress you have that hasnt passed anything decent since january

Page: << < prev 13 14 [15] 16 17 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.492188E-02