What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Isn't human nature wonderful?

This whole debate will be decided in two weeks (one hopes! :) *). Sort of like arguing about who is going to win a sporting event before the event takes place, the athletes on the field, combined with luck, combined with officiating, will generally decide the outcome, no matter how passionate the fan base.




* the latest conspiracy theory is that if Obama loses a close election, he will have armies of attorneys ready to keep the results tied up in court indefinitely. During the process, more and more "overlooked" votes will continue to be "discovered."
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

FreshFish said:
Isn't human nature wonderful?

This whole debate will be decided in two weeks (one hopes! :) *). Sort of like arguing about who is going to win a sporting event before the event takes place, the athletes on the field, combined with luck, combined with officiating, will generally decide the outcome, no matter how passionate the fan base.




* the latest conspiracy theory is that if Obama loses a close election, he will have armies of attorneys ready to keep the results tied up in court indefinitely. During the process, more and more "overlooked" votes will continue to be "discovered."
Click to expand...


"The campaign continues."--Bill Daley on election night 2000.
 
Old Pio said:
Okay, so we rule out hysteria about the election. I guess the only conclusion that leaves is that you're just a natural prik. We got it. Well, lying about whether you're moving campaign resources from one state to another could be construed as "politics." And what is it when POTUS dissembles for a couple of weeks about a non-existant video? Isn't that "politics" as well? Only in this case, you've got four dead Americans whose deaths, evidently, aren't nearly so important as getting that jumped up cheap sh*t Chicago pol re-elected. Yup, you're on the side of the angels.
Click to expand...

Quite the contrary Opie. Its because we live in a dangerous world as evidenced by the 4 unfortunate deaths in Libya that we need to re-elect the Prez. See, Mittens has no core beliefs on foreign policy. He's either for arming Syrian rebels or not depending on what week we're in. Then he wants to extend troop deployment in Afghanistan but now maybe not. He wants to follow Israel's lead in bombing Iran but then he won't commit to militarily defending Isreal if they are attacked. I mean, where does the guy stand on anything??? Except for a +2T promise for defense spending over the next 10 years...

The problem with all this is its a neo-cons wet dream. Inexperienced and easily influenced President bent on jacking up defense spending. Gee, what could *possibly* go wrong with that? Since 1993 there's only been one GOP administration, and it was a complete disaster. All the quality people from the Reagan and Bush I foreign policy teams are either dead or very old men (Schultz, Baker, etc). So, that leaves Bush II admin refugees to fill out a Romney cabinet. That means nuts like John Bolton or angry old Congressional geezers like McCain. No thanks. Why don't we just give Rumsfeld his old job back while we're at it?
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Rover said:
Quite the contrary Opie. Its because we live in a dangerous world as evidenced by the 4 unfortunate deaths in Libya that we need to re-elect the Prez. See, Mittens has no core beliefs on foreign policy. He's either for arming Syrian rebels or not depending on what week we're in. Then he wants to extend troop deployment in Afghanistan but now maybe not. He wants to follow Israel's lead in bombing Iran but then he won't commit to militarily defending Isreal if they are attacked. I mean, where does the guy stand on anything??? Except for a +2T promise for defense spending over the next 10 years...

The problem with all this is its a neo-cons wet dream. Inexperienced and easily influenced President bent on jacking up defense spending. Gee, what could *possibly* go wrong with that? Since 1993 there's only been one GOP administration, and it was a complete disaster. All the quality people from the Reagan and Bush I foreign policy teams are either dead or very old men (Schultz, Baker, etc). So, that leaves Bush II admin refugees to fill out a Romney cabinet. That means nuts like John Bolton or angry old Congressional geezers like McCain. No thanks. Why don't we just give Rumsfeld his old job back while we're at it?
Click to expand...

And these hallucinations justify 6 mentions of the "video" before the UN (among other lies)? Seriously? His Truthlessness has to lie to keep Romney from winning?
 
Last edited:
Old Pio said:
And these hallucinations justify 6 mentions of the "video" before the UN? Seriously? His Truthlessness has to lie to keep Romney from winning?
Click to expand...

For the umpteenth time Opie, even the CIA briefings Rice used didn't know the cause of the demonstration and the video was as good an explanation as any other at the time. If Obama is lying about all this and its being done to keep Mittens from winning, why didn't The Mittwit mention that even once during the foreign policy debate? That would be a pretty big oversight, no?
 
Last edited:
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Rover said:
For the umpteenth time Opie, even the CIA briefings Rice used didn't know the cause of the demonstration and the video was as good an explanation as any other at the time. If Obama is lying about all this and its being done to keep Mittens from winning, why didn't The Mittwit mention that even once during the foreign policy debate? That would be a pretty big oversight, no?
Click to expand...

What was that sign on Harry Truman's desk? Did I mention Ambassador Rice and her lies? I'm talking about His Islamistness' lies. Try to stay focused.

". . .demonstration?" Seriously?
 
Last edited:
gojackets said:
"Indiana Senate candidate Richard Mourdock: Pregnancies from rape are God's will"


Read more: http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/natio...nancies-from-rape-are-gods-will#ixzz2AEQj5LSH
http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/natio...-mourdock-pregnancies-from-rape-are-gods-will


When will the Republicans stop putting their foot in their mouths regarding this stuff...and what are the odds this idiot still wins his election?
Click to expand...

Murdoch hasn't reached laughingstock status like Akin so his chances are pretty good. On the other hand this is about the last thing Romney needed for a guy he's already endorsed. If closing the gender gap is key to the election, having the Republican brand collectively being tarnished by these guys week after week can't be helping any.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Old Pio said:
Yup, what Reagan did or did not do or knew or didn't know is certainly relevant now, arsewipe. What's the matter, Bunky, do you feel it slipping away?
Click to expand...
Relevant...like when I was instructed to ask Bill Clinton about his Silverspoonfedness dodging the draft? That kind of relevant? Who's the arsewipe again?
 
gojackets said:
"Indiana Senate candidate Richard Mourdock: Pregnancies from rape are God's will"


Read more: http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/natio...nancies-from-rape-are-gods-will#ixzz2AEQj5LSH
http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/natio...-mourdock-pregnancies-from-rape-are-gods-will


When will the Republicans stop putting their foot in their mouths regarding this stuff...and what are the odds this idiot still wins his election?
Click to expand...

Why do you say it is a foot in the mouth comment? This is mainstream thinking for a signifigant percentage of today's Republican Party.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Rover said:
Murdoch hasn't reached laughingstock status like Akin so his chances are pretty good. On the other hand this is about the last thing Romney needed for a guy he's already endorsed. If closing the gender gap is key to the election, having the Republican brand collectively being tarnished by these guys week after week can't be helping any.
Click to expand...

Errrrrrrrrrrrrrr................what? Murdoch is only reciting the Republican platform passed at the GOP convention. The fact that Romney want's us to forget every position he's taken since running for President back in ~2007 till now doesn't change that.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

brookyone said:
Relevant...like when I was instructed to ask Bill Clinton about his Silverspoonfedness dodging the draft? That kind of relevant? Who's the arsewipe again?
Click to expand...

Your little feelings hurt? Give it up, dear. Everyone understood the concept of your varying standards of outrage at dodging the draft, except you.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Rover said:
Which I believe Obama said in debate #2, right before Romney humiliated himself on the Benghazi question.
Click to expand...
Yes, Romney bungled the technicality badly - Obama did use the word "terror" in his Rose Garden speech. He got so flustered that he didn't hammer on the SUBSTANCE of the issue, which is that Obama was flinging his pet theories around willy-nilly for two weeks (including to the UN) rather than simply saying "it's early, and we need to gather more information." Obama was so desperate to project a presidential image that he forgot to actually be a president - image is everything, apparently.

Romney could have absolutely (rightly) devastated Obama on that topic, but he fumbled it away badly. Romney fumbled 30 seconds of a live debate; Obama fumbled the actual situation for more than two weeks while getting daily briefings from his staff. Which exactly is worse, again?
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

LynahFan said:
Yes, Romney bungled the technicality badly - Obama did use the word "terror" in his Rose Garden speech. He got so flustered that he didn't hammer on the SUBSTANCE of the issue, which is that Obama was flinging his pet theories around willy-nilly for two weeks (including to the UN) rather than simply saying "it's early, and we need to gather more information." Obama was so desperate to project a presidential image that he forgot to actually be a president - image is everything, apparently.

Romney could have absolutely (rightly) devastated Obama on that topic, but he fumbled it away badly. Romney fumbled 30 seconds of a live debate; Obama fumbled the actual situation for more than two weeks while getting daily briefings from his staff. Which exactly is worse, again?
Click to expand...
Romney immediately jumping on the situation to try and secure cheap political points without knowing anything at all?
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

LynahFan said:
Yes, Romney bungled the technicality badly - Obama did use the word "terror" in his Rose Garden speech. He got so flustered that he didn't hammer on the SUBSTANCE of the issue, which is that Obama was flinging his pet theories around willy-nilly for two weeks (including to the UN) rather than simply saying "it's early, and we need to gather more information." Obama was so desperate to project a presidential image that he forgot to actually be a president - image is everything, apparently.

Romney could have absolutely (rightly) devastated Obama on that topic, but he fumbled it away badly. Romney fumbled 30 seconds of a live debate; Obama fumbled the actual situation for more than two weeks while getting daily briefings from his staff. Which exactly is worse, again?
Click to expand...

Americans having to spend any time at all on Libya, Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, and North Korea. They're all a waste of time and money. I'm sure there's many more, those are the ones that come to mind.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

ScoobyDoo said:
Americans having to spend any time at all on Libya, Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, and North Korea. They're all a waste of time and money. I'm sure there's many more, those are the ones that come to mind.
Click to expand...

What's wrong with just letting all these people kill eachother?
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

LynahFan said:
Yes, Romney bungled the technicality badly - Obama did use the word "terror" in his Rose Garden speech. He got so flustered that he didn't hammer on the SUBSTANCE of the issue, which is that Obama was flinging his pet theories around willy-nilly for two weeks (including to the UN) rather than simply saying "it's early, and we need to gather more information." Obama was so desperate to project a presidential image that he forgot to actually be a president - image is everything, apparently.

Romney could have absolutely (rightly) devastated Obama on that topic, but he fumbled it away badly. Romney fumbled 30 seconds of a live debate; Obama fumbled the actual situation for more than two weeks while getting daily briefings from his staff. Which exactly is worse, again?
Click to expand...

That's a rhetorical question, right? As to the question of His Truthlessness referring to Benghazi as a terror attack in the Rose Garden, the record is not clear. He used the phrase "no act of terror," which could have meant Benghazi, but not absolutely. If he had said "this act of terror," then there would be no doubt, would there? Just another example of a politician covering his butt. The murder of four diplomats tends to call into question his bragging about AQ being "on the run." That's the motivation for the lying. Period.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top