2012 Presidential Election Part 4

[huskyfan]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

lets get real folks. this election is over. Dems turned against Obama a year ago. he didnt do the required schmoozing of his donors, party people and congressmen. their support is tepid at best. the Clintons are solidifying the party and their $$$ for '16. the Obama that we saw during the first debate is the Obama Washington insiders have seen from day one. aloof, uninvolved, condescending, disinterested. Dems will live to fight another day, but Romney is the next president.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Nice to see they gave you your ex-lax on time this afternoon! Interesting again how you call the CIA into question, an agency run by a highly decorated former general. I guess for you implying corruption upon a fellow serviceman is okay if the guy agrees to work for a Dem, right?

I mentioned the CIA? Who knew? "Corruption?" Maybe Obamacare will pay to up your meds.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Are you actually trying to respond to what I wrote or to the narrative on loop in your head?


As soon as you get called on something, you without fail change the argument by an increment or two. Nice tactic. That way you never have to actually prove or support anything you're writing.

Round and round we go!

His Liarness is a liar. Two weeks of that bullsh*t about a video. He lied. And you know it.

It wasn't me who suggested the only alternative to doing nothing was an "invasion."

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

His Liarness is a liar. Two weeks of that bullsh*t about a video. He lied. And you know it.

It wasn't me who suggested the only alternative to doing nothing was an "invasiion."

Thanks Lindsey. Let us know how much money you want to spend.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Well, I've been an Obama supporter most of this year as the closest thing available to my views, but it's not an easy call. You might call me a flip-flopper on the presidential race. I'm leaning Romney this week.
There are a number of proposals in MI that I'm definitely more eager to vote against, being pointless amendments to the constitution so proposed because they're too stupid to be put into action any other way.
I'm actually supporting some county millage for the sheriff dept. Money well spent IMO, good people and have been ready and responsive.

I will say I don't think there's as much diff between the two as people make it out. I might just go in there and flip a coin.

I tend to vote against most ballot propositions here in Arizona. There's a fair number of them that just aren't well-laid out or clear on what all they do and what potential side effects are.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Thanks Lindsey. Let us know how much money you want to spend.

You ladies better get some new material. You're running out of time. Plus, I don't think "Lindsey" has quite the cachet of Bush. So dig into your tattered quiver and find a non-sequitor Bush snark. Then ask yourself, what the h*ll does that have to do with anything he posted?

 

[Rover]

lets get real folks. this election is over. Dems turned against Obama a year ago. he didnt do the required schmoozing of his donors, party people and congressmen. their support is tepid at best. the Clintons are solidifying the party and their $$$ for '16. the Obama that we saw during the first debate is the Obama Washington insiders have seen from day one. aloof, uninvolved, condescending, disinterested. Dems will live to fight another day, but Romney is the next president.

Ummm....okaaayyy....

Mittens baby! He's losing almost all the swing states but he's got MOMENTUM Dammit!!!

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

You ladies better get some new material. You're running out of time. Plus, I don't think "Lindsey" has quite the cachet of Bush. So dig into your tattered quiver and find a non-sequitor Bush snark. Then ask yourself, what the h*ll does that have to do with anything he posted?

Thanks, John. You be sure and let us know how many troops you want in Syria, ok, thanks.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Thanks, John. You be sure and let us know how many troops you want in Syria, ok, thanks.

Deranged. And making less sense than usual. Which is a major accomplisment.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Ummm....okaaayyy....

Mittens baby! He's losing almost all the swing states but he's got MOMENTUM Dammit!!!

When did the Sioux endorse him?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Deranged. And making less sense than usual. Which is a major accomplisment.

Thanks Lindsey. Don't worry, Mittens will give you what you crave.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Thanks Lindsey. Don't worry, Mittens will give you what you crave.

Weak.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Weak.

What do you want? Impeachment? Go for it. Call your Senator McCain and tell him to impeach Obama. Especially if he gets reelected. Put your money where your mouth (typing hand) is and get er done. Otherwise stop posting your Conservative Propaganda in hopes that well all think the President is out to get us.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

There are a number of proposals in MI that I'm definitely more eager to vote against, being pointless amendments to the constitution so proposed because they're too stupid to be put into action any other way.

This is pretty much the only reason I'm going to the polls.

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

If we can't agree on anything, can we at least admit that we're all losing this election regardless of outcome? I mean, you've got one guy who's entire re-election campaign has been a year-long shrug with his eyebrows raised saying "it's not that bad", and the other guy is threatening to increase spending (by a lot) and cut taxes as a solution to our federal deficit (the key to less debt is to spend more and earn less, right? It's the kind of logic that inevitably leads to "if you're having trouble affording to go to college, try borrowing money from your parents"). And they're bolstered by America's drunken idiot uncle and an objectivist.

I'm getting close to deciding that I'll just write George Lucas in the ballot. At least he would change history books so we would start looking back on them and realize that everything we love about our country wasn't as good as we thought it was before.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

I wonder if any of the religious right in this state are going to claim that God wants Romney to win, now that NYC has been taken out and the hurricane is looking to hit Buffalo...

 

[joecct]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

What do you want? Impeachment? Go for it. Call your Senator McCain and tell him to impeach Obama. Especially if he gets reelected. Put your money where your mouth (typing hand) is and get er done. Otherwise stop posting your Conservative Propaganda in hopes that well all think the President is out to get us.

High Crimes and Misdemeanors is the cut line for an impeachment, not because you disagree with someone politically (which, IMO, was the basis for the 2 Articles of Impeachment approved by the House). Unless you have a solid proof that the President is in the pay of a foreign government or is running a criminal enterprise at the White House, you wait until the next election and either vote him/her out or neutralize him/her via an opposition Congress in the midterm.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

I wonder if any of the religious right in this state are going to claim that God wants Romney to win, now that NYC has been taken out and the hurricane is looking to hit Buffalo...

Let's ask Pat Robertson. And while we're at it, we can ask him if mac & cheese is a "black thing."

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

All I saw was a bunch of whining about someone who has been out of office for 4 years. I didn't see anything regarding a rebuttal.

Sure you did. Show me in the post that I'm mentioning.


And you'll vote Republican. Do all the posturing on here that you want, but when it comes down to it, no one believes you.

Just about everything you post is a parrot of Republican talking points, or at least right wing radio/TV talking points, which are usually the same thing.


So you don't have to go back 3 pages...


"Were "guards told to stand down" or was a CIA field office told not to send aid? Are the CIA guys the guards? Are they located at the building that was attacked? Do you guys even bother to make this stuff plausible?

So, you're drawing the conclusion that the CIA is actually saying that they didn't give the order to stand down, but someone else did? Meaning the President? From what I can find, that's a leap, a convenient leap.

I can just as easily look at the statement and conclude that no one was ever told to stand down. The field officers wouldn't have gotten a call directly from the White House, would they? Wouldn't the White House call the CIA and tell a superior what to do and then the order would have travelled down the chain? For the field office to stand down, they would have gotten an order from their superior - who would have been in the CIA.

Maybe I just don't understand how these conspiracies work... "


You and grandpa OP got nothing to say to that, do you?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

High Crimes and Misdemeanors is the cut line for an impeachment, not because you disagree with someone politically (which, IMO, was the basis for the 2 Articles of Impeachment approved by the House). Unless you have a solid proof that the President is in the pay of a foreign government or is running a criminal enterprise at the White House, you wait until the next election and either vote him/her out or neutralize him/her via an opposition Congress in the midterm.

Sure. Same with Clinton, right?

Now, impeach Obama and get it over with Pio.