Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#36016 Feb 8, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
You're leaving out an important part of the equation.
Many elderly workers, who REALLY shouldn't be working in the first place at their stage in life, have had to work for crappy cheap employers because they would not be able to get medical care that keeps them alive if they didn't. Essentially they've been turned into slaves for health-care in their advanced and frail ages.
In America we like Freedom right? And we don't like slavery?
These people are Americans. It's fair and right because they are members of our 'tribe", our "society", and we don't throw good people under the bus here in America. Do We?
Economically this all works out in the long run. As employers have a harder time filling those "insurance -slave" positions, they will face pressure to increase wages and benefits and candidates will fill those slots who earn more, pay more taxes, and wanted a job in the first place.
Elderly workers are not those the Democrats have been harping about the last few days. They have been specifically talking about workers in their prime. And have you never heard of Medicare? I thought Dems LOVED Medicare.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#36017 Feb 8, 2014
time wrote:
The chameleon Boehner cannot be trusted..........
"How the Tea Party Cornered John Boehner on Immigration"
"Inside the Capitol, Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions began flouting delicate congressional protocol, openly organizing House members against Boehner. His Senate colleagues were following suit. Regulars like Ted Cruz and Mike Lee took shots at Boehner's principles, but pretty soon John Cornyn and even Mitch McConnell were making it clear they thought Boehner was out to lunch.
At the retreat, roughly 40 House Republicans told Boehner face-to-face they wanted nothing to do with immigration in 2014, a large majority of those who spoke.
That day, the hits just kept on coming for Boehner in the conservative media, the greatest indignity being a superimposed sombrero hat on the Drudge Report."
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/...
It is so time for Boehner to GO and take McCain with you, please.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#36018 Feb 8, 2014
TROLL MAN wrote:
I see Dull Bill is still too embarrassed to show up on Topix. If someone beat my sorry a$$ like he received yesterday, I wouldn't show up either. Oh, the irony.
What must it be like in that strange little world you inhabit.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#36019 Feb 8, 2014
Bill in Dville wrote:
And yet the Left thinks that it is perfectly reasonable for the full might of the federal government to come down on this woman, after all, she's a..........conservative.
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#36020 Feb 8, 2014
“No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation." President Obama, September 12th, right after the attack on our embassy.

ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#36021 Feb 8, 2014
time wrote:
thanks to obama and libroids for killing employment and wages..........
http://reflectionsofarationalrepublican.files...

Any questions?

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#36022 Feb 8, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
Please explain what is inaccurate about that assessment. Are you insinuating that Americans killed our ambassador? I'm looking forward to your enlightened views.
========
CB: "Yes, yes... all of the 'MEDIA" got together and had a meeting. They all decided to "let her off the hook".
"The Media" is like the mafia. If they don't go along with the meeting decisions, they sleep with the fishes.
Thank GOODNESS we have the NY POST and you looking out for us so that we don't stay misinformed.
========

CB: "Thanks for keeping us informed, INVESTIGATOR Silver Foxx!
So HILLARY killed Ambassador Stephens?
It's a 15 hour flight from Washington DC to Benghazi, Then 15 hours back.
I think her alibi holds up. Maybe you should focus on different suspects at this stage in your investigation. I know this might seem a little unconventional, but have you considered that the radical Muslims might have done it? Whatever - you're the expert.
We all feel safer knowing you're on the case."
==========

CB: "The seem to have no memory of the fact the simultaneous protests were happening at our Embassies at the same time across the Middle East that WERE the result of the film."

----------

Deflect and make hyperbolic statements all you like. It still doesn't answer the main question. Why was it so important to the Obama administration to NOT call an attack an attack? Why was Susan Rice sent out to peddle a lie that the administration knew was a lie? Why did Obama go on the View weeks later and still try to peddle the lie? But of course, you have no interest in why your government would lie about something that seems so foolish. And that alone, should make those with a modicum of sense question their actions.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#36023 Feb 8, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
Really?
You can't even admit that the armed Muslims storming the embassy are the ones that killed out Ambassador? It's all the fault of a woman who was thousands of miles away?
Go ahead and say this basic simple fact: "Hillary did not kill our ambassador. Radical Muslims killed our ambassador."
Just say it. Reacquaint yourself with the truth.
It really shouldn't be this hard.
That is weak even for you.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#36024 Feb 8, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
House Republicans cut the administration’s request for embassy security funding by $128 million in fiscal 2011 and $331 million in fiscal 2012....Last year, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned that Republicans’ proposed cuts to her department would be “detrimental to America’s national security”— a charge Republicans rejected.
Ryan, Issa and other House Republicans voted for an amendment in 2009 to cut $1.2 billion from State operations, including funds for 300 more diplomatic security positions. Under Ryan’s budget, non-defense discretionary spending, which includes State Department funding, would be slashed nearly 20 percent in 2014, which would translate to more than $400 million in additional cuts to embassy security.
And has been noted many times, when Charlotte Lamb was asked directly if budget cuts led to decreased security at Benghazi, she said no. The decreased security is directly attributable to decisions made by the State Dept. The links have been given time and again.
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#36025 Feb 8, 2014
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
It is so time for Boehner to GO and take McCain with you, please.
Of course. Even when the dangerously radical element of the Republican party chose not to pay the bills of the United States of America and shut down the CITIZENS government, they still didn't get their "demands" met.

Solution?

Go more radical.

Brilliant.
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#36026 Feb 8, 2014
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
That is weak even for you.
There's nothing weak about it.

In order to have a base level of conversation we must seek out the very most elemental truths on which to build that conversation.

I wanted to see if we could agree that Radical Muslims killed out ambassador, rather than Hillary Clinton herself.

The Republican Supporter in question would not agree to that this was a fact.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#36027 Feb 8, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
“No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation." President Obama, September 12th, right after the attack on our embassy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =3ILstYEZfusXX
Read the whole transcript, he was not referring specifically to Benghazi in that sentence.

And again, then why did he decline to call it a terrorist attack two weeks later on the View? Why did he blame the attack on a video in a speech at the UN?

I'm done. You have your head firmly entrenched in the dirt where Benghazi is concerned. The questions are simple and could put this to rest so quickly, but they will not be answered:

1. Who told Susan Rice to appear on 5 talk shows and peddle the video story?
2. What did Obama do the rest of the evening - while the attack was still going on and while Doherty and Woods were still alive?
3. Why did they continue to peddle the video story for weeks, when they knew it was an attack and there had been NO demonstration outside the consulate prior to the attack?

"inquiring minds want to know" - too bad that doesn't include Democrat apologists.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#36028 Feb 8, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
There's nothing weak about it.
In order to have a base level of conversation we must seek out the very most elemental truths on which to build that conversation.
I wanted to see if we could agree that Radical Muslims killed out ambassador, rather than Hillary Clinton herself.
The Republican Supporter in question would not agree to that this was a fact.
Because some idiocy is not worth responding to, but I did anyway.
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#36029 Feb 8, 2014
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
And has been noted many times, when Charlotte Lamb was asked directly if budget cuts led to decreased security at Benghazi, she said no. The decreased security is directly attributable to decisions made by the State Dept. The links have been given time and again.
Of course, The SECRETARY OF STATE, Charlotte Lamb.

ooops --- sorry... that's not right.

The DEPUTY secretary of state, Charlotte Lamb said..

ooopp.. still not right! Let me try again.

The ASSISTANT Secretary of State Cha...

Nope. That's not it either!

The Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Charlo.....

Dagnabit!

The FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT secretary of state, Charlotte Lamb (whew, I think I finally got all the assistants and deputies and formers all worked out properly in her title)

who said that SHE didn't know about a funding cut, outweighs the actual spending bill that was passed into law that we can review right now in the Congressional Record and see that the spending was cut, and the testimony of Congressmen who admitted that they cut the spending?

Really? Let's use her testimony since it's what we're predisposed to want to hear?

Really? How does that work?
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#36030 Feb 8, 2014
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Because some idiocy is not worth responding to, but I did anyway.
It's right there in print a few posts up. Read it for yourself.

He asserts that Ambassador Stephens death is the fault of Hillary Clinton.

It's insane, you know it, I know, but he won't budge on that. He simply WILL NOT agree that Former Secretary of State of the United States of America Hillary Clinton did not murder Ambassador Stephens.

Such is the mind-set of much of the right-wing in America today.
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#36031 Feb 8, 2014
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
========
CB: "Yes, yes... all of the 'MEDIA" got together and had a meeting. They all decided to "let her off the hook".
"The Media" is like the mafia. If they don't go along with the meeting decisions, they sleep with the fishes.
Thank GOODNESS we have the NY POST and you looking out for us so that we don't stay misinformed.
========
CB: "Thanks for keeping us informed, INVESTIGATOR Silver Foxx!
So HILLARY killed Ambassador Stephens?
It's a 15 hour flight from Washington DC to Benghazi, Then 15 hours back.
I think her alibi holds up. Maybe you should focus on different suspects at this stage in your investigation. I know this might seem a little unconventional, but have you considered that the radical Muslims might have done it? Whatever - you're the expert.
We all feel safer knowing you're on the case."
==========
CB: "The seem to have no memory of the fact the simultaneous protests were happening at our Embassies at the same time across the Middle East that WERE the result of the film."
----------
Deflect and make hyperbolic statements all you like. It still doesn't answer the main question. Why was it so important to the Obama administration to NOT call an attack an attack? Why was Susan Rice sent out to peddle a lie that the administration knew was a lie? Why did Obama go on the View weeks later and still try to peddle the lie? But of course, you have no interest in why your government would lie about something that seems so foolish. And that alone, should make those with a modicum of sense question their actions.
I posted the video of President of the United States of America, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States of America Barack Obama calling the attack an "act of terror" less than 24 hours after the event occurred.

But you wanted "terror attack" rather than "the attack was an act of terror".

Sounds petty and silly to me.

“Registered Conservative”

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#36032 Feb 8, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course, The SECRETARY OF STATE, Charlotte Lamb.
ooops --- sorry... that's not right.
The DEPUTY secretary of state, Charlotte Lamb said..
ooopp.. still not right! Let me try again.
The ASSISTANT Secretary of State Cha...
Nope. That's not it either!
The Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Charlo.....
Dagnabit!
The FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT secretary of state, Charlotte Lamb (whew, I think I finally got all the assistants and deputies and formers all worked out properly in her title)
who said that SHE didn't know about a funding cut, outweighs the actual spending bill that was passed into law that we can review right now in the Congressional Record and see that the spending was cut, and the testimony of Congressmen who admitted that they cut the spending?
Really? Let's use her testimony since it's what we're predisposed to want to hear?
Really? How does that work?
Did our folks at the embassy in Benghazi, ask for more security resources?
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#36033 Feb 8, 2014
It always cracks me up when I get "spam" and "clueless" icons in posts
that have absolutely no commentary in them whatsoever, just simple basic verifiable facts and nothing else.

You RWW's really don't like facts, do you?
AnyoneButDeal

United States

#36034 Feb 8, 2014
General Robert E Lee wrote:
<quoted text>
It's Obama who is standing by, ready to bail out the insurance companies when they go broke because the ACA is turning out to be a failure.
Quote: "turning out".

Any government regulated program can turn. Give it time ANY turn may prove to be most successful. Social Security has turned many times and Republicans have tried to harm SS many times.

Americans must be ever vigil to stave of Republicans, and the rich which Republicans represent, from stealing everything from workers.

The only good Republican is a de...
No that can't be right, those stink as bad as the rest of them. There are no good Republicans, period.
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#36035 Feb 8, 2014
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
You are conveniently ignoring the role the Clinton Justice Dept played due to their threats of prosecution against banks and lending institutions that did not make enough loans to those the Justice Dept determined should get them - nevermind their credit history, their income, just make those loans or face the displeasure of the federal government.
Yeah....ok...

That's why Wall Street went hog-wild. It didn't have anything to do with making money hand-over-fist and defrauding their own clients for profit.

I believe you.(*cough**cough*)

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Brunswick Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Speed Trap along the I-95 corridor in Mcintosh ... (Nov '15) Aug 11 elder abuse 50
Job Corps info. (Aug '11) Aug 10 Jenforbus 6
Looking Aug 10 Truth 10
are great white sharks in altamahal river ? Aug 2 FLNDN 6
Watch Out Woodbine Aug 2 BellSouth 1
What Y'all think of District Attorney Jackie Jo... (Nov '11) Jul 21 Martin gillis 103
Part 12 Guy Heinze Jr. (May '10) Jul '17 Jeb 1,232

Brunswick Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Brunswick Mortgages