Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Georgia in 2010?

[Aggie23]

OMTE wrote:

<quoted text>What I see is him standing firm on what he said he would do. His tactics are questionable, but he is our President and I believe in him.

The man is a proven LIAR. Bob Woodard has already proven the sequester was Obama's idea, Obama talked about wanting the sequester in his Des Moines Register interview of Oct 23. And this was after the debate the previous night when he blamed it again on Republicans and adamantly claimed the sequester would never go through - "It's (sequestration) something Congress proposed. It will not happen."
desmoinesregister.com

I do find it interesting how the ever so respected Bob Woodward of Watergate fame is suddenly being dumped on by some in the mainstream media after he calls out the White House for not telling the truth and states he was even threatened after stating publicly that Obama has "moved the goal post" on the Republicans.

[Informed Opinion]

Synergy wrote:

<quoted text>Now THIS is profound.
And YOU'RE the reason we need more mental health facilities with padded rooms.(See how silly you are?)

BTW, I like Marco Rubio. If he runs and wins the nomination, I'll vote for him. Yep! Absolutely.

Yea Rubio,

An otherwise illegal alien family, that got preferential treatment because of political power, who used every liberal socialist commie Democratic program to benefit himself and his family - and now wants to claim he's a "self-made" man.

The perfect Right Wing candidate a total hypocrite.

[scorekeeper]

Aggie23 wrote:

<quoted text>
SOMEONE authorized the release of detained illegal aliens. The White House has no clue, the DHS Secretary has no clue. And yet someone felt that that they could take it upon themselves to release criminal detainees? Well, either the WH and DHS are lying or incompetent - which would you prefer?
Reminds me of Benghazi - no one knows who denied the embassy and the annex the assistance they requested (or the requested increased security before the attack).- 4 Americans dead and no one is held in any way responsible for the decisions that could easily be responsible for the lack of security that led to those deaths.

great analogies.only problem is that if you hold to it and think back to 9/11/01,then someone would have to be accountable for that.right? but then i guess you'd just blame that on the former democratic prez,huh. back,kinda.2500 vs.4?

[Informed Opinion]

Aggie23 wrote:

<quoted text>The man is a proven LIAR. Bob Woodard has already proven the sequester was Obama's idea, Obama talked about wanting the sequester in his Des Moines Register interview of Oct 23. And this was after the debate the previous night when he blamed it again on Republicans and adamantly claimed the sequester would never go through - "It's (sequestration) something Congress proposed. It will not happen."
desmoinesregister.com

I do find it interesting how the ever so respected Bob Woodward of Watergate fame is suddenly being dumped on by some in the mainstream media after he calls out the White House for not telling the truth and states he was even threatened after stating publicly that Obama has "moved the goal post" on the Republicans.

Please - suddenly Woodward and the Corporate Press are honest, trustworthy, and reliable.

Yesterday, the Corporate Press was in Obama's pocket.

Can we at least try to be consistent ?

By the way - the sequester is great.

Cut Social Security, Medicare, the V.A., School Lunches, and above all the War Department.

Let's see which programs the people want refunded first.

Let's see if the people want to watch their families suffer in order to protect the rich from paying taxes.

This is gonna be fun.

[Aggie23]

scorekeeper wrote:

<quoted text>great analogies.only problem is that if you hold to it and think back to 9/11/01,then someone would have to be accountable for that.right? but then i guess you'd just blame that on the former democratic prez,huh. back,kinda.2500 vs.4?

In my examples, we have the deliberate actions of those in Obama's administration (if not Obama himself) to release criminals and to first refuse increased security and then refuse aid to Americans under attack.

In your example, somehow Bush was supposed to know that 19 fanatics were going to hijack airlines and turn them into weapons. Though perhaps he might have if Jamie Gerelick while working for the Clinton Administration had not made sure that the FBI and the CIA could not share information. There were red flags that may have been acted upon had those two entities been able to share info. So yeah, you're right, IF any one administration is to blame it would be Clinton's.

[Bigdave1]

OMTE wrote:

<quoted text>What I see is him standing firm on what he said he would do. His tactics are questionable, but he is our President and I believe in him.

Without a doubt his tactics are questionable. He is purposely trying to scare the American people and trying to force hardships on us to get his way. What decent American would could do these things to the American people and be able to sleep at night? This is the most deplorable use of politics that I have ever witnessed.It is deception at best with no regard to our safety and well being.
I believe in what I see happening, and as Otis Redding used to sing, my eyes don't fool me.

[Bill in Dville]

Aggie23 wrote:

<quoted text>
When B.S.= Brilliant Summarization - couldn't agree more.

+1

Thanks, Aggie!

:)

[scorekeeper]

Aggie23 wrote:

<quoted text>
In my examples, we have the deliberate actions of those in Obama's administration (if not Obama himself) to release criminals and to first refuse increased security and then refuse aid to Americans under attack.
In your example, somehow Bush was supposed to know that 19 fanatics were going to hijack airlines and turn them into weapons. Though perhaps he might have if Jamie Gerelick while working for the Clinton Administration had not made sure that the FBI and the CIA could not share information. There were red flags that may have been acted upon had those two entities been able to share info. So yeah, you're right, IF any one administration is to blame it would be Clinton's.

well,i guess that just wraps it all up.demos caused two wars,countless dead and maimed,and the reps. are blameless,huh.

[Bill in Dville]

OMTE wrote:

<quoted text>What I see is him standing firm on what he said he would do. His tactics are questionable, but he is our President and I believe in him.

You believe in Santa Claus, too?

Standing firm on what he would do?

LMAO, hysterically. Surely, you can't be serious, and, yes, I just called you Shirley...

[scorekeeper]

Bill in Dville wrote:

<quoted text>
You believe in Santa Claus, too?
Standing firm on what he would do?
LMAO, hysterically. Surely, you can't be serious, and, yes, I just called you Shirley...

hey bill,this is jeb.i am the one that judged your comment 'mean'-but i am glad to see you display some humor.

[Aggie23]

scorekeeper wrote:

<quoted text>well,i guess that just wraps it all up.demos caused two wars,countless dead and maimed,and the reps. are blameless,huh.

actually, I would lay most of the blame on jihadists.

[scorekeeper]

Aggie23 wrote:

<quoted text>
actually, I would lay most of the blame on jihadists.

jihadists? they are aka libertarians,right-and i do mean right,or 'far right'.

[Bigdave1]

scorekeeper wrote:

<quoted text>jihadists? they are aka libertarians,right-and i do mean right,or 'far right'.

I do believe you mean Islamic terrorist. Yes, I said it. I will say the political incorrect words again. Islamic terrorist. This country was attacked by Islamic terrorist that are purposefully trying to gain control of the world by turning it into a huge Islamic one world government. So far they are waging 39 wars all over the world.
Wake up fool!

[scorekeeper]

Aggie23 wrote:

<quoted text>
actually, I would lay most of the blame on jihadists.

btw,you reckon any of those'jihadists' were involved in the bengazi thing?

[scorekeeper]

Bigdave1 wrote:

<quoted text>
I do believe you mean Islamic terrorist. Yes, I said it. I will say the political incorrect words again. Islamic terrorist. This country was attacked by Islamic terrorist that are purposefully trying to gain control of the world by turning it into a huge Islamic one world government. So far they are waging 39 wars all over the world.
Wake up fool!

thanks for the kind comments,dave.it is really weird how someone can go from being sensible to foolish so quickly."manic depression is a frustrating mess"- jimi hendrix.

[Aggie23]

scorekeeper wrote:

<quoted text>btw,you reckon any of those'jihadists' were involved in the bengazi thing?

Is this a serious question?

[Bigdave1]

scorekeeper wrote:

<quoted text>thanks for the kind comments,dave.it is really weird how someone can go from being sensible to foolish so quickly."manic depression is a frustrating mess"- jimi hendrix.

I am sorry but I am missing some critical information. Did your thread speak in jest, or are you serious? Please explain what you mean by the far right and libertarians again for me will you? I am serious about this. Perhaps I misunderstood you. I want to be fair.

[OMTE]

Bigdave1 wrote:

<quoted text>
I do believe you mean Islamic terrorist. Yes, I said it. I will say the political incorrect words again. Islamic terrorist. This country was attacked by Islamic terrorist that are purposefully trying to gain control of the world by turning it into a huge Islamic one world government. So far they are waging 39 wars all over the world.
Wake up fool!

Are you serious?

[OMTE]

Aggie23 wrote:

<quoted text>
actually, I would lay most of the blame on jihadists.

That's who I blame for Benghazi.

[Aggie23]

OMTE wrote:

<quoted text>That's who I blame for Benghazi.

Obviously, the ultimate blame for the attack lies with the attackers. But it does not change the fact that the consulate asked for additional security which was denied because it would have shown that the situation was not as under control as the Obama administration wanted to pretend it was. Nor does it change the fact that other than the men from Tripoli - who apparently went of their own volition , no help was sent in the seven hours the consulate and then the annex were under attack. Glenn Doherty and Ty Woods died in the last hour of that attack. Do you really not want to at least know why no support was sent?