Did you vote today?

Did you vote today?

Created by Rick on Jun 8, 2010

6,407 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

Speller Feller

United States

#30602 May 9, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
That is your connection RC, my connection is a ignorant ass congressman raising money to keep his sick Republican ass in Congress
Funny you should make a return after the transposing letters twins made a quick exit, only temporarily i'm sure, I can only hope.
Frankly, you come across as big of a scum bag for defending this asshole as he is for using Benghazi as a fund raiser.
Even the Republican House Speaker avoided the subject when confronted about it, it would behoove you to avoid it as well
This is Speller Feller and I approve this message.

Here's what's really funny, Barney.
You wouldn't be able to carry on any conversation if it wasn't for intelligent comments and points made by others that you ineffectively try to use as your own.
-Your numerous spelling/grammar errors that are pointed out by so many...you turn into an error-filled dictionary.
-Your obvious multi-personality disorder that makes you so identifiable and such an easy target...you decide to take this illness you have and then lump all those that disagree with you into being the same person.
-It's readily pointed out that you are scum-pond scum, scum bag, scummy...now look at your word of choice!
-You run away for weeks at a time when you are alway proven wrong...now here you are, accusing others of your hide and seek games!
-We bring up a topic. You rattle some incoherent jibber-jabber that is always wrong, or my favorite of yours, when you are always wrong, you realize it in mid-ranting, and then change your entire stance as if you hadn't been proven to be the idiot you are (such as changing your 'IT ISN'T VERIFIED...It can't be true' until you realized what an idiot you are because you were questioning something no one else in the free press was, and changed your point to 'international air space', crude oil, obamacare, the list goes on and on!!).

You are only 'right' in your own mind...even when your multiple personality disorder creates a new fan club to cheer you on.

It's your right to stand your political ground and disagree with others. But when you make your stand on quicksand, and every political point you attempt causes you to sink lower and lower and lower...eventually, you'll be under, and what a day that will be!!
And you are always funny!!

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#30605 May 10, 2014
Speller Feller wrote:
<quoted text>
This is Speller Feller and I approve this message.
Here's what's really funny, Barney.
You wouldn't be able to carry on any conversation if it wasn't for intelligent comments and points made by others that you ineffectively try to use as your own.
-Your numerous spelling/grammar errors that are pointed out by so many...you turn into an error-filled dictionary.
-Your obvious multi-personality disorder that makes you so identifiable and such an easy target...you decide to take this illness you have and then lump all those that disagree with you into being the same person.
-It's readily pointed out that you are scum-pond scum, scum bag, scummy...now look at your word of choice!
-You run away for weeks at a time when you are alway proven wrong...now here you are, accusing others of your hide and seek games!
-We bring up a topic. You rattle some incoherent jibber-jabber that is always wrong, or my favorite of yours, when you are always wrong, you realize it in mid-ranting, and then change your entire stance as if you hadn't been proven to be the idiot you are (such as changing your 'IT ISN'T VERIFIED...It can't be true' until you realized what an idiot you are because you were questioning something no one else in the free press was, and changed your point to 'international air space', crude oil, obamacare, the list goes on and on!!).
You are only 'right' in your own mind...even when your multiple personality disorder creates a new fan club to cheer you on.
It's your right to stand your political ground and disagree with others. But when you make your stand on quicksand, and every political point you attempt causes you to sink lower and lower and lower...eventually, you'll be under, and what a day that will be!!
And you are always funny!!
Some one throws a 10 Lb Cat fish at you, and you catch that fish in mid air.

You can say, with all the honesty in the world, 100% true, you caught a ten pound Catfish.

Well General Carlisle can honestly say they were Russian planes near Guam, and not offer any detail and be 100% truthful also.
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#30606 May 10, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
That is your connection RC, my connection is a ignorant ass congressman raising money to keep his sick Republican ass in Congress
Funny you should make a return after the transposing letters twins made a quick exit, only temporarily i'm sure, I can only hope.
Frankly, you come across as big of a scum bag for defending this asshole as he is for using Benghazi as a fund raiser.
Even the Republican House Speaker avoided the subject when confronted about it, it would behoove you to avoid it as well
That's right, no Democrat ever used a situation to their political and financial advantage. If they are establishment, they are corrupt regardless of party affiliation. I disagree that Benghazi was used to raise funds though, since it's a Republican in question, you will take every liberty to make it appear as if it was the worst crime in the history of our country showing your outrage that someone could sink so low as to take advantage of such a terrible tragedy (which could have been avoided had the Obama administration done the right thing). The House Speaker is either a progressive or a coward no matter what letter is next to his name and he is very adept at the political game. Either way, he should have lost his primary but now he becomes the lesser of two evils in November so I will reluctantly be rooting for him.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#30607 May 10, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
That's right, no Democrat ever used a situation to their political and financial advantage. If they are establishment, they are corrupt regardless of party affiliation. I disagree that Benghazi was used to raise funds though, since it's a Republican in question, you will take every liberty to make it appear as if it was the worst crime in the history of our country showing your outrage that someone could sink so low as to take advantage of such a terrible tragedy (which could have been avoided had the Obama administration done the right thing). The House Speaker is either a progressive or a coward no matter what letter is next to his name and he is very adept at the political game. Either way, he should have lost his primary but now he becomes the lesser of two evils in November so I will reluctantly be rooting for him.
COUNT THEM, ALL 13 OF THEM.

Could they have been prevented ? had G W bush "done the right thing".

January 22, 2002. Calcutta, India. Gunmen associated with Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami attack the U.S. Consulate. Five people are killed.

June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber connected with al Qaeda attacks the U.S. Consulate, killing 12 and injuring 51.

October 12, 2002. Denpasar, Indonesia. U.S. diplomatic offices bombed as part of a string of "Bali Bombings." No fatalities.

February 28, 2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are killed.

May 12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al Qaeda terrorists storm the diplomatic compound, killing 36 people including nine Americans. The assailants committed suicide by detonating a truck bomb.

July 30, 2004. Tashkent, Uzbekistan. A suicide bomber from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan attacks the U.S. Embassy, killing two people.

December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the perimeter wall. Nine people are killed.

March 2, 2006. Karachi, Pakistan again. Suicide bomber attacks the U.S. Consulate killing four people, including U.S. diplomat David Foy who was directly targeted by the attackers.(I wonder if Lindsey Graham or Fox News would even recognize the name "David Foy." This is the third Karachi terrorist attack in four years on what's considered American soil.)

September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria. Four armed gunmen shouting "Allahu akbar" storm the U.S. Embassy using grenades, automatic weapons, a car bomb and a truck bomb. Four people are killed, 13 are wounded.

January 12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Members of a Greek terrorist group called the Revolutionary Struggle fire a rocket-propelled grenade at the U.S. Embassy. No fatalities.

March 18, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Members of the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic Jihad of Yemen fire a mortar at the U.S. Embassy. The shot misses the embassy, but hits nearby school killing two.

July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four armed terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate. Six people are killed.

September 17, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Terrorists dressed as military officials attack the U.S. Embassy with an arsenal of weapons including RPGs and detonate two car bombs. Sixteen people are killed, including an American student and her husband (they had been married for three weeks when the attack occurred). This is the second attack on this embassy in seven months.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#30608 May 10, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
That's right, no Democrat ever used a situation to their political and financial advantage. If they are establishment, they are corrupt regardless of party affiliation. I disagree that Benghazi was used to raise funds though, since it's a Republican in question, you will take every liberty to make it appear as if it was the worst crime in the history of our country showing your outrage that someone could sink so low as to take advantage of such a terrible tragedy (which could have been avoided had the Obama administration done the right thing). The House Speaker is either a progressive or a coward no matter what letter is next to his name and he is very adept at the political game. Either way, he should have lost his primary but now he becomes the lesser of two evils in November so I will reluctantly be rooting for him.
You don't think they are using it as a fund raiser, some of the family of those murdered would disagree, I do believe ......

http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/05/09/343...
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#30611 May 10, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't think they are using it as a fund raiser, some of the family of those murdered would disagree, I do believe ......
http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/05/09/343...
I'm sure you have asked all of them. I take it at face value that the article wasn't written in order to get people to find the link to donate but rather it was written and, as a separate entity, a chance to donate to a good cause (getting rid of the liberals to blame for this political and foreign relations disaster). Obama and his liberal administration do Benghazi right and we are not even talking about this. I don't believe that, I KNOW IT.
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#30612 May 10, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
COUNT THEM, ALL 13 OF THEM.
Could they have been prevented ? had G W bush "done the right thing".
January 22, 2002. Calcutta, India. Gunmen associated with Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami attack the U.S. Consulate. Five people are killed.
June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber connected with al Qaeda attacks the U.S. Consulate, killing 12 and injuring 51.
October 12, 2002. Denpasar, Indonesia. U.S. diplomatic offices bombed as part of a string of "Bali Bombings." No fatalities.
February 28, 2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are killed.
May 12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al Qaeda terrorists storm the diplomatic compound, killing 36 people including nine Americans. The assailants committed suicide by detonating a truck bomb.
July 30, 2004. Tashkent, Uzbekistan. A suicide bomber from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan attacks the U.S. Embassy, killing two people.
December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the perimeter wall. Nine people are killed.
March 2, 2006. Karachi, Pakistan again. Suicide bomber attacks the U.S. Consulate killing four people, including U.S. diplomat David Foy who was directly targeted by the attackers.(I wonder if Lindsey Graham or Fox News would even recognize the name "David Foy." This is the third Karachi terrorist attack in four years on what's considered American soil.)
September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria. Four armed gunmen shouting "Allahu akbar" storm the U.S. Embassy using grenades, automatic weapons, a car bomb and a truck bomb. Four people are killed, 13 are wounded.
January 12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Members of a Greek terrorist group called the Revolutionary Struggle fire a rocket-propelled grenade at the U.S. Embassy. No fatalities.
March 18, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Members of the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic Jihad of Yemen fire a mortar at the U.S. Embassy. The shot misses the embassy, but hits nearby school killing two.
July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four armed terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate. Six people are killed.
September 17, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Terrorists dressed as military officials attack the U.S. Embassy with an arsenal of weapons including RPGs and detonate two car bombs. Sixteen people are killed, including an American student and her husband (they had been married for three weeks when the attack occurred). This is the second attack on this embassy in seven months.
Did he sell any of these instances as something they weren't like, let's say, an internet video? Question is, did Bush allow the military to do their job or tell them to stand down as Obama and his administration did? BTW, I thought blaming Bush for Obama's epic failure of a presidency had run it's course. I think the new thing is to blame the current congress for Obama's failures. I just want you to be up-to-date on who to blame for your leader's disasters in leadership.
you need to pay more tax

UK

#30615 May 10, 2014
Remember when Barack Obama was caught on a hot mic telling Russian President Dmitri Medvedyev to let incoming Russian President Vladimir Putin know that after his re-election he would have more "flexibility"? If you don't remember, check it out here. If you do, well now we are seeing a bit of that flexibility in motion. The Obama Department of Defense is going to spend nearly $700 million to buy Russian Mi-17 helicopters for the Afghan Air Force.

That's right,$700 million of U.S. taxpayer money is going to fund our enemy's air force. However, not only could this be considered treasonous, but even by the federal government's 2013 National Defense Authorization Act they are in violation of their own legislation.

According to Riz Novosti:

WASHINGTON, April 4 (By Maria Young for RIA Novosti) The US Department of Defense said Thursday it plans to sidestep a Congressional ban to purchase 30 helicopters from Russian state-owned defense firm Rosoboronexport, despite objections from US lawmakers who allege that the firm has equipped the Syrian government to commit brutal crimes against civilians.

"The Department of Defense (DOD) has notified Congress of its intent to contract with Rosoboronexport for 30 additional Mi-17 rotary-wing aircraft to support the Afghanistan National Security Forces (ANSF) Special Mission Wing," Pentagon spokesman James Gregory told RIA Novosti in emailed comments.

The 2013 National Defense Authorization Act, approved by Congress last year, includes an amendment that prohibits financial contracts between the United States and Rosoboronexport, except when the Secretary of Defense determines that such arrangements are in the interest of national security.

"Given current timelines, the department has determined that Rosoboronexport is the only viable means of meeting ANSF requirements" for the helicopters, Gregory said.

The contract totals $690 million, most of which would go to the Russian arms maker, he added.

Obviously the question should be, why are we not spending money on American made helicopters? Second, why are we spending any money on helicopters for enemies? Third, why are we giving money to Russia for these helicopters?

Well the Obama administration doesn't want the U.S. economy to actually improve, that's why they aren't spending here. It seems this is also a bit of the flexibility he spoke of in 2012 and maybe a bit of payback to President Putin. Also, the Afghans have been trained to operate Russian aircraft, so switching to a new platform would delay the transition by three years, according to Gregory.
Questions

Van Buren, AR

#30616 May 10, 2014
I voted for Alex Selkirk today

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#30619 May 11, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Did he sell any of these instances as something they weren't like, let's say, an internet video? Question is, did Bush allow the military to do their job or tell them to stand down as Obama and his administration did? BTW, I thought blaming Bush for Obama's epic failure of a presidency had run it's course. I think the new thing is to blame the current congress for Obama's failures. I just want you to be up-to-date on who to blame for your leader's disasters in leadership.
Numb Nuts, the BS you posted above has long been debunked.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/bengh...
Politico

Cantonment, FL

#30620 May 11, 2014
Hell no.

It's SUNday. MOTHER's Day, you fools!!

No Polling Places Open, No Ballots To Be Cast.

Go call Your Moms.

“The Donald for President”

Since: Mar 14

Narragansett, RI

#30621 May 11, 2014
Politico wrote:
Hell no.
It's SUNday. MOTHER's Day, you fools!!
No Polling Places Open, No Ballots To Be Cast.
Go call Your Moms.
Good call. LOL!
independent voter

Amsterdam, Netherlands

#30622 May 11, 2014
That's funny, old Barney pretending he's from Washington DC. He'd fit right in with the Obamas, though and they've got their extended family living in the White House anyway, so Barney might be able to suck up to Michelle's mama or some of the others enough to get him some after all.

“The Donald for President”

Since: Mar 14

Narragansett, RI

#30623 May 11, 2014
Love that Trey Gowdy!! &#128153;
Demo

Van Buren, AR

#30624 May 11, 2014
speller feller wrote:
<quoted text>
(Just because...)
Yes, this Republican Congressman got caught in the double-talk of politics. Why politicians think they can say one thing and do another is beyond me! Whatever the political opinion is as to whether this is about money or searching for answers, his double-talk has hurt his credibility, for sure.
But Barney, you should have investigated this clip from MSNBC 'Morning Joe' show before you referenced it as if it were like discovering gold! You wouldn't have been nearly as eager to cite your source had you realized the entire content!
This little nugget source that you referenced was from a 17 minute long clip from the 'Morning Joe' show.
http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/harry-...
I highly recommend the clip, and thank Barney for bringing it to our attention!
- The first 10 minutes provide a wonderfully entertaining clip of Harry Reid doing quite a bit of double-talking himself!
-He shares an enlightening explanation as to why the Koch Bros. are bad and 'only in it for the money' while Sheldon Adelson is good, and 'doesn't care anything about the money'!
It is priceless!
-The hosts then spend several minutes raking him over the coals before turning their attention to more of his taped interview discussing Hillary Clinton and a possible run for president. After awkward pauses and stammering a few odd sentences, the hosts pick him apart again, reminding everyone about Reid's lack of support for Hillary in 2008, and Bills visit to Reid's home state of Nevada bemoaning the election he being sure it was 'fixed'.
Again, priceless!!
-And then, for an entire ONE MINUTE AND FOURTEEN SECONDS, the hosts talk about the republican Congressman, and his double-talk. They all agree it was stupid, they agree it should be removed, and then...they move on without another thought!
-The last 5 - 6 minutes are the most interesting of all! You REALLY will wish you had taken a peek at the very show you referenced to give credibility to your post above, because the rest of the clip, the hosts spend discussing the debacle and what it could mean for the White House and Hillary Clinton.
( http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemp...
"The Freedom of Information Act hounds at Judicial Watch last week unearthed a Benghazi-related article that had not yet met with public scrutiny. It's an email White House official Ben Rhodes sent on the morning of September 14, just two days before then, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice made her famous, mistaken remarks on Sunday talk shows about how the Benghazi attacks were prompted by a video. The Rhodes email, titled "PREP CALL with Susan" addressed protests across the Middle East and advised Rice to mention a controversial video as the cause, as opposed to blaming them on 'broader failure of policy.'
That advice contradicted the longstanding White House contention that it didn't politically influence the information that Rice took with her to the political talk shows, where the central topic was the Benghazi attacks. And, it helped prompt House Republicans to plan a select committee on Benghazi.")
Again, Barney, thank you for the source! It proved enlightening!!
They were jumping ship
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#30625 May 11, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Numb Nuts, the BS you posted above has long been debunked.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/bengh...
You realize that when only one side of the argument says something is "debunked" then it doesn't count? Or do you?
really

United States

#30626 May 11, 2014
Did you?
Speller feller

Conway, AR

#30627 May 12, 2014
speller feller wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, this Republican Congressman got caught in the double-talk of politics. Why politicians think they can say one thing and do another is beyond me! Whatever the political opinion is as to whether this is about money or searching for answers, his double-talk has hurt his credibility, for sure.
But Barney, you should have investigated this clip from MSNBC 'Morning Joe' show before you referenced it as if it were like discovering gold! You wouldn't have been nearly as eager to cite your source had you realized the entire content!
This little nugget source that you referenced was from a 17 minute long clip from the 'Morning Joe' show.
http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/harry-...
I highly recommend the clip, and thank Barney for bringing it to our attention!
- The first 10 minutes provide a wonderfully entertaining clip of Harry Reid doing quite a bit of double-talking himself!
-He shares an enlightening explanation as to why the Koch Bros. are bad and 'only in it for the money' while Sheldon Adelson is good, and 'doesn't care anything about the money'!
It is priceless!
-The hosts then spend several minutes raking him over the coals before turning their attention to more of his taped interview discussing Hillary Clinton and a possible run for president. After awkward pauses and stammering a few odd sentences, the hosts pick him apart again, reminding everyone about Reid's lack of support for Hillary in 2008, and Bills visit to Reid's home state of Nevada bemoaning the election he being sure it was 'fixed'.
Again, priceless!!
-And then, for an entire ONE MINUTE AND FOURTEEN SECONDS, the hosts talk about the republican Congressman, and his double-talk. They all agree it was stupid, they agree it should be removed, and then...they move on without another thought!
-The last 5 - 6 minutes are the most interesting of all! You REALLY will wish you had taken a peek at the very show you referenced to give credibility to your post above, because the rest of the clip, the hosts spend discussing the debacle and what it could mean for the White House and Hillary Clinton.
( http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemp...
"The Freedom of Information Act hounds at Judicial Watch last week unearthed a Benghazi-related article that had not yet met with public scrutiny. It's an email White House official Ben Rhodes sent on the morning of September 14, just two days before then, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice made her famous, mistaken remarks on Sunday talk shows about how the Benghazi attacks were prompted by a video. The Rhodes email, titled "PREP CALL with Susan" addressed protests across the Middle East and advised Rice to mention a controversial video as the cause, as opposed to blaming them on 'broader failure of policy.'
That advice contradicted the longstanding White House contention that it didn't politically influence the information that Rice took with her to the political talk shows, where the central topic was the Benghazi attacks. And, it helped prompt House Republicans to plan a select committee on Benghazi.")
Again, Barney, thank you for the source! It proved enlightening!!
Barney, since you can't use your words to comment on these topics, I'm glad you have your little pictures to express yourself!
Words are hard for you, I know. The little cartoon pics are far more your level to articulate your frustration over having to use your words!!
Too bad the White House didn't have these little pics instead of 'PREP CALL with Susan'!
Maybe a little phone...a stick girl...anything but names!
I can see why you struggle with words, since you parrot those that aren't very smart.
speller feller

Conway, AR

#30628 May 12, 2014
Well, the liberal loons are slinging lots of Benghazi lies, so Barney should be loading up his cut and paste arsenal for the round table.
There are several 'catch phrases and words' that liberal loon Pelosi and others are specifically using...and if past posts are indicative of what Barney will be ranting next... just watch a few clips from the crazies as they deny, deny, deny...in spite of evidence and facts!
The blame game is also a favorite of theirs...as was Barneys last timeline of those killed under President G.W. Bush.
Apparently, Barney was more concerned and grieved for these families, yet doesn't care to mock and scream lies and conspiracy about grieving Benghazi families. Again, another thing he learned from the liberal left crazies!
Barney is in the lower percentage of crazies that chose to believe them!
He pulled his typical ' run-a-way bride' stunt, but now Nancy has that wild eyed look about her, there is a camera in her face, and she's ranting!
Barney is sure to follow!
Old Army

Joliet, IL

#30629 May 12, 2014
I voted today. Couldn't find Barney's name anywhere. Guess he is running unopposed for ____________ (fillin the blank).

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.

El Dorado Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Frank Foster 36 min News Scene 7 5
MAD district. 39 min Tom Joad 16
Crooked Cop 6 hr whoop whoop 1
Pooting women 22 hr right wing dumbass 12
gay club!!! in eldorado!!! (Mar '11) Wed tyler 51
Creepy Safeway murders Wed Lynn 39
Hobby Lobby Wed legend 11

El Dorado Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

El Dorado Mortgages