Who do you support for Governor in Oh...
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Akron, OH

#32701 Aug 13, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
You do realize the only President that ever admitted to using coke is your failure-and-cheif, don't you?
Of course not. You're just a troll and a flamer.
It would seem that the man who admits it is more of a man than the one who won't.
xxxrayted

Maple Heights, OH

#32702 Aug 13, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>
It would seem that the man who admits it is more of a man than the one who won't.
Good point. Now remember that with all the other things Zero never admits to.
xxxrayted

Maple Heights, OH

#32703 Aug 13, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>
I must say, it is very patriotic of you to want to spend all of that money helping foreigners rather than helping God Fearing Americans. We can always count on Taliban Ray to have his priorities in order.
Who needs more help? People on top of a mountain and families getting their heads cut off, or lowlifes that keep voting Democrat to ensure their goodies?
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Medina, OH

#32704 Aug 13, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Who needs more help? People on top of a mountain and families getting their heads cut off, or lowlifes that keep voting Democrat to ensure their goodies?
Your strawman description of people who receive assistance in the US is pathetic. I'm sure that you had the same concern about all of the people in Darfur, Rwanda and other places in the world where people were being slaughtered, right? You were all about helping them too, weren't you?
ino

Ashburn, VA

#32705 Aug 13, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Good point. Now remember that with all the other things Zero never admits to.
When his term is over, he won't admit he was president.
Jerry K

Newark, OH

#32706 Aug 13, 2014
Anyone interested in Iraq should watch Frontline : Losing Iraq. You can get the story from many sources that were actually involved, under both administrations. Maliki, having been supported by Bush my guess is that when he is gone Obama will develop a warm cozy relationship with Iraq.
xxxrayted

Maple Heights, OH

#32707 Aug 13, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>
Your strawman description of people who receive assistance in the US is pathetic. I'm sure that you had the same concern about all of the people in Darfur, Rwanda and other places in the world where people were being slaughtered, right? You were all about helping them too, weren't you?
Sure, there is inhumanity everywhere on the earth, but what you don't understand is that there are people in Iraq that helped us expecting our protection. We let them down. We failed them. We let them be slaughtered for being friends with our military and helping us out in the past.

We have huge investments in Iraq in regards to money and fallen American solders. DumBama let them down as well.

Now we are back in Iraq to some degree, and we may need to be more involved in the future. These kooks invading Iraq and Syria are the worst of the worst. Even Al Quada doesn't want anything to do with these guys because they are so radical. And yes, they vowed that Americans would be next.
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Medina, OH

#32708 Aug 13, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure, there is inhumanity everywhere on the earth, but what you don't understand is that there are people in Iraq that helped us expecting our protection. We let them down. We failed them. We let them be slaughtered for being friends with our military and helping us out in the past.
We have huge investments in Iraq in regards to money and fallen American solders. DumBama let them down as well.
Now we are back in Iraq to some degree, and we may need to be more involved in the future. These kooks invading Iraq and Syria are the worst of the worst. Even Al Quada doesn't want anything to do with these guys because they are so radical. And yes, they vowed that Americans would be next.
The Yazidis helped us during our invasion expecting us to protect them in the future? Who writes this stuff for you?
Pops

Cincinnati, OH

#32709 Aug 13, 2014
Old Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think you made it up. This is a talk radio "meme", one that I believe originated with Michael Medved. You are carrying on the oral tradition, where someone tells you a story and you tell the story to someone else. It's a great way to learn things and spread the word.
But you always have to consider the source --- does the teller have some ax to grind? I don't want to read a history written by Rush Limbaugh or Mark Levin. You know that will be a thinly disguised political tract. I'd rather read a book by some unknown history nerd that will give me a lot of interesting details and let me draw my own conclusions.
I don't know who Michael Medved is & I very seldom listen to Rush since I see him as an egotist. I would never listen to him if the local radio station didn't also have traffic reports during his program. Mark Levin is on here after I go to bed so I never hear his program. But then again there is always oppositional programing out there to any program.
I think that both of us can agree that for every 'story' found on line we can find other stories that counter the other. So let's let that position pass. Even the people that think that Jefferson fathered Hemming children say that after DNA test & historic research of TJ & of TJ's brother, his brother may have been the father of Sally's kids. Who can prove different? No one.
As far as you asking who TJ made the request to for a copy/translation of the Koran, does that matter? Maybe TJ could read Arabic to some degree his self. He was a very learned/educated person. What if he got his copy in 1755 or 1804? Does that really matter?
But the start of this was about the Barbary Pirates 17th/18th century. The bottom line about that is that Muslims have been the aggressors since the early years of Mohammed & has NOT changed in 1500 yrs. That's a rather long period of time.
They started what we know as the crusades. Many of their religious verses are based on the old testament including religious sites, not eating pork, Jesus, Abraham & so on. But still want to KILL.
Does it matter who TJ asked for an English translation of the Koran or when? Not really. The Muslim extremist is still stoning female adulterers but not males, they still behead infidels,(remember D. Pearl) they still severe hands of thieves, they still destroy churches, temples & synagogs, etc etc Do 'they' still hold caliphates against other sects of Mohammadism?....YES. Such people are very very dangerous on a world wide scale.
Pops

Cincinnati, OH

#32710 Aug 13, 2014
Old Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
Those nations want us there. Nouri al-Maliki did not want us in Iraq.
"Obama opposed the U.S. invasion and occupation from the beginning. He was nominated and elected president largely because of his pledge to end the war. He withdrew all U.S. troops only after Maliki refused to negotiate a viable agreement to leave a residual force in place."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/eugene...
How about that Maliki didn't AGREE with US terms as compared to being totally "opposed" to negotiation. It does take 2 sides to agree. Maliki was also the democratically elected head of state of Iraq & had powers commensurate to that position . Plus Obama campaigned to remove U.S. troops, so how did that affect negotiations for good or bad? We'll never really know even tho we have opinions.
You say that Obama removed troops "only" because Maliki wanted them removed.(By the way, the war is NOT over) Does that imply that Obama would have kept troops there longer? One of my sons was a member of the 30,000 troop 'surge' & now has measurable PTSD for which he gets some treatment. Just asking.
Pops

Cincinnati, OH

#32711 Aug 13, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>
Now, go check and see how much we have spent in Iraq and tell us where you are going to come up with the rest.
BOTH houses of Congress had approved of expenditures no matter which party was in charge at whatever time so stick that in your pipe & smoke it!!!
bah bah jesus maybe

United States

#32712 Aug 13, 2014
You know it I said I'll do what I can do if you know if ya know what I'm saying n know me calllllllll will figure it out
Jerry K

Newark, OH

#32713 Aug 13, 2014
Secretary of State John Kerry recently announced his disappointment about the failure of a treaty between Israel and Hamas. When questioned negotiators of the treaty said " we were for it before we were against it."
Old Guy

Mason, OH

#32714 Aug 14, 2014
Jerry K wrote:
Secretary of State John Kerry recently announced his disappointment about the failure of a treaty between Israel and Hamas. When questioned negotiators of the treaty said " we were for it before we were against it."
His only mistake that day was phrasing his response in a direct and accurate way (that accurately described the Senate process) that could be easily exploited by simpletons.

"As part of his case that Kerry has sent mixed messages, Bush asserted that "he voted against the $87 billion supplemental to provide equipment for our troops, and then said he actually did vote for it before he voted against it."

While Bush meant it as a jab, this was an accurate description of the Senate process. Kerry supported a different version of the bill, which was opposed by the administration. At the time, many Republicans were uncomfortable with the administration's plans and the White House had to threaten a veto against the congressional version to bring reluctant lawmakers in line. In a floor statement explaining his vote, Kerry said he favored the $67 billion for the troops on the ground, but he faulted the administration's $20 billion request for reconstruction."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles...

Ten years later, and it's the gift that keeps on giving to those that like to reduce complicated political discourse to slogans.
Old Guy

Mason, OH

#32715 Aug 14, 2014
Pops wrote:
<quoted text> How about that Maliki didn't AGREE with US terms as compared to being totally "opposed" to negotiation. It does take 2 sides to agree. Maliki was also the democratically elected head of state of Iraq & had powers commensurate to that position . Plus Obama campaigned to remove U.S. troops, so how did that affect negotiations for good or bad? We'll never really know even tho we have opinions.
You say that Obama removed troops "only" because Maliki wanted them removed.(By the way, the war is NOT over) Does that imply that Obama would have kept troops there longer? One of my sons was a member of the 30,000 troop 'surge' & now has measurable PTSD for which he gets some treatment. Just asking.
Pops, you are asking a lot of questions, and I don't think I'm patient enough to answer all of them. But I think a lot of the answers are out there, if you will take some time to read. It's a complicated issue. Here's a good starting point, from 2 years ago:

"All American forces were to leave Iraq by the end of 2011, the departure date set in an agreement signed by President George W. Bush and Mr. Maliki in 2008. Even so, Mr. Obama left the door open to keeping troops in Iraq to train Iraqi forces if an agreement could be negotiated.

The situation the Obama administration inherited was complex. Many Iraqi politicians were worried that Mr. Maliki, a Shiite, was amassing too much power and overstepping the Iraqi constitution by bypassing the formal military chain of command and seeding intelligence agencies with loyalists. Those concerns were aggravated by the political gridlock that plagued Baghdad after the March 2010 elections..."

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/world/middl...
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Medina, OH

#32716 Aug 14, 2014
Pops wrote:
<quoted text>I don't know who Michael Medved is & I very seldom listen to Rush since I see him as an egotist. I would never listen to him if the local radio station didn't also have traffic reports during his program. Mark Levin is on here after I go to bed so I never hear his program. But then again there is always oppositional programing out there to any program.
I think that both of us can agree that for every 'story' found on line we can find other stories that counter the other. So let's let that position pass. Even the people that think that Jefferson fathered Hemming children say that after DNA test & historic research of TJ & of TJ's brother, his brother may have been the father of Sally's kids. Who can prove different? No one.
As far as you asking who TJ made the request to for a copy/translation of the Koran, does that matter? Maybe TJ could read Arabic to some degree his self. He was a very learned/educated person. What if he got his copy in 1755 or 1804? Does that really matter?
But the start of this was about the Barbary Pirates 17th/18th century. The bottom line about that is that Muslims have been the aggressors since the early years of Mohammed & has NOT changed in 1500 yrs. That's a rather long period of time.
They started what we know as the crusades. Many of their religious verses are based on the old testament including religious sites, not eating pork, Jesus, Abraham & so on. But still want to KILL.
Does it matter who TJ asked for an English translation of the Koran or when? Not really. The Muslim extremist is still stoning female adulterers but not males, they still behead infidels,(remember D. Pearl) they still severe hands of thieves, they still destroy churches, temples & synagogs, etc etc Do 'they' still hold caliphates against other sects of Mohammadism?....YES. Such people are very very dangerous on a world wide scale.
The other foundational tenet of today's "conservatism": "What difference does being wrong make?"
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Medina, OH

#32717 Aug 14, 2014
Pops wrote:
<quoted text> How about that Maliki didn't AGREE with US terms as compared to being totally "opposed" to negotiation. It does take 2 sides to agree. Maliki was also the democratically elected head of state of Iraq & had powers commensurate to that position . Plus Obama campaigned to remove U.S. troops, so how did that affect negotiations for good or bad? We'll never really know even tho we have opinions.
You say that Obama removed troops "only" because Maliki wanted them removed.(By the way, the war is NOT over) Does that imply that Obama would have kept troops there longer? One of my sons was a member of the 30,000 troop 'surge' & now has measurable PTSD for which he gets some treatment. Just asking.
Your pal Taliban Ray wants your son to get his ass back over to Iraq where he belongs.
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Medina, OH

#32718 Aug 14, 2014
Pops wrote:
<quoted text> BOTH houses of Congress had approved of expenditures no matter which party was in charge at whatever time so stick that in your pipe & smoke it!!!
So? My discussion was with Ray, not the congress. Ray wants us to maintain our military presence in Iraq indefinitely, so I asked him how he wanted us to pay for that, get it?

By the way, when I wrote "pay" I meant in dollars only, we haven't even gotten to the cost to the minds and bodies of people like your son.
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#32719 Aug 14, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>
So? My discussion was with Ray, not the congress. Ray wants us to maintain our military presence in Iraq indefinitely, so I asked him how he wanted us to pay for that, get it?
By the way, when I wrote "pay" I meant in dollars only, we haven't even gotten to the cost to the minds and bodies of people like your son.
The Constitution is very specific to the duty of the government and funding.

In fact the military is the number 1 duty of government.

so to answer your question regarding funding…..something gets cut before the military does per the US Constitution.

no worries mate.

PS: the US military has bases all over the world, and 3rd world monetary assistance by the US government was building a base and paying rent. Yes the countries actually had to do something to get paid.

Military service people when signing up understand the potential death aspect of the job. It is a volunteer military of soldiers who give their life to protect America. Hero's. These people wanted this job, nobody forced them.

I hope I cleared up your above post confusion.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#32720 Aug 14, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>
The other foundational tenet of today's "conservatism": "What difference does being wrong make?"
Liberalism today goes by that tenet which has been wrong since the New Left Liberal Democrat's Revolution took over in the 1960's and being wrong still makes no difference socially or economically to the Liberal Democrats of today.

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.

Westlake Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Review: Patient First - John Kavlich MD (May '09) Sep 12 anon2 69
News Lorain firefighter pleads no contest to mischie... (Jun '16) Aug '17 WILD BILL 2
News Maple Heights drug dealer sold fatal heroin dos... (Jan '17) Aug '17 WestVee 7
News Rattlesnake Island Revealed (Sep '08) Jul '17 Cock Hero 22
News Islam's not so subtle onslaught into America Jun '17 No honor only shame 2
News Obituaries 10/26/11 (Nov '11) Jun '17 351tree 49
River Edge Jun '17 Middie 1

Westlake Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Westlake Mortgages