OBAMA is the BEST PRESIDENT EVER
Bloody Bill Anderson

Marion, KY

#14800 Jun 19, 2014
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no problem with just walking away from the mess.
But with all the politics involved Obama may feel he has to do something or Republicans will blame him for the mess they got us into and created.
So if he decides to do anything drone strikes and long distance air strikes might save face and appease the war mongers. At least it eliminates a lot of risk to Americans.
I would though get most of the Americans left in Iraq out ASAP.
The last person to listen too is John McCain if one remembers all of his past predictions.
So true.

President Obama is in a no win situation. No matter what he does the Right wing nuts are going to blame him and say, "Obama lost Iraq."

I agree that it is time for the U.S. to strike the tent, take down the flag, and leave Iraq.

Funny thing (well, not so funny), just about everybody that really knows anything about the Middle East and its societal dynamics predicted just this development at the time of the U.S. invasion.

Americans never seem top learn from our mistakes in these type situations -- of which there have been far more than successes.
Maude

Floral Park, NY

#14801 Jun 19, 2014
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no problem with just walking away from the mess.
But with all the politics involved Obama may feel he has to do something or Republicans will blame him for the mess they got us into and created.
So if he decides to do anything drone strikes and long distance air strikes might save face and appease the war mongers. At least it eliminates a lot of risk to Americans.
I would though get most of the Americans left in Iraq out ASAP.
The last person to listen too is John McCain if one remembers all of his past predictions.
John McCain has enough on his plate and not doing anything about the illegal aliens crossing his border.
BS detector

Yonkers, NY

#14802 Jun 19, 2014
Bloody Bill Anderson wrote:
<quoted text>
So true.
President Obama is in a no win situation. No matter what he does the Right wing nuts are going to blame him and say, "Obama lost Iraq."
Who else is there to blame? He asked for the job.

The buck stops on top of his pen and phone.
nac

Bellmore, NY

#14803 Jun 19, 2014
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
I’m not disagreeing that common sense would lead a reasonable person to conclude that something is amiss when in violation of the law, years of emails are suddenly missing. Especially when they could shed light of possible guilt.
In addition, if they were known to be missing that should have been brought to the attention of everyone as soon as there was a possible IRS miss-deed.
Without question that information should have been made public when any investigation was started .
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) who is chairman of the House Oversight Committee, issued a blistering statement alleging that such federal records can only disappear like this through deliberate destruction.
“The commissioner knew or should have known that this had already occurred, they were getting us data through other sources and failed to tell us month after month,” Issa said Wednesday.“It’s contemptible and he’s going to have some answering to do, but so are people up and down the IRS.”
Now common sense would tell me that there is likely violation of record keeping laws that should cause some heads to roll.
But just because of those missing emails we cannot by using common sense make Louis Lerner suddenly guilty of all charges based on the assumption that the missing emails held proof of all charges.
They admit that they have all of your emails.

They deny that they have any of their own.

They plead the 5th.

You're not yet suspicious... Impressive.

We play poker every other Wednesday night here. I'll fly you in if you want to play.
Opinion

Wall, SD

#14804 Jun 19, 2014
nac wrote:
<quoted text>
They admit that they have all of your emails.
They deny that they have any of their own.
They plead the 5th.
You're not yet suspicious... Impressive.
We play poker every other Wednesday night here. I'll fly you in if you want to play.
I thought it was pretty clear that I agreed that it is “suspicious’ when I said:
“I’m not disagreeing that common sense would lead a reasonable person to conclude that something is amiss when in violation of the law, years of emails are suddenly missing. Especially when they could shed light of possible guilt.”

But as I also stated:
“But just because of those missing emails we cannot by using common sense make Louis Lerner suddenly guilty of all charges based on the assumption that the missing emails held proof of all charges.”

I was not completely disagreeing with you.

Suspicions, doubt should not make one foolish enough to go “all in” in a poker game and call a suspected bluff --- especially when you have nothing in your hand to beat them even if they are bluffing and you are correct.

But playing poker and proving suspected guilt in a court of law is two different things. You can reasonably suspect the emails were deleted but you cannot prove her guilty of what you believe might have been in those emails. Suspicion doesn’t fly very far in the legal word without factual proof. One can though call in poker game based on suspicions alone – it’s your loss or gain based on your common sense and suspicions.

By all common sense and reason Chris Christie is likely guilty but that will not convict him unless some factual proof is found.

Before you invite me to a poker game remember I did live in Las Vegas for a while and did play some poker against pretty good poker players. I did not go broke but I learned my poker weaknesses and not to go all in when you likely don’t hold a good enough hand to win anyway.
nac

Bellmore, NY

#14805 Jun 19, 2014
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
I thought it was pretty clear that I agreed that it is “suspicious’ when I said:
“I’m not disagreeing that common sense would lead a reasonable person to conclude that something is amiss when in violation of the law, years of emails are suddenly missing. Especially when they could shed light of possible guilt.”
But as I also stated:
“But just because of those missing emails we cannot by using common sense make Louis Lerner suddenly guilty of all charges based on the assumption that the missing emails held proof of all charges.”
I was not completely disagreeing with you.
Suspicions, doubt should not make one foolish enough to go “all in” in a poker game and call a suspected bluff --- especially when you have nothing in your hand to beat them even if they are bluffing and you are correct.
But playing poker and proving suspected guilt in a court of law is two different things. You can reasonably suspect the emails were deleted but you cannot prove her guilty of what you believe might have been in those emails. Suspicion doesn’t fly very far in the legal word without factual proof. One can though call in poker game based on suspicions alone – it’s your loss or gain based on your common sense and suspicions.
By all common sense and reason Chris Christie is likely guilty but that will not convict him unless some factual proof is found.
Before you invite me to a poker game remember I did live in Las Vegas for a while and did play some poker against pretty good poker players. I did not go broke but I learned my poker weaknesses and not to go all in when you likely don’t hold a good enough hand to win anyway.
I've hardly gone "all in" on this, Polly.
I'm saying that a thorough investigation of the high level IRS & White House officials up to and including the President is more than warranted in light of the circumstances discussed above.
You, on the other hand, have implied that you would be satisfied with low-level tech guys taking the fall for "losing" the emails when you said:
"common sense would tell me that there is likely violation of record keeping laws that should cause some heads to roll."
I don't care where you've been, Polly... People that love to ignore harsh realities are my favorite poker opponents.
Bloody Bill Anderson

Hopkinsville, KY

#14806 Jun 20, 2014
BS detector wrote:
<quoted text>
Who else is there to blame? He asked for the job.
The buck stops on top of his pen and phone.
Point is there is nothing to be gained by blaming Obama.

Here is an interesting and informative take on the situation by a political science professor:

“President Obama has articulated the view of the United States on the situation in Iraq and the actions it will pursue. The plan is sensible… It is also unlikely to bring meaningful results, precisely because the conditions for success are unlikely to be met…The option of total commitment to the disastrous and sectarian government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki would be foolish. U.S. power could reverse ISIS' advances, but at a steep price, which the American people will not tolerate…”

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/19/opinion/mendels...

Since: May 14

Location hidden

#14807 Jun 20, 2014
HUH?????????? Where are all the clowns who said Sodumb had no WMD's

Saddam era WMDs captured in Iraq by ISIS

The British newspaper, The Telegraph reported this stunning little nugget yesterday, on June 19th:

Chemical weapons produced at the Al Muthanna facility, which Isis today seized, are believed to have included mustard gas, Sarin, Tabun, and VX.

Wait……WHAT?

I thought there were no WMD’s in Iraq, of any kind? Whatsoever!

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/06/s...
Opinion

Wall, SD

#14808 Jun 20, 2014
nac wrote:
<quoted text>
I've hardly gone "all in" on this, Polly.
I'm saying that a thorough investigation of the high level IRS & White House officials up to and including the President is more than warranted in light of the circumstances discussed above.
You, on the other hand, have implied that you would be satisfied with low-level tech guys taking the fall for "losing" the emails when you said:
"common sense would tell me that there is likely violation of record keeping laws that should cause some heads to roll."
I don't care where you've been, Polly... People that love to ignore harsh realities are my favorite poker opponents.
If you are going to play poker “nac” you have to pay attention to more than cocktail waitress.
You have to pay close attention ---Did you miss the part of my posting reading:

“Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) who is chairman of the House Oversight Committee, issued a blistering statement alleging that such federal records can only disappear like this through deliberate destruction.
“The commissioner knew or should have known that this had already occurred, they were getting us data through other sources and failed to tell us month after month,” Issa said Wednesday.“It’s contemptible and he’s going to have some answering to do, but so are people up and down the IRS.”

That statement would clearly indicate that Issa and his Oversight Committee will investigate.
I am quite willing to let the facts lead where they may. I am quite willing to find out why email records were not maintained as required. I am quite willing to find out whose job it was to make sure they were down loaded and properly maintained. Let the trail lead where it may and punish those responsible from bottom to top.

But there has to be some factual proof rather than just your opinions and suspicions. As I stated before the issue requires factual proof that will stand up in a court of law. That is the harsh reality when one knows the difference between legal issues and gambling.
Opinion

Wall, SD

#14809 Jun 20, 2014
scirocco wrote:
HUH?????????? Where are all the clowns who said Sodumb had no WMD's
Saddam era WMDs captured in Iraq by ISIS
The British newspaper, The Telegraph reported this stunning little nugget yesterday, on June 19th:
Chemical weapons produced at the Al Muthanna facility, which Isis today seized, are believed to have included mustard gas, Sarin, Tabun, and VX.
Wait……WHAT?
I thought there were no WMD’s in Iraq, of any kind? Whatsoever!
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/06/s...
Get up to speed on the history of WMD’s in Iraq. At least understand what your are reading about.

The claim that former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction and posed a threat to world security was the basis for the 2003 US invasion of Iraq. Before the invastion, the weapons at Muthanna had been found by UN inspectors but were dismantled with chemical stocks militarily useless and closed off in bunkers.

During the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s, Hussein used the Muthanna complex to make chemical weapons, including sarin, mustard gas, and VX (a nerve agent), according the Iraq Study Group, which conducted the hunt for weapons of mass destruction in the aftermath of the war.

The Iraq Study group did find chemical munitions at Muthanna but determined that inspections by United Nations Special Commission, or Unscom, had ensured the facility was dismantled and remaining chemical stocks militarily useless and sealed in bunkers.

"Two wars, sanctions and Unscom oversight reduced Iraqi's premier production facility to a stockpile of old damaged and contaminated chemical munitions (sealed in bunkers), a wasteland full of destroyed chemical munitions, razed structures, and unusable war-ravaged facilities," the Iraq Study Group's 2004 report concluded.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/sunni-extremis...
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/isil-seizes-sadda...
Zero Comments

New York, NY

#14810 Jun 20, 2014
Another reason to cheer for President Obama!!!!!!!!!!

Right Power!!!!!!!!!!

A new poll released Tuesday by PPP found that by a nearly two to one margin (54%-28%), the American people are strongly siding with President Obama's decision not to have sent combat troops back into Iraq.

Only 16% of Americans would support sending combat troops to help deal with the crisis in Iraq, compared to 74% who are opposed. There's a bipartisan consensus on that issue with with Republicans (28/57), Democrats (10/86), and independents (9/86) all strongly opposed to sending combat troops.

Asked specifically whose vision they agreed with more about having US troops in Iraq between Obama (no troops under any circumstances) and John McCain (troops should have remained in Iraq after 2011), voters side with Obama by a 54/28 spread. In addition to Democrats strongly siding with Obama's perspective, independents (53/28) and Republicans (49/30) do as well.

O'Reilly also has the same position as McCain on leaving troops in Iraq, so the majority of Americans also disagree with Bill O'Reilly.

People aren't buying what O'Reilly and the Republicans are selling on Iraq. They are blaming the violence on the withdrawal of American troops, but 67% of Americans think the conflict is rooted in centuries of internal conflict that was exacerbated by the Bush administration's decision to invade Iraq.

Americans overwhelmingly support providing intelligence to the Iraqi government (56%-30%), and a major international diplomatic effort (52%-30%) to stabilize Iraq.

It turns out that the American people aren't about to get fooled again by the same lies that got the country into Iraq in the first place. O'Reilly and the Republican Party are playing a politically dangerous game by trying to blame President Obama for the wave of violence in Iraq. Instead of blaming Obama, their attacks are reminding the American people that it was the GOP who lied to them and got the nation into a war of choice.

A war Bill O'Reilly supported 100 percent, and even called people who opposed it un-American traitors.

The American people don't want combat troops back in Iraq because Iraq belongs to the Iraqis. President Obama did not lose Iraq because Iraq never belonged to the United States. It is up to the Iraqis to stabilize their country, and resolve their internal differences. The neo-con war agenda has never been less popular than it is today.

The 275 troops that Obama sent to Iraq to secure US facilities and personnel was a smart decision. If the president didn't send the extra security and something happened, Republicans would be screaming about another Benghazi. However, there is a big difference between sending a few hundred troops to keep Americans secure, and sending hundreds of thousands of troops to do the Iraqi government's fighting for them.

The Republican era of war is over, and Obama's decision to not send combat troops back to Iraq is a reminder of why so Americans voted twice for him to be president.
Zero Comments

New York, NY

#14811 Jun 20, 2014
President Obama is The Right Power!!!!!!!!!!

Former VP Dick Cheney wrote the following in his Wall Street Journal op-ed this week:

"Rarely has a U.S. president been so wrong about so much at the expense of so many."

And if you were to guess that he was referring to his former boss, George W. Bush, you'd be wrong.

The man with whom Bush committed the worst military debacle in U.S. history and, as many believe, with whom he's guilty of war crimes, was actually talking about President Barack Obama.

In in the wake of escalating sectarian violence in Iraq, neo-cons like Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Paul Bremer and others have crawled out from under their war-mongering rocks in a pathetic attempt to vindicate themselves while dumping the blame for this disastrous mess on Obama.

The level of audacity, duplicity, shamelessness and megalomania with Cheney in particular is astounding. The war began unjustly, was misguided and mismanaged, and soon proved Cheney 100% dead-wrong on everything he pitched to Americans. Let's revisit for a moment his greatest hits:

-Insisted Iraq had WMD
-Predicted the invasion/war would "last weeks, not months"
-Claimed we'd be "greeted as liberators"
-Bragged that extremists would have to "rethink their strategy of Jihad"
-Boasted that the insurgency "was in its last throes" back in 2005

In fact, the war lasted eight years, cost $1-trillion and 4500 U.S. soldiers' lives. It was a blood-thirsty conflation of Saddam Hussein with 9/11. It was battered with threats of "mushroom clouds" and domestic terrorism. It remains a vile twisting of reality, and an unconscionable exploitation of the nation's collective emotion and fear following the horrific New York City and DC attacks. And it was all perpetrated by Bush/Cheney & Co., not Obama, who merely inherited this mess.

Since: May 14

Location hidden

#14812 Jun 20, 2014
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Get up to speed on the history of WMD’s in Iraq. At least understand what your are reading about.
The claim that former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction and posed a threat to world security was the basis for the 2003 US invasion of Iraq. Before the invastion, the weapons at Muthanna had been found by UN inspectors but were dismantled with chemical stocks militarily useless and closed off in bunkers.
During the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s, Hussein used the Muthanna complex to make chemical weapons, including sarin, mustard gas, and VX (a nerve agent), according the Iraq Study Group, which conducted the hunt for weapons of mass destruction in the aftermath of the war.
The Iraq Study group did find chemical munitions at Muthanna but determined that inspections by United Nations Special Commission, or Unscom, had ensured the facility was dismantled and remaining chemical stocks militarily useless and sealed in bunkers.
"Two wars, sanctions and Unscom oversight reduced Iraqi's premier production facility to a stockpile of old damaged and contaminated chemical munitions (sealed in bunkers), a wasteland full of destroyed chemical munitions, razed structures, and unusable war-ravaged facilities," the Iraq Study Group's 2004 report concluded.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/sunni-extremis...
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/isil-seizes-sadda...
First: You now admit Sodumb had WMD's. Thanks

Second : Could you explain why the WMD's are still there?
Opinion

Wall, SD

#14813 Jun 20, 2014
scirocco wrote:
<quoted text>
First: You now admit Sodumb had WMD's. Thanks
Second : Could you explain why the WMD's are still there?
Read the links.
Opinion

Wall, SD

#14814 Jun 20, 2014
Bloody Bill Anderson wrote:
<quoted text>
Truth be told, the U.S. lacks the means to "stop ISIS in thrie tracks." Thanks to the "cut taxes, cut spending" crowd, the U.S. Army is now down to about 500,000 men. The troops are psychologically worn out by too many deployments, too often.
Going back into Iraq would be a mistake. It would be another 5,000 dead Americans, and the result would still be the same. It will be a lot more than that if the U.S. gets involved in a full blown regional sectarian civil war.
The only workable solution is to let the regional powers handle it: Iran and Turkey.
The U.S. can't do that, however. The Israel Lobby will never allow the U.S. to form any kind of working relationship with Iran. Every bought and paid for politician will oppose it. Television preachers will rally the Christian fundamentalists to flood Congress with protests against it. Turkey will also be difficult because for the last several years the Israelis have done everything possible to make enemies of the Turks.
The Israelis probably want the whole Arab world to turn into an Islamic state dominated by a group like ISIS. It is to their advantage if the Arabs are ruled by a regime that is an avowed enemy of the United States.
One point that is seldom mentioned is that President Obama in my humble opinion does not have the authority to re-start a war in Iraq with ISIS.

Congress clearly by the Constitution without question has the authority to authorize war. The War Powers Act alone with the fact that the Congressional authorization for going into Iraq is likely not applicable.

Problem is Congress don't want to vote and take a strong position that they can be later held accountable for. Yes, there will be a couple of war monger's that are always read to go to war again.

Make Congress vote on the matter and at the same time they can figure out a way to fund all these unnecessary military wars. If they raised taxes to pay for the wars that would change a lot of opinions.
Bloody Bill Anderson

Crofton, KY

#14815 Jun 20, 2014
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
One point that is seldom mentioned is that President Obama in my humble opinion does not have the authority to re-start a war in Iraq with ISIS.
Congress clearly by the Constitution without question has the authority to authorize war. The War Powers Act alone with the fact that the Congressional authorization for going into Iraq is likely not applicable.
Problem is Congress don't want to vote and take a strong position that they can be later held accountable for. Yes, there will be a couple of war monger's that are always read to go to war again.
Make Congress vote on the matter and at the same time they can figure out a way to fund all these unnecessary military wars. If they raised taxes to pay for the wars that would change a lot of opinions.
I never thought of that, but you may be right.

I would recommend that the president ask Congress to declare war, but with the express statement that he opposes it. That would put the war mongers in an awfully uncomfortable position, since if they did declare war, then it would be on them.

I don't think the Republicans would do much about paying for it, not if it required raising taxes on their billionaire constituency.
nac

Bellmore, NY

#14816 Jun 20, 2014
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
If you are going to play poker “nac” you have to pay attention to more than cocktail waitress.
You have to pay close attention ---Did you miss the part of my posting reading:
“Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) who is chairman of the House Oversight Committee, issued a blistering statement alleging that such federal records can only disappear like this through deliberate destruction.
“The commissioner knew or should have known that this had already occurred, they were getting us data through other sources and failed to tell us month after month,” Issa said Wednesday.“It’s contemptible and he’s going to have some answering to do, but so are people up and down the IRS.”
That statement would clearly indicate that Issa and his Oversight Committee will investigate.
I am quite willing to let the facts lead where they may. I am quite willing to find out why email records were not maintained as required. I am quite willing to find out whose job it was to make sure they were down loaded and properly maintained. Let the trail lead where it may and punish those responsible from bottom to top.
But there has to be some factual proof rather than just your opinions and suspicions. As I stated before the issue requires factual proof that will stand up in a court of law. That is the harsh reality when one knows the difference between legal issues and gambling.
Yes, Polly... we'd all love for "the facts to lead where they may."

But we're no longer entitled to the facts. Lerner pleads the 5th. The emails are "uh... gone."

If it goes any deeper, we'll see another use of executive privilege to end the investigation, just like with fast & furious.

The days of the government giving us the facts are long over. That didn't start with Obama, but it should end with Obama.

It should have ended with Bush. It should have ended with Clinton. It should have ended with HW Bush.

It didn't. And that is our fault for putting up with it.

But WHY should we STILL put up with it???

They say that they have our emails but they don't have their own. They use executive privilege to cover their misdeeds.

Why should we accept it, Polly?

Why can't we have better?

Why am I wrong for wanting better?

Since: Jun 14

Canoga Park, CA

#14817 Jun 20, 2014
Funny Obama Joke!
How Do You Know If Obama Is In Your Garden?
http://www.funnyjokester.com/new-obama-joke/

http://www.funnyjokester.com/political-jokes/
Political Jokes with Funny Cartoons!
Laugh at Funny Original Political Jokes with Hidden Answers! NEW Joke Ratings!

Since: May 14

Location hidden

#14818 Jun 21, 2014
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Read the links.
Answer the questions
Opinion

Wall, SD

#14820 Jun 21, 2014
nac wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, Polly... we'd all love for "the facts to lead where they may."
But we're no longer entitled to the facts. Lerner pleads the 5th. The emails are "uh... gone."
If it goes any deeper, we'll see another use of executive privilege to end the investigation, just like with fast & furious.
The days of the government giving us the facts are long over. That didn't start with Obama, but it should end with Obama.
It should have ended with Bush. It should have ended with Clinton. It should have ended with HW Bush.
It didn't. And that is our fault for putting up with it.
But WHY should we STILL put up with it???
They say that they have our emails but they don't have their own. They use executive privilege to cover their misdeeds.
Why should we accept it, Polly?
Why can't we have better?
Why am I wrong for wanting better?
You are not wrong for wanting truth and honesty from every elected politician.

I wish we had better but we have what we have.

The reason? Likely one opinion is as good as another and like there is more that one reason.

You have touched on the issue of partisan politics. People do treat their party as capable of doing no wrong - my team never fouls - or my brand of politics is like a religion and is the only way to political heaven. I doubt if we are ever going to get around political parties being treated as the only way to political heaven.

There is far too much special interest money in the game that turns politicians in a bought and paid for whore. It's not going to get better with the recent Supreme Court Decision regarding Citizen's United.

It's ok to have gerrymandering if its my party doing it. Voter suppression is ok as long as my party wins.

It's ok to have political talking heads on radio and TV that are not accountable for truth of fact and correcting miss statements. The head packing goes on all day long filling low information voters with one sided information.

I have stated before that a big new shiny guillotine should be placed in Washington with a engraved plaque that reads something like this:

"Those who come here to represent the people with be held to the highest personal standards while doing so. Those who are found guilty of violating their oath of office shall face and receive the peoples justice here."

The reminder might do a lot to keep a lid on conduct but it would only take one head lopped off to created a pretty honest place.

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.

New York Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
President Trump's first 100 days - Roadmap to D... (Nov '16) 3 min NEMO 4,858
Abused wife 5 min Shocked wife 5
Man blocks out sun with his thumb ! 31 min safety officer 3
TRUMP to have REPUBLICAN GUARD at WHITEHOUSE ! 1 hr TRUMP YADA YADA YADA 3
TRUMP - OBAMACARE STILL STANDING ? .. Whazzup ? 1 hr TRUMP SHILL GAME 3
IT TWERKED ! .. No Talk about RUSSIA or TAXES !... 1 hr TRUMP SHELL GAME 7
VERY WELL DONE .. Mr PRESIDENT ! 1 hr The Great White N... 2

New York Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

New York Mortgages