• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama Goes Full Retard

HorseLoverGirl said:
First of all R-word | Spread the Word to End the Word Second the President is not that bad. Its not his fault no one has given him any chance since he threw his hat in the ring the first time.
Click to expand...

Oh the PC nonsense is nonsense, so no thanks. I've been using the word retard for far too long and I have no reason or compunction to change now. "Given him any chance" --- change at what? He's charismatic, he's a great speech giver and a incompetent President in every aspect. I've said it before and I'll say it again, we'd be better off with a bowl of fruit running this country.
 
Ockham said:
Oh the PC nonsense is nonsense, so no thanks. I've been using the word retard for far too long and I have no reason or compunction to change now. "Given him any chance" --- change at what? He's charismatic, he's a great speech giver and a incompetent President in every aspect. I've said it before and I'll say it again, we'd be better off with a bowl of fruit running this country.
Click to expand...


Just because you say certain words does not in any shape, fashion or form give truth to the words.
 
Somerville said:
You don't care that you are seen as not speaking the truth? Really?
Click to expand...
I don't care what your opinion of words are as they are not relevant to me. I use the language and words that benefit me and that I'm comfortable using. If that displeases you, it's not my problem.


Somerville said:
Always enjoy intelligent conversations with political opponents :roll:
Click to expand...
Perhaps you should attempt being honest instead of snide - you'll get a better result.
 
zimmer said:
Too bad Obama-rama-ding-dong didn't reveal his true self during the elections.

Such a "uniter".

ROTFLMFAO...
Click to expand...

I don't like the deal myself. But, isn't this just politics as usual? After all, every time I look around someone from the GOP side of life is accusing Liberals of being anti-American or pro-Castro or in cahoots with ISIS, not to mention all the "Obama was really born in Kenya," BS we heard for the past 7 years.
 
justabubba said:
what about the deal do you not approve?
Click to expand...

Lifting sanctions, weak inspection criteria: the 24-day notice, in particular. The concessions and allowances for Iran to develop a "peaceful" nuclear program also bother the hell out of me.

Why a nation chock full of oil would need a nuclear program for anything other than developing weapons escapes me.
 
calamity said:
Lifting sanctions,
Click to expand...
that is the cost of requiring iran to abandon any aspirations to develop a nuclear weapon and permitting access to its facilities by the inspections teams. would you prefer we retain the sanctions and gamble that iran chooses a course not to develop a nuclear weapon to establish military parity with israel?
weak inspection criteria: the 24-day notice, in particular.
Click to expand...
the inspections will be quite rigorous, at least at the known facilities, where monitoring will occur from the uranium mining operations thru the entire processing of that that material. that is what will allow us to know there is no uranium being diverted for weapons purposes. the 24-day interval is only for those sites SUSPECTED of being engaged in nuclear weapons development. that is the maximum span between the identification of the basis of suspicion and a determination whether that suspicion is legitimate. presently, there is NO time frame in the inspections protocol to make such a determination. so, this would appear to be an enhanced aspect of the monitoring procedure. and if iran refuses access where legitimate basis is found, the sanctions are re-imposed in an agreed upon snap-back measure. iran could cheat ... but it would be subject to re-imposed sanctions if it does. thus, we would be right back where we are today, only with better insight into the current iranian nuclear development industry
The concessions and allowances for Iran to develop a "peaceful" nuclear program also bother the hell out of me.Why a nation chock full of oil would need a nuclear program for anything other than developing weapons escapes me.
Click to expand...
nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, such as powering homes and industries. the USA has more than enough coal to fuel our power plants, and yet we turned to supplement that with nuclear. why should that make sense for us but not for iran? each barrel they do not need domestically is a barrel they can sell internationally
 
The right winger comments in this thread reek of desperation.
 
Got to shake your head when a extreme partisan goes on a 'full retard' rant about the President, no matter the President. I had to wonder about the name calling of BushII, and now those who wail about Obama.

Fact is neither ever went 'full retard', but the opposition refuses to use any reason in the 'debate'. Fact is the GOP has a die hard, refuse any compromise, caucus that unless Iran completely folds they will refuse to go along. There is a similar cadre of hardliners in Iran.

No where did Obama claim the two groups share the same moral plane, just how they both are never going to publicly accept the treaty.

But extremists, no matter the group, are not known for reasoned thought, but more the loud farter in church. The temper tantrum child in some corner, gonna scream until they get their way.

Scream on, some of it is amusing, the rest can be fast forwarded over... :peace
 
justabubba said:
that is the cost of requiring iran to abandon any aspirations to develop a nuclear weapon and permitting access to its facilities by the inspections teams. would you prefer we retain the sanctions and gamble that iran chooses a course not to develop a nuclear weapon to establish military parity with israel?the inspections will be quite rigorous, at least at the known facilities, where monitoring will occur from the uranium mining operations thru the entire processing of that that material. that is what will allow us to know there is no uranium being diverted for weapons purposes. the 24-day interval is only for those sites SUSPECTED of being engaged in nuclear weapons development. that is the maximum span between the identification of the basis of suspicion and a determination whether that suspicion is legitimate. presently, there is NO time frame in the inspections protocol to make such a determination. so, this would appear to be an enhanced aspect of the monitoring procedure. and if iran refuses access where legitimate basis is found, the sanctions are re-imposed in an agreed upon snap-back measure. iran could cheat ... but it would be subject to re-imposed sanctions if it does. thus, we would be right back where we are today, only with better insight into the current iranian nuclear development industry nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, such as powering homes and industries. the USA has more than enough coal to fuel our power plants, and yet we turned to supplement that with nuclear. why should that make sense for us but not for iran? each barrel they do not need domestically is a barrel they can sell internationally
Click to expand...

In essence, I like what Obama is trying to do: bring Iran into the fold and use them to help fight ISIS. No problem.

On the down side, it is a regime which has in its mission statement the desire to destroy Israel. So, I guess, for me--I just do not trust them.
 
CanadaJohn said:
I'm pretty shocked you'd post this.

So, you believe Obama is right when he says that those in Iran chanting "death to America" have common cause with Republicans?

Sorry, but that kind of offhanded rhetoric is offensive on many levels. It would be no different than if a leading Republican claimed that Democrats and Obama have common cause with ISIS because they oppose putting US troops on the ground in Iraq/Syria.

This from the guy who claimed he would do politics differently and would be a unifier.
Click to expand...

Actually the difference is only an "s". The Iranian hardliners say "death to America" the U.S. ones say "death to Americans" since they want a war with Iran which would surely result Americans dying . I say no more death, let the agreement pass and screw them both.
As far as working with the GOP this cartoon says it all

RogerR20150213_low.jpg
 
Last edited:
HorseLoverGirl said:
Yeah this country was headed in the wrong direction and my Southern ancestors saw it
Click to expand...

Yes they sure saw the light at the end of the tunnel (Sadly that was emancipation by proclamation Train coming)

[qoute]The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery. They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic. This hostile policy of our confederates has been pursued with every circumstance of aggravation which could arouse the passions and excite the hatred of our people, and has placed the two sections of the Union for many years past in the condition of virtual civil war. Our people, still attached to the Union from habit and national traditions, and averse to change, hoped that time, reason, and argument would bring, if not redress, at least exemption from further insults, injuries, and dangers. Recent events have fully dissipated all such hopes and demonstrated the necessity of separation.[/quote]

Diving Mullah
 
iguanaman said:
Actually the difference is only an "s". The Iranian hardliners say "death to America" the U.S. ones say "death to Americans" since they want a war with Iran which would surely result Americans dying . I say no more death, let the agreement pass and screw them both.
As far as working with the GOP this cartoon says it all
Click to expand...

You're right about one thing - for American liberals, a cartoon says all they have to say.
 
After reading this thread I can tell many on the right wing have complete disregard to the facts of the deal. All you have to do is repeat some ****ty talking point over and over again. Complete and utter disregard to the facts.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
It was indicative of the long-running pattern that in midterms, whatever party is NOT in the White House generally has better turnout than usual and does better.
Click to expand...

Not just better dude, nice try, what happened last year was profound!

Tim-
 
TheDemSocialist said:
After reading this thread I can tell many on the right wing have complete disregard to the facts of the deal. All you have to do is repeat some ****ty talking point over and over again. Complete and utter disregard to the facts.
Click to expand...

Like "War on Women". Talk about a talking point that's ****ty and repeated over and over again with complete and utter disregard to the facts.
 
tres borrachos said:
Like "War on Women". Talk about a talking point that's ****ty and repeated over and over again with complete and utter disregard to the facts.
Click to expand...

What facts contradict the GOP's war on women? Why is opposing equal pay and putting more restriction on abortions not opposing women's rights?
 
iguanaman said:
What facts contradict the GOP's war on women? Why is opposing equal pay and putting more restriction on abortions not opposing women's rights?
Click to expand...

I have never understood how any self-respecting woman could vote Republican. Perhaps, they are just being a "good wife," and doing what their husband's tell them too?

I dunno. :confused:

I got nothing! Just don't add up.
 
Hicup said:
Not just better dude, nice try, what happened last year was profound!

Tim-
Click to expand...

Not nearly as profound as what will happen in 2016. Wait and see. How will you deal with a women President and a Democrat controlled Senate?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom