On this political "unity" Crap

[ReverendHellh0und]

American issues are "idiotic"!

I guess that ends your patriotism issue.

no your empty rhetoric is idiotic. do I need to type slower?


still see you are avoiding the issue as usual.

 

[Billo_Really]

no your empty rhetoric is idiotic. do I need to type slower?

still see you are avoiding the issue as usual.

Refusing to spoon feed you the issues is not avoidance.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Refusing to spoon feed you the issues is not avoidance.

Should we unify around the left's continual bashing of Palin?


Should we unify around his pick of a super partisan chief of staff?


Should we unify around his plan to nationalize health care?


Should we unify around a man who calls racists his mentors?


Should we unify around a man who associated with an unrepentant terrorist?

Should we unify around a man who stated American troops kill civillians and air raid villages?

Should we unify around a man who talks of nationalizing 401k's?

I await your response. will it be cut, run, or the surf and turf? :lol:

 

[Billo_Really]

Should we unify around the left's continual bashing of Palin?


Should we unify around his pick of a super partisan chief of staff?


Should we unify around his plan to nationalize health care?


Should we unify around a man who calls racists his mentors?


Should we unify around a man who associated with an unrepentant terrorist?

Should we unify around a man who stated American troops kill civillians and air raid villages?

Should we unify around a man who talks of nationalizing 401k's?

I await your response. will it be cut, run, or the surf and turf? :lol:

What does that have to do with me?

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

What does that have to do with me?

wait, i give you what you had a little mantrum over, and now you are going with this response?


you fail so miserably at this it is quite pathetic.


what is the topic of this thread? what have you been yammering on about? what did I just give you, what was your response?


you are beyond transparent.



I gave you what you asked for, you were incapable of a coherent response, you sir, were owned. :lol:

 

[1069]

Should we unify around the left's continual bashing of Palin?

That would be a good start.
I'm sure we'd all feel just really a lot better if we had some kind of assurance that we've seen the last of that weird lummox on the national political stage, and y'all aren't planning to truck her out again in another four years, when she won't even be cute anymore.

That would certainly, yes, be a major gesture toward bipartisan unity.

 

[DivineComedy]

Was that bang, or bash?

Why can't "your people" move on, you won. Frack Palin! Newt 2012!

Do you really want us to keep pointing out that your boy is either an articulate "gifted" idiot savant--who doesn't know ex post facto from legal, civilian from ordered and forced, or respectful cooperation from one party nationalist state unity--or he is the Great Satan with universal values that the ether of democracy (principalities and powers of the air) demand?

 

[Billo_Really]

wait, i give you what you had a little mantrum over, and now you are going with this response?


you fail so miserably at this it is quite pathetic.


what is the topic of this thread? what have you been yammering on about? what did I just give you, what was your response?


you are beyond transparent.



I gave you what you asked for, you were incapable of a coherent response, you sir, were owned. :lol:

Oh, I get it, were those the issues you kept wanting me to come up with?

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Oh, I get it, were those the issues you kept wanting me to come up with?

sort of, when you failed as usual to back up your position I came up with a list of his issues and asked you if conservatives should unify around them.

I did your work, and you have no response. typical.

 

[Voidwar]

Here we have another person who does not put "Country First".

Putting Country First means opposing this newbie and his feel-good Robin Hood idiocy. You Billo_Really, have NO business telling anyone not to be partisan. You have no business trying to chastise another for behavior you have rabidly indulged in for the last seven years.

 

[Truth Detector]

He voted "present" like 140 out of over 4,000 votes. Check your math. I don't think that's 90%.

My mistake; he voted Present 3% of the time; happy to give you this one if you think this is a good thing.

Experience doesn't matter if you can't speak intelligently about the things you will be in charge of. Obama can do that. She can't.

I beg to disagree with you on this one; the notion that speaking good is a substitute for experience is laughable if not hysterical. But when you support a candidate who himself admits he lacks the resume, I NOT surprised you would make such weak arguments.

Palin gave an outstanding speech at the Republican convention and numerous other great speeches during the election. The fact that you don't agree with the issues hardly changes that.

FACT: Palin's executive experience super-exceeds Obama's.

But that doesn't matter to people who don't vote on substance but rather on rhetoric.

Here's an example of great Obama oratory if you like a lot of ah's and ums:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHgH5i8ug6E

Do you think Carter would have been successful if he only had another four years of experience?

Carter wasn't successful for the same reasons Obama won't be; he was a bleeding heart Liberal who thought he could hug his enemies and TALK to them. His economic policies were equally naive to Obama's.

My feeling is that when Obama is done, the Carter years will look like a great success comparatively speaking. That is, if Obama stands behind his promises and implements his economics for disaster.

Carry on.

 

[Truth Detector]

American issues.

How's that?

Do tell us what you think "American Issues" are; it should be entertaining at least.

 

[winston53660]

Carter wasn't successful for the same reasons Obama won't be; he was a bleeding heart Liberal who thought he could hug his enemies and TALK to them. His economic policies were equally naive to Obama's.


Carry on.

Carter stood up to Iran and Reagan traded arms with them.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Do tell us what you think "American Issues" are; it should be entertaining at least.

He won't. ....

 

[Cold Highway]

While Im willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt I will have no problem calling him out on policies I dont want for the country. I was called a traitor, communist, an illegal, etc for slamming Bush's foreign and social policies Im prepared to hear the same insults when I call Obama out on his own policies. Anyone whether it be right or left calling for unity should really blow it out of their ass. There would be no way in hell I would unify with social/religious conservatives, fiscal liberals and politically correct liberals. As we have seen in the last few elections unity is non-existent.

 

[Truth Detector]

Carter stood up to Iran and Reagan traded arms with them.

Your level of denial is only exceeded by your lack of historic knowledge.

The reason our embassy was taken over in the first place was due to Carter's naive global policies and perceived weakness combined with his refusal to support the Shah of Iran not due to any Carter confrontation.

Our pals in France released the Ayatollah back to Iran which led to the circumstances we are currently dealing with today.

Reagan didn't deal in arms with Iran; he was allowing the arming of "moderates" within Iran who promised to release hostages:

It began as an operation to increase U.S.-Iranian relations, wherein Israel would ship weapons to a moderate, politically influential group of Iranians opposed to the Ayatollah Khomeini; the U.S. would reimburse Israel for those weapons and receive payment from Israel. The moderate Iranians agreed to do everything in their power to achieve the release of six U.S. hostages, who were being held by Hezbollah.

Iran-Contra affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But of course, Carters failure as a President is to be ignored and we want to impugn Reagan for working for American interests in the region.
Did the Carter administration "lose" Iran, as some have suggested? Gaddis Smith might have put it best: "President Carter inherited an impossible situation -- and he and his advisers made the worst of it." Carter seemed to have a hard time deciding whether to heed the advice of his aggressive national security advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, who wanted to encourage the Shah to brutally suppress the revolution, or that of his more cautious State Department, which suggested Carter reach out to opposition elements in order to smooth the transition to a new government. In the end he did neither, and suffered the consequences.

The Crisis
Even after it became known that the Shah was suffering from cancer, President Carter was reluctant to allow him entry to the United States, for fear of reprisal against Americans still in Iran. But in October, when the severity of the Shah's illness became known, Carter relented on humanitarian grounds. "He went around the room, and most of us said, 'Let him in.'" recalls Vice President Walter Mondale. "And he said, 'And if [the Iranians] take our employees in our embassy hostage, then what would be your advice?' And the room just fell dead. No one had an answer to that. Turns out, we never did."

When students overran the embassy and seized more than sixty Americans on November 4, it was not at all clear who they represented or what they hoped to achieve. In fact, a similar mob had briefly done the same thing nine months earlier, holding the American ambassador hostage for a few hours before members of Khomeini's retinue ordered him released. But this time, Khomeini saw a chance to consolidate his power around a potent symbol, and issued a statement in support of the action against the American "den of spies." The students vowed not to release the Americans until the U.S. returned the Shah for trial, along with billions of dollars they claimed he had stolen from the Iranian people.

American Experience | Jimmy Carter | People & Events

Carry on; your denial and ignorance of history has been noted.

 

[Cardinal]

Though if he nationalizes 401k's do you expect me to "unify" around him on that issue?

This one slipped past me. Where did you see that Obama intends to nationalize 401k's?

 

[Kernel Sanders]

Talking out both sides of thier mouths, many lefties here are bashing Palin after the election in one thread, and in another are demanding that we all support Obama's presidency.

Well as one who has seen the left call Bush, and right wingers every name in the book, besmirch my brothers and sisters serving, calling them murderers and rapists I for one, say no thanks.

This request is like an abusive husband who after 8 years of beating his wife suddenly asks her for a tone of "peace" as if she had any part of it and given the Palin threads, is also still abusing his wife.


It is shallow and no thank you.

The annoying thing is that all the Palin bashing gets justified because the right wont STFU about her either. Don't get me wrong, it's a torrent from the left and a trickle from the right, but it gives them justification. Every time I get ready to post a "Just let Palin fade away" thread, I see a "PALIN '12!!!1!" thread that takes the legitimacy out of my bitching. I'm afraid that the days of her being a little known governor from Alaska are behind us.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

The annoying thing is that all the Palin bashing gets justified because the right wont STFU about her either. Don't get me wrong, it's a torrent from the left and a trickle from the right, but it gives them justification. Every time I get ready to post a "Just let Palin fade away" thread, I see a "PALIN '12!!!1!" thread that takes the legitimacy out of my bitching. I'm afraid that the days of her being a little known governor from Alaska are behind us.

so mentioning it is justification? This is kinda a "blame the rape victim" mentality.

 

[Kernel Sanders]

so mentioning it is justification? This is kinda a "blame the rape victim" mentality.

It's pretty crappy justification, but the justification is there. As I said (or implied I guess), I'm with the righties on this one. The left has handily shown that the right's charges of Palin obsession were more than just posturing. The right, however, must accept that by keeping Palin in the spotlight has effects, and one effect is to keep the attacks going.

The rapist is always responsible for the rape. Walking naked through LA at two in the morning is still pretty damned stupid though.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

It's pretty crappy justification, but the justification is there. As I said (or implied I guess), I'm with the righties on this one. The left has handily shown that the right's charges of Palin obsession were more than just posturing. The right, however, must accept that by keeping Palin in the spotlight has effects, and one effect is to keep the attacks going.

The rapist is always responsible for the rape. Walking naked through LA at two in the morning is still pretty damned stupid though.

List the times of the Palin threads since the election and who started them. I dont see what you mean.

 

[Kernel Sanders]

First page of search results for "Palin" turns up a thread shilling for Palin in '12 and a thread proposing she run for Stevens' seat once he's ousted. The pro-Palin threads aren't nearly as active as the Palin bashing threads, and there are far less, but they are there. The sooner everybody gives it a rest with Palin, the happier I'll be

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

This one slipped past me. Where did you see that Obama intends to nationalize 401k's?

LewRockwell.com Blog: More on the Government <s>Strengthening and Protecting</s> Confiscating Your 401k

 

[American]

Talking out both sides of thier mouths, many lefties here are bashing Palin after the election in one thread, and in another are demanding that we all support Obama's presidency.

Well as one who has seen the left call Bush, and right wingers every name in the book, besmirch my brothers and sisters serving, calling them murderers and rapists I for one, say no thanks.

This request is like an abusive husband who after 8 years of beating his wife suddenly asks her for a tone of "peace" as if she had any part of it and given the Palin threads, is also still abusing his wife.


It is shallow and no thank you.

I've notice the same thing, liberals and Democrats are liars. Every single one of the regulars on this site have continued the bashing process. They had no intention of changing the tone. They have become true haters without conscience. It's really sad.

 

[American]

This one slipped past me. Where did you see that Obama intends to nationalize 401k's?

Excuse me, try to stay on topic. We're talking about you liberals posting bashing thread even after the election is over. They are listed in plain view, why don't you take a look?