Thanks a pant load Obama for not even challenging that dooshnozzle Ortega's attack on this country.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/18/obama-endures-ortega-diatribe/
I'm surprised Obama did not apologize for the 100 years of U.S. terrorism in central America. Exit question: When I was in Honduras in the 1980s providing medical services to the poor villagers, was I a terrorist?
Here is a video of Obama ripping Chavez (NOT) over his calling America an "evil" country and for calling Bush the devil:
http://www.noticias24.com/actualidad/noticia/38602/imagenes-del-ultimo-encuentro-entre-chavez-y-obama/
And for calling Obama a poor ignoramous:
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE52L19G20090322?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true
Quote from: guido911 on April 19, 2009, 02:12:37 PM
Thanks a pant load Obama for not even challenging that dooshnozzle Ortega's attack on this country.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/18/obama-endures-ortega-diatribe/
I'm surprised Obama did not apologize for the 100 years of U.S. terrorism in central America. Exit question: When I was in Honduras in the 1980s providing medical services to the poor villagers, was I a terrorist?
Why respond to a 50-minute diatribe about the past when it's pretty obvious that Obama's looking forward? (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/17/us.cuba/?iref=mpstoryview)
Quote(CNN) -- The Cuban government, long the object of a U.S. economic blockade, is prepared to meet with the Obama administration, Cuba's leader said.
"We've told the North American government, in private and in public, that we are prepared, wherever they want, to discuss everything -- human rights, freedom of the press, political prisoners -- everything, everything, everything that they want to discuss," Cuban President Raúl Castro said Thursday at a summit of leftist Latin American leaders in Venezuela.
The Cuban Embargo is the rough equivalent of the Israel/Palestinian conflict in the Americas. The quickest way to take the air out of Ortega's "argument" is to take away a major ideological prop to the region's anti-americanism, and I'd say that Obama's well on his way to solving the Cuban problem.
Quote from: we vs us on April 20, 2009, 11:57:45 AM
Why respond to a 50-minute diatribe about the past when it's pretty obvious that Obama's looking forward? (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/17/us.cuba/?iref=mpstoryview)
Well then, I expect Obama will no longer blame the Bush administration for all the troubles this country has, because Obama is looking forward. NOT! I didn't expect you would be the one apologizing for Obama.
Quote from: guido911 on April 20, 2009, 12:02:58 PM
Well then, I expect Obama will no longer blame the Bush administration republijerks for all the troubles this country has, because Obama is looking forward. NOT! I didn't expect you would be the one apologizing for Obama.
fixed that for you....and The POTUS will continue to say he was left a bag of grunt burning on the front steps of the White House when Dumbya and his "no" leftovers lit the bag and ran away.....
Guido, the devil is trying to catch up on the Karma number thingy but is having no luck. What's your secret?
Quote from: guido911 on April 20, 2009, 12:02:58 PM
Well then, I expect Obama will no longer blame the Bush administration for all the troubles this country has, because Obama is looking forward.
And why would you expect that? Are you saying that a rambling 50 minute speech by the president of Nicaragua has some equivalency to 8 years of the Bush Administration? That Ortega is somehow as responsible for the current state of American affairs as GWB is?
Quote from: we vs us on April 20, 2009, 12:11:28 PM
And why would you expect that? Are you saying that a rambling 50 minute speech by the president of Nicaragua has some equivalency to 8 years of the Bush Administration? That Ortega is somehow as responsible for the current state of American affairs as GWB is?
No, you were the one that said Obama was forward looking. If so, why does he dwell in the past whenever issues such as the state of the economy is all Bush's fault. And by the way, this is what real leaders do (as opposed to our girlie girl) when they are in the presence of some idiot attacking either their country or an allies' country:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6132972.ece
I'm not sure what the strategy is.
We are seeing a new type of nationalism out of President Obama. We've never had a leader that engages the country in flagellation. Even President Carter laid out the policies and actions of the United States as representative of the will of the people.
Until I understand where he's going with this, I can't help but disagree. Sure we have strong enemies, and perhaps the offer of an olive branch to those who show genuine effort toward peace is an excellent policy, but to roll over and let them scratch your belly is just strange. And to curtsy before those who would relish in our destruction bothers me.
Chavez took advantage of the situation by sliding in front of the cameras and handing President Obama an anti-USA book with a handshake and a grin. What a brilliant politician! In the US that book went from #57,000 on Amazon to #2 overnight. Chavez's political clout went through the roof worldwide. After the act, Chavez laughed so deeply and President Obama had no recognition of what was taking place.
Chavez will be in front of every camera in the lap of every journalist that he can in the next few months. Sounds crazy, but I wouldn't rule out Opra.
The world is seeing an American leader who is desperate to make friends, and to forget lessons of the past. Is this part of a broader strategy to promote national security? If so, could someone help me to understand?
When one is willing to bow before those who would destroy him, and sacrifice himself for the love of others, we have many great words for that . . .But when one is willing to bow to enemies and represent himself above the will of those he represents, we have a lesser definition.
I remain confused.
Quote from: Gaspar on April 20, 2009, 01:20:25 PM
When one is willing to bow before those who would destroy him, and sacrifice himself for the love of others, we have many great words for that . . .But when one is willing to bow to enemies and represent himself above the will of those he represents, we have a lesser definition.
I remain confused.
I'm confused, too. It's not like Venezuela is in the position to destroy anything. Who cares what Chavez thinks?
Quote from: rwarn17588 on April 20, 2009, 01:42:10 PM
I'm confused, too. It's not like Venezuela is in the position to destroy anything. Who cares what Chavez thinks?
Exactly. Now the whole world cares. He's on the front page of just about every newspaper.
Quote from: rwarn17588 on April 20, 2009, 01:42:10 PM
I'm confused, too. It's not like Venezuela is in the position to destroy anything. Who cares what Chavez thinks?
Sometimes acknowledging a small snake on the ground in the company of people who are afraid of snakes does more damage than the snake could if it went unnoticed.
Quote from: Gaspar on April 20, 2009, 01:43:56 PM
Exactly. Now the whole world cares. He's on the front page of just about every newspaper.
People maybe will care for five minutes. Then they'll move on to other things and forget about it.
When I saw the story, I thought: "It's Chavez being Chavez," shrugged and moved on with my life.
Quote from: rwarn17588 on April 20, 2009, 01:50:57 PM
People maybe will care for five minutes. Then they'll move on to other things and forget about it.
When I saw the story, I thought: "It's Chavez being Chavez," shrugged and moved on with my life.
I hope you're right. I hope it doesn't continue to develop into a pattern.
There is no greater fallacy than the belief that aims and purposes are one thing, while methods and tactics are another ... All human experience teaches that methods and means cannot be separated from the ultimate aim. – Emma Goldman
Quote from: Gaspar on April 20, 2009, 01:46:50 PM
Sometimes acknowledging a small snake on the ground in the company of people who are afraid of snakes does more damage than the snake could if it went unnoticed.
I didn't know guido was afraid of snakes.
Seriously, though, if you get that worked up and angry over this trivial episode, maybe you need to see a counselor or a shrink or something. Going through life that p*ssed off is unhealthy.
Quote from: Gaspar on April 20, 2009, 01:52:30 PM
I hope you're right. I hope it doesn't continue to develop into a pattern.
A pattern of what? Like jumping up and getting outraged over every little thing is a
good pattern?
There is a thing called priorities, you know.
This thread began with Obama doing nothing as that communist Ortega blasted this country. Only wevus has attempted to defend Obama's cowardice in not doing anything in response as a true leader of this country would do. Incidentally, Ortega was not attacking Bush, he was attacking Clinton, Carter, Reagan and every person in this country. As for Obama's defenders, I expected RW would think that Obama's coziness/lovefest with a communist and a socialist would be "trivial", but I expect more from the man that, according to Biden, has "steel in his spine."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RzGTbfcL3w
I am confused to what the response should have been and what would it have gained us?
Quote from: guido911 on April 20, 2009, 02:35:13 PM
This thread began with Obama doing nothing as that communist Ortega blasted this country. Only wevus has attempted to defend Obama's cowardice in not doing anything in response as a true leader of this country would do. Incidentally, Ortega was not attacking Bush, he was attacking Clinton, Carter, Reagan and every person in this country. As for Obama's defenders, I expected RW would think that Obama's coziness/lovefest with a communist and a socialist would be "trivial", but I expect more from the man that, according to Biden, has "steel in his spine."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RzGTbfcL3w
I think you're hyperventilating. I also think that at this point you're just throwing smile against the wall to see if it sticks.
In follow up questioning, Obama was asked about his response to Chavez: (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-obama-americas20-2009apr20,0,3878264.story)
"Obama dismissed such concerns. He said the 2008 presidential campaign proved that American voters want the president to engage with his counterparts, whether or not they are avowed friends of the U.S.
He said it "was a nice gesture to give me a book. I'm a reader." The president added that the election was a referendum of sorts on the argument that U.S. solicitude toward foreign leaders could be seen as "weakness."
"The American people didn't buy it," Obama said. "And there's a good reason the American people didn't buy it, because it doesn't make sense."
And he's exactly right. I'd have been appalled if he'd stormed out of any of those encounters. The kind of oversensitivity and general huffiness you seem to expect of our CiC is completely counterintiuitive to functioning diplomacy. It might actually be one of the reasons that Bush's foreign relations were such a dismal failure.
If you're looking for power relationships that are ruled entirely by the sword, allow me to direct you to the warlord state of Somalia, where the number of AK-47s you've got stashed relates directly to the influence you can wield.
Quote from: we vs us on April 20, 2009, 03:12:37 PM
"Obama dismissed such concerns. He said the 2008 presidential campaign proved that American voters want the president to engage with his counterparts, whether or not they are avowed friends of the U.S.
Really, Americans elected Obama so he would sit idly and listen to a thug hammer them. I guess Bush fatigue, the economy, or even the war in Iraq had nothing to do with his being elected.
As for the hyperbole in the conclusion to your last post and your being "appalled", where were you (or how appalled were you) when Charlie Rangel publicly ripped Chavez over his attack on Bush:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eX1lBOxoJeU&feature=related
Rangel was right to respond to Chavez, Obama should be as courageous.
As for what he should have done? How about saying "Americans are not terrorists". How about saying "America has sent its soldiers and money to aid central America". Hey, what about "I disagree with Ortega". Nope, we get more of the "it's all about me" crap.
Quote from: Trogdor on April 20, 2009, 03:08:21 PM
I am confused to what the response should have been and what would it have gained us?
Oh, I don't know, maybe a response similar to what was issued today re: Iran's leader's anti-Israel rant today.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.f6a7492655c21f479cbd21b7c1d1c12c.801&show_article=1
Accuse Americans of terrorism? Good
Accuse Israelis of being most cruel and racist regime? Bad
(http://homohominilupus.files.wordpress.com/2007/01/ahmadinejad_chavez_3.jpg)
Quote from: guido911 on April 20, 2009, 03:52:48 PM
Oh, I don't know, maybe a response similar to what was issued today re: Iran's leader's anti-Israel rant today.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.f6a7492655c21f479cbd21b7c1d1c12c.801&show_article=1
Accuse Americans of terrorism? Good
Accuse Israelis of being most cruel and racist regime? Bad
(http://homohominilupus.files.wordpress.com/2007/01/ahmadinejad_chavez_3.jpg)
So Obama should have left the meeting and not speak. I thought these colors didn't run?
Quote from: guido911 on April 20, 2009, 03:39:28 PM
Really, Americans elected Obama so he would sit idly and listen to a thug hammer them. I guess Bush fatigue, the economy, or even the war in Iraq had nothing to do with his being elected.
As for the hyperbole in the conclusion to your last post and your being "appalled", where were you (or how appalled were you) when Charlie Rangel publicly ripped Chavez over his attack on Bush:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eX1lBOxoJeU&feature=related
Rangel was right to respond to Chavez, Obama should be as courageous.
As for what he should have done? How about saying "Americans are not terrorists". How about saying "America has sent its soldiers and money to aid central America". Hey, what about "I disagree with Ortega". Nope, we get more of the "it's all about me" crap.
For you wingnutians....
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/americas/story/1006696.html
"But senior U.S. officials cautioned that an upgrade in the relationship -- such as a return of both countries' ambassadors -- would depend on a new tone from Chávez after the summit. U.S. officials say the
''bigger indications'' may be a move by Chávez to make it easier for U.S. diplomats to get visas to get into Venezuela, as well as a toning down of anti-American rhetoric."
''President Chávez has been trying to reach out to President Obama over the last day,'' said Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough. ``
But I know that President Obama recognizes that a smile and a handshake are not enough to indicate a new relationship. There will be bigger indications on whether Venezuela wants a new relationship.''
further...''Given what the president is saying about dialogue with these countries, dialogue has obviously helped when ambassadors are in place,''
farther..."In a plenary meeting later in the day, Chávez told the presidents that ''at least Obama listens and takes notes,'' (stab at the previous US monsters?)
Sample Galeano, the Great Writer Hugo Chavez introduced Obama to . . . http://www.progressive.org/mag_galeano0408
http://mediamatters.org/countyfair/200904200032?f=cf_clips
Obviously, our Prez is being stalked....bunch of zeros trying to make a mountain out of a handshake.
Quote from: Trogdor on April 20, 2009, 04:14:35 PM
So Obama should have left the meeting and not speak. I thought these colors didn't run?
Did you even read what I suggested he should have done? Jeez. Once again:
How about saying "Americans are not terrorists". How about saying "America has sent its soldiers and money to aid central America". Hey, what about "I disagree with Ortega". He also could have delivered a similar rebuke that he gave Iran.
According to Obama, its no big deal:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2009/04/20/2009-04-20_antius_tirades_no_big_deal_sez_obama.html
Well it is to me it is a big deal. As I have stated, I spent time in Honduras (you know, Nicaragua's neighbor) helping poor villagers when Ortega had his Sandinista government and for my and the hundreds of others in my unit trouble we get called terrorists. Many on this forum simply have no clue or understanding as to the contributions made by Americans to that part of the world, perhaps because they were out community organizing rather than community saving.
I thought younwere referring to the fact they walked out. I don't even know why they released a statement other than to clarify why they walked out. I find this political say something just to say it pointless. But some statements could have been said to the contrary officialy. Luckily though there is one more thing for you to complain about and long for the eutopian years from 2000-2008 when the world made sense.
Quote from: guido911 on April 20, 2009, 04:50:54 PM
Did you even read what I suggested he should have done? Jeez. Once again:
How about saying "Americans are not terrorists". How about saying "America has sent its soldiers and money to aid central America". Hey, what about "I disagree with Ortega". He also could have delivered a similar rebuke that he gave Iran.
According to Obama, its no big deal:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2009/04/20/2009-04-20_antius_tirades_no_big_deal_sez_obama.html
Well it is to me it is a big deal. As I have stated, I spent time in Honduras (you know, Nicaragua's neighbor) helping poor villagers when Ortega had his Sandinista government and for my and the hundreds of others in my unit trouble we get called terrorists. Many on this forum simply have no clue or understanding as to the contributions made by Americans to that part of the world, perhaps because they were out community organizing rather than community saving.
1) you should not take things personally
2) you're running up your bad karma number on purpose...aren't you?
3) should you want transfer some over to me, be free.
Quote from: FOTD on April 20, 2009, 05:53:02 PM
1) you should not take things personally
2) you're running up your bad karma number on purpose...aren't you?
3) should you want transfer some over to me, be free.
Again, as I have repeatedly stated, I do not care about karma. Personally, those that do care what others think about them or those that get off on giving people bad karma have the problem. It's like, "I'll show Guido, I'll check the disagree box."
As for taking stuff personally, Ortega will not give me a platform to refute blatant lies about our country. Obama had both a platform and opportunity to stand up for this country and refused.
I remember a certain president who'd been in office about 6 months who met with Vladimir Putin...
"I looked the man in the eye. I was able to get a sense of his soul."
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1390000/images/_1392791_laughingap300.jpg)
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1390000/images/_1392791_hands150.jpg)
Saturday, 16 June, 2001, 23:09 GMT 00:09 UK
Bush and Putin: Best of friends
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1392791.stm
(http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/data?pid=avimage&iid=iaRJVCAnHg6I)
(http://gdb.rferl.org/4485C2EC-9B47-4F44-BEA2-D00CCDE83609_mw800_mh600.jpg)
(http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i151/slemieux66/bush-putin_China.jpg)
Then there's my personal favorite......
(http://www.danwei.org/2008/03/31/bush_saudi1.jpg)
(http://www.gregpalast.com/wp-content/uploads/bushtheking.jpg)
http://www.gregpalast.com/george-of-arabia-better-kiss-your-abe-goodbye/
(http://www.flyingsnail.com/Dahbud/images/vet-bush-coward.jpg)
The president is also our chief diplomat... at the beginning of his term, Obama's being..... well..... very diplomatic... as opposed to the multitude of mixed signals given by his predecessor... President "Bring them on" Bush.
"Speak softly and carry a big stick."
We'll see....
Hey soccer, unless you too have worn the uniform of this country and been under fire, don't you dare call anyone out for not serving. Anyway, last I checked, Obama never served and Biden was himself a draft dodger.
Probably not a good idea to post photos of Bush's blunders with foreign dignataries. You on the left have 8 years worth of photos of Bush. These are from just the first three months:
(http://iusbvision.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/obama-bow-saudi.jpg)
(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01386/obama-chavez_1386798c.jpg)
(http://blog.cleveland.com/world_impact/2009/04/large_Daniel-Ortega-Barack-Obama-Apr19-02.jpg)
And who can forget this moment on Leno:
(http://www.independent.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00152/OBAMA-AFP-GETTY_152543s.jpg)
Oh, and nice attempt at changing the subject in this thread.
Gleedoe, iPLAW left you his karma .....didn't he? :D
How long Lord? How long must we endure, "if you didn't wear the uniform you can't say anything about the military or those who did"?
Please smite anyone who uses that tired old bumper sticker philosophy. I'll give up all my karma if you will. :o
Quote from: waterboy on April 20, 2009, 09:36:57 PM
How long Lord? How long must we endure, "if you didn't wear the uniform you can't say anything about the military or those who did"?
Please smite anyone who uses that tired old bumper sticker philosophy. I'll give up all my karma if you will. :o
It's because in his mind, he's "King Gweed"....or is that "King Dweeb"? I forget.
Quote from: waterboy on April 20, 2009, 09:36:57 PM
How long Lord? How long must we endure, "if you didn't wear the uniform you can't say anything about the military or those who did"?
That was not the point I was making in my response and you damned well know it. The point I was making, for you kindergartners out there, is that if you never served, you have no business being critical of another that had not. Now, how is that remotely close to what you are saying (misrepresenting) in your post? Tell me waterboy.
Quote from: guido911 on April 20, 2009, 09:50:03 PM
That was not the point I was making in my response and you damned well know it. The point I was making, for you kindergartners out there, is that if you never served, you have no business being critical of another that had not. Now, how is that remotely close to what you are saying (misrepresenting) in your post? Tell me waterboy.
The Anti-American book Obama was given as a gift which he called a "nice gesture" is at #2 on Amazon. Although the devil is sure Obama already had it.
Check out what the only book it didn't beat is. We should read it, Guido. Or are you going to dismiss it before reading it? Or is not worth reading cause it discusses US crimes in Latin America?
YES WE DO!
Quote from: guido911 on April 20, 2009, 09:07:29 PM
Hey soccer, unless you too have worn the uniform of this country and been under fire, don't you dare call anyone out for not serving. Anyway, last I checked, Obama never served and Biden was himself a draft dodger.
Don't you EVER PRETEND you are a better man than me or my family, many of whom served in the military, you Obama despising republicanazi. The Vietnam vets I've lived around and seen and met and still have drinks with have never been as partisan and conservative as you continuously pretend them to be........
You had no problems watching people who never served spread propaganda about John Kerry, or go on and on and on ad infinitum about Bill Clinton's deferments... yet conveniently ignored Bush and Cheney.... you right wing nutjob hypocrits are gonna make those 80s-era feminazis Rush Limbaugh once lampooned look reasonable in comparison.
You have called out our democratically elected commander in chief... called him every friggin name in the book.... that makes you a slanderer who seems intent on testing the limits on what any industrialized democracy would call.... wait for it... a traitor.
The only difference between you and Timothy McVeigh is wealth and a Rider truck full of
XXXX.....
You insist on using your military service to justify shameless partisan attacks on any and all liberals.... that also makes you a hypocrit.
If your views and tactics are any indication of the "base" of the post-Bush Republican party, god help the GOP....... we need more RINOs in congress to replace the partisan lunatics who've managed a hostile takeover of the Republican Party, a party I used to have respect for.......
Pantywaste? Yeah, we know the loaded arguments that conservatives have been beating people over the head with since the end of the Vietnam War...... that dog ain't a gonna hunt anymore...
/rant.
RUFFIAN! YOU ROCK!
Here's some more photos culled of great leaders kissing up to their opponents....softens them up for the kill, evidentally.
(http://www.aohell.com/media/deferment.jpg)
Quote from: guido911 on April 20, 2009, 09:50:03 PM
The point I was making, for you kindergartners out there, is that if you never served, you have no business being critical of another that had not.
Boy, that's a tired old canard. Sort of goes against the Constitution, too. Good luck arguing that in court.
Quote from: USRufnex on April 20, 2009, 10:34:25 PM
Don't you EVER PRETEND you are a better man than me or my family, many of whom served in the military, you Obama despising republicanazi. The Vietnam vets I've lived around and seen and met and still have drinks with have never been as partisan and conservative as you continuously pretend them to be........
You had no problems watching people who never served spread propaganda about John Kerry, or go on and on and on ad infinitum about Bill Clinton's deferments... yet conveniently ignored Bush and Cheney.... you right wing nutjob hypocrits are gonna make those 80s-era feminazis Rush Limbaugh once lampooned look reasonable in comparison.
You have called out our democratically elected commander in chief... called him every friggin name in the book.... that makes you a slanderer who seems intent on testing the limits on what any industrialized democracy would call.... wait for it... a traitor.
The only difference between you and Timothy McVeigh is wealth and a Rider truck full of XXXX.....
You insist on using your military service to justify shameless partisan attacks on any and all liberals.... that also makes you a hypocrit.
If your views and tactics are any indication of the "base" of the post-Bush Republican party, god help the GOP....... we need more RINOs in congress to replace the partisan lunatics who've managed a hostile takeover of the Republican Party, a party I used to have respect for.......
Pantywaste? Yeah, we know the loaded arguments that conservatives have been beating people over the head with since the end of the Vietnam War...... that dog ain't a gonna hunt anymore...
/rant.
I do not need to pretend anything when it comes to comparing myself to you or your family. I know where I stand, you apparently have issues with how you see yourself.
Now let's get to the point. Running up to the Iraq war and afterwards, the liberal (your) meme was Bush and Cheney were chickenhawks, let the rich kids fight the war, and blah blah blah. Shoot, I just heard Charles Grodin try to diminish a person that supported the war in Iraq because he never served the military. In addition in 2004, Dan Rather attempted to destroy President Bush's reelection bid by running a fake National Guard story and we also had John Kerry saluting a crowd and "reporting for duty" when he was nominated. Where in the hell were you screaming about how using military service as a means to make a point or to improve credibility was wrong? Lemme tell you, nowhere. You were probably saying, "hell ya" because those statements advance your liberal agenda. How do I know this?; because YOU started this whole row when you posted that picture of a guy protesting Bush's military service. Either that or you and that guy have something in common, "coward".
Now, your pissed because I don't like Obama. Tough sh*t. I think the guy is a weakling and a liar. "Pantywaste"? I am just borrowing that word from what a Brit called him and it's damned funny (and approrpriate). To be fair, I have credited Obama for approving of the taking out of the pirates (although credit for the rescue goes to the SEALs) and for visiting the troops in Iraq. So I am not merciless in my attacks on this guy.
Slander? In the legal realm, the absolute defense to a slander or defamation charge/claim is "truth". Is Obama a liar? Yes, proven repeatedly (earmark reform, no lobbyists in his administration, raising taxes on all but cap and trade). Is Obama cozying up to dictators? Yes, do we need to see his ear-to-ear grin while homeying up to Chavez again and sitting silently while Ortega ripped into America). Is he is in favor of protecting the unborn, even in cases where there was a botched abortion? We know his voting history on Illinois' Born Alive Act. So **** with your slander BS. Hell, did you even read your own post with all your name-calling?
Let's talk about this "traitor" stuff. You know, the fact that I oppose Obama and publicly denounce him makes me a "traitor." My response is simple, FU. Yep RW, put this in the memory bank for rehash later. Who the hell are you to call me a traitor you sex trophy citizen? What have you done to make the world safer. How many times have you been shot at? How many U.S. soldiers have you helped put back together after they sustained traumatic war injuries? None. Comparing to me to McVeigh? Very easy to discredit all veterans that oppose Obama by lumping us into McVeigh-ites. I guess all those vets I saw at tea parties are like McVeigh as well. What a wuss argument. Furthermore, how do you get there? I haven't bombed anyone, I am just exercising my First Amendment rights that YOU have because of the likes of me and not because of anything you have done. If I'm a traitor, you're a coward. Consider this your mean ol' "Red Card" in your parlance.
Do I think I am BETTER than you, no. Do I think me and my wife have done more to make this world a better and safer place than you? Absofreakinlutely. Folks like you that throw stones at those that never served, and had never served themselves, are not only cowards but just plain stupid.
And by the way, knowing a veteran is not the same as being one.
So, the mother of a fallen soldier like Lila Lipscomb, or the son of a vet, a grunt who came back messed up (still is) don't count... sounds about par for the course that this comes from partisan republican convervatives who insist they themselves are the REAL AMERICANS...
Reminds me that the most PATRIOTIC FLAG WAIVING family and friends I knew back in the 70s when I was kid were always the folks who never served.... they instead worked for Rockwell and McDonnell Douglas......
Funny dat.
Using your definitions, guido.... all politicians are liars. Would a military dictatorship be preferable to you?
But if I had posted consistently over the first few months of a new republican's presidency, that the new president is a liar, or an idiot, or a pantywaist.... you'd tell me in no uncertain terms that I wasn't a real American.... and that as a vet, you have the right to say anything you want....
And you've already said you're witholding charitable donations due to your taxes going back to what they were in the 90s..... to use a politically incorrect term, this makes you an "Indian giver"....
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/853/whats-the-origin-of-the-expression-indian-giver
Quote from: USRufnex on April 23, 2009, 09:05:36 AM
Using your definitions, guido.... all politicians are liars. Would a military dictatorship be preferable to you?
But if I had posted consistently over the first few months of a new republican's presidency, that the new president is a liar, or an idiot, or a pantywaist.... you'd tell me in no uncertain terms that I wasn't a real American.... and that as a vet, you have the right to say anything you want....
And you've already said you're witholding charitable donations due to your taxes going back to what they were in the 90s..... to use a politically incorrect term, this makes you an "Indian giver"....
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/853/whats-the-origin-of-the-expression-indian-giver
Stop drinking the bong water.
Quote from: USRufnex on April 23, 2009, 09:05:36 AM
Using your definitions, guido.... all politicians are liars. Would a military dictatorship be preferable to you?
But if I had posted consistently over the first few months of a new republican's presidency, that the new president is a liar, or an idiot, or a pantywaist.... you'd tell me in no uncertain terms that I wasn't a real American.... and that as a vet, you have the right to say anything you want....
And you've already said you're witholding charitable donations due to your taxes going back to what they were in the 90s..... to use a politically incorrect term, this makes you an "Indian giver"....
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/853/whats-the-origin-of-the-expression-indian-giver
While I know that most republican talking heads would definitely call upon those speaking in that way as traitors (assume of course the person in office was a Republican). And even though Guido does channel Limbaugh and Hannity almost directly. I don't think he said such things to other members of the board when Bush was in office (Somebody correct me if I am wrong). It might be a little of a stretch to attribute every Neocon attempt to marginalize dissent back to Guido.