Five Neo-cons Who Were For Syrian Intervention Before They Were Against It

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Five Neo-cons Who Were For Syrian Intervention Before They Were Against It

    Remember...Dems change mind they're "evolving". Repub changes mind they're flip-flopping. We get it Airborne...you hate Repubs/conservatives....we get it already....

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Five Neo-cons Who Were For Syrian Intervention Before They Were Against It

    Stating one's opinion in a fast moving developing story is different than taking a vote; like Kerry and Clinton on Iraq, or like Markey's Obama-like Present vote. 

    ...the man who really counts in the world is the doer,...  TR 1891

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Five Neo-cons Who Were For Syrian Intervention Before They Were Against It

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    [QUOTE]Dems change mind they're "evolving". Repub changes mind they're flip-flopping.



     

    And if we had the search button, we could dig up old threads in which conservatives attack Obama for saying he is "evolving" as a flip-flopping hypocrite. But you probably called those conservatives out with the reverse of the above quoted sentences.....     

    ...right?

    [/QUOTE]

    You're a laugh. I've called out conservatives on a NUMBER of topics. In fact I've defended Obama when cons complain about his vacations. I also backed Obama on bin Laden when some cons were negative about it. You're the LAST person who should call me out in regards to going after my own "side" if you will. When you start doing it to Dems/Libs then you can have a leg to stand on. Until then...stiffle yourself

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Five Neo-cons Who Were For Syrian Intervention Before They Were Against It

    Heh, neo-cons. You're so funny.

    --

    Think for yourself, question authority.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName9. Show UserName9's posts

    Re: Five Neo-cons Who Were For Syrian Intervention Before They Were Against It

     

    Its a simple formula:  Whatever the Obama administration puts forth, the conservatives will hate and spare no expense to demonize. Facts and history are of little importance to them.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Five Neo-cons Who Were For Syrian Intervention Before They Were Against It

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    [QUOTE]When you start doing it to Dems/Libs then you can have a leg to stand on. Until then...stiffle yourself



    You know I already have disagreed with every accused librul here on a number of issues. Thanks for lying, though.

     

    And no, no need to issue a typical dishonest demand that I dig up 100 old threads to "prove it" to you.

     

     

     

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    I've called out conservatives on a NUMBER of topics. In fact I've defended Obama when cons complain about his vacations. I also backed Obama on bin Laden when some cons were negative about it. You're the LAST person who should call me out in regards to going after my own "side" if you will. When you start doing it to Dems/Libs then you can have a leg to stand on. Until then...stiffle yourself

     

    [/QUOTE]


     

    No, you haven't called conservatives out for hypocrisy.  You only do that to accused libruls, even when conservatives here are guilty of exactly the same thing on the same topic.


    You disagree with skeeter when he says something idiotic and false about health care, sure. And you chime in neutrally that you don't see a problem with Obama taking vacations. Sure, that much is true.

    But you don't play this asinine hypocrisy-detection game with BDC conservatives. You just use it to try to get a reaction out of libruls.

    So, you've been called out for it (redux #1000).

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Don't look now but you're being as dishonest as you can be. Nothing new there. Carry on

     

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Five Neo-cons Who Were For Syrian Intervention Before They Were Against It

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    [QUOTE]Don't look now but you're being as dishonest as you can be. Nothing new there. Carry on

     

    What's that clever line you came up with recently? Oh right.

     

    [QUOTE]That's what I thought.[/QUOTE]

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Wasn't looking to be clever. Just stating a fact. 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Five Neo-cons Who Were For Syrian Intervention Before They Were Against It

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     

    Its a simple formula:  Whatever the Obama administration puts forth, the conservatives will hate and spare no expense to demonize. Facts and history are of little importance to them.



    I think the formula is even simpler:  What ever Obama screws up creates a resistance for people to trust him in the future.

    Five years in:  Dead in the water economy, the Middle East in flames, and a health care system about to be destroyed by the heavy hand of government.

    It is about trust, and Obama hasn't demonstrated or built a record that tells us that we should trust him.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Re: Five Neo-cons Who Were For Syrian Intervention Before They Were Against It

    skeeter .... don't play poker with Obama

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BilltheKat. Show BilltheKat's posts

    Re: Five Neo-cons Who Were For Syrian Intervention Before They Were Against It

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]Dems change mind they're "evolving". Repub changes mind they're flip-flopping.



     

     

    And if we had the search button, we could dig up old threads in which conservatives attack Obama for saying he is "evolving" as a flip-flopping hypocrite. But you probably called those conservatives out with the reverse of the above quoted sentences.....     

    ...right?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You're a laugh. I've called out conservatives on a NUMBER of topics. In fact I've defended Obama when cons complain about his vacations. I also backed Obama on bin Laden when some cons were negative about it. You're the LAST person who should call me out in regards to going after my own "side" if you will. When you start doing it to Dems/Libs then you can have a leg to stand on. Until then...stiffle yourself

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    No, this is a boldfaced lie. Don't know how many times I've ask the "where's pinkeye to call out this hypocrisy?" question when some con spouts out some nonsense only to find nothing but an echo chamber. Always conveniently absent. 

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Five Neo-cons Who Were For Syrian Intervention Before They Were Against It

    In response to BilltheKat's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]Dems change mind they're "evolving". Repub changes mind they're flip-flopping.



     

     

     

    And if we had the search button, we could dig up old threads in which conservatives attack Obama for saying he is "evolving" as a flip-flopping hypocrite. But you probably called those conservatives out with the reverse of the above quoted sentences.....     

    ...right?

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You're a laugh. I've called out conservatives on a NUMBER of topics. In fact I've defended Obama when cons complain about his vacations. I also backed Obama on bin Laden when some cons were negative about it. You're the LAST person who should call me out in regards to going after my own "side" if you will. When you start doing it to Dems/Libs then you can have a leg to stand on. Until then...stiffle yourself

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    No, this is a boldfaced lie. Don't know how many times I've ask the "where's pinkeye to call out this hypocrisy?" question when some con spouts out some nonsense only to find nothing but an echo chamber. Always conveniently absent. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Hahahaha....do you read every thread on BDC? Neither do I. Nice try. Now go burrow back up WDYWN's backside.

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Five Neo-cons Who Were For Syrian Intervention Before They Were Against It

    Too many of the neo-cons get their panties in a bunch and report posts if I use the much more apt "whacko wingnut" tag.

    Tell you what, look up the prefix neo and come back and report what you've found. Then, explain how this applies to the people that you apply it to. I'll be waiting.

    And you can call me whatever your little heart desires, it's perfectly fine.

    --

    Think for yourself, question authority.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Five Neo-cons Who Were For Syrian Intervention Before They Were Against It

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    He doesn't call conservatives out for "hypocrisy" because, due to the fact that he doesn't read "every" thread, he miraculously has only seen liberal hypocrisy.

    Over several years.

    LOL. Yeah now that is a "nice try".

    Talk about dishonesty.....  

     

     



    Of course that isn't what I said...but you continue with your lies. 

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Five Neo-cons Who Were For Syrian Intervention Before They Were Against It

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    [QUOTE]I think the formula is even simpler:  What ever Obama screws up creates a resistance for people to trust him in the future.

     

    So basically, Obama screwed up so bad that if he issued a public service announcement reminding people to breath, Rs would be justified in holding their breath until they pass out?

    [/QUOTE]

    I guess you think everyone is listening to his administrations constant prattling about obesity.

    government does not need to remind us to breathe, just like they don't need to remind us to not eat so much.  They just need to butt out.

    as this relates to Syria, Obama has spent his political capital telling us that this infitesimally small attack will somehow get Syria in line.  I guess my point would be, if this is such a great strategy, why doesn't Obama threaten Iran with an infitesimally small attack that will not accomplish anything, but it will send a message?

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hansoribrother. Show Hansoribrother's posts

    Re: Five Neo-cons Who Were For Syrian Intervention Before They Were Against It

    Strange that a leftwing lunatic would use the same lingo that got the current Sec'y of State in a mess while running for President a few years back. And who did he lose to? The dumbest President ever.

    And how is John Kerry doing now as Sec'y of State? Doing his best to make Hillary Clinton look great.

    What a bone head Kerry is. 

    The Democrats are proving once again that they are not to be trusted defending the country.

    And in a few minutes we get to hear the man that lied to us about his healthcare plan, Benghazi and several other things I have no desire to recount

    I mean, really. He sent out half the cabinet and sacrificed their credbility to deal with Benghazi - which happend a year ago tomorrow along with attacks on 20 other US embassy facilities. 

    We are supposed to belive him? He is a forking liar. He'll say whatever it takes to make him look good, get votes and save face. Yeah, something like he never set a red line in Syria over chemical weapons. It was the rest of the world and Congress that did that and forced him to act like a dope.

    And the leftwing losers complain about Bush lies??? Did you learn anything??? It isn't about party it is about power.  

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Five Neo-cons Who Were For Syrian Intervention Before They Were Against It

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Stating one's opinion in a fast moving developing story is different than taking a vote; like Kerry and Clinton on Iraq, or like Markey's Obama-like Present vote. 

    ...the man who really counts in the world is the doer,...  TR 1891

     




    Heh, heh, heh...ya of course it is.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Talk is cheap; a vote is putting your reputation on the line,... unless all you can do is utter present.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share