NO MO O IS TOTALLY OFF HIS GOURD (IMNSHO)

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: NO MO O IS TOTALLY OFF HIS GOURD (IMNSHO)

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     


    If that's how you show you care then I guess I have to take your word for it...yikes!

    [/QUOTE]

    People who need help respond differently to different methods of engagement.

    And yet I hope for a positive outcome in spite of my reservations.

     

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: NO MO O IS TOTALLY OFF HIS GOURD (IMNSHO)

    In response to jmel's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Please advise something (anything) that has "indeed improved"?

    Gas, food costs, debt, deficit, unemployment (8.3% today), 393,000 claims last week, 370,000 claims this week,housing (1.3 million foreclosures in Oct), layoffs at Ford, Hewlett Packard, Texas Instruments, Boeing, Siemens, healthcare, al Qaeda attacks, divided country, fiscal cliff nightmare? Give me one "improvement"....................

    Oh yah........bin Laden is dead and GM is alive  (pssst, alQaeda is STRONGER and GM will be seeing more bailout dough, but don`t tell anyone)

     [/QUOTE]

    Cool your pits, now.  I didn't say there were no problems, so your rant is out-of-line.

    The "fiscal cliff" aside (which cannot be blamed solely upon either Congress OR POTUS), nearly every significant economic indicator today is better than it was at the nadir of the recession.

    Also, there is NO question that the current debate in D.C. (the cliff, sequestration, taxation) is a direct result of trying to rectify the damage caused by fiscal imbalances incurred over the last 12 years or so (some would argue longer).

    Al Qaeda is definitely NOT stronger today than it was four years ago; actually, it's split into a few different factions with more regional ties.  (And this is despite the hornet's nest that was unleashed primarily with the Iraq invasion.)

     

     

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

    Re: NO MO O IS TOTALLY OFF HIS GOURD (IMNSHO)

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     If that's how you show you care then I guess I have to take your word for it...yikes!

    [/QUOTE]

    People who need help respond differently to different methods of engagement.

    And yet I hope for a positive outcome in spite of my reservations.

     [/QUOTE]


    Ok, whatever.

     [/QUOTE]


    Indeed.

     

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: NO MO O IS TOTALLY OFF HIS GOURD (IMNSHO)

     

     [/QUOTE]

    Cool your pits, now.  I didn't say there were no problems, so your rant is out-of-line.

    The "fiscal cliff" aside (which cannot be blamed solely upon either Congress OR POTUS), nearly every significant economic indicator today is better than it was at the nadir of the recession.

    Also, there is NO question that the current debate in D.C. (the cliff, sequestration, taxation) is a direct result of trying to rectify the damage caused by fiscal imbalances incurred over the last 12 years or so (some would argue longer).

    Al Qaeda is definitely NOT stronger today than it was four years ago; actually, it's split into a few different factions with more regional ties.  (And this is despite the hornet's nest that was unleashed primarily with the Iraq invasion.)

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    al Qaeda is "NOT" stronger? 

    Tell that to Chris Stevens, 3 other dead Americans and their families. 

    You said "indeed improved", not me.  Therefore my statements are right IN LINE.  Nothing is "improved" and it`s about to get worse.  The incompetent has no idea what the heck to do. He`ll probaly be off to Hawaii for a couple of weeks with a $5 million price tag for us.........oooops.

    [/QUOTE]

    Al Qaeda planned and executed the Benghazi attack?  You have no proof of that.? Some shadowy group "affiliated" with Al Qaeda took credit.  That is proof of not much at all.  

    Get past your ideological bias and look at the real facts.   The Al Qaeda leadership has been decimated and the number of attacks has graually petered out.  It is NOTHING compared to what was going on when they were making attacks outside the Middle East and at American forces in Iraq during the Bush years.  Get a grip on reality man. 

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: NO MO O IS TOTALLY OFF HIS GOURD (IMNSHO)

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I must have missed where that "weakened" al Qaeda killed Americans before?
    Some one needs to get a "grip on reality"............but it ain`t me.

    Ex-CIA chief Petraeus testifies Benghazi attack was al Qaeda-linked terrorism By the CNN Wire Staff

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Four people get killed by a group that may be "linked" to Al Qaeda and you think that compares to the many, many attacks by actual Al Qaeda forces in and out of the Middle East during the Bush years?  Facts are not your strong suit obviously.  Rant on mindlessly.  But you impress no one but fellow ranters.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: NO MO O IS TOTALLY OFF HIS GOURD (IMNSHO)

    In response to jmel's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jmel's comment:

    I must have missed where that "weakened" al Qaeda killed Americans before. Some one needs to get a "grip on reality"............but it ain`t me. Ex-CIA chief Petraeus testifies Benghazi attack was al Qaeda-linked terrorism By the CNN Wire Staff



    A stunningly brilliant one-factor analysis.

     


    4 Americans were killed by a terrorist group that isn't Al Queda. Therefore, Al Queda is stronger than ever.

     

    Ooooooooook. So, like, stronger than when they killed 4,000 Americans or......... the Cole?

     

     

    Nevermind. I know you just wanted to b!tch about Obama.

    [/QUOTE]


    You`re missing the point (big surprise).  4000 Americans were killed by al Qaeda in 2001.  Since then no Americans have been killed by al Qaeda until Sep 11, 2012 (2 months ago). YES, it was al Qaeda, stop lying.  The incompetent had spent 1 year bragging that al Qaeda was "on the run" and low and behold, they show up and kill 4 Americans.  That narrative would have hurt his campaign if it wasn`t covered up with a big lie.

    Pay attention.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Are you suggesting that the Al Qeada in Iraq never killed any Americans or that the Al Qeada in Afghanistan never killed any Americans?

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from dcr400m. Show dcr400m's posts

    Re: NO MO O IS TOTALLY OFF HIS GOURD (IMNSHO)

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    "How about the 63% of Democrats that thought that the Bush adminstration had something to do with 911?"

    Something to do is broad enough to include failure to go after before the attacks, a charge fairly aimed at Clinton as well.

    Caused or conspired to allow is completely different and would be crazy. And I do know a number of people thought that as well.

     

     

     

     

    "Or........the 65% of Democrats that believed Sara Palin actually did say, "I can see Russia from my house""

     

    LOL. Man, do you really want to go through this again? Allright, so people who thought she said those words were careless and jumped on a SNL bit.

    The trouble is that in this case, the SNL bit was for all intents and purposes accurate. She cited the facts that (1) in the right conditions, one can see Russia from "land here in Alaska" (meaning a cold crappy Island no one goes to), and (2) Russian planes sometimes approach Alaskan airspace as proof that she has experience in foreign policy.

    "my house" vs. "land here" is completely irrelevant when you look at the sheer idiocy of what she said!

     

     

     

     

     

    "the 53% in exit polls a mere 4 weeks ago,that still blame Bush for the disaster that this incompetent fool has given us for the last 4 -years?"

    I agree that the mortgage crisis and financial crises were not Bush's exclusive fault. Both had been building for more time. I could put more blame initially on Democrats for mortgage crises given the "home ownership society" push (of which Reps also contributed) and more blame on Republicans for the financial crisis (deregulation, which Dems failed to sufficiently fight).

    But Bush did start the war in Iraq, which should have been fought to its end in 1991, with much better results. But starting the war wasn't the issue. Iraq didn't have to be a disaster.

    Iraq became a disaster because of the sheer incompetence and profound naivety of an administration that thought if you just walked in and killed Saddam, and did nothing to establish an alternate power structure immediately, that:

    - The Iraqis, who had been severely tortured as a people, would immediately form a funcitoning government.

    - That there would be massive looting that set them back a good decade.

    - That disbanding the Iraqi army wouldn't result in the sudden unemployment of 400,000 people, thrown into the chaos.

    - That Sunnis, Shia's and Kurds would suddenly all hug and make up; rather than fighting one another now that the only thing worse than eachother was now out of power.

    - That all these things and more would not push a huge amount of Iraqis towards sympathzing with incoming Al Queda and other groups.

    YES I blame Bush for a trillion+ on Iraq.

    YES I blame Bush for trillions+ unfunded prescription plan.

    YES I blame Bush for trillions of dollars in missing revenue resuling from a war time tax cut.

    Anyone who doesn't is a damned fool, im-not at all humble-o.

    None of those things stopped costing money when Obama took office. Why do you think they are no longer Bush's fault?

    Oh and I would just love to see what you'd be saying if Obama ordered immediate full evacuation of Iraq and Afghanistan upon taking office. Especially if Al Queda strongly re-established itself in both places as a result, and then attacked us successfully.

    Yeah ... I'm sure that wouldn't be Obama's fault. But now it's his fault he didn't do that because it cost money not to?

    Right.

     

     

     

    Bottom line: If you look at the actual numbers for the costs of the wars and programs Bush started, and compare them to new spending under Obama, Obama's new spending is way lower.

    [/QUOTE]

    Shuld a President and his administration fly $8+ billion - cash in plastic - watch it disappear and no one is punished? Of course not, it was Iraqui "stimulus" (HA!)

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from dcr400m. Show dcr400m's posts

    Re: NO MO O IS TOTALLY OFF HIS GOURD (IMNSHO)

    In response to jmel's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jmel's comment:

    I must have missed where that "weakened" al Qaeda killed Americans before. Some one needs to get a "grip on reality"............but it ain`t me. Ex-CIA chief Petraeus testifies Benghazi attack was al Qaeda-linked terrorism By the CNN Wire Staff



    A stunningly brilliant one-factor analysis.

     


    4 Americans were killed by a terrorist group that isn't Al Queda. Therefore, Al Queda is stronger than ever.

     

    Ooooooooook. So, like, stronger than when they killed 4,000 Americans or......... the Cole?

     

     

    Nevermind. I know you just wanted to b!tch about Obama.

    [/QUOTE]


    You`re missing the point (big surprise).  4000 Americans were killed by al Qaeda in 2001.  Since then no Americans have been killed by al Qaeda until Sep 11, 2012 (2 months ago). YES, it was al Qaeda, stop lying.  The incompetent had spent 1 year bragging that al Qaeda was "on the run" and low and behold, they show up and kill 4 Americans.  That narrative would have hurt his campaign if it wasn`t covered up with a big lie.

    Pay attention.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I just wish you wingnuts actually cared about the dead victims - instead we are all aware of your Obama derangement syndrome driving you to create a false equivalence with Bush's failure that led to 9/11 - only McLame, Little Lindsay. Kelly Cry-Ayotte and wingnuts like yourself continue this silliness - maybe logic will finally reclaim your addled brains (Naaaaaahhhhhhh!)

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from dcr400m. Show dcr400m's posts

    Re: NO MO O IS TOTALLY OFF HIS GOURD (IMNSHO)

    In response to jmel's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jmel's comment:

    I must have missed where that "weakened" al Qaeda killed Americans before. Some one needs to get a "grip on reality"............but it ain`t me. Ex-CIA chief Petraeus testifies Benghazi attack was al Qaeda-linked terrorism By the CNN Wire Staff



    A stunningly brilliant one-factor analysis.

     


    4 Americans were killed by a terrorist group that isn't Al Queda. Therefore, Al Queda is stronger than ever.

     

    Ooooooooook. So, like, stronger than when they killed 4,000 Americans or......... the Cole?

     

     

    Nevermind. I know you just wanted to b!tch about Obama.

    [/QUOTE]


    You`re missing the point (big surprise).  4000 Americans were killed by al Qaeda in 2001.  Since then no Americans have been killed by al Qaeda until Sep 11, 2012 (2 months ago). YES, it was al Qaeda, stop lying.  The incompetent had spent 1 year bragging that al Qaeda was "on the run" and low and behold, they show up and kill 4 Americans.  That narrative would have hurt his campaign if it wasn`t covered up with a big lie.

    Pay attention.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I just wish you wingnuts actually cared about the dead victims - instead we are all aware of your Obama derangement syndrome driving you to create a false equivalence with Bush's failure that led to 9/11 - only McLame, Little Lindsay. Kelly Cry-Ayotte and wingnuts like yourself continue this silliness - maybe logic will finally reclaim your addled brains (Naaaaaahhhhhhh!)

     

    http://snd.sc/ZPlFK8

     http://snd.sc/QcQMPt

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share