+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 6 First 12345 ... Last
  1. #26
    Forum Member
    DennisTheMenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC/Northern Virginia
    Posts
    3,717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Not true. Congress sent legislation to the idiot in chief providing for a specific timeline to withdraw from Iraq. The moron in the Oval Office vetoed the bill proclaiming himself as the "decider."

    He's already starting to do a PR campaign to temper people's expectations on the "surge" and its effectiveness when Petraeus gives his report in September.
    There was no solution to the problem in that bill, just a cut off of the problem. There was no compromise in the bill either. Provide a moral solution to the problem not just a cut and run which would be immoral.
    Be for Peace, but don't be for the Enemy!
    -Big Russ

    Learn from the mistakes of others; you won't live long enough to make them all yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by nyckftbl View Post
    LOL....dont you people have anything else to do besides b*tch about our b*tching?

  2. #27
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,302

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    As opposed to the morons who refused to come up with a real solution rather than sending a bill they knew was going to be vetoed? A bill they knew they didn't have the votes to override a veto?

    I'm fine with people declaring people morons no matter what my stance, just so long as theydo so with equal opportunity.

    Quote Originally Posted by DennisTheMenace
    There was no solution to the problem in that bill, just a cut off of the problem. There was no compromise in the bill either. Provide a moral solution to the problem not just a cut and run which would be immoral.
    Sure there was a solution. The timetable would have given the Iraq government an incentive to be ready to take control of their country and its affairs. As it stands right now there is no incentive to aggresively start shouldering the burden since they know we are there backing them up. We've been involved in Iraq almost as long as our effort in WW II. How much time do they need? And from what I've read from both sides, the Iraqi citizenry would like us to leave post haste.

    As far as offering a bill with no compromises. What compromise did the WH offer so as to avoid a veto?
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  3. #28
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Not true. Congress sent legislation to the idiot in chief providing for a specific timeline to withdraw from Iraq. The moron in the Oval Office vetoed the bill proclaiming himself as the "decider."

    He's already starting to do a PR campaign to temper people's expectations on the "surge" and its effectiveness when Petraeus gives his report in September.
    Well, matter of factly, as Commander in Chief, he is the "decider." Maybe not a great one, sure, but there is a reason why we have one guy in charge of the military and not 536 (535 + the president). It's worked that way for over 200 years, and no one has seen fit to change it.

    However, should Congress ever decide to alter the powers of the executive branch through a legislative process, that's another story entirely. All they have to do is propose a bill that expressly denies a president's ability to call for a deployment of troops without a Declaration of War, and the bill will then go through all the proper channels to go into effect (or perhaps be shot down), as thousands of other bills before it have done.

    But, I do not see this happening, because there are too many in Congress who would like those same executive military powers should they ever get voted into the White House, especially if their party is the minority on Capitol Hill.

    Furthermore, would you not expect any president to start a PR campaign to promote something he or she still believes in? Like it or not, these are not underhanded tactics (and certainly not new tactics).

    Maybe we'll see a party change in 2008, but don't expect a change in political tactics. Both sides swing at the same baseball when they're up to bat. Don't expect a big sigh of relief from me.
    "Yeah, but as I've always said, this country has A.D.D." - Denis Leary

    http://www.lettertogop.com/

  4. #29
    Forum Member
    FireCapt1951retired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Between here and there
    Posts
    790

    Default

    Politician = HYPOCRITE

    Party affiliation makes no difference.

  5. #30
    Forum Member
    DaSharkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Posts
    4,713

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FireLt1951 View Post
    Politician = HYPOCRITE

    Party affiliation makes no difference.
    There you go. Nothing more needs to be said. Although I hardly doubt that this statement will kill the thread.
    "Too many people spend money they haven't earned, to buy things they don't want, to impress people they don't like." Will Rogers

    The borrower is slave to the lender. Proverbs 22:7 - Debt free since 10/5/2009.

    "No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session." - New York Judge Gideon Tucker

    "As Americans we must always remember that we all have a common enemy, an enemy that is dangerous, powerful and relentless. I refer, of course, to the federal government." - Dave Barry

    www.daveramsey.com www.clarkhoward.com www.heritage.org

  6. #31
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    608

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HotTrotter View Post
    Yup, Bush initiated this war with the backing of 99 out of 100 Senators. And a huge majority of the congressmen. Bush didn't do it alone. Eve nthe public supported the war back then. Of course we had just come out of the senseless devastation of the former Yugoslav republic where very few troops were killed. They all expected the same thing to happen in Iraq especially after the victory in Desert Storm. It is funny to see all of the turn coats that show up when the going gets tough. Hillary and Obama were in favor of the war, but now they are not. They are both too wishy washy for me. A couple of opportunist he will say what their people want to hear just to get elected. Those two are just as scary as Gore and Kerry, you just don't know where they stand on the issues.
    Thank you, Thank you, Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    That's exactly the point of the intitial post. Gore condemning Bush I for not being hard enough on Saddam. He states emphatically that Saddam is seeking nukes, has strong ties to terrorists, is willing to use his arsonel of chemical weapons, etc... Now he blasts President Bush's reasoning for going to war with Iraq in full contradiction of his very statements in 1992.

    They'll say anything to attempt to destroy those in their way, no matter the cost to our country, and with no backbone to stick with and stand by their stances. It's tough to even get them to define their true stance on the issues.

    Wait one, let me take a poll before taking a stand. LOL

  7. #32
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    608

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DennisTheMenace View Post
    Huh? War in Iraq started in 2003, Obama sworn into office in 2005. How did he vote against going to war in Iraq when he did not join the Senate until we had already been there for almost two years?

    Here is the problem, both sides, from Joe-blow on the street to Senator Whatshisface and Candidate Doubletalk are stuck in the blaim and defend game rather than coming up with a realistic and morally legit solution to the situation at hand. We need to end the violance in Iraq and come get our folks home and on to other jobs in the real war on terror. We can't just pack up and leave the violance behind, that would be immoral. Neither should we accept the status quo and just try to keep things from getting any worse.

    If these folks are smart enough to get themselves into office, they should be smart enough to present somesort of reasonably workable solutions, rather than just to blame or defend the sitution.
    Thanks for that!!!!!

    A big Ditto!!!!!!!

  8. #33
    Forum Member
    DennisTheMenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC/Northern Virginia
    Posts
    3,717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FireLt1951 View Post
    Politician = HYPOCRITE

    Party affiliation makes no difference.
    Blanket statements usually fail when held up to real facts.

    Frankly you will find tons of politicians who are not hypocrites at all, they are some of the worst because they are so stuck on their own stance that they refuse to compromise and get anything positively done because folks like you will throw that hypocracy label at them. Some of our best statesmen were called "hypocrites" at the time. Some of our worst politicians were not hypocrites they were just out and out liers or to stuborn to adjust.
    Be for Peace, but don't be for the Enemy!
    -Big Russ

    Learn from the mistakes of others; you won't live long enough to make them all yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by nyckftbl View Post
    LOL....dont you people have anything else to do besides b*tch about our b*tching?

  9. #34
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,302

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nail200 View Post
    Thank you, Thank you, Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    That's exactly the point of the intitial post. Gore condemning Bush I for not being hard enough on Saddam. He states emphatically that Saddam is seeking nukes, has strong ties to terrorists, is willing to use his arsonel of chemical weapons, etc... Now he blasts President Bush's reasoning for going to war with Iraq in full contradiction of his very statements in 1992.
    Nails. Do you make this up? Yes Gore blasted Bush the smarter for not pursuing Hussein. By the time Bush the idiot invaded Iraq, Hussein had been defanged via UN inspections. Your desire to draw a nexus of hypocrisy via ten year old statements is seriously flawed to all but the truly blind.

    I could easily make the same case that your hero Bush the idiot is a hypocrite because he ran on a platform of fiscal conservatism, shrinking government, and a non-interventionist foreign policy that specifically was opposed to nation building. Which one of those has he succeeded in fulfilling?
    Last edited by scfire86; 06-15-2007 at 09:03 PM.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  10. #35
    Forum Member
    FireCapt1951retired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Between here and there
    Posts
    790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DennisTheMenace View Post
    Blanket statements usually fail when held up to real facts.

    Frankly you will find tons of politicians who are not hypocrites at all, they are some of the worst because they are so stuck on their own stance that they refuse to compromise and get anything positively done because folks like you will throw that hypocracy label at them. Some of our best statesmen were called "hypocrites" at the time. Some of our worst politicians were not hypocrites they were just out and out liers or to stuborn to adjust.
    In todays context I don't agree at all. I haven't seen or heard a politician that won't bend with the wind or the poll (although there are politicians I don't have much if any knowledge of), which ever suits their need at the time. They rarely if ever actually stick to firm beliefs. Compromise is a good thing but polls are what drives the vast majority of today's politicians. Just my opinion and no one needs to agree.

  11. #36
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,302

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FireLt1951 View Post
    Compromise is a good thing but polls are what drives the vast majority of today's politicians. Just my opinion and no one needs to agree.
    I won't disagree. In fact I agree wholeheartedly. I read somewhere (so might not be true) that Gore and Bush spent more money on focus groups and pollsters than the combined races of the previous six elections. Again it might be false, but it wouldn't surprise me.

    Any candidate who claims to not be influenced by polls is a liar. If they aren't lying, you can be assured their chances of getting elected are somewhere between slimski and noneski.
    Last edited by scfire86; 06-15-2007 at 09:04 PM.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  12. #37
    Forum Member
    ThNozzleman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Jefferson City, TN
    Posts
    4,339

    Default

    Nails. Do you make this up?
    Of course he doesn't...he lets Rush Limbaugh do it for him.

  13. #38
    Forum Member
    DennisTheMenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC/Northern Virginia
    Posts
    3,717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I read somewhere (so might not be true) that Gore and Bush spent more money on focus groups and pollsters than the combined races of the previous six elections. Again it might be false, but it wouldn't surprise me.
    Probably close to the truth, but it is also probably more of an indication of the work that goes into a modern poll and the prices the pollsters charge than of anything else. To get a good and acurate poll, it costs a lot for the professional pollsters rather than just the college kids calling for minimum wag and than a bunch more for a good scientific analysis. Polls are getting a lot better, but they take up more and more work to get right.
    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Any candidate who claims to not be influenced by polls is a liar. If they aren't lying, you can be assured their chances of getting elected are somewhere between slimski and noneski.
    To a large degree isn't that what we want in a democracy? Don't we want our officials to do what we want 98% of the time. It is that other 2% of the time that seperates the Statesman from the Politician.
    Be for Peace, but don't be for the Enemy!
    -Big Russ

    Learn from the mistakes of others; you won't live long enough to make them all yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by nyckftbl View Post
    LOL....dont you people have anything else to do besides b*tch about our b*tching?

  14. #39
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,302

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DennisTheMenace View Post
    get right.
    To a large degree isn't that what we want in a democracy? Don't we want our officials to do what we want 98% of the time. It is that other 2% of the time that seperates the Statesman from the Politician.
    I wouldn't disagree. Where I laugh out loud is when a certain president's supporters claim he isn't influenced by polls.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  15. #40
    Forum Member
    DennisTheMenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC/Northern Virginia
    Posts
    3,717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I wouldn't disagree. Where I laugh out loud is when a certain president's supporters claim he isn't influenced by polls.
    The President's detractors don't always get their story straight though. They say he is not doing what the people want, and then say he is governing by poll numbers. They say he is an idiot, then claim he has these scams to help his supports that would take a genius to pull off. It is nothing but stupid mud slinging, attack the person rather than the ideas. Attack the ideas but off up no reasonable solution. It is why this coming election seems to be a toss up. There are monetary front runners, but no one with a real vision and ideas out there yet.
    Be for Peace, but don't be for the Enemy!
    -Big Russ

    Learn from the mistakes of others; you won't live long enough to make them all yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by nyckftbl View Post
    LOL....dont you people have anything else to do besides b*tch about our b*tching?

  16. #41
    Banned

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    In my house
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DennisTheMenace View Post
    ....To a large degree isn't that what we want in a democracy? Don't we want our officials to do what we want 98% of the time. It is that other 2% of the time that seperates the Statesman from the Politician.
    I would disagre witht hat 100%. And that is part of our problem. I want our leaders to be leaders and not swayed by public opinion. I want a leader who can make the right choice versus the popular choice. Then again, I realize that 85% to 90% of the voting public is uninformed.

    Want to have some fun? Pick 3 or 4 issues. Then research the leading candidates. Then start asking people if they know where people stand on those issues. You will get a bunch of shoulder shrugs and I don't knows.

  17. #42
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,302

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HotTrotter View Post
    Then again, I realize that 85% to 90% of the voting public is uninformed.
    I'm glad that statement wasn't made by a liberal elitist. I would agree completely. One need only look at the last two presidential elections for confirmation.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  18. #43
    Banned

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    In my house
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I'm glad that statement wasn't made by a liberal elitist. I would agree completely. One need only look at the last two presidential elections for confirmation.
    I agree 100%, how else can you explain Al Gore getting so many votes...

  19. #44
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,302

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HotTrotter View Post
    I agree 100%, how else can you explain Al Gore getting so many votes...
    Gore could've gone into the Oval Office and slept for eight years and done a better job than the current idiot in chief.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  20. #45
    Banned

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    In my house
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Gore could've gone into the Oval Office and slept for eight years and done a better job than the current idiot in chief.
    Ohh I highly doubt that. His arguments that he invented the internet and that there is man made global warming makes one question his ability to think logically and clearly. What is really funny is that the public doesn't believe the congress is doing all that good of a job as well.

    And then there are the empty promises of our Democratic legislative leaders http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/...rks/index.html

  21. #46
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,302

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HotTrotter View Post
    Ohh I highly doubt that. His arguments that he invented the internet and that there is man made global warming makes one question his ability to think logically and clearly. What is really funny is that the public doesn't believe the congress is doing all that good of a job as well.
    Thanks for bringing up Al Gore and inventing the Internet; please see MediaMatters regarding the details on “Al Gore inventing the Internet.” Vint Cerf, the inventor of the world wide web, has stated that Al Gore’s work in Congress to help fund the development of the Internet makes him a “father of the Internet.”

    At least Gore knows it’s “the Internet” and not the “Internets” and I don’t think Gore uses “The Google.”

    Media perpetuates myth that Gore claimed to have invented the internet.

    Regarding global warming. I look at this way. If Gore and all the other climatologists are wrong the worst thing that happens is we have an ozone layer intact and cleaner air. If the detractors like yourself are wrong, the ozone layer burns off and everything on planet Earth dies.....slowly.

    It's a pretty easy choice for me.

    Quote Originally Posted by HotTrotter View Post
    And then there are the empty promises of our Democratic legislative leaders http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/...rks/index.html
    I've decided to take your lead and not believe anything I read in the liberal media.
    Last edited by scfire86; 06-19-2007 at 01:34 PM.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  22. #47
    MembersZone Subscriber
    voyager9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Southern NJ
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GodSendRain View Post
    However, should Congress ever decide to alter the powers of the executive branch through a legislative process, that's another story entirely. All they have to do is propose a bill that expressly denies a president's ability to call for a deployment of troops without a Declaration of War,
    Don't we already have something similar with the War Powers Act?

    I haven't looked at it in a while but my understanding is that it grants the Executive the power to put troops into harms way without a Declaration of War by Congress. The President then has to go before Congress within a certain amount of time(30 days?) and ask for a DoW, or extension. Congress then has to Declare War, offer an extension(90 days?), or the President has to withdraw troops from harm.

    If I'm remembering the above correctly, then I don't understand why Congress is has to go through such hubub with the Funding bill. GW should be appearing in front of them every N-days to request extensions as required by the War Powers Act. All Congress has to do is refuse to grant the extension to force troops to be withdrawn.
    So you call this your free country
    Tell me why it costs so much to live
    -3dd

  23. #48
    Forum Member
    DennisTheMenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC/Northern Virginia
    Posts
    3,717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by voyager9 View Post
    Don't we already have something similar with the War Powers Act?

    I haven't looked at it in a while but my understanding is that it grants the Executive the power to put troops into harms way without a Declaration of War by Congress. The President then has to go before Congress within a certain amount of time(30 days?) and ask for a DoW, or extension. Congress then has to Declare War, offer an extension(90 days?), or the President has to withdraw troops from harm.

    If I'm remembering the above correctly, then I don't understand why Congress is has to go through such hubub with the Funding bill. GW should be appearing in front of them every N-days to request extensions as required by the War Powers Act. All Congress has to do is refuse to grant the extension to force troops to be withdrawn.
    They don't have to "Declare War", they just have to authorize deployment, which they did in the Fall of 2002. Troops remain in Iraq with in the legal parameters of US Law.
    Be for Peace, but don't be for the Enemy!
    -Big Russ

    Learn from the mistakes of others; you won't live long enough to make them all yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by nyckftbl View Post
    LOL....dont you people have anything else to do besides b*tch about our b*tching?

  24. #49
    Banned

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    In my house
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Thanks for bringing up Al Gore and inventing the Internet; please see MediaMatters regarding the details on “Al Gore inventing the Internet.” Vint Cerf, the inventor of the world wide web, has stated that Al Gore’s work in Congress to help fund the development of the Internet makes him a “father of the Internet.”

    At least Gore knows it’s “the Internet” and not the “Internets” and I don’t think Gore uses “The Google.”
    Actually there are several internets making up hte internet. There is NIPRNET, DREN, SIPRNET, as well as all of the .gov,.edu,.us, etc domains. So one can look at the internet as many conected internets.

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Media perpetuates myth that Gore claimed to have invented the internet.

    Regarding global warming. I look at this way. If Gore and all the other climatologists are wrong the worst thing that happens is we have an ozone layer intact and cleaner air. If the detractors like yourself are wrong, the ozone layer burns off and everything on planet Earth dies.....slowly.

    It's a pretty easy choice for me.
    My problem is I have a hard time wasting money and resources. And really, the scientific community itself is divided on the issue of global warming. But it is funny that you bring up the Ozone. I recall severla years ago all of the global warming stuff focused on the depletion of the Ozone. The focus has shifted to "greenhouse gases" . The Earth itself makes most of these greenhouse gases and man only contributes less than 1%. I personally don't believe we can contorl our weather or the climate. To me, all of this talk of global warming is just a bunch of hot air (pun intended)

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post

    I've decided to take your lead and not believe anything I read in the liberal media.
    Now that's funny, I don't care who you are.....

  25. #50
    Forum Member
    DennisTheMenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC/Northern Virginia
    Posts
    3,717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HotTrotter View Post
    I would disagre witht hat 100%. And that is part of our problem. I want our leaders to be leaders and not swayed by public opinion. I want a leader who can make the right choice versus the popular choice. Then again, I realize that 85% to 90% of the voting public is uninformed.

    Want to have some fun? Pick 3 or 4 issues. Then research the leading candidates. Then start asking people if they know where people stand on those issues. You will get a bunch of shoulder shrugs and I don't knows.
    I bet you would disagree, seems you believe in the wisdom of the elite versus the wisdom of the democracy. 98% of an elected official's work is routine things that should reflect the absolute ideals of the community, it is that 2% of things where their wisdom should be called into play and where the stateman steps above the politician.
    Be for Peace, but don't be for the Enemy!
    -Big Russ

    Learn from the mistakes of others; you won't live long enough to make them all yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by nyckftbl View Post
    LOL....dont you people have anything else to do besides b*tch about our b*tching?

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 6 First 12345 ... Last

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Has Gore lost it?
    By Dalmatian90 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 07-17-2007, 01:21 PM
  2. Mr. Clarke and the 9-11-01 hearings...
    By E40FDNYL35 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 04-02-2004, 08:05 PM
  3. Gore brand vapor barrier
    By Firefighter430 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-06-2002, 06:07 AM
  4. IAFF Endorses Al Gore
    By huntere6 in forum Fire Politics
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 03-02-2001, 08:00 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register