Romney already causing tension between the US and Russia

FlyLikeAnEagle

Well-Known Member
What a disaster this dumbass is.....


Putin: Romney helped Russia by calling it top foe


MOSCOW—President Vladimir Putin said Tuesday that a comment made by U.S. presidential candidate Mitt Romney has made Russia feel justified in opposing America's missile defense plans in Europe.

The Republican challenger to President Barack Obama has branded Russia the "No. 1 geopolitical foe" of the United States.

Putin said that statement shows Russia is right to criticize the U.S.-led NATO plan to place land- and sea-based radars and interceptors in several European locations. Washington says the shield is intended against a possible missile attack from Iran, but Moscow sees it as a threat to its security, saying it may eventually grow powerful enough to undermine Russia's nuclear deterrent.

"I'm grateful to him for formulating his stance so clearly, because he has once again proven the correctness of our approach to missile defense problems," Putin said of Romney. "The most important thing for us is that even if he doesn't win now, he or a person with similar views may come to power in four years. We must take that into consideration while dealing with security issues for a long perspective."



 

timbo123

Active Member
Pat Robertson (the old bible thumping moron in the pic) has actually publicly stated that he is for legalizing marijuana!!
 

Xub420

Active Member
lol, is he really? Not that I would be surprised but I'd like to see a cite for this.
For smuggling though. Gingrich proposed that shit years ago. It was the "Drug Importer Death Penalty Act of 1996". What the FUCK is wrong with these fools?
 

ottomatik

Well-Known Member
Pat Robertson (the old bible thumping moron in the pic) has actually publicly stated that he is for legalizing marijuana!!
hmm really interesting, didn't know that

On the December 16, 2010 broadcast of The 700 Club Pat Robertson condemned harsh sentences for people convicted of possession of cannabis. Robertson stated, “We're locking up people that take a couple of puffs of marijuana, and the next thing you know they've got 10 years.” He went on to say, “I'm not exactly for the use of drugs – don't get me wrong – but I just believe that criminalizing marijuana, criminalizing the possession of a few ounces of pot and that kind of thing, I mean, it's just costing us a fortune and it's ruining young people.”[SUP][62][/SUP]

Robertson’s remarks were applauded by the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws and the Drug Policy Alliance. Executive Director of the Drug Policy Alliance Ethan Nadelmann said, "The people who are listening to him may roll their eyes when the Democrats say this, but when Pat Robertson says this he has credibility in the faith community."[SUP][63][/SUP]
Appearing on Good Morning America, Vice President Joe Biden condemned Robertson's commentary, saying, “I still believe it's a gateway drug. I've spent a lot of my life as chairman of the Judiciary Committee dealing with this. I think it would be a mistake to legalize.”
 

Ringsixty

Well-Known Member
Silly people. Why can't we call Russia a top threat? The Russians view us the same way and so do many other countries..

Let's have a Kumbaya moment. Yah, right.

A lot of dumb asses don't understand the real world outside the USA and many don't even understand the real world in the USA.

Trust me, If you haven't lived overseas. You don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

The world is full of HATE and that isn't going to change till the world is destroyed.
 

timbo123

Active Member
I am drawing a line in the sand on the federal marijuana prohibition issue. If a candidate isn't openly for legalizing and regulating pot like alcohol, they will not get my vote. No more holding my nose and voting for "the lessor of two evils"... because at the end of the day, that's still a vote for evil. I;m voting for Gary Johnosn (Libertarian candiate) 2012. Do i think he'll win? Nope. does that mean my vote is "wasted"? Nope. They don't hand out medals to people who can say after the election "I voted for the guy that won." I want to send a message with my vote. You are against pot? Then you cannot have my vote anymore... under any circumstances.
 

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
I am drawing a line in the sand on the federal marijuana prohibition issue. If a candidate isn't openly for legalizing and regulating pot like alcohol, they will not get my vote. No more holding my nose and voting for "the lessor of two evils"... because at the end of the day, that's still a vote for evil. I;m voting for Gary Johnosn (Libertarian candiate) 2012. Do i think he'll win? Nope. does that mean my vote is "wasted"? Nope. They don't hand out medals to people who can say after the election "I voted for the guy that won." I want to send a message with my vote. You are against pot? Then you cannot have my vote anymore... under any circumstances.
What you are doing by saying that is allowing the top 2 political parties to do fuck all what they want because they know you are not a threat to either of them.

Yes, you are throwing your vote away because it simply wont matter. If gary johnson gets 4% of the vote instead of 3% of the vote do you think either side will give much of a shit?
 

Xub420

Active Member
They all just say shit and foreign policy stays fuckin put. Blah fuckin Blah! The last time there was any movement is when Bush signed that Start1 with Gorbachev. B4 that it was Reagens Petal-Picking with them. I dont think Romney has the balls anyway. So, I think its gonna be back and forth until some revolution or some shit. Just legalize the HERB!
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
What you are doing by saying that is allowing the top 2 political parties to do fuck all what they want because they know you are not a threat to either of them.

Yes, you are throwing your vote away because it simply wont matter. If gary johnson gets 4% of the vote instead of 3% of the vote do you think either side will give much of a shit?

While I agree, at what point do we begin to reject our current two party system where each candidate struggles to define himself as opposed to the other candidate? The more they figure they have to do such a thing the more we begin to realize that if they have to spend any time explaining the difference between themselves and the other guy, there really isn't much of a difference.

What is needed is a strikingly different candidate who manages to have enough money behind him to make a difference to run as a third party, it would be even better if he did so in an election year where both of the other parties run inept races.
 

timbo123

Active Member
What you are doing by saying that is allowing the top 2 political parties to do fuck all what they want because they know you are not a threat to either of them.

Yes, you are throwing your vote away because it simply wont matter. If gary johnson gets 4% of the vote instead of 3% of the vote do you think either side will give much of a shit?
The two mainstream parties ALREADY do "fuck all they want" and I'm not voting for either of them. It seems you are satisfied with the status quo choose one or the other Dem or Repub... when both of them are satisfied locking up people like you and me for pot. Fuck no I am not voting for those fucks.
It is not a wasted vote. People with your attitude is what perpetuates the two party system. People say, well I agree with the Libertarian but a Libertarian "can't win" so i'll vote for one of the two Fucks. So the Libertarian gets very few votes. And it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
There are enough Independents in this country that they could elect a third party candidate, if it wasn't for the "wasted vote" mentality that you cling to.
I'm voting for Johnson and encouraging others to shake off the "wasted vote" nonsense. The more votes he gets... the more people in 2016 will see it as a viable option. You feel free to vote for a "Fuck" and feel good about that.

If one of the two main parties can fuck us over and still get our votes... where is their incentive to change?
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
The two mainstream parties AREADY do "fuck all they want" and I'm not voting for either of them. It seems you are satisfied with the status quo choose one or the other Dem or Repub... when both of them are satisfied locking up people like you and me for pot. Fuck no I am not voting for those fucks.
It is not a wasted vote. People with your attitude is what perpetuates the two party system. People say, well I agree with the Libertarian but a Libertarian "can't win" so i'll vote for one of the two Fucks. So the Libertarian gets very few votes. And it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
There are enough Independents in this country that they could elect a third party candidate, if it wasn't for the "wasted vote" mentality that you cling to.
I'm voting for Johnson and encouraging others to shake off the "wasted vote" nonsense. The more votes he gets... the more people in 2016 will see it as a viable option. You feel free to vote for a "Fuck" and feel good about that.

If one of the two main parties can fuck us over and still get our votes... where is their incentive to change?

I will say it again. consider that you ARE subject to being locked up under either administration. Consider that your vote for anyone else will not get you a guy who would champion legalization. Now figure that your best vote will be for someone who selects supreme court justices who are for individual liberties and not against them. Vote for someone who is inclined to put someone on the court who does not believe that government should be afforded every convenience when it comes to courts and jails. Knowing that you have a higher likelyhood of coming into contact with the law, wouldn't it be wise to vote for someone who will put a judge on the court that thinks that even criminals have rights?
 

Grandpapy

Well-Known Member
I will say it again. consider that you ARE subject to being locked up under either administration. Consider that your vote for anyone else will not get you a guy who would champion legalization. Now figure that your best vote will be for someone who selects supreme court justices who are for individual liberties and not against them. Vote for someone who is inclined to put someone on the court who does not believe that government should be afforded every convenience when it comes to courts and jails. Knowing that you have a higher likelyhood of coming into contact with the law, wouldn't it be wise to vote for someone who will put a judge on the court that thinks that even criminals have rights?
I hope you are c&ping this each time. lol
 
Top