hilary 2016?

AlabamaRedneck said:

And now I must say good nite...I have to be at work tomorrow morning...unlike Buck!!!

Click to expand...

i have to keep guard all night. i will be fertilizing my indoor plants tonight, that will take about an hour to measure, mix and distribute.

i'll be able to get about 4 hours of sleep from 6am to 10am before i get up and turn off the lights, and drive 45 minutes to my buddy's house to help him trim his indoor harvest. i'll have to cut out at about 4pm to come back and cover my greenhouse, same as every night, and then stand guard. the light dep greenhouse will need water tomorrow, and the big GH will need nutes and a haircut for some of the low lying branches.

but i guess none of that qualifies as work, because i won't be sitting on my fat ass and making someone else rich.

heavens to betsy, how will i live with myself?

BigNBushy said:

Reagan did not have an opposing party whose primary purpose was to destroy his presidency, this is something that presidents of both parties have to deal with today. To be fair, I think Republicans started this with their impeachment of Clinton, however, it was legal, and an impeachable offense. However, since he was only lying about sex, it wasn't seen as a major offense by most Americans. The Democrats took it further with their crusade against Bush, and now its the Republicans at it again against Obama.

The media has also changed since Reagan, no longer do they strive to be objective, they are almost as partisan as the members of congress.

Our political system is fucked. I do not know how it can be unfucked.

Click to expand...

you got a couple things slightly wrong.

reagan did have the dems trying to destroy him, but nothing would stick. teflon president.

shrub did not face a crusade from the dems, to say so is idiotic.*

what the republicans are trying to engineer against obama is way over the top compared to what we've seen in recent history. they are running away from their own ideas, are doing record filibusters, and in their own leader's words, their top objective was to simply make obama a one termer, not to work for the american people.

unprecedented in recent history.

UncleBuck said:

you got a couple things slightly wrong.

reagan did have the dems trying to destroy him, but nothing would stick. teflon president.

shrub did not face a crusade from the dems, to say so is idiotic.*

what the republicans are trying to engineer against obama is way over the top compared to what we've seen in recent history. they are running away from their own ideas, are doing record filibusters, and in their own leader's words, their top objective was to simply make obama a one termer, not to work for the american people.

unprecedented in recent history.

Click to expand...

So Repubs are bashing Obama for things they supported, and Bush didnt have that problem? How about all the top Democrats lending support to Iraq, vouching for WMD. Being totally in support until it was politically expedient for them not to.

Sure, Reagan had opposition, but it could be classified as "loyal opposition." Tip O'Neil & Reagan =/= Nancy Pelosi & Bush

BigNBushy said:

So Repubs are bashing Obama for things they supported, and Bush didnt have that problem? How about all the top Democrats lending support to Iraq, vouching for WMD. Being totally in support until it was politically expedient for them not to.

Click to expand...

there's a big difference between dreaming up a piece of legislation and then crying out against it once obama supports it, versus being fed false intelligence and later realizing that you got duped.

UncleBuck said:

there's a big difference between dreaming up a piece of legislation and then crying out against it once obama supports it, versus being fed false intelligence and later realizing that you got duped.

Click to expand...

Bush and the Dems got their info from the same place; foreign and domestic intelligence agencies, all telling the same story. To later criticize a president for saying the same things you said that you believed in at the time is far worse, to me, than failing to support legislation that superficially resembles things you have previously supported. You ought to know well enough that there can be all kinds of little things added to legislation other than the primary aim it is supposed to address to make seemingly republican ideas unpalatable to republicans.

BigNBushy said:

Bush and the Dems got their info from the same place; foreign and domestic intelligence agencies, all telling the same story.

Click to expand...

that's a gigantic pile of crap, and anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows it. some info stays classified, some bad info gets peddled off and sold as true even when the person peddling it knows it to be false.

for example:**"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

there was a concerted and sustained effort to lie about intelligence, and all of your attempts to excuse it fall flat and do not comport with historical fact.

BigNBushy said:

To later criticize a president for saying the same things you said that you believed in at the time is far worse, to me

Click to expand...

no one else uttered those 16 words i posted above, so your claim is based on a lie, a demonstrable lie.

BigNBushy said:

...than failing to support legislation that superficially resembles things you have previously supported. You ought to know well enough that there can be all kinds of little things added to legislation other than the primary aim it is supposed to address to make seemingly republican ideas unpalatable to republicans.

Click to expand...

and here is where you go for the hat trick of demonstrable lies.

the republicans milked the 9/11 first responders for all they were worth, but they filibustered the zadroga bill. do tell me what part of the zadroga bill only "superficially resembled" republican support for the 9/11 first responders or was "unpalatable" to republicans. i'll be waiting.

fucking lying through your teeth there, and not even good at it. you did the world a service by getting hooked on smack and not becoming a lawyer.

I don't know shit about the zardroga bill. Bit I will say this. In contemporary politics, if the choice is between getting something you want, or making the other party look bad, you make the other party look bad.

BigNBushy said:

I don't know shit about the zardroga bill.

Click to expand...

in other words, you were just speaking out of your ass a few posts earlier.

thanks for admitting it.

UncleBuck said:

that's a gigantic pile of crap, and anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows it. some info stays classified, some bad info gets peddled off and sold as true even when the person peddling it knows it to be false.<br>
<br>
for example:**"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."<br>
<br>
there was a concerted and sustained effort to lie about intelligence, and all of your attempts to excuse it fall flat and do not comport with historical fact.<br>
<br>
no one else uttered those 16 words i posted above, so your claim is based on a lie, a demonstrable lie.
<br>

<br>
and here is where you go for the hat trick of demonstrable lies.<br>

Click to expand...

**"There's not that much difference between my position and George Bush's position at this stage. The difference, in my mind, is who's in a position to execute."

echelon1k1 said:

**"There's not that much difference between my position and George Bush's position at this stage. The difference, in my mind, is who's in a position to execute."

Click to expand...

a quote from obama after the war started, that's just grand.

care to remind us what obama was doing in the lead up to the war? or do you specialize only in douchebaggery and lies?

UncleBuck said:

a quote from obama after the war started, that's just grand.

care to remind us what obama was doing in the lead up to the war? or do you specialize only in douchebaggery and lies?

Click to expand...

"I am not opposed to all wars, I'm opposed to dumb wars." (Oct '02)

He also opposed the "surge" in 2007 then went on to praise it's "success" - "The surge has succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated"

He also increased Iraq funding in 2008 and paid blackwater $70m to stay in Iraq... http://www.alternet.org/story/132171/president_obama,_why_did_you_pay_blackwater_$70_million_in_february

I leave "douchebaggery and lies" up to you the chief prosecutor in florida.

echelon1k1 said:

"I am not opposed to all wars, I'm opposed to dumb wars." (Oct '02)

He also opposed the "surge" in 2007 then went on to praise it's "success" - "The surge has succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated"

He also increased Iraq funding in 2008 and paid blackwater $70m to stay in Iraq... http://www.alternet.org/story/132171/president_obama,_why_did_you_pay_blackwater_$70_million_in_february

I leave "douchebaggery and lies" up to you the chief prosecutor in florida.

Click to expand...

as usual, you're way off topic most of the time.

the only on topic quote was when he called the decision to go into iraq "dumb", thereby not contradicting a damn thing.

your labia must be inflamed.

UncleBuck said:

as usual, you're way off topic most of the time.

the only on topic quote was when he called the decision to go into iraq "dumb", thereby not contradicting a damn thing.

your labia must be inflamed.

Click to expand...

Only contradiction is from you and your commander in queef... If it was really "dumb" he wouldn't have praised the surge in 2007, increased funding and replaced 10,000 + troops with contractors... Look into an anal re-tread because your shit for brains has been "pushed in" one too many times...

Padawanbater2 said:

Yeah, then what, Michelle in 2020?

Fuck the US government. It clearly doesn't make any difference who the president is. Why are people still buying this bullshit? If they don't open their eyes after Obama's terms, what the fuck will it take? Shit won't get better until the end of the United States, and it'll happen exactly how the Soviet Union did.

Click to expand...

What?
The Soviet Union ended up like the United States when it fell?
Michelle?
LOL, She doesnt do shit.
Much like her husband.

echelon1k1 said:

Only contradiction is from you and your commander in queef... If it was really "dumb" he wouldn't have praised the surge in 2007, increased funding and replaced 10,000 + troops with contractors... Look into an anal re-tread because your shit for brains has been "pushed in" one too many times...

Click to expand...

there's no contradiction between calling the initial decision to invade iraq "dumb" and admitting that the surge worked or completing the execution of the war.

the real contradiction is someone who is opposed to "war mongering" signing up for pointless and unnecessary wars like you did.

UncleBuck said:

there's no contradiction between calling the initial decision to invade iraq "dumb" and admitting that the surge worked or completing the execution of the war.

the real contradiction is someone who is opposed to "war mongering" signing up for pointless and unnecessary wars like you did.

Click to expand...

No comment on swapping troops for contractors....

Unlike you I honour my commitments and cannot just take off and ask my father in law for money when things get tough... Try all you may to knock it but I'm proud to have served... You talk a big game on the net but you'd never say that to a veterans face... Shame you didn't meet up with sirgreenthumb...

We leave war-mongering up to your government and it's Al-Qaeda supporting commander in thief...

echelon1k1 said:

No comment on swapping troops for contractors....

Unlike you I honour my commitments and cannot just take off and ask my father in law for money when things get tough... Try all you may to knock it but I'm proud to have served... You talk a big game on the net but you'd never say that to a veterans face... Shame you didn't meet up with sirgreenthumb...

We leave war-mongering up to your government and it's Al-Qaeda supporting commander in thief...

Click to expand...

irrelevance and internet tough guy-ism. cool stuff.

doesn't change the fact that bush lied about intelligence or that obama was opposed to the war from the start.

UncleBuck said:

irrelevance and internet tough guy-ism. cool stuff.

doesn't change the fact that bush lied about intelligence or that obama was opposed to the war from the start.

Click to expand...

Bush did lie I never said otherwise, but you think opposing something then agreeing with it is still opposition. Sorry, for a second there I forgot who I was talking to.

Why didn't you meet up with sirgreenthumb?

echelon1k1 said:

Bush did lie I never said otherwise, but you think opposing something then agreeing with it is still opposition. Sorry, for a second there I forgot who I was talking to.

Click to expand...

when did obama agree with the premise of the iraq war?