Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 22 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,551 posts, read 16,539,320 times
Reputation: 6039
Advertisements
None of these type threads ever attack President Obama, they only attack liberals for being hypocritical in the eyes of conservatives who never attempt to actually talk to liberals.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 22 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,551 posts, read 16,539,320 times
Reputation: 6039
Quote:
Originally Posted by detwahDJ
OK to the 7 points which you seem to agree with.
1) You know the difference between Iraq and Afghanistan?
2) Those figures if true: Bush did very little in Afghanistan. It's no secret that Obama accelerated the war there - where it belonged in the first place.
3) The title says "if Bush did this". The article says "when Bush did this". Obama has a kill list of suspected terrorists? Horrors...
4) "Liberals" are outraged about that very thing. So this is a lie. Al-Aulaqi v. Obama | American Civil Liberties Union President Obama, did or did you not kill Anwar al-Awlaki? - Washington Post
5) Ditto.
6) Torture in Afghan facilities? And again "when Bush did this" - not "if Bush did this".
7) "Bush also did this", not "if Bush did this". And again the "left" has complained loudly, throughout Obama's term. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/26/op...ison.html?_r=0 Obama Guantanamo Obama Promised (Again) That He'd Close Gitmo. So Can He? | Mother Jones
How many examples of "left wing" outrage at Obama's actions do you need? This is just a very few.
8) And what is this??
So here's what I deduce from looking over this site:
** The title of the piece doesn't match the content ("if Bush did this" vs "when Bush did this")
** The claim that the "left" lacked outrage about any Obama actions is a lie.
** It seems to be something of an attempt at biting and relevant comedy.
** The basic premise, seemingly aimed at the right-wing audience, is faulty. The entire content like something out of a right-wing bubble (maybe a Fox contributor).
Look, I have nothing against biting political humour, but this is for dullards - more clever animations than witty content. Is this a conservative version of The Onion?
I agree with the majority of this.
#7 and #8 are wrong though, On his first day in office, President Obama signed an executive order for Congress to find a place for the prisoner in other prisons.
The problem is, prisons fall under the jurisdiction of congress, there for he never actually had the power to close it. All he could do is suggest to them to close it.
You should probably read the article, Bush did more than half those things, he did ALL of them.
You and the rest of the cons on this site get your information about liberals from CONSERVATIVE news outlets. Before you make an argument about what liberals are and arent for, you should go to liberal outlets.
And your not being con, we all are get used to it. AFYI i do not need any news outlets to get information, just read the poltiical forums. Take a good long hard look around, see and hear. Really think you need news outlets to know what is happening.
And i am refering to Obama, right now he is our problem, not Bush. Get over it, Bush is history, Obama is here, address him.
Your a con too, and do not know it, we can say each one of us in our own way are cons, if we believe a certain way. And only think one way. And if Bush did half the things that Obama has under his presidency, he would be history, and you know it.
Some people just can't accept any negativity at all, get use to it.
And you don't feel we have a slanted bias as all hell frenzy media out there, your wrong we do. The way i remember it, and i have a pretty good memory, They were always gunning for Bush, they should also be gunning for Obama! They were mean, and nasty, that is what i remember.
Stop talking about past, and talk about present, and how we can once again be a better Country.
When it comes to foreign policy and military policy there is very, very little difference between Republicans and Democrats.
That's not necessarily true.
Conservatives view libs as being weak on defense and homeland security.
If America is attacked again under this administration, you'll see the neo cons come out of the woodwork and say, I told you so, and will call Obama an apologist.
You and the rest of the cons on this site get your information about liberals from CONSERVATIVE news outlets. Before you make an argument about what liberals are and arent for, you should go to liberal outlets.
No, I get my information from CNN mostly, random articles off real clear politics - which cut a variety of ways, and speaking to Obama supporters.
The typical Obama supporter does not realize that he has flip flopped numerous times and lied on big issues.
And your not being con, we all are get used to it. AFYI i do not need any news outlets to get information, just read the poltiical forums. Take a good long hard look around, see and hear. Really think you need news outlets to know what is happening.
And i am refering to Obama, right now he is our problem, not Bush. Get over it, Bush is history, Obama is here, address him.
Your a con too, and do not know it, we can say each one of us in our own way are cons, if we believe a certain way. And only think one way. And if Bush did half the things that Obama has under his presidency, he would be history, and you know it.
Some people just can't accept any negativity at all, get use to it.
And you don't feel we have a slanted bias as all hell frenzy media out there, your wrong we do. The way i remember it, and i have a pretty good memory, They were always gunning for Bush, they should also be gunning for Obama! They were mean, and nasty, that is what i remember.
Stop talking about past, and talk about present, and how we can once again be a better Country.
When they keep beating this Benghazi thing to death it`s hard to NOT talk about the 4,500 soldiers killed in a search for wmd`s.Bush got a free pass for the Iraq fiasco and we`re going to do Benghazi for the next 4 years? I don`t recall anyone "gunning" for Bush. There were no demands to see his birth certificate Nobody called Bush a muslim or a communist and that garbage started on day 1. "Gunning for Bush".
The OPs thesis is that democrats would object to policies that Obama is performing. The OP is clearly not paying attention because among Obama's critics on these policies are Democrats. One need only read liberal blogs to confirm this.
We objected wen Bush wire tapped without court order; when he arrested Americans itch out charges and stared two wars under false pretenses and we object to Obama's questionable foreign policy stretches too. We have been completely consistent.
The best policy for a good defense is isolationism, with a strong national guard.
The enemies we have today are our enemies because of our involvement of them when we were fighting the communist boogieman.
That's NOT what Reagan did, and he was admired by many from both sides of the aisle.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And again "when Bush did this" - not "if Bush did this".
