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.
He absolutely slobberknocked two GOP opponents who had lots of "experience."
He's been effectively cleaning up the horrible mess his predecessor (with gubernatorial "experience") left behind, even though the opposition party has done everything in their power to maintain that mess and try to blame it on him.
Two of the leading GOP presidential "hopefuls" are first term senators.
I recall how successful the most recent GOP administration (in concert with its GOP congress) was at preventing N Korea from developing and deploying nuclear weapons. Somehow, they now want to appear to be nonproliferation authorities.
That's funny.
Carry on.
Winning an election when you're supported by 98% of the media, 100% of the blacks and 100% of the America hating, leftist scum doesn't mean a thing when it comes to the ability to govern, or even demonstrate basic competence which he and his admin most assuredly have not. Throw your red herring elsewhere.
He absolutely slobberknocked two GOP opponents who had lots of "experience."
But he was black, and they were white. Experience or lack there of played no role.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo
He's been effectively cleaning up the horrible mess his predecessor (with gubernatorial "experience") left behind, even though the opposition party has done everything in their power to maintain that mess and try to blame it on him.
He's "cleaned up" nothing. He has made a mess out of what he inherited which was a far more stable Middle East than we have today, and a lot less dangerous world. We are less safe today than in 2008. He has been a total disaster in the Middle East, and if you can't admit that, you are either blind or cant see.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo
Two of the leading GOP presidential "hopefuls" are first term senators.
I recall how successful the most recent GOP administration (in concert with its GOP congress) was at preventing N Korea from developing and deploying nuclear weapons. Somehow, they now want to appear to be nonproliferation authorities.
That's funny.
Carry on.
So, whatever failures have resulted in North Korea obtaining "nukes" makes it okay for Obama to allow (ALLOW) Iran to become a nuclear power? Indeed.
I've really had it with the Leftists (Democrats, a.k.a. "Progressives") who have supported this idiot and they are largely responsible for the mess we are in today, because if they really cared about the U.S. and our security, they could have stopped all this long ago. But they have simply acted like a rubber stamp for all of Obama's "policies" (such as they are).
Winning an election when you're supported by 98% of the media, 100% of the blacks and 100% of the America hating, leftist scum doesn't mean a thing when it comes to the ability to govern, or even demonstrate basic competence which he and his admin most assuredly have not. Throw your red herring elsewhere.
Logic is not something that these people have mastered. Thinking is not a skill they have ever learned.
But he was black, and they were white. Experience or lack there of played no role.
He's "cleaned up" nothing. He has made a mess out of what he inherited which was a far more stable Middle East than we have today, and a lot less dangerous world. We are less safe today than in 2008. He has been a total disaster in the Middle East, and if you can't admit that, you are either blind or cant see.
So, whatever failures have resulted in North Korea obtaining "nukes" makes it okay for Obama to allow (ALLOW) Iran to become a nuclear power? Indeed.
I've really had it with the Leftists (Democrats, a.k.a. "Progressives") who have supported this idiot and they are largely responsible for the mess we are in today, because if they really cared about the U.S. and our security, they could have stopped all this long ago. But they have simply acted like a rubber stamp for all of Obama's "policies" (such as they are).
They didn't tell Obama, they ran directly to Mullahs and told them to not trust those evil Americanos.
They did no such thing. Cotton posted a civics lesson on his own website as an open letter, essentially an oped.
In reality, it's both less direct and less pointedly antagonistic to the President than what Biden himself did partnered with Helms in 1998 and 2000 when they were repeatedly telling the UN (even speaking directly at the UN and then inviting members of the UN Security Council to the Senate) that Clinton's deal on the international criminal court was DOA in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and even as an executive action wouldn't survive the next President. Biden actually said on the record that even discussing Clinton's signing onto the ICC was a waste of time since it was "never going to come to fruition anyway."
Unlike Obama though, Clinton used the Senate's opposition to improve his deal making, not throw a tantrum and pout like a little child.
In contrast to past legislative smacks at the executive, Cotton's oped is pretty tame, it's just dramatic because every opposition to King Obama increasing his monarchy is seen as treason.
Nobody ran to the Mullahs. Cotton told the Mullahs indirectly that whatever Obama promises is temporary and non-binding if the Senate doesn't like it. Simple enough reminder how our Constitution works.
Some Republican senators admitted Wednesday they were caught off guard by the backlash to a letter warning Iranian leaders against a nuclear agreement with President Barack Obama. And Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said Republicans — many of whom blessed the missive during a brisk signing session at a Senate lunch a week ago, as senators prepared to flee a Washington snowstorm — should have given it closer consideration.
“It was kind of a very rapid process. Everybody was looking forward to getting out of town because of the snowstorm,†McCain said. “I think we probably should have had more discussion about it, given the blowback that there is.â€
On this at least, Democrats and Republicans found agreement.
“I find it hard to believe that they understood the severity of what they were doing,†said Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.).
They did no such thing. Cotton posted a civics lesson on his own website as an open letter, essentially an oped.
In reality, it's both less direct and less pointedly antagonistic to the President than what Biden himself did partnered with Helms in 1998 and 2000 when they were repeatedly telling the UN (even speaking directly at the UN and then inviting members of the UN Security Council to the Senate) that Clinton's deal on the international criminal court was DOA in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and even as an executive action wouldn't survive the next President. Biden actually said on the record that even discussing Clinton's signing onto the ICC was a waste of time since it was "never going to come to fruition anyway."
Unlike Obama though, Clinton used the Senate's opposition to improve his deal making, not throw a tantrum and pout like a little child.
In contrast to past legislative smacks at the executive, Cotton's oped is pretty tame, it's just dramatic because every opposition to King Obama increasing his monarchy is seen as treason.
Nobody ran to the Mullahs. Cotton told the Mullahs indirectly that whatever Obama promises is temporary and non-binding if the Senate doesn't like it. Simple enough reminder how our Constitution works.
Give us a link and some proof otherwise it is just hot air from you.
"not throw a tantrum and pout like a little child."
But he was black, and they were white. Experience or lack there of played no role.
So, you're refuting your own point.
Neat.
Quote:
He's "cleaned up" nothing. He has made a mess out of what he inherited which was a far more stable Middle East than we have today, and a lot less dangerous world. We are less safe today than in 2008. He has been a total disaster in the Middle East, and if you can't admit that, you are either blind or cant see.
Here's an easy valid method of evaluating a president's effectiveness:
Compare America at the beginning and end of his term.
Obama is orders of magnitude above his predecessor. I know it hurts the hyperpartisan right to consider that. But you can't avoid reality. you can only avoid looking at it.
Quote:
So, whatever failures have resulted in North Korea obtaining "nukes" makes it okay for Obama to allow (ALLOW) Iran to become a nuclear power? Indeed.
It was the failure to reach an agreement that let N korea proceed.
Now that we're approaching an agreement with Iran, the GOP wants to torpedo it.
That's just so smart.
Quote:
I've really had it with the Leftists (Democrats, a.k.a. "Progressives") who have supported this idiot and they are largely responsible for the mess we are in today, because if they really cared about the U.S. and our security, they could have stopped all this long ago. But they have simply acted like a rubber stamp for all of Obama's "policies" (such as they are).
It's obvious that Obama is a complete idiot when a bright guy like Tom Cotton, a decorated war veteran and a graduate of Harvard shows him this little respect.
What it comes down to is Tom Cotton has no respect or confidence in this White House. I happen to agree with him.
I hope he runs for President in '16, he has my vote.
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.
