Pig F**king Traitors: the GOP

[NowhereInTime]

I don't like the current US president because he is a socialist. That is not an insult (although it should be), it's simply a statement of fact. I come from a country where socialism was once implemented so completely it almost starved everyone do death. It's not a crime to not like someone, even if it is you precious President Obama

Way to be wounded!  Good Lord, you are a simpleton.  What you experienced was totalitarianism, not socialism.  France experiences socialism.  Sweden experiences socialism.  What Poland was put through was brutal totalitarianism masked as a mutually beneficial socialist state.  how do you not know the fucking difference?

You have the same problem every fundamentalist has.

No, mhy problem is you are clearly a fuck up with delusions pf political grandeur.  News flash, bunkie, I DONT THINK OBAMA'S PERFECT!!

If you don't know what my point is, you should read my 2 latest posts again, they are not that long

Fuck no, I'm almost bored to tears now.

. About the first one:
Chris Matthews Says Obama is the "Perfect Father, Perfect Husband and Perfect AMERICAN"
The statement made in this video is the purest form of fundamentalism.

No, that's Chris Matthews' opinion, numb nuts, not some cultish manifesto.

Much of your argument is built on that exact principle,

You pay no attention to detail, do you?

... in particular your defense of the abominable title of this thread.

An abominable thread you cannot resist, you ignorant ass.

The first part of my second post deals with the same issue, which is cosmetics so the confusion that you are expressing at the end of your response is not justified.

Because, unlike you, I do not wear cosmetics.  Oh, don't worry, I'm not judging your lifestyle; live and let live.

I might say how the "Liberals" were behaving about the second Iraq war, how many of them were in support of it when it needed to be approved in the Senate only to later be against the official foreign policy of the US.

Except Obama, which I one of the big reasons why I supported him and why he won.  Twice.

Because what the President says is the official foreign policy, isn't it? And to be clear - I was and am against that war. I recently listened to the Howard Stern show from 9/11. Interesting to hear how he wants to nuke everything in the Middle East and every caller agrees with that. Puts lots of Bush's decisions in perspective.

Yeah, please don't misconstrue Howard Stern as having any authority on foreign policy...

To conclude about "Pig fucking traitors":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerzy_Urban
Read this for example and STFU because you haven't seen shit.

Again, dingleberry, more shenanigans by the REAGAN Administration!!

Oh, in case you're wondering?  "STFU because you haven't seen shit." was the reason why I've been insulting you.

I don't care who the hell you think you are, but when you keep confusing conservative misdeeds (ie: Ronald Reagan not warning Solidarity) with President Obama, your head is so far up your ass you can see what you ate for lunch.

Get your shit together.

[NowhereInTime]

I've already addressed Obama's end-around the Constitution on treaties.

Not adaquately.  How is it Obama can't issue proclamations like Bush, or, for that matter, Reagan?

... Announcing we have a treaty and bypassing Senate ratification thru the use of an 'Executive Order' is not a valid, legal option.

Sez you.  You guys keep re-writing the rulebook on law (Citizens United), procedure (filibuster), and protocol (how about not fucking writing letters presuming to invalidate our President or inviting braggarts to campaign in our capitol?), so have a shit sammich in return.

Nor are his other 'Executive Orders' that he has used to change existing laws and create new ones.  Or every President would have been doing that all along.

Which they pretty much have been.

I'm surprised you don't understand what a valid Executive Order is, since it's been explained to you before.

I'm surprised you are so naive and arrogant as to think you do.

Congress passes laws and the President signs then into law.

Yeah, I saw this as a kid:

I'm Just a Bill (Schoolhouse Rock!)

In order for them to be carried out and applied, details often need to be spelled out in order for those affected to comply.  The agency or department that oversees that portion of the law issues Regulations that go hand in hand with the law and support it.  These Regs aren't supposed to be in conflict with the law, they interpret it and provide detail.

Do I owe you money or something?  I mean, WTF?

An Administration has a lot to do.  The elected officials at the top and their political appointees typically do not get into the details of Reg writing.  Sometimes an Administration wants to implement or change specific policy and - still in compliance with existing law - issues an Executive Order rather than try to steer it through the bureaucracy.  But it isn't to supersede the law or create a new one.  Or to expand his Presidential powers beyond their Constitutional limits.  Or go around Constitutional provisions on issues that are clearly spelled out, like treaties.

Eyelids...heavy...

So it's not about 'how many' Executive Orders this president or that on has issued, it's about what the specific contents of those Executive Orders are.

Right, and if Black Obama writes them, by God they must not pass!!!!!!

It's also not about what other presidents may or may not have done in the past.

Of course it isn't   Uppity Barack should "mind his tone", right Papes?

Obviously other presidents have gone beyond their Constitutional authority with Executive Orders.

But that's ok, because they were "one of us", right, Papes?

That doesn't make it ok for the next president to do so.

So long as he's a Black Secret Muslim Kenyan.

And no one has abused this the way Obama has - he's in a league of his own when it comes to illegal Executive Orders, ignoring court decisions, bypassing Congress.  He despises our Constitution, our form of government, the separation of powers that keep us from having our government seized by an 'elected' dictator.

THERE IT IS!!  Boy, had to go through a hell of a preamble, but you never fail to deliver!!

And from your panicked posts, I gather you do as well

Panicked?  What the fuck are you talking about?  You and ONeill must smoking some serious skankweed.  Puff, puff, pass, crash.

[PB the Deplorable]

... I missed the part where they [Executive Orders] suddenly became "unconstitutional.  Is that because the constitution views him as 3/5's of a man?  So the Executive order only carries 3/5's of the authority that Reagan's did?...

Is the use of Race to smear opponents still Plan A for the Left?  Is that all you've got?  If you haven't figured it out by now, smearing people who don't agree with you as racists in order to get them to back down and be quiet stopped working when you (the Left) managed to get one of your dangerous America haters elected.

But since the Left loves to use that '3/5ths of a man' to disparage the Constitution, our founders and framers, our form of government, our economic system, the people of this country, and the country itself, lets discuss it in it's actual context.

In 1787 the former colonies had been operating under the Articles of Confederation since 1781.  Problems had developed between them that the various states wanted to address, so they called for a convention of the states (these were fairly frequent at the time) and sent delegates to discuss issues and find solutions.

During those sessions, it turned into a Constitutional convention, with the idea of creating something new, rather than continue to try to improve the Articles.


They discussed and argued over the form the new federal government would take, and - without going into all the details of that - finally settled on what we now know as the Constitution.  When it came to apportioning the number of seats each State would have in the House of Representatives, they decided that would be done by population.

There was already economic conflict between the more industrial North and the more rural south - it's what caused most of the problems between the states that they were there to try to address in the first place.  It was vitally important to both the northern states and southern states to not have the new federal government be dominated by the other.

The northern states didn't want non-voting slaves in the southern states to be counted when it came to apportioning House seats - it would give disproportional power to the slave holding south.  The representatives from the south did not want the new federal government to be dominated by the more populous north.  So they came to the 3/5ths compromise.

I don't think the Left would have wanted the southern plantation owners t have more power - by counting those slaves when it came to apportioning House seats, but they certainly do love to take it out of context 200-some years later to smear us with it.

Slavery would have continued in the South whether they passed a new Constitution that did not address it, or if it was to be the sticking point that caused the convention to fail.  Those men chose to not address it at the time in order to be able to reach an agreement on setting up the new government, and have it ratified.  In the early years of our Republic our representatives were careful to not give the slave states disproportional representation, including the admission of states into the Union in pairs - a slave state and a free state.  With the election of the abolitionist Abraham Lincoln in 1860, it all came to a head


Those who constantly use race to attack their opponents, who constantly pour this filth into our body politic, who constantly stir things up and keep people divided, angry, and upset - all for politics - are just as bad if not worse than the racists themselves.  Why these people hate this country this much is beyond me, but they really ought to leave here and go seek out a perfect country - for their own sake as well as that of the rest of us.

[ONeill]

Way to be wounded!  Good Lord, you are a simpleton.  What you experienced was totalitarianism, not socialism.  France experiences socialism.  Sweden experiences socialism.  What Poland was put through was brutal totalitarianism masked as a mutually beneficial socialist state.  how do you not know the fucking difference?

No, mhy problem is you are clearly a fuck up with delusions pf political grandeur.  News flash, bunkie, I DONT THINK OBAMA'S PERFECT!!

Fuck no, I'm almost bored to tears now.

No, that's Chris Matthews' opinion, numb nuts, not some cultish manifesto.

You pay no attention to detail, do you?

An abominable thread you cannot resist, you ignorant ass.

Because, unlike you, I do not wear cosmetics.  Oh, don't worry, I'm not judging your lifestyle; live and let live.

Except Obama, which I one of the big reasons why I supported him and why he won.  Twice.

Yeah, please don't misconstrue Howard Stern as having any authority on foreign policy...

Again, dingleberry, more shenanigans by the REAGAN Administration!!

Oh, in case you're wondering?  "STFU because you haven't seen shit." was the reason why I've been insulting you.

I don't care who the hell you think you are, but when you keep confusing conservative misdeeds (ie: Ronald Reagan not warning Solidarity) with President Obama, your head is so far up your ass you can see what you ate for lunch.

Get your shit together.

OMFG, I am speechless. And I'll take my answer of the air.

Just one thing - I shouldn't have used this wikipedia entry about Urban, you understood nothing. But indeed it's hard just being given the information provided there. Apologies.

[ONeill]

An abominable thread you cannot resist, you ignorant ass.

OK, one more thing, I indeed just can't resist - Hi Falkie!

[FightTheFuture]

Fantasy.  Wise up. There's no "network" beyond the neighborhood and village mullahs who control who gets the jobs, who goes to higher education, and who gets a motivational visit from the security police.  The omnipotent CIA has so many successes at overthrowing our adversaries...lemmee see....I'm sure one will come to me.

Now you're talking out your ass. Villiage mullahs? Don't make me laugh. The middle class and upper middle class in and around Tehran live, eat, and breathe "Western decadence." They have every desire for the same things we have in the United States and the black market underground network to keep them fully stocked. The "village mullahs". I suppose, must be spending too much time at the local mosque. I have two friends that visit Iran regularly. If the "village mullahs" had any clue of their presence there, my friends would be hanging from a crane.

And who the hell said anything about the CIA overthrowing Iran? Oh, make no mistake, the CIA is in Iran. But they're merely a conduit for propaganda and cash these days. However, that could change if opportunities again present themselves. The table was set in 2009, but Obama dropped a floater in the punch bowl and killed the party. But the future is promising.

[PB the Deplorable]

... you understood nothing... Apologies.

Then you succeeded, he's not interested in understanding anything

[FightTheFuture]

Oh, because your engagement in the end was so great. Going to bed with the bloodiest dictator in the world to defeat the second best one in that field to later divide the world in half with the larger SoB. And all of that done by a 'liberal' hero, great stuff.

Good Lord. Really?

[ONeill]

Then you succeeded, he's not interested in understanding anything

He's clearly not, but this particular part was my fault.

[ONeill]

Good Lord. Really?

Yes, exactly, really. The war ended with half of the world under the most extreme version of the worst ideology conceived in human history. And the reason that was possible was because all the help the Soviets got from the US. America had 0 interest in taking part in European theater apart from extending their own sphere of influence.

[FightTheFuture]

Yes, exactly, really. The war ended with half of the world under the most extreme version of the worst ideology conceived in human history. And the reason that was possible was because all the help the Soviets got from the US. America had 0 interest in taking part in European theater apart from extending their own sphere of influence.

That rates as the stupidest post I have ever read on this form in all the years I've been a member. Congratulations.

[ONeill]

That rates as the stupidest post I have ever read on this form in all the years I've been a member. Congratulations.

Than you.

[FightTheFuture]

Than you.

You're welcom

[PB the Deplorable]

... To conclude about "Pig fucking traitors":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerzy_Urban
Read this for example and STFU because you haven't seen shit.

... Again, dingleberry, more shenanigans by the REAGAN Administration!! ...

C'mon Nit, you hear the story of Jerzey Urban - press secretary to the Polish dictator at the time - planting a story about Reagan stiffing Solidarity and 'allowing' martial law in Poland, and you fall for it while reading a few sentences outlining it and debunking it. 

Is this the quality of your thought process?

[ONeill]

You're welcom

Amazing, an "America, fuck yeah!" person and an Obama religious zealot in one evening.

[pyewacket]

my world view has changed a lot in the last ten years.  i think we need to be trading with the iranians.  we need to be allowing them easy access to our products and culture.  we need to be inviting their leaders to the white house.  we need to make friends of them.  the westernization of iran will follow, and it won't require a single bullet.

I agree. We were told that getting rid of Sadam was going to stabilize the region- we see how that worked out. Many sources have shown how much the young Iranians embrace western culture. Attacking Iran will turn them against us.

[NowhereInTime]

OMFG, I am speechless. And I'll take my answer of the air.

I would hope so, but somehow I doubt it.

Just one thing - I shouldn't have used this wikipedia entry about Urban, you understood nothing. But indeed it's hard just being given the information provided there. Apologies.

I understand plenty. Most of all I understand you don't show up to gunfight with a peashooter, a lesson you would do well to learn.  Better luck next time.

[136 or 142]

Way to be wounded!  Good Lord, you are a simpleton.  What you experienced was totalitarianism, not socialism.  France experiences socialism.  Sweden experiences socialism.  What Poland was put through was brutal totalitarianism masked as a mutually beneficial socialist state.  how do you not know the fucking difference?

Socialism is government ownership of the 'commanding heights' of the economy.  I don't know of any socialist party any more in the North America or Western Europe.

[NowhereInTime]

Amazing, an "America, fuck yeah!" person and an Obama religious zealot in one evening.

And you offended both of them with your brazen stupidity. Lesson learned.

[VtaGeezer]

Now you're talking out your ass. Villiage mullahs? Don't make me laugh. The middle class and upper middle class in and around Tehran live, eat, and breathe "Western decadence." They have every desire for the same things we have in the United States and the black market underground network to keep them fully stocked. The "village mullahs". I suppose, must be spending too much time at the local mosque. I have two friends that visit Iran regularly. If the "village mullahs" had any clue of their presence there, my friends would be hanging from a crane.

And who the hell said anything about the CIA overthrowing Iran? Oh, make no mistake, the CIA is in Iran. But they're merely a conduit for propaganda and cash these days. However, that could change if opportunities again present themselves. The table was set in 2009, but Obama dropped a floater in the punch bowl and killed the party. But the future is promising.

Parsing will get you nothing; I said "neighborhood and village". As in urban neighborhood mosques in the cities.  Your friends are transient visitors; if they hung around and tried to get political they'd tell a different story.  The middle class in Iran is only about 30% of the population and has doubled in size since "The Revolution" and far from all are anti-Islamist.  The Green Protests were about politics and Ahmadenijad's hardline extremism more than the Islamists in general. The political base of the ayatollahs is in the working class and they're still managed from the mosque.  Don't confuse attachment to western goodies with disloyalty or weak Islamic belief. Arabs love decadence too, but also support mutaween in Saudi and the Emirates.  When the first US bombs drop on Iranian targets, any dissatisfaction with the regime will instantly be replaced with patriotic and Shiite fervor; all will be loyal Iranians.  As they were against Saddam and their Shiite brothers in his army.

[PB the Deplorable]

I agree. We were told that getting rid of Sadam was going to stabilize the region- we see how that worked out. Many sources have showed how much the young Iranians embrace western culture. Attacking Iran will turn them against us.

Well, no one is proposing attacking Iran, although Obama's foolishness (if that's what it is) may end up resulting in that being the only option at some point.

What is needed is regime change, or creating a situation where the mullahs are in a much poorer position to generate mischief in the region and around the world.  The sanctions were working (diplomatic and political, and most of all economic).  Which is why Obama wants to lift them.

[NowhereInTime]

C'mon Nit, you hear the story of Jerzey Urban - press secretary to the Polish dictator at the time - planting a story about Reagan stiffing Solidarity and 'allowing' martial law in Poland, and you fall for it while reading a few sentences outlining it and debunking it. 

Is this the quality of your thought process?

Seriously? You're going to try to pretend you knew who the hell the press secretary of Poland in the 80's was?  What a fraud!

Here's my thought process:

Normally, if I care, i follow a link to learn (and to check surce).  My mistake was to a) follow a link for an issue I couldn't have cared less about and b) missing the phrase "masterminded the story" which, I assume, is meant to indicate the story was probably a falsehood.  I don't remember this story at all but then again I was 15.

Nonetheless, there are two takeaways: 1) this did happen 30 years ago and 2) what the fuck was the point of this, except to expose the fact I am not well versed in 80's Polish history (as you appear to claim to be)?

The last part of my thought process? It has finally hit 60 degrees for the first time in months here in CT and I am inside dicking around with a halfwit and a misanthropic shut in! (I'll leave it to you two to figure out who's who.)

[MV/Liberace!]

Well, no one is proposing attacking Iran...

really?

defensetech.org/2013/12/04/congressman-hunter-says-u-s-should-attack-iran-with-tactical-nukes/

that's from about 11 seconds of googling.

[136 or 142]

“The U.S. Senate Historian’s Office has so far been unable to find another example in the chamber’s history where one political party openly tried to deal with a foreign power against a presidential policy, as Republicans have attempted in their open letter to Iran this week,” McClatchy reports.

[136 or 142]

really?

defensetech.org/2013/12/04/congressman-hunter-says-u-s-should-attack-iran-with-tactical-nukes/

that's from about 11 seconds of googling.

To be fair to Man-boy, nobody cares about Duncan Hunter Jr.

I can't find any quotes from the resident U.S Senate war mongers - John McCain or Lindsey Graham advocating the U.S invade Iran.  Just unspecified threats.

[albrecht]

“The U.S. Senate Historian’s Office has so far been unable to find another example in the chamber’s history where one political party openly tried to deal with a foreign power against a presidential policy, as Republicans have attempted in their open letter to Iran this week,” McClatchy reports.

I thought was the whole reason for the Logan Act (as was discussed earlier) although it has never been used and only one indictment ever brought forth but never went to trial. And, of course, Congress has gone even further in some case to stifle dissent or conflict with national policy (Alien & Sedition Act (countered by the Virgina and Kentucky Acts and various state actions for nullification), Sedition Act, Espionage Act, etc etc.)

Probably is even the Logan Act is questionable court-wise but I would like to see it used and see what happens and where it stands once and for all. It is still US law and on the books but never used. Every time I see Congressmen etc going to secret foreign meetings, traveling to countries for which we are at war or have sanctions, or even campaigning for people in foreign elections (as Obama did for his "cousin" Odinga) I wonder why it is never used?

Obama, please try to use the Logan Act against these Republicans (at least so I can see where it stands legally and because it would be a nice political firestorm.) And maybe it would take your attention from policies intended to ruin, sorry "fundamentally transform," the country.

[pate]

Pig F**king Traitors: the GOP

What an absolutely lovely title for the thread!

I bet the ass-hat that started this gem, prolly used the term "tea-baggers"!

So hip, so kewl, man I am convinced!

Double plus good, and I don't even need to read any of this shit!

[PB the Deplorable]

Seriously? You're going to try to pretend you knew who the hell the press secretary of Poland in the 80's was?  What a fraud!

Here's my thought process:

Normally, if I care, i follow a link to learn (and to check surce).  My mistake was to a) follow a link for an issue I couldn't have cared less about and b) missing the phrase "masterminded the story" which, I assume, is meant to indicate the story was probably a falsehood.  I don't remember this story at all but then again I was 15.

Nonetheless, there are two takeaways: 1) this did happen 30 years ago and 2) what the fuck was the point of this, except to expose the fact I am not well versed in 80's Polish history (as you appear to claim to be)?

The last part of my thought process? It has finally hit 60 degrees for the first time in months here in CT and I am inside dicking around with a halfwit and a misanthropic shut in! (I'll leave it to you two to figure out who's who.)

No, I didn't know who Jerzey Urban is because he was a minor official in Poland in the 80s. 

I know who he is because of this bullshit story he planted while paying attention to the events surrounding what turned out to be the final stages of the Cold War.  Also known as 'current events', or, 'the news'.

[PB the Deplorable]

“The U.S. Senate Historian’s Office has so far been unable to find another example in the chamber’s history where one political party openly tried to deal with a foreign power against a presidential policy, as Republicans have attempted in their open letter to Iran this week,” McClatchy reports.

Well gosh, they didn't look very hard.

First off, the Senators that signed that letter are not 'trying to deal with a foreign power' - openly or covertly.  They are informing them of a fact, one that was apparently overlooked by both Obama and the Iranians.  So there's that.


But in response to this crap, how about the dealings between the Democrats and the Sandinistas during the Reagan years?  People like, you know, John Kerry

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/guatemala-kerry-reminiscences-about-trip-visit-communist-sandinista-leader-1985_733873.html

The above wasn't the only time the Democrats were undermining US effort to fight the Cuban proxies in Central America - it went on the entire time until those wars ended.  Or what about all those D's going to see Fidel in Cuba, Ortega in Venezuela over the years?    Undermining Reagan when he was dealing with the Soviets on arms control?  Or stationing the MX missiles in Germany?  What about interfering with the radar stations in Poland and the Czech Republic after those had been agreed on?  Haven't members of Congress gone to Israel to stand with the Palestinians against the government there - without 'clearing it' with the Administration?  What about the infamous 'Dear Comrade' letter to the Marxist dictator in Grenada? 

The list is endless.  Frankly this kind of thing has been so routine that I'd mostly tuned it out. 

Are you suggesting no Congressmen or Senators ever travel to foreign countries - both friendly or unfriendly nations?  What is it you think they talk about?  Do you think they are always there in support of current Administration policy?  Wasn't 'Dumbshit' John McCain traveling to Syria multiple times to meet with what turned out to be an al-Qaeda offshoot in an attempt to change Obama's policy in Syria?  This stuff is fairly routine, and offhand I'd say over the years the Republicans have minded 'protocol' and not interfered to a much larger extent than the Democrats have.

And what is it we are talking about here:  an open letter reminder that under our system of separation of powers the Senate has to ratify any treaty?  Wow, some 'interference'.  Boy, that's just way out of line, isn't it? 


It astonishes me the extent Big Media protects and lies for this president, and how easily some just follow right along swallowing it whole.  It really is amazing

[Evil Twin Of Zen]

.....  When the first US bombs drop on Iranian targets, any dissatisfaction with the regime will instantly be replaced with patriotic and Shiite fervor; all will be loyal Iranians.  As they were against Saddam and their Shiite brothers in his army.

exactly. it would further vaporize the need to stabilize prevent a united middle east. such an action would result in an instant attack on israel. it would likely get a bit nasty after that.

nobody is talking peace. we are negotiating WWIII.

No Boom Today...Boom Tomorrow