• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Dear Oldtimer

ranch hand

Well-known member
The election is over, the debates are done.
My party lost, your party won.
So let's be friends, let arguments pass.
................
I'll hug my elephant, you kiss your ass.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
ranch hand said:
The election is over, the debates are done.
My party lost, your party won.
So let's be friends, let arguments pass.
................

You know that would be the way for the election to end-- and the country to go on, work together, and move forward--but probably won't from what I'm seeing from the right wingers and Tea Party group that always scream so loud about our President and government following the laws or Constitution--BUT when the voters act- or the courts rule (and lately we've had a conservative SCOTUS) contrary to the way they want /want to believe the Constitution/law reads-- then they scream bloody murder and throw three year olds type temper tantrums....

Best example is now following the election- and the Repubs lost while some of the Tea Party candidates took a shellacking-- and now they don't want to play on this playground any more- want to take their ball and go home and secede from the US... :roll: :p :lol: :(

McCain took the cake the other day throwing with his little rage against the press (which he then had to get aides to come up with a cover story for)...He should realize that it is no longer cute when 76 year old grey haired rich men throw a temper tantrum....
Some of these old farts need to retire and just go enjoy life...
 

Steve

Well-known member
Best example is now following the election- and the Repubs lost while some of the Tea Party candidates took a shellacking

we lost a few ,.. and gained four...

Blamed by Republicans for alienating voters, anti-tax Tea Party lawmakers have cemented their influence as most were re-elected to Congress this week.

Of the 55 members of the Tea Party caucus who ran for House seats on Nov. 6, at least 51 will return for the 113th Congress starting in January.

some of the losses were from career politicians such as
Roscoe Bartlett, a 10-term Maryland Republican.

Rep. Roscoe Bartlett on retirement, legacy
10-term, 86-year-old congressman to return to farm, family

a decent man by all accounts.. but not one you could or should include n the 2010 tea party wave...


a net loss of three.. and a gain of four new congressmen with new ideas is a decent showing for a new party.. and a new way of re-defining a party.. not a shellacking..
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
ranch hand said:
The election is over, the debates are done.
My party lost, your party won.
So let's be friends, let arguments pass.
................

You know that would be the way for the election to end-- and the country to go on, work together, and move forward--but probably won't from what I'm seeing from the right wingers and Tea Party group that always scream so loud about our President and government following the laws or Constitution--BUT when the voters act- or the courts rule (and lately we've had a conservative SCOTUS) contrary to the way they want /want to believe the Constitution/law reads-- then they scream bloody murder and throw three year olds type temper tantrums....

Best example is now following the election- and the Repubs lost while some of the Tea Party candidates took a shellacking-- and now they don't want to play on this playground any more- want to take their ball and go home and secede from the US... :roll: :p :lol: :(

McCain took the cake the other day throwing with his little rage against the press (which he then had to get aides to come up with a cover story for)...He should realize that it is no longer cute when 76 year old grey haired rich men throw a temper tantrum....
Some of these old farts need to retire and just go enjoy life...

First I think it is rather childiss for someone to condemn McCain when he was standing up for those four Amercains who can't defend themslevs because some idiot sat on his azz
It is way past ignorant to condemn McCain for his action it is downright stupid for you to condemn a man when he defends Americans instead of letting your idol kill four Americans. Does that really puff out your chest that obama killed four Americans?

Oh and if you want to see someone throw a temper tantrum like a three year old, just go to an occupy protest. There they are throwing a tmeper tantrum and also crapping all over like a kid does. Heck even a three year old does better than those ot friendly occutards.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Larrry said:
Oldtimer said:
ranch hand said:
The election is over, the debates are done.
My party lost, your party won.
So let's be friends, let arguments pass.
................

You know that would be the way for the election to end-- and the country to go on, work together, and move forward--but probably won't from what I'm seeing from the right wingers and Tea Party group that always scream so loud about our President and government following the laws or Constitution--BUT when the voters act- or the courts rule (and lately we've had a conservative SCOTUS) contrary to the way they want /want to believe the Constitution/law reads-- then they scream bloody murder and throw three year olds type temper tantrums....

Best example is now following the election- and the Repubs lost while some of the Tea Party candidates took a shellacking-- and now they don't want to play on this playground any more- want to take their ball and go home and secede from the US... :roll: :p :lol: :(

McCain took the cake the other day throwing with his little rage against the press (which he then had to get aides to come up with a cover story for)...He should realize that it is no longer cute when 76 year old grey haired rich men throw a temper tantrum....
Some of these old farts need to retire and just go enjoy life...

First I think it is rather childiss for someone to condemn McCain when he was standing up for those four Amercains who can't defend themslevs because some idiot sat on his azz
It is way past ignorant to condemn McCain for his action it is downright stupid for you to condemn a man when he defends Americans instead of letting your idol kill four Americans. Does that really puff out your chest that obama killed four Americans?

.

What I thought was childish and Hypocritical was for McCain to rant and rave about all that he perceived/imagined that happened-- but then be one of the R Senators that thought themselves too arrogant to show up at the hearings and briefings to hear from those in the know......

And then to go into temper tantrums when the media questioned him on that hypocrisy.... :roll:

Just saying NO and sticking your head in the sand on issues you don't want to hear about will not win you elections....
 

Larrry

Well-known member
obama stuck his head in the sand and let four Americans die. And then blame it on a video..now that is the ultimate in HYPOCRISY.

Does it make you proud that your prez sat on his azz aqnd let four Americans die?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Larrry said:
obama stuck his head in the sand and let four Americans die. And then blame it on a video..now that is the ultimate in HYPOCRISY.

Does it make you proud that your prez sat on his azz aqnd let four Americans die?

And you don't know that... I'll wait until all the facts come out - rather than jump to believing all the conspiracy stories...I'm surprised some of you have came out blaming Patraeus and his girlfriend for killing them... Its a good thing he's a besmirched R cult hero or I'm sure that would be one of the conspiracy's.... :roll: :wink:
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Ot if you look at and I know this. as it is the only two options. He was either incompetent and can't think his way out of a wet paper sack or he didn't care as it didn't fit his agenda. There is no other explanation.

It is so hilarious that for the Teabagee's you choose to make your decision but if a Conservative does something you piule on before the facts are in. Your history on here Proves that.


ot you never fail to live down to the D cult leftwingernuts.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
5 questions after Petraeus hearings


By Jeremy Herb and Jordy Yager - 11/17/12 11:45 AM ET


The testimony this week of former CIA director David Petraeus left a number of unanswered questions about his resignation and the deadly attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

Petraeus was grilled by lawmakers behind closed doors on Friday, one week after he resigned as the nation’s top spy over an extra-martial affair he conducted with the author Paula Broadwell.


Lawmakers pressed Petraeus for more information about the Sept. 11 attack in Libya, which the Obama administration initially blamed on an anti-Islam movie before later labeling it terrorist attack. Officials say the early account reflected the intelligence that officials were given by the CIA and other agencies.

Democrats and Republicans remained at odds over the Obama administration’s characterization of the attack after being brief by Petraeus, sparking a new round of questions about who in the administration knew what, and when.

Here are five questions that will drive the Petraeus story going forward:

What happened with the Benghazi talking points?


Lawmakers clashed over what Petraeus’s testimony revealed about the intelligence that was provided to Obama officials after the Libya attack. The scrutiny has focused on Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, who blamed the assault on a spontaneous protest in multiple television interviews the weekend after it occurred.

According to Rep. Pete King (R-N.Y), Petraeus testified that the CIA labeled the incident terrorism within 24 hours, and that the talking points provided by the CIA were changed by someone in the administration.

But Democrats said the testimony they heard cleared the U.N. ambassador, because Petraeus and the CIA signed off on the unclassified talking points that Rice used.


Several Republicans have pointed to Rice’s statements in opposing her as a potential candidate for secretary of State. The fight could easily spill over into a confirmation battle in the Senate if Obama nominates her.

The new information also raises questions about Petraeus’s testimony to Congress three days after the Libya attack, when he briefed the House and Senate with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Deputy Defense Secretary Ash Carter.

Petraeus did not emphasize terrorism in Benghazi during that first briefing, according to lawmakers who were present, but on Friday claimed the CIA suspected terrorism from the start.


Will lawmakers investigate the FBI and the Justice Department?


Lawmakers were shocked to discover that the FBI, which is under the Department of Justice (DOJ), had conducted an investigation of the former CIA chief without notifying members of Congress who oversee the intelligence community and the judiciary.

Republicans immediately raised concerns about why news of the investigation — which had been underway for at least three months — became public only after the election.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, have asked the heads of the FBI and DOJ for a timeline of the investigation and when White House officials were told.

Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.), the chairman of the subcommittee that oversees DOJ’s funding, has said he wants Attorney General Eric Holder to testify if House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) moves to form a bicameral Select Committee to investigate the attack.

FBI Director Robert Mueller briefed Intelligence Committee members this week in an attempt to smooth relations and bring them up to speed. And Obama — along with the DOJ — have held that the agencies acted in complete accordance with their procedures.

What really happened in Benghazi?


Congress is still trying to determine how the events at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi unfolded on Sept. 11, and what led to the small amount of American security at the outpost.

The lack of security at the compound, which had been attacked earlier in the year, is a top concern for members as they pore through documents and cables from State Department officials who were denied more manpower.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has led Congress’ investigation of the security issue so far, but more details are sure to emerge when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton appears before the House and Senate foreign relations committees later this year.

The House Intelligence Committee also wants to get to the bottom of the Benghazi security situation. Panel member Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) has vowed to press for answers about why it took the U.S. military so long to secure the consulate after the attack, and has questioned why it took the FBI three weeks to begin an on-site investigation.

Will Petraeus have to testify again?


Petraeus was quietly moved in and out of the Capitol with heavy security presence Friday, avoiding the waves of cameras staked out across the complex to try and get a shot of him.

But the back-to-back hearings are unlikely to be Petraeus’s last trip to Capitol Hill.

Numerous House and Senate committees are investigating the Benghazi attack, and Petraeus’s role as CIA director during the incident makes him a key witness. His trip to Tripoli after the attack gives him perspective that others, including his successor at the CIA, do not have.

King, who is chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, said that his committee was not planning to get involved, but the Intelligence Committee would continue to investigate.

“We’ll see how this evolves,” King told The Hill. “It’s far from over.”

Other lawmakers who aren’t on the Intelligence Committee have also indicated they want to question Petraeus.

What will the CIA’s investigation of Petraeus find?


The CIA Inspector General said Thursday it was opening an investigation into Petraeus’s conduct over the affair and his resignation.

A number of strange details about the affair have emerged in the week since Petraeus resigned, and more revelations are likely.

The possible involvement of Petraeus’s successor in Afghanistan, four-star Gen. John Allen, was perhaps the biggest surprise beyond the initial scandal itself. The FBI turned over 20,000 to 30,000 pages of communications between Allen and the woman who received threatening e-mails from Petraeus’s mistress.

Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta was asked this week if he was concerned any more officials would be drawn into the scandal, which he responded by saying he was not aware of any others “at the present time.”

Petraeus says he divulged no classified information to Broadwell and that his resignation was only as a result of the affair.

Allen, who is being investigated by the Defense Department Inspector General, has also denied wrongdoing.


Nope Larry- I already said I disagreed with Obama-- because #1 we shouldn't have been there in the first place.... We shouldn't be sending openly recognizable diplomats and delegations to countries that have too unstable a government to guarantee their protection....

the CIA signed off on the unclassified talking points that Rice used


What I chuckle about- is its a good thing Patraeus is a R cult and rightwingernut favorite -- or they would be trying to hang him out to dry like they are doing to this black lady that they want to rip apart so she doesn't become Secretary of State...
 

Larrry

Well-known member
ot you are a fool. No matter or not whether we sahould be there is not the issue. We are there, and as long as we are there we defend our citizens. Geez the reasoning of a few
 

gmacbeef

Well-known member
Oltimer wrote :
Some of these old farts need to retire and just go enjoy life...

Then why don't you shut up & take your own advice. I would rather listen to A true American HERO ,like John McCain ,than some old Liberal FOOL like you!
 

Texan

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
What I chuckle about- is its a good thing Patraeus is a R cult and rightwingernut favorite -- or they would be trying to hang him out to dry like they are doing to this black lady that they want to rip apart so she doesn't become Secretary of State...

Are you suggesting that the same Republicans who supported Condoleeza Rice as Secretary of State are now opposed to Susan Rice because she's a "black lady"? :???:

What does being a "black lady" have to do with the issue of expecting honesty and transparency from cabinet appointees?

Or maybe you're just parroting the Democrat talking points? You libs always want to make something appear to be about race instead of admitting when your candidates/appointees have integrity issues and character flaws.

Sometimes it seems as if you libs think we should hold blacks to a lower standard. Is that the way you feel, Oldtimer? "Them thar Negroes shouldn't be expected to have the same standards as us white folk." Is that the way you feel?

You've reached a new low, Oldtimer. But there's one thing for sure about you - you've proven in the past that each new low will be short-lived.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Texan said:
Oldtimer said:
What I chuckle about- is its a good thing Patraeus is a R cult and rightwingernut favorite -- or they would be trying to hang him out to dry like they are doing to this black lady that they want to rip apart so she doesn't become Secretary of State...

Are you suggesting that the same Republicans who supported Condoleeza Rice as Secretary of State are now opposed to Susan Rice because she's a "black lady"? :???:

What does being a "black lady" have to do with the issue of expecting honesty and transparency from cabinet appointees?

Or maybe you're just parroting the Democrat talking points? You libs always want to make something appear to be about race instead of admitting when your candidates/appointees have integrity issues and character flaws.

Sometimes it seems as if you libs think we should hold blacks to a lower standard. Is that the way you feel, Oldtimer? "Them thar Negroes shouldn't be expected to have the same standards as us white folk." Is that the way you feel?

You've reached a new low, Oldtimer. But there's one thing for sure about you - you've proven in the past that each new low will be short-lived.

Someday you should read the stories of how Cheney and Rumsfeld treated Ms Rice... Your quote sounds like something they probably said...

I remember a couple others of your heros that you thru under the bus-- Powell when he showed his honesty about the dysfunction that caused the fiasco called the Iraq War- and then supported Obama --- and the Repubs "token" -- Steele which they ran roughshod over.....
 

Texan

Well-known member
Can you answer the question, Oldtimer?

Texan said:
What does being a "black lady" have to do with the issue of expecting honesty and transparency from cabinet appointees?

You're the one that brought up her race. What does that have to do with anything?
 

Texan

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
I remember a couple others of your heros that you thru under the bus-- Powell when he showed his honesty about the dysfunction that caused the fiasco called the Iraq War- and then supported Obama --- and the Repubs "token" -- Steele which they ran roughshod over.....
Can you provide some links, please? I've done a search and really can't find what you are alleging. I've only mentioned Powell in a few posts and the closest I can find to what you are alleging is when I posted that he was one of the ones that was trying to preserve his own legacy at the end of the Bush Administration by blaming others for his own failures:

http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=278498#278498

(I believe you'll see that happen at the end of the Obama Administration, as well - people trying to preserve their own legacies by blaming others.)

I've only mentioned Steele in one post and it's nothing like what you are claiming. His name was mentioned in an article that I posted. But, if you'll give me some links I'll be glad to look at them and discuss them.

However, I'll admit that I'm not surprised by you referring to Michael Steele as a "token." That's just like you libs - you don't believe that Blacks can achieve any success without being propelled through affirmative action or being a "token" appointment. They're just not as good as you, are they, Oldtimer?
 

Steve

Well-known member
and the Repubs "token" -- Steele which they ran roughshod over.....

if I remember this right it was you and the liberals who were overly critical of Steele..

Steele did a good job of going into liberal news rooms and making our point.. and still is..
 

Mike

Well-known member
OT Wrote:
Someday you should read the stories of how Cheney and Rumsfeld treated Ms Rice... Your quote sounds like something they probably said...

I have read them. You're lying again........................... :roll:
 
Top