Can you imagine Fox 'news' if Democrats did this while Bush was in the White House.

Wow!

Just more evidence for the pile Owl...but keep denying and lying.

Quote:“Let me reassure you on this,” Lamborn told a small gathering of so-called liberty voters in Colorado Springs on Tuesday. “A lot of us are talking to the generals behind the scenes, saying, ‘Hey, if you disagree with the policy that the White House has given you, let’s have a resignation.’

“You know, let’s have a pubic resignation, and state your protest, and go out in a blaze of glory. I haven’t seen that very much. In fact, I haven’t seen that at all in years.”

Rep. Lamborn urging generals who disagree with Obama to resign

Which Owl?
And who is denying or lying?
About what?

I'm sure he doesn't agree with much of anything the White House does, so why doesn't he practice what preaches?

Why would they want to resign?

(09-26-2014 01:05 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Which Owl?
And who is denying or lying?
About what?

You.
You.
That Bush was treated worse than Obama.

But at least they didn't make a movie! Right?

(09-26-2014 01:06 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-26-2014 01:05 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Which Owl?
And who is denying or lying?
About what?

You.
You.
That Bush was treated worse than Obama.

But at least they didn't make a movie! Right?

They're both treated like sh/it....and it's all warranted imho.

(09-26-2014 01:06 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-26-2014 01:05 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Which Owl?
And who is denying or lying?
About what?

You.
You.
That Bush was treated worse than Obama.

But at least they didn't make a movie! Right?

Dude, people protested him outside of his own ranch and called him a murderer. Besides, in my opinion, I don't see how resigning would be a good move. But I could be reading this wrong.

The Colorado Independent? That's your source?

(09-26-2014 01:06 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-26-2014 01:05 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Which Owl?
And who is denying or lying?
About what?

You.
You.
That Bush was treated worse than Obama.
But at least they didn't make a movie! Right?

Where have I said that Bush was treated worse than Obama?

What I've said is that your'e lying when you post this crap about how much worse Obama is treated than Bush. And you are.

How is requesting that generals resign in protest worse that what was done to Bush?

(09-26-2014 01:15 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-26-2014 01:06 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-26-2014 01:05 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Which Owl?
And who is denying or lying?
About what?

You.
You.
That Bush was treated worse than Obama.
But at least they didn't make a movie! Right?

Where have I said that Bush was treated worse than Obama?

What I've said is that your'e lying when you post this crap about how much worse Obama is treated than Bush. And you are.

How is requesting that generals resign in protest worse that what was done to Bush?

Seems pretty trivial to me as well, in regards to treatment of a president.

I'm confused... if the generals disagree with how they're told to run their troops, then yes, they should consider stepping down. They're the ones who the troops end up reporting to in the "chain of command".

(09-26-2014 01:21 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  I'm confused... if the generals disagree with how they're told to run their troops, then yes, they should consider stepping down. They're the ones who the troops end up reporting to in the "chain of command".

But if they step down, who will they be replaced with? That would be my concern.

It's very hard to lead when you have blatant dissension within. It's a neat thing they have going though and it's a great talking point. On one hand outright sabotage and create mutiny within the ranks then with the other hand complain about not having good leadership. Good work if you can find it.

(09-26-2014 01:25 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  It's very hard to lead when you have blatant dissension within. It's a neat thing they have going though and it's a great talking point. On one hand outright sabotage and create mutiny within the ranks then with the other hand complain about not having good leadership. Good work if you can find it.

But when you're the reason for the blatant dissension, it's hard to blame that on others.

And make no mistake, Obama is the reason for the blatant dissension. You don't start a good working relationship by asking the other side over to meet and then telling them, "I won. We're doing it my way. I don't care what you think." But Obama doesn't understand that because he's never done anything. He's been things--Harvard Law Review editor, adjunct professor, community organizer--but he's never accomplished anything by getting people to work together toward a common goal.

He's even been the cause of substantial dissension in his OWN party, not to mention republicans. He's pushing an agenda, not compromise.

And when those words are reflected in the actions carried out, you're damn right you're going to get dissension.

(09-26-2014 01:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-26-2014 01:25 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  It's very hard to lead when you have blatant dissension within. It's a neat thing they have going though and it's a great talking point. On one hand outright sabotage and create mutiny within the ranks then with the other hand complain about not having good leadership. Good work if you can find it.

But when you're the reason for the blatant dissension, it's hard to blame that on others.

And make no mistake, Obama is the reason for the blatant dissension. You don't start a good working relationship by asking the other side over to meet and then telling them, "I won. We're doing it my way. I don't care what you think."

And when those words are reflected in the actions carried out, you're damn right you're going to get dissension.

Try telling that to Mr. Nothing is My Fault Unless its Economy Growth or Troops Coming Home Pre-ISIS, or any fool that still carries his water.

You can't be a f-king a-hole and then wonder why nobody wants to work with you.

(09-26-2014 01:35 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  You can't be an a-hole and then wonder why nobody wants to work with you.

Bingo.


All you'll be left with are those that are ass kissers that, if you were no longer their boss, most likely not even attempt to put you out if you were on fire.

In August 1967, there came a point at which all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff -- (Chairman) Earle J. Wheeler plus leaders of the Army-Navy-Air Force-Marines -- all secretly agreed to resign en masse because of objections in the way that LBJ and McNamara (the Defense Secretary) were supervising US operations in Vietnam. McNamara in particular had just given some testimony to Congress that basically spat in the JCS' face and said they were being ignored in the formation of military strategy/policy. That's obviously not a quote but that was the basic gist of it.

The officers went home around 9pm in the evening, with an agreement to make the announcement the following morning about 8.30am. During the night, JCS Chairman Wheeler suffered intense chest-pains and when the men re-convened he told them he had changed his mind. He now considered the plan to be "mutiny", and the whole idea fell apart.

I disagree with Wheeler's idea that resignation = mutiny, and I sometimes wonder how the history of US involvement in Vietnam might have changed if the JCS resignation-plan had actually been put in to effect.

This THREAD is the new low.

(09-26-2014 01:45 PM)MonarchManiac Wrote:  This THREAD is the new low.

Really? How so?