(01-30-2016 05:19 PM)EagleX Wrote:  I remember when we weren't every dictator and thug on the planet's party b*tch. and it's always booty call. put on your clean panties, john kerry. the phone is ringing. it's time to go.

Awwww...the neocons have a bruised ego. Only WWIII will cure their itch. Ridiculous.

(02-01-2016 09:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 05:19 PM)EagleX Wrote:  I remember when we weren't every dictator and thug on the planet's party b*tch. and it's always booty call. put on your clean panties, john kerry. the phone is ringing. it's time to go.

Awwww...the neocons have a bruised ego. Only WWIII will cure their itch. Ridiculous.

there is that word again. I've never seen a liberal that could define "neoconservative", yet they can't stop themselves from using it.

the thing that is going to start wwiii is obama's rudderless foreign policy. weakness is provocative. and when we get there, it will be sure to be with a nuclear armed iran. wear it, dude. you're building it, not us.

(01-30-2016 02:51 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 11:49 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 11:45 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 11:41 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  So an unmanned drone flew over a US carrier and we did not shoot the thing down? Did they know it was unmanned?

Supposedly they knew it was unarmed, but it's still a reconnaissance drone. Iran doesn't need real-time photos of an aircraft carrier that can help them determine the type and number of aircraft on board, and whether or not they are currently carrying out flight operations.

How did they know it wasn't packed full of explosives?

Why would Iran do that? If they did, they would be wiped off the map.

Never stopped Terrorists before, Why would Iranian Terrorists be any different ?

(02-01-2016 10:00 AM)EagleX Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 09:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 05:19 PM)EagleX Wrote:  I remember when we weren't every dictator and thug on the planet's party b*tch. and it's always booty call. put on your clean panties, john kerry. the phone is ringing. it's time to go.

Awwww...the neocons have a bruised ego. Only WWIII will cure their itch. Ridiculous.

there is that word again. I've never seen a liberal that could define "neoconservative", yet they can't stop themselves from using it.

the thing that is going to start wwiii is obama's rudderless foreign policy. weakness is provocative. and when we get there, it will be sure to be with a nuclear armed iran. wear it, dude. you're building it, not us.

Are you going on record that WWIII will happen in the next year?

And for your definition, I don't know why we need to define it...Merriam-Webster already has...and it's pretty clear.

Quote:a conservative who advocates the assertive promotion of democracy and United States national interest in international affairs including through military means.

(02-01-2016 10:27 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 10:00 AM)EagleX Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 09:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 05:19 PM)EagleX Wrote:  I remember when we weren't every dictator and thug on the planet's party b*tch. and it's always booty call. put on your clean panties, john kerry. the phone is ringing. it's time to go.

Awwww...the neocons have a bruised ego. Only WWIII will cure their itch. Ridiculous.

there is that word again. I've never seen a liberal that could define "neoconservative", yet they can't stop themselves from using it.

the thing that is going to start wwiii is obama's rudderless foreign policy. weakness is provocative. and when we get there, it will be sure to be with a nuclear armed iran. wear it, dude. you're building it, not us.

Are you going on record that WWIII will happen in the next year?

And for your definition, I don't know why we need to define it...Merriam-Webster already has...and it's pretty clear.

Quote:a conservative who advocates the assertive promotion of democracy and United States national interest in international affairs including through military means.

no, typical of this president, all of his chickens will come home to roost after he has left office. then, he will blame his successor for squandering his legacy just like he blamed his predecessor for all of his failures.

a neoconservative is a former liberal that, for openers, originally switched sides because they couldn't stomach the left's embrace of communism.

(01-30-2016 02:51 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 11:49 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 11:45 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 11:41 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  So an unmanned drone flew over a US carrier and we did not shoot the thing down? Did they know it was unmanned?

Supposedly they knew it was unarmed, but it's still a reconnaissance drone. Iran doesn't need real-time photos of an aircraft carrier that can help them determine the type and number of aircraft on board, and whether or not they are currently carrying out flight operations.

How did they know it wasn't packed full of explosives?

Why would Iran do that? If they did, they would be wiped off the map.

We have yet to wipe any terrorist group off the map. What makes you think we'd start with Iran?

(02-01-2016 10:31 AM)EagleX Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 10:27 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 10:00 AM)EagleX Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 09:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 05:19 PM)EagleX Wrote:  I remember when we weren't every dictator and thug on the planet's party b*tch. and it's always booty call. put on your clean panties, john kerry. the phone is ringing. it's time to go.

Awwww...the neocons have a bruised ego. Only WWIII will cure their itch. Ridiculous.

there is that word again. I've never seen a liberal that could define "neoconservative", yet they can't stop themselves from using it.

the thing that is going to start wwiii is obama's rudderless foreign policy. weakness is provocative. and when we get there, it will be sure to be with a nuclear armed iran. wear it, dude. you're building it, not us.

Are you going on record that WWIII will happen in the next year?

And for your definition, I don't know why we need to define it...Merriam-Webster already has...and it's pretty clear.

Quote:a conservative who advocates the assertive promotion of democracy and United States national interest in international affairs including through military means.

no, typical of this president, all of his chickens will come home to roost after he has left office. then, he will blame his successor for squandering his legacy just like he blamed his predecessor for all of his failures.

Pfft. He blamed Bush for the economy that he turned around. Hardly a failure. He blamed bush for creating ISIS...still a work in progress and by no means a failure.

(02-01-2016 10:31 AM)EagleX Wrote:  a neoconservative is a former liberal that, for openers, originally switched sides because they couldn't stomach the left's embrace of communism.

That's completely ridiculous. It's not 1970 anymore! Would you prefer hawk?

(02-01-2016 11:18 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 10:31 AM)EagleX Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 10:27 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 10:00 AM)EagleX Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 09:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Awwww...the neocons have a bruised ego. Only WWIII will cure their itch. Ridiculous.

there is that word again. I've never seen a liberal that could define "neoconservative", yet they can't stop themselves from using it.

the thing that is going to start wwiii is obama's rudderless foreign policy. weakness is provocative. and when we get there, it will be sure to be with a nuclear armed iran. wear it, dude. you're building it, not us.

Are you going on record that WWIII will happen in the next year?

And for your definition, I don't know why we need to define it...Merriam-Webster already has...and it's pretty clear.

Quote:a conservative who advocates the assertive promotion of democracy and United States national interest in international affairs including through military means.

no, typical of this president, all of his chickens will come home to roost after he has left office. then, he will blame his successor for squandering his legacy just like he blamed his predecessor for all of his failures.

Pfft. He blamed Bush for the economy that he turned around. Hardly a failure. He blamed bush for creating ISIS...still a work in progress and by no means a failure.

(02-01-2016 10:31 AM)EagleX Wrote:  a neoconservative is a former liberal that, for openers, originally switched sides because they couldn't stomach the left's embrace of communism.

That's completely ridiculous. It's not 1970 anymore! Would you prefer hawk?

newsflash; the recession was over in the second quarter of 2009, before the first flaccid stimulus buck ever hit the economy. and the economy that he "turned around" was flat last quarter. the house of cards is trembling. it probably won't collapse until the next guy/gal takes office.

Seriously...one quarter? A quarter which while slow still showed a small growth mind you?

The hoops that some have to jump through...lol

(02-01-2016 11:34 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Seriously...one quarter? A quarter which while slow still showed a small growth mind you?

The hoops that some have to jump through...lol

Have a feeling the world is going to pull us down for a while going forward.

(02-01-2016 11:35 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 11:34 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Seriously...one quarter? A quarter which while slow still showed a small growth mind you?

The hoops that some have to jump through...lol

Have a feeling the world is going to pull us down for a while going forward.

Probably. The economy is continually moving in a more global direction. And while yes, we may see some downturn, look at China and other places. We're still by far the most stable.

(02-01-2016 11:34 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Seriously...one quarter? A quarter which while slow still showed a small growth mind you?

The hoops that some have to jump through...lol

this economy would be booming if it was not for the obamite health care "reform", the war on fossil fuels, inference in the private sector, and intimidation of capital. their foreign policy megafail in the mideast isn't helping, either.

(02-01-2016 11:48 AM)EagleX Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 11:34 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Seriously...one quarter? A quarter which while slow still showed a small growth mind you?

The hoops that some have to jump through...lol

this economy would be booming if it was not for the obamite health care "reform", the war on fossil fuels, inference in the private sector, and intimidation of capital. their foreign policy megafail in the mideast isn't helping, either.

Can you source this please? Thanks.

(02-01-2016 11:58 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 11:48 AM)EagleX Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 11:34 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Seriously...one quarter? A quarter which while slow still showed a small growth mind you?

The hoops that some have to jump through...lol

this economy would be booming if it was not for the obamite health care "reform", the war on fossil fuels, inference in the private sector, and intimidation of capital. their foreign policy megafail in the mideast isn't helping, either.

Can you source this please? Thanks.

it's the exact same source the president used when he said that, if not for his courageous actions, the economy would have completely collapsed. completely collapsed, as in: would have made the great depression seem like the good old days.

if it's good enough for him, it's good enough for you.

awesome. you totally walked into that one.

(02-01-2016 12:10 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 11:58 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 11:48 AM)EagleX Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 11:34 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Seriously...one quarter? A quarter which while slow still showed a small growth mind you?

The hoops that some have to jump through...lol

this economy would be booming if it was not for the obamite health care "reform", the war on fossil fuels, inference in the private sector, and intimidation of capital. their foreign policy megafail in the mideast isn't helping, either.

Can you source this please? Thanks.

it's the exact same source the president used when he said that, if not for his courageous actions, the economy would have completely collapsed. completely collapsed, as in: would have made the great depression seem like the good old days.

if it's good enough for him, it's good enough for you.

awesome. you totally walked into that one.

(02-01-2016 01:15 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 12:10 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 11:58 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 11:48 AM)EagleX Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 11:34 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Seriously...one quarter? A quarter which while slow still showed a small growth mind you?

The hoops that some have to jump through...lol

this economy would be booming if it was not for the obamite health care "reform", the war on fossil fuels, inference in the private sector, and intimidation of capital. their foreign policy megafail in the mideast isn't helping, either.

Can you source this please? Thanks.

it's the exact same source the president used when he said that, if not for his courageous actions, the economy would have completely collapsed. completely collapsed, as in: would have made the great depression seem like the good old days.

if it's good enough for him, it's good enough for you.

awesome. you totally walked into that one.

no, I think he was totally sober when he said that.

(02-01-2016 01:26 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 01:15 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 12:10 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 11:58 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 11:48 AM)EagleX Wrote:  this economy would be booming if it was not for the obamite health care "reform", the war on fossil fuels, inference in the private sector, and intimidation of capital. their foreign policy megafail in the mideast isn't helping, either.

Can you source this please? Thanks.

it's the exact same source the president used when he said that, if not for his courageous actions, the economy would have completely collapsed. completely collapsed, as in: would have made the great depression seem like the good old days.

if it's good enough for him, it's good enough for you.

awesome. you totally walked into that one.

no, I think he was totally sober when he said that.

How would anyone know...you still never provided a source.

(02-01-2016 01:34 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 01:26 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 01:15 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 12:10 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 11:58 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Can you source this please? Thanks.

it's the exact same source the president used when he said that, if not for his courageous actions, the economy would have completely collapsed. completely collapsed, as in: would have made the great depression seem like the good old days.

if it's good enough for him, it's good enough for you.

awesome. you totally walked into that one.

no, I think he was totally sober when he said that.

How would anyone know...you still never provided a source.

Jesus.

Sorry, the point...isn't.

(02-01-2016 11:42 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 11:35 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 11:34 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Seriously...one quarter? A quarter which while slow still showed a small growth mind you?

The hoops that some have to jump through...lol

Have a feeling the world is going to pull us down for a while going forward.

Probably. The economy is continually moving in a more global direction. And while yes, we may see some downturn, look at China and other places. We're still by far the most stable.

Link?