Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
edjr

can you imagine 8 more years of republican whining if Hillary is elected?

Recommended Posts

Rand Paul is officially in. At least there's one person I like even if his chances are small. So now it evens out in that we have somebody I'm sure to vote for rather than Hillary joining somebody who will certainly lose my vote to Hillary. Still a long way to go and many more candidates to be evaluated.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rand Paul is officially in.

 

:pointstosky:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the Benny Hill theme plays in my head.

That is an awesome music theme. I also like Sanford and Son.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rand Paul is officially in. At least there's one person I like even if his chances are small. So now it evens out in that we have somebody I'm sure to vote for rather than Hillary joining somebody who will certainly lose my vote to Hillary. Still a long way to go and many more candidates to be evaluated.

I like Rand Paul's stance on civil liberties but otherwise he sounds like a dangerous moonbat imo.

 

However I know that you favor more of an isolationist foreign policy so I can see why he is your guy :cheers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Rand Paul's stance on civil liberties but otherwise he sounds like a dangerous moonbat imo.

 

However I know that you favor more of an isolationist foreign policy so I can see why he is your guy :cheers:

moonbat is a term for your type

 

hth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Rand Paul's stance on civil liberties but otherwise he sounds like a dangerous moonbat imo.

 

However I know that you favor more of an isolationist foreign policy so I can see why he is your guy :cheers:

I'm generally pretty conservative. Foreign policy is a big issue with me and really, by far the single-most important reason I voted Obummer rather than McCain in 2008 since I was otherwise more aligned with McCain across a broad swath of minor issues rather than I was Obummer. Had McCain not been so maddeningly wrong on Iraq, it would have been easy to vote for him, instead it kept me undecided all that summer and eventually cost him my vote. GOP foreign policy has been a nightmare since Daddy Bush left office.

 

I also would have easily voted for Romney 1.0 over Obummer as well. But that guy was totally renounced and nowhere to be seen when the time came to evaluate the remnants of the Romney we had presented to us as a presidential option. Easy to pass on without really a shot at even considering as a viable alternative. Far worse than Romney, the Bushtard was never an option, we have almost no overlap nor the slightest shred of appeal. And so I've voted Dem four straight presidential elections, having gone with Ross the two before that.

 

That Paul is better on foreign policy than Hillary is a huge chip to steal out from under the Dems. That'd leave the Dems with environmental policy and banking reform which are important but won't be enough and aren't really Hillary's major issues anyways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm generally pretty conservative. Foreign policy is a big issue with me and really, by far the single-most important reason I voted Obummer rather than McCain in 2008 since I was otherwise more aligned with McCain across a broad swath of minor issues rather than I was Obummer. Had McCain not been so maddeningly wrong on Iraq, it would have been easy to vote for him, instead it kept me undecided all that summer and eventually cost him my vote. GOP foreign policy has been a nightmare since Daddy Bush left office.

 

I also would have easily voted for Romney 1.0 over Obummer as well. But that guy was totally renounced and nowhere to be seen when the time came to evaluate the remnants of the Romney we had presented to us as a presidential option. Easy to pass on without really a shot at even considering as a viable alternative. Far worse than Romney, the Bushtard was never an option, we have almost no overlap nor the slightest shred of appeal. And so I've voted Dem four straight presidential elections, having gone with Ross the two before that.

 

That Paul is better on foreign policy than Hillary is a huge chip to steal out from under the Dems. That'd leave the Dems with environmental policy and banking reform which are important but won't be enough and aren't really Hillary's major issues anyways.

I don't think very many people would agree that Rand is better than Hillary on foreign policy. What is Rand's experience? Hillary was secretary of state. Also I think most Americans do not support an isolationist policy although they're also against protracted military intervention

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think very many people would agree that Rand is better than Hillary on foreign policy. What is Rand's experience? Hillary was secretary of state. Also I think most Americans do not support an isolationist policy although they're also against protracted military intervention

Hillary as SOS was a clusterfukk of epic proportions.

 

A retarded slug couldn't do as much damage as she did. :doh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hillary as SOS was a clusterfukk of epic proportions.

 

A retarded slug couldn't do as much damage as she did. :doh:

imagine all the fun she'll have as pous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hillary as SOS was a clusterfukk of epic proportions.

 

A retarded slug couldn't do as much damage as she did. :doh:

 

 

Example? I know that's asking a lot from you, but go ahead and try your best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

moonbat is a term for your type

 

hth

Yah guys. It's not the guy who votes for a guy whose lord and savior is a child rapist. It's the guys who vote for a black guy or woman. Y'all fockin moonbat crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Example? I know that's asking a lot from you, but go ahead and try your best.

Benghazi of course. The republican rallying cry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Libya

 

No one asked you, you stupid pollack. And a one word reply would be about the extent of your capabilities. And besides, it's already been established that Libya is on Reagan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one asked you, you stupid pollack. And a one word reply would be about the extent of your capabilities. And besides, it's already been established that Libya is on Reagan.

Link?

The name calling really shows who you are! Sad! Sad! Sad!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Link?

The name calling really shows who you are!

Pot...meet the kettle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pot...meet the kettle

Well look it is our resident racist. Explain to us the plight of the Black American. Tell us what they think and feel, explain to us what they really mean when they say something. These are your words not mine, I find this racist what do you call it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well look it is our resident racist. Explain to us the plight of the Black American. Tell us what they think and feel, explain to us what they really mean when they say something. These are your words not mine, I find this racist what do you call it?

Trying that BS again huh?

And no, thise are your version of my words.

 

Better get over to that Iran thread you ran away from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Benghazi of course. The republican rallying cry.

It's true that ithe Benghazi bosessors who hate Obummer and Hillary are idiots but Libya still qualifies as a failure anyways. We got involved in a civil war we had no business in and our efforts made thing worse.

 

Before I go there though, let's start with some positives that I admire about Obummer and Hillary regarding our efforts in Libya. What I really like about Libya is how we got regime change on the cheap. Just some airstrikes and no combat troops. If we're going to invade in the future, this is how I want to see it done. It's easy on the budget.

 

Unfortunately, sometimes just blowing up Muslim turds you don't like, even if you can do it on the cheap, isn't always the best thing. You have to consider the day after. Sometimes your better off with the sh*tbag you know rather than roll the dice on the sh*tbag you don't. The place is a mess now and is worse off for our efforts. Libya would be better off with Uncle Moe just like Iraq would be better off with Saddam. I mean they both hate us but they couldn't do anything to us and were mostly horrible to the own minority tribes and clans which is none of our business.

 

Now if you expect me to get upset about taking three weeks to declare Benghazi a terrorist attack rather than doing so instantaneously, or anything Susan Rice said on TV, I'm out the door.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×