Obamagate

Status
Not open for further replies.
RobAnybody said:
I'm responsible for the Detroit Tigers being in the World Series. I wrote it on the internet, therefore it must be true & no one should question it once they read this sentence.
Click to expand...

I believe you 100%, an anonymous internet forum poster that I don't believe I've ever read before!
 
Republicans seem to want this to be something SO BAD. Other than this, all they have is Solyndra. I almost feel sorry for them, but then I remembered the Dems couldn't win in 2004 with all the scandals and corruption in the world.
 
Azale said:
Republicans seem to want this to be something SO BAD. Other than this, all they have is Solyndra. I almost feel sorry for them, but then I remembered the Dems couldn't win in 2004 with all the scandals and corruption in the world.
Click to expand...

Soylandra is pretty weak too. Fast and Furious is probably the closest to being a Somethingate (Holdergate?).
 
Cutlass said:
He sold grain to the Soviets at heavily subsidized prices, so in effect the US taxpayer was paying for Soviet missiles pointed at the US. He sold weapons to the Iranians, knowing that those weapons would be used against America and our allies. And he may have collaborated with Iran on the hostage release to embarrass a political opponent, even though he had no legal right to be involved in foreign affairs before he was sworn in.
Click to expand...

I don't know aboutt the other two, I'm not familiar enough with the Reagan administration and would have to look further into it.

That said, if he negotiated the release of those hostages, good on him. Regardless of whether he was in office at the time. That obviously shouldn't have mattered.
 
He bargained with the Iranians to hold the hostages until his first day in office. Then he did nothing to get revenge.

His response to a terrorist attack that killed hundreds of our citizens in Beirut? Cut and run.
 
I actually talked to a senior state department official (and two time ambassador, and guy tasked with transferring diplomacy with Iraq from the military to the state dept after the way) about this a couple weeks ago before the conclusion was in, but after we suspected it was only a terrorist attack. He still thought it was partly a protest.
 
GhostWriter16 said:
I don't know aboutt the other two, I'm not familiar enough with the Reagan administration and would have to look further into it.

That said, if he negotiated the release of those hostages, good on him. Regardless of whether he was in office at the time. That obviously shouldn't have mattered.
Click to expand...
Once a president gets elected, their job begins. Obama was doing it, Bush was doing it, etc. To suggest that no future planning be done until the moment the person is sworn in is ridiculous.
Cutlass is just mad because Reagan did such a good job where Carter was an abject failure.
 
kochman said:
Once a president gets elected, their job begins. Obama was doing it, Bush was doing it, etc. To suggest that no future planning be done until the moment the person is sworn in is ridiculous.
Cutlass is just mad because Reagan did such a good job where Carter was an abject failure.
Click to expand...

No, Cutlass is mad because Reagan did us and the world some bad. Carter was not a failure, and the hostage release to happen during Reagan's first day and not ASAP was more than partisan shadiness.
 
Hygro said:
No, Cutlass is mad because Reagan did us and the world some bad. Carter was not a failure, and the hostage release to happen during Reagan's first day and not ASAP was more than partisan shadiness.
Click to expand...
Oh, so you guys think that Reagan conspired with the Ayatollah against Carter specifically.

Cutlass is mad because his agenda only allows him to compliment or accept goodness from people with D's in their title and not R's. He doesn't actually hide it or contest that idea.
 
kochman said:
Ummm, no, it's been documented..
Click to expand...
Then you won't have any difficulty at all proving that is indeed the case. The official administration position on the issue continues to directly contradict both of those assertions.
 
kochman said:
Oh, so you guys think that Reagan conspired with the Ayatollah against Carter specifically.

Cutlass is mad because his agenda only allows him to compliment or accept goodness from people with D's in their title and not R's. He doesn't actually hide it or contest that idea.
Click to expand...

Well, except when those "R"s kill hundreds of thousands of people in order to fight against self-determination, then and only then are they good people.

Cutlass is one of the most straight out partisan posters I've ever seen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom