You are a moron. Its no surprise you see it that way, considering most of your posts are laced with bias. What do you call a group of people sworn to serve the people, meeting for the sole purpose of trying to get the president to fail? Mitch and his friends got together not to help America, but to do everything in their power to make Obama fail, which would in turn would be negative for this country as well. Perfect example of party over country, and country meant nothing to them in that instance. I don't see dems doing that, in which case they would be treasonous as well. If you are an elected official serving this country...and you don't, you are in fact betraying the American people and thus this country. It warms my heart to know you know how to google though. Keep it up Special Cadet, we'll ween you into critical thinking soon enough.
It is often said that those with low intelligence use hyperboles, simply because they can't understand context or severity in a proper interpretation. And its funny, women protesting a president who wants to overturn R v W and has documented sexually harassing rhetoric on record ---is whining. So in that case they should get on their knees for emperor Trump right? I'm just amazed at how you can continue to post saying this type of stuff.
I'll remember you said this when the Republican congress is forcing things through the opposition of the Democrats for the next 4 years. I would never be so rude as to suggest that's why you've resorted to ridiculous hyperbole......but you might be right.
I'm not a democrat, if they do the same then they be damned. Its a quote, I didn't state whether I thought it to be true or not. Calling my stance on hyperbole a hyperbole, is in fact...making it a hyperbole.
I was calling your stance on the Republicans not rubber stamping Obama's agenda hyperbole given that anyone with a fully functioning brain knows that it's not actually treason. Try to keep up.
Did you really have the audacity to say "deep care for the victims"? There are tens of thousands of dead innocent civilians in Syria that are a direct result of his backing islamic rebel groups and advocating for regime change. ISIS could have been crushed in its infancy if Obama had worked with the secular Syrian government and Russia. Those deaths are on him. And I don't believe he gives two ***** about them.
You do realize that was addressed as being factually incorrect in the post previous to yours right? I'm sorry but your posts are full of irony..."keep up" when you can't demonstrate rudimentary reading abilities? "half a brain" when the majority of the forum sees you as the short bus crew. lol man. Like I said, options being presented in extreme ways...but if a perceived internet victory makes your day I'll be glad to make it so. Let me know if there is anything I can do to help, from basic tutoring in reading to what society sees as right and wrong. Lets not forget the comparison of Spicer's propaganda to anything previous administrations have done. You sir lack the basic tools to effectively understand the discussion, internalize it to come up with an opinion, come up with a logical answer, and deliver it effectively. I won't put you on ignore for the simple fact of not wanting to hurt your feelings.
Wow, you are really proving to be slow. If you aren't bright enough to understand that you responded with yet more rhetoric after being called out for your rhetoric.....then I guess I just can't help you. I gave you a chance to catch up with the big kids, and just admit your mistake and move on, but well....at least you tried probably.
Trumpanzee magic, where you turn a brutal, terrorist sponsor dictatorship propped up by Iran and Russia into a "secular" Syrian government fighting terrorists. Syria has been on the state sponsors of terrorist list longer than any country in the world. Clueless. Spare me the innocent civilians routine. There are millions of innocent civilians who now have health care insurance because of Obama, not that you give two damns about any of that. America first and all that. Obama bluffed on Syria and his bluff was called. His choice was to attack Syria and come into direct conflict with Russia or to put as much pressure on them as he could without getting himself into a quagmire. If he had attacked Syria people like you would have railed against him for starting an unnecessary war. No matter what Obama does, people like yourself will say he should have done the opposite.
lol. This ladies and gentleman, is what insecurity sounds like. Lacks the basic tools to understand what has been said, can simply scroll up and try again but has thrown in the towel and concedes his limitations. At the age of mid 30s to 40s it is a bit concerning but it is safe to say that he has reached his pinnacle, as low as it may be and finds an avenue of trying to be "the man" or smart in front us. We'll let you have it bobby. Too much off the forum has you on ignore or has already established you as r****ded. I don't want to go into either category for the sake of clubbing baby seals. I look forward to seeing your response during my lunch break tomorrow. I imagine it will be crafted in as try hard of a manner as before, but you never stop being you ponyboy. Take care bud. For the record, if it was anybody else I would take a great amount of time in breaking it down. Here it would just be a loss however.
It's okay little man, perhaps one day you'll be able to talk with the big kids. Till then, I'll just go ahead and ignore you because we really don't need you drooling all over the thread simply because you aren't bright enough to understand your own words. Let's all remember that this started because you are too stupid to realize that accusing the congress of treason for not going along with Obama's agenda is just ridiculous rhetoric. Have fun.
I'll bite for a second, is the bar really at "going along with Obama's agenda" or was it meeting before the president ever had to unveil his agenda---and vowing to oppose him at every turn? You know...its crazy, because I think the latter statement is actually documented as a fact! I think I may be onto something here Bobby...wanna help me dig? So lets take it slow, if a republican congress, sworn to serve the people....meets for the sole purpose of causing obstruction---with no reason for doing so as Obama had just taken office----really serving this country? If I had to take a bet I'd say they were serving their own interests. You know what else!... Its crazy but I think their job as elected officials in the legislative branch was to serve the people and not waste tax payer time, money, and their elected seat---all of which is derived from the citizens themselves. Serving their self interests in that way, something which isn't in the best interest of the american people and this country is in fact betraying this country. I know the success ladder hasn't been kind to you, but someone on the internet just took a great deal of time in breaking things down. I expect a thank you and a PM on how you can do better in life Bobby : )
With every post you further prove how out of your league you are trying to have adult political conversation. At this point I don't even feel like busting out the crayons to explain to you in a way you might understand just how wrong you are about this.....so you'll just have to remain horribly ignorant for now. Hopefully you do some work on your own and one day show back up as a more worthy poster. Out of infinite kindness on my part, I will however give you a place to start in your attempts to inform yourself, try and look up what those Republicans ran on, you know, what they told the people they would do if they were elected. Find out why the people wanted so much to help the Republicans strip power from the president. Here's a hint, it wasn't treasonous. Now I've just given you homework that given your level of competency could take you years, good luck kiddo. You'll likely need it.
I think that the conversation is going over your head and you still haven't realized it... Ignorance is bliss though, having shortcomings as severe as that and not being cognizant allows you to function--- in whatever limited skill occupation it is that you keep busy with. You just be you bobby! If it helps you put a meal on the table every night who am I to judge. Just respect your betters is all.
It's adorable that you ignorantly lash out like this....but I think I'll do the board a favor and just finally put you on ignore so that you can stop drooling all over the thread. You've proven incapable of adding anything of value and aren't even intelligent enough to understand your own words. Just yet another reminder that all of this started because you are too stupid to understand that literally accusing the congress of treason for not going along with Obama's agenda is ridiculous rhetoric. I mean, seriously, you want me to believe you are that dumb? Fair enough. If this was all one big troll job, then congratulations, I bit for a while by making the mistake of treating you as if you were worthy of reply.....you've proven since then that you are absolutely not. Anyway, get some sleep kiddo, it's over.
Please... A brutal, terrorist sponsor? Stop swallowing the establishment propaganda hook, line, and sinker. Syria has only been on the terrorist sponsor list due to their support of Hezbollah, of which there is contention as to even whether or not they can be considered a terrorist organization. And since 1986 Syria has not provided direct support to any so-called terrorist organizations and has barred them from staging operations within Syrian territory. Syria is hostile to Al Qaeda and was quick to condemn the 9/11 attacks and even shared intelligence information with the United States relating to the 9/11 attacks. Syria is a secular dictatorship. Assad is western-educated and has a British-born wife. Assad has long protected the Christian minority in Syria. Is Assad harsh and unrelenting against his political opponents? Certainly. That's necessary to retain power in an environment such as that. Is his regime preferable to that of the various islamic zealots that President Obama supported against him? Certainly. Obama picked the wrong side and supported "moderate" rebels who in many cases turned out to be terrorists themselves. So, in a way, you could say the US is a state sponsor of terrorism now too thanks to Obama. You mention millions of people who now have health insurance because of Obama. Why should I give a **** about them? They should get off their lazy asses and get a job that provides health insurance like myself and tens of millions of responsible people do. And if they are unable to work that is what Medicare & Medicaid are for. The government should not be in the business of providing subsidies so that people who are able to work can have discounted health insurance.
President Obama did not pardon Chelsea Manning. You can b**** about many things but at least get the most simple facts right. Or, is this the "alternative fact" the right is going with?
