• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Fool us once shame on them, fool us twice shame on us

Loki97 said:
I wouldn't give up my day job for the comedy circuit if I were you. I'm also sure the other conservatives who have expressed the same ideas are all being sarcastic also. If you can't understand the difference between engaging in a war where some collateral damage is unavoidable and torturing people then there probably is no real hope for you. The United States bombed both Germany and Japan extensively during WW II and caused heavy civilian casualties. We did not torture people however. I really think the right just is obsessed with water boarding because they get some kind of sexual thrill out of the idea.
Click to expand...

You really don't know anyone who served in the thick of it during WWII do you? That and/or they didn't talk to you about their experiences. War is hell and that one was no exception. The difference now is that the DOD has a hard time keeping things out of the press, that wasn't so then.

My father was in the first wave that took Tarawa. The 1st and 2cd Marines didn't have time to take prisoners and were under orders not to. They just threw them in a cave (the Japanese had dug an extensive cave system) and turned the flamethrowers on them. Later after the battle (not just Tarawa, but everywhere in both the Pacific and Euro theatres), GIs were fleecing the dead and pulling gold teeth.

You better believe we tortured the hell out of captured Germans and Japanese to get the info we needed most riki tik. Waterboarding, that was ***** compared to what went on to get vital info.
 
shiang said:
How's Romney really different from Bush. Same warhawk rhetoric, almost identical economic policies (only more extreme with further tax cuts, deregulation, and voucher system for healthcare).


They also claim to cut deficit spending

History of Deficits and Surpluses In The United States


They say "whoever gives away the most wins the election"

Who gave huge tax cuts? Not Obama.

Bush didn't win because of failing to slow the high tech collapse of 2001.
Click to expand...

LMFAO... With the title of this thread, I thought it was going to be about the Obama Hype message... and how people arent falling for it this time around...
 
clownboy said:
You really don't know anyone who served in the thick of it during WWII do you? That and/or they didn't talk to you about their experiences. War is hell and that one was no exception. The difference now is that the DOD has a hard time keeping things out of the press, that wasn't so then.

My father was in the first wave that took Tarawa. The 1st and 2cd Marines didn't have time to take prisoners and were under orders not to. They just threw them in a cave (the Japanese had dug an extensive cave system) and turned the flamethrowers on them. Later after the battle (not just Tarawa, but everywhere in both the Pacific and Euro theatres), GIs were fleecing the dead and pulling gold teeth.

You better believe we tortured the hell out of captured Germans and Japanese to get the info we needed most riki tik. Waterboarding, that was ***** compared to what went on to get vital info.
Click to expand...

Sorry, your anecdotal evidence doesn't impress me. While killing soldiers you can't take into captivity and looting the dead may be unethical in their own right, neither is the same as torturing prisoners already taken. The only documented incident I can find during WW II was during Operation Teardrop in the closing months of the war and an official Navy investigation was held afterwards which would indicate the methods employed were not officially sanctioned. That is the big distinction between your war stories, which sound as if they were gleaned from watching HBO's "The Pacific", and official policy. While it may not be possible to completely control the behavior of troops under immense stress on the battlefield, it is much easier to refuse to stoop to a barbaric and usually unnecessary level of sanctioned torture of POWs.
 
I mean lets be honest, Obama's not perfect but his policies are a lot better than Bush and Romney seems no different. I personally don't like this saying but conservatives love it so here goes.

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

BTW the saying came from the "Red Scare" with the anti communist movement.
 
Last edited:
Zyphlin said:
I'll give you a hint....spouting out useless liberal talking points and thinking saying "BAINE" is going to scare me is going to get you no where with me.

He's an unknown in terms of how he'll act as President, because he has never acted as President. While we can make a number of assumptions about him as President, ultimately we won't know how he'll act as President until a point he's elected an in the position.

Based on what I can glimmer from Romney's multifaceted past, it wouldn't shock me if he's as bad on the issues as Obama and Bush have been based on what's important to me on those issues. That said, he at least has a slimmer more of a chance...based both on his unknown status in the position and his history in terms of his seeming ability to waver to public opinion...to act in a way that I prefer over how either of them have acted.
Click to expand...

Hell Marry's don't usually end well in pro football :).
 
Ah, the liberals are trying to run against President Bush again.

The tax cuts give nothing to President Obama's supporters because most of them pay no income tax.

How is this Obama candidate different from the last Obama candidate? He isn't. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on you. Except a sense of shame requires a sense of responsibility and President Obama has no sense of responsibility. He'll take credit for making your company grow but he won't take the blame for the bankruptcies.

How is Barack Obama different from Hugo Chavez or Joseph Stalin or Pol Pot?
 
305rob305 said:
Killing someone with a drone is self defense?? Who's the victim? The drone? Lol
Click to expand...

So you think we shold keep human targets in the M.E. on a permanent basis? So some a-hole can blow his legs off? I volunteer your sons to go first then.
Drones are the most humane method of eliminating terror cells that threaten our security There is much less collateral damage than sending troops.
 
iguanaman said:
So the difference is the name? I was hoping for more than that.
Click to expand...

How's Obama different from Bush? He's not much, which should infuriate a liberal like you. But it doesn't because he's the Messiah right?
 
Patrickt said:
Ah, the liberals are trying to run against President Bush again.

The tax cuts give nothing to President Obama's supporters because most of them pay no income tax.

How is this Obama candidate different from the last Obama candidate? He isn't. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on you. Except a sense of shame requires a sense of responsibility and President Obama has no sense of responsibility. He'll take credit for making your company grow but he won't take the blame for the bankruptcies.

How is Barack Obama different from Hugo Chavez or Joseph Stalin or Pol Pot?
Click to expand...

Tax cuts that mostly benefit the rich = Bush. And "If it quacks like a Bush"............
 
American said:
How's Obama different from Bush? He's not much, which should infuriate a liberal like you. But it doesn't because he's the Messiah right?
Click to expand...

He different in a most important way. He knows how to clean up alot of huge messes and mistakes. Bush seemed only able to make them.
 
Peter King said:
Since when does one have to give terrorists that are not in the custody of the US due process? Killing terrorists is self defense, torture is not self defense, it is forbidden.
Click to expand...

Self defense is a predator drone half way around the world in a country we down own or we were asked to protect? Sounds like invasion.
 
Blue_State said:
Self defense is a predator drone half way around the world in a country we down own or we were asked to protect? Sounds like invasion.
Click to expand...

So the drone strikes are a no no because they "sound like invasion" but ACTUAL INVASION of two COUNTRIES is just fine?
 
Peter King said:
Since when does one have to give terrorists that are not in the custody of the US due process? Killing terrorists is self defense, torture is not self defense, it is forbidden.
Click to expand...

Yeah, don't ever capture them and put them in Clubgetmo, just kill them, instead.
 
shiang said:
How's Romney really different from Bush. Same warhawk rhetoric, almost identical economic policies (only more extreme with further tax cuts, deregulation, and voucher system for healthcare).


They also claim to cut deficit spending

History of Deficits and Surpluses In The United States


They say "whoever gives away the most wins the election"

Who gave huge tax cuts? Not Obama.

Bush didn't win because of failing to slow the high tech collapse of 2001.
Click to expand...

Would you please forget Bush and stop comparing everyone to him? He's not running for the presidency. Never will. Good God.

How is Romney different from Obama?? That's the question voters should be asking.

In my mind, Romney is willing to do some serious reform in our tax code. That's needed. Simply raising tax percentages to raise tax revenue isn't the answer. The answer is a complete overhaul of our ridiculously complicated, full-of-loopholes tax code. Romney's willing to go there. Obama isn't.

Romney has a business head on his shoulders. We need that right now. We don't need a community organizer who has shown that he thinks "business" is somehow not a good thing. I don't know who he thinks built the United States of America from its pioneer days; but it certainly wasn't community groups. It was business. And now, somehow, we're to believe that business doesn't give a damn about this country. If this country's economy isn't healthy? Neither is business. (Oh, that would be UNLESS the government bails them out.)

President Obama and the Federal Reserve under his presidency has done more to harm seniors than any other president in recent history. By keeping interest rates at historic lows, the FR has decimated seniors' retirement plans. Interest rates are so low that those who counted on interest income are now forced into risky stocks and bonds in order to supplement their Social Security. Oh, that would be UNLESS you're some of the lucky PUBLIC sector workers who have defined benefits pension plans. Then, their pensions are paid by, among others, seniors who can barely fund their lifestyles.
 
AdamT said:
I honestly don't know how you can compare Romney to Obama, as Romney changes positions with lightening speed. It's ironic that those on the right are over the moon with Romney's debate performance, when his success is almost entirely attributable to his tossing overboard right wing ballast -- or at least pretending to. Romney has done this so consistently over the years that it's impossible to say who the "real" Romney is and what he would do if he wasn't guided entirely by political expediency. Is he for restricting abortion or against it? For gun control or against? For tax cuts or against them? For health care reform or against it? He's none of the above. His views will change based upon what he thinks he would need to do to get reelected. That is why I could never vote for Romney. He is a follower -- not a leader.
Click to expand...

But we know who the real Obama is and he is an absolute failure as a president.

That is why I did not vote or will I ever vote for Obama because of his failed policies. You can only take so much of Obama failure.

And last Obama is man known for "leading from behind" he is not a leader.
 
MaggieD said:
Would you please forget Bush and stop comparing everyone to him? He's not running for the presidency. Never will. Good God.

How is Romney different from Obama?? That's the question voters should be asking.

In my mind, Romney is willing to do some serious reform in our tax code. That's needed. Simply raising tax percentages to raise tax revenue isn't the answer. The answer is a complete overhaul of our ridiculously complicated, full-of-loopholes tax code. Romney's willing to go there. Obama isn't.

Romney has a business head on his shoulders. We need that right now. We don't need a community organizer who has shown that he thinks "business" is somehow not a good thing. I don't know who he thinks built the United States of America from its pioneer days; but it certainly wasn't community groups. It was business. And now, somehow, we're to believe that business doesn't give a damn about this country. If this country's economy isn't healthy? Neither is business. (Oh, that would be UNLESS the government bails them out.)

President Obama and the Federal Reserve under his presidency has done more to harm seniors than any other president in recent history. By keeping interest rates at historic lows, the FR has decimated seniors' retirement plans. Interest rates are so low that those who counted on interest income are now forced into risky stocks and bonds in order to supplement their Social Security. Oh, that would be UNLESS you're some of the lucky PUBLIC sector workers who have defined benefits pension plans. Then, their pensions are paid by, among others, seniors who can barely fund their lifestyles.
Click to expand...

Dude have you ever looked at Romney's business record, he's literally a legal thief. He only knows how to steal money he doesn't have a clue how to build from the ground up. To me his business record is his greatest liability not his greatest strength.
 
shiang said:
Dude have you ever looked at Romney's business record, he's literally a legal thief. He only knows how to steal money he doesn't have a clue how to build from the ground up. To me his business record is his greatest liability not his greatest strength.
Click to expand...

It is you who has never looked at his business record. Our country needs venture capitalists. Until you know what they do, how they do it, what success Bain has had overall, you have no business judging him. If you don't like the way he does business, legally, then best you change the laws.
 
MaggieD said:
It is you who has never looked at his business record. Our country needs venture capitalists. Until you know what they do, how they do it, what success Bain has had overall, you have no business judging him. If you don't like the way he does business, legally, then best you change the laws.
Click to expand...

Yep, nothing wrong with venture capitalists. But as they go, Bain was pretty scummy. There's nothing in his business record that makes me want him to be president.
 
MaggieD said:
It is you who has never looked at his business record. Our country needs venture capitalists. Until you know what they do, how they do it, what success Bain has had overall, you have no business judging him. If you don't like the way he does business, legally, then best you change the laws.
Click to expand...

Tell me what Bain did with Domino's, Sealy, and Toys R' Us. I have every right to call him a thief in business and a cheat in school. The guy is dumb and compensates with a lack of morals and a lot of luck.

Seriously read up everything Bain did under Romney before voting for him.
 
Last edited:
MaggieD said:
Would you please forget Bush and stop comparing everyone to him? He's not running for the presidency. Never will. Good God.

How is Romney different from Obama?? That's the question voters should be asking.
...
Click to expand...

A fantastic post, Maggie, as per usual.

It's easier for them to run against Bush. Liberals have had 12 years to practice attacking Pres. Bush. It also helps that since Bush's worst policies were expansion of government and over spending. Conservatives and Libertarians don't much care for those.

I can't totally blame the liberals here. Romney would not be a fun guy to run against if you had to be honest about his record or couldn't construct a narrative about how he is evil, aloof, rich, and all that. Turns out, he's a successful businessman, governor, and family man.

Despite the other side of false narratives, Pres. Obama has some victories and positives. DADT repealed, payroll taxes lowered, OBL, and more.

We could only dream that this was really a battle of merits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom