Thread: John Boehner is an a******

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Originally Posted by SlimTrae

And just remember when Bush went to war- It was a Democratic majority that gave him the powers, but feel free to omit it.

#1 The Democrats gained Senate Majority in 2008 well after the War had been declared. Yes Democrats were HEAVILY in favor of action in Iraq: Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, damn near 100% of the base of the party and that zeal was drummed up in 1998 when those people wished to attack then candidate George W. Bush politically by saying that former President George H.W. Bush was "too soft" on Saddam Hussein. Shortly after 2001 those same vociferous Democrats that were gung ho about the war started to undermine George W. Bush, the election was rigged, he's stupid, he's a bumbling idiot, etc etc. and why? Well because right after 9/11 W's poll numbers were outrageously high and to Democrats who narrowly lost election in 2000, that was politically very scary.

#2 The OP said Boehner is an asshole, but also went on to say his moves were divisive and unprecedented. I merely pointed out similar divisive and unprecedented actions taken by Harry Reid in order to spark a compare and contrast debate.

#3 George W. Bush, whom I'm no true fan of to be quite honest, had a VERY different attitude in office than President Obama. W was repeatedly and maliciously attacked, not just as a politician but as a person same with Sarah Palin in 2008 to the present day (again, whom I really don't care for), same with Dick Cheney (likewise, not a fan), same with Condi Rice, personal salacious attacks calling each of them: Stupid, evil, dumb, retarded, conniving, fascist, etc day in day out by not only their political opponents but members of the media....the very same members of the media who routinely protect President Obama from ANY attack political or otherwise. So 2000-2008 the media looked like it wanted to manufacture dissent, 2009-2015 the media has looked to quell dissent and I'm sorry I don't want the media playing favorites anymore than I want politicians playing favorites it's not an honest way to do the jobs they are in.

Let's see if I can get the picture you've painted:
Overview
Post # 2 : Benjamin Netanyahu & the event mentioned as a political theatre- deemed as divisive. Mentioned zero times on your post # 2

Post # 5 a video-not about Benjamin Netanyahu & the event again- NOT mentioned as a political theatre- deemed as divisive is mentioned zero times on post #5

Post #8 Benjamin Netanyahu & the event mentioned as a political theatre-AGAIN is omitted for the time frame we today call the past. You now detail the war. What does WAR have to do with a comparison to what this thread deemed as divisive? I admit I don't get the comparison. End result the topic is mentioned zero times on post # 8 at least from my POV.

Post #11 Benjamin Netanyahu & the event..ONCE AGAIN NOT mentioned by you. Nor the question of the event as being called political theatre- deemed as divisive. Rather you claim to be no fan of Boehner and to prove it? The next sentence goes on the attack of Democrats—with this here: but here's how I see it if politics is like basketball then the Republicans and Democrats both commit fouls but the Democrats are like ...

So you detail what you loathe, disdain and hate about Democrats as I stated in another thread: You use a meticoulous microscopic glass treatment to find the molehill that can be magnified to a mountain. Then when one wants to learn/know/understand why you are not a fan of Boehner..where can they find it? Not in this thread, this folder hell, not at this site known as Saddo Boxing from what I have seen so far.

Post # 12- You start this post on a thread about Benjamin-with a paragrah about democrats, why? Please don't answer its a rhetorical question, Im gonna need some Tylenol if U do asnwer!!

Then you mentioned that OP said Boehner was an asshole. My Point? You dont call him that ...so you give that honor to someone else. Then you injected Harry Reid…Post #12
...
mi mano…
Harry Reid is in a thread about Benjamin? See, at this point: don’t even mentioned Ben’s name now. It would seem disengenous.

Then your 3rd point on that post claims to be no fan of Bush, then rather explain it- U seemingly defend Palin, Cheney with an accusation that they had adjectives hurled at them with the likes of: Stupid, evil, dumb, retarded, conniving, fascist

Yet, you omitted why they had thoe adjective hurled at them. Pssst. Would you like me to list some individuals who made those claims and weren’t Democrats? Let alone politicians or liberal commentators? Just say it and I can, but I would be going your route: down a rabbit hole.

Post #15- once again nothing about said topic Sounded like a one sentence-barb at Eric. The very thing you claim Democrats do, you seem to be a professor at it.

OK, fair enough allow me to retort....

The topic is about Boehner being an "asshole". Why? Because he invited Netanyahu to speak to Congress without the President's approval. Netanyahu is the Prime Minister of Israel, Israel is one of the closest Allies of the United States. So "we" (by "we" I mean Brockton, and whoever else is offended by Boehner's move) are up in arms because the Majority Leader of the House wanted the leader of a nation closely allied with us to speak to a joint session of Congress.


So when we get down to brass tacks the headline is: "Prime Minister of national ally speaks to Congress without Presidential approval." That is why Boehner is an asshole? That seems rather miniscule in comparison to what Boehner's predecessor did does it not? Inviting the leader of an allied nation over to speak to Congress doesn't seem like it would cause such a great stir....it's not as though Boehner took the President's political legs out from under him, it's not as though Boehner told the nation (nay the WORLD) that "The war is lost" during an actual war is it?


Why is it divisive to have the leader of an Allied nation speak to Congress? Because he doesn't get along with our current President? Well I'm sorry I thought that President Barack Obama was going to IMPROVE the way leaders of other nations thought of the United States, he was going to improve the standing of the United States in the world, he was going to undo the evil which President George W. Bush had done....those WERE his promises were they not?


CANDIDATE Obama even promised to hold talks with despots without so much as batting an eye, no preconditions


But to allow Netanyahu to speak to Congress was such a bad thing that he wouldn't even say yes to that....he wouldn't say yes to an ALLY regardless of whether or not he agreed with them or vice versa. Seems to me that CANDIDATE Obama would have allowed the Prime Minister to make his points, make his speech, and then given a thoughtful, friendly response even if that response was explaining why President Obama disagreed with the Prime Minister.

I hate to be difficult here but were we as Americans not told during the tenure of President George W. Bush that "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism"? ....I yield the floor to the Senator from New York



....but to each their own. If it's offensive to you, fine be offended, offensive stuff has happened in the past and it'll happen in the future but IMO President Obama who swore up and down he'd talk to and work with anyone and then turned around and told Congress "I won, deal with it" has 0 room for complaint, he didn't even allow a bridge to be built between him and the Republican party so he could later burn it. President George W. Bush not only worked with Democrats, he HAPPILY worked with them, and they turned on him right quick nevertheless.

[QUOTE=El Kabong;1307612]OK, fair enough allow me to retort....

The topic is about Boehner being an "asshole". Why? Because he invited Netanyahu to speak to Congress without the President's approval.
Exactly. And I raised the point that it isn't the 1st time he's been accused of being an asshole and that he as an asshole has divided his own damn party along Tea partiers/Conservatives, to compound what makes him an asshole.


Netanyahu is the Prime Minister of Israel, Israel is one of the closest Allies of the United States.

To me this is one of those outrageous lies told by conservatives. By definition: when has Israel-ever, EVER been an ally to us? Or are we re-writing the definition? Ally:
to join (yourself) with another person, group, etc., in order to get or give support

Britain fits that definition. Poland fits it.
Why? Because when we needed support in our so-called wars like the Gulf War up to the last bullshit war. They put boots on the ground. Did Israel? Israel is America's pimp. Israel dictates our foreign policy. Israel has compromised our leadership with people like Richard Perle to Paul Wolfowitz who stated himself: WMD was chosen as a reason America would follow and not as the truth. It was a lie to him and who has denounced the undersecretary of the Pentagon for that? Not a gosh-darn-dang-tootin' Republican. They have shut their trappers when it comes to denouncing their own.
Even if...If Israel has sent troops to die for causes [which they haven't].. we send our own to die- how do you figure that is not a divisive move..to invite a leader of a nation without the current leader of this nation?

So "we" (by "we" I mean Brockton, and whoever else is offended by Boehner's move) are up in arms because the Majority Leader of the House wanted the leader of a nation closely allied with us to speak to a joint session of Congress.
No, you are dead-ass-out wrong- you started it out right, but truncated the rationale for the post- it would have went like this if you were serious about the whole truth and not partial truth:

...Majority Leader of the House wanted the leader of a nation closely allied with us to speak to a joint session of Congress...WITHOUT THE PRESIDENT. And I like how you keep adding this (closely) allied nation, like that makes it ok. It does not.




So when we get down to brass tacks the headline is: "Prime Minister of national ally speaks to Congress without Presidential approval." That is why Boehner is an asshole?
Yup. But again, I added my two cents by showing non-Americans who are reading this thread...Boner aka Boehner isn't very well liked by Tea Partiers, either. I also gave those who aren't familiar with (objective) politics like MINES That he is so divisive that for the first time in 100 years of American history-25 outta 29 of his own dang-diggity-dog partisan party voted AGAINST HIM. Feel free to omit that, Like you've done for the most of this one-sided drubbing I'm handing out.

That seems rather miniscule in comparison to what Boehner's predecessor did does it not?
Interpolation over interpretation is a sad comeback. Always you feel the need to make comparisons. Boner I mean Boehner's predecessor was Dennis Hastert- A republican forced to step down. Before him was Tom Delay...forced to step down. And before him was Newt Gingrich ..forced to step down. Let the non-American know that Pelosi came into power because your CON-servatives couldn't find a house majority/minority leader who couldn't stay without stepping down for their dirt-bag doings.
But I digress; since you like to take things outta context, please enlighten me just a bit more: What did Pelosi do, that makes this move so pale in comparison that we should all say...well damn! I guess Boehner isn't that bad...now that we know what his predecessor do. So what was it again mi amigo?

Inviting the leader of an allied nation over to speak to Congress doesn't seem like it would cause such a great stir....
That's an opinion, please don't go Maxpower on me and upgrade an opinion to a fact.

it's not as though Boehner took the President's political legs out from under him, it's not as though Boehner told the nation (nay the WORLD) that "The war is lost" during an actual war is it?
What are talking about? If I understand your point- then from here on out; any house leader can invite another nation's leader without the POTUS? And we are supposed to be cool with it? Remember your words here. Then use some fortune cookie-response? It's not as if the next Democratic house speaker has taken the political legs out from Romney/Jeb Bush or whomever.


Why is it divisive to have the leader of an Allied nation speak to Congress?
Why don't you ask the owner of this thread?

Because he doesn't get along with our current President?
I don't get along with my co-workers, but I don't allow that to interfere with being a pro at my job. Most would never know who I loathe at work, because of my work ethic. Boehner has done no less than a hundred stupid ass stunts, insults and political posturing, this aint the 1st: its the latest. Wake up dude.


Well I'm sorry I thought that President Barack Obama was going to IMPROVE the way leaders of other nations thought of the United States,
I think that isn't the truth. I think that is typical conservative-sarcasm. Show me here. Show me a post, a link, a postcard where you wrote, typed your feelings of Obama was to improve. Based on your words here: you've hated him since day one. Find something that remotely makes those words sound true and I will log on here at saddo as: Kabong's student. Otherwise you cant sell no wolf tickets here G when it comes to politics? I was through with it- b4 U knew what to do with it.

he was going to improve the standing of the United States in the world,
Surely there was reason to think that-since that last prez was so hated by the nations, a dude threw shoes at him. Remember? Remember when Bush walked on stage with a dozen leaders who all shook hands with each other and NOT Bush? I could send the link if ya need. Surely though you are right that we needed to improve the standings of the U.S. in the world, Question is-why did we need to do that? Unless someone so fucked it up, so bad, so long, that Obama as asked to fulfill it. He failed it, but it has to be understood: IT meaning improve what Bush fucked up: Our standings in the world.

he was going to undo the evil which President George W. Bush had done....those WERE his promises were they not?
I like how you start off with Benjamin..then fall right back into your I hate Obama-speech, like a knee-jerk reaction. Wow, you literally can't help yourself can you?
Yes those were his statements, hopes and promises. Some evils were saying he was going to capture the enemy, and actually do it: Osama, gone. Gadhafi gone. Pull troops out of Iraq, done-but took a while. Send more troops to the place he stated in his campaign was ground zero: Afghanistan: he did. And who has thrown shoes at him? None yet. Bush gave him the blueprint that he had for 8 years and utterly failed- Today Obama is more entangled in this jack-the-fucked-up mess. Cant side with one nation in this-without causing a stir on the other side. So with Isis- The prez appeared to have at least gained allies with Iraq to help- I wonder is Israel our..as U say CLOSEST Ally helping? Syria, Lebanon, UAE, shit even Iran hates ISIS and US, but is working to fuck up ISIS- which is to our advantage. But don't give the prez any credit for that. Turkey, Jordan, Qatar, Bahrain all in it to curb ISIS. To some degree -yes that is undoing some of Bush's evil ass plan to start a war with stateless enemies...in the name of WMD..shit that not one damn ISIS is using. Are they? Naw, their using stone-aged tools like knives & machetes and shit.

Who are America's regional allies in the fight against Isis? | World news | The Guardian


CANDIDATE Obama even promised to hold talks with despots without so much as batting an eye, no preconditions
Sorry & Sad. Yeah candidates do that. They make promises they rarily keep. Let us know in one of these threads a POTUS U picked that kept their promise. WHO Romney? He spoke on every side of the issue and was called a multiple choice candidate. So sorry you cant find a person to beat Obama. hell, he one the electoral and popular vote. TWICE. That's how pathetic the Republicans candidates are. We chose a loser in Obama over a flip-the-fuckin-flop in Romney. We both out to be shamed Kabong. Me for Obama and U for not having a clue on how to find a candidate that could even deliver a promise that he didn't contradict himself in the week's prior.

But to allow Netanyahu to speak to Congress was such a bad thing that he wouldn't even say yes to that....he wouldn't say yes to an ALLY regardless of whether or not he agreed with them or vice versa. Sounds like an untruth.

Seems to me that CANDIDATE Obama would have allowed the Prime Minister to make his points, make his speech, and then given a thoughtful, friendly response even if that response was explaining why President Obama disagreed with the Prime Minister. Are you aware that only Republicans in America see Ben as an ally? Look outside the Drudge world Fox and Fools. You'd be surprise to see that for very UN violation by Iraq, so, too is Israel a repeat offender. This thread is only the tip of the iceberg called Ben Naten-whatever his name is. I feel sorry for good citizens of Israel who has to put up with him. But you, sir? Go ahead and speak of him in a proud manner.

I hate to be difficult here but were we as Americans not told during the tenure of President George W. Bush that "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism"? ....I yield the floor to the Senator from New York
You're not being difficult tome. Sorry but IMO you are being what the Brits would say...DAFT.


....but to each their own. If it's offensive to you, fine be offended,
Simpletons don't offend me. No where in my posts can you find me being offended by someone who comes off as a masochist.

offensive stuff has happened in the past and it'll happen in the future but IMO President Obama who swore up and down he'd talk to and work with anyone and then turned around and told Congress "I won, deal with it" has 0 room for complaint, he didn't even allow a bridge to be built between him and the Republican party so he could later burn it.
What world do you live in? Did you forget when he was elected the Republican majority with Boehner and Mitch McConnell said they wanted to make him a one-time president? Are you aware that Republicans in the past sessions are the only ones on this earth to vote against the bills the created when Obama sided with it? Are you aware that the most filibusters in history of this nation just occurred? And Republicans did it? Need the numbers? Then after you reject the president ideas, then reject the ideas you gave that he sided..with he then invokes the Executive orders as a last resort, then I 've seen U and other label him a king. Stupid. Man. Sad how U consistently turn every discussion into an I hate Obama fest. Sad and sorry for ya man.



President George W. Bush not only worked with Democrats, he HAPPILY worked with them, and they turned on him right quick nevertheless.[/QUOTE]
When did Bush work with them? Out right lie. Bush not once in the majority Republican congress vetoed a thing. I PROCLAIM IT...FIND IT AND I WILL COME HERE AS KABONG'S STUDENT... SERIOUS.
WHEN BUSH LOST HIS MAJORITY IN 2006, HE STARTED TO VETO SHIT LEFT AND RIGHT- TRUTH. IF HIS FIRST VETO WASNT IN 2006...FIND IT AND I WILL CREATE A LOGON HERE FOR A MONTH

CALLED KABONG'S STUDENT.
Dude play in the sandbox with the kids, cause when U stomp with the big-dogs you gonna get a dog-stomping...

Alright point by point here

1. Boehner has a lot of faults, I'm not going to defend the entirety of his political career by any means, but worse things have happened and will happen than a leader speaking to a joint session of congress without Presidential approval. It's not a huge issue to be perfectly honest. Out of all the stupid shit Boehner has done this is nothing.

2. OK, let's say for the sake of your argument that Israel is NOT a close ally. What of it, Candidate Obama had seemingly no qualms about meeting with anyone, talking to anyone, he said and I quote "The notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them is ridiculous". Note that President Obama has refused to meet with Netanyahu on various occasions and unnamed White House officials....OFFICIALS mind you have called Netanyahu a and I quote "chickenshit".....how's that for improving US standing in the World?

3. In the First Persian Gulf War Israel was told SPECIFICALLY to stay out of things as, how would it look for Israel to be a part of a force invading Iraq? Think a Jewish invading Army would be welcomed or do you think it would spark World War III? In the Middle East it is difficult to ask for/expect their help as they are the 1 Jewish nation among a sea of Arab/Sunni and Persian/Shia nations, all Muslim.

4. Boehner is not popular at all there's 0 doubt about it and I don't argue against that. He has no political strength and seemingly no spine.

5. I misspoke and meant to equate what former Majority Leader of the Senate Harry Reid said to what Majority Leader of the House John Boehner did. It's not wholly irrelevant considering the outrage over this issue. Former Majority Leader Reid said and I quote "THE WAR IS LOST"....on tv, to the American people, and to the enemies of America THAT is something to get outraged over. Former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi attempted to gin up votes to DEFUND the Iraq War, again something to be legitimately outraged over. A foreign leader speaking to Congress is nothing compared to those.

6. I took President Obama at his word, I know he's a politician, (and one from Chicago no doubt) but when has he helped our standing in the World? When has he spoken to leaders we didn't speak to before? Has it hurt? Has it helped? It seems to me that foreign policy is not President Obama's main focus, nor is it his strong suit. His words, his promises, he said he would improve our standing in the world and by God if he didn't have the PERFECT chance to do just that....I don't think he did us any favors abroad, none at all, he's increased drone strikes and he's allowed them in nations where we aren't even at war! I didn't like Obama, but I wasn't going to begrudge him for doing a good job....had he done one. He got Bin Laden, props to him for that but holy shit under his watch any and all progress made in Iraq has been wiped out! He wiretapped our allies in Germany, they're still considered an Ally right? http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/24/wo...rope.html?_r=0He's NOT shut down Gitmo as he said he would....I don't want it shut down, but again if he feels that Gitmo is a "recruiting tool" for jihadis, then why not do as he promised?

7. Ghaddaffi gone, yes, Mubarack gone, yes, but in their places what is left? A VACUUME FOR ISIS! Luckily for everyone in the world the Egyptian military is still in control to a certain extent in that area.

8. Iran, Syria, and Lebanon hate ISIS because they are Persians, they are Shia Muslims, ISIS is for Arabs/Sunni Muslims. Now the Saudi's (and UAE) are scared because they're seen as puppets of the US, but some of those rat bastards are funneling money to Al Qaeda and ISIS and have been all along, it's just like the guy said in 'Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy' "You never buy an Arab, you can only rent them"

9. If you think A) there were no WMD's http://www.defense.gov/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=15918 and B ) George W. Bush started this entire thing out of the blue fucking sky (I can point you to any number of terrorist activities pre-W) then I'm sorry I just can't help you more.

10. The Democrats attempted to impeach George W. Bush.....and the sun rises tomorrow, it's the world of politics. Whoever the next President is, (I for one hope it's Rand Paul) will receive but a short little honeymoon in the oval office before being the target of their opponents.

I'll end my argument with this, YES I agree John Boehner is an asshole......

Letter Details Kennedy Offer To USSR | Sweetness & Light

.....but there have been far, FAR worse.

Lyle of course they have been far far worse nobody is contesting that. But seriously it was a very very divisive thing to do and you know that in your heart. Even if we hate Obama and we do haha going over or around the president is not necessarily the smartest thing to do for harmony and for consistency or solidarity. It really was an a****** thing to do not that it was the worst thing ever done by him and of course his predecessor was worse. Not contesting that either but come on man john boehner is definitely an a****** for doing that it just further served 2 divided the nation and polarized things even more than they already are. Don't you see that is really politically motivated?

@ Kabong, disagree or not you kept it professional and I did not. It should never go personal and for that I apologize.
But I'm still right!

Originally Posted by SlimTrae

@ Kabong, disagree or not you kept it professional and I did not. It should never go personal and for that I apologize.
But I'm still right!

We both have strong views on the issue, no worries. Good job presenting your side of the argument.

Originally Posted by SlimTrae

@ Kabong, disagree or not you kept it professional and I did not. It should never go personal and for that I apologize.
But I'm still right!

Very nice slim, el kabong will not, like you, back down in political discourse. It easily can get out of hand. I've done the same on some religious threads and had to apologize. Regardless Bush will go down as one of our greatest presidents and Boehner is a good man. I think that settles everything, might as well lock this bitch up.

oh please. I myself single handedly have made el Kabong back down on several key points the first of which has to do with tin foil hats and Moon bats. after he back down on it I got him to back down slightly much less than I had desired but at least slightly about that whack job George W Bush now Lyle and I have been good for a couple of years it is only because he has come to see the light.that left right and center are all bought and paid for by special interests. I also thought I scored some major points with him because of how much I hate Obama and the freaking left wing whack jobs. also me and him are going to visit a couple of micro breweries down there or over there where Orville and Wilbur Wright first took to the air in 1902.