19
   

Ted Cruze is blaming Reid for holding the American People hostage

 
 
Moment-in-Time
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Oct, 2013 04:19 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:

There seems to be lots of talk lately about a middle path...one that actually does not go to the lifting of sanctions at all for a while.

The plan is to use "giving the Iranians their own money" as an incentive...by releasing accounts that have been impounded around the world by pressure exerted by the United States.

This way...sanctions will not actually be lifted...but there is benefit to Iran (they need the money desperately) to continue down the path to give up centrifuges and stop enrichment and so forth.


Let's all hope this works...that the nuclear threat ends and that we soon move on to lifting sanctions.


Thanks, Frank. I haven't followed events as closely as I should. I too hope sanctions will be lifted soon because many Iranians are suffering from these restrictions. For a while I was quite angry at Iran for contributing weapons to the Syrian military, all which helped keep Assad in power, along with Russia and China, but hated that ordinary Iranians suffered the consequences.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  0  
Reply Sun 20 Oct, 2013 04:22 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
I refer you to Ed's reply. I read it a day after responding to your post, and had to do a double take. I always thought of you as one of the smarter Conservatives, but resorting to stuff that's over fifty years old doesn't help with that perception.

Btw, there's absolutely nothing clear cut about the Kennedy assassination. Whichever way you look at it, it's as murky as ****.
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Sun 20 Oct, 2013 04:25 pm
@izzythepush,
So true; some today even believe that the government assassinated Kennedy. Who knows?
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Oct, 2013 04:48 pm
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

I refer you to Ed's reply. I read it a day after responding to your post, and had to do a double take. I always thought of you as one of the smarter Conservatives, but resorting to stuff that's over fifty years old doesn't help with that perception.

Btw, there's absolutely nothing clear cut about the Kennedy assassination. Whichever way you look at it, it's as murky as ****.


Well, then you must also have glitterbag on ignore, or only read the comments of those with which you wish to argue.

Reread the comment to which I was responding and you will find that it contains the originating statement (to the effect of; if not verbatim)

"Let's not forget that a President was assasinated in Texas."

This was in the context of a diatribe directed not only against Ted Cruz, but the people of Texas.

So apparently you have no problem with libelling Texans based on something that happened 50 years ago, but you do have a problem with my sarcastic retort.

I'm not sure why I feel the need to explain what should have been obvious to you and edgar other than as a means to point out the narrow nature of your focus.

If the past is any predictor, either you or edgar will now completely ignore what I have written and continue to harp on how it is ridiculous of me to bring up Kennedy's assasination.
Moment-in-Time
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Oct, 2013 04:49 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:

So true; some today even believe that the government assassinated Kennedy. Who knows?


I hadn't heard that conspiracy theory before. I heard recently the intended target of Lee Harvey Oswald was Texas governor John Connalley.

Another conspiracy theory was a second shooter on the mall.

I even heard this morning on one of the talk shows that Jack Ruby, Oswald's assassin, happened too quickly for it not to be a coverup but from which source?

Another theory was the Mafia was out for Kennedy.

I guess JFK's murder is destined to go down in history as unresolved.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Oct, 2013 05:01 pm
@Moment-in-Time,
Moment-in-Time wrote:

I guess JFK's murder is destined to go down in history as unresolved.


By those who don't want to accept the facts.

Oswald, a nut, killed Kennedy.

That he happened to be a nut who served in the US Marines and was a self-professed communist is entirely irrelevant, just as it is entirely irrelevant that he committed the act in Texas.

All of the conspiracy theorists allegations have been examined and debunked.

If you don't believe a federal commission headed up by a Supreme Court Chief Justice maybe you might believe the PBS series NOVA or any number of other rational experts who have weighed in on the topic.

But this is the way with conspiracy theories. Any and all proof that they are wrong is considered the product of the conspiracy and not to be trusted. It is this way with theories about the Moon landing, cattle mutilations in New Mexico and 9/11, to name but three.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Sun 20 Oct, 2013 05:10 pm
@Moment-in-Time,
From HuffingtonPost.
Quote:
As national security adviser, Brennan made news last May by becoming the first U.S. official to acknowledge the U.S. government's drone war against suspected terrorists in Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere. Brennan won kudos for his candor from supporters of the drone war, while critics found his claims of "moral rectitude" to be dubious in the absence of any checks on his power to target suspected terrorists (and inevitably innocent bystanders.)

Brennan's confirmation hearings are a rare opportunity for the Congress to hold the Executive Branch accountable for its secret actions. Brennan is reported to favor a more restrained drone war while liberal critics will seek disclosure of the legal justification for the extra-judicial assassination of U.S. citizens suspected of terrorism.

The overarching issue at stake in Brennan's confirmation is official secrecy in the name of national security. Do the White House and national security agencies acknowledge any limits on their powers of official secrecy? How can a self-governing democracy prevent the abuse of power without disclosure and accountability?

The JFK assassination story provides a useful benchmark in this debate because it is one area where a broad consensus holds that secrecy is not appropriate. If the Congress wants to demonstrate that it has the power to insure accountability at Obama's CIA, the JFK assassination records are a good place to start.
izzythepush
 
  0  
Reply Sun 20 Oct, 2013 05:11 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
I don't pay a lot of attention to Glitterbag's posts actually.

I probably give yours a lot more attention than they deserve.

Repeating the fact that a president was assassinated in Texas does not constitute libel.

At least it is a fact as opposed to what you claim happened. It's still as murky as ****.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Oct, 2013 05:15 pm
@izzythepush,
You still haven't read her post apparently if you don't think that her admonition to remember that a President was killed in Texas was not intended to defame Texans.

I claimed that Oswald killed him, that he served in the Marines and that he was a professed communist.

What is incorrect in that statement, let alone murky?

You just can't admit you were wrong, can you?
izzythepush
 
  0  
Reply Sun 20 Oct, 2013 05:22 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

You still haven't read her post


No I've not. I don't see much point. She lost all credibility as far as I'm concerned a long time ago. I don't bother with the posts of those I don't take seriously.


Finnbar wrote:
I claimed that Oswald killed him, that he served in the Marines and that he was a professed communist.

What is incorrect in that statement, let alone murky?


Grassy knolls, an anti-Communist state that's not above fabricating evidence. Reds under beds and all that. Well well murky.[/quote]

I'm often wrong, and will admit it when I am.
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Sun 20 Oct, 2013 05:23 pm
@cicerone imposter,
From Wiki.
Quote:
John F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


President John F. Kennedy, Jackie Kennedy, Nellie Connally, and Governor John Connally, moments before the assassination.
The circumstances surrounding the assassination of John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963 spawned suspicions of a conspiracy. These suspicions were mitigated somewhat when an official investigation by the Warren Commission concluded the following year that there was no conspiracy. Since then, doubts have arisen regarding the Commission's finding that Lee Harvey Oswald was responsible for the assassination of Kennedy, and most Americans today believe that others besides Oswald were also involved in the assassination.[1] Critics have argued that the Commission and the government have covered up crucial information pointing to a conspiracy.
Subsequent official investigations confirmed most of the conclusions of the Warren Commission. However, the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) concluded that Kennedy was probably assassinated as the result of a conspiracy, with "...a high probability that two gunmen fired at [the] President."[2][3] No person or organization was identified by the HSCA as being a co-conspirator of Oswald. Most current theories put forth a criminal conspiracy involving parties as varied as the CIA, the mafia, anti-Castro Cuban exile groups, the military industrial complex, sitting Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson, Cuban President Fidel Castro, FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, the KGB, or some combination of those entities.


I doubt very much we'll ever find out the 'true' facts.
0 Replies
 
Moment-in-Time
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Oct, 2013 06:34 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Thanks for the Huff article, CI. I'm not really interested in JFK conspiracy theories. I merely interjected because of something you said in a post prior to my response.
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Sun 20 Oct, 2013 07:33 pm
@Moment-in-Time,
I've been on a2k since its beginnings, and I try to provide support for my opinions. When I don't, somebody will ask me where I got info from, so it's become somewhat of a habit.
0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Oct, 2013 10:35 pm
@Moment-in-Time,
No. A 23 year friend is being sent to Afghanistan in January. I suspect this young person is not the only one going. Thats my problem With the president and the military. They say one thing for people like you and do something entirely different. There are many people like you that buy the politicians bs. One thing I have learned is to believe no one until you see results.
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Oct, 2013 10:39 pm
@Moment-in-Time,
It was the tea party.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Sun 20 Oct, 2013 10:55 pm
@RABEL222,
I've learned the same thing; don't trust until you see results.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Oct, 2013 11:57 pm
Quote:
While lawmakers reached an agreement last week to avert the country’s first default in its 237-year history, overseas investors who own almost half the Treasuries outstanding have reduced holdings for four straight months, the longest stretch since 2001. Their growing reluctance to finance the world’s biggest debtor nation may lift borrowing costs further and harm an economy that has yet to fully recover from the deepest recession since the 1930s. Each percentage point increase in Treasuries would boost annual U.S. funding costs by $20 billion, based on the amount of debt issued in the year ended Sept. 30.
“Default or no default, the damage is already done,” Steve Major, the London-based global head of rates strategy at HSBC Holdings Plc, Europe’s largest bank, said in a telephone interview. “Politicians are kicking the can down the road when the world needs a longer-term solution. This sort of political brinkmanship undermines confidence.”
.
.
.
“Every time we play this game it’s just a small chip away, it slightly erodes the benchmark status that Treasuries enjoy,” Evans said

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-20/treasuries-losing-cachet-with-weakest-foreign-demand-since-2001.html?cmpid=yhoo

predictably the D's are all "IT'S THE R'S FAULT!" but in reality the problem is that Washington can not make a decision that the rest of the world has confidence will be followed. sure the D's want the R's to roll over and give them their way, but that was never going to happen, and the D's best start to desire to find a way out of this mess along with the R's because they are in this fight together.

this is going to get a lot worse before it gets better as there is a sever shortage of adults.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Oct, 2013 04:59 am
@hawkeye10,
It seems that everyone I in general agreement.WITH THE EXCEPTION OF CONGRESS.
What should we do (rather than just sit here in a circle jerk over whos at fault or what the rest of the world I going to do)

I strongly suggest that, of the several congressmen who teetered us to the brink, we institute some serious RECALL actions(ARTICLE 1 Section 5 of our Constitution)
parados
 
  3  
Reply Mon 21 Oct, 2013 07:13 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
demonstrating government incompetence by not even being able to set up a website correctly after several years and $300 million in work.

Government didn't set up the website. They outsourced to a private company. Perhaps we can use this as evidence that private companies are incompetent.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  3  
Reply Mon 21 Oct, 2013 07:20 am
@hawkeye10,
When one side proposes that we increase the interest on our debt, reduce our revenues and then claims that will fix the problem, you have to wonder about their sanity.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 05/11/2021 at 05:36:16