and of course you have to go to some obscure website to read about it. there are no fiscal conservatives in washington. we all know that. there is only one party- people who like money given from people who have a lot of money and expect government benefits in return.
and of course you have to go to some obscure website to read about it. there are no fiscal conservatives in washington. we all know that. there is only one party- people who like money given from people who have a lot of money and expect government benefits in return.
Its a subsidy to protect domestic producers from lower cost imports.
It is tough for sure..do we want to turn into an ag importer and be subject to supply outside this country or do we want to protect domestic crops and suppliers?
All countries have protective measures in place, I am not sure I want our supply to be dictated by a countries that do not have reasonable supply expectations.
If we turn all our ag over to other countries then we become a slave to them and we take away the potential for our suppliers to meet our needs.
I am not for corporate freebies, but ag subsidies are sticky for sure..
0
Its a subsidy to protect domestic producers from lower cost imports.
It is tough for sure..do we want to turn into an ag importer and be subject to supply outside this country or do we want to protect domestic crops and suppliers?
All countries have protective measures in place, I am not sure I want our supply to be dictated by a countries that do not have reasonable supply expectations.
If we turn all our ag over to other countries then we become a slave to them and we take away the potential for our suppliers to meet our needs.
I am not for corporate freebies, but ag subsidies are sticky for sure..
Not to worry, Obama is going to go through the budget "line by line". I guess it's really not a lie when you haven't produced a budget in 4+ years.
I know politicians only lie when their lips move, but this fraud takes it to an entirely unprecedented level, he's the Cal Ripken Iron Man imo. I mean he's not the least bit concerned about "cutting the deficit in half" but really doubling it for example.
And the lap dog media just play along. He wants to grab guns but supplies the Mexican cartels with 2,000. Where were you when Bengazi was going on? Golfing, playing hoops? Where were you? I'll assume you all weren't huddled around a live video feed (ala Bin Landen) because we didn't see a photo.
When does Bush get a little credit for calling out N. Korea, Iran & Iraq as the axis of evil? He seems to be spot on with N. Korea & Iran. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on Iraq since he's 100% correct on the other 2. Perhaps Sadaam was just posturing as if he had WMDs and got called on it.
0
Not to worry, Obama is going to go through the budget "line by line". I guess it's really not a lie when you haven't produced a budget in 4+ years.
I know politicians only lie when their lips move, but this fraud takes it to an entirely unprecedented level, he's the Cal Ripken Iron Man imo. I mean he's not the least bit concerned about "cutting the deficit in half" but really doubling it for example.
And the lap dog media just play along. He wants to grab guns but supplies the Mexican cartels with 2,000. Where were you when Bengazi was going on? Golfing, playing hoops? Where were you? I'll assume you all weren't huddled around a live video feed (ala Bin Landen) because we didn't see a photo.
When does Bush get a little credit for calling out N. Korea, Iran & Iraq as the axis of evil? He seems to be spot on with N. Korea & Iran. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on Iraq since he's 100% correct on the other 2. Perhaps Sadaam was just posturing as if he had WMDs and got called on it.
Na train, we'll wait until Washington DC is in flames before we do anything, because we "learned" so much from Iraq. I don't need to defend BUSH, he called out those 3 countries in 2000. 1 of them isn't a problem anymore, how about the other 2? This doesn't mean I support the gov/military complex that gets rolling and never stops. Should of destroyed Saddam's military and left. PROTECT OUR INTERESTS ONLY FOR A CHANGE. Once it was certain there was no threat, leave.
Bush looks like Ronald Reagan next to Obumbler.
0
Na train, we'll wait until Washington DC is in flames before we do anything, because we "learned" so much from Iraq. I don't need to defend BUSH, he called out those 3 countries in 2000. 1 of them isn't a problem anymore, how about the other 2? This doesn't mean I support the gov/military complex that gets rolling and never stops. Should of destroyed Saddam's military and left. PROTECT OUR INTERESTS ONLY FOR A CHANGE. Once it was certain there was no threat, leave.
Na train, we'll wait until Washington DC is in flames before we do anything, because we "learned" so much from Iraq. I don't need to defend BUSH, he called out those 3 countries in 2000. 1 of them isn't a problem anymore, how about the other 2? This doesn't mean I support the gov/military complex that gets rolling and never stops. Should of destroyed Saddam's military and left. PROTECT OUR INTERESTS ONLY FOR A CHANGE. Once it was certain there was no threat, leave.
Bush looks like Ronald Reagan next to Obumbler.
I must have missed that part where Iraq threatened us. Inform me about that again.
Pakistan actually does have nukes, and they were harboring Bin Laden. Perhaps we should invade them as well? Why not go after Saudi Arabia since that is where most of the terrorist were actually from?
Why don't we make those countries accountable for their citizens, especially since they are supposed to have some of the better intelligence communities in the world.
Or maybe, just maybe we could protect our own interest by pulling back our troops in overseas bases that aren't countries that aren't friendly to us or want our support. Maybe we could stop trying to manipulate other countries governments by overthrowing their governments (in some cases like Iran, elected governments) and setting up our own puppet governments that allow us to do what we want with their resources.
Maybe then they wouldn't harbor such resentment towards America? Maybe then they wouldn't seek to harm us like they want to now. If we educated our citizens on why they actually don't like America, instead of that b.s. line about them hating freedom and democracy, we would have a different view on different countries attitudes towards America.
I honestly feel like I am talking to Dubya right now. Are you a relative of his?
Let me guess, I'm the enemy now because I didn't support the Iraq invasion?
0
Quote Originally Posted by Killer_B:
Na train, we'll wait until Washington DC is in flames before we do anything, because we "learned" so much from Iraq. I don't need to defend BUSH, he called out those 3 countries in 2000. 1 of them isn't a problem anymore, how about the other 2? This doesn't mean I support the gov/military complex that gets rolling and never stops. Should of destroyed Saddam's military and left. PROTECT OUR INTERESTS ONLY FOR A CHANGE. Once it was certain there was no threat, leave.
Bush looks like Ronald Reagan next to Obumbler.
I must have missed that part where Iraq threatened us. Inform me about that again.
Pakistan actually does have nukes, and they were harboring Bin Laden. Perhaps we should invade them as well? Why not go after Saudi Arabia since that is where most of the terrorist were actually from?
Why don't we make those countries accountable for their citizens, especially since they are supposed to have some of the better intelligence communities in the world.
Or maybe, just maybe we could protect our own interest by pulling back our troops in overseas bases that aren't countries that aren't friendly to us or want our support. Maybe we could stop trying to manipulate other countries governments by overthrowing their governments (in some cases like Iran, elected governments) and setting up our own puppet governments that allow us to do what we want with their resources.
Maybe then they wouldn't harbor such resentment towards America? Maybe then they wouldn't seek to harm us like they want to now. If we educated our citizens on why they actually don't like America, instead of that b.s. line about them hating freedom and democracy, we would have a different view on different countries attitudes towards America.
I honestly feel like I am talking to Dubya right now. Are you a relative of his?
Let me guess, I'm the enemy now because I didn't support the Iraq invasion?
Train, Dubya wasn't alone on the invasion. He was given authorization. Granted the intelligence was wrong, but at the time after 911 were we going to take chances with a guy that the U.N. passed 17 resolutions to prove he disarmed. In hindsight, it was the wrong move but I have a great memory, Sadaam gave them the run around for years, Congress was on board, even the lefties are on record saying they knew he had WMDs. Dubya wasn't all alone on this.
I have more a problem with the method and definitely that we have to police the world. We should make it clear to the world that another attack on our country will face complete devastation, every weapon will be used to achieve this. Instead we are weak, our enemies know it and take full advantage of it. For example, do you think the N. Korean nut would threaten China or Russia like he's punking us right now? I think they'd send him a message directly or indirectly that it wouldn't be tolerated. Our response is building another $1B defense missile system (as if we have the money for anything else).
0
Train, Dubya wasn't alone on the invasion. He was given authorization. Granted the intelligence was wrong, but at the time after 911 were we going to take chances with a guy that the U.N. passed 17 resolutions to prove he disarmed. In hindsight, it was the wrong move but I have a great memory, Sadaam gave them the run around for years, Congress was on board, even the lefties are on record saying they knew he had WMDs. Dubya wasn't all alone on this.
I have more a problem with the method and definitely that we have to police the world. We should make it clear to the world that another attack on our country will face complete devastation, every weapon will be used to achieve this. Instead we are weak, our enemies know it and take full advantage of it. For example, do you think the N. Korean nut would threaten China or Russia like he's punking us right now? I think they'd send him a message directly or indirectly that it wouldn't be tolerated. Our response is building another $1B defense missile system (as if we have the money for anything else).
I don't feel threatened at all and I don't view North Korea as a serious threat until they make a move on South Korea first. I'm 99% sure they would make an initial move on South Korea before trying anything directly at America. At that point, I'm all for putting bombs on Kim Jung Un's front door. I'm pretty sure Kim wouldn't do that to China or Russia because they are of value to him. Not because he is necessarily afraid of them(although I'm sure he knows he wouldn't come out of a war with them on top).
As far as the 9/11-Iraq "thing". I was initially on board with taking it to Saddam as well. I was all for it and bite that line from Dubya like everyone else. The countries mindset was in a state that it hadn't been in since Pearl Harbor, of which most of the voting age people have no experience with.
Removing Saddam was pointless. It accomplished nothing except making defense contractors rich and ending the lives of 4000+ soldiers and defense contractors in addition to the innocent Iraqi lives that just wanted to be left alone. I'm sure living under Saddam sucked for part of the Iraqi population, but that occurs all over the world. We don't need to spend tax dollars and military lives trying to police yet another country and set up another puppet government their population doesn't want.
The country was in hysteria when we invaded Iraq, the only politician I remember that was against Iraq was Ron Paul(and I may even be mistaken on that) and going against the President at that point in time would be political suicide. However, once things progressed and the country witnessed the results of the war, the sentiment changed.
Just because an idea seems popular at the time, doesn't make it the right thing to do. I would have been more happy had the USFG put the screws to the Saudi and Pakistani Governments to find Bin Laden and this really should have all been over 6 or 7 years ago.
We can't start wars the second someone flinches at us, just like you can't fight everyone one the street that you think looks at you wrong. I'm not necessarily saying we have to be a militarily reactive country. However, if the President is going to invade a country and overthrow a Government, he better be damn sure of his intelligence and have a nearly full proof game plan for war from start to finish. Bush started strong but his 4th quarter was a mess.
0
I don't feel threatened at all and I don't view North Korea as a serious threat until they make a move on South Korea first. I'm 99% sure they would make an initial move on South Korea before trying anything directly at America. At that point, I'm all for putting bombs on Kim Jung Un's front door. I'm pretty sure Kim wouldn't do that to China or Russia because they are of value to him. Not because he is necessarily afraid of them(although I'm sure he knows he wouldn't come out of a war with them on top).
As far as the 9/11-Iraq "thing". I was initially on board with taking it to Saddam as well. I was all for it and bite that line from Dubya like everyone else. The countries mindset was in a state that it hadn't been in since Pearl Harbor, of which most of the voting age people have no experience with.
Removing Saddam was pointless. It accomplished nothing except making defense contractors rich and ending the lives of 4000+ soldiers and defense contractors in addition to the innocent Iraqi lives that just wanted to be left alone. I'm sure living under Saddam sucked for part of the Iraqi population, but that occurs all over the world. We don't need to spend tax dollars and military lives trying to police yet another country and set up another puppet government their population doesn't want.
The country was in hysteria when we invaded Iraq, the only politician I remember that was against Iraq was Ron Paul(and I may even be mistaken on that) and going against the President at that point in time would be political suicide. However, once things progressed and the country witnessed the results of the war, the sentiment changed.
Just because an idea seems popular at the time, doesn't make it the right thing to do. I would have been more happy had the USFG put the screws to the Saudi and Pakistani Governments to find Bin Laden and this really should have all been over 6 or 7 years ago.
We can't start wars the second someone flinches at us, just like you can't fight everyone one the street that you think looks at you wrong. I'm not necessarily saying we have to be a militarily reactive country. However, if the President is going to invade a country and overthrow a Government, he better be damn sure of his intelligence and have a nearly full proof game plan for war from start to finish. Bush started strong but his 4th quarter was a mess.
Old delusional idiots are having a harder and harder time trying to justify their own ignorance.
And it is a willful ignorance nowadays, as partisan lemmings try to reconstruct a reality in which the killing of 100,000 innocent people is justified.
That will never be justified. It will never be forgiven.
0
Old delusional idiots are having a harder and harder time trying to justify their own ignorance.
And it is a willful ignorance nowadays, as partisan lemmings try to reconstruct a reality in which the killing of 100,000 innocent people is justified.
That will never be justified. It will never be forgiven.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
