• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

RIP JHMD

Wrangor said:
I don't see how this is dominating anything. She lied for him. He rewarded her. He timed it to try and increase the uproar so that he could denounce the uproar further. It really isn't that difficult. His strategy isnt to address the Issues (IRs, DOJ especially). He has chosen to address the GOP rather than the issues his admin os having.

She might be a fine advisor. Who knows. Just because someone lied doesn't make them incompetent. Obama is a very smart politician but I wouldn't define that as dominating. Instead I see him trying to survive.
Click to expand...

How do you know she was lying at that time? He just took the biggest talking point Republicans have and said I'm not only appointing her, but bring it on. Keep bitching and losing votes.
 
Last edited:
ONW said:
He is dominating the folks of your ilk.
Click to expand...

Well, not him exactly. His goons at the IRS, sure. He's been careful enough to keep his prints off of it directly.

"Dominating" LOLz.
 
Last edited:
Because every piece of evidence from the intelligence community says they knew it wasn't what Rice said it was.

But like I said. She might be a great advisor. But this is just likely Obama paying his debts as anything. He owed Rice a big favor after she took the heat for him during the election. He hired her for the one job that no republicans could interfere with.

Just because someone slaps the floor doesn't mean they are dominating the game. Obama may very well come out ahead of all these scandals. This nomination will be a small part of that.

The Intelligent part is that Obama is intentionally trying to raise the fervor. If the Republicans are smart they will stick to what they can control and not lose sight of the IRS and DOJ problems. Obama wins this battle if he is able to bait the pubs into a fervor. Will be interesting to see. My guess is that the republicans just can't resist the red meat.
 
For her to have lied she would have had to access to the info. All she did was read a statement that was provided to her.
 
I guess you know more than Pickering Group. They disagree with you.

You must have more intimate knowledge of the subject than all of the Congressional Committees and those who testified under oath as that is what they have found as well.

Don't let multiple committees and dozens of sworn statements get in the way of your irrationality now. You've been holding onto it for dear life for almost a year now.
 
RJKarl said:
For her to have lied she would have had to access to the info. All she did was read a statement that was provided to her.
Click to expand...

RJ, how is what you just said here any different from your going on endlessly about President Bush '43 lying to start a war in Iraq? Wasn't all he did was react to flawed intelligence that was provided to him?
 
19deac92 said:
RJ, how is what you just said here any different from your going on endlessly about President Bush '43 lying to start a war in Iraq? Wasn't all he did was react to flawed intelligence that was provided to him?
Click to expand...

U have made the grand mistake of assuming that logic applies here.
 
19deac92 said:
RJ, how is what you just said here any different from your going on endlessly about President Bush '43 lying to start a war in Iraq? Wasn't all he did was react to flawed intelligence that was provided to him?
Click to expand...

Read the books by Frum and Woodward. He was looking for excuses to go to war and didn't care. Further it was his duty to not go to war unless there was incontrovertible evidence.

Multiple sources showed Bush's reliance on and use if lies in the months leading up to the war. The lies his people told had been exposed.

He had access. She didn't.

It was his duty not to start a war unless everything he told the public was true.

She was a spokesperson.

Having been in the military like you were, it's shocking that you pose such a question.
 
you nincompoops ain't got nothing. Your little witch hunt has become tiresome. isn't it time to run along and get your own dying party together?
 
Wrangor said:
She might be a great advisor. But this is just likely Obama paying his debts as anything. He owed Rice a big favor after she took the heat for him during the election. He hired her for the one job that no republicans could interfere with.

The Intelligent part is that Obama is intentionally trying to raise the fervor. If the Republicans are smart they will stick to what they can control and not lose sight of the IRS and DOJ problems. Obama wins this battle if he is able to bait the pubs into a fervor. Will be interesting to see. My guess is that the republicans just can't resist the red meat.
Click to expand...

I do think a favor's being repaid, but it's to the Clintons, not Rice. Why would Rice want/need to keep taking crap from Issa, McCain, and Graham? This moves smells a lot more like something from the Clintons than from Obama. The conservative entertainment complex won't be able to resist and multiple 'Pubs will say stupid, regrettable, and embarrassing things about Rice. Like Holder, she's a proxy and will take a lot of blows for Hillary.

I do think there's too much cronyism in the White House, but it's also amazing how two way it is. Obama should fire Holder and Jarrett, but Rice and Holder take tons of hits for the team too.
 
Very possible Rube. rice took the fall for Clinton. Obama owes a lot to the Clinton's. he pays rice back for Clintons. Very possible scenario.
 
RJKarl said:
For her to have lied she would have had to access to the info. All she did was read a statement that was provided to her.
Click to expand...

But see, George Bush ---who isn't very intelligent by the way---was so devious that he managed to trick Bill Clinton into believing a) Iraq had WMD and b) we needed regime change in Iraq, BEFORE 43 was even President. Bush was lying on that intel when he reached the same conclusions, whereas Bill Clinton was either reasonably mistaken or was, to borrow a phrase, taken by a hoax. Try to keep up.
 
Wrangor said:
Very possible Rube. rice took the fall for Clinton. Obama owes a lot to the Clinton's. he pays rice back for Clintons. Very possible scenario.
Click to expand...

Seriously dude? You think if there is anything here Issa, Boehner, and McConnell aren't going to get that information out...fucking hell
 
ONW said:
Seriously dude? You think if there is anything here Issa, Boehner, and McConnell aren't going to get that information out...fucking hell
Click to expand...

If it is there, I think think they will, and then I think you guys will still deny it. See W&B's posts, this thread.
 
ONW said:
Seriously dude? You think if there is anything here Issa, Boehner, and McConnell aren't going to get that information out...fucking hell
Click to expand...

I don't think there's anything there. Issa & Co. have taken two serious runs at it already and if they truly had anything they would have played it. Doesn't mean that putting Rice in place isn't helpful to both Obama and Hillary. The GOP never let the Whitewater hearings end, claimed Bubba and Hil bumped off 3 dozen people, and didn't stop until Monica. Since they were so consistently and zealously wrong, Hillary skated on the commodities trading scam. Really don't see what Rice gets out of the deal, but she's valuable to Obama & the Clintons in a role that seriously pisses off the GOP diehards. Look how quickly they moved on after calls for impeachment and that Benghazi was ten times bigger than Watergate. They're terrified of their base so they'll never admit defeat when it comes to anything Obama or one of the Tea Party deities (Palin, Rush, or Bachmann).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ONW
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top