Reports floating around that Obama threatened to shoot down Israeli fighter planes. Not really seen it from a legit source yet though.
Political Thread: Global Warming Edition
- Thread starter kybobcat_rivals185207
- Start date
- Status
My opinion on Clinton is he was the first president who made decisions based on short term gains for the nation, and long term on his personal gains.
That's a very good point. Being president was the end game for everyone. But for Willie, he was just hitting his stride. I feel like Obama is trying to do the same thing. But his lack of overwhelming popularity will hinder those plans.
Big blue, I think Obama is using the same playbook as Clinton. And he'll get uber rich after his term ends from it. It's disgusting
Dr Ben Carson, stop being an idiot thinking you can run for President and instead take the now open Senate slot in your state of Maryland. He would crush that race with all the ties he has built up around Baltimore and the millions he would raise from admirers across conservatives in this country.
Oh I think he definitely is too. The only difference is that he'll be wildly unpopular upon leaving. And probably more unpopular as time goes on. So that may sideline his plan.
Should Republicans in the House just say screw it and vote to fully fund DHS instead of trying to take action on the President's immigration order?
This post was edited on 3/2 3:41 PM by Catfan in Tn.
This post was edited on 3/2 3:41 PM by Catfan in Tn.
Congressional republicans act like they lost the last election, when, in fact, they won in historic fashion. They're too stupid to understand that the same voting majority who gave them a mandate would enthusiastically support them in stopping Obama's power grab. What a bunch of spineless chickenshits. Who do they represent, if not the electorate that game them majorities?
No doubt he has some big money backers. But I don't think he has the sweeping popularity across demographics of Clinton.
No they should defund Homeland Security and then blame it on Obama. That way they can avoid a primary challenge next time and coast back into office. Priorities my friends.
This post was edited on 3/2 6:15 PM by Deeeefense
It's good to see dictator Obama is now looking into raising taxes by executive dictate.
Wouldn't want Congress to get in the way of his legislation.
Wouldn't want Congress to get in the way of his legislation.
They shouldn't, but they will. The Republican establishment-types are beholden to the big money donors, and amnesty is what the donors want. It's truly a blight on or system...definitely not what the Founders envisioned. Sickening.
If they did they would be taking a play right out of the democrats play book. Your boys are always blaming their mistakes on the Republicans.Originally posted by Deeeefense:
No they should defund Homeland Security and then blame it on Obama. That way they can avoid a primary challenge next time and coast back into office. Priorities my friends.
This post was edited on 3/2 6:15 PM by Deeeefense
This email thing with Clinton is a big deal, and shady as hell. Its like she just assumes she can do whatever she wants, and no one calls her on it.
Her role is not to do whatever she can to become President, anything that could be used against her she tried to hide, its ridiculous.
Everything shes done is a setup to be President, everything. Is this what we as a nation have become? We don't care what politicians do as long as its our guy doing it?
Her role is not to do whatever she can to become President, anything that could be used against her she tried to hide, its ridiculous.
Everything shes done is a setup to be President, everything. Is this what we as a nation have become? We don't care what politicians do as long as its our guy doing it?
It's such a big deal it bottles the mind. I'm sure Deeealbany will be along to say nonstory but it sure tf is.
- Illegal
- No archival backup
- Gets to turn in emails at her leisure / not at all
- Use of unsecure email by the touching Sec of [email protected] could be hacked by anyone.
The type of behavior Hillary exhibits (not her liberal points of view) are the kind of thing bleeding heart liberals always *rail* against. But she's their guy. Illegal? Nontransparent? Dangerous? Well.....she knows best and she's Hillary, the smartest woman who's hooves have walked the earth.
- Illegal
- No archival backup
- Gets to turn in emails at her leisure / not at all
- Use of unsecure email by the touching Sec of [email protected] could be hacked by anyone.
The type of behavior Hillary exhibits (not her liberal points of view) are the kind of thing bleeding heart liberals always *rail* against. But she's their guy. Illegal? Nontransparent? Dangerous? Well.....she knows best and she's Hillary, the smartest woman who's hooves have walked the earth.
Good read from CBS....our wonderful govt, with powers growing daily, at work. The bolded might have been deeeefense.
Red tape keeps some bad gov't workers from being fired
In the private sector, if you're caught viewing porn on company time or intimidating a co-worker, you'd probably be fired immediately; not so if you're a federal employee.
A CBS News investigation looks at how hard it is for the U.S. government to discipline or fire employees who behave badly. With examples ranging from extravagant to explicit, civil service rules meant to protect public workers from political pressure may be backfiring, and costing you big, reports CBS News correspondent Don Dahler.
At the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), red tape is preventing the removal of a top level employee accused of viewing porn two to six hours a day while at work, since 2010. Even though investigators found 7,000 pornographic files on his computer and even caught him watching porn, he remains on the payroll.
At a Congressional hearing, EPA administrator Gina McCarthy was asked why she hadn't fired the employee and said, "I actually have to work through the administrative process, as you know."
The administrative process meant to prevent against politically motivated firings is the civil servant protection system. The rules give employees the right to appeal a termination, a process that can take up two years.
"There is a big difference between trying to protect against that and what we have today," Partnership for Public Service president and CEO Max Stier said.
He said those rules make it nearly impossible to fire poor performers or problematic employees, even when they've committed egregious violations.
"Many managers would like to get rid of problem employees and find that they have to go through a challenging process," Stier said.
A CBS News analysis of cases under review by the Merit System Protection Board (MSPB), an appeals board for federal workers, found other instances of employees who had committed seemingly fireable offenses who were later reinstated to their jobs, often with back pay and interest.
Highly publicized cases are no exception.
Five years ago, the General Services Administration (GSA) spent more than $800,000 on a lavish conference in Las Vegas. They were served 1,000 sushi rolls costing $7 each and a clown and mind reader were hired for entertainment. Two managers were initially fired but got their jobs back after the MSPB reversed the decision.
Red tape keeps some bad gov't workers from being fired
In the private sector, if you're caught viewing porn on company time or intimidating a co-worker, you'd probably be fired immediately; not so if you're a federal employee.
A CBS News investigation looks at how hard it is for the U.S. government to discipline or fire employees who behave badly. With examples ranging from extravagant to explicit, civil service rules meant to protect public workers from political pressure may be backfiring, and costing you big, reports CBS News correspondent Don Dahler.
At the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), red tape is preventing the removal of a top level employee accused of viewing porn two to six hours a day while at work, since 2010. Even though investigators found 7,000 pornographic files on his computer and even caught him watching porn, he remains on the payroll.
At a Congressional hearing, EPA administrator Gina McCarthy was asked why she hadn't fired the employee and said, "I actually have to work through the administrative process, as you know."
The administrative process meant to prevent against politically motivated firings is the civil servant protection system. The rules give employees the right to appeal a termination, a process that can take up two years.
"There is a big difference between trying to protect against that and what we have today," Partnership for Public Service president and CEO Max Stier said.
He said those rules make it nearly impossible to fire poor performers or problematic employees, even when they've committed egregious violations.
"Many managers would like to get rid of problem employees and find that they have to go through a challenging process," Stier said.
A CBS News analysis of cases under review by the Merit System Protection Board (MSPB), an appeals board for federal workers, found other instances of employees who had committed seemingly fireable offenses who were later reinstated to their jobs, often with back pay and interest.
Highly publicized cases are no exception.
Five years ago, the General Services Administration (GSA) spent more than $800,000 on a lavish conference in Las Vegas. They were served 1,000 sushi rolls costing $7 each and a clown and mind reader were hired for entertainment. Two managers were initially fired but got their jobs back after the MSPB reversed the decision.
The House will vote today to fully fund DHS with no restrictions on trying to roll back President Obama's EO on immigration.
Did something new come out that we didn't already know about Hilary being unethical and using an illegal email account?
Strange to see everyone running with it this morning.
Strange to see everyone running with it this morning.
why do you assume I'm going to defend the Chipmunk? What bothers me here is the security issue. Sensative national security correspondence should use the highest level of secruity on the servers which I'm sure the state deparment had access to. I think this story needs to be unraveled more to find out what exactly happened here. So yea the Chipmunk's got some 'splainin to do.
other than obvious national security issues, this just seems like more made up outrage. Evidently Secretary Kerry is the FIRST secretary of state NOT to use personal email. I guess since Powell supported Obama you can now safely throw him under the bus as well since he used personal email as well.
Jonathan Karl þ@jonkarl 2h2 hours ago
Spokesperson for Condi Rice tells ABC: "She did not use personal email for official communication as Secretary." (h/t @JustinFishelABC)
Spokesperson for Condi Rice tells ABC: "She did not use personal email for official communication as Secretary." (h/t @JustinFishelABC)
Every single person illegally using a personal email account for government correspondence should be thrown in jail.
That goes for Hilary. Powell. And whoever the hell else is breaking the law.
If you're a "public servant" who cares so much about the country and not just personal profit, why is it necessary to use illegal means of communication?
You're exactly right Cosby, there is absolutely no reason to not use official email.....unless you know it's saved and you don't want it being seen. There is no other reason.
I for one am a HUGE fan of prosecuting all federal government employees that break the law (and any employees of companies that take federal money to bail them out).
Lois Lerner should have the book thrown at her. Comb over every single piece of her life.
Oh, she doesn't deserve that?
Talk to Joe Schmo down the street who has had to deal with an IRS audit. Ask him how he feels about leniency for Lois Lerner. If he got any sympathy when the IRS was going through every aspect of his business. I'm sure he would have killed to have worked in the Federal government so he could have half the country argue he should be free from any scrutiny or prosecution.
Lois Lerner should have the book thrown at her. Comb over every single piece of her life.
Oh, she doesn't deserve that?
Talk to Joe Schmo down the street who has had to deal with an IRS audit. Ask him how he feels about leniency for Lois Lerner. If he got any sympathy when the IRS was going through every aspect of his business. I'm sure he would have killed to have worked in the Federal government so he could have half the country argue he should be free from any scrutiny or prosecution.
If Hillary corresponded with govt. employees on a regular basis (which one would logically assume that she did --- unless everyone in the administration is using private accounts), then it also seems logical that her private account correspondence could be retrieved from the federal database. I'm sure there will be a computer crash, server crash, office fire, coincidental fall and concussion, or other extenuating circumstances that will prevent such a retrieval, though
This post was edited on 3/3 2:50 PM by BlueManToo
This post was edited on 3/3 2:50 PM by BlueManToo
Interesting irony that Hillary's illegal use of an email address gets some run the same day news breaks of Petraeus reaching a deal to plead guilty to allegations of mishandling classified material.
Of course anyone with sense knows nothing will become of this for Hillary. If Whitewater and Benghazi couldn't bring her down; nothing will. If it would have been a Repub, Benghazi would've ended the political careers for anyone within 6 degrees of separation of any involved. But with Hillary, Obama, etc; its just laughed about and marginalized.
Of course anyone with sense knows nothing will become of this for Hillary. If Whitewater and Benghazi couldn't bring her down; nothing will. If it would have been a Repub, Benghazi would've ended the political careers for anyone within 6 degrees of separation of any involved. But with Hillary, Obama, etc; its just laughed about and marginalized.
Regarding the Iran nuke deal, honestly does anyone on here or anywhere think this is going to prevent or delay Iran building nuclear bombs?
We want to agree to allow them to use nuclear power, but don't expect them to use that as a ruse to build a bomb really? What am I missing here?
We want to agree to allow them to use nuclear power, but don't expect them to use that as a ruse to build a bomb really? What am I missing here?
I don't know but I do know that with an agreement we also have the right to put inspectors into the key locations to keep track of what they do, without a treaty we don't know what they are doing except for whatever we might garner from any covert intel sources, which will be sketchy at best.
The only alternative to an agreement other than warfare that has been suggested, is increased sanctions, but does anyone seriously think that if Iran wanted a nuke, sanctions would keep them from building one?
The bottom line is Israel has 500 armed and ready nukes some of which are undoubted pointed at Iran right now, they also have an early warning system. So if Iran did enrich enough uranium and develop a delivery device for say 5 units, who but a fool would fire them at Israel knowing it would result in their own annihilation?
All things considered I would rather they continue on the current path they are on to see where it takes. The work should be completed soon. then let's see where we are? I for one will not support a multi-trillion dollar military operation in Iran which will only breed new and more sophisticated terrorist groups which will target our home land. Israel has been given everything they need to protect themselves but at some point we have to consider our OWN national interests first.
This post was edited on 3/3 7:26 PM by Deeeefense
I have mixed feelings about a treaty with Iran simply because I don't trust anything they would say. There is a part of me that agrees with what you are saying and a part that says they would use the treaty as a way take the pressure off so they can develop a nuclear devise without the threat of military action. If intelligence is sketchy, as you suggest, how will we know where to inspect in order to determine if they are developing a nuclear device? I'm not sure there is a good solution here.
As to the idea that only an idiot would launch a nuke at Israel since they would be greatly outnumbered, I would agree if these were the types of people that you and I are used to dealing with. However, when martyrdom gets you into heaven, I'm not sure that act would be looked upon with the kind of negativity that you and I see it as.
- Status