Treason by Obama??

[itsbob (Premo)]

Originally Posted by tommyjones

paaalezzzz

the only difference here is that Regan (our supreme republican) negotiated with terrorists while Obama was talking with what will be a future allied nation, hopefully.



the iran contra affair showed that this was a standard practice for regan's administration.

And I'll take 1/2 of a supreme Republican (Reagan) over ten democrat poster children (Carter)

[Beta84]

Originally Posted by itsbob

On the Today show Matt Lauer is interviewing two governors.. Gov Richardson (D).. and don't remember the others name.

Democrat tried to lay blame for the current bank situation at McCains feet. HE's the head of the Commerce Comittee.. etc.. etc.. This happened on HIS watch.

TO which the (R) Governor replied, You're right, it did. And in 2005 AND 2006 he wrote (not sponsored or co-sponsored) legislation to prevent these failures, HE saw it coming. Congress declined to pass the legislation.


OWNED!!

How did your response have anything to do with what I said? Question though -- wasn't it a Republican Congress in 2005 and 2006? The Dems took the House in the '06 elections. The Senate has been in a deadlock since either '04 or '06. If Congress didn't pass the legislation, was McCain's party holding him back?

[Penn]

Originally Posted by itsbob

And I'll take 1/2 of a supreme Republican (Reagan) over ten democrat poster children (Carter)

Way to go itsbob!

I'm not totally up to snuff on what Jimmah did, or did not do - in order to bring those hostages back home, but clearly it did not work.

Under Reagan's leadership, we went in and GOT our bretheren out of harms way, and back to the shores of theirs - and OUR country!

[Lenny]

Originally Posted by tommyjones

is this really any different that what Regan did to negotiate the hostages release on his inaguration?

You were obviously too busy ####ting your diapers to notice what really happened at that time.

[tommyjones]

Originally Posted by itsbob

And I'll take 1/2 of a supreme Republican (Reagan) over ten democrat poster children (Carter)

me too, but it doesn't change the facts. that regan negotiated with terroists even before his presidency, which is no different than what Obama has done, excpt that Obama was talking with the leaders of a forgien country we hope to have allied with us some day.....

[Penn]

Originally Posted by Lenny

You were obviously too busy ####ting your diapers to notice what really happened at that time.

Obviously true!

What Reagan did was start negotiations, in order to bring our Imprisoned Troops back home!

What is more important than that??

Carter allowed them to rot and be tortured - for what - weeks and months?

I would wager there are some folks on this board, that would be damned glad he did what he thought was right.

[tommyjones]

Originally Posted by Penn

Obviously true!

What Reagan did was start negotiations, in order to bring our Imprisoned Troops back home!

What is more important than that??

Carter allowed them to rot and be tortured - for what - weeks and months?

I would wager there are some folks on this board, that would be damned glad he did what he thought was right.

that is some serious revisionist history happening right there.

[outlawrc]

Originally Posted by Beta84

How did your response have anything to do with what I said? Question though -- wasn't it a Republican Congress in 2005 and 2006? The Dems took the House in the '06 elections. The Senate has been in a deadlock since either '04 or '06. If Congress didn't pass the legislation, was McCain's party holding him back?

The point wasn't whether or not the Repubs or the Dems were at fault, but that the dems were trying to put McCain at fault since he is the head of the committee, so since he "authered" a remedy that wasn't passed it is a moot point who didn't pass it. It is only important that he was aware of the pending doom and attempted to thwart it.

[Beta84]

Originally Posted by outlawrc

The point wasn't whether or not the Repubs or the Dems were at fault, but that the dems were trying to put McCain at fault since he is the head of the committee, so since he "authered" a remedy that wasn't passed it is a moot point who didn't pass it. It is only important that he was aware of the pending doom and attempted to thwart it.

I'm aware, but that had nothing to do with my initial post. My main question was why that was listed as a response to what I said, and how I was "owned" by the response.

McCain should really make those bills public if he saw this coming. Then again, it wasn't hard to see it coming...everyone saw it coming. The question is, what did he propose in those bills that never made it through Congress and why were they rejected?

[Penn]

Originally Posted by tommyjones

that is some serious revisionist history happening right there.

As I was hinting at, in my last post, I wonder what YOUR thoughts would have been, if YOU were one of those troops being held hostage, in that hell hole?

Tell us tommy - would you have enjoyed staying there?