|
|
| Re: More Sedition from SMAZ (1311330) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 3 |
||
|
| (1311414) | |
Re: More Sedition from SMAZ |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Sep 1 15:21:30 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from SMAZ, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Sep 1 15:20:38 2015. You have a way of making even a reasonable argument seem insane. |
|
|
| (1311417) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Sep 1 15:26:03 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 14:22:44 2015. He's hardly on Subchat. I suspect he hates trains. |
|
|
| (1311418) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Tue Sep 1 15:28:33 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by AlM on Tue Sep 1 14:12:35 2015. his approval rate still beats the shrub's at this point of administration term. |
|
|
| (1311420) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Tue Sep 1 15:36:22 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 14:35:39 2015. How about from the horse's mouth? |
|
|
| (1311421) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 15:48:17 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by 3-9 on Tue Sep 1 15:36:22 2015. “Today’s meeting only reaffirms my opposition to this deal. I will stand with Prime Minister Netanyahu and Israel and work with my colleagues in Congress to stop this deal and to ensure that Israel has the means to defend itself against Iran and its terrorist surrogates.”Wow, you have a low threshold of what constitutes sedition. Obama never "stands with foreign leaders" in agreement over policy issues? Of course, you guys think anyone disagreeing with Obama is treasonous. Obama is not The Government, nor does he have sole power in foreign policy, notwithstanding bingbong. Obama shows open contempt for the other branches of government, except when they agree with him. |
|
|
| (1311422) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Tue Sep 1 15:49:08 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 14:27:42 2015. What you're missing is that the approval hasn't gone down since then. In fact, it's lightly higher, has been all summer. Hell, the guy actually got an uneventful vacation in this year. |
|
|
| (1311423) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 15:49:35 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by Dutchrailnut on Tue Sep 1 15:28:33 2015. LOL. Talk about the law of diminishing returns. |
|
|
| (1311424) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 15:50:24 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by bingbong on Tue Sep 1 15:49:08 2015. Yup, you can take 45% to the bank. |
|
|
| (1311425) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Tue Sep 1 15:52:09 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 14:19:13 2015. Like I said, the aside from advise and consent, which basically means to ensure the people being sent out aren't disloyal to the nation, nor criminals nor seeking enriching themselves. That's all, a President is supposed to appoint who he wants for any particular post. The Senate is NOT supposed to force him to appoint who they want. They're not even supposed to try. |
|
|
| (1311426) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Tue Sep 1 15:52:52 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 14:24:20 2015. He is. I'd say even a little right of center on some things. |
|
|
| (1311427) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Tue Sep 1 15:53:26 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by Dave on Tue Sep 1 14:45:37 2015. Source? |
|
|
| (1311428) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Tue Sep 1 15:58:38 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 15:48:17 2015. No, Obama is just one third of the government. However, Cotton and Boehner are deliberately inviting foreign interference in our government's deliberations and openly siding with said foreigner, even before reading the treaty they opposed. Now think about how you would feel if Obama brought in the prime minister of Japan to stand in front of Congress to lecture the Republicans about American policy. |
|
|
| (1311429) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 16:04:31 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by bingbong on Tue Sep 1 15:52:09 2015. Where does the Constitution give the President sole power over foreign policy as you assert?And no one here has answered the question as to whether a President can commit treason. |
|
|
| (1311430) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Tue Sep 1 16:05:12 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 15:48:17 2015. Also, please note that his blurb would imply that's he's looking out for the best interests of Israel. Where does he mention that this was in the best interest of the United States? |
|
|
| (1311431) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 16:07:34 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by 3-9 on Tue Sep 1 15:58:38 2015. It's not a treaty. And Obama doesn't have the power to bring anyone before Congress, because it's the Congress.But he makes secret deals with foreign leaders with whom we don't even have diplomatic relations. |
|
|
| (1311432) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 16:19:55 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by 3-9 on Tue Sep 1 16:05:12 2015. First, he says he is working with the Congress. He doesn't have the power to unilaterally specify an agreement, as Obama is trying to do, nor in the context of the statement, does he need to explicitly mention the U.S.And you think he is only acting in the interests of Israel? You don't think this is also in the interest of the United States? 56% vs. 25% of the people (Quinnipiac-Aug 20-25); 56% vs. 46% (CNN/ORC Aug 13-16) seem to disagree with you. And Quinnipiac shows only 46% (vs. 25%) of DEMOCRATS supporting the deal. |
|
|
| (1311433) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 16:21:12 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by bingbong on Tue Sep 1 15:52:52 2015. Heh. The center of bingbong. |
|
|
| (1311434) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 16:22:13 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by bingbong on Tue Sep 1 15:53:26 2015. The average of polls at real clear politics is 44.6% |
|
|
| (1311435) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Tue Sep 1 16:22:30 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 16:07:34 2015. It's not a treaty. And Obama doesn't have the power to bring anyone before Congress, because it's the Congress.He does have the power to receive ambassadors and ministers from other countries however (unlike Congress). How would you like it if invited a couple of them to lecture the Republicans on what a mistake their policies are? But he makes secret deals with foreign leaders with whom we don't even have diplomatic relations. And how do you expect Obama to open diplomatic relations or otherwise negotiate without diplomacy? |
|
|
| (1311436) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Tue Sep 1 16:32:32 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 16:19:55 2015. First, he says he is working with the Congress. He doesn't have the power to unilaterally specify an agreement, as Obama is trying to do, nor in the context of the statement, does he need to explicitly mention the U.S.And you think he is only acting in the interests of Israel? You don't think this is also in the interest of the United States? All he mentioned is how this is good for Israel. That's great, but he's part of the United States govt. I want to know why this agreement to curb Iran's nukes doesn't benefit our country. 56% vs. 25% of the people (Quinnipiac-Aug 20-25); 56% vs. 46% (CNN/ORC Aug 13-16) seem to disagree with you. And Quinnipiac shows only 46% (vs. 25%) of DEMOCRATS supporting the deal. University of Maryland puts it at 52% for vs 47% against. The majority of Democrats and independents support it. The percentage you cite for Democrats in Quinnipiac shows only that there is a lot of undecideds, and that was a month ago. |
|
|
| (1311437) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by R2Chinatown on Tue Sep 1 16:46:49 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by bingbong on Tue Sep 1 15:52:09 2015. Tap dancing again? Why don't you just say, "Duh, I guess I was wrong again!" and move on? |
|
|
| (1311439) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by R2Chinatown on Tue Sep 1 16:49:16 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by bingbong on Tue Sep 1 14:02:41 2015. And look what happened with FDR. He got us into WWII. |
|
|
| (1311441) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Tue Sep 1 16:57:03 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by bingbong on Tue Sep 1 15:53:26 2015. Rasmussen. |
|
|
| (1311444) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Tue Sep 1 17:02:12 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 15:48:17 2015. That's an improvement over total contempt for the American people, like the last bunch. |
|
|
| (1311445) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Tue Sep 1 17:02:56 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by R2Chinatown on Tue Sep 1 16:46:49 2015. Because I wasn't. |
|
|
| (1311454) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Tue Sep 1 17:28:52 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by bingbong on Tue Sep 1 17:02:56 2015. Delusional |
|
|
| (1311457) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Tue Sep 1 17:35:06 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by bingbong on Tue Sep 1 15:53:26 2015. What difference does it make. Your particular dysfunction causes you to denounce any source where you disagree with tje data. Lulz |
|
|
| (1311465) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by TerrApin Station on Tue Sep 1 17:48:03 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by 3-9 on Tue Sep 1 16:32:32 2015. "All he mentioned is how this is good for Israel. That's great, but he's part of the United States govt. I want to know why this agreement to curb Iran's nukes doesn't benefit our country."Obviously the idea is to support the agreement if the sum of all its positive effects outweigh the sum of all its negative effects. Those effects are wide ranging and effect many different countries. And we care about doe of those countries. And each individual US citizen values each of the positive and negative effects differently. There is even disagreement about whether some of the effects will be negative or positive! So just because someone is publicly extolling his opinion of certain effects doesn't mean he's necessarily working against the United States' best interests! |
|
|
| (1311466) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton? |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Sep 1 17:58:27 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton?, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Sep 1 15:26:03 2015. I go to SubChat to learn.I go to OTChat to educate. |
|
|
| (1311467) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Sep 1 18:00:39 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by R2Chinatown on Tue Sep 1 16:49:16 2015. It figures that you would loved it had we done nothing to stop your beloved Nazis. |
|
|
| (1311468) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Sep 1 18:01:01 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Sep 1 14:30:02 2015. Great post. |
|
|
| (1311469) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Tue Sep 1 18:04:53 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SMAZ on Tue Sep 1 18:00:39 2015. I guess that you have no understanding of history, at least qhen it's written in English |
|
|
| (1311470) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Sep 1 18:07:10 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 14:26:19 2015. Decades from now, people will not be debating whether the 44th US President was a good one.They will be debating whether he was the greatest ever. God Bless Barack Obama. |
|
|
| (1311471) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Sep 1 18:09:42 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 13:24:14 2015. Do you think Israel is not our ally?Pledging allegiance to an ally over your own country is still sedition. Ask Jonathan Pollard. |
|
|
| (1311472) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Sep 1 18:12:32 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by cortelyounext on Tue Sep 1 14:07:14 2015. Actually my father served with some Italian Army sapper unit in Milano in the 50's. |
|
|
| (1311473) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Tue Sep 1 18:15:31 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SMAZ on Tue Sep 1 18:12:32 2015. So was he pro American or anti-American like his son. |
|
|
| (1311474) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by cortelyounext on Tue Sep 1 18:18:46 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SMAZ on Tue Sep 1 18:12:32 2015. What are you saying? |
|
|
| (1311475) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Sep 1 18:31:56 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SLRT on Tue Sep 1 16:04:31 2015. Where does the Constitution give the President sole power over foreign policy as you assert?The SCOTUS explains here: US v Curtiss-Wright US v Belmont (the most relevant in the Iran nuclear deal) Dame-Morre v Regan (another case involving Iran and executive powers. Was Reagan called an enemy of Israel over this?) Zivotovsky v Kerry And no one here has answered the question as to whether a President can commit treason. Yes. If the President could not commit treason, the Founders would not have included it among impeachable offenses. If a President can commit treason, it goes without saying that a sitting Senator certainly can. |
|
|
| (1311476) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Sep 1 18:37:08 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by Dave on Tue Sep 1 14:42:31 2015. The Senate’s Finance Committee decided that Congress should get an up- or down-vote on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a free-trade deal between America and dozen Pacific nations.Trade agreements like TPP MUST be approved by Congress because they deal with tariffs. |
|
|
| (1311477) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Sep 1 18:41:18 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by R2ChinaTown on Tue Sep 1 18:04:53 2015. I discuss history here with functioning adults, not with special ed dropouts. |
|
|
| (1311478) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Sep 1 18:44:02 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by R2Chinatown on Tue Sep 1 16:49:16 2015. Do you consider that a bad thing? |
|
|
| (1311479) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Sep 1 18:44:15 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by cortelyounext on Tue Sep 1 18:18:46 2015. What are you saying?some US Army butter bar seen below. 
|
|
|
| (1311480) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by cortelyounext on Tue Sep 1 18:46:47 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SMAZ on Tue Sep 1 18:44:15 2015. Oh my G-d. I'm sorry and I apologize. |
|
|
| (1311488) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Tue Sep 1 19:12:26 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SMAZ on Tue Sep 1 18:07:10 2015. What's the color of the sky in your world? |
|
|
| (1311492) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Tue Sep 1 19:22:58 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by Dave on Tue Sep 1 19:12:26 2015. ORANGE |
|
|
| (1311494) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by Jeff Rosen on Tue Sep 1 19:23:14 2015, in response to More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by SMAZ on Tue Sep 1 11:14:31 2015. The author sounds like an anti Semitic asshole. |
|
|
| (1311495) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Sep 1 19:23:32 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by Jeff Rosen on Tue Sep 1 19:23:14 2015. IAWTP!!!! |
|
|
| (1311498) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by Jeff Rosen on Tue Sep 1 19:27:03 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by bingbong on Tue Sep 1 12:22:14 2015. All he needs is a Hawaiian birth certificate.
|
|
|
| (1311499) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by Jeff Rosen on Tue Sep 1 19:34:51 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by bingbong on Tue Sep 1 13:10:39 2015. "You RW'ers??" You mean like Chuck Shumer? Or Alan Dershowitz? Right now I'm reading a book by liberal Democrat Dershowitz called "The Case Against The Iran Deal". |
|
|
| (1311505) | |
Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton |
|
|
Posted by Gamera on Tue Sep 1 20:27:42 2015, in response to Re: More Sedition from Tom Cotton, posted by Jeff Rosen on Tue Sep 1 19:23:14 2015. There are a lot of closet anti Semites on this board who believe it too |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 3 |
||