"Dem senator: Obama must respond to Iran missile test"

boards of FL wrote:Or, do what you have always - always - done in the past.  Offer empty rhetoric.

PkrBum wrote:It's too late for an alternative. Obama and kerry have set the path for a legitimized nuclear iran.

Save your strawman bs... useful idiot. Do you have anything to offer given the present reality... or just empty rhetoric?

boards of FL wrote:To date, no alternatives to the Iran deal have been offered by anyone on this forum.  Only empty rhetoric.

https://pensacoladiscussion.forumotion.com/t20672p45-can-any-republican-lay-out-an-alternative-to-the-iran-deal

Forum republicans, feel free to contribute your substantive ideas on this topic.

Or, do what you have always - always - done in the past.  Offer empty rhetoric.

Joanimaroni wrote:

boards of FL wrote:To date, no alternatives to the Iran deal have been offered by anyone on this forum.  Only empty rhetoric.

https://pensacoladiscussion.forumotion.com/t20672p45-can-any-republican-lay-out-an-alternative-to-the-iran-deal

Forum republicans, feel free to contribute your substantive ideas on this topic.

Or, do what you have always - always - done in the past.  Offer empty rhetoric.

An alternative to the Iran deal.....empty rhetoric? 

This is a forum consisting of a handful of ordinary people. To my knowledge not one member has an advanced  degree in political science nor a defensive warfare background. 

boards of FL wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

boards of FL wrote:To date, no alternatives to the Iran deal have been offered by anyone on this forum.  Only empty rhetoric.

https://pensacoladiscussion.forumotion.com/t20672p45-can-any-republican-lay-out-an-alternative-to-the-iran-deal

Forum republicans, feel free to contribute your substantive ideas on this topic.

Or, do what you have always - always - done in the past.  Offer empty rhetoric.

An alternative to the Iran deal.....empty rhetoric? 

This is a forum consisting of a handful of ordinary people. To my knowledge not one member has an advanced  degree in political science nor a defensive warfare background. 

Having a substantive opinion that can be communicated coherently is one thing.  Saying "Bad ideas fail, comrade" or "Clinton lies!" is empty rhetoric.

If PkrBum doesn't know what good policy with respect to Iran looks like, how can he possibly tell us what bad policy looks like?  

The difference is being able to discuss the issue substantively versus repeating talking points that one picks up on fringe media sites and then running away.

That this needs to be explained to you speaks volumes.

Joanimaroni wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

boards of FL wrote:To date, no alternatives to the Iran deal have been offered by anyone on this forum.  Only empty rhetoric.

https://pensacoladiscussion.forumotion.com/t20672p45-can-any-republican-lay-out-an-alternative-to-the-iran-deal

Forum republicans, feel free to contribute your substantive ideas on this topic.

Or, do what you have always - always - done in the past.  Offer empty rhetoric.

An alternative to the Iran deal.....empty rhetoric? 

This is a forum consisting of a handful of ordinary people. To my knowledge not one member has an advanced  degree in political science nor a defensive warfare background. 

Having a substantive opinion that can be communicated coherently is one thing.  Saying "Bad ideas fail, comrade" or "Clinton lies!" is empty rhetoric.

If PkrBum doesn't know what good policy with respect to Iran looks like, how can he possibly tell us what bad policy looks like?  

The difference is being able to discuss the issue substantively versus repeating talking points that one picks up on fringe media sites and then running away.

That this needs to be explained to you speaks volumes.

It did not  need to be explained to me....once again you chose to do that for personal gratification.

You are assuming that you know what good policy with Iran looks like based on websites you frequent. So, you are actually arguing over media outlets. Once again it is about personal opinion.

Joanimaroni wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

boards of FL wrote:To date, no alternatives to the Iran deal have been offered by anyone on this forum.  Only empty rhetoric.

https://pensacoladiscussion.forumotion.com/t20672p45-can-any-republican-lay-out-an-alternative-to-the-iran-deal

Forum republicans, feel free to contribute your substantive ideas on this topic.

Or, do what you have always - always - done in the past.  Offer empty rhetoric.

An alternative to the Iran deal.....empty rhetoric? 

This is a forum consisting of a handful of ordinary people. To my knowledge not one member has an advanced  degree in political science nor a defensive warfare background. 

Having a substantive opinion that can be communicated coherently is one thing.  Saying "Bad ideas fail, comrade" or "Clinton lies!" is empty rhetoric.

If PkrBum doesn't know what good policy with respect to Iran looks like, how can he possibly tell us what bad policy looks like?  

The difference is being able to discuss the issue substantively versus repeating talking points that one picks up on fringe media sites and then running away.

That this needs to be explained to you speaks volumes.

It did not  need to be explained to me....once again you chose to do that for personal gratification.

You are assuming that you know what good policy with Iran looks like based on websites you frequent. So, you are actually arguing over media outlets. Once again it is about personal opinion.

EmeraldGhost wrote:Yeah ... keep the pressure on.   They came to the table once because it was starting to really hurt.   They'll be back with more concessions when it starts to hurt more.


(in any case ... I don't think the Iranian populace in general are a bunch of crazies, they are fairly sane & mostly well-educated compared to some other Middle Eastern countries  .... and especially compared to, say, Pakistan.   It wouldn't be the end of the world if they did manage to develop a few nukes.   The USA & Iran could get along famously with some slight changes in leadership in Iran.)

boards of FL wrote:We don't have that luxury.  Our allies are doing us a favor at the expense of their economies in joining us in these Iran sanctions.  We can't expect them (and they won't) to continue on that path indefinitely, particularly if we had a deal right in front of us and walked away.  

Simply staying the course is not an option either.  

PkrBum wrote:Lol... no chance. The iranians will cheat... the un will cave... while obama and useful idiots will call it a success.

Yea team..!!

PkrBum wrote:It's too late for an alternative. Obama and kerry have set the path for a legitimized nuclear iran.

Save your strawman bs... useful idiot. Do you have anything to offer given the present reality... or just empty rhetoric?

PkrBum wrote:Does it surprise you when leftist propaganda tells you exactly what you so desperately want to hear and believe?

boards of FL wrote:PkrBum, you created this thread (below) which suggests that the DOD offered support on the Benghazi attack, and that offer of support was denied or perhaps ignored and - thus - Clinton lied and people died.  Right?  I mean, that was your intent when you created that thread, wasn't it?

Oddly enough, before you even created that thread, I had already shown you (in this current thread that we are in now) that the very support forces mentioned in the underacted email had in fact been deployed; hence, your entire narrative is complete bullshit.

PkrBum, now that someone has held your hand and dumbed this down for you, you agree that you were wrong, correct?  You agree now that the forces mentioned in the underacted email were in fact deployed, don't you?  And by extension, you agree that you were entirely full of shit when you created this thread (below), don't you?

https://pensacoladiscussion.forumotion.com/t22980-dod-offered-dos-forces-for-benghazi#266793


I realize PkrBum is going to run away as usual,  so do any other republicans want to take this one on or are we done here?  Do any of our forum republicans still not understand what these new series of Benghazi articles are telling us?  Do any other forum republicans need the articles read to them in a dumbed down fashion that is republican-voter-accessible?

PkrBum wrote:That was all the dos had provided to comply with the foia suit. Why was it redacted? Why was it unredacted?

Just a bunch of political bs imo. Y'all ignore the 1000+ classified emails... and want to play gotcha with one.

Not impressed.

PkrBum wrote:Hillary is more hawkish than any of the pubs. Do you just ignore that? My guess is you'll vote for her and support war.

boards of FL wrote:OK, Markle.  You obviously cling to this economic data point.  This is your chance to make your case and explain to all of us exactly why it is that you feel the Labor Force Participation rate is the end-all economic data point. You seem to be under the impression that posting the same chart again and again is a valid, substantive entry into any discussion, no matter the topic.  This is your chance to lay out why you feel that is the case.

I'll just go ahead and get this out of the way now to save you the time.  The labor force participation rate:





So there it is. This is the holy-grail of all economic data points in Markle-land.   Notice the long rising trend that lasts between the years 1963 and 2000.  Many would attribute that to cultural changes that took hold in the US during that time.  We evolved from a society in which women had a very specific roll - a homemaker - to a society in which women are empowered to gain education and work.  This is just one factor perhaps among many.  That said, Makle likely discounts conventional wisdom and instead has his own theories to explain that increase, and I suspect they're all political.

Also notice the peak in the year 2000 and the subsequent decline.  Some would say the peak was the end of the "dot com" era in which we saw massive gains in productivity in large part due to widespread adoption of computers and the internet in business.  What followed was a steady trend of automation combined with a massive aging cohort (baby boomers) that were reaching retirement age and that began to exit the workforce.  But here again, I'm sure Markle has his own theories and I'm sure they're all based in politics.

So, with that said, the floor is yours, Markle.  Let's hear it.  Tell us all why the labor force participation rate is the end-all economic data point that trumps everything from jobless claims, to GDP, to retail sales, to consumer confidence, to the employment situation.  Enlighten us as to why we see the movements that we do in this data point, which clearly are long long running trends.  

Please proceed, governor....

Markle wrote:Progressives can't stand the heat, FACTS on the LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION thread...magically disappears.  Go figure!

They CANNOT support their argument, so they erase the FACTS.

BOF was so desperate that he, being the only one with the ability, attached his...shall we say misleading...thread to the top of the page.

Grow up kiddies.

Joanimaroni wrote:Hillary lied about her emails.

2seaoat wrote:What did she say which was a lie?

No committee has come to that conclusion, but if you have a quote, I am all ears.

Joanimaroni wrote:Hillary said....“I never sent or received any classified e-mail, nothing marked classified, and I think it will all sort itself out. ....

boards of FL wrote:So what are you seeing that indicates to you that this is a lie?

boards of FL wrote:Were you able to come up with anything or should I just take your word for it?

PkrBum wrote:Which is empty rhetoric?

A) Discussion of a present issue and the current events involved.

B) A hypothetical scenario that would only be applicable in the past.

PkrBum wrote:

PkrBum wrote:Which is empty rhetoric?

A) Discussion of a present issue and the current events involved.

B) A hypothetical scenario that would only be applicable in the past.

I guess we have the answer. Bofer has inserted a strawman to divert criticism from the obama/kerry iran nuclear deal and their icbm provocation. He's a truly useful idiot.

PkrBum wrote:

PkrBum wrote:Which is empty rhetoric?

A) Discussion of a present issue and the current events involved.

B) A hypothetical scenario that would only be applicable in the past.

I guess we have the answer. Bofer has inserted a strawman to divert criticism from the obama/kerry iran nuclear deal and their icbm provocation. He's a truly useful idiot.

boards of FL wrote:To date, no alternatives to the Iran deal have been offered by anyone on this forum.  Only empty rhetoric.

https://pensacoladiscussion.forumotion.com/t20672p45-can-any-republican-lay-out-an-alternative-to-the-iran-deal

Forum republicans, feel free to contribute your substantive ideas on this topic.

Or, do what you have always - always - done in the past.  Offer empty rhetoric.

Salinsky wrote:Of course, there are extremists ideologues in Iran whose very survival depends on continued conflict, just as there are extremist ideologues in the GOP whose very survival depends on continued conflict.

Both are set on scuttling this agreement, but their efforts must be rebuffed by the more reasonable actors.

Issues will have to be addressed as they arise, but the agreement must be pushed forward.

There is no viable alternative.

Markle wrote:

Salinsky wrote:Of course, there are extremists ideologues in Iran whose very survival depends on continued conflict, just as there are extremist ideologues in the GOP whose very survival depends on continued conflict.

Both are set on scuttling this agreement, but their efforts must be rebuffed by the more reasonable actors.

Issues will have to be addressed as they arise, but the agreement must be pushed forward.

There is no viable alternative.

There is no agreement and if you believe Iran is NOT intent on developing a nuclear weapon, with the full intent to use that weapon, you are living in semi-retired President Obama's fantasy world.

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:To date, no alternatives to the Iran deal have been offered by anyone on this forum.  Only empty rhetoric.

https://pensacoladiscussion.forumotion.com/t20672p45-can-any-republican-lay-out-an-alternative-to-the-iran-deal

Forum republicans, feel free to contribute your substantive ideas on this topic.

Or, do what you have always - always - done in the past.  Offer empty rhetoric.

There is no agreement.  How is that so difficult for Progressives to understand.  There is no agreement.

Just as with Syria when semi-retired President Obama LAID DOWN A RED LINE IN THE SAND threatening Bashar al Assad that there would be serious consequences if he used chemical weapons.  Assad used chemical weapons and President Obama did...?

Iran has flagrantly violated the non-agreement...agreement with the launch two medium range ICBM's.  President Obama does nothing.

We have another massive terrorist attack in San Bernardino and President Obama does NOT assure American citizens that he will protect us, he threatens to take our guns leaving us defenseless.

Tuesday was another terrorist attack when LA closed over 900 schools because of an email.  The Oval Office...silent.  Packing for a multi-million dollar vacation in Hawaii.

Donald Trump is doing so well because we have a...wimp in the oval office who sees the world as HE WISHES IT WAS rather than as it is.  That's fine in his role as a college instructor, but NOT as president.

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:To date, no alternatives to the Iran deal have been offered by anyone on this forum.  Only empty rhetoric.

https://pensacoladiscussion.forumotion.com/t20672p45-can-any-republican-lay-out-an-alternative-to-the-iran-deal

Forum republicans, feel free to contribute your substantive ideas on this topic.

Or, do what you have always - always - done in the past.  Offer empty rhetoric.

There is no agreement.  How is that so difficult for Progressives to understand.  There is no agreement.

Just as with Syria when semi-retired President Obama LAID DOWN A RED LINE IN THE SAND threatening Bashar al Assad that there would be serious consequences if he used chemical weapons.  Assad used chemical weapons and President Obama did...?

Iran has flagrantly violated the non-agreement...agreement with the launch two medium range ICBM's.  President Obama does nothing.

We have another massive terrorist attack in San Bernardino and President Obama does NOT assure American citizens that he will protect us, he threatens to take our guns leaving us defenseless.

Tuesday was another terrorist attack when LA closed over 900 schools because of an email.  The Oval Office...silent.  Packing for a multi-million dollar vacation in Hawaii.

Donald Trump is doing so well because we have a...wimp in the oval office who sees the world as HE WISHES IT WAS rather than as it is.  That's fine in his role as a college instructor, but NOT as president.

There's that coping mechanism again.  "There is no deal!  There is no deal!" and then "Iran violated the deal!"  Your coping mechanism doesn't even agree with your own coping mechanism's assertions.

Markle, there is a deal.  Here is the full text:

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/world/full-text-of-the-iran-nuclear-deal/1651/


Regarding the school closure and San Bernadino, what is it exactly that you expect the president to have done by now in response to that?  Should we go occupy another country in the middle east?  

We're never going to be able to prevent someone from making a bomb threat, and we're likely never going to be able to stop someone from subscribing to idiotic ideas, arming themself, and then going on a killing spree, so I'm not exactly sure what it is that you expect the president to have done by now.  

Perhaps you can elaborate on that?

gatorfan wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:To date, no alternatives to the Iran deal have been offered by anyone on this forum.  Only empty rhetoric.

https://pensacoladiscussion.forumotion.com/t20672p45-can-any-republican-lay-out-an-alternative-to-the-iran-deal

Forum republicans, feel free to contribute your substantive ideas on this topic.

Or, do what you have always - always - done in the past.  Offer empty rhetoric.

There is no agreement.  How is that so difficult for Progressives to understand.  There is no agreement.

Just as with Syria when semi-retired President Obama LAID DOWN A RED LINE IN THE SAND threatening Bashar al Assad that there would be serious consequences if he used chemical weapons.  Assad used chemical weapons and President Obama did...?

Iran has flagrantly violated the non-agreement...agreement with the launch two medium range ICBM's.  President Obama does nothing.

We have another massive terrorist attack in San Bernardino and President Obama does NOT assure American citizens that he will protect us, he threatens to take our guns leaving us defenseless.

Tuesday was another terrorist attack when LA closed over 900 schools because of an email.  The Oval Office...silent.  Packing for a multi-million dollar vacation in Hawaii.

Donald Trump is doing so well because we have a...wimp in the oval office who sees the world as HE WISHES IT WAS rather than as it is.  That's fine in his role as a college instructor, but NOT as president.

There's that coping mechanism again.  "There is no deal!  There is no deal!" and then "Iran violated the deal!"  Your coping mechanism doesn't even agree with your own coping mechanism's assertions.

Markle, there is a deal.  Here is the full text:

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/world/full-text-of-the-iran-nuclear-deal/1651/


Regarding the school closure and San Bernadino, what is it exactly that you expect the president to have done by now in response to that?  Should we go occupy another country in the middle east?  

We're never going to be able to prevent someone from making a bomb threat, and we're likely never going to be able to stop someone from subscribing to idiotic ideas, arming themself, and then going on a killing spree, so I'm not exactly sure what it is that you expect the president to have done by now.  

Perhaps you can elaborate on that?

Since the people from your tribe blame Bush for the 9/11 attacks by well-financed and trained suicidal fanatics how would you have prevented them? Or are the rules different?

boards of FL wrote:

gatorfan wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:To date, no alternatives to the Iran deal have been offered by anyone on this forum.  Only empty rhetoric.

https://pensacoladiscussion.forumotion.com/t20672p45-can-any-republican-lay-out-an-alternative-to-the-iran-deal

Forum republicans, feel free to contribute your substantive ideas on this topic.

Or, do what you have always - always - done in the past.  Offer empty rhetoric.

There is no agreement.  How is that so difficult for Progressives to understand.  There is no agreement.

Just as with Syria when semi-retired President Obama LAID DOWN A RED LINE IN THE SAND threatening Bashar al Assad that there would be serious consequences if he used chemical weapons.  Assad used chemical weapons and President Obama did...?

Iran has flagrantly violated the non-agreement...agreement with the launch two medium range ICBM's.  President Obama does nothing.

We have another massive terrorist attack in San Bernardino and President Obama does NOT assure American citizens that he will protect us, he threatens to take our guns leaving us defenseless.

Tuesday was another terrorist attack when LA closed over 900 schools because of an email.  The Oval Office...silent.  Packing for a multi-million dollar vacation in Hawaii.

Donald Trump is doing so well because we have a...wimp in the oval office who sees the world as HE WISHES IT WAS rather than as it is.  That's fine in his role as a college instructor, but NOT as president.

There's that coping mechanism again.  "There is no deal!  There is no deal!" and then "Iran violated the deal!"  Your coping mechanism doesn't even agree with your own coping mechanism's assertions.

Markle, there is a deal.  Here is the full text:

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/world/full-text-of-the-iran-nuclear-deal/1651/


Regarding the school closure and San Bernadino, what is it exactly that you expect the president to have done by now in response to that?  Should we go occupy another country in the middle east?  

We're never going to be able to prevent someone from making a bomb threat, and we're likely never going to be able to stop someone from subscribing to idiotic ideas, arming themself, and then going on a killing spree, so I'm not exactly sure what it is that you expect the president to have done by now.  

Perhaps you can elaborate on that?

Since the people from your tribe blame Bush for the 9/11 attacks by well-financed and trained suicidal fanatics how would you have prevented them? Or are the rules different?

We'll never know if the 9/11 terror attacks could have been prevented.  What we can say, however, is that the Bush administration came into office and immediately shifted focus and priority to a missile defense shield.  Democrats voiced opposition to that policy in stating that terrorism, not missiles coming from sovereign nations with a clear return address, are our greatest threat - and they were correct in that assertion.   Clearly, the republican's defense priorities were less than optimal at best.  Incompetent or serving only the MIC's financial statements at worst.  Also, perhaps the president shouldn't have spent entire months on vacation during his first year on the job - ignoring various warning signs and advice from the intelligence community.  

But beyond that, the 9/11 terror attacks were likely planned and practiced for years.  That is a considerably different type of threat in comparison to a  kid spontaneously firing off an email or some certifiable wacko spontaneously walking into a Planned Parenthood clinic and shooting employees after watching the GOP debates.  

That you compare the two in the sense of presidential liability suggests that your internal faculties are sorely lacking.

gatorfan wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

gatorfan wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:To date, no alternatives to the Iran deal have been offered by anyone on this forum.  Only empty rhetoric.

https://pensacoladiscussion.forumotion.com/t20672p45-can-any-republican-lay-out-an-alternative-to-the-iran-deal

Forum republicans, feel free to contribute your substantive ideas on this topic.

Or, do what you have always - always - done in the past.  Offer empty rhetoric.

There is no agreement.  How is that so difficult for Progressives to understand.  There is no agreement.

Just as with Syria when semi-retired President Obama LAID DOWN A RED LINE IN THE SAND threatening Bashar al Assad that there would be serious consequences if he used chemical weapons.  Assad used chemical weapons and President Obama did...?

Iran has flagrantly violated the non-agreement...agreement with the launch two medium range ICBM's.  President Obama does nothing.

We have another massive terrorist attack in San Bernardino and President Obama does NOT assure American citizens that he will protect us, he threatens to take our guns leaving us defenseless.

Tuesday was another terrorist attack when LA closed over 900 schools because of an email.  The Oval Office...silent.  Packing for a multi-million dollar vacation in Hawaii.

Donald Trump is doing so well because we have a...wimp in the oval office who sees the world as HE WISHES IT WAS rather than as it is.  That's fine in his role as a college instructor, but NOT as president.

There's that coping mechanism again.  "There is no deal!  There is no deal!" and then "Iran violated the deal!"  Your coping mechanism doesn't even agree with your own coping mechanism's assertions.

Markle, there is a deal.  Here is the full text:

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/world/full-text-of-the-iran-nuclear-deal/1651/


Regarding the school closure and San Bernadino, what is it exactly that you expect the president to have done by now in response to that?  Should we go occupy another country in the middle east?  

We're never going to be able to prevent someone from making a bomb threat, and we're likely never going to be able to stop someone from subscribing to idiotic ideas, arming themself, and then going on a killing spree, so I'm not exactly sure what it is that you expect the president to have done by now.  

Perhaps you can elaborate on that?

Since the people from your tribe blame Bush for the 9/11 attacks by well-financed and trained suicidal fanatics how would you have prevented them? Or are the rules different?

We'll never know if the 9/11 terror attacks could have been prevented.  What we can say, however, is that the Bush administration came into office and immediately shifted focus and priority to a missile defense shield.  Democrats voiced opposition to that policy in stating that terrorism, not missiles coming from sovereign nations with a clear return address, are our greatest threat - and they were correct in that assertion.   Clearly, the republican's defense priorities were less than optimal at best.  Incompetent or serving only the MIC's financial statements at worst.  Also, perhaps the president shouldn't have spent entire months on vacation during his first year on the job - ignoring various warning signs and advice from the intelligence community.  

But beyond that, the 9/11 terror attacks were likely planned and practiced for years.  That is a considerably different type of threat in comparison to a  kid spontaneously firing off an email or some certifiable wacko spontaneously walking into a Planned Parenthood clinic and shooting employees after watching the GOP debates.  

That you compare the two in the sense of presidential liability suggests that your internal faculties are sorely lacking.

I knew you wouldn't answer the question. Because you can't, you also fail to understand the "comparison" - regardless of degree. It's virtually impossible to stop a determined attack if the attacker doesn't plan to escape. Your infantile response proves how clueless you really are.