Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by tanked_as_usual, Jun 4, 2009.
AP Source: Obama nominee tied to CIA interrogation - Yahoo! News
does this mean you are against the nominee for his 'allegid' ties to terrorism...err....I mean torture...errr....I mean waterboarding?
or are you FOR the nominee for the same reason?
BTW: Great posting! full of insight, and charm. Everyday seems a little longer, everyway, love is getting stronger.
Itis fun watching the dems getting hoisted on their own hypocritical petards...
If this guy was overseeing Waterboarding, then lets get to the bottom of it...
so tell me, are you against this nominne or for him, based on the article?....and please expand on your answer.
Its fun watching conservative posters on this forum who support waterboarding, avoid the simple issue of hypocrisy with lame commentary....
Sotomayo is a catholic
I never cared either way...........but you, Diver are already squirming
if you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem, right?
or are you simply going to glaze over every person in any chain of command who said nothing and insist it was all bush/cheney
Not at all...
to me this isn't a partisan issue, its ethical.
Meaning that if you were in the know about these tactics before, or while they were happening and did nothing to stop it, you are in the guilty as fukc category. I could care less if you are a democrat, republican, green, or whig....you looked the other way when people tortures humans in our nations name.
now, if this dude falls into that category, and I hear you conservatives all up in arms over this, you are being hypocrites.
Judging from your lack of response to my question, your blatant acceptance of waterboarding has left your opinion of this nominee in limbo. You have no clue what to think.
But by all means, prove me wrong, Jeremy. Take a stance.
I don't have an opinion one way or the other, your squealing is entertaining though.
of course you don't. Rush Limbaugh didn't tell you what to think yet.
let me know when Ol' Oxycontin informs you how to think, thanks pal.
first, there has to be someone 'up in arms' over this.........I am not.......like I said, I could care less either way.......unlike you who educates himself through the OPINIONS of others, I am not going to sit here and tell you that I know whether it is effective or not....its not my job....its the guy who was doing it.........I'm not going to sit here like you and sob about it even though I can't do anything about it........even if I could, I don't care anyway
you politicize this issue and then sit there and say you don't care about the politics......a 3rd grader could see through that veil
RIIIIIIIIGHT...coming from the child who posted the article with no context, and the subject thread inferring you are gloating in a sea of your own self justification of the issue at hand.
sure, just sidestep the issue and wash your hands of it, but all of the people who click on the thread, and read the link you provided, can understand what you meant when you posted it. Don't assume that you can just erase that.
Id still enjoy to read your explanation of why you posted that link with this title, if you are SOOOOOO unbiased, and have NOOOOO real stance on the issue....
you are so transparent its redonculous, I can't wait to finally meet you, in August...then grab you by your hand and escort you to the front office because you lost your mommy and daddy. I'll explain to you the whole time that its okay, and might even convince you that they didn't leave you there on purpose. I'll buy you a soda, and a Youk jersey. We will keep score together.
Whew! I was afraid she was baptist.
Baptist's must have some of the most boring weddings.
it was your obsession that made it worth posting..............and see? jump, monkey, jump..........its so easy
I don't sidestep the 'issue' because its not an issue with me..........
how many articles have you posted only to spout the same crap over and over again?
as for the rest of your fantasy, tough guy...........you'll just have to wait and see......in the meantime, keep it in your pants you perv
Separate names with a comma.