Keukasmallies Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 So four Americans die in Benghazi, isolated from assistance by who-knows-whom and the media all but ignores the event. A general/CIA fella is doing the horizontal hula and it takes on the mantra of a firestorm/outrage against humanity--who knew what, when--stop the presses? I just don't get it...Oh, wait a minute, I guess I do get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 Benghazi would get more coverage is Chris Stevens took a shirtless picture of himself in the mirror before he was murdered by terrorists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 LockMar CEO out for inappropriate relationship http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/11/13/lockheed-martin-ousts-future-ceo-over-relationship-with-subordinate/ Cleaning house Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 People get fired for inappropriate relationships all the time and its rarely about sex (the common complaint), its about appearance and liability. You simply can not !@#$ your subordinates in America anymore without putting your organization into big legal risk. And if you are the Director of the CIA and dumb enough to let your nutjob girlfriend threaten other women for no reason, well I think that speaks for itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outsidethebox Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 So four Americans die in Benghazi, isolated from assistance by who-knows-whom and the media all but ignores the event. A general/CIA fella is doing the horizontal hula and it takes on the mantra of a firestorm/outrage against humanity--who knew what, when--stop the presses? I just don't get it...Oh, wait a minute, I guess I do get it. How many people died in the needless war with Iraq? Now the right are outraged? Took you long enough! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meathead Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 People get fired for inappropriate relationships all the time and its rarely about sex (the common complaint), its about appearance and liability. You simply can not !@#$ your subordinates in America anymore without putting your organization into big legal risk. huh? unless im missing something you just contradicted yourself you say people get fired for non sexual personal relationships, then you immediately say you cant expoint/atsign/pound/dollar your subordinates clearly implying a sexual relationship is your point which is it? and what would be the nature of the non-sexual personal relationship that gets you fired anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 huh? unless im missing something you just contradicted yourself you say people get fired for non sexual personal relationships, then you immediately say you cant expoint/atsign/pound/dollar your subordinates clearly implying a sexual relationship is your point go a which is it? and what would be the nature of the non-sexual personal relationship that gets you fired anyway? If I'm reading it right, he was saying that the FIRING is not in and of itself due to the sex act, but the implications that are surmised e.g. they were boinking so that's why she got the promotion rather than Fred, who is more qualified / they stopped boinking so that's why she was fired. Lawsuits in these matters get numerous, vicious, and extremely costly both in $ and b/c of the distraction to business. That's why those clauses are in employment contracts. KD wasn't saying sexual vs. nonsexual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 (edited) How many people died in the needless war with Iraq? Now the right are outraged? Took you long enough! That is to weak to even be called a strawman. So forever a Democratic president can f*** up and you just yell "IRAQ"? Try presenting a factual opinion on the subject at hand. It makes it so much more interesting for the reader, Edited November 14, 2012 by Jim in Anchorage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outsidethebox Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 That is to weak to even be called a strawman. So forever a Democratic president can f*** up and you just yell "IRAQ"? Try presenting a factual opinion on the subject at hand. It makes it so much more interesting for the reader, that's pretty !@#$in convienant isn't it. Lets just totally ignore the cluster!@#$ job Bush did and focus on the cluster!@#$ job Obama might do. You and your party are pretty !@#$in ignorant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 George W. Bush hasn't been POTUS for four years and two election cycles. Nothing that's happened in Iraq since that time is his fault, nor any other policy decisions. We've had a new President for some time now who needs to be held accountable. The mistakes of one administration ae not a viable shield for the malfeasance of another seperate administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outsidethebox Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 It must be pretty nice to walk away from a total disaster and say "not my fault". If you think the actions of the previous administration has no bearing on the last four years, you'r a bigger idiot than I thought. I didn't think it was possible. The republican party should have an ostrich as its mascot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meathead Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 oh i see i think i read it wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 It must be pretty nice to walk away from a total disaster and say "not my fault". It must be because Barack Obama makes a living at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 that's pretty !@#$in convienant isn't it. Lets just totally ignore the cluster!@#$ job Bush did and focus on the cluster!@#$ job Obama might do. You and your party are pretty !@#$in ignorant. LOL! That was Barry's WHOLE campaign strategy. Ignore his cluster!@#$ job in his first 4 years and focus on the cluster!@#$ job Romney might do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 It must be pretty nice to walk away from a total disaster and say "not my fault". If you think the actions of the previous administration has no bearing on the last four years, you'r a bigger idiot than I thought. I didn't think it was possible. The republican party should have an ostrich as its mascot. Why is it that you're incapable of responding to anyone's comments without strawmanning? No one said that anyone gets to walk away, absolving themselves of their prior sins. What was said is that each man is wholely responsible for the policy decisions of their own administration, and cannot look backwards to blame anyone else for the decisions they themselves make. George W. Bush was one of the worst presidents our country has ever had, but that doesn't make President Obama better by default or absolve him of his own awful decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted November 14, 2012 Author Share Posted November 14, 2012 westside, if you think Bush screwed up, you should see the things Chester Arthur messed with; yeah, that SOB is the root of all evil! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 that's pretty !@#$in convienant isn't it. Lets just totally ignore the cluster!@#$ job Bush did and focus on the cluster!@#$ job Obama might do. You and your party are pretty !@#$in ignorant. Might? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanM.D. Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 George W. Bush hasn't been POTUS for four years and two election cycles. Nothing that's happened in Iraq since that time is his fault, nor any other policy decisions. We've had a new President for some time now who needs to be held accountable. The mistakes of one administration ae not a viable shield for the malfeasance of another seperate administration. Yes. May the following Rest in Peace: "The decisions of my predecessor..." "The policies of the prior administration...." "The mess I inherited..." "The choices of the past four years..." They all apply to one man now....President Obama. It's time to pull out the yardstick. He has 'essentially' completed a four year term. I.e. a FULL term as President. The free pass card has been used up. I think most understand no President operates in a vacuum. Bush made a lot of bad decisions....it doesn't mean Obama should have a Teflon coating under the guise of 'Bush bad.' It's about time folks look at what he has done/is doing about the 'mess' he so eloquently describes. As above....it's his mess now....according to his 'own' standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts