olivier in france Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 No, it's not. But that's not the discussion we're having. We're discussing your statement that senators are powerless to affect the economy. Hell, it's not even a partisan argument. OK OK i believe you're sincere and even i don't agree i respect that. But DC, just a question: If politicians have a real power on the economy, is it good or bad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olivier in france Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 Remember he's 8 hours ahead over there. He's probably half in the bag by now. Actually 6 hours. That's why i'm smarter than you, i live in the future!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 Well that's the most important part in politics! Listening to another politician tell you what his priorities are? Maybe so - but that certainly does not mean they honor their requests. And they generally don't, except coincidentally - they follow their own interests. The legislation reflects the elected makeup of Congress more so than the political identity of the president. It is designed to be passed, which means getting the majority of congress on board, which means having enough in it for those congressmen to satisfy their constituents. Being seen to go along with the president takes a distant back seat to being seen to deliver the goods locally and/or championing programs or ideologies which you have built your career on. The obvious example, of which surely you are aware, is the embarrassment the Obama administration faced with his first spending bill. The spin was "it's really owned by the Bush administration, ours starts next year." The reality was that it reflects the budget wishes of Reid and Pelosi, not the White House. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 OK OK i believe you're sincere and even i don't agree i respect that. But DC, just a question: If politicians have a real power on the economy, is it good or bad? Bad. And I say that only because I believe most politicians are charlatans who won't act with the country's best interests in mind, no matter what they claim. And the one's that aren't - Obama AND Bush spring most immediately to mind - are instead sincerely believe they know what's best for everyone regardless of what "everyone" might want, which is even scarier. I have no objective reason for that statement, it's strictly personal bias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 Actually 6 hours. That's why i'm smarter than you, i live in the future!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olivier in france Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 Bad. And I say that only because I believe most politicians are charlatans who won't act with the country's best interests in mind, no matter what they claim. And the one's that aren't - Obama AND Bush spring most immediately to mind - are instead sincerely believe they know what's best for everyone regardless of what "everyone" might want, which is even scarier. I have no objective reason for that statement, it's strictly personal bias. see we can agree on something!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 Actually 6 hours. That's why i'm smarter than you, i live in the future!! Enjoy it, you wont have it much longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 Actually 6 hours. That's why i'm smarter than you, i live in the future!! So if the relationship between France and the US deterioates terribly, France can surrender 6 hours before the US declares war Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 Enhanced interrogations' don't work, ex-FBI agent tells panel WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The contentious debate over so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques" took center stage on Capitol Hill on Wednesday as a former FBI agent involved in the questioning of terror suspects testified that such techniques -- including waterboarding -- are ineffective. From my experience -- and I speak as someone who has personally interrogated many terrorists and elicited important actionable intelligence -- I strongly believe that it is a mistake to use what has become known as the 'enhanced interrogation techniques,' " Soufan noted in his written statement. People were given misinformation, half-truths and false claims of successes; and reluctant intelligence officers were given instructions and assurances from higher authorities," Soufan testified. So again may I state .... Liz Cheney should SHUT UP with her comments stating that Obama appears to be siding with terrorists. Take your butt back to where it was when daddy was in office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 Enhanced interrogations' don't work, ex-FBI agent tells panel WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The contentious debate over so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques" took center stage on Capitol Hill on Wednesday as a former FBI agent involved in the questioning of terror suspects testified that such techniques -- including waterboarding -- are ineffective. From my experience -- and I speak as someone who has personally interrogated many terrorists and elicited important actionable intelligence -- I strongly believe that it is a mistake to use what has become known as the 'enhanced interrogation techniques,' " Soufan noted in his written statement. People were given misinformation, half-truths and false claims of successes; and reluctant intelligence officers were given instructions and assurances from higher authorities," Soufan testified. Somebody need some attention? How many threads are you going to post this in? So again may I state .... Liz Cheney should SHUT UP with her comments stating that Obama appears to be siding with terrorists. Take your butt back to where it was when daddy was in office. Yeah, okay, that follows... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 Enhanced interrogations' don't work, ex-FBI agent tells panel WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The contentious debate over so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques" took center stage on Capitol Hill on Wednesday as a former FBI agent involved in the questioning of terror suspects testified that such techniques -- including waterboarding -- are ineffective. From my experience -- and I speak as someone who has personally interrogated many terrorists and elicited important actionable intelligence -- I strongly believe that it is a mistake to use what has become known as the 'enhanced interrogation techniques,' " Soufan noted in his written statement. People were given misinformation, half-truths and false claims of successes; and reluctant intelligence officers were given instructions and assurances from higher authorities," Soufan testified. Gee, the FBI has a lot of credibility. An organization which isn't in charge of the detainees, is historically a bitter rival of CIA, and which is obligated to use only traditional interrogation techniques... To think that a career FBI guy would come out and bad-mouth CIA's approach before Congress is quite surprising! I think we need to break the tie by getting a Department of Motor Vehicles investigator to testify. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 I think we need to break the tie by getting a Department of Motor Vehicles investigator to testify. Talk about a department that's got plenty of expertise in torture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 Oh, water BOARDing, I thought the briefers said water HOARDing, and I switched from bottled water to gin! As Sargeant Schultz used to say, "I know NOTHING!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 Gee, the FBI has a lot of credibility. An organization which isn't in charge of the detainees, is historically a bitter rival of CIA, and which is obligated to use only traditional interrogation techniques... To think that a career FBI guy would come out and bad-mouth CIA's approach before Congress is quite surprising! I think we need to break the tie by getting a Department of Motor Vehicles investigator to testify. Wow, you're really reaching now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 Look up SEAR training. The soldiers are trained to withstand torture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 Look up SEAR training. The soldiers are trained to withstand torture. SEAR training? Like the dudes who teach you how to sell refrigerators? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chump Change Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 SEAR training? Like the dudes who teach you how to sell refrigerators? No, the dudes who teach you how to put those sear marks on your Hot Pockets... BTW, it's SERE Training. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 No, the dudes who teach you how to put those sear marks on your Hot Pockets... BTW, it's SERE Training. I thought it was SEER Training. You know...because the guy who created it was so far-sighted...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 Look up SEAR training. The soldiers are trained to withstand torture. Actually, I think in SEAR training they're just taught to withstand a serious grilling... Ba-dum bum <rimshot>. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StupidNation Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 I'm pretty sure he wasn't talking about the world economy but rather the US economy, where Obama approved virtually every spending measure he could when he showed up for his job, only to become president and repeatedly say (on his own and through his aides): "I inherited this problem." He contributed to this problem, and since he's been in office, all he's done is put the ball in motion to make things worse by spending out his ass with absolutely no accountability. And if anyone here cannot understand the above you are retarded. The man voted and pushed liberalized bills through his party the last 2 years. His party wanted the bills passed and they were. The man is a sincere liar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts