DescentBB

First we had Herr Klintons escapades, then we had Weinergate and now another oversexed Dem was stupid enough that he thought no one would find out. So stupid he even used the gal who took down Weiner:

The part-time porn star whose sexting affair took down former New York congressman Anthony Weiner has struck again, this time ensnaring a state lawmaker from Indiana.

Congressman Justin Moed, a Democratic legislator representing downtown Indianapolis, the state’s largest city and its capital, posted graphic sexual texts to Leathers on Twitter using the handle “★■◆● Boy” and sent her gifts including a “Fetish Fantasy Series Pink Leash & Collar."

well, there's one to be weeded out, for sure. Didn't read anything about him making racist comments, breaking the Federal sedition laws, screwing over workers(other than the woman in question) or threatening to privatize Social Security in there. Did you?

Actually, as a serious aside, I really was hoping this thread was about the whole sedition thing and the Senate GOP letter. On that, some 'Progressive' types are literally foaming at the mouth today. I mean, what they did likely does violate the Logan Act, but that law hasn't be invoked since 1808, and never has been successfully prosecuted. I expressed, on several blogs today, my dismay that they can waste a day or three laser-focused on this(seemingly regular) act of stupidity by the GOP, rather than develop THEIR platform for the 2016 race. You, Woody, would have been rather amused at how many times in the last 24 hours, I've been called a Confederate Conservative, Republican Scum or the like. And, when I catch a load of crap from the extreme right and the extreme left, I figure I'm right where my comfort zone is. That, by the way, is a good deal of why my gut is still positive about Obama.

callmeslick wrote:....
I'm right where my comfort zone is. That, by the way, is a good deal of why my gut is still positive about Obama.

Way to set the bar nice and low! Limbo champion in the frat house I'm guessing.

Will Robinson wrote:

callmeslick wrote:....
I'm right where my comfort zone is. That, by the way, is a good deal of why my gut is still positive about Obama.

Way to set the bar nice and low! Limbo champion in the frat house I'm guessing.

out-of-context. lol.

Ferno wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:

callmeslick wrote:....
I'm right where my comfort zone is. That, by the way, is a good deal of why my gut is still positive about Obama.

Way to set the bar nice and low! Limbo champion in the frat house I'm guessing.

out-of-context. lol.

Nothing goes over your head. Your reflexes are too fast. You would have caught it.

Will Robinson wrote:
Nothing goes over your head. Your reflexes are too fast. You would have caught it.

I'm guessing Will's a fan of Guardians of the Galaxy.

callmeslick wrote:Actually, as a serious aside, I really was hoping this thread was about the whole sedition thing and the Senate GOP letter. On that, some 'Progressive' types are literally foaming at the mouth today.

I don't think Progressives have a thing to worry about. The Iranian Foreign Minister just did them a favor by making the GOP look like idiots, not that it was hard to do.

I seem to remember how the Iranians also Made Carter look like a ineffectual fool also.

vision wrote:

callmeslick wrote:Actually, as a serious aside, I really was hoping this thread was about the whole sedition thing and the Senate GOP letter. On that, some 'Progressive' types are literally foaming at the mouth today.

I don't think Progressives have a thing to worry about. The Iranian Foreign Minister just did them a favor by making the GOP look like idiots, not that it was hard to do.

I don't think the GOP has to be concerned with any press release/opinion expressed by their enemy on this issue.
They delivered their message and a defensive/hostile reply from Iran would not be unexpected or be effective.

The message, meanwhile, was received...and it will fit into the Iranians calculations regardless of any public dismissal they make. They aren't idiots though so it isn't like they couldn't have anticipated the scenario without ever recieving the letter.
I think the letter was a shot at the President, a way to keep a light shining on what he is doing, not an attempt to tell the Iranians something they don't know.

the GOP Senators made complete fools of themselves. Moreover, they made the nation look weak, as they've tended to for years.

The only fool sits in the white house. The letter is intended to make sure he knows Tricks are for Kids and not for drooling self centered idiots who think they know what is best.

callmeslick wrote:the GOP Senators made complete fools of themselves. Moreover, they made the nation look weak, as they've tended to for years.

Lol! As if their display of dissent from Obama's ineffective efforts and telling Iran they would be more resolute than he has been could possibly do that.

woodchip wrote:The only fool sits in the white house. The letter is intended to make sure he knows Tricks are for Kids and not for drooling self centered idiots who think they know what is best.

sorry, but all serious commentary, including that of the ranking GOP member of the Armed Services Committee(Corker), who didn't sign off on the thing, and just watched his bill to provide stronger Congressional involvement in negotiations go up in smoke. Thanks for supporting a weaker US, Woody.

callmeslick wrote:the GOP Senators made complete fools of themselves. Moreover, they made the nation look weak, as they've tended to for years.

Not only that, but it appears that they broke the law, even though it's unconstitutional and never enforced, and that's why they're going to get away with it. Personally, I think what they did was outright treasonous. If a Democratic congress ever interfered with a Republican president's foreign negotiations, I'm betting that they would yell and scream and call it treason and an insult to the competency of their president.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/201 ... ran-letter

Will Robinson wrote:They delivered their message and a defensive/hostile reply from Iran would not be unexpected or be effective.

Did you read the response? It wasn't hostile or defensive. It was dismissive, and hilariously at that. It basically said "this behavior is unwarranted, embarrassing, and shows no understanding of foreign relations."

vision wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:They delivered their message and a defensive/hostile reply from Iran would not be unexpected or be effective.

Did you read the response? It wasn't hostile or defensive. It was dismissive, and hilariously at that. It basically said "this behavior is unwarranted, embarrassing, and shows no understanding of foreign relations."

Dismissive is defensive if you are trying to dismiss something that you know will survive your characterization of it as insignificant. Slick uses it all the time to try to defend his favorite politicians from criticism. With equally ineffective results.

Do you sincerely think any verbal parry from Iran is going to change the GOP members opinion of the policy they plan to undo?
Do you think the Iranians actually think their dismissive reply will have that effect, or that they are so stupid as to believe the sentiment expressed in the letter wasn't sincere?

tunnelcat wrote:

callmeslick wrote:the GOP Senators made complete fools of themselves. Moreover, they made the nation look weak, as they've tended to for years.

Not only that, but it appears that they broke the law, even though it's unconstitutional and never enforced, and that's why they're going to get away with it. Personally, I think what they did was outright treasonous. If a Democratic congress ever interfered with a Republican president's foreign negotiations, I'm betting that they would yell and scream and call it treason and an insult to the competency of their president.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/201 ... ran-letter

Congress has to approve any foreign negotiations by the president so how would this case be treasonous?

no, they don't Woody. Multinational agreements don't require any congressional input. Treaties must be ratified. Big difference.

Will Robinson wrote:Dismissive is defensive...

That's quite a stretch. You're pretty good with the mental gymnastics at this point I suppose. So much for seeing things as they are and not how you want them to be.

Will Robinson wrote:Do you sincerely think any verbal parry from Iran is going to change the GOP members opinion of the policy they plan to undo?

They can't undo anything. And meanwhile, they register another notch on the stupid-meter.

Will Robinson wrote:Do you think the Iranians actually think their dismissive reply will have that effect, or that they are so stupid as to believe the sentiment expressed in the letter wasn't sincere?

It's pretty clear the letter has zero affect on Iran because the GOP doesn't even know how foreign policy matters work. That's why it's so funny. What a bunch of morons.

woodchip wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:

callmeslick wrote:the GOP Senators made complete fools of themselves. Moreover, they made the nation look weak, as they've tended to for years.

Not only that, but it appears that they broke the law, even though it's unconstitutional and never enforced, and that's why they're going to get away with it. Personally, I think what they did was outright treasonous. If a Democratic congress ever interfered with a Republican president's foreign negotiations, I'm betting that they would yell and scream and call it treason and an insult to the competency of their president.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/201 ... ran-letter

Congress has to approve any foreign negotiations by the president so how would this case be treasonous?

160,000 people have already signed a petition telling the Administration they want to charge those 47 Senators with treason. The law in question is the Logan Act, written in 1799. But it's never been used against Congress, nor against any citizens since it's creation and it appears it can't be used this time either. However, this case puts forth a great reason for a new amendment. Congressional members need to be restrained from going around any president's foreign policy negotiations in the future (yes, the Dems are guilty of doing the same thing. Pelosi did it to Bush). They need to stick to their own jobs and not interfere with the duties of the president.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/201 ... entury-law

Anyone who wants to call this treason is nothing short of a moron

Will Robinson wrote:
Nothing goes over your head. Your reflexes are too fast. You would have caught it.

back-handed compliment. I see you're improving. but it needs some work, though.

Ferno wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:
Nothing goes over your head. Your reflexes are too fast. You would have caught it.

back-handed compliment. I see you're improving. but it needs some work, though.

Look at the reach on this guy! "Missed it by this much".

CUDA wrote:Anyone who wants to call this treason is nothing short of a moron

Well, that little poison pen from the Republicans has pretty much destroyed our President's negotiating credibility and made the U.S. look like a bunch of disorganized political liars. I'd say it was treason and the bastards should be thrown in jail. Hope you right wingers like eternal war and death, because this country won't be able to negotiate in good faith with any foreign nation on earth from now on, and that includes any future Republican president and his foreign policy attempts. Oh wait, Republicans like to go to war. Screw negotiating for peace.

http://www.ibtimes.com/iran-letter-upda ... ns-1845542

http://news.yahoo.com/khamenei-slams-re ... 27123.html

So TC, you don't mind a country being allowed by our president to possess a nuclear bomb, a country that has expressed interest in wiping our country and Israel off the face of the earth?

tunnelcat wrote:

CUDA wrote:Anyone who wants to call this treason is nothing short of a moron

Well, that little poison pen from the Republicans has pretty much destroyed our President's negotiating credibility and made the U.S. look like a bunch of disorganized political liars. I'd say it was treason and the bastards should be thrown in jail. ...

Here TC, maybe this will give you pause like it did slick:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... tions.html

Karma is a ★■◆● huh?

Or will you suggest Obama share the cell/firing squad with his fellow traitors?

And think about this, if merely suggesting the obvious destroys Obama's credibility what does that really say about him?

Will Robinson wrote:"Missed it by this much".

That was an awesome show.

woodchip wrote:So TC, you don't mind a country being allowed by our president to possess a nuclear bomb, a country that has expressed interest in wiping our country and Israel off the face of the earth?

That's beside the point. Foreign policy, constitutionally, is under the purview of the president, NOT congress, whether you like that president or not. Once any president makes a deal with a foreign nation, then it's up to Congress to decide if that deal is in the best interests of our nation. That's the appropriate time to nix things if they don't like it. You don't like that, petition to get a change to the Constitution, a document you hold in very high esteem.

This is the comment years ago from President Bush's spokesman for President Bush's National Security Council, Gordon Johndroe, when your favorite Democrat, Pelosi, went around Bush and visited with King Assad of Syria.

Gordon Johndroe wrote:"Unfortunately that road is lined with the victims of Hamas and Hezbollah, the victims of terrorists who cross from Syria into Iraq," he said. "It's unfortunate that she took this unilateral trip which we only see as counterproductive."

In hindsight, perhaps if Bush had gone ahead held a dialog with Assad, maybe we wouldn't have something far worse to contend with like we have with ISIS today. Sometimes diplomacy can work better than turning one's back on a potential enemy. It's better to keep one's enemies as frenemies, just to make it easier to keep an eye on them instead of kicking them away as an enemy into the shadows to do God knows what behind our backs. It's far easier to prevent a mess than clean one up.

Will Robinson wrote:Here TC, maybe this will give you pause like it did slick:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... tions.html

Karma is a ★■◆● huh?

Or will you suggest Obama share the cell/firing squad with his fellow traitors?

And think about this, if merely suggesting the obvious destroys Obama's credibility what does that really say about him?

I pointed that out in my response to woodchip. Neither party should be violating the Constitution for their own purposes. With Obama and the Republicans, it's not karma, but schadenfreude.

tunnelcat wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:Here TC, maybe this will give you pause like it did slick:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... tions.html

Karma is a ★■◆● huh?

Or will you suggest Obama share the cell/firing squad with his fellow traitors?

And think about this, if merely suggesting the obvious destroys Obama's credibility what does that really say about him?

I pointed that out in my response to woodchip. Neither party should be violating the Constitution for their own purposes. With Obama and the Republicans, it's not karma, but schadenfreude.

Oh, ok, my bad. I must have missed it when you called for charges of treason back when Obama did that...