What about Christie?

A forum not related to waterfowl for discussing the more controversial and hot topic issues in our world from immigration, politics, the war, etc..

Moderators: Smackaduck, MM

Re: What about Christie?

Postby SpinnerMan » Wed Feb 19, 2014 7:32 am

vincentpa wrote:
dudejcb wrote:let's bump this back to where it belongs. Christie ain't out of the woods yet by a long ways.


It's not about him being out of the woods. I'm almost sure that if they had something on him or he really did the deed, he would be toast by now. The goal is to do as much damage by smearing him in order to ruin his chance of running for president. Keep those blinders on.

Of course it is for dude and the MSNBC idiots.

However, does it bother you that these are the friends he keeps and the people he appoints? He seems pretty blind to the culture of corruption that everyone knows exists in Jersey on both sides of the political aisle. I've never trusted the guy, so this fits the view I have always had of him.

He's still a million times less of a lying crook than Hillary, which dude doesn't care about in the slightest. I'm sure he will say what difference does it make at this point or any point what Hillary or any other Democrat has done, but their potential challengers :hammer: :hammer: :hammer: After all why would ethics of our political leaders matter if you want to give them vast power? It makes sense to the left that entrusting these people with power is not reason to demand the absolutely highest ethical standards and not to be very wary of people that are unable to avoid the appearance of impropriety and associate with people known for political corruption.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15796
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL


Re: What about Christie?

Postby dudejcb » Wed Feb 19, 2014 8:44 pm

Tell me Spinner, just for perspective, how long did Ken Starr investigate Clinton? and what was the cost? and what was the victory?
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5242
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Re: What about Christie?

Postby SpinnerMan » Thu Feb 20, 2014 6:57 am

dudejcb wrote:Tell me Spinner, just for perspective, how long did Ken Starr investigate Clinton? and what was the cost? and what was the victory?

Nothing if you only care about political victory. It is the irony of all ironies that the Democrats talk about a war on women and then defend a man accused many times by many women of sexual assault up to and including rape. Of course political victory demands that these women not be taken seriously. However, Christie been accused of political retribution, now that is serious. Why? Because there is victory to be had. Image the truth. Image justice. Image principles. Image right and wrong. What is the political victory to be had?

And this attitude of what victory is how we get Obamacare. A huge victory for Obama and great suffering for millions.

If the Republicans had acted like Democrats, Nixon could also have claimed all this money spent, but what victory was had? Would you have believed that would have been a victory for justice or a victory for the powerful being above the law?
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15796
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby dudejcb » Wed Feb 26, 2014 9:23 pm

SpinnerMan wrote:
dudejcb wrote:Tell me Spinner, just for perspective, how long did Ken Starr investigate Clinton? and what was the cost? and what was the victory?

Nothing if you only care about political victory. It is the irony of all ironies that the Democrats talk about a war on women and then defend a man accused many times by many women of sexual assault up to and including rape. Of course political victory demands that these women not be taken seriously. However, Christie been accused of political retribution, now that is serious. Why? Because there is victory to be had. Image the truth. Image justice. Image principles. Image right and wrong. What is the political victory to be had?

And this attitude of what victory is how we get Obamacare. A huge victory for Obama and great suffering for millions.

If the Republicans had acted like Democrats, Nixon could also have claimed all this money spent, but what victory was had? Would you have believed that would have been a victory for justice or a victory for the powerful being above the law?
Don't obfuscate. Just give us the facts about the Starr Adventures. facts are your area of interest and expertise. I expect some bar charts showing money spent versus value obtained, or some such Spinneresque contrivance.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5242
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Re: What about Christie?

Postby SpinnerMan » Thu Feb 27, 2014 7:15 am

dudejcb wrote:
SpinnerMan wrote:
dudejcb wrote:Tell me Spinner, just for perspective, how long did Ken Starr investigate Clinton? and what was the cost? and what was the victory?

Nothing if you only care about political victory. It is the irony of all ironies that the Democrats talk about a war on women and then defend a man accused many times by many women of sexual assault up to and including rape. Of course political victory demands that these women not be taken seriously. However, Christie been accused of political retribution, now that is serious. Why? Because there is victory to be had. Image the truth. Image justice. Image principles. Image right and wrong. What is the political victory to be had?

And this attitude of what victory is how we get Obamacare. A huge victory for Obama and great suffering for millions.

If the Republicans had acted like Democrats, Nixon could also have claimed all this money spent, but what victory was had? Would you have believed that would have been a victory for justice or a victory for the powerful being above the law?
Don't obfuscate. Just give us the facts about the Starr Adventures. facts are your area of interest and expertise. I expect some bar charts showing money spent versus value obtained, or some such Spinneresque contrivance.

I know you are old enough to remember. Maybe you are getting too old that you are forgetting.

Impeaching a president for crimes that he later cops to in a plea agreement is HUGE!

The Democrats simply saying those crimes are not sufficient to remove a president is also huge. That was my last straw with the Democrat party which made it clear that they feel they are above the law, especially the powerful.

Then there were a large number of people that went to jail. It uncovered corruption on a broad scale, but I know that you simply do not care about that. If you did, you could not support Democrats in general and Illinois politicians in particular. This is business as usual, which is why so many people went to jail as a result of the Clinton investigation and why so many people close to Obama have gone to jail in Illinois.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitewater_controversy
Ultimately the Clintons were never charged, but 15 other persons were convicted of more than 40 crimes, including Bill Clinton's successor as Governor, who was removed from office.[40]
Jim Guy Tucker: Governor of Arkansas at the time, removed from office (fraud, 3 counts)
John Haley: attorney for Jim Guy Tucker (tax evasion)
William J. Marks, Sr.: Jim Guy Tucker business partner (conspiracy)
Stephen Smith: former Governor Clinton aide (conspiracy to misapply funds). Bill Clinton pardoned.
Webster Hubbell: Clinton political supporter; Rose Law Firm partner (embezzlement, fraud)
Jim McDougal: banker, Clinton political supporter: (18 felonies, varied)
Susan McDougal: Clinton political supporter (multiple fraud). Bill Clinton pardoned.
David Hale: banker, self-proclaimed Clinton political supporter: (conspiracy, fraud)
Neal Ainley: Perry County Bank president (embezzled bank funds for Clinton campaign)
Chris Wade: Whitewater real estate broker (multiple loan fraud). Bill Clinton pardoned.
Larry Kuca: Madison real estate agent (multiple loan fraud)
Robert W. Palmer: Madison appraiser (conspiracy). Bill Clinton pardoned.
John Latham: Madison Bank CEO (bank fraud)
Eugene Fitzhugh: Whitewater defendant (multiple bribery)
Charles Matthews: Whitewater defendant (bribery)
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15796
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby cartervj » Tue Mar 11, 2014 9:16 pm

Is this as bad?????????? :lol3:



Newly released public records show that the Department of the Interior knew in advance that two groups of aging veterans would be visiting the World War II Memorial on October 1, 2013, but they decided to barricade the premises anyway.

According to emails obtained by National Review Online, the U.S. National Park Service employees were also constantly monitoring the news for any negative media attention. Moreover, the emails show that government shutdown exceptions were granted to National Park Service employees.

The Obama administration tried to make political hay out of the government shutdown by closing the National Mall and denying access to monuments, but the decision backfired when the veterans defied the signs and fences and entered the WWII Memorial. The vets were taking part in the Mississippi Gulf Coast Honor Flight, established in 2011 to help fly the state's WWII veterans to Washington, D.C. and to provide tours to monuments dedicated in their honor.

Obama told the American people that it was necessary to shut down the Mall and blamed Republicans for creating the hardships. However, the emails reveal that the Department of the Interior and National Park Service did not have to shut down the monuments but did so to make a point.

On September 30, Tom Buttry, a legislative correspondent in Senator Tom Harkin’s (D-Iowa) office, stated that it would actually be easier and less costly to keep the mall open than to shut it down:

While I understand that these memorials have remained accessible to the public during past shutdowns (I’d imagine with the mall being so open, it'd probably [be] more manpower intensive to try to completely close them), I wanted to do my due diligence and make 100 percent sure that people could visit the outdoor memorials on the National Mall in the event of a shutdown.
“Nothing makes me more certain of the victory of our ideas than our success in the universities” – Adolf H, 1930
User avatar
cartervj
hunter
 
Posts: 7188
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: NW AL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby boney fingers » Wed Mar 12, 2014 5:44 am

dudejcb wrote:Tell me Spinner, just for perspective, how long did Ken Starr investigate Clinton? and what was the cost? and what was the victory?


The victory is that the President was put on notice that engaging in behavior that makes him vulnerable to black mail will result in an investigation. Any one who is in a position of top secret security should be scrutinized in this way. This is why what General Patraeus did was wrong from a stand point of his position, not because of what it did to his family. Members of the military in top secret positions are held to this standard, there is no reason the Commander in Chief should not be held to the same standard.
boney fingers
hunter
 
Posts: 793
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:30 pm

Re: What about Christie?

Postby boney fingers » Wed Mar 12, 2014 5:56 am

cartervj wrote:Is this as bad?????????? :lol3:



Newly released public records show that the Department of the Interior knew in advance that two groups of aging veterans would be visiting the World War II Memorial on October 1, 2013, but they decided to barricade the premises anyway.

According to emails obtained by National Review Online, the U.S. National Park Service employees were also constantly monitoring the news for any negative media attention. Moreover, the emails show that government shutdown exceptions were granted to National Park Service employees.

The Obama administration tried to make political hay out of the government shutdown by closing the National Mall and denying access to monuments, but the decision backfired when the veterans defied the signs and fences and entered the WWII Memorial. The vets were taking part in the Mississippi Gulf Coast Honor Flight, established in 2011 to help fly the state's WWII veterans to Washington, D.C. and to provide tours to monuments dedicated in their honor.

Obama told the American people that it was necessary to shut down the Mall and blamed Republicans for creating the hardships. However, the emails reveal that the Department of the Interior and National Park Service did not have to shut down the monuments but did so to make a point.

On September 30, Tom Buttry, a legislative correspondent in Senator Tom Harkin’s (D-Iowa) office, stated that it would actually be easier and less costly to keep the mall open than to shut it down:

While I understand that these memorials have remained accessible to the public during past shutdowns (I’d imagine with the mall being so open, it'd probably [be] more manpower intensive to try to completely close them), I wanted to do my due diligence and make 100 percent sure that people could visit the outdoor memorials on the National Mall in the event of a shutdown.


This is a great point, Im sure MSNBC has spent countless hours in pursuit of the truth on this, and Im sure Dude and the rest of the liberals have a good answer for you :sarcmark: .
boney fingers
hunter
 
Posts: 793
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:30 pm

Re: What about Christie?

Postby ScaupHunter » Wed Mar 12, 2014 11:05 am

dudejcb wrote:Tell me Spinner, just for perspective, how long did Ken Starr investigate Clinton? and what was the cost? and what was the victory?



Tell me Dude. Why corrupt politicians did not impeach Clinton for clear and obvious lying in court. As in clear and obvious perjury. That is the real question. Clinton's guilt was proven beyond the shadow of a doubt. He skated scott free due to corrupt politics. Answer that question and you have your answer to the real issue, not the red herring you just threw on the table.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6395
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: What about Christie?

Postby SpinnerMan » Wed Mar 12, 2014 11:38 am

If the Dude is so worried about what Christie's advisors did, I'm sure he is very concerned about this as well.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304020104579433831480424514
Federal prosecutors are providing new details in court documents about the role an adviser to Hillary Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign allegedly played in what prosecutors say was an illegally funded operation to build voter support for the candidate during the Democratic nomination fight that year.


The case involves Jeffrey Thompson, a Washington, D.C., businessman who pleaded guilty on Monday in U.S. district court for the District of Columbia to felony conspiracy charges. Prosecutors said in court documents that Mr. Thompson and his companies funneled more than $3.3 million in illegal contributions to at least 28 federal and local candidates, including Mrs. Clinton and Vincent Gray, the mayor of Washington, D.C. Some information about the matter emerged last fall.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15796
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby TheMiz » Wed Mar 12, 2014 12:42 pm

boney fingers wrote:
dudejcb wrote:Tell me Spinner, just for perspective, how long did Ken Starr investigate Clinton? and what was the cost? and what was the victory?


The victory is that the President was put on notice that engaging in behavior that makes him vulnerable to black mail will result in an investigation. Any one who is in a position of top secret security should be scrutinized in this way. This is why what General Patraeus did was wrong from a stand point of his position, not because of what it did to his family. Members of the military in top secret positions are held to this standard, there is no reason the Commander in Chief should not be held to the same standard.



Yes, exactly this.

Anyone who has held a clearance knows this. Guys have lost there clearance for a lot of things. It all comes back to could you be black mailed? Plenty of guys have gone through a divorce and mysteriously lost there clearance.

The president shouldn't be any different. If you're holding a top secret, you have to play by the same rules as everyone else.
User avatar
TheMiz
hunter
 
Posts: 103
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 8:59 am
Location: KS

Re: What about Christie?

Postby Indaswamp » Thu Mar 27, 2014 9:38 pm

The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Save the Marsh, Eat a Nutria!

Image
User avatar
Indaswamp
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 56114
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South Louisiana

Re: What about Christie?

Postby Botiz630 » Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:24 am

Yeah, cleared by an investigation that he initiated. What a surprise!
B Squad Captain
If do right, no can defense
User avatar
Botiz630
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 15907
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 11:24 pm

Re: What about Christie?

Postby SpinnerMan » Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:28 am

Botiz630 wrote:Yeah, cleared by an investigation that he initiated. What a surprise!

Isn't that how it works today? :huh: Obama and Holder have cleared themselves of all kinds of things.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15796
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby cartervj » Fri Mar 28, 2014 7:09 am

and it will take years to assemble the IRS emails from Lerner and others

anyone could do it in an afternoon but the IRS can't :welcome:
“Nothing makes me more certain of the victory of our ideas than our success in the universities” – Adolf H, 1930
User avatar
cartervj
hunter
 
Posts: 7188
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: NW AL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby Glimmerjim » Tue Apr 01, 2014 12:11 pm

Botiz630 wrote:Yeah, cleared by an investigation that he initiated. What a surprise!

Yep. That struck me as a rather odd case of the fox guarding the hen house, too, Botiz!
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10672
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: What about Christie?

Postby cartervj » Tue Apr 01, 2014 12:25 pm

Glimmerjim wrote:
Botiz630 wrote:Yeah, cleared by an investigation that he initiated. What a surprise!

Yep. That struck me as a rather odd case of the fox guarding the hen house, too, Botiz!



don't forget, Obama and company have doing this as well :thumbsup:
“Nothing makes me more certain of the victory of our ideas than our success in the universities” – Adolf H, 1930
User avatar
cartervj
hunter
 
Posts: 7188
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: NW AL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby Gunnysway » Tue Apr 01, 2014 12:45 pm

That doesn't make it right, or me respect him any more...


Two words...


Status quo...






This is all assuming he is like every other politician. :lol3:
Setting up meetings between geese and God since 1992...

Gud till ära, oss till gagn...
User avatar
Gunnysway
hunter
 
Posts: 2566
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 11:46 am
Location: Somewhere between Heaven and Hell

Re: What about Christie?

Postby Glimmerjim » Tue Apr 01, 2014 8:33 pm

cartervj wrote:
Glimmerjim wrote:
Botiz630 wrote:Yeah, cleared by an investigation that he initiated. What a surprise!

Yep. That struck me as a rather odd case of the fox guarding the hen house, too, Botiz!



don't forget, Obama and company have doing this as well :thumbsup:

I freely admit it is politics as usual these days, carter, and no one beyond the most basic of local government positions is above it. So I think the real question is do we judge these people based on the homily that the "end justifies the means", or do we scrutinize and hold them accountable for behavior that is clearly beyond, if not Constitutionality, then at least any sense of morality or fairness. And I ask that question in all seriousness, with absolutely no partisanship involved.
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10672
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: What about Christie?

Postby dudejcb » Tue Apr 01, 2014 8:37 pm

SpinnerMan wrote:
Botiz630 wrote:Yeah, cleared by an investigation that he initiated. What a surprise!

Isn't that how it works today? :huh: Obama and Holder have cleared themselves of all kinds of things.

So Spinner, if I follow (and I do): you're going to invoke what, by your own admission, is in your opinion the lowest possible standard ever witnessed in US political history, as your standard when it serves you? What a convenient, disingenuous, and cheap turn of the table. Nice work! :clapping:
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5242
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Re: What about Christie?

Postby Nabs » Tue Apr 01, 2014 11:30 pm

How else can anyone justify bad behavior, unless it is by pointing out other bad behavior.
User avatar
Nabs
hunter
 
Posts: 725
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 5:35 pm

Re: What about Christie?

Postby Glimmerjim » Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:23 am

Nabs wrote:How else can anyone justify bad behavior, unless it is by pointing out other bad behavior.

It would be nice to be able to examine and ascertain bad behavior by demonstrating the history of those who didn't engage in egregious conduct when they were in a position of power. Unfortunately, the unicorn population has been severely decimated, if it ever existed at all, and it is hardly worth the effort to attempt to find one to study. It is my understanding that on occasion a very young unicorn will be discovered. However, studies continually show that after they mature they become as elusive as leprechauns and Yeti.
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10672
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: What about Christie?

Postby cartervj » Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:49 pm

Glimmerjim wrote:
cartervj wrote:
Glimmerjim wrote:
Botiz630 wrote:Yeah, cleared by an investigation that he initiated. What a surprise!

Yep. That struck me as a rather odd case of the fox guarding the hen house, too, Botiz!



don't forget, Obama and company have doing this as well :thumbsup:

I freely admit it is politics as usual these days, carter, and no one beyond the most basic of local government positions is above it. So I think the real question is do we judge these people based on the homily that the "end justifies the means", or do we scrutinize and hold them accountable for behavior that is clearly beyond, if not Constitutionality, then at least any sense of morality or fairness. And I ask that question in all seriousness, with absolutely no partisanship involved.



I'm tired of both self serving sides, voting them ALL out is the only answer. :thumbsup:
“Nothing makes me more certain of the victory of our ideas than our success in the universities” – Adolf H, 1930
User avatar
cartervj
hunter
 
Posts: 7188
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: NW AL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby SpinnerMan » Wed Apr 02, 2014 1:44 pm

dudejcb wrote:
SpinnerMan wrote:
Botiz630 wrote:Yeah, cleared by an investigation that he initiated. What a surprise!

Isn't that how it works today? :huh: Obama and Holder have cleared themselves of all kinds of things.

So Spinner, if I follow (and I do): you're going to invoke what, by your own admission, is in your opinion the lowest possible standard ever witnessed in US political history, as your standard when it serves you? What a convenient, disingenuous, and cheap turn of the table. Nice work! :clapping:

As usual. You do not follow. I was being sarcastic about the silliness and hypocrisy. Go back and look what I said about Christie earlier.

All of them should stay far from power. :thumbsup:

Obama because he is a serial liar at a minimum.

Holder because he lies to Congress and is a criminal at a minimum.

Christie because he hired these types at a minimum. Is he corrupt like the other two I mentioned? I do not know. Time will probably tell, but he is too close to the corrupt political machine. Do I want to gamble that he was simply oblivious? :no:

However, how many people care about Obama, Holder, and Christie and want all three as far from power as possible? :huh:
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15796
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby dudejcb » Thu Apr 03, 2014 9:14 pm

SpinnerMan wrote:
dudejcb wrote:
SpinnerMan wrote:
Botiz630 wrote:Yeah, cleared by an investigation that he initiated. What a surprise!

Isn't that how it works today? :huh: Obama and Holder have cleared themselves of all kinds of things.

So Spinner, if I follow (and I do): you're going to invoke what, by your own admission, is in your opinion the lowest possible standard ever witnessed in US political history, as your standard when it serves you? What a convenient, disingenuous, and cheap turn of the table. Nice work! :clapping:

As usual. You do not follow. I was being sarcastic about the silliness and hypocrisy. Go back and look what I said about Christie earlier.

All of them should stay far from power. :thumbsup:

Obama because he is a serial liar at a minimum.

Holder because he lies to Congress and is a criminal at a minimum.

Christie because he hired these types at a minimum. Is he corrupt like the other two I mentioned? I do not know. Time will probably tell, but he is too close to the corrupt political machine. Do I want to gamble that he was simply oblivious? :no:

However, how many people care about Obama, Holder, and Christie and want all three as far from power as possible? :huh:
I totally missed your sarcasm. Sometimes I do that.

Mea culpa ... I take it all back (for the time being :beer: ).
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5242
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

PreviousNext

Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: macdaddy and 5 guests