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 Glimmerjim » Fri Jan 31, 2014 8:20 pm

assateague wrote:When was Reagan president again?

:lol3: You're right. :oops: I had carried this concept out in my mind, as my mind runs off on tangents unless I keep a very strict leash on it, and he was such a stand out he stuck! The only other Rep in name at that time would have been Nixon, but we can only really count a year of his Presidency.
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10865
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am


Re: What about Christie?

Postby assateague » Fri Jan 31, 2014 9:07 pm

Between his starting the war on drugs and shitcanning the gold standard, I'd just as soon we forget about all of his years.
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Re: What about Christie?

Postby Glimmerjim » Sat Feb 01, 2014 1:49 am

assateague wrote:Between his starting the war on drugs and shitcanning the gold standard, I'd just as soon we forget about all of his years.

Boy howdy! :thumbsup:
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10865
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: What about Christie?

Postby cartervj » Sat Feb 01, 2014 8:00 pm

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/fdr-takes-united-states-off-gold-standard

On June 5, 1933, the United States went off the gold standard, a monetary system in which currency is backed by gold, when Congress enacted a joint resolution nullifying the right of creditors to demand payment in gold. The United States had been on a gold standard since 1879, except for an embargo on gold exports during World War I, but bank failures during the Great Depression of the 1930s frightened the public into hoarding gold, making the policy untenable.

Soon after taking office in March 1933, Roosevelt declared a nationwide bank moratorium in order to prevent a run on the banks by consumers lacking confidence in the economy. He also forbade banks to pay out gold or to export it. According to Keynesian economic theory, one of the best ways to fight off an economic downturn is to inflate the money supply. And increasing the amount of gold held by the Federal Reserve would in turn increase its power to inflate the money supply. Facing similar pressures, Britain had dropped the gold standard in 1931, and Roosevelt had taken note.

On April 5, 1933, Roosevelt ordered all gold coins and gold certificates in denominations of more than $100 turned in for other money. It required all persons to deliver all gold coin, gold bullion and gold certificates owned by them to the Federal Reserve by May 1 for the set price of $20.67 per ounce. By May 10, the government had taken in $300 million of gold coin and $470 million of gold certificates. Two months later, a joint resolution of Congress abrogated the gold clauses in many public and private obligations that required the debtor to repay the creditor in gold dollars of the same weight and fineness as those borrowed. In 1934, the government price of gold was increased to $35 per ounce, effectively increasing the gold on the Federal Reserve's balance sheets by 69 percent. This increase in assets allowed the Federal Reserve to further inflate the money supply.

The government held the $35 per ounce price until August 15, 1971, when President Richard Nixon announced that the United States would no longer convert dollars to gold at a fixed value, thus completely abandoning the gold standard. In 1974, President Gerald Ford signed legislation that permitted Americans again to own gold bullion.
“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: 7357
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: NW AL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby Glimmerjim » Sun Feb 02, 2014 10:23 pm

It sounds as though Christie is sliding into the hole he dug foot by foot. The GOP will at some point decide that is simply easier to fill the hole, with him in it, than to attempt to rescue him. Actually, I kind of liked his brashness myself!
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10865
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: What about Christie?

Postby SpinnerMan » Mon Feb 03, 2014 7:14 am

Glimmerjim wrote:It sounds as though Christie is sliding into the hole he dug foot by foot. The GOP will at some point decide that is simply easier to fill the hole, with him in it, than to attempt to rescue him. Actually, I kind of liked his brashness myself!

How is he sliding into the hole? There are 2 options: 1) he knew; and 2) he did not. Accusations by those trying to avoid jail should be treated as such. However, it is precisely these accusations and your reaction to them that will knock him out even if absolute proof comes out that he did not know and it was clear he was opposed to anything like what happened.

While I don't think he knew. It is precisely this culture from which he comes. Would he work with corrupt power brokers to by a home he could not afford? No I don't think he is that corrupt. Would he get his wife a $300k/yr no show job? No I don't think he is that corrupt. Would he flat out lie to get a signature piece of legislation passed? No I don't think he is that corrupt. However, I think he will use government resources as his own. I think he will trade your tax money for things he wants. I think he is not going to be principled and focus on what he wants. He's not there to sacrifice for the people. He thinks he is bigger than the people and knows what they need even if they tell him otherwise, so if he needs to make deals in backroom and let a few facts slip by, well he knows best.

This is precisely what is wrong with the Democrat voters. Ted Leave 'em Dead Kennedy was an icon. And they are sadly sincerely outraged about what Christie is ACCUSED of doing. There is no even recognition that people should be judged by one standard applied uniformly. The concept of equal justice is totally incomprehensible to so many on the left while it is a guiding principle on the right.

What was Obama doing while our embassy was under attack? So what if he couldn't be bothered because he had campaigning to do.

So what if he used the IRS to attack his political opponents? That's not as bad as blocking traffic for political retribution :no:

Obama is accused of far, far worse, why is he not sliding into a hole? The answer is obvious if you are honest with yourself.
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: 16293
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby vincentpa » Tue Feb 04, 2014 6:57 am

Whoops, MSNBC backtracking after jumping all over a story they shouldn't have. Lying lawyers and shady pols should be investigated before reporting unsupported allegations as truth.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7742
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: What about Christie?

Postby assateague » Tue Feb 04, 2014 11:31 am

I don't like Christie. Never have.

But I find it more than a little insulting that there has been 10 times more coverage of the "what did he know and when did he know it" by the media than there ever was about Benghazi. We had Americans under attack, calling for help, on 9/11, and it was just pooh-poohed away. But now there is some grand self of righteous outrage about a fat governor closing a lane of a bridge. Excuse me if I laugh you into oblivion, News Media.

If Christie was smart, he'd call a press conference, and say "at this point, WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?", and see if the media accepts that as readily as they did from Hillary.
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Re: What about Christie?

Postby vincentpa » Tue Feb 04, 2014 11:43 am

assateague wrote:I don't like Christie. Never have.

But I find it more than a little insulting that there has been 10 times more coverage of the "what did he know and when did he know it" by the media than there ever was about Benghazi. We had Americans under attack, calling for help, on 9/11, and it was just pooh-poohed away. But now there is some grand self of righteous outrage about a fat governor closing a lane of a bridge. Excuse me if I laugh you into oblivion, News Media.

If Christie was smart, he'd call a press conference, and say "at this point, WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?", and see if the media accepts that as readily as they did from Hillary.



I couldn't agree more.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7742
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: What about Christie?

Postby dudejcb » Tue Feb 04, 2014 8:46 pm

vincentpa wrote:Whoops, MSNBC backtracking after jumping all over a story they shouldn't have. Lying lawyers and shady pols should be investigated before reporting unsupported allegations as truth.
Have you been listening to what's coming out? Christie is slick but there seems to be a lot of moving parts with long ties between all, and they tend to employ the share tight-lipped--forgetful--talk to my lawyer for specifics MO. His "machine" appears to perhaps have moved in synch ... read that conspiracy.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5251
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Re: What about Christie?

Postby vincentpa » Tue Feb 04, 2014 8:55 pm

dudejcb wrote:
vincentpa wrote:Whoops, MSNBC backtracking after jumping all over a story they shouldn't have. Lying lawyers and shady pols should be investigated before reporting unsupported allegations as truth.
Have you been listening to what's coming out? Christie is slick but there seems to be a lot of moving parts with long ties between all, and they tend to employ the share tight-lipped--forgetful--talk to my lawyer for specifics MO. His "machine" appears to perhaps have moved in synch ... read that conspiracy.


Yes, a grand conspiracy years in the planning to shut down two lanes of traffic. I'm scandalized at its depth.

The NYT and MSNBC jumped too fast.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7742
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: What about Christie?

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue Feb 04, 2014 10:09 pm

dudejcb wrote:
vincentpa wrote:Whoops, MSNBC backtracking after jumping all over a story they shouldn't have. Lying lawyers and shady pols should be investigated before reporting unsupported allegations as truth.
Have you been listening to what's coming out? Christie is slick but there seems to be a lot of moving parts with long ties between all, and they tend to employ the share tight-lipped--forgetful--talk to my lawyer for specifics MO. His "machine" appears to perhaps have moved in synch ... read that conspiracy.

And when this was the Clinton's and the travel office, billing records, or about a thousand other things, you had no problem and you will vote Hillary without hesitation if she gets the nod, so what is your point? What about Obama and the IRS, Bengazi, all his crooked and crazy cohorts that he forgot he knew, etc.? No problem with that either.

The only reason you care is because he has an R after his name. Read my lips, Obama lied and dude don't care. Christie may, we don't know, but may have lied, and dude has his panties in a bunch.

How are we supposed to take people like your self seriously? Funny thing is that you don't even see how different the rules you apply to different people are.
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: 16293
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby ScaupHunter » Tue Feb 04, 2014 11:31 pm

No one here takes him seriously for a lot of reasons.
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: 6702
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: What about Christie?

Postby Glimmerjim » Tue Feb 04, 2014 11:43 pm

ScaupHunter wrote:No one here takes him seriously for a lot of reasons.

Aw c'mon, Scaup. Lay off a bit. dude is a decent guy whether you agree with him or not. And I've never heard him get personal about anyone.
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10865
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: What about Christie?

Postby ScaupHunter » Wed Feb 05, 2014 4:42 am

Not a chance. His post was complete drivel. Which is his norm here. He mocks everyone with claims they are conspiracy theorists and makes excuses for clear violations of liberty. Then jumps on the band wagon when the media lie is unraveling.
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: 6702
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: What about Christie?

Postby vincentpa » Wed Feb 05, 2014 7:30 am

ScaupHunter wrote:Not a chance. His post was complete drivel. Which is his norm here. He mocks everyone with claims they are conspiracy theorists and makes excuses for clear violations of liberty. Then jumps on the band wagon when the media lie is unraveling.



:lol3: :lol3: :lol3:
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7742
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: What about Christie?

Postby SpinnerMan » Wed Feb 05, 2014 10:01 am

Glimmerjim wrote:
ScaupHunter wrote:No one here takes him seriously for a lot of reasons.

Aw c'mon, Scaup. Lay off a bit. dude is a decent guy whether you agree with him or not. And I've never heard him get personal about anyone.

I agree he is a decent guy. A lot of well intended people say and do really dumb things.

Everything he said, which may be true, we know to be true about the Clintons, we know to be true about the Obamas, we suspect it to be true of most career politicians, particularly machine candidates, yet he only sees that as a negative for people he views negatively and pointless for people he supports.

http://www.duckhuntingchat.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=49438&p=370585
The Dude wrote:I think you give Bush1 undue credit for whatever you imagine he might have done had he had a second term. He's the guy who said, I have an economic plan and I'll reveal it after the election... and, read my lips, no new taxes. he lost his credibility too.

He will never say Obama lost credibility because of his many outright lies. Bush was a fool for this and the Dems were going to force him to break his promise just so people like The Dude can rip him for it. Nobody forced Obama to lie about his health care plan, it was not part of a negotiation with Republicans where he sincerely tried to keep his promise, it was just a premediated lie to deceive the people, so he could say, sorry you are Image, and what difference does it make at this point Image

I've been debating The Dude for many years. While I like him personally and I think we would get along well hunting, fishing, etc., he does not hold those he likes to any standards comparable to those that he dislikes. However, consistency and objectivity is simply not something people on the left put any serious weight on. If they don't like the outcome, it by definition is not fair and fair is their excuse for ever shifting standards by which things are judged and given that it is a self-centered definition of fairness, as soon as their perspective changes, the standards change like flipping a switch. That's why with a totally straight face Bush lied and people died is a sincere position and then when Obama lies and people die, they are just as sincere that it does not matter.
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: 16293
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby ScaupHunter » Wed Feb 05, 2014 10:06 am

Glimmerjim wrote:
ScaupHunter wrote:No one here takes him seriously for a lot of reasons.

Aw c'mon, Scaup. Lay off a bit. dude is a decent guy whether you agree with him or not. And I've never heard him get personal about anyone.



If you cry fowl and conspiracy then make excuses for those you like when they have done the same thing you are a complete ass hat with a douche bag cherry on top! Trying to play it both ways to your benefit makes it so your being a decent guy is completely canceled by your lack of integrity.
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: 6702
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: What about Christie?

Postby vincentpa » Thu Feb 06, 2014 8:18 pm

Two lanes in NJ compared to siccing the IRS on political opponents in order to subvert their rights. Which is truly relevant to the health and permanence of our republic?

I find dude's silence on the latter true scandal to be telling.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7742
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: What about Christie?

Postby dudejcb » Thu Feb 06, 2014 10:02 pm

SpinnerMan wrote:The only reason you care is because he has an R after his name.
No, the R after his name is icing on the cake. It's an interesting story that keeps developing in several directions and because of the pervasiveness of his (and his cronies) activities. It started with the bridge lane closures, but now the "use" of hurricane Sandy recovery funds coming to light may imply criminal acts more in line with Chicago politics. All his Justice Department cronies that make up his inner circle and appear involved to one degree or another in a myriad of questionable activities.

SpinnerMan wrote:How are we supposed to take people like your self seriously? Funny thing is that you don't even see how different the rules you apply to different people are.
You don;t need to take me seriously, look at what's coming out all around Christie. That's what's serious.

BTW: I wasn't proud of Clinton's proclivities, but a BJ and a stained dress just doesn't rise to the level of public threat on a par with political malfeasance, undue enrichment, and criminal activity.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5251
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Re: What about Christie?

Postby dudejcb » Thu Feb 06, 2014 10:10 pm

vincentpa wrote:I find dude's silence on the latter true scandal to be telling.
Gee, What's it tell you?

My silence, and general absence from DHC, is due to my work (and play) schedule. Duck sesaon's over but we still have a Speck season and then the spring snow season.

Even if I had time to spend at DHC these days, the security firewall of my work installation doesn't allow me to log into DHC (I've tried) although I can read posts ... just can't log in to reply. It's also too remote for Ipad or cell service (I've tried those too). I leave for work at 5:30 AM and get home about 6 PM, so by the time I get home in the evening, take care of the dogs, have dinner, etc. I usually spend what's left of the day with she who must be heard ... before hitting the rack. So when I do have a moment to post, it tends to be more like a text message than an essay simply because I'm time constrained.
Last edited by dudejcb on Thu Feb 06, 2014 10:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5251
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Re: What about Christie?

Postby dudejcb » Thu Feb 06, 2014 10:18 pm

ScaupHunter wrote:
Glimmerjim wrote:
ScaupHunter wrote:No one here takes him seriously for a lot of reasons.

Aw c'mon, Scaup. Lay off a bit. dude is a decent guy whether you agree with him or not. And I've never heard him get personal about anyone.



If you cry fowl and conspiracy then make excuses for those you like when they have done the same thing you are a complete ass hat with a douche bag cherry on top! Trying to play it both ways to your benefit makes it so your being a decent guy is completely canceled by your lack of integrity.

First: don't care if Scaup takes me seriously. It's mutual.

Second: When you look at the gaggle of ex Justice Department cronies Christie has in his New Jersey machine, and then see the various things they've done, it appears there is an eerily similar, if not organized, effort to expand power on several fronts, not just the lane closures. The use of hurricane Sandy relief funds is especially interesting/concerning and deserves more sunshine and scrutiny. SERIOUS stuff.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5251
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Re: What about Christie?

Postby vincentpa » Fri Feb 07, 2014 6:41 am

dudejcb wrote:
ScaupHunter wrote:
Glimmerjim wrote:
ScaupHunter wrote:No one here takes him seriously for a lot of reasons.

Aw c'mon, Scaup. Lay off a bit. dude is a decent guy whether you agree with him or not. And I've never heard him get personal about anyone.



If you cry fowl and conspiracy then make excuses for those you like when they have done the same thing you are a complete ass hat with a douche bag cherry on top! Trying to play it both ways to your benefit makes it so your being a decent guy is completely canceled by your lack of integrity.

First: don't care if Scaup takes me seriously. It's mutual.

Second: When you look at the gaggle of ex Justice Department cronies Christie has in his New Jersey machine, and then see the various things they've done, it appears there is an eerily similar, if not organized, effort to expand power on several fronts, not just the lane closures. The use of hurricane Sandy relief funds is especially interesting/concerning and deserves more sunshine and scrutiny. SERIOUS stuff.



What about entire Obama Administration filled with Chicago acolytes and liberal cronies? What about the IRS? What about the stimulus? What about the ACA? Anything Christie is ALLEGED (so far only accusations in four years yet to be produce a shred, a shred of evidence) to have done pales in comparison to what Barry and his minions has done you myopic hypocritical fool.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7742
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: What about Christie?

Postby SpinnerMan » Fri Feb 07, 2014 7:29 am

dudejcb wrote:
SpinnerMan wrote:The only reason you care is because he has an R after his name.
No, the R after his name is icing on the cake. It's an interesting story that keeps developing in several directions and because of the pervasiveness of his (and his cronies) activities. It started with the bridge lane closures, but now the "use" of hurricane Sandy recovery funds coming to light may imply criminal acts more in line with Chicago politics. All his Justice Department cronies that make up his inner circle and appear involved to one degree or another in a myriad of questionable activities.

SpinnerMan wrote:How are we supposed to take people like your self seriously? Funny thing is that you don't even see how different the rules you apply to different people are.
You don;t need to take me seriously, look at what's coming out all around Christie. That's what's serious.

BTW: I wasn't proud of Clinton's proclivities, but a BJ and a stained dress just doesn't rise to the level of public threat on a par with political malfeasance, undue enrichment, and criminal activity.

I agree, it is serious, just not nearly serious as the President doing far worse. The reason I care is because seriousness is not a function of party affiliation. It is however a function of power in the hands of the individual.

Governor of the 11th most populous state having an administration with people so corrupt is very serious.

Having the President with an administration using the IRS to thwart political rivals is far more serious.

Having a President lie to thwart a civil lawsuit is very serious. Having him lie to thwart the will of the people to impose his signature law that tosses millions out of their insurance is very serious. Is it OK to lie to harm you if it benefits me - are individuals interchangeable pawns or are they people that should be respected as individuals and not statistics?

A President covering up the death of an ambassador for political benefit is far more serious, and I could go on and on and on.

As I posted earlier, this corrupt mindset is similar between the Christie administration and the Obama administration. It's been proven far worse with Obama, but its of like kind. Both are serious, but the President is far more serious than the Governor of New Jersey.
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: 16293
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby cartervj » Fri Feb 07, 2014 7:36 pm

vincentpa wrote:
dudejcb wrote:
ScaupHunter wrote:
Glimmerjim wrote:
ScaupHunter wrote:No one here takes him seriously for a lot of reasons.

Aw c'mon, Scaup. Lay off a bit. dude is a decent guy whether you agree with him or not. And I've never heard him get personal about anyone.



If you cry fowl and conspiracy then make excuses for those you like when they have done the same thing you are a complete ass hat with a douche bag cherry on top! Trying to play it both ways to your benefit makes it so your being a decent guy is completely canceled by your lack of integrity.

First: don't care if Scaup takes me seriously. It's mutual.

Second: When you look at the gaggle of ex Justice Department cronies Christie has in his New Jersey machine, and then see the various things they've done, it appears there is an eerily similar, if not organized, effort to expand power on several fronts, not just the lane closures. The use of hurricane Sandy relief funds is especially interesting/concerning and deserves more sunshine and scrutiny. SERIOUS stuff.



What about entire Obama Administration filled with Chicago acolytes and liberal cronies? What about the IRS? What about the stimulus? What about the ACA? Anything Christie is ALLEGED (so far only accusations in four years yet to be produce a shred, a shred of evidence) to have done pales in comparison to what Barry and his minions has done you myopic hypocritical fool.



:clapping: :clapping: :clapping:
“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: 7357
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: NW AL

PreviousNext

Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests