« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Why does the RW INSIST on 100% vetting our candidates--yet refuse to vet their o  (Read 2079 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Freeper

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17779
  • Reputation: +1311/-314
  • Creepy ass cracker.
Why does the RW INSIST on 100% vetting our candidates--yet refuse to vet their o
« on: August 18, 2012, 12:17:25 PM »
Quote
Horse with no Name (29,386 posts)

Why does the RW INSIST on 100% vetting our candidates--yet refuse to vet their own?


 
They didn't care anything about Bush's military or academic records when there were obviously reasons to delve a little deeper into the content.
Why are 0bama's sealed?
They smeared John Kerry and stated his military records and medals were faked. No proof offered, just smears.
Where's Harry's proof of Romney's tax problem?
They wanted the tax returns of Teresa Heinz Kerry--even though she was NOT running for office.


They insisted on Obama's birth certificate. Then they wanted the long form. Then they accused the state of lying. There was never sufficient evidence to give to these idiots to make them believe the truth. They wanted a complete accounting of Obama's educational records--just making Editor of Harvard Law Review was not enough. They wanted more. And more. And more.

Now, they are willing to settle for a wink and a handshake on Romney's taxes and the new "meme" going around today states Mitt HAS given tax returns yet they still have not got proof of Obama's birth.

Seriously? Why do I have to share my air with these people?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021155324

Quote
JaneyVee (177 posts)
1. Because they're authoritarian fascists with a messiah complex.

Last edited Sat Aug 18, 2012, 10:19 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

edit: Oh, and HUGE HYPOCRITES!

 :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf:
The projection is strong in this one.

Logged
I may not lock my doors while sitting at a red light and a black man is near, but I sure as hell grab on tight to my wallet when any democrats are close by.

Offline obumazombie

  • Siege engine to lib fortresses
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21814
  • Reputation: +1661/-578
  • Last of the great minorities
Re: Why does the RW INSIST on 100% vetting our candidates--yet refuse to vet their o
« Reply #1 on: August 18, 2012, 12:53:56 PM »
Libs magnify, then project.
Logged
There were only two options for gender. At last count there are at least 12, according to libs. By that standard, I'm a male lesbian.

Offline Delmar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5295
  • Reputation: +592/-41
Re: Why does the RW INSIST on 100% vetting our candidates--yet refuse to vet their o
« Reply #2 on: August 18, 2012, 01:09:34 PM »
Quote
Response to Horse with no Name (Original post)Sat Aug 18, 2012, 10:31 AM
 BumRushDaShow (8,907 posts)
7. Because it puts "us" on the defense

and by the time we get all the facts together to refute it, they have moved to getting their ilk elected.

It's the neocon way - "pre-emptive strike".

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/pre-emptive+strike

Noun   1.   pre-emptive strike - a surprise attack that is launched in order to prevent the enemy from doing it to you
coup de main, surprise attack - an attack without warning

Is pre-emptive strike some newly coined term since BumRushDaShow felt the need to include definition?


Quote
Response to liberal N proud (Reply #2)Sat Aug 18, 2012, 10:28 AM
JaneyVee (180 posts)
5. Yeah, they always feel as though they're chaperoning the country. Even when they lose by a landslide

They don't care about governing for the people, they care only about POWER & CONTROL.

This has got to be a mole since she just described democrats to a tee.
Logged
We will make America strong again. We will make America proud again. We will make America safe again. And we will make America great again.

Donald Trump

Offline 98ZJUSMC

  • The Most Deplorable
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8424
  • Reputation: +436/-76
  • Now, with 99% less yellow!
Re: Why does the RW INSIST on 100% vetting our candidates--yet refuse to vet their o
« Reply #3 on: August 18, 2012, 01:52:42 PM »
Quote
 Bush's military or academic records

Right.  We didn't care about a debunked ANG hit piece and the fact that his grades were better than both aLgOrEs and Jean Francois'.

Problem, (D)Ullard?

Quote
 This has got to be a mole since she just described democrats to a tee.

I don't know.  Projection is their normal state of abnormal.

Quote from: obumazombie on August 18, 2012, 12:53:56 PM
Libs magnify, then project.

On a level difficult to measure with existing technology.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2012, 01:58:23 PM by 98ZJUSMC »
Logged
              

Liberal thinking is a two-legged stool and magical thinking is one of the legs, the other is a combination of self-loating and misanthropy.  To understand it, you would have to be able to sit on that stool while juggling two elephants, an anvil and a fragmentation grenade, sans pin.

"Accuse others of what you do." - Karl Marx

Offline Kyle Ricky

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7596
  • Reputation: +614/-1086
Re: Why does the RW INSIST on 100% vetting our candidates--yet refuse to vet their o
« Reply #4 on: August 18, 2012, 02:01:53 PM »
Vetted? Captain Zero is the least vetted President in history. In fact, he didn't get vetted at all. And they are still trying to cover up for him. You talk about stupid on top of stupid. Wow.  :thatsright:
Logged

Offline Skul

  • Sometimes I drink water just to surprise my liver
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12475
  • Reputation: +914/-179
  • Chief of the cathouse
Re: Why does the RW INSIST on 100% vetting our candidates--yet refuse to vet their o
« Reply #5 on: August 18, 2012, 02:06:13 PM »
There are currently 88 editors listed for The Harvard Law Review.
It is a student run organization, and being selected has a variety of quals.
Logged
Then-Chief Justice John Marshall observed, “Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos.”

John Adams warned in a letter, “Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet, that did not commit suicide.”

Offline txradioguy

  • Minister of Propaganda
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18686
  • Reputation: +1292/-1116
  • Rule 39
Re: Why does the RW INSIST on 100% vetting our candidates--yet refuse to vet their o
« Reply #6 on: August 18, 2012, 02:06:58 PM »
Quote
They didn't care anything about Bush's military or academic records when there were obviously reasons to delve a little deeper into the content.

There were over 2 THOUSAND freedom of information act requests made to the Texas Army National Guard concerning the former President's service record...and the best you idiots could do with them was forge something out of whole cloth.

As for the academic records...DUmmies brought those up all the time until they found out his grades were better than both Algore AND D Student Kerry.

Attention was paid to those documents...the problem is that idiots like you didn't like what you found.
Logged
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Creator of the largest Fight Club thread ever!

http://conservativecave.com/index.php?topic=83285.0

Offline Skul

  • Sometimes I drink water just to surprise my liver
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12475
  • Reputation: +914/-179
  • Chief of the cathouse
Re: Why does the RW INSIST on 100% vetting our candidates--yet refuse to vet their o
« Reply #7 on: August 18, 2012, 02:12:52 PM »
Quote from: txradioguy on August 18, 2012, 02:06:58 PM
There were over 2 THOUSAND freedom of information act requests made to the Texas Army National Guard concerning the former President's service record...and the best you idiots could do with them was forge something out of whole cloth.

As for the academic records...DUmmies brought those up all the time until they found out his grades were better than both Algore AND D Student Kerry.

Attention was paid to those documents...the problem is that idiots like you didn't like what you found.
Then they changed it, lied about it, and called it the troof.  :banghead:
Logged
Then-Chief Justice John Marshall observed, “Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos.”

John Adams warned in a letter, “Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet, that did not commit suicide.”

Offline obumazombie

  • Siege engine to lib fortresses
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21814
  • Reputation: +1661/-578
  • Last of the great minorities
Re: Why does the RW INSIST on 100% vetting our candidates--yet refuse to vet their o
« Reply #8 on: August 18, 2012, 03:51:16 PM »
Quote from: Kyle Ricky on August 18, 2012, 02:01:53 PM
Vetted? Captain Zero is the least vetted President in history. In fact, he didn't get vetted at all. And they are still trying to cover up for him. You talk about stupid on top of stupid. Wow.  :thatsright:
Stupid on top of stupid, like hump on an a leg.

edit preposition
Logged
There were only two options for gender. At last count there are at least 12, according to libs. By that standard, I'm a male lesbian.

Offline Airwolf

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12168
  • Reputation: +915/-163
Re: Why does the RW INSIST on 100% vetting our candidates--yet refuse to vet their o
« Reply #9 on: August 18, 2012, 04:33:53 PM »
Tell us again who's college records are still sealed?  I bet his name isn't Bush or Reagan.
Logged
MOLON LABE

"Someday, when all your civilization and science are likewise swept away, your kind will pray for a man with a sword."-- Conan the Barbarian

Clint Eastwood - Because God wanted Chuck Norris to have nightmares.

"I am not a Number,I am a free man"

"He's my hero, you don't put away your heros, you honor them!"

Offline Kyle Ricky

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7596
  • Reputation: +614/-1086
Re: Why does the RW INSIST on 100% vetting our candidates--yet refuse to vet their o
« Reply #10 on: August 18, 2012, 09:14:02 PM »
Quote from: obumazombie on August 18, 2012, 03:51:16 PM
Stupid on top of stupid, like hump on an a leg.

edit preposition

They do go hand in hand, that is for sure.


Quote from: Airwolf on August 18, 2012, 04:33:53 PM
Tell us again who's college records are still sealed?  I bet his name isn't Bush or Reagan.

They don't care about that. Captain Zero has a 'D' after his name, he is God to them.
Logged

Offline I_B_Perky

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7532
  • Reputation: +721/-329
Re: Why does the RW INSIST on 100% vetting our candidates--yet refuse to vet their o
« Reply #11 on: August 18, 2012, 09:18:39 PM »
Quote from: Kyle Ricky on August 18, 2012, 02:01:53 PM
Vetted? Captain Zero is the least vetted President in history. In fact, he didn't get vetted at all. And they are still trying to cover up for him. You talk about stupid on top of stupid. Wow.  :thatsright:

If the MSM had put forth one eighth of the effort they spent on Palin, Bush, or any other rep for that matter, obozo would not have won his home state, let alone any other state.
Logged
Living in the Dummies minds rent free since 2009!

Montani Semper Liberi

Offline obumazombie

  • Siege engine to lib fortresses
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21814
  • Reputation: +1661/-578
  • Last of the great minorities
Re: Why does the RW INSIST on 100% vetting our candidates--yet refuse to vet their o
« Reply #12 on: August 18, 2012, 09:23:05 PM »
Quote from: I_B_Perky on August 18, 2012, 09:18:39 PM
If the MSM had put forth one eighth of the effort they spent on Palin, Bush, or any other rep for that matter, obozo would not have won his home state, let alone any other state.
Hawaii ? The most liberal state in the union ? Everything on his resume that a conservative would find immoral, unethical, or repulsive, would be a resume enhancer to a liberal state like hawaii.
Logged
There were only two options for gender. At last count there are at least 12, according to libs. By that standard, I'm a male lesbian.

Offline Kyle Ricky

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7596
  • Reputation: +614/-1086
Re: Why does the RW INSIST on 100% vetting our candidates--yet refuse to vet their o
« Reply #13 on: August 18, 2012, 09:27:49 PM »
Quote from: I_B_Perky on August 18, 2012, 09:18:39 PM
If the MSM had put forth one eighth of the effort they spent on Palin, Bush, or any other rep for that matter, obozo would not have won his home state, let alone any other state.

If he would have been properly vetted, he wouldn't have made it past the Primaries. They just looked at the fact that he is black and pushed him through. Who cares what his policies or beliefs are.
Logged

Offline SSG Snuggle Bunny

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23582
  • Reputation: +2497/-270
  • Voted Rookie-of-the-Year, 3 years running
Re: Why does the RW INSIST on 100% vetting our candidates--yet refuse to vet their o
« Reply #14 on: August 18, 2012, 10:49:07 PM »
Geez...

...you'd think they'd leap at the chance to display Obama's academic genius.

Instead they resent even the mention of his scholarship.

How telling.
Logged
According to the Bible, "know" means "yes."

Offline obumazombie

  • Siege engine to lib fortresses
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21814
  • Reputation: +1661/-578
  • Last of the great minorities
Re: Why does the RW INSIST on 100% vetting our candidates--yet refuse to vet their o
« Reply #15 on: August 19, 2012, 01:23:30 AM »
Quote from: SGT Snuggle Bunny on August 18, 2012, 10:49:07 PM
Geez...

...you'd think they'd leap at the chance to display Obama's academic genius.

Instead they resent even the mention of his scholarship.

How telling.

They leap at the chance to exclaim his genius. They think by exclaiming his genius, everyone will accept their propaganda at face value.
Logged
There were only two options for gender. At last count there are at least 12, according to libs. By that standard, I'm a male lesbian.
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »