davjohns 1 #26 June 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteI'm pretty sure that doesn't mean what it appears to mean. I dunno... it looks pretty cut and dried to me. Elaborate? It means I was up late and trying to be funny. It's meaning is clear to me.I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 200 #27 June 21, 2012 Meet the new boss...Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #28 June 23, 2012 QuoteMeet the new boss... Since you mention it, the operation began in 2006 when the OLD BOSS was president. Best commentary I've seen. So how come all you ODS victims weren't complaining about it in 2006?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #29 June 23, 2012 QuoteQuoteMeet the new boss... Since you mention it, the operation began in 2006 when the OLD BOSS was president. Best commentary I've seen. So how come all you ODS victims weren't complaining about it in 2006? But it was ended before he left office because it did not work as intended The Obama admin created a new one With a different agenda But lets say you are right If that is really the case then why not release the documents? It would implicate the Bush Admin if you are correct. Why not release them now?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #30 June 23, 2012 QuoteQuoteMeet the new boss... Since you mention it, the operation began in 2006 when the OLD BOSS was president. Best commentary I've seen. So how come all you ODS victims weren't complaining about it in 2006? Probably because Operation Wide Receiver ended in 2007. Fast and Furious is all Obama/Holder. Then there's this little tidbit from CBS, last year: QuoteDocuments obtained by CBS News show that the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) discussed using their covert operation "Fast and Furious" to argue for controversial new rules about gun sales. In Fast and Furious, ATF secretly encouraged gun dealers to sell to suspected traffickers for Mexican drug cartels to go after the "big fish." But ATF whistleblowers told CBS News and Congress it was a dangerous practice called "gunwalking," and it put thousands of weapons on the street. Many were used in violent crimes in Mexico. Two were found at the murder scene of a U.S. Border Patrol agent. ATF officials didn't intend to publicly disclose their own role in letting Mexican cartels obtain the weapons, but emails show they discussed using the sales, including sales encouraged by ATF, to justify a new gun regulation called "Demand Letter 3". That would require some U.S. gun shops to report the sale of multiple rifles or "long guns." Demand Letter 3 was so named because it would be the third ATF program demanding gun dealers report tracing information.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #31 June 23, 2012 I think the idea that they tried to turn this botched operation into an anti-gun issue would explain why they refuse to release ALL documents including emails. I think Obama and Holder exchanged emails and they don't want that info getting out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davjohns 1 #32 June 23, 2012 http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/21/politics/gergen-holder-contempt/index.html At this point, it is hard to believe anyone in congress has grey matter engaged. The vote to hold in contempt was 'along part lines'. Any time I see that phrase, it tells me that people are voting politics and not convictions. If everyone were being honest, some republican would have voted against and some democrat would have voted for (or vice versa depending on the issue). When they vote along party lines, they are not thinking. They are obeying.I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #33 June 23, 2012 QuoteI think the idea that they tried to turn this botched operation into an anti-gun issue would explain why they refuse to release ALL documents including emails. I think Obama and Holder exchanged emails and they don't want that info getting out. Yup...the whole "under the radar" gun control issue.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #34 June 23, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteMeet the new boss... Since you mention it, the operation began in 2006 when the OLD BOSS was president. Best commentary I've seen. So how come all you ODS victims weren't complaining about it in 2006? Probably because Operation Wide Receiver ended in 2007. "A rose by any other name". This is ODS, pure and simple.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #35 June 23, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteMeet the new boss... Since you mention it, the operation began in 2006 when the OLD BOSS was president. Best commentary I've seen. So how come all you ODS victims weren't complaining about it in 2006? Probably because Operation Wide Receiver ended in 2007. "A rose by any other name". This is ODS, pure and simple. Obama Defense Syndrome? Yes, it is. Wide Receiver actually tracked the guns and the Mexican authorities knew about it - and, as stated above, *ended* in 2007. Contrast with F&F where guns *weren't* tracked until beside the body of a Border Patrol agent and the Mexican authorities weren't notified.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
futuredivot 0 #36 June 24, 2012 Just a simple observation. Nobody has posted that President Obama is acting in an honorable, ethical,, or transparent manner. If the only defense you can come up for him is "Well, the other guy did it" just go ahead and say "yep, he's screwing the pooch on this one"You are only as strong as the prey you devour Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davjohns 1 #37 June 24, 2012 I hate to being conspiracy minded, but I think what happened here is pretty clear. Consider a political application of Occam's Razor: The AG said the POTUS didn't know anything about it to protect the POTUS in an election year. Things progressed too far, too fast and the AG got a subpoena he couldn't get out of. POTUS can't hang him out to dry in an election year because the AG has the goods on him. So, POTUS throws a cloak of protection over the AG. I don't mean this in a partisan way. I think any AG would have likely told the lie in an election year. I think any POTUS running for re-election would have allowed it and protected the AG in return when needed. I expect the hope was to delay the whole thing until after the election. I also expect the opposing party knew this and pressed it for that very reason. It's certainly cynical, but I expect many on this forum will recognize the likelihood of it. And the cynical answer is likely the right answer in American politics. Therefore, Occam wins again.I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #38 June 24, 2012 Quote"A rose by any other name". Yes. Because planting a transmitter in the guns to lead to drug henchmen, tracking the guns and making arrests of people with them is exactly the same as releasing guns, interdicting to make sure that they are not followed, and planning on using the mayhem to argue for stricter gun laws are exactly the same thing. Next thing you know, people will be saying that Obama's claims of executive privilege are the same as Nixon's were. A rose my any other name, after all.. Would you agree? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #39 June 25, 2012 Quotethat's pretty much what Andy said. Yes, I was AGREEING. He understood even if you did not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #40 June 25, 2012 QuoteSince you mention it, the operation began in 2006 when the OLD BOSS was president. False. 2006-2007 was operation wide receiver. It was run by the Arizona branch of the ATF and it involved the participation of Mexican authorities and they at least tried to track the weapons when they got to Mexico. It was also shut down in 2007. Fast and Furious was done by the FEDERAL ATF, the Mexican Govt knew nothing about it and the ATF made no attempt to track the weapons once in Mexico. Also, the ATF punished people who tried to be whistle blowers. So vastly different programs with only one trait in common. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #41 June 25, 2012 QuoteQuoteMeet the new boss... Since you mention it, the operation began in 2006 when the OLD BOSS was president. Best commentary I've seen. So how come all you ODS victims weren't complaining about it in 2006? How many border agents died as a result of Bush running operation Wide Reciever? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
funjumper101 15 #42 June 25, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteMeet the new boss... Since you mention it, the operation began in 2006 when the OLD BOSS was president. Best commentary I've seen. So how come all you ODS victims weren't complaining about it in 2006? How many border agents died as a result of Bush running operation Wide Reciever? How many US servicepeople died because of ShrubCo's Iraq adventure? How many Iraqi civilians died because of ShrubCo's lies that started the Iraq invasion and occupation? How many Iraqi civilians were displaced by the invasion and occupation? How many displaced Iraqi women have been forced into prostitution to support their families? When you and the other Right Wing CONServatives start to push for the Congressional investigations into these real issues, you might have a tiny bit of moral standing to get all outraged over the deaths of a few DEA agents. Until then, you are simply tools of the RWC leaders, doing your part to drive the USA down the shithole that you all are taking us, cheeering all the way. Hating the USA by pretending to love it is really, really weird. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #43 June 25, 2012 The topic is running guns to drug dealers. I know your ilk finds it hard to discuss the topic at hand since there's really no defense as hard as you try. But let's go ahead and play your ADHD based game. How many people died because FDR got us into a war? Did FDR let Pearl Harbor occur because he knew that would garner support from Americans? How many innocent Japanese died because HST dropped the atom bomb on 2 cities. See how stupid and non-sequitur that sounds? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #44 June 25, 2012 Quote When you and the other Right Wing CONServatives start to push for the Congressional investigations into these real issues, you might have a tiny bit of moral standing to get all outraged over the deaths of a few DEA agents. so how many DEA agents should die before RWCs can get outraged? It's a bit sad that this was the first use of executive privilege by Obama. Seems simple - they fucked up, Holder lied about it and got caught in the lies. Time to come clean. I won't miss him. Let's bring on the next rights trampling AG to continue the sad chain of the past 20 years. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wolfriverjoe 1,368 #45 June 26, 2012 QuoteQuote When you and the other Right Wing CONServatives start to push for the Congressional investigations into these real issues, you might have a tiny bit of moral standing to get all outraged over the deaths of a few DEA agents. so how many DEA agents should die before RWCs can get outraged? It's a bit sad that this was the first use of executive privilege by Obama. Seems simple - they fucked up, Holder lied about it and got caught in the lies. Time to come clean. I won't miss him. Let's bring on the next rights trampling AG to continue the sad chain of the past 20 years. Well, the real question becomes "What did he know and when did he know it?" "He" can be both Holder and Obama. It has become pretty clear that this entire fiasco was more about having American sourced weapons being found in the hands of Mexican drug smugglers than about tracking the weapons pipelines. The failure to have any resources available to track the weapons in any way after they left the US and the failure to tell the Mexican authorities anything about the operation indicate that they had no intention of trying to catch anyone until after the weapons had been found by the Mexican authorities and a trace requested. So the ATF is complicit in providing weapons to the Mexican drug cartels. It seems that this was done to bolster claims that the drug cartels were getting weapons from the US. And to then use these claims to further restrict gun sales in the US. Gun control legislation has pretty much been a "Non-starter" since the AWB was passed. The backlash that was a significant factor in the Rs taking back congress in '96 has had a chilling effect. (how much of a factor is debatable). Obama's record prior to becoming president was strongly anti-gun. He put out a couple ads during the presidential campaign in favor of the right to keep and bear arms and has not publically proposed, promoted or supported any gun control legislation while in office. But... How much did he know about Fast and Furious? And when did he know it?"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #46 June 26, 2012 Quote Quote When you and the other Right Wing CONServatives start to push for the Congressional investigations into these real issues, you might have a tiny bit of moral standing to get all outraged over the deaths of a few DEA agents. so how many DEA agents should die before RWCs can get outraged? It's a bit sad that this was the first use of executive privilege by Obama. Seems simple - they fucked up, Holder lied about it and got caught in the lies. Time to come clean. I won't miss him. Let's bring on the next rights trampling AG to continue the sad chain of the past 20 years. Heck, what's a few dead DEA and Border Patrol Agents in the bigger scheme of things? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #47 June 26, 2012 Quote Gun control legislation has pretty much been a "Non-starter" since the AWB was passed. The backlash that was a significant factor in the Rs taking back congress in '96 has had a chilling effect. (how much of a factor is debatable). well, if we ever need a gun controller's equivalent to that gun expert shooting himself in the hip while teaching gun safety, this is it. For a little while we were hearing that sound bite (even here) about how many guns in Mexico came from the US. Funny how that talking point got buried in the closet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 643 #48 June 26, 2012 See why we need more gun control laws? Them nasty guns kill people. Disgusting what some are willing to do in that endeavor. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #49 June 26, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteMeet the new boss... Since you mention it, the operation began in 2006 when the OLD BOSS was president. Best commentary I've seen. So how come all you ODS victims weren't complaining about it in 2006? How many border agents died as a result of Bush running operation Wide Reciever? How many US servicepeople died because of ShrubCo's Iraq adventure? Obamas war hit the 2000 dead mark last week. The media fully reported that number when Bush was in office, remember? Same number must not be news worthy now huh.......Anyway, news given and news with held has an impact on ones perception when the only place someone gets news is from the main stream sources How many Iraqi civilians died because of ShrubCo's lies that started the Iraq invasion and occupation? How many Iraqi civilians were displaced by the invasion and occupation? How many displaced Iraqi women have been forced into prostitution to support their families? When you and the other Right Wing CONServatives start to push for the Congressional investigations into these real issues, you might have a tiny bit of moral standing to get all outraged over the deaths of a few DEA agents. Until then, you are simply tools of the RWC leaders, doing your part to drive the USA down the shithole that you all are taking us, cheeering all the way. Hating the USA by pretending to love it is really, really weird."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #50 June 26, 2012 QuoteObamas war Seriously? It's America's war. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
