Bluegrassrivals

Trump was right to point out the continuing hypocrisy of the Dems. Supposedly under the guise of putting Iran's nuclear ambitions in check, former president Obama gave Iran A LOT of money in his laughable negotiations with Iran to work out a deal. And if Congress was consulted about it I guess that all must have been kept under wraps, because the public knew/knows exactly nothing about the particulars of how much the whole affair actually cost taxpayers. Now however, Cryin Chuck and San Fran Nan have dug in their heels on border wall funding. NO money whatever. Nancy says funding the wall would be immoral if you will recall.

The fact of the matter is as MR Trump said, Dems were cool with the Iran deal and the cash that went with it. But they won't give a dime, of our money BTW, to fund border wall construction. Now, not to say there aren't tons of revisionist lies floating around out there about the Iran nuclear deal and the money that went with it. But if one cares to see the truth of it, what the deal cost the US and what we got for our money... I am posting a link where the whole mess is put in concise terms by Rush Limbaugh. https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2018/...-saved-us/

The Iran deal was a terrible deal for the U.S. and should have been the subject of a special counsel investigation because Obama essentially signed a treaty that was not ratified by Congress as if not calling it a treaty excused his failure to follow the law. However, like so many other claims that Trump makes, the claim that the $150 billion was "ours" is not even half true. In distorting the facts, Trump just opened himself up for more ridicule by the media and Democrats.

When the truth is devastating without any embellishment, then it is stupid to engage in wild hyperbole. The source of the $150 billion was Iranian funds that had been frozen. A much smaller amount of $1.7 or $1.8 billion was money the U.S. owed Iran as part of an arms deal that predated the overthrow of the Shah of Iran. It could and probably should have been argued that debt was erased when the Iranian terrorists erased the legitimate government of Iran.

Obama's Iranian deal was an illegal treaty that was simply given another title. Iran was and remains an enemy of this country and I view Obama's action as treasonous - certainly one fitting the high crime and misdemeanor threshold for impeachment.

Telling the American people that Obama was a traitor in the pocket of mullahs would have been truthful and supported by the facts. Painting the $150 billion as taxpayer's money spent by Democrats when they refuse to spend much less on a border wall is dishonest and really not an effective argument to make.

Hoot Gibson Wrote:The Iran deal was a terrible deal for the U.S. and should have been the subject of a special counsel investigation because Obama essentially signed a treaty that was not ratified by Congress as if not calling it a treaty excused his failure to follow the law. However, like so many other claims that Trump makes, the claim that the $150 billion was "ours" is not even half true. In distorting the facts, Trump just opened himself up for more ridicule by the media and Democrats.

When the truth is devastating without any embellishment, then it is stupid to engage in wild hyperbole. The source of the $150 billion was Iranian funds that had been frozen. A much smaller amount of $1.7 or $1.8 billion was money the U.S. owed Iran as part of an arms deal that predated the overthrow of the Shah of Iran. It could and probably should have been argued that debt was erased when the Iranian terrorists erased the legitimate government of Iran.

Obama's Iranian deal was an illegal treaty that was simply given another title. Iran was and remains an enemy of this country and I view Obama's action as treasonous - certainly one fitting the high crime and misdemeanor threshold for impeachment.

Telling the American people that Obama was a traitor in the pocket of mullahs would have been truthful and supported by the facts. Painting the $150 billion as taxpayer's money spent by Democrats when they refuse to spend much less on a border wall is dishonest and really not an effective argument to make.

I must be missing something. In light of the past 10 years of political soap opera, since when do 'the facts' really mean anything? And you are directing the bolded comment to who? The President, Rush Limbaugh, or possibly one of the many commentators out there taking the same stand as the President on this matter? As I have said lately, if stating the truth still cut any ice in this country, there are ample enough sage and seasoned purveyors of said truth out there EVERYDAY, sufficient to get the message in front of every concerned set of eyes this nation has. Not the least of whom would be Mark Levin. On the Iran Deal, 2015---- [SIZE="3"]"A conga-line of Democrats, one after another, supports this surrender," roared Mark Levin. "It is clear the Democrats no longer represent the party of Truman and Kennedy."

"It is now the Democrat party of Bill Ayers, Saul Alinsky, and Barack Obama. The Democrat Party will have blood on its hands as a result of this deal for the rest of time. This deal sows the seeds of war."

"And (to) the Republicans. You see some of that scaffolding over there? They should take some of it and use it on their damn spines."[/SIZE]

As noted, this quote is from all the way back in 2015, but the truth of it is so beyond question that it's logic survives unscathed to this day. No, but revisionist libs can still lie their way around the granite face of any truth out there. And the argument presently being made by the President, and to which I alluded is no exception to the rule.

But maybe you could point to the trust in which the Iranian funds were laid back, and which were supposedly 'owed' to the Mullahs? To say tax dollars were used to bribe the Mullahs is a very fair statement to make. In fact, the argument you just made is straight off the lips of rabid libs who supported the actions of Obama. Past that, it just so happens that I remember watching Iran implode, and saw the Shah of Iran fall to the Islamic extremists who've managed to survive to this day. Killing, or having a part of killing, many innocent Americans along the way. Pacification, in any form, does not work. We cannot buy off our enemies. Oh they'll take the plane loads of cash until we run of money and or the jet fuel to carry it to them. But at some point down the road the specter of our willingness to use our considerable military might must lie in wait. It's that or our complete surrender, in the which case murder and mayhem still lies in wait. The simple truth of history is this, cowards are humiliated, pillaged and then ground into the earth.

Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton for the most part, and Barack Obama all showed the same lack of courage where it came to facing down Iran. Meanwhile George H, George W, and D J Trump had chin enough to face them down. So outside of the later three Presidents mentioned, for our cowardice in the face of confrontation, look at the damage done and the level of Middle Eastern destabilization. Not to mention the flood stage surge of blood and treasure that had to be reinvested over there and the 911 attack on our own soil. An enemy that was over time, encouraged to oppose the US after we had already paid the necessary price to secure victory in WW2. Spineless libs and RINO's are to thank, as Mark Levin said in concise terms.

But the point is they have and are growing stronger and stronger. Sworn enemies of ours who chant "Death to America" on a national holiday, and soon to be in possession of a nuclear arsenal. And yet we stand around with the spit dripping off our chins. While the US Congress argues incessantly over the issues of special interests and open borders, their military progress continues. We have data which shows that for those close enough to the detonation of a nuclear bomb, those people's flesh literally vaporizes from off their bones, before those bones can even begin to fall. Strangely enough, this same data is born out in the Bible. Zechariah 14:12 (KJV)
12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.

Of course, this passage has to do specifically with the present enemies of Israel. And yet it is further validation that despite the words of the imminent Barack Obama, large scale war is coming. Even large scale nuclear war, the likelihood of which ironically having been exacerbated by his own rationalizations. Any way you slice it, the US sent 150 billion plus, to a sworn enemy with a burning desire to see the US and Israel on history's ash heap. LOL, thought just a touch more hyperbole might be in order.

TheRealThing Wrote:I must be missing something. In light of the past 10 years of political soap opera, since when do 'the facts' really mean anything? And you are directing the bolded comment to who? The President, Rush Limbaugh, or possibly one of the many commentators out there taking the same stand as the President on this matter? As I have said lately, if stating the truth still cut any ice in this country, there are ample enough sage and seasoned purveyors of said truth out there EVERYDAY, sufficient to get the message in front of every concerned set of eyes this nation has. Not the least of whom would be Mark Levin. On the Iran Deal, 2015---- [SIZE="3"]"A conga-line of Democrats, one after another, supports this surrender," roared Mark Levin. "It is clear the Democrats no longer represent the party of Truman and Kennedy."

"It is now the Democrat party of Bill Ayers, Saul Alinsky, and Barack Obama. The Democrat Party will have blood on its hands as a result of this deal for the rest of time. This deal sows the seeds of war."

"And (to) the Republicans. You see some of that scaffolding over there? They should take some of it and use it on their damn spines."[/SIZE]

As noted, this quote is from all the way back in 2015, but the truth of it is so beyond question that it's logic survives unscathed to this day. No, but revisionist libs can still lie their way around the granite face of any truth out there. And the argument presently being made by the President, and to which I alluded is no exception to the rule.

But maybe you could point to the trust in which the Iranian funds were laid back, and which were supposedly 'owed' to the Mullahs? To say tax dollars were used to bribe the Mullahs is a very fair statement to make. In fact, the argument you just made is straight off the lips of rabid libs who supported the actions of Obama. Past that, it just so happens that I remember watching Iran implode, and saw the Shah of Iran fall to the Islamic extremists who've managed to survive to this day. Killing, or having a part of killing, many innocent Americans along the way. Pacification, in any form, does not work. We cannot buy off our enemies. Oh they'll take the plane loads of cash until we run of money and or the jet fuel to carry it to them. But at some point down the road the specter of our willingness to use our considerable military might must lie in wait. It's that or our complete surrender, in the which case murder and mayhem still lies in wait. The simple truth of history is this, cowards are humiliated, pillaged and then ground into the earth.

Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton for the most part, and Barack Obama all showed the same lack of courage where it came to facing down Iran. Meanwhile George H, George W, and D J Trump had chin enough to face them down. So outside of the later three Presidents mentioned, for our cowardice in the face of confrontation, look at the damage done and the level of Middle Eastern destabilization. Not to mention the flood stage surge of blood and treasure that had to be reinvested over there and the 911 attack on our own soil. An enemy that was over time, encouraged to oppose the US after we had already paid the necessary price to secure victory in WW2. Spineless libs and RINO's are to thank, as Mark Levin said in concise terms.

But the point is they have and are growing stronger and stronger. Sworn enemies of ours who chant "Death to America" on a national holiday, and soon to be in possession of a nuclear arsenal. And yet we stand around with the spit dripping off our chins. While the US Congress argues incessantly over the issues of special interests and open borders, their military progress continues. We have data which shows that for those close enough to the detonation of a nuclear bomb, those people's flesh literally vaporizes from off their bones, before those bones can even begin to fall. Strangely enough, this same data is born out in the Bible. Zechariah 14:12 (KJV)
12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.

Of course, this passage has to do specifically with the present enemies of Israel. And yet it is further validation that despite the words of the imminent Barack Obama, large scale war is coming. Even large scale nuclear war, the likelihood of which ironically having been exacerbated by his own rationalizations. Any way you slice it, the US sent 150 billion plus, to a sworn enemy with a burning desire to see the US and Israel on history's ash heap. LOL, thought just a touch more hyperbole might be in order.

The money should have never been released as long as Iran remained a state sponsor of terror governed by terrorists. That is the truth of the matter. I don't see how Trump gained anything by trying to support the facts of the matter with a foundation of lies.

As for Rush, he used to be a steadfast conservative who was very entertaining and politically incorrect. That Rush ceased to exist long ago. Now he is a Republican above all else and he plays it too safe with his humor, IMO. I used to love his parodies of the Clinton crime family but he's no longer willing to risk his job to for laughs.

Hoot Gibson Wrote:The money should have never been released as long as Iran remained a state sponsor of terror governed by terrorists. That is the truth of the matter. I don't see how Trump gained anything by trying to support the facts of the matter with a foundation of lies.

As for Rush, he used to be a steadfast conservative who was very entertaining and politically incorrect. That Rush ceased to exist long ago. Now he is a Republican above all else and he plays it too safe with his humor, IMO. I used to love his parodies of the Clinton crime family but he's no longer willing to risk his job to for laughs.

Well, you just might be smack-on with that. It is also possible that recent events have caused him to take on a somewhat more pragmatic outlook of late. And in so doing though he finds himself still willing to carry the message, that willingness is tempered with the sobering reality for example, that despite all the mountains of recently revealed evidence, the American voter just last month returned Democrats to power in the House anyway. It's difficult to be as creative in voicing one's opinion with the end of things as we know them, looming in our immediate future. I mean, how many times does the daily news loop need to cause one's jaw to drop before optimism fads a bit?

And in saying that, and although to lose the House was a decidedly bad outcome, it's way more than that. IMHO for folks like Rush, the realities of the foundational precepts that once made this land the apple of the world's eye, have all but dissipated. Those precepts remain nonetheless, in sharp remembrance for folks of Rush's age group. To wit, morality nowadays, does not establish boundaries for proper behavior as in days past. The concept of right and wrong has become passé, just a backdrop from which to launch a clever argument meant to subvert morality. So where at one time people's own convictions caused them to choose to behave, now their first inclination seems to be to look for a way out of such responsibility. Thus are the foundations of this land under attack, whether social, moral, or pertaining to the pandect of US law as such cases might pertain to same sex marriage and the like. But at the core of these ceaseless attacks, the character and willingness of those who're supposed to be responsible enough to effectively self govern, are very much in question. Because as 'the people' have all too shamelessly demonstrated in the voting booth, trading one's integrity for the sake of free stuff courtesy of Uncle Sam, is done without a thought, let alone regret.

That realization is sufficient to take the wind out of the sails of many, if not all. Because at some point from a secular standpoint, one is forced to admit the enormity of trying to hold back the flood of ruin which has inundated America has made the task futile. And the heavyhearted concern of the forefathers made evident. Now spiritually, all of that which is to come was foretold of God long ago. And the ultimate victory over the evil flood can be found only in Christ. But for those like Rush and others though they understand the end game to all of this, they soldier on because to go down fighting is the right thing to do. Rush BTW, still has his good days.