Iranian Home-Coming?

[JakeStarkey]

PC 11942538

Is your point that his being educated means he could not be a sympathizer of the terrorist regime in Tehran?

Think carefully before you respond.

Did you ever stop to think ( dumb way to ask you a question I know) that being educated he could be a great sympathizer to the millions of Iranians who are moderates and do not sympathize with the theocratic religious zealot regime in Iran. The moderates in Iran are in favor of this deal which makes you a hater of Iranian moderates no matter your ethnic background. The Shiite Persian moderates in Iran are face an existential threat by Sunni terrorists that have moved close to Iran's borders and at least their tyrannical government and its military forces are helping to kill and destroy ISIS. That makes you by your dark and ignorant conjecture a direct supporter with sympathy toward ISIS killers.

You are exposed by your own version of McCarthyism.

There is an Iranian Islamo Nazi right now hiding under your bed. You better go look.

"You are exposed by your own version of McCarthyism."

Is that the great American hero, Senator Josepth McCarthy, to whom you refer?

Tell me more.

The man destroyed politically by his own party because of his antiAmericanism yes, that one.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Let's extend today's lesson into another area in which we find you Liberals...'challenged'...
History.

We can find numerous occasions in which Liberals/Progressives have either worked against the interests of the nation, or been oblivious to what the interests of America are.


Taking policy advice from individuals with ties to an enemy nation is certainly one.


Another glaring example is Franklin Roosevelt's embrace of foreign agents in his administration.

The major player in the Alger Hiss saga was fellow Communist, Whitaker Chambers.

In his book, Witness, Chambers explains is disillusionment as follows. In 1938, he determined not only to break with the Communist Party, but to inform on the Party when he could.

The reason was that he was informed that Stalin was making efforts to align with Hitler, in 1939, and “from any human point of view, the pact was evil.”

As Hitler marched into Poland, Chambers arranged a private meeting with Adolf Berle, President Roosevelt’s assistant Sec’y of State. Chambers detailed the Communist espionage network, naming at least two dozen Soviet spies in Roosevelt’s administration, including Alger Hiss. Berle reported this to Roosevelt, who laughed, and told Berle to go f--- himself. (Arthur Herman, Joseph McCarthy: Reexaming the Life and Legacy of America’s Most Hated Senator, p. 60)

No action was taken, and in fact, Roosevelt promoted Hiss. Almost a decade later, Chambers was called before the HUAC and named Hiss as a Soviet agent. Hiss sued Chambers, at which time Chambers presented “… four notes in Alger Hiss's handwriting, sixty-five typewritten copies of State Department documents and five strips of microfilm, some of which contained photographs of State Department documents. The press came to call these the "Pumpkin Papers"(Whittaker Chambers - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia)

And, of course, all doubt was removed in 1995, when the Venona Soviet cables were decrypted.

You are lying again about the Venona Soviet cables removing doubt about Hiss. We have gone over this before. You just don't want to admit the controversy and disputes about Hiss exist because you need the accusation to be true to make so many of your assertions make any sense. Venona cable #1822 mentions a code name ALES and so an assumption was made that it was Alger Hiss. That worked until it was proven that Hiss did not attend the meeting being referenced in the cable. There are several explanations why this code name could have been used, one being that if the cables were ever discovered the code name would lead investigators away from the real spy. More importantly however is the fact that high ranking Russian officials testified than Hiss was not a spy. Add the accusation of the cables being "adjusted" during three different "interpretations", one for the famous Red Scare Hearings and there is plenty of doubt about your Venona cables.

www.algerhiss.com/lowsoviet.html

Reminder: I'm never wrong.


The following is from the CIA analysis of the case of Alger Hiss.


Background:


" In 1948, Whittaker Chambers, a self-confessed former communist and Soviet spy, alleged that Alger Hiss, who had been a high-level official in the State Department during the 1930s and 1940s and who had worked closely with Secretary of State Edward Stettinius, had also been a communist and a spy. After a dramatic series of events and two trials, Hiss was convicted in 1950 of perjury for lying when he denied having passed documents to Chambers in 1938. Hiss served almost four years in a federal prison and for the rest of his life--he died in 1996--denied all of Chambers's charges."

For more than 50 years, intellectuals, journalists, and political figures have bitterly argued over Hiss's guilt or innocence. All the participants have understood that at stake is not only the question of whether Hiss had been the victim of a miscarriage of justice but also fundamental questions about American liberalism,..."


1. "...supporters are claiming vindication of the man at the center of one of the most notorious spy cases in US history. This is a remarkable development, because the case against Hiss has steadily grown more damning and complete as researchers have delved into the files of his lawyers, declassified US intelligence documents, and Soviet-bloc archives.

2. In April 2007, a prominent American historian, Kai Bird, and his Russian collaborator, historian Svetlana Chervonnaya, stepped forward at a conference to claim that the central piece of evidence against Hiss--an intercepted cable in the VENONA series, No. 1822, naming a Soviet asset, ALES--did not refer to Hiss, as the FBI and NSA had judged, but someone else.... however, the Bird-Chervonnaya assertion is built on thin reeds, suppositions, and unsupportable "ifs then thats."

3. The debate ought to have ended after the publication of Allen Weinstein's definitive history of the case, Perjury in 1978, and with the release in the mid-1990s of the VENONA cables in the United States and archival materials in the former East Bloc.As Thomas Powers, one of the most astute observers of US intelligence affairs, wrote in 2000, the "evidence following the publication of VENONA...is simply overwhelming." By then all but a few determined Hiss supporters concluded that Hiss had been a spy. (Thomas Powers, "The Plot Thickens," New York Review of Books, 11 May 2000,)

4. Discussions of the Hiss case since the late 1990s have focused on VENONA 1822, the message from the NKGB residency in Washington to Moscow on 30 March 1945 that named ... in clear language, lays out four identifying characteristics of ALES:

• He had worked for the GRU (Neighbors) since 1935.
• He led a small group of spies that included his relatives.
• He passed military information and had been at the Yalta Conference (4-11 February 1945).
• Finally, he had gone to Moscow after the conference.

a. .... the cable makes for an easily understood case against Hiss, who appears to fit all the criteria. As a result, public debate has tended to overlook the mountain of other evidence and treat the cable as if it were the only evidence in the case. Hiss's defenders have encouraged this perception and have made determined efforts to break the link between ALES and Hiss.

The Mystery of ALES Central Intelligence Agency

The CIA link, the one you posted is a long read, but it confirms what I posted and agrees the the case remains controversial. The most interesting part I found to be the final paragraph, the conclusion as to why it is important to accept Hiss as being guilty or not guilty to the intelligence community and the flagrant admission that the truth is not the priority.

It does the very opposite, you liar.

.... the cable makes for an easily understood case against Hiss, who appears to fit all the criteria. As a result, public debate has tended to overlook the mountain of other evidence and treat the cable as if it were the only evidence in the case. Hiss's defenders have encouraged this perception and have made determined efforts to break the link between ALES and Hiss.
The Mystery of ALES Central Intelligence Agency


Alger HIss.....Stalin's spy
Franklin Roosevelt.....Stalin's puppet
You......a low-life lying Liberal sap

Anyone interested can read the report. They do not have to read the entire report. The pertinent part is the conclusion, a five paragraph section titled "Why it Matters" at the bottom of the page. The first paragraph offers what is clearly and admittedly a biased opinion by the CIA that the opponents of the view you propagate fail to make a total conclusive case. It does not hide that it is biased and only an opinion, as the next four paragraphs give shocking reason why the CIA prefers to go along with the idea of Hiss being guilty, while admitting that he might not be. Hence, it is exactly as I stated to refute your claims. There is a controversy about your claim and your claim is just an opinion. The issue is debated by a long list of scholars and historians and has been for over 60 years.
It is doubtful that you even comprehend the meaning of whether Hiss was the spy and your claim he was or mine that he was not. Those final paragraphs, the conclusion of the report, explain that the allegations against Hiss where used as a catapult into the Cold War, the launching of the Red Scare and the power and control given the the MIC and the influence of the CIA in the global politics of the 1950's and 60's.
Those final four paragraphs tell whether you are once again distorting and abusing a source, or not. It is a fairly quick read.

Proven guilty, jailed for 44 months for perjury (the statute of limitations had run out on espionage), Alger Hiss, traitorous agent of Soviet espionage, the American left views Hiss as a hero. After leaving prison, he spoke at Princeton and was given a standing ovation. Bard College actually has the Alger Hiss Chair of Social Studies (Lawrence Helm s Blog The Alger Hiss Chair at Bard College) In 1972, Massachusetts readmitted him to the bar. Liberals would never turn their backs on a man who spied for Stalin against America.

And no better example of a Leftist, anti-American, pro-Stalinst suck up is the poster to whom this is addressed.

 

[Camp]

You are lying again about the Venona Soviet cables removing doubt about Hiss. We have gone over this before. You just don't want to admit the controversy and disputes about Hiss exist because you need the accusation to be true to make so many of your assertions make any sense. Venona cable #1822 mentions a code name ALES and so an assumption was made that it was Alger Hiss. That worked until it was proven that Hiss did not attend the meeting being referenced in the cable. There are several explanations why this code name could have been used, one being that if the cables were ever discovered the code name would lead investigators away from the real spy. More importantly however is the fact that high ranking Russian officials testified than Hiss was not a spy. Add the accusation of the cables being "adjusted" during three different "interpretations", one for the famous Red Scare Hearings and there is plenty of doubt about your Venona cables.

www.algerhiss.com/lowsoviet.html

Reminder: I'm never wrong.


The following is from the CIA analysis of the case of Alger Hiss.


Background:


" In 1948, Whittaker Chambers, a self-confessed former communist and Soviet spy, alleged that Alger Hiss, who had been a high-level official in the State Department during the 1930s and 1940s and who had worked closely with Secretary of State Edward Stettinius, had also been a communist and a spy. After a dramatic series of events and two trials, Hiss was convicted in 1950 of perjury for lying when he denied having passed documents to Chambers in 1938. Hiss served almost four years in a federal prison and for the rest of his life--he died in 1996--denied all of Chambers's charges."

For more than 50 years, intellectuals, journalists, and political figures have bitterly argued over Hiss's guilt or innocence. All the participants have understood that at stake is not only the question of whether Hiss had been the victim of a miscarriage of justice but also fundamental questions about American liberalism,..."


1. "...supporters are claiming vindication of the man at the center of one of the most notorious spy cases in US history. This is a remarkable development, because the case against Hiss has steadily grown more damning and complete as researchers have delved into the files of his lawyers, declassified US intelligence documents, and Soviet-bloc archives.

2. In April 2007, a prominent American historian, Kai Bird, and his Russian collaborator, historian Svetlana Chervonnaya, stepped forward at a conference to claim that the central piece of evidence against Hiss--an intercepted cable in the VENONA series, No. 1822, naming a Soviet asset, ALES--did not refer to Hiss, as the FBI and NSA had judged, but someone else.... however, the Bird-Chervonnaya assertion is built on thin reeds, suppositions, and unsupportable "ifs then thats."

3. The debate ought to have ended after the publication of Allen Weinstein's definitive history of the case, Perjury in 1978, and with the release in the mid-1990s of the VENONA cables in the United States and archival materials in the former East Bloc.As Thomas Powers, one of the most astute observers of US intelligence affairs, wrote in 2000, the "evidence following the publication of VENONA...is simply overwhelming." By then all but a few determined Hiss supporters concluded that Hiss had been a spy. (Thomas Powers, "The Plot Thickens," New York Review of Books, 11 May 2000,)

4. Discussions of the Hiss case since the late 1990s have focused on VENONA 1822, the message from the NKGB residency in Washington to Moscow on 30 March 1945 that named ... in clear language, lays out four identifying characteristics of ALES:

• He had worked for the GRU (Neighbors) since 1935.
• He led a small group of spies that included his relatives.
• He passed military information and had been at the Yalta Conference (4-11 February 1945).
• Finally, he had gone to Moscow after the conference.

a. .... the cable makes for an easily understood case against Hiss, who appears to fit all the criteria. As a result, public debate has tended to overlook the mountain of other evidence and treat the cable as if it were the only evidence in the case. Hiss's defenders have encouraged this perception and have made determined efforts to break the link between ALES and Hiss.

The Mystery of ALES Central Intelligence Agency

The CIA link, the one you posted is a long read, but it confirms what I posted and agrees the the case remains controversial. The most interesting part I found to be the final paragraph, the conclusion as to why it is important to accept Hiss as being guilty or not guilty to the intelligence community and the flagrant admission that the truth is not the priority.

It does the very opposite, you liar.

.... the cable makes for an easily understood case against Hiss, who appears to fit all the criteria. As a result, public debate has tended to overlook the mountain of other evidence and treat the cable as if it were the only evidence in the case. Hiss's defenders have encouraged this perception and have made determined efforts to break the link between ALES and Hiss.
The Mystery of ALES Central Intelligence Agency


Alger HIss.....Stalin's spy
Franklin Roosevelt.....Stalin's puppet
You......a low-life lying Liberal sap

Anyone interested can read the report. They do not have to read the entire report. The pertinent part is the conclusion, a five paragraph section titled "Why it Matters" at the bottom of the page. The first paragraph offers what is clearly and admittedly a biased opinion by the CIA that the opponents of the view you propagate fail to make a total conclusive case. It does not hide that it is biased and only an opinion, as the next four paragraphs give shocking reason why the CIA prefers to go along with the idea of Hiss being guilty, while admitting that he might not be. Hence, it is exactly as I stated to refute your claims. There is a controversy about your claim and your claim is just an opinion. The issue is debated by a long list of scholars and historians and has been for over 60 years.
It is doubtful that you even comprehend the meaning of whether Hiss was the spy and your claim he was or mine that he was not. Those final paragraphs, the conclusion of the report, explain that the allegations against Hiss where used as a catapult into the Cold War, the launching of the Red Scare and the power and control given the the MIC and the influence of the CIA in the global politics of the 1950's and 60's.
Those final four paragraphs tell whether you are once again distorting and abusing a source, or not. It is a fairly quick read.

Proven guilty, jailed for 44 months for perjury (the statute of limitations had run out on espionage), Alger Hiss, traitorous agent of Soviet espionage, the American left views Hiss as a hero. After leaving prison, he spoke at Princeton and was given a standing ovation. Bard College actually has the Alger Hiss Chair of Social Studies (Lawrence Helm s Blog The Alger Hiss Chair at Bard College) In 1972, Massachusetts readmitted him to the bar. Liberals would never turn their backs on a man who spied for Stalin against America.

And no better example of a Leftist, anti-American, pro-Stalinst suck up is the poster to whom this is addressed.

You are deflecting away from admitting I did not lie when I refuted your statements about Hiss. I merely gave the alternative view. You thrive, like all conspiracy writers, on interpreting opinions as fact. It is the difference between a conspiracy theory and an academic view of history. Your opinion of Hiss being a spy and that interpretation of an unproven opinion leads to your conclusion that Stalin manipulated FDR because Hiss was an aid to FDR. That is how conspiracy theories work. You were to uninformed to even realize that your very own sources and links disprove your conspiracy theories. This last one is a good example.
Hiss was supported and is still supported because he is a prime example of how the right, controlled by the MIC, military industrial complex, used fear to propagate and even start the Cold War and the era of the massive build up of weapons. He was a patriot that gave great service to America and was key and instrumental on the team that helped win WWII. That is why the left defends him.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

PC 11942538

Is your point that his being educated means he could not be a sympathizer of the terrorist regime in Tehran?

Think carefully before you respond.

Did you ever stop to think ( dumb way to ask you a question I know) that being educated he could be a great sympathizer to the millions of Iranians who are moderates and do not sympathize with the theocratic religious zealot regime in Iran. The moderates in Iran are in favor of this deal which makes you a hater of Iranian moderates no matter your ethnic background. The Shiite Persian moderates in Iran are face an existential threat by Sunni terrorists that have moved close to Iran's borders and at least their tyrannical government and its military forces are helping to kill and destroy ISIS. That makes you by your dark and ignorant conjecture a direct supporter with sympathy toward ISIS killers.

You are exposed by your own version of McCarthyism.

There is an Iranian Islamo Nazi right now hiding under your bed. You better go look.

"You are exposed by your own version of McCarthyism."

Is that the great American hero, Senator Josepth McCarthy, to whom you refer?

Tell me more.

So you can't answer the question why you think Kerry's Son in Law would not be sympathetic to Iranian moderates rather than to Iranian hardliners as you are trying to infer the latter.

Nice dodge though.

 

[PoliticalChic]

PC 11942538

Is your point that his being educated means he could not be a sympathizer of the terrorist regime in Tehran?

Think carefully before you respond.

Did you ever stop to think ( dumb way to ask you a question I know) that being educated he could be a great sympathizer to the millions of Iranians who are moderates and do not sympathize with the theocratic religious zealot regime in Iran. The moderates in Iran are in favor of this deal which makes you a hater of Iranian moderates no matter your ethnic background. The Shiite Persian moderates in Iran are face an existential threat by Sunni terrorists that have moved close to Iran's borders and at least their tyrannical government and its military forces are helping to kill and destroy ISIS. That makes you by your dark and ignorant conjecture a direct supporter with sympathy toward ISIS killers.

You are exposed by your own version of McCarthyism.

There is an Iranian Islamo Nazi right now hiding under your bed. You better go look.

"You are exposed by your own version of McCarthyism."

Is that the great American hero, Senator Josepth McCarthy, to whom you refer?

Tell me more.

So you can't answer the question why you think Kerry's Son in Law would not be sympathetic to Iranian moderates rather than to Iranian hardliners as you are trying to infer the latter.

Nice dodge though.

I see I have you running from the question 'Is that the great American hero, Senator Josepth McCarthy, to whom you refer?'

That was my intention, to smash the Liberal propaganda, 'McCarthyism,' right back in your kisser.

I love doing that.....you mindless Libs mouth whatever your masters tell you, but you are clueless about its meaning.

 

[paddymurphy]

PC 11942538

Is your point that his being educated means he could not be a sympathizer of the terrorist regime in Tehran?

Think carefully before you respond.

Did you ever stop to think ( dumb way to ask you a question I know) that being educated he could be a great sympathizer to the millions of Iranians who are moderates and do not sympathize with the theocratic religious zealot regime in Iran. The moderates in Iran are in favor of this deal which makes you a hater of Iranian moderates no matter your ethnic background. The Shiite Persian moderates in Iran are face an existential threat by Sunni terrorists that have moved close to Iran's borders and at least their tyrannical government and its military forces are helping to kill and destroy ISIS. That makes you by your dark and ignorant conjecture a direct supporter with sympathy toward ISIS killers.

You are exposed by your own version of McCarthyism.

There is an Iranian Islamo Nazi right now hiding under your bed. You better go look.

"You are exposed by your own version of McCarthyism."

Is that the great American hero, Senator Josepth McCarthy, to whom you refer?

Tell me more.

So you can't answer the question why you think Kerry's Son in Law would not be sympathetic to Iranian moderates rather than to Iranian hardliners as you are trying to infer the latter.

Nice dodge though.

I see I have you running from the question 'Is that the great American hero, Senator Josepth McCarthy, to whom you refer?'

That was my intention, to smash the Liberal propaganda, 'McCarthyism,' right back in your kisser.

I love doing that.....you mindless Libs mouth whatever your masters tell you, but you are clueless about its meaning.

All you do is run from questions. McCarthy is not relevant to what is being discussed. What is relevant is your idiotic insistence, sans evidence, that Kerrys' son in law, who was born here to naturalized Americans citizens, would somehow compromise Kerry's ability to do his job. When ever you are proven to not know wtf you are talking about, as when I pointed out that you had no clue what a foreign national is, you go of on tangents about Alger Hiss and, now, the drunken, idiot Senator who was disgraced and died of his alcoholism. While I know that you do not have the intellectual ability to actually debate normally, why not give it a try and explain why an educated, American citizen or Iranian descent, whose parents abandoned their home country when it was taken over by the radical mullahs to come here and become hugely successful would have any sympathy for the Mullahs they fled and would not, rather, support the clear desire of the Iranian people for more freedom and more interaction with the west? And, while you are at it, let us know if you now understand that none of Kerry's daughter's in laws are nationals of any nation but this one.

 

[paddymurphy]

Ted Cruz cannot be President!

He was born in Canada.

His father fought with Castro.

His wife worked on Wall Street

How do we know he won't just give Florida to Cuba? Or Canada? Or Goldman Sachs?

C'mon back after you've read the 'Help Iran Get A Nuke' Treaty, and the secret 'side deals.'

Here you go, again, not responding to the comment but diverting attention away from your inability to do so.

 

[paddymurphy]

I just whipped all of you Lock-Step Liberals......

....sure seems more like I embarrassed you dopes.


True?

You are pathetic. Are you so lacking in self esteem that you come here to find it? So, so sad. You should get a dog. They don't care that you are a complete and utter moron.

She's Korean. I wouldn't trust her around a dog.

It's a compliment to me how quickly you Liberals give up substantive posts in favor of what you imagine are insults.

I do so much a better job in both areas......see what I mean about my superiority to you?

You have yet to post anything substantive. You told us that Valerie Jarret was born in Iran 60 years ago. You did not tell us that she is not Iranian and, in fact, was born to American Citizens living there 22 years before the Mullahs came to power. You have not explained why her five years there, from birth to 5, would in any way make her favorably disposed to the current Iranian regime. You see, intelligent people, when making an argument, set forth the facts and then explain, logically, how those facts support their ultimate conclusion. Your ultimate conclusion is that Jarret favors Iran. You have not explained why her birth there makes that more likely. You cannot. You do not have the ability to connect the fact of her birth to your conclusion. Even if you were not a moron, you could not make that connection because it is not there. One does not lead to the other. As for Kerry, again, he has no relatives in Iran. His son-in-law might, but you have offered not proof of that. The daily caller assumed there were relatives there, but offered no proof. You might be able to work for them since that is your pattern.

Has your A.D.D.been diagnosed?


"Since its inception, the FBI has vetted U.S. government officials involved in national security issues, and it generally won’t grant clearances to individuals who are married to nationals of an enemy nation or have family members living in that country, for fear of divided loyalties or, more simply, blackmail."


I get it!

You're trying to prove you're a dunce!

Unnecessary.

Here you go, again, not responding to the comment but diverting attention away from your inability to do so.

 

[paddymurphy]

All Iranians think alike now?

lol, ferreting out Iranians for blanket condemnation is quite a bit like the Nazis ferreting out Jews,

wouldn't you say, Mr. Huckabee?

I must admit that Huckabee certainly went up in my estimation this week.

Of course. You value stupidity.

I looked it up.

The definition of 'stupid' is having voted for the unmitigated failure, Barack Hussein Obama, even once.

Voted for him twice?
Then, it's one of the following:
Imperfectly grounded in reality...
Psychosis....a break with reality
Hallucinations....seeing or hearing things that aren't there
Delusions.....immutable false ideas

Here you go, again, not responding to the comment but diverting attention away from your inability to do so.

 

[paddymurphy]

Ted Cruz cannot be President!

He was born in Canada.

His father fought with Castro.

His wife worked on Wall Street

How do we know he won't just give Florida to Cuba? Or Canada? Or Goldman Sachs?

C'mon back after you've read the 'Help Iran Get A Nuke' Treaty, and the secret 'side deals.'

Are you saying we should wait until after he gives Florida away?

I say, stop him now!

How often are weak sisters like you going to pretend that posts like yours are
a. funny
b. eliminate the need to actually critique the deeply flawed foreign policy of a man who should never have been given the presidency?


I suppose the answer is until the once great nation is no more than smoldering embers.

Here you go, again, not responding to the comment but diverting attention away from your inability to do so.

 

[PoliticalChic]

PC 11942538

Is your point that his being educated means he could not be a sympathizer of the terrorist regime in Tehran?

Think carefully before you respond.

Did you ever stop to think ( dumb way to ask you a question I know) that being educated he could be a great sympathizer to the millions of Iranians who are moderates and do not sympathize with the theocratic religious zealot regime in Iran. The moderates in Iran are in favor of this deal which makes you a hater of Iranian moderates no matter your ethnic background. The Shiite Persian moderates in Iran are face an existential threat by Sunni terrorists that have moved close to Iran's borders and at least their tyrannical government and its military forces are helping to kill and destroy ISIS. That makes you by your dark and ignorant conjecture a direct supporter with sympathy toward ISIS killers.

You are exposed by your own version of McCarthyism.

There is an Iranian Islamo Nazi right now hiding under your bed. You better go look.

"You are exposed by your own version of McCarthyism."

Is that the great American hero, Senator Josepth McCarthy, to whom you refer?

Tell me more.

So you can't answer the question why you think Kerry's Son in Law would not be sympathetic to Iranian moderates rather than to Iranian hardliners as you are trying to infer the latter.

Nice dodge though.

I see I have you running from the question 'Is that the great American hero, Senator Josepth McCarthy, to whom you refer?'

That was my intention, to smash the Liberal propaganda, 'McCarthyism,' right back in your kisser.

I love doing that.....you mindless Libs mouth whatever your masters tell you, but you are clueless about its meaning.

All you do is run from questions. McCarthy is not relevant to what is being discussed. What is relevant is your idiotic insistence, sans evidence, that Kerrys' son in law, who was born here to naturalized Americans citizens, would somehow compromise Kerry's ability to do his job. When ever you are proven to not know wtf you are talking about, as when I pointed out that you had no clue what a foreign national is, you go of on tangents about Alger Hiss and, now, the drunken, idiot Senator who was disgraced and died of his alcoholism. While I know that you do not have the intellectual ability to actually debate normally, why not give it a try and explain why an educated, American citizen or Iranian descent, whose parents abandoned their home country when it was taken over by the radical mullahs to come here and become hugely successful would have any sympathy for the Mullahs they fled and would not, rather, support the clear desire of the Iranian people for more freedom and more interaction with the west? And, while you are at it, let us know if you now understand that none of Kerry's daughter's in laws are nationals of any nation but this one.

"All you do is run from questions. McCarthy is not relevant to what is being discussed."

I didn't bring it up.

What are you afraid of?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Ted Cruz cannot be President!

He was born in Canada.

His father fought with Castro.

His wife worked on Wall Street

How do we know he won't just give Florida to Cuba? Or Canada? Or Goldman Sachs?

C'mon back after you've read the 'Help Iran Get A Nuke' Treaty, and the secret 'side deals.'

Are you saying we should wait until after he gives Florida away?

I say, stop him now!

How often are weak sisters like you going to pretend that posts like yours are
a. funny
b. eliminate the need to actually critique the deeply flawed foreign policy of a man who should never have been given the presidency?


I suppose the answer is until the once great nation is no more than smoldering embers.

Here you go, again, not responding to the comment but diverting attention away from your inability to do so.

You moron....did you actually imagine ( I almost said 'think') he was worried about Florida????

 

[JakeStarkey]

PC will not respond to rebuttal but simply keep posting the same nonsense.

 

[paddymurphy]

PC 11942538 Did you ever stop to think ( dumb way to ask you a question I know) that being educated he could be a great sympathizer to the millions of Iranians who are moderates and do not sympathize with the theocratic religious zealot regime in Iran. The moderates in Iran are in favor of this deal which makes you a hater of Iranian moderates no matter your ethnic background. The Shiite Persian moderates in Iran are face an existential threat by Sunni terrorists that have moved close to Iran's borders and at least their tyrannical government and its military forces are helping to kill and destroy ISIS. That makes you by your dark and ignorant conjecture a direct supporter with sympathy toward ISIS killers.

You are exposed by your own version of McCarthyism.

There is an Iranian Islamo Nazi right now hiding under your bed. You better go look.

"You are exposed by your own version of McCarthyism."

Is that the great American hero, Senator Josepth McCarthy, to whom you refer?

Tell me more.

So you can't answer the question why you think Kerry's Son in Law would not be sympathetic to Iranian moderates rather than to Iranian hardliners as you are trying to infer the latter.

Nice dodge though.

I see I have you running from the question 'Is that the great American hero, Senator Josepth McCarthy, to whom you refer?'

That was my intention, to smash the Liberal propaganda, 'McCarthyism,' right back in your kisser.

I love doing that.....you mindless Libs mouth whatever your masters tell you, but you are clueless about its meaning.

All you do is run from questions. McCarthy is not relevant to what is being discussed. What is relevant is your idiotic insistence, sans evidence, that Kerrys' son in law, who was born here to naturalized Americans citizens, would somehow compromise Kerry's ability to do his job. When ever you are proven to not know wtf you are talking about, as when I pointed out that you had no clue what a foreign national is, you go of on tangents about Alger Hiss and, now, the drunken, idiot Senator who was disgraced and died of his alcoholism. While I know that you do not have the intellectual ability to actually debate normally, why not give it a try and explain why an educated, American citizen or Iranian descent, whose parents abandoned their home country when it was taken over by the radical mullahs to come here and become hugely successful would have any sympathy for the Mullahs they fled and would not, rather, support the clear desire of the Iranian people for more freedom and more interaction with the west? And, while you are at it, let us know if you now understand that none of Kerry's daughter's in laws are nationals of any nation but this one.

"All you do is run from questions. McCarthy is not relevant to what is being discussed."

I didn't bring it up.

What are you afraid of?

How surprising. Another deflection to avoid a substantive discussion.

 

[paddymurphy]

Ted Cruz cannot be President!

He was born in Canada.

His father fought with Castro.

His wife worked on Wall Street

How do we know he won't just give Florida to Cuba? Or Canada? Or Goldman Sachs?

C'mon back after you've read the 'Help Iran Get A Nuke' Treaty, and the secret 'side deals.'

Are you saying we should wait until after he gives Florida away?

I say, stop him now!

How often are weak sisters like you going to pretend that posts like yours are
a. funny
b. eliminate the need to actually critique the deeply flawed foreign policy of a man who should never have been given the presidency?


I suppose the answer is until the once great nation is no more than smoldering embers.

Here you go, again, not responding to the comment but diverting attention away from your inability to do so.

You moron....did you actually imagine ( I almost said 'think') he was worried about Florida????

More deflections. You are such a coward when it comes to defending the nonsense you post.

 

[g5000]

There's a codicle in the give-nukes-to-Iran treaty which states if the treaty is passed by the US, Barack HUSSEIN Sotoreo gets 72 houri.

STOP THE OBAMA-WANTS-ISRAEL-NUKED TREATY NOW!!!

Remember. You read it on the internet, so it's true.

 

[paddymurphy]

Are you saying we should wait until after he gives Florida away?

I say, stop him now!

How often are weak sisters like you going to pretend that posts like yours are
a. funny
b. eliminate the need to actually critique the deeply flawed foreign policy of a man who should never have been given the presidency?


I suppose the answer is until the once great nation is no more than smoldering embers.

Here you go, again, not responding to the comment but diverting attention away from your inability to do so.

You moron....did you actually imagine ( I almost said 'think') he was worried about Florida????

More deflections. You are such a coward when it comes to defending the nonsense you post.

How many times must I show you to be a moron before you have it monogrammed on your overalls?

And yet one more deflection; one more time you cannot respond substantively. Every time you duck the question, you make it clearer what an intellectual coward you are.

 

[g5000]

I heard Obama has some African relatives. So we absolutely, positively cannot trust him to negotiate with any African nations.

We'll have to use this guy:

 

[Synthaholic]

"Yet you cannot articulate in any way why you believe he's a failure."

You really are mind-numbed.

Take notes:

1.More than 6.7 million more Americans have been plunged into poverty since Obama became President.

2.Real household income is down 5%

3. Consumer prices are up 10.2%

You went through a lot of work on behalf of dishonesty.

Let me ask you a question:

In 1997, Wayne Huizenga's Florida Marlins won the World Series. Following that win, Huizenga completely dismantled the team, selling all the stars rather than paying their high salaries. He then sold the team to current Red Sox owner John Henry. The Marlins finished the season in last place.

Who deserves the blame for the last place finish: Huizenga or Henry?

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Yet you cannot articulate in any way why you believe he's a failure."

You really are mind-numbed.

Take notes:

1.More than 6.7 million more Americans have been plunged into poverty since Obama became President.

2.Real household income is down 5%

3. Consumer prices are up 10.2%

You went through a lot of work on behalf of dishonesty.

Let me ask you a question:

In 1997, Wayne Huizenga's Florida Marlins won the World Series. Following that win, Huizenga completely dismantled the team, selling all the stars rather than paying their high salaries. He then sold the team to current Red Sox owner John Henry. The Marlins finished the season in last place.

Who deserves the blame for the last place finish: Huizenga or Henry?

Oh,man....was that funny!

You said:
"Yet you cannot articulate in any way why you believe he's a failure."

And I ripped you a new one!!!!


You're lookin' dumber than a soup sandwich.