Who say this regime hasn't learned anything from Iran?

[SAYIT]

1) our security should not be a political football.
2) the Prez, unlike most in congress, will not have to run for reelection on the consequences of what a DHS shutdown may bring.
3) Obama may believe he was elected, in large part, to find a peaceful solution (at any cost) to the Iran problem. He wants his legacy.

What are those "any costs" pule? upsetting Rudy and the rest of you christonazi's

It is not my presidential legacy at stake, Princess. Obama will have to determine where (or if) to draw the line. I would remind you that the Mideast is a pretty important place (for reasons one such as you couldn't possibly fathom) and "Peace in Our Time" type solutions have been known to have disastrous results.

 

[OKTexas]

This regime has definitely learned quite a bit form it's failed dealings with Iran. Give us everything we want and then we'll talk about talking This is the exact attitude the regime is taking with congress on his illegal executive actions. He is demanding everything he wants and then he says he'll talk about them.

Now it seems that congress is acting just like the dear leader is with Iran, they are surrendering by degrees. They were elected to put a stop to this crap and it's way past time they do exactly that, what ever it takes. If the dear leader is satisfied to refuse funding to DHS to preserve his lawlessness congress should accommodate him and force him to live with that decision. We know the propaganda the MSM will engage in but that should not alter the course of congress.

What do you think?

1) our security should not be a political football.
2) the Prez, unlike most in congress, will not have to run for reelection on the consequences of what a DHS shutdown may bring.
3) Obama may believe he was elected, in large part, to find a peaceful solution (at any cost) to the Iran problem. He wants his legacy.

1) It's your dear leader who is making security a political football by doing what he said 23 times he had no authority to do and insisting congress reward him for his lawlessness by funding his illegal actions. Congress has just as much constitutional authority in this matter as he does, he's not a dictator, even though you wouldn't know it by his actions.
2) Why do you folks insist on this lie that there will be a shutdown?
3) BTW what do you think your dear leaders legacy will be if he makes a bad deal, a bad deal is worse than no deal at all.

 

[OKTexas]

Iran has every right to build the bomb there Tex. That's one thing that nations do, build weapons.

Maybe you should actually read the OP, the only thing mentioned in it that concerns Iran are the tactics they are using negotiating with this regime. The primary point is your dear leader is using the same tactics in negotiating with congress over his lawless executive actions and DHS.

drivel texarse

Really, are you capable of explaining?

 

[SAYIT]

This regime has definitely learned quite a bit form it's failed dealings with Iran. Give us everything we want and then we'll talk about talking This is the exact attitude the regime is taking with congress on his illegal executive actions. He is demanding everything he wants and then he says he'll talk about them.

Now it seems that congress is acting just like the dear leader is with Iran, they are surrendering by degrees. They were elected to put a stop to this crap and it's way past time they do exactly that, what ever it takes. If the dear leader is satisfied to refuse funding to DHS to preserve his lawlessness congress should accommodate him and force him to live with that decision. We know the propaganda the MSM will engage in but that should not alter the course of congress.

What do you think?

1) our security should not be a political football.
2) the Prez, unlike most in congress, will not have to run for reelection on the consequences of what a DHS shutdown may bring.
3) Obama may believe he was elected, in large part, to find a peaceful solution (at any cost) to the Iran problem. He wants his legacy.

1) It's your dear leader who is making security a political football by doing what he said 23 times he had no authority to do and insisting congress reward him for his lawlessness by funding his illegal actions. Congress has just as much constitutional authority in this matter as he does, he's not a dictator, even though you wouldn't know it by his actions.
2) Why do you folks insist on this lie that there will be a shutdown?
3) BTW what do you think your dear leaders legacy will be if he makes a bad deal, a bad deal is worse than no deal at all.

Obama is only my prez because he is America's duly elected president and there is nothing dear about it. Furthermore I agree his high-handed tactics precipitated this staged crisis and that it is really about his abuse of his power.
The shutdown was averted but from what I read there would have been a cessation of all non-essential functions, including low-level investigations that could bear (or fail to bear) future "fruit."
I agree a "Peace in Our Time" type deal would be bad for the Mideast, America and the world but that doesn't mean he won't make one just to establish his legacy. I'm not arguing for him but rather noting what may be motivating him. Hell, Tex, you asked what I thought.

 

[MaryL]

Anyone remember the SHAH Pehlavi? The US lead coup that really pissed off the Iranians to begin with? No wonder Iran hates us so much.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Anyone remember the SHAH Pehlavi? The US lead coup that really pissed off the Iranians to begin with?

That tends to happen when you overthrow their elected government to protect Western oil interests and install a puppet and his police state.

 

[Preacher]

Iran has every right to build the bomb there Tex. That's one thing that nations do, build weapons.

NO, it doesn't! When they threaten to BOMB our ALLY they DO NOT have a right!

Lol...the faux outrage is funny. Maybe you should start a hate Iran group and go start a war with them. LOL...Israel can take care of its self. PERIOD. I HOPE Iran gets a nuke...love to see u retards attack then..

 

[OKTexas]

This regime has definitely learned quite a bit form it's failed dealings with Iran. Give us everything we want and then we'll talk about talking This is the exact attitude the regime is taking with congress on his illegal executive actions. He is demanding everything he wants and then he says he'll talk about them.

Now it seems that congress is acting just like the dear leader is with Iran, they are surrendering by degrees. They were elected to put a stop to this crap and it's way past time they do exactly that, what ever it takes. If the dear leader is satisfied to refuse funding to DHS to preserve his lawlessness congress should accommodate him and force him to live with that decision. We know the propaganda the MSM will engage in but that should not alter the course of congress.

What do you think?

1) our security should not be a political football.
2) the Prez, unlike most in congress, will not have to run for reelection on the consequences of what a DHS shutdown may bring.
3) Obama may believe he was elected, in large part, to find a peaceful solution (at any cost) to the Iran problem. He wants his legacy.

1) It's your dear leader who is making security a political football by doing what he said 23 times he had no authority to do and insisting congress reward him for his lawlessness by funding his illegal actions. Congress has just as much constitutional authority in this matter as he does, he's not a dictator, even though you wouldn't know it by his actions.
2) Why do you folks insist on this lie that there will be a shutdown?
3) BTW what do you think your dear leaders legacy will be if he makes a bad deal, a bad deal is worse than no deal at all.

Obama is only my prez because he is America's duly elected president and there is nothing dear about it. Furthermore I agree his high-handed tactics precipitated this staged crisis and that it is really about his abuse of his power.
The shutdown was averted but from what I read there would have been a cessation of all non-essential functions, including low-level investigations that could bear (or fail to bear) future "fruit."
I agree a "Peace in Our Time" type deal would be bad for the Mideast, America and the world but that doesn't mean he won't make one just to establish his legacy. I'm not arguing for him but rather noting what may be motivating him. Hell, Tex, you asked what I thought.

If you would have said this to begin with I would have clicked the agree button and moved on. I just hope congress stands their ground, unlike the mulatto messiah with Iran.