US Presidential Election: Tuesday November 6th, 2012

Status
Not open for further replies.
I just saw FNC boasting about their 12 million viewers on election note. I reckon at least 75% were like me and hatewatching them!
 
He would not want to vote against a tax reduction for the middle class...which is what will happen if we go off the cliff.

:confused: If you go over the so-called 'cliff' the Bush cuts expire which means a tax hike for most people, including the middle-classes.

I suppose O would then try and pass a tax cut on the bottom 90%, and dare the GOP to block it.

Seems incorrect terminology to me. Bashing is defined

...
So to me it would literally bashing the bible (i.e. its accuracy, authenticity, etc.). Like celebrity bashing is mocking and ridiculing celebrities.

The English language isn't logical though. A bible-basher is someone who tries to convert people the whole time. I suppose in context you could use it your way... "People like Dawkins are always bashing the bible. But bible bashers like him don't seem to realise they're going to burn in hell." But it would be a bit confusing.

Yep but you're American. That is how we ended up with words like "color".

Not really, there was fairly free variation b/w -or and -our on both sides of the Pond until the nineteenth century.
 
Word is that Petraeus will not be testifying in next week's Benghazi hearings.

This has to be a massive WUM for the right.....if he does know something dodgy i don't see how the chicago mob can be this brazen!
 
:confused: If you go over the so-called 'cliff' the Bush cuts expire which means a tax hike for most people, including the middle-classes.

I suppose O would then try and pass a tax cut on the bottom 90%, and dare the GOP to block it.

thats what I meant Plech. probably did not word it right.

Understand the Senate has already sent a bill to the house ensuring only theose earning $250,000 or less keep their tax cuts.
 
Word is that Petraeus will not be testifying in next week's Benghazi hearings.

This has to be a massive WUM for the right.....if he does know something dodgy i don't see how the chicago mob can be this brazen!

what do you think there really is with this Benghazi thing?

I mean if they really had something, it would have come out before the elections.

Romney did not even breathe about it in the Foreign Policy debate.
 
what do you think there really is with this Benghazi thing?

I mean if they really had something, it would have come out before the elections.

Romney did not even breathe about it in the Foreign Policy debate.

Cuz he'd gotten bitch-slapped by Candy Crowley in the 2nd debate about it, and didn't want to bring that up again.
 
If the right knew anything explosive about Benghazi we'd know about it by now. I just don't see what can hurt the POTUS here. I mean, is the problem that he didn't call it a terrorist attack?....big deal. That there wasn't enough security?.....oh well, a mistake but not by the Prez.

Where's the beef?
 
Mockney hasnt posted in a while.

He's probably hiding under his blankie watching reruns of Hannity and waiting for the impending apocalypse to arrive.

Told him he was watching too much Fox.
 
Yeah the late push for PA wasn't due to being behind in OH, it was because FL went back to 50-50 or slight lean Obama. Without FL they were fecked even if they won OH - PA was the Hail Mary option.

Seems I was wrong about that. That was Nate Silver's take, but Jan Crawfod, who broke the inside story on the SCOTUS ACA decision, has been talking to some of Romney's team, and apparently they thought they had the swing states wrapped up. Seems they bought their own bullshit about skewed polls.
 
Patraeus is resiging.

Extramarital affair is the apparent reason.

Not in America anyway.

I really couldn't care less.

He is the Director of the CIA. Affairs are not acceptable in ANY country.

Unless someone is breaking the law (like fecking a minor or a prostitute), we really couldn't care less here in Norway. It's none of our business, and it doesn't have anything to do with the someone's qualifications for governing.

He is a feckING SPY MASTER. It kind of compromises him if his cock keeps falling out of his pants.

Possibly opening himself up to extortion/blackmail.

How? In what way is this relevant to anyone other than his wife and family?

Patreaus was never a CIA field officer that I'm aware of so technically he was never an actual spy. He was military brass.

But in his position he has to be squeaky clean. CIA Director is an extremely important and public position.

But there's no evidence of that, and there are no reports of him having revealed classified information because he was being blackmailed over this. What I'm saying is that it's ridiculous for someone to have to resign from his job simply because he or she cheated on their spouse.

Perhaps, but I was responding to mjs saying that it's "not good" when someone in his position can't keep his cock in his pants. I'm saying that it's irrelevant for whether he's good at his job or not.

My initial argument is someone in one of the most sensitive jobs in the world, if not the most sensitive job, might be a tad vulnerable if he can't keep his cock in his pants.

I would make an awful Director of the CIA. There would be photos and videos of me doing all sorts of stuff locked in safes across the globe.

At the Agency, unlike elected or even similar positions at State, everyone from the director level down to the janitor at Langley goes through pretty much the same process on the security side. During security they ask everything under the sun and try to check the veracity of it, from the most random things to past fidelity/cheating/relationships etc.

I'm sure it is the same at SIS, though SIS is more relaxed regarding certain things such as prior Pot use compared to the Agency.

Perhaps norwegian intelligence is not like that in their recruiting, but then again, what exactly does the noggie intelligence apparatus really do?
 
At the Agency, unlike elected or even similar positions at State, everyone from the director level down to the janitor at Langley goes through pretty much the same process on the security side. During security they ask everything under the sun, from the most random things to past fidelity/cheating/relationships etc.

I'm sure it is the same at SIS.

Perhaps norwegian intelligence is not like that in their recruiting, but then again, what exactly does the noggie intelligence apparatus really do?

Watch hot Swedish birds.
 
At the Agency, unlike elected or even similar positions at State, everyone from the director level down to the janitor at Langley goes through pretty much the same process on the security side. During security they ask everything under the sun, from the most random things to past fidelity/cheating/relationships etc.

I'm sure it is the same at SIS.

Perhaps norwegian intelligence is not like that in their recruiting, but then again, what exactly does the noggie intelligence apparatus really do?

Noggie secret service spend their time trying to find out which wax the other teams are using.
 
At the Agency, unlike elected or even similar positions at State, everyone from the director level down to the janitor at Langley goes through pretty much the same process on the security side. During security they ask everything under the sun and try to check the veracity of it, from the most random things to past fidelity/cheating/relationships etc.

I'm sure it is the same at SIS, though SIS is more relaxed regarding certain things such as prior Pot use compared to the Agency.

Perhaps norwegian intelligence is not like that in their recruiting, but then again, what exactly does the noggie intelligence apparatus really do?

Hopefully they don't worry about whether anyone is cheating on their wife or not.

If they do, I want my tax money back.
 
Hopefully they don't worry about whether anyone is cheating on their wife or not.

If they do, I want my tax money back.

cheating, or a history of cheating speaks to your risk of being coerced/blackmailed. It's one of the easiest ways to get someone to be an asset along with money, change in ideology, or ego.
 
Seems I was wrong about that. That was Nate Silver's take, but Jan Crawfod, who broke the inside story on the SCOTUS ACA decision, has been talking to some of Romney's team, and apparently they thought they had the swing states wrapped up. Seems they bought their own bullshit about skewed polls.

That was the link and story that sparked the conversation your quote is replying to :lol:
 
cheating, or a history of cheating speaks to your risk of being coerced/blackmailed. It's one of the easiest ways to get someone to be an asset along with money, change in ideology, or ego.

But why resign? Why not just admit that you've cheated on your wife? That in itself disproves what I can only assume to be your theory; that he was only let go/forced to resign because of the risk of being blackmailed.

As long as he's admitted to cheating, there's nothing to use against him, is there?
 
But why resign? Why not just admit that you've cheated on your wife? That in itself disproves what I can only assume to be your theory; that he was only let go/forced to resign because of the risk of being blackmailed.

As long as he's admitted to cheating, there's nothing to use against him, is there?

He may be embarrassed and ashamed. He's from an organization and a lifestyle where personal honour and integrity are very important.
 
But why resign? Why not just admit that you've cheated on your wife? That in itself disproves what I can only assume to be your theory; that he was only let go/forced to resign because of the risk of being blackmailed.

As long as he's admitted to cheating, there's nothing to use against him, is there?

And you think the norm is to go to your boss and admit you cheated on your wife rather than tried to keep it hidden?
 
He may be embarrassed and ashamed. He's from an organization and a lifestyle where personal honour and integrity are very important.

- If he resigned by his own free will - fair enough. But I don't think he did, and nor do I think Weiner did, for example. They were both forced out for nonsense reasons.
 
original.jpg
 
I saw an interview of her on Charlie Rose a while ago..she is literally fit too. Does triathlons etc.
I digress... I was was wondering at that time how she got (or in her case gave assess) to Petraeus, a very quiet man media-wise.

Hmmm.. now we know.

Women are sneaky that way.... flash a bit of tits and we are puddy in their hands. ;-)
 
I'm presuming you don't mean that in the Catholic/BSA sense of the term...

No, not in a Penn St. sort of way. Most generals in the Iraq war were basically glorified grunts, where as Petreaus was more of an intellectual who happened to be a general. His methodologies were largely based on his his own academic research and probably changed the trajectory of the Iraq war from 07 to 09.
 
He can afford to. He has a 100% salary match on his military pension.

Not good when someone in his position can't keep his cock in his pants.

Out of curiosity, was this your opinion when Clinton had his affair?
 
Out of curiosity, was this your opinion when Clinton had his affair?

Its not particularly good for the POTUS either. Not sure its quite the same though but Clinton should have stood down. Lying and cheating is all very well BUT getting caught lying and cheating lets everyone know your honesty and integrity is a little suspect.
 
The reason he resigned is because she 'may 'have had access to classified information. emails and other information. She is under investigation by the FBI.

The general is in big trouble. What a shame for a man that so many respected.

Now this would add much more to the full reasoning behind him coming out to admit, a bit of honor instead of having this come out through a leak or the press, or even the administration. He saves face and steps down (we Americans love honesty ya know).

And if she indeed became privy to highly classified information, you now have a massive security breach. Pussy can make men do strange things. She's working on a book with Gen. Petraeus, they start shagging, and he's probably telling her some things he shouldn't because she's sucking on his old cock. Hell I probably would too (tell a woman too much).

But in the intelligence/spy business, one must wonder how field agents would react to hearing of their boss over in his cozy Virginia office shagging chicks while these guys are out there with their lives on the line. That could cause some problems. Then again I'm not a field agent so I don't know how they think.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.