bass4funk's past comments

  • -6

    bass4funk

    I'm going to save this to quote when she becomes president next year.

    Yeah, you do that. I hope your predictions are as accurate as last November when you said the Dems would retain the Senate....Ok, maybe you were right, but your timing was off. ROFL

    Posted in: 150 more Clinton emails retroactively classified

  • -5

    bass4funk

    She's pretty much toast.

    Despite their own internal investigations turning up nothing FIVE TIMES already and them admitting she has done nothing wrong, they need SOMETHING to try and deflect from the circus that the GOP nomination has become and the fact that they cannot pass anything in the House or Senate (suddenly they don't seem to like filibustering as much!).

    Sorry, that dumb excuse just will not fly. Doesn't matter what she says. Oh, and by the way, don't think this is some conspirators trying to get one over Hillary. Remember, Obama hates Hillary as much as the GOP does, even more perhaps. Who do you think the DOJ works for? Definitely not the GOP, the prosecutor appointed, it's all coming from the Obama admin. all of it, not the mention the FBI is also involved and they don't work for the GOP either. You Dems want a bogeyman so bad and that it's NOT the GOP inquiring into Hillary's mails is just asinine for you all. I don't feel sorry for her one bit, deserves her right. The woman thinks she's so smart and the funny thing is, she just doesn't have Bill's charisma or talent to dance out of a compromising situation.

    Posted in: 150 more Clinton emails retroactively classified

  • -3

    bass4funk

    I learned from the best. Like I said, there is no satisfying you libs and progressives, the only way to is, if the facts fall in line with YOUR skewed viewpoints, it's acceptable, if not, it's quickly dismissed. Bias? Naaaaw! Hypocrites? Of course not! Partisan? Absolutely not!

    Posted in: Obama expects better U.S.-Israel ties after Iran deal in place

  • -1

    bass4funk

    No, i leave that for libs to do.

    Posted in: Obama expects better U.S.-Israel ties after Iran deal in place

  • -4

    bass4funk

    Reality is that U.S. power is limited. U.S. needs Russian and Chinese support for an Iranian nuclear deal.

    The problem with that analogy is that the negotiations shouldn't have been held in the first place. For one reason, there were no concessions on Iran's part, none. Obama wanted a legacy, let's get that off our chest fist, every president needs to have some legacy before they leave office, Obamacare, Cuba, I get it, but as sloppy as these attempts were to carve out a legacy, he decided to make a play to bring Iran to the talks, I never had a problem with that, but what is NOW known and what the TRUE intentions of the Obama admin. Really are as well as Iran's it's not wonder everyone, especially in the States are skeptical about this treaty. Obama knew and with good reason that the GOP would never go for it.

    U.S. officials can’t simultaneously put maximum pressure on both Assad and ISIS, the two main rivals for power in Syria. They must decide who is the lesser evil.

    Technically, Obama could have and has the power to not only give pressure and put the screws to Assad, he could have sent a sizable force of special forces to at least put eyes on the ground (something we desperately need and are lacking) to assess and gather Intel. Obama doesn't have a problem using drones to target ISIS, which is something I don't mind, but on the other hand it would be nice to bring in someone alive to gather more information about the daily activities, plans and goals of the radical Islamists.

    Accepting that American power is limited means prioritizing. It means making concessions to regimes and organizations you don’t like in order to put more pressure on the ones you fear most. That’s what Roosevelt did when allying with Stalin against Hitler. It’s what Nixon did when he reached out to communist China in order to increase America’s leverage over the U.S.S.R.

    But with all due respect, times have changed and we have weapons that can do a bit more considerable damage than what we had 70 years ago. Reagan negotiated from a point of strength, it wasn't easy, but Gorbachev later worked with Reagan and despite their stark and strong differences, the came to understand one another and even became friends later, this is sadly not the case with Iran and will never be.

    Bush refused to do after 9/11, when he defined the “war on terror” not merely as a conflict against al-Qaeda but as a license to wage war, or cold war, against every anti-American regime supposedly pursuing weapons of mass destruction. This massive overestimation of American power underlay the war in Iraq, which has taken the lives of over 5000,000 Iraqis and almost 4,500 Americans, and cost the U.S. over $2 trillion.

    Which was unfortunate, the sectarian violence caused overwhelming damage and I agree, having America in the middle of that clash was catastrophic, looking back, it could have been handled in a different way, but we really don't need to rehash the war, it's over and we need to move on.

    And it underlay Bush’s refusal to negotiate with Iran, even when Iran made dramatic overtures to the U.S. Negotiations, after all, require mutual concessions, which Bush believed were unnecessary, if America just kept flexing its muscles, the logic went, Iran’s regime would collapse.

    Bush knew full well that what Iran was proposing was total lip service from Iran, there were a few top military officials and Ex-prisoners that testified on the record to the U.S. Intelligence commitee with insider knowledge that Iran or better the top regime or Mullahs can NOT and should NOT be trusted.

    Obama has certainly made mistakes in the Middle East. But behind his drive for an Iranian nuclear deal is the effort to make American foreign policy “solvent” again by bringing America’s ends into alignment with its means. That means recognizing that the U.S. cannot force Iran into total submission, either economically or militarily. U.S. tried that in Iraq. It codifies the limits of American power. For the Republican right, that’s a deeply unwelcome realization.

    I'm sorry, but I'm just not buying that. I don't believe Obama for one second cares about the real outcome of this deal, so long as he himself can reap the benefits of a quasi-successful deal. Also, if Obama is that committed to solving this crisis, if he cares about our allies, if he cares to achieve something historical and something that could make us and the region safe, then why was there Not a single mention about our 4 hostages that The Iranians are holding.

    Saeed Abedini, Robert Levinson, Amir Hekmati and Jason Rezaian

    Not a word from the president, not a word to the families, not a word out in the public and right in the face of the Iranians. Had Obama said, absolutely NO negotiations until these men are set free and walked away, I would have given him respect, but he didn't and these men, our men are sitting rotting away in an Iranian prison as, and let's be frank about it, they are human shields! Both Obama and Kerry lost the little respect I had when they said nothing. Even when Obama was asked about the Hostages, he got defensive, why? If he cares so much, he should show his anger and frustration towards the Iranians and not to the media for asking a perfectly legitimate question. Remember, the Dems are still not in unison and perplexed about going with the president, if it were so great, there wouldn't be any apprehensions whatsoever, but they know, all in all its a very bad deal Obama is not running again, many of the Dems are looking to be reelected in their districts and are deeply thinking about possible ramifications if this deal goes bad and it will.

    So it's a global conspiracy. Even conservatives like David Cameron and Angela Merkel are in on it. All of them witches!

    If something goes down,they don't have to worry about the fallout.

    Nice cut and paste from the Heritage Foundation. It's just the same polemic more eloquently expressed than you are capable of. But it doesn't add any legitimacy to your rant.

    My, my, my, you keep trying so hard. I told you, comedy doesn't suit liberals, just leave it. Also, I never said, I wrote it. One more thing, you and the other libs whine about sources, when I put it up, then it's not to....ahem, your liberal liking. I can't stop laughing, but I love the fact that libs try. Can't hate you guys for that. ROFL!

    (And really, you should cite your sources. You are a journalist, after all.) Or you can look them up yourself. When you guys cut and paste, I do the same, or I guess it only applies to libs as usual. Lol.

    What the hell is wrong with you? Obviously you know we can't just cut off the U.S. economy from half of world trade. Look, some people sold you on some half-baked "plan" that you never thought to question. Now you're stuck alone on a message board trying to guess what the details of the "plan" are.

    I am???

    And apparently there's a footnote that says the U.S. economy gets destroyed overnight, and it's all for a statement, but enough about that.

    You think so?

    Maybe you should stick to the cut and paste comments about Obama and liberals. You're well out of your depth on this one.

    If it's good for the goose.....ROFL

    Posted in: Obama expects better U.S.-Israel ties after Iran deal in place

  • -2

    bass4funk

    Taken from a widely discredited AP story (also subsequently discredited by AP itself) that opponents of the deal have manipulated.

    Discredited by nuclear experts as well as IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano:

    That was one report and there were more scientists that confirmed that the deal was a complete scam. The media has always fought tooth and nail and has an agenda and a complete interest in Obama and this deal, so no surprise there. They have always been irresponsible, bias and beyond corrupt and if they can find ANYTHING that would give a shrewd of doubt to anyone that is against this treaty, they will do anything to make anyone look bad that is against it.

    Although some supporters of the Iran nuclear deal sought to discredit the initial Associated Press report, the news organization stands by its reporting and the Obama administration has not denied the story.

    This unprecedented arrangement, which would involve Iranian personnel providing photos, videos, and environmental samples from the Parchin military complex to the IAEA, has stoked concerns that the IAEA investigation of Iran’s past work on developing nuclear warheads will amount to little more than a public relations exercise.

    The IAEA, as well as intelligence agencies from the U.S. and other countries, long have suspected that Iranian scientists experimented with high-explosive detonators for nuclear arms at Parchin and conducted additional weapons-related work at other sites.

    Despite repeated promises to fully cooperate with the IAEA’s investigation, Iran has blocked IAEA inspectors from looking at the Parchin facilities and has razed buildings and stripped away large quantities of earth, further fueling suspicions that Tehran is concealing evidence of past nuclear weapons work.

    The disturbing news that the IAEA has agreed to outsource some of its responsibilities to Iran has amplified concerns that questions about Iran’s past efforts to develop nuclear warheads will be swept under the rug in a rush to lift sanctions.

    Fred Fleitz, who has worked on Iranian nuclear issues at the CIA, State Department, and House Intelligence Committee during a distinguished 25-year government career, has condemned the IAEA’s side deal as a “preposterous and unserious plan to investigate past and ongoing Iranian nuclear-weapons-related activities.”

    The IAEA’s absurd arrangement with Iran is a far cry from “anytime/anywhere” inspections promised by the Obama administration. The final agreement reached at Vienna allows Iran to delay inspections for up to 24 days, and possibly a lot longer if the U.N. Security Council gets involved in deliberations over possible Iranian efforts to delay inspections.

    The IAEA’s ludicrous concessions allowing Iranian personnel to gather possible evidence about past Iranian nuclear weapons experiments set a dangerous precedent for future nuclear inspections.

    Allowing Iran to assume such a prominent role in investigating itself would amount to putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop.

    It's interesting that Boehner is not also roasting David Cameron and Angela Merkel, both conservatives. Because this is not about common sense, it's about going after Obama.

    Why should he??? Obama is the president (one would think otherwise, but...) of the US and he was the one that made this disastrous deal and has to answer to his constituents and the people, NOT the foreign leaders.

    Decline to do business with Russia, China, and parts of Europe? Not to mention other countries who would be so pissed off at the US they wouldn't go along with any plan?

    Yeah, so what? It might be painful for a time being, but at least we wouldn't give in to principles and make a huge statement that there is no way we will allow Iran to have a bomb or threaten our allies in the region.

    The entire world economy would collapse overnight.

    Gee, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd didn't care, don't give me that!

    Come back when you have a "plan" that doesn't include that buried in the footnotes.

    I did, but I know Dems care about looking....cool, I think is the word. If Jimmy Fallon approves of it, it's good!

    It's near religion to them.

    And the same goes to the Dems and libs when it comes to Bush...or Atheist belief or some spiritual supernatural...something, something belief..

    Posted in: Obama expects better U.S.-Israel ties after Iran deal in place

  • -2

    bass4funk

    Thanks for proving with that comment that you don't understand the details of the agreement,

    No, that would be the Democrats and libs, particularly Obama and Lurch.

    and are just opposing it because it came from Obama's government.

    Even if Bush were doing it or any other Republican, I would be against it, they would never be that dumb, but if they did, I would object to it all the same.

    Posted in: Obama expects better U.S.-Israel ties after Iran deal in place

  • -2

    bass4funk

    Do you have any idea what effect that would have on the American economy?

    As if Obama cared and it wouldn't be the first time the economy would take a tumble, we would just have to ride out the storm, it's possible, it's feasible.

    Remember, we don't live in a cartoon universe.

    That's why I don't understand why you libs live in it!!

    Obama's realism on this issue is wise:

    For himself and Lurch, I agree.

    The ironic thing is that Obama and the republicans are on the exact same page in this regard, but the Republican hatred of president blackenstein won't allow them to actually admit that this deal achieves that goal.

    The goal that Iran can inspect themselves, the absolute despicable and nuttiest thing to come about since Kerry announced he was running for president.

    Posted in: Obama expects better U.S.-Israel ties after Iran deal in place

  • -1

    bass4funk

    Glad that little girl wasn't my child running, because I would've pried those scissors from that Woman's hands and chased her with them! Unbelievable some people!

    Posted in: Woman attacks 8-year-old girl with scissors in supermarket parking lot

  • -2

    bass4funk

    So you confirm you used to be the chairman of a major corporation.

    Never said that.

    Those people (and you) have multimillionaire yearly salaries.

    Never said that.

    Also, your stocks. You should be worth at least 100 million.

    Never said that.

    Donald Trump is a lot more charismatic alternative to democratic candidate than McCain or Romney were in previous elections. His pro side is that he doesn't like small talk, he wants to get the things done, has the courage to say things that aren't pleasant to hear. That means he will probably be a tough negotiator. On the other side, however, there is very little subtlety and political correctness in him. That's everything but good in maintaining foreign relations. Also I'd expect him to force his own vision, rather than participate in the public debate (this is the bad side of not liking small talk). He'd be probably willing to throw all of Obama's work to the trash and deal harshly with the illegal immigration. That does remind me of Nixon to an extent. Still, it's only my speculation.

    I completely agree.

    Posted in: Trump dumps insults on questioners; insists on control

  • -2

    bass4funk

    Talking about Iran getting nukes doesn't make your specific proposal any more or less credible.

    Any SANE person on this planet that thinks Iran wants peace and is trying to be responsible and reliable future friend and ally is on crack, pure and simple

    It's actually just sidestepping the credibility issue entirely. In previous posts you've admitted that we will lose Russia and China (at the very least) on the sanctions, yet you haven't explained how your policy of sanctions can still work given that fact.

    I did so, so many times and I get tired of repeating them. Again, you make it tougher, as tough and as painful you can make the sanctions and increase them if you must, if the others drop there's, then you can impose a blockade and decline to do business with ANY country that does give aid to the country. There are always other alternatives, but you don't give the country a match so that it makes it easier for them to light the fuse.

    Are you able to address that issue specifically?

    I just did.

    I have no problem hearing a better plan but when your plan is challenged you start talking about how much you dislike liberals and the result is that you never address the flaws in your plan so naturally people will just table it and move on.

    And yet, you keep coming back and jumping on the only viable and logical solution, but being the dovish, hippie, spineless bunch liberals are, they have just given Iran the match and the key to WWIII. Because Obama, Lurch and the weak Dems that would fall on the sword for Obama NO matter right or wrong have unlocked Pandora's box with this. You Dems and libs are nuts if you think Israel and the Sunni's are just going to sit back and wait, absolutely off. Regardless of how dumb and irresponsible this thing is, they don't have to stand for it, nor should they. I just truly feel very sorry for the Iranian people in general because they have these idiot religious Mullahs that could give a rats ass whether the country lives or dies, as long as they follow their sick prophecy. Because the Saudis have their Nukes ready for pick up in Pakistan and the Israelis have a few hundred of their own and they will wipe the county off the map into oblivion and it doesn't matter what libs think what they want or how it should be, they don't live in that region and the ultimate and absolute final say on this matter are the people that feel most threatened and the life of the Iranian people are in the hands of the Mullahs, they will determine the fate of their country. Israel as well as the Sunnis want to exist and if anyone thinks it won't vaporize that country, really doesn't understand anything.

    Posted in: Obama expects better U.S.-Israel ties after Iran deal in place

  • -2

    bass4funk

    What alternative? The GOP has no alternative, so there is no comparison to be made.

    That's the point. You don't compromise with radical Islamists...NEVER, you just squeeze them until they lose the desire to ever want to acquire nuclear weapons.

    Strange, please stop. Everyone knows that this deal is a s...... deal. it's just embarrassing. The problem was it was too obvious that Obama and Lurch wanted nothing more than to get a Nobel Prize and the chance for Kerry to take another shot at the presidency. A story, a legend, something for the history books, yes, but not in the way they want. As the liberal AP reported, basically, Iran would be allowed to inspect itself and that's a good thing, seriously??!!? I have to say, even the more liberal press are NOW finally waking up and agreeing this is a crap of a treaty.

    But like I said, when it comes to the point when they do declare they have weapons, at least we can count on Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and even Egypt to wipe that country off the map and it will be a astronomical "I told you so" Libs never learn, we went through this with Clinton and the North Koreans. They promised and promised, signed every deal and then what happens, in 2000 they announce to the world, they have nukes. The same exact scenario with Iran will pop up as well. Libs are completely detached and devoid of any type of mental rationalization what's at stake. I'm not at all surprised.

    Posted in: Obama expects better U.S.-Israel ties after Iran deal in place

  • -2

    bass4funk

    How is 'enough' an answer to whether or not it's increased or decreased.

    Meaning, it's no one's business, but enough to never worry about my life.

    You are the Chairman of a major corporation and are not a millionaire?

    I am now self-employed and well off.

    Posted in: Trump dumps insults on questioners; insists on control

  • -3

    bass4funk

    You said that your kids are going to inherent your millions. You are a multimillionaire.

    I never said, I'm a multimillionaire.

    You have a big corporation that employs many many people.

    Something like that.

    You are a job creator, aren't you? You need to pay a low tax rate in order to reinvest your millions that is not taxed and create more jobs for the middle class. Your corporation is an engine of capitalism.

    No, lots of new millionaires. Didn't you make more millions than you already had?

    No comment.

    Hillary? Now you are saying being rich is bad? Which is it?

    No, Hillary has more money.

    Has Obama helped you make more millions or not?

    That depends.

    Posted in: Trump dumps insults on questioners; insists on control

  • -3

    bass4funk

    Really? Yes.

    I don't know any people having trouble paying premiums for ObamaCare (which was a Republican idea).

    I do.

    You are a multimillionaire, yet,

    I never said that. I think you're confusing me with Hillary.

    I'm surprised to hear you are in direct contact with such people.

    The world is full of surprises. Bernie Sanders running surprised me totally!

    So you are rich enough to not have health insurance and just pay cash. Hasn't Obama made you richer?

    Around the Mulberry Bush again??

    Under Obama more riches have been made. Many new millionaires. Aren't you one of the fortunate ones under Obama?

    For the people that invested, maybe a few, for the people that didn't, NO.

    Have you ever met a Saudi prince? How about the Saudi king?

    I do like Saudi Food.

    That depends? What do you mean?

    It means, it depends.

    Who is better for your finances? Trump or Obama?

    If Trump becomes president and after the first 4 years, I will let you know, promise!

    Posted in: Trump dumps insults on questioners; insists on control

  • -3

    bass4funk

    That list doesn't really apply to me and hasn't made any difference in my life. What do you care about ObamaCare?

    I care about people getting hosed by this president and I know a lot of people that have a problem paying their premiums and 4 people that just can't afford it at all, so they just decided to pay as they go.

    You are rich. Don't you just pay the hospital bill by cash like a rich Saudi prince would?

    Yes

    how has Obama affected you? Did his presidency make you less rich?

    No comment

    "I already had money before Obama." How about now? More? Less?

    Enough

    But he wants to tax you more personally. Do you think Trump will make you more or less rich?

    That depends...

    But you always talk about it. Also, you say you people who are Fortune 500 CEOs. Friends of yours. What do they say about Trump?

    The same as what I said before, please scroll up to see previous comments.

    Posted in: Trump dumps insults on questioners; insists on control

  • -3

    bass4funk

    I wonder if you actually believe that this response matches the question, or if you are deliberately trying to be obtuse.

    Basically, it's no one's business, just let's say "enough."

    Posted in: Trump dumps insults on questioners; insists on control

  • -4

    bass4funk

    The GOP don't have a workable alternative, just some pipe dream where everyone in the world does what we want when we want it, which means their plan can be anything and it always works and we don't need allies.

    Better than the alternative that Iran has a bomb and decides to go nuts on destroying what it sees as a religious prophecy. The good thing about all this in actuality is that, at least the next president has the power to null and void the deal and it's NOT etched in stone. Thank God for something.

    Then if you question their plan you're any idiot because how could you be against always getting what you want? Sheesh!

    Ok, so we just let Iran inspect themselves and trust that what they say to the IAEA is valid, honest and upfront?? You bought that line, hook and sinker!

    Posted in: Obama expects better U.S.-Israel ties after Iran deal in place

  • -3

    bass4funk

    But if the rest of the world isn't respecting them, then what will that do?

    I already said.

    Really you're just parroting the same thing the US has been doing until now - which isn't working.

    Yeah, libs said the same thing about getting the Soviets open up.

    You mean like they've agreed to do with this deal?

    You know, this is why I get completely amazed by the feeble minds of libs. When someone brings facts, you guys completely blow it off, dismiss it and then when you don't have written facts, then you guys gripe and whine and demand that you are shown facts. So I have come to the conclusion that facts ONLY matter to libs, if they agree it to be factual, if NOT, then it's not facts.

    Anyway, I already laid it out, but please scroll up. There are about 15 sights that are NOT allowed to be inspected, also, what the f... Sense does it make that Iran is allowed to verify their own nuclear facilities, are you serious???! That doesn't make sense whatsoever. Also, the Americans, Japanese and The Israeli scientists are not allowed to go in and verify any of the sights? I'm usually a very calm, cool, collected guy, but this just infuriates me to no end! No one with half a brain buys this, but as Dr. Carson said, Washington probably already had half of their brains removed.

    Neither will anyone else - which is the whole point of this deal. If you truly believe what you are saying, you should be supporting the deal, not opposing it.

    That is just utter liberal BS to the max!

    If you were truly non-partisan as you say, you would be supporting it.

    Because I'm a non-partisan, I vehemently object to the deal.

    But the fact is, the faux news bubble has told you it's wrong, so you believe them without question, without actually looking into the actual details of the deal.

    Ahhhhh, I was referring to the AP report. Please Strange, you and the other libs, please turn off your selective reading minds and check what the AP wrote, this has nothing to do with Fox. 436 more days until the madness of the Tyrant is finally over!!

    Posted in: Obama expects better U.S.-Israel ties after Iran deal in place

  • -2

    bass4funk

    "But he did enough and that bitterness is still in my mouth" Like what?

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/12/23/president-obamas-top-10-constitutional-violations-of-2013/

    https://www.committeeforjustice.org/content/25-violations-law-president-obama-and-his-administration

    "I already had money before Obama." How about now? More? Less?

    Enough.

    So you no longer worship Trump? You really did before.

    No, I just love his boldness and how he can't be bought, doesn't play to the tune of the politicians and especially the media. Not worship, but admiration.

    Posted in: Trump dumps insults on questioners; insists on control

View all