Wow, FoxNews and their minions have been so full of it.

[awesome guy]

Chuck, the reason you never made it to combat is because you'd have done more to endanger the entire troop than you would've done to help. They knew this about you the day you enlisted. You weren't looking to serve...you were looking for a meal ticket. And that's why you mopped so many floors.

Thanks for serving and being a leech. You continue to do all of us very proud.

I could have made it anywhere I wanted in the military. I scored a 89 on my ASVAB the day after I turned 17. At 18 and a few months, I finished third out of eighteen in my A School and had my choice of orders. Many of the guys I was competing woth there were well into their 20s. And also, I have a 137 IQ and just completed a 90 Credit Master's Degree program. Again, I could have made it as far as I desired in the Navy. I instead became aware fairly early on that what was happening there had little to do with defending my country so I moved on. I served one year with Americorps and did more for the greater good there than my entire time in the military. You're quite welcome for that service too.

Now put your tin foil hat back on, grab your gun and continue to cry about the way things used to be, or at least the way you like to think they used to be. The rest of the world is moving on and moving forward. That's the problem with all you traditionalists, you're always on the wrong side of history. Just like you were wrong about Benghazi we now know for certain. I for one Really Really hope you all continue to bring it up, especially considering what we recently learned about that night.

WOW, 137, just like Al Gore

[USN_Hokie]

Chuck, the reason you never made it to combat is because you'd have done more to endanger the entire troop than you would've done to help. They knew this about you the day you enlisted. You weren't looking to serve...you were looking for a meal ticket. And that's why you mopped so many floors.

Thanks for serving and being a leech. You continue to do all of us very proud.

I could have made it anywhere I wanted in the military. I scored a 89 on my ASVAB the day after I turned 17. At 18 and a few months, I finished third out of eighteen in my A School and had my choice of orders. Many of the guys I was competing woth there were well into their 20s. And also, I have a 137 IQ and just completed a 90 Credit Master's Degree program. Again, I could have made it as far as I desired in the Navy. I instead became aware fairly early on that what was happening there had little to do with defending my country so I moved on. I served one year with Americorps and did more for the greater good there than my entire time in the military. You're quite welcome for that service too.

Now put your tin foil hat back on, grab your gun and continue to cry about the way things used to be, or at least the way you like to think they used to be. The rest of the world is moving on and moving forward. That's the problem with all you traditionalists, you're always on the wrong side of history. Just like you were wrong about Benghazi we now know for certain. I for one Really Really hope you all continue to bring it up, especially considering what we recently learned about that night.

This officially makes chuck the Joe Biden of UWS.

[oaktonhokie]

Wow, you are really smart, according to you.

The receptical was very smart too. He was kind enough to share his body mass index, his sexual proclivities with his primary person, his ability to ride a bike, and lots of information about his personal life and his kids.

Can we expect the same riveting information about you?

Please share. 137, wow.

Chuck, the reason you never made it to combat is because you'd have done more to endanger the entire troop than you would've done to help. They knew this about you the day you enlisted. You weren't looking to serve...you were looking for a meal ticket. And that's why you mopped so many floors.

Thanks for serving and being a leech. You continue to do all of us very proud.

I could have made it anywhere I wanted in the military. I scored a 89 on my ASVAB the day after I turned 17. At 18 and a few months, I finished third out of eighteen in my A School and had my choice of orders. Many of the guys I was competing woth there were well into their 20s. And also, I have a 137 IQ and just completed a 90 Credit Master's Degree program. Again, I could have made it as far as I desired in the Navy. I instead became aware fairly early on that what was happening there had little to do with defending my country so I moved on. I served one year with Americorps and did more for the greater good there than my entire time in the military. You're quite welcome for that service too.

Now put your tin foil hat back on, grab your gun and continue to cry about the way things used to be, or at least the way you like to think they used to be. The rest of the world is moving on and moving forward. That's the problem with all you traditionalists, you're always on the wrong side of history. Just like you were wrong about Benghazi we now know for certain. I for one Really Really hope you all continue to bring it up, especially considering what we recently learned about that night.

[chuckd4vt]

Wow, you are really smart, according to you.

The receptical was very smart too. He was kind enough to share his body mass index, his sexual proclivities with his primary person, his ability to ride a bike, and lots of information about his personal life and his kids.

Can we expect the same riveting information about you?

Please share. 137, wow.

Chuck, the reason you never made it to combat is because you'd have done more to endanger the entire troop than you would've done to help. They knew this about you the day you enlisted. You weren't looking to serve...you were looking for a meal ticket. And that's why you mopped so many floors.

Thanks for serving and being a leech. You continue to do all of us very proud.

I could have made it anywhere I wanted in the military. I scored a 89 on my ASVAB the day after I turned 17. At 18 and a few months, I finished third out of eighteen in my A School and had my choice of orders. Many of the guys I was competing woth there were well into their 20s. And also, I have a 137 IQ and just completed a 90 Credit Master's Degree program. Again, I could have made it as far as I desired in the Navy. I instead became aware fairly early on that what was happening there had little to do with defending my country so I moved on. I served one year with Americorps and did more for the greater good there than my entire time in the military. You're quite welcome for that service too.

Now put your tin foil hat back on, grab your gun and continue to cry about the way things used to be, or at least the way you like to think they used to be. The rest of the world is moving on and moving forward. That's the problem with all you traditionalists, you're always on the wrong side of history. Just like you were wrong about Benghazi we now know for certain. I for one Really Really hope you all continue to bring it up, especially considering what we recently learned about that night.

Only if you're lucky.

[awesome guy]

Wow, you are really smart, according to you.

The receptical was very smart too. He was kind enough to share his body mass index, his sexual proclivities with his primary person, his ability to ride a bike, and lots of information about his personal life and his kids.

Can we expect the same riveting information about you?

Please share. 137, wow.

Chuck, the reason you never made it to combat is because you'd have done more to endanger the entire troop than you would've done to help. They knew this about you the day you enlisted. You weren't looking to serve...you were looking for a meal ticket. And that's why you mopped so many floors.

Thanks for serving and being a leech. You continue to do all of us very proud.

I could have made it anywhere I wanted in the military. I scored a 89 on my ASVAB the day after I turned 17. At 18 and a few months, I finished third out of eighteen in my A School and had my choice of orders. Many of the guys I was competing woth there were well into their 20s. And also, I have a 137 IQ and just completed a 90 Credit Master's Degree program. Again, I could have made it as far as I desired in the Navy. I instead became aware fairly early on that what was happening there had little to do with defending my country so I moved on. I served one year with Americorps and did more for the greater good there than my entire time in the military. You're quite welcome for that service too.

Now put your tin foil hat back on, grab your gun and continue to cry about the way things used to be, or at least the way you like to think they used to be. The rest of the world is moving on and moving forward. That's the problem with all you traditionalists, you're always on the wrong side of history. Just like you were wrong about Benghazi we now know for certain. I for one Really Really hope you all continue to bring it up, especially considering what we recently learned about that night.

Only if your lucky.

yeah. You sure did well on that FB link to answer the 5 questions and get an IQ score. Must be a stud in the sack too. Impressive.

[ip_law-hokie]

To this day, I'm still unclear what their ultimate "gotcha" was/is. Why does it matter?

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/wo ... ?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.

The day the attacks happened, my views had nothing to do with Fox News whatsoever.
It went like this:

See the News?
Gosh! Our Embassy was attacked.
Yeah. The WH is saying it is due to a video.
What video?
I dunno. Some video.
Did the president notice today's date? The attack was 9/11.
Seems like the obvious reason. Anniversary of 9/11.
Yup.
Video?
Yeah, I know, right?
Have you seen the video?
Nope.

The simple answer is the simple answer.
Video. LMAO.
c'mon, man.

People had been protesting outside of and attacking the embassy in Cairo that entire day. As Hillary said, "what does it matter" anyhow? I suppose some guys were walking home drunk, heard about the video, joined the party, and attacked in Benghazi. Some guys may have lost a loved one at the hands of our military. Some might have actually watched the video. And some probably just heard about the video, broke up with his girlfriend, and wanted to fight. It was an unorganized mob and from the sound of it, the video contribjted was a rallying cry. Some Remner the Maine type nonsense. I frankly don't care what the motives were, but FoxNews has obsessed about this thing and their viewers have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

[Major Kong]

To this day, I'm still unclear what their ultimate "gotcha" was/is. Why does it matter? At this point what difference does it make?

FTFY

[cwtcr hokie]

yes, keep repeating the Hillary line, great idea

who cares if some americans got killed at our embassy, what does it matter????

To this day, I'm still unclear what their ultimate "gotcha" was/is. Why does it matter?

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/wo ... ?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.

The day the attacks happened, my views had nothing to do with Fox News whatsoever.
It went like this:

See the News?
Gosh! Our Embassy was attacked.
Yeah. The WH is saying it is due to a video.
What video?
I dunno. Some video.
Did the president notice today's date? The attack was 9/11.
Seems like the obvious reason. Anniversary of 9/11.
Yup.
Video?
Yeah, I know, right?
Have you seen the video?
Nope.

The simple answer is the simple answer.
Video. LMAO.
c'mon, man.

People had been protesting outside of and attacking the embassy in Cairo that entire day. As Hillary said, "what does it matter" anyhow? I suppose some guys were walking home drunk, heard about the video, joined the party, and attacked in Benghazi. Some guys may have lost a loved one at the hands of our military. Some might have actually watched the video. And some probably just heard about the video, broke up with his girlfriend, and wanted to fight. It was an unorganized mob and from the sound of it, the video contribjted was a rallying cry. Some Remner the Maine type nonsense. I frankly don't care what the motives were, but FoxNews has obsessed about this thing and their viewers have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

[ip_law-hokie]

OK.

yes, keep repeating the Hillary line, great idea

who cares if some americans got killed at our embassy, what does it matter????

To this day, I'm still unclear what their ultimate "gotcha" was/is. Why does it matter?

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/wo ... ?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.

The day the attacks happened, my views had nothing to do with Fox News whatsoever.
It went like this:

See the News?
Gosh! Our Embassy was attacked.
Yeah. The WH is saying it is due to a video.
What video?
I dunno. Some video.
Did the president notice today's date? The attack was 9/11.
Seems like the obvious reason. Anniversary of 9/11.
Yup.
Video?
Yeah, I know, right?
Have you seen the video?
Nope.

The simple answer is the simple answer.
Video. LMAO.
c'mon, man.

People had been protesting outside of and attacking the embassy in Cairo that entire day. As Hillary said, "what does it matter" anyhow? I suppose some guys were walking home drunk, heard about the video, joined the party, and attacked in Benghazi. Some guys may have lost a loved one at the hands of our military. Some might have actually watched the video. And some probably just heard about the video, broke up with his girlfriend, and wanted to fight. It was an unorganized mob and from the sound of it, the video contribjted was a rallying cry. Some Remner the Maine type nonsense. I frankly don't care what the motives were, but FoxNews has obsessed about this thing and their viewers have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

[chuckd4vt]

To this day, I'm still unclear what their ultimate "gotcha" was/is. Why does it matter?

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/wo ... ?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.

The day the attacks happened, my views had nothing to do with Fox News whatsoever.
It went like this:

See the News?
Gosh! Our Embassy was attacked.
Yeah. The WH is saying it is due to a video.
What video?
I dunno. Some video.
Did the president notice today's date? The attack was 9/11.
Seems like the obvious reason. Anniversary of 9/11.
Yup.
Video?
Yeah, I know, right?
Have you seen the video?
Nope.

The simple answer is the simple answer.
Video. LMAO.
c'mon, man.

People had been protesting outside of and attacking the embassy in Cairo that entire day. As Hillary said, "what does it matter" anyhow? I suppose some guys were walking home drunk, heard about the video, joined the party, and attacked in Benghazi. Some guys may have lost a loved one at the hands of our military. Some might have actually watched the video. And some probably just heard about the video, broke up with his girlfriend, and wanted to fight. It was an unorganized mob and from the sound of it, the video contribjted was a rallying cry. Some Remner the Maine type nonsense. I frankly don't care what the motives were, but FoxNews has obsessed about this thing and their viewers have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

FoxNews told them to be upset about it, and they did what they were told. The rest of the world was Mehhh about it. I hate that those 4 guys died, but Americans have been killed daily as this global War on Terror has raged on.

I just don't get it either. In hindsight, security should have been beefed up, but that can be said for every instance American service people have died in this war.

[awesome guy]

To this day, I'm still unclear what their ultimate "gotcha" was/is. Why does it matter?

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/wo ... ?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.

The day the attacks happened, my views had nothing to do with Fox News whatsoever.
It went like this:

See the News?
Gosh! Our Embassy was attacked.
Yeah. The WH is saying it is due to a video.
What video?
I dunno. Some video.
Did the president notice today's date? The attack was 9/11.
Seems like the obvious reason. Anniversary of 9/11.
Yup.
Video?
Yeah, I know, right?
Have you seen the video?
Nope.

The simple answer is the simple answer.
Video. LMAO.
c'mon, man.

People had been protesting outside of and attacking the embassy in Cairo that entire day. As Hillary said, "what does it matter" anyhow? I suppose some guys were walking home drunk, heard about the video, joined the party, and attacked in Benghazi. Some guys may have lost a loved one at the hands of our military. Some might have actually watched the video. And some probably just heard about the video, broke up with his girlfriend, and wanted to fight. It was an unorganized mob and from the sound of it, the video contribjted was a rallying cry. Some Remner the Maine type nonsense. I frankly don't care what the motives were, but FoxNews has obsessed about this thing and their viewers have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

The "gotcha" is the truth. The truth is the administration lied about the video causing the attack as it was part of an Al Qaeda attack in revenge for drone attacks (in Pakistan as it happens) on their leadership. The other troop is Stevenson was negotiating with these ISIS guys in the other thread, giving them arms and funds. But part is just coming to light now, as Iraq is falling into their hands. It mattered before because Obama was lying to you, me, and the nation about Benghazi to keep is political campaign talking point of beating the terrorists. He could have come clean and said something like "of course they're going to strike back, I'm kicking their butt". But I think they realized the next obvious point is on the drone strikes for which they were retaliating, strikes with collateral damage and in foreign. sovereign entities. He apparently just didn't want to go there, even though he likely would have still dodged the issue.


Of course now, these same guys he was meeting in secret in Libya to fight Syria have changed sights to Iraq and now have Saddam's WMDs. Great job Berry.

[VoiceOfReason]

The R's you say you used to like were built around the Christian Coalition. That doesn't fit into the "the party left me" talk at all. They were much more conservative on social issues then. I find it ironic too that you call others trolls.

Your recollection is a bit different than mine. Yes, Reagan and Bush Daddy came along as the CC was making it's ascent. But the GOP kept things contained in the 80's. The Rs put the CC garbage in their platforms and patted the little Christians on their heads and thanked them for their votes... but they didn't really do anything for them. As long as that was happening, I was fine with the big tent.

Once the CC started taking over the big tent and forcing the GOP to do their bidding... the party left me. And I left the party.

[ip_law-hokie]

To this day, I'm still unclear what their ultimate "gotcha" was/is. Why does it matter?

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/wo ... ?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.

The day the attacks happened, my views had nothing to do with Fox News whatsoever.
It went like this:

See the News?
Gosh! Our Embassy was attacked.
Yeah. The WH is saying it is due to a video.
What video?
I dunno. Some video.
Did the president notice today's date? The attack was 9/11.
Seems like the obvious reason. Anniversary of 9/11.
Yup.
Video?
Yeah, I know, right?
Have you seen the video?
Nope.

The simple answer is the simple answer.
Video. LMAO.
c'mon, man.

People had been protesting outside of and attacking the embassy in Cairo that entire day. As Hillary said, "what does it matter" anyhow? I suppose some guys were walking home drunk, heard about the video, joined the party, and attacked in Benghazi. Some guys may have lost a loved one at the hands of our military. Some might have actually watched the video. And some probably just heard about the video, broke up with his girlfriend, and wanted to fight. It was an unorganized mob and from the sound of it, the video contribjted was a rallying cry. Some Remner the Maine type nonsense. I frankly don't care what the motives were, but FoxNews has obsessed about this thing and their viewers have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

The "gotcha" is the truth. The truth is the administration lied about the video causing the attack as it was part of an Al Qaeda attack in revenge for drone attacks (in Pakistan as it happens) on their leadership. The other troop is Stevenson was negotiating with these ISIS guys in the other thread, giving them arms and funds. But part is just coming to light now, as Iraq is falling into their hands. It mattered before because Obama was lying to you, me, and the nation about Benghazi to keep is political campaign talking point of beating the terrorists. He could have come clean and said something like "of course they're going to strike back, I'm kicking their butt". But I think they realized the next obvious point is on the drone strikes for which they were retaliating, strikes with collateral damage and in foreign. sovereign entities. He apparently just didn't want to go there, even though he likely would have still dodged the issue.


Of course now, these same guys he was meeting in secret in Libya to fight Syria have changed sights to Iraq and now have Saddam's WMDs. Great job Berry.

Thanks. I guess the issue I have is whether one characterizes the attack as an organized terrorist strike, or some random nutjob, doesn't affect how most anyone views the man. I read what you wrote, but still don't see the motivation to lie about it.

And didn't we determine that the guy wasn't highly connected to AQ?

[VoiceOfReason]

Well he's keeps jumping around. First it's that "the party left me" and he'll be happy to vote for republicans as soon as they become more Reagan/Bush I... but that doesn't make sense, unless he's considering Obama to be more like Reagan/Bush I than McCain/Romney (maybe he is?).
Then he admits that his views have changed over the years, which is pretty much my point anyway.

I don't keep jumping around. Different posters keep trying to poke at me from different angles. If you believe all the stuff people say about me, then yes it might seem illogical.

Again, the confusion may be that we saw different things in Reagan/Bush. I saw good leaders, record economic expansion, cutting onerous taxes (70%!) and solid foreign policy. I did not like everything about them... specifically their relationship with the Christian right and their abortion litmus test. But I did favor them over their opposition. Perhaps what you guys liked about Reagan/Bush WAS their association with the Christian right. Back then, the GOP was a more welcoming big tent. Today... not so much.

[awesome guy]

The R's you say you used to like were built around the Christian Coalition. That doesn't fit into the "the party left me" talk at all. They were much more conservative on social issues then. I find it ironic too that you call others trolls.

Your recollection is a bit different than mine. Yes, Reagan and Bush Daddy came along as the CC was making it's ascent. But the GOP kept things contained in the 80's. The Rs put the CC garbage in their platforms and patted the little Christians on their heads and thanked them for their votes... but they didn't really do anything for them. As long as that was happening, I was fine with the big tent.

Once the CC started taking over the big tent and forcing the GOP to do their bidding... the party left me. And I left the party.

They were fighting no fault divorce, the explosion of abortion and fatherless homes. Not sure how anyone would consider that "contained" or want it contained.

[awesome guy]

To this day, I'm still unclear what their ultimate "gotcha" was/is. Why does it matter?

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/wo ... ?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.

The day the attacks happened, my views had nothing to do with Fox News whatsoever.
It went like this:

See the News?
Gosh! Our Embassy was attacked.
Yeah. The WH is saying it is due to a video.
What video?
I dunno. Some video.
Did the president notice today's date? The attack was 9/11.
Seems like the obvious reason. Anniversary of 9/11.
Yup.
Video?
Yeah, I know, right?
Have you seen the video?
Nope.

The simple answer is the simple answer.
Video. LMAO.
c'mon, man.

People had been protesting outside of and attacking the embassy in Cairo that entire day. As Hillary said, "what does it matter" anyhow? I suppose some guys were walking home drunk, heard about the video, joined the party, and attacked in Benghazi. Some guys may have lost a loved one at the hands of our military. Some might have actually watched the video. And some probably just heard about the video, broke up with his girlfriend, and wanted to fight. It was an unorganized mob and from the sound of it, the video contribjted was a rallying cry. Some Remner the Maine type nonsense. I frankly don't care what the motives were, but FoxNews has obsessed about this thing and their viewers have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

The "gotcha" is the truth. The truth is the administration lied about the video causing the attack as it was part of an Al Qaeda attack in revenge for drone attacks (in Pakistan as it happens) on their leadership. The other troop is Stevenson was negotiating with these ISIS guys in the other thread, giving them arms and funds. But part is just coming to light now, as Iraq is falling into their hands. It mattered before because Obama was lying to you, me, and the nation about Benghazi to keep is political campaign talking point of beating the terrorists. He could have come clean and said something like "of course they're going to strike back, I'm kicking their butt". But I think they realized the next obvious point is on the drone strikes for which they were retaliating, strikes with collateral damage and in foreign. sovereign entities. He apparently just didn't want to go there, even though he likely would have still dodged the issue.


Of course now, these same guys he was meeting in secret in Libya to fight Syria have changed sights to Iraq and now have Saddam's WMDs. Great job Berry.

Thanks. I guess the issue I have is whether one characterizes the attack as an organized terrorist strike, or some random nutjob, doesn't affect how most anyone views the man. I read what you wrote, but still don't see the motivation to lie about it.

And didn't we determine that the guy wasn't highly connected to AQ?

The guy was an AQ leader. Not sure how he could be even more connected with Bin Laden.

The motivation is Obama was chastising Romney as a foreign policy light-weight for rightfully pointing out AQ attacking the Libyan embassy. And they doubled down with Candy (for breakfast, lunch, and dinner) Crowley saying Obama got it right when he didn't. Obama felt weak on this, so went with the bold faced lie of youtube video. Plus he didn't want anyone digging deeper and discovering is own Iran-Contra scandal.

[VoiceOfReason]

They were fighting no fault divorce, the explosion of abortion and fatherless homes. Not sure how anyone would consider that "contained" or want it contained.

It was "contained" because nothing really happened. Yeah, they talked about it. And I disagreed with it... but the beauty of it was... they did nothing about it. Just the way I liked it.

At risk of diverting the discussion, why would anyone oppose no fault divorce? Two people don't want to stay married and don't want to pin blame on the other? Yeah, we can't allow that! Much better that mom tells the kids what a jerk dad is and vise versa

[ip_law-hokie]

[/quote]

The guy was an AQ leader. Not sure how he could be even more connected with Bin Laden.

The motivation is Obama was chastising Romney as a foreign policy light-weight for rightfully pointing out AQ attacking the Libyan embassy. And they doubled down with Candy (for breakfast, lunch, and dinner) Crowley saying Obama got it right when he didn't. Obama felt weak on this, so went with the bold faced lie of youtube video. Plus he didn't want anyone digging deeper and discovering is own Iran-Contra scandal.[/quote]

Gotcha.

[awesome guy]

They were fighting no fault divorce, the explosion of abortion and fatherless homes. Not sure how anyone would consider that "contained" or want it contained.

It was "contained" because nothing really happened. Yeah, they talked about it. And I disagreed with it... but the beauty of it was... they did nothing about it. Just the way I liked it.

At risk of diverting the discussion, why would anyone oppose no fault divorce? Two people don't want to stay married and don't want to pin blame on the other? Yeah, we can't allow that! Much better that mom tells the kids what a jerk dad is and vise versa

They fought it and brought up legislation. They just flat out lost on the issue.


I think it's much better they present a valid reason for divorce rather than "we don't want to be married". They should show cause.

[VoiceOfReason]

They fought it and brought up legislation. They just flat out lost on the issue.


I think it's much better they present a valid reason for divorce rather than "we don't want to be married". They should show cause.

Why are you so interested in other people's business? Amazing how conservatives preach getting government out of people's lives... unless the intervention is "good for them" according to their own religious beliefs.

A married couple wants a divorce. So? Let them find their happiness.
Two men want to get married. So? Let them find their happiness.

How does either event effect you? Why do you think your religious beliefs should trump the rights of others to find happiness in their own lives?

[awesome guy]

They fought it and brought up legislation. They just flat out lost on the issue.


I think it's much better they present a valid reason for divorce rather than "we don't want to be married". They should show cause.

Why are you so interested in other people's business? Amazing how conservatives preach getting government out of people's lives... unless the intervention is "good for them" according to their own religious beliefs.

A married couple wants a divorce. So? Let them find their happiness.
Two men want to get married. So? Let them find their happiness.

How does either event effect you? Why do you think your religious beliefs should trump the rights of others to find happiness in their own lives?

because we're on the hook for dealing with the issues the kids face. They're much more likely to be incarcerated and live in poverty. It's an harsh thing for the children to go through, often leading to a lifetime of issues. Best to avoid it. And since we have to pay for the poverty and crime, we have a say in it. There responsibility to be parents trumps their quest for happiness. If they don't want the responsibility, they shouldn't have gotten married in the first place.

[ip_law-hokie]

They fought it and brought up legislation. They just flat out lost on the issue.


I think it's much better they present a valid reason for divorce rather than "we don't want to be married". They should show cause.

Why are you so interested in other people's business? Amazing how conservatives preach getting government out of people's lives... unless the intervention is "good for them" according to their own religious beliefs.

A married couple wants a divorce. So? Let them find their happiness.
Two men want to get married. So? Let them find their happiness.

How does either event effect you? Why do you think your religious beliefs should trump the rights of others to find happiness in their own lives?

because we're on the hook for dealing with the issues the kids face. They're much more likely to be incarcerated and live in poverty. It's an harsh thing for the children to go through, often leading to a lifetime of issues. Best to avoid it. And since we have to pay for the poverty and crime, we have a say in it. There responsibility to be parents trumps their quest for happiness. If they don't want the responsibility, they shouldn't have gotten married in the first place.

In NY before no-fault, couples used to stage fake extra-marital bedroom affairs and take pictures. Kind of silly, eh?

[awesome guy]

They fought it and brought up legislation. They just flat out lost on the issue.


I think it's much better they present a valid reason for divorce rather than "we don't want to be married". They should show cause.

Why are you so interested in other people's business? Amazing how conservatives preach getting government out of people's lives... unless the intervention is "good for them" according to their own religious beliefs.

A married couple wants a divorce. So? Let them find their happiness.
Two men want to get married. So? Let them find their happiness.

How does either event effect you? Why do you think your religious beliefs should trump the rights of others to find happiness in their own lives?

because we're on the hook for dealing with the issues the kids face. They're much more likely to be incarcerated and live in poverty. It's an harsh thing for the children to go through, often leading to a lifetime of issues. Best to avoid it. And since we have to pay for the poverty and crime, we have a say in it. There responsibility to be parents trumps their quest for happiness. If they don't want the responsibility, they shouldn't have gotten married in the first place.

In NY before no-fault, couples used to stage fake extra-marital bedroom affairs and take pictures. Kind of silly, eh?

extremely selfish if they have kids. The minority of people going to such lengths to skirt their responsibility doesn't justify giving an easy escape to everyone else. They could not get married in the first place if they can't hack it.

[ip_law-hokie]

They fought it and brought up legislation. They just flat out lost on the issue.


I think it's much better they present a valid reason for divorce rather than "we don't want to be married". They should show cause.

Why are you so interested in other people's business? Amazing how conservatives preach getting government out of people's lives... unless the intervention is "good for them" according to their own religious beliefs.

A married couple wants a divorce. So? Let them find their happiness.
Two men want to get married. So? Let them find their happiness.

How does either event effect you? Why do you think your religious beliefs should trump the rights of others to find happiness in their own lives?

because we're on the hook for dealing with the issues the kids face. They're much more likely to be incarcerated and live in poverty. It's an harsh thing for the children to go through, often leading to a lifetime of issues. Best to avoid it. And since we have to pay for the poverty and crime, we have a say in it. There responsibility to be parents trumps their quest for happiness. If they don't want the responsibility, they shouldn't have gotten married in the first place.

In NY before no-fault, couples used to stage fake extra-marital bedroom affairs and take pictures. Kind of silly, eh?

extremely selfish if they have kids. The minority of people going to such lengths to skirt their responsibility doesn't justify giving an easy escape to everyone else. They could not get married in the first place if they can't hack it.

I actually support your sentiment, but you can't legislate how consenting adults choose to live. It's an antiquated notion of the same ilk as dry counties and sodomy laws.

[hokie80]

They fought it and brought up legislation. They just flat out lost on the issue.


I think it's much better they present a valid reason for divorce rather than "we don't want to be married". They should show cause.

Why are you so interested in other people's business? Amazing how conservatives preach getting government out of people's lives... unless the intervention is "good for them" according to their own religious beliefs.

A married couple wants a divorce. So? Let them find their happiness.
Two men want to get married. So? Let them find their happiness.

How does either event effect you? Why do you think your religious beliefs should trump the rights of others to find happiness in their own lives?

because we're on the hook for dealing with the issues the kids face. They're much more likely to be incarcerated and live in poverty. It's an harsh thing for the children to go through, often leading to a lifetime of issues. Best to avoid it. And since we have to pay for the poverty and crime, we have a say in it. There responsibility to be parents trumps their quest for happiness. If they don't want the responsibility, they shouldn't have gotten married in the first place.

In NY before no-fault, couples used to stage fake extra-marital bedroom affairs and take pictures. Kind of silly, eh?

extremely selfish if they have kids. The minority of people going to such lengths to skirt their responsibility doesn't justify giving an easy escape to everyone else. They could not get married in the first place if they can't hack it.

My first wife and I did a no fault. We both realized we made a mistake and agreed to divorce. It was indeed the best thing for both of us. Granted, we didn't have kids. But why would anyone want to stay in a bad situation that would only get worse by being forced to stay married.

And frankly, it's none of your business anyway.