1983
 

On 11/22/13, 8:21 AM, Tim wrote:
On Friday, November 22, 2013 5:15:43 AM UTC-6, F.O.A.D. wrote:
The answer is, there wasn't,

because, well, you know...a white guy was president back then.


Oh really, Harry? Is that truly your mode of reasoning?


Indeed, Tim. The controlling influences in your political party hate the
fact that a black man is POTUS. They make it obvious every day.

--
Religion: together we can find the cure.

1983
 

On Friday, November 22, 2013 8:18:06 AM UTC-6, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 11/22/13, 8:21 AM, Tim wrote:

On Friday, November 22, 2013 5:15:43 AM UTC-6, F.O.A.D. wrote:

The answer is, there wasn't,



because, well, you know...a white guy was president back then.





Oh really, Harry? Is that truly your mode of reasoning?





Indeed, Tim. The controlling influences in your political party hate the

fact that a black man is POTUS. They make it obvious every day.



Not really my political party, Harry. and I don't see how 'they' make racial prejudice obvious every day, as you say, or any day as I would say.

1983
 

Hank© wrote:
On 11/22/2013 8:21 AM, Tim wrote:
On Friday, November 22, 2013 5:15:43 AM UTC-6, F.O.A.D. wrote:
The answer is, there wasn't,

because, well, you know...a white guy was president back then.


Oh really, Harry? Is that truly your mode of reasoning?


I'd love to see a black republican president, just to watch Harry's
head explode. Herman Cain or Bill Cosby would work for me. ;-)

Allen West would send him to his grave!

1983
 

F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 11/22/13, 8:21 AM, Tim wrote:
On Friday, November 22, 2013 5:15:43 AM UTC-6, F.O.A.D. wrote:
The answer is, there wasn't,

because, well, you know...a white guy was president back then.


Oh really, Harry? Is that truly your mode of reasoning?


Indeed, Tim. The controlling influences in your political party hate
the fact that a black man is POTUS. They make it obvious every day.

The "black' POTUS who refuses to acknowledge his WHITE mother is a liar
and losing friends on his own side daily.

1983
 

In article , says...

Apparently the lives of Marines don?t matter when a Republican is
president?because, if you look in a mirror and say Benghazi three times,
the 241 Marines who died in Beirut ask why there was no Republican
outrage in 1983.

Different time, different situation, different outcome. The results of the Beruit bombing
changed the ways the Marines operated. Bengahzi has been brushed under the rug instead of
being an lesson.

1983
 

In article , says...

On 11/21/13, 11:45 PM, KC wrote:
On 11/21/2013 9:59 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/21/2013 9:46 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:


Apparently the lives of Marines don?t matter when a Republican is
president?because, if you look in a mirror and say Benghazi three times,
the 241 Marines who died in Beirut ask why there was no Republican
outrage in 1983.


Ask the Lebanese who described "flying Volkswagens" as the USS New
Jersey blasted areas with her 16-inch guns. Largest naval bombardment
since Korea.



One of my best friends died in Beruit... to have a pig mother ****er
coward like krause disrespect for his internet play is just enough to
make me puke...


The question was, why wasn't there Republican outrage in 1983 (meaning
elected Republicans going nutso, holding endless hearings, holding up
presidential appointments, et cetera). The answer is, there wasn't,
because, well, you know...a white guy was president back then.

Because the administration didn't sweep it under a rug, require that the people involved sing
NDAs and hide all of the participants to prevent them from testifying in Congress.