AmberCutie's Forum
An adult community for cam models and members to discuss all the things!

ACF 2012 Presidential Election Poll

  • ** WARNING - ACF CONTAINS ADULT CONTENT **
    Only persons aged 18 or over may read or post to the forums, without regard to whether an adult actually owns the registration or parental/guardian permission. AmberCutie's Forum (ACF) is for use by adults only and contains adult content. By continuing to use this site you are confirming that you are at least 18 years of age.

2012 U.S. Presidential Poll Vote

  • Obama

    Votes: 109 66.5%
  • Romney

    Votes: 27 16.5%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 6 3.7%
  • Obligatory Other

    Votes: 22 13.4%

  • Total voters
    164
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm not sure if you'll be able to get through all this harsh reality Boce, but do try to read to the end. There's something important there. My apologies in advance for not being able to post a 1 minute Fox news soundbite, but sometimes it's better to examine things in detail.
http://www.americanprogress.org/iss...omats-national-security-and-the-house-budget/

In 1985 four off-duty Marine security guards were machine gunned to death at a sidewalk café in San Salvador. In 1998 nine Americans serving in the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya, were killed in the bombing of that embassy, including Deputy Chief of Mission Julian Bartley. In 2002 Barbara Green was killed in a terrorist attack in Pakistan, and Laurence Foley was killed in a second attack in Jordan. A total of nine embassy personnel were killed in attacks in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008.
The deaths last week of Stevens, Smith, Doherty, and Woods should remind all of us of the extreme risks and daily discomforts that are taken by a great many of the thousands of men and women who staff the more than 260 embassies, consulates, and missions we maintain in 180 separate countries. We should also recognize that our national security is as dependent on men like Christopher Stevens and the work they do in weaving together alliances and bringing stability to strife-torn regions of the world as by our investments in military hardware or our deployment of military personnel. It is a tough, often dirty business—it deserves our respect and appreciation.
It also deserves resources. In each of the last two years, Congress has cut President Obama’s request for U.S. Foreign Service and U.S. Agency for International Development staffing levels despite repeated analysis by the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, indicating that our embassies are critically understaffed.
But even more inexcusable are the repeated and deep cuts made to embassy security and construction. Thousands of our diplomatic personnel are serving overseas in facilities that do not come close to meeting the minimal requirements for security established by the so-called Inman commission’s report on overseas diplomatic security to President Ronald Reagan’s secretary of state more than two decades ago.
Nor is it likely to change anytime soon. In the 2011 continuing resolution, Congress, at the insistence of the House of Representatives, slashed the president’s request for embassy security and construction and forced another cut in fiscal year 2012. Altogether Congress has eliminated $296 million from embassy security and construction in the last two years with additional cuts in other State Department security accounts.
Sequestration required under the Budget Control Act of 2011 will take more than $100 million more out of the program in 2013 if the current Congress does not overcome the impasse over budget cuts and tax revenues by yearend. Those cuts are largely the result of the draconian and unrealistically low budget caps placed by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) on all discretionary spending, falling particularly hard on the State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee with responsibility for embassy security.
 
Jupiter551 said:
I'm not sure if you'll be able to get through all this harsh reality Boce, but do try to read to the end. There's something important there. My apologies in advance for not being able to post a 1 minute Fox news soundbite, but sometimes it's better to examine things in detail.

Just more leftist bullshit and excuses trying to shift responsibility and blame. The bitch herself, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Programs Charlene Lamb, stated that the State Department "had the correct number of assets in Benghazi at the time," and admitted budget concerns were not an issue.

From the hearings...

“It has been suggested that budget cuts are responsible for a lack of security in Benghazi, and I’d like to ask Miss Lamb,” said Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R., Calif.). “You made this decision personally. Was there any budget consideration and lack of budget which lead you not to increase the number of people in the security force there?”

“No, sir,” said Lamb.
 
Bocefish said:
The bitch herself, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Programs Charlene Lamb
Why do you find it necessary to call her a bitch?
Your point would be just as valid, or not as the case may be, if you had left that part out.
 
Bocefish beat me to posting this. While it is nice story that budget cuts cost Amb. Chris Stevens his life. Asst Sec. Lamb sworn testimony to Congress directly contradicts this.
That doesn't mean that there aren't cost saving to be achieved in the field. For instance I know that US embassy in Paris has a full Marine detachment, I bet the same thing is true is Australia and New Zealand, eventhough the risk of angry mob storming the consulates without help from the host country is very low.
 
Bocefish said:
Because it was her decision to repeatedly deny the required Consulate security and she'd never even been to Libya which makes her a total grade A bitch to me and this is an adult website.
So under that logic Paul Ryan would be a grade A bitch because he has repeatedly denied requests for additional funds for the entire embassy program, and before you accuse me of it I'm not saying that extra funding would have prevented the deaths in the attack.
 
Bocefish said:
From the hearings...

“It has been suggested that budget cuts are responsible for a lack of security in Benghazi, and I’d like to ask Miss Lamb,” said Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R., Calif.). “You made this decision personally. Was there any budget consideration and lack of budget which lead you not to increase the number of people in the security force there?”

“No, sir,” said Lamb.
Wow, what a leading question. How about "Was there any budget consideration and lack of budget which lead you not to increase the number of people in the security force there, and implement recommended building security improvements in TWO HUNDRED SIXTY embassies and consulates all over the world on the anniversary of 9/11?"

I think the answer to that, would obviously be OF COURSE budgetary constraints are a factor. You know the difference here though? She, and Secretary Clinton, and President Obama are taking responsbility not because they are personally at fault but because that's what leaders do. Paul Ryan and his ilk are simply using this for political gain to shift to spotlight from their threadbare policy platform when it is undisputed that he led a campaign to cut foreign service budgets. Indirectly, he IS responsible for those deaths and I don't know how he sleeps at night using this to score political points.
 
Bocefish said:

Wait wait wait, after almost 9 minutes of background, the point of that was that embassy security had been prematurely cut? Well fucking duh, and do you think it wasn't perhaps budgets that had to do with those cuts? No? What other reason could you suggest? Give one other credible reason why security would be actively cut at an embassy, if not with concern to budgetary restraints.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LadyLuna
Bocefish said:
Because it was her decision to repeatedly deny the required Consulate security and she'd never even been to Libya which makes her a total grade A bitch to me and this is an adult website.



I appreciate your leadership on this issue.
 

Attachments

  • yeah right.jpg
    yeah right.jpg
    89.6 KB · Views: 134
Jupiter551 said:
Give one other credible reason why security would be actively cut at an embassy, if not with concern to budgetary restraints.

Already gave you three. What part of the Obama administration's failed foreign policy (blending in) and the incompetent bitch herself saying she had the right amount of assets in Benghazi and that budget concerns were not the issue do you not understand?
 
AmberCutie said:
To me, it looks like people are splitting hairs about exactly when Obama said certain exact words in that speech. It seems he was including the attack in his "acts of terror" line within the speech.

I'm not really sure why this particular thing is being picked apart so much, but when I read the transcript, that's what I took from it.

IMO, all the hair splitting, personal attacks (including curse words), etc. occur due to the inability of the advocate to present hard facts...maybe because there aren't any. I'd call it "grasping at straws", but what do I know?
 
Bocefish said:
Yes, I called her a bitch. So what? Are your feelings hurt? :crybaby:

No, my feelings are not hurt at all. Furthermore, I could not care less about what you think.

And that, my friend, is the crux of the issue. You started this thread (asking for civility), and it's full of shouted half-truths, personal attacks, personality attacks...and very short on actual rational debate. One word here, just because it's phrased in correct English does not mean it's rational or factual.

Boce, you are not the only guilty party here. I just find it very curious that a group of somewhat intelligent people can't seem to participate in a discussion with out resorting to all this elementary school crap. Hey, if that's what you want to do, fine. I guess I was mistaken when I assumed that some people wanted to have an adult discussion. You and everyone else here is smart enough to know that shouting insanities is not the way to disseminate information, much less convert people over to your way of thinking.

Both sides are 100% correct. This IS an important election. There ARE polarizing issues that need to be discussed. There ARE some folks who only want information help them decide on how to act (aka vote). If I came here looking for that, I'd be sorely disappointed. It's a good thing I didn't expect that here.

And people wonder why we elect incompetents to lead out government.

OK, back to your little school yard fight...
 
When it comes to politics on boards like this, you really need thick skin to engage and participate for any duration. That's just the way it has become for the majority of people when topics get heated and/or passionate.

Differences of opinions can and do turn into childish name calling on occasion from both sides of an issue. I think expecting this forum to significantly help your decision making is asking a bit too much. Each side is biased but there are some good points to pick up on once in a while.

If you're really undecided, the best thing to do is ask questions about what you're most concerned with.

It's no surprise I think Obama is the worst President in our history, while others think he's the best. Discussions will get heated from time to time, but there's nobody forcing you to click on it or read about them.

After the election, we can all get back to perving full time. :-D
 
Bocefish said:
When it comes to politics on boards like this
Very telling comment, it almost reads as "them people". I appreciate your clarification.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JickyJuly
Another wonderful celebrity Tweet from Eva Langoria who also happens to be the Obama campaign's co-chair. Reminder: Campaign co-chairs like Longoria are recruited to “advocate for the president, advise the campaign and motivate voters.”
 

Attachments

  • EvaTweet.jpg
    EvaTweet.jpg
    134.2 KB · Views: 89
mynameisbob84 said:
Also, the "woman in a binder" thing is my new favourite meme and I have an uncontrollable to urge to conclude any and all future arguments with women with "get back in the binder, bitch" :-D

Amazon reviewers appear to enjoy the meme as well. (read the reviews)
 
Always_Tim said:
mynameisbob84 said:
Also, the "woman in a binder" thing is my new favourite meme and I have an uncontrollable to urge to conclude any and all future arguments with women with "get back in the binder, bitch" :-D

Amazon reviewers appear to enjoy the meme as well. (read the reviews)

Ha! That's awesome :-D
 
Bocefish said:
It's no surprise I think Obama is the worst President in our history, while others think he's the best. Discussions will get heated from time to time, but there's nobody forcing you to click on it or read about them.

You are sick if you think Obama is anywhere close to being the worst president ever. He is not even in the bottom five.

jYt5R.jpg
aadEi.jpg
 
Shaun__ said:
You are sick if you think Obama is anywhere close to being the worst president ever. He is not even in the bottom five.

jYt5R.jpg
aadEi.jpg
Wow. :shock: That is all horrifying. I hope someday the way our country has treated women will be looked back on with as much shame too.
 
Bocefish said:
Another wonderful celebrity Tweet from Eva Langoria who also happens to be the Obama campaign's co-chair. Reminder: Campaign co-chairs like Longoria are recruited to “advocate for the president, advise the campaign and motivate voters.”
But it IS a major lapse in judgement for women and minorities to vote for a candidate who clearly doesn't have their best interests in mind. At least she made a clear statement instead of all the wishy washy crap the candidates put out there trying not to sound bad.
 
JickyJuly said:
Bocefish said:
Another wonderful celebrity Tweet from Eva Langoria who also happens to be the Obama campaign's co-chair. Reminder: Campaign co-chairs like Longoria are recruited to “advocate for the president, advise the campaign and motivate voters.”
But it IS a major lapse in judgement for women and minorities to vote for a candidate who clearly doesn't have their best interests in mind. At least she made a clear statement instead of all the wishy washy crap the candidates put out there trying not to sound bad.

No offense meant, but there are plenty of women and minorities on the Romney side too. I know you only meant to express your opinion but it kinda sounded like you were speaking for all women and minorities.
 
Bocefish said:
JickyJuly said:
Bocefish said:
Another wonderful celebrity Tweet from Eva Langoria who also happens to be the Obama campaign's co-chair. Reminder: Campaign co-chairs like Longoria are recruited to “advocate for the president, advise the campaign and motivate voters.”
But it IS a major lapse in judgement for women and minorities to vote for a candidate who clearly doesn't have their best interests in mind. At least she made a clear statement instead of all the wishy washy crap the candidates put out there trying not to sound bad.

No offense meant, but there are plenty of women and minorities on the Romney side too. I know you only meant to express your opinion but it kinda sounded like you were speaking for all women and minorities.
No. I was speaking of my opinion regarding the women and minorities who are voting for Romney. I am aware that there are women, minorities and probably even a few gays ready to throw down for Romney. If there weren't a few, he wouldn't have managed to get the nomination. They are ill informed and essentially voting against themselves which IS stupid. Not to mention that voting for Mitt means that Anne Romney becomes the representative for American women. I'm not a huge Michelle Obama fan, but Mrs. Romney sounds like a spoiled 2nd grader every time she talks. I also don't think that the poor decisions of some female and minority voters is limited to this election. If more women and minorities got involved and forced their voices and rights to be respected, many of the things the candidates use as fodder wouldn't even be issues.
 
JickyJuly said:
Bocefish said:
JickyJuly said:
Bocefish said:
Another wonderful celebrity Tweet from Eva Langoria who also happens to be the Obama campaign's co-chair. Reminder: Campaign co-chairs like Longoria are recruited to “advocate for the president, advise the campaign and motivate voters.”
But it IS a major lapse in judgement for women and minorities to vote for a candidate who clearly doesn't have their best interests in mind. At least she made a clear statement instead of all the wishy washy crap the candidates put out there trying not to sound bad.

No offense meant, but there are plenty of women and minorities on the Romney side too. I know you only meant to express your opinion but it kinda sounded like you were speaking for all women and minorities.
No. I was speaking of my opinion regarding the women and minorities who are voting for Romney. I am aware that there are women, minorities and probably even a few gays ready to throw down for Romney. If there weren't a few, he wouldn't have managed to get the nomination. They are ill informed and essentially voting against themselves which IS stupid. Not to mention that voting for Mitt means that Anne Romney becomes the representative for American women. I'm not a huge Michelle Obama fan, but Mrs. Romney sounds like a spoiled 2nd grader every time she talks. I also don't think that the poor decisions of some female and minority voters is limited to this election. If more women and minorities got involved and forced their voices and rights to be respected, many of the things the candidates use as fodder wouldn't even be issues.
Agree with everything you're saying here...although I, for one, am a huge Michelle Obama fan. Her life story, her concerns for every American, and damn it, her good looks. :)
 
I suppose women think more about who will be First Lady than guys do, but Ann Romney is in her mid 60's with MS. I highly doubt she will be very active or be the spokeswoman for American women. I'm sure she'll have some projects for less advantaged children or something along those lines, but far less prominent than Mrs. O. :twocents-02cents:
 
Bocefish said:
I suppose women think more about who will be First Lady than guys do, but Ann Romney is in her mid 60's with MS. I highly doubt she will be very active or be the spokeswoman for American women. I'm sure she'll have some projects for less advantaged children or something along those lines, but far less prominent than Mrs. O. :twocents-02cents:
lol how condescending.

What Eva Longoria said was undiplomatic. There's a difference between being undiplomatic and being wrong - she wasn't wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.