Just when you thought there were no good Democrats left

[Rustic]

No Obama just let our troops bleed in Afghanistan with no real chance of winning.

Obama got our troops off the front lines and hugely reduced their numbers by the commitment to training hundreds of thousands of Afghans to fight their own fight.

Bush's surge was a surge in a neddkesd and stupid war where the US military should never have been in the first place. The mission in Afghanistan suffered greatly by Bush's lies and poor judgment that he used to send our great military into Iraq.

Only idiots think A land war can/could be won in Afghanistan(Hindu Kush)…

 

[Rustic]

Kosh, post: 18003008

Just like how Obama got more soldiers killed by changing the rules of engagement to protect the terrorists!

Liar. Obama sought and followed the advice of General McChrystal on ROE to protect civilians in order to gain and hold their trust. McCrystal was a disciple of Petraeus and his counter-insurgency doctrine which included the very same ROE's

Why don't you just buy a bobble head doll of Obama and shove it up your ass since you like The motherfucker so much?
Obama you

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Why don't you just buy a bobble head doll of Obama and shove it up your ass since you like The motherfucker so much?

Stating facts to right wing ignorance based liars has nothing to do with a like or dislike of President Obama.

Your obvious ignorant and deprived of factual content reply here tells me you are not capable of having a realistic discussion about what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Since they say ignorance is bliss enjoy your blissful hate world.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Only idiots think A land war can/could be won in Afghanistan(Hindu Kush)…

We are not at present in a land war in Afghanistan, it is a counter insurgency. All battles focused on taking land from the Taliban have been won.

The Taliban control a small fraction of the land they controlled in 2003. Trump needs to keep it that way.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Rustic, post: 18111868

Only idiots think A land war can/could be won in Afghanistan(Hindu Kush)…

A few weeks ago Trump said this:

“First, our nation must seek an honorable and enduring outcome worthy of the tremendous sacrifices that have been made … Second, the consequences of a rapid exit are both predictable and unacceptable. … A hasty withdrawal would create a vacuum that terrorists, including ISIS and al-Qaeda, would instantly fill, just as happened before September 11th. … Third and finally, I concluded that the security threats we face in Afghanistan and the broader region are immense. Today, 20 U.S.-designated foreign terrorist organizations are active in Afghanistan and Pakistan — the highest concentration in any region anywhere in the world.”

Analysis | The Daily 202: A dozen key lines from Trump’s Afghanistan speech

Reality bites Trump. And you think our entire military chain of command are idiots.

Take a look Ray. This is what anti/Military looks like.

 

[Freewill]

Why don't you just buy a bobble head doll of Obama and shove it up your ass since you like The motherfucker so much?

Stating facts to right wing ignorance based liars has nothing to do with a like or dislike of President Obama.

Your obvious ignorant and deprived of factual content reply here tells me you are not capable of having a realistic discussion about what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Since they say ignorance is bliss enjoy your blissful hate world.

Under which president were more troops killed in Afghanistan?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Freewill, post: 18112019

Under which president were more troops killed in Afghanistan?

It was under Obama. What of it. The cause is worthy and the Taliban had taken back control of 80% of Afghanistan by the end of Bush's failed presidency. That's after Bush declared the Taliban defeated in 2003 and moved massive troops to invade Iraq.

Obama earned Trump the ability to say this just a few weeks ago;

"“First, our nation must seek an honorable and enduring outcome worthy of the tremendous sacrifices that have been made … Second, the consequences of a rapid exit are both predictable and unacceptable. … A hasty withdrawal would create a vacuum that terrorists, including ISIS and al-Qaeda, would instantly fill, just as happened before September 11th. … Third and finally, I concluded that the security threats we face in Afghanistan and the broader region are immense. Today, 20 U.S.-designated foreign terrorist organizations are active in Afghanistan and Pakistan — the highest concentration in any region anywhere in the world.”

Analysis | The Daily 202: A dozen key lines from Trump’s Afghanistan speech

The Afghans do 99% of the fighting and dying now. Bush was losing Afghanistan at the end of 2008 because of Iraq. What Obama had to do, like Trump has to do now, is all Bush's fault for invading Iraq. All combat deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan are in Bush.

Obama was right in 2002. Invading Iraq will be stupid if Bush dies it. He said with that, because it will harm out efforts in Afghanistan.

Obama nailed it. I'm guessing you can't remember things like that.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Ray From Cleveland, post: 18103215

If several younger people start chasing me for a beating and robbery, I can use my firearm and kill them if need be.

You can but if you go into a predominately black neighborhood shouting the N word all over the place you have incited a riot, Your self defense claim suddenly becomes a hate crime.

Youve posted language here that won't help you in court.

What I say here has nothing to do with court. You might be shocked, but there are more people in our city named Ray than just me.

Correct. A CCW holder is not allowed to incite or participate in aggressive activity and still use deadly force. I can't get into a road rage situation and when the guy drives his car into mine, I shoot in self-defense. However if somebody is chasing me, corners me, and then tries to enter my vehicle, I can use deadly force which is covered by our Castle Doctrine. Under the Castle Doctrine, breaking into the car of a licensed CCW holder is the same as breaking into your home.

 

[rightwinger]

Seems like peaceful protest

How is it disrespecting veterans?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Right, except for the FACT that Loomis's interview happened on Sept 5th on the Bob Franz show. Your article was dated today-Sept 7th.

Your Loomis caved. Praying Players never apologized or were fined for that protest. Loomis has union officers back in opening day flag ceremony.

"Once again, Cleveland has risen above the fray and has demonstrated that respectful communication is the key to solving any problem," said Steve Loomis , the association's president. "We can always accomplish much more good by standing, communicating and working together than we ever will by standing apart."

Ricardo Louis meets with Browns owners, police chief after anthem protest

Loomis now standing with unAnerican uncivilized flag and military and police haters come Sunday at 1:00 PM. What are you gonna do?

Are you still a divisive hater Ray? On the side of police brutality?

Loomis got his racist ass handed to him, but he responded the right way. Can you do the same?

As I pointed out, Loomis is not going to hold a grudge forever. And as I explained, it was his idea in the first place. Loomis was the one that made the suggestion that the Browns running out with police may heal some of the wounds.

Now I know you will once again challenge me on that, but as I pointed out, the article you posted was the day after Loomis made that suggestion on the early morning Bob Frantz show on 1420 here in Cleveland. So this time I brought evidence of my claim:

The pod cast was Tuesday Sept 5th, hour 2 of the show. To get to the beginning of the interview, use the timeline and forward to 20:00 of the segment. To get to the part where Loomis suggested running out on the field with police was a possibility of reconciliation, that's on the timeline of 35:00 of the show, but I suggest you listen to the entire interview so you might seem like you know WTF you're talking about when you come back here.

Local Podcasts

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Ray From Cleveland, post: 18112126

However if somebody is chasing me, corners me, and then tries to enter my vehicle, I can use deadly force which is covered by our Castle Doctrine. Under the Castle Doctrine, breaking into the car of a licensed CCW holder is the same as breaking into your home

That all goes without saying. What's your point? It's the same for cops. The agreement with the Feds is court enforceable. You wrote that the police force went along to keep the Feds out of their excessive use of force issues.

In other words you laud the bad cops for mocking Federal law, courts and the Fourth Amendnent. You disrespect cops that want a better relationship and trust with the community they serve.

Like I said you are a law disrespecting sicko who believes blacks are unciviluzed America haters taught that evil is good and good is evil with a right to carry your beloved gun with you wherever you go.

There is a danger here that of course you don't see. Being the defender of the civilized race against the uncivilized race in America.

I doubt the other Ray's in Cleveland see that self-anointed role for themselves and express it on a message board.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Ray From Cleveland, post: 18112126

However if somebody is chasing me, corners me, and then tries to enter my vehicle, I can use deadly force which is covered by our Castle Doctrine. Under the Castle Doctrine, breaking into the car of a licensed CCW holder is the same as breaking into your home

That all goes without saying. What's your point? It's the same for cops. The agreement with the Feds is court enforceable. You wrote that the police force went along to keep the Feds out of their excessive use of force issues.

In other words you laud the bad cops for mocking Federal law, courts and the Fourth Amendnent. You disrespect cops that want a better relationship and trust with the community they serve.

Like I said you are a law disrespecting sicko who believes blacks are unciviluzed America haters taught that evil is good and good is evil with a right to carry your beloved gun with you wherever you go.

There is a danger here that of course you don't see. Being the defender of the civilized race against the uncivilized race in America.

I doubt the other Ray's in Cleveland see that self-anointed role for themselves and express it on a message board.

I have no problems with the police having a good relationship with the public. In fact, they do with most of the public. But the MSM would have you believe the entire black community is against the police; they're not. Only a handful are.

But those are the people that get the most attention thanks to the MSM. In fact, we recently had a black police officer acquitted of charges in a deadly shooting of an unarmed black suspect. The news didn't even make it out of our area let alone go national. Why? Because the MSM couldn't get people riled up enough to start protests and riots that makes them a lot of money. They only make the big money when they can get people to burn down stores, smash police cars and hurt or kill other people. That's how their business works.

You see, for us on the right, the problem has a very simple solution: listen to the orders of the police officer(s). That's it. If everybody did that, we would never have another situation of a police officer killing an unarmed suspect black or white. There would be no need to. The problem is that the left is extremely void of pragmatism. They don't want simple solutions because simple solutions don't buy them votes. It would solve the problem, but not buy them votes, and that is their goal here.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Ray From Cleveland, post: 18112174

Now I know you will once again challenge me on that, but as I pointed out, the article you posted was the day after Loomis made that suggestion on the early morning Bob Frantz show on 1420 here in Cleveland

I doubt the players listen to right wing hate talk radio in Cleveland.The article I cite is dated on the 7th but is referring to the players' initiating the police/players unity display many days before. It says the discussions began right after Loomis canceled the scheduled ceremony. Loomis publically stated the players disrespected the flag and military. For that he planned on punishing the entire Browns team by pulling his officers out.

Loomis was an asshole. He was wrong. And even if he came up with the current plan which I doubt, it is his admission that he was an asshole, by joining the first game ceremony now that many officers and the Chief of police said Loomis did not represent them.

Something good has come from the MNF prayerful protest which has obviously advanced police and player unity like never before.

I can celebrate that. You can't. You want punishment and you called the players anti-America and anti-America and anti-police.

Obviously they are not anti-police.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Ray From Cleveland, post: 18112174

Now I know you will once again challenge me on that, but as I pointed out, the article you posted was the day after Loomis made that suggestion on the early morning Bob Frantz show on 1420 here in Cleveland

I doubt the players listen to right wing hate talk radio in Cleveland.The article I cite is dated on the 7th but is referring to the players' initiating the police/players unity display many days before. It says the discussions began right after Loomis canceled the scheduled ceremony. Loomis publically stated the players disrespected the flag and military. For that he planned on punishing the entire Browns team by pulling his officers out.

Loomis was an asshole. He was wrong. And even if he came up with the current plan which I doubt, it is his admission that he was an asshole, by joining the first game ceremony now that many officers and the Chief of police said Loomis did not represent them.

Something good has come from the MNF prayerful protest which has obviously advanced police and player unity like never before.

I can celebrate that. You can't. You want punishment and you called the players anti-America and anti-America and anti-police.

Obviously they are not anti-police.

Judging from your response, you didn't listen to two minutes of that interview. Loomis stated that it was less the players or their politics than it was with management that allowed them to do what they did. He also stated that the Chief is a politician and he didn't object to many of the things the Chief said.

And if you listened to the interview, you would hear that Loomis was cautious about saying the thing about the flag and tunnel; it was kind of like something that just came from the top of his head.

I may hold resentment, but I don't speak for Loomis, the chief, or the Browns. I speak for myself and the way I feel. I also believe that everybody has the right to feel whatever it is they feel including Loomis, the fans, and yes, even you.

 

[deanrd]

COLUMBUS, Ohio — An Ohio Supreme Court justice is criticizing some Cleveland Browns players who prayed in silent protest during the national anthem before a game.

Justice Bill O’Neill writes on Facebook he won’t attend any games at which “draft dodging millionaire athletes disrespect the veterans who earned them the right to be on that field.” He said Tuesday “shame on you all.”

O’Neill notes he’s a Vietnam veteran whose family has a history of military service. He’s also the lone Democrat holding a statewide office in Ohio.

More than a dozen Browns players kneeled and formed a circle on the sideline during the anthem Monday. Tight end Seth DeValve says he wanted “to pray for our country.”

Browns linebacker Christian Kirksey talked to FOX 8 News on Tuesday, and said, “Respect to all the veterans, respect to the military — we are not protesting against them. We have our reasons for doing what we did, and last night felt like the right time to do it, and that’s why we did it.”

The protest was the largest in a social-consciousness movement started last season by San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick currently a free agent.

Ohio Supreme Court justice blasts Browns over anthem protest

I say good for him. A man that served our country realizing the anti-American stances taken by these un-appreciative Americans who are millionaires because they do live in this great country.

I for one will never turn on a Browns game unless they apologize and take measures to assure us Clevelanders they will never allow their players to embarrass us again; especially on national TV. Like this Democrat judge, I find their actions distasteful, disrespectful, and using God and prayer to take the heat off is also sacrilegious and cowardly.

Screw them. Boycott all Cleveland Browns games and products if you are a real American.

How is it Republicans think they can judge who is good and who isn't?

Republicans have become the party of "let him die" and "feed the poor and they will breed" and "some Mexicans don't rape".

The party of KKK and the Alt Right who think some Nazi's are "good".

They want to end healthcare for over 30 million Americans.

Take away school lunch for poor children.

Republicans not only attack America, but they attack those least able to defend themselves.

And they can identify GOOD people? I don't think so.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

COLUMBUS, Ohio — An Ohio Supreme Court justice is criticizing some Cleveland Browns players who prayed in silent protest during the national anthem before a game.

Justice Bill O’Neill writes on Facebook he won’t attend any games at which “draft dodging millionaire athletes disrespect the veterans who earned them the right to be on that field.” He said Tuesday “shame on you all.”

O’Neill notes he’s a Vietnam veteran whose family has a history of military service. He’s also the lone Democrat holding a statewide office in Ohio.

More than a dozen Browns players kneeled and formed a circle on the sideline during the anthem Monday. Tight end Seth DeValve says he wanted “to pray for our country.”

Browns linebacker Christian Kirksey talked to FOX 8 News on Tuesday, and said, “Respect to all the veterans, respect to the military — we are not protesting against them. We have our reasons for doing what we did, and last night felt like the right time to do it, and that’s why we did it.”

The protest was the largest in a social-consciousness movement started last season by San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick currently a free agent.

Ohio Supreme Court justice blasts Browns over anthem protest

I say good for him. A man that served our country realizing the anti-American stances taken by these un-appreciative Americans who are millionaires because they do live in this great country.

I for one will never turn on a Browns game unless they apologize and take measures to assure us Clevelanders they will never allow their players to embarrass us again; especially on national TV. Like this Democrat judge, I find their actions distasteful, disrespectful, and using God and prayer to take the heat off is also sacrilegious and cowardly.

Screw them. Boycott all Cleveland Browns games and products if you are a real American.

How is it Republicans think they can judge who is good and who isn't?

Republicans have become the party of "let him die" and "feed the poor and they will breed" and "some Mexicans don't rape".

The party of KKK and the Alt Right who think some Nazi's are "good".

They want to end healthcare for over 30 million Americans.

Take away school lunch for poor children.

Republicans not only attack America, but they attack those least able to defend themselves.

And they can identify GOOD people? I don't think so.

Who ever said some Nazi's were good?

We have the power now, why didn't we end healthcare for 30 million people yet?

The KKK was created by the Democrats--not the Republicans.

When did Republicans ever take away school lunch for poor children, and why can't those poor children take lunches to school like the rich children? Are they special or something?

Yes, we can identify the good. Not that hard really. Police--good, criminals--bad. I know it's confusing to a liberal, but you'll figure it out eventually.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Loomis stated that it was less the players or their politics than it was with management that allowed them to do what they did.

What's that do for Loomis? You and him are still wrong. He took a stand and less than a week he backed off big time. You posted him as a big ally in your short-lived nonsense boycott.

Browns management has nothing to do with it. They have expressed their obvious neutral
opinion which includes the players right to freedom of expression.

Still Loomis caved.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Loomis stated that it was less the players or their politics than it was with management that allowed them to do what they did.

What's that do for Loomis? You and him are still wrong. He took a stand and less than a week he backed off big time. You posted him as a big ally in your short-lived nonsense boycott.

Browns management has nothing to do with it. They have expressed their obvious neutral
opinion which includes the players right to freedom of expression.

Still Loomis caved.

I think you have it the other way around. Loomis suggested that perhaps a way FOR THE BROWNS to show the police they meant no disrespect was to come out on the field with them.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

I think you have it the other way around. Loomis suggested that perhaps a way FOR THE BROWNS to show the police they meant no disrespect was to come out on the field with them.

That's not an apology by the players or the team management. The Browns players never showed disrespect for the police or active military or military veterans.

Just because an ahole who wraps himself in the flag like Loomis did, declaring the players disrespectful does not make them so. So running out onto the field with the police would never have been a problem for the players. You have no point.

I've got Loomis's motivation down. He does not believe police brutality existed in Cleveland
And according to this link: Cleveland police union protest of Browns lacks credibility of player protest: Mark Naymik. .... Loomis spends his time trying to undermine a court settlement regarding police brutality.


"Let me suggest a logical explanation for Loomis's actions.

He represents officers in a police department that's been under fire for years for its poor relations with residents and for its use of excessive force. The police department is the subject of 2015 settlement between the city and U.S. Justice Department that outlines numerous reforms aimed at improving community relations and combating police brutality. Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson asked the feds to investigate the police department's use of force and related issues. (The investigation did not examine racial bias, but the settlement calls for better tracking of underlying data.)

Loomis spends his time trying to undermine the settlement, which he publicly discounts as misguided, unfair and not needed. He also cozied up last year to then-presidential candidate Donald Trump, who downplayed demonstrations against police and suggested his administration would take a more hands-off approach to monitoring police departments than President Obama's administration did. Loomis and the union endorsed Trump.

Given all this, it's hard to see how Loomis' protest is about anything more than pushing back on critics of police."

Loomis opposes a legal court order and his occupation is supposed to be upholding the law.

So Loomis got his tit in a ringer and has called off his protest of a protest because the community he is supposed to be serving and most of the police in the union he leads don't agree with what he did.

The players were communicating with the Chief of Police on a show of unity before Loomis publically accepted it as well. Loomis had to eat crow and join the unity between players and police or go on looking stupid as well as wrong about the court settlement between the Justice Department and the Cleveland Police Department.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Ray From Cleveland, post: 18112174,

The pod cast was Tuesday Sept 5th, hour 2 of the show. To get to the beginning of the interview, use the timeline and forward to 20:00 of the segment. To get to the part where Loomis suggested running out on the field with police was a possibility of reconciliation, that's on the timeline of 35:00 of the show, but I suggest you listen to the entire interview so you might seem like you know WTF you're talking about when you come back here.

Here is more proof you are full of crap about Loomis.


"Hello, Cleveland,

Recent statements made by the President of the Cleveland Police Patrolmen's Association would lead one to believe that members of the Cleveland Division of Police are against participating in events with our Cleveland Browns athletes. This is simply not the viewpoint of all of our officers. The Cleveland Browns Organization has been a longtime partner of the Cleveland Division of Police, donating and assisting (many times quietly) to our Police Athletic League and hosting events with kids in the city's Muny League Football . We know that we can count on this partnership to continue.

As law enforcement officers, we took an oath to serve and to protect. We protect the rights of all citizens to express their views as protected by the First Amendment of our constitution, no matter the issue. Our American flag is an important symbol to our great country and we, as officers, will continue to salute it.

More importantly, we as Cleveland Police Officers strive to open the lines of communication with all of our citizens--athletes and enthusiastic Browns fans alike. Who are we kidding?! We are CLEVELAND!! And we stay strong together. We stand together.

Moving forward, I can tell you that we within the Cleveland Division of Police are in communication with the Cleveland Browns Organization as we have been in the past. We want to hear from our players, the fans and our citizens of this great city. We want to bridge the gap. We want to talk.

I look forward to a continued partnership with our CLEVELAND athletes, our community and a great BROWNS season!!!"


Cleveland police chief responds to unions' choice to not hold flag at Browns' opener

That was a public statement dated September 5, 2017. Updated on Sep 05, 2017 at 11:49 AM EDT.

It was a direct rejection of Steve Loomis. And you believe Loomis thought up the idea of the players and the police running out of the tunnel together. You are being absurd.