It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Growing List of Congressmen Boycotting Netanyahu Address

page: 3
23
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96


Like the Senate Democrats following protocol when they change the filibuster rules.

Doesn't matter in the slightest.


Don't bring it left vs right here, that's not what the question, or the response should have been about.


I don't care if they voted on it or not.


So you'll only complain when the left breaks protocol, and the right can do it to, so long as the left did it first?

Where's the accountability for your side of the aisle? I don't much care either to be honest, but it seems to be faux outrage on both sides if you ask me.

They should have followed the rules, established by your own source. It's not like it would have failed the house anyway, considering the GOP have a majority. They knew that, so Boehner did it, just to snub Obama.

That's the only logical answer as to why he didn't have the house vote on something as silly as this.

~Tenth




posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:58 PM
link   
Just for snips and giggles.



GOP inviting the Pope to address Congress brilliantly exposes Dem’s Netanyahu hatred



President Barack Obama put his fellow Democrats in a perilous and unsustainable position when the White House signaled that attending Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to a joint session of Congress was tantamount to shedding their party affiliation. As expected, congressional Democrats reported plan to boycott Netanyahu’s speech is crumbling.




For congressional Democrats, it seems clear that there won’t be any retribution from minority leadership should they decide to attend Netanyahu’s speech. Predictably, what had been “dozens” of Democrats who reportedly pledged to boycott the speech has dwindled to only three. And those three Democrats — Reps. John Lewis (D-GA), Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), and G.K. Butterworth (D-NC) — represent districts with partisan voting index ratings of D+32, +21, and +17 respectively. It has become even clearer that Democrats who fail to attend this speech are merely doing so out of respect for the president.


Only 3 ?

LOL wow.

That' enough to raise this stink!



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:58 PM
link   
Those mental gymnastics were incredible.






posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:59 PM
link   
a reply to: tothetenthpower




Don't bring it left vs right here, that's not what the question, or the response should have been about.


That is why this is even being talked about.

The Potus doesn't want sanctions. He wants to cut deals.

The GOP. and Netanyahu want none of it.

It is about the POLITICS, and nothing else.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 01:00 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Mental Gymnastics???

Im sorry.... do you mean 'thinking'?



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: combatmaster

Yeah, sure.




posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Yeah, maybe it's starting to dawn on Congress that Netanyahu is just using discord & anti-Obama sentiment to bolster Israel & garner further sympathy...


Nothing about his agenda nor his speech would be beneficial to the Citizens whose Tax Money pays for his little Terror State to survive...



& only someone not putting the US's best interest first would even suggest such a thing...

What sort of person is this Boehner...
I've heard the name thrown about often but I can't be bothered to find out where he stands.

Aside from his obvious Zionist leanings.


On the other side of the aisle from Obama and his Moslem leanings.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 01:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Hendrick99

Still calling obama a muslim lover, i see emotional responses and lies is all the right has.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Hendrick99

No doubt.

I mean when Obama's Drone Policy kills 28 Muslim innocents for every Muslim terrorist they strike, who, if they're intellectually honest about it...
Who can deny he is a Muslim with Muslim leanings...



edit on 10-2-2015 by CharlieSpeirs because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 01:39 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs




I mean when Obama's Drone Policy kills 28 Muslim innocents for every Muslim terrorist they strike, who, if they're intellectually honest about it... Who can deny he is a Muslim with Muslim leanings...


do muslims not war on one another? is there not (forgive the expression) collateral damage in those war?



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 01:41 PM
link   
I don't that it is fair to compare idols with state leaders. It is one thing to shake hands with your peoples idols, it is another to shake hands with those that want access to your nations money and military equipment without going through proper channels.

Comparing the Pope to Nutyahoo comes off as desperately avoiding the real topic... Treason.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 01:41 PM
link   
I'm literally nauseous from this already.

Between the disgusting manner in which US politicians obviously operate only for votes and payoffs with no moral standing or set of actual beliefs AND the nature at which we discard our allies even for such trite reasons... it's just gross already.

We needed the Taliban against Russia then they became enemies, we needed Saddam against Iran then he became the Enemy, we needed Israel for a foot hold in the region now we are discarding Israel... much harder thing to do in America, we go on about the Israeli "influence" which you know...a lot of money, a lot of Nukes and a body of influential people and well...science, throw away Israeli medicine kind of not a good idea if you value Nana right?

But we have the foothold in the region now, tons of bases, usefulness has worn out to a degree, the money is in the Oil the Sauds are helping with Russia and the popular vote has shifted a bit anti Israel soooo they aren't immune to the tactics we use either, just harder to deal dirty...

You want a solution?

Vote out everybody in politics in the States over the next 4 years and get a genuine set of reformers of our political system in office, ones that for starters will deal with Lobbying



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 01:46 PM
link   
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Ahh he is one of them Muslims.


Fair enough.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 01:50 PM
link   
I don't think Netanyahu coming to speak to congress is an issue in its self. But, when talks and diplomacy with Iran about its nuclear program are making progress, why would anyone suggest adding sanctions.

I agree with how the administration is handling this matter, to some degree. Adding sanctions at this time would just provoke and undermine any work done on negotiations. The only problem I see from Boehner not contacting the WH is it would appear to some as a ruse to garner support for possible veto proof sanctions which the president said he'd veto.

Netanyahu speaking to congress isn't the issue, however, when political issues are hot, such as the sanctions debacle, it may appear as if this speech is quite timely for Israeli elections and support for Iranian sanctions.

Having said that, to note, in the letter Boehner sent to Netanyahu, it suggested his visit had bipartisan support, which clearly is not the case.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 01:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
a reply to: Hendrick99

Still calling obama a muslim lover, i see emotional responses and lies is all the right has.


The "names" have to stop period or it gets nowhere ever. From both sides, the "Zionist" "Terrorist" etc if it doesn't stop it never gets fixed and both sides do it now not just the Republicans.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 01:55 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs





Ahh he is one of them Muslims. Fair enough.


well i know of three of them "Muslims". sunni, shia, and the jihadist sects. all of which war on one another. which one are you talking about.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

The Harvard educated ones who kill innocent people for no reason.

As opposed to uneducated ones who kill villagers caught up in tribal nonsense.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs




The Harvard educated ones who kill innocent people for no reason. As opposed to uneducated ones who kill villagers caught up in tribal nonsense


please, you don't have to go to college to kill innocent people for no reason. and being uneducated is no excuse for killing someone.

you don't have to be educated to know that killing because of tribal nonsense is wrong,and there are plenty uneducated tribal members that don't kill.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

All true.

But the phrase "should know better" comes to mind.

imo.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 02:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: crazyewok

This entire thread is a straw man since congress has invited people to speak there for centuries.

but hey who cares right ?



Clearly not you - the issue isn't Congress inviting someone to speak - you have cherry picked that.

The issue is Congress inviting someone to speak without consulting the administration.




top topics



 
23
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join