I'll toss the same response that I give to the usual "but they're being hypocritical!" claims. I suspect you're not grasping how the conservative and liberal agenda's are aligned. As a general rule, conservatives view the role of the federal government as primarily being externally focused. So spending on wars, foreign policy, foreign aid, immigration enforcement, etc, while wanting to reduce spending on domestic stuff, is not in any way hypocritical nor is it inconsistent. In the other direction, liberals tend to view the role of the federal government as being internally focused. so choosing to focus on things like health care, education, deciding who gets to use which bathrooms in public spaces, etc, while taking a minimal "let's just all get along" approach to foreign policy is also neither hypocritical nor inconsistent for them.
DHS, TSA, dozens more agencies and sub-agencies created by Bush. Billions to spend by government.
"To them". Real conservatives would balk at an unnecessary $2 trillion war. A dozen new agencies. Massive expansion of government. DHS and TSA etc. are rather obviously only internally focused btw.
Again, what did you expect? You're how old and you haven't yet figured out that the typical liberal approach to foreign policy mostly involves boats and not rocking them?
You're how old that you aren't aware Korea was initiated by Democrat Truman, and Vietnam by Democrat Kennedy? It's laughable that anyone would adhere to any sense of their party being less warmongering--both are. You should apparently be proud of Truman, JFK, etc. for "rocking boats". The ****. If you like "rocking boats" of the past century of war-mongering, you should champion Clinton for POTUS. She's likely to rock a lot more boats than Trump. You looove rocking boats (war!) My son. My child. My little gbaji suckling pig.
That he hasn't been asked to do so? That doing so doesn't involve inserting himself into what he may view as a "foreign problem"? I will point out, since you seem **** bent on trying to invent an inconsistency here, that he has in fact been criticized for taking what many feel to be a far too moderate stance on Israel and the Holocaust. Again though, that's completely consistent with his foreign policy approach of not taking sides. It's not like he's only been doing this with just this one issue. Maybe broaden your viewpoint and you might just see the bigger picture here?
"asked"? He PROMISED. Has nothing to do with Israel or Micronesia or Deer Park, Texas or the Bahamas. Has to do with millions of Armenian corpses. Google such if you want!
"Promise". Look up a word in a dictionary. Also, have zero idea what you mean be "too moderate...Holocaust". What? I think it's obviously from this thread I don't like Obama, but just what do you mean by him being "moderate on the Holocaust
"?? I admire you gbaji as a lone conservative still here, but gtfo with your ********* I'll tear you apart just like I did Jophiel in this thread (well okay Joph, I didn't, but let's say I did for the sake of impact). Edited, May 24th 2016 9:22am by Palpitus1