Democratic Debate Hillary Clinton looked Presidential
Angelocracy.com
the candidates took shots at Hillary Clinton. At one point John
Edwards and Barack Obama were trying some sort of tag team attack on
Hillary Clinton . But Hillary Clinton held her own. And I think that
John Edwards came in a strong second at the debate.
http://angelocracy.blogspot.com/2007/06/democratic-debate-hillary-clinton.html
Bob Loblaw
"Angelocracy.com" <dump...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1180967941.6...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
Thanks for the "American Idol" perspective. Do you realize that you just
said absolutely nothing?
lab~rat >:-)
<dump...@hotmail.com> puked:
They all were wonderful. Clearly each represents exactly what this
country is all about. The biggest pity is that we can't elect them
all co-presidents because they are all so great.
Each should have a coin, no, a bill with their smiling faces on
them...
--
lab~rat >:-)
Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
DickChe...@aol.com
Isn't it nice to hear someone like Hillary who talks sense, for a
change.
We have been dumbed-down to a nation of retards (the Republicans that
is) from listening to the Liar-in-Chief and his tall tales he tells
us.
It will be nice to have someone who has read books, and a Rhodes
Scholar, in the White House instead of a family of drug-addicts.
Pookie
"Angelocracy.com" <dump...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1180967941.6...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
A Democrat focus group in NH watching the debate chose Edwards as the
winner...
BC
> On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 14:39:01 -0000, "Angelocracy.com"
>
> >Hillary Clinton was the clear winner of the Democratic Debate. Many of
> >the candidates took shots at Hillary Clinton. At one point John
> >Edwards and Barack Obama were trying some sort of tag team attack on
> >Hillary Clinton . But Hillary Clinton held her own. And I think that
> >John Edwards came in a strong second at the debate.
>
>
> They all were wonderful. Clearly each represents exactly what this
> country is all about. The biggest pity is that we can't elect them
> all co-presidents because they are all so great.
>
> Each should have a coin, no, a bill with their smiling faces on
> them...
> --
> lab~rat >:-)
> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
Hey, at least they aren't Republicans. Voting in another
Republican President for 2008 would be telling the world
to stick a huge "Kick Me" sign on our collective, big,
dumb backsides.
-BC
Christopher Helms
> On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 14:39:01 -0000, "Angelocracy.com"
>
> >Hillary Clinton was the clear winner of the Democratic Debate. Many of
> >the candidates took shots at Hillary Clinton. At one point John
> >Edwards and Barack Obama were trying some sort of tag team attack on
> >Hillary Clinton . But Hillary Clinton held her own. And I think that
> >John Edwards came in a strong second at the debate.
>
>
> They all were wonderful. Clearly each represents exactly what this
> country is all about. The biggest pity is that we can't elect them
> all co-presidents because they are all so great.
Who are you and what have you done with lab rat?
KK
> Voting in another
> Republican President for 2008
That presumes the current occupant of the Oval Office is a Republican. He
certainly doesn't look like one to me.
Guy
"KK" <_K...@furburger.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.06.04....@furburger.net...
There was an (R) beside his name on the ballot.
KK
So? The letter on the ballot doesn't constrain his policies - obviously.
Patriot Games
news:1180967941.6...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
Not a chance.
Buckwheat blew them all away.
> Many of the candidates took shots at Hillary Clinton.
No, only three and they are now finished. Some idiot from Alaska, the moron
Kookcinich, and Breck Girl Edwards.
> At one point John
> Edwards and Barack Obama were trying some sort of tag team attack on
> Hillary Clinton.
Naaa, never happenned.
> But Hillary Clinton held her own.
She did okay for herself. That's about it. Too many times she tried to
speak for everybody acting like the Nazi control-freak bitch she really is.
> And I think that
> John Edwards came in a strong second at the debate.
HA! Edwards got destroyed!!!!
Buckwheat was the clear winner.
Hitlary was #2.
Patriot Games
news:466458f2$0$12439$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
For future reference...
'D' = Dolt.
'R' = Retard.
Patriot Games
news:PFX8i.86$_Q7...@newsfe12.lga...
As they say, "You get what you pay for..."
Red
There is only two people on the face of this planet worse than
Bush...Cheney and Hillary!
Red
Wow, what kind of shit have you been drinking today!
Red
> "Angelocracy.com" <dumpd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1180967941.6...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Hillary Clinton was the clear winner of the Democratic Debate. Many of
> > the candidates took shots at Hillary Clinton. At one point John
> > Edwards and Barack Obama were trying some sort of tag team attack on
> > Hillary Clinton . But Hillary Clinton held her own. And I think that
> > John Edwards came in a strong second at the debate.
>
>
> A Democrat focus group in NH watching the debate chose Edwards as the
> winner...
I'm surprised you haven't posted on that article about a part of
Vermont wanting to secede from the US. I sure hope they do.
Red
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yea, because we all know Hillary has done such a wonderful job as the
Senator from NY. Man, some people are dense!
Red
wrote:> > "KK" <_...@furburger.net> wrote in message
> >news:pan.2007.06.04....@furburger.net...
> >> On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 17:17:28 +0000, BC wrote:
> >>> Voting in another
> >>> Republican President for 2008
> >> That presumes the current occupant of the Oval Office is a Republican.
> >> He
> >> certainly doesn't look like one to me.
> > There was an (R) beside his name on the ballot.
>
> For future reference...
>
> 'D' = Dolt.
>
> 'R' = Retard.
I can agree with this!
Bob Loblaw
"lab~rat >:-)" <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote in message
news:ip8863htunh4ge2gq...@4ax.com...
Since that was neither, how about fucking yourself?
AnAmericanCitizen
>They all were wonderful. Clearly each represents exactly what this
>country is all about. The biggest pity is that we can't elect them
>all co-presidents because they are all so great.
Clearly why there are so many republicans/independents in the country....AAC
AnAmericanCitizen
Hillary was just throwing out her usual prepared sound bites with references to Bill
frequently thrown in to remind people how she got where she is. She was just trying
to be like one of the boys, even down to her attire.
Richardson was impressive...very likable, knowledgeable. Too bad he is so in favor
of chain migration, that's a killer. Even Edwards came across favorably as did the
only one up there with any guts...the senator from Alaska. He actually knew what he
was talking about and wasn't afraid to speak the truth. Dodds likable, but
presidential, I'm not sure. Kicinich (sp?)....Biden? I think his time has passed.-
I felt Obama and Hillary were both just trying to make a good impression while being
careful not to step on each other's toes. However, there is no doubt about it, Obama
is a force to be watched IMHO.....AAC
AnAmericanCitizen
wrote:
Hey -- anyone who will pay $400 for a haircut.....AAC
Pookie
"Red" <RedRed...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1180988436.2...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
It's only 13%, but you can hope ;-)
Sid9
Are Republicans disowning bush,jr?
If so they ought to round
up 17 Republican Senators
who will agree to oust him
and Chney from office in a
dual impeachment
inkyb...@yahoo.com
they will hand the presidency to Fred Thompson or Mitt Romney.
Hillary Clinton is UNELECTABLE! Republicans have a warehouse of dirt
on her just waiting to be aired during the presidential campaign. She
has too many scandals and too many stupid statements in her past, plus
huge numbers of Democrats hate her lying guts.
Hillary Clinton's plan is to suck up to Jews and win the nomination
with Jewish money. Thus she is a self-proclaimed "Neo-Liberal", a
Democratic Party version of Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz, the guys
who got us into Iraq. Hillary Clinton would be a disaster for the
Democratic Party and if she is nominated I and millions of other
potential Democratic Party voters will vote third party.
Any of the other Democratic candidates can win the general election.
A vote for Hillary is a vote for 4 more years with a Republican in the
White House.
IB
Sid9
That proves it!
You fear her most!
Red
> "lab~rat >:-)" <c...@cheeze.net> wrote in message
>
> news:ip8863htunh4ge2gq...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 14:39:01 -0000, "Angelocracy.com"
>
> >>Hillary Clinton was the clear winner of the Democratic Debate. Many of
> >>the candidates took shots at Hillary Clinton. At one point John
> >>Edwards and Barack Obama were trying some sort of tag team attack on
> >>Hillary Clinton . But Hillary Clinton held her own. And I think that
> >>John Edwards came in a strong second at the debate.
>
>
> > They all were wonderful. Clearly each represents exactly what this
> > country is all about. The biggest pity is that we can't elect them
> > all co-presidents because they are all so great.
>
> > Each should have a coin, no, a bill with their smiling faces on
> > them...
> > --
> > lab~rat >:-)
> > Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Wow!
Red
> "Red" <RedRedCoun...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
How fast would they call us if there banks were held up or a criminal
was loose. Please for the sake of God let them GO!
BC
Cute but this cynicism isn't going to help matters.
When you vote in a President, you just don't get
a Vice-President as part of the deal -- you get an
army of appointees and staff replacements, as well
as an inderminate list of favors owed and unknown
agendas. Democrats have tended to draw in best
and brightest earniest do-gooders, while the
Republicans seem to prefer businessmen and to
reward people for good, loyal service and return
favors.
We're going to be need a whole of lot very smart,
highly capable people placed in government on the
next go round to deal with a huge host of problems
that Bush and company either ignored or made
worse. But the cynicism is running so deep now
that any new President may have a lot of trouble
getting the right people to join in. Not good....
-BC
Coo Coo McGoo
If we can nuke Bush's red state mafia, sure.
inkyb...@yahoo.com
"That proves it! You fear her most!"
--------------------------------------------------
Sid9,
Your comment makes no sense at all. I WANT a Democrat to win in 08,
not a Republican. Of course a Hillary Clinton nomination scares me
the most because I know she is a sure loser for the Democratic Party.
And even if she did win, she would make such a mess of things and
disgrace the Democrats so badly that it would still be a disaster.
John Edwards can win. Barack Obama can win. Hillary Clinton cannot
win the general election. I don't want to have to choose between Fred
Thompson and Hillary Clinton. If faced with that ugly choice, I and
millions of other voters will vote for an anti-war third party
candidate, and I am sure there will be one. I will never vote for
Hillary Clinton and millions and millions of Americans, many of whom
are Democrats, feel the same way.
Hillary Clinton = doom for Democrats!
That is why Republicans want her to win the Democratic nomination so
badly. That is why Fox News and the Republican campaign machine talk
up her as a candidate. If she wins, Democrats hand the White House to
the Republicans on a golden platter. The election will be over as
soon as Democrats nominate her. Hillary Clinton is doom, doom, doom
for Democrats!
IB
Perseid
the Words
Must be the kind of shit that makes you tell the truth. It is just
really refreshing having a public servant speak to me as if I'm
older than 10 years old. Bush is just a shit-fer-brains and that's
not just rhetoric.. he really is a fucking imbecile.
Sid9
Any of the three you
mention will win against
anything the Republics
have including Thompson, ANY!
Any of these three will make
excellent presidents to get
our country out of the hole
bush,jr and the Republics
have placed us in
inkyb...@yahoo.com
"Any of these three will make excellent presidents to get our country
out of the hole bush,jr and the Republics have placed us in-."
------------------------
Polls show even Rudy Giuliani would wipe the floor with Hillary
Clinton. Fred Thompson can beat her. Mitt Romney can beat her too.
Hillary Clinton is one of the most despised public figures in
America. She rubs people the wrong way. She's a proven liar, a
political whore, and a two face bitch. Independents will not vote for
her and Democrats cannot win without the Independent vote, because
there are more Independents than Republicans or Democrats. Hillary is
divisive and a disaster on wheels.
IB
Rich_Keebler's_Mom's_Stank.
28% of Americans are, Red-ass.
lab~rat >:-)
>On Jun 4, 10:47 am, "lab~rat >:-)" <c...@cheeze.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 14:39:01 -0000, "Angelocracy.com"
>> <dumpd...@hotmail.com> puked:
>>
>> >Hillary Clinton was the clear winner of the Democratic Debate. Many of
>> >the candidates took shots at Hillary Clinton. At one point John
>> >Edwards and Barack Obama were trying some sort of tag team attack on
>> >Hillary Clinton . But Hillary Clinton held her own. And I think that
>> >John Edwards came in a strong second at the debate.
>>
>> >http://angelocracy.blogspot.com/2007/06/democratic-debate-hillary-cli...
>>
>> They all were wonderful. Clearly each represents exactly what this
>> country is all about. The biggest pity is that we can't elect them
>> all co-presidents because they are all so great.
>>
>> Each should have a coin, no, a bill with their smiling faces on
>> them...
>> --
>> lab~rat >:-)
>> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
>
>Hey, at least they aren't Republicans. Voting in another
>Republican President for 2008 would be telling the world
>to stick a huge "Kick Me" sign on our collective, big,
>dumb backsides.
>
>-BC
Of course. Voting for Democrats is the only smart thing to do. In
fact, regardless of their message, or even if they keep it to
themselves, they should be handed our vote.
After all, it's very important to vote AGAINST the Bush
administration. If it weren't for them, we'd have no problems right
now. The economy would be great and there would have been no 9/11.
So run out to your voting booths today and vote as many times as you
can for someone with a 'D' by their name, that way you'll be sure
you're voting for the right person.
Voting for a Republican would just be asking the world to kick us, and
you know how important it is to have people like us. We should have
all the world leaders over for tea and bad mouth the Republicans.
Or better yet, go to their country and talk about how bad the US is.
I mean, after all, if you're a Democrat it isn't YOUR country now, is
it?
lab~rat >:-)
puked:
I'm carefully studying the candidates because I want to vote for the
best person for the job. Who could possibly do a better job that
these people? They are clearly the best America has to offer...
lab~rat >:-)
>
>Any of the three you
>mention will win against
>anything the Republics
>have including Thompson, ANY!
>
>Any of these three will make
>excellent presidents to get
>our country out of the hole
>bush,jr and the Republics
>have placed us in
>
So you are all for one party controlling the house, senate and
presidency as long as it's your party?
KK
> KK wrote:
>> On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 17:17:28 +0000, BC wrote:
>>
>>> Voting in another
>>> Republican President for 2008
>>
>> That presumes the current occupant of the Oval Office is a
>> Republican. He certainly doesn't look like one to me.
>
>
> Are Republicans disowning bush,jr?
I don't know - I'm not a Republican. If I were, I certainly wouldn't
recognize him as one.
> If so they ought to round
> up 17 Republican Senators
> who will agree to oust him
> and Chney from office in a
> dual impeachment
They've committed no impeachable offense. Give it up and try this time to
scrape up a Democrat who can beat a guy with 35% favorable polls.
KK
> Democrats have tended to draw in best
> and brightest earniest do-gooders,
(spit)
Red
>
> - Show quoted text -
I think both sides are equally the same when appointing people. Jimmy
Carter had as many buffoons as Georgie does. Back then we had 20%
interest rates, 20% inflation and gas lines. Most of these appointees
do this to get rewarded down the road.
Red
wrote:
> "Red" <RedRedCoun...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1181001550....@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 4, 6:02?pm, "Pookie" <pookie18...@optonline.net> wrote:
> >> "Red" <RedRedCoun...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:1180988436.2...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > On Jun 4, 1:07?pm, "Pookie" <pookie18...@optonline.net> wrote:
> >> >> "Angelocracy.com" <dumpd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >> >>news:1180967941.6...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> >> > Hillary Clinton was the clear winner of the Democratic Debate. Many
> >> >> > of
> >> >> > the candidates took shots at Hillary Clinton. At one point John
> >> >> > Edwards and Barack Obama were trying some sort of tag team attack on
> >> >> > Hillary Clinton . But Hillary Clinton held her own. And I think that
> >> >> > John Edwards came in a strong second at the debate.
>
> >> >> >http://angelocracy.blogspot.com/2007/06/democratic-debate-hillary-cli...
>
> >> >> A Democrat focus group in NH watching the debate chose Edwards as the
> >> >> winner...
>
> >> > I'm surprised you haven't posted on that article about a part of
> >> > Vermont wanting to secede from the US. I sure hope they do.
>
> >> It's only 13%, but you can hope ;-)- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > How fast would they call us if there banks were held up or a criminal
> > was loose. Please for the sake of God let them GO!
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hey, these people believe it or not, are NOT red state people.
They're not true Conservatives. They're power hungry assholes. True
Conservatives like myself don't want us in Iraq, want lower taxes,
want Govt out of your bedroom and so on. We're not all like George
Bush. You'll never find me sticking up for Bush, ever!
Patriot Games
news:5s1963h3ohuhcpi66...@4ax.com...
Finishing that thought....
"Anyone who will pay $400 for a haircut" will pay ten times that much for
their very own focus group.
BC
Now, now -- whether you want to admit it or not,
that's the truth of the matter. A Giuliani, Thompson,
or Romney is only going to bring in more Michael
Brown's, Alberto Gonzalez's and the like:
http://www.oldamericancentury.org/bushco/cronyism.htm
You guys don't realize how Bush and the Republicans
in general have made politics and public service so
utterly odious to the very people you really want to be
involved in government. The Democrats,.by appearing
so weak and not being nearly harsh enough with Bush,
his policies and with Republican crackpottery in
general, have also alienated good, highly competent
people as well. Not nearly to the extent the Republicans
have, but still perhaps to the point that a Democratic
President may also have trouble getting all the good
people he or she would need.
Just look at the news items these days, especially the
overseas stuff. You're going to need a lot of smarts and
competence to deal with all that, and the Republicans
won't have any and Democrats may not have enough.
-BC
Sid9
>
>>
>> Any of the three you
>> mention will win against
>> anything the Republics
>> have including Thompson, ANY!
>>
>> Any of these three will make
>> excellent presidents to get
>> our country out of the hole
>> bush,jr and the Republics
>> have placed us in
>>
>
> So you are all for one party controlling the house, senate and
> presidency as long as it's your party?
Yes, especially after
the Republican fuckups
that have been in control
recent years.
It will take years to reverse
yhe damage to America.
lab~rat >:-)
I pretty much agree with most of what you said except I will defend
him in terms that he is better than what Gore would have brought us...
lab~rat >:-)
Ok, as long as you admit your hypocrisy, no problem.
Patriot Games
news:1180999690....@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> If Democrats are stupid enough nominate Hillary Clinton for president,
> they will hand the presidency to Fred Thompson or Mitt Romney.
Yep.
> Hillary Clinton is UNELECTABLE!
Yep.
> Hillary Clinton would be a disaster for the
> Democratic Party and if she is nominated I and millions of other
> potential Democratic Party voters will vote third party.
You don't have a third party to vote for. Yet.
> Any of the other Democratic candidates can win the general election.
Nope.
> A vote for Hillary is a vote for 4 more years with a Republican in the
> White House.
Hey! Demmies!! You better PAY ATTENTION to this panty-soiling "inkyblacks"
because he/she/it IS RIGHT.
Hitlary is steamrolling the nomination. If history and tradition come into
play Buckwheat WILL BE the VP.
Reality Check: Sure, its fun, but GET REAL. They are UNELECTABLE!
Sid9
Yeah, Democrats are going to take advice from the likes you....sure thing!
BC
Carter was a long time ago -- things have become a
lot, LOT more lopsided. I myself am in an awkward
position where I was involved recently in a certain
issue involving a massive bank hack attempt that I
detected and reported on. That meant dealing with
certain government agencies that use to be
considered kind of cool. While intellectually I knew
I was being overall helpful and doing the right thing,
gutwise I felt I was somehow helping Bush, however
indirectly, and I found that idea so utterly repulsive
that I don't want to be involved beyond the minimal
needed. As much as I really dislike Bush, I was still
taken by surprise by my gut reaction. I haven't fully
decided what to do yet -- I normally don't think twice
about being responsible and helpful, but because of
the nature of the current government....I can't
emphasize enough how awkward and uneasy I feel
about being involved in any way. I'm sure I'm not the
only person who found him/herself in this situation.
Like I said, not good....
-BC
lab~rat >:-)
>>> A vote for Hillary is a vote for 4 more years with a Republican in
>>> the White House.
>>
>> Hey! Demmies!! You better PAY ATTENTION to this panty-soiling
>> "inkyblacks" because he/she/it IS RIGHT.
>>
>> Hitlary is steamrolling the nomination. If history and tradition
>> come into play Buckwheat WILL BE the VP.
>>
>> Reality Check: Sure, its fun, but GET REAL. They are UNELECTABLE!
>
>Yeah, Democrats are going to take advice from the likes you....sure thing!
>
Yeah, Democrats are garnering so much love so far.
At this rate, I'm wagering that less than 15% of all Americans vote
for president due to lack of faith in what any politician says...
KK
> Yes, especially after
> the Republican fuckups
> that have been in control
> recent years.
>
> It will take years to reverse
> yhe damage to America.
What are you using, a 25-column CRT?
KK
> Now, now -- whether you want to admit it or not,
> that's the truth of the matter. A Giuliani, Thompson,
> or Romney is only going to bring in more Michael
> Brown's, Alberto Gonzalez's and the like:
> http://www.oldamericancentury.org/bushco/cronyism.htm
>
> You guys don't realize how Bush and the Republicans
> in general have made politics and public service so
> utterly odious to the very people you really want to be
> involved in government.
And your fucking head is in the sand if you think that one side is better
than the other.
Carville and Blumenthal are as evil as Rove or any of Bush's other close
political buddies.
Berger, Guinier, Lee, Reno, Ron Brown ... the names roll off the tongue.
I'm not targeting Clinton, but I'm too young to remember a lot of the
Carter Administration fuckers.
Both sides have the same goal: to entrench their power. Both feel
justified, both are foul.
Sid9
Nope.....just makes
it easier for you near
illiterate Republicans
to read.
Glad you noticed.
Sid9
Gore would not have brought war.
Gore would not have allowed the fiscal mess.
Gore would have good relations with our allies
Gore would not be bush,jr, loser, liar, and world class incompetent
Gore would have pushed and achieved universal health care for Americans
KK
1. I'm not a republican.
2. Both of the sentences you posted above are mangled. You're in no
position to call anyone else "illiterate".
Sid9
1. I apologize.
Nobody should be
incorrectly accused
of being a Republican.
2. Sentence structure
was never a strong
point with me.
I hope you got the
meaning, nonetheless
lab~rat >:-)
9/11 would still have happened.
>Gore would not have allowed the fiscal mess.
He would have taxed us to death and harmed the economy.
>Gore would have good relations with our allies
He would have sucked off Osama bin Laden, if that's what you mean.
>Gore would not be bush,jr, loser, liar, and world class incompetent
Gore has already lied about his role in the internet.
>Gore would have pushed and achieved universal health care for Americans
I thought you were only listing GOOD things...
Tag Heuer
<NoAm...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 14:47:45 GMT, "lab~rat >:-)" <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote:
>>They all were wonderful. Clearly each represents exactly what this
>>country is all about. The biggest pity is that we can't elect them
>>all co-presidents because they are all so great.
>Clearly why there are so many republicans/independents in the country....AAC
And wandering right smack dab into an unprecedented 'political
wilderness.' They http://tinyurl.com/24urzh are desperately
distancing themselves as far away from that chimpanzee in the
Whitehouse that no amount of Lysol and bleach can rid themselves of
that repulsive "Turd Blossom" stench that the Republican party has
repugnantly immersed itself in for the past seven or so odd years.
"I will bring honor to the process and honor to the office I seek
...I will repair the broken bonds of trust between Americans and
their government." --- George W. Bush, March 7, 2000
http://tinyurl.com/erln2
lab~rat >:-)
puked:
I guess Bush underestimated how nasty Democrats could be. You know,
trying to lie and sue their way into the White House.
Thanks again, Al Gore, for taking your selfish egotistical
self-aggrandizing opinion of yourself and tearing this country apart.
If not for stupid fucks like you, our country would be united against
an outside enemy instead of fighting within. Instead, your mindless
followers side with America's enemies, and against those that want to
protect her.
You, Al Gore, are one of the greatest terrorists this country has ever
seen and should rot in Gitmo simply by existing...
BC
> On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 17:17:28 -0000, BC <callm...@gmail.com> puked:
I'm neither Democrat nor Republican. In a perfect
world, I would have nothing to do with either party,
but this ain't a perfect world and you sometimes
have to annoyingly choose sides. The Democrats
have lots of problems, starting with Pelosi having
taken the impeachment option off the table, and
then this recent BS with the war funding. But you
look at the alternative, the Republicans, and see
nothing but a cesspool of greed, lies, corruption,
incompetence and crackpot thinking.
Pre-9/11 intel was mishandled, the response to
9/11 was mishandled, and the post 9/11 stuff has
been a train wreck. For all intents and purposes,
bin Laden not only won, but to an extent he never
likely dreamed of. Half-ass, expensive, and grossly
inconvenient "security" implementations are all
over the place, terrorism is up, US prestige is down,
and we got this nice little blackhole of mess in
Iraq that had nothing to friggin do with 9/11 or
bin Laden because about half the US population
is too stupid to be let near a voting booth.
And having a "Kick Me" sign on your backside
doesn't just mean people don't like you -- they
also think you're a fool to make fun of and taunt. It
doesn't matter if you're big if you're also really
stupid.
The only solution to the Iraq mess I can see is
one nobody is going to pursue -- reinstituting the
draft and putting about a million troops into the
area and brooking no nonsense in securing civil
order. If a million sounds like an excessive
amount, go look up how many troops the US
deployed in the first Gulf War in driving Iraqi
forces from Kuwait:
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=14792
While I don't see any of the Democrats running
for President having the wherewithal to really fix
things well, at least there is a reasonable chance
things will get better to some extent. There is little
chance that will happen with another Republican
President. And Bush was a Republican whether
or not you now want to disown him -- he ran his
elections like a Republican, was helpful the the
wealthy like a Republican, lied like a Republican,
was hostile to science, reason and the environment
like a Republican, and flew to fundraisers amid
catastrophe just like a Republican. Ergo, he is a
Republican.
-BC
lab~rat >:-)
William Jefferson was framed. They should know better than to think
someone from New Orleans would do something dishonest...
Tag Heuer
wrote:
>>On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 16:47:07 GMT, Tag Heuer <tagheu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 14:31:15 -0700, AnAmericanCitizen <NoAm...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>>On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 14:47:45 GMT, "lab~rat >:-)" <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote:
>
>>>>They all were wonderful. Clearly each represents exactly what this
>>>>country is all about. The biggest pity is that we can't elect them
>>>>all co-presidents because they are all so great.
>>>Clearly why there are so many republicans/independents in the country....AAC
>>And wandering right smack dab into an unprecedented 'political
>>wilderness.' They http://tinyurl.com/24urzh are desperately
>>distancing themselves as far away from that chimpanzee in the
>>Whitehouse that no amount of Lysol and bleach can rid themselves of
>>that repulsive "Turd Blossom" stench that the Republican party has
>>repugnantly immersed itself in for the past seven or so odd years.
>>"I will bring honor to the process and honor to the office I seek
>>...I will repair the broken bonds of trust between Americans and
>>their government." --- George W. Bush, March 7, 2000
>I guess Bush underestimated how nasty Democrats could be. You know,
>trying to lie and sue their way into the White House.
Take a good long hard look at Bush's finger and "bird" in the URL
above which you conveniently snipped - That was directed at ALL
Americans and the world. Furthermore, that monkey, to his credit
UNDERESTIMATED just how much he can F%%K up a country such as the
United States and Iraq and Afghanistan, and not to mention destroying
our National Guard and military, and opening up the nation to terror
in two terms.
>Thanks again, Al Gore, for taking your selfish egotistical
>self-aggrandizing opinion of yourself and tearing this country apart.
>If not for stupid fucks like you, our country would be united against
>an outside enemy instead of fighting within. Instead, your mindless
>followers side with America's enemies, and against those that want to
>protect her.
WTF does Al Gore have to do with those middle-aged geriatric group of
adult diaper-wearing Republican presidential candidate wanna-bes and
dinosaurs who look like they are ready to keel-over from a cardiac?
Not a goddamn thing. You morons are so obssessed with LOSING that
you've no other option but to pull a Gore out of your collective
head-up-the-ass asses in order to satisfy some depraved notion of
rationality. In fact, my oily rat-face bastard, the only thing that's
keeping the Republican party together is the thought of getting rid of
that monkey in the Whitehouse - Try to squeeze that into that severely
damaged pin head of your's. Yes, that's right. With each and every
Republican candidate debate, watch the GOP and the Repugnants ever so
slowly slide into that POLITICAL WILDERNESS of uncertainty, for
certainly that AWOL draft dodging nit wit is one tough nut to follow.
In fact, if you can pull your head out of your ass for just one
fleeting moment, you will see a political landscape strewn with dead
bodies and awash with blood, and that which has these Repulsive
candidates moving further away from the Chimp and much more to the
center, if not the extreme fascist right.
>You, Al Gore, are one of the greatest terrorists this country has ever
>seen and should rot in Gitmo simply by existing...
Bwahahahahar! "Al Gore!?!?" You fear him . . . You wish he was
being incarcerated and tortured or even killed . . . You have no other
thought but to hate him, and such a deranged frame of mind illustrates
the insanity and where YOU and the Republican party belongs - In the
wild and the wilderness. Now strap on some kevlar, grab your gun and
get your pathetic coward f&%king ass over to Iraq in Bush's campaign
for his failed LEGACY, and where you STRICTLY belong, you F&%KING
traitor!
>lab~rat >:-)
>Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
Apparently you simply want to be an assh0le.
"The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between
Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda: because there was a relationship between
Iraq and al Qaeda . . ." --- George W. Bush, Whitehouse, June 18, 2004
" . . .First, just if I might correct a misperception, I don’t think
we ever said -- at least I know I didn’t say that there was a direct
connection between September the 11th and Saddam Hussein . . ."
--- George W. Bush, Cleveland, Ohio, March 20, 2006
" . . . What did Iraq have to do with what? . . . [Question: The
attack on the World Trade Center] . . . Nothing." --- George W. Bush,
Lying his ass off, Washington, DC, August 21, 2006
BC
That's BS false equivalence -- you're comparing
speeders to car jackers, cashiers who have trouble
counting to thiefs, and girls who are "easy" to paid
prostitutes -- while in either case, there is a problem,
there is a still big friggin difference between them.
Even if you were dealing with small difference between
someone how speeds by an average of 10 miles/hr to
one who speeds by and average of 15, that's still a
difference. If you consistently vote for people who are
even just sllightly incrementally better than the opposition,
you will still end up with government getting incrementally
better. Saying that "Oh, they are all just as bad" is
usually just an excuse, I've noticed, to vote stupid
again. If you're not going to make the effort to tell
apart the candidates, it's kind of irresponsible to be
voting at all. It may be a right, but voting is also a
responsibility.
-BC
BC
> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 17:28:01 -0000, BC <callm...@gmail.com> puked:
Someone is in need of a reality check:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6685617,00.html
-BC
KK
Says you. I say that our freedoms have been encroached upon nearly
equally by both sides since 1900 and particularly since about 1970.
> Even if you were dealing with small difference between
> someone how speeds by an average of 10 miles/hr to
> one who speeds by and average of 15, that's still a
> difference.
You are really beating that dead horse. Neither side is "better". Both
sides have reasonable, honest people, both sides have morally lax people,
and both sides have evil, foul, bastards.
> If you consistently vote for people who are
> even just sllightly incrementally better than the opposition,
> you will still end up with government getting incrementally
> better. Saying that "Oh, they are all just as bad" is
> usually just an excuse, I've noticed, to vote stupid
> again.
What's "stupid"? Not voting the way you think people should? One thing
both major parties have worked together on is tightening their duopoly at
the polls. Going along with that is what's "stupid" to me.
> If you're not going to make the effort to tell
> apart the candidates, it's kind of irresponsible to be
> voting at all. It may be a right, but voting is also a
> responsibility.
You are an asshole. I didn't say there should be no effort to weed out
good from bad - I said both sides have the same goal. Your
myopic view (at the top of the post) that the GOP is bad and the Dems are
good is fucking infantile.
Red
Move to the part of Vermont that wants to secede. It's a different
world post 9-11.
Red
No, don't you know, it's Rosie!
Red
> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 17:28:01 -0000, BC <callm...@gmail.com> puked:
>
> - Show quoted text -
This will go away. The press has already buried it. I heard more in
one day on Foley than I have on this.
BC
Yeah, I'm sure:
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Ashcroftss_exno._2_says_White_House_0515.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37480-2004Jul8.html
>
> > Even if you were dealing with small difference between
> > someone how speeds by an average of 10 miles/hr to
> > one who speeds by and average of 15, that's still a
> > difference.
>
> You are really beating that dead horse. Neither side is "better". Both
> sides have reasonable, honest people, both sides have morally lax people,
> and both sides have evil, foul, bastards.
You're the one who's beating the dead horse that
both sides are all the same -- no. The Republicans
in totality and on average are far, far worse than
the Democrats. Just look at the characters making
up the Republican leadership for the past several
years, Delay, Frist, Santorum, Hastert, Pombo,
Sensenbrenner, Hatch, Roberts, etc, friggin etc.
For every bad Democrat like William Jefferson, you
have a garbage truck's worth of Republicans.
l
>
> > If you consistently vote for people who are
> > even just sllightly incrementally better than the opposition,
> > you will still end up with government getting incrementally
> > better. Saying that "Oh, they are all just as bad" is
> > usually just an excuse, I've noticed, to vote stupid
> > again.
>
> What's "stupid"? Not voting the way you think people should? One thing
> both major parties have worked together on is tightening their duopoly at
> the polls. Going along with that is what's "stupid" to me.
Stupid is what stupid does -- you vote for someone
without a chance in hell to do any good because,
well, there's nothing in that person's past to indicate
that's not going to happen, then that's being, well,
stupid, plain and simple. If you vote for someone
because you get suckered by campaign ads that
actually target dummies that can be counted on to
not really think things through, well, that's also
being stupid.
>
> > If you're not going to make the effort to tell
> > apart the candidates, it's kind of irresponsible to be
> > voting at all. It may be a right, but voting is also a
> > responsibility.
>
> You are an asshole. I didn't say there should be no effort to weed out
> good from bad - I said both sides have the same goal. Your
> myopic view (at the top of the post) that the GOP is bad and the Dems are
> good is fucking infantile.
Is that what I said? I thought I said something along
the lines that Democrats have their problems, but
the Republicans truly suck big time, to the point that
few if any good, competent people will have anything
to do with another Republican President. Which means
that voting for a Republican to be President will also
mean voting for a bunch of not-so-good, not-so-
competent people who will coming along as part of the
deal.
Sorry, but there's no getting around this until the
Republicans do a major house cleaning and rethink
long and hard about the purpose of government and
leadership and the responsibilities that entail.
-BC
lab~rat >:-)
puked:
>WTF does Al Gore have to do with
<snip>
Al Gore has much to do with all of the hate in this country. He tore
this country apart. Your post is evidence of what I am saying.
--
lab~rat >:-)
Of course Libby was convicted. He's a Republican and all Republicans
are always guilty.
This should be proof enough to drop all the charges against William
Jefferson. He clearly isn't a Republican...
Sid9
"lab~rat >:-)" <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote in message
news:b9cb635o13al7ho4d...@4ax.com...
If Jefferson is guilty
we don't want him
in the Democratic
party, we want him
in jail with the other
Republicans.
Sid9
Projecting what bsuh,jr did to our country.
lab~rat >:-)
You are in the minority with that opinion.
Now let me ask you this, what would you suggest should happen to him
if they let him off because of a technicality in the search and
recovery of the bribe money? Should he still be allowed to serve even
if he is not convicted?
lab~rat >:-)
Uh, Al Gore began the bitter feud before Bush even took office. He
will go down in history as being the villain in 2000. Has anyone EVER
tried to sue themselves into the presidency before like Al the big
crybaby?
Red
> On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 08:11:38 -0400, "Sid9" <s...@bellsouth.net> puked:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >"lab~rat >:-)" <c...@cheeze.net> wrote in message
> >news:pk8b639ae16qpjj02...@4ax.com...
> >> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 17:51:27 GMT, Tag Heuer <tagheuerb...@gmail.com>
> >> puked:
>
> >>>WTF does Al Gore have to do with
>
> >> <snip>
>
> >> Al Gore has much to do with all of the hate in this country. He tore
> >> this country apart. Your post is evidence of what I am saying.
> >> --
> >> lab~rat >:-)
> >> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
>
> >Projecting what bsuh,jr did to our country.
>
> Uh, Al Gore began the bitter feud before Bush even took office. He
> will go down in history as being the villain in 2000. Has anyone EVER
> tried to sue themselves into the presidency before like Al the big
> crybaby?
> --
> lab~rat >:-)
>
> - Show quoted text -
You know Bush has been bad, but AlGore would've been worse. Gore will
never be President. He's not liked. He's a bitter condescending old
man now. No one wants to be lectured and that's what Gore does. I do
like Obamasama's approach. He doesn't bully and he comes across a
nice guy. But he's more fluff than anything else. I do like Bill
Richardson and think he could make a good President. But he has no
chance either. We're left with McCain, Guiliani and Thompson if he
wants it. My prediction is it will be McCain or Thompson against Gore
or Obamasama. Hillary won't be there.
lab~rat >:-)
What about Romney?
In any event, if people were smart enough to vote for who would
actually be the best president for the country, none of those
Democrats would even register...
Angelocracy.com
> Hillary Clinton was the clear winner of the DemocraticDebate. Many of
> the candidates took shots at Hillary Clinton. At one point John
> Edwards and Barack Obama were trying some sort of tag team attack on
> Hillary Clinton . But Hillary Clinton held her own. And I think that
> John Edwards came in a strong second at thedebate.
>
> http://angelocracy.blogspot.com/2007/06/democratic-debate-hillary-cli...
http://angelocracy.blogspot.com/2007/06/republican-debate-who-will-be-last-man.html
Tag Heuer
wrote:
><snip>
>Al Gore has much to do with all of the hate in this country. He tore
>this country apart. Your post is evidence of what I am saying.
You are delusional, and snap out of it. That neuropoletic lip-smacking
baboon in the Whitehouse was anointed president by the U.S. Supreme
Court in 2001 and where this country is now was not of Gore's doing
but of that miserable failure who has led this nation into one of the
largest military and foreign policy debacles ever recorded in this
country. Furthermore, you have no 'evidence' whatsoever, but your
bigoted hatred of Gore of whom you yourself fear. Pull your rat-face
out of that sewer and take a breath of air, and consider the remote
and outside chance in your horror of a Gore ticket and presidential
nomination - LOL! BwaRHaRHAR!
You are now free, and I will leave you to go sh%t in your pants.
" . . . During my service in the United States Congress, I took the
initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving
forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important
to our country's economic growth and environmental protection,
improvements in our educational system . . ." - Al Gore, in not
"inventing the Internet," CNN Late Edition, March 9, 1999
>>>You, Al Gore, are one of the greatest terrorists this country has ever
>>>seen and should rot in Gitmo simply by existing...
>>Bwahahahahar! "Al Gore!?!?" You fear him . . . You wish he was
>>being incarcerated and tortured or even killed . . . You have no other
>>thought but to hate him, and such a deranged frame of mind illustrates
>>the insanity and where YOU and the Republican party belongs - In the
>>wild and the wilderness. Now strap on some kevlar, grab your gun and
>>get your pathetic coward f&%king ass over to Iraq in Bush's campaign
>>for his failed LEGACY, and where you STRICTLY belong, you F&%KING
>>traitor!
>>>lab~rat >:-)
>>>Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
>>Apparently you simply want to be an assh0le.
BC
> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 18:41:49 -0000, BC <callm...@gmail.com> puked:
For one William Jefferson, there are, what how may
Republicans? Actually you can just look at the scale
of misbehavior involved to gauge the difference between
even dishonest Democrats and Republicans:
Rep. William Jefferson: $90,000 in the fridge plus other
chump change:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/04/jefferson/index.html
Rep. Duke Cunningham: $2.4 Million plus an easy to
understand "bribe menu" with prices for his services:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=1667009
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/28/cunningham
Democratic corruption, when it occurs, is usually a small
time free lance operation. Republican corruption is almost
a standard service with handy rate cards, but for much
bigger bucks. I wonder if they have special sales for
President's Day -- you know, 10% off for eliminating an
environmental regulation, 2 for 1 when seeking a personal
meeting with the President and such...
-BC
lab~rat >:-)
puked:
<snip after-the-fact bullshit>
Gore has caused people like you to dislike people like me just because
I don't like Gore. You are weak minded and fell for a stunt that
backfired on him and has splintered the whole US.
>
>You are now free, and I will leave you to go sh%t in your pants.
>
>
>" . . . During my service in the United States Congress, I took the
>initiative in creating the Internet.
He didn't create shit. It was there and operational before he started
meddling with it.
And he did a shitty job, too.
Al Gore must like porn a lot because delivering porn is the only thing
the internet does reliably...
--
lab~rat >:-)
>>
>> >Someone is in need of a reality check:
>> >http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6685617,00.html
>>
>> >-BC
>>
>> Of course Libby was convicted. He's a Republican and all Republicans
>> are always guilty.
>>
>> This should be proof enough to drop all the charges against William
>> Jefferson. He clearly isn't a Republican...
>> --
>> lab~rat >:-)
>> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
>
>For one William Jefferson, there are, what how may
>Republicans? Actually you can just look at the scale
>of misbehavior involved to gauge the difference between
>even dishonest Democrats and Republicans:
>
>Rep. William Jefferson: $90,000 in the fridge plus other
>chump change:
>http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/04/jefferson/index.html
Just curious, do you think he should go to jail?
Tag Heuer
wrote:
>>><snip>
>>You are delusional, and snap out of it. That neuropoletic lip-smacking
>>baboon in the Whitehouse was anointed president by the U.S. Supreme
>>Court in 2001 and where this country is now was not of Gore's doing
>>but of that miserable failure who has led this nation into one of the
>>largest military and foreign policy debacles ever recorded in this
>>country. Furthermore, you have no 'evidence' whatsoever, but your
>>bigoted hatred of Gore of whom you yourself fear. Pull your rat-face
>>out of that sewer and take a breath of air, and consider the remote
>>and outside chance in your horror of a Gore ticket and presidential
>>nomination - LOL! BwaRHaRHAR!
><snip after-the-fact bullshit>
Aw.
>Gore has caused people like you to dislike people like me just because
>I don't like Gore. You are weak minded and fell for a stunt that
>backfired on him and has splintered the whole US.
"People like you?" You are a goddamn rodent fer' Christsakes! The
manner in which you think and communicate don't count as what rational
and intelligent "people" could be construed as. In fact, I'm inclined
to believe that "people like you" may perhaps be that 20 or some odd
percent of Americans who continue to hug that baboon in the
Whitehouse. "Splintered?" Take a look at the 10 morons of the
Apocalypse who debated last night in New Hampshire - There is your
godforsaken "splinter" and guess whose responsible for that?
At no time in recent memory has one party gone this early in trying to
capture the nomination for an election a year and a half away! This
Chimp is so F%&KED up that even members of his own party are jockeying
to obscure their imminent entry in the Political Wilderness and to rid
this country of such a criminal miscreant and failure. Furthermore,
ask yourself why Cheney isn't running for the nomination, as in the
case of VP Gore, VP George H. W. Bush and all vice presidential
incumbents and presidential hopefuls thereafter? There is a term and
it is called "plunder." Nevertheless, the damage to the respect,
prestige, honor, integrity and security has long since been done since
Bush was appointed President. But of course to you it's "all Gore's
fault."
>>You are now free, and I will leave you to go sh%t in your pants.
>>" . . . During my service in the United States Congress, I took the
>>initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving
>>forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important
>>to our country's economic growth and environmental protection,
>>improvements in our educational system . . ." - Al Gore, in not
>>"inventing the Internet," CNN Late Edition, March 9, 1999
>He didn't create shit. It was there and operational before he started
>meddling with it. And he did a shitty job, too. Al Gore must like porn a
>lot because delivering porn is the only thing the internet does reliably...
Take your soiled diarrhea dripping diaper and wrap it around your
mouth - You are PROJECTING! Accept the fact that Gore is no more of a
threat to you than you finding a clue itself. You delude yourself to
the point of psychotic incoherency that you clearly need clinical help
- And fast. Furthermore, you point that Gore himself has destroyed
what he wasn't in the capacity to destroy is just plain lunacy - It
was that monkey in the Whitehouse who allowed the worst terror attack
on US soil in recent memory; it was that draft dodging AWOL idiot who
unilaterally created a terrorist haven AND a religious sectarian war
in a country that had NOTHING to do with 9/11; it was that smirking
chimp who for all his incoherent neueropoletic psycho babble that has
retarded the American people at large into believing that the
Consitution and our Rights should take a back-seat to his pogrom of
eliminating them little, and beginning with "warrantless
surveillance," sanctioned data mining and through an instrument known
as the Patriot Act; it was that moron who believes that GOD tells him
what to do, and fails to see the immoral decay that he has wrought
upon the country, and to the "horror" of a half of a country's people,
that once "trusted" him.
Now try wedging that into what's left of your capacity to think, Rat.
>>>>>You, Al Gore, are one of the greatest terrorists this country has ever
>>>>>seen and should rot in Gitmo simply by existing...
>>>>Bwahahahahar! "Al Gore!?!?" You fear him . . . You wish he was
>>>>being incarcerated and tortured or even killed . . . You have no other
>>>>thought but to hate him, and such a deranged frame of mind illustrates
>>>>the insanity and where YOU and the Republican party belongs - In the
>>>>wild and the wilderness. Now strap on some kevlar, grab your gun and
>>>>get your pathetic coward f&%king ass over to Iraq in Bush's campaign
>>>>for his failed LEGACY, and where you STRICTLY belong, you F&%KING
>>>>traitor!
>>>>>lab~rat >:-)
>>>>>Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
>>>>Apparently you simply want to be an assh0le.
Sid9
If he's fround guilty he ought to go to
jail for them maximum according to law
Red
> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 07:28:55 -0700, Red <RedRedCoun...@aol.com> puked:
Too much fluff. I think he's a good guy but I don't particularly care
for Mormons. Too cultish for me.
Red
>
> Democratic corruption, when it occurs, is usually a small
> time free lance operation. Republican corruption is almost
> a standard service with handy rate cards, but for much
> bigger bucks. I wonder if they have special sales for
> President's Day -- you know, 10% off for eliminating an
> environmental regulation, 2 for 1 when seeking a personal
> meeting with the President and such...
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
They're saying Jefferson has much more money than you think from
illegal stuff. He was negotiating with everyone for illegal
kickbacks. Don't be surprised if we never hear about it. And no one
has stolen more money than John Murtha. Even his brother who is a
lobbyist has it all set up.
Red
> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 17:15:56 GMT, "lab~rat >:-)" <c...@cheeze.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >>On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 16:18:07 GMT, Tag Heuer <tagheuerb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 12:06:45 GMT, "lab~rat >:-)" <c...@cheeze.net> wrote:
> >>>>On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 17:51:27 GMT, Tag Heuer <tagheuerb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 16:57:08 GMT, "lab~rat >:-)" <c...@cheeze.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 16:47:07 GMT, Tag Heuer <tagheuerb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 14:31:15 -0700, AnAmericanCitizen <NoAmne...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 14:47:45 GMT, "lab~rat >:-)" <c...@cheeze.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>They all were wonderful. Clearly each represents exactly what this
> >>>>>>>>country is all about. The biggest pity is that we can't elect them
> >>>>>>>>all co-presidents because they are all so great.
> >>>>>>>Clearly why there are so many republicans/independents in the country....AAC
> >>>>>>And wandering right smack dab into an unprecedented 'political
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Vote Republican....for a change!
BC
> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 09:58:33 -0700, BC <callm...@gmail.com> puked:
He seems pretty damn jail-worthy to me. But then I
think Bush needs his sorry lying-ass behind bars
more than any other American politician so what do
I know.
-BC
The Pretzel
the case.
> --
> lab~rat >:-)
> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
sincerity Rightards can provide...
lab~rat >:-)
puked:
Holy shit, I think I just caused more division with one post that Al
Gore. Dude, just calm your flakey ass down. Reread your hate-filled
blather.
Look, I'm extending an olive branch here. You really show some wit in
your writing, not a whole wit, but somewhere hovering around half.
With some work you could advance that to a full nit worth of wit.
Now tell me, how do you feel about George W. Bush?
--
lab~rat >:-)
Do you think they should pursue the supposed wrongdoing in the search
aspect? And if they find that the search was unlawful, should he go
free?
lab~rat >:-)
puked:
Should he? Answer the question.
>> --
>> lab~rat >:-)
>> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
>We get sincere stupidity from you, Rightard. It's the only form of
>sincerity Rightards can provide...
Brilliant.
lab~rat >:-)
>>
>> What about Romney?
>>
>> In any event, if people were smart enough to vote for who would
>> actually be the best president for the country, none of those
>> Democrats would even register...
>> --
>> lab~rat >:-)
>> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>Too much fluff. I think he's a good guy but I don't particularly care
>for Mormons. Too cultish for me.
Moreso than Catholics? I doubt that...
KK
> Delay, Frist, Santorum, Hastert, Pombo,
> Sensenbrenner, Hatch, Roberts, etc, friggin etc.
> For every bad Democrat like William Jefferson, you
> have a garbage truck's worth of Republicans.
And your head's too far in the sand to see that for every one of them,
there's just as filthy a Democrat.
Wright, Trafficant, Keating, (three of the other Keating 5), etc., etc.,
etc.
You say it's foolish to support someone who won't win - but what's more
foolish than voting for a piece of shit just hoping you'll be able to beam
that you voted for the "winner"?
Tag Heuer
wrote:
>>>>><snip>
>>><snip after-the-fact bullshit>
>>Aw.
Again, you MISSED the point entirely. Al Gore has NOTHING to do with
the context of this thread. You tossed him in in hopes of spinning it
in one partisan way or another and altogether not coming close to a
coherent rebut in defense of those ten geriatric mental midgets that
debated yesterday - Furthermore, in terms of making "nice," I
respectfully suggest that to reconfigure your default reply script,
you duplicitous vomitous rodent.
>>>>>>>You, Al Gore, are one of the greatest terrorists this country has ever
>>>>>>>seen and should rot in Gitmo simply by existing...
>>>>>>Bwahahahahar! "Al Gore!?!?" You fear him . . . You wish he was
>>>>>>being incarcerated and tortured or even killed . . . You have no other
>>>>>>thought but to hate him, and such a deranged frame of mind illustrates
>>>>>>the insanity and where YOU and the Republican party belongs - In the
>>>>>>wild and the wilderness. Now strap on some kevlar, grab your gun and
>>>>>>get your pathetic coward f&%king ass over to Iraq in Bush's campaign
>>>>>>for his failed LEGACY, and where you STRICTLY belong, you F&%KING
>>>>>>traitor!
>>>>>>>lab~rat >:-)
>>>>>>>Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
>>>>>>Apparently you simply want to be an assh0le.
lab~rat >:-)
puked:
>>Holy shit, I think I just caused more division with one post that Al
>>Gore. Dude, just calm your flakey ass down. Reread your hate-filled
>>blather. Look, I'm extending an olive branch here. You really show some
>>wit in your writing, not a whole wit, but somewhere hovering around half.
>>With some work you could advance that to a full nit worth of wit. Now tell
>>me, how do you feel about George W. Bush?
>
>Again, you MISSED the point entirely. Al Gore has NOTHING to do with
>the context of this thread. You tossed him in in hopes of spinning it
>in one partisan way or another and altogether not coming close to a
>coherent rebut in defense of those ten geriatric mental midgets that
>debated yesterday - Furthermore, in terms of making "nice," I
>respectfully suggest that to reconfigure your default reply script,
>you duplicitous vomitous rodent.
Jeez, Al Gore zombies are not only losing their sense of humor, but
are becoming rigid bores just like their master...
--
BC
You're ir-rationalizing just like the people who
think this current round of global warming is
natural and point to what very, VERY few
scientists percentagewise, nearly all of whom
with expertise not directly applicable, who still
believe that.
I can't emphasize enough how Republican
leaders via their support of Bush and their
overall dispicable behavior over the past several
years have alienated all the wrong people to
alienate.
Did you see that lineup of Republican candidates
for President the other night and their answers to
questions? Any one of those God-quoting clowns
would be disasterous as a follow-up to Bush, with
the lone, barely possible exception of McCain, who
use to be considered a "good" Republican prior
to the 2004 election.
-BC
KK
> ou're ir-rationalizing just like the people who
> think this current round of global warming is
> natural and point to what very, VERY few
> scientists percentagewise, nearly all of whom
> with expertise not directly applicable, who still
> believe that.
Knowledge is not gained through consensus or vote.
>
> I can't emphasize enough how Republican
> leaders via their support of Bush and their
> overall dispicable behavior over the past several
> years have alienated all the wrong people to
> alienate.
And, as I can't seem to pound hard enough into your thick skull, ditto for
Dems (except the Bush part).
> Did you see that lineup of Republican candidates
> for President the other night and their answers to
> questions? Any one of those God-quoting clowns
> would be disasterous as a follow-up to Bush, with
> the lone, barely possible exception of McCain, who
> use to be considered a "good" Republican prior
> to the 2004 election.
Ron Paul was the only honest one up there.
And McCain was not considered a "good" Republican by many people - for one
reason, his free speech-busting McCain-Feingold Act.
BC
> On Jun 5, 10:06?am, BC <callm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 5, 9:33 am, Red <RedRedCoun...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 4, 8:10?pm, BC <callm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jun 4, 4:22 pm, Red <RedRedCoun...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jun 4, 12:57?pm, "Patriot Games" <Crazy_Bastard@The_Beach.com>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > "Guy" <nos...@nospam.us> wrote in message
>
> > > > > >news:466458f2$0$12439$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
> > > > > > > "KK" <_...@furburger.net> wrote in message
> > > > > > >news:pan.2007.06.04....@furburger.net...
> > > > > > >> On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 17:17:28 +0000, BC wrote:
> > > > > > >>> Voting in another
> > > > > > >>> Republican President for 2008
> > > > > > >> He
> > > > > > >> certainly doesn't look like one to me.
> > > > > > > There was an (R) beside his name on the ballot.
>
> > > > > > For future reference...
>
> > > > > > 'D' = Dolt.
>
> > > > > > 'R' = Retard.
>
> > > > > I can agree with this!
>
> > > > Cute but this cynicism isn't going to help matters.
> > > > When you vote in a President, you just don't get
> > > > a Vice-President as part of the deal -- you get an
> > > > army of appointees and staff replacements, as well
> > > > as an inderminate list of favors owed and unknown
> > > > agendas. Democrats have tended to draw in best
> > > > and brightest earniest do-gooders, while the
> > > > Republicans seem to prefer businessmen and to
> > > > reward people for good, loyal service and return
> > > > favors.
>
> > > > We're going to be need a whole of lot very smart,
> > > > highly capable people placed in government on the
> > > > next go round to deal with a huge host of problems
> > > > that Bush and company either ignored or made
> > > > worse. But the cynicism is running so deep now
> > > > that any new President may have a lot of trouble
> > > > getting the right people to join in. Not good....
>
> > > > -BC- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > Carter had as many buffoons as Georgie does. Back then we had 20%
> > > interest rates, 20% inflation and gas lines. Most of these appointees
> > > do this to get rewarded down the road.
>
> > Carter was a long time ago -- things have become a
> > lot, LOT more lopsided. I myself am in an awkward
> > position where I was involved recently in a certain
> > issue involving a massive bank hack attempt that I
> > detected and reported on. That meant dealing with
> > certain government agencies that use to be
> > considered kind of cool. While intellectually I knew
> > I was being overall helpful and doing the right thing,
> > gutwise I felt I was somehow helping Bush, however
> > indirectly, and I found that idea so utterly repulsive
> > that I don't want to be involved beyond the minimal
> > needed. As much as I really dislike Bush, I was still
> > taken by surprise by my gut reaction. I haven't fully
> > decided what to do yet -- I normally don't think twice
> > about being responsible and helpful, but because of
> > the nature of the current government....I can't
> > emphasize enough how awkward and uneasy I feel
> > about being involved in any way. I'm sure I'm not the
> > only person who found him/herself in this situation.
> > Like I said, not good....
>
> > -BC- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> world post 9-11.
If you guys really understood how dysfunctional
overall the US has been in dealing with the "post
9-11" world, you would not be even entertaining
the idea of voting Republican again in 2008. It's
been one f*ck-up after another. My main concern
of late has involved cybersecurity, and that by
itself has been a colossal mess of incompetence
and either inaction or the wrong action -- pretty
much like everything else. It's been fortunate that
the bad guys are mostly even more stupid. For
me personally, it's been the case of lots of WTF!'s.
I want to help, but I also don't want to deal with
dysfunctional people more interested in protecting
their jobs and maintaining blamelessness than in
actually being on top of things and doing their jobs
well and responsibly.
-BC