Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
"The Five" co-host Eric Bolling to Obama: "Quit using our military as a photo-op"
18 views
Skip to first unread message
One Big Assed Mistake America
May 2, 2012, 4:14:23 AM5/2/12
to
http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/27/the-five-co-host-eric-bolling-
to-obama-quit-using-ou-military-the-as-a-photo-op/
On Friday’s “The Five,” co-host Eric Bolling took issue with
President Barack Obama’s Ft. Stewart, Ga. announcement of an
executive order to crack down on institutions that “aggressively
target veterans” for the G.I. Bill’s tuition assistance, saying
that the men and women of the Armed Forces don’t need the
president’s protection from so-called predatory institutions, as
they have faced much worse on the battlefield.
“These heroic men and women do more for freedom, more for
America in a day, than you will ever do, sir,” Bolling said.
“Don’t insult them by talking about schools preying on them.
They take live rounds. They deal with roadside bombs. They risk
their lives, sir. They’ll be OK with Dean Wormer.”
Bolling went on to castigate Obama for what he perceived to be a
campaign speech with soldiers as a backdrop.
“And by the way, how about you stop insulting Americans who see
right through you while you deliver a left-wing campaign speech
while pretending to give a damn about their service?” he
continued. “And one more thing — quit using our military as
photo op — it’s unbecoming of a commander-in-chief.”
to-obama-quit-using-ou-military-the-as-a-photo-op/
On Friday’s “The Five,” co-host Eric Bolling took issue with
President Barack Obama’s Ft. Stewart, Ga. announcement of an
executive order to crack down on institutions that “aggressively
target veterans” for the G.I. Bill’s tuition assistance, saying
that the men and women of the Armed Forces don’t need the
president’s protection from so-called predatory institutions, as
they have faced much worse on the battlefield.
“These heroic men and women do more for freedom, more for
America in a day, than you will ever do, sir,” Bolling said.
“Don’t insult them by talking about schools preying on them.
They take live rounds. They deal with roadside bombs. They risk
their lives, sir. They’ll be OK with Dean Wormer.”
Bolling went on to castigate Obama for what he perceived to be a
campaign speech with soldiers as a backdrop.
“And by the way, how about you stop insulting Americans who see
right through you while you deliver a left-wing campaign speech
while pretending to give a damn about their service?” he
continued. “And one more thing — quit using our military as
photo op — it’s unbecoming of a commander-in-chief.”
Jeff M
May 2, 2012, 8:36:19 AM5/2/12
to
On 5/2/2012 3:14 AM, One Big Assed Mistake America wrote:
> http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/27/the-five-co-host-eric-bolling-
> to-obama-quit-using-ou-military-the-as-a-photo-op/
>
> On Friday’s “The Five,” co-host Eric Bolling took issue with
> President Barack Obama’s Ft. Stewart, Ga. announcement of an
> executive order to crack down on institutions that “aggressively
> target veterans” for the G.I. Bill’s tuition assistance, saying
> that the men and women of the Armed Forces don’t need the
> president’s protection from so-called predatory institutions, as
> they have faced much worse on the battlefield.
>
> “These heroic men and women do more for freedom, more for
> America in a day, than you will ever do, sir,” Bolling said.
> “Don’t insult them by talking about schools preying on them.
> They take live rounds. They deal with roadside bombs. They risk
> their lives, sir. They’ll be OK with Dean Wormer.”
What a silly, misplaced rant. These fly by night "schools" lie to
> http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/27/the-five-co-host-eric-bolling-
> to-obama-quit-using-ou-military-the-as-a-photo-op/
>
> On Friday’s “The Five,” co-host Eric Bolling took issue with
> President Barack Obama’s Ft. Stewart, Ga. announcement of an
> executive order to crack down on institutions that “aggressively
> target veterans” for the G.I. Bill’s tuition assistance, saying
> that the men and women of the Armed Forces don’t need the
> president’s protection from so-called predatory institutions, as
> they have faced much worse on the battlefield.
>
> “These heroic men and women do more for freedom, more for
> America in a day, than you will ever do, sir,” Bolling said.
> “Don’t insult them by talking about schools preying on them.
> They take live rounds. They deal with roadside bombs. They risk
> their lives, sir. They’ll be OK with Dean Wormer.”
active duty service members and vets looking to develop job skills for
their return to civilian life. They promise them the Moon to get them
to sign up, then take all their VA education benefits, and often
considerable cash out of their pocket. But all they get in return is
usually some on-line or correspondence "courses" or other dubious
instruction in a non-accredited program. Therefore, any credit hours
awarded cannot be recognized by real colleges toward a degree, and any
certifications or diplomas they award are essentially worthless.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating, as the saying goes, and these
programs have a long track record of high "tuition" and very few
students actually employed at whatever job they were supposedly trained
for or going on to earn college degrees. Meanwhile, they pay their
"recruiters" enormous sums and often a bounty on each vet they sign up.
In consequence, there are many cases where wounded, disabled, brain
damaged vets have been enrolled in programs they could not possibly hope
to pursue, because the VA will pay the tuition.
How dare the Obama administration work to help vets who "risked their
lives" serving our country avoid being exploited by these corporate
rip-off artists? Don't they know that these brave young men and women
fought for the RIGHT of those very corporations to take from them
everything they've earned, in return for an empty promise to help them
make better lives for themselves?
Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names
May 2, 2012, 9:37:44 AM5/2/12
to
On 2 May 2012 08:14:23 -0000, "One Big Assed Mistake America"
Obama using troops for a photo op? You mean he fly in, landed on a
carrier, and strutted around in a flight suit with a MISSION
ACCOMPLISHED banner flying in the breeze? Damn, I missed that.
carrier, and strutted around in a flight suit with a MISSION
ACCOMPLISHED banner flying in the breeze? Damn, I missed that.
de...@dudu.org
May 2, 2012, 10:17:33 AM5/2/12
to
Sir Ray
May 2, 2012, 10:49:50 AM5/2/12
to
So, Obama should listen to some fool host on a Fox talk show...
because?
because?
max headroom
May 2, 2012, 11:01:10 AM5/2/12
to
Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names <PopUl...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:t3e2q7dca8s5liern...@6ax.com:
> Obama using troops for a photo op? You mean he fly in, landed on a
> carrier, and strutted around in a flight suit with a MISSION
> ACCOMPLISHED banner flying in the breeze? Damn, I missed that.
As if he could do anything so complex.
news:t3e2q7dca8s5liern...@6ax.com:
> Obama using troops for a photo op? You mean he fly in, landed on a
> carrier, and strutted around in a flight suit with a MISSION
> ACCOMPLISHED banner flying in the breeze? Damn, I missed that.
Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E
May 2, 2012, 1:00:47 PM5/2/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
Why would he?? Does he need a "flight sui" to ride a girl's bike and
eat dogs?
Btw,why does Obama need a "flight jacket" when he can't even fly a
kite??
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-05-05/president-barack-obama-wears-an-af1-air-force-one/1672758
http://www.utsandiego.com/photos/2010/mar/28/136991/
Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E
May 2, 2012, 12:59:57 PM5/2/12
to
On May 2, 9:49 am, Sir Ray <waterboi5...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> So, Obama should listen to some fool host on a Fox talk show...
> because?
Obama doesn't listen to anybody. He's too inftuated with the sound of
> So, Obama should listen to some fool host on a Fox talk show...
> because?
his own voice to shutup long enough to listen.
"Aloof and distant"
http://beforeitsnews.com/story/2019/436/Visibly_Annoyed_and_Aloof_Obama_Gets_Slammed_by_Brazilian_President_Over_U.S._Monetary_Policy.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/29/us/politics/obama-gains-reputation-as-distant-in-washington.html
JohnJohnsn
May 2, 2012, 2:10:47 PM5/2/12
to
On May 2, 12:00 pm, "Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey Rd.,Wilmington,D.C"
<burtonu...@gmail.com> wrote:
his closet???
>
That isn't a "flight jacket," Bob; that is an U.S. Air Force "JACKET,
MAN'S LIGHTWEIGHT, WITH REMOVABLE LINER" (a/k/a windbreaker) straight
from DSCP {Defense Supply Center Philadelphia), which has been custom
embroidered with the Air Force One logo and wearer's name, and is
standard issue for all Air Force One flight and support personnel.
Do you want to buy the souvenir version? Just 45-to-60 bucks:
http://whitehouse.merchantcart.net/mainshopping.cfm?icg_id=25&showsku_ID=850&sm_id=109
How about "the gen-u-ine article? Obama has them `On Sale' for a mere
hundred bucks (marked down from $129.95):
http://whitehousegiftsandapparel.com/airfooneprja.html
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-05-05/president-barack-obama-wears-an-af1-air-force-one/1672758
> http://media.utsandiego.com/img/photos/2010/03/28/c8ef8659-8a61-4741-95af-4eb90662bdb1news.ap.org_t620.jpg
>
That, OTOH, _is_ a leather "flight jacket."
>
> http://www.utsandiego.com/photos/2010/mar/28/136991/
>
These Lying Liberals continue to ignore and distort the truth about
the "Mission Accomplished" banner.
It was put up by Capt. Kendall L. Card; the captain of the USS Abraham
Lincoln (CVN 72) to commemorate the Lincoln's deployment "mission"
being "accomplished:" it wasn't for or about George W Bush.
You will note that the banner was still posted as the Lincoln arrived
back in port at San Diego CA; a day after Bush's visit:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/USS_Abraham_Lincoln_%28CVN-72%29_Mission_Accomplished.jpg
The USS Abraham Lincoln returning to port carrying its Mission
Accomplished banner, 2 May 2003.
Moreover:
"The carrier returned home in May 2003, in the process receiving a
visit from President George W. Bush before officially ending Lincoln's
deployment by docking at San Diego before returning to homeport in
Everett, WA. Bush stated at the time that this was the end to major
combat operations in Iraq. While this statement did coincide with an
end to the conventional phase of the war, Bush's assertion—and the
sign itself—became controversial after guerrilla warfare in Iraq
increased during the Iraqi insurgency. The vast majority of
casualties, both military and civilian, have occurred since the
speech. The White House said their services constructed the banner. As
explained by Cmdr. Conrad Chun, a Navy spokesman, "The banner was a
Navy idea, the ship's idea. The idea popped up in one of the meetings
aboard the ship preparing for its homecoming and thought it would be
good to have a banner, 'Mission Accomplished.' The sailors then asked
if the White House could get the sign made. ... The banner signified
the successful completion of the ship's deployment," Cmdr. Chun
continued noting that the Abraham Lincoln was deployed 290 days,
longer than any other nuclear-powered aircraft carrier in history."
...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Abraham_Lincoln_(CVN-72)
From the Lincoln's history page:
May 1, U.S. President George W. Bush made his historic landing on the
deck of USS Abraham Lincoln in an S-3B Viking, piloted by Cmdr. John
"Loose" Lussier, VS-35 XO, and Lt. Ryan Phillips. This marked the
first time a sitting President landed on a carrier in a fixed-wing
aircraft.
May 5, USS Abraham Lincoln returned to Everett [WA] after nine-and-a-
half month combat deployment. The ship traveled 102,816 n.m., recorded
12,700 arrested landings and launched 16,500 sorties.
http://www.uscarriers.net/cvn72history.htm
BTW, Scheißekopf:
1) You don't fly or ride in an S-3B Viking during a "COD" ("carrier
onboard delivery") mission (which, BTW, is usually accomplished with a
Grumman C-2 Greyhound instead of the S-3B) without wearing a flight
suit _and_ flight helmet; and,
2) As a former Air Force fighter pilot himself, he was more that
qualified to be wearing the flight suit in the first place.
<burtonu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On May 2, 9:17 am, Scheißekopf <d...@dudu.org> wrote:
>
>> On 2 May 2012 08:14:23 -0000, "One Big Assed Mistake America"
>> <o.b.a....@mistake.com> wrote:
>>>http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/27/the-five-co-host-eric-bolling-to-obama-quit-using-ou-military-the-as-a-photo-op/
>
>>> On Friday’s “The Five,” co-host Eric Bolling took issue with
>>> President Barack Obama’s Ft. Stewart, Ga. announcement of an
>>> executive order to crack down on institutions that “aggressively
>>> target veterans” for the G.I. Bill’s tuition assistance, saying
>>> that the men and women of the Armed Forces don’t need the
>>> president’s protection from so-called predatory institutions, as
>>> they have faced much worse on the battlefield.
>
>>>“These heroic men and women do more for freedom, more for
>>> America in a day, than you will ever do, sir,” Bolling said.
>>>“Don’t insult them by talking about schools preying on them.
>>> They take live rounds. They deal with roadside bombs. They risk
>>> their lives, sir. They’ll be OK with Dean Wormer.”
>
>>> Bolling went on to castigate Obama for what he perceived to be
>>> a campaign speech with soldiers as a backdrop.
>
>>>“And by the way, how about you stop insulting Americans who see
>>> right through you while you deliver a left-wing campaign speech
>>> while pretending to give a damn about their service?” he
>>> continued. “And one more thing — quit using our military as
>>> photo op — it’s unbecoming of a commander-in-chief.”
>
>> Too bad Obama doesn't have a flight suit.
>
How do you know he doesn't, Scheißekopf: you been snooping around in
>
> On May 2, 9:17 am, Scheißekopf <d...@dudu.org> wrote:
>
>> On 2 May 2012 08:14:23 -0000, "One Big Assed Mistake America"
>> <o.b.a....@mistake.com> wrote:
>>>http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/27/the-five-co-host-eric-bolling-to-obama-quit-using-ou-military-the-as-a-photo-op/
>
>>> On Friday’s “The Five,” co-host Eric Bolling took issue with
>>> President Barack Obama’s Ft. Stewart, Ga. announcement of an
>>> executive order to crack down on institutions that “aggressively
>>> target veterans” for the G.I. Bill’s tuition assistance, saying
>>> that the men and women of the Armed Forces don’t need the
>>> president’s protection from so-called predatory institutions, as
>>> they have faced much worse on the battlefield.
>
>>>“These heroic men and women do more for freedom, more for
>>> America in a day, than you will ever do, sir,” Bolling said.
>>>“Don’t insult them by talking about schools preying on them.
>>> They take live rounds. They deal with roadside bombs. They risk
>>> their lives, sir. They’ll be OK with Dean Wormer.”
>
>>> Bolling went on to castigate Obama for what he perceived to be
>>> a campaign speech with soldiers as a backdrop.
>
>>>“And by the way, how about you stop insulting Americans who see
>>> right through you while you deliver a left-wing campaign speech
>>> while pretending to give a damn about their service?” he
>>> continued. “And one more thing — quit using our military as
>>> photo op — it’s unbecoming of a commander-in-chief.”
>
>> Too bad Obama doesn't have a flight suit.
>
his closet???
>
> Why would he??
> Does he need a "flight sui" to ride a girl's bike and eat dogs?
>
> Btw,why does Obama need a "flight jacket" when he can't even fly a
> kite??
>
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/1672758-3x2-940x627.jpg
> Why would he??
> Does he need a "flight sui" to ride a girl's bike and eat dogs?
>
> Btw,why does Obama need a "flight jacket" when he can't even fly a
> kite??
>
>
That isn't a "flight jacket," Bob; that is an U.S. Air Force "JACKET,
MAN'S LIGHTWEIGHT, WITH REMOVABLE LINER" (a/k/a windbreaker) straight
from DSCP {Defense Supply Center Philadelphia), which has been custom
embroidered with the Air Force One logo and wearer's name, and is
standard issue for all Air Force One flight and support personnel.
Do you want to buy the souvenir version? Just 45-to-60 bucks:
http://whitehouse.merchantcart.net/mainshopping.cfm?icg_id=25&showsku_ID=850&sm_id=109
How about "the gen-u-ine article? Obama has them `On Sale' for a mere
hundred bucks (marked down from $129.95):
http://whitehousegiftsandapparel.com/airfooneprja.html
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-05-05/president-barack-obama-wears-an-af1-air-force-one/1672758
> http://media.utsandiego.com/img/photos/2010/03/28/c8ef8659-8a61-4741-95af-4eb90662bdb1news.ap.org_t620.jpg
>
That, OTOH, _is_ a leather "flight jacket."
>
> http://www.utsandiego.com/photos/2010/mar/28/136991/
>
These Lying Liberals continue to ignore and distort the truth about
the "Mission Accomplished" banner.
It was put up by Capt. Kendall L. Card; the captain of the USS Abraham
Lincoln (CVN 72) to commemorate the Lincoln's deployment "mission"
being "accomplished:" it wasn't for or about George W Bush.
You will note that the banner was still posted as the Lincoln arrived
back in port at San Diego CA; a day after Bush's visit:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/USS_Abraham_Lincoln_%28CVN-72%29_Mission_Accomplished.jpg
The USS Abraham Lincoln returning to port carrying its Mission
Accomplished banner, 2 May 2003.
Moreover:
"The carrier returned home in May 2003, in the process receiving a
visit from President George W. Bush before officially ending Lincoln's
deployment by docking at San Diego before returning to homeport in
Everett, WA. Bush stated at the time that this was the end to major
combat operations in Iraq. While this statement did coincide with an
end to the conventional phase of the war, Bush's assertion—and the
sign itself—became controversial after guerrilla warfare in Iraq
increased during the Iraqi insurgency. The vast majority of
casualties, both military and civilian, have occurred since the
speech. The White House said their services constructed the banner. As
explained by Cmdr. Conrad Chun, a Navy spokesman, "The banner was a
Navy idea, the ship's idea. The idea popped up in one of the meetings
aboard the ship preparing for its homecoming and thought it would be
good to have a banner, 'Mission Accomplished.' The sailors then asked
if the White House could get the sign made. ... The banner signified
the successful completion of the ship's deployment," Cmdr. Chun
continued noting that the Abraham Lincoln was deployed 290 days,
longer than any other nuclear-powered aircraft carrier in history."
...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Abraham_Lincoln_(CVN-72)
From the Lincoln's history page:
May 1, U.S. President George W. Bush made his historic landing on the
deck of USS Abraham Lincoln in an S-3B Viking, piloted by Cmdr. John
"Loose" Lussier, VS-35 XO, and Lt. Ryan Phillips. This marked the
first time a sitting President landed on a carrier in a fixed-wing
aircraft.
May 5, USS Abraham Lincoln returned to Everett [WA] after nine-and-a-
half month combat deployment. The ship traveled 102,816 n.m., recorded
12,700 arrested landings and launched 16,500 sorties.
http://www.uscarriers.net/cvn72history.htm
BTW, Scheißekopf:
1) You don't fly or ride in an S-3B Viking during a "COD" ("carrier
onboard delivery") mission (which, BTW, is usually accomplished with a
Grumman C-2 Greyhound instead of the S-3B) without wearing a flight
suit _and_ flight helmet; and,
2) As a former Air Force fighter pilot himself, he was more that
qualified to be wearing the flight suit in the first place.
N Shaun Kiser
May 2, 2012, 5:44:25 PM5/2/12
to
Ramon is foreign transplant originally from Venezuela, probably a
beaner terrorist, and definitely a Fraud. Ramon F Herrera also goes by
"Cambridge Ray," "Google Poster," "Lucius Sanctimonious," and
"Hadron.".An ultra-left, open-borders pretend-American. He lives and
works in Houston, TX. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you
encourage them to continue lying.
Ramon F Herrera
13313 Cutten Rd, Apt 7102
Houston, TX 77069-2374
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 18:08:40 -0700 (PDT), Ramon F Herrera
<gopo...@jonjay.com> wrote:
>Oh, the Tea Party slashed the ICE and BP budget.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
President Barack Obama's proposed 2011 budget would cut the border
patrol by 180 agents and trim spending on a "virtual fence" along the
nation's Southwest border.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/02/01/20100201border-patrol-obama-cuts.html
Posted from:
The DemocRATs Hall of Shame!
http://www.democrathallofshame.com/
beaner terrorist, and definitely a Fraud. Ramon F Herrera also goes by
"Cambridge Ray," "Google Poster," "Lucius Sanctimonious," and
"Hadron.".An ultra-left, open-borders pretend-American. He lives and
works in Houston, TX. Note that when you reply to a Proven Liar you
encourage them to continue lying.
Ramon F Herrera
13313 Cutten Rd, Apt 7102
Houston, TX 77069-2374
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 18:08:40 -0700 (PDT), Ramon F Herrera
<gopo...@jonjay.com> wrote:
>Oh, the Tea Party slashed the ICE and BP budget.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
President Barack Obama's proposed 2011 budget would cut the border
patrol by 180 agents and trim spending on a "virtual fence" along the
nation's Southwest border.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/02/01/20100201border-patrol-obama-cuts.html
Posted from:
The DemocRATs Hall of Shame!
http://www.democrathallofshame.com/
Lissa Damion Gallardo
May 2, 2012, 5:45:06 PM5/2/12
to
Sir Gay is an unidentified imposter (sock puppet) and scores 9.4 on
the Faggotry Meter. (Which strongly suggests he is a sock puppet of
Fwanklin Hummer, although others suggest he is a sock of Retardia or
Lickin' Ass.) Sir Gay is mostly a public imbecile, a proven liar and
an ultra-left butthurt faggot.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 12:36:52 -0800 (PST), Sir Ray
<waterb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Re: Patriot Games a little late to the Contraception Coverage discussion.
>Seeing as how this was discussed yesterday in detail Patriot, you're a
>little late to the party...
Oops! Caught lying...
About 3 hours ago...
Catholic church stance on contraception policy speaks to subordination
of women
Sunday, February 12, 2012, 9:03 AM
http://blog.nj.com/njv_john_farmer/2012/02/catholic_church_stance_on_cont.html
About 1 hour ago...
Of Contraceptives and Same-Sex Marriage
02/12/2012 11:20 am
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/geoffrey-r-stone/obama-contraceptives-prop-8_b_1271509.html?ref=politics
the Faggotry Meter. (Which strongly suggests he is a sock puppet of
Fwanklin Hummer, although others suggest he is a sock of Retardia or
Lickin' Ass.) Sir Gay is mostly a public imbecile, a proven liar and
an ultra-left butthurt faggot.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
<waterb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Re: Patriot Games a little late to the Contraception Coverage discussion.
>Seeing as how this was discussed yesterday in detail Patriot, you're a
>little late to the party...
Oops! Caught lying...
About 3 hours ago...
Catholic church stance on contraception policy speaks to subordination
of women
Sunday, February 12, 2012, 9:03 AM
http://blog.nj.com/njv_john_farmer/2012/02/catholic_church_stance_on_cont.html
About 1 hour ago...
Of Contraceptives and Same-Sex Marriage
02/12/2012 11:20 am
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/geoffrey-r-stone/obama-contraceptives-prop-8_b_1271509.html?ref=politics
Gray Guest
May 3, 2012, 8:18:30 PM5/3/12
to
--
I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to
be sure.
What I like about this attitude is it works equally well for Iran and the
Democrat National Covention.
http://nukeitfromorbit.com/
Jeff M
May 3, 2012, 8:42:36 PM5/3/12
to
On 5/3/2012 7:18 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
[snip]
officer would have allowed George Bush to touch the controls of an
aircraft in flight, did you?
"the museum's S-3B Viking ... On 1 May 2003, the aircraft made history
when President George W. Bush was a passenger during a carrier arrested
landing on board the flattop"
http://collections.naval.aviation.museum/emuwebdoncoms/pages/doncoms/Display.php?irn=6671&QueryPage=%2FQuery.php
[snip]
>>
>> Obama using troops for a photo op? You mean he fly in, landed on a
>> carrier, and strutted around in a flight suit with a MISSION
>> ACCOMPLISHED banner flying in the breeze? Damn, I missed that.
>>
> Of course you did asshole. Bush was actually flying the plane.
No, he did not. You didn't actually think that any responsible Naval
>> Obama using troops for a photo op? You mean he fly in, landed on a
>> carrier, and strutted around in a flight suit with a MISSION
>> ACCOMPLISHED banner flying in the breeze? Damn, I missed that.
>>
> Of course you did asshole. Bush was actually flying the plane.
officer would have allowed George Bush to touch the controls of an
aircraft in flight, did you?
"the museum's S-3B Viking ... On 1 May 2003, the aircraft made history
when President George W. Bush was a passenger during a carrier arrested
landing on board the flattop"
http://collections.naval.aviation.museum/emuwebdoncoms/pages/doncoms/Display.php?irn=6671&QueryPage=%2FQuery.php
emoneyjoe
May 3, 2012, 11:11:18 PM5/3/12
to
with nothing to do except watch for other planes
because there was no radar then except GCA,
the pilot said "do you want to sit here", and went
down in the nose to sightsee, and the
copilot/proficiency "student" said "do you
want to take it", and he laid his head on the
window sill and went to sleep.
I don't think Bush would have landed the
plane, but it is common for even beginners
to have the controls.
Jeff M
May 3, 2012, 11:36:09 PM5/3/12
to
the Air Force about such things, and the military today is generally
much more uptight and by-the-book than it was in days gone by. Also,
flying with the CinC is a drastically different proposition than a
routine and boring flight with one's own aircrew. Moreover, the carrier
was very close-in to shore, meaning that the flight would have been very
short and therefore busy hop, with little time left over for that sort
of thing.
GG's unqualified claim that "Bush was actually flying the plane" is
patently absurd on its face. There's no way that happened. If it did,
I'm sure the Bush PR team would have played it up and we would have been
able to read all about it, and you'd be able to find a credible cite to
it. Care to try?
The historian for the National Museum of Naval Aviation, where the plane
Bush "flew" is now residing, is an acquaintance of mine. If I run
across him sometime, I'll try to remember to ask him about it.
emoneyjoe
May 3, 2012, 11:55:00 PM5/3/12
to
like Bush enough to archive a plane just because
he "rode" in it?
Is this just more trivia spin to distract from
the current mess(s)?
Jeff M
May 4, 2012, 1:27:23 AM5/4/12
to
gave you. Or you could just read the information from it that I quoted
in my post, to make it easier for you. Since the aircraft was taken out
of the ASW role, I suppose the Navy was cutting its S-3 inventory, and
transferred that historically notable example to the museum.
> Is this just more trivia spin to distract from
> the current mess(s)?
only irrelevancy I've seen is your little story about how you flew a
B-25, as if that had anything to do with establishing whether or not
Bush flew the S-3 out to the USS Lincoln.
Just face it and stop trying to tap dace your way out of it. You're
wrong. We both know it. Otherwise you'd have produced a credible cite
proving the rather remarkable event of Bush flying that plane by now.
emoneyjoe
May 4, 2012, 6:52:36 AM5/4/12
to
aircraft with a cabin where people can move around,
why would anybody try to claim he didn't take the
controls for a few minutes.
And comments about wearing a flight suit are
even more silly, parachute harness could soil a
white shirt.
Why should all the snide remarks stand without
questioning them? Jokes are fine, but leftists
have no sense of humor at all.
Sorry about not looking at the link, so it was
the actual plane Bush flew on/in.
Oglethorpe
May 4, 2012, 11:15:57 AM5/4/12
to
"emoneyjoe" <emon...@iglou.com> wrote in message
news:qqh6q7975ob1eb3up...@4ax.com...
emoneyjoe
May 4, 2012, 10:02:14 AM5/4/12
to
On Fri, 4 May 2012 08:15:57 -0700, "Oglethorpe" <anti...@go.com>
wrote:
F-102s never did trap landings on carriers though,
and either did Bush.
But if the CnC says get up, let me have that
seat, who would refuse?
wrote:
and either did Bush.
But if the CnC says get up, let me have that
seat, who would refuse?
Capt. Justice
May 4, 2012, 11:14:28 AM5/4/12
to
A Decade of War - for What? - by Pat Buchanan
http://original.antiwar.com/buchanan/2012/05/03/a-decade-of-war-for-what/
by Patrick J. Buchanan, May 04, 2012
"My fellow Americans, we have traveled through more than a decade under
the dark cloud of war," said Barack Obama from Bagram Air Base.
"Here in the predawn darkness, we can see the light of a new day on the
horizon. The Iraq War is over. The number of troops in harm's way has
been cut in half, and more will be coming home. " The time of war began
in Afghanistan, and this is where it will end."
Interesting comment, that last.
If "the time of war" is at an end, does that rule out U.S. military
action in Syria or war on Iran?
Setting aside the 14,000-mile round trip to Afghanistan to do an end
zone dance on the anniversary of Seal Team Six's dispatch of Osama bin
Laden, Obama seems to have boxed in his Republican rivals.
His assurance that our wars are ending and our troops are coming home
reflects the national will. And his partnership agreement with President
Hamid Karzai and pledge that a U.S. force will remain to train the
Afghan army and prevent al-Qaeda's return inoculates him against the
charge that he is cutting and running.
Yet The New York Times was disappointed.
Obama had not said how the United States is to train the Afghan army to
defeat the Taliban by 2014, nor how we can get Karzai to deal with the
pervasive corruption and incompetence of his government.
Nor did Obama say how we can be certain al-Qaeda will not return when we
depart.
The Times misses the point.
This speech was not designed to lay out a U.S. strategy for the next 12
years, but to get Barack Obama past the post in November.
And for that objective, the speech works. No one knows what will happen
when 23,000 more U.S. troops come home by Sept. 30, and all combat
troops are out in 2014. The odds are that, after a "decent interval,"
like the one in Vietnam from 1973 to 1975, the Taliban will return to
take vengeance on all who abandoned them, and Afghanistan will come
again to resemble the land we invaded a decade ago.
Why is this probable?
First, because the Taliban have shown themselves to be, though fewer in
number, a superior fighting force to the Afghan army. They have not
needed foreigners to motivate, train, advise or lead them.
Nor have they needed foreign money to fight. Yet they have battled the
best army in the world for a decade and repeatedly sacrificed their
lives in suicide attacks.
How many Afghans on our side have launched suicide attacks?
Second, the Taliban are rooted in the Pashtun, the largest tribal group
in Afghanistan, which constitutes half the population and is
concentrated in the crucial south and east.
Third, they have a secure sanctuary in Pakistan.
Fourth, because, as we saw with the hysterical reaction to what U.S.
troops thought was the routine burning of desecrated Qurans, Islam is
the most powerful cultural and social force in the country. And the
Taliban are the most deeply rooted in that faith.
Fifth, because nationalism is the most potent political current roiling
nations from the Maghreb to Middle East to South Asia. And the Taliban
have the causalities and credentials to prove they will fight forever to
free their country of foreign influence.
A majority of Afghans surely wish the Taliban would not return, given
the savagery of their previous rule and the desire of the Afghan people
to be free to live their own lives according to their own interpretation
of their faith.
Yet the Taliban have shown themselves willing to persist against huge
odds, to fight and die in considerable numbers for the kind of country
they wish to live in - and the kind of regime they wish to live under.
Our allies have not remotely matched their zeal.
"A small body of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable faith in
their mission can alter the course of history," said Mohandas Gandhi.
So, after a decade of war in Afghanistan, what have we accomplished, and
at what cost? Some 2,000 U.S. dead, 16,000 wounded, hundreds of billions
sunk, scores of thousands of Afghan dead. Al-Qaeda was driven out a
decade ago but is now in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, North Africa and
Iraq.
The Taliban are gone from Kabul but may be coming back. And our hope of
preserving what success we have had rests with Hamid Karzai.
"America has no designs beyond an end to al-Qaeda safe havens," said
Obama in Bagram. "Our goal is not to build a country in America's image,
or to eradicate every vestige of the Taliban." But if those are our
goals, had we not achieved them all by early 2002? What, then, were we
fighting for - these 10 years?
If we had to do it all over again, would we?
The nation now seems not to think so. And the nation is right.
http://original.antiwar.com/buchanan/2012/05/03/a-decade-of-war-for-what/
by Patrick J. Buchanan, May 04, 2012
"My fellow Americans, we have traveled through more than a decade under
the dark cloud of war," said Barack Obama from Bagram Air Base.
"Here in the predawn darkness, we can see the light of a new day on the
horizon. The Iraq War is over. The number of troops in harm's way has
been cut in half, and more will be coming home. " The time of war began
in Afghanistan, and this is where it will end."
Interesting comment, that last.
If "the time of war" is at an end, does that rule out U.S. military
action in Syria or war on Iran?
Setting aside the 14,000-mile round trip to Afghanistan to do an end
zone dance on the anniversary of Seal Team Six's dispatch of Osama bin
Laden, Obama seems to have boxed in his Republican rivals.
His assurance that our wars are ending and our troops are coming home
reflects the national will. And his partnership agreement with President
Hamid Karzai and pledge that a U.S. force will remain to train the
Afghan army and prevent al-Qaeda's return inoculates him against the
charge that he is cutting and running.
Yet The New York Times was disappointed.
Obama had not said how the United States is to train the Afghan army to
defeat the Taliban by 2014, nor how we can get Karzai to deal with the
pervasive corruption and incompetence of his government.
Nor did Obama say how we can be certain al-Qaeda will not return when we
depart.
The Times misses the point.
This speech was not designed to lay out a U.S. strategy for the next 12
years, but to get Barack Obama past the post in November.
And for that objective, the speech works. No one knows what will happen
when 23,000 more U.S. troops come home by Sept. 30, and all combat
troops are out in 2014. The odds are that, after a "decent interval,"
like the one in Vietnam from 1973 to 1975, the Taliban will return to
take vengeance on all who abandoned them, and Afghanistan will come
again to resemble the land we invaded a decade ago.
Why is this probable?
First, because the Taliban have shown themselves to be, though fewer in
number, a superior fighting force to the Afghan army. They have not
needed foreigners to motivate, train, advise or lead them.
Nor have they needed foreign money to fight. Yet they have battled the
best army in the world for a decade and repeatedly sacrificed their
lives in suicide attacks.
How many Afghans on our side have launched suicide attacks?
Second, the Taliban are rooted in the Pashtun, the largest tribal group
in Afghanistan, which constitutes half the population and is
concentrated in the crucial south and east.
Third, they have a secure sanctuary in Pakistan.
Fourth, because, as we saw with the hysterical reaction to what U.S.
troops thought was the routine burning of desecrated Qurans, Islam is
the most powerful cultural and social force in the country. And the
Taliban are the most deeply rooted in that faith.
Fifth, because nationalism is the most potent political current roiling
nations from the Maghreb to Middle East to South Asia. And the Taliban
have the causalities and credentials to prove they will fight forever to
free their country of foreign influence.
A majority of Afghans surely wish the Taliban would not return, given
the savagery of their previous rule and the desire of the Afghan people
to be free to live their own lives according to their own interpretation
of their faith.
Yet the Taliban have shown themselves willing to persist against huge
odds, to fight and die in considerable numbers for the kind of country
they wish to live in - and the kind of regime they wish to live under.
Our allies have not remotely matched their zeal.
"A small body of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable faith in
their mission can alter the course of history," said Mohandas Gandhi.
So, after a decade of war in Afghanistan, what have we accomplished, and
at what cost? Some 2,000 U.S. dead, 16,000 wounded, hundreds of billions
sunk, scores of thousands of Afghan dead. Al-Qaeda was driven out a
decade ago but is now in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, North Africa and
Iraq.
The Taliban are gone from Kabul but may be coming back. And our hope of
preserving what success we have had rests with Hamid Karzai.
"America has no designs beyond an end to al-Qaeda safe havens," said
Obama in Bagram. "Our goal is not to build a country in America's image,
or to eradicate every vestige of the Taliban." But if those are our
goals, had we not achieved them all by early 2002? What, then, were we
fighting for - these 10 years?
If we had to do it all over again, would we?
The nation now seems not to think so. And the nation is right.
Jeff M
May 4, 2012, 12:48:35 PM5/4/12
to
the the dual controls for a few idle moments of straight and level
flight, while maintaining primary control himself. But that's about as
close to Bush "flying the plane" as my holding a retractor or something
for a physician in an emergency or field operation is to me "performing
surgery." It's a stretch so ridiculous as to constitute a lie.
> And comments about wearing a flight suit are
> even more silly, parachute harness could soil a
> white shirt.
Marine One helicopter, so Bush "had" to fly out on the S-3. But that
was a lie. It turned out that the USS Lincoln was only about 30nm
offshore, and they even needed to turn the ship about so that the
buildings and shoreline of Southern California wouldn't be clearly
visible on-camera behind Bush.
All this was done, apparently, just so Bush could have his photo-op
mincing about on the carrier deck in his flight suit, possibly with the
theme music from the movie "Top Gun" playing in his head, and to
manufacture some macho imagery for Bush's upcoming re-election campaign.
It was all, however, carefully staged, utterly unnecessary, and
completely phoney-baloney.
Moreover, it delayed all those sailors and Marines from getting home
from their very lengthy deployment just that much longer. I know
exactly what that felt like. I have personally been similarly
significantly hampered in my work by the Bush staffers arranging a
photo-op for him. What they did was pull several large trucks that were
already on-site and delivering needed aid, supplies and equipment to
Hurricane Katrina victims, back to a staging area while still mostly
loaded and leaving us for several hours without the stuff we needed
right then, so they could form a photo/video backdrop for Bush, to show
that he was rushing federal aid to the scene. Of course, they did that
by removing federal aid from the scene, which was more than a bit galling.
> Why should all the snide remarks stand without
> questioning them?
with their intentional distortions and outright lies, of course.
> Jokes are fine, but leftists
> have no sense of humor at all.
right-wingers themselves, on the other hand, are pretty darn funny, and
I see Lefties laughing at them all the time.
> Sorry about not looking at the link, so it was
> the actual plane Bush flew on/in.
Jeff M
May 4, 2012, 1:04:35 PM5/4/12
to
On 5/4/2012 9:02 AM, emoneyjoe wrote:
[snip]
Force Reserve rated him a disqualified pilot.
> But if the CnC says get up, let me have that
> seat, who would refuse?
Any responsible aircraft commander, not that you could stand up or trade
seats in an S-3 Viking. It may be Bush's military to command, but that
S-3 was most definitely that aircraft commander's.
[snip]
>>> I don't think Bush would have landed the
>>> plane, but it is common for even beginners
>>> to have the controls.
>>>
>>>
>> Bush wasn't a beginner and F-102s didn't fly themselves.
>
> F-102s never did trap landings on carriers though,
> and either did Bush.
Let's remember that Bush wasn't a qualified pilot, in fact, the Air
>>> plane, but it is common for even beginners
>>> to have the controls.
>>>
>>>
>> Bush wasn't a beginner and F-102s didn't fly themselves.
>
> F-102s never did trap landings on carriers though,
> and either did Bush.
Force Reserve rated him a disqualified pilot.
> But if the CnC says get up, let me have that
> seat, who would refuse?
seats in an S-3 Viking. It may be Bush's military to command, but that
S-3 was most definitely that aircraft commander's.
Gray Guest
May 4, 2012, 8:05:54 PM5/4/12
to
Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
news:ntKdnT_zdtVKuD7S...@giganews.com:
Sure asshole. How many jet interceptors have you qualed for and flown.
news:ntKdnT_zdtVKuD7S...@giganews.com:
Gray Guest
May 4, 2012, 8:08:03 PM5/4/12
to
emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com> wrote in
news:q7o7q79kfek99fopa...@4ax.com:
And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when he
clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
You people make me sick. Anything to denigrate Bush and elevate the trash
you foisted on us.
Irrespective of the results of course.
news:q7o7q79kfek99fopa...@4ax.com:
clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
You people make me sick. Anything to denigrate Bush and elevate the trash
you foisted on us.
Irrespective of the results of course.
Gray Guest
May 4, 2012, 8:08:53 PM5/4/12
to
emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com> wrote in
news:iik6q7dvfsvopho71...@4ax.com:
Its's an indication of how vacant these morons are.
news:iik6q7dvfsvopho71...@4ax.com:
Jeff M
May 4, 2012, 9:12:15 PM5/4/12
to
On 5/4/2012 7:05 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
> news:ntKdnT_zdtVKuD7S...@giganews.com:
>
>> On 5/3/2012 7:18 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>> Obama using troops for a photo op? You mean he fly in, landed on a
>>>> carrier, and strutted around in a flight suit with a MISSION
>>>> ACCOMPLISHED banner flying in the breeze? Damn, I missed that.
>>>>
>>> Of course you did asshole. Bush was actually flying the plane.
>>
>> No, he did not. You didn't actually think that any responsible Naval
>> officer would have allowed George Bush to touch the controls of an
>> aircraft in flight, did you?
>>
>> "the museum's S-3B Viking ... On 1 May 2003, the aircraft made history
>> when President George W. Bush was a passenger during a carrier arrested
>> landing on board the flattop"
>>
>> http://collections.naval.aviation.museum/emuwebdoncoms/pages/doncoms/Disp
>> lay.php?irn=6671&QueryPage=%2FQuery.php
>>
> Sure asshole. How many jet interceptors have you qualed for and flown.
Don't whine just because you were proved factually incorrect again.
> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
> news:ntKdnT_zdtVKuD7S...@giganews.com:
>
>> On 5/3/2012 7:18 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>> Obama using troops for a photo op? You mean he fly in, landed on a
>>>> carrier, and strutted around in a flight suit with a MISSION
>>>> ACCOMPLISHED banner flying in the breeze? Damn, I missed that.
>>>>
>>> Of course you did asshole. Bush was actually flying the plane.
>>
>> No, he did not. You didn't actually think that any responsible Naval
>> officer would have allowed George Bush to touch the controls of an
>> aircraft in flight, did you?
>>
>> "the museum's S-3B Viking ... On 1 May 2003, the aircraft made history
>> when President George W. Bush was a passenger during a carrier arrested
>> landing on board the flattop"
>>
>> http://collections.naval.aviation.museum/emuwebdoncoms/pages/doncoms/Disp
>> lay.php?irn=6671&QueryPage=%2FQuery.php
>>
> Sure asshole. How many jet interceptors have you qualed for and flown.
There's nothing out of the ordinary about that, so you should be well
used to it.
Jeff M
May 4, 2012, 9:15:06 PM5/4/12
to
On 5/4/2012 7:08 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
[snip]
>
[snip]
>
> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when he
> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy," the
> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with. Any
regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a carrier
landing. I darn sure would.
Harold Burton
May 4, 2012, 9:15:30 PM5/4/12
to
In article <t3e2q7dca8s5liern...@6ax.com>,
service was VERY important to leftards, until the Current Resident.
Leftards, batshit crazy and dogshit stupid, every single last one of you.
snicker
Lickin' Ass and Fakin' Names <PopUl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 2 May 2012 08:14:23 -0000, "One Big Assed Mistake America"
> <o.b....@mistake.com> wrote:
>
> >http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/27/the-five-co-host-eric-bolling-
> >to-obama-quit-using-ou-military-the-as-a-photo-op/
> >
> >On Friday’s “The Five,” co-host Eric Bolling took issue with
> >President Barack Obama’s Ft. Stewart, Ga. announcement of an
> >executive order to crack down on institutions that “aggressively
> >target veterans” for the G.I. Bill’s tuition assistance, saying
> >that the men and women of the Armed Forces don’t need the
> >president’s protection from so-called predatory institutions, as
> >they have faced much worse on the battlefield.
> >
> >“These heroic men and women do more for freedom, more for
> >America in a day, than you will ever do, sir,” Bolling said.
> >“Don’t insult them by talking about schools preying on them.
> >They take live rounds. They deal with roadside bombs. They risk
> >their lives, sir. They’ll be OK with Dean Wormer.”
> >
> >Bolling went on to castigate Obama for what he perceived to be a
> >campaign speech with soldiers as a backdrop.
> >
> >“And by the way, how about you stop insulting Americans who see
> >right through you while you deliver a left-wing campaign speech
> >while pretending to give a damn about their service?” he
> >continued. “And one more thing — quit using our military as
> >photo op — it’s unbecoming of a commander-in-chief.”
> >
> >
>
>
> On 2 May 2012 08:14:23 -0000, "One Big Assed Mistake America"
> <o.b....@mistake.com> wrote:
>
> >http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/27/the-five-co-host-eric-bolling-
> >to-obama-quit-using-ou-military-the-as-a-photo-op/
> >
> >On Friday’s “The Five,” co-host Eric Bolling took issue with
> >President Barack Obama’s Ft. Stewart, Ga. announcement of an
> >executive order to crack down on institutions that “aggressively
> >target veterans” for the G.I. Bill’s tuition assistance, saying
> >that the men and women of the Armed Forces don’t need the
> >president’s protection from so-called predatory institutions, as
> >they have faced much worse on the battlefield.
> >
> >“These heroic men and women do more for freedom, more for
> >America in a day, than you will ever do, sir,” Bolling said.
> >“Don’t insult them by talking about schools preying on them.
> >They take live rounds. They deal with roadside bombs. They risk
> >their lives, sir. They’ll be OK with Dean Wormer.”
> >
> >Bolling went on to castigate Obama for what he perceived to be a
> >campaign speech with soldiers as a backdrop.
> >
> >“And by the way, how about you stop insulting Americans who see
> >right through you while you deliver a left-wing campaign speech
> >while pretending to give a damn about their service?” he
> >continued. “And one more thing — quit using our military as
> >photo op — it’s unbecoming of a commander-in-chief.”
> >
> >
>
>
> Obama using troops for a photo op? You mean he fly in, landed on a
> carrier, and strutted around in a flight suit with a MISSION
> ACCOMPLISHED banner flying in the breeze? Damn, I missed that.
You also missed his military service, as did all you leftards. Military
> carrier, and strutted around in a flight suit with a MISSION
> ACCOMPLISHED banner flying in the breeze? Damn, I missed that.
service was VERY important to leftards, until the Current Resident.
Leftards, batshit crazy and dogshit stupid, every single last one of you.
snicker
Harold Burton
May 4, 2012, 9:17:07 PM5/4/12
to
In article <XnsA048CE987F0F1We...@88.198.244.100>,
Ain't it amazin' how important a Presidential candidate's prior military
service was to leftards . . . . until the Current Resident, of course.
snicker
service was to leftards . . . . until the Current Resident, of course.
snicker
Harold Burton
May 4, 2012, 9:20:25 PM5/4/12
to
In article <ntKdnT_zdtVKuD7S...@giganews.com>,
friend but you were to stupid to check it out before shooting your
ignorant mouth off.
Leftard rule #1: lie, lie again, then lie about lying.
Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote:
> On 5/3/2012 7:18 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
> [snip]
> >>
> >> Obama using troops for a photo op? You mean he fly in, landed on a
> >> carrier, and strutted around in a flight suit with a MISSION
> >> ACCOMPLISHED banner flying in the breeze? Damn, I missed that.
> > Of course you did asshole. Bush was actually flying the plane.
> No, he did not.
Oh yes he was, feel free to prove otherwise. Hint: Google is your
> On 5/3/2012 7:18 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
> [snip]
> >>
> >> Obama using troops for a photo op? You mean he fly in, landed on a
> >> carrier, and strutted around in a flight suit with a MISSION
> >> ACCOMPLISHED banner flying in the breeze? Damn, I missed that.
> > Of course you did asshole. Bush was actually flying the plane.
> No, he did not.
friend but you were to stupid to check it out before shooting your
ignorant mouth off.
Leftard rule #1: lie, lie again, then lie about lying.
Jeff M
May 4, 2012, 9:23:32 PM5/4/12
to
On 5/4/2012 8:15 PM, Harold Burton wrote:
[snip]
> You also missed his military service, as did all you leftards.
The evidence suggests Bush himself in good part "also missed his
military service."
[snip]
> You also missed his military service, as did all you leftards.
military service."
Harold Burton
May 4, 2012, 9:22:41 PM5/4/12
to
> On 5/3/2012 7:18 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
> [snip]
> >>
> >> Obama using troops for a photo op? You mean he fly in, landed on a
> >> carrier, and strutted around in a flight suit with a MISSION
> >> ACCOMPLISHED banner flying in the breeze? Damn, I missed that.
> >>
> > Of course you did asshole. Bush was actually flying the plane.
>
> No, he did not. You didn't actually think that any responsible Naval
> officer would have allowed George Bush to touch the controls of an
> aircraft in flight, did you?
You didn't actually think that any responsible Naval Officer would have
> [snip]
> >>
> >> Obama using troops for a photo op? You mean he fly in, landed on a
> >> carrier, and strutted around in a flight suit with a MISSION
> >> ACCOMPLISHED banner flying in the breeze? Damn, I missed that.
> >>
> > Of course you did asshole. Bush was actually flying the plane.
>
> No, he did not. You didn't actually think that any responsible Naval
> officer would have allowed George Bush to touch the controls of an
> aircraft in flight, did you?
defied an order from his CIC, did you?
In fact, you didn't think at all, it's what makes you a leftard.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha,
Harold Burton
May 4, 2012, 9:24:32 PM5/4/12
to
In article <qqh6q7975ob1eb3up...@4ax.com>,
> I don't think . . .
You got that part right.
> . . . Bush would have landed the
> plane . . .
You got that part right.
> . . . Bush would have landed the
> plane . . .
Harold Burton
May 4, 2012, 9:26:27 PM5/4/12
to
In article <xZ6dnYiAaOoZ0z7S...@giganews.com>,
Only to idiot leftards.
> There's no way that happened. If it did . . .
Make up your mind.
> There's no way that happened. If it did . . .
Make up your mind.
Harold Burton
May 4, 2012, 9:35:40 PM5/4/12
to
In article <dc-dncspifpCHTnS...@giganews.com>,
AWOLers are just the leftard version of Birthers.
snicker.
snicker.
Lookout
May 4, 2012, 11:42:00 PM5/4/12
to
On Fri, 04 May 2012 20:15:06 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
wrote:
No, I wouldn't want to have a beer with a fucking idiot.
wrote:
Lookout
May 4, 2012, 11:43:34 PM5/4/12
to
emoneyjoe
May 5, 2012, 12:08:05 AM5/5/12
to
Lookout
May 5, 2012, 12:17:55 AM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 00:08:05 -0400, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
"There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably
in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool
me — you can't get fooled again." —Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH
in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool
me — you can't get fooled again." —Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH
Kathryne Boykin
May 4, 2012, 9:31:34 PM5/4/12
to
Lookout ran away after several severe beatings... And has returned for
more beatings.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
Every time you got caught lying look what happened:
2009 Jun 126 posts
Jul 61 -51% Beatdown!
2009 Oct 115 posts
Nov 6 -95% Beatdown!
2009 Dec 274 posts
2010 Jan 56 -80% Beatdown!
2010 Apr 267 posts
May 92 -66% Beatdown!
http://tinyurl.com/32y863z
Posted from:
The DemocRATs Hall of Shame!
http://www.democrathallofshame.com/
more beatings.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
Every time you got caught lying look what happened:
2009 Jun 126 posts
Jul 61 -51% Beatdown!
2009 Oct 115 posts
Nov 6 -95% Beatdown!
2009 Dec 274 posts
2010 Jan 56 -80% Beatdown!
2010 Apr 267 posts
May 92 -66% Beatdown!
http://tinyurl.com/32y863z
Posted from:
The DemocRATs Hall of Shame!
http://www.democrathallofshame.com/
Marcellus Tyler Steele
May 4, 2012, 9:31:52 PM5/4/12
to
Lookout ran away after several severe beatings... And has returned for
more beatings.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 20:01:16 -0500, Lookout <mrLo...@yahoo.com>
more beatings.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
wrote:
>Message-ID: <o57sq59a3d1nc6o8s...@4ax.com>
>On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 14:40:19 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
><okamu...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
>>You also have to "force" people to buy health insurance.
>That's a lie.
On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 14:57:06 -0500, Lookout <mrLo...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> Message-ID: <0cosq59f9ru0opr5n...@4ax.com>
>On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 08:37:19 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
><okamu...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
>>A lie? What the heck do you think the IRS is going to do? How can you get
>>everyone to buy health insurance without know who has insurance and who does
>>not have insurance?
>Show me in the bill where the IRS has anything to do with this.
>Until then YOU'RE lying.
Oops! Caught LYING!
http://democrats.senate.gov/reform/patient-protection-affordable-care-act.pdf
ëë(1) IN GENERAL.óIf an applicable individual fails to meet the
requirement of subsection (a) for 1 or more months during any calendar
year beginning after 2013, then, except as provided in subsection (d),
there is hereby imposed a penalty with respect to the individual in
the amount determined under subsection (c).
ëë(2) INCLUSION WITH RETURN.óAny penalty imposed by this section with
respect to any month shall be included with a taxpayerís return under
chapter 1 for the taxable year which includes such month.
ëë(3) PAYMENT OF PENALTY.óIf an individual with respect to whom a
penalty is imposed by this section for any monthó
ëë(A) is a dependent (as defined in section 152) of another taxpayer
for the other taxpayerís taxable year including such month, such other
taxpayer shall be liable for such penalty, or
ëë(B) files a joint return for the taxable year including such month,
such individual and the spouse of such individual shall be jointly
liable for such penalty.
=============
ëë(g) ADMINISTRATION AND PROCEDURE.ó
ëë(1) IN GENERAL.óThe penalty provided by this section shall be paid
upon notice and demand by the Secretary, and except as provided in
paragraph (2), shall be assessed and collected in the same manner as
an assessable penalty under subchapter B of chapter 68.
ëë(2) SPECIAL RULES.óNotwithstanding any other provision of lawó
ëë(A) WAIVER OF CRIMINAL PENALTIES.ó
In the case of any failure by a taxpayer to timely pay any penalty
imposed by this section, such taxpayer shall not be subject to any
criminal prosecution or penalty with respect to such failure.
ëë(B) LIMITATIONS ON LIENS AND LEVIES.óThe Secretary shall notó
ëë(i) file notice of lien with respect to any property of a taxpayer
by reason of any failure to pay the penalty imposed by this section,
or
ëë(ii) levy on any such property with respect to such failure.íí.
=============
TITLE 26 > Subtitle F > CHAPTER 68 > Subchapter B > PART I
PART IóGENERAL PROVISIONS
PART IIóFAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CERTAIN INFORMATION REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sup_01_26_10_F_20_68_30_B_40_I.html
B Scot Hendricks
May 4, 2012, 9:32:32 PM5/4/12
to
Lookout ran away after several severe beatings... And has returned for
more beatings.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
more beatings.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
Lookout <mrLo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 04:10:01 GMT, Buster Norris <bus...@buster.com>
>wrote:
>>Cor...@Blue.net wrote:
>>>On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 03:46:52 GMT, Buster Norris <bus...@buster.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>>A real President would have promised victory and return with honor.
>>>Like Bush?
>>Great example. Both, in fact.
>>George Bush I promised victory in the Gulf War, he delivered, we returned with
>>honor.
>Uh..we had to go back. We DIDN'T win. We just put it off for a few
>more years.
No, LIAR. Bush promised the liberation of Kuwait. He delivered.
>>George Bush II promised victory in OIF, he delivered, we're returning with
>>honor.
>
>Define "honor". Losing 4,000+ lives and $15 dollars for what?
For the liberation of Iraq from tyranny. Bush promised it, he
delivered.
>Please..define "honor" for us.
Go read a dictionary.
>>Too bad your Magic Negro is a wuss loser..........
>
>And then the 3rd grade insult. How typical.
It took just 2 posts to catch you lying...
How typical.
You're inferior to dogshit.
Fuck off now.
Gray Guest
May 5, 2012, 1:15:16 AM5/5/12
to
Lookout <mrloo...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:pb89q75rcvdj03efm...@4ax.com:
Then you don't drink alone.
What makes you think he would want to have one with you? Compared to you
he's a class act.
news:pb89q75rcvdj03efm...@4ax.com:
What makes you think he would want to have one with you? Compared to you
he's a class act.
emoneyjoe
May 5, 2012, 1:58:48 AM5/5/12
to
On Fri, 04 May 2012 23:17:55 -0500, Lookout <mrloo...@yahoo.com>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKgPY1adc0A
http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/Fool+me+once,+shame+on+you%3B+fool+me+twice,+shame+on+me
wrote:
>On Sat, 05 May 2012 00:08:05 -0400, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 04 May 2012 22:42:00 -0500, Lookout <mrloo...@yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 04 May 2012 20:15:06 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 5/4/2012 7:08 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>>>>[snip]
>>>>>
>>>>> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when he
>>>>> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
>>>>
>>>>One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy," the
>>>>sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with. Any
>>>>regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a carrier
>>>>landing. I darn sure would.
>>>>
>>>No, I wouldn't want to have a beer with a fucking idiot.
>>
>> Then never drink alone.
>>
>"There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably
>in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool
>me — you can't get fooled again." —Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
>
>AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH
That's garbled, you've been drinking.
>On Sat, 05 May 2012 00:08:05 -0400, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 04 May 2012 22:42:00 -0500, Lookout <mrloo...@yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 04 May 2012 20:15:06 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 5/4/2012 7:08 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>>>>[snip]
>>>>>
>>>>> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when he
>>>>> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
>>>>
>>>>One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy," the
>>>>sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with. Any
>>>>regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a carrier
>>>>landing. I darn sure would.
>>>>
>>>No, I wouldn't want to have a beer with a fucking idiot.
>>
>> Then never drink alone.
>>
>"There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably
>in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool
>me — you can't get fooled again." —Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
>
>AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKgPY1adc0A
http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/Fool+me+once,+shame+on+you%3B+fool+me+twice,+shame+on+me
Jeff M
May 5, 2012, 8:17:01 AM5/5/12
to
On 5/5/2012 12:58 AM, emoneyjoe wrote:
> On Fri, 04 May 2012 23:17:55 -0500, Lookout<mrloo...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 05 May 2012 00:08:05 -0400, emoneyjoe<emon...@iglou.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 04 May 2012 22:42:00 -0500, Lookout<mrloo...@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 04 May 2012 20:15:06 -0500, Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/4/2012 7:08 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when he
>>>>>> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
>>>>>
>>>>> One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy," the
>>>>> sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with. Any
>>>>> regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a carrier
>>>>> landing. I darn sure would.
>>>>>
>>>> No, I wouldn't want to have a beer with a fucking idiot.
>>>
>>> Then never drink alone.
>>>
>> "There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably
>> in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool
>> me — you can't get fooled again." —Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
>>
>> AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH
>
> That's garbled, you've been drinking.
Have you been drinking? Because it appears that Lookout quoted it
> On Fri, 04 May 2012 23:17:55 -0500, Lookout<mrloo...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 05 May 2012 00:08:05 -0400, emoneyjoe<emon...@iglou.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 04 May 2012 22:42:00 -0500, Lookout<mrloo...@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 04 May 2012 20:15:06 -0500, Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/4/2012 7:08 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when he
>>>>>> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
>>>>>
>>>>> One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy," the
>>>>> sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with. Any
>>>>> regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a carrier
>>>>> landing. I darn sure would.
>>>>>
>>>> No, I wouldn't want to have a beer with a fucking idiot.
>>>
>>> Then never drink alone.
>>>
>> "There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably
>> in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool
>> me — you can't get fooled again." —Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
>>
>> AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH
>
> That's garbled, you've been drinking.
pretty exactly as Bush himself garbled it.
http://thinkexist.com/quotation/there-s_an_old_saying_in_tennessee-i_know_it-s_in/264577.html
Lookout
May 5, 2012, 8:29:38 AM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 07:17:01 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
Like most conservatives he can't admit when he's wrong.
Jeff M
May 5, 2012, 8:48:32 AM5/5/12
to
just how wrong he is. It seemed that perhaps he thought you mangled the
saying yourself, and didn't realize that you were quoting Bush mangling it.
Lookout
May 5, 2012, 9:00:15 AM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 07:48:32 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
You think he could be that ignorant and uninformed even when I
included the location and date and the '"saying" in quotes?
I guess he could be as stupid as bush : )
included the location and date and the '"saying" in quotes?
I guess he could be as stupid as bush : )
Jeff M
May 5, 2012, 9:47:10 AM5/5/12
to
truth denial so essential to sustaining many core right-wing and
rightard beliefs.
Klaus Schadenfreude
May 5, 2012, 10:02:09 AM5/5/12
to
>Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
"When I meet with world leaders, what's striking -- whether it's in
Europe or here in Asia..." -mistakenly referring to Hawaii as Asia
while holding a press conference outside Honolulu, Nov. 16, 2011
"We're the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad."
—Cincinnati, OH, Sept. 22, 2011
"One such translator was an American of Haitian descent,
representative of the extraordinary work that our men and women in
uniform do all around the world -- Navy Corpse-Man Christian
Brossard." --mispronouncing "Corpsman" (the "ps" is silent) during a
speech at the National Prayer Breakfast, Washington, D.C., Feb. 5,
2010 (The Corpsman's name is also Christopher, not Christian)
"The Middle East is obviously an issue that has plagued the region for
centuries." --Tampa, Fla., Jan. 28, 2010
"UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right? It's the Post Office that's
always having problems." –attempting to make the case for
government-run healthcare, while simultaneously undercutting his own
argument, Portsmouth, N.H., Aug. 11, 2009
"The reforms we seek would bring greater competition, choice, savings
and inefficiencies to our health care system." --in remarks after a
health care roundtable with physicians, nurses and health care
providers, Washington, D.C., July 20, 2009
"It was also interesting to see that political interaction in Europe
is not that different from the United States Senate. There's a lot of
-- I don't know what the term is in Austrian, wheeling and dealing."
--confusing German for "Austrian," a language which does not exist,
Strasbourg, France, April 6, 2009
"No, no. I have been practicing...I bowled a 129. It's like -- it was
like Special Olympics, or something." --making an off-hand joke during
an appearance on "The Tonight Show", March 19, 2009
"What I was suggesting -- you're absolutely right that John McCain has
not talked about my Muslim faith..." --in an interview with ABC's
George Stephanopoulos, who jumped in to correct Obama by saying "your
Christian faith,"
"I'm here with the Girardo family here in St. Louis." --speaking via
satellite to the Democratic National Convention, while in Kansas City,
Missouri, Aug. 25, 2008
"Let me introduce to you the next President -- the next Vice President
of the United States of America, Joe Biden." --slipping up while
introducing Joe Biden at their first joint campaign rally,
Springfield, Illinois, Aug. 23, 2008
"Let me be absolutely clear. Israel is a strong friend of Israel's. It
will be a strong friend of Israel's under a McCain...administration.
It will be a strong friend of Israel's under an Obama administration.
So that policy is not going to change." --Amman, Jordan, July 22, 2008
"How's it going, Sunshine?" --campaigning in Sunrise, Florida
"On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of
fallen heroes -- and I see many of them in the audience here today --
our sense of patriotism is particularly strong."
"I've now been in 57 states -- I think one left to go." --at a
campaign event in Beaverton, Oregon
"Why can't I just eat my waffle?" --after being asked a foreign policy
question by a reporter while visiting a diner in Pennsylvania
"The point I was making was not that Grandmother harbors any racial
animosity. She doesn't. But she is a typical white person, who, if she
sees somebody on the street that she doesn't know, you know, there's a
reaction that's been bred in our experiences that don't go away and
that sometimes come out in the wrong way, and that's just the nature
of race in our society."
He can't fly an airplane, either.
[chuckle]
Europe or here in Asia..." -mistakenly referring to Hawaii as Asia
while holding a press conference outside Honolulu, Nov. 16, 2011
"We're the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad."
—Cincinnati, OH, Sept. 22, 2011
"One such translator was an American of Haitian descent,
representative of the extraordinary work that our men and women in
uniform do all around the world -- Navy Corpse-Man Christian
Brossard." --mispronouncing "Corpsman" (the "ps" is silent) during a
speech at the National Prayer Breakfast, Washington, D.C., Feb. 5,
2010 (The Corpsman's name is also Christopher, not Christian)
"The Middle East is obviously an issue that has plagued the region for
centuries." --Tampa, Fla., Jan. 28, 2010
"UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right? It's the Post Office that's
always having problems." –attempting to make the case for
government-run healthcare, while simultaneously undercutting his own
argument, Portsmouth, N.H., Aug. 11, 2009
"The reforms we seek would bring greater competition, choice, savings
and inefficiencies to our health care system." --in remarks after a
health care roundtable with physicians, nurses and health care
providers, Washington, D.C., July 20, 2009
"It was also interesting to see that political interaction in Europe
is not that different from the United States Senate. There's a lot of
-- I don't know what the term is in Austrian, wheeling and dealing."
--confusing German for "Austrian," a language which does not exist,
Strasbourg, France, April 6, 2009
"No, no. I have been practicing...I bowled a 129. It's like -- it was
like Special Olympics, or something." --making an off-hand joke during
an appearance on "The Tonight Show", March 19, 2009
"What I was suggesting -- you're absolutely right that John McCain has
not talked about my Muslim faith..." --in an interview with ABC's
George Stephanopoulos, who jumped in to correct Obama by saying "your
Christian faith,"
"I'm here with the Girardo family here in St. Louis." --speaking via
satellite to the Democratic National Convention, while in Kansas City,
Missouri, Aug. 25, 2008
"Let me introduce to you the next President -- the next Vice President
of the United States of America, Joe Biden." --slipping up while
introducing Joe Biden at their first joint campaign rally,
Springfield, Illinois, Aug. 23, 2008
"Let me be absolutely clear. Israel is a strong friend of Israel's. It
will be a strong friend of Israel's under a McCain...administration.
It will be a strong friend of Israel's under an Obama administration.
So that policy is not going to change." --Amman, Jordan, July 22, 2008
"How's it going, Sunshine?" --campaigning in Sunrise, Florida
"On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of
fallen heroes -- and I see many of them in the audience here today --
our sense of patriotism is particularly strong."
"I've now been in 57 states -- I think one left to go." --at a
campaign event in Beaverton, Oregon
"Why can't I just eat my waffle?" --after being asked a foreign policy
question by a reporter while visiting a diner in Pennsylvania
"The point I was making was not that Grandmother harbors any racial
animosity. She doesn't. But she is a typical white person, who, if she
sees somebody on the street that she doesn't know, you know, there's a
reaction that's been bred in our experiences that don't go away and
that sometimes come out in the wrong way, and that's just the nature
of race in our society."
He can't fly an airplane, either.
[chuckle]
emoneyjoe
May 5, 2012, 10:07:00 AM5/5/12
to
non-ASCII characters.
You are becoming a first class leftist liberal
kneejerk reactionist democrat, didn't you use to
claim to be undecided?
emoneyjoe
May 5, 2012, 10:15:05 AM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 07:29:38 -0500, Lookout <mrloo...@yahoo.com>
Wrong about what, you drinking, or your copy and
paste being garbled in a ASCII-text only newsgroup?
paste being garbled in a ASCII-text only newsgroup?
Lookout
May 5, 2012, 10:16:14 AM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 10:07:00 -0400, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
Windows XP
No one else had a problem.
Why are you lying?
No one else had a problem.
Why are you lying?
Jeff M
May 5, 2012, 10:18:18 AM5/5/12
to
> You are becoming a first class leftist liberal
> kneejerk reactionist democrat, didn't you use to
> claim to be undecided?
in my youth.
Are you trying to be insulting to me now because YOU screwed up again on
something so simple, and I corrected you? I thought you were a bit more
mature than that.
emoneyjoe
May 5, 2012, 10:21:10 AM5/5/12
to
you read, I don't have a problem seeing that some
people have a problem with words in public speaking,
the cut and paste was garbled using the character
set I have configured.
Too bad ms didn't see fit to continue to support
DOS ANSI characters in windows.
Lookout
May 5, 2012, 10:25:35 AM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 10:15:05 -0400, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
You're the only one having the problem
emoneyjoe
May 5, 2012, 10:34:42 AM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 09:16:14 -0500, Lookout <mrloo...@yahoo.com>
Don't show your ignorance of character sets, not
only is XP configurable but the newsreader is also.
If you are interested to learn google, otherwise, FO.
only is XP configurable but the newsreader is also.
If you are interested to learn google, otherwise, FO.
emoneyjoe
May 5, 2012, 10:40:24 AM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 10:21:10 -0400, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
Jeff;
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 5.00/32.1170
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Me;
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 5.00/32.1170
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Me;
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
emoneyjoe
May 5, 2012, 10:42:48 AM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 09:25:35 -0500, Lookout <mrloo...@yahoo.com>
And you know that how?
Oh, I forgot, you blame Bush.
Oh, I forgot, you blame Bush.
emoneyjoe
May 5, 2012, 10:46:54 AM5/5/12
to
>Are you trying to be insulting to me now because YOU screwed up again on
>something so simple, and I corrected you? I thought you were a bit more
>mature than that.
you seeming to be a little open minded before is correct,
and now are cocksure and a mechanized clone.
Lookout
May 5, 2012, 10:51:00 AM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 09:18:18 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
And here's a real gem:
"You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a
literacy test." -Townsend, Tenn., Feb. 21, 2001
"You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a
literacy test." -Townsend, Tenn., Feb. 21, 2001
Lookout
May 5, 2012, 10:52:26 AM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 10:40:24 -0400, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 5.00/32.1170
Dumbass
Dumbass
Lookout
May 5, 2012, 10:53:01 AM5/5/12
to
Lookout
May 5, 2012, 10:54:27 AM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 10:34:42 -0400, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
Maybe it's time YOU upgraded from X-Newsreader: Forte Agent
1.93/32.576 English (American)
What's the matter...mommy doesn't allow you to install programs?
1.93/32.576 English (American)
What's the matter...mommy doesn't allow you to install programs?
Lookout
May 5, 2012, 10:55:06 AM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 10:46:54 -0400, emoneyjoe <emon...@iglou.com>
You're the one that screwed up, asshole.
RD Sandman
May 5, 2012, 11:03:24 AM5/5/12
to
Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
news:04ydnXBgavB54znS...@giganews.com:
> On 5/4/2012 7:08 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
> [snip]
>>
>> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when he
>> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
>
> One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy," the
> sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with. Any
> regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a carrier
> landing. I darn sure would.
>
actually landing one.
BTW, when was Bush disqualified from flying F-102s? It is not an easy AC
to fly but last I heard he had qualified to do so.
--
It's too bad the people who really know how to run this
country are so busy cutting hair and driving taxis!!
George Burns
Sleep well, tonight.....
RD (The Sandman)
RD Sandman
May 5, 2012, 11:04:17 AM5/5/12
to
> On Fri, 04 May 2012 20:15:06 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
> wrote:
>
> wrote:
>
>>On 5/4/2012 7:08 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>>[snip]
>>>
>>> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when
he
>>> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
>>
>>One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy," the
>>sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with. Any
>>regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a carrier
>>landing. I darn sure would.
>>
>>[snip]
>>>
>>> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when
he
>>> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
>>
>>One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy," the
>>sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with. Any
>>regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a carrier
>>landing. I darn sure would.
>>
> No, I wouldn't want to have a beer with a fucking idiot.
>
You wouldn't want to have a beer with me either since you would be
>
constantly looking over your shoulder for the exit.
emoneyjoe
May 5, 2012, 11:06:46 AM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 09:54:27 -0500, Lookout <mrloo...@yahoo.com>
Mommy has been dead 40 years, I have Agent 5.0
but prefer this one, which has nothing to do which
character set either is configured to.
but prefer this one, which has nothing to do which
character set either is configured to.
Lookout
May 5, 2012, 11:20:06 AM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 10:03:24 -0500, RD Sandman
<rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
>news:04ydnXBgavB54znS...@giganews.com:
>
>> On 5/4/2012 7:08 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>
>>> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when he
>>> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
>>
>> One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy," the
>> sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with. Any
>> regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a carrier
>> landing. I darn sure would.
>>
>
>There is a big difference between experiencing a landing on a carrier and
>actually landing one.
>
>BTW, when was Bush disqualified from flying F-102s? It is not an easy AC
>to fly but last I heard he had qualified to do so.
No, I would not want to sit down and have a beer with an idiot like
<rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
>news:04ydnXBgavB54znS...@giganews.com:
>
>> On 5/4/2012 7:08 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>
>>> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when he
>>> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
>>
>> One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy," the
>> sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with. Any
>> regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a carrier
>> landing. I darn sure would.
>>
>
>There is a big difference between experiencing a landing on a carrier and
>actually landing one.
>
>BTW, when was Bush disqualified from flying F-102s? It is not an easy AC
>to fly but last I heard he had qualified to do so.
bush.
Lookout
May 5, 2012, 11:21:11 AM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 10:04:17 -0500, RD Sandman
<rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>Lookout <mrloo...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>news:pb89q75rcvdj03efm...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Fri, 04 May 2012 20:15:06 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On 5/4/2012 7:08 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>>>[snip]
>>>>
>>>> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when
>he
>>>> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
>>>
>>>One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy," the
>>>sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with. Any
>>>regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a carrier
>>>landing. I darn sure would.
>>>
>> No, I wouldn't want to have a beer with a fucking idiot.
>>
>
>You wouldn't want to have a beer with me either since you would be
>constantly looking over your shoulder for the exit.
>
Why would I be looking for an exit?
<rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>Lookout <mrloo...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>news:pb89q75rcvdj03efm...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Fri, 04 May 2012 20:15:06 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On 5/4/2012 7:08 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>>>[snip]
>>>>
>>>> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when
>he
>>>> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
>>>
>>>One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy," the
>>>sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with. Any
>>>regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a carrier
>>>landing. I darn sure would.
>>>
>> No, I wouldn't want to have a beer with a fucking idiot.
>>
>
>You wouldn't want to have a beer with me either since you would be
>constantly looking over your shoulder for the exit.
>
I would have liked to have a had a beer with you a couple of years ago
before you started losing it.
RD Sandman
May 5, 2012, 11:25:20 AM5/5/12
to
Lookout <mrloo...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:98haq71ug5dljk3tk...@4ax.com:
So?? What does that have to do with the question that I asked Jeff?
news:98haq71ug5dljk3tk...@4ax.com:
Jeff M
May 5, 2012, 1:24:16 PM5/5/12
to
On 5/5/2012 10:03 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
> news:04ydnXBgavB54znS...@giganews.com:
>
>> On 5/4/2012 7:08 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>
>>> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when he
>>> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
>>
>> One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy," the
>> sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with. Any
>> regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a carrier
>> landing. I darn sure would.
>>
>
> There is a big difference between experiencing a landing on a carrier and
> actually landing one.
>
> BTW, when was Bush disqualified from flying F-102s? It is not an easy AC
> to fly but last I heard he had qualified to do so.
When he disobeyed an order to take a flight physical from an AF
> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
> news:04ydnXBgavB54znS...@giganews.com:
>
>> On 5/4/2012 7:08 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>
>>> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when he
>>> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
>>
>> One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy," the
>> sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with. Any
>> regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a carrier
>> landing. I darn sure would.
>>
>
> There is a big difference between experiencing a landing on a carrier and
> actually landing one.
>
> BTW, when was Bush disqualified from flying F-102s? It is not an easy AC
> to fly but last I heard he had qualified to do so.
physician, the first one he faced to potentially include the then-new
drug tests. He was automatically DQed from flight status, but, for
whatever reason, never faced a hearing board that being DQed should have
mandated, nor any on-record disciplinary action for disobeying an order.
But things were different then.
The only account of his actual flying ability I've read is a somewhat
dubious account of a supposed flight in a Cessna. Here's a sample of
the stories:
"Bush really flying in a Cessna 172 in 1976:
NOT LONG AFTER Reisner's delicate trip to Midland[summer 1976], Bush
banged on the door of Susie and Don Evans on an otherwise placid Sunday
afternoon and suggested to Don that they head out to the airport and
spend a few bucks for a spin over the desiccated Permian Basin in a
single-engine Cessna. Susie Evans, who had gone to elementary school
with Bush, was a longtime Midland presence, and when she had been dating
her future husband in Houston, she had frequently stayed at the Bush
house. She had moved back to Midland, and after she had heard that Bush
was back in town, she and her husband had frequently invited him over.
Her husband Don Evans... Willard... was a short, fastidious,
narrow-faced oilman in his early thirties who was poised to assume
control of the Tom Brown Company, one of the legendary older names in
the West Texas patch. Bush had begun spending more time at the Evanses'
apartment in the Windsor Courts, drinking cocktails with them and
leaving his laundry for Susie to do. Bush liked Evans's politics, he
liked that they were about the same age and that both of them had recent
MBAs. He liked the fact that Evans's old man had landed on the beach at
Normandy during World War II.
Evans said he'd love to go flying. At the airport he watched Bush stare
at the controls, at the panel, and he realized that Bush-though not
admitting it-had no idea how to fly the thing properly. After finally
figuring out how to launch the plane, Bush pushed the Cessna hard down
the runway. Evans screamed, "Give it some gas!" The Cessna's warning
system was blinking and crackling. Bush tried to lift his craft fast,
almost as if he were piloting a jet back in the Texas Air National
Guard. The plane wobbled into the air, and the unsubtle maneuvering
threatened to shove it into a stall. Now the rented plane was rattling
in the sky over Midland
The endless petrochemical complexes, all the aluminum and steel and
smoke stacks that pockmark the Permian Basin, were spiking up just below
the aircraft. Bush nervously turned to Evans, put his hand on his knee
and blurted in his self-mocking West Texas way, "Okay, Evvie, I’ve got
it under control."
After more seemingly endless moments, he somehow got control of the
plane again. He aimed the aircraft down, and the landing was as shaky
and brutal as the takeoff. The plane careened off the runway and onto
the desert. Evans sighed in relief. Then an unbelieving Evans braced
himself as Bush suddenly and unexpectedly spun the plane and bounced
back along the runway. Evans stared at Bush. He could see the fear and
panic flooding his face. Bush pressed on. Evans had no idea why Bush
wanted to go again. The plane wobbled uncertainly back into the West
Texas skies, and Bush turned to Evans. "Hey," said Bush airily, as if he
had just had an original, amusing idea, "let's fly around Midland."
The men began cracking up. Bush brought the Cessna back to the airport.
It was the last time he flew a plane. Evans would be one of the three
people at Bush's side in almost every public venture for the
twenty-three years.
Minutaglio pg 175&176
Here is another version:
Donnie Evans remembered a similar story involving an airplane. He told
David Maraniss that less than a year after George W. first got back to
Midland he came over to Donnie's house and told him he wanted to take a
single-engine Cessna for a little joyride. They drove over to the
airfield and got in the plane. Then George W. realized he didn't have a
clue how to fly a Cessna.
"The guy didn't even know how to start the thing," Evans reportedly
said. "That was a bad omen. Finally we get it started and roll down the
runway, and he tries to take it straight up like a jet! We go into a
stall, buzzers are going off. I say, 'Give it some gas!' We finally get
it airborne, and he decides he better turn around and go back. I can
tell he's nervous, but he says, 'Okay, Evvie, got it under control.' We
come down and he lands half on the runway and half on the grass. And
then he pats my leg and says don't worry, and he takes it up again. This
time he's so scared he says, 'Hey, let's fly around Midland.' He had to
get his confidence up. Somehow we got back safely. He's never flown again."
http://www.seanet.com/~johnco/bush102.htm
RD Sandman
May 5, 2012, 2:43:01 PM5/5/12
to
Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
news:N7mdneXOR5m8_zjS...@giganews.com:
> On 5/5/2012 10:03 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
>> news:04ydnXBgavB54znS...@giganews.com:
>>
>>> On 5/4/2012 7:08 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when
>>>> he clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
>>>
>>> One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy,"
>>> the sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with.
>>> Any regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a
>>> carrier landing. I darn sure would.
>>>
>>
>> There is a big difference between experiencing a landing on a carrier
>> and actually landing one.
>>
>> BTW, when was Bush disqualified from flying F-102s? It is not an
>> easy AC to fly but last I heard he had qualified to do so.
>
> When he disobeyed an order to take a flight physical from an AF
> physician, the first one he faced to potentially include the then-new
> drug tests. He was automatically DQed from flight status, but, for
> whatever reason, never faced a hearing board that being DQed should
> have mandated, nor any on-record disciplinary action for disobeying an
> order.
> But things were different then.
>
> The only account of his actual flying ability I've read is a somewhat
> dubious account of a supposed flight in a Cessna. Here's a sample of
> the stories:
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0185.shtml
http://www.strategypage.com/military_photos/f_102_g_w_bush.aspx
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush_military_service_controversy
http://www.seanet.com/~johnco/bush102.htm
pilot certifications. It certainly isn't like owning a Ford and just
jumping into the driver's seat of your buddy's Chevy.
on his records. It appears that johnco didn't want to take a stand in
either direction.
Jeff M
May 5, 2012, 3:02:07 PM5/5/12
to
flying altogether.
qualified to fly that aircraft, he had no business taking it up. It
would have been dangerous to do so, and Bush would have shown very poor
judgment in doing so. Having bad judgment about flying is certainly not
considered a desirable trait in an aviator.
"Champagne Brigade" stateside during the Vietnam War. It's just that so
many of his service records from the TX ANG went missing by the time
Bush was Governor of Texas, and later, President.
RD Sandman
May 5, 2012, 3:19:43 PM5/5/12
to
Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
news:aaKdnWseANeS5DjS...@giganews.com:
just kinda skimmed the refererence.
It
> would have been dangerous to do so, and Bush would have shown very poor
> judgment in doing so. Having bad judgment about flying is certainly
not
> considered a desirable trait in an aviator.
whether or not he was qualified to fly an F-102. It is a difficult plane
to fly because it is underpowered for its intent. The F-106, its follow-
on isn't underpowered and is a real hotrod.
>>> The endless petrochemical complexes, all the aluminum and steel and
>>> smoke stacks that pockmark the Permian Basin, were spiking up just
>>> below the aircraft. Bush nervously turned to Evans, put his hand on
>>> his knee and blurted in his self-mocking West Texas way, "Okay,
Evvie,
Bush, I was simply asking about his disqualification from flying and that
it had nothing to do with his ability (or lack of it) to fly the plane.
de...@dudu.org
May 5, 2012, 3:22:29 PM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 13:43:01 -0500, RD Sandman
<rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>> http://www.seanet.com/~johnco/bush102.htm
>
>This particular site also reports Bush as flying the F-102 and having it
>on his records. It appears that johnco didn't want to take a stand in
>either direction.
Bush flew in flight school only. When his unit was going to be
<rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>> http://www.seanet.com/~johnco/bush102.htm
>
>This particular site also reports Bush as flying the F-102 and having it
>on his records. It appears that johnco didn't want to take a stand in
>either direction.
rotated to Vietnam he went AWOL. All his records of him reporting to
his Guard unit conveniently have disappeared.
de...@dudu.org
May 5, 2012, 3:28:04 PM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 14:02:07 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
wrote:
>I think we all knew that Bush was once a pilot in the so-called
>"Champagne Brigade" stateside during the Vietnam War. It's just that so
>many of his service records from the TX ANG went missing by the time
>Bush was Governor of Texas, and later, President.
They had to destroy his records to cover up the fact he went AWOL.
wrote:
>I think we all knew that Bush was once a pilot in the so-called
>"Champagne Brigade" stateside during the Vietnam War. It's just that so
>many of his service records from the TX ANG went missing by the time
>Bush was Governor of Texas, and later, President.
Greg Arama
May 5, 2012, 3:34:55 PM5/5/12
to
DooDoo lied when he wrote in message
news:sbvaq75vbhsrlcfde...@4ax.com...
YOU have any proof of that, you retard?
After all, YOU just said that all records are gone, so that means YOU are a
fucking liar!
And "we" all know your record of telling the truth and "knowing" facts!
Lookout
May 5, 2012, 3:39:36 PM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 13:22:29 -0600, de...@dudu.org wrote:
>On Sat, 05 May 2012 13:43:01 -0500, RD Sandman
><rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>> http://www.seanet.com/~johnco/bush102.htm
>>
>>This particular site also reports Bush as flying the F-102 and having it
>>on his records. It appears that johnco didn't want to take a stand in
>>either direction.
>
>Bush flew in flight school only. When his unit was going to be
>rotated to Vietnam he went AWOL.
You better check that. His unit was NEVER scheduled to rotate to Viet
>On Sat, 05 May 2012 13:43:01 -0500, RD Sandman
><rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>> http://www.seanet.com/~johnco/bush102.htm
>>
>>This particular site also reports Bush as flying the F-102 and having it
>>on his records. It appears that johnco didn't want to take a stand in
>>either direction.
>
>Bush flew in flight school only. When his unit was going to be
>rotated to Vietnam he went AWOL.
Nam. The jet he was qualified to use wasn't used in Nam anymore. It
was obsolete.
Jeff M
May 5, 2012, 4:04:07 PM5/5/12
to
On 5/5/2012 2:19 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
[snip]
> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
>> No it's not. But if he wasn't checked out, certified or otherwise
>> qualified to fly that aircraft, he had no business taking it up.
>
> That's true but didn't that plane belong to one of those with him? I
> just kinda skimmed the refererence.
I dunno. The whole story sounds kinda sketchy to me. I don't put too
>> qualified to fly that aircraft, he had no business taking it up.
>
> That's true but didn't that plane belong to one of those with him? I
> just kinda skimmed the refererence.
much credence in it. But it's odd I haven't seen any accounts of his
flying ability, or even of him flying at all, from any instructor pilots
or squadron mates, commanding officers, ground crew, etc. We know he
made it through all the necessary instruction to get into F-102s, which
means he must have had many flight hours with a variety of people at
different bases to witness it, but nobody seems to recall seeing him in
the air. It seems quite unusual.
> It
>> would have been dangerous to do so, and Bush would have shown very poor
>> judgment in doing so. Having bad judgment about flying is certainly
> not
>> considered a desirable trait in an aviator.
>
> Agreed....but, AFAIK, the discussion wasn't about his skill level but
> whether or not he was qualified to fly an F-102. It is a difficult plane
> to fly because it is underpowered for its intent. The F-106, its follow-
> on isn't underpowered and is a real hotrod.
Viking out to the USS Lexington.
someone posted "You mean he fly(sic) in, landed on a
carrier, and strutted around in a flight suit with a MISSION
ACCOMPLISHED banner flying in the breeze? Damn, I missed that."
Then Grey Ghost replied in his usual calm and mature manner: "Of course
you did asshole. Bush was actually flying the plane." Then I set the
facts straight with a quote from the NMNA that made clear Bush was only
a passenger, and we were off, with much discussion of this rather
insignificant and easily independently confirmed or denied point to follow.
de...@dudu.org
May 5, 2012, 4:08:03 PM5/5/12
to
On Sat, 05 May 2012 15:04:07 -0500, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
wrote:
Dumbass wingers actually thought Bush was pilot? Too funny.
wrote:
Jeff M
May 5, 2012, 4:18:26 PM5/5/12
to
them, have gone missing. A lot of human error must have occurred over
the decades. There have also been fires at records depositories, and
other disasters. The 1973 fire in St. Louis alone destroyed about 18
million service records.
Of course, there have been many reported instances of willful omission
or even "grooming" to remove derogatory information or falsify or add
laudatory material, whether by sympathetic commanders, service buddies,
patrons wanting to protect their proteges, or through political
influence or corruption. There were allegations Bush's records were
groomed about the time he became TX Governor, and again when he was
running for President. I don't think it's ever been proved, but it
wouldn't surprise me, and could have easily happened without Bush's
knowledge, by "friends" thinking they were helping him.
RD Sandman
May 5, 2012, 4:39:05 PM5/5/12
to
Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
news:IbGdnSgXl4kTGjjS...@giganews.com:
> On 5/5/2012 2:19 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
> [snip]
>>> No it's not. But if he wasn't checked out, certified or otherwise
>>> qualified to fly that aircraft, he had no business taking it up.
>>
>> That's true but didn't that plane belong to one of those with him? I
>> just kinda skimmed the refererence.
>
> I dunno. The whole story sounds kinda sketchy to me. I don't put too
> much credence in it. But it's odd I haven't seen any accounts of his
> flying ability, or even of him flying at all, from any instructor
> pilots or squadron mates, commanding officers, ground crew, etc. We
> know he made it through all the necessary instruction to get into
> F-102s, which means he must have had many flight hours with a variety
> of people at different bases to witness it, but nobody seems to recall
> seeing him in the air. It seems quite unusual.
>> It
>>> would have been dangerous to do so, and Bush would have shown very
>>> poor judgment in doing so. Having bad judgment about flying is
>>> certainly
>> not
>>> considered a desirable trait in an aviator.
>>
>> Agreed....but, AFAIK, the discussion wasn't about his skill level but
>> whether or not he was qualified to fly an F-102. It is a difficult
>> plane to fly because it is underpowered for its intent. The F-106,
>> its follow- on isn't underpowered and is a real hotrod.
>
> IIRC, The discussion was about a false claim that Bush flew the S-3
> Viking out to the USS Lexington.
take it off or land it on the carrier.
> someone posted "You mean he fly(sic) in, landed on a
> carrier, and strutted around in a flight suit with a MISSION
> ACCOMPLISHED banner flying in the breeze? Damn, I missed that."
>
> Then Grey Ghost replied in his usual calm and mature manner: "Of
> course you did asshole. Bush was actually flying the plane." Then I
> set the facts straight with a quote from the NMNA that made clear Bush
> was only a passenger, and we were off, with much discussion of this
> rather insignificant and easily independently confirmed or denied
> point to follow.
RD Sandman
May 5, 2012, 4:43:37 PM5/5/12
to
Lookout <mrloo...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:gd0bq7d441u8213pa...@4ax.com:
> On Sat, 05 May 2012 13:22:29 -0600, de...@dudu.org wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 05 May 2012 13:43:01 -0500, RD Sandman
>><rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> http://www.seanet.com/~johnco/bush102.htm
>>>
>>>This particular site also reports Bush as flying the F-102 and having
>>>it on his records. It appears that johnco didn't want to take a
>>>stand in either direction.
>>
>>Bush flew in flight school only. When his unit was going to be
>>rotated to Vietnam he went AWOL.
>
> You better check that. His unit was NEVER scheduled to rotate to Viet
> Nam. The jet he was qualified to use wasn't used in Nam anymore. It
> was obsolete.
It was quite underpowered for its mission when it was new. It did see
service in Nam, however, for most of the war.
>> All his records of him reporting to
>>his Guard unit conveniently have disappeared.
>
news:gd0bq7d441u8213pa...@4ax.com:
> On Sat, 05 May 2012 13:22:29 -0600, de...@dudu.org wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 05 May 2012 13:43:01 -0500, RD Sandman
>><rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> http://www.seanet.com/~johnco/bush102.htm
>>>
>>>This particular site also reports Bush as flying the F-102 and having
>>>it on his records. It appears that johnco didn't want to take a
>>>stand in either direction.
>>
>>Bush flew in flight school only. When his unit was going to be
>>rotated to Vietnam he went AWOL.
>
> You better check that. His unit was NEVER scheduled to rotate to Viet
> Nam. The jet he was qualified to use wasn't used in Nam anymore. It
> was obsolete.
service in Nam, however, for most of the war.
>> All his records of him reporting to
>>his Guard unit conveniently have disappeared.
>
RD Sandman
May 5, 2012, 4:46:23 PM5/5/12
to
Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
news:KsmdnY71wsl4FzjS...@giganews.com:
> On 5/5/2012 2:28 PM, de...@dudu.org wrote:
>> On Sat, 05 May 2012 14:02:07 -0500, Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I think we all knew that Bush was once a pilot in the so-called
>>> "Champagne Brigade" stateside during the Vietnam War. It's just
>>> that so many of his service records from the TX ANG went missing by
>>> the time Bush was Governor of Texas, and later, President.
>>
>> They had to destroy his records to cover up the fact he went AWOL.
>
>
> Lots of service records, or things that should have been included in
> them, have gone missing. A lot of human error must have occurred over
> the decades. There have also been fires at records depositories, and
> other disasters. The 1973 fire in St. Louis alone destroyed about 18
> million service records.
and 1/1/64 and whose last name begins after Hubbard, James E.
Jeff M
May 5, 2012, 5:08:19 PM5/5/12
to
On 5/5/2012 3:39 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
> news:IbGdnSgXl4kTGjjS...@giganews.com:
>
>> On 5/5/2012 2:19 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
>> [snip]
>>>> No it's not. But if he wasn't checked out, certified or otherwise
>>>> qualified to fly that aircraft, he had no business taking it up.
>>>
>>> That's true but didn't that plane belong to one of those with him? I
>>> just kinda skimmed the refererence.
>>
>> I dunno. The whole story sounds kinda sketchy to me. I don't put too
>> much credence in it. But it's odd I haven't seen any accounts of his
>> flying ability, or even of him flying at all, from any instructor
>> pilots or squadron mates, commanding officers, ground crew, etc. We
>> know he made it through all the necessary instruction to get into
>> F-102s, which means he must have had many flight hours with a variety
>> of people at different bases to witness it, but nobody seems to recall
>> seeing him in the air. It seems quite unusual.
>
> Yes, but it is in his military records....so what can I say?
That's the point, one thing we can prove is that Bush did, in fact,
> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
> news:IbGdnSgXl4kTGjjS...@giganews.com:
>
>> On 5/5/2012 2:19 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
>> [snip]
>>>> No it's not. But if he wasn't checked out, certified or otherwise
>>>> qualified to fly that aircraft, he had no business taking it up.
>>>
>>> That's true but didn't that plane belong to one of those with him? I
>>> just kinda skimmed the refererence.
>>
>> I dunno. The whole story sounds kinda sketchy to me. I don't put too
>> much credence in it. But it's odd I haven't seen any accounts of his
>> flying ability, or even of him flying at all, from any instructor
>> pilots or squadron mates, commanding officers, ground crew, etc. We
>> know he made it through all the necessary instruction to get into
>> F-102s, which means he must have had many flight hours with a variety
>> of people at different bases to witness it, but nobody seems to recall
>> seeing him in the air. It seems quite unusual.
>
> Yes, but it is in his military records....so what can I say?
complete all the training in various aircraft necessary to fly F-102s.
But nobody published any anecdotes about flying with the future
President? Odd indeed.
>>>> It
>>>> would have been dangerous to do so, and Bush would have shown very
>>>> poor judgment in doing so. Having bad judgment about flying is
>>>> certainly
>>> not
>>>> considered a desirable trait in an aviator.
>>>
>>> Agreed....but, AFAIK, the discussion wasn't about his skill level but
>>> whether or not he was qualified to fly an F-102. It is a difficult
>>> plane to fly because it is underpowered for its intent. The F-106,
>>> its follow- on isn't underpowered and is a real hotrod.
>>
>> IIRC, The discussion was about a false claim that Bush flew the S-3
>> Viking out to the USS Lexington.
>
> He may have handled the controls while in flight, but he certainly didn't
> take it off or land it on the carrier.
certainly not doing any takeoffs or traps.
RD Sandman
May 5, 2012, 5:20:13 PM5/5/12
to
Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
news:_KednV8YrsMSCzjS...@giganews.com:
> On 5/5/2012 3:39 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
>> news:IbGdnSgXl4kTGjjS...@giganews.com:
>>
>>> On 5/5/2012 2:19 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>>> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
>>> [snip]
>>>>> No it's not. But if he wasn't checked out, certified or otherwise
>>>>> qualified to fly that aircraft, he had no business taking it up.
>>>>
>>>> That's true but didn't that plane belong to one of those with him?
>>>> I just kinda skimmed the refererence.
>>>
>>> I dunno. The whole story sounds kinda sketchy to me. I don't put
>>> too much credence in it. But it's odd I haven't seen any accounts
>>> of his flying ability, or even of him flying at all, from any
>>> instructor pilots or squadron mates, commanding officers, ground
>>> crew, etc. We know he made it through all the necessary instruction
>>> to get into F-102s, which means he must have had many flight hours
>>> with a variety of people at different bases to witness it, but
>>> nobody seems to recall seeing him in the air. It seems quite
>>> unusual.
>>
>> Yes, but it is in his military records....so what can I say?
>
> That's the point, one thing we can prove is that Bush did, in fact,
> complete all the training in various aircraft necessary to fly F-102s.
> But nobody published any anecdotes about flying with the future
> President? Odd indeed.
in the O Club, though.
>>>>> It
>>>>> would have been dangerous to do so, and Bush would have shown very
>>>>> poor judgment in doing so. Having bad judgment about flying is
>>>>> certainly
>>>> not
>>>>> considered a desirable trait in an aviator.
>>>>
>>>> Agreed....but, AFAIK, the discussion wasn't about his skill level
>>>> but whether or not he was qualified to fly an F-102. It is a
>>>> difficult plane to fly because it is underpowered for its intent.
>>>> The F-106, its follow- on isn't underpowered and is a real hotrod.
>>>
>>> IIRC, The discussion was about a false claim that Bush flew the S-3
>>> Viking out to the USS Lexington.
>>
>> He may have handled the controls while in flight, but he certainly
>> didn't take it off or land it on the carrier.
>
> Yeah, I don't think he was maneuvering the aircraft, either, and
> certainly not doing any takeoffs or traps.
>>> someone posted "You mean he fly(sic) in, landed on a
>>> carrier, and strutted around in a flight suit with a MISSION
>>> ACCOMPLISHED banner flying in the breeze? Damn, I missed that."
>>>
>>> Then Grey Ghost replied in his usual calm and mature manner: "Of
>>> course you did asshole. Bush was actually flying the plane." Then I
>>> set the facts straight with a quote from the NMNA that made clear
>>> Bush was only a passenger, and we were off, with much discussion of
>>> this rather insignificant and easily independently confirmed or
>>> denied point to follow.
>>
>> Gotcha'
>>
>>
>
>
Gray Guest
May 5, 2012, 5:29:07 PM5/5/12
to
Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in news:N7mdneXOR5m8
_zjSnZ2dnU...@giganews.com:
> On 5/5/2012 10:03 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
>> news:04ydnXBgavB54znS...@giganews.com:
>>
>>> On 5/4/2012 7:08 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when he
>>>> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
>>>
>>> One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy," the
>>> sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with. Any
>>> regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a carrier
>>> landing. I darn sure would.
>>>
>>
>> There is a big difference between experiencing a landing on a carrier
and
>> actually landing one.
>>
>> BTW, when was Bush disqualified from flying F-102s? It is not an easy
AC
>> to fly but last I heard he had qualified to do so.
>
> When he disobeyed an order to take a flight physical from an AF
> physician, the first one he faced to potentially include the then-new
> drug tests. He was automatically DQed from flight status, but, for
> whatever reason, never faced a hearing board that being DQed should have
> mandated, nor any on-record disciplinary action for disobeying an order.
Or so goes the liberal narrative. Pity there is nothing to support this
line of stupidity.
Next point, counseler.
then.
Or you're just dishonest. Being a lib it's 50-50.
--
I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to
be sure.
What I like about this attitude is it works equally well for Iran and the
Democrat National Covention.
http://nukeitfromorbit.com/
_zjSnZ2dnU...@giganews.com:
> On 5/5/2012 10:03 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
>> news:04ydnXBgavB54znS...@giganews.com:
>>
>>> On 5/4/2012 7:08 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when he
>>>> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
>>>
>>> One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy," the
>>> sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with. Any
>>> regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a carrier
>>> landing. I darn sure would.
>>>
>>
>> There is a big difference between experiencing a landing on a carrier
and
>> actually landing one.
>>
>> BTW, when was Bush disqualified from flying F-102s? It is not an easy
AC
>> to fly but last I heard he had qualified to do so.
>
> When he disobeyed an order to take a flight physical from an AF
> physician, the first one he faced to potentially include the then-new
> drug tests. He was automatically DQed from flight status, but, for
> whatever reason, never faced a hearing board that being DQed should have
> mandated, nor any on-record disciplinary action for disobeying an order.
line of stupidity.
Next point, counseler.
>
> The only account of his actual flying ability I've read is a somewhat
> dubious account of a supposed flight in a Cessna. Here's a sample of
> the stories:
The actual fact is that you aren't really as smart as you think you are
> The only account of his actual flying ability I've read is a somewhat
> dubious account of a supposed flight in a Cessna. Here's a sample of
> the stories:
then.
Or you're just dishonest. Being a lib it's 50-50.
--
I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to
be sure.
What I like about this attitude is it works equally well for Iran and the
Democrat National Covention.
http://nukeitfromorbit.com/
Harold Burton
May 5, 2012, 5:59:33 PM5/5/12
to
In article <XnsA04AB1E0AC8DDWe...@88.198.244.100>,
Remember leftard rule #1: Lie, lie again, then lie about lying. ;-)
Jeff M
May 5, 2012, 6:07:22 PM5/5/12
to
On 5/5/2012 4:29 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in news:N7mdneXOR5m8
Sorry, but you're wrong again. Just about everybody already knows that
though, if not from the generally idiotic and wrongheaded run of your
posts, then from the many times this has been rehashed in this
newsgroup, with the scant available facts repeatedly verified.
If by "liberal narrative" you meant "factually correct narrative" then
you'd be right for once. It certainly beats your "narrative," which was
nothing more than the naive belief of a simpleton that since Bush was
was prancing around in a flight suit, he must have been flying the plane.
Normally, like most people do, I just ignore your silly, lame-brained
posts or let them slide past as the pathetic rantings of an angry,
bitter and confused old man consumed by hate and lost in life-long
ignorance. But your silly claim that Bush was flying the plane that
delivered him to the carrier was just so laughably stupid that I had to
comment and set the facts straight.
You know, it's one thing to be just plain ol' ignorant and sadly
misinformed about most things, but it's quite another to actively reject
ever learning anything. Worse, your inability or failure to use the
vast resources available on the internet to inform yourself at least a
little about even the basics of a topic before you begin spouting off
about it is completely inexcusable and a mark of your mental laziness.
> Next point, counseler.
>>
>> The only account of his actual flying ability I've read is a somewhat
>> dubious account of a supposed flight in a Cessna. Here's a sample of
>> the stories:
>
> The actual fact is that you aren't really as smart as you think you are
> then.
Well, regardless of how smart I may or may not be, I've repeatedly
demonstrated that I'm much smarter, more knowledgeable and better
informed than you are, not that it's much of an accomplishment.
> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in news:N7mdneXOR5m8
though, if not from the generally idiotic and wrongheaded run of your
posts, then from the many times this has been rehashed in this
newsgroup, with the scant available facts repeatedly verified.
If by "liberal narrative" you meant "factually correct narrative" then
you'd be right for once. It certainly beats your "narrative," which was
nothing more than the naive belief of a simpleton that since Bush was
was prancing around in a flight suit, he must have been flying the plane.
Normally, like most people do, I just ignore your silly, lame-brained
posts or let them slide past as the pathetic rantings of an angry,
bitter and confused old man consumed by hate and lost in life-long
ignorance. But your silly claim that Bush was flying the plane that
delivered him to the carrier was just so laughably stupid that I had to
comment and set the facts straight.
You know, it's one thing to be just plain ol' ignorant and sadly
misinformed about most things, but it's quite another to actively reject
ever learning anything. Worse, your inability or failure to use the
vast resources available on the internet to inform yourself at least a
little about even the basics of a topic before you begin spouting off
about it is completely inexcusable and a mark of your mental laziness.
> Next point, counseler.
>>
>> The only account of his actual flying ability I've read is a somewhat
>> dubious account of a supposed flight in a Cessna. Here's a sample of
>> the stories:
>
> The actual fact is that you aren't really as smart as you think you are
> then.
demonstrated that I'm much smarter, more knowledgeable and better
informed than you are, not that it's much of an accomplishment.
Scout
May 5, 2012, 6:59:57 PM5/5/12
to
"Jeff M" <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in message
news:N7mdneXOR5m8_zjS...@giganews.com...
> On 5/5/2012 10:03 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
>> news:04ydnXBgavB54znS...@giganews.com:
>>
>>> On 5/4/2012 7:08 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when he
>>>> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
>>>
>>> One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy," the
>>> sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with. Any
>>> regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a carrier
>>> landing. I darn sure would.
>>>
>>
>> There is a big difference between experiencing a landing on a carrier and
>> actually landing one.
>>
>> BTW, when was Bush disqualified from flying F-102s? It is not an easy AC
>> to fly but last I heard he had qualified to do so.
>
> When he disobeyed an order to take a flight physical from an AF physician,
> the first one he faced to potentially include the then-new drug tests.
Sorry, that just suspends his flight status that does NOT remove his flight
>> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
>> news:04ydnXBgavB54znS...@giganews.com:
>>
>>> On 5/4/2012 7:08 PM, Gray Guest wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>> And you think that Bush was stupid enough to trap on a carrier when he
>>>> clearly might have good knowledge about how hard it was?
>>>
>>> One of Bush's strong suits is that he seems like a "regular guy," the
>>> sort who'd be good to have as neighbor or drink a beer with. Any
>>> regular guy I know would jump at the chance to experience a carrier
>>> landing. I darn sure would.
>>>
>>
>> There is a big difference between experiencing a landing on a carrier and
>> actually landing one.
>>
>> BTW, when was Bush disqualified from flying F-102s? It is not an easy AC
>> to fly but last I heard he had qualified to do so.
>
> When he disobeyed an order to take a flight physical from an AF physician,
> the first one he faced to potentially include the then-new drug tests.
qualifications.
Jeff M
May 5, 2012, 7:10:14 PM5/5/12
to
longer allowed to fly any military aircraft, period.
Scout
May 5, 2012, 7:18:43 PM5/5/12
to
"Jeff M" <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in message
news:aaKdnWseANeS5DjS...@giganews.com...
disqualified
Harold Burton
May 5, 2012, 7:43:27 PM5/5/12
to
Harold Burton
May 5, 2012, 7:44:15 PM5/5/12
to
Scout
May 5, 2012, 7:48:35 PM5/5/12
to
Harold Burton
May 5, 2012, 9:28:01 PM5/5/12
to
In article <jo4e92$3vn$1...@dont-email.me>,
deep dudu doesn't think at all, he stupidly parrots leftard talking
points.
You don't have to be a complete moron to be a leftard, but as deep dudu
proves again and again, it helps.
points.
You don't have to be a complete moron to be a leftard, but as deep dudu
proves again and again, it helps.
emoneyjoe
May 5, 2012, 9:50:40 PM5/5/12
to
I intentionally neglected to take the monthly or
quarterly written test the Air Force started after
finding out they would be a separate branch
service (late spring 1947).
I was then shipped from the B-25 flight
line in Mississippi to Randolph Field to work
on an AT-6 flight line, first on student aircraft
and then a new instructor pilot training flight
line.
Sometimes people resent these types of
things, I was uncomfortable with the fact
that because of the written test the tech sarge
crew chief that had been with the airplane the
entire time during the war in Europe lost his job
and became just a flunky mechanic in the crew.
de...@dudu.org
May 5, 2012, 10:01:02 PM5/5/12
to
he wasn't qualified to land on aircraft carriers.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages