Nancy Pelosi hates the British...
Matthew Hennig
supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their actions...
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/017191.php
MH
--
Ten of Spades
Aggee Fedayeen Chief
Supreme Ruler of the Obvious
RSFC Rookie of the Year 2005
Time Magazine Person of the Year 2006
"We just got outplayed today. That's the bottom line. And we got
outcoached."
- OU Head Coach Bob Stoops following the Texas A&M game, Nov 9, 2002
miande...@yahoo.com
> Apparently she refuses to allow a House Resolution to be brought to a vote
> supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their actions...
good for her if she did(I haven't seen it reported anywhere but
powerline, so who really knows)
It's not the job of congress to go around passing such meaningless
resolutions that mean nothing.
Pelosi's approval rating with the american public is pretty good right
now.....she should just keep doing whatever it is she is doing as far
as Im concerned.
lein
> On Mar 29, 7:00 pm, Matthew Hennig <m...@aggies.No_JuNk.com> wrote:
>
> > Apparently she refuses to allow a House Resolution to be brought to a vote
> > supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their actions...
>
> good for her if she did(I haven't seen it reported anywhere but
> powerline, so who really knows)
>
> It's not the job of congress to go around passing such meaningless
> resolutions that mean nothing.
Actually it is and they do it all the time.
miande...@yahoo.com
well true that they do it all the time. It's not good gov't
though....
Charles Beauchamp
news:1175209685.4...@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 29, 7:00 pm, Matthew Hennig <m...@aggies.No_JuNk.com> wrote:
>> Apparently she refuses to allow a House Resolution to be brought to a
>> vote
>> supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their actions...
>
> good for her if she did(I haven't seen it reported anywhere but
> powerline, so who really knows)
>
> It's not the job of congress to go around passing such meaningless
> resolutions that mean nothing.
>
> Pelosi's approval rating with the american public is pretty good right
> now
her approval rating has remained in the 40s for months.
--
v/r Beau
My only hope for torture by the US government is that they would
torture you. - Rich Hammett 3/27/2007
Charles Beauchamp
news:1175210638.2...@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
True...like sticking stupid withdrawal dates into a military spendign
package knowing fully well that it will rightly get a Veto? Glad to know
you are on board with the grownups now.
Richard B.
"Charles Beauchamp" <c.e.be...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:orqdnQa4R-a8wpHb...@comcast.com...
>
just like her hip size.
--
"Life is pleasant. Death is peaceful. It's the transition that's
troublesome."
- Isaac Asimov
The Grand Beckoning
Yeah, it's not good gov't to support our troops' efforts, morally or
financially.
rich hammett
olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, Matthew Hennig:
> Apparently she refuses to allow a House Resolution to be brought to a vote
> supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their actions...
> http://powerlineblog.com/archives/017191.php
What did Bush say about it? Has he condemned Iran, yet?
rich
--
-to reply, it's hot not warm
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
\ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett
/ --I am sick of the self-absorbed city of New York.
The Grand Beckoning
<bubba...@warmmail.com> wrote:
>Minun olisi pitänyt tietää, olisi pitänyt tietää,
>olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, Matthew Hennig:
>> Apparently she refuses to allow a House Resolution to be brought to a vote
>> supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their actions...
>
>> http://powerlineblog.com/archives/017191.php
>
>What did Bush say about it? Has he condemned Iran, yet?
>
>rich
He put an awesome amount of naval power off their coast doing lord
knows what kind of secret things.
Trent Woodruff
>Apparently she refuses to allow a House Resolution to be brought to a vote
>supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their actions...
>http://powerlineblog.com/archives/017191.php
Of course, it wasn't back in World War I, so that's different?
--
..."I am certain that most Americans find your whining unbecoming of an NCO.
Thank you for quitting. This country doesn't need your kind of leadership.
Your kind weaken national security."
Charles Beauchamp, 25 Nov 06
..."Yep the Air Force is scraping rock bottom if a psycho like you could be
anywhere near leadership. You work in a training command? No wonder we are
losing the war in Iraq. Yep.....it is your fault. Now put that in your sig
too pussy."
Charles Beauchamp, 19 Feb 07
..."Whatever the standards are today they need to be high enough to
prevent people like you from entering - we've lost enough wars
recently."
Hugh Sullivan, 26 Jan 07
Trent Woodruff
>> Apparently she refuses to allow a House Resolution to be brought to a vote
>> supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their actions...
>> http://powerlineblog.com/archives/017191.php
>What did Bush say about it? Has he condemned Iran, yet?
This is frighteningly akin to the "Clinton did it too" argument.
Hoover
there one too many times
"Richard B." <RBS...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3mZOh.21112$_a1....@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
abor...@redshark.goodshow.net
I agree with you. Glad to know you weren't one of the ones complaining
about the "Armenian Genocide" resolution.
Oh wait... you're the one WHO STARTED the thread complaining about
it.
--
Aaron
Tom Enright
question the timing of this post:
> lein <boomer_the_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
IIRC, lein's issue was with the political fallout. Supporting the
Armenian Genocide deal would have a negative impact in a very
dangerous area where the US is involved in a war. WRT the British
sailors, not backing-up an ally in that war, would also reflect
poorly.
Realpolitik and all that.
-Tom Enright
> --
> Aaron
lein
Just the timing, as it's clear it's intent is to undermine the war in
Iraq.
I'll leave it to you to check and see if I complain 90 year from now
if that congress passes a resolution condeming Iran's hostage taking.
Matthew Hennig
news:dT3vlsb...@redshark.goodshow.net:
Making a resolution on something that happened 80-90 years ago is
different han a resolution to support an ally in a matter that is
currently ongoing.
TimV
"Matthew Hennig" <ma...@aggies.No_JuNk.com> wrote in message
news:Xns990387C735AE...@216.196.97.136...
> <abor...@redshark.goodshow.net> wrote in
> news:dT3vlsb...@redshark.goodshow.net:
>
>> lein <boomer_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>> On Mar 29, 4:08 pm, mianderso...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>> On Mar 29, 7:00 pm, Matthew Hennig <m...@aggies.No_JuNk.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Apparently she refuses to allow a House Resolution to be brought
>>>> > to a vote supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their
>>>> > actions...
>>>>
>>>> good for her if she did(I haven't seen it reported anywhere but
>>>> powerline, so who really knows)
>>>>
>>>> It's not the job of congress to go around passing such meaningless
>>>> resolutions that mean nothing.
>>>
>>> Actually it is and they do it all the time.
>>>
>>
>> I agree with you. Glad to know you weren't one of the ones complaining
>> about the "Armenian Genocide" resolution.
>>
>> Oh wait... you're the one WHO STARTED the thread complaining about
>> it.
>
> Making a resolution on something that happened 80-90 years ago is
> different han a resolution to support an ally in a matter that is
> currently ongoing.
>
> MH
>
Yet both are equally as pointless. Britain is well aware of our support,
support that would have been conveyed through diplomatic channels. A
Congressional resolution is about as useful as sending a Hallmark card.
Tom Enright
frankly, I question the timing of this post:
> "Matthew Hennig" <m...@aggies.No_JuNk.com> wrote in message
> > Making a resolution on something that happened 80-90 years ago is
> > different han a resolution to support an ally in a matter that is
> > currently ongoing.
> >
> > MH
> Yet both are equally as pointless. Britain is well aware of our support,
> support that would have been conveyed through diplomatic channels. A
> Congressional resolution is about as useful as sending a Hallmark card.
IAWTP. Problem is, Pelosi isn't taking a stand against such a
resolution because she believes these resolutions are pointless, she's
doing it.....why....? I'm not sure. The only reason seems to be to
somehow embarass the county and/or Bush.
If she's going to slap-down a Senate resolution, why not wait until
someone calls for "National Potato Chip Day" assuming some basturd
from Idaho doesn't fillibuster.
-Tom Enright
abor...@redshark.goodshow.net
> On Mar 30, 10:40 am, <aborg...@redshark.goodshow.net>, frankly, I
> question the timing of this post:
>
>> lein <boomer_the_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>> > On Mar 29, 4:08 pm, mianderso...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>> >> good for her if she did(I haven't seen it reported anywhere but
>> >> powerline, so who really knows)
>> >>
>> >> It's not the job of congress to go around passing such meaningless
>> >> resolutions that mean nothing.
>
>> > Actually it is and they do it all the time.
>
>> I agree with you. Glad to know you weren't one of the ones complaining
>> about the "Armenian Genocide" resolution.
>>
>> Oh wait... you're the one WHO STARTED the thread complaining about
>> it.
>
> IIRC, lein's issue was with the political fallout. Supporting the
> Armenian Genocide deal would have a negative impact in a very
> dangerous area where the US is involved in a war.
Yeah, screw morality and right and wrong... kowtow to dirtbags. Sorry,
but the ends don't justify the means. Too bad if you're offended
Turkey - don't like it? Quit doing offensive things.
> WRT the British
> sailors, not backing-up an ally in that war, would also reflect
> poorly.
NOT taking Turkey to task for their (ongoing) genocide of the
Armenians - and for that matter the Kurds - reflects rather
poorly.
> Realpolitik and all that.
...and THAT has served us so well...
--
Aaron
abor...@redshark.goodshow.net
> On Mar 30, 7:40 am, <aborg...@redshark.goodshow.net> wrote:
>> lein <boomer_the_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> > On Mar 29, 4:08 pm, mianderso...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >> On Mar 29, 7:00 pm, Matthew Hennig <m...@aggies.No_JuNk.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > Apparently she refuses to allow a House Resolution to be brought to a vote
>> >> > supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their actions...
>>
>> >> good for her if she did(I haven't seen it reported anywhere but
>> >> powerline, so who really knows)
>>
>> >> It's not the job of congress to go around passing such meaningless
>> >> resolutions that mean nothing.
>>
>> > Actually it is and they do it all the time.
>>
>> I agree with you. Glad to know you weren't one of the ones complaining
>> about the "Armenian Genocide" resolution.
>>
>> Oh wait... you're the one WHO STARTED the thread complaining about
>> it.
>
>
> Just the timing, as it's clear it's intent is to undermine the war in
> Iraq.
Yeah... I'm sure American Armenians (who have been pushing for such a
resolution since before the start of the "war") are out to undermine
the war in Iraq.
> I'll leave it to you to check and see if I complain 90 year from now
> if that congress passes a resolution condeming Iran's hostage taking.
Turkey has:
1) never admitted the genocide
2) been committing associated atrocities from then UNTIL THIS VERY DAY.
3) Is still killing and jailing journalists who even dare bring it up.
If Iran is still taking hostages 90 years from now, and hasn't apologized
for taking these hostages (and in fact won't even admit it happened),
while still murdering and imprisoning journalists who dare mention the
occurence - I bet you'll still be complaining about congress not
passing a resolution condemning it.
--
Aaron
abor...@redshark.goodshow.net
> <abor...@redshark.goodshow.net> wrote in
> news:dT3vlsb...@redshark.goodshow.net:
>
>> lein <boomer_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>> On Mar 29, 4:08 pm, mianderso...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>> On Mar 29, 7:00 pm, Matthew Hennig <m...@aggies.No_JuNk.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Apparently she refuses to allow a House Resolution to be brought
>>>> > to a vote supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their
>>>> > actions...
>>>>
>>>> good for her if she did(I haven't seen it reported anywhere but
>>>> powerline, so who really knows)
>>>>
>>>> It's not the job of congress to go around passing such meaningless
>>>> resolutions that mean nothing.
>>>
>>> Actually it is and they do it all the time.
>>>
>>
>> I agree with you. Glad to know you weren't one of the ones complaining
>> about the "Armenian Genocide" resolution.
>>
>> Oh wait... you're the one WHO STARTED the thread complaining about
>> it.
>
> Making a resolution on something that happened 80-90 years ago
...and is still happening... and is denied to ever have happened
by the Turks... and is still causing them to imprison/kill
Turkish journalists who dare mention it...
> is
> different han a resolution to support an ally in a matter that is
> currently ongoing.
Your assertion that the Armenian genocide was a singular occurence
of 80-90 years ago, and not an ongoing situation, is false.
--
Aaron
Tom Enright
Are you purposely missing my point?
-Tom Enright
> --
> Aaron
Dan Bretta
> On Mar 30, 1:57 pm, "TimV" <tvanwagoner_yourknicke...@ou.edu>,
> frankly, I question the timing of this post:
>
> > "Matthew Hennig" <m...@aggies.No_JuNk.com> wrote in message
> > > Making a resolution on something that happened 80-90 years ago is
> > > different han a resolution to support an ally in a matter that is
> > > currently ongoing.
>
> > > MH
> > Yet both are equally as pointless. Britain is well aware of our support,
> > support that would have been conveyed through diplomatic channels. A
> > Congressional resolution is about as useful as sending a Hallmark card.
>
> IAWTP. Problem is, Pelosi isn't taking a stand against such a
> resolution because she believes these resolutions are pointless, she's
> doing it.....why....? I'm not sure. The only reason seems to be to
> somehow embarass the county and/or Bush.
>
a go ahead to attack Iran?
<smiley face>
Dan
abor...@redshark.goodshow.net
Your point seems to be that the ends (possibly making the war
in Iraq easier) justifies the means (tacitly condoning Turkish
genocide and human rights violations)...
It doesn't.
--
Aaron
Tonawanda Kardex
> Apparently she refuses to allow a House Resolution to be brought to a vote
> supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their actions...
>
> http://powerlineblog.com/archives/017191.php
She's a great American, after all ... not.
Tonawanda Kardex
>
> > Apparently she refuses to allow a House Resolution to be brought to a vote
> > supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their actions...
>
> good for her if she did(I haven't seen it reported anywhere but
> powerline, so who really knows)
>
> It's not the job of congress to go around passing such meaningless
> resolutions that mean nothing.
Dems specialize in meaningless actions; didn't you know this?!
rich hammett
> On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 02:06:11 -0000, rich hammett
> <bubba...@warmmail.com> wrote:
>>Minun olisi pitänyt tietää, olisi pitänyt tietää,
>>olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, Matthew Hennig:
>>> Apparently she refuses to allow a House Resolution to be brought to a vote
>>> supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their actions...
>>
>>> http://powerlineblog.com/archives/017191.php
>>
>>What did Bush say about it? Has he condemned Iran, yet?
> He put an awesome amount of naval power off their coast doing lord
> knows what kind of secret things.
Actual action doesn't count if he didn't say very war promotional
things.
rich hammett
>>On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 02:06:11 -0000, rich hammett <bubba...@warmmail.com> wrote:
>>>olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, Matthew Hennig:
>>> Apparently she refuses to allow a House Resolution to be brought to a vote
>>> supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their actions...
>>> http://powerlineblog.com/archives/017191.php
>>What did Bush say about it? Has he condemned Iran, yet?
> This is frighteningly akin to the "Clinton did it too" argument.
Nope, just trying to get the point across that loudly shouting
about what Iran has done is not a necessary part of an
appropriate reaction, either with Congress or the bellicose
president.
Trent Woodruff
>>> Realpolitik and all that.
Your point that both bin Ladin and Saddam Hussein were our buddies via
Realpolitik or some other point?
Trent Woodruff
>>olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, Trent Woodruff:
>>>On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 02:06:11 -0000, rich hammett <bubba...@warmmail.com> wrote:
>>>>olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, Matthew Hennig:
>>>> Apparently she refuses to allow a House Resolution to be brought to a vote
>>>> supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their actions...
>>>> http://powerlineblog.com/archives/017191.php
>>>What did Bush say about it? Has he condemned Iran, yet?
>> This is frighteningly akin to the "Clinton did it too" argument.
>Nope
Sure it is.
Trent Woodruff
>>olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, The Grand Beckoning:
>>> On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 02:06:11 -0000, rich hammett
>>>> Apparently she refuses to allow a House Resolution to be brought to a vote
>>>> supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their actions...
>>>> http://powerlineblog.com/archives/017191.php
>>>What did Bush say about it? Has he condemned Iran, yet?
>> He put an awesome amount of naval power off their coast doing lord
>> knows what kind of secret things.
>Actual action doesn't count if he didn't say very war promotional
>things.
Huh?
rich hammett
>>On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 23:24:17 -0000, rich hammett <bubba...@warmmail.com> wrote:
>>>olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, The Grand Beckoning:
>>>> On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 02:06:11 -0000, rich hammett
>>>>>olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, Matthew Hennig:
>>>>> Apparently she refuses to allow a House Resolution to be brought to a vote
>>>>> supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their actions...
>>>>> http://powerlineblog.com/archives/017191.php
>>>>What did Bush say about it? Has he condemned Iran, yet?
>>> He put an awesome amount of naval power off their coast doing lord
>>> knows what kind of secret things.
>>Actual action doesn't count if he didn't say very war promotional
>>things.
> Huh?
Look up at the original post, it wasn't about any actual action or
funding by Congress, it was a whine about Pelosi not allowing a
vote on an empty warlike statement. That's an even worse attack
if Bush, who is not a peacemaker in general, has also not said
those same warlike things. I gave the OP a chance to post what
he said about it.
rich hammett
>>On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 23:26:16 -0000, rich hammett <bubba...@warmmail.com> wrote:
>>>olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, Trent Woodruff:
>>>>On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 02:06:11 -0000, rich hammett <bubba...@warmmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, Matthew Hennig:
>>>>> Apparently she refuses to allow a House Resolution to be brought to a vote
>>>>> supporting the Brits and condemning Iran for their actions...
>>>>> http://powerlineblog.com/archives/017191.php
>>>>What did Bush say about it? Has he condemned Iran, yet?
>>> This is frighteningly akin to the "Clinton did it too" argument.
>>Nope
> Sure it is.
Why'd you delete my post?
It is not akin to the "Clinton did it too" argument, because I
think it was a GOOD THING that Bush and Congress haven't
issued any empty warlike statements over this issue.
rich hammett
>> lein <boomer_the_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> Realpolitik and all that.
I don't think he said anything about that. I think he whined
about pointless resolutions.
Jeffrey Davis
Idealsim. Now, you're back to Realpolitik?