Back to the days of Herbert Hoover
Cliff
http://www.memphisflyer.com/JacksonBaker/archives/2010/12/30/mad-as-hell-last-chance-before-the-tea-party-starts-for-real
"MAD AS HELL: Last Chance Before the Tea Party Starts for Real!"
[
...
Perhaps you have figured out by now that the Tea Party is a sham— a gigantic
ball of self-serving, self-righteous faux outrage bounced back and forth by
Republicans. After two years of marching and bellowing — of dressing up in
stupid costumes with three-cornered hats and carrying misspelled signs—-of going
apoplectic at town halls about the mountains of debt and deficit spending that
are “destroying our children’s future,” the Tea Party finally had an opportunity
to display their fury, wrath, and indignation. When Republicans fought for and
voted almost unanimously to add $858 billion to the budget deficit by extending
the Bush tax cuts, the Tea Party was quieter than little church mice. There
wasn’t even a whimper of an outcry. Confirmed was what we already knew — they
are hypocrites for hire.
This “movement” has never really had anything to do with making serious fiscal
policy change — no, the Master Thespians of the right wing are simply tools who
were bought and paid for by the billionaire Koch brothers, Rupert Murdoch, and
Dick Armey’s FreedomWorks for the explicit purpose of Bringing the Crazy ...
...
... —- all the way back to the days of Herbert Hoover.
...
]
Rich Grise
>
> This “movement” has never really had anything to do with making serious
> fiscal policy change — no, the Master Thespians of the right wing are
> simply tools who were bought and paid for by the billionaire Koch
> brothers, Rupert Murdoch, and Dick Armey’s FreedomWorks for the explicit
> purpose of Bringing the Crazy ... ...
And of course George Soros is pure as the driven snow...
Thanks,
Rich
Strabo
>
> http://www.memphisflyer.com/JacksonBaker/archives/2010/12/30/mad-as-hell-last-chance-before-the-tea-party-starts-for-real
> "MAD AS HELL: Last Chance Before the Tea Party Starts for Real!"
> [
> ...
> Perhaps you have figured out by now that the Tea Party is a sham— a gigantic
> ball of self-serving, self-righteous faux outrage bounced back and forth by
> Republicans. After two years of marching and bellowing — of dressing up in
> stupid costumes with three-cornered hats and carrying misspelled signs—-of going
> apoplectic at town halls about the mountains of debt and deficit spending that
> are “destroying our children’s future,” the Tea Party finally had an opportunity
> to display their fury, wrath, and indignation. When Republicans fought for and
> voted almost unanimously to add $858 billion to the budget deficit by extending
> the Bush tax cuts, the Tea Party was quieter than little church mice. There
> wasn’t even a whimper of an outcry. Confirmed was what we already knew — they
> are hypocrites for hire.
>
Running out of government tits to suck?
A tax cut is a decrease in taxes. Maintaining the tax cut is not an
expenditure. It adds nothing to the deficit.
We oppose unnecessary taxes AND we're happy to decrease spending. That
will decrease the deficit.
>
> This “movement” has never really had anything to do with making serious fiscal
> policy change — no, the Master Thespians of the right wing are simply tools who
> were bought and paid for by the billionaire Koch brothers, Rupert Murdoch, and
> Dick Armey’s FreedomWorks for the explicit purpose of Bringing the Crazy ...
>
Boy, we're gonna have fun with you!
Too_Many_Tools
wrote:
> http://www.memphisflyer.com/JacksonBaker/archives/2010/12/30/mad-as-h...
Well said.
The Pee Party is just a bunch of cheap conservative whores busy
licking the GOP boot....while the Republican tax cuts cost the Country
858 billion dollars of unnecessary debt.
TMT
Rich Grise
>
> The Pee Party is just a bunch of cheap conservative whores busy
> licking the GOP boot....while the Republican tax cuts cost the Country
> 858 billion dollars of unnecessary debt.
>
to block another huge _increase_, and it doesn't _cost_ anything - what
costs is the Obammunist handouts to the unions, unelected bureaucrats,
and illegal Mexicans.
But. much like with warmingism, faith is impervious to facts.
Thanks,
Rich
Curly Surmudgeon
> A tax cut is a decrease in taxes.
Correct so far.
> Maintaining the tax cut is not an expenditure.
True again.
> It adds nothing to the deficit.
We disagree. In accounting ledgers you have income and expenditures.
The deficit(profit/gain) is the difference between those two. Change
either and the deficit changes unless one counterbalances the other.
Expenditures have increased for decades but taken a quantum leap about
2001 and again in 2008 while tax cuts went the other direction. Either
alone increases deficit. Both together are deadly.
--
Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meg who?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cliff
wrote:
No doubt.
We all know who the liars, tools & fools are.
BTW, Found those "WMDs" yet?
--
Cliff
Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:
> Too_Many_Tools wrote:
>>
>> The Pee Party is just a bunch of cheap conservative whores busy licking
>> the GOP boot....while the Republican tax cuts cost the Country 858
>> billion dollars of unnecessary debt.
>>
> No, in the first place, there were no tax cuts...
Why do you wackos persist in such transparent lies?
And screwing up the newsgroup list so respondents aren't heard?
Beam Me Up Scotty
> On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 18:52:27 -0800, Rich Grise <ri...@example.net.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> Too_Many_Tools wrote:
>>>
>>> The Pee Party is just a bunch of cheap conservative whores busy licking
>>> the GOP boot....while the Republican tax cuts cost the Country 858
>>> billion dollars of unnecessary debt.
>>>
>> No, in the first place, there were no tax cuts...
>
> Why do you wackos persist in such transparent lies?
If you cut taxes and TAXES went down ZERO dollars($0.00), how much were
taxes cut?
Curly Surmudgeon
Ah, your 30 days in the Bozo Bin are up already?
You've evaded my question so really you don't have a right to demand an
answer of your own. But I'll destroy that assertion ended with a
question mark to demonstrate the falsities used by your gang. Or
Republicans. Just as they've lied us into two wars and almost collapsed
the world economy with lies.
The answer to your loaded question is obvious however the assertion used
to fabricate that scenario is false. The basis is the last year this tax
cut _wasn't_ implemented.
Now, you wackos told us for eight years that tax cuts would spur the
economy and make jobs. Bush left office as the only president to *lose*
jobs during his eight years in office. And it becomes even worse for
your gang if you measure jobs to the bottom of his recession when America
was bleeding nearly a half million jobs a month.
Your tax cuts were in effect continuously during the worst job losses
America has ever experienced. And you crazymotherfuckers want more of
that? Fuck you and your band of outlaws. Fuck you and your band of
torturers. Fuck you and your economic programs. Fuck you and your shift
of taxation from the rich to the already suffering poor. Fuck you and
your heartless treatment of the unemployed and sick. Fuck you and your
criminal leaders that Obama will not prosecute.
Do not whine and lie about when is a "tax cut" not a "tax cut".
Fuck you.
Rich Grise
> On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 18:52:27 -0800, Rich Grise <ri...@example.net.invalid>
>>>
>
> Why do you wackos persist in such transparent lies?
OK, show me exactly which taxes got cut. The numbers should be
readily available.
Show me.
Thanks,
Rich
Beam Me Up Scotty
In other words, I was correct and your Autistic triggered Tourette's is
in full bloom......
And Obama said the "tax cuts" would save jobs. If you want to call him
a liar then just do it. I'm guessing he meant that the lack of tax
increases, would stave of the job losses that would come with higher taxes.
Boris Kapusta
<Then-Destro...@Blackhole.NebulaX.com> wrote:
Obama's a poseur. And Curly's "fuck you" is like yelling "Hitler".
He's done,just filter him like the rest of us have done.
Cliff
<CurlySu...@live.com> wrote:
>Now, you wackos told us for eight years that tax cuts would spur the
>economy and make jobs. Bush left office as the only president to *lose*
>jobs during his eight years in office.
The only jobs he & the rethugs added were GOVERNMENT jobs !!!
(And lobbiests.)
Real Estate in & near Washington boomed !!
Outsource the rethugs.
--
Cliff
Cliff
<CurlySu...@live.com> wrote:
>Now, you wackos told us for eight years that tax cuts would spur the
>economy and make jobs. Bush left office as the only president to *lose*
>jobs during his eight years in office. And it becomes even worse for
>your gang if you measure jobs to the bottom of his recession when America
>was bleeding nearly a half million jobs a month.
And then they wanted to claim McDonalds as added manufacturing jobs ....
--
Cliff
Cliff
<CurlySu...@live.com> wrote:
> Fuck you and your band of
>torturers.
Wickileaks well documented continued murders,
death squads & torture ..... all the way to the demise
of bushco.
They NEVER tried to put a stop to it, just to hide it better.
--
Cliff
Cliff
<Then-Destro...@Blackhole.NebulaX.com> wrote:
> would stave of the job losses that would come with higher taxes.
Idiot.
Taxes are on things like profits.
Wages are expenses.
--
Cliff
Cliff
wrote:
>
>Obama's a poseur. And Curly's "fuck you" is like yelling "Hitler".
>He's done,just filter him like the rest of us have done.
You jump too much.
--
Cliff
Cliff
wrote:
>Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
Why not do your own homework?
AND I restored the groups so they could see your post .... clearly
you did not want them to.
HTH
--
Cliff
Cliff
<hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Cliff has a problem with freedom.
Wingers lie.
"Right-wing dictator" "Right-wing death squad" ..... etc.
They call it the right-wing because they lie about everything,
starting with "right". Probably in their rules. That and being idiots
& wanting to steal & murder people. And impose their silly superstitions
by force on everybody but themselves.
[
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal
[
Liberalism refers to a broad array of related doctrines, ideologies,
philosophical views, and political traditions which advocate individual liberty.
...
Broadly speaking, liberalism emphasizes individual rights. It seeks a society
characterized by freedom of thought for individuals, limitations on power
(especially of government and religion), the rule of law, the free exchange of
ideas, a market economy that supports free private enterprise, and a transparent
system of government in which the rights of all citizens are protected.
...
Liberalism rejected many foundational assumptions that dominated most earlier
theories of government, such as the Divine Right of Kings, hereditary status,
and established religion. Fundamental human rights that all liberals support
include the right to life, liberty, and property.
]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservativism
[
Conservatism is a relativistic term used to describe political philosophies that
favor traditional values, where "tradition" refers to religious, cultural, or
nationally defined beliefs and customs.
...
Some conservatives seek to preserve the status quo, while others seek to return
to the values of an earlier time, the status quo ante.
...
The prototype of a conservative society is the medieval manor where the majority
were serfs who lived under the authority of the "lords" and the Church. Such an
arrangement insulated itself from change. Conservatism has not produced, nor
does it tend to produce systematic treatises like Hobbes’ Leviathan or Locke’s
Two Treatises of Government.
...
[
Scholar R.J. White once put it this way:
"To put conservatism in a bottle with a label is like trying to liquefy the
atmosphere … The difficulty arises from the nature of the thing. Conservatives
are people who live in the shroud of ignorance and darkness...."
]
...
Benjamin Disraeli, himself a member of the Conservative Party in England, wrote
in 1845, "A conservative government is an organized hypocrisy. The comment was
provoked when the Conservative Party split into two groups, based on whether or
not they would personally profit from the repeal of the corn laws"
...
In western democracies, 'conservative' and 'right-wing' are often used
interchangeably, as near-synonyms.
...
Religious conservatives seek to preserve the teachings of some particular
religion, sometimes by proclaiming the value of those teachings, at other times
seeking to have those teachings given the force of law.
...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi
"Early support for the Nazis, displayed in various parades, came from the old
conservative order that was the military."
...
"... Nazism's populism, anti-Communism and anti-capitalism helped it become
more powerful and popular than traditional conservative parties."
...
"The simplicity of Nazi rhetoric, campaigns, and ideology also made its
conservative allies underestimate its strength .."
...
" .. Britain (from 1931 onwards under an overwhelmingly Conservative
government) had appeased pre-Nazi Germany."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
"Fascism had a strong base of support among the working classes and extremely
poor peasants. Other supports have included members of big business, farmers and
landowners, nationalists, and reactionaries, disaffected World War I veterans,
intellectuals such as Gabriele D'Annunzio, Curzio Malaparte, Filippo Tommaso
Marinetti, Carl Schmitt and Martin Heidegger, conservatives and small
businessmen."
...
"Italian Fascism took power with the blessing of Italy's king after years of
leftist-led unrest led many conservatives to fear that a communist revolution
was inevitable (Marxist philosopher Antonio Gramsci popularized the conception
that fascism was the Capital's response to the organized workers' movement)."
...
Throughout Europe, numerous aristocrats, conservative intellectuals,
capitalists and industrialists lent their support to fascist movements in their
countries that emulated Italian Fascism. In Germany, numerous right-wing
nationalist groups arose ...
...
Fascist movements like Rexism in Belgium and the Christian Social Party also
combined fascist and conservative populist Roman Catholic elements."
]
]
--
Cliff
Cliff
>On 12/31/2010 12:18 PM, Shall not be infringed wrote:
>> On Dec 31, 9:13 am, Rich Grise<ri...@example.net.invalid> wrote:
>> Cliff has a problem with freedom.
>
>
> Yea but nobody keeps promoting the Tea Party and Palin more than
>Cliff, he spends the entirety of every day keeping them noticed.
Stupidity is amusing.
--
Cliff
Curly Surmudgeon
<Then-Destro...@Blackhole.NebulaX.com> wrote:
Nope, wrong again. In other words you're a fucking lunatic who fails to
learn from his mistakes. Instead of recognizing just how badly your
programs fucked the United States and entire world economy you want more
of the same.
Fuck you.
> And Obama said the "tax cuts" would save jobs. If you want to call him
> a liar then just do it. I'm guessing he meant that the lack of tax
> increases, would stave of the job losses that would come with higher
> taxes.
If you expect me to defend Obama then you're beyond lunacy. Obama is
president only because your band of criminals nominated two detestable,
unelectable, lunatics. America preferred an inexperienced, Arabic,
Nigerian, Manchurian candidate over the two fools your band of criminals
would have put into power.
Think about that for a moment. Your candidates were so repulsive that
even with the latent racism and full blown propaganda campaign of your
rich masters Obama won.
But I expect a Republican drone to fail to comprehend that.
Thank you, and fuck you very much. Your band of criminals may finally
make it possible to throw off the yoke of this corrupt 2-party system.
Not despite, but thanks to, you lunatics.
Keep up the good work.
Dave B
<Clhuprich...@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
> The only jobs he & the rethugs added were GOVERNMENT jobs !!!
In support of Sessions’ statement, his office guided us through
employment statistics posted online by the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics (BLS). Sure enough, between February 2009, Obama’s first
full month in office, and June 2010, the number of private-sector jobs
dropped from 110.3 million to 107.7 million, a decrease of nearly 2.7
million. In the same period, the number of federal government workers
rose from 2,792,000 to 3,171,000, an increase of 379,000.
db
Curly Surmudgeon
Believable. Now study why those figures came about.
Job losses are the Bush legacy. I realize you desperately would like to
pin the blame on anybody else for taking the entire world economy to the
brink of destruction but that doesn't wash. Your team handed the "Next
Guy<tm>" a steaming bag of shit.
From tax cuts for the uber-wealthy, multiple unbudgeted wars around the
world and off-shoring jobs your leader was the only president ever to
preside over a net job loss after eight years of leadership. Do not try
to weasel out of responsibility for the result of programs your
Republicans put into operation.
Public employment rose mainly due to Census workers.
Dave B
<CurlySu...@live.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 12:21:34 -0800, Dave B <deb...@hm.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 12:34:47 -0500, Cliff
>> <Clhuprich...@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote:
>>
>>> The only jobs he & the rethugs added were GOVERNMENT jobs !!!
>>
>>
>> In support of Sessions? statement, his office guided us through
>> employment statistics posted online by the U.S. Bureau of Labor
>> Statistics (BLS). Sure enough, between February 2009, Obama?s first full
>> month in office, and June 2010, the number of private-sector jobs
>> dropped from 110.3 million to 107.7 million, a decrease of nearly 2.7
>> million. In the same period, the number of federal government workers
>> rose from 2,792,000 to 3,171,000, an increase of 379,000.
>>
>> db
>
>Believable. Now study why those figures came about.
>
>Job losses are the Bush legacy. I realize you desperately would like to
>pin the blame on anybody else for taking the entire world economy to the
>brink of destruction but that doesn't wash. Your team handed the "Next
>Guy<tm>" a steaming bag of shit.
>
>From tax cuts for the uber-wealthy, multiple unbudgeted wars around the
>world and off-shoring jobs your leader was the only president ever to
>preside over a net job loss after eight years of leadership. Do not try
>to weasel out of responsibility for the result of programs your
>Republicans put into operation.
>
>Public employment rose mainly due to Census workers.
Agree, the increase is really around 46,000.
db
Cliff
>yes, you have entertained us for years, as you keep blowing the socialists!
"Wingers just hate having their beloved lies exposed."
Find those "WMDs" yet?
The Palins in Alaska are like the Beverly Hillbillies moved.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/sarah-palin-north-korea-gaffe-glenn-beck-show/story?id=12242889
"Sarah Palin: 'We Gotta Stand With Our North Korean Allies'"
[
...
Sarah Palin said in an interview with Glenn Beck Wednesday that North Korea was
a U.S. ally.
...
Palin continued: "Obviously, we gotta stand with our North Korean allies,"
....
]
Vote for Cthulhu: Why Vote for the Lesser Evil?
Barry Goldwater slogan: �In your guts, you know he�s nuts�.
--
Cliff
Cliff
>
>"Too_Many_Tools" <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:9a717ffd-f8c9-4fe9...@t35g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
>Well said.
>
>The Pee Party is just a bunch of cheap conservative whores busy
>licking the GOP boot....while the Republican tax cuts cost the Country
>858 billion dollars of unnecessary debt.
>
>TMT
>
>Hmm, sounds like a case of "sour grapes" to me, tool. Sore loser.
Idiot.
What it clearly shows is that the rethugs & teabaggers were lying
about their vast & loudly expresed concerns over the debts & deficits.
Which THEY RAN UP in the first place.
You wingers are born suckers.
Read Vance Packard's "The Hidden Persuaders",
not that it takes much to fool you gullible fools.
I DARE you to read it.
HTH
--
Cliff
Cliff
>
>"Cliff" <Clhuprich...@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote in message
>news:uk9ci69hvrk057vee...@4ax.com...
>Yup! right here
>
>http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/wikileaks-show-wmd-hunt-continued-in-iraq-with-surprising-results/
>
"WikiLeaks war logs doesn�t reveal evidence of some massive WMD program by the
Saddam Hussein regime "
"Later investigation revealed those contents to be vitamins."
Get reading comprehension lessons.
HTH
Find those "WMDs" yet?
--
Cliff
P
You could sure use 'em! Cherry picker
"Nearly three years later, American troops were still finding WMD in the
region. An armored Buffalo vehicle unearthed a cache of artillery shells
"that was covered by sacks and leaves under an Iraqi Community Watch
checkpoint. "The 155mm rounds are filled with an unknown liquid, and several
of which are leaking a black tar-like substance." Initial tests were
inconclusive. But later, "the rounds tested positive for mustard."
Very NEXT paragraph after the sentence you culled -
"But even late in the war, WMDs were still being unearthed. In the summer of
2008, according to one WikiLeaked report, American troops found at least 10
rounds that tested positive for chemical agents. "These rounds were most
likely left over from the [Saddam]-era regime. Based on location, these
rounds may be an AQI [Al Qaeda in Iraq] cache. However, the rounds were all
total disrepair and did not appear to have been moved for a long time."
Curly Surmudgeon
Whoop-de-fucking-doo, a few artillery shells long past their shelf life
were found...
How about the 500,000 liters of chemical and biological agents?
How about the 2,000 arial drones?
How about the fleet of SCUD's?
How about the "ongoing nuclear program"?
When you find those get back to me. In the mean time shut the fuck up.
For that Bush and his Republicans bankrupted America, shredded the
Constitution, tried to make torture an American value and brought the
entire Global economy to it's knees.
--
Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ldrhy7yS5U1qbgvm4o1_500.gif
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cliff
IOW Nothing.
If you have to look for old traces or possibles (lots of false possibles no
doubt) you have nothing.
"coverted by sacks & leaves .... " you only get leaves where it rains
& you hardly store valuable *working* weapons in the rain.
>Very NEXT paragraph after the sentence you culled -
>"But even late in the war, WMDs were still being unearthed.
That (editorial) comment was from the winger. NOT from Wickileaks.
> In the summer of
>2008, according to one WikiLeaked report, American troops found at least 10
>rounds that tested positive for chemical agents. "These rounds were most
>likely left over from the [Saddam]-era regime. Based on location, these
>rounds may be an AQI [Al Qaeda in Iraq] cache.
And, as we all know, Saddam would have jailed any Al Qaeda
members he could have found, if not executed.
> However, the rounds were all
>total disrepair and did not appear to have been moved for a long time."
"total disrepair" .. "long time".
NO "WMDs", even with quoted & editorial content *from a winger*.
And we know they all lie.
And this was the BEST they could find to try to claim <snicker>.
Get reading comprehension lessons.
Found those "WMDs" yet?
--
Cliff
P
> >"But even late in the war, WMDs were still being unearthed.
> > In the summer of
> >2008, according to one WikiLeaked report, American troops found at least
10
> >rounds that tested positive for chemical agents. "These rounds were most
> >likely left over from the [Saddam]-era regime. Based on location, these
> >rounds may be an AQI [Al Qaeda in Iraq] cache.
>
So IOW, even when they find them, you'll still deny they existed!
Cliff
FREE CLUE:
What may have existed 20+ years ago is not at all related to
the matters at hand.
After all, back then (1980�88) Ronnie Raygun & bush were aiding
both Saddam AND Iran while promoting the war.
--
Cliff
Curly Surmudgeon
Reagan/Bush41 *gave* sarin, precursors and the receipe to make more to
their Good Friend Saddam. Of course Iraq had WMD's however the quantity
in 2003 was so miniscule and so badly degraded that it takes a laboratory
significant time to discover what agent it was.
There were no WMD's in Iraq worth worrying about let alone spending
decades of Dollars and lives to search a desert for.
But you'll never convince the Bush-bots...
--
Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Don't retreat, reload!" --Sarah Palin
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boris Kapusta
Iarnrod
> Fixed the subject line for ya!
You fixed it wrong as usual, honey.
This recession is on AWOL's dime, and can be traced to the GOP's war
on the middle class. If not for Obama you be relying on your mother
selling pencils on the street corner right now, fuckwit.
BTW, what did Deborah say when you showed up asking for ten G's,
fuzznuts? BWAHAAAAHAHAAAHAHAAA!!! Keep us posted, moron!
Boris Kapusta
<tha...@nothanks.notreal> wrote:
>Fixed the subject line for ya!
The Silence of the Libs.
Boris Kapusta
wrote:
You like my fuzznuts? There's some fuzz in your tooth, the cum stained
one.
Iarnrod
> On Tue, 11 Jan 2011 05:11:46 -0800 (PST), Iarnrod <iarn...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Jan 10, 11:14 pm, Boris Kapusta <tha...@nothanks.notreal> wrote:
> >> Fixed the subject line for ya!
>
> >You fixed it wrong as usual, honey.
>
> >This recession is on AWOL's dime, and can be traced to the GOP's war
> >on the middle class. If not for Obama you be relying on your mother
> >selling pencils on the street corner right now, fuckwit.
>
> >BTW, what did Deborah say when you showed up asking for ten G's,
> >fuzznuts? BWAHAAAAHAHAAAHAHAAA!!! Keep us posted, moron!
>
> one.
<snicker>
Iarnrod
> On Tue, 11 Jan 2011 00:14:40 -0600, Boris Kapusta
>
> <tha...@nothanks.notreal> wrote:
> >Fixed the subject line for ya!
>
Boris Kapusta
wrote:
I guess that answers the question about whether you swallow or not.
<chortle>
<ahhh>
<now get the fuck out, here's $20 go clean yourself up>
<what's that smell, another fish kill?>
Iarnrod
> On Wed, 12 Jan 2011 05:13:08 -0800 (PST), Iarnrod <iarn...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Jan 11, 8:48 pm, Boris Kapusta <tha...@nothanks.notreal> wrote:
> >> I like my fuzznuts. There's some fuzz in my tooth, the cum stained
> >> one.
>
> ><snicker>
>
> <chortle>
>
> <ahhh>
>
> <now I should get the fuck out, here's $20 go clean myself up>
>
> <what's that smell, another fish kill?>
<snicker>
Winston_Smith
>On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 06:13:47 -0800, Rich Grise wrote:
>>Cliff wrote:
>>>
>>> This “movement” has never really had anything to do with making serious
>>> fiscal policy change — no, the Master Thespians of the right wing are
>>> simply tools who were bought and paid for by the billionaire Koch
>>> brothers, Rupert Murdoch, and Dick Armey’s FreedomWorks for the explicit
>>> purpose of Bringing the Crazy ... ...
>>
>>And of course George Soros is pure as the driven snow...
>
> We all know who the liars, tools & fools are.
Are you bad mouthing TMT again? The whacko left is eating their own
again.
> BTW, Found those "WMDs" yet?
Not yet but Obama is still out there looking. Keep the faith,
brother. Damn, he sure has a warped idea of six months.
deepdudu
What do you expect him to do? Unilaterally withdraw and allow a civil
war to erupt into a bloodbath?
Winston_Smith
That would be bad. I know because some politician said it and I
always believe those mental giants.
Let's note that the left is now quoting Bush to defend their "me too"
policies. You guys are a hoot.
deepdudu
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
Nobody is quoting Bush. Just pointing out the harsh reality of the
situation that an immediate withdrawal would allow both countries to
erupt into a total bloodbath. Bush got us into this mess, but it
isn't as easy as simply saying we can suddenly end it.
Winston_Smith
You sure ARE quoting Bush. In the campaign Bush said just what you
wrote and Bam Bam said he had this plan to get out in six months.
Piece of cake. It's been a damn long six months.
If we do get out by the end of the year as planned, there is going to
be a blood bath. And that will be on Bam Bam's head.
It's tough when you talk simple plans to simple liberal voters and
then you have to try to manage the real world.
Oh, well, blame your predecessor is a great defense.
Shall not be infringed
Any blood bath is on them. Nobody is making them kill each other.
deepdudu
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>>
>>Nobody is quoting Bush. Just pointing out the harsh reality of the
>>situation that an immediate withdrawal would allow both countries to
>>erupt into a total bloodbath. Bush got us into this mess, but it
>>isn't as easy as simply saying we can suddenly end it.
>
>You sure ARE quoting Bush. In the campaign Bush said just what you
>wrote and Bam Bam said he had this plan to get out in six months.
>Piece of cake. It's been a damn long six months.
>
>If we do get out by the end of the year as planned, there is going to
>be a blood bath. And that will be on Bam Bam's head.
No, it will be on Bush's head because he got us in that mess.
>
>It's tough when you talk simple plans to simple liberal voters and
>then you have to try to manage the real world.
Everyone was very realistic about the promises. Nobody thought a
pullout was going to quick and easy. They never are.
>
>Oh, well, blame your predecessor is a great defense.
When something is your predecessors fault, it is only appropriate.
Shall not be infringed
> On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 18:05:13 -0700, Winston_Smith
>
Obama had an exit strategy during his campaign. Then Alzheimers set
in...
Winston_Smith
>On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 18:05:13 -0700, Winston_Smith
><inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>Nobody is quoting Bush. Just pointing out the harsh reality of the
>>>situation that an immediate withdrawal would allow both countries to
>>>erupt into a total bloodbath. Bush got us into this mess, but it
>>>isn't as easy as simply saying we can suddenly end it.
>>
>>You sure ARE quoting Bush. In the campaign Bush said just what you
>>wrote and Bam Bam said he had this plan to get out in six months.
>>Piece of cake. It's been a damn long six months.
>>
>>If we do get out by the end of the year as planned, there is going to
>>be a blood bath. And that will be on Bam Bam's head.
>
>No, it will be on Bush's head because he got us in that mess.
It would have been. But Bam Bam told us he had this neat plan to get
us out while the Iraqis joined arms and sang Kumbaya. Bam Bam took on
the responsibilty when he made a stupid promise to con the sheeples.
>>It's tough when you talk simple plans to simple liberal voters and
>>then you have to try to manage the real world.
>
>Everyone was very realistic about the promises. Nobody thought a
>pullout was going to quick and easy. They never are.
Wrong. Bam Bam told me it was a piece of cake. How was I to know he
was lying?
>>Oh, well, blame your predecessor is a great defense.
>
>When something is your predecessors fault, it is only appropriate.
It sure was. See above. Bam Bam to it over by his lies.
Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:
The truth lies somewhere between your statements.
Probably closer to yours than DD's.
Obama had a terribly difficult task. And failed despite the caveats. On
multiple levels and issues. So much so that his campaign promises can
reasonable be considered lies.
--
Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Irony defined: http://www.fox.com/lietome/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shall not be infringed
> On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 19:27:46 -0700, Deep Dudu wrote:
> >On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 18:05:13 -0700, Winston_Smith
> ><inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>
> >>>Nobody is quoting Bush. Just pointing out the harsh reality of the
> >>>situation that an immediate withdrawal would allow both countries to
> >>>erupt into a total bloodbath. Bush got us into this mess, but it
> >>>isn't as easy as simply saying we can suddenly end it.
>
> >>You sure ARE quoting Bush. In the campaign Bush said just what you
> >>wrote and Bam Bam said he had this plan to get out in six months.
> >>Piece of cake. It's been a damn long six months.
>
> >>If we do get out by the end of the year as planned, there is going to
> >>be a blood bath. And that will be on Bam Bam's head.
>
> >No, it will be on Bush's head because he got us in that mess.
>
> It would have been. But Bam Bam told us he had this neat plan to get
> us out while the Iraqis joined arms and sang Kumbaya. Bam Bam took on
> the responsibilty when he made a stupid promise to con the sheeples.
Why is leaving Iraq a stupid promise? Our mission there is long over.
> >>It's tough when you talk simple plans to simple liberal voters and
> >>then you have to try to manage the real world.
>
> >Everyone was very realistic about the promises. Nobody thought a
> >pullout was going to quick and easy. They never are.
>
> Wrong. Bam Bam told me it was a piece of cake.
What's so hard about it?
> How was I to know he was lying?
Don't feign naivete. You knew that you were being lied to and you
loved it.
> >>Oh, well, blame your predecessor is a great defense.
>
> >When something is your predecessors fault, it is only appropriate.
>
> It sure was. See above. Bam Bam to it over by his lies.-
Telling us that he was going to close Gitmo and withdraw from Iraq is
entirely on Obama.
Just like him racing McCain back to DC to bail out the fat cats.
Then he said he was cleaning up someone else's mess.
Winston_Smith
<hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Mar 14, 10:56嚙緘m, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 19:27:46 -0700, Deep Dudu wrote:
>> >On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 18:05:13 -0700, Winston_Smith
>> ><inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>>
>> >>>Nobody is quoting Bush. 嚙皚ust pointing out the harsh reality of the
>> >>>situation that an immediate withdrawal would allow both countries to
>> >>>erupt into a total bloodbath. 嚙畿ush got us into this mess, but it
>> >>>isn't as easy as simply saying we can suddenly end it.
>>
>> >>You sure ARE quoting Bush. 嚙瘢n the campaign Bush said just what you
>> >>wrote and Bam Bam said he had this plan to get out in six months.
>> >>Piece of cake. 嚙瘢t's been a damn long six months.
>>
>> >>If we do get out by the end of the year as planned, there is going to
>> >>be a blood bath. 嚙璀nd that will be on Bam Bam's head.
>>
>> >No, it will be on Bush's head because he got us in that mess.
>>
>> It would have been. 嚙畿ut Bam Bam told us he had this neat plan to get
>> us out while the Iraqis joined arms and sang Kumbaya. 嚙畿am Bam took on
>> the responsibilty when he made a stupid promise to con the sheeples.
>
>Why is leaving Iraq a stupid promise? Our mission there is long over.
LEAVING Iraq is a great idea. It's so great we should have left the
day before we went in.
PROMISING that he can get us out quick, easy, on a none-existent plan,
and with no consequences, is what's stupid. What's more stupid is the
sheeples believed him. (Not that war monger John, would have done any
better.)
>> >>It's tough when you talk simple plans to simple liberal voters and
>> >>then you have to try to manage the real world.
>>
>> >Everyone was very realistic about the promises. 嚙瞇obody thought a
>> >pullout was going to quick and easy. 嚙確hey never are.
>>
>> Wrong. 嚙畿am Bam told me it was a piece of cake. 嚙�>
>What's so hard about it?
How come were are still there? Are you saying it's easy to get out
and Bam Bam just hasn't gotten around to it?
Seriously, what's hard about it is as soon as we are out, it's going
to degrade into tribal civil war. A Saddam II will gain control. He
will probably be a puppet of Iran and a source of terrorism. We will
either live without their oil or pay them to cut our throats.
And Bam Bam is going to get the hell because the getting out part is
all on his dime.
>> How was I to know he was lying?
>
>Don't feign naivete. You knew that you were being lied to and you
>loved it.
>
>> >>Oh, well, blame your predecessor is a great defense.
>>
>> >When something is your predecessors fault, it is only appropriate.
>>
>> It sure was. 嚙磅ee above. 嚙畿am Bam to it over by his lies.-
>
>Telling us that he was going to close Gitmo and withdraw from Iraq is
>entirely on Obama.
>
>Just like him racing McCain back to DC to bail out the fat cats.
>
>Then he said he was cleaning up someone else's mess.
Agreed. McBush told us that morning the economy was sound and solid.
By lunch he declared it a crisis and raced ObamaMagic for home base.
Insiders claimed the deal was done before he got around to showing up
and his posturing cost precious days.
Two parties, not a dimes worth of difference.
Boris Kapusta
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 15:37:48 -0700 (PDT), Shall not be infringed
><hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Mar 14, 10:56 pm, Winston_Smith <inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 19:27:46 -0700, Deep Dudu wrote:
>>> >On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 18:05:13 -0700, Winston_Smith
>>> ><inva...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> >>>Nobody is quoting Bush. Just pointing out the harsh reality of the
>>> >>>situation that an immediate withdrawal would allow both countries to
>>> >>>erupt into a total bloodbath. Bush got us into this mess, but it
>>> >>>isn't as easy as simply saying we can suddenly end it.
>>>
>>> >>You sure ARE quoting Bush. In the campaign Bush said just what you
>>> >>wrote and Bam Bam said he had this plan to get out in six months.
>>> >>Piece of cake. It's been a damn long six months.
>>>
>>> >>If we do get out by the end of the year as planned, there is going to
>>> >>be a blood bath. And that will be on Bam Bam's head.
>>>
>>> >No, it will be on Bush's head because he got us in that mess.
>>>
>>> It would have been. But Bam Bam told us he had this neat plan to get
>>> us out while the Iraqis joined arms and sang Kumbaya. Bam Bam took on
>>> the responsibilty when he made a stupid promise to con the sheeples.
>>
>>Why is leaving Iraq a stupid promise? Our mission there is long over.
>
>LEAVING Iraq is a great idea. It's so great we should have left the
>day before we went in.
>
>PROMISING that he can get us out quick, easy, on a none-existent plan,
>and with no consequences, is what's stupid. What's more stupid is the
>sheeples believed him. (Not that war monger John, would have done any
>better.)
>
>>> >>It's tough when you talk simple plans to simple liberal voters and
>>> >>then you have to try to manage the real world.
>>>
>>> >Everyone was very realistic about the promises. Nobody thought a
>>> >pullout was going to quick and easy. They never are.
>>>
>>> Wrong. Bam Bam told me it was a piece of cake.
>>
>>What's so hard about it?
>
>How come were are still there? Are you saying it's easy to get out
>and Bam Bam just hasn't gotten around to it?
>
>Seriously, what's hard about it is as soon as we are out, it's going
>to degrade into tribal civil war. A Saddam II will gain control. He
>will probably be a puppet of Iran and a source of terrorism. We will
>either live without their oil or pay them to cut our throats.
>
>And Bam Bam is going to get the hell because the getting out part is
>all on his dime.
>
>>> How was I to know he was lying?
>>
>>Don't feign naivete. You knew that you were being lied to and you
>>loved it.
>>
>>> >>Oh, well, blame your predecessor is a great defense.
>>>
>>> >When something is your predecessors fault, it is only appropriate.
>>>
>>> It sure was. See above. Bam Bam to it over by his lies.-
>>
>>Telling us that he was going to close Gitmo and withdraw from Iraq is
>>entirely on Obama.
>>
>>Just like him racing McCain back to DC to bail out the fat cats.
>>
>>Then he said he was cleaning up someone else's mess.
>
>Agreed. McBush told us that morning the economy was sound and solid.
>By lunch he declared it a crisis and raced ObamaMagic for home base.
>Insiders claimed the deal was done before he got around to showing up
>and his posturing cost precious days.
>
>Two parties, not a dimes worth of difference.
More than a dime, loon.
Boris Kapusta
wrote:
>You missed the word "worth". The difference in their value to the
>American people is no greater than what a dime will buy you. That is
>to say essentially no difference between the value of one party
>relative to the other.
Well if you phrase it that way, I apologize :)
I was thinking in the trillion$.