Fear Inbalanced: John Stewart On Faux News

2 views
Skip to first unread message

waynesn...@yahoo.com

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 8:13:38 AM1/24/09
to
Only days into the Obama adiminstration, these gems are showing up on
Faux News.

There is a You-Tube broadcast of this but I don't have the link.

They showed Obama taking the oath of office for the second time. The
converation went like this:

"He didn't have his hand on the bible."

"Is he really President?"

Could you imagine a legitimate news organization saying that?

A legitimate news organization would know there there is no
Consitutional requirement for the President to have a bible when
taking the oath of office.

Indeed, a legitimate news organization would know that the oath of
office goes like this: I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I
will . . .

It indeed says "swear (or affirm)." So the President can say I do
solemnly affirm if he is non-religious or does not believe in swearing
on the bible.

One of the Faux's miss americas said this: "I find it highly
entertaining that only twenty-four hours or less, we are already
talking about stuff like this" meaning attacking Barack Obama.

Just the opposite. I find it highly entertaining that they waited
twenty-four hours.

Finally Bill O'Liely said: I didn't like the line in the speech about
"we don't have to compromise our values
for to protect ourselves." Sometimes we do.

To which Jon Stewart replied: If you don't stick to your values when
they are being tested, they aren't values, they're hobbies.


Snit

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 8:53:39 AM1/24/09
to
"waynesn...@yahoo.com" <waynesn...@yahoo.com> stated in post
160d21c1-d461-454d...@g3g2000pre.googlegroups.com on 1/24/09
6:13 AM:

> Only days into the Obama adiminstration, these gems are showing up on Faux
> News.
>
> There is a You-Tube broadcast of this but I don't have the link.
>
> They showed Obama taking the oath of office for the second time. The
> converation went like this:
>
> "He didn't have his hand on the bible."
>
> "Is he really President?"
>
> Could you imagine a legitimate news organization saying that?

No legitimate news organization would say something like that without a
retraction... especially given that there was no real doubt that his first
swearing in was legitimate... but historically when there have been
accidental swapped words or the like they do it again just to be 100% above
board and quiet the nay-sayers.

> A legitimate news organization would know there there is no Consitutional
> requirement for the President to have a bible when taking the oath of office.
>
> Indeed, a legitimate news organization would know that the oath of office goes
> like this: I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will . . .
>
> It indeed says "swear (or affirm)." So the President can say I do solemnly
> affirm if he is non-religious or does not believe in swearing on the bible.

It is wishful thinking on their part - they do not want Obama to be the
President.

> One of the Faux's miss americas said this: "I find it highly entertaining
> that only twenty-four hours or less, we are already talking about stuff like
> this" meaning attacking Barack Obama.
>
> Just the opposite. I find it highly entertaining that they waited twenty-four
> hours.

Did they wait that long? I bet not!

> Finally Bill O'Liely said: I didn't like the line in the speech about "we
> don't have to compromise our values for to protect ourselves." Sometimes we
> do.
>
> To which Jon Stewart replied: If you don't stick to your values when they are
> being tested, they aren't values, they're hobbies.

Well said... we might sometimes go against our values... but if we do we
recognize that as a *mistake* and try to not do so again.

--
Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments
that take our breath away.

Patricia Martin Steward

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 9:12:30 AM1/24/09
to
On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 05:13:38 -0800 (PST), waynesn...@yahoo.com
wrote:

>
>Finally Bill O'Liely said: I didn't like the line in the speech about
>"we don't have to compromise our values
>for to protect ourselves." Sometimes we do.
>
>To which Jon Stewart replied: If you don't stick to your values when
>they are being tested, they aren't values, they're hobbies.

I (heart) John Stewart.

Or maybe his writers, whichever applies.

--
January 20, 2009
The end of an error

John

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 9:23:59 AM1/24/09
to

<waynesn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:160d21c1-d461-454d...@g3g2000pre.googlegroups.com...

There is one guy around here named Steve Carroll who spends all day trolling
while drinking beer, growing his pot belly, and listening to that favorite
right wing nutjob "news source", Faux News.

Snit

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 9:32:17 AM1/24/09
to
"John" <nos...@nospam.com> stated in post
TIydnatfG5UQuebU...@giganews.com on 1/24/09 7:23 AM:

Steve Carroll cannot stay any more consistent than Rush is... maybe Steve is
even worse. He insists Bush cannot be *actually* guilty of the crimes he
clearly committed unless he is found so in a court of law, but then says
Clinton is guilty of crimes even though a court found otherwise (which does
not, of course, mean Clinton was not actually guilty!)

On and on... Steve is just barking mad.

Steve Carroll

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 10:25:59 AM1/24/09
to
On Jan 24, 7:32 am, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> stated in post
> TIydnatfG5UQuebUnZ2dnUVZ_g2dn...@giganews.com on 1/24/09 7:23 AM:
>
>
>
>
>
> > <waynesnoches...@yahoo.com> wrote in message


Uh, gluehead? In a legal sense that is true... you know, the context
is which I 'insisted' it.


> but then says
> Clinton is guilty of crimes even though a court found otherwise (which does
> not, of course, mean Clinton was not actually guilty!)


Part of Clinton's deal was to admit to having purposefully mislead the
court with his testimony of a material nature (aka perjury).

Why are you still whining because *you* were unable to show proof for
Bush's guilt for your parroted arguments that you really never
understood well enough to begin with?

Steve Carroll

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 10:30:41 AM1/24/09
to
On Jan 24, 7:23 am, "John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> <waynesnoches...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

Why aren't you and Snit calling for Obama's impeachment yet, John?
You're aware that he ordered an attack in Pakistan, right? You're
aware that the U.S. has not formally declared war on Pakistan, right?
You're aware that the U.N. charter doesn't sanction the U.S. attacking
Pakistan, right? These were the reasons you were calling for Bush's
impeachment. Why the legal double standard for Obama?

Fox News Blond Porn Outlet Mall

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 10:33:31 AM1/24/09
to
Snit wrote:

>>
>> Could you imagine a legitimate news organization saying that?
>
> No legitimate news organization would say something like that without a
> retraction...

That is why all the Faux disinformation, Blond Porn Star
whores should really move on to doing actual porn so
we can get some real entertainment.

Pro-Humanist FREELOVER

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 10:34:16 AM1/24/09
to

- - -

Follow-up to a thread originally cross-
posted to the following newsgroups by
waynesn...@yahoo.com :

alt.guitar.amps,
alt.vacation.las-vegas,
rec.music.beatles,
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,
alt.sports.football.pro.dallas-cowboys

"Patricia Martin Steward" <pat...@noteranews.com> wrote in message
news:mc8mn45hb6hbjs3q3...@4ax.com...

The most important task facing the President
and the newly-elected Congress?

- - -
January 24, 2009

Obama tries to build support for
$825 billion stimulus
http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKTRE50N1D220090124
- - -

Excerpt:

...

Saying more people filed for unemployment this
week than at any time in the past 26 years, Obama
warned in his weekly radio address that joblessness
could hit double digits and the economy could fall
$1 trillion short of its full capacity if nothing was
done.

"If we do not act boldly and swiftly, a bad situation
could become dramatically worse," the new U.S.
president said in his first weekly radio address. He
said he expected to sign an economic recovery plan
into law within a month.

The White House said a report outlining the impact
of the stimulus plan would be put on its website,
www.whitehouse.gov , at 6 a.m. (1100 GMT) on
Saturday. Aides said the report began to put "meat
on the bones" of Obama's previously stated goals.

Obama took office on Tuesday with the United
States in its worst economic crisis since the Great
Depression. The radio address on Saturday contin-
ued the push he began this month to win quick
congressional approval of the $825 billion spend-
ing bill he hopes will lift the economy out of reces-
sion.

...

- - - end excerpt - - -

- - -
Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address

Saturday, January 24th, 2009
http://www.whitehouse.gov/president-obama-delivers-your-weekly-address/
- - -

Download the Recovery Plan Metrics Report (PDF)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/assets/Documents/recovery_plan_metrics_report.pdf

We begin this year and this Administration in the
midst of an unprecedented crisis that calls for
unprecedented action. Just this week, we saw
more people file for unemployment than at any
time in the last twenty-six years, and experts agree
that if nothing is done, the unemployment rate
could reach double digits.

Our economy could fall $1 trillion short of its
full capacity, which translates into more than
$12,000 in lost income for a family of four.
And we could lose a generation of potential, as
more young Americans are forced to forgo col-
lege dreams or the chance to train for the jobs
of the future.

In short, if we do not act boldly and swiftly, a bad
situation could become dramatically worse.

That is why I have proposed an American Recovery
and Reinvestment Plan to immediately jumpstart
job creation as well as long-term economic growth.
I am pleased to say that both parties in Congress are
already hard at work on this plan, and I hope to sign
it into law in less than a month.

It's a plan that will save or create three to four mil-
lion jobs over the next few years, and one that recog-
nizes both the paradox and the promise of this mo-
ment - the fact that there are millions of Americans
trying to find work even as, all around the country,
there's so much work to be done.

That's why this is not just a short-term program to
boost employment. It's one that will invest in our
most important priorities like energy and education;
health care and a new infrastructure that are neces-
sary to keep us strong and competitive in the 21st
century.

Today I'd like to talk specifically about the progress
we expect to make in each of these areas.

To accelerate the creation of a clean energy economy,
we will double our capacity to generate alternative
sources of energy like wind, solar, and biofuels over
the next three years. We'll begin to build a new elec-
tricity grid that lay down more than 3,000 miles of
transmission lines to convey this new energy from
coast to coast.

We'll save taxpayers $2 billion a year by making
75% of federal buildings more energy efficient, and
save the average working family $350 on their energy
bills by weatherizing 2.5 million homes.

To lower health care cost, cut medical errors, and
improve care, we'll computerize the nation's health
record in five years, saving billions of dollars in
health care costs and countless lives. And we'll pro-
tect health insurance for more than 8 million Amer-
icans who are in danger of losing their coverage
during this economic downturn.

To ensure our children can compete and succeed in
this new economy, we'll renovate and modernize
10,000 schools, building state-of-the-art classrooms,
libraries, and labs to improve learning for over five
million students.

We'll invest more in Pell Grants to make college
affordable for seven million more students, provide
a $2,500 college tax credit to four million students,
and triple the number of fellowships in science to
help spur the next generation of innovation.

Finally, we will rebuild and retrofit America to meet
the demands of the 21st century. That means repair-
ing and modernizing thousands of miles of America's
roadways and providing new mass transit options for
millions of Americans.

It means protecting America by securing 90 major
ports and creating a better communications network
for local law enforcement and public safety officials
in the event of an emergency. And it means expanding
broadband access to millions of Americans, so busi-
ness can compete on a level-playing field, wherever
they're located.

I know that some are skeptical about the size and
scale of this recovery plan. I understand that skepti-
cism, which is why this recovery plan must and will
include unprecedented measures that will allow the
American people to hold my Administration account-
able for these results.

We won't just throw money at our problems - we'll
invest in what works. Instead of politicians doling
out money behind a veil of secrecy, decisions about
where we invest will be made public, and informed
by independent experts whenever possible.

We'll launch an unprecedented effort to root out
waste, inefficiency, and unnecessary spending in
our government, and every American will be able
to see how and where we spend taxpayer dollars by
going to a new website called
http://recovery.gov/

No one policy or program will solve the challenges
we face right now, nor will this crisis recede in a
short period of time. But if we act now and act
boldly; if we start rewarding hard work and respon-
sibility once more; if we act as citizens and not par-
tisans and begin again the work of remaking America,
then I have faith that we will emerge from this trying
time even stronger and more prosperous than we
were before. Thanks for listening.

- - - end of article - - -


Ye Tao Meister

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 11:51:37 AM1/24/09
to

The nation has _spoken_ and NewsCorp is giving itself *just* enough rope
to hang itself. Let it continue to feed the igno-proletariate...it ranks
*right* up there with the disservice immigrants do to themselves by not
bothering to learn English. If someone *chooses* the path to darkness,
ignorance, self-debilitating stupidity and H88, it's *his* life! He's
not in a position of power or authority, -just the opposite. *THIS* is
a case where, in human affairs, the 'market' works.

The Bush / neocon 8 years happened for a reason. The shit storm the
nation is in is our version as Americans of what Germany learned w/
the 1930's-1945.

:-) mvm
http://tinyurl.com/32j32m

Ye Tao Meister

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 11:54:47 AM1/24/09
to

Nature will take care of him w/out anyone's intercession. It may take
longer than you'd like- but it will :-) mvm

Dale Houstman

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 1:08:14 PM1/24/09
to

Here in Minneapolis, there are many immigrants from many countries, and
- at my job - there are lots of them working for the same lousy wage I
do. Almost all of them are not only learning English, they are also
studying to work as doctors, lawyers, nurses, and attending college for
any number of disciplines. Not that they have to - despite the hysteria
of anti-immigrant groups and individuals, and those crazy "only English"
proponents, the U.S. does NOT have an official language, and there is
absolutely no reason there shouldn't be any number of languages in the
U.S. as there are in most of the nations around the world. And beyond
all that, this is really a non-issue: the next generation will ALL have
learned English, as all the offspring of immigrants eventually do. When
the Irish came here, the first generation mostly spoke Gaelic (with a
little pidgin English to smooth the day-to-day business), the same for
Germans, and Poles, and on and on. When the whites first came to the
continent they didn't rush out to learn all the various Indian languages
that were the "law of the land" (quite the opposite: we forced Indian
children into language and culture classes). This is all just racist
hysteria.

dmh

cpc...@gmail.com

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 1:39:54 PM1/24/09
to
On Jan 24, 5:13 am, waynesnoches...@yahoo.com wrote:
***>

> They showed Obama taking the oath of office for the second time.  The
> converation went like this:
>
> "He didn't have his hand on the bible."
>
> "Is he really President?"
>
> Could you imagine a legitimate news organization saying that?
>
***

I, for one, am sure that he was not legitimately sworn in. Not
because he didn't have his hand on the Bible, but because he concluded
by saying "so help me God." Those words are nowhere to be found in
the Presidential oath prescribed by the Constitution, so by invoking
the help of God Obama went outside the Constitution and invalidated
his inauguration.

Rhino Plastee

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 2:01:38 PM1/24/09
to

Now you want to impeach Obama for fighting terrorists.

You are fucked in the head asshole.


Rhino Plastee

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 2:02:48 PM1/24/09
to

What arguements do you think Snit used and what do you think is wrong with
those arguements?

And why do you spew your crap into a million groups just to prove you have
no idea what the fuck you are talking about?


Rhino Plastee

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 2:03:33 PM1/24/09
to

Steve is now saying Obama should be impeached for fighting terrorism. What
a fuckface!


Steve Carroll

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 2:08:11 PM1/24/09
to

"Actually"... anyone that can comprehend what they read can see I'm
simply asking Snit (and John) why the double standard.

> You are fucked in the head asshole.

Said the ng twit who doesn't mind proving his inability to comprehend
what he reads;)

bushlyed

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 3:57:09 PM1/24/09
to
On Jan 24, 8:32 am, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> "John" <nos...@nospam.com> stated in post
> TIydnatfG5UQuebUnZ2dnUVZ_g2dn...@giganews.com on 1/24/09 7:23 AM:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > <waynesnoches...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

Well, Clinton was guilty of getting a blow job; I should be so lucky

bushlyed

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 3:58:46 PM1/24/09
to

Clinton didn't lie about WMDs or yellow cake or to get us into war; he
lied so that maybe his little affair would go away which it should
have.

All Clinton did was have sex and lie about it which is par for the
course for most men.

bushlyed

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 4:00:54 PM1/24/09
to

Obama is not attacking Pakistan

He is attacking IDENTIFIABLE Al-Queda targets which we as a nation
have an absolute right to do

I for one never complaint about Bush doing that, only that he did not
do that more often and wasted precious time, money, material and lives
on his precious little Iraqi war rather than getting the people who
attacked us on 9/11

bushlyed

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 4:05:00 PM1/24/09
to

Look, I am an Atheist too and I think it is ludicrous to invoke the
little man in the sky but hey, they said all the words so what if they
added some.

I just can't believe that intelligent people believe that the little
man in the sky with the white beard is where all blessings come from
when we in the know know that it is the Flying Spaghetti Monster who
is the source of all good in the world for we have been touched by his
noodly appendages.

Rhino Plastee

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 5:40:17 PM1/24/09
to

Steve Fuck-head Carroll is looking at the UN Charter where it specifically
talkes about Pakistan when he should be looking to see where it says a
nation has the fucking right to defend itself. Only a fucked up asshole
like Steve Carroll would try to argue Obama should be impeached because he
is working to defend the nation. I bet Steve Carroll was never in the
military.


Rhino Plastee

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 5:41:06 PM1/24/09
to

Steve Carroll fucking hates anyone who is not Bush, Rush, or some other
fucked in the head right wing asshole.


Rhino Plastee

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 5:46:17 PM1/24/09
to

You are the one talking about impeaching Obama because he is defending the
country. You are, asshole, not Snit or any other boogy man your fucked up
head conjures.


Ye Tao Meister

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 5:58:05 PM1/24/09
to

idiot.

libcrus...@gmail.com

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 6:10:47 PM1/24/09
to
On Jan 24, 5:13�am, waynesnoches...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Only days into the Obama adiminstration, these gems are showing up on
> Faux News.
>
> There is a You-Tube broadcast of this but I don't have the link.
>
> They showed Obama taking the oath of office for the second time. �The
> converation went like this:
>
> "He didn't have his hand on the bible."
>
> "Is he really President?"

You're an idiot that doesn't get sarcasm.


>
> Could you imagine a legitimate news organization saying that?

Just on CNN yesterday on Wolf Blitzer they repeated the lie that Palin
said she could see Russia from her backyard. What a fucking joke.

"She lost because of comments like seeing Russia from her backyard"

Hahahahahahahahahaha

They are as dumb as the Obama voters!

"86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her
"house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!"

"Americans are perhaps the dumbest people on the planet" - Mike Moore

CNN - news straight from SNL!

No wonder Fox has been number 1 for 7 straight years...


> One of the Faux's miss americas said this: �"I find it highly
> entertaining that only twenty-four hours or less, we are already
> talking about stuff like this" meaning attacking Barack Obama.

Meanwhile on MSNBC, they are still calling Bush an idiot.

You have some weird priorities if you think that's an "attack".


>
> Finally Bill O'Liely said: �I didn't like the line in the speech about
> "we don't have to compromise our values
> for to protect ourselves." �Sometimes we do.


So you'd rather see 3000 Americans dead than a terrorist tortured?

It'd be funny if you die from some terrorist let go at Gitmo.


> To which Jon Stewart replied: �If you don't stick to your values when
> they are being tested, they aren't values, they're hobbies.

Jon Stewart is a comedian, and not to good of one.

SNL isn't a news source.

Anything else you want to learn?

LOL

Bang That Poo ( Father of Bang Poo More )

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 6:12:38 PM1/24/09
to
Steve Carroll wrote:
> You're aware that he ordered an attack in Pakistan, right? You're
> aware that the U.S. has not formally declared war on Pakistan,


I support carpet bombing most of Pakistan simply to
eliminate any more of them coming over here to be
taxi drivers and convenient store owners.

libcrus...@gmail.com

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 6:13:32 PM1/24/09
to


Clinton said Saddam had WMDs up until the invasion, supported the
invasion and his wife voted for the invasion, you idiot.

Back to Olbermann for you!

libcrus...@gmail.com

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 6:15:36 PM1/24/09
to
> impeachment. Why the legal double standard for Obama?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

2 US soldiers died his first day in office.

While Obama was celebrating with blacks saying "White lies, my
President is black, Nigger"

Why isn't Obama pulling our troops out?

Why did Obama lie?

Why is he only helping terrorists while are soldiers are caught,
tortured and killed?

BLACKPOOLJIMMY

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 6:15:38 PM1/24/09
to


Yea...how can you stand your own stink?
>
> LOL

libcrus...@gmail.com

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 6:22:13 PM1/24/09
to
On Jan 24, 10:08�am, Dale Houstman <d...@skypoint.com> wrote:
> Ye Tao Meister wrote:

Here in Los Angeles, there are lots of immigrants from Mexico, and
their kids join gangs and they kill anyone in thier hood who isn't
Mexican, especially blacks.

The world is a lot bigger than Minneapolis, LOL.

Rhino Plastee

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 7:00:07 PM1/24/09
to
libcrus...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 24, 7:30?am, Steve Carroll <fretw...@comcast.net> wrote:

>> On Jan 24, 7:23?am, "John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> <waynesnoches...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>>> news:160d21c1-d461-454d...@g3g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>> Only days into the Obama adiminstration, these gems are showing up
>>>> on Faux News.
>>
>>>> There is a You-Tube broadcast of this but I don't have the link.
>>
>>>> They showed Obama taking the oath of office for the second time.
>>>> ?The converation went like this:

>>
>>>> "He didn't have his hand on the bible."
>>
>>>> "Is he really President?"
>>
>>>> Could you imagine a legitimate news organization saying that?
>>
>>>> A legitimate news organization would know there there is no
>>>> Consitutional requirement for the President to have a bible when
>>>> taking the oath of office.
>>
>>>> Indeed, a legitimate news organization would know that the oath of
>>>> office goes like this: ?I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I
>>>> will . . .
>>
>>>> It indeed says "swear (or affirm)." ?So the President can say I do

>>>> solemnly affirm if he is non-religious or does not believe in
>>>> swearing on the bible.
>>
>>>> One of the Faux's miss americas said this: ?"I find it highly

>>>> entertaining that only twenty-four hours or less, we are already
>>>> talking about stuff like this" meaning attacking Barack Obama.
>>
>>>> Just the opposite. ?I find it highly entertaining that they waited
>>>> twenty-four hours.
>>
>>>> Finally Bill O'Liely said: ?I didn't like the line in the speech

>>>> about "we don't have to compromise our values
>>>> for to protect ourselves." ?Sometimes we do.
>>
>>>> To which Jon Stewart replied: ?If you don't stick to your values

>>>> when they are being tested, they aren't values, they're hobbies.
>>
>>> There is one guy around here named Steve Carroll who spends all day
>>> trolling while drinking beer, growing his pot belly, and listening
>>> to that favorite right wing nutjob "news source", Faux News.
>>
>> Why aren't you and Snit calling for Obama's impeachment yet, John?
>> You're aware that he ordered an attack in Pakistan, right? You're
>> aware that the U.S. has not formally declared war on Pakistan, right?
>> You're aware that the U.N. charter doesn't sanction the U.S.
>> attacking Pakistan, right? These were the reasons you were calling
>> for Bush's impeachment. Why the legal double standard for Obama?-
>> Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> 2 US soldiers died his first day in office.
>
> While Obama was celebrating with blacks saying "White lies, my
> President is black, Nigger"
>
> Why isn't Obama pulling our troops out?
>
> Why did Obama lie?
>
> Why is he only helping terrorists while are soldiers are caught,
> tortured and killed?

Did you listen to a fucking thing Obama said? Where do you think he lied?


bushlyed

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 7:18:40 PM1/24/09
to
On Jan 24, 5:10 pm, libcrushersm...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> You're an idiot that doesn't get sarcasm.
>
>

Watch the tape; it wasn't sarcasm. Sarcasm is much more clever than
that

>
> > Could you imagine a legitimate news organization saying that?
>
> Just on CNN yesterday on Wolf Blitzer they repeated the lie that Palin
> said she could see Russia from her backyard. What a fucking joke.
>

Show me where they said that and show me proof that she didn't

> "She lost because of comments like seeing Russia from her backyard"
>
> Hahahahahahahahahaha
>
> They are as dumb as the Obama voters!
>

No, you are dumb if you think THAT is the reason McCain and Palin
lost.

Are you saying they wouldn't have lost if that never came up?

> "86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her
> "house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!"
>
> "Americans are perhaps the dumbest people on the planet"  - Mike Moore
>

Yes, they elected Bush didn't they

> CNN - news straight from SNL!
>
> No wonder Fox has been number 1 for 7 straight years...
>

Fox is number one because there are a lot more sheep like you than
leaders

> > One of the Faux's miss americas said this: "I find it highly
> > entertaining that only twenty-four hours or less, we are already
> > talking about stuff like this" meaning attacking Barack Obama.
>
> Meanwhile on MSNBC, they are still calling Bush an idiot.
>

Truth is a bitch isn't it

> You have some weird priorities if you think that's an "attack".
>
>

Priorities is not quite the right word

>
> > Finally Bill O'Liely said: I didn't like the line in the speech about
> > "we don't have to compromise our values
> > for to protect ourselves." Sometimes we do.
>
> So you'd rather see 3000 Americans dead than a terrorist tortured?
>

False choice. We didn't have to torture anyone to know that Al-Queda
was going to fly planes into buildings and stop it; all we had to do
is have a President that pays attention to the daily PDB

> It'd be funny if you die from some terrorist let go at Gitmo.
>

You have a sick sense of humor

> > To which Jon Stewart replied: If you don't stick to your values when
> > they are being tested, they aren't values, they're hobbies.
>
> Jon Stewart is a comedian, and not to good of one.
>
> SNL isn't a news source.
>

John Stewart is not on SNL and comedians are sometimes the best social
commentators (Mark Twain anyone)

> Anything else you want to learn?
>
> LOL

No thanks for the comic relief

bushlyed

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 7:19:40 PM1/24/09
to
On Jan 24, 5:12 pm, "Bang That Poo ( Father of Bang Poo More )"

Obviously you never have had to scramble for a cab at 4:00am on a
Saturday night/Sunday morning

bushlyed

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 7:20:52 PM1/24/09
to

He didn't order troops and Bush did so there is a difference

If someone decides to blow your brains out and I cheer him on but
don't do anything, I am not guilty of murder just happen that you are
fucking dead

bushlyed

unread,
Jan 24, 2009, 7:21:53 PM1/24/09
to

Yes and I gave them a copy of this post along with your address and
description

SNIT

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 1:48:25 AM1/25/09
to
On 1/24/09 2:00 PM, in article
d456e9d6-bd20-4b24...@t39g2000prh.googlegroups.com,
"bushlyed" <bush...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Steve will *not* understand that. And being that you make sense he will
insist you are my sock puppet or shill.

100% predictable.

SNIT

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 1:51:11 AM1/25/09
to
On 1/24/09 1:58 PM, in article
ccc95aaa-c3c0-4399...@v39g2000pro.googlegroups.com,
"bushlyed" <bush...@yahoo.com> wrote:

In general, perjury of that nature is ignored as insignificant... but, no
doubt, Clinton had an affair and as part of that affair committed such
perjury. He broke the law... *actually* is guilty of doing so, even though
the court found otherwise.

Steve accept that Clinton broke the law - contrary to the court's
findings... but denies it is even possible for Bush to be *actually* guilty,
no matter much evidence there is against him - unless he is found so in a
court of law.

Steve has let himself be completely consumed by his hatred to the point
where he cannot understand how absurd his claims are.

Elvis Kabong

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 3:15:06 AM1/25/09
to

"Steve Carroll" <fret...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:5afa7c7c-d2a9-459f...@i18g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny thing though - it was never any of the court's business to
begin with. His mistake was not stating such.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why are you still whining because *you* were unable to show proof for
Bush's guilt for your parroted arguments that you really never
understood well enough to begin with?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Huh?
Invading a soveriegn nation based on falsified intelligence?
Disregarding the FISA Act?
Acting like some above the law monarch?
Appointing former CEOs or lobbyists of certain industries
to head oversight agencies to monitor those same industries?
(That's as retarded as some small city pulling a career criminal
off the street and appointing him Police Chief).
Being big buds with the monarchs of Saudia Arabia yet most
of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis and has our military attack
Iraq instead? WTF? And at the same time using the excuse
of "bringing *democracy* to Iraq", but NOT to Saudi Arabia?
Huh?
Ever heard of "conflicts of interest"?
Then there were the no bid contracts with Halliburton (Cheney
the Dick having been the CEO and obviously getting war
profiteering kickbacks.
Oh, and how about being close friends with Ken Lay
of EnRon who is not unlikely alive and living at the
Bush estate in Paraguay?


Elvis Kabong

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 3:19:22 AM1/25/09
to

"Steve Carroll" <fret...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:66b59eae-32dd-4446...@o4g2000pra.googlegroups.com...

On Jan 24, 7:23 am, "John" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:

Why aren't you and Snit calling for Obama's impeachment yet, John?


You're aware that he ordered an attack in Pakistan, right? You're
aware that the U.S. has not formally declared war on Pakistan, right?
You're aware that the U.N. charter doesn't sanction the U.S. attacking
Pakistan, right? These were the reasons you were calling for Bush's
impeachment. Why the legal double standard for Obama?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't you right wing ding kooks consider the UN as irrelevant
and useless?
Can't have it both ways unless you and your ilk are double
standard hypocrites.


libcrus...@gmail.com

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 4:35:56 AM1/25/09
to

Of course he didn't order any troops, he wasn't President. DUH!

If he was, he said he would have done what Bush did, only he would
have gotten the UN more involved with him (which we know now were in
Saddam's pocket and the reason he resisted Bush, and would have done
no good at all but waste Bill's time).

You lose...always.

notreadyforp...@yahoo.com

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 4:40:26 AM1/25/09
to
On Jan 25, 3:35 am, libcrushersm...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 24, 4:20 pm, bushlyed <bushl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 24, 5:13 pm, libcrushersm...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > Clinton said Saddam had WMDs up until the invasion, supported the
> > > invasion and his wife voted for the invasion, you idiot.
>
> > > Back to Olbermann for you!
>
> > He didn't order troops and Bush did so there is a difference
>
> > If someone decides to blow your brains out and I cheer him on but
> > don't do anything, I am not guilty of murder just happen that you are
> > fucking dead
>
> Of course he didn't order any troops, he wasn't President. DUH!
>

He was President for eight years and didn't order an invasion of Iraq
fuckwit

> If he was, he said he would have done what Bush did, only he would
> have gotten the UN more involved with him (which we know now were in
> Saddam's pocket and the reason he resisted Bush, and would have done
> no good at all but waste Bill's time).
>
>

Let's see, the UN was in Saddam's pocket but they passed resolutions
against him

And the thing is you don't even know how ridiculous you sound

libcrus...@gmail.com

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 5:12:00 AM1/25/09
to
On Jan 24, 4:18�pm, bushlyed <bushl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jan 24, 5:10�pm, libcrushersm...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > You're an idiot that doesn't get sarcasm.
>
> Watch the tape; it wasn't sarcasm. �Sarcasm is much more clever than
> that

LOL, that's a 3 second clip out of context with a bunch of other clips
out of context from a liberal comedy show.

Are you really this dumb?

Plus, that clip was from FOX AND FRIENDS - that's a "good morning"
light-hearted show, you moron. She was asking the question for the
audience, like most hosts do, who might have that question. DUH!

Geez, all you know about Fox is the 3 second sound bites cut up on
Comedy Central.

No wonder you're so easily routed...

> > > Could you imagine a legitimate news organization saying that?
>
> > Just on CNN yesterday on Wolf Blitzer they repeated the lie that Palin
> > said she could see Russia from her backyard. What a fucking joke.
>
> Show me where they said that and show me proof that she didn't

A - I didn't tape it, but it doesn't matter because:
B - you're a fucking dolt along with "86.9 % thought that Palin said


that she could see Russia from her "house," even though that was Tina
Fey who said that!!"

*You* prove to me, Olbermann-fuckwit, that she said she could see
Russia from her backyard, porch or any part of her house.

You can't...

Because you're an idiot....

An idiot that voted for Obama based on info from SNL...

Prove me wrong....

You lose... again.


>
> > "She lost because of comments like seeing Russia from her backyard"
>
> > Hahahahahahahahahaha
>
> > They are as dumb as the Obama voters!
>
> No, you are dumb if you think THAT is the reason McCain and Palin
> lost.

They lost because fcukwits like you get their info from comedy shows
like Jon Stewart and SNL.

LOL

"Prove Palin didn't say she could see Russia from her backyard" -
Bushlyed, lib idiot


> > "86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her
> > "house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!"
>
> > "Americans are perhaps the dumbest people on the planet" �- Mike Moore
>
> Yes, they elected Bush didn't they

Not the ones who get their news from SNL. LOL

>
> > CNN - news straight from SNL!
>
> > No wonder Fox has been number 1 for 7 straight years...
>
> Fox is number one because there are a lot more sheep like you than
> leaders

Fox is number one because lib idiots like Jon Stewart and Olbermann
are the competition..


>
> > > One of the Faux's miss americas said this: "I find it highly
> > > entertaining that only twenty-four hours or less, we are already
> > > talking about stuff like this" meaning attacking Barack Obama.

You moron, not you Bushlyed, the other moron who posted this
originally -

After veiwing the Jon Stewart comedy tape, you're quoting a 3 second
snip from Fox and you have no idea what the fuck she was talking
about.

You ever hear of tape room editing?

LOL at the lib idiocy and knowledge gained from Comedy Central and
SNL!


>
> > Meanwhile on MSNBC, they are still calling Bush an idiot.
>
> Truth is a bitch isn't it

Coming from the idiot that gets his info from SNL and Comedy Central

LMFAO!

No wonder I beat you like a red headed step-child every time we
meet...


> > You have some weird priorities if you think that's an "attack".
>
> Priorities is not quite the right word

Bushlyed isn't quite the right word or a word at all.


"Any valid question about Obama is an attack. Baa Waa, but it''s ok to
smear Bush. I have my priorities fucked up!" - Waynepussches

> > > Finally Bill O'Liely said: I didn't like the line in the speech about
> > > "we don't have to compromise our values
> > > for to protect ourselves." Sometimes we do.
>
> > So you'd rather see 3000 Americans dead than a terrorist tortured?
>
> False choice. �We didn't have to torture anyone to know that Al-Queda
> was going to fly planes into buildings and stop it; all we had to do
> is have a President that pays attention to the daily PDB

So why didn't Clinton stop it? They were training under his watch.

What, Hard-on in Chief was getting head from fat interns and didn't
notice Arabs were learning to fly plans and not wanting to learn how
to land or fly? How many red flags can you miss while shooting your
wad???


> > It'd be funny if you die from some terrorist let go at Gitmo.
>
> You have a sick sense of humor

But at least I'm not gay and have a sick sense of sex like you.


>
> > > To which Jon Stewart replied: If you don't stick to your values when
> > > they are being tested, they aren't values, they're hobbies.
>
> > Jon Stewart is a comedian, and not to good of one.
>
> > SNL isn't a news source.
>
> John Stewart is not on SNL and comedians are sometimes the best social
> commentators (Mark Twain anyone)

Jon (it's JON, and I don't even watch the show) is on COMEDY CENTRAL.

Keep watching Olbermann and the clowns and I'll keep humiliating you.


Next...

Steve de Mena

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 5:22:31 AM1/25/09
to
libcrus...@gmail.com wrote:

Please don't cross-post to an Apple Mac advocacy group.

Steve

libcrus...@gmail.com

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 6:18:28 AM1/25/09
to
On Jan 25, 1:40�am, notreadyforprimetimepa...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Jan 25, 3:35�am, libcrushersm...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 24, 4:20 pm, bushlyed <bushl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 24, 5:13 pm, libcrushersm...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > Clinton said Saddam had WMDs up until the invasion, supported the
> > > > invasion and his wife voted for the invasion, you idiot.
>
> > > > Back to Olbermann for you!
>
> > > He didn't order troops and Bush did so there is a difference
>
> > > If someone decides to blow your brains out and I cheer him on but
> > > don't do anything, I am not guilty of murder just happen that you are
> > > fucking dead
>
> > Of course he didn't order any troops, he wasn't President. DUH!
>
> He was President for eight years and didn't order an invasion of Iraq
> fuckwit

BINGO!

Saddam broke the truce under his watch and the resolutions were
started under Clinton's watch and Bill did nothing but wait and pass
the buck.

>
> > If he was, he said he would have done what Bush did, only he would
> > have gotten the UN more involved with him (which we know now were in
> > Saddam's pocket and the reason he resisted Bush, and would have done
> > no good at all but waste Bill's time).
>
> Let's see, the UN was in Saddam's pocket but they passed resolutions
> against him

LOL

You don't even know about the Oil-for-Food ripoff either!

Holy shit you are a dumbass -

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/07/world/main647977.shtml

UN Sets Probe Of Iraq Aid Program
U.S. Says Oil-For-Food Put Billions In Saddam's Pocket


http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/03/27/1080330984252.html

According to the best estimate of the non-partisan US Government
Accounting Office, Oil for Food generated at least $10 billion for
Saddam's family, and a further $1 billion to pay the 1000-plus UN
bureaucrats who were supposed to be keeping it honest.

http://aawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=3&id=5849

According to this account, Saddam Hussein wrote the script of his doom
by making two assumptions that proved wrong.

The first was that the United States, the only power capable of
changing his regime by force would never do so. The second was that
even if the Americans did launch an attack on Iraq, his Russian,
French and other" friends" would immediately use the United Nations to
force a ceasefire and allow him to survive in the context of yet
another stalemate.

Part of Saddam's delusions was of his own making. Over the years, he
had persuaded himself that by relying on his "sixth sense" he could
read the mind of any adversary at any given time. He told his
entourage: Do not worry! I understand the Americans! I read them like
a book!

However, to blame Saddam alone for his delusions would be unfair.
Everyone in his entourage did their best to encourage the dictator's
fantasies, and none questioned his judgement. Worse still several
foreign powers, notably Russia and France also joined the game of
fooling Saddam into believing they would save him just in time. Even
as the drama was heading for a crescendo in the spring of 2003, the
Iraqi ambassador in Moscow sent a top-secret report quoting senior
Russian intelligence sources as saying that they were sure the US
would not invade. Did the ambassador invent the report? Or was he
duped by former KGB officers who had been bribed by Iraq for decades?

The French also played a role in encouraging Saddam in his defiance by
pretending that the threat of using their veto in the United Nations'
Security Council would make it impossible for the US and its allies to
start a pre-emptive war.

Tareq Aziz, a veteran associate of Saddam and one of the interviewees,
speaks with bitterness about both France and Russia that, he claims,
had no regard for Iraq's interests and were concerned only about
making money in Iraq's captive market.


>
> And the thing is you don't even know how ridiculous you sound

Another golden idiot statement by "notreadyforprimetime".

Boy, does your name ever fucking fit.

Look at the bright side, every time you talk to me you learn a little
more about the world you live in.

Next...

notreadyforp...@yahoo.com

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 6:53:19 AM1/25/09
to
On Jan 25, 4:12 am, libcrushersm...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 24, 4:18 pm, bushlyed <bushl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 24, 5:10 pm, libcrushersm...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > You're an idiot that doesn't get sarcasm.
>
> > Watch the tape; it wasn't sarcasm. Sarcasm is much more clever than
> > that
>
> LOL, that's a 3 second clip out of context with a bunch of other clips
> out of context from a liberal comedy show.
>
> Are you really this dumb?
>
> Plus, that clip was from FOX AND FRIENDS - that's a "good morning"
> light-hearted show, you moron. She was asking the question for the
> audience, like most hosts do, who might have that question. DUH!
>

There is nothing light hearted aboujt fox

> Geez, all you know about Fox is the 3 second sound bites cut up on
> Comedy Central.
>

No I watch Fox and know their tone

>
>
> > Show me where they said that and show me proof that she didn't
>
> A - I didn't tape it, but it doesn't matter because:


It doesn't matter that I can't prove the outrageous shit you keep
posting her

>
> You lose... again.
>

No, it is you who keeps losing, since November, actually since
November of 2006

>
>
> They lost because fcukwits like you get their info from comedy shows
> like Jon Stewart and SNL.
>
> LOL
>

So in other words, the American people, get their news only from Jon
Stewart and SNL

Next, you will be saying it was the tooth fairy


>
> Fox is number one because lib idiots like Jon Stewart and Olbermann
> are the competition..
>

If Fox is number one and so powerful, how come their candidate lost so
badly

>
> No wonder I beat you like a red headed step-child every time we
> meet...
>

You man enough, i.e. cowardly enough, to only beat a red-headed step
child

You are a moral and ethical coward

>
> So why didn't Clinton stop it? They were training under his watch.
>

Unlike Bush, he didn't receive a Presidential Daily Briefing; had he
gotten that same briefing he would have taken action not go back
clearing wood from his ranch


> What, Hard-on in Chief was getting head from fat interns and didn't
> notice Arabs were learning to fly plans and not wanting to learn how
> to land or fly? How many red flags can you miss while shooting your
> wad???
>

And no one alerted Clinton but they did alert Bush who did nothing

And you are so jealous that some people actually get sex; you jealous
little wimp

And to call a woman a "fat intern" is disgusting and shows what a
cretin you are

>
> But at least I'm not gay and have a sick sense of sex like you.
>
>

When all else fails, get the gay slur going

You seem obsessed with gay sex; larry craig is waiting for you

notreadyforp...@yahoo.com

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 6:58:25 AM1/25/09
to
On Jan 25, 5:18 am, libcrushersm...@gmail.com wrote:

>
> Saddam broke the truce under his watch and the resolutions were
> started under Clinton's watch and Bill did nothing but wait and pass
> the buck.
>

Clinton contained him as evidence by the total lack of WMDs and the
fact that Saddam was basically impotent (not as impotent as you but
close)

And he didn't need to waste a single American life to do so

>
> According to the best estimate of the non-partisan US Government
> Accounting Office, Oil for Food generated at least $10 billion for
> Saddam's family, and a further $1 billion to pay the 1000-plus UN
> bureaucrats who were supposed to be keeping it honest.
>

Your precious rethuglican oil companies had most of the blame in this

>
> Look at the bright side, every time you talk to me you learn a little
> more about the world you live in.
>
> Next

All anyone in this newsgroup is learning is that you are a chickenshit
chickenhawk cowardly cheerleading war monger who loves war so long as
others fight in it

Too cowardly, too scared, too chicken to do so himself

A moral and ethical coward

A low-life scum

Your posts are getting angrier and angrier, more bitter, more
delusional, more moronic

Anger, bitterness

It is going to be fun taunting you for the next eight years

libcrus...@gmail.com

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 7:12:24 AM1/25/09
to
On Jan 25, 3:58�am, notreadyforprimetimepa...@yahoo.com wrote:

<snipped changing of subject, crying and idiot ranting>

You're a fucking moron.

Dance for me.

Snit

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 7:18:45 AM1/25/09
to
On 1/25/09 1:19 AM, in article ydVel.1406$S8....@bignews3.bellsouth.net,
"Elvis Kabong" <ampsc...@tuneland.com> wrote:

Not to mention: the UN charter specifically says one *can* defend oneself...
which includes, of course, working to "take out" al Qaeda. How Steve
Carroll could so quickly forget 9-11 is just amazing. And a bit gross.

Snit

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 7:40:05 AM1/25/09
to
On 1/25/09 1:15 AM, in article y9Vel.1404$S8....@bignews3.bellsouth.net,
"Elvis Kabong" <ampsc...@tuneland.com> wrote:

Oh, Steve and I have been going round and round on this for years... Bush,
to Steve, cannot be *actually* guilty of *anything* unless a court finds him
so. Same with anyone in Bush's administration.

But Clinton! Oh, he is guilty as can be... even contrary to the findings of
a court. Because he had an affair.

Snit

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 7:51:44 AM1/25/09
to
On 1/25/09 2:35 AM, in article
a92e9e8f-1430-4038...@k9g2000vbl.googlegroups.com,
"libcrus...@gmail.com" <libcrus...@gmail.com> wrote:

If the goal is to get you to even simple understanding then, yes, people
*always* lose.

Always.

slydrule

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 10:47:01 AM1/25/09
to
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Bush put up with much worse than this for 8 years and 1 week into the Obama
administration and liberals are complaining about the news coverage.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You retards will be jumping from windows in a year or two.

<waynesn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

Steve Carroll

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 11:09:41 AM1/25/09
to
On Jan 25, 1:15 am, "Elvis Kabong" <ampscie...@tuneland.com> wrote:
> "Steve Carroll" <fretw...@comcast.net> wrote in message

"falsified intelligence" that SH saw fit to falsify. Every
intelligence in the wrold had that same intel for that very reason...
but hey, why ruin a good delusion you are having, right;)


Steve Carroll

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 11:12:22 AM1/25/09
to
On Jan 25, 1:19 am, "Elvis Kabong" <ampscie...@tuneland.com> wrote:
> "Steve Carroll" <fretw...@comcast.net> wrote in message

Earth to EK... I'm asking Snit why he has a double standard regarding
Obama.


notreadyforp...@yahoo.com

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 11:19:51 AM1/25/09
to

Got to you, big time

> Dance for me.

Cry for me

Angry, bitter

"We won" - Barack Obama

"Now STFU and bend over" - Me

Steve Carroll

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 11:20:41 AM1/25/09
to
On Jan 25, 5:18 am, Snit <c...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 1/25/09 1:19 AM, in article ydVel.1406$S8....@bignews3.bellsouth.net,
>
>
>
> "Elvis Kabong" <ampscie...@tuneland.com> wrote:
>
> > "Steve Carroll" <fretw...@comcast.net> wrote in message

Picking and choosing text (out of context) from the U.N. charter
again, Snit? It's *amazing* how little you "actually" know about this
topic;)

ATTN: Snit will now outline for everyone the legal processes that are
utilizing to "defend oneself" as per the U.N. charter and show how
they were followed relative to the attacks Obama has ordered in
Pakistan.


p.s. I guess this means that Pakistan now has the right to "defend"
themselves by attacking the U.S. right, Snit?

LOL!

notreadyforp...@yahoo.com

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 11:21:56 AM1/25/09
to
On Jan 25, 9:47 am, "slydrule" <stopspam> wrote:
> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
>
> Bush put up with much worse than this for 8 years and 1 week into the Obama
> administration and liberals are complaining about the news coverage.
>
> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>

Who is complaining about news coverage?

You are making shit up

> You retards will be jumping from windows in a year or two.
>

"We won" - Barack Obama

Leroy

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 11:27:53 AM1/25/09
to
bushlyed wrote:

>
> Obviously you never have had to scramble for a cab at 4:00am on a
> Saturday night/Sunday morning

Shitte .. as a black man .. I never get picked up by nobody ..

notreadyforp...@yahoo.com

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 11:53:18 AM1/25/09
to

Interesting

I am friends with a cab driver who makes sure he picks up well dressed
black people because they are usually very thankful and tip big and
they are usually going up to Harlem rather than somewhere in Midtown
so it is a great fair

Steve de Mena

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 1:05:28 PM1/25/09
to
slydrule wrote:
> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
>

Please leave the Apple Mac advocacy forum out of this off topic thread.

Steve

Elvis Kabong

unread,
Jan 25, 2009, 8:00:30 PM1/25/09