dmarc117 Posted April 25, 2007 Author Share Posted April 25, 2007 It wouldn't have required anything more than enforcing the laws we already have. You're a coward and a traitor to America to give up your freedom for a little security. Go ahead and snivel your way to another country where you can be safe. It is already over and all that is left is political bs like Republicans calling other Americans traitors keystone cops Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 keystone cops You sad little clown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted April 25, 2007 Author Share Posted April 25, 2007 You sad little clown. i'll reply to that in your language.....heehaw! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 while you're thinking of names to call me, unta, i submit this editorial for your consideration... This is it? This is why the Republicans failed to do anything at all to stem illegal immigration? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 drastic problems call for drastic measures sometimes. Or maybe we should start at electing competent people into the executive branch. Maybe those who put them in power need to look into the mirror and start accepting some responsibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted April 25, 2007 Author Share Posted April 25, 2007 Or maybe we should start at electing competent people into the executive branch. Maybe those who put them in power need to look into the mirror and start accepting some responsibility. 1. i didnt vote 2. if i had, would i be responsible for al queda hatin the US? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGrunt Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 Or maybe we should start at electing competent people into the executive branch. Maybe those who put them in power need to look into the mirror and start accepting some responsibility. If or when competent people run for election, I'll be there to vote for 'em. Until then, we are stuck with rich momo's who know how to fool the general public into believing they will vote one way or another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted April 25, 2007 Author Share Posted April 25, 2007 rudi's timing couldnt be better........ MANCHESTER, N.H. - - Rudy Giuliani said if a Democrat is elected president in 2008, America will be at risk for another terrorist attack on the scale of Sept. 11, 2001. “If any Republican is elected president - - and I think obviously I would be the best at this - - we will remain on offense and will anticipate what (the terrorists) will do and try to stop them before they do it,” Giuliani said. “But the question is how long will it take and how many casualties will we have?” Giuliani said. “If we are on defense (with a Democratic president,) we will have more losses and it will go on longer.” “I listen a little to the Democrats and if one of them gets elected, we are going on defense,” Giuliani continued. “We will wave the white flag on Iraq. We will cut back on the Patriot Act, electronic surveillance, interrogation and we will be back to our pre-Sept. 11 attitude of defense.” He added: “The Democrats do not understand the full nature and scope of the terrorist war against us.” After his speech to the Rockingham County Lincoln Day Dinner, I asked him about his statements and Giuliani said flatly: "America will be safer with a Republican president." http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0407/3684.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 (edited) If or when competent people run for election, I'll be there to vote for 'em. Until then, we are stuck with rich momo's who know how to fool the general public into believing they will vote one way or another. From Regan to Bush 2 , their has been nothing comparable to the level imcompetency displayed by this administration. You may have not liked Clinton, but don't confuse competency with character. Edited April 25, 2007 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGrunt Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 rudi's timing couldnt be better........ http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0407/3684.html I completely agree. 100%. However, if the worst case scenario were to occur and a Democrat is elected president I will be satisfied if Republicans own a majority of Congress. That way each side can't get too out of line, and they both balance each other out. BUT, if Hillary Clinton any women currently running for President today wins the election AND the Democrats win a majority of Congress, then save our souls because we're in for a rough 4 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 I completely agree. 100%. However, if the worst case scenario were to occur and a Democrat is elected president I will be satisfied if Republicans own a majority of Congress. That way each side can't get too out of line, and they both balance each other out. BUT, if Hillary Clinton any women currently running for President today wins the election AND the Democrats win a majority of Congress, then save our souls because we're in for a rough 4 years. Bush has created a world where there is a target on America after squandering almost universal international goodwill following 9/11 and yer still this big a sucker? Like I told yer brother a while back, go read some books, please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted April 25, 2007 Author Share Posted April 25, 2007 Bush has created a world where there is a target on America after squandering almost universal international goodwill following 9/11 and yer still this big a sucker? Like I told yer brother a while back, go read some books, please. you are on a roll tonight!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGrunt Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 From Regan to Bush 2 , their has been nothing comparable to the level imcompetency displayed by this administration. You may have not liked Clinton, but don't confuse competency with character. Clinton wasn't the greatest President, but what made him appear more competent is due to the fact that Congress was controlled by Republicans for the majority of his Presidency. The less a President is able to do himself, the better off he'll look in the end. To be honest, it's the extremists on both sides of politics that are hurting the name of what a true Republican and true Democrat is. If JFK were president today he'd be more considered a Republican than a Democrat based on his personal views. That says a lot. It tells you how far left the Democrats have gone. President Bush is about as extreme right-wing Republican as you can get, and I can say for myself that he goes too far with certain views of his. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGrunt Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 Bush has created a world where there is a target on America after squandering almost universal international goodwill following 9/11 and yer still this big a sucker? Like I told yer brother a while back, go read some books, please. Um... are you serious? So what you're saying is that 9/11 and any previous attack on America didn't wake you up to realize that maybe we already are a target? I don't know where you think of these theories, but Bush didn't "create" some universal idea that America should be a target; he simply went on the offensive to do something about what already exists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 (edited) Clinton wasn't the greatest President, but what made him appear more competent is due to the fact that Congress was controlled by Republicans for the majority of his Presidency. The less a President is able to do himself, the better off he'll look in the end. No, what made Clinton more competent is that he was a lot more intelligent than Chimpy McDumb Ass and he generally appointed people into positions that had expertise in their respective areas. He didn't appoint commissioners of Arabian Horse Federations to head up FEMA and 34 year old Pat Robertson graduates to senior positions in the Department of Justice. Edited April 25, 2007 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted April 25, 2007 Author Share Posted April 25, 2007 No, what made Clinton more competent is that he was a lot more intelligent than Chimpy McDumb Ass and he generally appointed people into positions that had expertise in their respective areas. He didn't appoint commissioners of Arabian Horse Federations to head up FEMA and 34 year old Pat Robertson graduates to senior positions in the Department of Justice. and appointed judges to rule in favor of his cronies.... http://www.alamo-girl.com/03151.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGrunt Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 No, what made Clinton more competent is that he was a lot more intelligent than Chimpy McDumb Ass and he generally appointed people into positions that had expertise in their respective areas. He didn't appoint commissioners of Arabian Horse Federations to head up FEMA and 34 year old Pat Robertson graduates to senior positions in the Department of Justice. Well at least you didn't let your bias opinion get in the way of your argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 Well at least you didn't let your bias opinion get in the way of your argument. I don't think it takes a left leaning bias to conclude that Clinton was more intelligent than George W. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 Well at least you didn't let your bias opinion get in the way of your argument. He's right though. Bush has put ideology way in front of competence in almost every case. Take a look at the US Attorney fiasco. The level of political corruption we have here puts some third world countries to shame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted April 25, 2007 Author Share Posted April 25, 2007 (edited) He's right though. Bush has put ideology way in front of competence in almost every case. Take a look at the US Attorney fiasco. The level of political corruption we have here puts some third world countries to shame. ahem.....http://www.alamo-girl.com/03151.htm every politician appoints his cronies, its nothing new Edited April 25, 2007 by dmarc117 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 Clinton wasn't the greatest President, but what made him appear more competent is due to the fact that Congress was controlled by Republicans for the majority of his Presidency. The less a President is able to do himself, the better off he'll look in the end. To be honest, it's the extremists on both sides of politics that are hurting the name of what a true Republican and true Democrat is. If JFK were president today he'd be more considered a Republican than a Democrat based on his personal views. That says a lot. It tells you how far left the Democrats have gone. President Bush is about as extreme right-wing Republican as you can get, and I can say for myself that he goes too far with certain views of his. How is juco treating you? The less a President is able to do the better off he'll look? So if the President sleeps for four years, he'll be greater than George Washington, using yer super duper logic. JFK would be a Republican? You do realize you look like an idiot when you talk about a lifelong Democrat from a preeminent Democratic family and you claim he's secretly magically a Republican, right? I mean, you dont really buy this stuff yer regurgitating, do you? Um... are you serious? So what you're saying is that 9/11 and any previous attack on America didn't wake you up to realize that maybe we already are a target? I don't know where you think of these theories, but Bush didn't "create" some universal idea that America should be a target; he simply went on the offensive to do something about what already exists. Bush went on the offensive in Iraq because we were a target, huh? Think a little more broadly and less literally. Of course, there were some pre-9/11 who viewed us as a target. And we went after them briefly with the whole world behind us. Pre-9/11, America was a target of Al Qaeda. Post-Iraq, we are an isolated reviled nation viewed by the world as an illegal imperialist occupier and a target of many as our acts swell the ranks of our enemies and we create enemies where none existed before. Crap, the British are trying to get away from us so quickly they are lying about how Basra is pacified just so they can yank their troops out of Iraq. You understand why Pat Tillman and his brother, both Rangers who fought in Afghanistan, thought the Iraq invasion was illegal and strategically stupid, right? I am not suggesting you agree with their reasoning, but you know why they thought that, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 every politician appoints his cronies, its nothing new The degree to which this administration did it isn't routine, Marctarded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted April 25, 2007 Author Share Posted April 25, 2007 (edited) The degree to which this administration did it isn't routine, Marctarded. ok the classic liberal posse montra.... when our argument is defeated either call a name or put alot of smiley faces. bravo lib! Edited April 25, 2007 by dmarc117 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 I find that I no longer have to post to defend my position. aaah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 President Bush is about as extreme right-wing Republican as you can get, and I can say for myself that he goes too far with certain views of his. I don't think he is extreme right wing whatsoever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.