Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Colossus_500 on May 16, 2008, 01:29:28 PM
-
Here's exactly what President Bush said:
There are good and decent people who cannot fathom the darkness in these men and try to explain away their words. It's natural, but it is deadly wrong. As witnesses to evil in the past, we carry a solemn responsibility to take these words seriously. Jews and Americans have seen the consequences of disregarding the words of leaders who espouse hatred. And that is a mistake the world must not repeat in the 21st century.
Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: "Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided." We have an obligation to call this what it is--the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.
Some people suggest if the United States would just break ties with Israel, all our problems in the Middle East would go away. This is a tired argument that buys into the propaganda of the enemies of peace, and America utterly rejects it.
-
How did Obama know it was a reference to him unless . . . there is some truth to it (it could have easily been a reference to Jimmy Carter or even a general statement of foreign policy). Obama lacks the internal fortitude for the office he seeks. After all if someone like Hillary Clinton can tell you "if you can't take the heat stay our of the kitchen" . . . then let's face it, you're a little too "sensitive" to put it mildly.
-
Camp mccain, an hour after bush said that, replaced it with obama's name and reitereated it.
It was obviously a coordinated attack.
They're not dumb. Bush interjected himself into the 2008 campaign to call obama an appeaser. The problem is that 1) That's not appeasement by definition - that involved giving the enemy something, and 2) Bush appeased North korea by giving them million barrels of oil to stop firing missiles at us.
-
Camp mccain, an hour after bush said that, replaced it with obama's name and reitereated it.
It was obviously a coordinated attack.
They're not dumb. Bush interjected himself into the 2008 campaign to call obama an appeaser. The problem is that 1) That's not appeasement by definition - that involved giving the enemy something, and 2) Bush appeased North korea by giving them million barrels of oil to stop firing missiles at us.
Rank speculation! How do you know it was ccordinated as opposed to McCain seizing the opportunity and jumping on the issue.
-
Rank speculation! How do you know it was ccordinated as opposed to McCain seizing the opportunity an jumping on the issue.
mccain said we should negotiate with HAMAS.
Why are you defending this TERRORIST SYMPATHIZER?
-
How did Obama know it was a reference to him unless . . . there is some truth to it (it could have easily been a reference to Jimmy Carter or even a general statement of foreign policy). Obama lacks the internal fortitude for the office he seeks. After all if someone like Hillary Clinton can tell you "if you can't take the heat stay our of the kitchen" . . . then let's face it, you're a little too "sensitive" to put it mildly.
Exactly!
-
Before this was announced I said all Obama wants to do is "talk" and Decker asked for some specific links to his case for "talking"...this is it.
If Obama is prez he will let anyone in the country and bow down to all other nations (muslim mostly)
No reason for Obama to have responded to what Bush said unless it really held truth, and it did.
W.H. press even stated that the world does not revolve around Osama and asked why he thinks this is a linkage towards his self
-
lol at Bush's spokeswoman talking about how the world does not revolve around Obama. Yes, it does. Bush's time is over.... now all that's left is to right about his inglorious time as president.
-
Bush absolutely did not say Obama's name! If he did, on foreign soil, I would have agreed he would be completely out of line. There are groups of leaders that talk about negotiating with Hamas, Iran, etc. Matter of fact, you could easily say this this is in reference to Jimmy Carter's recent trip.
This statement is similar to his past statements about not negotiating with terrorists. Obama's camp is being ultra-sensitive...relax.
-
Yeah, let's compare how many headlines Obama, Carter and Bush have each had in the last three months.
::)
-
70% of americans want to throw-up when they see or hear bush speak. Its like kicking a dead horse anyway.....bush will be charged with war crimes soon.....
Mccain=Bush 3...... :-X
-
mccain said we should negotiate with HAMAS.
Why are you defending this TERRORIST SYMPATHIZER?
Link please.
-
Gates wants to negotiate with Iran. Maybe Bush was talking about him.
-
oh brother, if it was not a comment toward the democrats who was it toward ::) for what purpose? Let me guess, the pres was setting up a straw man to address for the hell of it ::) No, it was directed at the people who have suggested we be willing to talk to our enemies. Now who is suggesting that? Dems and who is the primary person of interest, the person who has the highest potential to change policy in that direction and the person who has been vocal about changing our policy on diplomacy with the enemy? OBAMA!!!!
pull your head out of the pundits ass for once and think for yourself ::)
-
oh brother, if it was not a comment toward the democrats who was it toward ::) for what purpose? Let me guess, the pres was setting up a straw man to address for the hell of it ::) No, [I assume] it was directed at the people who have suggested we be willing to talk to our enemies. Now who is suggesting that? Dems and who is the primary person of interest, the person who has the highest potential to change policy in that direction and the person who has been vocal about changing our policy on diplomacy with the enemy? OBAMA!!!!
pull your head out of the pundits ass for once and think speculate for yourself ::)
Speculation, conjecture, guesswork, innuendo . . . all good substitutions for facts.
-
Speculation, conjecture, guesswork, innuendo . . . all good substitutions for facts.
::) In this case, I have the facts and you have the speculation!
-
::) In this case, I have the facts and you have the speculation!
Where? A neutron microscope could not divine a single shred of fact in that morass of pablum! Finding a fact in that glob of non-intellectual goo is worse than "Where's Waldo"! (or in this case, where is Osama errr... I mean Hussein, whoops I mean Obama!)
-
Link please.
i watched the video today. Mccain, in his own words, describing the need to talk to hamas.
Please, call bullshit, so I will have motivation to look it up, then you can apologize for doubting me.
I'm sure it'll be all youtubed up this weekend - it makes mccain look realllly fcking hypocritical to be saying this 1 and 2 years ago - in CONTRAST with Bush Admin and ISR position - then suddenly this year saying we cannot talk to them.
hamas was launching rockets into fvcking houses - and Mccain said we should talk to them. that's bullshit, joe.
-
i watched the video today. Mccain, in his own words, describing the need to talk to hamas.
Please, call bullshit, so I will have motivation to look it up, then you can apologize for doubting me.
I'm sure it'll be all youtubed up this weekend - it makes mccain look realllly fcking hypocritical to be saying this 1 and 2 years ago - in CONTRAST with Bush Admin and ISR position - then suddenly this year saying we cannot talk to them.
hamas was launching rockets into fvcking houses - and Mccain said we should talk to them. that's bullshit, joe.
Strange, no refutation of the central point. It seems not only Obama is wearing panties....
-
mccain said we should negotiate with HAMAS.
Why are you defending this TERRORIST SYMPATHIZER?
(http://www.math.vanderbilt.edu/~ugsem/pinocchio.PNG)
McCain denies 'flip-flop' on Hamas, blasts Obama
McCain says he has always opposed talks with Hamas unless it changes
Ex-diplomat journalist calls McCain hypocrite for change in stance since 2006
In 2006 British TV interview, McCain said U.S. had to deal with Hamas
Next Article in Politics »
(CNN) -- John McCain's campaign said Friday that claims by a former State Department official that McCain had advocated unconditional dialogue with the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas were misleading.
(http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2008/POLITICS/05/16/mccain.hamas/art.mccain.thurs.speach.02..jpg)
Sen. John McCain's campaign says he has always placed conditions on talking with Hamas.
James P. Rubin said on CNN Friday that McCain had told him during a 2006 interview that the United States would inevitably have to deal with Hamas. Rubin said criticism now of similar statements by Democrats was "the ultimate flip-flop in American politics."
But McCain said Friday that his position had remained consistent, saying "I will not and would not sit down and negotiate with terrorist organizations and never have."
The presumed Republican presidential nominee said he would talk to Hamas only "if they wanted to become an organization dedicated to peace rather than the extermination of the state of Israel and sponsoring acts of terror."
The Arizona senator has criticized Barack Obama for his stated willingness to speak with hostile nations like Iran, and repeatedly raised what he has described as Hamas' approval of Obama's candidacy.
"Now, Sen. Obama supports sitting down with a state sponsor of that terrorist organization. Sen. Obama wants to have direct talks with the president of Iran, who has said that Israel is a stinking corpse and wants to wipe Israel off the map -- those are [the president's] words, not mine," McCain said.
Speaking before the National Rifle Association in Louisville, Kentucky, Friday afternoon, McCain criticized Obama.
McCain added that "it would be a wonderful thing if we lived in a world where we don't have enemies. That's not the world we live in. And until Sen. Obama understands that reality, the American people have every reason to doubt whether he has strength, judgment and determination to keep us safe." Watch more of McCain's comments »
During an event in Watertown, South Dakota, Obama responded to McCain's attack, calling it a "kind of hypocrisy."
"John McCain has repeated this notion that I'm prepared to negotiate with terrorists. I have never said that; I have been adamant about not negotiating with Hamas, a terrorist organization that has vowed to destroy Israel and won't recognize them," the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination said.
"If George Bush and John McCain want to have a debate about protecting the United States of America, that is a debate that I'm happy to have any time, any place, and that is a debate that I will win, because George Bush and John McCain have a lot to answer for," Obama said.
On CNN's "American Morning" Friday, Rubin -- a former assistant secretary of state in the Clinton administration and a supporter of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign -- said McCain's criticism of Obama's position was hypocritical. Watch Rubin accuse McCain of flip-flopping »
"When he was in Davos [Switzerland] amongst the European crowd and I interviewed him there two years ago, he was talking as if it was appropriate and natural and reasonable to negotiate with Hamas, the new government of the Palestinian territories," Rubin said.
"And then two years later, he's taking a very, very different position ... smearing people for suggesting that one ought to talk to Hamas when it was he himself who was prepared to talk to Hamas two years ago."
Rubin wrote an op-ed piece in Friday's Washington Post relating an interview he conducted with McCain on the British network Sky News shortly after Hamas won the Palestinian elections in January 2006.
McCain said the United States would not be able to avoid a dialogue with the Islamic militant group.
"They're the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another," he said at the time. "And I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas, because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice ...
"But it's a new reality in the Middle East. I think the lesson is people want security and a decent life and decent future, that they want democracy. Fatah was not giving them that."
Bounds sent reporters a 2006 McCain statement in which he called on Hamas to renounce violence -- though he did not say that requirement would be a precondition for dialogue.
"John McCain's position is clear and has always been clear: The president of the United States should not unconditionally meet with leaders of Iran, Hamas or Hezbollah," Bounds said.
In a January 2006 CNN interview, McCain stressed conditions Hamas would need to meet before establishing a working relationship of any kind with the United States.
McCain told CNN he hoped "that Hamas, now that they are going to govern, will be motivated to renounce this commitment to the extinction of the state of Israel. Then we can do business again. We can resume aid, we can resume the peace process."
On a conference call Thursday, McCain said Obama's position was "unacceptable" and shows that he "does not have the knowledge, the experience, the background to make the kind of judgments that are necessary to preserve this nation's security."
After President Bush seemed to suggest Thursday that Obama's foreign policy vision that included talking with adversaries was fatally flawed, Obama said again that his position had been mischaracterized. Watch the uproar over Bush's comments »
"George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the president's extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel," the Illinois senator said in a statement.
He is planning to respond to attacks on his position at a speech Friday afternoon in South Dakota.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/16/mccain.hamas/?iref=mpstoryview
-
Obama has done nothing in his life that would indicate he is ready for the toughest job in the world. Like blind sheep his ilk follows.
-
Your retort is that "McCain denies 'flip-flop'"
He denied it, so you're calling me a liar?
okay, let's find the youtube clip of him 2 years ago. I watched MSNBC play it last night. Geez, your 'evidence' is a denial from mccain. charming!
-
Your retort is that "McCain denies 'flip-flop'"
He denied it, so you're calling me a liar?
okay, let's find the youtube clip of him 2 years ago. I watched MSNBC play it last night. Geez, your 'evidence' is a denial from mccain. charming!
Just post it already.
-
Your retort is that "McCain denies 'flip-flop'"
He denied it, so you're calling me a liar?
okay, let's find the youtube clip of him 2 years ago. I watched MSNBC play it last night. Geez, your 'evidence' is a denial from mccain. charming!
Go to youtube and type "McCain Hammas"
-
Where? A neutron microscope could not divine a single shred of fact in that morass of pablum! Finding a fact in that glob of non-intellectual goo is worse than "Where's Waldo"! (or in this case, where is Osama errr... I mean Hussein, whoops I mean Obama!)
Are you a complete fucking retard? Bill O'Reilly, is that you! >:(
1. FACT. Obama has been a strong vocal critic of Bush's policy of not talking to the enemy. (http://"http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15251928")
2. FACT Barrack has been not only at the forefront of changing the disastrous Bush policies on diplomacy but also served as a rally point for democrats and liberals who feel the same way. (http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4901)
Additional info: http://www.cgdev.org/doc/blog/obama_strengthen_security.pdf
3. FACT BUSH was addressing what he believes to be a group that is the modern day equivalent of WWII era appeasers. QUOTE: "Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland..."
4. NEW FACT I asked and I ask again: If Bush was not addressing Obama and those rallying behind the message in question, what straw man was Bush setting up and for what purpose? YOU didn't answer that and instead said I didn't have any facts behind what I said ::)
5. ABSOLUTE FACTYou suck at this. Never have I encountered someone so blind to the obvious.
Again, I tell you, pull your head out of the pundit's ass and think for yourself, it's really sad to see people come here and post almost word for word what some jackass twit spewed on tv from something he was handed that morning to learn and repeat. Don't think it doesn't get noticed when we read someone's remarks that ditto the gop queef we just heard on CNN, Fox or some other network ::)
-
Are you a complete fucking retard? Bill O'Reilly, is that you! >:(
1. FACT. Obama has been a strong vocal critic of Bush's policy of not talking to the enemy. (http://"http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15251928")
2. FACT Barrack has been not only at the forefront of changing the disastrous Bush policies on diplomacy but also served as a rally point for democrats and liberals who feel the same way. (http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4901)
Additional info: http://www.cgdev.org/doc/blog/obama_strengthen_security.pdf
3. FACT BUSH was addressing what he believes to be a group that is the modern day equivalent of WWII era appeasers. QUOTE: "Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland..."
4. NEW FACT I asked and I ask again, if Bush was not addressing Obama and those rallying behind the message in question, what straw man was Bush setting up and for what purpose? YOU didn't answer that and instead said I didn't have any facts behind what I said ::)
5. ABSOLUTE FACTYou suck at this. Never have I encountered someone so blind to the obvious.
Again, I tell you, pull your head out of the pundit's ass and think for yourself, it's really sad to see people come here and post almost word for word what some jackass twit spewed on tv from something he was handed that morning to learn and repeat. Don't think it doesn't get noticed when we read someone's remarks that ditto the gop queef we just heard on CNN, Fox or some other network ::)
I know i keep saying this, but BUSH's own defense secretary, this week said, we should be talking to Iran.
Here what BUSH's defense Secretary said yesterday:
Gates: U.S. Should Engage Iran With Incentives, Pressure
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/14/AR2008051403553.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/14/AR2008051403553.html)
By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 15, 2008; Page A04
The United States should construct a combination of incentives and pressure to engage Iran, and may have missed earlier opportunities to begin a useful dialogue with Tehran, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said yesterday.
"We need to figure out a way to develop some leverage . . . and then sit down and talk with them," Gates said. "If there is going to be a discussion, then they need something, too. We can't go to a discussion and be completely the demander, with them not feeling that they need anything from us."
-
Are you a complete fucking retard? Bill O'Reilly, is that you! >:(
1. FACT. Obama has been a strong vocal critic of Bush's policy of not talking to the enemy. (http://"http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15251928")
2. FACT Barrack has been not only at the forefront of changing the disastrous Bush policies on diplomacy but also served as a rally point for democrats and liberals who feel the same way. (http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4901)
Additional info: http://www.cgdev.org/doc/blog/obama_strengthen_security.pdf
3. FACT BUSH was addressing what he believes to be a group that is the modern day equivalent of WWII era appeasers. QUOTE: "Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland..."
4. FACT I asked and I ask again, if Bush was not addressing Obama and those rallying behind the message in question, what straw man was Bush setting up and for what purpose? YOU didn't answer that and instead said I didn't have any facts behind what I said ::)
5. ABSOLUTE FACTYou suck at this. Never have I encountered someone so blind to the obvious.
Again, I tell you, pull your head out of the pundit's ass and think for yourself, it's really sad to see people come here and post almost word for word what some jackass twit spewed on tv from something he was handed that morning to learn and repeat. Don't think it doesn't get noticed when we read someone's remarks that ditto the gop queef we just heard on CNN/Fox ::)
Who cares if his views are similar to someone you saw on TV? There is usually someone on the networks, in print, or on the internet that has views consistent with what we all believe. I'm sure you've said things that are consistent with people you've seen or heard in the media (or pseudo-media). If someone says something I agree with, I have no trouble repeating it.
-
Are you a complete fucking retard? Bill O'Reilly, is that you! >:(
1. FACT. Obama has been a strong vocal critic of Bush's policy of not talking to the enemy. (http://"http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15251928")
2. FACT Barrack has been not only at the forefront of changing the disastrous Bush policies on diplomacy but also served as a rally point for democrats and liberals who feel the same way. (http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4901)
Additional info: http://www.cgdev.org/doc/blog/obama_strengthen_security.pdf
3. FACT BUSH was addressing what he believes to be a group that is the modern day equivalent of WWII era appeasers. QUOTE: "Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland..."
4. NEW FACT I asked and I ask again: If Bush was not addressing Obama and those rallying behind the message in question, what straw man was Bush setting up and for what purpose? YOU didn't answer that and instead said I didn't have any facts behind what I said ::)
5. ABSOLUTE FACTYou suck at this. Never have I encountered someone so blind to the obvious.
Again, I tell you, pull your head out of the pundit's ass and think for yourself, it's really sad to see people come here and post almost word for word what some jackass twit spewed on tv from something he was handed that morning to learn and repeat. Don't think it doesn't get noticed when we read someone's remarks that ditto the gop queef we just heard on CNN, Fox or some other network ::)
Question: "If Bush was not addressing Obama and those rallying behind the message in question, what straw man was Bush setting up and for what purpose?"
Answer: The President was making a statement regarding policy, which he should be free to do without liberal barf bags throwing themselves on the ground and crying. Unlike you, I do not speculate over secret motives behind every word.
As for whether I "suck" at this, all I can say is I consider the source and could care less "Hugo." Understand? Good.
-
Question: "If Bush was not addressing Obama and those rallying behind the message in question, what straw man was Bush setting up and for what purpose?"
Answer: The President was making a statement regarding policy, which he should be free to do without liberal barf bags throwing themselves on the ground and crying. Unlike you, I do not speculate over secret motives behind every word.
As for whether I "suck" at this, all I can say is I consider the source and could care less "Hugo." Understand? Good.
Maybe Former President Carter who met with Hamas?
-
Maybe Former President Carter who met with Hamas?
Exactly. It describes about half of the Democrat party. According to what you posted above, it may also include someone in the defense department. We can speculate all day, just like "Hugo" does and then try after the fact to string together "facts" which may, or may not, have any relation to the president's thinking. Obama wanted it to be about him so that he could get publicity and highlight his purportedly "superior" views on the subject. You wonder if Jewish Americans are going to abandon the Dems given Barack's anti-semetic affifilations and policy leanings. He is already courting disaster with women and the white middle class voters.
-
I know i keep saying this, but BUSH's own defense secretary, this week said, we should be talking to Iran.
Here what BUSH's defense Secretary said yesterday:
Gates: U.S. Should Engage Iran With Incentives, Pressure
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/14/AR2008051403553.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/14/AR2008051403553.html)
By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 15, 2008; Page A04
The United States should construct a combination of incentives and pressure to engage Iran, and may have missed earlier opportunities to begin a useful dialogue with Tehran, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said yesterday.
"We need to figure out a way to develop some leverage . . . and then sit down and talk with them," Gates said. "If there is going to be a discussion, then they need something, too. We can't go to a discussion and be completely the demander, with them not feeling that they need anything from us."
yup, Gates wasn't affraid to speak his mind from day one. Not saying I agree with everything he says but he hasn't been a Bush yes man like all the rest, or at least not to the same degree as the rest.
-
Exactly. It describes about half of the Democrat party. According to what you posted above, it may also include someone in the defense department. We can speculate all day, just like "Hugo" does and then try after the fact to string together "facts" which may, or may not, have any relation to the president's thinking. Obama wanted it to be about him so that he could get publicity and highlight his purportedly "superior" views on the subject. You wonder if Jewish Americans are going to abandon the Dems given Barack's anti-semetic affifilations and policy leanings. He is already courting disaster with women and the white middle class voters.
I really doubt it. Because, BUSH's comments (intentions or not) were a bad move that gave Obama an opportunity to take the high road.
And if he was talking about the half the democrat party then....... he was talking about Obama.
But what do i know? We'll see how this plays out. So far, it looks like Obama is gaining from it.
-
Question: "If Bush was not addressing Obama and those rallying behind the message in question, what straw man was Bush setting up and for what purpose?"
Answer: The President was making a statement regarding policy, which he should be free to do without liberal barf bags throwing themselves on the ground and crying. Unlike you, I do not speculate over secret motives behind every word.
As for whether I "suck" at this, all I can say is I consider the source and could care less "Hugo." Understand? Good.
Oh brother ::) How long have you been active in politics? How old are you? At this point I have to ask. This just is not the way it works bubba. I've followed this shit day by day, year by year for 2 decades and based on the day by day of the last half year alone, your statement sound silly as all fuck... I gave you the background and you fall on him just addressing policy LOLOLOL... out of the blue on Israel's 60th ::) You're either a noob or naive as fuck or just locked into your team fully willing to grasp for anything rather than see your team lose a point.
-
BUSH's own defense secretary, this week said, we should be talking to Iran.
Is Robert Gates an appeaser?
-
BUSH's own defense secretary, this week said, we should be talking to Iran.
Is Robert Gates an appeaser?
Can you post it already? ;D
Yes Gates, sent OBL some x-box games.
Namely: Army of 2
-
McCain on Hamas in 2006: "They;'re the Govt, and sooner or later, we're going to Have to Deal With Them in one way or another. I understand why this admin, and previous admins, had such antimpathy toward hamas, because of their dedication to violence and the things they not only espouse but practice. But it's a new reality in the middle east.
beach Bum, please don't doubt 240. He speaks the truth. You're a confused child.
-
lol. Someone get the girlyman a dictionary. :)
-
lol. Someone get the girlyman a dictionary. :)
yawn.
-
lol. Someone get the girlyman a dictionary. :)
for what?
-
we're going to Have to Deal With Them in one way or another.
???
Appeasement
-
???
Appeasement
Mccain broke Bush Rule #1. You do not deal with terrorists.
of course, Bush broke it too, when he paid NKorea with a million barrels of oil not to fire any more missiles at us. And he broke it again talking with Libya. What? He talked with iran too, when it was convenient for our dealings in iraq?
Shit, bush/mccain, you guys aren't exactly consistent here. Let's scream "libs hate reagan" for the FOX news cameras and hope people ignore our hypocracy. 22% of Americans are still thick enough to buy our bullshit :)
-
Oh brother ::) How long have you been active in politics? How old are you? At this point I have to ask. This just is not the way it works bubba. I've followed this shit day by day, year by year for 2 decades and based on the day by day of the last half year alone, your statement sound silly as all fuck... I gave you the background and you fall on him just addressing policy LOLOLOL... out of the blue on Israel's 60th ::) You're either a noob or naive as fuck or just locked into your team fully willing to grasp for anything rather than see your team lose a point.
As for my involvement in politics, I was the editor of a for-profit political newsletter for two years called Common Sense (of which, I must add you are sorely lacking). I corresponded with William F. Buckley, who thought the points raised by my staff and I were clever and articulate. I have met with Jack Kemp and Bill Bennett. I was an active member of Empower America, the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society. I covered politics for my college newspaper and became editor and met/covered Bush senior when he was campaigning for re-election. I was a history political science major in college and (in addition to being valedictorian I might add) I received a coveted research grant to produce an article about what the founding fathers would have thought about the Boland Amendment. I wrote a political novel called "Left and Right" (I decided not to pursue publication because I am a perfectionist) and another is in the works. I clerked for the U.S. Attorney's office while in law school, where I was on law review, was published therein, and graduated with honors. I advised my brother-in law on campaign strategy when he ran for congress in Pennsylvania in the last election against a 40 year incumbent liberal hack. I have presented oral argument before the California Court of Appeals and drafted a brief which influenced the California Supreme Court on an important point of law.
Am I to be impressed because you have been a couch potato for twenty years and watched C-SPAN while you crammed oreos down your throat? Not a chance. You impress only yourself with your rather pedantic posts.
And while we are at it, I cannot believe someone who calls themselves "Hugo Chavez" even has the nerve to talk about mainstream American politics. Moderator or not, you sound like a bad joke. Just my opinion. Now go bother someone who cares what you think, if you can find anybody.
-
How old am I, look at my profile "Genius."
you quoted genius... Did someone refer to me as a genius? Before I bother going further, where did I say or anyone say I am a genius? So far you and Berserk Fury are the only two who approach me like I claim to be some sort of high intellectual. WTF ::) wait.... hmmmm....
-
welcome aboard midnight rambo.
who are you supporting this year - obama or hilary?
-
welcome aboard midnight rambo.
who are you supporting this year - obama or hilary?
;D lol
-
for what?
To look up the word "negotiate."
-
As for my involvement in politics, I was the editor of a for-profit political newsletter for two years called Common Sense (of which, I must add you are sorely lacking). I corresponded with William F. Buckley, who thought the points raised by my staff and I were clever and articulate. I have met with Jack Kemp and Bill Bennett. I was an active member of Empower America, the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society. I covered politics for my college newspaper and became editor and met/covered Bush senior when he was campaigning for re-election. I was a history political science major in college and (in addition to being valedictorian I might add) I received a coveted research grant to produce an article about what the founding fathers would have thought about the Boland Amendment. I wrote a political novel called "Left and Right" (I decided not to pursue publication because I am a perfectionist) and another is in the works. I clerked for the U.S. Attorney's office while in law school, where I was on law review, was published therein, and graduated with honors. I advised my brother-in law on campaign strategy when he ran for congress in Pennsylvania in the last election against a 40 year incumbent liberal hack. I have presented oral argument before the California Court of Appeals and drafted a brief which influenced the California Supreme Court on an important point of law.
Am I to be impressed because you have been a couch potato for twenty years and watched C-SPAN while you crammed oreos down your throat? Not a chance. You impress only yourself with your rather pedantic posts.
And while we are at it, I cannot believe someone who calls themselves "Hugo Chavez" even has the nerve to talk about mainstream American politics. Moderator or not, you sound like a bad joke. Just my opinion. Now go bother someone who cares what you think, if you can find anybody.
Dang. That's pretty impressive. Congrats on your success.
Hugo that has to sting a little, no? :) (Talking about questioning his knowledge/credentials.)
-
As for my involvement in politics, I was the editor of a for-profit political newsletter for two years called Common Sense (of which, I must add you are sorely lacking). I corresponded with William F. Buckley, who thought the points raised by my staff and I were clever and articulate. I have met with Jack Kemp and Bill Bennett. I was an active member of Empower America, the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society. I covered politics for my college newspaper and became editor and met/covered Bush senior when he was campaigning for re-election. I was a history political science major in college and (in addition to being valedictorian I might add) I received a coveted research grant to produce an article about what the founding fathers would have thought about the Boland Amendment.
Translation: In college, I was one of those annoying triers who thinks he's Robert Bork's bastard.
I wrote a political novel called "Left and Right" (I decided not to pursue publication because I am a perfectionist) and another is in the works.
No one wanted/wants to publish my dreck. :'(
I clerked for the U.S. Attorney's office while in law school, where I was on law review, was published therein, and graduated with honors.
I couldn't get a summer job with a big law firm, or a major clerkship, so I settled for AUSA. I hope you don't notice that while I mentioned by name the "newsletter" I worked for, I don't mention my law school by name....b/c I wasn't good enough to get into one with a name.
the rest of the bs is too boring to translate. :-\
-
Translation: In college, I was one of those annoying triers who thinks he's Robert Bork's bastard.
No one wanted/wants to publish my dreck. :'(
I couldn't get a summer job with a big law firm, or a major clerkship, so I settled for AUSA. I hope you don't notice that while I mentioned by name the "newsletter" I worked for, I don't mention my law school by name....b/c I wasn't good enough to get into one with a name.
the rest of the bs is too boring to translate. :-\
Pepperdine School of Law, ABA accreditted, graduated cum laude, on scholarship (2/3 tuition). My second year I clerked with the U.S, Attorney because I was interested in criminal law. My third year I clerked with a Century City firm that I eventually worked for (where I did estate planning for the Reagans). Sorry for being an "annoying trier."
Funny, I didn't see your credentials, jackass....
"Translation"- I have no accomplishments in my own life.
-
Apparently while patting yourself on the back you missed my thread......the LONGEST on this site. ::)
Admit it, you're a douchebag.
NT
You're right, I didn't read it, as I am sure no one reads your "unfiltered" crap. As far as patting myself on the back, you apparently can't read (not surprising) because it was a response to Hugo's post about how I have no credentials to write about politics. By the way, having the "LONGEST" post is VERY impressive. Even a monkey can keep banging on the keyboard long enough to produce a LONG post. WOW.
But, hey, you have guts to post your pictue with that fine Supercuts Shag hairdo. Ellen Degeneres would love you. Now, as I said to Hugo, go bother someone who cares what you think.
-
midnite rambo will add a new dimension to this place. I look fwd to it.
Most of us can only imagine what neotaint tastes like. We have a man in our midst who has actually savored it in various flavors. Welcome aboard, brother :)
-
[...]My second year I clerked with the U.S, Attorney[...]
Traslation: You gave him a blowjob once in a while.
-
[...]And while we are at it, I cannot believe someone who calls themselves "Hugo Chavez" even has the nerve to talk about mainstream American politics.[...]
The thing is that he's got a right to do that. Even fucking insinuating that he doesn't is well-deserving of a bloody nose.
-
Pepperdine School of Law, ABA accreditted, graduated cum laude, on scholarship (2/3 tuition). My second year I clerked with the U.S, Attorney because I was interested in criminal law. My third year I clerked with a Century City firm that I eventually worked for (where I did estate planning for the Reagans). Sorry for being an "annoying trier."
Funny, I didn't see your credentials, jackass....
"Translation"- I have no accomplishments in my own life.
Hahahaha. SO, I was right. Not even a "top 50" law school.
I know that Pepperdine offers its top recruits full tuition and a stipend. How come you didn't get that? Too big of a douche? Ooh, estate planning for the Reagans. Only a neotaint would be proud of that.
-
Or maybe it's because you can't even spell accredited. ;D And nobody "clerks" for a firm their third year. You either join them, or you clerk for a judge. you sure you're a lawyer?
In any case, mediocrity is writ large on your forehead, cowboy.
-
Hahahaha. SO, I was right. Not even a "top 50" law school.
I know that Pepperdine offers its top recruits full tuition and a stipend. How come you didn't get that? Too big of a douche? Ooh, estate planning for the Reagans. Only a neotaint would be proud of that.
Still waiting for your resume. Since you're too gutless to provide, let me guess
1995-99 Chevron Gas Station Assistant
1999-05 Unemployed
2005-present K-Mart Night time Manager
I'm sure I'm fairly close.
-
Still waiting for your resume. Since you're too gutless to provide, let me guess
1995-99 Chevron Gas Statin Assistant
1999-05 Unemployed
2005-present K-Mart Night time Manager
I'm sure I'm fairly close.
Since I'm not a mediocre trier, I don't feel the need to brag.
BTW, post the WL no. of the case in which you were so influential, and we can get to the bottom of this "influencing" the CA Supreme Court business.
-
Since I'm not a mediocre trier, I don't feel the need to brag.
BTW, post the WL no. of the case in which you were so influential, and we can get to the bottom of this "influencing" the CA Supreme Court business.
Oooohh the "WL no." he is "in the know," (spoken like a true law clerk or paralegal by the way) no, you see Junior, it is a published case with an actual official reporter citation which I am quite proud of. But until you disclose anything which establishes even a shred of credibility (or decide to make it up which I am sure your are capable of based on what fellow Get Biggers are saying about you) we are not playing this game. And by the way, pussy, nothing wrong with my so-called "mediocre tier" alma matter. 4 out of the 5 partners in the law firm I just started are from there and we kick the ass out of USC and UCLA attorneys every week. So while you are jerking off to the U.S. News and World Report law school rankings, I am out there actually winning trials. Last week I obtained a summary judgment ruling against a Harvard/Harvard guy (undergrad and law school). You obviously have no clue how it works in the real world. I'm quite sure I could make short work of you in court, once (if) you pass the bar.
-
Oooohh the "WL no." he is "in the know," (spoken like a true law clerk or paralegal by the way) no, you see Junior, it is a published case with an actual official reporter citation which I am quite proud of. But until you disclose anything which establishes even a shred of credibility (or decide to make it up which I am sure your are capable of based on what fellow Get Biggers are saying about you) we are not playing this game. And by the way, pussy, nothing wrong with my so-called "mediocre tier" alma matter. 4 out of the 5 partners in the law firm I just started are from there and we kick the ass out of USC and UCLA attorneys every week. So while you are jerking off to the U.S. News and World Report law school rankings, I am out there actually winning trials. Last week I obtained a summary judgment ruling against a Harvard/Harvard guy (undergrad and law school). You obviously have no clue how it works in the real world. I'm quite sure I could make short work of you in court, once (if) you pass the bar.
Since I have just returned from church (future in-laws are in town, and one has to make amends for inducing their daughter to live in sin), I am full of the milk of human kindness, and will refrain from continuing to tear you a new asshole.
But, here's a tip, there are several people here with better educations and more prestigious jobs than you (Bay, for instance, although I'm not sure), so tone down the pompous act and play nice.
Can't resist.... you adored Doug Kmiec, did you not? ;D
-
Since I have just returned from church (future in-laws are in town, and one has to make amends for inducing their daughter to live in sin), I am full of the milk of human kindness, and will refrain from continuing to tear you a new asshole.
But, here's a tip, there are several people here with better educations and more prestigious jobs than you (Bay, for instance, although I'm not sure), so tone down the pompous act and play nice.
Can't resist.... you adored Doug Kmiec, did you not? ;D
::)
-
::)
Aw, is he your new hero? ;D
-
Since I have just returned from church (future in-laws are in town, and one has to make amends for inducing their daughter to live in sin), I am full of the milk of human kindness, and will refrain from continuing to tear you a new asshole.
So you actually went? haha why not the "This is my house" speech
-
Aw, is he your new hero? ;D
::)
-
So you actually went? haha why not the "This is my house" speech
I'm still a little bit in awe of her dad, so I don't try to make too many waves. Don't think the "This is my house" speech would be very effective if I started stuttering in the middle of it.
-
Since I have just returned from church (future in-laws are in town, and one has to make amends for inducing their daughter to live in sin), I am full of the milk of human kindness, and will refrain from continuing to tear you a new asshole.
But, here's a tip, there are several people here with better educations and more prestigious jobs than you (Bay, for instance, although I'm not sure), so tone down the pompous act and play nice.
Can't resist.... you adored Doug Kmiec, did you not? ;D
LMAO. ;D You beast!!!
-
Yeah, I'm so beastly I quietly put on a suit and drove them all to church this morning. ;D
So I just reread my post in your quote War-Horse, and I'm LMAO at my saying "tone down the pompous act and play nice" ;D Who am I kidding? Nobody comes here to be un-pompous/nice.
-
Yeah, I'm so beastly I quietly put on a suit and drove them all to church this morning. ;D
So I just reread my post in your quote War-Horse, and I'm LMAO at my saying "tone down the pompous act and play nice" ;D Who am I kidding? Nobody comes here to be un-pompous/nice.
Hahaha. Wolf in sheeps clothing...... I always tell my wife i have, 1/2 a Halo and 1 horn on sundays. :)
-
Hahaha. Wolf in sheeps clothing...... I always tell my wife i have, 1/2 a Halo and 1 horn on sundays. :)
;D my 1 horn went unattended to this morning ;D I just got told that we're going to go see Prince Caspian. Hope that shit's somewhat entertaining.
-
;D my 1 horn went unattended to this morning ;D I just got told that we're going to go see Prince Caspian. Hope that shit's somewhat entertaining.
LOL. Should have good effects. I promised my 9yr old daughter to go see Ironman. i tease her about it being the bodybuilding show........she says dad!!! and ::) i love it. ;D
-
LOL. Should have good effects. I promised my 9yr old daughter to go see Ironman. i tease her about it being the bodybuilding show........she says dad!!! and ::) i love it. ;D
Ironman was fun. I read somewhere that Prince caspian's effects were pretty cool, so it should be fun.