If Obama is elected president...

[RoyalOrleans]

Its an expression we use here. It means dont wait for it to happen, because it probably wont.
AA is ridiculously dumb, but the liberals who seem to be running the west think its a great idea, so nothing is likely to change unfortunately. We have the same nonsense here.

I was just being facetious, chum. I knew what you meant.

 

[Chi]

Good.
We should not care what others think of us.

I mean, do you really care what I think of you and your little affiliations right now?

Didn't think so.

Good.

But I do care what you think.... sniff (lol!)

And come on now, you know **** well it isn't smart to have so many enemies. People don't forget. Take 9/11 for instance. Why they did it and what we did in retaliation.

 

[Chi]

And they will quickly align themselves with us when the need is dire, their cities burn, and their people are perishing.
The engines of terror will reach everyone, be it foreign or domestic, and all will come to the U.S. for help. Then criticize us for not coming to their aid fast enough.

Reminder: It is the US that always volunteers people, time, and money to humanitarian efforts all over the world.

I completely agree.

 

[RoyalOrleans]

But I do care what you think.... sniff (lol!)

Why would you care what this old battle axe thinks of you?

And come on now, you know **** well it isn't smart to have so many enemies. People don't forget.

No... it's not good to have enemies all around.

It's even better to have all the right friends. Look at Israel. They are surrounded by hateful, spiteful, envious neighbors, but they have US backed support.

The state of Israel ain't too worried.

Take 9/11 for instance. Why they did it and what we did in retaliation.

A small victory for the envious, wrath filled rabble. Our retribution was swift and terrible, because we did not want to look weak.

 

[ImWithStupid]

A small victory for the envious, wrath filled rabble. Our retribution was swift and terrible, because we did not want to look weak.

My favorite look at how that retribution probably would have gone if a Dem had been President during 9/11.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5onpavKbWSg]YouTube - MadTV 09/11 Bush&Kerry[/ame]

 

[Chi]

Why would you care what this old battle axe thinks of you?

I was being sarcastic

 

[ImWithStupid]

This is interesting...

Obama's Trip Backfires; McCain Surges to 4-Point Lead in USA Today/Gallup Poll
Monday, July 28, 2008 9:35 PM

A surprising poll released Monday confirms Sen. Barack Obama's worst nightmare: he actually lost ground to Sen. John McCain after a global trip meant to buck up his sagging credentials in foreign and military policy.

The USA Today/Gallup poll has McCain leading Obama by four points, 49 percent to Obama's 45 percent, among likely voters.

Just last month, the same poll had McCain trailing by six points to the neophyte U.S. senator.

Among registered voters, McCain was just three points behind Obama -- a statistical dead heat.

Newsmax.com - Obama's Trip Backfires; McCain Surges to 4-Point Lead in USA Today/Gallup Poll

Unfortunately, I feel that no matter who wins, America loses. I just believe one is worse than the other.

 

[ImWithStupid]

This is still funny...

View attachment 2019

 

[RoyalOrleans]

Unfortunately, I feel that no matter who wins, America loses. I just believe one is worse than the other.

I wonder that if Obama were to lose to McCain, especially in a close margin, if he'd cry, scream, kick, whine, *****, and moan like Al Gore?

 

[phreakwars]

This is still funny...
View attachment 2020

Even funnier is the fact that FDR was a Democrat. So you know whatever idiot came up with that picture doesn't know a **** thing about history.

.

.

 

[ImWithStupid]

Even funnier is the fact that FDR was a Democrat. So you know whatever idiot came up with that picture doesn't know a **** thing about history..

.

I was kinda thinking that when I first saw the picture too, but it somewhat went along with the Mad TV vid that posted.

 

[phreakwars]

Republicans trying to paint Democrats as spineless, it's all it is. Here's an interesting factoid... The last Democrat to take the heavily Republican state of Nebraska, was Johnson... who in turn... did what? Sent troops to NAM.

So what do we have, FDR, LBJ, GWB all war Presidents. The only difference, aside from the political partys, is GWB...

LIED

and sent troops in to a false war. And had the audacity to COMPARE his fake war to a war that was needed.

Then, had the nerve to call the people who could see through his BS plot... unpatriotic, and spineless Liberals.

HA !

.

.

 

[eddo]

Even funnier is the fact that FDR was a Democrat. So you know whatever idiot came up with that picture doesn't know a **** thing about history..

.

Bender, can you please explain what you mean?

The pic is obviously satire based on anti-war sentiments nowadays, and the satirical application to the Pearl Harbor attacks.

 

[ImWithStupid]

Republicans trying to paint Democrats as spineless, it's all it is. Here's an interesting factoid... The last Democrat to take the heavily Republican state of Nebraska, was Johnson... who in turn... did what? Sent troops to NAM.
So what do we have, FDR, LBJ, GWB all war Presidents. The only difference, aside from the political partys, is GWB...

LIED

Three words. Gulf of Tonkin.

The particulars of the incidents of early August 1964, as reported by the Johnson administration, were crucial to gaining the legislative authority President Johnson sought, which came in the form of the Tonkin Gulf Resolution. At the time and for some years afterward, the United States government took the position that it had done nothing to provoke a naval engagement in the Tonkin Gulf between North Vietnamese and U.S. warships. The Johnson administration also maintained that it had acted with restraint, refusing to respond to an initial North Vietnamese attack on August 2, 1964, and reacting only after North Vietnam made a second naval attack two nights later. Both of these assertions turned out to be misleading.
In fact the United States at the time was carrying out a program of covert naval commando attacks against North Vietnam and had been engaged in this effort since its approval by Johnson in January 1964.

In fact the United States at the time was carrying out a program of covert naval commando attacks against North Vietnam and had been engaged in this effort since its approval by Johnson in January 1964.

Essay: 40th Anniversary of the Gulf of Tonkin Incident

You know the old saying, "How do you tell when a politician is lying? Their lips are moving"

.

.

.

 

[ImWithStupid]

Bender, can you please explain what you mean?
The pic is obviously satire based on anti-war sentiments nowadays, and the satirical application to the Pearl Harbor attacks.

I think he was saying that since the President was a Dem at the time, the Dems wouldn't be protesting what happened.

Kind of like the majority of the Repubs now.

 

[phreakwars]

Bender, can you please explain what you mean?
The pic is obviously satire based on anti-war sentiments nowadays, and the satirical application to the Pearl Harbor attacks.

Sure, it's trying to insinuate that the 3 Democrats pictured would show no guts when it came to retaliation back then. I say they would. It's trying to make a comparison of the reasoning for war back then to the reasoning of war in this day and age. It fails miserably. Anybody with any historical knowledge on the whole Pearl Harbor situation knows that, "HIPPY LIBERAL" or not, FDR did what he thought needed to be done to secure our best interests.

Granted, in MY honest opinion, FDR was a traitor. He didn't have Amerucka on his side BEFORE Pearl Harbor, had knowledge of the attack that was going to take place, and simply let it happen. Effectively murdering and sacrificing innocent American lives just to gain support for the war..

I find his tactics disgusting, but the end justification outweighed the means.

.

.

 

[ImWithStupid]

Sure, it's trying to insinuate that the 3 Democrats pictured would show no guts when it came to retaliation back then. I say they would. It's trying to make a comparison of the reasoning for war back then to the reasoning of war in this day and age. It fails miserably. Anybody with any historical knowledge on the whole Pearl Harbor situation knows that, "HIPPY LIBERAL" or not, FDR did what he thought needed to be done to secure our best interests.
Granted, in MY honest opinion, FDR was a traitor. He didn't have Amerucka on his side BEFORE Pearl Harbor, had knowledge of the attack that was going to take place, and simply let it happen. Effectively murdering and sacrificing innocent American lives just to gain support for the war..

I find his tactics disgusting, but the end justification outweighed the means.

.

.

and used it as a means to get what he really wanted, which was a reason to go to war with Germany.

 

[phreakwars]

Three words. Gulf of Tonkin.


Essay: 40th Anniversary of the Gulf of Tonkin Incident

You know the old saying, "How do you tell when a politician is lying? Their lips are moving"

.

.

.

And as a result, what happened? People who were opposed to the war, who demonstrated against it, who hated the government for it, all labeled "UNPATRIOTIC HIPPY LIBERAL WIMPS"

 

[phreakwars]

and used it as a means to get what he really wanted, which was a reason to go to war with Germany.

And by that time, it had become clear, that the war was needed, support for it actually GREW.. no potesters there to say any different. Although, I'm pretty sure if there were protesters, they would have been called "UNPATRIOTIC LIBERALS" as well.... or possibly COMMIES..

.

 

[ImWithStupid]

And as a result, what happened? People who were opposed to the war, who demonstrated against it, who hated the government for it, all labeled "UNPATRIOTIC HIPPY LIBERAL WIMPS"

I was just saying that all three of the war Presidents that you named, manipulated the situation to go to war. It's too bad that this type of historical atrocity keeps happening.