Tappy Toes Larry Craig Behaving Like a Democrat is the perfect argument for term limits

M

MioMyo

Guest
Now this Craig idiot, guilty or not, did plead guilty, yet the point being
he is a fine example and excellent argument why term limits are so
desperately needed to clean house in Washington. Further, it's not whether
or not Craig is gay- no one cares, nor it's not that his seat will change
parties- this is unlikely. What it is, this fool has been in Washington so
long, he wants to argue what "WAS" should have been- something he should
have thought of when accepting his guilty status. In reality, Craig's lust
to remain in power is his overwhelming concern, not his word, nor not that
he's changed his word on this topic many times over- thereby Clintonized
himself. And now Craig is both an embarrassment to himself -his family too
and also to the institutions of congress.

As if Larry Craig isn't a great example why term limits time has come, I
believe if the majority of congress were exposed, there'd be overwhelming
similar examples why this country would be better off if these decision
makers were essentially a product of American society, not American society
a product of career politicians. Just look at teddy Chappiquiddick kennedy
as another fine example what career politicians morph into!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/uc/20071005/cm_uc_crsesx/op_394013

He didn't even flush the toilet.

When he exited the bathroom stall, Senator Larry Craig never flushed the
toilet. As my kids would say when they were little, that certainly suggests
he didn't have to go.

So what was he doing peering into someone else's stall for long enough that
the officer was able to see he had blue eyes? Why did he wait for the
adjoining stall to be empty when there were plenty of others available? What
was he doing tapping his foot and waving his hand underneath the divider
between the stalls? Certainly not going to the bathroom.

Larry Craig must think the people of Idaho are fools. He certainly has no
problem lying to them, and the rest of us. Maybe it's all those years in
Congress that have left him thinking he can get away with anything he wants.

After the media - Roll Call in particular - disclosed that Craig had pleaded
guilty to cruising for sex in a men's room at the Minneapolis airport, the
distinguished gentleman from Idaho announced he would resign as of September
30.

Then he changed his mind and said he was going to try to withdraw his guilty
plea and would hold off on resigning until the judge reached a decision on
that issue.

On Thursday, the judge reached a decision. To the surprise of no one who
knows anything about criminal law, Judge Porter of the Minneapolis Superior
Court concluded there was absolutely no basis for Senator Craig to withdraw
his plea, no new evidence of anything, no showing that he'd been coerced by
the prosecutors or police to plead guilty, nothing approaching the proof of
a "manifest injustice" that would allow the plea to be withdrawn.

So now Craig has changed his mind again. Now, he's decided that even though
he lost in court and has as much chance of winning on appeal as I do of
winning the lottery (I don't even buy tickets) he's going to serve out his
term for the good of the people of Idaho.

Liar, liar, pants on fire.

The best thing he could do for the people of Idaho, and the rest of us, is
spare us the embarrassment of what's to come next. Just what we need is an
ethics hearing on the mechanics of bathroom pickups.
 
On Sat, 6 Oct 2007 05:41:27 -0700, "MioMyo"
<USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote:

>Now this Craig idiot, guilty or not, did plead guilty, yet the point being
>he is a fine example and excellent argument why term limits are so
>desperately needed to clean house in Washington


What the **** is wrong with you.

Why any thinking person believes that replacing one
politician with another politician solves anything is
mind-boggling.

The purpose of having a "politician" in the first
place---is to DO "political things"----among which is
represent a constituency.

Why in **** would you send "another green politician"
to try and leverage YOUR intrests in a system that
cannot be altered to any degree?

You're really describing an irrational argument that
wants YOUR politician to be "okay"----but get rid of
ALL those politicians YOU don't agree with-----IOW
"someone else's"
 
MioMyo wrote:
> Now this Craig idiot, guilty or not, did plead guilty, yet the point being
> he is a fine example and excellent argument why term limits are so
> desperately needed to clean house in Washington. Further, it's not whether
> or not Craig is gay- no one cares, nor it's not that his seat will change
> parties- this is unlikely. What it is, this fool has been in Washington so
> long, he wants to argue what "WAS" should have been- something he should
> have thought of when accepting his guilty status.

Actually, Zippy the Clown, it's the hypocrisy of an anti-gay stance
by a man who smokes ****. Do try and keep up... <laughing>

Miles "Grasp of the Obvious" Long


> In reality, Craig's lust
> to remain in power is his overwhelming concern, not his word, nor not that
> he's changed his word on this topic many times over- thereby Clintonized
> himself. And now Craig is both an embarrassment to himself -his family too
> and also to the institutions of congress.
>
> As if Larry Craig isn't a great example why term limits time has come, I
> believe if the majority of congress were exposed, there'd be overwhelming
> similar examples why this country would be better off if these decision
> makers were essentially a product of American society, not American society
> a product of career politicians. Just look at teddy Chappiquiddick kennedy
> as another fine example what career politicians morph into!
>
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/uc/20071005/cm_uc_crsesx/op_394013
>
> He didn't even flush the toilet.
>
> When he exited the bathroom stall, Senator Larry Craig never flushed the
> toilet. As my kids would say when they were little, that certainly suggests
> he didn't have to go.
>
> So what was he doing peering into someone else's stall for long enough that
> the officer was able to see he had blue eyes? Why did he wait for the
> adjoining stall to be empty when there were plenty of others available? What
> was he doing tapping his foot and waving his hand underneath the divider
> between the stalls? Certainly not going to the bathroom.
>
> Larry Craig must think the people of Idaho are fools. He certainly has no
> problem lying to them, and the rest of us. Maybe it's all those years in
> Congress that have left him thinking he can get away with anything he wants.
>
> After the media - Roll Call in particular - disclosed that Craig had pleaded
> guilty to cruising for sex in a men's room at the Minneapolis airport, the
> distinguished gentleman from Idaho announced he would resign as of September
> 30.
>
> Then he changed his mind and said he was going to try to withdraw his guilty
> plea and would hold off on resigning until the judge reached a decision on
> that issue.
>
> On Thursday, the judge reached a decision. To the surprise of no one who
> knows anything about criminal law, Judge Porter of the Minneapolis Superior
> Court concluded there was absolutely no basis for Senator Craig to withdraw
> his plea, no new evidence of anything, no showing that he'd been coerced by
> the prosecutors or police to plead guilty, nothing approaching the proof of
> a "manifest injustice" that would allow the plea to be withdrawn.
>
> So now Craig has changed his mind again. Now, he's decided that even though
> he lost in court and has as much chance of winning on appeal as I do of
> winning the lottery (I don't even buy tickets) he's going to serve out his
> term for the good of the people of Idaho.
>
> Liar, liar, pants on fire.
>
> The best thing he could do for the people of Idaho, and the rest of us, is
> spare us the embarrassment of what's to come next. Just what we need is an
> ethics hearing on the mechanics of bathroom pickups.
>
>
>
>
 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/uc/20071005/cm_uc_crsesx/op_394013

He didn't even flush the toilet.

When he exited the bathroom stall, Senator Larry Craig never flushed the
toilet. As my kids would say when they were little, that certainly suggests
he didn't have to go.

So what was he doing peering into someone else's stall for long enough that
the officer was able to see he had blue eyes? Why did he wait for the
adjoining stall to be empty when there were plenty of others available? What
was he doing tapping his foot and waving his hand underneath the divider
between the stalls? Certainly not going to the bathroom.

Larry Craig must think the people of Idaho are fools. He certainly has no
problem lying to them, and the rest of us. Maybe it's all those years in
Congress that have left him thinking he can get away with anything he wants.

After the media - Roll Call in particular - disclosed that Craig had pleaded
guilty to cruising for sex in a men's room at the Minneapolis airport, the
distinguished gentleman from Idaho announced he would resign as of September
30.

Then he changed his mind and said he was going to try to withdraw his guilty
plea and would hold off on resigning until the judge reached a decision on
that issue.

On Thursday, the judge reached a decision. To the surprise of no one who
knows anything about criminal law, Judge Porter of the Minneapolis Superior
Court concluded there was absolutely no basis for Senator Craig to withdraw
his plea, no new evidence of anything, no showing that he'd been coerced by
the prosecutors or police to plead guilty, nothing approaching the proof of
a "manifest injustice" that would allow the plea to be withdrawn.

So now Craig has changed his mind again. Now, he's decided that even though
he lost in court and has as much chance of winning on appeal as I do of
winning the lottery (I don't even buy tickets) he's going to serve out his
term for the good of the people of Idaho.

Liar, liar, pants on fire.

The best thing he could do for the people of Idaho, and the rest of us, is
spare us the embarrassment of what's to come next. Just what we need is an
ethics hearing on the mechanics of bathroom pickups.


<Click@Knicklas.com> wrote in message
news:vi3fg35sug419dqt9ehb2phhjm28qf41pp@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 6 Oct 2007 05:41:27 -0700, "MioMyo"
> <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote:
>
>>Now this Craig idiot, guilty or not, did plead guilty, yet the point being
>>he is a fine example and excellent argument why term limits are so
>>desperately needed to clean house in Washington
>
>
> What the **** is wrong with you.
>
> Why any thinking person believes that replacing one
> politician with another politician solves anything is
> mind-boggling.

I don't expect someone like you knickers to understand what it is to stand
by your word, just as you have demonstrated time & again you don't
understand the meaning of noble concepts like "honor," "dignity," and
"integrity."

> The purpose of having a "politician" in the first
> place---is to DO "political things"----among which is
> represent a constituency.
>
> Why in **** would you send "another green politician"
> to try and leverage YOUR intrests in a system that
> cannot be altered to any degree?
>
> You're really describing an irrational argument that
> wants YOUR politician to be "okay"----but get rid of
> ALL those politicians YOU don't agree with-----IOW
> "someone else's"
>

Thanks for explaining the liberal platform which is, "LIE," "CHEAT" and/or
do the political thing because "The Ends Justify The Means"!
 
On Oct 6, 6:41 am, "MioMyo" <USA_Patr...@Somewhere.com> wrote:
> Now this Craig idiot, guilty or not, did plead guilty, yet the point being
> he is a fine example and excellent argument why term limits are so
> desperately needed to clean house in Washington. Further, it's not whether
> or not Craig is gay- no one cares,

Wrong. You care. That is why you are writing this nonsense.

Tartarus
 
"Miles Long" <Miles@Home.net> wrote in message
news:eek:_qdnS8tL4EcDpranZ2dnUVZ_vbinZ2d@giganews.com...
> MioMyo wrote:
>> Now this Craig idiot, guilty or not, did plead guilty, yet the point
>> being he is a fine example and excellent argument why term limits are so
>> desperately needed to clean house in Washington. Further, it's not
>> whether or not Craig is gay- no one cares, nor it's not that his seat
>> will change parties- this is unlikely. What it is, this fool has been in
>> Washington so long, he wants to argue what "WAS" should have been-
>> something he should have thought of when accepting his guilty status.
>
> Actually, Zippy the Clown, it's the hypocrisy of an anti-gay stance
> by a man who smokes ****. Do try and keep up... <laughing>
>
> Miles "Grasp of the Obvious" Long

So according to your logic, all dems are out of the closet eh? or they don't
have any dirty little secrets like $90,000 of illegal campaign cash in the
freezer (but one example) they're hiding?

Do go on telling us, though, how sanctimoniously clean you think your
politicians are Wrong, while I'll continue arguing politicians should do the
right thing and pass term limits in order to inject a bit of reality into
our failing political system!


> > In reality, Craig's lust
>> to remain in power is his overwhelming concern, not his word, nor not
>> that he's changed his word on this topic many times over- thereby
>> Clintonized himself. And now Craig is both an embarrassment to
>> himself -his family too and also to the institutions of congress.
>>
>> As if Larry Craig isn't a great example why term limits time has come, I
>> believe if the majority of congress were exposed, there'd be overwhelming
>> similar examples why this country would be better off if these decision
>> makers were essentially a product of American society, not American
>> society a product of career politicians. Just look at teddy
>> Chappiquiddick kennedy as another fine example what career politicians
>> morph into!
>>
>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/uc/20071005/cm_uc_crsesx/op_394013
>>
>> He didn't even flush the toilet.
>>
>> When he exited the bathroom stall, Senator Larry Craig never flushed the
>> toilet. As my kids would say when they were little, that certainly
>> suggests he didn't have to go.
>>
>> So what was he doing peering into someone else's stall for long enough
>> that the officer was able to see he had blue eyes? Why did he wait for
>> the adjoining stall to be empty when there were plenty of others
>> available? What was he doing tapping his foot and waving his hand
>> underneath the divider between the stalls? Certainly not going to the
>> bathroom.
>>
>> Larry Craig must think the people of Idaho are fools. He certainly has no
>> problem lying to them, and the rest of us. Maybe it's all those years in
>> Congress that have left him thinking he can get away with anything he
>> wants.
>>
>> After the media - Roll Call in particular - disclosed that Craig had
>> pleaded guilty to cruising for sex in a men's room at the Minneapolis
>> airport, the distinguished gentleman from Idaho announced he would resign
>> as of September 30.
>>
>> Then he changed his mind and said he was going to try to withdraw his
>> guilty plea and would hold off on resigning until the judge reached a
>> decision on that issue.
>>
>> On Thursday, the judge reached a decision. To the surprise of no one who
>> knows anything about criminal law, Judge Porter of the Minneapolis
>> Superior Court concluded there was absolutely no basis for Senator Craig
>> to withdraw his plea, no new evidence of anything, no showing that he'd
>> been coerced by the prosecutors or police to plead guilty, nothing
>> approaching the proof of a "manifest injustice" that would allow the plea
>> to be withdrawn.
>>
>> So now Craig has changed his mind again. Now, he's decided that even
>> though he lost in court and has as much chance of winning on appeal as I
>> do of winning the lottery (I don't even buy tickets) he's going to serve
>> out his term for the good of the people of Idaho.
>>
>> Liar, liar, pants on fire.
>>
>> The best thing he could do for the people of Idaho, and the rest of us,
>> is spare us the embarrassment of what's to come next. Just what we need
>> is an ethics hearing on the mechanics of bathroom pickups.
>>
>>
>>
 
On Oct 6, 5:41 am, "MioMyo" <USA_Patr...@Somewhere.com> wrote:
> Tappy Toes Larry Craig

Aren't you proud of your republican icons?
(even though you appear to be some canuckian loon)

Get out there and thank your idol properly.
 
"MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:WnLNi.416$LD2.315@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
> Now this Craig idiot, guilty or not, did plead guilty, yet the point being
> he is a fine example and excellent argument why term limits are so
> desperately needed to clean house in Washington.

Nonsense. First, Craig has already announced he's not running for
re-election. And if that turns out to be a lie too he'll be taken out in
the primary or the general election.

Term limits are a terrible idea foisted by Repubic wingnuts when they don't
think they can win elections any way else. The real term limit is in the
voting booth. America had no trouble limiting the term of the
Republic-controlled Congress last election, and we'll clip their wings even
more next year, now that it's likely we'll pick up seats in Virginia,
Nebraska and now New Mexico.
 
"Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kimmel@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:TO6dnQR9mf32W5ranZ2dnUVZ_vvinZ2d@rcn.net...
>
> "MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
> news:WnLNi.416$LD2.315@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
>> Now this Craig idiot, guilty or not, did plead guilty, yet the point
>> being
>> he is a fine example and excellent argument why term limits are so
>> desperately needed to clean house in Washington.
>
> Nonsense. First, Craig has already announced he's not running for
> re-election.

But he's pulling a clinton or another typical democrat bait and switch you
dumb-ass. Plus, I don't believe he's up for election next year.

> And if that turns out to be a lie too he'll be taken out in
> the primary or the general election.
>
> Term limits are a terrible idea foisted by Repubic wingnuts when they
> don't
> think they can win elections any way else.

That's an opinion which may not be held by a majority of Americans and
should be brought up by referendum since career politicians will only
continue sucking off the government tit while dishing out favors to their
constituents to keep them in power!

Plus, if it's good enough for the president (not required by the original
framers, but later passed), then the same arguments can be applied to the
congress too.

> The real term limit is in the
> voting booth. America had no trouble limiting the term of the
> Republic-controlled Congress last election, and we'll clip their wings
> even
> more next year, now that it's likely we'll pick up seats in Virginia,
> Nebraska and now New Mexico.
>
>
 
"MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:_PPNi.6868$6p6.4303@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
>
> "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kimmel@rcn.com> wrote in message
> news:TO6dnQR9mf32W5ranZ2dnUVZ_vvinZ2d@rcn.net...
> >
> > "MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
> > news:WnLNi.416$LD2.315@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
> >> Now this Craig idiot, guilty or not, did plead guilty, yet the point
> >> being
> >> he is a fine example and excellent argument why term limits are so
> >> desperately needed to clean house in Washington.
> >
> > Nonsense. First, Craig has already announced he's not running for
> > re-election.
>
> But he's pulling a clinton or another typical democrat bait and switch you
> dumb-ass.

No, moron, he's pulling a Bush: lie until the lie become untentable, then
igorne it and come up with a new lie.

> Plus, I don't believe he's up for election next year.

As with most things you "believe," you're wrong. His, you should excuse the
expression, seat is up for grabs next year.


>
> > And if that turns out to be a lie too he'll be taken out in
> > the primary or the general election.
> >
> > Term limits are a terrible idea foisted by Repubic wingnuts when they
> > don't
> > think they can win elections any way else.
>
> That's an opinion which may not be held by a majority of Americans and
> should be brought up by referendum since career politicians will only
> continue sucking off the government tit while dishing out favors to their
> constituents to keep them in power!

You're a Republic wingnut all right. You learn nothing from history.
Presidential term limits were foisted on us by the Republics after FDR won
four elections. So who was the first president it affected? Eisenhower.
Reagan might have won a third term as well (unless the Alzheimer's already
affecting him in the White House became public). So all you're doing is
peventing people from exercising their free choice because YOU don't like
their choices. Notice how term limits was a Republic cry until1994, then
disappeared. Now that it looks like the Republics have screwed themselves
(as they screwed America) for years to come, suddenly up pops the Republc
wingnuts bleating about "term limits."


> Plus, if it's good enough for the president (not required by the original
> framers, but later passed), then the same arguments can be applied to the
> congress too.

Good point. Let's repeal presidential term limits, a bad idea that never
should have been enacted. Then we can re-elect Bill Clinton, who would win
in a cakewalk.



> > The real term limit is in the
> > voting booth. America had no trouble limiting the term of the
> > Republic-controlled Congress last election, and we'll clip their wings
> > even
> > more next year, now that it's likely we'll pick up seats in Virginia,
> > Nebraska and now New Mexico.

Why do you hate Americans so much that you don't trust them in the voting
booth? One way or another, Republic wingnuts prefer rigged elections.
 
"Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kimmel@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:QNGdnQdhj_JER5ranZ2dnUVZ_hzinZ2d@rcn.net...
>
> "MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
> news:_PPNi.6868$6p6.4303@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
>>
>> "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kimmel@rcn.com> wrote in message
>> news:TO6dnQR9mf32W5ranZ2dnUVZ_vvinZ2d@rcn.net...
>> >
>> > "MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
>> > news:WnLNi.416$LD2.315@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
>> >> Now this Craig idiot, guilty or not, did plead guilty, yet the point
>> >> being
>> >> he is a fine example and excellent argument why term limits are so
>> >> desperately needed to clean house in Washington.
>> >
>> > Nonsense. First, Craig has already announced he's not running for
>> > re-election.
>>
>> But he's pulling a clinton or another typical democrat bait and switch
>> you
>> dumb-ass.
>
> No, moron, he's pulling a Bush: lie until the lie become untentable, then
> igorne it and come up with a new lie.

Your partisan, hate-contrived opinion is duly noted you idiot.

>> Plus, I don't believe he's up for election next year.
>
> As with most things you "believe," you're wrong. His, you should excuse
> the
> expression, seat is up for grabs next year.

Bring it. Idaho is as patriotically red as it gets!


>> > And if that turns out to be a lie too he'll be taken out in
>> > the primary or the general election.
>> >
>> > Term limits are a terrible idea foisted by Repubic wingnuts when they
>> > don't
>> > think they can win elections any way else.
>>
>> That's an opinion which may not be held by a majority of Americans and
>> should be brought up by referendum since career politicians will only
>> continue sucking off the government tit while dishing out favors to their
>> constituents to keep them in power!
>
> You're a Republic wingnut all right. You learn nothing from history.
> Presidential term limits were foisted on us by the Republics after FDR won
> four elections. So who was the first president it affected? Eisenhower.
> Reagan might have won a third term as well (unless the Alzheimer's already
> affecting him in the White House became public). So all you're doing is
> peventing people from exercising their free choice because YOU don't like
> their choices. Notice how term limits was a Republic cry until1994, then
> disappeared. Now that it looks like the Republics have screwed themselves
> (as they screwed America) for years to come, suddenly up pops the Republc
> wingnuts bleating about "term limits."
>
>
>> Plus, if it's good enough for the president (not required by the original
>> framers, but later passed), then the same arguments can be applied to the
>> congress too.
>
> Good point. Let's repeal presidential term limits, a bad idea that never
> should have been enacted. Then we can re-elect Bill Clinton, who would
> win
> in a cakewalk.
>
>
>
>> > The real term limit is in the
>> > voting booth. America had no trouble limiting the term of the
>> > Republic-controlled Congress last election, and we'll clip their wings
>> > even
>> > more next year, now that it's likely we'll pick up seats in Virginia,
>> > Nebraska and now New Mexico.
>
> Why do you hate Americans so much that you don't trust them in the voting
> booth? One way or another, Republic wingnuts prefer rigged elections.
>
>
>
>
 
"MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:LBSNi.884$R95.801@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
>
> "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kimmel@rcn.com> wrote in message
> news:QNGdnQdhj_JER5ranZ2dnUVZ_hzinZ2d@rcn.net...
> >
> > "MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
> > news:_PPNi.6868$6p6.4303@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
> >>
> >> "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kimmel@rcn.com> wrote in message
> >> news:TO6dnQR9mf32W5ranZ2dnUVZ_vvinZ2d@rcn.net...
> >> >
> >> > "MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:WnLNi.416$LD2.315@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
> >> >> Now this Craig idiot, guilty or not, did plead guilty, yet the point
> >> >> being
> >> >> he is a fine example and excellent argument why term limits are so
> >> >> desperately needed to clean house in Washington.
> >> >
> >> > Nonsense. First, Craig has already announced he's not running for
> >> > re-election.
> >>
> >> But he's pulling a clinton or another typical democrat bait and switch
> >> you
> >> dumb-ass.
> >
> > No, moron, he's pulling a Bush: lie until the lie become untentable,
then
> > igorne it and come up with a new lie.
>
> Your partisan, hate-contrived opinion is duly noted you idiot.


Your partisan, hate-contrived opinion is duly noted you idiot.


>
> >> Plus, I don't believe he's up for election next year.
> >
> > As with most things you "believe," you're wrong. His, you should excuse
> > the
> > expression, seat is up for grabs next year.
>
> Bring it. Idaho is as patriotically red as it gets!

Thanks for conceding that Virginia, New Mexico and Nebraska will vote
American rather than for continuing the failures of the Republic Party.

Who knows, if patriots in Idaho REALLY comes out and vote, maybe the
Republic candidate will be defeated there as well.


>
>
> >> > And if that turns out to be a lie too he'll be taken out in
> >> > the primary or the general election.
> >> >
> >> > Term limits are a terrible idea foisted by Repubic wingnuts when they
> >> > don't
> >> > think they can win elections any way else.
> >>
> >> That's an opinion which may not be held by a majority of Americans and
> >> should be brought up by referendum since career politicians will only
> >> continue sucking off the government tit while dishing out favors to
their
> >> constituents to keep them in power!
> >
> > You're a Republic wingnut all right. You learn nothing from history.
> > Presidential term limits were foisted on us by the Republics after FDR
won
> > four elections. So who was the first president it affected?
Eisenhower.
> > Reagan might have won a third term as well (unless the Alzheimer's
already
> > affecting him in the White House became public). So all you're doing is
> > peventing people from exercising their free choice because YOU don't
like
> > their choices. Notice how term limits was a Republic cry until1994,
then
> > disappeared. Now that it looks like the Republics have screwed
themselves
> > (as they screwed America) for years to come, suddenly up pops the
Republc
> > wingnuts bleating about "term limits."
> >
> >
> >> Plus, if it's good enough for the president (not required by the
original
> >> framers, but later passed), then the same arguments can be applied to
the
> >> congress too.
> >
> > Good point. Let's repeal presidential term limits, a bad idea that
never
> > should have been enacted. Then we can re-elect Bill Clinton, who would
> > win
> > in a cakewalk.
> >
> >
> >
> >> > The real term limit is in the
> >> > voting booth. America had no trouble limiting the term of the
> >> > Republic-controlled Congress last election, and we'll clip their
wings
> >> > even
> >> > more next year, now that it's likely we'll pick up seats in Virginia,
> >> > Nebraska and now New Mexico.
> >
> > Why do you hate Americans so much that you don't trust them in the
voting
> > booth? One way or another, Republic wingnuts prefer rigged elections.
> >


I accept your concession (by your non-response) that Republic wingnuts
prefer rigged elections.
 
MioMyo wrote:
> "Miles Long" <Miles@Home.net> wrote in message
> news:eek:_qdnS8tL4EcDpranZ2dnUVZ_vbinZ2d@giganews.com...
>> MioMyo wrote:
>>> Now this Craig idiot, guilty or not, did plead guilty, yet the point
>>> being he is a fine example and excellent argument why term limits are so
>>> desperately needed to clean house in Washington. Further, it's not
>>> whether or not Craig is gay- no one cares, nor it's not that his seat
>>> will change parties- this is unlikely. What it is, this fool has been in
>>> Washington so long, he wants to argue what "WAS" should have been-
>>> something he should have thought of when accepting his guilty status.
>> Actually, Zippy the Clown, it's the hypocrisy of an anti-gay stance
>> by a man who smokes ****. Do try and keep up... <laughing>
>>
>> Miles "Grasp of the Obvious" Long
>
> So according to your logic, all dems are out of the closet eh? or they don't
> have any dirty little secrets like $90,000 of illegal campaign cash in the
> freezer (but one example) they're hiding?
>
> Do go on telling us, though, how sanctimoniously clean you think your
> politicians are Wrong, while I'll continue arguing politicians should do the
> right thing and pass term limits in order to inject a bit of reality into
> our failing political system!
>

What are you, six years old? <laughing> Although, even six year olds
display better reading skills and retention than pitiful you...

Miles "Again, Over His/Her Head" Long


>
>>> In reality, Craig's lust
>>> to remain in power is his overwhelming concern, not his word, nor not
>>> that he's changed his word on this topic many times over- thereby
>>> Clintonized himself. And now Craig is both an embarrassment to
>>> himself -his family too and also to the institutions of congress.
>>>
>>> As if Larry Craig isn't a great example why term limits time has come, I
>>> believe if the majority of congress were exposed, there'd be overwhelming
>>> similar examples why this country would be better off if these decision
>>> makers were essentially a product of American society, not American
>>> society a product of career politicians. Just look at teddy
>>> Chappiquiddick kennedy as another fine example what career politicians
>>> morph into!
>>>
>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/uc/20071005/cm_uc_crsesx/op_394013
>>>
>>> He didn't even flush the toilet.
>>>
>>> When he exited the bathroom stall, Senator Larry Craig never flushed the
>>> toilet. As my kids would say when they were little, that certainly
>>> suggests he didn't have to go.
>>>
>>> So what was he doing peering into someone else's stall for long enough
>>> that the officer was able to see he had blue eyes? Why did he wait for
>>> the adjoining stall to be empty when there were plenty of others
>>> available? What was he doing tapping his foot and waving his hand
>>> underneath the divider between the stalls? Certainly not going to the
>>> bathroom.
>>>
>>> Larry Craig must think the people of Idaho are fools. He certainly has no
>>> problem lying to them, and the rest of us. Maybe it's all those years in
>>> Congress that have left him thinking he can get away with anything he
>>> wants.
>>>
>>> After the media - Roll Call in particular - disclosed that Craig had
>>> pleaded guilty to cruising for sex in a men's room at the Minneapolis
>>> airport, the distinguished gentleman from Idaho announced he would resign
>>> as of September 30.
>>>
>>> Then he changed his mind and said he was going to try to withdraw his
>>> guilty plea and would hold off on resigning until the judge reached a
>>> decision on that issue.
>>>
>>> On Thursday, the judge reached a decision. To the surprise of no one who
>>> knows anything about criminal law, Judge Porter of the Minneapolis
>>> Superior Court concluded there was absolutely no basis for Senator Craig
>>> to withdraw his plea, no new evidence of anything, no showing that he'd
>>> been coerced by the prosecutors or police to plead guilty, nothing
>>> approaching the proof of a "manifest injustice" that would allow the plea
>>> to be withdrawn.
>>>
>>> So now Craig has changed his mind again. Now, he's decided that even
>>> though he lost in court and has as much chance of winning on appeal as I
>>> do of winning the lottery (I don't even buy tickets) he's going to serve
>>> out his term for the good of the people of Idaho.
>>>
>>> Liar, liar, pants on fire.
>>>
>>> The best thing he could do for the people of Idaho, and the rest of us,
>>> is spare us the embarrassment of what's to come next. Just what we need
>>> is an ethics hearing on the mechanics of bathroom pickups.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
 
"Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kimmel@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:TJGdndgm18E5iZXanZ2dnUVZ_gOdnZ2d@rcn.net...
>
> "MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
> news:LBSNi.884$R95.801@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>
>> "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kimmel@rcn.com> wrote in message
>> news:QNGdnQdhj_JER5ranZ2dnUVZ_hzinZ2d@rcn.net...
>> >
>> > "MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
>> > news:_PPNi.6868$6p6.4303@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
>> >>
>> >> "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kimmel@rcn.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:TO6dnQR9mf32W5ranZ2dnUVZ_vvinZ2d@rcn.net...
>> >> >
>> >> > "MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
>> >> > news:WnLNi.416$LD2.315@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
>> >> >> Now this Craig idiot, guilty or not, did plead guilty, yet the
>> >> >> point
>> >> >> being
>> >> >> he is a fine example and excellent argument why term limits are so
>> >> >> desperately needed to clean house in Washington.
>> >> >
>> >> > Nonsense. First, Craig has already announced he's not running for
>> >> > re-election.
>> >>
>> >> But he's pulling a clinton or another typical democrat bait and switch
>> >> you
>> >> dumb-ass.
>> >
>> > No, moron, he's pulling a Bush: lie until the lie become untentable,
> then
>> > igorne it and come up with a new lie.
>>
>> Your partisan, hate-contrived opinion is duly noted you idiot.
>
>
> Your partisan, hate-contrived opinion is duly noted you idiot.
>
>
>>
>> >> Plus, I don't believe he's up for election next year.
>> >
>> > As with most things you "believe," you're wrong. His, you should
>> > excuse
>> > the
>> > expression, seat is up for grabs next year.
>>
>> Bring it. Idaho is as patriotically red as it gets!
>
> Thanks for conceding that Virginia, New Mexico and Nebraska will vote

Where did I concede anything bitch? Answer: didn't and you know it which
makes you a scum liar,

> Who knows, if patriots in Idaho REALLY comes out and vote, maybe the
> Republic candidate will be defeated there as well.

So according to kimmey if they don't vote democrat, the election must have
been stolen!

Come on bitch let's have it on the record right now.

>> >> > And if that turns out to be a lie too he'll be taken out in
>> >> > the primary or the general election.
>> >> >
>> >> > Term limits are a terrible idea foisted by Repubic wingnuts when
>> >> > they
>> >> > don't
>> >> > think they can win elections any way else.
>> >>
>> >> That's an opinion which may not be held by a majority of Americans and
>> >> should be brought up by referendum since career politicians will only
>> >> continue sucking off the government tit while dishing out favors to
> their
>> >> constituents to keep them in power!
>> >
>> > You're a Republic wingnut all right. You learn nothing from history.
>> > Presidential term limits were foisted on us by the Republics after FDR
> won
>> > four elections. So who was the first president it affected?
> Eisenhower.
>> > Reagan might have won a third term as well (unless the Alzheimer's
> already
>> > affecting him in the White House became public). So all you're doing
>> > is
>> > peventing people from exercising their free choice because YOU don't
> like
>> > their choices. Notice how term limits was a Republic cry until1994,
> then
>> > disappeared. Now that it looks like the Republics have screwed
> themselves
>> > (as they screwed America) for years to come, suddenly up pops the
> Republc
>> > wingnuts bleating about "term limits."
>> >
>> >
>> >> Plus, if it's good enough for the president (not required by the
> original
>> >> framers, but later passed), then the same arguments can be applied to
> the
>> >> congress too.
>> >
>> > Good point. Let's repeal presidential term limits, a bad idea that
> never
>> > should have been enacted. Then we can re-elect Bill Clinton, who would
>> > win
>> > in a cakewalk.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> > The real term limit is in the
>> >> > voting booth. America had no trouble limiting the term of the
>> >> > Republic-controlled Congress last election, and we'll clip their
> wings
>> >> > even
>> >> > more next year, now that it's likely we'll pick up seats in
>> >> > Virginia,
>> >> > Nebraska and now New Mexico.
>> >
>> > Why do you hate Americans so much that you don't trust them in the
> voting
>> > booth? One way or another, Republic wingnuts prefer rigged elections.
>> >
>
>
> I accept your concession (by your non-response) that Republic wingnuts
> prefer rigged elections.

Wrong, democrat have made crooked elections an art form.
 
On Oct 6, 4:54 pm, "MioMyo" <USA_Patr...@Somewhere.com> wrote:
> "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kim...@rcn.com> wrote in message
>
> news:QNGdnQdhj_JER5ranZ2dnUVZ_hzinZ2d@rcn.net...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "MioMyo" <USA_Patr...@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
> >news:_PPNi.6868$6p6.4303@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
>
> >> "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kim...@rcn.com> wrote in message
> >>news:TO6dnQR9mf32W5ranZ2dnUVZ_vvinZ2d@rcn.net...
>
> >> > "MioMyo" <USA_Patr...@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:WnLNi.416$LD2.315@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
> >> >> Now this Craig idiot, guilty or not, did plead guilty, yet the point
> >> >> being
> >> >> he is a fine example and excellent argument why term limits are so
> >> >> desperately needed to clean house in Washington.
>
> >> > Nonsense. First, Craig has already announced he's not running for
> >> > re-election.
>
> >> But he's pulling a clinton or another typical democrat bait and switch
> >> you
> >> dumb-ass.
>
> > No, moron, he's pulling a Bush: lie until the lie become untentable, then
> > igorne it and come up with a new lie.
>
> Your partisan, hate-contrived opinion is duly noted you idiot.
>
> >> Plus, I don't believe he's up for election next year.
>
> > As with most things you "believe," you're wrong. His, you should excuse
> > the
> > expression, seat is up for grabs next year.

= Bring it. Idaho is as patriotically red as it gets!

yeah and so is Larry the Fairy Craig's sore throat from all those blow
jobs!


> >> > And if that turns out to be a lie too he'll be taken out in
> >> > the primary or the general election.
>
> >> > Term limits are a terrible idea foisted by Repubic wingnuts when they
> >> > don't
> >> > think they can win elections any way else.
>
> >> That's an opinion which may not be held by a majority of Americans and
> >> should be brought up by referendum since career politicians will only
> >> continue sucking off the government tit while dishing out favors to their
> >> constituents to keep them in power!
>
> > You're a Republic wingnut all right. You learn nothing from history.
> > Presidential term limits were foisted on us by the Republics after FDR won
> > four elections. So who was the first president it affected? Eisenhower.
> > Reagan might have won a third term as well (unless the Alzheimer's already
> > affecting him in the White House became public). So all you're doing is
> > peventing people from exercising their free choice because YOU don't like
> > their choices. Notice how term limits was a Republic cry until1994, then
> > disappeared. Now that it looks like the Republics have screwed themselves
> > (as they screwed America) for years to come, suddenly up pops the Republc
> > wingnuts bleating about "term limits."
>
> >> Plus, if it's good enough for the president (not required by the original
> >> framers, but later passed), then the same arguments can be applied to the
> >> congress too.
>
> > Good point. Let's repeal presidential term limits, a bad idea that never
> > should have been enacted. Then we can re-elect Bill Clinton, who would
> > win
> > in a cakewalk.
>
> >> > The real term limit is in the
> >> > voting booth. America had no trouble limiting the term of the
> >> > Republic-controlled Congress last election, and we'll clip their wings
> >> > even
> >> > more next year, now that it's likely we'll pick up seats in Virginia,
> >> > Nebraska and now New Mexico.
>
> > Why do you hate Americans so much that you don't trust them in the voting
> > booth? One way or another, Republic wingnuts prefer rigged elections.
 
On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 14:01:55 GMT, "MioMyo"
<USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote:

>> What the **** is wrong with you.
>>
>> Why any thinking person believes that replacing one
>> politician with another politician solves anything is
>> mind-boggling.
>
>I don't expect someone like you knickers to understand what it is to stand
>by your word, just as you have demonstrated time & again you don't
>understand the meaning of noble concepts like "honor," "dignity," and
>"integrity."

So YOU stand by YOUR conservative "principles" of
Slavery, Jim Crow, lynching, whipping, abuse, child
labor, "states rights", White Supremacy, hatred of
aliens, immigrants, the eldery, the poor, women,
children and using government to **** the majority for
the good of a FEW?

Was it "dignified" for a cabal of conservatives to take
out full page ads against Kennedy the month he was
assasinated, or ads calling for the impeachment of Earl
Warren because he (a LIBERAL) expanded Civil Rights,
Civil Liberties, and curtailed police power over
citizens?

Was it "honorable" for your favorite drooling turnip to
LIE to congress, LIE to the American people about
selling our SWORN enemies weapon?

Was it "honorable" for William Bennett to suggest that
if they could find a "question of character" to use
against Clinton in 1995, they might be able to help
themselves politically----thus ushering in the $4
Million given CPAC (policy making arm of the GOP/RNC)
to conduct a smear against a president that was killing
them politically?

Was it honorable for nearly every conservative to vote
against regulating Child labor, providing a "safety
net" for the elderly, expanding womens rights, workers
rights, or helping the homeless and hungry

Just what the **** DID conservatism EVER do for the
good of America---that wasn't first considered good for
the wealthiest and most powerful, you goddamn
uneducated moron.

>> You're really describing an irrational argument that
>> wants YOUR politician to be "okay"----but get rid of
>> ALL those politicians YOU don't agree with-----IOW
>> "someone else's"
>>
>
>Thanks for explaining the liberal platform which is, "LIE," "CHEAT" and/or
>do the political thing because "The Ends Justify The Means"!

Exactly what was the fundamental basis for the millions
spent by CPAC "finding" paula Jones, you stupid ****?
 
When?


"MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:xuWNi.2536$y21.1380@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...
>
> "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kimmel@rcn.com> wrote in message
> news:TJGdndgm18E5iZXanZ2dnUVZ_gOdnZ2d@rcn.net...
> >
> > "MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
> > news:LBSNi.884$R95.801@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
> >>
> >> "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kimmel@rcn.com> wrote in message
> >> news:QNGdnQdhj_JER5ranZ2dnUVZ_hzinZ2d@rcn.net...
> >> >
> >> > "MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:_PPNi.6868$6p6.4303@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
> >> >>
> >> >> "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kimmel@rcn.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:TO6dnQR9mf32W5ranZ2dnUVZ_vvinZ2d@rcn.net...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
> >> >> > news:WnLNi.416$LD2.315@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
> >> >> >> Now this Craig idiot, guilty or not, did plead guilty, yet the
> >> >> >> point
> >> >> >> being
> >> >> >> he is a fine example and excellent argument why term limits are
so
> >> >> >> desperately needed to clean house in Washington.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Nonsense. First, Craig has already announced he's not running for
> >> >> > re-election.
> >> >>
> >> >> But he's pulling a clinton or another typical democrat bait and
switch
> >> >> you
> >> >> dumb-ass.
> >> >
> >> > No, moron, he's pulling a Bush: lie until the lie become untentable,
> > then
> >> > igorne it and come up with a new lie.
> >>
> >> Your partisan, hate-contrived opinion is duly noted you idiot.
> >
> >
> > Your partisan, hate-contrived opinion is duly noted you idiot.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> >> Plus, I don't believe he's up for election next year.
> >> >
> >> > As with most things you "believe," you're wrong. His, you should
> >> > excuse
> >> > the
> >> > expression, seat is up for grabs next year.
> >>
> >> Bring it. Idaho is as patriotically red as it gets!
> >
> > Thanks for conceding that Virginia, New Mexico and Nebraska will vote
>
> Where did I concede anything bitch? Answer: didn't and you know it which
> makes you a scum liar,
>
> > Who knows, if patriots in Idaho REALLY comes out and vote, maybe the
> > Republic candidate will be defeated there as well.
>
> So according to kimmey if they don't vote democrat, the election must have
> been stolen!
>
> Come on bitch let's have it on the record right now.
>
> >> >> > And if that turns out to be a lie too he'll be taken out in
> >> >> > the primary or the general election.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Term limits are a terrible idea foisted by Repubic wingnuts when
> >> >> > they
> >> >> > don't
> >> >> > think they can win elections any way else.
> >> >>
> >> >> That's an opinion which may not be held by a majority of Americans
and
> >> >> should be brought up by referendum since career politicians will
only
> >> >> continue sucking off the government tit while dishing out favors to
> > their
> >> >> constituents to keep them in power!
> >> >
> >> > You're a Republic wingnut all right. You learn nothing from history.
> >> > Presidential term limits were foisted on us by the Republics after
FDR
> > won
> >> > four elections. So who was the first president it affected?
> > Eisenhower.
> >> > Reagan might have won a third term as well (unless the Alzheimer's
> > already
> >> > affecting him in the White House became public). So all you're doing
> >> > is
> >> > peventing people from exercising their free choice because YOU don't
> > like
> >> > their choices. Notice how term limits was a Republic cry until1994,
> > then
> >> > disappeared. Now that it looks like the Republics have screwed
> > themselves
> >> > (as they screwed America) for years to come, suddenly up pops the
> > Republc
> >> > wingnuts bleating about "term limits."
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> Plus, if it's good enough for the president (not required by the
> > original
> >> >> framers, but later passed), then the same arguments can be applied
to
> > the
> >> >> congress too.
> >> >
> >> > Good point. Let's repeal presidential term limits, a bad idea that
> > never
> >> > should have been enacted. Then we can re-elect Bill Clinton, who
would
> >> > win
> >> > in a cakewalk.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> > The real term limit is in the
> >> >> > voting booth. America had no trouble limiting the term of the
> >> >> > Republic-controlled Congress last election, and we'll clip their
> > wings
> >> >> > even
> >> >> > more next year, now that it's likely we'll pick up seats in
> >> >> > Virginia,
> >> >> > Nebraska and now New Mexico.
> >> >
> >> > Why do you hate Americans so much that you don't trust them in the
> > voting
> >> > booth? One way or another, Republic wingnuts prefer rigged
elections.
> >> >
> >
> >
> > I accept your concession (by your non-response) that Republic wingnuts
> > prefer rigged elections.
>
> Wrong, democrat have made crooked elections an art form.
>
>
 
"MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:xuWNi.2536$y21.1380@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...
>
> "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kimmel@rcn.com> wrote in message
> news:TJGdndgm18E5iZXanZ2dnUVZ_gOdnZ2d@rcn.net...
> >
> > "MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
> > news:LBSNi.884$R95.801@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
> >>
> >> "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kimmel@rcn.com> wrote in message
> >> news:QNGdnQdhj_JER5ranZ2dnUVZ_hzinZ2d@rcn.net...
> >> >
> >> > "MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:_PPNi.6868$6p6.4303@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
> >> >>
> >> >> "Dan Kimmel" <daniel.kimmel@rcn.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:TO6dnQR9mf32W5ranZ2dnUVZ_vvinZ2d@rcn.net...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "MioMyo" <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
> >> >> > news:WnLNi.416$LD2.315@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
> >> >> >> Now this Craig idiot, guilty or not, did plead guilty, yet the
> >> >> >> point
> >> >> >> being
> >> >> >> he is a fine example and excellent argument why term limits are
so
> >> >> >> desperately needed to clean house in Washington.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Nonsense. First, Craig has already announced he's not running for
> >> >> > re-election.
> >> >>
> >> >> But he's pulling a clinton or another typical democrat bait and
switch
> >> >> you
> >> >> dumb-ass.
> >> >
> >> > No, moron, he's pulling a Bush: lie until the lie become untentable,
> > then
> >> > igorne it and come up with a new lie.
> >>
> >> Your partisan, hate-contrived opinion is duly noted you idiot.
> >
> >
> > Your partisan, hate-contrived opinion is duly noted you idiot.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> >> Plus, I don't believe he's up for election next year.
> >> >
> >> > As with most things you "believe," you're wrong. His, you should
> >> > excuse
> >> > the
> >> > expression, seat is up for grabs next year.
> >>
> >> Bring it. Idaho is as patriotically red as it gets!
> >
> > Thanks for conceding that Virginia, New Mexico and Nebraska will vote
>
> Where did I concede anything bitch? Answer: didn't and you know it which
> makes you a scum liar,
>
> > Who knows, if patriots in Idaho REALLY comes out and vote, maybe the
> > Republic candidate will be defeated there as well.
>
> So according to kimmey if they don't vote democrat, the election must have
> been stolen!
>
> Come on bitch let's have it on the record right now.

No, virgin, I'm noting that real patriots don't vote for Republic wingnuts.
Some of the red states are in the most anti-American parts of the country --
where they hate the bedrock values of this great nation -- like the Deep
South. The anti-American Republic party is shrinking to a fringe regional
party. That's why so many incumbents are jumping ship now, before they're
kicked out of office next year.



>
> >> >> > And if that turns out to be a lie too he'll be taken out in
> >> >> > the primary or the general election.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Term limits are a terrible idea foisted by Repubic wingnuts when
> >> >> > they
> >> >> > don't
> >> >> > think they can win elections any way else.
> >> >>
> >> >> That's an opinion which may not be held by a majority of Americans
and
> >> >> should be brought up by referendum since career politicians will
only
> >> >> continue sucking off the government tit while dishing out favors to
> > their
> >> >> constituents to keep them in power!
> >> >
> >> > You're a Republic wingnut all right. You learn nothing from history.
> >> > Presidential term limits were foisted on us by the Republics after
FDR
> > won
> >> > four elections. So who was the first president it affected?
> > Eisenhower.
> >> > Reagan might have won a third term as well (unless the Alzheimer's
> > already
> >> > affecting him in the White House became public). So all you're doing
> >> > is
> >> > peventing people from exercising their free choice because YOU don't
> > like
> >> > their choices. Notice how term limits was a Republic cry until1994,
> > then
> >> > disappeared. Now that it looks like the Republics have screwed
> > themselves
> >> > (as they screwed America) for years to come, suddenly up pops the
> > Republc
> >> > wingnuts bleating about "term limits."
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> Plus, if it's good enough for the president (not required by the
> > original
> >> >> framers, but later passed), then the same arguments can be applied
to
> > the
> >> >> congress too.
> >> >
> >> > Good point. Let's repeal presidential term limits, a bad idea that
> > never
> >> > should have been enacted. Then we can re-elect Bill Clinton, who
would
> >> > win
> >> > in a cakewalk.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> > The real term limit is in the
> >> >> > voting booth. America had no trouble limiting the term of the
> >> >> > Republic-controlled Congress last election, and we'll clip their
> > wings
> >> >> > even
> >> >> > more next year, now that it's likely we'll pick up seats in
> >> >> > Virginia,
> >> >> > Nebraska and now New Mexico.
> >> >
> >> > Why do you hate Americans so much that you don't trust them in the
> > voting
> >> > booth? One way or another, Republic wingnuts prefer rigged
elections.
> >> >
> >
> >
> > I accept your concession (by your non-response) that Republic wingnuts
> > prefer rigged elections.
>
> Wrong, democrat have made crooked elections an art form.


That is indeed "wrong." It is the Republic party that has been caught
repeatedly rigging elections. Bush couldn't win otherwise. That's a matter
of historical record which only the dwindling number of America-hating
wingnuts, such as yourself, foolsihly deny.

If you hate this country so much why don't you leave and find some place
more in keeping with your totalitarian views, like North Korea?
 
<Click@Knicklas.com> wrote in message
news:j3egg3povellsqf7i9u81rcfvqnormkt6n@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 14:01:55 GMT, "MioMyo"
> <USA_Patriot@Somewhere.com> wrote:
>
>>> What the **** is wrong with you.
>>>
>>> Why any thinking person believes that replacing one
>>> politician with another politician solves anything is
>>> mind-boggling.
>>
>>I don't expect someone like you knickers to understand what it is to stand
>>by your word, just as you have demonstrated time & again you don't
>>understand the meaning of noble concepts like "honor," "dignity," and
>>"integrity."

Notwithstanding your drooling babbling lies below knickers, do go seek
professional help for your deranged mental condition.


> So YOU stand by YOUR conservative "principles" of
> Slavery, Jim Crow, lynching, whipping, abuse, child
> labor, "states rights", White Supremacy, hatred of
> aliens, immigrants, the eldery, the poor, women,
> children and using government to **** the majority for
> the good of a FEW?
>
> Was it "dignified" for a cabal of conservatives to take
> out full page ads against Kennedy the month he was
> assasinated, or ads calling for the impeachment of Earl
> Warren because he (a LIBERAL) expanded Civil Rights,
> Civil Liberties, and curtailed police power over
> citizens?
>
> Was it "honorable" for your favorite drooling turnip to
> LIE to congress, LIE to the American people about
> selling our SWORN enemies weapon?
>
> Was it "honorable" for William Bennett to suggest that
> if they could find a "question of character" to use
> against Clinton in 1995, they might be able to help
> themselves politically----thus ushering in the $4
> Million given CPAC (policy making arm of the GOP/RNC)
> to conduct a smear against a president that was killing
> them politically?
>
> Was it honorable for nearly every conservative to vote
> against regulating Child labor, providing a "safety
> net" for the elderly, expanding womens rights, workers
> rights, or helping the homeless and hungry
>
> Just what the **** DID conservatism EVER do for the
> good of America---that wasn't first considered good for
> the wealthiest and most powerful, you goddamn
> uneducated moron.
>
>>> You're really describing an irrational argument that
>>> wants YOUR politician to be "okay"----but get rid of
>>> ALL those politicians YOU don't agree with-----IOW
>>> "someone else's"
>>>
>>
>>Thanks for explaining the liberal platform which is, "LIE," "CHEAT" and/or
>>do the political thing because "The Ends Justify The Means"!
>
> Exactly what was the fundamental basis for the millions
> spent by CPAC "finding" paula Jones, you stupid ****?
>
 
Miles arguing insults and personal attacks again because nothing else is
left in his bag of dirty dem tricks!


"Miles Long" <Miles@Home.net> wrote in message
news:p-adnY9XevxQr5XanZ2dnUVZ_ozinZ2d@giganews.com...
> MioMyo wrote:
>> "Miles Long" <Miles@Home.net> wrote in message
>> news:eek:_qdnS8tL4EcDpranZ2dnUVZ_vbinZ2d@giganews.com...
>>> MioMyo wrote:
>>>> Now this Craig idiot, guilty or not, did plead guilty, yet the point
>>>> being he is a fine example and excellent argument why term limits are
>>>> so desperately needed to clean house in Washington. Further, it's not
>>>> whether or not Craig is gay- no one cares, nor it's not that his seat
>>>> will change parties- this is unlikely. What it is, this fool has been
>>>> in Washington so long, he wants to argue what "WAS" should have been-
>>>> something he should have thought of when accepting his guilty status.
>>> Actually, Zippy the Clown, it's the hypocrisy of an anti-gay stance
>>> by a man who smokes ****. Do try and keep up... <laughing>
>>>
>>> Miles "Grasp of the Obvious" Long
>>
>> So according to your logic, all dems are out of the closet eh? or they
>> don't have any dirty little secrets like $90,000 of illegal campaign cash
>> in the freezer (but one example) they're hiding?
>>
>> Do go on telling us, though, how sanctimoniously clean you think your
>> politicians are Wrong, while I'll continue arguing politicians should do
>> the right thing and pass term limits in order to inject a bit of reality
>> into our failing political system!
>>
>
> What are you, six years old? <laughing> Although, even six year olds
> display better reading skills and retention than pitiful you...
>
> Miles "Again, Over His/Her Head" Long
>
>
>>
>>>> In reality, Craig's lust
>>>> to remain in power is his overwhelming concern, not his word, nor not
>>>> that he's changed his word on this topic many times over- thereby
>>>> Clintonized himself. And now Craig is both an embarrassment to
>>>> himself -his family too and also to the institutions of congress.
>>>>
>>>> As if Larry Craig isn't a great example why term limits time has come,
>>>> I believe if the majority of congress were exposed, there'd be
>>>> overwhelming similar examples why this country would be better off if
>>>> these decision makers were essentially a product of American society,
>>>> not American society a product of career politicians. Just look at
>>>> teddy Chappiquiddick kennedy as another fine example what career
>>>> politicians morph into!
>>>>
>>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/uc/20071005/cm_uc_crsesx/op_394013
>>>>
>>>> He didn't even flush the toilet.
>>>>
>>>> When he exited the bathroom stall, Senator Larry Craig never flushed
>>>> the toilet. As my kids would say when they were little, that certainly
>>>> suggests he didn't have to go.
>>>>
>>>> So what was he doing peering into someone else's stall for long enough
>>>> that the officer was able to see he had blue eyes? Why did he wait for
>>>> the adjoining stall to be empty when there were plenty of others
>>>> available? What was he doing tapping his foot and waving his hand
>>>> underneath the divider between the stalls? Certainly not going to the
>>>> bathroom.
>>>>
>>>> Larry Craig must think the people of Idaho are fools. He certainly has
>>>> no problem lying to them, and the rest of us. Maybe it's all those
>>>> years in Congress that have left him thinking he can get away with
>>>> anything he wants.
>>>>
>>>> After the media - Roll Call in particular - disclosed that Craig had
>>>> pleaded guilty to cruising for sex in a men's room at the Minneapolis
>>>> airport, the distinguished gentleman from Idaho announced he would
>>>> resign as of September 30.
>>>>
>>>> Then he changed his mind and said he was going to try to withdraw his
>>>> guilty plea and would hold off on resigning until the judge reached a
>>>> decision on that issue.
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday, the judge reached a decision. To the surprise of no one
>>>> who knows anything about criminal law, Judge Porter of the Minneapolis
>>>> Superior Court concluded there was absolutely no basis for Senator
>>>> Craig to withdraw his plea, no new evidence of anything, no showing
>>>> that he'd been coerced by the prosecutors or police to plead guilty,
>>>> nothing approaching the proof of a "manifest injustice" that would
>>>> allow the plea to be withdrawn.
>>>>
>>>> So now Craig has changed his mind again. Now, he's decided that even
>>>> though he lost in court and has as much chance of winning on appeal as
>>>> I do of winning the lottery (I don't even buy tickets) he's going to
>>>> serve out his term for the good of the people of Idaho.
>>>>
>>>> Liar, liar, pants on fire.
>>>>
>>>> The best thing he could do for the people of Idaho, and the rest of us,
>>>> is spare us the embarrassment of what's to come next. Just what we need
>>>> is an ethics hearing on the mechanics of bathroom pickups.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
 

Similar threads

M
XEVIL 6: the best software for captcha solving is available !!
Replies
0
Views
125
MaryIntork0176
M
M
XEvil 6.0 [Beta-8]: the best application for ReCaptcha and hCaptcha solving is available !
Replies
0
Views
206
MaryIntork2556
M
WorldNews
Gambian president submits candidacy for fifth term
Replies
0
Views
25
WorldNews
WorldNews
S
Golf: Moving ball rule changed in wake of Johnson controversy
Replies
0
Views
23
Sports News
S
S
Dallas grand jury indicts football's Manziel for domestic violence
Replies
0
Views
23
Sports News
S
Back
Top