The Lack Of Character Inside The Democrat Party

<bvallely@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1188873341.036526.82240@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Uninformed, maybe.
> > But not ignorant.
> .
> > One need not actually listen to al Jazeera, or the 700 club, to know
> > that we'd all be better off if bin Laden and Pat Robertson would shoot
> > each other.
>
> I'm curious - other than his unforgiveable sin of daring to state
> opinions you disagreement, what has Pat Robinson done which forced you
> to support his murder?

The very fact that he's called for the murder of many others might be
sufficiently just cause.
 
"Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> wrote in message
news:hJ4Di.52389$YL5.16213@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
> Richardson-Obama in 08 wrote:
>
> > In the end it will make little difference. The worst of the Democratic
> > field . . . in my personal opinion that would be Mike Gravel . . . is
far
> > better than the best the Republicans can offer.
>
> That's easy for you to say.
>
> But for the heroin dealers, weapons manufacturers, arms traffickers, and
> preachers - the Republicans are a guarantee of good fortune.
>
> What - don't they get a say?

Sure they do, but this time around they'll only get one vote apiece. The
electronic voting machines that can be hacked by a high school kid are
getting tossed out by more states every month.
 
On Sep 3, 2:22 pm, "bvall...@aol.com" <bvall...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Sep 3, 6:42 am, Matt <matttel...@sprynet.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 3, 7:28 am, "Harry Dope" <H...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > The Lack Of Character Inside The Democrat Party
> .
> > You know, Harry here reminds me of all that is wrong with the
> > Republicans.
> .
> > The "Grand Old Party" really ought to be renamed to the Grand Ostrich
> > Party.
> > They are so very good at sticking their heads in the sand and ignoring
> > everything around them.
>
> And yet, you responded to a very real scandal in the Clinton camp by
> listing dreary Daily Kos talking points against the Bush
> Administration.
>
> Ostrich, indeed.

More like the Boy who Cried Wolf. You dumb tards have tried to pin
fake scandal after fake scandal on the Clintons since the early 90's
and they've ALL turned out to be a bunch of bogus charges. Why on
earth would anyone listen to you retards now? Seriously!
 
kyldltn@yahoo.com wrote:

> More like the Boy who Cried Wolf. You dumb tards have tried to pin
> fake scandal after fake scandal on the Clintons since the early 90's
> and they've ALL turned out to be a bunch of bogus charges. Why on
> earth would anyone listen to you retards now? Seriously!

If they were all fake, why did Bill Clinton loose his law license for 5 years?
If they were all fake, how was Ken Starr able to get 15 major convictions?

http://members.tripod.com/~GOPcapitalist/starr.html
Over 15 major convictions including a governor and a dozen of Clinton's closest
friends, the 2nd impeachment of a president in history, a contempt of court
charge found against that president for lying under oath, and justice brought to
the most corrupt president in the history of the United States.
 
kyldltn@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Sep 3, 2:22 pm, "bvall...@aol.com" <bvall...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On Sep 3, 6:42 am, Matt <matttel...@sprynet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sep 3, 7:28 am, "Harry Dope" <H...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> The Lack Of Character Inside The Democrat Party
>> .
>>> You know, Harry here reminds me of all that is wrong with the
>>> Republicans.
>> .
>>> The "Grand Old Party" really ought to be renamed to the Grand Ostrich
>>> Party.
>>> They are so very good at sticking their heads in the sand and ignoring
>>> everything around them.
>> And yet, you responded to a very real scandal in the Clinton camp by
>> listing dreary Daily Kos talking points against the Bush
>> Administration.
>>
>> Ostrich, indeed.
>
> More like the Boy who Cried Wolf. You dumb tards have tried to pin
> fake scandal after fake scandal on the Clintons since the early 90's
> and they've ALL turned out to be a bunch of bogus charges. Why on
> earth would anyone listen to you retards now? Seriously!

No matter how corrupt the Democrats may believe the Republicans to be, it seems
as if they are as bad, or worse:

http://members.tripod.com/~GOPcapitalist/clintonpage.html#criminals
 
David Hartung wrote:
> kyldltn@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>> More like the Boy who Cried Wolf. You dumb tards have tried to pin
>> fake scandal after fake scandal on the Clintons since the early 90's
>> and they've ALL turned out to be a bunch of bogus charges. Why on
>> earth would anyone listen to you retards now? Seriously!
>
> If they were all fake, why did Bill Clinton loose his law license for
> 5 years? If they were all fake, how was Ken Starr able to get 15
> major convictions?
> http://members.tripod.com/~GOPcapitalist/starr.html
> Over 15 major convictions including a governor and a dozen of
> Clinton's closest friends, the 2nd impeachment of a president in
> history, a contempt of court charge found against that president for
> lying under oath, and justice brought to the most corrupt president
> in the history of the United States.

Same ****, another day
 
David Hartung wrote:
> kyldltn@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Sep 3, 2:22 pm, "bvall...@aol.com" <bvall...@aol.com> wrote:
>>> On Sep 3, 6:42 am, Matt <matttel...@sprynet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sep 3, 7:28 am, "Harry Dope" <H...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>> The Lack Of Character Inside The Democrat Party
>>> .
>>>> You know, Harry here reminds me of all that is wrong with the
>>>> Republicans.
>>> .
>>>> The "Grand Old Party" really ought to be renamed to the Grand
>>>> Ostrich Party.
>>>> They are so very good at sticking their heads in the sand and
>>>> ignoring everything around them.
>>> And yet, you responded to a very real scandal in the Clinton camp by
>>> listing dreary Daily Kos talking points against the Bush
>>> Administration.
>>>
>>> Ostrich, indeed.
>>
>> More like the Boy who Cried Wolf. You dumb tards have tried to pin
>> fake scandal after fake scandal on the Clintons since the early 90's
>> and they've ALL turned out to be a bunch of bogus charges. Why on
>> earth would anyone listen to you retards now? Seriously!
>
> No matter how corrupt the Democrats may believe the Republicans to
> be, it seems as if they are as bad, or worse:
>
> http://members.tripod.com/~GOPcapitalist/clintonpage.html#criminals


Nothing new here
 
Richardson-Obama in 08 wrote:
> "David Hartung" <dhart1ng@quixnet.net> wrote in message
> news:4tSdnaP9iIqDykDbnZ2dnUVZ_uSgnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> kyldltn@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>>> More like the Boy who Cried Wolf. You dumb tards have tried to pin
>>> fake scandal after fake scandal on the Clintons since the early 90's
>>> and they've ALL turned out to be a bunch of bogus charges. Why on
>>> earth would anyone listen to you retards now? Seriously!
>> If they were all fake, why did Bill Clinton loose his law license for 5
> years?
>> If they were all fake, how was Ken Starr able to get 15 major convictions?
>>
>> http://members.tripod.com/~GOPcapitalist/starr.html
>> Over 15 major convictions including a governor and a dozen of Clinton's
> closest
>> friends, the 2nd impeachment of a president in history, a contempt of
> court
>> charge found against that president for lying under oath, and justice
> brought to
>> the most corrupt president in the history of the United States.
>
> How many of those 15 major convictions were against the Clintons themselves?

As many as have been against president Bush, but that hasn't stopped you from
calling him corrupt.
 
Sid9 wrote:
> David Hartung wrote:
>> kyldltn@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> On Sep 3, 2:22 pm, "bvall...@aol.com" <bvall...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sep 3, 6:42 am, Matt <matttel...@sprynet.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 3, 7:28 am, "Harry Dope" <H...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>> The Lack Of Character Inside The Democrat Party
>>>> .
>>>>> You know, Harry here reminds me of all that is wrong with the
>>>>> Republicans.
>>>> .
>>>>> The "Grand Old Party" really ought to be renamed to the Grand
>>>>> Ostrich Party.
>>>>> They are so very good at sticking their heads in the sand and
>>>>> ignoring everything around them.
>>>> And yet, you responded to a very real scandal in the Clinton camp by
>>>> listing dreary Daily Kos talking points against the Bush
>>>> Administration.
>>>>
>>>> Ostrich, indeed.
>>> More like the Boy who Cried Wolf. You dumb tards have tried to pin
>>> fake scandal after fake scandal on the Clintons since the early 90's
>>> and they've ALL turned out to be a bunch of bogus charges. Why on
>>> earth would anyone listen to you retards now? Seriously!
>> No matter how corrupt the Democrats may believe the Republicans to
>> be, it seems as if they are as bad, or worse:
>>
>> http://members.tripod.com/~GOPcapitalist/clintonpage.html#criminals
>
>
> Nothing new here

In other words, it is factual, thank you for confirming the corruption of the
Clintons.
 
David Hartung wrote:
> Richardson-Obama in 08 wrote:
>> "David Hartung" <dhart1ng@quixnet.net> wrote in message
>> news:4tSdnaP9iIqDykDbnZ2dnUVZ_uSgnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>> kyldltn@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> More like the Boy who Cried Wolf. You dumb tards have tried to pin
>>>> fake scandal after fake scandal on the Clintons since the early
>>>> 90's and they've ALL turned out to be a bunch of bogus charges.
>>>> Why on earth would anyone listen to you retards now? Seriously!
>>> If they were all fake, why did Bill Clinton loose his law license
>>> for 5 years? If they were all fake, how was Ken Starr able to get
>>> 15 major convictions?
>>> http://members.tripod.com/~GOPcapitalist/starr.html
>>> Over 15 major convictions including a governor and a dozen of
>>> Clinton's closest friends, the 2nd impeachment of a president in
>>> history, a contempt of court charge found against that president
>>> for lying under oath, and justice brought to the most corrupt
>>> president in the history of the United States.
>>
>> How many of those 15 major convictions were against the Clintons
>> themselves?
>
> As many as have been against president Bush, but that hasn't stopped
> you from calling him corrupt.

I don't know if bush,jr is corrupt.
I believe his administration is corrupt
I do know that he's incompetent.
He's an incompetent military leader
He's an incompetent fiscal manager
He's an incompetent at addressing the needs of ordinary Americans
 
On Sep 3, 8:54 pm, Sanders Kaufman <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
> bvall...@aol.com wrote:
> >> One need not actually listen to al Jazeera, or the 700 club, to know
> >> that we'd all be better off if bin Laden and Pat Robertson would shoot
> >> each other.
>
> > I'm curious - other than his unforgiveable sin of daring to state
> > opinions you disagreement, what has Pat Robinson done which forced you
> > to support his murder?
>
> It's not murder, it's regicide.
> And more directly to your question, because he energized the base.
>
> I'm perfectly fine with him believing that Muslims should die. >

Robinson never said that "Muslims should die". He said the terrorists
should die.

> And I'm perfectly fine with him saying so out loud. But when doing so causes
> Muslims to die - he should suffer that fate himself.

> The same goes for Osama and George Bush and any other chicken-****
> Evangelical who promotes this War Against Islam.

> ... but you already knew that. It's just that, in typical evangelical
> fashion, you ask an insincere question, hoping nobody will hear the answer.

First off, I'm not an evangelist, I'm a Lutheran. So, you're one of
these weasles who insist that anyone who supports the war should die.
Not that you have the stones to do it yourself, of course. That would
require courage. No, you want other people to commit your dirty work
for you.

Coward.

> And that's why all those US soldiers have to die tonight in the
> desert... alone, far from home, bodies shredded, and screaming in mortal
> agony.

So that your friends won't be able to blow up the Empire State
Building.

That's why the troops (all volunteers, BTW) are heroes, and you're a
traitor.
 
"David Hartung" <dhart1ng@quixnet.net> wrote in message
news:4tSdnaP9iIqDykDbnZ2dnUVZ_uSgnZ2d@comcast.com...
> kyldltn@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > More like the Boy who Cried Wolf. You dumb tards have tried to pin
> > fake scandal after fake scandal on the Clintons since the early 90's
> > and they've ALL turned out to be a bunch of bogus charges. Why on
> > earth would anyone listen to you retards now? Seriously!
>
> If they were all fake, why did Bill Clinton loose his law license for 5
years?
> If they were all fake, how was Ken Starr able to get 15 major convictions?
>
> http://members.tripod.com/~GOPcapitalist/starr.html
> Over 15 major convictions including a governor and a dozen of Clinton's
closest
> friends, the 2nd impeachment of a president in history, a contempt of
court
> charge found against that president for lying under oath, and justice
brought to
> the most corrupt president in the history of the United States.

How many of those 15 major convictions were against the Clintons themselves?
 
"Richardson-Obama in 08" <NoThanks@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:tr-dnfvvq9_Y70DbnZ2dnUVZ_v6rnZ2d@comcast.com...
> "David Hartung" <dhart1ng@quixnet.net> wrote in message
> news:pJadnTAoCI3xwkDbnZ2dnUVZ_gidnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> Richardson-Obama in 08 wrote:
>> > "David Hartung" <dhart1ng@quixnet.net> wrote in message
>> > news:4tSdnaP9iIqDykDbnZ2dnUVZ_uSgnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> >> kyldltn@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> More like the Boy who Cried Wolf. You dumb tards have tried to pin
>> >>> fake scandal after fake scandal on the Clintons since the early 90's
>> >>> and they've ALL turned out to be a bunch of bogus charges. Why on
>> >>> earth would anyone listen to you retards now? Seriously!
>> >> If they were all fake, why did Bill Clinton loose his law license for
>> >> 5
>> > years?
>> >> If they were all fake, how was Ken Starr able to get 15 major
> convictions?
>> >>
>> >> http://members.tripod.com/~GOPcapitalist/starr.html
>> >> Over 15 major convictions including a governor and a dozen of
>> >> Clinton's
>> > closest
>> >> friends, the 2nd impeachment of a president in history, a contempt of
>> > court
>> >> charge found against that president for lying under oath, and justice
>> > brought to
>> >> the most corrupt president in the history of the United States.
>> >
>> > How many of those 15 major convictions were against the Clintons
> themselves?
>>
>> As many as have been against president Bush, but that hasn't stopped you
> from
>> calling him corrupt.
>
> Let's compare:
>
> The Clintons faced eight years of wild accusations from the right
> including
> six years of investigation, re-investigation and probing by a belligerent,
> partisan and adversarial Republican Congress and a Special Investigator
> who
> left absolutely no stones unturned, even if the stones were well outside
> of
> the scope of what he was directed to investigate. After millions of
> taxpayer dollars spent on the witch hunt, the end result, for the Clintons
> themselves, was nothing more than a Contempt of Court citation for the
> President for claiming to have not had extramarital sex. And you feel
> that
> justifies calling Clinton "the most corrupt president in the history of
> the
> United States".
>
> By comparison, Bush enjoyed a six-year absolutely free ride from a
> sycophantic press and an even more sycophantic Congress, which would have
> turned a blind eye to him raping Mother Theresa on the White House lawn.
> The new Democratic Congress hasn't been quite so generous, but virtually
> every request for information they make of the White House is met with
> claims of Executive Privilege . . . more in the eight months that this
> Congress has existed than any other President has made in an entire term .
> .
> . invocation of the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination
> and/or outright refusal to testify. And you provide the lack of a
> conviction for anything in only eight short months as evidence that Bush
> is
> as pure as the driven snow.
>
> Don't forget that the Statute of Limitations for the crimes that many have
> alleged to have been committed by Bush and his cronies extends well into
> the
> next (almost definitely Democratic) President's term. Former Presidents
> and
> their underlings have no Executive Privilege rights. The truth will come
> out eventually, and when it does we'll be able to make a more accurate
> determination of just who was "the most corrupt president in the history
> of
> the United States."
>
>

A real sign of character is a man after serving two terms as a President
being remembered for
`Monica playing his harmonica`.
 
Sid9 wrote:

> I don't know if bush,jr is corrupt.


The Libby case should have cleared that up for you.

When he promised to fire anyone involved, but then didn't fire scooter -
that was corruption. Then, when he commuted the sentence - that was
corruption, too.
 
"David Hartung" <dhart1ng@quixnet.net> wrote in message
news:pJadnTAoCI3xwkDbnZ2dnUVZ_gidnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Richardson-Obama in 08 wrote:
> > "David Hartung" <dhart1ng@quixnet.net> wrote in message
> > news:4tSdnaP9iIqDykDbnZ2dnUVZ_uSgnZ2d@comcast.com...
> >> kyldltn@yahoo.com wrote:
> >>
> >>> More like the Boy who Cried Wolf. You dumb tards have tried to pin
> >>> fake scandal after fake scandal on the Clintons since the early 90's
> >>> and they've ALL turned out to be a bunch of bogus charges. Why on
> >>> earth would anyone listen to you retards now? Seriously!
> >> If they were all fake, why did Bill Clinton loose his law license for 5
> > years?
> >> If they were all fake, how was Ken Starr able to get 15 major
convictions?
> >>
> >> http://members.tripod.com/~GOPcapitalist/starr.html
> >> Over 15 major convictions including a governor and a dozen of Clinton's
> > closest
> >> friends, the 2nd impeachment of a president in history, a contempt of
> > court
> >> charge found against that president for lying under oath, and justice
> > brought to
> >> the most corrupt president in the history of the United States.
> >
> > How many of those 15 major convictions were against the Clintons
themselves?
>
> As many as have been against president Bush, but that hasn't stopped you
from
> calling him corrupt.

Let's compare:

The Clintons faced eight years of wild accusations from the right including
six years of investigation, re-investigation and probing by a belligerent,
partisan and adversarial Republican Congress and a Special Investigator who
left absolutely no stones unturned, even if the stones were well outside of
the scope of what he was directed to investigate. After millions of
taxpayer dollars spent on the witch hunt, the end result, for the Clintons
themselves, was nothing more than a Contempt of Court citation for the
President for claiming to have not had extramarital sex. And you feel that
justifies calling Clinton "the most corrupt president in the history of the
United States".

By comparison, Bush enjoyed a six-year absolutely free ride from a
sycophantic press and an even more sycophantic Congress, which would have
turned a blind eye to him raping Mother Theresa on the White House lawn.
The new Democratic Congress hasn't been quite so generous, but virtually
every request for information they make of the White House is met with
claims of Executive Privilege . . . more in the eight months that this
Congress has existed than any other President has made in an entire term . .
.. invocation of the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination
and/or outright refusal to testify. And you provide the lack of a
conviction for anything in only eight short months as evidence that Bush is
as pure as the driven snow.

Don't forget that the Statute of Limitations for the crimes that many have
alleged to have been committed by Bush and his cronies extends well into the
next (almost definitely Democratic) President's term. Former Presidents and
their underlings have no Executive Privilege rights. The truth will come
out eventually, and when it does we'll be able to make a more accurate
determination of just who was "the most corrupt president in the history of
the United States."
 
bvallely@aol.com wrote:
> On Sep 3, 8:54 pm, Sanders Kaufman <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:

>> I'm perfectly fine with him believing that Muslims should die. >
>
> Robinson never said that "Muslims should die". He said the terrorists
> should die.

Normally, I'm up for a good debate with people.
But that's pointless when dealing with religious freaks, white
supremacists, and other such psychopaths.

It's become quite clear to me over the past decade or so that you people
will do anything, and say anything, to get what you want.

Furthermore, the only way to stop religious freaks like you from lying
to promote your sick, twisted faith and wrecking our country is to gun
you down.



> First off, I'm not an evangelist, I'm a Lutheran.

I don't care what you call yourself today.
You're still a faith-based traitor to the nation.

> So, you're one of
> these weasles who insist that anyone who supports the war should die.

No, I believe that many folks (even some who STILL support the war) do
not deserve to die. They should be ostracized, bankrupted, and have
their children taken away from them - but there's no need to kill them.


> Not that you have the stones to do it yourself, of course. That would
> require courage. No, you want other people to commit your dirty work
> for you.

It's interesting how you anonymous arm-chair warriors speak on this
matter, even as you cower in the rear - neither fighting, nor paying for
your own holy war.
 
SHb wrote:
> "Richardson-Obama in 08" <NoThanks@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
> news:tr-dnfvvq9_Y70DbnZ2dnUVZ_v6rnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> "David Hartung" <dhart1ng@quixnet.net> wrote in message
>> news:pJadnTAoCI3xwkDbnZ2dnUVZ_gidnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>> Richardson-Obama in 08 wrote:
>>>> "David Hartung" <dhart1ng@quixnet.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:4tSdnaP9iIqDykDbnZ2dnUVZ_uSgnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>>> kyldltn@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> More like the Boy who Cried Wolf. You dumb tards have tried to
>>>>>> pin fake scandal after fake scandal on the Clintons since the
>>>>>> early 90's and they've ALL turned out to be a bunch of bogus
>>>>>> charges. Why on earth would anyone listen to you retards now?
>>>>>> Seriously!
>>>>> If they were all fake, why did Bill Clinton loose his law license
>>>>> for 5
>>>> years?
>>>>> If they were all fake, how was Ken Starr able to get 15 major
>>>>> convictions? http://members.tripod.com/~GOPcapitalist/starr.html
>>>>> Over 15 major convictions including a governor and a dozen of
>>>>> Clinton's
>>>> closest
>>>>> friends, the 2nd impeachment of a president in history, a
>>>>> contempt of court charge found against that president for lying
>>>>> under oath, and justice brought to the most corrupt president in
>>>>> the history of the United States.
>>>>
>>>> How many of those 15 major convictions were against the Clintons
>>>> themselves?
>>>
>>> As many as have been against president Bush, but that hasn't
>>> stopped you from calling him corrupt.
>>
>> Let's compare:
>>
>> The Clintons faced eight years of wild accusations from the right
>> including
>> six years of investigation, re-investigation and probing by a
>> belligerent, partisan and adversarial Republican Congress and a
>> Special Investigator who
>> left absolutely no stones unturned, even if the stones were well
>> outside of
>> the scope of what he was directed to investigate. After millions of
>> taxpayer dollars spent on the witch hunt, the end result, for the
>> Clintons themselves, was nothing more than a Contempt of Court
>> citation for the President for claiming to have not had extramarital
>> sex. And you feel that
>> justifies calling Clinton "the most corrupt president in the history
>> of the
>> United States".
>>
>> By comparison, Bush enjoyed a six-year absolutely free ride from a
>> sycophantic press and an even more sycophantic Congress, which would
>> have turned a blind eye to him raping Mother Theresa on the White
>> House lawn. The new Democratic Congress hasn't been quite so
>> generous, but virtually every request for information they make of
>> the White House is met with claims of Executive Privilege . . . more
>> in the eight months that this Congress has existed than any other
>> President has made in an entire term . .
>> . invocation of the Fifth Amendment protection against
>> self-incrimination and/or outright refusal to testify. And you
>> provide the lack of a conviction for anything in only eight short
>> months as evidence that Bush is
>> as pure as the driven snow.
>>
>> Don't forget that the Statute of Limitations for the crimes that
>> many have alleged to have been committed by Bush and his cronies
>> extends well into the
>> next (almost definitely Democratic) President's term. Former
>> Presidents and
>> their underlings have no Executive Privilege rights. The truth will
>> come out eventually, and when it does we'll be able to make a more
>> accurate determination of just who was "the most corrupt president
>> in the history of
>> the United States."
>>
>>
>
> A real sign of character is a man after serving two terms as a
> President being remembered for
> `Monica playing his harmonica`.

Maybe that's why a
great majority of
American admire
Bill Clinton and
think bush,jr is a loser.
 
On Sep 3, 10:37 am, David Hartung <dhart...@quixnet.net> wrote:
> Matt wrote:
> > On Sep 3, 7:28 am, "Harry Dope" <H...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> The Lack Of Character Inside The Democrat Party
>
> > You know, Harry here reminds me of all that is wrong with the
> > Republicans.
>
> > The "Grand Old Party" really ought to be renamed to the Grand Ostrich
> > Party.
> > They are so very good at sticking their heads in the sand and ignoring
> > everything
> > around them.
>
> > Global warming? No such thing.
> > Iraq? Everything is going great.
> > The economy is fabulous.
> > The mortgage system is doing great with a "few small easily fixable
> > problems".
>
> None of which has anything to do with Hillary Clinton's shady activities.

But all of which are more relevant to these newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-
limbaugh, alt.politics.bush, alt.politics.republicans, alt.politics,
alt.impeach.bush (outside of alt.politics, and maybe alt.fan.rush-
limbaugh).

- Rich
 
On Mon, 03 Sep 2007 19:11:38 -0700, "bvallely@aol.com"
<bvallely@aol.com> wrote:

>
>> > And yet, you responded to a very real scandal in the Clinton camp by
>> > listing dreary Daily Kos talking points against the Bush
>> > Administration.
>
>> Daily Kos is only one of THOUSANDS of media outlets that have turned
>> against Bush - and that's just here in the US.
>
>Great men are almost always surrounded by squealing mediocritizes.

Will you pass me whatever you're smoking?

WB Yeats
 

Similar threads

A
The Higher-Self Alignment 2024 Calendar
Replies
0
Views
63
Andrewimmix
A
A
The Higher-Self Alignment 2024 Calendar
Replies
0
Views
25
Andrewimmix
A
A
Here is Practical Explanation about Next Life, Purpose of Human Life, philosophical/religious facts, theories etc.
Replies
0
Views
343
avyea
A
M
XEVIL 6: the best software for captcha solving is available !!
Replies
0
Views
125
MaryIntork0176
M
Y
Podcast host blames 'embarrassment' for why she didn't admit to Ozempic use earlier: 'My decision to not share was rooted in a little bit of shame'
Replies
0
Views
38
Yahoo News
Y
Back
Top