The problem with this conversation is you have an extreme bias. If you truly believe President Bush is possessed by the devil than you will always see evil in his actions. Pretend it was Clinton your writing about and read you're comments. You would think they're ridiculous. Yet you're positive they are spot on with Bush.
On 1/31/07, Denshtizzy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The Democrats in Congress are not yes men/women. > > Now? or what? I guess more of the blame falls on the Republicans, > as they had the majority. But they all kowtowed(neat werd). Lilly livered > basteds. Filibusters, gang of 14, any of that ring a bell? > And thus my point about "it was already a skeleton", I guess. > Bush Jr. took it to the next level. Should I bring up lowering EPA > standards? So Clinton did something that you blamed on Bush and in response you threaten to really find something to pin on Bush. Whatever :) > > That's not funny. > Oh, my bad. You seriously think good and evil are that clear cut? We're not terrorists. We don't go around trying to kill as many women and children as possible. And to imply that we are equal to the terrorist is hurtful. > Or so long as we kill in the name of "good", it's ok? I bet you also don't > mind sending a couple of innocents to the electric chair, so long as > more "bad" people "get it" than good/innocent people? Where do you > draw the line, and what does it take to be justified? I only support the death penalty when there's absolute proof. Most cases are based on hearsay or circumstantial evidence and I say life in prison unless were positive they did it. But I never told anyone that so I'm not sure why you think you know how I feel about it. > > Do we count the hundred and a half billion we've paid their neighbors to > sign peace > treaties with them? The sneaky tendrils stretch wide and far. ;] Nice charts but Israel is number 9: http://www.globalissues.org/images/USAid20032004.gif > *Bush:* We're now in the 41st month of uninterrupted job growth, in a > recovery that has *created 7.2 million new jobs* -- so far. What part of that is a lie? > Actual Bush quote: "We do not monitor calls from America, we monitor calls > coming in from foreign countries and vice versa." > ^--- not really a lie, I guess. This sentence is false. Source please. > > Since I don't chat with al Qaeda my phone isn't tapped. However, if > > they called me I would hope someone would listen in. > > Ah. The good old, "if you're doing nothing wrong, you've nothing to fear" > argument, eh? That's a load of BS, and hopefully you know it. I guess you weren't following along. Did you ever wonder why the press stopped talking about it? It's not because the NY Times loves Bush. > Besides the fact that: is it every call from the middle east, or just ones > from suspected terrorists? Wait, don't answer that-- some professors > are taking these jokers to court, maybe some real data will come out. Yes we pay millions of people to sit around and listen to every phone call from the Mid-East. > Because it's there, duh! That's the whole problem with having this stuff. You missed the point, if the gman is bad wiretaps will have no effect. Unless you're claiming wiretapping al Qaeda corrupts government workers. > And it looks like it's getting pretty hard to get an illegal wire tap, and > thus > my major malfunction. It's horrible, and more people should be upset. This is a targeted program by top professionals that are saving our lives. You seem to think anyone working for the government can tap any phone. No wonder your upset. > > Worse than say having the IRS audit you? Worse than having hundreds of > > personal republican FBI files on Clintons desk? > > Yes. Hands down. Way worse. You're advocating institutionalizing the > practice. You really think it's a good way to run things? I'm not worried about the guys in the room looking for known terrorist calling from al Qaeda. I am of course worried about the IRS calling me in because of what they read on this list. > > Our culture had more of an impact on the wall than anything else. > > > Well, that and them putting the military in charge. Smooth move X-lax! > > > > So Hollywood got the wall taken down not Reagan? > > > What? Were you serious in proposing it was Reagan that brought the > wall down? Went out there with his horn... circled whatever-half-of- > germany-it-was-that-were-the-pinkos seven times? It's called history. Look into it. Reagan all the way and there's no disputing it. > > And now look. Latest fashion comes from the east! Bill started it, > > > and bush was so wrapped up with his private crusade he didn't even > > > notice. If you subscribe to that whole power struggle whatnot. > > > > I lost you again. > > Fashion trends. Right now I hear Japan or some such is where all > the "hip" countries are looking. > > I was implying that China is getting in the mix, and I wonder how > much of it is related to Clinton. Yeah, the make the fashionable crap we tell them to make. What's the point? > > Yup, Bush Jr. pretty much sucked the marrow out of an already > > > pretty skeletal assemblage... well, it wasn't just him. No, it was > > > a team effort. Too bad we only see the best in people. =] > > Gone > But now I guess you'll pull all that data that says how whenever > Republicans get in the mix the economy does better, our deficit > goes down, etc., etc.,. Right? Like with Reagan? Oh, wait, I keep > forgetting-- Reagan set it up for Clinton to cash in! It really does > work, this theory about giving to the rich being the same as giving to > the poor. We just didn't give it enough time. LOL. Reagan set it up and Bush 41 called it voodoo economics and lost it. Clinton got luck with the WWW. Plus he raided the SS fund which you keep failing to respond to. > Yes, I'm holding the Republican party responsible as well. Those > fools stuck together, all the way over the cliff-- and took our great > country with 'em. Fiscally Bush screwed us with all the spending but he did magic with the economy and wanted to fix SS. > Guess it really is about rich getting richer, etc.. *sniff* I'm thinking the Dems are more into big business while the GOP is for all businesses. Look at the minimum wage fight the Dems are doing for the big corps. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7 Experience Flex 2 & MX7 integration & create powerful cross-platform RIAs http:http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;56760587;14748456;a?http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=LVNU Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:226422 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
