On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Eric Roberts <[email protected]> wrote: > > So what are you saying? It;'s ok to be against gay marriage if your > name is Obama? > ***************** > I can care less if you are against gay marriage on a personal level. It's > when you try to pass laws that force your religious morals on everyone else > that I have issues. > ******************
Interesting. So there position doesn't matter unless they have the power to change the law. Principals or is it Principles > You mean like two weeks ago when they refused to allow a vote on > extending tax breaks? Semantics. > ************** > How is that Semantics? If that was Dems doing it, you would be scraming and > hollering up a storm about how anti-business Dems are, but when Repubs do > it...you are ok with it... > ************** Because technically they didn't vote, they went home. So I can't say two weeks ago even though the result is the same. > ****************** > Considering that the problem is that small businesses aren't getting > money...yeah. That was part of it and part of the solution. The TARP was > focused on big banks, who were supposed to get money to the smaller banks. > That did not happen, so this was pointed directly at small banks. Real > anti-business solution ya know... Again, how did that work out for them? Another $50 billion pissed away to friends of Barney and nothing to show for it. > *********************** > You are right...it is bizarre that you are incapable of seeing the obvious. Because you fell for the bait-n-switch. $50 billion for Barneys friends and you think they were helping small business. It was a scam. > ************** > > If the parent is conservative, then so would the child since the parent > controls the child. Maybe they just though he was the best man for the job. Are you really that naive? You really think everything is run by the puppet master. >> Wasted? How's that? It stemmed the job loss and brought the jobs back to >> pre-Bush levels. > > Unemployment is back at 5%? > ********** > Guess you can't read what I posted...no big surprise there. RIF man... > ********** Jobs back to pre-Bush level? I guess you can pick any period before 2001, the depression was pre-Bush. > He is a contractor and has seen this happen in his dealing with the > department of labor. So your saying most companies are trying to beat the system and should be run by the government? I'm not sure what your point is. >> Nope...the bubble didn't burst until after Bush got into office followed > up >> by a huge loss in consumer confidence after the he was given the > presidency >> by the SCOTUS. Well you can say anything you wantas long as you don't have to back it up. Google it: First hit: The "dot-com bubble" (or sometimes "IT bubble"[1] or "TMT bubble") was a speculative bubble covering roughly 19952000 > The bubble popped in 2000, I was in it. Came out not a millionaire, > Don't you ever dis the Duke again! No > ************ > He was a pussy that didn't even have the cajones to actually serve... > *********** Well: No talent, you need direction, you a pussy with a yeast infection :P ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:330631 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
