No need to get hysterical, Nancy. You just don't understand how fiscal appropriations happen in Congress.
On Jan 2, 11:48 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > Zeb, > > Point out where I said something inaccurate or untrue in the post you > are responding to numbnuts. > > On Jan 1, 4:43 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > You can SAY and pretend all you like Holly. But the FACT is that a > > Democrat congress authorized (thats within THEIR purview) the spending > > bill. They own it. And the sad thing is that the damage Pelosi and > > Reid did to the country with this bailout will continue on, unabated. > > > On Jan 1, 4:20 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Zeb, > > > > Like I said, THE BUSH BAIL OUT. > > > > Would you be happy if I called it "The Bush proposed and heavily > > > promoted bail-out"? > > > That's a little wordy and awkward, thus "THE BUSH BAIL-OUT. ;-) > > > > On Jan 1, 3:16 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > So fucking what? The President can get on TV and say he thinks we > > > > should buy 2000 tons of candy canes. CONGRESS has to appropriate the > > > > money. It is THEY who hold the purse strings. It was the Senate Dems > > > > that hauled the heads of the banks before them. Harry and Nancy sold > > > > us up the river and fully intend to continue their ruinous ways. > > > > > On Jan 1, 4:10 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Zeb, > > > > > > Was it or was it not George Bush and Henry Paulson that introduced the > > > > > bill to Congress and was it or was it not George Bush that appeared on > > > > > national TV warning dire and immediate consequences if the bill was > > > > > not approved immediately? > > > > > > Yes or fucking NO? > > > > > > On Jan 1, 2:46 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > I see you know no more about government than you do about anything > > > > > > else. Try reading past newspapers about the votes in the Senate and > > > > > > the House about the bailout bill and who opposed it. Nancy and Harry > > > > > > really screwed us this time. And it looks as if they intend to > > > > > > continue on down the road of disaster they have mapped out for us. > > > > > > > On Jan 1, 3:03 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Zeb, > > > > > > > > Sorry, this stinky baby is Bush's. Just deal with it. > > > > > > > > On Jan 1, 12:46 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Bush Bailout? LOL! This money was allocated and authorized by a > > > > > > > > Democrat congress. Nancy and Harry are the authors of this > > > > > > > > disaster. > > > > > > > > > On Jan 1, 10:01 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > mark, > > > > > > > > > > You mean their is still a corporation that has not yet gotten > > > > > > > > > a piece > > > > > > > > > of the Bush Bail-Out? > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 1, 6:03 am, Ohio mark <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > the times will run to the dems and demand their payback for > > > > > > > > > > being the > > > > > > > > > > propaganda wing for them. maybe some pleading, some > > > > > > > > > > begging, a little > > > > > > > > > > blackmail. they will get their bailout too. > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 1, 12:30 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Zeb, > > > > > > > > > > > > My, but you're certainly being an exceptionally nasty > > > > > > > > > > > little cock- > > > > > > > > > > > sucker tonight. You have something against the > > > > > > > > > > > Constituion or > > > > > > > > > > > something? > > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 31, 9:43 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > We are not putting a boot on the throat of the Iraqi > > > > > > > > > > > > people the way > > > > > > > > > > > > Saddam did, you filthy piece of stinking dog shit. As a > > > > > > > > > > > > toast to the > > > > > > > > > > > > new year, drink some Drano, traitor. > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 31, 9:52 pm, lef <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course you can pacify Iraq by using excessive > > > > > > > > > > > > > force. Saddam did it > > > > > > > > > > > > > for decades. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 31 Dec 2008, 21:28, jgg1000a <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Amazing, and dishonest... One does not have to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wonder why Urban Myths > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are seen as facts when the paper of record refuses > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to acknowledge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simple basic facts... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2008/12/and-a-happy-new.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>We expect the Times to continue to promote the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>notion that withdrawals can work. The appealing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>wrinkle is that now, withdrawals are appropriate > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>because the areas are pacified; the old theme > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>had been that withdrawals were necessary because > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>to stand and fight was a waste of lives and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>effort. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Neither this article nor the September piece > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mention Bush or use the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > word "surge". Whatever.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
