View Full Version : Debate II...This time it's personal....
Bush is smoking tonight!
Kerry has sounded whinny and ignorant at every question. He has offered no facts whatsoever, just more his usual BS.
Don't know what happened last week, but The Man is back and he is kicking liberal butt tonight.
I just don't understand how anyone can look at an listen to Kerry and every thingk he is even remotely qualified to be a senator, let alone President. He is so lame and weak it is sad.
sq764
10-08-2004, 09:42 PM
I was honestly curious to hear Kerry's answer on his bullshit draft rumors..
I haven't seen dancing like that since Patrick Swayze in Dirty Dancing...
Originally posted by sq764
I was honestly curious to hear Kerry's answer on his bullshit draft rumors..
I haven't seen dancing like that since Patrick Swayze in Dirty Dancing...
End of hour one.....Keery looks like "Baby" at her first dance lesson with Swayze....this guy is a laugh!
Bush is attacking Kerry's 20 year absence from the senate....about time. Like shooting fish in a barrel. I love his answer about tort reform....if you are so in favor of it, why didn't you show up to vote on it?
sq764
10-08-2004, 09:52 PM
Wow is this a turnaround..
This is the first time I have seen Kerry flustered.. Its kinda funny to watch..
I am ready for him to say "Well, your daughter's a slut.. there!"
Classic..."Need some wood?"
This will get some mileage.
Kerry never recovered from that first round knockdown.
I was amused by his answer about getting drugs from Canada. Isn't that outsourcing? Why is it ok to outsource in this case but not for businesses to outsource when they are saddled with unreasonable costs from labor unions, which Kerry supports? Inconsistet. But, that is Kerry.
Lefty
10-09-2004, 12:21 AM
speaking of outsourcing and closing loopholes, those loopholes were there way before Bush took office. Kerry's been in the Senate 20 yrs. Where's his bill to close loopholes?
Another pesky leetle fact: Close the loopholes, make companies deal with constant regs and pay higher labor costs. What happens? The product price goes up. We, as consumers pay more. Hmm, isn't that a hidden tax increase on us?
dav4463
10-09-2004, 02:10 AM
How in hell can these polls show Kerry won the debate? Were these people even watching ? I doubt it.. Bush kicked Kerry's ass tonight !
sq764
10-09-2004, 07:38 AM
Will be interesting to see if these instapolls show Kerry winning by like 70% or something, yet Bush gaining more ground in the presidential polls..
...along with the subsequent explanation by these polls as to how this could happen..
Don't mean to interrupt your little visit to fantasy island but I thought this picture says more then words.
http://www.fantasy3d.com/blogs/images/wringer.jpg
I think this is Bush responding to a question about wood? ;)
sq764
10-09-2004, 09:54 AM
Too bad pictures don't decide elections, votes do..
TomBush is smoking tonight!Yep. But the question is--What is he smoking! He OVERCOMPENSATED for being a reserved scowler and a petty petulant kid last week, and now is A LOUD, in your face teenager.
Look how hard Bush was trying to keep a poker face. It's was killing him! The man simply is NOT presidential. His command of the English language is embarrassing. "I hear there's rumors on the Internets"??? "They was"???
Bush became so annoyed by Kerry's description of the "back-door draft," that he jumped out of his chair and shrieked over moderator Charles Gibson, who was trying to maintain the peace.
To look at the replay of the preznit ignoring Gibson go here
http://homepage.mac.com/jhebertocx/bushflipsout.html
"You tell Tony Blair we're going alone," "Tell Tony Blair we're going alone!" blah blah blah-- "coalition of 30 countries" in Iraq.
Kerry: "Mr. President, countries are leaving the coalition, not joining. Eight countries have left it. If Missouri, just given the number of people from Missouri who are in the military over there today, were a country, it would be the third.
Bush:"When a drug comes in from Canada, I wanna make sure it cures ya, not kill ya. ... And what my worry is is that, you know, it looks like it's from Canada, and it might be from a Third World."
Yeah tell that to the canadians.
Meanwhile back at the ranch
Mort Kondracke: "... I think Kerry won this debate as he won the first debate I don't think... I thought that Kerry was much more aggressive and the president was basically on the defense and didn't have new arguments didn't have...wasn't as facile as he should have been." [Fox News Channel, 10/8/04]
Mort Kondracke: "I thought [Kerry] was very effective. I thought that he was also on the attack a lot and frankly I thought that the President seemed to be on the defense a lot and trying to explain things and not explaining them all that well." [Fox News Channel, 10/8/04]
Bill Kristol: "I guess I think if you think the President was doing okay and didn't need a win in this debate, he did fine, but I think, if one thinks that Bush missed an awful lot of opportunities to go after Kerry in the first debate he had to make some of them up in this debate, I'm not sure he really succeeded in doing so." [Fox New Channel, 10/8/04]
Brit Hume: "Is it now fair to say that in each of these debates in terms of marshaling arguments, and remembering them and presenting them that this is something John Kerry has proved he is very good at. And that it doesn't play to the president's strong suit." [Fox News Channel, 10/8/04]
Jonah Goldberg: "On the question of whether Bush did everything he needed to tonight, I don't think so. I think he helped himself, but Kerry leaves these debates energized." [National Review Online, 10/8/04]
Yowser, it's gotta really hurt when even the dummys from faux are accepting defeat again. :D :D :D
You don't like the 30 naotions on our side now?
OK, bright boys, who is Kerry going to get to join?
France, Germany and Russia have already said no.
Spains has no balls.
Who is Kerry going to get?
Pleaswe, if you can't offer specific names, don't bother answering.
Hcap, Ljb.......you see, intelligent people think for themselves, not rely on what others have to say.
You guys are a tad antsy tonight......feel that nipping behind you already?
sq764
10-09-2004, 11:14 AM
yeah, it is funny LJB..
Hey, still curious, how is Kerry going to get these 40,000 extra troops he promised? Because, remember, he swore to the camera no taxes to people under $200K...
I didn't know that he personally knew Michael J Fox and Christopher Reeve!! That changes everything..
Lefty
10-09-2004, 11:42 AM
The President showed fire and vigor defending his beliefs in America. Kerry was his usual wooden self weighing arguments for polical expediency. Gimme the guy who acts because he believes with all his heart that he's right and not the guy who flip-flops to polls and whims of other countries. Gimme the guy who acts in OUR best interests and not in the best interests of Europe.
If you want facile vote Kerry. If you want heart and core beliefs, vote Bush. Simple as that.
boxcar
10-09-2004, 01:35 PM
Tom wrote:
You don't like the 30 naotions on our side now?
OK, bright boys, who is Kerry going to get to join?
France, Germany and Russia have already said no.
Spains has no balls.
Who is Kerry going to get?
Pleaswe, if you can't offer specific names, don't bother answering.
This is indeed the $64. question. I've already posted elsewhere on this forum two reasons why the "big 3" won't come aboard militiarily. Here are a couple more reasons:
a) These countries have very large Muslim populations. No need to elaborate further on the implications to this fact, is there?
b) In the final analysis all politics are local, and the wilting socialist populations of these countries are very much anti-war. Save for Russia, it would be political suicide for France & Germany to buck the tide.
Russia, however, is in a world of its own and has its own large problems with terrorism, on which it has failed to get a handle. Not very likely that Russia will send troops elsewhere when they may be need at home...to defend the Motherland and keep Putin in power.
But have no fear...Kerry has a [secret] "plan".
Boxcar
boxcar
10-09-2004, 01:38 PM
sq764 wrote:
yeah, it is funny LJB..
Hey, still curious, how is Kerry going to get these 40,000 extra troops he promised? Because, remember, he swore to the camera no taxes to people under $200K...
Yeah...but at least he didn't say "read my lips". :)
Maybe this means that Kerry really meant what he said? :D
Boxcar
sq764
10-09-2004, 01:48 PM
Until the 3rd debate when he says "I promise you America, I will ONLY raise taxes on people making under $200,000 a year"
Secretariat
10-10-2004, 12:51 AM
John Kerry has had his tax plan with the $200,000 level on his website since the primaries. It's been discussed ad infinitum here. I don't know why anyone was so surprised he looked in the camera and said it.
Steve 'StatMan'
10-10-2004, 12:56 AM
I suspect my Doctor and Dentist, who should make over $200,000, will raise their rates because of the tax increase. So much for reducing the cost of healthcare.
Secretariat
10-10-2004, 12:57 AM
Originally posted by Lefty
The President showed fire and vigor defending his beliefs in America. Kerry was his usual wooden self weighing arguments for polical expediency. Gimme the guy who acts because he believes with all his heart that he's right and not the guy who flip-flops to polls and whims of other countries. Gimme the guy who acts in OUR best interests and not in the best interests of Europe.
If you want facile vote Kerry. If you want heart and core beliefs, vote Bush. Simple as that.
Give me the guy who intelligent and thinks about the consequences of his actions before doing them. I know guys in bars who are drunk with fire and vigor, and I sure as heck don't want them president.
As to core beleifs, you are kidding right. A man who gives corporate tax breaks to off-shore, an adminstration which says outsourcing is good for america, a man who disrgards the envrionment behind slogans, a man who tacks up the largest deficit in history which our chidlren will have to pay so he can give a tax loan to the wealthiest peopel in America, a person who beleives he has a direct line to God, and has no tolerance for others religion, a man who won't even fund his own educational program, a man who extends active duty and NG and IRR troops indefinitely, and closes down veterans hospitals, who states he's protecting amnericans from Canadian drugs when HE HAS DONE NOTHING in 4 years to do anything to deal with the issue, who refguses to negotiate with large drug companies to bring the costs down...my god, the list goes on and on....
If these are his core values- take them Lefty. I was raised a lot differently.
Originally posted by Steve'StatMan'BTW
I suspect my Doctor and Dentist, who should make over $200,000, will raise their rates because of the tax increase. So much for reducing the cost of healthcare.
They got thier TAX CUTS and they still raised thier rates. Health care and Health Care Premiums are up 35% to 65% Nationwide.
.
JustRalph
10-10-2004, 01:43 AM
Originally posted by Suff
They got thier TAX CUTS and they still raised thier rates. Health care and Health Care Premiums are up 35% to 65% Nationwide.
.
Yep.........and you can thank Mr. Edwards and his brethren.
On the subject of the 200k Tax info. I agree that when you raise taxes on these guys..........you raise it on everybody. It reminds me of the Dems promising to raise taxes on Corporations. Corporations don't pay taxes. They just pass them on to customers.....proven over and over again. It makes for a nice sound bite........but the Congress has to side with the President on these issues. You can promise all you want. It doesn't mean any of it will happen. Gridlock would be a good thing if Kerry gets elected. I kind of look forward to it..........him flailing around whining about Congress..............
Lefty
10-10-2004, 02:13 AM
If you think you can raise taxes on people making 200,000 and up and it not affect the people making less then you are truly naive.
He says he wouldn't go to war without the UN(coalition)yet says he won't cede power, sure seems like a contradiction to me; but Kerry full of contradictions.
Originally posted by Lefty
If you think you can raise taxes on people making 200,000 and up and it not affect the people making less then you are truly naive.
.
If You think People with Money, that get more money, will now spend it more liberally with you, Then your in worse shape than Naive.
Lefty
10-10-2004, 02:35 AM
Suff, people with money that get tax brks invest it, grow their business and create jobs or is your employer just a poor person?
Class warfare has been in the Dems playbook for yrs and a lot of people still buy into it. Truly amazing.
sq764
10-10-2004, 07:09 AM
..one question I still am left in limbo about after 2 debates is - according to Kerry, was Sadam a threat or no??
I heard him say Sadam was a threat, then about 10 minutes later, he said he was not..
The 1st debate he said Sadam being out of power is a good thing.. The 2nd debate he said if he were president, Sadam 'wouldn't necessarily be in power'..
What does this all mean?
Originally posted by Secretariat
John Kerry has had his tax plan with the $200,000 level on his website since the primaries. It's been discussed ad infinitum here. I don't know why anyone was so surprised he looked in the camera and said it.
I was surprised he is still trying to sell it. I thought it would have ended up on ebay long ago. It is such a stupid, meritless idea, but then Kerry is such a stupid, meritless person. A gigilo whop married a catsup queen to support him is going fix our economy????
Braaaawwwwwwhhhaaaaaaa!
Lefty
10-10-2004, 11:57 AM
Well, he sure fixed his economy. The Kerry's have an effective tax rate of less than 15%
I seem to remember 2 President's lately that promised a middle class tax cut. Clinton: But it didn't happen.
Bush. YES! Thank you, Mr President
highnote
10-10-2004, 12:51 PM
Originally posted by Tom
I A gigilo whop married a catsup queen to support him is going fix our economy????
Braaaawwwwwwhhhaaaaaaa!
Tom,
Can you explain the "gigilo whop" reference? Thanks.
John
Originally posted by Lefty
Suff, people with money that get tax brks invest it, grow their business and create jobs or is your employer just a poor person?
Class warfare has been in the Dems playbook for yrs and a lot of people still buy into it. Truly amazing.
Whats Truly amazing Lefty? That you simply MIMIC the Bullshit that the trickle down economics works? First off Lefty... all economics are "Theories"... Not exact scieneces. So show a Little humilty when someone holds a polar view.
Are you watching whats Happening? You say that when Corporations pay less Tax's they reinvest in Jobs? Please. What they do is after they make MORE money from the tax cuts, they move overseas abd make even More Money. They have no interest In Creating more jobs in the US. They just want to make more money. Consolidate wealth.
And the Companies that do stay.. When they get thier Tax cuts.. They go buy some software that Performs fucntions that Humans used to do and they cut Jobs. Corporations want to CUT JOBS Lefty , not add them. They'll do everything they can not tp have to hire anyone. Or pay overtime.
Lefty. BUSH has a 1.9 million JOB LOSS. The first President in 75 years who will finish a term with a negative Job Gain. Thats a FACT. Despite that, You insist his policies are good for Job Growth. NOW THAT! Is truly amazing.
And I don't want to hear no excuses about the who's , whats and wheres. The BOSS takes the blame. He's CEO, it happened on his watch aand he owns it.
No Crying in leadership
sq764
10-10-2004, 02:47 PM
I believe it's more in the neighborhood of 850,000 jobs, but whatever..
I am sure this had nothing to do with any of it..
http://lists.iww.org/pipermail/iww-news/2004-June/005636.html
Originally posted by swetyejohn
Tom,
Can you explain the "gigilo whop" reference? Thanks.
John
OOOPPS!!!
That should read a gigilo WHO....not whop!
I apologize for the typo...I didn't mean it to say that!
highnote
10-10-2004, 03:22 PM
Originally posted by Tom
OOOPPS!!!
That should read a gigilo WHO....not whop!
I apologize for the typo...I didn't mean it to say that!
Thanks for clarifying that. Now it makes sense. I kept trying to figure out what that meant. :)
I gotta be more carefull:D
JustRalph
10-10-2004, 05:27 PM
Originally posted by Tom
I gotta be more carefull:D
there is a difference between saying "whop" and "wop"
Secretariat
10-10-2004, 06:26 PM
Originally posted by Steve'StatMan'BTW
I suspect my Doctor and Dentist, who should make over $200,000, will raise their rates because of the tax increase. So much for reducing the cost of healthcare.
Aahh..perhaps so, but then don't we have a choice not to go to that doctor or dentist.
Your argument leads to this hypotheisis - Charge nothing in taxes to those making over 200,000 and let's hope they pass all those savings onto us in the middle class. Trickle down nonsense.
Go back and look at the tax rates on the upper 1% in Eisenhower's day and tell me they can't handle a slight increase to pay for the war in Iraq (whre their kids aren't fighting), and help pay for the massive deficit AND INTEREST run up by this President. The greed is unbelievable.
Lefty
10-11-2004, 12:17 AM
suff, why should I show humility for the bs you dems post. You work or have worked for big corps and fed your family cause they were there to give you work. Now you "down" them. Maybe it's you who should show some humility and respect. If Bush lost so many jobs how come the unemployment rate is essentially the same as when Clinton was Pres and everyone saying things were great? And don't give me the b.s. about low paying jobs either, it won't fly. Lottsa "hamburger flipping" jobs during Clinton too. I keep hearing this is the fastest growing economy in 20 yrs but to listen to the Dem leadership and you followers you'd think we were in a depression. If all economics is theory then i'll opt for the tax cut and not the tax raise.
Hmmm, Kennedy cut taxes and the economy iimproved. Reagan cut taxes and the economy improved. Bush cut taxes and overcome the devastating economy of taking over in a recession and the 9-11 lost a million jobs and now we have the fastest growing economy in 20 yrs. The tax cuts worked again. Sounds like more than a theory to me.
From Lefty,
If Bush lost so many jobs how come the unemployment rate is essentially the same as when Clinton was Pres and everyone saying things were great?
Everytime one person is added to the unemployed another person exhausts his/her benefits and drops off the list. You may want to go to factcheck.org before posting in the future.
Lefty
10-11-2004, 11:55 PM
No, I don't need to go anywhere. You need to know it's still the same nos you guys were getting off on During Clinton. This is the fastest growing economy in 2o yrs despite terrorists and a recession caused by Clinton tax raises.
boxcar
10-12-2004, 12:33 AM
ljb writes:
You may want to go to factcheck.org before posting in the future.
Hey, BirdBrain...before telling anyone else on this forum to do their homework...do some of your own first. Try this little fact on for size:
The only way an umemployed person can leave the Unemployed Rolls is to become gainfully employed. Let me spell this out carefully for you, so there is no misunderstanding: That person must become employed by someone else...by a company. The unemployment figs and the number of new jobs stats do not take into account the number of unemployed who formally go into business for themseleves (by forming a Chapter S corp., for example), nor people who, in a less formal way, seek other kinds of entrpreneurial paths. The fact of the matter is that the Internet (you know the thing Gore invented) is home to untold thousands, even tens of thousands of enterprising, self-employed entrepreneurs who make their money mainly or solely in Cyberspace. I know too many who are doing this, including this writer's wife -- not only on Ebay but now also on Cafe Press.
Speaking of Ebay, the company just held its International Convention (which I think was its first) and it was a huge success -- attended by more people (especially "power sellers") than the company could handle.
Furthermore, I have a tough time believing the unemployment stat of 5.4% (I think it is) because home ownership is at an all time high. If the economy was half as bad as you and your fellow Seed Eaters think it is, I'd be very hard-pressed to understand how this could be. Where are people getting all this money to buy homes and pay off high mortgages, month after month?
Boxcar
JustRalph
10-12-2004, 01:41 AM
Boxcar makes some good points. Anybody that has spent any time in California is aware of the awesome underground economy out there. I find it goes on just about everywhere. Spurred on by a confiscatory tax system........and the underground economy is growing "off the books" all the time. But it doesn't show up on any "official numbers" If Kerry is elected and the taxes go up it will just push more of our economy "off the books"
boxcar
10-12-2004, 08:25 AM
"Underground economy" is an apt description, JR. God only knows how many "mom and pop" entreprenurial types are operating in Cyberspace who report little or no income at all to the IRS. -- thanks solely to the grossly unfair, oppressive, confiscatory, complicated and incomprehensible income tax system. This is, yet, another reason to entirely abandon this communistic system and go with a totally transparent Nat'l Sales Tax, which would also be eminently fairer.
Boxcar
Secretariat
10-12-2004, 01:02 PM
Originally posted by boxcar
ljb writes:
You may want to go to factcheck.org before posting in the future.
Hey, BirdBrain...before telling anyone else on this forum to do their homework...do some of your own first. Try this little fact on for size:
The only way an umemployed person can leave the Unemployed Rolls is to become gainfully employed. Let me spell this out carefully for you, so there is no misunderstanding: That person must become employed by someone else...by a company. The unemployment figs and the number of new jobs stats do not take into account the number of unemployed who formally go into business for themseleves (by forming a Chapter S corp., for example), nor people who, in a less formal way, seek other kinds of entrpreneurial paths. The fact of the matter is that the Internet (you know the thing Gore invented) is home to untold thousands, even tens of thousands of enterprising, self-employed entrepreneurs who make their money mainly or solely in Cyberspace. I know too many who are doing this, including this writer's wife -- not only on Ebay but now also on Cafe Press.
Speaking of Ebay, the company just held its International Convention (which I think was its first) and it was a huge success -- attended by more people (especially "power sellers") than the company could handle.
Furthermore, I have a tough time believing the unemployment stat of 5.4% (I think it is) because home ownership is at an all time high. If the economy was half as bad as you and your fellow Seed Eaters think it is, I'd be very hard-pressed to understand how this could be. Where are people getting all this money to buy homes and pay off high mortgages, month after month?
Boxcar
Well, you're wrong on so many accounts.
1. Unemployment - When people exhaust their benefits they are dropped from the roles..it's as simple as that whether they got another job or not. Beleive me, I know.
The unemployment figures are based on the nubmer of claims per week, hence if these people are dropped from the roles they no longer count, but they are still jobless.
Additionally, unemployment does not trackwhether someone who did get work is making the same (even unadjusted for inflation) and whether he maintains the same quality of benefits.
You have to go to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics to get some of that info. The median wage is signficantly down since 2000 adjusted for inflation. A new report just came out showing that 1 in 5 American familes is now below the poverty level.
I assume Kerry will mention this in the debate. Millions of new people have been added to the uninsured, and those with insurance have seen premiums rise while benefits have declined.
Get out of the bubble and talk to some people. One of the reasons businesses are off shoring is not only wages but to avoid paying benefits.
Anyone who thinks this economy is doing jim dandy needs to take off the President's rose colored glasses.
But it's getting near the end and soon the people will decide if they want 4 more years of this. Deficits off the chart, instability all over the world, corporate give aways, and continued environmental desecration.
One thing about a democracy is we get what we vote for (with the exception of the electoral college).
I hope more than anything that whoever wins it is with a plurality and does not create a non-popular vote winner. That is bad for the country and if it happens again I think you'll see large protests in the streets and instability in our government.
sq764
10-12-2004, 01:50 PM
So Secretariat, are you saying that the 5.4% unemployment rate now is not better than the 5.6% rate in 1996 when Clinton was in office?
sq764
10-12-2004, 02:04 PM
And before you answer, I know your response will be that now people out of work for 18 months are not counted as unemployed..
My question is, should they??
PaceAdvantage
10-12-2004, 02:05 PM
Maybe Sec missed my last post on this topic in another thread...I'd like a response, so I'll re-post it here to make it more convenient for him and LJB and HCAP and anyone else to respond.
=====================================
Originally posted by Tom
Now that unemployment is low, the libs no longer consider it a real statistic...they only referenced it when it was high.
Ahh, a great add-on to my Clinton vs. Bush post:
Unemployment rate at 5.4% in 1996 under Clinton - GOOD
Unemployment rate at 5.4% in 2004 under Bush - BAD
It's MADNESS I tell you......UTTER MADNESS!!!
FLASHBACK:
http://www.cnn.com/US/9607/05/jobless/
AND YOU GOTTA LOVE THIS QUOTE FROM THAT ARTICLE in 1996:
The Labor Department said Friday that businesses added 239,000 workers to their payrolls during June. The vast majority of the jobs added were in the service industry, including restaurants, bars, and agencies that place temporary workers
Nobody was crying in 1996....but they're crying now...wonder why?
Secretariat
10-12-2004, 03:43 PM
Again with the Clintonism. If you look at my posts I have never been too fond of Bill Clinton.
What you guys fail to realize again is that it takes approximately 150,000 a month in new jobs just to keep up with population growth. So a 5.4% rate in 96 compared to a 5.4% in 04 means a LOT more people unemployed.
But it doesn't even go to the core issue I raised which is the median wage. Compare Clinton's 96 median wage adjusted for inflation with today's wage, AND the number of unemployment recipients REMOVED from the roles.
You will see today a MUCH lower median wage AND many more individuals REMOVED from the roles because the prospects of work have forced many to take much lower paying jobs with severe cuts in benefits. And that doesn't even address health care.
You guys just don't get it. Go look at the Bureau of Labor and Statistics if you don' beleive me. Take a real good look at that manufacturing sector. And then put your rose colored glasses back on.
...........
Memorable things said on the Senate floor over the centuries:
"I have always strenuously supported the right of every man to his own opinion, however different that opinion might be to mine. He who denies another this right makes a slave of himself to his present opinion, because he precludes himself the right of changing it." - Thomas Paine, 1783
"Free speech exercised both individually and through a free press, is a necessity in any country where people are themselves free." -Theodore Roosevelt, 1918
"The truth is found when men are free to pursue it." - Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1936
"If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." - George Rowel, 1945
"Any time we deny any citizen the full exercise ofhis constitutional rights, we are weakening our own claim to them." - Dwight David Eisenhower, 1963
"What is objectionable, what is dangerous aboutextremists is not that they are extreme, but that they are intolerant." - Robert F. Kennedy, 1964
"Go f*ck yourself." - Dick Cheney, 2004
sq764
10-12-2004, 04:12 PM
And you are certain that Kerry will improve this trend?
I mean, let's remember, he partakes in millions from a company in which he owns stock in that oursources more than half it's workers.. BUT he is vehemently against outsourcing..
JustRalph
10-12-2004, 05:07 PM
A much-married woman walked into a bridal shop one day and told the sales clerk that she was looking for a wedding gown for her 4th wedding.
"Well," replied the sales clerk, "exactly what type of dress are you looking for?"
The bride-to-be said, "I'd like a long, frilly white dress with a veil."
The sales clerk was quite taken aback but finally said, "Frankly, Madame, gowns of that nature are considered more appropriate for brides who are being married the first time -- for those who are a bit more innocent, if you know what I mean."
"Well," replied the customer, more than a little put out. "I can assure you that I am as innocent as the rest of them. Believe it or not, despite all of my marriages, I remain as innocent as a first-time bride." "You see, my first husband was so excited about our wedding night he died as we were checking into our hotel. My second husband and I got into a terrible fight in the limo on our way to the reception and have not spoken since. We had that wedding annulled immediately."
"What about your third husband?," asked the sales clerk.
"Well," said the woman, "he was a Democrat and every night for four years he just sat on the edge of the bed and told me how good it was going to be."
betchatoo
10-12-2004, 05:55 PM
Originally posted by JustRalph
A much-married woman walked into a bridal shop one day and told the sales clerk that she was looking for a wedding gown for her 4th wedding.
"Well," replied the sales clerk, "exactly what type of dress are you looking for?"
The bride-to-be said, "I'd like a long, frilly white dress with a veil."
The sales clerk was quite taken aback but finally said, "Frankly, Madame, gowns of that nature are considered more appropriate for brides who are being married the first time -- for those who are a bit more innocent, if you know what I mean."
"Well," replied the customer, more than a little put out. "I can assure you that I am as innocent as the rest of them. Believe it or not, despite all of my marriages, I remain as innocent as a first-time bride." "You see, my first husband was so excited about our wedding night he died as we were checking into our hotel. My second husband and I got into a terrible fight in the limo on our way to the reception and have not spoken since. We had that wedding annulled immediately."
"What about your third husband?," asked the sales clerk.
"Well," said the woman, "he was a Democrat and every night for four years he just sat on the edge of the bed and told me how good it was going to be."
Unfortunately her 4th marriage didn't work out any better. She married a Republican and divorced him after a year of looking for his weapon of mass destruction, which he swore he had, but could never be found.
JustMissed
10-12-2004, 06:02 PM
Originally posted by Secretariat
...........
Memorable things said on the Senate floor over the centuries:
"Go f*ck yourself." - Dick Cheney, 2004
Secretary, what is wrong with you man?
You have been hung up on this Dick Cheny thing every since it happened. What is your problem?
The Senate wasn't even in session. They were there for a group photo. So what.
There you go again--you give a bunch of quotes that were made when the Senate was in session and part of the record and try to compare them to what Cheny said off the record and in a private conversation when the Senate was not in session.
I am sick and tired of you and wish you would GO F*CK YOURSELF
If the truth is known you are probably nothing more than a BIG OLE PU*SSY.
JM
:mad:
"What you guys fail to realize again is that it takes approximately 150,000 a month in new jobs just to keep up with population growth. So a 5.4% rate in 96 compared to a 5.4% in 04 means a LOT more people unemployed."
Sec, you libs gotta put more math classes in to your pathetic school system.
You guys just do not graps the idea of percentages at all.
If 5.4% means more people unemployed, then the same 96.6% means more people are employed. Equalibirum. It's a wash - more people, divided the same way. Using your logic, eventually, we will need 110% employement to make sure we don't have too many people unemployed.
Originally posted by sq764
And you are certain that Kerry will improve this trend?
I mean, let's remember, he partakes in millions from a company in which he owns stock in that oursources more than half it's workers.. BUT he is vehemently against outsourcing..
He is going to go after "rich" people too. But Bush paid 31% in taxes last year, Kerry only paid 12%!
Sooo, looks like Kerry is going after himself! Like a doggie chasin his tail. Hehe, hehe, hehe.
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.