Blind Hatred for Bush Exposes Libs' Utter Hypocrisy...

[boxcar]

Evidently, Libs have very short memories. Very often what they said yesterday will not reflect their actions today. Note carefully that most of their quotes were made when Comrade Clinton was in office.

Boxcar
--------------------------------------------

May 9 Marks 2nd Anniversary Of Delay & Obstruction

In the past, Senate Democrats supported floor votes for judicial nominees

DASCHLE IN 1999: “I Find It Simply Baffling That A Senator Would Vote Against Even Voting On A Judicial Nomination.” (Senator Tom Daschle (S-SD) Congressional Record, 10/5/99)

In 1997, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) Said Senate Should “[A]ccept Our Responsibility And Vote People Up Or Vote Them Down. …If We Want To Vote Against Them, Vote Against Them.” (Senator Patrick Leahy, Congressional Record, 10/22/97)

In 1997, Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) Said “[I]t Is Not … Appropriate Not To Have Hearings On [Judicial Nominees], Not To Bring Them To The Floor And Not To Allow A Vote …” (Senator Joe Biden, Congressional Record, 3/19/97)

In 1997, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) Said The Senate Should Not“[O]bstruct The Process And Prevent Numbers Of Highly Qualified Nominees From Even Being Given The Opportunity For A Vote On The Senate Floor.” (Senator Barbara Boxer, Congressional Record, 5/14/97)

In 1998, Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) Said “We Owe It To Americans Across The Country To Give These Nominees A Vote. If Our Republican Colleagues Don’t Like Them, Vote Against Them. But Give Them A Vote.” (Senator Ted Kennedy, Congressional Record, 2/3/98)

In 1998, Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) Demanded “Vote The Person Up Or Down.” (Senator Richard Durbin, Congressional Record, 9/28/98)

In 1999, Sen. Tom Daschle Said “An Up-Or-Down Vote, That Is All We Ask …” (Senator Tom Daschle, Congressional Record, 10/5/99)

In 1999, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) Said “It Is Our Job To Confirm These Judges. If We Don’t Like Them, We Can Vote Against Them.” (Senator Dianne Feinstein, Congressional Record, 9/16/99)

In 2000, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) Said “[W]e Are Charged With Voting On The Nominees. The Constitution Does Not Say If The Congress Is Controlled By A Different Party Than The President There Shall Be No Judges Chosen.” (Senator Chuck Schumer, Congressional Record, 3/7/00)

In 2000, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) Urged “[T]he Republican Leadership To Take The Steps Necessary To Allow The Full Senate To Vote Up Or Down On These Important Nominations.” (Senator Tom Harkin, Congressional Record, 9/11/00)

In 2001, Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) Declared “[W]e Should Have Up-Or-Down Votes In The Committee And On The Floor.” (CNN’s “Evans, Novak, Hunt & Shields,” 6/9/01)

In 2001, Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND) Said “My Expectation Is That We’re Not Going To Hold Up Judicial Nominations. …You Will Not See Us Do What Was Done To Us In Recent Years In The Senate With Judicial Nominations.” (Fox News’ “Special Report With Brit Hume,” 6/4/01)

[ljb]

Boxcar,
If I had nothing to do I would dig up quotes from the bible-thumpin rednecks and post them in response but, I am a busy man so I'll just post a quote from your leader.
"Will the highways on the Internet become more few?" George W. Bush January 29, 2000
You figure this one out.
ljb;)

[Lefty]

Boxcar, thanks. Great stuff. That's why i'm flabbergasted any liberal can write a book; they are" memory challenged."

[Lefty]

ljb, Boxcar got his quotes from congressional record and they clearly show the blatent hypocrisy of the left.
And the best you can do is a little "mispeak" from Bush and call people rednecks? I'm busting a gut laughing.
Hey, I concede, Bush not a great orator, but he's a great leader.
My daddy always said,"actions speak louder than words."
Daddy, you were so right.

[Amazin]

You don't need blind hatred for Bush.He gives people plenty of reasons to openly loathe him.The only blind ones are the blind loyalists.No questions asked,no reasons given.

[Lefty]

amazin, only misguided people like you loathe Bush. You're mistake is believing we are blind loyalists. Not so. But he has given us no reason to mistrust him. He is a man of his word.
He KNOWS, what is is. And he KNOWS who our enemies are, and he KNOWS the Govt has no money that it belongs to the taxpayers.

[Amazin]

How many mother's days for Iraqi and Afghanistan mothers has he ruined?More than Osama.How many people has he unemployed in this country?More than Osama.How many small businesses have gone broke while he favors specific corporations?More than Osama.And you tell me there's no reason to mistrust him?Spoken like a true blind Patriot,for the Terrorist in the White House.

[dav4463]

Better to defend Bush than defend Osama.

[dav4463]

Amazin,

I am normally a nice guy, but you are really starting to piss me off !

[Dave Schwartz]

Amazin',

>>>How many mother's days for Iraqi and Afghanistan mothers has he ruined?<<<

And how many MORE Iraqi and Afghanistan mothers praise the fact that it was GW's leadership that freed their sons from prison?

And how many MORE Iraqi and Afghanistan mothers praise the U.S. for freeing them from the tyranny they have faced for two ddecades?

And how many MORE Iraqi and Afghanistan mothers will not have to cry over their dead sons and daughters just in the next year alone?

Enough said.


Dave Schwartz

[Amazin]

Dave:

Do you have numbers to support anything you said.General Tommy Franks say's"we don't do body counts".Enough said too.

[boxcar]

Originally posted by ljb
Boxcar,
If I had nothing to do I would dig up quotes from the bible-thumpin rednecks and post them in response but, I am a busy man so I'll just post a quote from your leader.
"Will the highways on the Internet become more few?" George W. Bush January 29, 2000
You figure this one out.
ljb;)

Not all "bible thumpers" are "rednecks", so be careful with your words.

And just how does Bush's words equate with the deception and lies of the Dems' words that I posted earlier -- and that are part of the public record in the Congressional Record?

And why is my shot "cheap"? Because I exposed their hypocrisy by posting the truth of the matter? Because you're a lover of deceivers, liars, cheats and thieves? Just the types you love cozying up to and rubbing elbows with, aren't they?

Boxcar

[Tom]

Originally posted by Amazin
How many mother's days for Iraqi and Afghanistan mothers has he ruined?More than Osama.How many people has he unemployed in this country?More than Osama.How many small businesses have gone broke while he favors specific corporations?More than Osama.And you tell me there's no reason to mistrust him?Spoken like a true blind Patriot,for the Terrorist in the White House.

....pull your head out of your butt and look at it. In fact, stare at it.
5-2 says you won't even see it. You are blind and I warned you that too much verbal masturbation would do this to you. Now look at yourself....oh, you can't. Neve mind.
Have a nice life.
A short one, but nice!:p

[ljb]

Here's another one for the redneck bible-thumpers to muse over.
"If the federal government wants us to tighten the borders, the federal govenment can send us the money to pay for the increased expense."
George W. Bush, Governor of Texas.
You want hipocrosy this one takes the cake. Don't you think?
ljb
;)

[ljb]

Bush is not a great orator nor a great leader. He is leading the lap dogs down a primrose path. Your children and your children's children are going to be paying for the mistakes this administration is making.
The actions are indeed speaking louder then words and they are not doing the world any good. So laugh on Lefty, enjoy it while you can.
ljb


:D

[Tom]

Nope. Not at all. You cannot compare a comment made before 911 to one made after. Unlike liberals, conservatives grow and learn and change and adapt as new information becomes available.

[Lefty]

Amazin and Ljb, when you guys are wrong you don't do it by half measures, do you? At least this guy has his mind on bus. and not who's under the desk. Thank God for a mature grown-up man in the White House. If I hated this country as much as you guys seem to i'd find another place to live. Perhaps France.

[ljb]

Now wait a minute Tom. This thread started with the accusation of Democrats being hipocrits based on statements they made prior to 9/11. Now you say it's ok for some people to say different things prior to 9/11 but not others. You are losing touch in your spin. Face it, when Bush was Govenor of Texas he said the feds should pay for border patrol. Now that he's President he wants the states to pay. Another example of hiprocacy at it's greatest.
Sorry Tom but you totally Wrong on this one Rather then growing with the changing times you are regressing.. :D

[ljb]

Lefty, I would prefer you didn't post comments to me and amazin. I cannot speak for amazin.
I have said in the past that Clinton is no longer President please get over it. The problems we are currently in have to rest solely on the Bush team's shoulders.
I DO NOT hate this country. I am not very fond of it's current leadership.
ljb

[boxcar]

Originally posted by ljb
Now wait a minute Tom. This thread started with the accusation of Democrats being hipocrits based on statements they made prior to 9/11. Now you say it's ok for some people to say different things prior to 9/11 but not others. You are losing touch in your spin. Face it, when Bush was Govenor of Texas he said the feds should pay for border patrol. Now that he's President he wants the states to pay. Another example of hiprocacy at it's greatest.
Sorry Tom but you totally Wrong on this one Rather then growing with the changing times you are regressing.. :D

How is Bush a hypocrite, when after 9/11, he refuses, as president, to spend more money by putting troops on the border? (In case you don't get it: He didn't want tighter security on the borders as Gov, nor does he necessarily want it now as pres!)Nor have I read anything or have ever heard him say, as president, that the states should pick up the tab for increased border patrol.

Evidently, you don't have the foggiest idea of what the definition of "hypocrite" is -- just as Comrade Bill didn't have a clue on what "is" means!

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Originally posted by ljb
Now wait a minute Tom. This thread started with the accusation of Democrats being hipocrits based on statements they made prior to 9/11. Now you say it's ok for some people to say different things prior to 9/11 but not others. You are losing touch in your spin. Face it, when Bush was Govenor of Texas he said the feds should pay for border patrol. Now that he's President he wants the states to pay. Another example of hiprocacy at it's greatest.
Sorry Tom but you totally Wrong on this one Rather then growing with the changing times you are regressing.. :D

Tom's observation is valid! Bush's remarks about tighter border security before and after 9/11 have this in common: Both were made in the context of national security concerns - concerns which were certainly heightened after 9/11. However, those lying Dems and the comments they made on Clinton's watch and subsequently on Bush's about the judicial nominees ratificatiion process has no such common thread, except this: both were made for pure political expediency and gain.

Even so...as pointed out in my previous post, I have never read or heard where Pres Bush contradicted himself over the border patrol issue. In fact, I wish he would by putting U.S. troops on both borders!

Boxcar

[Dave Schwartz]

Amazin',

Are you suggesting that only a "few" people died each year at the hands of Saddam's police state?

If you are this uninformed then try reading that ultra-liberal online rag called MSNBC. Permit me to provide a few links...

http://www.msnbc.com/news/908837.asp
http://www.msnbc.com/news/910212.asp

Here is one from AMnesty International:
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engMDE140082001?OpenDocument&of=COUNTRIES%5CIRAQ?OpenDocument&of=COUNTRIES%5CIRAQ

Here are several from Human Rights Watch:
http://www.hrw.org/mideast/iraq.php

How about the Iraq Foundation?
http://www.iraqfoundation.org/news/2003/emay/6_sports.html

You probably won't believe this one because it is from your own government:
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/15996.htm

Here is another one about the soccor team:
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0506IraqTorture06-ON.html

If you'd care to go on you can do the search yourself on Google. Just use keywords like Iraq, torture, prison and murder.


In my humble opinion, nobody with an open mind can read of these attrocities and put the focus on President Bush's actions (in a negative way). This was about Iraq and Saddam. If you insist making it about Bush then you are proving what people are saying here: that you are so biased in your hatred of Bush that you will not see the truth.

The truth is that what the United States of America has done in Iraq is a wonderful, heroic and selfless thing. I am proud of everything our nation has accomlished there, the men who accomplished it, and our leaders for making it happen, especially in light of the world's lack of support.


Dave Schwartz

[Lefty]

Sorry, ljb, as long as you make silly statements, I will address them. Our economic doldrums started during the last of Clinton adm. Then 9-11 came. If Clinton had "arrested" Bin Laden when Syria offered him up on a "silver platter" perhaps, just perhaps 9-11 wouldn't have happened. So how are these probs Bushes fault? They are "his" to solve but not his fault. You're not proud of this adm but you were prob. proud as hell of Bill when he raised taxes on everybody, even social security. And you were prob. real proud when he lied to the country and then perjured himself in front of a judge. Ahh, the proud days.

[Tom]

72 out of 100 Americans like Bush's performance.
Most of the world doesn't.
Where would you rather live?
Get used to it, guys.....MR. Bush is not done yet.
He is just warming up. The only question is, Who's Next?

Syria 9-5
Iran 5-1
K Korea 8-1
Palestine 8-1

Now, take out your charts from Four Quarters and see where the value lies.

[ljb]

Lefty,
Fact! Bush's lies have cost us more the Clinton's lies.
Fact 2!
Osama is just a figurehead for a massive idea in the world. His whereabouts on 9/11 had little to do with the attack. We are not at war with Osama we are at war with a terroist organization.
Fact 3
Republicans blame all the troubles in the world on Clinton. Tend to shy away from responsibility for there own dismal leadership.
Sorry lefty but the facts prove you wrong again.
gotta call them like i see them.

[ljb]

Boxcar,
I don't doubt that you have never read where Bush contradicted himself on border issues. You probably only read the propoganda put out by the right wing. The information was on a Phoenix news program march of this year. It was a quote from the Governer of Arizona. I can't give exact date as I am no longer in Phoenix. Now let it be known he made one statement as Governor of Texas and reversed his opinion as President. But the fact remains he like the democrats had a form reversal based on current conditions. You originally called the dems hipocrits for changing there opinions based on current conditions, what say you now about your revered President Bush?

[ljb]

Tom,
I think your 72% is a figment of imagination. Funny that you would mention this poll in a note suggesting the odds on Bush's next victim. I was going to start a contest on this board having to do with similiar conditions. Only mine was going to ask:
At what popularity rating will Bush start his next war?
60%
55%
50%
<50%
and of course the tie breaker would be to guess which country would be designated evil empire?
You have already indicated your choice of countries, would you care to venture the first guess at what popularity rating Bush sinks to before he gets all fired up again?
I don't have this fine tuned yet but would probably allow your entry to come in early. Oh and good luck on you guess.

[Lefty]

ljb, apparently you can't discern fact from opinion. Care to prove your so-called fact no.1?

[Lefty]

Tom, ain't it weird that the libs love the polls when they can finagle and skew them but when one comes out like 72% agree with Bush then they just can't standb it and it must be a fig newton of your immigration.

[ljb]

Well I don't know maybe I spoke to soon. After all the republicans did spend 40 million or was it billion of our tax dollars proving that Clinton had a weakness in the sexual area.
However when you consider the lives it cost to find no weapons of mass destruction or eliminate the threat to the world (some threat hey!) it may be more expensive covering Bush's lies. And that of course does not include the cost of the bombs etc.
But on a brighter note Halliburton is doing well with all the re-construction contracts they are getting. Halliburton wasn't that part of Cheney's gang, the one that was selling equipment to Saddam before he got his government job? Just a coincidence i guess.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally posted by ljb
your revered President Bush?


He's all of ours, yours included. Your lack of respect for the office of the President of the United States is frightening.

No, I did not vote for President Clinton, and no, I did not approve of many of the things he did while in office, but he was still MY PRESIDENT. How terrible, as an American citizen, that you can not even have the common decency to show just a speck of respect for the office.....

[Lefty]

That's proof?What's the investigation of Clinton got to do with Geo. W? But i'll play. Let's see 40 million but they proved he was exactly what we thought he was; a liar and a pervert. Worth it. Hey, how much did the dems spend trying to prove that fantasy on Geo. H?
You know, the October surprise. It didn't exist yet all that money was spent.
And scuse me, they did find WMD's and hey, did you hear about the people we freed and the torture prisons and the deathcamps?
Rebuilding:Somebody has gotta get the contract. Now say, you're the pres; who would you pick? I know you would pick a co. that was unfriendly to you. sure you would. Get real. Sorry, ljb, no cigar for you.

[Lefty]

PA, didja ever notice how most of the time when the mainstream news talks about Pres. Bush they call him Mr Bush, and when they talk about Clinton they call him President Clinton. Talk about disrespect.

[ljb]

Excuse me but the key word in the out of context quote you used is: "revered" . Please note i was reffering to what appears to me to be the blind reverence most of his supporters on this board have for President Bush.
George W. Bush is my President and I hold utmost respect for the position he holds. I do however, with my right as an American, disagree with most of his policy decisions. When that right is taken from me, it will be taken from all of us.

[ljb]

Lefty,
Your narrowmindedness is starting to show again. Calling a former President a pervert is a little much. And if you think 40 million or was it billion tax dollars spent to delve into the private activities of a government official is "OK" , you must be one of them thar bible thumpers.
Praise the lord and pass the peas.:D

[ljb]

Oh,
I almost forgot would any of you be interested in getting in the contest I mentioned in my reply to Tom? ;)

[boxcar]

Originally posted by ljb
Boxcar,
I don't doubt that you have never read where Bush contradicted himself on border issues. You probably only read the propoganda put out by the right wing. The information was on a Phoenix news program march of this year. It was a quote from the Governer of Arizona. I can't give exact date as I am no longer in Phoenix. Now let it be known he made one statement as Governor of Texas and reversed his opinion as President. But the fact remains he like the democrats had a form reversal based on current conditions. You originally called the dems hipocrits for changing there opinions based on current conditions, what say you now about your revered President Bush?

Provide us with the quotation, wise guy, and then we'll go from there.

Moreover, those lying, scum bucket Dems you love so much changed their opinions on judicial nominees strictly for political reasons, and had nothing to do with 9/11 -- with national security -- with border patrol issues, etc. The Dems in the Senate sang one tune when a Dem was in office, but acts altogether differently when a Repub is in office. This is a classical example of hypocrisy.

Boxcar

[Lefty]

ljb, calling Clinton a pervert a bit much? Anyone that sticks cigars in a woman's vagina is a pervert in my "narrow minded" world.
You defend Clinton, a man who let his so called friends go to jail so he wouldn't have to take responsibility for ANYTHING. A Pres. who did not respond to any terrorist attack. A man who was too involved in "Bill"s" world to "arrest" Bin Laden when he had the chance.
And you demean a President who is chasing the terrorists to the "ends" of the earth and at the same time trying to rebuild a faltering economy that was partly devastated by the shenanigans of Clinton i.e. tax raises, a "phoney" stock market built on fraud and then 9-11 and Geo. W. Bush has the monumental job to turn all this around and making a "gallant" effort without complaint and you demean him? Sheds a lot of light on YOU.

[ljb]

Lefty,
so you know for a fact that Clinton stuck a cigar in someones vagina. Were you there? If so you could be considered a pervert in some circles. Also there are many people in this world that don't share your views of what is and is not perversion. Especially when it comes to sex. However with the right wing bible thumpers in charge perhaps we can get a law stating what is or is not perversion. Perhaps we could do a poll on board here to determine what exactly is sexual perversion. Maybe i can tie it in with my contest. Have you made your entry yet? Oh and I must remind you Clinton is no longer President.
Well I have raised a few topics for your perusal, please do so and respond accordingly. :rolleyes:
Thank you

[ljb]

Boxcar,
You may want to look into an anger managment seminar. You seem to be losing control here. Calling names and such. tsk tsk!
As for the quotation. I have no reason to lie here. You will have to take my word for it. It was in the news in Phoenix sometime in March.
Now let's work on that name calling.:eek:

[Lefty]

ljb, it comes under the category of one of those "proven fact" thingys.
I am not a bible thumper. But silly me, I think Clinton's perverted.
He's not Pres anymore? Tell him that; he runs around the country making "noises" like he is. The things he did while Pres will affect this country negatively for a long time; much as i'd like to forget him, it's rather impossible at this time, especially when you try to pin a faltering economy on Bush. One cannot devastate an economy overnight my friend, it starts somewhere, and it started with Clinton. He took an economy that was starting to "blossom" and did everything in his power to wreck it; and by the end of his tenure, he had succeeded.
Mind you, not on purpose, just because he was more interested in himself than the country, and because he adhered to the Demo idea that tax raises were a good thing.

[Lefty]

ljb, I know you were trying to be wry when you suggested a law about sexual perversion, but i'm a conservative and we have too many laws already, thank you. And I care not one whit what anyone does in the privacy of one's bedroom. Ahh, that's the rub(so to speak)he was not in the privacy of his own bedroom, was he? He was in the Oval Office, the People's Office, the %$^#pervert.

[ljb]

Well Lefty you still haven't responded as to your whereabouts during this alleged pervert act. If it did take place how do you know where it took place.
You see Lefty you are basing your thoughts/decisions on partial evidence. Oh how quick we are to condemn those we do not agree with. And profane symbols also. Perhaps you could sign up for the anger management class boxcar has agreed to attend. We may be able to get you two a group discount.;)

[Lefty]

I wanted to have an intelligent discourse but you and your childishness have rendered that impossible. It's all part of the record and you know it. You or amazin once told me to grow up but it's you who need to. You can't respond with intelligence so you play these games. I'm not interested in your sillygames. You know what I say is true.
BTW, it's you and amazin and other libs who are so angry over Bush that yu are beside yourselves. Boxcar and I are happy as can be. Least I am and I will assume Boxcar not angry either. But you guys sure are. Wow!
But we have strayed from Boxcar's orig. post. He gave actual quotes of what all those Dems said during Clinton's adm and they are saying exactly the opposite now and won't give Bush an up or down vote on his nominees and even have changed the rules.
And that is one of those pesky facts that is incontovertible.

[Derek2U]

Tweedle + Tweedless .... 80 years ago they played state fairs
as the "2peeps-1sharedbrain" entity. When blindfolded & spun
around 50 times both of them sat in the same pew# in different
churches in different states. They are telepathically impaired.
So why waste your brain cells on these 2 mummys? (BTW guys,
just between us, for 50K i'll book U2 on them Reality Shows like
Survivor ... yeaH pack ur silk jammies ur mark twain books and
ur 30s porn.

[Tom]

Originally posted by ljb


Osama is just a figurehead for a massive idea in the world. His whereabouts on 9/11 had little to do with the attack. We are not at war with Osama we are at war with a terroist organization.



What planet do you live on?????
Is there intelligent life there? (get it?)

[Tom]

I cannot figure out which one of you - Ljb/Amazin is really Al Gore.
It is just too close to call. If only I could hear a sound-byte.
But I must say, either one could be him......and both should be put into a "locked box!"
Good night, you two leaders of the "28% Club"
Pleasant dreams....even more pleasant than the ones you live out during the daytime.

******

Derek....Welcome back. How was the honeymoon, guy?
BTW....what the Heck are you talking about above?? hehehe

[boxcar]

Originally posted by ljb
Boxcar,
You may want to look into an anger managment seminar. You seem to be losing control here. Calling names and such. tsk tsk!
As for the quotation. I have no reason to lie here. You will have to take my word for it. It was in the news in Phoenix sometime in March.
Now let's work on that name calling.:eek:

Angry? Why do you think I'm angry? Because I calls them the way I sees them. Most libs are lying scumbuckets (it's just their nature), which is why I won't take your word for what you allege was in some Phoenix newspaper. You'll just have to show me.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Originally posted by Tom@HTR
What planet do you live on?????
Is there intelligent life there? (get it?)

Oh, there might be some intelligent life there alright...but you just can't put A-Maze, LJB or Derek for that matter into that category -- and do it with a straight face!

Boxcar

[JustRalph]

Apparently JFK had an Intern of his own............ I guess Clinton was imitating his hero.........

Historian Robert Dallek has revealed in a new book that a credible source has told him that President John. F. Kennedy carried on an affair with a 19 year-old White House intern and had sex with her on official trips, possibly in the White House.
So now we have the news that JFK had an intern as well. The big beneficiary of this story is of course, William Jefferson Blythe Clinton. The liberals and the Democrats are going to say that none of this affected Kennedy's ability to do his job. Bill Clinton wasn't the first to boink an intern.

[ljb]

Tom,
Hate to upset you so, but I am from the planet earth. There is intelligent life on earth, very little of it on this thread.
I stand by my statement. Osama's whereabouts on 9/11 had little to do with the attack.
Are you trying to tell me he was air traffic controller for the planes cause we all know he wasn't flying them.
Tom you have to open up your eyes a bit and try to see the BIG picture. Osama's gang of terroists were responsible for the attack BUT the attack could have taken place even if Osama was dead and buried.
Oh also I see 10 Americans killed in terroist attack in Saudi, you may want to consider this country when you post your entry in the Bush's next war contest.
Just trying to help you out a bit.:rolleyes:

[ljb]

Boxcar,
After you get through your anger managment seminar you may want to go to a good optometrist. You seem to be lacking in periphial vision.
Give me enough time and I can probably make you into a halfway decent human being.
:rolleyes:

[ljb]

Originally posted by jr

Bill Clinton wasn't the first to boink an intern.

Correct JR and he wont be the last. Boinking interns is a sport that has been enjoyed by many for years and will continue to be so. Unless the rednecks morallity police can find a way to put a stop to it. I've heard the interns seem to enjoy it also.;)

[Derek2U]

Me & my wife Solange met so many interesting peeps in both France & Italy we're gonna have guests in nyc for the next 6 months. But I'm glad to be back ... i've got this week off also cause we're moving 2 anothr apt ... and I'm off to Calif on friday & will miss the preakness day betting but will see the race at Del Mar simulcasting I think. See U later amigo.

[boxcar]

Originally posted by ljb
Boxcar,
After you get through your anger managment seminar you may want to go to a good optometrist. You seem to be lacking in periphial vision.
Give me enough time and I can probably make you into a halfway decent human being.
:rolleyes:

Given that you're hopelessly trapped in the muck and mire of your own miserable, socialist existence, I don't see how you could ever influence anyone for good.

Boxcar

[ljb]

Originally posted by Boxcar
I don't see how you could ever influence anyone for good.

This is a good beginning Boxcar, you are finally admitting you don't see some things. Now lets continue on our anger management and we'll start looking for a good optometrist. ;)

[Lefty]

ljb, now I get you. Fighting terrorists, making the world a little bit safer doesn't get your admiration. But just let a pres. boink an intern, act like an oversexed pimply faced 16 yr old, turn his back on his marriage vows, redefine any word in the dictionary when it suits his purpose, this kind of man gets your loyalty and admiration.
Geez, no wonder you don't like Bush.

[ljb]

Lefty,
Sorry pal but you again are way off pace here. The world is less safe now then before Bush started his war. Yesterdays events in Saudi are an example.
And as for the boinking statement I was just making light of something you rednecks use as a flag to wave against Clinton anytime the heat gets to high for Bush. :rolleyes:

[Lefty]

ljb, you can call us rednecks, you can obfuscate and deny all you want, but the world and America is a safer place because of this Pres. Clinton armed N. Korea with nukes and it now becomes Geo. W's place to eradicate and deal with Clinton's mistakes.
I really don't care about Clinton having sex with whomever, I do care when he does it in the Oval office and I really do care when he sticks his finger in America's face and lies about it and I really really do care when he commits perjury. There are people in jail for doing the exact same thing and he belongs there too.
Uh, how many terrorists attacks in America since "the war on terrorism?" You can say anytrhing you want ljb, but the FACTS do not back you up.
You hate Bush so that it is you and amazin and maybe even Derek who needs those anger mgt classes. I'm happy with the Pres we got and am happy, happy, happy. I'll bet Boxcar is too.
Hmmm.

[ljb]

originally posted by Lefty
Uh, how many terrorists attacks in America since "the war on terrorism?"
Uh, how many terroist attacks in America since G.W. Bush became President?
The world is in turmoil, Bush's lap dogs close there eyes to this reality. Bush in his desire to gain public support started a war and consequently made things worse.
:confused:

[Lefty]

ljb, one because Clinton didn't do his job. That's my point: Bill's child-like deference to only himself and his libido cost a lot of lives.
Sorry you can't see what a great leader "W" is and sorry to tell you that he will be reelected and you can be angry 4 more yrs. So,
don't lose sight of that anger mgt class you've tried to foist on those that are not angry at all but enjoying watching a real man adhere to the responsibilities he was elected to and not self-gratification.

[Tom]

Ljb....
Are we going to discuss this like adults? If so, then I will respond.
Bush did not start this war. IT was started years ago and it is nowhere near over. Irqaq was only a battle.
Osama Bin Laden created, financed and runs El Qeda. He and his thugs orchastrated the 911 attack. It was only one in a series of attacks on Americans. Yesterdays was just another in that series.
I do not blindly follow W, in fact, I don't really like him all that much. I did not vote for him as much as I voted against Al Gore. The reason was what actually happened...foreign catastrophes, although in my wild wildest dreams, I never anticipated 911.
I agree with the way W has responded and I agree with what he said today about those that launched the attack in Saudia Arabia will learn what American justice is. As far as Suadia Arabia goes, read my posts - I have maintained that SA is our enemy, same as Iraq...no, worse! I do not agree with Bush and Powell in their so-called friendship with the Saudi's - they cannot be trusted and they will cause more death and destruction. I totally disagree with W in that I believe we are at war with Islam-all of it. At least Islam is at war with us. Unfortunatley, it will take another 911 for people to realize that. I trust no one Islamic and have no desire to make peace with them. Until some of them stand up and prove me wrong, I will never look any arab as anything but an enemy and a potential sleeper/murderer. I do not care how long they have lived in this country. Call me a bigot? You are correct. And I don't care- so before you and your cohort call me a blind Bush follower, remember, Bush is far to middle of the road for me.
We are in a new world order, and all that counts anymore is power. We are not acting serious enough in the war on terrorism.
That is weakness. These people are willing to die to destroy us.
I say, let's accomadate them. Remeber, no matter how much you praise or side with Osama, he wants to kill YOU, too.
That, L, is the "big picture."

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by Tom@HTR
I do not blindly follow W, in fact, I don't really like him all that much. I did not vote for him as much as I voted against Al Gore. The reason was what actually happened...foreign catastrophes, although in my wild wildest dreams, I never anticipated 911.
I agree with the way W has responded and I agree with what he said today about those that launched the attack in Saudia Arabia will learn what American justice is.

Great point Tom. I was voting against Gore and his ilk. But the way Bush has stepped up and handled all of this crap, he gets my support for his response. Dennis Miller said it best:
" Clinton was on cruise control, Bush got Bushwacked! But he is handling it better than anybody expected and he deserves a ton of credit" Miller also said " If Clinton would have been a little more like Bush there might be a few thousand more people in New York City today, and the economy would be a hell of alot better off". I agree with Dennis Miller.

[doophus]

ljb & Amazin'...

Just to further enlighten, I, too, did NOT vote for W or GORE or PHILLIPS or LANE or BROWNE or DODGE or HAGELIN or BUCHANAN or MC REYNOLDS or HARRIS or MOOREHEAD. I voted for a super-liberal, NADER.

Ya'll guessed it. I'm a tree-hugger. I hug (and kiss occasionally) each large tree just before the tree chopping machine moves on site. There just aren't enough large trees, soft or hardwood, remaining in the South. A big ol' wild cherry tree with 18+ inches of diameter really gets my blood pumping. A big old white oak or very scarce old red oak or an impossible to find 1st cut cypress becomes some beautiful things, floors, cabinets, boards with which to make "board roads" that lead to a new oil and/or gas well drilling site. We need more domestic oil & gas production, and I'm convinced that trees willingly give it up for the betterment of all. Also, if one of my hardwood boards could be used on Osama's head, there would be a lot of tree huggin' and log-rolling going on, worldwide.

Gosh, educating you two gives me great pleasure. You're welcome!


George Evans



PS:

ljb, sure wish you had stayed in 'zona. Now that you're back in Michigan the Big Muddy, Mississippi River, must deal with your excrement. The river has enuff already.

[ljb]

doofus,
Do all those words you just posted have any meaning to anyone other then yourself?
ps where do you dump your shit?
:rolleyes:

[Tom]

Doophus...just humor-don't get mad....

I think that I shall never see
A sight more sickening than a tree.
A tree that takes up so much space,
where cheese-box homes could stand in place.

The trees were grown for you and me,
for hard-wood floors and cabinetry.
A tree you chop down in the gulch,
can soon be made into paper mulch.

Then books and letters will abound,
On trees we all helped to chop down.
The mighty oak, the ole elm dutch,
I really don't like all that mutch.

The spotted owls that in them nest,
I love them fried with watercress,
The Black Forrest, make no mistake,
is only good as chocolate cake.

[ljb]

Lefty,
Your anger at not being able to oust Clinton has caused you to overreact to everything. Bush is not a godsend, he is the man currently serving as President of the U.S. of A.
I personally do not agree with the way he is doing his job. And will do what I can to try and limit him to one term. That is, donate to his opponet maybe even put up some signs and do some volunteer work for the Dems.
BUT I DO NOT HATE BUSH... I kinda like him as a person he's the sorta guy I would have over for dogs and burgers in the back yard. I'm sure he would be lottsa fun.
But he sure ain't Presidential material.
;)

[ljb]

Tom,
Your post is a little longer then i prefer. But I agree with a lot of what you say. I don't think Bush started the war against terroism, he started a war in Iraq. Which I think just served to solidify the muslims hatred of us. And also coincidently ? Gave Bush a lot of support in the polls.
I also agree that the muslims have a hatred for us. Most likely because of our support for Israel but, we are talking holy wars here and they can go on for centuries. Maybe just maybe there is a better solution then killing all the muslims.
There are other points in your note i could discuss but I just finished power washing my deck and i am tired. Gotta sit in front of the boob tube and veg out a bit.:eek:

[Tom]

Now that is an opinion I can respect.
No one says anyone has to like Bush or agree with him.
And it is a given that people will work to keep him out of a second term.
That's why we keep Florida around :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Lefty]

Bush not presidential material? Ha, ha. A joke, right?
Tell you what, not blind, not obedient, not blindly obrdient, but I know when a man's doing everything right. I never thght about it in that context, till you brght it up but, You know, he just might be a Godsend.

[boxcar]

Originally posted by ljb
Originally posted by Boxcar
I don't see how you could ever influence anyone for good.

This is a good beginning Boxcar, you are finally admitting you don't see some things. Now lets continue on our anger management and we'll start looking for a good optometrist. ;)

"We"? You have rat in your pocket, do you?

Boxcar

[JustRalph]

It appears that the Kennedy cronies have decided the grace period is over for covering up for JFK. This is from the Washington Post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51466-2003May13.html

Kennedy Was Cocaine User, New Book Claims

Reuters
Tuesday, May 13, 2003; 7:52 PM
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - John F. Kennedy snorted cocaine with actor Peter Lawford while the two stayed at Frank Sinatra's Palm Springs house in the late 1950s, according to an excerpt from a tell-all book written by Sinatra's former valet.

Writing about the close friendship between Sinatra and the future U.S. president, George Jacobs said that although the Rat Pack singer knew of Kennedy's weakness for women -- and went so far as to arrange liaisons for him -- he would not have approved of his drug use.

In an excerpt from his forthcoming book "Mr.S," released in the June edition of Playboy Magazine, Jacobs said he was present on several occasions in Palm Springs "when Peter Lawford and the future president did lines of cocaine together in Lawford's guest rooms."

"The first time it happened Jack must have seen the shocked look on my face. 'For my back, George' Kennedy said to me with his bad-boy wink," Jacobs wrote, adding that Lawford pleaded with him not to tell Sinatra.

Lawford was married at the time to Kennedy's sister Pat and both men were frequent guests at Sinatra's Palm Springs compound.

Jacobs, who was Sinatra's valet from 1953 to 1968, said Kennedy had an "endless obsession with sex and gossip. He wanted to know all the Hollywood dirt." But Jacobs said he never told Sinatra about Kennedy's cocaine habit.

"I wasn't about to break the bad news about Jack, who Mr. S. had put on a pedestal. Sex and alcohol may have made Jack a better man in Sinatra's sight. Cocaine was a different story," he wrote.

A new biography of Kennedy by historian Robert Dallek published this month disclosed that in the last eight years of his life Kennedy was taking as many as eight medications a day for a variety of medical problems including back pain and Addison's disease, a life-threatening lack of adrenal function.

Jacobs' book about his life as Sinatra's right-hand man is to be published in June by HarperCollins.

[ljb]

Boxcar,
Sorry I overstepped my bounds a bit. It's a little early for me to get that close to you.
I will rephrase the statement.
Continue the anger managment program and start looking for a good optometrist.:D

[ljb]

Lefty, Your question as quoted below:
Bush not presidential material?
Is not what I said. I said Bush is not Presidential. He is definately presidential material, has the charm, good looks and charisma to be a good candidate. However he is not presidential in that he does not now how to do the job. He has the U.S. economy in a shambles and the world in a turmoil. When history puts up the scorecards Bush will go down as one of the worst presidents in history.
You seem to have as much passion in your reverence for Bush as you do in your hatred of his predecessor. It's almost like a blind obedience, yeah that's what it is a blind obedience. You have been trained well. :eek:

[Show Me the Wire]

I guess it depends on your perspective of presidential. To me appearing on MTV, playing the saxophone on television and committing perjury, in order to obstruct justice is not presidential.

Also, I believe the world was in turmoil way befroe President Bush took his oath of office and I actually believe there will be less turmoil in the world, as a result of this President's actions.

It is easy to ignore problems, and even easier to critcize, especially when criticism contains no alternative solution. All I hear from opponents of Bush's policy is that there must be a better way. However, I have not heard a detailed alternative plan from any of these critics, except for broad generalizations about acting against without other countries consent.

Other countries act in their own best interests, i.e. France without getting the world community's consent, and the U.S. has the same right to act in its best interest to the exclusion of other countries best interest.

I can see the argument, but if the U.S acts in its own best interests there will be turmoil in the world. Too bad. The world has responsibilities too, France, Russia, Germany, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, China, etc need to be responsible citizens of the wolrd too. Until these countries stop acting irresponsibly they have no right to question U.S. actions predicated on U.S. interests.

Ah but I have become tangental to my discussion of presidential.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perspective is reality.

[ljb]

Show, your quote:I guess it depends on your perspective of presidential. To me appearing on MTV, playing the saxophone on television and committing perjury, in order to obstruct justice is not presidential.
Ah but this fellow had the presidential candidate qualifications as I mentioned in my statement about Bush. The big difference here is, Under Clinton we had peace and prosperity.:cool:

[so.cal.fan]

Some really good points here from everyone. Too bad the conservatives on the PA board can't run the UN, and our liberal friends run our domestic policies.
Look, history will prove what was good judgement and what wasn't.
So far, it seems that the extreme LEFT position WAS NOT ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF HISTORY, in regards to foreign policy.
Just like the extreme RIGHT position was not always on the RIGHT side of HISTORY in regards to domestic and enviromental issues.

I know I sound like a Fox cable news ad......but........we need to be FAIR AND BALLANCED.

;)

[boxcar]

Originally posted by ljb
Boxcar,
Sorry I overstepped my bounds a bit. It's a little early for me to get that close to you.
I will rephrase the statement.
Continue the anger managment program and start looking for a good optometrist.:D

You flatter yourself when you start thinking I would ever let you get within a hundred yards of me. My natural instincts would prohibit me from allowing gutter rat lovers to get any closer.

Boxcar

P.S. But I do agree that you're one sorry sap.

[Lefty]

ljb, read your own post. last line "He difinitely ain't presidential material." Yup, word material DID follow word presidential.
But just saying you think he's not presidential then after comparing Clinton To Bush, I have to scratch my head and wonder. I guss you will have to give YOUR definition of presidential.
You trumpeting the merits of a flawed personality like the self-obsessed Clinton shows that it is YOU that is blindly obedient.
All I want in a pres is a man who will defend our country and cut taxes so the people will be more in control of their own money. That's not blind obedience; that's recognizing this guy is doing what I want.

[Lefty]

ljb said "under Clinton we had peace and prosperity."
ljb, you win the award for shallow, knee-jerk thinking. Congrats.
The prosperity was built by Reagan and G.H. Bush. Check it out, economy coming back during Bush adm and like a rock going downhill picked up "steam" that lasted through Clinton, but Clinton with his tax raises managed to slow it dn during his last quarter and G.W. had to hit this "dead ball."
Any peace we had was because of Reagan's military buildup. But
Clinton started decimating that too. Man, talk about blind and obedient; well, it's you ljb, it's you.

[Lefty]

So. Cal, Oh, no. The left has ran the domestic side for far too long. They controlled congress for over forty yrs. In that time our taxes raised through the roof, over 5 trillion spent on a failed "war on poverty" Not to mention the public schools have went to hell and have even gone so far as to revise the history books so the "founding fathers" barely mentioned.
And then there's the failed medicare plan which has completely "wrecked" the health care system.
Of course, the fact that G. W. hasn't turned this mess completely around in a scant 2 yrs shows her's not presidential material.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally posted by ljb

Ah but this fellow had the presidential candidate qualifications as I mentioned in my statement about Bush. The big difference here is, Under Clinton we had peace and prosperity.:cool: [/B]

...or did we have the illusion of peace and prosperity?

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality.

[ljb]

Well I'm not sure about your illusions but I lived in a time of peace and prosperity during the Clinton years.
Maybe we are really having peace and prosperity now and all these suicide bombings and killing of U.S. citizens and fear of travel abroad and the high unemployement and rising medical expenses and low stock market values and low returns on investments are just illusions. :confused:

[ljb]

Lefty
Oh yeah that's right all the good things that happened in our lifetime are because of the republicans. Course it doesn't take affect until a Dem gets in office and all the bad things are caused by the Dems , course they don't really take affect until a repub is in office. I get it now if we want good times again we have to get another dem in office so we can reap the benifits of this republican. Then of course we don't want to put another republican in cause we don't want to have to suffer through the nasty things the dems left them with.

Lefty, sometimes you are unbelievable in your fantasy world.:rolleyes:

[ljb]

Boxcar, you probably don't see it yet but, you are making progress. Note your last line where you said I do agree......
This is progress. I still think you, like Lefty, may amount to something someday. Just keep following my advice, I have faith in you.;)

[ljb]

Lefty,
You seem to be confused over my use of presidential material. I said Bush is not presidential material. Show me the wire responded with some remarks about Clintons activities. My response to him was Yes but he did have the same presidential canidate qualities as G.W. Bush the only difference being we had peace and prosperity during the Clinton years.
Sorry you are so confused, perhaps you could talk to Boxcar he may be advancing faster then you.;)

[Tom]

Originally posted by ljb
Well I'm not sure about your illusions but I lived in a time of peace and prosperity during the Clinton years.
Maybe we are really having peace and prosperity now and all these suicide bombings and killing of U.S. citizens and fear of travel abroad and the high unemployement and rising medical expenses and low stock market values and low returns on investments are just illusions. :confused:

To be fair, we thought we were safer back then, and the economy was better than today. To blame the economy and security on either Clinton of Bush is not really fair. The islamic menace was growing in power and daring through those years and El Qeada had not yet developed to the point where they could attack us so boldy - but they were getting there and had already made plans that they carried out. And the economy was good but being built on a house of cards, of unsound investing and outright fraud.
We have get past the idea that the President is going to fix everything for us. We have a very real enemy out there that we need to focus on, and we have a big business climate that is killing our economy. This isn't a liberal/conservative issue - it is those that want to kill us and those that want to have all the money the world.

[Jen]

I think those are the first reasonable conclusions I've read on this thread.

Jen


P.S. Been a bit tired with the ruckus. Generally staying in lurk mode right now.:)

[Derek2U]

I tell all newbies the same thing: why waste your breathe on
Lefty & Boxcar --- they're both lacking in any thinking but they
both can sure type a lot. Both are irrelevant on every issue; #43
gave them the medal of non-sequitur distinction.

[hurrikane]

to re-iterate

I can't believe this thread is still alive. :rolleyes:

[Lefty]

ljb, make up your mind. First you say Bush not presidential material and you said you didn't say that. And then I call you on it and you go back to saying he's not presidential material and once more say that I am confused. How confused can you be?
No wonder you are such a shallow thinker.
Peace? During the Clinton yrs we had domestic problems like Waco and the Oklahoma city bombings.
Then of course we had attacks on our embassies and the attack on the USS Cole and Clinton diddled.
The man did nothing to improve the economy and you can't point out one single thing he did to stimulate the economy. And don't say he balanced the budget and reformed welfare because it was the REPUBLICAN 94 congress that made him sign those pieces of legislation. Think, man, think.
Derek, you never bring anything to these debates except clutter
and a little name calling, so why bother, as you say.

[boxcar]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ljb
Well I'm not sure about your illusions but I lived in a time of peace and prosperity during the Clinton years.

I bet you did. With your head buried in that very dark, quiet place where the sun never gets to shine, you had all the peace and prosperity you could handle -- the only kind your type will ever have!

Boxcar

[JustRalph]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by boxcar
[QUOTE]Originally posted by ljb
[B]Well I'm not sure about your illusions but I lived in a time of peace and prosperity during the Clinton years.

Provided By the Tax Cuts Mr. Reagan initiated years before. This coupled with Bill Gates (MSFT) and Intel made for a confluence of economic factors and an incredible serendipitous result occurred. Instead of realizing what has occurred you Libs/Dems are still sitting on your ass screaming "no tax cuts" During the 90's You had your head buried just like the rest of your ilk. The Clintonesque free love and peace types didn't care about dismantling the CIA, Roasting the Navy over Tailhook and the rest of the crap the Clinton's pulled. Here is an example:

After Tailhook 66% of the tenured Navy Pilots who were in their best years exited the Military. Many went to the Airlines. I heard one on a radio show the other day that explained that almost all of them are out of work right now because they were some of the first to be laid off by the Airlines because of seniority issues. They still suffer because of Clinton. Because he allowed Usama to walk around free after being offered his head on three seperate occasions. They got out of the Clinton Military to get away from it, and the Clinton Curse followed them.

You damn Liberal idiots don't realize all the pain that can rain down on people when you make half ass politically correct, think with your heart and not your head, decisions. It will take years for the damage done by the Clinton era to be undone. Ross Perot ought to be taken out and shot! Don't whine about how the country supported Clinton enough to elect him again either. He got less than 23 percent of this country to vote for his second term. Every time I think I can ignore you Left wing Goons one of you guys strikes a chord in me...........remember, if the right was everything you say it is, you wouldn't be allowed to exist. Think about it. Your points are steeped in an idealogy of consistent failure since the days of LBJ. Wake Up and Smell the Coffee!

I just finished reading about how Gray Davis is going to raise the costs of License Tags a hundred Bucks on every car in California next year. What the hell was California doing during the 90's ? They never heard of a rainy day fund? I went to the DMV today and watched a couple hundred people waiting in line to pay their taxes.....oh yeah....it's a tax. Don't ever forget it.

[ljb]

JR's words;
Provided By the Tax Cuts Mr. Reagan initiated years before.
jr you have just surpassed Lefty in ignorance. he always gives credit for any thing good in the world to the republicans of the previous administration. But going back 15 --20 years and taking credit is a bit much. I have already helped lefty and boxcar open up their eyes a bit. Perhaps you would like to sign on. It is obvious you need a lot of help.
You can start with the anger management seminar and depending on how you progress in that, you can begin working on your vision problem.:rolleyes:

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by ljb
JR's words;
Provided By the Tax Cuts Mr. Reagan initiated years before.
jr you have just surpassed Lefty in ignorance. he always gives credit for any thing good in the world to the republicans of the previous administration. But going back 15 --20 years and taking credit is a bit much. I have already helped lefty and boxcar open up their eyes a bit. Perhaps you would like to sign on. It is obvious you need a lot of help.
You can start with the anger management seminar and depending on how you progress in that, you can begin working on your vision problem.:rolleyes:


Once again...you will never ever get it.... do the letters F/O mean anything to you......?

[ljb]

Lefty,
I'll try to keep this simple so even you can understand. I said Bush is not Presidential material. I also said he is good presidential candidate material. Sorry but there is a difference between a president and a presidential candidate. This may be where your confusion comes from you see one has been elected and is serving the other is just campaigning and trying to be elected or re-elected for that matter.
Good thing we haven't had a Waco or Oklahoma city under Bush's watch. He would have a difficult time starting a war with Texas or Michgan. Course he could get them on his evil empire list. Wonder how that would play in the polls ? :rolleyes:

[ljb]

from boxcar I bet you did. With your head buried in that very dark, quiet place where the sun never gets to shine, you had all the peace and prosperity you could handle -- the only kind your type will ever have!
Now Boxcar this appears to be a regression in your progress. Illogical ranting, have you been taking your medications? Remember anger management first, broaden horizons second. :D

[ljb]

from jr.
Once again...you will never ever get it.... do the letters F/O mean anything to you......?
Jr you must learn to control yourself, this will only do you harm. If you don't want to work with me on this, talk to Lefty or Boxcar. They have both made small steps in learning to control there anger and hostility. I'm sure you can be helped also.
Anyway good luck to you and may you travel with the wind at your back. ;)

[boxcar]

Originally posted by ljb
from jr.
Once again...you will never ever get it.... do the letters F/O mean anything to you......?
Jr you must learn to control yourself, this will only do you harm. If you don't want to work with me on this, talk to Lefty or Boxcar. They have both made small steps in learning to control there anger and hostility. I'm sure you can be helped also.
Anyway good luck to you and may you travel with the wind at your back. ;)

JR, these lamebrain liberals will never get it. Conservatives tell them how things really are (after all, Libs never have both feet touching the ground at the same time), and all they can do is stereotype us as being "angry" (white males, of course!). No wonder at all the Dems lost seats in the House and Senate in the mid-term elections, will lose more seats in 2004, and will fail miserably in their WH bid, as well.
People are waking up and are getting disgusted with these Clueless Wonders.

In 2004, Americans will again vote to throw out more socialist trash. Count on it.

Boxcar

[ljb]

Boxcar,
Thank you for opening up to Jr. I had reccomended he contact you for some help and your post to him shows your willingness to help others in need. Although you did do a little name calling in your note (inborn trait perhaps) you are indeed making progress. Stay the course. ;)

[Lefty]

ljb, you are so dsmned confused you don't know what you said.
now your posts are just condescending pieces of nothing. You have no facts and you have no argument. I asked what Clinton did to generate the great economy you attribute to him. And I hear... nothing. Because there is nothing.

BTW, we finally got the guys responsible for the bombing of the USS Cole.
Bushes accomplishments in 2 yrs are downtight uh, amazin...

[ljb]

Lefty
I'll try to make this clear. Clinton raised taxes thereby balancing the budget. Which in fact stopped the drain on money that the federal government had been responsible for. Thereby releasing funds for the private sector. Now this is advanced economics so you may have to work it out, but it is fact.
Now a question for you.
Other then campaigning and starting wars what has Bush done for this country?
:rolleyes:

[Tom]

Originally posted by ljb
Lefty

Other then campaigning and starting wars what has Bush done for this country?
:rolleyes:

Finishing wars? :rolleyes:

Oh, yeah, and his mother scrubbed out the oval office. :eek:

[JustRalph]

Former intern admits affair with JFK

Mimi Fahnestock holds her statement outside her New York apartment building Thursday.
A new book says Kennedy had an affair with an intern and struggled with severe health problems. NBC's Victoria Corderi reports.

N.Y. woman issues statement
after book brings dalliance to light

MSNBC NEWS SERVICES

NEW YORK, May 15 — A 60-year-old woman has admitted that she had an affair with President John F. Kennedy when she was a 19-year-old intern at the White House.
‘From June 1962 to November, I was involved in a sexual relationship with President Kennedy. For the last 41 years, it is a subject that I have not discussed.’
— STATEMENT BY MIMI FAHNESTOCK
MIMI FAHNESTOCK refused to answer reporters’ questions as she left her New York City apartment Thursday.
But in a written statement, she admitted to the secret she has been keeping for four decades.
The statement she handed out to the media read: “From June 1962 to November, I was involved in a sexual relationship with President Kennedy. For the last 41 years, it is a subject that I have not discussed.”
Details of the affair became public with the release of a new biography of Kennedy, written by historian Robert Dallek.
Fahnestock is now a grandmother of four and works as a church administrator in New York.
Kennedy is known to have had numerous extramarital liaisons, but this is the first report of an affair with an intern.

• Newsweek: We hardly knew the half of it
Dallek’s assertion stemmed from newly released pages from a 1964 interview with Barbara Gamarekian, a Kennedy press aide, who recalled that a woman she identified only as Mimi had “sort of a special relationship with the president.”
According to Gamarekian, Kennedy brought the young intern along on presidential trips.
“She couldn’t type,” Gamarekian said in her interview, conducted for an oral history project for the John F. Kennedy Library in Boston. “She could answer the phone and she could handle messages and things, but she was not really a great asset to us.”
Advertisement

Dallek said earlier this week, “Apparently her only real skill was to provide sexual release for JFK on these trips, and maybe at the White House.”
The New York Daily News reported that Fahnestock, known then as Mimi Beardsley, left the White House to return to college in the fall of 1963, just weeks before Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas on Nov. 22.
Fahnestock said Thursday she will have nothing more to say on the subject but said she is pleased that her family now knows this part of her history.

The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.

[Lefty]

ljb, Raising taxes is good for the economy? My gawd you're dense.
When Reagan cut taxes the IRS coffers more than dbled. So what's better, cutting or raising? Cutting taxes puts the money to work Raising taxes just takes money out of working people and seniors pockets. but I know i'm wasting my time and typing finger on you. It's not a zero sum game. Clinton did one clever thing; he took credit for every damn thing the '94 Congress did. I admit the man's devious and a clever conman. He sure has you fooled.
Bush has made the world and the U.S. a safer place. He did the job that Clinton didn't.
He cut taxes and only a little has taken effect. Stand back libs and let the man work. And he's only been there 2 yrs!