Articles of impeachment introduced against Bush?!

[SBrad001]

:clap:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iE21FOVAfMfEbAE5LDwiYm8fGh4QD916SHJ01

[JeepinCoastie]

just proves what a big bunch of morons the democratic party is ...

[jpcherokeekid]

There is a reason why the democratic national party symbol is the donky, because there all a bunch of jack-ass'es:roflmao:

[DeftwillP]

But I thought that they were going to take care of gas prices first.....:gag:

[Rev Den]

Great idea.

MUCH better then addressing real issues.

Rev

[JTwthaXJ]

Honestly, what's the point of impeaching him NOW! I agree with the comment about the jackass and addressing real issues. I can barely afford to pay my student loans with the price of gas being through the freaking roof...

[Rev Den]

This is MUCH better....

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h5734/show

Just a few more months.

Rev

[bjoehandley]

This is MUCH better....

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h5734/show

Just a few more months.

Rev

Straight pipes for everybody!

[scottmcneal]

Please find the handle to FLUSH these guys out of office.....PLEASE

[WrenchMonkey]

We get the government we deserve.

Blurb in today's paper cited a recent poll, that half of all Americans (I use the term loosely) didn't know the democrats had taken over congress in '06, they thought the gop was still in charge.

This nation won't function long-term on that level of ignorance and apathy.

Robert

[98XJSport]

Blurb in today's paper cited a recent poll, that half of all Americans (I use the term loosely) didn't know the democrats had taken over congress in '06, they thought the gop was still in charge.


http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g26/Rhutchinson123/lzi080204.gif

Not disagreeing with the rest of your post, just found that funny.

[JNickel101]

I decided to write Mr Douchebag through the very handy "write your congressman an email" link.

I'm not expecting a reply from him....

[vetteboy]

It must be nice to be able to rationalize all your problems away, by just saying "it'll get better when Bush is out of office".

Idiots. I think there's going to be a lot of disappointed and confused people next year when there's a new president and nothing's different.

[winkosmosis]

Great idea.

MUCH better then addressing real issues.

Rev
Real issues:
Bush ignoring warnings about bin Laden's determination to strike at us, and then lying about his meetings with Tenet. He told the CIA (this is an actual quote) "OK, you've covered your ass" and twiddled his thumbs. Really, if GWB had nothing to hide, why did he only testify twice before the 9/11 commission, before only two members, with no recording or notetaking, and always with Dick Cheney at his side?

ILLEGAL wiretapping authorized by the president.

Authorization of torture (troops from Abu Graib say the commands came from the top- hard to imagine Rumsfield authorizing torture without Bush's knowledge)

Outing Valerie Plame (doesn't that constitute treason?)

Pushing faulty intelligence to justify the war (lying to Congress is grounds for impeachment).

Mismanaging the war by sending too few troops with insufficient equipment, causing the quagmire we have today. Remember, McCain spoke out against this.


Unfortunately, GWB won't be impeached because it's seen as a political maneuver thanks to the Clinton fiasco.


You can call Kucinich names all you want, but informed Americans realize by now that George W. Bush is one of the worst presidents in history, and has committed several crimes in office. This has nothing to do with ideology-- Liberals and conservatives should be able to agree on this.

vettboy, a new president WILL be different. The only people who think all presidents are the same just don't know any better. I was too young to really know at the time, but as I understand, Bush Sr.'s and Bil Clinton's presidencies were much much better than this one. I predict that either Obama or McCain will be remembered among the greatest presidents.

[TRNDRVR]

Page one.

http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1974_eating_popcorn.gif

Carry on!

[DrMoab]

Real issues:
Bush ignoring warnings about bin Laden's determination to strike at us, and then lying about his meetings with Tenet. He told the CIA (this is an actual quote) "OK, you've covered your ass" and twiddled his thumbs.
And Clinton didn't? Remember under Clinton's presidency they had Bin Laden in their sights, they could have taken him out but Clinton told them to stand down.
ILLEGAL wiretapping authorized by the president.
Dirty times call for dirty measures. Check out Lincon and what he did with the constitution in wartime.
Authorization of torture (troops from Abu Graib say the commands came from the top- hard to imagine Rumsfield authorizing torture without Bush's knowledge)
You think that was torture? Ever see what those assholes have done to our guys? If you think that was tourture...you are a wimp!
Outing Valerie Plame (doesn't that constitute treason?)
He didn't out Valerie, someone else did.
Pushing faulty intelligence to justify the war (lying to Congress is grounds for impeachment).
How was he to know it was faulty? It was the best intelligence we had at the time...remember most of Congress voted for it, including your dumb ass demorats
Mismanaging the war by sending too few troops with insufficient equipment, causing the quagmire we have today. Remember, McCain spoke out against this.
This is the only thing I agree with you on. We should have went in there guns blazing and wiped that country off the map.

Unfortunately, GWB won't be impeached because it's seen as a political maneuver thanks to the Clinton fiasco.

[winkosmosis]

http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/secrethistory/timeline4.html

Clinton didn't strike the 2nd time because bin Laden was supposed to be in a governor's mansion next to a mosque. The intelligence wasn't reliable, and 200 innocent people could have been killed. One terrorist is not worth 200 innocent men, women, and children. Remember, he's not Hitler and this isn't WWII, where you cut off the head and the beast dies. Some other two bit religious fundamentalist would have taken his place. This is why the issue isn't bin Laden, but the lack of steps taken by Bush to increase security, or even READ the briefing given to him by Condoleeza.

You're using Lincoln to defend Bush? The Constitution is most important precisely in desperate times.

It was torture according to the tribunals that sentenced soldiers to prison terms. It's torture according to John McCain. Are you more of an expert on torture than a US senator who has been tortured?
What they've done to our troops has no bearing on the way we should act. We are civilized, free people. We are supposed to be BETTER than them.

George Bush may not have personally outed Plame, but someone in his administration did. Either he's a mouthpiece who's out of the loop, or he can be held responsible for the actions of his administration as a whole. Too bad he'll always get someone else to take the fall.

He knew it was faulty. The admin picked and chose which intelligence to present, and buried warnings and intelligence that didn't support invasion. Technically Congress authorized GWB to use force if necessary, not to go to war. IMO, they were most concerned with public opinion, which supported the war, otherwise they wouldn't have voted to authorize the use of force.


More troops doesn't mean going in there with guns blazing and wiping the country off the map. It means getting the job done properly, and leaving the Iraqis with a free country. I fully support finishing the job done in Iraq, even if it takes "100 years".

Wow.. Imagine if we did just wipe them off the map. Then I guess no one would be the wiser about the lack of WMDs, and the only thing Bush would have to worry about would be the millions of dead children resting on his conscience.

[DrMoab]

http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/secrethistory/timeline4.html

Clinton didn't strike the 2nd time because bin Laden was supposed to be in a governor's mansion next to a mosque. The intelligence wasn't reliable, and 200 innocent people could have been killed. One terrorist is not worth 200 innocent men, women, and children. Remember, he's not Hitler and this isn't WWII, where you cut off the head and the beast dies. Some other two bit religious fundamentalist would have taken his place. This is why the issue isn't bin Laden, but the lack of steps taken by Bush to increase security, or even READ the briefing given to him by Condoleeza.
Thats the whole problem with our country today. We have got wussified. Who the hell cares if a couple hundred civilians got dead? How many civilians died in the towers?

We need to quit letting our military fight with their hands tied behind their back. If it was WWII this war would have been over a long time ago.

This whole damn country is turning into pansies.

[winkosmosis]

Thats the whole problem with our country today. We have got wussified. Who the hell cares if a couple hundred civilians got dead? How many civilians died in the towers?

We need to quit letting our military fight with their hands tied behind their back. If it was WWII this war would have been over a long time ago.

This whole damn country is turning into pansies.

For every innocent civilian you kill, you create a whole family of terrorists and terrorist sympathizers.

[MT Mike]

For every innocent civilian you kill, you create a whole family of terrorists and terrorist sympathizers.

If you use that rationale, then are all the family members of the victims from 9/11 now terrorists and terrorist sympathizers?
















I didn't think so.....

[Ray H]

For every innocent civilian you kill, you create a whole family of terrorists and terrorist sympathizers.

For every innocent family we kill, we creat a family of dead terrorist.
I like dead terrorists.

[winkosmosis]

If you use that rationale, then are all the family members of the victims from 9/11 now terrorists and terrorist sympathizers?
















I didn't think so.....

We aren't Afghans or Iraqis. There's no Al Qaeda recruiting center on our streetcorners, no Sadr militia men handing out food and candy to our children, not many mosques promoting terrorism to get 72 virgins, and no century of constant violence and oppression.

[buschwhaked]

Ever thought about the burden soldiers would have to carry if they "wasted" civilians unneccesarily?

[WrenchMonkey]

We aren't Afghans or Iraqis. There's no Al Qaeda recruiting center on our streetcorners, no Sadr militia men handing out food and candy to our children, not many mosques promoting terrorism to get 72 virgins, and no century of constant violence and oppression.

That's his point: Their culture instills that hatred and violence in their citizens, in a way that ours doesn't. Saying that attacking terrorists magically creates new terrorists ignores the fact that many of these backward fawks were 90% of the way there already, looking for an excuse.

We can't afford to tiptoe around these psychos because they've got a chip on their shoulder. We need to find a way to change that culture that creates that bloodthirst.

Sowing the seeds for good ole American-style Consumerism seems an odd way to do that, but I'll be damned if I can come up with a better idea...

Robert

[kahaikapu]

haha..america is the terrorist..look what the have done to the native people..indians,,blacks,mexicans..and the hawaiians..like all great nation..U.S will fall..they deserve it.....chill its the truth..get ready for the New World Order..remember this quote..its comin
THATS WHAT THE WAR ON THE MIDDLE CLASS IS ALL ABOUT

[vetteboy]

:lol:

[winkosmosis]

Ever thought about the burden soldiers would have to carry if they "wasted" civilians unneccesarily?

Yes, which is why I hate it when someone says we need to kill every Afghan, Iraqi, or whatever. The people who take the "nuke them all" stance are the ones who will never see combat.

[Shorty]

IMO, they were most concerned with public opinion, which supported the war, otherwise they wouldn't have voted to authorize the use of force.

and for this, they should be given a free pass?? it just goes to show that they'll vote for anything that will keep them in office and use the excuse of "public opinion" to fall back on when it turns out to be an unwise choice.

The Iraqi dictator was a monster that killed tens of thousands of people and you don't see why we removed him from power? He agreed to UN weapons inspections after the first gulf war and failed to abide by the terms of his own agreement seventeen times and you don't see why we ousted him??

I don't fool myself by believing Hussein was the only monster (or even the worst) in the region, but when you've got the chance to rid the world of any of them (monsters) you take it. You don't sacrifice tens of thousands of innocent people to save the lives of a few. Thanx Bill.......

[SBrad001]

and for this, they should be given a free pass?? it just goes to show that they'll vote for anything that will keep them in office and use the excuse of "public opinion" to fall back on when it turns out to be an unwise choice.

The Iraqi dictator was a monster that killed tens of thousands of people and you don't see why we removed him from power? He agreed to UN weapons inspections after the first gulf war and failed to abide by the terms of his own agreement seventeen times and you don't see why we ousted him??

I don't fool myself by believing Hussein was the only monster (or even the worst) in the region, but when you've got the chance to rid the world of any of them (monsters) you take it. You don't sacrifice tens of thousands of innocent people to save the lives of a few. Thanx Bill.......

That's fine and can agree with that.

But the point is that Bush's administration purposefully used intel reports and information that was faulty and or fabricated in order to justify the use of force in Iraq. And dubiously outed a CIA operative because the intel she gathered was contrary to what they wanted to hear.

Multiple questionable and illegal activities by our current administration that have resulted in the quagmire in Iraq and Bin Laden still on the lam.

[Boatwrench]

Page Two.

http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1974_eating_popcorn.gif

Carry on!

Fixed it Dan! This ones going to be good.

[Shorty]

That's fine and can agree with that.

But the point is that Bush's administration purposefully used intel reports and information that was faulty and or fabricated in order to justify the use of force in Iraq. And dubiously outed a CIA operative because the intel she gathered was contrary to what they wanted to hear.

Multiple questionable and illegal activities by our current administration that have resulted in the quagmire in Iraq and Bin Laden still on the lam.

I am not aware of any proof of intent to use faulty or fabricated to justify that which was already justified. I know some or the intel was shown to be incorrect, but to my knowledge the decision to react came before the that realization. I've been wrong before and can happily admit my ignorance, but I'm not aware of any decisions intentionally based on known false intel.

[Ray H]

Yes, which is why I hate it when someone says we need to kill every Afghan, Iraqi, or whatever. The people who take the "nuke them all" stance are the ones who will never see combat.

Really?
8 years in two branches of the service disagrees with you.
If I were "in combat" today, what I would want most of all is 100% support for the job Im doing. Ever wonder why we kicked so much butt during WWII yet faultered during Korea, Vietnam and Iraq? I'll tell you. The miltary didnt have 100%. I dont mean 100% of the people back here yelling "we support our troops". What I mean is 100% of the economy and 100% of the might that the U.S. poccesses. That means that once we go to war, the politicians shut up and step aside and let the military go do their job unhindered. Politicians should be deciding if we go to war, once that decision is made, get out of the way. The U.S. economy should be regeared to meet whatever needs the military has. That means if need be, the citizens take a hit and stop buying cars or fuel or whatever it takes.
Once we go to war, all talks stop. Talking is for politicians. Do you think we had talks with Japan or Germany? The only talks we had with them was their surrender.
Do I think we should go in and "nuke" the whole place? Of course not. I do think that we shouldve gone in a cleaned house from one end of that whole region to the other end because that whole region poses a threat, plain and simple.

Should we have gone to war in the first place. Im not sure we had a choice. We were already considered a bunch of clowns by the rest of the world, how bad would it have been to let 9/11 go without so much as a shot fired? Personally, I dont think I couldve dealt with that.

[SBrad001]

. . .Should we have gone to war in the first place. Im not sure we had a choice. We were already considered a bunch of clowns by the rest of the world, how bad would it have been to let 9/11 go without so much as a shot fired? Personally, I dont think I couldve dealt with that.

Could you clarify for me this position? Are you saying that Iraq was tied to 9/11? And if so how was Iraq tied to 9/11?

As far as I'm concerned, we had ever right and obligation to invade and occupy Afghanistan. And that campaign is out of this discussion. It was justified.

[98XJSport]

Know what would be worse than a war with Iraq? A war with the Muslim Middle East. Which would at some point happen, all it would take is a strong leader to unite (fear for a generation, religion for a second) these regions into a area with large families which we are already aware have no regards to thier own lives.

Just something else to think about :eyes:

[lonecountryboy]

To much propaganda flying around and not enough facts. With the media only reporting the bad things that we do and not reporting on the progress that has been made the dems are going to be in charge for at least the next 4yrs. Until the dumba## repubs get there butts in gear and remember what got them there like conservitive principals and law and order and less spending we are going down a very dark path. As far as impeachment give it a rest nothing is going to come of it and it is only for show. They want to impeach him for the one thing I think he has done right and that is be aggresive on the war. What I don't care for is the open borders and out of control spending that is going on. We need to quit believing all the conspiracy theories out there and concentrate on getting out of the hole we have dug for ourselves. Remember the first rule when you are in a hole: quit digging!!!!

[Ray H]

Could you clarify for me this position? Are you saying that Iraq was tied to 9/11? And if so how was Iraq tied to 9/11?

As far as I'm concerned, we had ever right and obligation to invade and occupy Afghanistan. And that campaign is out of this discussion. It was justified.

I dont draw any geographical boundries, they are all muslim nation.
The middle east may be dividied by man made lines, and they may fight amongst themselves, but when push comes to shove, they will come together against us. Ever hear of Jihad? History has proven, they ALL will fight us, they just take turns. One of them will fight us while we supply another with arms, then they turn around and fight us. At some time in the near future (as in next 200 years) we will have had to fight each and every one of them at some point, at the same time, we will rebuild the one we just got done fighting.
All Id like to do is stop this rollercoaster ride either by getting completely away from them or by removing them from the planet. Either way is fine with me, I just dont like this halfassed position we have been taking.

[buschwhaked]

Really?
What I mean is 100% of the economy and 100% of the might that the U.S. poccesses. That means that once we go to war, the politicians shut up and step aside and let the military go do their job unhindered. Politicians should be deciding if we go to war, once that decision is made, get out of the way. The U.S. economy should be regeared to meet whatever needs the military has. That means if need be, the citizens take a hit and stop buying cars or fuel or whatever it takes.


This is the by-product of an all-volunteer military that is tasked to stay trained and ready for the next fight. WWII we were caught with our pants down, not having enough military might to fight a two war front. That is part of the reason we re-tooled assembly lines to make tanks and rationed the resources neccessary to make the tools of war.

Also, back then there wasn't the War Powers Act which allowed the president to fight unilaterally. It was unlawful at that point to marshall the military into a campaign congress hadn't approved. Also, back then they didn't have the military-industrial complex we do today.

So, for one of those rare moments in life I agree with Bush. After 9/11 he encouraged everyone to go about their lives and spend money. Why? Because your tax dollars were going to be paid to civilian companies that supply the tools of war. I'm not saying this from a conspiriatorial perspective either. More money made/spent=more money to tax More tax revenue=more dollars for bullets, tanks, etc.

I'm not going to jump back into a debate over whether the Iraq war was right or wrong, my opinions are clear on that. But the 'kill 'em all' attitude isn't effective in the modern world for an unconventional conflict. No to mention it's immoral and wrong. To boot, our end goal (as stated by he President) is to set up a stable democracy. Killing everyone does not result in stability of any kind. The second and third order effects are too costly.

[winkosmosis]

and for this, they should be given a free pass?? it just goes to show that they'll vote for anything that will keep them in office and use the excuse of "public opinion" to fall back on when it turns out to be an unwise choice.

The Iraqi dictator was a monster that killed tens of thousands of people and you don't see why we removed him from power? He agreed to UN weapons inspections after the first gulf war and failed to abide by the terms of his own agreement seventeen times and you don't see why we ousted him??

I don't fool myself by believing Hussein was the only monster (or even the worst) in the region, but when you've got the chance to rid the world of any of them (monsters) you take it. You don't sacrifice tens of thousands of innocent people to save the lives of a few. Thanx Bill.......

I didn't say they should be given a free pass for voting to authorize the war. I'm blaming them to caving to public opinion.

Deposing a dictator is a good thing, but we didn't invade Iraq out of the goodness of our hearts, but because he supposedly had WMDs... At least officially. Unofficially, war is obviously good for business. Remember the Haliburton no-bid contracts?

During the run up to the war, my position was that we should wait for UN support. The IAEA said the same thing. The reality was that there was no rush. Many commentators said that Saddam was only posturing, which it turns out he was.

Bill didn't sacrifice the lives of tens of thousands to save a few. He refrained from killing one based on dodgy intel, to save the lives of a few hundred. He did everything short of killing 200 innocent worshippers plus other innocent people in that governor's mansion, to capture bin Laden.
And guess what. Bin Laden is not synonymous with terrorism. If he didn't plan the attack, someone else would have.
You'll never kill every terrorist. The only way to keep your nation reasonably safe is to have a foreign policy that tries to solve the situations that create terrorists in the first place.

[winkosmosis]

Really?
8 years in two branches of the service disagrees with you.
If I were "in combat" today, what I would want most of all is 100% support for the job Im doing. Ever wonder why we kicked so much butt during WWII yet faultered during Korea, Vietnam and Iraq? I'll tell you. The miltary didnt have 100%. I dont mean 100% of the people back here yelling "we support our troops". What I mean is 100% of the economy and 100% of the might that the U.S. poccesses. That means that once we go to war, the politicians shut up and step aside and let the military go do their job unhindered. Politicians should be deciding if we go to war, once that decision is made, get out of the way. The U.S. economy should be regeared to meet whatever needs the military has. That means if need be, the citizens take a hit and stop buying cars or fuel or whatever it takes.
Once we go to war, all talks stop. Talking is for politicians. Do you think we had talks with Japan or Germany? The only talks we had with them was their surrender.
Do I think we should go in and "nuke" the whole place? Of course not. I do think that we shouldve gone in a cleaned house from one end of that whole region to the other end because that whole region poses a threat, plain and simple.

Should we have gone to war in the first place. Im not sure we had a choice. We were already considered a bunch of clowns by the rest of the world, how bad would it have been to let 9/11 go without so much as a shot fired? Personally, I dont think I couldve dealt with that.

8 years in the military and you think Iraq was responsible for 9/11? Colin Powell said that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

[JNickel101]

Mismanaging the war by sending too few troops with insufficient equipment, causing the quagmire we have today. Remember, McCain spoke out against this.


Yep, but he was going with the recommendation of the GENERALS and the SecDef (who is the one/are the ones to blame for that)

Rummy will go down as the worst SecDef in US History. That's who you can blame.

And you can blame Slick Willy Clinton for destroying the CIA and NSA (among other Intel agencies), leaving it in the condition it was in when Bush took over....

Step back and imagine the past 8 years with Owl Gorilla or John Kerry as President instead...

I shudder at the mere thought....

[JNickel101]

8 years in the military and you think Iraq was responsible for 9/11? Colin Powell said that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

Zero years in the military (I'm guessing, based on your arguments) and you can't comprehend simple English.

He didnt say that Iraq was responsible for 9/11. However, Iraq posed a threat and failed to comply with UN Weapons Inspectors. Even Clinton declared that Iraq must be disarmed and called for a regime change.

[JNickel101]

Ever thought about the burden soldiers would have to carry if they "wasted" civilians unneccesarily?

Only takes one cruise missile :D

[djwright4341]

Real issues:
Bush ignoring warnings about bin Laden's determination to strike at us, and then lying about his meetings with Tenet. He told the CIA (this is an actual quote) "OK, you've covered your ass" and twiddled his thumbs. Really, if GWB had nothing to hide, why did he only testify twice before the 9/11 commission, before only two members, with no recording or notetaking, and always with Dick Cheney at his side?

ILLEGAL wiretapping authorized by the president.

Authorization of torture (troops from Abu Graib say the commands came from the top- hard to imagine Rumsfield authorizing torture without Bush's knowledge)

Outing Valerie Plame (doesn't that constitute treason?)

Pushing faulty intelligence to justify the war (lying to Congress is grounds for impeachment).

Mismanaging the war by sending too few troops with insufficient equipment, causing the quagmire we have today. Remember, McCain spoke out against this.


How about the REAL real issues?

--Rampant illegal immigration.
--Out of control government spending.
--You drawing Social Security yet? If not, don't plan on it.
--Oil prices driving the economy down.

Yeah, let's impeach President Bush, with six months left in his term anyway, for events that happened six and seven years ago. Then the Democratic morons will spend the rest of Cheney's term trying to impeach him. Works for taking the American public's mind off of issues that we should be worried about though.

[karstic]

http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/secrethistory/timeline4.html

Clinton didn't strike the 2nd time because bin Laden was supposed to be in a governor's mansion next to a mosque. The intelligence wasn't reliable, and 200 innocent people could have been killed. One terrorist is not worth 200 innocent men, women, and children.

I guess the Nürnberg and Dresden firebombings don't count huh?

Who's cooking up some more popcorn?

[buschwhaked]

Only takes one cruise missile :D

Push button killers...pansies? :dunno: :)

[lonecountryboy]

Forget trying to talk sense into the lib left in this country. My daddy once told me you can't argue with a drunk and you can't argue with stupid, all you do is waste your time.

[JNickel101]

Push button killers...pansies? :dunno: :)

Navy? You said it not me....:anon:

The buttons my fellow Airmen push make much bigger KABLOOIES :D

[JNickel101]

Forget trying to talk sense into the lib left in this country. My daddy once told me you can't argue with a drunk and you can't argue with stupid, all you do is waste your time.

x Eleventy Billion....and four

[TRNDRVR]

--You drawing Social Security yet? If not, don't plan on it.
I'm so glad I don't pay into social security. :thumbup:
Who's cooking up some more popcorn?Here, help yourself.

http://www.slicky.net/smilies/drama2.gif

[JNickel101]

I'm so glad I don't pay into social security. :thumbup:


i need to figure out how to get in on that program....seems ironic that i pay into it when i'm building towards a different (better) pension/retirement...through....the...government...hmmmm.. ..:flamemad:

[Boatwrench]

Forget trying to talk sense into the lib left in this country. My daddy once told me you can't argue with a drunk and you can't argue with stupid, all you do is waste your time.


My sentiments exactly, except about the right. I am as liberal as all get out, it's root is the word Liberty. About 230 years ago conservatives in America were called tories....Tea anyone?

Read the article, even the poster girl (Pelosi D-CA) for all the right hate spewers said impeachment wasn't going to happen. Kukenich (D-OH) does this every year and every year nothing comes of it.

Seven months left in the Presidents term, so what, the law is the law, if he is guilty he's guilty. You want to use the same excuse that bleeding hearts use when an old guy that's got six forms of cancer and aids but is guilty of murder...he only has seven months left you can't send him to jail. If he's guilty of impeachable charges then he's impeached, and Cheney becomes President. Big Deal, that's the way the law works

Rumsfeld was responsible for not giving the generals the suppport requested, who was responsible for Rumsfeld? That's right The President. Look at the mass exodus of professional military personnel circa 2003 following several generals out the door, think they knew something was amiss?

Killing innocent civilians in WWII, well the USA demonized not just the army, but the citizenery as well, just look at old propaganda.

blah, blah, blah...

So let's start thinking like Americans, don't listen to Fox News (America's Al-Jazerra) or CNN (communist news network) as gospel and start looking at the issues that are bringing this country down...lost jobs, questionable lending practices and run away debt.

[karstic]

Killing innocent civilians in WWII, well the USA demonized not just the army, but the citizenery as well, just look at old propaganda.



Just making the point that war is messy. Read "Flyboys" interesting perspective into the Japanese and WWII and how the US dealt with them.

[in2fords]

Take away everything else and guess what, no attacks on U.S. soil and economy was great while Bill was in. Go ahead and blame it all on him, still happened under Bush's watch.

[JNickel101]

Read "State of Fear" for insight into liberal hippy democrat tree huggers and the farce that is Global Warming.

Clinton was President during the first WTC bombing in 1994. Yep, none of this was his fault! :roflmao:

Economy was great b/c he followed 12 years of Republicans. Current economy is not based on current leadership...its the result of planning by prior leadership. Everyone is talking about taxing big oil and all their "huge profits" - when actually they are about the #8 industry as far as profits. Take a look at prescription drug makers, banks and cosmetics! All make more than "big oil".

Taxing the oil companies will only further drive up the cost of gas. Wait and see. It will also hurt American investors, since oil companies are some of the most heavily invested in by Americans (mutual funds, stocks). The solution is for the Dems to back down and actually let us drill our own oil....

Lets see...complain about our dependence on foreign oil....complain about high gas prices and "big oil" not re-investing their profits into new technology/refineries...yet BLOCK drilling and BLOCK the construction of new refineries.

Yep...y'all are right, democrats are spot on about how to fix the economy....

:roflmao:

[Ghost]

The left can say what they want and the nieve can believe what they want about Sodom. I know at one time he had WMD. I rember the pictures from teh 80's of the attacks on his own people. W did a good thing by taking out his regiem IMHO. The middle east in general is a training bed for terrorist and terrorist training camps. I for one agree that the issues need to be adressed by congress not this wasted wich hunt of propoganda.

http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1974_eating_popcorn.gif

[JNickel101]

$10 to anyone here who can correctly state how he "gassed" the Kurds....

:D

[Ghost]

$10 to anyone here who can correctly state how he "gassed" the Kurds....

:D
Nerve gas IIRC.

[JNickel101]

Ok, but how was it employed...thats what I was getting at....sorry.

[Ghost]

Ok, but how was it employed...thats what I was getting at....sorry.
Bombs/Migs IIRC I rember an add in SOF for any pilot to defect.

[JNickel101]

in simplest forms....crop dusting. at that time they couldnt figure out how to attach/employ chemical weapons on a bomb/missile....so they just basically crop dusted them...

[JNickel101]

WELL WELL WELL...

Look who's leading the charge in Congress to help alleviate our dependence on foreign oil:

Rep. John Peterson, R-Pa. is leading the charge Wednesday, when he'll push for an amendment to a spending bill that would open up U.S. waters between 50 and 200 miles off shore for drilling. The first 50 miles off shore would be left alone...

(Source: Fox News.com)

FYI - that uppercase "R" following his name stands for REPUBLICAN :D

The Democrat/Tree Hugger response (this is classic):

Environment Florida spokeswoman Holly Binns told the Media General news group that offshore drilling has no immediate impact on prices.
“It would take anywhere from seven to 10 years to bring those resources to shore — to have any measurable impact on supply,” Binns said, advocating renewable energy sources.
Democrats are holding their own series of events on Capitol Hill Wednesday to focus attention on global warming (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,365627,00.html#) and energy independence, but drilling is not on the agenda. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said Tuesday ongoing calls for more drilling "is the Johnny One-Note of the Republican (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,365627,00.html#) Party."


Well...had they not been BLOCKING drilling for 27 years, we'd have had shit pumping for a while now and wouldnt be in the condition we're in!!! They want to focus on energy independence....but...not....drilling...our...own. ..oil...deposits....

yes yes..I see the logic in that thinking...LOL...idiots...

I want to know what "renewable resources" they have in mind that will make an "immediate impact" on gas prices....I want to get in Steny Hoyer's face and tell him "bitching about problems and offering no solutions is the 'Johnny One-Note' of the Democratic Party..."

[Ghost]

I'd bet that it would not take near 7- 10 years to get it to shore.

[TRNDRVR]

http://www.neonlite.ca/archives/gumby.jpg

Bottom line is....
http://www.slicky.net/smilies/deadhorse.gif

[JNickel101]

Nah, it will take 7-10 years because Dems/tree huggers will tie up simple processes in court...file lawsuits...drag things out...and they ADMIT they will do it. Example:

http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/articles/2008/06/04/news/top/4e608d46402d5adb8625745e00110beb.txt

Regarding approval of zoning ordinance for Hyperion (new refinery):

While conceding defeat, opponents vowed to keep fighting the controversial project on every imaginable front, pressing on with a lawsuit it filed against the county over the zoning procedures and opposing Hyperion as it applies for a bevy of state and federal permits.

"We have strategies in place to slow or delay all the permit processes," Ed Cable, chairman of the anti-Hyperion group Save Union County, said after the vote.






These same morons are the ones complaining we're not doing enough to lower gas prices...

[Bent]

I am as liberal as all get out, it's root is the word Liberty.
Ironic

[JNickel101]

President Bush Job Approval
Spread -37.8%

Approve
29.0%
Disapprove
66.8% Congressional Job Approval
Spread -56.3%

Approve
18.7%
Disapprove
75.0% I thought this was funny too...everyone talks about Bush's approval rating being so low...what about the Democratic led Congress??? :D

[buschwhaked]

Here's the thing: We need to seek long term solutions for our energy needs. Drilling for more oil is not a long term solution because it is a finite resource, which means it will run out. And as oil becomes more scarce the price will go up. Demand is also increasing, not just in the US but in developing countries as well (like China). The simple fact is, we're between a rock and a hard place and drilling for more oil will not solve the long term ramifications of our dependance on it.

Whoever wins this presidential campaign, Republican or Democrat, they need to initiate a 'Kennedy-style go-to-the-moon' program to get us a viable (aka affordable) alternitive energy resource. IMO there is not a singular solution. Every new car doesn't need to run on cooking oil and smell like french fries nor should every power plant be powered by uranium, but there has to be a way we stop depending on the black gold like we do.

I don't know about the amount of resources available from off-shore drilling, but I do remember hearing it is 5 miles under ground and the ground is a mile deep in the Gulf of Mexico. So it probably will take a while to get to it. Drilling in Anwar will also take about that amount of time, but the amount of oil there does not really make it worth it. At current level of demands, even on the high end of estimated reserve there, will only produce enough to supply about a year of oil. The low end estimation is three months worth. If you adjust for projected demand by the time they can actually start bringing oil out of the ground, that time frame will be even lower. It's not a one-shot one-kill solution to the energy crisis going on in America, effective alternative energy initiative would be a good start.

[WrenchMonkey]

Here's the thing: We need to seek long term solutions for our energy needs...

Yes. But until you bolt the Mr Fusion to your flux capacitor, we also need shorter term solutions. Right now, all our cars run on oil.

Sayin "Wouldn't it be cool if we ran em on pixie-dust" doesn't make it happen. And no amount of govt spending is going to replace all the cars on the road anytime soon.

So for the time being, we do need oil. I for one would rather use our own oil.

Robert

[JNickel101]

Here's the thing: We need to seek long term solutions for our energy needs. Drilling for more oil is not a long term solution because it is a finite resource, which means it will run out. And as oil becomes more scarce the price will go up. Demand is also increasing, not just in the US but in developing countries as well (like China). The simple fact is, we're between a rock and a hard place and drilling for more oil will not solve the long term ramifications of our dependance on it.

Whoever wins this presidential campaign, Republican or Democrat, they need to initiate a 'Kennedy-style go-to-the-moon' program to get us a viable (aka affordable) alternitive energy resource. IMO there is not a singular solution. Every new car doesn't need to run on cooking oil and smell like french fries nor should every power plant be powered by uranium, but there has to be a way we stop depending on the black gold like we do.

I don't know about the amount of resources available from off-shore drilling, but I do remember hearing it is 5 miles under ground and the ground is a mile deep in the Gulf of Mexico. So it probably will take a while to get to it. Drilling in Anwar will also take about that amount of time, but the amount of oil there does not really make it worth it. At current level of demands, even on the high end of estimated reserve there, will only produce enough to supply about a year of oil. The low end estimation is three months worth. If you adjust for projected demand by the time they can actually start bringing oil out of the ground, that time frame will be even lower. It's not a one-shot one-kill solution to the energy crisis going on in America, effective alternative energy initiative would be a good start.

Oil should be used for one thing - cars. Electricity should be dirt cheap, but Democrats block everything from construction of nuclear, wind, hydro and coal power plants to construction of new refineries. I have yet to hear what the Democrats have to offer as a solution to energy/oil crisis other than "we need to tax big oil even more!!!".

Still waiting....chirp chirp chirp.....

Oh and it doesnt have to be offshore or ANWAR - it could be the HUGE oil deposit in ND/MT that rivals the amount of oil in Saudi Arabia. Offshore is being mentioned b/c its probably the least objectionable by the Democrats (but they still object to it - notice, that article I posted, we have to go out 50-200 miles to drill - because tree huggers "dont want to see huge oil platforms in the scenery of our beaches")

[Boatwrench]

- it could be the HUGE oil deposit in ND/MT that rivals the amount of oil in Saudi Arabia.
Sand oils, there is plenty of energy avaiable there, but it cost more to extract and refine than would be profitable

Offshore is being mentioned b/c its probably the least objectionable by the Democrats (but they still object to it - notice, that article I posted, we have to go out 50-200 miles to drill - because tree huggers "dont want to see huge oil platforms in the scenery of our beaches")Having participated in several oil spill clean-ups, I agree no off shore oil drilling

Solar and Wind is not blocked by the democrats, it is expensive, the return on investment is low that is why it is still heavily subsidized through gov't tax incentives. Coal, there's plenty but it also is a finite source and causes heavy air pollution even with all the technology.

Nuclear is the way to go, the reason we haven't found a solution to properly disposing of the waste product is again...cost. Why research something that well, isn't needed. A chicken-egg agruement. Won't build more p/plants because of waste - won't research waste remediation because no more is being generated.

A manhattan project or man on the moon vision for energy is needed and neither candidate has the answer.

But back to the original question...

[TRNDRVR]

Curious, does the military know you have such an anger problem?

You know, they have diagnosis and meds for your problems. You should check into that.

It just might help.


PS The more I read your post, the more convinced I am that you're nothing but a f*cking nut. I even bet you masturbate to your picture of GW when you're alone at night, don't you? Or maybe you pictures of Rush and Hanity? :looney:

[buschwhaked]

Curious, does the military know you have such an anger problem?

You know, they have diagnosis and meds for your problems. You should check into that.

It just might help.


PS The more I read your post, the more convinced I am that you're nothing but a f*cking nut. I even bet you masturbate to your picture of GW when you're alone at night, don't you? Or maybe you pictures of Rush and Hanity? :looney:

Just angry he didn't join a branch that sees combat. ;)

[SeansBlueXJ]

Ok without trying to repeat anything anyone has said, and to say that I am not really Dem or Rep, i take some extreem views from both sides, I will say this.

The "war" is not a "War" congress has not declared war. And if we had what is the endgame there is one to surrender and come to our terms? Sadam is dead, there is no finite army to defeat. Bush has abused the powers of being comander in cheif, bent ever rule to breaking tollerance and should be put up for public ridicule as a war criminal.

illegal immigraton, yes it's a big problem we need to adress it more then we are. And to the protest signs "we are not criminals" umm really? Last I checked you comitted a criminal act by being here illegally. That would make one a criminal, we do not solve the problem by merely making thoes here suddenly legal, but i guess Bush is proof we reward thoes who carry out illegal actions in this country. (i mean my god we actually gave him a 2nd term!)

oil prices, yes drill drill drill.... there are ways to responsably and ecco friendly drill domestically, see what happened already when we relied soley on import for a necessity? Plus the plumiting dollar doesnt help.

just my $0.02, not trying to convince any one, trying to sway ones political views is like trying to move mountains.

[JNickel101]

Solar and Wind is not blocked by the democrats, it is expensive, the return on investment is low that is why it is still heavily subsidized through gov't tax incentives. Coal, there's plenty but it also is a finite source and causes heavy air pollution even with all the technology.

Nuclear is the way to go, the reason we haven't found a solution to properly disposing of the waste product is again...cost. Why research something that well, isn't needed. A chicken-egg agruement. Won't build more p/plants because of waste - won't research waste remediation because no more is being generated.

A manhattan project or man on the moon vision for energy is needed and neither candidate has the answer.

But back to the original question...

You need to read more. New technology using horizontal drilling is able to get large amounts of oil out of oil sand/shale and its economical.

Democrats block wind power b/c it kills poor defenseless birds AND ruins the landscape. I feel like I'm repeating myself......wind power is excellent and we should be using much more!!!

There is a huge nuclear waste storage facility in Nevada. Problem isnt that. Its the democrats who are afraid of nuclear power (uneducated) and who are afraid of the nuclear waste (more propoganda) - have you ever seen what they store it in??? They've hit these storage containers with a freight train, dropped them from buildings and they DONT BREAK.

Coal can be clean if you do it properly...or if you convert it to liquid fuel...

Next.

[JNickel101]

Curious, does the military know you have such an anger problem?

You know, they have diagnosis and meds for your problems. You should check into that.

It just might help.


PS The more I read your post, the more convinced I am that you're nothing but a f*cking nut. I even bet you masturbate to your picture of GW when you're alone at night, don't you? Or maybe you pictures of Rush and Hanity? :looney:

At least I'm not a sex pervert like you. Disgusting.

Simple problem would be ridding the country of asshat Democrats. My anger stems from having to watch stupid people :banghead: make "important" decisions. Zero common sense in control.

Thanks for contributing yet another constructive and intelligent post. You, Sir, are quite the scholar.

[JNickel101]

Just angry he didn't join a branch that sees combat. ;)

We're just smarter about how we do it.

I'm fine with my role...I was smart enough to join the branch I am in :D

Don't forget who to call next time you need CAS!

[JNickel101]

Ok without trying to repeat anything anyone has said, and to say that I am not really Dem or Rep, i take some extreem views from both sides, I will say this.

The "war" is not a "War" congress has not declared war. And if we had what is the endgame there is one to surrender and come to our terms? Sadam is dead, there is no finite army to defeat. Bush has abused the powers of being comander in cheif, bent ever rule to breaking tollerance and should be put up for public ridicule as a war criminal.

illegal immigraton, yes it's a big problem we need to adress it more then we are. And to the protest signs "we are not criminals" umm really? Last I checked you comitted a criminal act by being here illegally. That would make one a criminal, we do not solve the problem by merely making thoes here suddenly legal, but i guess Bush is proof we reward thoes who carry out illegal actions in this country. (i mean my god we actually gave him a 2nd term!)

oil prices, yes drill drill drill.... there are ways to responsably and ecco friendly drill domestically, see what happened already when we relied soley on import for a necessity? Plus the plumiting dollar doesnt help.

just my $0.02, not trying to convince any one, trying to sway ones political views is like trying to move mountains.

I agree with most of what you said but....

If we're not at war, and there was no war declared.....how can you charge someone as a war criminal?

Would you define "war criminal" as someone who launches 100 cruise missiles (@ over a million bucks each) into Afghanistan, supposedly targeting terrorist cells, in order to take the attention off of a sex scandal...?

No wonder those same people attacked us a couple of years later....

[SBrad001]

. . . Coal can be clean if you do it properly...or if you convert it to liquid fuel...


That's comedy GOLD right there! :D

Clean coal? So what do you do with all the acid water laced with heavy metal s and mercury used to scub the flue gases? It's just a few billion gallons of water a day that needs to be cleaned and treated. But it will keep me in a job for the rest of my life.

[buschwhaked]

Don't forget who to call next time you need CAS!

Yeah, I'll call the Apache's. Less chance of fratricide.

But you seriously need to learn the difference between "Democrats" and interest groups. Enviromentalists are an interest group. So are those crazy right wing Bible thumpers that believe God caused 9/11 because of gays. There are extremes on both sides. There are normal, working class Americans on both sides of the isle that are equally respectable. Lumping me as a Democrat with some dude who lives in a tree IOT save it isn't the same thing. Part of the reason we can't have a decent discussion on issues is because people get too caught up in labeling and bringing up extremes in both parties.

[ehall]

Yeah, I'll call the Apache's. Less chance of fratricide.

But you seriously need to learn the difference between "Democrats" and interest groups. Enviromentalists are an interest group.
They are an interest group that controls Democrat policy

[TRNDRVR]

At least I'm not a sex pervert like you.Well you got me here. I have no shame to admit, you're right. Disgusting.I take it you're one of those zealots that only have sex to procreate? (I'll let you in on a little secret, sex is fun!)
You, Sir, are quite the scholar.Your claim, not mine. I would just say casual observer. :eyes:

[SeansBlueXJ]

Coal can be clean if you do it properly...or if you convert it to liquid fuel...

Next.

Actually we can get coal to gas for like $60 a barrel, that's refined Gas not Crude btw.

[SeansBlueXJ]

I agree with most of what you said but....

If we're not at war, and there was no war declared.....how can you charge someone as a war criminal?

Would you define "war criminal" as someone who launches 100 cruise missiles (@ over a million bucks each) into Afghanistan, supposedly targeting terrorist cells, in order to take the attention off of a sex scandal...?

No wonder those same people attacked us a couple of years later....

Ok fair point, then what about just criminal against humanity. Plus we impeached clinton didnt we? Bush has done far more sins, but because it wasnt a "scandal" it's ok.
----------------------
and it's not to say there arent terrorists we shoulndt be after, but as Barack Obama (and not OSAMA) wants he never said bring every troop everywhere home, if you really read up he says we dont belong in Iraq. But we need to re focous on Afghanstan, and watch Iran, North Korea, and the like.

There was no such thing as "al queda in Iraq" till we were there BTW Sadam had that country on lock, and the UN had him on lock, he wasnt really doing anything or going anywhere... Bush just had to finish up for daddy.

[JNickel101]

I'm not gonna argue again Bush vs Clinton - but your boy Clinton (and actually Osama/Obama too) called for/voted for regime change in Iraq. The way we initially went about it was wrong, but again, due to faulty Intel. We are just getting our intel community and military back in the direction it should be, after Mr Clinton cut the defense budget more than any Prez in US history.

I'm tired of arguing with "civilians" regarding the war. Come visit this part of the world and then form an opinion. We are fighting muslims as a whole. Someone stated that earlier....quit diversifying between borders, because I can tell you, they sure arent seeing any. Iran, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan...our enemy is all over, and their support is coming from all over. You are getting your "intel" from CNN/Fox/MSNBC. You know about 0.001% about what's going on.

And yes, my "comedy gold" as Brad called it is the coal to gas refinery, like the ones South Africa uses and the one we want to build at Malmstrom AFB. If you "recycle" the byproduct, it only produces 4% more greenhouse gas than a traditional oil refinery. Which is pretty good for coal.

[JNickel101]

Well you got me here. I have no shame to admit, you're right. I take it you're one of those zealots that only have sex to procreate? (I'll let you in on a little secret, sex is fun!)
Your claim, not mine. I would just say casual observer. :eyes:

wow....:doh:

You truly leave me at a loss for words dude. Yet another productive, intelligent post.

[JNickel101]

They are an interest group that controls Democrat policy

x Eleventy billion...thank you :cheers:

[JNickel101]

That's comedy GOLD right there! :D

Clean coal? So what do you do with all the acid water laced with heavy metal s and mercury used to scub the flue gases? It's just a few billion gallons of water a day that needs to be cleaned and treated. But it will keep me in a job for the rest of my life.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_coal_technology

depending which community you side with....

the one i side with is the one that isnt out to strike fear in society with the farce that is global warming.

the amound of "greenhouse gas" that humans produce is minute in the grand scheme of things. Termites produce more than humans do worldwide. If in fact the Earth's climate is increasing, its because of the sun, not our actions. 1974, scientists said we were on the verge of another ice age. 1989, everything was reversed. WTF, are you kidding me?

at one time, there were no polar ice caps on this planet. I guess dinosaurs were burning a shitload of coal huh? :roflmao:

but....keep believing Owl Gorilla if you want...afterall, he did invent the Internet....:lecture:

[TRNDRVR]

wow....:doh:

You truly leave me at a loss for words dude. Yet another productive, intelligent post.I'm flattered. Thanks!

Here's a Gumby for you.......
http://www.neonlite.ca/archives/gumby.jpg
(you're going to be fun)

[Boatwrench]

I am NOT angry, don't read it that way

You need to read more. Really! you cite wikipedia? Read it on the net, must be true

New technology using horizontal drilling is able to get large amounts of oil out of oil sand/shale and its economical. Well that all depends on what your source of info is. Interesting coincidence I listened to a conservative radio talk show today and the guest on there stated it is not profitable to go after the sand oils. This contradicted the morning drive show on a liberal station that stated the US had plenty of shale oil and with a little investment could end the reliance on mid-east oil

Did you know Indonesia dropped out of OPEC, they do not produce enough oil to remain a member, their resource is running out

Democrats block wind power b/c it kills poor defenseless birds AND ruins the landscape. Yes, but the fact of the matter is it is not profitable, the return on the investment is poor and it's heavily subsidized.

I feel like I'm repeating myself....You are, and your still incorrect..wind power is excellent but not PROFITABLE enough to be taken seriouslyand we should be using much more!!!Agreed

There is a huge nuclear waste storage facility in Nevada. Yep, Yucca Mountain, just because it stored there doen't mean it's inert. You missed my point, I'm pro nuclear energy I just believe there won't be any hard study into refining the waste unless there is a need, again it is more profitable to just store this waste than invest in finding a solution of how to refine for other uses once expended

Problem isnt that. That's exactly what the problem is

Its the democrats who are afraid of nuclear power (uneducated) and who are afraid of the nuclear waste (more propoganda) As well as everyone should be, it's bad stuff.- have you ever seen what they store it in??? YesThey've hit these storage containers with a freight train, dropped them from buildings and they DONT BREAK.

Coal can be clean if you do it properly...or if you convert it to liquid fuel...Nasty by-products

Next.

Oil is just cheaper than all the others from drilling, to refining, to delivery, best return on investment (profitable).

BTW: Frt skid still sitting on the shelf waiting for you to get home.

Spelling in this post is probably all incorrect as I rushing to get the "yikes" car pool home.
Tom

[DWK]

Honestly, what's the point of impeaching him NOW! I agree with the comment about the jackass and addressing real issues. I can barely afford to pay my student loans with the price of gas being through the freaking roof...


Yeah, I mean if I killed someone last year, or defrauded thousands a few years ago, or committed any crime before, say, yesterday; what the hell? Why arrest or prosecute me today? The past is the past, sheez, get over it!

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/

[TRNDRVR]

Yeah, I mean if I killed someone last year, or defrauded thousands a few years ago, or committed any crime before, say, yesterday; what the hell? Why arrest or prosecute me today? The past is the past, sheez, get over it!

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/x Eleventy billion...thank you :cheers::thumbup:

[flynruff]

http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?RsrcID=2036

Check this out

[Darky]

and the UN had him(Saddam) on lock
http://www.slicky.net/smilies/rofld.gifhttp://www.slicky.net/smilies/rofld.gifhttp://www.slicky.net/smilies/rofld.gif


And the inspector's kept going back for the free continental breakfast....

[Darky]

Yeah, I mean if I killed someone last year, or defrauded thousands a few years ago, or committed any crime before, say, yesterday; what the hell? Why arrest or prosecute me today? The past is the past, sheez, get over it!

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/
I turned it off after the black people saying it was dems who gave them rights...The democrats had a very long history of oppressing blacks and voting against giving us equal rights. I figured if they want to use that bit of misinformation, who knows what else they're fudging...

[IndyXJ]

Bush and his NWO cronies will be bombing Iran before he leaves office.

Happy to be free of the left/right paradigm trap.

[JNickel101]

I am NOT angry, don't read it that way



Oil is just cheaper than all the others from drilling, to refining, to delivery, best return on investment (profitable).

BTW: Frt skid still sitting on the shelf waiting for you to get home.

Spelling in this post is probably all incorrect as I rushing to get the "yikes" car pool home.
Tom

I cite wiki b/c its a quick and easy search...and usually easily explainable. None of the info I'm talking about is from there.

First and foremost, my brother is a petroleum and natural gas engineer. He's working with a company pioneering new drilling techniques, including one where they drill into coal beds before they are strip mined in order to pull out the natural gas pockets that exist in the coal beds. That way, they dont just strip mine and let the gas float off.

I'd like to see where wind power isnt profitable. Where I hunt in WV there are TONS of these that provide quite a bit of power to DC. There are also large amounts of them to the east of El Paso, TX. I liken this to the way we buy jets. Sure, if we only buy 100 F-22s, they're going to cost us $200 mil each....but if we'd buy 200 of them, the cost per jet goes down considerably.

Similarly, if you buy 5 wind generators, yeah, sure, you're not gonna get much out of that. But if we start building farms of 100 of them, well....I think we'd be better off. Again...there are people attempting to put these up - my point isnt whether or not they are profitable - the point is the IRONY of the democrats - they are calling for renewable energy, yet turn around and block it, citing killing birds and/or ruining landscape.

Yet again...still waiting for a democrat to state what their solution is to the "energy and economic crisis"

I have a feeling i'll be waiting for a while. at least republicans are trying things - democrats are so quick to point fingers and call out flaws, yet offer ZERO alternative solutions. You REALLY think that taxing windfall profits from big oil is going to lower gas prices or help the economy? Better yet, lets impeach Bush, that will solve our issues w/ oil prices and the economy!!!! What a joke....

Hasta

[JNickel101]

Bush and his NWO cronies will be bombing Iran before he leaves office.

Happy to be free of the left/right paradigm trap.

No, we're doing all the can to NOT do that.

Trust me, the plans for that type of op exist, but the aftermath and results are not pretty....

[JNickel101]

whoops, all that we can to NOT do that...

[SBrad001]

I cite wiki b/c its a quick and easy search...and usually easily explainable. None of the info I'm talking about is from there.

First and foremost, my brother is a petroleum and natural gas engineer. He's working with a company pioneering new drilling techniques, including one where they drill into coal beds before they are strip mined in order to pull out the natural gas pockets that exist in the coal beds. That way, they dont just strip mine and let the gas float off.

I'd like to see where wind power isnt profitable. Where I hunt in WV there are TONS of these that provide quite a bit of power to DC. There are also large amounts of them to the east of El Paso, TX. I liken this to the way we buy jets. Sure, if we only buy 100 F-22s, they're going to cost us $200 mil each....but if we'd buy 200 of them, the cost per jet goes down considerably.

Similarly, if you buy 5 wind generators, yeah, sure, you're not gonna get much out of that. But if we start building farms of 100 of them, well....I think we'd be better off. Again...there are people attempting to put these up - my point isnt whether or not they are profitable - the point is the IRONY of the democrats - they are calling for renewable energy, yet turn around and block it, citing killing birds and/or ruining landscape.

Yet again...still waiting for a democrat to state what their solution is to the "energy and economic crisis"

I have a feeling i'll be waiting for a while. at least republicans are trying things - democrats are so quick to point fingers and call out flaws, yet offer ZERO alternative solutions. You REALLY think that taxing windfall profits from big oil is going to lower gas prices or help the economy? Better yet, lets impeach Bush, that will solve our issues w/ oil prices and the economy!!!! What a joke....

Hasta

Dude, you really listen to too much Rush Limpooh.

If Bush committed a crime, then he needs to be impeached. Just like CLinto was impeached for lying before a grand jury except Bush's possible crimes led to the deaths of thousands of US servicemembers and untold civilians.

As for your exhausting anti-democrat rants about how all these problems are their fault, give it a rest. The republican party has had more than it's fair share of scandal in the last 7 years. Given a chance to show the country true integrity and a positive change, they instead have put us in to the BIGGEST deficit in our nation history, started a questionable war, and overseen this economic turn down that will be left to the next administration to clean up.

You really are starting to remind me of a extreme zealot. Do you really think demonizing democrats in total this is an accurate description of democrats.

It would be like me saying that republicans are greedy, corrupt, coporate XXXX loving, homo(this is a Senator Craig referance) twits that care for no one but themselves. Sounds pretty silly doesn't it?

[WrenchMonkey]

Yet again...still waiting for a democrat to state what their solution is to the "energy and economic crisis"

Blah blah blah your guys suck as bad as our guys suck blah blah blah

Yeah, there's assholes on both sides, but that's not what he was talking about.

He was asking about actual solutions. And while the right has completely screwed the pooch trying to actually implement anything (mostly because they let the left run the show), I haven't heard anything out of the left that sounds like a solution at all...

Robert

[SBrad001]

Yeah, there's assholes on both sides, but that's not what he was talking about.

He was asking about actual solutions. And while the right has completely screwed the pooch trying to actually implement anything (mostly because they let the left run the show), I haven't heard anything out of the left that sounds like a solution at all...

Robert


They aren't my guys, I haven't voted for a Democrat in 15 years. Don't really care for them all that much either.

[JNickel101]

I personally dont care for either side, but I vote republican b/c at least they are offering up solutions and attempting to do things. For the most part, democrats just want to argue shoot down any idea. Again, still just waiting for a democrat idea/solution/sensible thought.

AND again....I think there are bigger problems in this country and whether or not the President should be impeached. But...I dont see what crime he committed. YET again, even democrats (including Clinton, in 2003 no less) called for regime change in Iraq. Americans need to quit pretending they know the truth and know what's going on over here.

And no, I dont listen to Rush at all actually...

Radical Muslims as a whole are out to create a worldwide Islamic State. Can you look at a Muslim and tell whether or not they are radical? Nope. Can you talk to one and tell which they are? Nope. Due to my experience, I dont trust any of them. Even the ones who claim they love America and Americans....do they really? Or are they going by the whole "keep your friends close and enemies closer"....?

[TRNDRVR]

I personally dont care for either side, but I vote republican b/c at least they are offering up solutions and attempting to do things. For the most part, democrats just want to argue shoot down any idea. Again, still just waiting for a democrat/republican idea/solution/sensible thought.blahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahbl ahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblah blahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahbl ah
AND again....I think there are bigger problems in this country and whether or not the President should be impeached. But...I dont see what crime he committed. YET again, even democrats (including Clinton, in 2003 no less) called for regime change in Iraq. Americans need to quit pretending they know the truth and know what's going on over here.blahblahblahblahblah
blahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahbl ahblahblahblahblahblahblah
And no, I dont listen to Rush at all actually...blahblahblahblahblahblahblahblah
blahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahbl ahblahblahblahblahblahblah
Radical Muslims as a whole are out to create a worldwide Islamic State. Can you look at a Muslim and tell whether or not they are radical? Nope. Can you talk to one and tell which they are? Nope. Due to my experience, I dont trust any of them. Even the ones who claim they love America and Americans....do they really? Or are they going by the whole "keep your friends close and enemies closer"....?:rtm:

[Darky]

:rtm:
seems like a pointless post to just quote him and go through type in blahblahblah throughout it...

[TRNDRVR]

seems like a pointless post to just quote him and go through type in blahblahblah throughout it...Exactly.

Besides, he's easy prey.

[Boatwrench]

Exactly.

Besides, he's easy prey.


Dan, isn't that like fishing at a cat fish farm? It's fishing, but there ain't much sport in it.

[Ecomike]

...so the point is the IRONY of the democrats, they are calling for renewable energy, yet turn around and block it, citing killing birds and/or ruining landscape.

Yet again...still waiting for a democrat to state what their solution is to the "energy and economic crisis"

I have a feeling i'll be waiting for a while. at least republicans are trying things - democrats are so quick to point fingers and call out flaws, yet offer ZERO alternative solutions. You REALLY think that taxing windfall profits from big oil is going to lower gas prices or help the economy? Better yet, lets impeach Bush, that will solve our issues w/ oil prices and the economy!!!! What a joke....

Hasta

JNickel101,

I liked the rest of your post, and I agree with it, so I only quoted the part I disagree with. You and several others have said this in recent posts, so I pulled the folowing from Obama's web site:

"Invest in a Clean Energy Future


Invest $150 Billion over 10 Years in Clean Energy: Obama will invest $150 billion over 10 years to advance the next generation of biofuels and fuel infrastructure, accelerate the commercialization of plug-in hybrids, promote development of commercial-scale renewable energy, invest in low-emissions coal plants, and begin the transition to a new digital electricity grid. A principal focus of this fund will be devoted to ensuring that technologies that are developed in the U.S. are rapidly commercialized in the U.S. and deployed around the globe.
Double Energy Research and Development Funding: Obama will double science and research funding for clean energy projects including those that make use of our biomass, solar and wind resources.
Invest in a Skilled Clean Technologies Workforce: Obama will use proceeds from the cap-and-trade auction program to invest in job training and transition programs to help workers and industries adapt to clean technology development and production. Obama will also create an energy-focused Green Jobs Corps to connect disconnected and disadvantaged youth with job skills for a high-growth industry.
Convert our Manufacturing Centers into Clean Technology Leaders: Obama will establish a federal investment program to help manufacturing centers modernize and Americans learn the new skills they need to produce green products.
Clean Technologies Deployment Venture Capital Fund: Obama will create a Clean Technologies Venture Capital Fund to fill a critical gap in U.S. technology development. Obama will invest $10 billion per year into this fund for five years. The fund will partner with existing investment funds and our National Laboratories to ensure that promising technologies move beyond the lab and are commercialized in the U.S
Require 25 Percent of Renewable Electricity by 2025: Obama will establish a 25 percent federal Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) to require that 25 percent of electricity consumed in the U.S. is derived from clean, sustainable energy sources, like solar, wind and geothermal by 2025.
Develop and Deploy Clean Coal Technology: Obama will significantly increase the resources devoted to the commercialization and deployment of low-carbon coal technologies. Obama will consider whatever policy tools are necessary, including standards that ban new traditional coal facilities, to ensure that we move quickly to commercialize and deploy low carbon coal technology. Support Next Generation Biofuels


Deploy Cellulosic Ethanol: Obama will invest federal resources, including tax incentives, cash prizes and government contracts into developing the most promising technologies with the goal of getting the first two billion gallons of cellulosic ethanol into the system by 2013.
Expand Locally-Owned Biofuel Refineries: Less than 10 percent of new ethanol production today is from farmer-owned refineries. New ethanol refineries help jumpstart rural economies. Obama will create a number of incentives for local communities to invest in their biofuels refineries.
Establish a National Low Carbon Fuel Standard: Barack Obama will establish a National Low Carbon Fuel Standard to speed the introduction of low-carbon non-petroleum fuels. The standard requires fuels suppliers to reduce the carbon their fuel emits by ten percent by 2020.
Increase Renewable Fuel Standard: Obama will require 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels to be included in the fuel supply by 2022 and will increase that to at least 60 billion gallons of advanced biofuels like cellulosic ethanol by 2030. Set America on Path to Oil Independence

Obama's plan will reduce oil consumption by at least 35 percent, or 10 million barrels per day, by 2030. This will more than offset the equivalent of the oil we would import from OPEC nations in 2030.

Increase Fuel Economy Standards: Obama will double fuel economy standards within 18 years. His plan will provide retooling tax credits and loan guarantees for domestic auto plants and parts manufacturers, so that they can build new fuel-efficient cars rather than overseas companies. Obama will also invest in advanced vehicle technology such as advanced lightweight materials and new engines. Improve Energy Efficiency 50 Percent by 2030


Set National Building Efficiency Goals: Barack Obama will establish a goal of making all new buildings carbon neutral, or produce zero emissions, by 2030. He'll also establish a national goal of improving new building efficiency by 50 percent and existing building efficiency by 25 percent over the next decade to help us meet the 2030 goal.
Establish a Grant Program for Early Adopters: Obama will create a competitive grant program to award those states and localities that take the first steps to implement new building codes that prioritize energy efficiency.
Invest in a Digital Smart Grid: Obama will pursue a major investment in our utility grid to enable a tremendous increase in renewable generation and accommodate modern energy requirements, such as reliability, smart metering, and distributed storage"Found on:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/energy/

[Ghost]

I wonder where he plans on getting those billions? :shhh:

[Mudderoy]

President Bush stood up to terrorism, a dictator and ultimately to the American people and said "NO MORE!" 7 years after 9/11 we have not been attacked again, although President Bush has been attacked personally nearly daily.

President Clinton sat down and leaned back for Monica Lewinsky, then lied about it to the American people.

Bill Clinton deserved to be impeached and should have had the courage and honor to resign. But that is the problem isn't it? Many liberals see more grays or shades of what the truth is. "I never had sex with that woman.", for example.

Thank God we still have people in the country that can be elected to office to do what they believe is RIGHT and not bow, or cower to public pressure for political gain.

The last Democratic president that had any B@LLS was president Kennedy. We wouldn't see that kind of courage again until Regan, Bush 1st, and now Bush 2nd.

[JNickel101]

Exactly.

Besides, he's easy prey.

LOL...you should go read that again. He was saying your post was pointless.

I'm easy prey...yeah, ok...and you have yet to make a post that has any intelligence or thought in it. You're kinda like the big dumb bully in school. Sure, you pick on kids because you might be "bigger" (after all, on the Internet, we're all huge, right?) - but in the end, you're still just an ass.

Face to face, I'd love to see what you had to say....keep hiding behind your keyboard, big boy.:D

[JNickel101]

JNickel101,

I liked the rest of your post, and I agree with it, so I only quoted the part I disagree with. You and several others have said this in recent posts, so I pulled the folowing from Obama's web site:

"Invest in a Clean Energy Future



Invest $150 Billion over 10 Years in Clean Energy: Obama will invest $150 billion over 10 years to advance the next generation of biofuels and fuel infrastructure, accelerate the commercialization of plug-in hybrids, promote development of commercial-scale renewable energy, invest in low-emissions coal plants, and begin the transition to a new digital electricity grid. A principal focus of this fund will be devoted to ensuring that technologies that are developed in the U.S. are rapidly commercialized in the U.S. and deployed around the globe.
Double Energy Research and Development Funding: Obama will double science and research funding for clean energy projects including those that make use of our biomass, solar and wind resources.
Invest in a Skilled Clean Technologies Workforce: Obama will use proceeds from the cap-and-trade auction program to invest in job training and transition programs to help workers and industries adapt to clean technology development and production. Obama will also create an energy-focused Green Jobs Corps to connect disconnected and disadvantaged youth with job skills for a high-growth industry.
Convert our Manufacturing Centers into Clean Technology Leaders: Obama will establish a federal investment program to help manufacturing centers modernize and Americans learn the new skills they need to produce green products.
Clean Technologies Deployment Venture Capital Fund: Obama will create a Clean Technologies Venture Capital Fund to fill a critical gap in U.S. technology development. Obama will invest $10 billion per year into this fund for five years. The fund will partner with existing investment funds and our National Laboratories to ensure that promising technologies move beyond the lab and are commercialized in the U.S
Require 25 Percent of Renewable Electricity by 2025: Obama will establish a 25 percent federal Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) to require that 25 percent of electricity consumed in the U.S. is derived from clean, sustainable energy sources, like solar, wind and geothermal by 2025.
Develop and Deploy Clean Coal Technology: Obama will significantly increase the resources devoted to the commercialization and deployment of low-carbon coal technologies. Obama will consider whatever policy tools are necessary, including standards that ban new traditional coal facilities, to ensure that we move quickly to commercialize and deploy low carbon coal technology.Support Next Generation Biofuels



Deploy Cellulosic Ethanol: Obama will invest federal resources, including tax incentives, cash prizes and government contracts into developing the most promising technologies with the goal of getting the first two billion gallons of cellulosic ethanol into the system by 2013.
Expand Locally-Owned Biofuel Refineries: Less than 10 percent of new ethanol production today is from farmer-owned refineries. New ethanol refineries help jumpstart rural economies. Obama will create a number of incentives for local communities to invest in their biofuels refineries.
Establish a National Low Carbon Fuel Standard: Barack Obama will establish a National Low Carbon Fuel Standard to speed the introduction of low-carbon non-petroleum fuels. The standard requires fuels suppliers to reduce the carbon their fuel emits by ten percent by 2020.
Increase Renewable Fuel Standard: Obama will require 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels to be included in the fuel supply by 2022 and will increase that to at least 60 billion gallons of advanced biofuels like cellulosic ethanol by 2030.Set America on Path to Oil Independence

Obama's plan will reduce oil consumption by at least 35 percent, or 10 million barrels per day, by 2030. This will more than offset the equivalent of the oil we would import from OPEC nations in 2030.


Increase Fuel Economy Standards: Obama will double fuel economy standards within 18 years. His plan will provide retooling tax credits and loan guarantees for domestic auto plants and parts manufacturers, so that they can build new fuel-efficient cars rather than overseas companies. Obama will also invest in advanced vehicle technology such as advanced lightweight materials and new engines.Improve Energy Efficiency 50 Percent by 2030



Set National Building Efficiency Goals: Barack Obama will establish a goal of making all new buildings carbon neutral, or produce zero emissions, by 2030. He'll also establish a national goal of improving new building efficiency by 50 percent and existing building efficiency by 25 percent over the next decade to help us meet the 2030 goal.
Establish a Grant Program for Early Adopters: Obama will create a competitive grant program to award those states and localities that take the first steps to implement new building codes that prioritize energy efficiency.
Invest in a Digital Smart Grid: Obama will pursue a major investment in our utility grid to enable a tremendous increase in renewable generation and accommodate modern energy requirements, such as reliability, smart metering, and distributed storage"Found on:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/energy/

Thats the first I've actually heard about anything the man has to say other than "Change" and "I wanna go talk to Iran and be friends".

I've come up with a new theory after reading and seeing what has been going on with the Dems lately....they're out to make us all drive hybrids, electric cars and get rid of our trucks and SUVs.

Biofuels would be great...but right now, the technology isnt all that profitable. I need to read more about how it affects food prices as well. But then again, I think we should quit paying farmers NOT to farm. Hell, let them grow sugar beets or whatever makes the best bio-diesel. Though I'm not sure its the solution. Doesn't bio diesel still release bad shit into the air? He has some lofty goals that I'm not sure are attainable...first Dem I've seen to actually provide ideas...

But yeah....he's gonna tax us to death. That combined with Nancy Pelosi and her Marxist plan to tax the shit out of our investments so that we can "give immigrants and unemployed minorities the kind of life they want and deserve" and damn...the rest of us still wont have money to buy gas.

Nancy The Socialist:

Windfall Tax on Retirement Income

Adding a tax to your retirement is simply another way of saying to the American people, you're so darn stupid that we're going to keep doing this until we drain every cent from you. That's what the Speaker of the House is saying. Read below...............

Nancy Pelosi wants a Windfall Tax on Retirement Income. In other words tax what you have made by investing toward your retirement. This woman is a nut case! You aren't going to believe this.

Madam speaker Nancy Pelosi wants to put a Windfall Tax on all stock market profits (including Retirement fund, 401K and Mutual Funds! Alas , it is true - all to help the 20 Million Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed Minorities! This woman is frightening.

She quotes...' We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income, (didn't Marx say something like this), in our country and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest.' (I am not rich, are you?)

When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied:
'We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities. For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long way to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as 'Americans'.' (Read that quote again and again and let it sink in. 'Lower your retirement, give it to others who have not worked as you have for it'.)

:twak:

[srimes]

Thats the first I've actually heard about anything the man has to say other than "Change" and "I wanna go talk to Iran and be friends".

I've come up with a new theory after reading and seeing what has been going on with the Dems lately....they're out to make us all drive hybrids, electric cars and get rid of our trucks and SUVs.

Biofuels would be great...but right now, the technology isnt all that profitable. I need to read more about how it affects food prices as well. But then again, I think we should quit paying farmers NOT to farm. Hell, let them grow sugar beets or whatever makes the best bio-diesel. Though I'm not sure its the solution. Doesn't bio diesel still release bad shit into the air? He has some lofty goals that I'm not sure are attainable...first Dem I've seen to actually provide ideas...

But yeah....he's gonna tax us to death. That combined with Nancy Pelosi and her Marxist plan to tax the shit out of our investments so that we can "give immigrants and unemployed minorities the kind of life they want and deserve" and damn...the rest of us still wont have money to buy gas.

Nancy The Socialist:

Windfall Tax on Retirement Income

Adding a tax to your retirement is simply another way of saying to the American people, you're so darn stupid that we're going to keep doing this until we drain every cent from you. That's what the Speaker of the House is saying. Read below...............

Nancy Pelosi wants a Windfall Tax on Retirement Income. In other words tax what you have made by investing toward your retirement. This woman is a nut case! You aren't going to believe this.

Madam speaker Nancy Pelosi wants to put a Windfall Tax on all stock market profits (including Retirement fund, 401K and Mutual Funds! Alas , it is true - all to help the 20 Million Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed Minorities! This woman is frightening.

She quotes...' We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income, (didn't Marx say something like this), in our country and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest.' (I am not rich, are you?)

When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied:
'We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities. For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long way to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as 'Americans'.' (Read that quote again and again and let it sink in. 'Lower your retirement, give it to others who have not worked as you have for it'.)

:twak:

That's not true, quite passing on lies. I don't like Pelosi but there's enough real criticism to be made based on reality.

[Mudderoy]

Thats the first I've actually heard about anything the man has to say other than "Change" and "I wanna go talk to Iran and be friends".

I've come up with a new theory after reading and seeing what has been going on with the Dems lately....they're out to make us all drive hybrids, electric cars and get rid of our trucks and SUVs.

Biofuels would be great...but right now, the technology isnt all that profitable. I need to read more about how it affects food prices as well. But then again, I think we should quit paying farmers NOT to farm. Hell, let them grow sugar beets or whatever makes the best bio-diesel. Though I'm not sure its the solution. Doesn't bio diesel still release bad shit into the air? He has some lofty goals that I'm not sure are attainable...first Dem I've seen to actually provide ideas...

But yeah....he's gonna tax us to death. That combined with Nancy Pelosi and her Marxist plan to tax the shit out of our investments so that we can "give immigrants and unemployed minorities the kind of life they want and deserve" and damn...the rest of us still wont have money to buy gas.

Nancy The Socialist:

Windfall Tax on Retirement Income

Adding a tax to your retirement is simply another way of saying to the American people, you're so darn stupid that we're going to keep doing this until we drain every cent from you. That's what the Speaker of the House is saying. Read below...............

Nancy Pelosi wants a Windfall Tax on Retirement Income. In other words tax what you have made by investing toward your retirement. This woman is a nut case! You aren't going to believe this.

Madam speaker Nancy Pelosi wants to put a Windfall Tax on all stock market profits (including Retirement fund, 401K and Mutual Funds! Alas , it is true - all to help the 20 Million Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed Minorities! This woman is frightening.

She quotes...' We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income, (didn't Marx say something like this), in our country and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest.' (I am not rich, are you?)

When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied:
'We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities. For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long way to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as 'Americans'.' (Read that quote again and again and let it sink in. 'Lower your retirement, give it to others who have not worked as you have for it'.)

:twak:


Perhaps you guys have heard this one before. A friend sent it to me the other day, and I got a kick out of it...

I'm reminded of the time that Catherine, one of my son's friends when he was little, told me that she wanted to be President one day.
Both of her parents, liberal Democrats, were standing there with us - and I asked Catherine - 'If you were President what would be the first thing you would do?'

Catherine replied - 'I would give new houses to all the homeless people. Then they would have a place of their own to live'

'Wow - what a worthy goal you have there, Catherine.' I told her, 'You don't have to wait until you're President to do that, you can come over to my house and clean up all the dog poop in the back yard and I will pay you $15 dollars. Then we can go over to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out and you can give him the $15 dollars to use for a new house.'

Catherine (who was about 4) thought that over for a second, while her mom looked at me seething, and Catherine replied, 'why doesn't the homeless guy come over and clean up the dog poop and you can pay him the $15 dollars.'


I smiled and said: welcome to the Republican Party!!!

[Darky]

That's not true, quite passing on lies. I don't like Pelosi but there's enough real criticism to be made based on reality.
What is the truth? Don't say, no you're wrong and not offer the correct info.

If that is true, it's retarded, and yes rather Communist. I would love to have my income equalized to Bill Gates, but I don't expect the gov't to tax the hell outta him to give me free money...

[JNickel101]

That's not true, quite passing on lies. I don't like Pelosi but there's enough real criticism to be made based on reality.

LOL...ok, believe what you want....pretend it isn't true. These are the people we let take control of Congress...hate to break the news to you!

There's a reason that congress has an approval rating of less than 20%...and the Dems have only been in control since 2006!

[JNickel101]

Perhaps you guys have heard this one before. A friend sent it to me the other day, and I got a kick out of it...

I'm reminded of the time that Catherine, one of my son's friends when he was little, told me that she wanted to be President one day.
Both of her parents, liberal Democrats, were standing there with us - and I asked Catherine - 'If you were President what would be the first thing you would do?'

Catherine replied - 'I would give new houses to all the homeless people. Then they would have a place of their own to live'

'Wow - what a worthy goal you have there, Catherine.' I told her, 'You don't have to wait until you're President to do that, you can come over to my house and clean up all the dog poop in the back yard and I will pay you $15 dollars. Then we can go over to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out and you can give him the $15 dollars to use for a new house.'

Catherine (who was about 4) thought that over for a second, while her mom looked at me seething, and Catherine replied, 'why doesn't the homeless guy come over and clean up the dog poop and you can pay him the $15 dollars.'


I smiled and said: welcome to the Republican Party!!!

I love it!!!! :jester:

[srimes]

What is the truth? Don't say, no you're wrong and not offer the correct info.

If that is true, it's retarded, and yes rather Communist. I would love to have my income equalized to Bill Gates, but I don't expect the gov't to tax the hell outta him to give me free money...

http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/pelosi.asp

[Bent]

I wonder where he plans on getting those billions? :shhh:
:doh:
Our empty pockets.

[Ecomike]

:doh:
Our empty pockets.

Last I heard they just print it at the US Treasury!:party:

[TRNDRVR]

but in the end, you're still just an ass.Well you got me here. I have no shame to admit, you're right.
Next. :eyes:

(I'll let in on another little secret, I vote democrat)

[Bent]

(I'll let in on another little secret, I vote democrat)
Never would have suspected.

[WrenchMonkey]

Never would have suspected.

:roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:

Robert