More lies

[w2amr]

link (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21133278)

[w2amr]

And even more
link (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134143/)

[W1GUH]

How can anyone not be disgusted with the behavior from the President of the United States?

The is nothing but absolute comtempt for what the United States stands for. #

Impeach that FM. #Indict him and punish him appropriately. #

And...BTW, could you please warn us when there's such an offensive image at the link? #I almost blew lunch when I saw it unexpectedly.

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (W1GUH @ Oct. 04 2007,17:18)]How can anyone not be disgusted with the behavior from the President of the United States?

The is nothing but absolute comtempt for what the United States stands for. #

Impeach that FM. #Indict him and punish him appropriately. #

And...BTW, could you please warn us when there's such an offensive image at the link? #I almost blew lunch when I saw it unexpectedly.
The United States stands for freedom and justice. A beacon of hope. Or at least it once stood as such. Apparently we are heading in a different direction. Away from what our constitution is supposed to stand for. Away from what the founding fathers desired.

[K0RGR]

I started my own thread on this topic before I saw this one.

How many times can the White House lie to us, and get caught in the lies?

Bill Clinton lied about banging his secretary.

GWB has used that as justification for lying about EVERYTHING.

[ad4mg]

Uh, just a footnote ... as of 20:31 EDST, Fox News -dot- com has failed to cover this story.

You can, however, "Go Behind the Scenes" with Greta ... she's heading out to interview Jenna Bush.

"Fair and Balanced". "We Report. You Decide"

[W5JO]

Please feel free to post the next time one of you guys are tortured. I would like to know so I can complain to the White House.

[W1GUH]

Quote[/b] (W5JO @ Oct. 03 2007,18:46)]Please feel free to post the next time one of you guys are tortured. #I would like to know so I can complain to the White House.
And that means?

[K6UEY]

What I don't understand if you guys want to bolster the enemy why do you bother to post on QRZ?? Why not go straight to Al Jezzera and that way the enemy will get the word straight out.
For a group of Anti-Americans you don't seem too smart !! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[W1GUH]

Quote[/b] (K6UEY @ Oct. 03 2007,23:15)]What I don't understand if you guys want to bolster the enemy why do you bother to post on QRZ?? Why not go straight to Al Jezzera and that way the enemy will get the word straight out.
For a group of Anti-Americans you don't seem too smart !! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
No, you don't seem so smart.

America used to be big enough that we didn't stoop to those weak, stupid, ignorant means.

We had the reputation, and the history, of standing for all that is good.

Now, we stand for everything that they, the terrorists, stand for.

Thanks to the FM (now that you know what that means), we now stand for being no better than them. #We have exhibited to the world that we're no better than the worst stuff that's happened out there.

They have brought us down to their level because the American electorate has elected fools to be our leader. #Anybody who crosses the fools we've elected since '80, has been called every name in the book. #But, we know what we're saying, and know that we are the people that really stand for what America truly was, and can be again, as soon as we get over this illness where an ignorant electorate sends fools and morons to the White House.

Wake the F@#$% up...see how you've been duped by syrupy words. #Or perish.

[n4sva]

Awwww, those poor, poor terrorista. Allegedly subjected to simulated drownings and freezing temperatures. Oh the horror of it all!!!!! Beheadings don't come close to this.

[w2amr]

Quote[/b] (K6UEY @ Oct. 04 2007,22:15)]What I don't understand if you guys want to bolster the enemy why do you bother to post on QRZ?? Why not go straight to Al Jezzera and that way the enemy will get the word straight out.
For a group of Anti-Americans you don't seem too smart !! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
More toxic pie hole emissions. PU

[ad4mg]

Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Oct. 05 2007,01:25)]Awwww, those poor, poor terrorista. Allegedly subjected to simulated drownings and freezing temperatures. Oh the horror of it all!!!!! Beheadings don't come close to this.
It's clear that your gradual character descent continues 'sva.

First, you maliciously lift a post from a web site that you are too cowardly to join, and post it here so that it could be clearly taken out of context.

Then you make a very poor attempt at humor, at the expense of children suffering from a horrible disease.

Advocating torture would be your next logical step in your continued descent towards unadulterated hatred of anyone who dares not see the world exactly as you do.

Stay the course, neodude.

[K3XR]

Yes, the lies keep coming from the LEFT.

http://radioequalizer.blogspot.com/

[w2amr]

Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Oct. 05 2007,04:36)]Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Oct. 05 2007,01:25)]Awwww, those poor, poor terrorista. Allegedly subjected to simulated drownings and freezing temperatures. Oh the horror of it all!!!!! Beheadings don't come close to this.
It's clear that your gradual character descent continues 'sva.

First, you maliciously lift a post from a web site that you are too cowardly to join, and post it here so that it could be clearly taken out of context.

Then you make a very poor attempt at humor, at the expense of children suffering from a horrible disease.

Advocating torture would be your next logical step in your continued descent towards unadulterated hatred of anyone who dares not see the world exactly as you do.

Stay the course, neodude.
Yeah , but he IS consistant.

[ad4mg]

Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 05 2007,17:03)]Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Oct. 05 2007,04:36)]Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Oct. 05 2007,01:25)]Awwww, those poor, poor terrorista. Allegedly subjected to simulated drownings and freezing temperatures. Oh the horror of it all!!!!! Beheadings don't come close to this.
It's clear that your gradual character descent continues 'sva.

First, you maliciously lift a post from a web site that you are too cowardly to join, and post it here so that it could be clearly taken out of context.

Then you make a very poor attempt at humor, at the expense of children suffering from a horrible disease.

Advocating torture would be your next logical step in your continued descent towards unadulterated hatred of anyone who dares not see the world exactly as you do.

Stay the course, neodude.
Yeah , but he IS consistant.
Extremely.

[n4sva]

Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Oct. 04 2007,22:36)]Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Oct. 05 2007,01:25)]Awwww, those poor, poor terrorista. Allegedly subjected to simulated drownings and freezing temperatures. Oh the horror of it all!!!!! Beheadings don't come close to this.
It's clear that your gradual character descent continues 'sva.

First, you maliciously lift a post from a web site that you are too cowardly to join, and post it here so that it could be clearly taken out of context.

Then you make a very poor attempt at humor, at the expense of children suffering from a horrible disease.

Advocating torture would be your next logical step in your continued descent towards unadulterated hatred of anyone who dares not see the world exactly as you do.

Stay the course, neodude.
Awww, Mr. Sensitivity has his wittle list.

You know you love me, Lukey Pants :-*

[n4sva]

Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 05 2007,08:03)]Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Oct. 05 2007,04:36)]Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Oct. 05 2007,01:25)]Awwww, those poor, poor terrorista. Allegedly subjected to simulated drownings and freezing temperatures. Oh the horror of it all!!!!! Beheadings don't come close to this.
It's clear that your gradual character descent continues 'sva.

First, you maliciously lift a post from a web site that you are too cowardly to join, and post it here so that it could be clearly taken out of context.

Then you make a very poor attempt at humor, at the expense of children suffering from a horrible disease.

Advocating torture would be your next logical step in your continued descent towards unadulterated hatred of anyone who dares not see the world exactly as you do.

Stay the course, neodude.
Yeah , but he IS consistant.
Well, maybe at little more consitent than your spelling http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[w2amr]

Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Oct. 06 2007,16:55)]Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 05 2007,08:03)]Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Oct. 05 2007,04:36)]Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Oct. 05 2007,01:25)]Awwww, those poor, poor terrorista. Allegedly subjected to simulated drownings and freezing temperatures. Oh the horror of it all!!!!! Beheadings don't come close to this.
It's clear that your gradual character descent continues 'sva.

First, you maliciously lift a post from a web site that you are too cowardly to join, and post it here so that it could be clearly taken out of context.

Then you make a very poor attempt at humor, at the expense of children suffering from a horrible disease.

Advocating torture would be your next logical step in your continued descent towards unadulterated hatred of anyone who dares not see the world exactly as you do.

Stay the course, neodude.
Yeah , but he IS consistant.
Well, maybe at little more consitent than your spelling #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
consistent
Happy?

[n9yb]

Quote[/b] (W1GUH @ Oct. 05 2007,03:21)]Now, we stand for everything that they, the terrorists, stand for.
Oh horse hockey.

How many citizens on the streets of *pick the US city of your choice* are blown up on any given day?


What will the terrorists be doing at noon on January 20th 2009? In DC there will be an orderly transition of power. No guns, no violence, only ceremony and speeches.

your statement is uninformed at best...

[K6UEY]

I saw the topic, and I glanced at who was posting and I said, that most likely was true. Then I glanced at the caliber of the posting replys and that assured me the Topic was indeed True!! Just another QRZ level posting " More Lies".

[ad4mg]

Quote[/b] (K6UEY @ Oct. 07 2007,07:53)]I saw the topic, and I glanced at who was posting and I said, that most likely was true. Then I glanced at the caliber of the posting replys and that assured me the Topic was indeed True!! Just another QRZ level posting " More Lies".
Lies ... a subject you are more than qualified to address.

See signature for clarification.

[K6UEY]

ad4mg,
Quite correct luke,just reading your postings alone I have become almost an expert at recognizing LIES !!

As to the signiture comment we discussed this before, but I understand you don't always grasp what is being said the first time you read it!! Bring some proof and you shall see,so far you have FAILED AGAIN at the task !!
Don't let your failure ruin your day, I place a very LOW value on any thing you post !! That is one of the things I have learned from your postings!!

[ad4mg]

Quote[/b] (K6UEY @ Oct. 07 2007,08:15)]ad4mg,
Quite correct luke,just reading your postings alone I have become almost an expert at recognizing LIES !!

As to the signiture comment we discussed this before, but I understand you don't always grasp what is being said the first time you read it!! Bring some proof and you shall see,so far you have FAILED AGAIN at the task !!
Don't let your failure ruin your day, I place a very LOW value on any thing you post !! That is one of the things I have learned from your postings!!
Not gonna ruin my day, Orv. The proof you reference was posted 4 times.

Ignoring those 4 posts containing the truth is the equivalent of another lie.

Fess up, Orv. If proven wrong, you don't issue an apology, nor do you admit to the error. I'm not going to dig out the proof for a 5th time, it just isn't worth the effort.

The signature will remain until you admit that you were wrong when you said $30,000 of a $38,000 automobile produced in Detroit were union associated costs.

Are you big enough to simply state that you were in error, which will put an end to this, or will you continue lying, as my signature states?

It's up to you, Orv. What type of person are you, deep down inside? Your response will answer the question.

[K6UEY]

ad4mg,
Exactly as I said in the previous posting, you keep posting the same thing which is hardly proof except the Union Propaganda machine takes care of its own.You do not have to repeat that fact we all know they do!!

Lets see some figures on the salaries and bennies for all the Union vendors involved in the GM Contract.

Of course you are not naive enough to belive GM buys parts from whom ever they choose ,that is all in the Union contact, it is one big EXTORTION PLOT and it is sanctioned by Congress and the populace as a whole.

Now STOP claiming some claim by an insider who is most likely in on the extortion, is factual !!

I 'm aware as a Leftist you try to get your facts any where you can find some thing in your favor,but HONEST people use facts based on reality !!

Sorry you have once again used more than your allotted time !! # Have a Good Day, I WILL # #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[ad4mg]

Quote[/b] (K6UEY @ Oct. 07 2007,08:39)]ad4mg,
Exactly as I said in the previous posting, you keep posting the same thing which is hardly proof except the Union Propaganda machine takes care of its own.You do not have to repeat that fact we all know they do!!

Lets see some figures on the salaries and bennies for all the Union vendors involved in the GM Contract.

Of course you are not naive enough to belive GM buys parts from whom ever they choose ,that is all in the Union contact, it is one big EXTORTION PLOT and it is sanctioned by Congress and the populace as a whole.

Now STOP claiming some claim by an insider who is most likely in on the extortion, is factual !!

I 'm aware as a Leftist you try to get your facts any where you can find some thing in your favor,but HONEST people use facts based on reality !!

Sorry you have once again used more than your allotted time !! Have a Good Day, I WILL http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
That's pathetic, Orv. The sources I quoted were Industry sources, and by Management themselves.

You ignore the obvious, and hope everyone else does the same.

Carry on, you've been exposed for what you are.

Edit: Just FYI, the 5th posting of the data:

Quote[/b] ]K6UEY, from this thread: Ford And GM Say Factories In U.S. Face Axe (http://www.qrz.com/ib-bin/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=17;t=166476)

Quote[/b] (K6UEY @ Aug. 27 2007,01:09)]This is not news, the UAW had a chance to renegotiate with GM and save their jobs, instead they chose their typical method of extortion, however this time it did not work.What better way to get rid of the Unions than have them pull the rug from beneath their own feet.

We have been buying the same old $8000.00 car only we pay for the Union benifits to the tune of $38,000.00
So now may be GM also can afford a bit of Quality for that 38K. A typical maneuver of Ford is to follow in the footsteps of GM, lets hope that happens. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif
So, Orv says $30,000 of a $38,000 car manufactured in Detroit is union related expenses. NeoKon math at it's finest.

Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Aug. 27 2007,19:04)]Here's an August 2007 article, which seems to be by an unbiased source, that paints an entirely different picture. They say "But cost cuts and labor concessions alone won't make the automakers profitable, according to those who study the industry."

The problems, as I suspected, come from a myriad of issues, and are not solely blamed on the unions. It seems the reality of the situation is considerably different than the neoconservative hate filled spewage.

Detroit's Big 3 Fight to Make Money at Home (http://www.manufacturing.net/Detroit-Big-3-Fight.aspx)

Of course, I don't expect Orv to sway one bit from his bashing of his fellow Americans. Or at least the 72% of them that don't support the bush crime family.

Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Aug. 27 2007,19:11)]Get that apology ready Orv ... it looks like the labor expenses associated with that hypothetical $38,000 automobile are more like $3,800, and NOT the $30,000 you claimed.

Quote[/b] ]By most accounts, labor expenses for General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC amount to about 10 percent of the price of a new vehicle, including wages, benefits and ''legacy'' costs for retiree pensions and health care.

I again provide the link, Orv, so you may also have the opportunity to have the facts in front of you before you stick your foot in your mouth again.

UAW: Contract Talks About More Than Labor Costs (http://www.manufacturing.net/article.aspx?id=146110&menuid=276)

The source was "Manufacturing.Net". An industry source, from the industry that manufactures automobiles. Imagine that. And the source at the source is ... hold on to your hats ... MANAGEMENT!

In this particular thread, not another word was heard from Orville, K6UEY.

So him stating that he apologizes when he lies, is, well, just another lie.

This Case is Closed. Again.

[w2amr]

Quote[/b] (K6UEY @ Oct. 07 2007,05:15)]ad4mg,
Quite correct luke,just reading your postings alone I have become almost an expert at recognizing LIES !!
Like the one you told about the democrats voting not to fund body armor for the troops? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

[k9kxq]

Orv, you got a link to back yourself up? I really don't expect you to back your statement up because you can't, you are full of it again, your credibility is zero...

kxq

[K6UEY]

K9KXQ,
As usual you have your shoe on the wrong foot !!
You are the one questioning the statement NOT ME!! If you think it is incorrect then prove it,the burden of proof is on you, not me!! That is the problem with you leftists you are always getting things backwards !!

Just like the WMD's they did not find them so you take that as proof that there were none,SORRY but that does not fly, that is FEMALE LOGIC !!

[ad4mg]

Quote[/b] (K6UEY @ Oct. 07 2007,13:59)]K9KXQ,
As usual you have your shoe on the wrong foot !!
You are the one questioning the statement NOT ME!! If you think it is incorrect then prove it,the burden of proof is on you, not me!! That is the problem with you leftists you are always getting things backwards !!

Just like the WMD's they did not find them so you take that as proof that there were none,SORRY but that does not fly, that is FEMALE LOGIC !!
I see you're back, Orv. #Now that you've had time to examine the facts for the 5th time, maybe we can expect you'll "Man-Up" and issue that apology?

Just admit you're wrong on the UAW issue, Orv.

Just do it.

Be a man about this ... it'll do you good.

[ad4mg]

Quote[/b] (K6UEY @ Oct. 07 2007,13:59)]K9KXQ,
As usual you have your shoe on the wrong foot !!
You are the one questioning the statement NOT ME!! If you think it is incorrect then prove it,the burden of proof is on you, not me!! That is the problem with you leftists you are always getting things backwards !!

Just like the WMD's they did not find them so you take that as proof that there were none,SORRY but that does not fly, that is FEMALE LOGIC !!
Orv,

Are you running away from the truth again? The last four times I posted these facts, you ran away.

Some patriot you are. What a phony.

[kc0ukk]

So just who has seen the memo? Has Shulzberger actually quoted the memo or is he simply setting the baseline for the story?

Does anyone here actually know of even a single lie?

[kg6amw]

Why did a majority of Democratic Senators - such as Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller and Chuck Schumer - vote to authorize a war with Iraq on Oct. 11, 2002? And why is this war now supposedly George Bush's misfortune and not theirs? The phony indignation issues (Bush lied, torture, etc.) making the rounds in the Democratic party will come at cost. The next time a Democratic administration makes a case for using America's overwhelming military force to preempt a Milosevic or a mass murderer in Darfur - and history suggests that one will - the Democrats' own present disingenuous anti-war rhetoric may come back to haunt them, ensuring that such future humanitarian calls will probably fall on ears as deaf as they are partisan.

[k9kxq]

Quote[/b] (K6UEY @ Oct. 07 2007,12:59)]K9KXQ,
As usual you have your shoe on the wrong foot !!
You are the one questioning the statement NOT ME!! If you think it is incorrect then prove it,the burden of proof is on you, not me!! That is the problem with you leftists you are always getting things backwards !!

Just like the WMD's they did not find them so you take that as proof that there were none,SORRY but that does not fly, that is FEMALE LOGIC !!
I never put my shoes on the wrong foot Orv, although you stick yours in your mouth quite frequently...

You have ZERO credibility now pick yourself up and brush off the dirt...

kxq

[K0RGR]

Quote[/b] (kg6amw @ Oct. 07 2007,19:08)]Why did a majority of Democratic Senators - such as Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller and Chuck Schumer - vote to authorize a war with Iraq on Oct. 11, 2002? And why is this war now supposedly George Bush's misfortune and not theirs? The phony indignation issues (Bush lied, torture, etc.) making the rounds in the Democratic party will come at cost. The next time a Democratic administration makes a case for using America's overwhelming military force to preempt a Milosevic or a mass murderer in Darfur - and history suggests that one will - the Democrats' own present disingenuous anti-war rhetoric may come back to haunt them, ensuring that such future humanitarian calls will probably fall on ears as deaf as they are partisan.
A majority of Democrats in the Senate did vote for the war - just barely 27 to 22. However, in the House, the Democrats voted against the resolution.

Of course, they all say they were misled by the phonied up intelligence. Like the majority of Senators, after seeing Colin Powell's presentation at the U.N., I agreed that we were justified in invading Iraq. Very soon, however, it became pretty obvious that the White House had cooked the intelligence to bolster their case.

[w2amr]

Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Oct. 07 2007,11:34)]Quote[/b] (K6UEY @ Oct. 07 2007,13:59)]K9KXQ,
As usual you have your shoe on the wrong foot !!
You are the one questioning the statement NOT ME!! If you think it is incorrect then prove it,the burden of proof is on you, not me!! That is the problem with you leftists you are always getting things backwards !!

Just like the WMD's they did not find them so you take that as proof that there were none,SORRY but that does not fly, that is FEMALE LOGIC !!
I see you're back, Orv. #Now that you've had time to examine the facts for the 5th time, maybe we can expect you'll "Man-Up" and issue that apology?

Just admit you're wrong on the UAW issue, Orv.

Just do it.

Be a man about this ... it'll do you good.
I'm sure Orv will be offering an explanation to clear all of this up real soon.......


http://media4.dropshots.com/photos/88780/20071008/034006.jpg

[K2WH]

Quote[/b] ]The next time a Democratic administration makes a case for using America's overwhelming military force to preempt a Milosevic or a mass murderer in Darfur - and history suggests that one will - the Democrats' own present disingenuous anti-war rhetoric may come back to haunt them, ensuring that such future humanitarian calls will probably fall on ears as deaf as they are partisan.
Agreed. #Because of the years of political damnation, lies and vitriol directed at the current President (unwarranted I might add), and knowing how cowardly a democratic President would be, our military will be downsized and made impotent, and never be used for anything as trivial as a clear and present danger. I think it would be safe to say, if Hillary were elected with Bill tagging along and knowing how they hate the militray, our generals would retire enmass rather than be under the thumb of such people.

The enemy whomever that may be, will be allowed to do whatever it wants anywhere in the world including US soil. #No sitting President after this one will dare to use the military unless he wants to suffer the same political wrath. #We are done. #And why? #Because of liberal politics and the want of power.

K2WH

[W0BKR]

Well, they certainly handled Clinton's episodes in the White House appropriately...

NOT!

[ad4mg]

Quote[/b] (K2WH @ Oct. 08 2007,07:09)]Quote[/b] (kg6amw @ Oct. 07 2007,15:08)]Why did a majority of Democratic Senators - such as Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller and Chuck Schumer - vote to authorize a war with Iraq on Oct. 11, 2002? And why is this war now supposedly George Bush's misfortune and not theirs? The phony indignation issues (Bush lied, torture, etc.) making the rounds in the Democratic party will come at cost. The next time a Democratic administration makes a case for using America's overwhelming military force to preempt a Milosevic or a mass murderer in Darfur - and history suggests that one will - the Democrats' own present disingenuous anti-war rhetoric may come back to haunt them, ensuring that such future humanitarian calls will probably fall on ears as deaf as they are partisan.
Agreed. Because of the years of political damnation, lies and vitriol directed at the current President (unwarranted I might add), and knowing how cowardly a democratic President would be, our military will be downsized and made impotent, and never be used for anything as trivial as a clear and present danger.

The enemy whomever that may be, will be allowed to do whatever it wants anywhere in the world including US soil. No sitting President after this one will dare to use the military unless he wants to suffer the same political wrath. We are done. And why? Because of liberal politics and the want of power.

K2WH
Congratulations! You've covered all uber right-wing neoKon talking points per your orders from Lush Bimbo and the like. A perfect rendition, I might add. Not that I have any faith in the dimocrats, but excellence in replication of the right wing agenda as you have displayed requires recognition.

You have truly become the perfect little neoKon foot soldier, the ultimate achievement for a 'con.

You should be very proud.

And, as a bonus, you never have to deal with those pesky facts. You somehow buy into the lies spewed by this administration without question.

You have been assimilated. It was nice knowing you for a while there, Willie.

[W4BCR]

I am being tortured by all the left wing neodem BS. Who will I protest to. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (K6UEY @ Oct. 07 2007,10:59)]K9KXQ,
As usual you have your shoe on the wrong foot !!
You are the one questioning the statement NOT ME!! If you think it is incorrect then prove it,the burden of proof is on you, not me!! That is the problem with you leftists you are always getting things backwards !!

Just like the WMD's they did not find them so you take that as proof that there were none,SORRY but that does not fly, that is FEMALE LOGIC !!
"Female logic" ? Don't tell me that on top of being a youth hater you're a woman hater too ?

[K2WH]

Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Oct. 08 2007,00:15)]Quote[/b] (K2WH @ Oct. 08 2007,07:09)]Quote[/b] (kg6amw @ Oct. 07 2007,15:08)]Why did a majority of Democratic Senators - such as Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller and Chuck Schumer - vote to authorize a war with Iraq on Oct. 11, 2002? And why is this war now supposedly George Bush's misfortune and not theirs? # The phony indignation issues (Bush lied, torture, etc.) making the rounds in the Democratic party will come at cost. #The next time a Democratic administration makes a case for using America's overwhelming military force to preempt a Milosevic or a mass murderer in Darfur - and history suggests that one will - the Democrats' own present disingenuous anti-war rhetoric may come back to haunt them, ensuring that such future humanitarian calls will probably fall on ears as deaf as they are partisan.
Agreed. #Because of the years of political damnation, lies and vitriol directed at the current President (unwarranted I might add), and knowing how cowardly a democratic President would be, our military will be downsized and made impotent, and never be used for anything as trivial as a clear and present danger.

The enemy whomever that may be, will be allowed to do whatever it wants anywhere in the world including US soil. #No sitting President after this one will dare to use the military unless he wants to suffer the same political wrath. #We are done. #And why? #Because of liberal politics and the want of power.

K2WH
Congratulations! #You've covered all uber right-wing neoKon talking points per your orders from Lush Bimbo and the like. #A perfect rendition, I might add. #Not that I have any faith in the dimocrats, but excellence in replication of the right wing agenda as you have displayed requires recognition.

You have truly become the perfect little neoKon foot soldier, the ultimate achievement for a 'con.

You should be very proud.

And, as a bonus, you never have to deal with those pesky facts. #You somehow buy into the lies spewed by this administration without question.

You have been assimilated. #It was nice knowing you for a while there, Willie.
I'm not sure why you are referring to Limbaugh, I have not listened to him for a few days, but if my thinking has mimiced his, then I am honored.

Why not give us some insight into the way you see military usage in the coming 10 years instead of your constant drumbeat about neocons and koolaid while avoiding having to add to the debate.

K2WH

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (K2WH @ Oct. 08 2007,06:21)]Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Oct. 08 2007,00:15)]Quote[/b] (K2WH @ Oct. 08 2007,07:09)]Quote[/b] (kg6amw @ Oct. 07 2007,15:08)]Why did a majority of Democratic Senators - such as Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller and Chuck Schumer - vote to authorize a war with Iraq on Oct. 11, 2002? And why is this war now supposedly George Bush's misfortune and not theirs? # The phony indignation issues (Bush lied, torture, etc.) making the rounds in the Democratic party will come at cost. #The next time a Democratic administration makes a case for using America's overwhelming military force to preempt a Milosevic or a mass murderer in Darfur - and history suggests that one will - the Democrats' own present disingenuous anti-war rhetoric may come back to haunt them, ensuring that such future humanitarian calls will probably fall on ears as deaf as they are partisan.
Agreed. #Because of the years of political damnation, lies and vitriol directed at the current President (unwarranted I might add), and knowing how cowardly a democratic President would be, our military will be downsized and made impotent, and never be used for anything as trivial as a clear and present danger.

The enemy whomever that may be, will be allowed to do whatever it wants anywhere in the world including US soil. #No sitting President after this one will dare to use the military unless he wants to suffer the same political wrath. #We are done. #And why? #Because of liberal politics and the want of power.

K2WH
Congratulations! #You've covered all uber right-wing neoKon talking points per your orders from Lush Bimbo and the like. #A perfect rendition, I might add. #Not that I have any faith in the dimocrats, but excellence in replication of the right wing agenda as you have displayed requires recognition.

You have truly become the perfect little neoKon foot soldier, the ultimate achievement for a 'con.

You should be very proud.

And, as a bonus, you never have to deal with those pesky facts. #You somehow buy into the lies spewed by this administration without question.

You have been assimilated. #It was nice knowing you for a while there, Willie.
I'm not sure why you are referring to Limbaugh, I have not listened to him for a few days, but if my thinking has mimiced his, then I am honored.

Why not give us some insight into the way you see military usage in the coming 10 years instead of your constant drumbeat about neocons and koolaid while avoiding having to add to the debate.

K2WH
Quote[/b] ]
I'm not sure why you are referring to Limbaugh, I have not listened to him for a few days, but if my thinking has mimiced his, then I am honored.


You consider it honorable to be a hypocrite ?

[K2WH]

Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Oct. 08 2007,02:28)]Quote[/b] (K2WH @ Oct. 08 2007,06:21)]Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Oct. 08 2007,00:15)]Quote[/b] (K2WH @ Oct. 08 2007,07:09)]Quote[/b] (kg6amw @ Oct. 07 2007,15:08)]Why did a majority of Democratic Senators - such as Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller and Chuck Schumer - vote to authorize a war with Iraq on Oct. 11, 2002? And why is this war now supposedly George Bush's misfortune and not theirs? # The phony indignation issues (Bush lied, torture, etc.) making the rounds in the Democratic party will come at cost. #The next time a Democratic administration makes a case for using America's overwhelming military force to preempt a Milosevic or a mass murderer in Darfur - and history suggests that one will - the Democrats' own present disingenuous anti-war rhetoric may come back to haunt them, ensuring that such future humanitarian calls will probably fall on ears as deaf as they are partisan.
Agreed. #Because of the years of political damnation, lies and vitriol directed at the current President (unwarranted I might add), and knowing how cowardly a democratic President would be, our military will be downsized and made impotent, and never be used for anything as trivial as a clear and present danger.

The enemy whomever that may be, will be allowed to do whatever it wants anywhere in the world including US soil. #No sitting President after this one will dare to use the military unless he wants to suffer the same political wrath. #We are done. #And why? #Because of liberal politics and the want of power.

K2WH
Congratulations! #You've covered all uber right-wing neoKon talking points per your orders from Lush Bimbo and the like. #A perfect rendition, I might add. #Not that I have any faith in the dimocrats, but excellence in replication of the right wing agenda as you have displayed requires recognition.

You have truly become the perfect little neoKon foot soldier, the ultimate achievement for a 'con.

You should be very proud.

And, as a bonus, you never have to deal with those pesky facts. #You somehow buy into the lies spewed by this administration without question.

You have been assimilated. #It was nice knowing you for a while there, Willie.
I'm not sure why you are referring to Limbaugh, I have not listened to him for a few days, but if my thinking has mimiced his, then I am honored.

Why not give us some insight into the way you see military usage in the coming 10 years instead of your constant drumbeat about neocons and koolaid while avoiding having to add to the debate.

K2WH
Quote[/b] ]
I'm not sure why you are referring to Limbaugh, I have not listened to him for a few days, but if my thinking has mimiced his, then I am honored.


You consider it honorable to be a hypocrite ?
Another non-answer.

[kg6amw]

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 07 2007,22:42)]Quote[/b] (kg6amw @ Oct. 07 2007,19:08)]Why did a majority of Democratic Senators - such as Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller and Chuck Schumer - vote to authorize a war with Iraq on Oct. 11, 2002? And why is this war now supposedly George Bush's misfortune and not theirs? # The phony indignation issues (Bush lied, torture, etc.) making the rounds in the Democratic party will come at cost. #The next time a Democratic administration makes a case for using America's overwhelming military force to preempt a Milosevic or a mass murderer in Darfur - and history suggests that one will - the Democrats' own present disingenuous anti-war rhetoric may come back to haunt them, ensuring that such future humanitarian calls will probably fall on ears as deaf as they are partisan.
A majority of Democrats in the Senate did vote for the war - just barely 27 to 22. However, in the House, the Democrats voted against the resolution.

Of course, they all say they were misled by the phonied up intelligence. Like the majority of Senators, after seeing Colin Powell's presentation at the U.N., I agreed that we were justified in invading Iraq. Very soon, however, it became pretty obvious that the White House had cooked the intelligence to bolster their case.
The authorization was sought by President George W. Bush. Introduced as H.J.Res. 114 (Public Law 107–243 -- joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.), it passed the House on October 10, 2002 by a vote of 296-133,[2] and the Senate on October 11 by a vote of 77-23.[3] It was signed into law by President Bush on October 16, 2002.

[KA8DKT]

Quote[/b] (K6UEY @ Oct. 07 2007,13:59)]K9KXQ,
As usual you have your shoe on the wrong foot !!
You are the one questioning the statement NOT ME!! If you think it is incorrect then prove it,the burden of proof is on you, not me!! That is the problem with you leftists you are always getting things backwards !!

Just like the WMD's they did not find them so you take that as proof that there were none,SORRY but that does not fly, that is FEMALE LOGIC !!(My emphasis)

And we still have been unable to find them after five years. #In this case, they were just not there, no matter what you would like to believe.

The UN inspectors were not people selected by the bush administration, so we can be assured that they had at least minimum competence. #The fact is that they were very competent, very diligent, and very well equipped. #They did not find anything because there was nothing to find.

That is the problem with you righties. #You continue to believe something even after solid factual evidence shows otherwise. #The real question is, why this is so?

-gary

[W4BCR]

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 07 2007,22:42)]Quote[/b] (kg6amw @ Oct. 07 2007,19:08)]Why did a majority of Democratic Senators - such as Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller and Chuck Schumer - vote to authorize a war with Iraq on Oct. 11, 2002? And why is this war now supposedly George Bush's misfortune and not theirs? The phony indignation issues (Bush lied, torture, etc.) making the rounds in the Democratic party will come at cost. The next time a Democratic administration makes a case for using America's overwhelming military force to preempt a Milosevic or a mass murderer in Darfur - and history suggests that one will - the Democrats' own present disingenuous anti-war rhetoric may come back to haunt them, ensuring that such future humanitarian calls will probably fall on ears as deaf as they are partisan.
A majority of Democrats in the Senate did vote for the war - just barely 27 to 22. However, in the House, the Democrats voted against the resolution.

Of course, they all say they were misled by the phonied up intelligence. Like the majority of Senators, after seeing Colin Powell's presentation at the U.N., I agreed that we were justified in invading Iraq. Very soon, however, it became pretty obvious that the White House had cooked the intelligence to bolster their case.
The democrat's voted to support the war on Iraq because the public was behind the war. The democrat's (neodem's) never make a move without checking on the polls, as the neodem leadership is spineless. Even Hillary voted to support the action in Iraq.

[ad4mg]

Quote[/b] ]Why not give us some insight into the way you see military usage in the coming 10 years instead of your constant drumbeat about neocons and koolaid while avoiding having to add to the debate.

K2WH
Why? Your post, to which I replied, did nothing of the sort. It was pure partisan rhetoric, and totally baseless. Additionally, I was baited by you and ukKon once into a normal discussion, and you kons went on a "idiot fit". You only pretend to want civil discussion. I'm giving you what you actually seek.

I like this much better, anyway. Punting you neoKons around here is good therapy for lowering my blood pressure.