SarasotaSabre Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 If you consider that a personal attack you really need to stay far away from my posts. Go to My Controls - Manage Ignored Users. Add my name. The only way I think you would see my posts is if someone were to quote me. How often does that happen? I really suggest you do this. I don't think your delicate sensibilities can handle my posts. Trust me, they get a lot worse when I'm in the mood. I am not delicate in the slightest, I just have a penchant for calling out BS which I think is what you write. Suffice to say the fact we are Sabres fans is the only thing we have in common. I want what is best for my family, my fellow citizens, and for my country but it's obvious your views on these goals are diametrically different than mine. No big deal. Disagreement is a good thing when productive things come out of it.
inkman Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 You dont know me Thank God. (you can do that for me)
deluca67 Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 Thank God. (you can do that for me) Careful. He'll give you his phone number. :thumbsup:
deluca67 Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 I am not delicate in the slightest, I just have a penchant for calling out BS which I think is what you write. Suffice to say the fact we are Sabres fans is the only thing we have in common. I want what is best for my family, my fellow citizens, and for my country but it's obvious your views on these goals are diametrically different than mine. No big deal. Disagreement is a good thing when productive things come out of it. I think you're finally catching on. When the other guy posted a phone number I laughed so hard my dog started howling. As you continue to post you will learn not to take things so literally and personally. It's only entertainment. Sometimes it's fun to talk hockey. Sometimes it's fun to see which posters get their panties bunched up the quickest. BTW, Congrats to GW Bush. Who last Tuesday officially added 'Worst Former President' to his list of honors without doing a single thing. :lol:
SarasotaSabre Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 I think you're finally catching on. When the other guy posted a phone number I laughed so hard my dog started howling. As you continue to post you will learn not to take things so literally and personally. It's only entertainment. Sometimes it's fun to talk hockey. Sometimes it's fun to see which posters get their panties bunched up the quickest. BTW, Congrats to GW Bush. Who last Tuesday officially added 'Worst Former President' to his list of honors without doing a single thing. :lol: No, it's not your exchange with Stenbaro that I call BS - it's your views on socioeconomic/political issues that I call BS on. I don't take the personal jabs personally at all. I view them for what they are: nonsense. Why are you sending me congrats on Bush? You must be mistaking me for a defender of his. Nice try though....you are so good at stereotyping and putting people into neat little compartments. You don't know me so stop with the guilt by association. I really hope that after Obama's 4 year term that the non-liberals in the US are a little more classy with their review of a past President compared to the hate-filled crying of the Left. We'll have our microscopes on the Chosen One since surely the mainstream media will not have the sack to scrutinize him, since they are bed with him.....i.e., they never properly vetted him during the campaign and never properly examined his voting record or past (suspicious) associations. Let me guess which far-left publication bestowed this "honor" upon Bush?.....
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 Bush's initial reaction was perfect for 9/11 until he had our country invade Iraq. The man did not just sit still w/ his thumb up his arss. If he did, you'd be mad about that right now. Remember, the entire Senate, first time in our Nation's history, backed our President's course of action. Nice spin. The entire Senate? I'd re-think that. I think there was at least one Sen. that didn't back the Prez and vote yes on the resolution? Wait, I think he is President now. Strange, aye? Were you on TSW/PPP back in late 2002/early 2003? Quite an amzing place even amongst the sleps of the world (you and me... The "average Joes" of the world). :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 Another genious with the tru colors remark...You dont know me...Just to give you a history lesson on myself...10 years in the Marine Corps.. Go to CHurch and try and live an honest hardworking life.Raise 4 kids pay taxes and love my wife...There's my true colors drink that koolaid.... I do the same... Sans the Corps... Well, not really the Corps... Since I am a civilian DoD employee in the "other" Corps (USACE). Think there is a connection here between the differences in our beliefs? ;) ;)
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 boys, boys. this is exactly what the Iranians want us to do. :worthy: :worthy: :worthy: :w00t:
deluca67 Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 Nice spin. The entire Senate? I'd re-think that. I think there was at least one Sen. that didn't back the Prez and vote yes on the resolution? Wait, I think he is President now. Strange, aye? Were you on TSW/PPP back in late 2002/early 2003? Quite an amzing place even amongst the sleps of the world (you and me... The "average Joes" of the world). :rolleyes: :rolleyes: Would that be the same vote that was based on bad intelligence and outright lies by the White House? I just want to make sure we are talking about the same thing.
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 Would that be the same vote that was based on bad intelligence and outright lies by the White House? I just want to make sure we are talking about the same thing. Good point. Who were the smart one's that could see through the bad intell and outright lies... ;) ;) Not the the so-called "experts." <_<
deluca67 Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 Good point. Who were the smart one's that could see through the bad intell and outright lies... ;) ;) Not the the so-called "experts." <_< It's frustrating to think back at where the country was after 9/11 and to see where we are now. In 2001 we were unified unlike this country has seen since WWII. We had sympathy from the entire world. There wasn't a need to lie or to create an enemy or WMD's. It wouldn't have taken a great leader to move this country forward. If we just would have had competent leadership where would we be today? We didn't have the leadership and look where we are. We are divided as a nation, the economy is on verge of collapse and those worldwide who once shed tears now look upon us with disdain. What could have been. So many lives lost needlessly. So many meaningless deaths.
RayFinkle Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 Nice spin. The entire Senate? I'd re-think that. I think there was at least one Sen. that didn't back the Prez and vote yes on the resolution? Wait, I think he is President now. Strange, aye? Sure would have been strange considering he wasn't a Senator on 9/11 and didn't have a vote to cast....
Guest Sloth Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 Sure would have been strange considering he wasn't a Senator on 9/11 and didn't have a vote to cast.... That was my first thought after reading the post. The entire Senate did vote for the first course of action after 9/11 took place. Not one Senator voted against it.
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 Sure would have been strange considering he wasn't a Senator on 9/11 and didn't have a vote to cast.... We are not talking about 911... We are talking about resolution (2002) to go to war (2003) against Iraq. And :oops: I am sorry he (Obama) wasn't Sen. till 2004... But was very outspoken about his opposition to the war and would have voted against it no doubt. Here is HJ 114: A joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq. Far cry from "entire" Senate... There were 133 House memebers that vote nay too. Grouped By Vote Position YEAs ---77 Allard (R-CO) Allen (R-VA) Baucus (D-MT) Bayh (D-IN) Bennett (R-UT) Biden (D-DE) Bond (R-MO) Breaux (D-LA) Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Burns (R-MT) Campbell (R-CO) Cantwell (D-WA) Carnahan (D-MO) Carper (D-DE) Cleland (D-GA) Clinton (D-NY) Cochran (R-MS) Collins (R-ME) Craig (R-ID) Crapo (R-ID) Daschle (D-SD) DeWine (R-OH) Dodd (D-CT) Domenici (R-NM) Dorgan (D-ND) Edwards (D-NC) Ensign (R-NV) Enzi (R-WY) Feinstein (D-CA) Fitzgerald (R-IL) Frist (R-TN) Gramm (R-TX) Grassley (R-IA) Gregg (R-NH) Hagel (R-NE) Harkin (D-IA) Hatch (R-UT) Helms (R-NC) Hollings (D-SC) Hutchinson (R-AR) Hutchison (R-TX) Inhofe (R-OK) Johnson (D-SD) Kerry (D-MA) Kohl (D-WI) Kyl (R-AZ) Landrieu (D-LA) Lieberman (D-CT) Lincoln (D-AR) Lott (R-MS) Lugar (R-IN) McCain (R-AZ) McConnell (R-KY) Miller (D-GA) Murkowski (R-AK) Nelson (D-FL) Nelson (D-NE) Nickles (R-OK) Reid (D-NV) Roberts (R-KS) Rockefeller (D-WV) Santorum (R-PA) Schumer (D-NY) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Smith (R-NH) Smith (R-OR) Snowe (R-ME) Specter (R-PA) Stevens (R-AK) Thomas (R-WY) Thompson (R-TN) Thurmond (R-SC) Torricelli (D-NJ) Voinovich (R-OH) Warner (R-VA) NAYs ---23 Akaka (D-HI) Bingaman (D-NM) Boxer (D-CA) Byrd (D-WV) Chafee (R-RI) Conrad (D-ND) Corzine (D-NJ) Dayton (D-MN) Durbin (D-IL) Feingold (D-WI) Graham (D-FL) Inouye (D-HI) Jeffords (I-VT) Kennedy (D-MA) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) Mikulski (D-MD) Murray (D-WA) Reed (D-RI) Sarbanes (D-MD) Stabenow (D-MI) Wellstone (D-MN) Wyden (D-OR)
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 Careful. He'll give you his phone number. :thumbsup: Ya... With no area code... <_< <_< Maybe we can assume it is (716)... :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 That was my first thought after reading the post. The entire Senate did vote for the first course of action after 9/11 took place. Not one Senator voted against it. Again... Sorry. I thought we were talking about Iraq... My bad, funny how 911 and Iraq get mixed up? ;) ;) :oops: I have no problems with regards to going into Afghan... The good will was lost with Iraq, I think we all know that??
Guest Sloth Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 We are not talking about 911... We are talking about resolution to go to war in 2003 against Iraq. Some of us are talking about 9/11. And the entire Senate did vote w/ a thumbs up for the first coa after that terrible day. If Obama had been a Senator at the time of 9/11, he too would've voted yes. If he was a Senator back then and voted no, Obama would not have been a Senator in the next election and he probably wouldn't be President today. People would've viewed him unpatriotic.
Guest Sloth Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 Again... Sorry. I thought we were talking about Iraq... My bad, funny how 911 and Iraq get mixed up? ;) ;) :oops: I have no problems with regards to going into Afghan... The good will was lost with Iraq, I think we all know that?? I was typing as you were posting.
wjag Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 We are not talking about 911... We are talking about resolution (2002) to go to war (2003) against Iraq. And :oops: I am sorry he (Obama) wasn't Sen. till 2004... But was very outspoken about his opposition to the war and would have voted against it no doubt. Here is HJ 114: A joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq. Far cry from "entire" Senate... There were 133 House members that vote nay too. Grouped By Vote Position YEAs ---77 Clinton (D-NY) Ah yes.. The famous vote she made to become President that ultimately doomed her presidency
SarasotaSabre Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 Good point. Who were the smart one's that could see through the bad intell and outright lies... ;) ;) Not the the so-called "experts." <_< Let it go and move on boys....Bush is out of office and the new era of "hope" & "change" is now upon us. Turn the page....you are really coming across as petulant little whiners. There has been enough damage done by the mistakes of the past Administration - no disputing that.
deluca67 Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 No, it's not your exchange with Stenbaro that I call BS - it's your views on socioeconomic/political issues that I call BS on. I don't take the personal jabs personally at all. I view them for what they are: nonsense. Why are you sending me congrats on Bush? You must be mistaking me for a defender of his. Nice try though....you are so good at stereotyping and putting people into neat little compartments. You don't know me so stop with the guilt by association. I really hope that after Obama's 4 year term that the non-liberals in the US are a little more classy with their review of a past President compared to the hate-filled crying of the Left. We'll have our microscopes on the Chosen One since surely the mainstream media will not have the sack to scrutinize him, since they are bed with him.....i.e., they never properly vetted him during the campaign and never properly examined his voting record or past (suspicious) associations. Let me guess which far-left publication bestowed this "honor" upon Bush?..... Providing for those in need, ending a meaningless war and preserving individual rights. Wow, that is nonsense. What was I thinking. Microscope? That is another difference between the W and Obama. You don't need to look at the W through a microscope to see his flaws. They are visible with the naked eye. Hell, they are visible from space. We'll see how "classy" the "non-liberals" are after four years. I'm sure by that time their law suits to stop Obama from being president will be a distant memory. Good thing Obama re-took the oath. I'm beginning to think that Roberts screwed up on purpose to give non-liberals a chance at another law suit.
Patty16 Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 I get the feeling some of you are seriously misinformed Rush & BillO listeners. Using terms like far left? COnservatives of the "far right" had eight years, a majority of them with control of the Congress. Where are we now? your cut taxes, increase spending, start two wars, deregulate, ignore science, dumb down education with creationism, policies get us? Its amazing you can defend such policies, we have become the laughingstock of the world, our economy blows and somehow you are actually defending the man who was in charge of all this? Lemme guess its pron the fault of activist judges or the NYT or better yet its all Bill Clintons fault. Can you name one major policy that was a positive under Bush? Dont give me he kept us safe AFTER 9/11, remember the memo 'bin laden determined to attack" fro mthe summer of 2001? He didnt keep us safe we were attacked.
deluca67 Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 Some of us are talking about 9/11. And the entire Senate did vote w/ a thumbs up for the first coa after that terrible day. If Obama had been a Senator at the time of 9/11, he too would've voted yes. If he was a Senator back then and voted no, Obama would not have been a Senator in the next election and he probably wouldn't be President today. People would've viewed him unpatriotic. With such a unification of both parties how in the hell did we end up here?
deluca67 Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 I get the feeling some of you are seriously misinformed Rush & BillO listeners. Using terms like far left? COnservatives of the "far right" had eight years, a majority of them with control of the Congress. Where are we now? your cut taxes, increase spending, start two wars, deregulate, ignore science, dumb down education with creationism, policies get us? Its amazing you can defend such policies, we have become the laughingstock of the world, our economy blows and somehow you are actually defending the man who was in charge of all this? Lemme guess its pron the fault of activist judges or the NYT or better yet its all Bill Clintons fault. Can you name one major policy that was a positive under Bush? Dont give me he kept us safe AFTER 9/11, remember the memo 'bin laden determined to attack" fro mthe summer of 2001? He didnt keep us safe we were attacked. Do people still listen to Rush and Bill? Isn't Rush a admitted drug addict and doesn't Bill O have a history of sexually harassing his staff. These are still the voices of the conservative movement?
Patty16 Posted January 26, 2009 Report Posted January 26, 2009 Do people still listen to Rush and Bill? Isn't Rush a admitted drug addict and doesn't Bill O have a history of sexually harassing his staff. These are still the voices of the conservative movement? Yes and RUSH refuses to support the commander in chief during a time of war, because he thinks it helps the GOP. BillO settled a sex harrassment suit for approx $12 mill i believe, but dont quote me. Theres a reason the poorest least educated parts of the country are GOP strongholds... and it has nothing to do with values, everyone has values.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.