Ok, let me put this in a way you might understand.
The United States was looking for weapons that can kill a lot of people (also known as WMDs) not specifically nuclear weapons, in fact, nuclear weapons were never mentioned.
/Nukes
Ok, let me put this in a way you might understand.
The United States was looking for weapons that can kill a lot of people (also known as WMDs) not specifically nuclear weapons, in fact, nuclear weapons were never mentioned.
/Nukes
IA Rules doesn't allow these images in sigs
- IA Mgmt
Dude your going abou this the wrong way, you have to tell him a certain wa for him to understand. First find a lvl ranking republican and blame it on them, doesnt have to make since just blame a republican and he will agree with you. Remember democrats only ever want to blame someone else.
You have no idea what you are talking about.Originally Posted by TIGERJC
You are trying to hammer home a point that does not exist.
You are almost comically uninformed about the subject on which you are discoursing.
My advice: Stop now and go to the whore's lounge, where you can be a tard and actually get rep points for it.
2006 Cadillac CTS-V
I've been away from this discussion for a few days, but I'm glad to see some of you have been keeping things continually retarded.
It's obvious SOMEONE doesn't know what a WMD is. It certainly doesn't ONLY pertain to nuclear weapons. :jerkit:
If some of you liberal democrats spent just half the time you spend googling crap to Bush bash into really trying to LEARN something that is not one-sided, this would be a much more intelligent debate. As it is, it is abundantly easy to see, even if you were Ray Charles, that liberals are sadly equipped and ill prepared for such a request.
Quit googling liberal propaganda crap and come up with something original. The good ole, "OMG, look at our deficit (but let's just conviniently overlook the fact that we are at WAR that COSTS a ton of money DAILY and all of YOUR "hero" presidential predecesors didn't have to deal with yet THEY too had a huge deficit.....what was THEIR excuse???? :jerkit: )
It's like the liberals all read the same manual...."smoke and mirrors for dummies"......
In this case, the issue really -is- two sided, and is one of the main reason why I think Bush is a total failure as a republican president.I've been away from this discussion for a few days, but I'm glad to see some of you have been keeping things continually retarded.
It's obvious SOMEONE doesn't know what a WMD is. It certainly doesn't ONLY pertain to nuclear weapons. :jerkit:
If some of you liberal democrats spent just half the time you spend googling crap to Bush bash into really trying to LEARN something that is not one-sided, this would be a much more intelligent debate. As it is, it is abundantly easy to see, even if you were Ray Charles, that liberals are sadly equipped and ill prepared for such a request.
Quit googling liberal propaganda crap and come up with something original. The good ole, "OMG, look at our deficit (but let's just conviniently overlook the fact that we are at WAR that COSTS a ton of money DAILY and all of YOUR "hero" presidential predecesors didn't have to deal with yet THEY too had a huge deficit.....what was THEIR excuse???? :jerkit: )
It's like the liberals all read the same manual...."smoke and mirrors for dummies"......
Yes, war costs a lot of money, but the federal government has DOUBLED in size since he's been president. DOUBLED. There hasn't been a single spending bill that he's vetoed since he took office.
For a party that states their goal is reduced size and spending of the federal government, that doesn't sound very conservative to me.
2006 Cadillac CTS-V
Yes that's possible, but how does that affect the deficit per se?
Because if the government spends more money than it takes in (I'm sure you're aware that the government doesn't earn money, it takes money), then that's where you end up with a defecit. Defecits aren't necessarily a bad thing, everyone has them. The defecit is also not actually a record defecit, since the only relationship that matters in regards to a defecit is your ability to pay it off (as a percentage of GDP). The defecit is a smaller percentage of the GDP than it was 20-30 years ago, despite being a much higher actual number.
By spending like madmen, Bush and the republicans have joined hands with the Democrats and instead of saying 'we want smaller government', they're just saying 'we like huge government also, we just want to spend all your money this way, instead of that way'.
2006 Cadillac CTS-V
Funny, how everything is Bush's fault, what is it next, a black guy in New Orleans is gonna sneeze and its Bush's fault, wtf has come about here?! Get some education, stop sucking off of welfare for generation after generation, and get a job that pays you instead of leeching off the hard working class. Liberals need to stop whining and go get with the real world! You conservatives will agree with me, but Liberals, don't even bother posting a reply about this, its not worth it, just let it go, its just my two cents.
haha, I had to laugh at this. This is ridiculous.
Wow. You guys <i>really</i> need to take a course on logic and debate. That, or stop posting. That explains it...I just looked up profiles...Trans is 18, that explains all the rhetoric he's throwing in the wind of "Liberal Cocksucker" and the obscene use of profanity to form an "argument." Let me give you some help, stop regurgitating what you hear from your friends and do some research.
If anybody "blames the weather on Bush," then that is retarded. However, I don't think that anybody is. I think they're blaming the aftermath of the disaster on his ridiculous idea of who's "qualified" to run FEMA. Or possibly his Administration's view on cutting levy funds for Pontchartrain, viewed as an emminent natural disaster, to fund his war efforts in Iraq. I believe the "Bush hates Blacks" thing you guys keep referencing are the now infamous pictures of the Black person who "looted" goods, and the White couple who "found" goods. This cannot necessarily be credited to whether or not Bush is against Blacks, or New Orleans because it is heavily Black populated, but on the other hand, it cannot be misplaced by people to say all Liberals actually <i>think</i> such a thing.
As far as the war goes, it's very debatable. I think the timing made Bush look like more of a fool than he already allows himself to look, and the matter in which he went to war, and the matter in that he treats the war. I'll leave you with something to ponder.
"Our experience with [the Bush administration] is lengthy, and both types are replete with those who are characterised by pride, arrogance, greed and misappropriation of wealth. This resemblance began after the visits of Bush Sr to the region.
At a time when some of our compatriots were dazzled by America and hoping that these visits would have an effect on our countries, all of a sudden he was affected by those monarchies and military regimes, and became envious of their remaining decades in their positions, to embezzle the public wealth of the nation without supervision or accounting.
So he took dictatorship and suppression of freedoms to his son and they named it the Patriot Act, under the pretence of fighting terrorism. In addition, Bush sanctioned the installing of sons as state governors, and didn't forget to import expertise in election fraud from the region's presidents to Florida to be made use of in moments of difficulty."
"And even more dangerous and bitter for America is that the mujahidin recently forced Bush to resort to emergency funds to continue the fight in Afghanistan and Iraq, which is evidence of the success of the bleed-until-bankruptcy plan - with Allah's permission.
It is true that this shows that al-Qaida has gained, but on the other hand, it shows that the Bush administration has also gained, something of which anyone who looks at the size of the contracts acquired by the shady Bush administration-linked mega-corporations, like Halliburton and its kind, will be convinced. And it all shows that the real loser is ... you."
"Your security is in your own hands. And every state that doesn't play with our security has automatically guaranteed its own security."
--Usama Bin Laden
p.s. I don't want any comment suggesting I'm a terrorist or sympathize with terrorism. I believe the idea people have about "terrorism" is misplaced, and the ultimate cause of our downfall as a society. Attacks are generally responses. We were responded to in an unethical way, but it wasn't due to our democracy, or their lack of democracy, or our general religious beliefs, or their fascism, or, and please God let nobody think differently, it was not because of our "Freedom." Do some research, people.
Haha, I guess you don't use html in here? Forgive me, I don't know how to italicize or bold or anything else.
My god that was the most worthless babbling i have ever read! All you did was bring back old issues to a dead thread. Also saying that i need to do my research...you need to learn to read...IF you would have read ALL the post by EVERYONE you would have seen the stupid things we are refering to where nothing more that stupid..."SARCASTIC" jokes, that DJ brought up. You my friend are a moron jsut for thinking everything wesaid was real...we where doing nothing more than joking about what some....SOME of theys left wing liberal cocksuckers in here (not all jsut a small few) where saying. Next time read, and know what you are talking about before you rag someone!
Wow. You can't believe how releived I am to hear that this isn't "real" and instead just "joking." For a minute I thought people would take these statements to heart.
Stop throwing obscenities around because it makes you look that much more unintelligent.
LOL. Its funny looking back at this thread. Guess who was right? Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha. Poor Rubies. In the immortal words of Bob Marley:
"You can fool some people sometimes, But you canīt fool all the people all the time"
We stood up for our rights. Because we finally relized we had them all along.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote