UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (53) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: eatenbybears Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 1961534  
Subject: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/30/2013 12:19 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Can we chose to smoke? ...... No
Can we order a large soda? ..... No
Can we chose to own a gun? ...... No
Can we chose to use an incandescent light bulb? ..... No
Can we chose to use low cost coal? ..... No
Can we honor god in public ...... No

But, you can have an abortion

Let freedom ring


Thank you Mr Diaz
Print the post Back To Top
Author: alstroemeria Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868197 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/30/2013 12:54 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 54
Can we chose to smoke?

Of course you can--just not where members of the public would suffer from your second-hand smoke.

Can we order a large soda?

Yes. Even 2 or 3. I hope you enjoy your T2 Diabetes & obesity and/or liver problems.

Can we chose to own a gun?

Yes. Most of us prefer you not own a gun if you're crazy. Some of us prefer you not own big clips for your guns. It's a public safety issue.

Can we chose to use an incandescent light bulb?

I don't know. Why do you prefer bulbs that waste energy (on your electric bill), get hot (have been known to start fires), and need to be changed more often?

Can we chose to use low cost coal?

Your right to "dirty coal" ends at my lungs.

Can we honor god in public

Depends. You shouldn't force others to participate in or even listen to your prayers. And I find your desire to put a creche on the town green instead of on your own and your church's front lawn kind of suspicious.

But, you can have an abortion

Go right ahead.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: eatenbybears Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868198 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/30/2013 1:04 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
You Libs take everything so serious :)

Bears

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lowstudent Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868199 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/30/2013 1:08 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
You Libs take everything so serious :)
_____________

Well except the national debt, the administrations calls for censorship for years, deaths in the Middle East, creating a budget, North Korea and anything else actually important.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jerryab Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868268 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 12:19 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
You Libs take everything so serious :)
_____________

Well except the national debt, the administrations calls for censorship for years, deaths in the Middle East, creating a budget, North Korea and anything else actually important.


Found those WMDs in Iraq yet? Or weren't they "actually important"?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: alstroemeria Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868280 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 8:19 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Found those WMDs in Iraq yet? Or weren't they "actually important"?

W was mistaken. They weren't under his desk--they were under Dick Cheney's.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: LurkerMom Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868281 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 8:57 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 8
Found those WMDs in Iraq yet? Or weren't they "actually important"?


______________________________

Oh dear...the old worn out mime phrase again that is suppose to give the libs the last word and end any conversation...

Instead why don't you ask Hillary's boy Bill how important those WMD were...when he said,...

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."

or

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

Those two staunch liberal dems are still around to answer questions. Why don't you get together a PA lib entourage, go to DC and start there for your answers?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lowstudent Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868283 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 9:09 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Those two staunch liberal dems are still around to answer questions. Why don't you get together a PA lib entourage, go to DC and start there for your answers?
____________________

Well, apparently liberals do know that liberals are simply too stupid to think for themselves.

Although they agreed, and in Clinton's case was in fact in front of the parade. You do understand it was Darth Cheney, with his Vulcan mind meld<grin> that was shaping their beliefs.

Were they not being fooled by someone they would have been perfect, of course Bush and Cheney are idiots for being fooled by bad data, because

well, they are not liberals, and therefore should not have been wrong.

But be kind, you really do have to constantly lie to yourself and revise history to remain a liberal, and well, do you really want someone like that on your side?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jgc123 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868285 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 9:12 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 45
lowstudent: "Well except the national debt...creating a budget...and anything else actually important."

...says the people who started two trillion dollar wars, enacted multi-trillion dollar unfunded tax cuts while prosecuting those wars, built the economy on a multi-trillion dollar banking bubble and then started talking about deficits AFTER their bubble burst and they were voted out of office in 2008...

...and then immediately forgot the deficits and started attacking women and immigrants after winning a few elections in 2010...

...and then got crushed in 2012 and started pretending to care about deficits again...

Print the post Back To Top
Author: JavaRunner Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868293 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 10:17 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Instead why don't you ask Hillary's boy Bill how important those WMD were...when he said,...

======================================================================

I suppose because Clinton didn't take us into a long, drawn out war, which cost trillions, brought us to where we are economically, and all based on a lie.

Charlie

Print the post Back To Top
Author: LurkerMom Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868295 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 10:41 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
I suppose because Clinton didn't take us into a long, drawn out war, which cost trillions, brought us to where we are economically, and all based on a lie.

Charlie

___________________________

Right, based on the lies coming from Clinton and prominent dems...

http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jah609 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868302 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 11:18 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
<<<W was mistaken. They weren't under his desk--they were under Dick Cheney's.>>>>

See what I mean about all they have?

Poor things.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: JavaRunner Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868305 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 11:50 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 5
Right, based on the lies coming from Clinton and prominent dems...


Clinton and Bush were given intelligence claiming WMD. As Bush administration people now tell us, they saw it was faulty intel and the President still went to war. Clinton didn't. Do you not see a difference?

Charlie

Print the post Back To Top
Author: NemesisToLibs Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868307 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 12:04 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
"
Clinton and Bush were given intelligence claiming WMD. As Bush administration people now tell us, they saw it was faulty intel and the President still went to war. Clinton didn't. Do you not see a difference?

Charlie"


This is your argument?? Earth to javarunner, Clinton didn't have 9/11 to contend with. And yes there will always be people claiming intelligence is faulty, because by its very nature it's imperfect.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: crassfool Big funky green star, 20000 posts Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868308 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 12:07 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
bears says

You Libs take everything so serious :)

I know. It's easy to forget that some of the whining, howling, foot-stomping and arm-waving is just recreation.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TheDope1 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868310 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 12:16 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
I suppose because Clinton didn't take us into a long, drawn out war, which cost trillions, brought us to where we are economically, and all based on a lie.

The Iraq Wars aren't responsible for the Obama's poor recovery. That's number one.

Secondly, we'd been engaged in expensive combat operations over there for years. That they didn't make many headlines here doesn't change the fact that 1) a lot of Iraqis died during the sanctions and due to airstrikes and 2) US warplanes and crews were in harm's way all that time.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jerryab Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868326 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 1:12 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 20
Instead why don't you ask Hillary's boy Bill how important those WMD were...when he said,...

You have not been paying attention--AGAIN. 1998 is NOT 2002-2003. Both GHWB *and* Clinton knew the difference. Obviously, you do NOT.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002


Why don't YOU tell us *why* the US State Dept Intelligence Dept said there were NO WMDs in Irag--in mid-Oct 2002? Oh, you do NOT have the report? Neither did Kerry. OOPS !!! Yet GWB + Cheney DID have the report. It was IGNORED. Why? Because it did NOT *support* WMDs in Iraq = IGNORED !!

Print the post Back To Top
Author: nigelwhalmsley Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868332 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 1:36 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"Earth to javarunner, Clinton didn't have 9/11 to contend with."

By 'contend with', you mean go off half cocked and invade the wrong country? Yes, there's no doubt Clinton would not have done that.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: NemesisToLibs Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868343 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 3:38 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
"By 'contend with', you mean go off half cocked and invade the wrong country? Yes, there's no doubt Clinton would not have done that. "

I see that you continue to prove my point that you have nothing worthwhile to say.

Why don't you pick an issue, create a new thread and argue your position with supporting facts.

Not holding my breath, because it has been shown repeatedly you are incapable of debating whether 2+2 = 4.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TheDope1 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868348 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 4:52 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
liberals ARE pro choice. They just get to be the ones who get to choose for everyone. The little people? They're there to do what they're told.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: LurkerMom Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868354 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 6:14 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 6
Clinton and Bush were given intelligence claiming WMD. As Bush administration people now tell us, they saw it was faulty intel and the President still went to war. Clinton didn't. Do you not see a difference?

_____________________________


During the Clinton presidency and already in place before Bush, was the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998...

snip
"The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 is a United States Congressional statement of policy calling for regime change in Iraq.[1][2] It was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, and states that it is the policy of the United States to support democratic movements within Iraq."
snip
The Act declared that it was the Policy of the United States to support "regime change." The Act was passed 360-38 in the U.S. House of Representatives[4] and by unanimous consent in the Senate.[5] US President Bill Clinton signed the bill into law on October 31, 1998. The law's stated purpose was: "to establish a program to support a transition to democracy in Iraq."
snip
"The Act contemplated the future need for War Crimes Tribunals in Iraq stating, "The Congress urges the President to call upon the United Nations to establish an international criminal tribunal for the purpose of indicting, prosecuting, and imprisoning Saddam Hussein and other Iraqi officials who are responsible for crimes against humanity, genocide, and other criminal violations of international law."
snip
"A generalized statement of policy toward the post-Hussein Iraq was also set forth stating, "It is the sense of the Congress that once the Saddam Hussein regime is removed from power in Iraq, the United States should support Iraq's transition to democracy by providing immediate and substantial humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people"
snip
"President George W. Bush often referred to the Act and its findings to argue that the Clinton Administration supported regime change in Iraq and further that it believed that Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction. The Act was cited as a basis of support in the Congressional Authorization for use of Military Force Against Iraq in October 2002."

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

Question...how else do you remove someone such as Hussein from power without going to war? The seed to go to war with Iraq was already planted by Clinton.


snip
"Senate Report on Pre-war Intelligence on Iraq

The report, which was released on July 9, 2004, identified numerous failures in the intelligence-gathering and -analysis process. The report found that these failures led to the creation of inaccurate materials that misled both government policy makers and the American public."
snip
"General conclusions on intelligence relating to Iraq's WMD and ties to terrorism
Subsequent conclusions fault the intelligence community for failing to adequately explain to policymakers the uncertainties that underlay the NIE's conclusions, and for succumbing to "group think," in which the intelligence community adopted untested (and, in hindsight, unwarranted) assumptions about the extent of Iraq's WMD stockpiles and programs. The committee identified a failure to adequately supervise analysts and collectors, and a failure to develop human sources of intelligence (HUMINT) inside Iraq after the departure of international weapons inspectors in 1998. It also cited the post-9/11 environment as having led to an increase in the intensity with which policymakers review and question threat information."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Report_on_Pre-war_Intell...

and of course included in the link are accusations by opinionated democrats saying President Bush lied to promote the war in Iraq...regardless of the actual findings of the Senate Report.

As the saying goes, repeat the lie often enough etc. etc....

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: nigelwhalmsley Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868355 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 6:28 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
[ "By 'contend with', you mean go off half cocked and invade the wrong country? Yes, there's no doubt Clinton would not have done that." ]

"I see that you continue to prove my point that you have nothing worthwhile to say."

Hmm. I have a different perspective. First, you continue to misuse the phrase 'prove my point', as you use it often when nothing of the kind has been proven. Second, that you took the time to type that response is very ironic. Think about it.

"Why don't you pick an issue, create a new thread and argue your position with supporting facts."

I have.

"Not holding my breath, because it has been shown repeatedly you are incapable of debating whether 2+2 = 4."

No, it has been shown repeatedly that you have a very loose definition of what constitutes 'facts', and when someone slaps down your goofy premise with factual information, you tell them they are incapable of debating. You pick and choose what you find 'credible' based on whether or not is supports whatever you are currently trying to pass of as 'true'. There is a pattern.

If you find my responses offensive, please just ignore them.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: nigelwhalmsley Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868356 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 6:29 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"liberals ARE pro choice. They just get to be the ones who get to choose for everyone."

Huh? I don't think that is what you meant to say. Try again?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: xLife Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868358 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 6:39 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
Question...how else do you remove someone such as Hussein from power without going to war?

Dunno. Maybe we should ask Mossadegh, Arbenz, Sukarno, Lumumba, Qasim, Trujillo, Diem, Allende, Marcos, Milosovich, Mubarak or Qaddafi? Assad might have an opinion on this in a couple of months.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: anniesdad Big gold star, 5000 posts Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868359 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 6:40 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
and of course included in the link are accusations by opinionated democrats saying President Bush lied to promote the war in Iraq...regardless of the actual findings of the Senate Report.

As the saying goes, repeat the lie often enough etc. etc....


From you're link,

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


The Office of Special Plans (OSP), which existed from September 2002 to June 2003, was a Pentagon unit created by Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith, and headed by Feith, as charged by then-United States Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, to supply senior George W. Bush administration officials with raw intelligence (unvetted by intelligence analysts, see Stovepiping) pertaining to Iraq.[1] A similar unit, called the Iranian Directorate, was created several years later, in 2006, to deal with intelligence on Iran.[2]

n an interview with the Scottish Sunday Herald, former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) officer Larry C. Johnson said the OSP was "dangerous for US national security and a threat to world peace. [The OSP] lied and manipulated intelligence to further its agenda of removing Saddam. It's a group of ideologues with pre-determined notions of truth and reality. They take bits of intelligence to support their agenda and ignore anything contrary. They should be eliminated."[4]

Seymour Hersh writes that, according to an unnamed Pentagon adviser, "[OSP] was created in order to find evidence of what Wolfowitz and his boss, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, wanted to be true—that Saddam Hussein had close ties to Al Qaeda, and that Iraq had an enormous arsenal of chemical, biological, and possibly even nuclear weapons (WMD) that threatened the region and, potentially, the United States. [...] 'The agency [CIA] was out to disprove linkage between Iraq and terrorism,' the Pentagon adviser told me. 'That’s what drove them. If you’ve ever worked with intelligence data, you can see the ingrained views at C.I.A. that color the way it sees data.' The goal of Special Plans, he said, was 'to put the data under the microscope to reveal what the intelligence community can’t see.'"[5]

These allegations are supported by an annex to the first part of Senate Intelligence Committee's Report of Pre-war Intelligence on Iraq published in July 2004. The review, which was highly critical of the CIA's Iraq intelligence generally but found its judgments were right on the Iraq-al Qaeda relationship, suggests that the OSP, if connected to an "Iraqi intelligence cell" also headed by Douglas Feith which is described in the annex, sought to discredit and cast doubt on CIA analysis in an effort to establish a connection between Saddam Hussein and terrorism. In one instance, in response to a cautious CIA report, "Iraq and al-Qa'eda: A Murky Relationship", the annex relates that "one of the individuals working for the [intelligence cell led by Feith] stated that the June [2002] report, '...should be read for content only – and CIA's interpretation ought to be ignored.'"

In other words, just lie.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: 0x6a74 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868380 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 9:03 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I know. It's easy to forget that some of the whining, howling, foot-stomping and arm-waving is just recreation.



and the rest is a desperate cry for attention?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: NoSeeUm Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868382 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 9:23 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 64
Can we chose to smoke? ...... No
Can we order a large soda? ..... No
Can we chose to own a gun? ...... No
Can we chose to use an incandescent light bulb? ..... No
Can we chose to use low cost coal? ..... No
Can we honor god in public ...... No

But, you can have an abortion

Let freedom ring


Hey, bears! Let me know how your next abortion goes.
It's such a lovely physical-political experience that I'm sure you'll want one every month.
You can even have a realtime ultrasound beforehand. And the vaginal probe is every bit as enjoyable as advertised.

Meantime, Yes, you can smoke.
You can have a large soda...
....in a 55 gallon drum if you so desire.
You can own a gun...
...You can own a damn arsenal if you so desire.
You can use any light-bulb you want.
You might want to replace the one in your personal attic:
It's getting pretty dim.
You can burn all the coal you want.
My grandfather had a coal furnace 100 years ago.
Hell, you can use a typewriter if you can find one.
A horse and buggy is a very viable option in your contracted universe.

And you can honor God in public, with few restrictions.

But you still can't yell 'Fire!' in a nightclub.

Damn liberals. Won't let you do anything!

However, you can still jump off your seventh-floor balcony.
You know, join the rest of your fellow political lemmings.

Be my guest, Oh, Prophet of Everlasting Doom.


But, Jesus H. Christ, man.....Give it a rest.
Paint your cave or something.

May you wake up just cranky in the morning, and not paranoid freeked-out. And have the courtesy to keep your bizarre, paranoid imagination in the closet...at least for as long as it takes to draw a deep breath, if not a shaky bead on the next imaginary boogieman.

Have a miserable day...


Jimbo

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: JavaRunner Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868384 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 11:05 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Earth to javarunner, Clinton didn't have 9/11 to contend with


Earth to MemesisToNoOne - 9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq. Those bad guys were in Afghanistan(a war I initially fully supported).

Charlie

Print the post Back To Top
Author: JavaRunner Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868385 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 11:11 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
The Iraq Wars aren't responsible for the Obama's poor recovery. That's number one.


The poor recovery has more to do with political parties trying to score points, and not being interested in solving the nation's problems. Obama has not done enough, on the other hand the GOP has dome very little to come to some compromise which might actually work.

Sequester should never have happened. At the root though is we lived a life where the GOP insisted that deficits don't matter, and acted like it. You can blame Obama for failed current programs all you like, but we wouldn't be here if Bush had not dragged us into two wars we couldn't afford.

Charlie

Print the post Back To Top
Author: NemesisToLibs Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868386 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 3/31/2013 11:31 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 6
"The poor recovery has more to do with political parties trying to score points, and not being interested in solving the nation's problems. "

Nope.

The problem is Obama's policies that have stalled, hindered and created an economic environment that is the antithesis to what is needed for strong growth.

The problem is Obama's understanding of the economics is flawed and he is arrogant about it.

The problem is Obamacare.

The problem is Keynesian economics.

The problem is Obama's energy policy, which is guaranteeing high oil and gas prices.

The problem is excessive regulations at all levels of government.

The problem is Obama's crony capitalism.

The problem is government bailing out banks and businesses.

The problem is Obama's need to socialize risk.

The problem is the fed in the name of stimulating the economy is only saving the banks.

The problem is the EPA and its aggressive policies to destroy the coal industry and make it difficult for the oil and natural gas industries.

The problem is the political elite.

The problem is and I will spell it out for you: G O V E R N M E N T.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TheDope1 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868390 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 12:12 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
The poor recovery has more to do with political parties trying to score points, and not being interested in solving the nation's problems. Obama has not done enough, on the other hand the GOP has dome very little to come to some compromise which might actually work.


Obama hasn't done enough what? Spending? He's spent $6 trillion dollars (going by the debt added). What did that accomplish?

Sequester should never have happened. At the root though is we lived a life where the GOP insisted that deficits don't matter, and acted like it. You can blame Obama for failed current programs all you like, but we wouldn't be here if Bush had not dragged us into two wars we couldn't afford.

We wouldn't be where? The wars aren't the drivers of most of our debt. Entitlements are. Obama has done nothing to address any of those programs and never will.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: xLife Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868391 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 12:40 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
Obama hasn't done enough what? Spending? He's spent $6 trillion dollars (going by the debt added).

Fail.

It's true that the debt has increased by $6 trillion since January 20, 2009, the day Obama took office. But about $4 billion of that debt is the direct result of Bush administration policy, mostly the loss of revenue due to the Bush tax cuts and the cost of wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

That's your cue to commence whining that Obama blames Boooosh for the debt. But no matter how much you whine, it is simply a fact that Bush is responsible for about two-thirds of it.

One could argue Obama is to blame for not convincing Congress to let the Bush tax cuts expire and for not ending the wars sooner, but you can't make that argument because you were against letting the tax cuts expire and ending the wars sooner.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TheDope1 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868392 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 12:45 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
<Yoda>
Pantload, that is.
</Yoda>

Print the post Back To Top
Author: xLife Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868394 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 3:39 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 6
It's true that the debt has increased by $6 trillion since January 20, 2009, the day Obama took office. But about $4 billion of that debt is the direct result of Bush administration policy, mostly the loss of revenue due to the Bush tax cuts and the cost of wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

That's your cue to commence whining that Obama blames Boooosh for the debt.
---
Dope: Pantload, that is.


Well played, Dope. Faced with facts, tell poopie jokes. The self-proclaimed demolisher of liberal argument strikes again.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: eatenbybears Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868416 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 11:09 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Wow 44 recs for doodly

Liberals are like Toadstools. Drop some Doodly in a post and 44 of them spring up like Toadstools on Horse crap :)

Bears

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jerryab Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868417 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 11:17 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Clinton didn't have 9/11 to contend with

Correct.

Clinton was able to defend and protect the US against such attempts.

GWB was NOT.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jerryab Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868419 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 11:37 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"The poor recovery has more to do with political parties trying to score points, and not being interested in solving the nation's problems. "

Nope.


Mitch McConnel says differently.

The problem is Obama's policies that have stalled, hindered and created an economic environment that is the antithesis to what is needed for strong growth.

In the 1980s, the US govt GREW govt employment to create jobs--millions of govt jobs were ADDED (BLS). This time, govt employment was deliberately cut (BLS). That also cut private sector employment and job creation.

The problem is Obama's understanding of the economics is flawed and he is arrogant about it.

Tell that to Gov Walker in Wisconsin. ROFLMAO !!!

The problem is Obamacare.

Should be SP/UHC.

The problem is Keynesian economics.

Nope. People don't care--as long as they can get their "stuff".

The problem is Obama's energy policy, which is guaranteeing high oil and gas prices.

Nope. People don't care where their energy comes from--just that it works.

The problem is excessive regulations at all levels of government.

Then why can't people own nuclear weapons of self defense?

The problem is Obama's crony capitalism.</i.

As opposed to crony nepotism?

The problem is government bailing out banks and businesses.

Nope. The problem is the failure of conservative economic policy--which stated business management would never allow the markets to collapse.

The problem is Obama's need to socialize risk.

Nope. The problem is conservatives wanted to privatize the profits and socialize the losses.

The problem is the fed in the name of stimulating the economy is only saving the banks.

Conservatives want to save the TBTF banks and insurance companies.

The problem is the EPA and its aggressive policies to destroy the coal industry and make it difficult for the oil and natural gas industries.

Nope. The natural gas industry is killing the coal industry because they are competitors. And YOU want the govt to pick a winner. Then you whine some more--see YOUR last line. ROFLMAO !!!

The problem is the political elite.

Found a "death panel" for Mitch McConnell yet? Turn him over to Palin--she has experience killing people through govt inaction.

The problem is and I will spell it out for you: G O V E R N M E N T.

ROLFMAO !! You claim the problem is govt. Yet you want to be in--and control--govt. Which means you are not capable of being in govt because you want to destroy it. If that was your true desire (to be without govt), then you would not be anywhere where there was a govt. Thus, you are contradicting your own statement. You want the benefits of govt without having to pay for it. Which means you are a welfare queen.


Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: eatenbybears Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868420 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 11:39 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Clinton was able to defend and protect the US against such attempts.

Clinton was driving the bus for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing (practice run)

Black Hawk Down

1993 shootings at CIA Headquarters (with a assault weapon and high capacity magazine)

Columbine High School massacre

The Bombing of the East African capitals of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya all on the same day

Khobar Towers bombing

USS Cole bombing

All hail Clinton ..... Teflon

Bears

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jerryab Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868421 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 11:45 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
<Yoda>
Pantload, that is.
</Yoda>


You buying? Or selling?

Contact Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, and CPAC. Multi-shipload capabilities on a daily basis. Work out your pricing deals.

Limpy appears to have given up because his revenues are DOWN.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TheDope1 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868423 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 11:48 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 5
Don't forget failing to ID Bin Laden as a key player for years, letting him escape the Sudan, letting him run around and build up al Qaeda for nothing, and for failing to detect even a hint of the prep for 9/11. Then there was Sandy Berger stealing docs from the national archives that had to do with who was sneaking across the Mexican border.

libs. If these topics weren't so serious they'd produce a lot of laughs.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jerryab Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868427 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 11:56 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
Clinton was driving the bus for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing (practice run)

Nice try--and nice fail.

The 1993 WTC bombing took place in late Feb 1993--5 weeks after he took office.

Which means the people to do the job had to prepare AND come to the US before Clinton took office--which places the responsibility on GHWB. How could the former head of the CIA (GHWB--remember?) *not* be aware AND *not* tell his successor of that planned attack on the US?

Yet, GWB had been *personally* aware of the threat of planes being flown into buildings and/or landmarks for *years* (remember Marseille?--or NOT)? And the threat of such an attack had been known to the US govt since at least 1995.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_8969

Print the post Back To Top
Author: FoolishWaldo Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868429 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 12:03 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
NTL: I see that you continue to prove my point that you have nothing worthwhile to say.

You were probably looking in the mirror when you said that.

Why don't you pick an issue, create a new thread and argue your position with supporting facts.

Physician, heal thyself.

Not holding my breath, because it has been shown repeatedly you are incapable of debating whether 2+2 = 4.

Debating whether 2+2 = 4? No doubt you're going to argue (as usual) that 2+2 = 3 or 5.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lowstudent Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868432 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 12:08 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
libs. If these topics weren't so serious they'd produce a lot of laughs.
_____________________

Ahhhhh, so you're one of those guys who doesn't like the sad clowns and prefers the happy ones, either way ....

Print the post Back To Top
Author: eatenbybears Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868458 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 2:12 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Clinton was driving the bus for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing (practice run)

Nice try--and nice fail.

The 1993 WTC bombing took place in late Feb 1993--5 weeks after he took office.



Ok, so if GHWB takes the burn for the first Twin Towers run, because some GHWB personnel were still in under Clinton

Then Clinton takes the heat for 9/11 since it occured only 9 months after bush took office and there were still Clinton people strolling around the WH, including, but not limited to CIA Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John George Tennant .... who would have briefed Bush on Terrorism from Bush's first day in office.

So... (1)Clinton hired Tennant .... (2)who gathered info on Terrorism through the CIA and(3) then reported it to Clinton ..... and Tennant, Clinton's bud,(4) remained after Bush took over and (5)then briefed Bush on Terrorism.

Since Clinton hired Tennant, and Tennant gave bad intel on Terrorism, completely missing the later 9/11 conspirators ,,, but did report Sadam'm WMDs


It's all Clinton's fault


Bears

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jerryab Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868503 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 7:01 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Ok, so if GHWB takes the burn for the first Twin Towers run, because some GHWB personnel were still in under Clinton

Steeeerikes ONE and TWO !!

GHWB did not *tell* Clinton of that "first run". Clinton can NOT prepare for what he has not been told or learned. So, you get TWO strikes for missing BOTH points.

Then Clinton takes the heat for 9/11 since it occured only 9 months after bush took office and there were still Clinton people strolling around the WH, including, but not limited to CIA Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John George Tennant .... who would have briefed Bush on Terrorism from Bush's first day in office.

Steeeeeerikes THREE, FOUR, and FIVE !!

Marseilles happened in 1994--while GWB was Gov of TX. Thus, GWB was "fully informed" of the problem by both the govt AND through the news.

Tenet DID tell GWB to "do something"--or have you, once again--forgotten the PDB of August 6, 2001? OBL to attack the US--remember? IN WRITING.

NEXT we have the arrest of Moussaoui by the FBI--remember HIM? Who turned him in? Or don't you want to remember that either? He was turned in by the flight instructor at a flight training school. So, there is "no way" to claim the administration "did not know" well in advance. They KNEW--they just did not ACT.

did report Sadam'm WMDs

Steeeeeeeerike SIX !!

Ever do a timeline on those WMDs in Iraq? I presume NOT. After all, they were a gift from Reagan to Saddam--the gift that just keeps on giving.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: eatenbybears Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868505 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 7:17 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Tenet DID tell GWB to "do something"--or have you, once again--forgotten the PDB of August 6, 2001? OBL to attack the US--remember? IN WRITING.

Kind of like knowing the Rolling Stones are doing a US Tour but not having the venue and dates

Useless

To bad Clinton didnt keep pumping cash into the CIA so Tennant could do his job.

It's not like Clinton didnt know something was up

All needed funds should have been made available to Tennant .... instead they made him Punt and use a tin can and string to pass info between the CIA, FBI and NSA.

A truly sad time in American history ...

Bears

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lowstudent Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868506 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 7:32 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
All needed funds should have been made available to Tennant .... instead they made him Punt and use a tin can and string to pass info between the CIA, FBI and NSA.
___________________________

It was very important to make sure that US intelligence agencies were handcuffed

Just as it very important now, to ensure that the US is not a global bully, so we must slash slash slash the military

When the manure hits the fan however, it will be the blame of the poor sucker with no chair when the music stops.
, not the person who ensured there would be no chair, what else is new.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jerryab Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868510 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 8:09 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Kind of like knowing the Rolling Stones are doing a US Tour but not having the venue and dates

Useless


They doing that tour on roller skates? Or taking public transit?

There are a limited number of planes--and restricted access to same. The ONLY way for such an attack is through failure to act to protect the US. Clinton was NOT in charge of running the govt while GWB was President. GWB was aware of the risk--and he failed to make the call to protect the US.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: eatenbybears Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868513 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 8:19 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
GWB was aware of the risk--and he failed to make the call to protect the US.

Yeah ... old "day late and dollar short George" .... the fool shut down US air space ... After the planes hit the twin towers.

What a stupid move ... if he had just acted a few hours before impact none of this would have happened.

(I love Liberal hind sight thinking :)

It is so refreshingly Foolish



Bears

Print the post Back To Top
Author: NoSeeUm Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868515 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 8:54 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Liberals are like Toadstools. Drop some Doodly in a post and 44 of them spring up like Toadstools on Horse crap :)

Bears



<GRUMP>







<GRUMP> ! ! !


Woe is us.








<GRUMP>






Jimbo (~









<GRUMP>





















Woe is us







<GRUMP>

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jerryab Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868536 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 11:45 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
if he had just acted a few hours before impact none of this would have happened.

He had "direct and personal" knowledge of the risk for almost 7 years--Gov of TX, remember? No way he did NOT know.

Plus, he had been personally told of the risk by the Clinton administration. So he had the needed information to act. Yeah, everyone whined about the airport alerts and delays. It became clear why they were so important (and effective)--but only *after* 11 Sept 2001.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Umm Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868537 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/1/2013 11:49 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 5
"Don't forget failing to ID Bin Laden as a key player for years, letting him escape the Sudan, letting him run around and build up al Qaeda for nothing, and for failing to detect even a hint of the prep for 9/11."

Dope laughingly tries to re-write history yet again. Does he really think he is fooling anyone other than himself?

In the 1990 Bill Clinton was the only elected politician focused on Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. The Republicans routinely were critical of him for doing so.

Remember that chalenge that you ran away from where you were given a list of what Clinton did to get Bin Laden in his last nine month of office and then were asked to point to anything Bush did in his first nine months to get Bin Laden?

You ran away from it because you knew it would expose the patented Dope Double Standard.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: nigelwhalmsley Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1868579 of 1961534
Subject: Re: Liberals are Pro-Choice Date: 4/2/2013 9:59 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"In the 1990 Bill Clinton was the only elected politician focused on Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. The Republicans routinely were critical of him for doing so."

"Remember that chalenge that you ran away from where you were given a list of what Clinton did to get Bin Laden in his last nine month of office and then were asked to point to anything Bush did in his first nine months to get Bin Laden?"

Well said, and well worth noting for anyone how wants to ACCURATELY refer to history.

Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (53) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement