Politics/Elections/World News

Yow... Let's chill for a bit and let cooler heads prevail... :sweat:

Blame me for lighting the fuse, guys. :ashamed:

bmwracer wrote:Yow... Let's chill for a bit and let cooler heads prevail... :sweat:

Blame me for lighting the fuse, guys. :ashamed:

It ain't got nothing to do with you...don't trip.

Tu_triky wrote:

Chain letter BS...gimme a fuggin' break...no it wasn't the right response....
it was a disaster of epic proportions...in terms, lives, finance, and political capital....

By his own skewed logic, if it he wanted to attack the roots of radical Islam why didn't he attack Saudi Arabia...which anybody who knows shit knows they are principle propagators and financiers of fundamentalist thought in the Muslim world. He opted for political expedience not well-crafted policy. But you seem to find excuse for everything...attacking Iraq was the right decision...that is so laughable....even the bi-partisan 9/11 Commssion determined Iraq had no hand in the terrorist attack that spurred the war. As if any idiot needed to be told that.

Chill with your pedantic insults...please. Your interpretation of civics, notwithstanding.

Wrong on so many counts. Everything suggested that there was enough evidence at that time to warrant action. Iraq was a known terrorist supporter-FACT. Iraq had connections with members of Al Qaeda's leadership-FACT shown by the very people you've mentioned, Iraq, to the WORLD's belief, had WMD's-FACT. If anything, the President errored in side of caution. By the way, attacking Saudi Arabia directly would have been a greater world-wide disaster, and the argument was never that Iraq had a hand in 9/11, but had a connection with Al Qaeda-which the 9/11 Commission had shown. Want to bring up the Duellfer Report that had shown Saddam had continuing WMD ambitions as well as the knowledge and basic infrastructure to reconstitute it when sanctions were lifted, which they were about to? Or the hundred of metric ton of yellowcake that were just removed from Iraq's stockpile that you suggest doesn't exist?

I edited out the civcs slam because I realized it was getting insulting, but it is far from interpretation.

bmwracer wrote:Yow... Let's chill for a bit and let cooler heads prevail... :sweat:

Blame me for lighting the fuse, guys. :ashamed:

I'll bow out of this thread. It's obvious I'm the lightning rod here.

Kijinnmaru wrote:
Wrong on so many counts. Everything suggested that there was enough evidence at that time to warrant action. Iraq was a known terrorist supporter-FACT. Iraq had connections with members of Al Qaeda's leadership-FACT shown by the very people you've mentioned, Iraq, to the WORLD's belief, had WMD's-FACT. If anything, the President errored in side of caution. By the way, attacking Saudi Arabia directly would have been a greater world-wide disaster, and the argument was never that Iraq had a hand in 9/11, but had a connection with Al Qaeda-which the 9/11 Commission had shown. Want to bring up the Duellfer Report that had shown Saddam had continuing WMD ambitions as well as the knowledge and basic infrastructure to reconstitute it when sanctions were lifted, which they were about to? Or the hundred of metric ton of yellowcake that were just removed from Iraq's stockpile that you suggest doesn't exist?

I edited out the civcs slam because I realized it was getting insulting, but it is far from interpretation.

I never said that Saudi Arabia should be attacked but by the very logic you just reguritated (attacking Iraq because of a connection to Al-Qaeda) it should have loomed largest on radar screen. Hello? Saudi Arabia is the wellspring of Al Qaeda...

If we were going to attack terrorist supporters in the Middle East and Asia, why not go after Iran, Egypt, Pakistan, and Lebanon...among others?

Whatever...it's of little consequence...the policies of the administration that you defend have been famously successful and justified in your mind.

Do or say as you like...just keep the insults to yourself...I don't need your crass remarks.

House Speaker Pelosi calls Bush 'a total failure'

the irony

I second that.

The fact that Pelosi has held hard to the idea that impeachment must remain "off the table", is maddening.

I know. She and the Democratic leaders want to run against "Shrub" in November.

It's sound political thinking. If all you want is to win the election.

But allowing Shrub to sit in office, without even the threat of holding him accountable for his actions... will do nothing but hurt us in the future. It opens the door for more abuses.

Oh and Kijinnmaru. Simply saying something is a fact doesn't make it a fact.

^ "Shrub."

LOL. :lol: :lol: :lol:


You guys are killing me. :rofl:

Excerpt from Yahoo! News:
----------------------------------------------------
Schwarzenegger also has made clear that McCain's likely opponent, Democratic Sen. Barack Obama, wouldn't be so bad. He commonly answers questions about global warming and other topics by saying that either candidate will be a big improvement over President Bush.
----------------------------------------------------


Full story here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080731/ap_on_el_pr/schwarzenegger_presidential_race

bmwracer wrote:Excerpt from Yahoo! News:
----------------------------------------------------
Schwarzenegger also has made clear that McCain's likely opponent, Democratic Sen. Barack Obama, wouldn't be so bad. He commonly answers questions about global warming and other topics by saying that either candidate will be a big improvement over President Bush.
----------------------------------------------------


Full story here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080731/ap_on_el_pr/schwarzenegger_presidential_race

Arnold has got his own problems...his decision to cut the state employees' wages to the fed. min wage is conterversial at best...unless the Legislature comes up with a budget it quickly, his move is going to backfire on his cyborg a$$.

Tu_triky wrote:Arnold has got his own problems...his decision to cut the state employees' wages to the fed. min wage is conterversial at best...unless the Legislature comes up with a budget it quickly, his move is going to backfire on his cyborg a$$.

Instead of taking it out on the state employees, he should threaten to cut/deny the pay of the Legislature itself until they get the budget straightened out... Hit 'em where it hurts.

bmwracer wrote:
Instead of taking it out on the state employees, he should threaten to cut/deny the pay of the Legislature itself until they get the budget straightened out... Hit 'em where it hurts.

OMG, that would have rocked.

Tu_triky wrote:OMG, that would have rocked.

And it makes total sense: THEY'RE the ones that have to fix the budget, not the grunts.

It's ALWAYS the little guy who pays when the bungling is solely done by management.

*end rant*

bmwracer wrote:
And it makes total sense: THEY'RE the ones that have to fix the budget, not the grunts.

It's ALWAYS the little guy who pays when the bungling is solely done by management.

*end rant*

Indeed. I concur with you on all points...sh*t rolls down hill.

Tu_triky wrote:Indeed. I concur with you on all points...sh*t rolls down hill.

And it always comes down in one large, unavoidable mass. :grumble:

bmwracer wrote:
And it always comes down in one large, unavoidable mass. :grumble:

:hehe: True. Sad but true.

Tu_triky wrote: :hehe: True. Sad but true.

More evidence:

GM posts $15.5B 2Q loss, 3rd-worst in its history

Wanna bet layoffs are around the bend?

I'm sure the GM brass will give themselves raises for cutting costs. :shakehead:

bmwracer wrote:
More evidence:

GM posts $15.5B 2Q loss, 3rd-worst in its history

Wanna bet layoffs are around the bend?

I'm sure the GM brass will give themselves raises for cutting costs. :shakehead:

They already started at other places...unemployment is the higest in four years.

Oh man, I'm watching McCain talk on the news and he is so lame and uncharismatic... I just can't help but wince when he speaks. :sweat:

McCain is a disgrace and an embarrassment to the United States of America.

Hanzo21

McCain is a disgrace and an embarrassment to the United States of America.

How do you figure?