On Aug 30, 10:45*pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 30, 10:10 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 30, 10:06 am, BAR wrote:
NotNow wrote:
BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 27, 7:59 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
use of nuclear (for
you right wingers, that's 'nukular') missiles
And the Bay of Pigs, what kind of moron would agree to such a thing
AND then not support it once it was going? *Pure Kennedy cowardice.-
actually it was stupidity. the cuban missile crisis showed that
kennedy had the cojones to go toe to toe with the russkies.
Do you understand the difference between planning and implementation?-
do you understand the concept of national credibility?
National Credibility. Is that when you put a guy in jail for life for
murdering a couple of hundred people on an airplane but then let him
out on compassionate reasons because he has terminal cancer and is
going to die in three months?
When did the U.S. do that?
I thought the subject was national credibility, not US national
credibility.
why? did scotland put missiles in turkey in the 50's?
Because they Scottish kept draining the fuel, running it through a loaf
of bread and drinking it. They call it rocket juice. It has more of a
kick than torpedo juice.

guess they didn't too many missiles, then, right?

"guess they didn't too many missiles, then, right?"

What the hell does that mean?

it means far be it from me to argue with a man who believes the cuban
missile crisis was sparked by the fact the scottish run their whiskey
through a loaf of bread.

wf3h wrote:
On Aug 30, 10:45 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 30, 10:10 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 30, 10:06 am, BAR wrote:
NotNow wrote:
BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 27, 7:59 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
use of nuclear (for
you right wingers, that's 'nukular') missiles
And the Bay of Pigs, what kind of moron would agree to such a thing
AND then not support it once it was going? Pure Kennedy cowardice.-
actually it was stupidity. the cuban missile crisis showed that
kennedy had the cojones to go toe to toe with the russkies.
Do you understand the difference between planning and implementation?-
do you understand the concept of national credibility?
National Credibility. Is that when you put a guy in jail for life for
murdering a couple of hundred people on an airplane but then let him
out on compassionate reasons because he has terminal cancer and is
going to die in three months?
When did the U.S. do that?
I thought the subject was national credibility, not US national
credibility.
why? did scotland put missiles in turkey in the 50's?
Because they Scottish kept draining the fuel, running it through a loaf
of bread and drinking it. They call it rocket juice. It has more of a
kick than torpedo juice.
guess they didn't too many missiles, then, right?
"guess they didn't too many missiles, then, right?"

What the hell does that mean?

it means far be it from me to argue with a man who believes the cuban
missile crisis was sparked by the fact the scottish run their whiskey
through a loaf of bread.

Nobody said anything about Scottish Whiskey being run through a loaf of
bread except you.

On Aug 31, 8:10*am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:

What the hell does that mean?

it means far be it from me to argue with a man who believes the cuban
missile crisis was sparked by the fact the scottish run their whiskey
through a loaf of bread.

Nobody said anything about Scottish Whiskey being run through a loaf of
bread except you.-

here's what you wrote yesterday:

"Because they Scottish kept draining the fuel, running it through a
loaf
of bread and drinking it. They call it rocket juice. It has more of a
kick than torpedo juice."

guess being a conservative has addled your brain

wf3h wrote:
On Aug 31, 8:10 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:

What the hell does that mean?
it means far be it from me to argue with a man who believes the cuban
missile crisis was sparked by the fact the scottish run their whiskey
through a loaf of bread.
Nobody said anything about Scottish Whiskey being run through a loaf of
bread except you.-

here's what you wrote yesterday:

"Because they Scottish kept draining the fuel, running it through a
loaf
of bread and drinking it. They call it rocket juice. It has more of a
kick than torpedo juice."

guess being a conservative has addled your brain


Brain? He enlisted in the marines because he couldn't make it in college.

No brain.

wf3h wrote:
On Aug 31, 8:10 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:

What the hell does that mean?
it means far be it from me to argue with a man who believes the cuban
missile crisis was sparked by the fact the scottish run their whiskey
through a loaf of bread.
Nobody said anything about Scottish Whiskey being run through a loaf of
bread except you.-

here's what you wrote yesterday:

"Because they Scottish kept draining the fuel, running it through a
loaf
of bread and drinking it. They call it rocket juice. It has more of a
kick than torpedo juice."

guess being a conservative has addled your brain

You must have missed the part where you said the scottish placed missles
in turkey. If you had half a brain you would have looked up "torpedo
juice." Since you are too lazy to look things up I will help you just
this once: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torpedo_juice

I'll give you credit for trying to change the whole tone of the post.
But, like most of your attempts at bending the truth you have failed.

H the K wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 31, 8:10 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:

What the hell does that mean?
it means far be it from me to argue with a man who believes the cuban
missile crisis was sparked by the fact the scottish run their whiskey
through a loaf of bread.
Nobody said anything about Scottish Whiskey being run through a loaf of
bread except you.-

here's what you wrote yesterday:

"Because they Scottish kept draining the fuel, running it through a
loaf
of bread and drinking it. They call it rocket juice. It has more of a
kick than torpedo juice."

guess being a conservative has addled your brain


Brain? He enlisted in the marines because he couldn't make it in college.

No brain.

Your rent check is due tomorrow Harry, you had better get out and pick
up some more aluminum cans and turn them in for some $.

BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 31, 8:10 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:

What the hell does that mean?
it means far be it from me to argue with a man who believes the cuban
missile crisis was sparked by the fact the scottish run their whiskey
through a loaf of bread.
Nobody said anything about Scottish Whiskey being run through a loaf of
bread except you.-

here's what you wrote yesterday:

"Because they Scottish kept draining the fuel, running it through a
loaf
of bread and drinking it. They call it rocket juice. It has more of a
kick than torpedo juice."

guess being a conservative has addled your brain

You must have missed the part where you said the scottish placed missles
in turkey. If you had half a brain you would have looked up "torpedo
juice." Since you are too lazy to look things up I will help you just
this once: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torpedo_juice

I'll give you credit for trying to change the whole tone of the post.
But, like most of your attempts at bending the truth you have failed.


Hehehe. You were caught cold, BAR. Nice wiggle, though.

BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Aug 31, 8:10 am, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:

What the hell does that mean?
it means far be it from me to argue with a man who believes the cuban
missile crisis was sparked by the fact the scottish run their whiskey
through a loaf of bread.
Nobody said anything about Scottish Whiskey being run through a loaf of
bread except you.-

here's what you wrote yesterday:

"Because they Scottish kept draining the fuel, running it through a
loaf
of bread and drinking it. They call it rocket juice. It has more of a
kick than torpedo juice."

guess being a conservative has addled your brain


Brain? He enlisted in the marines because he couldn't make it in college.

No brain.

Your rent check is due tomorrow Harry, you had better get out and pick
up some more aluminum cans and turn them in for some $.


Your simplemindedness is...overwhelming.

John H. wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 16:09:02 -0400, NotNow wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 09:51:56 -0400, NotNow wrote:

The Fish wrote:
On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 15:24:29 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"JLH" wrote in message
...
Not sure what you mean by the Bush Rationale,
Since you'e speaking nicely...

The 'Bush Rationale' is the reason many liberals provide for any
negative critique of an Obama action.
I believe that is from a right-wing talking point. There's no shortage of
criticism of Obama from the left.

For example, "You didn't say anything when Bush did it." Or, "Bush did
it, so it's OK if Obama does it too." Hopefully you get the idea.
And, as I've said, I'm willing and able to call Obama on crap that's either
a hold-over from the Bush years or newly implemented along the same lines.
There are very few people who believe that Obama is perfect, I certainly am
not among them.

As I've said before, for you guys - yourself, w3fh, Harry, etc. - a
'debate' consists of personal insults and name-calling.
I absolutely reject that line of reasoning or implication. I don't engage in
such behavior. Feel free to show otherwise. I can't speak for others.
I may stand corrected. If so, I apologize. You're much different from
the pack.
And, for the record, Bush may have screwed up a few things during his
eight year tenure. But, Bush is gone. Obama is trying damn hard to
catch up in his first 3/4 of a year.
A few things???? Yeah, a few things like a war of choice and a war of
necessity, like ruining the economy, like taking approximately 1/3 of his
time in office as vacation, like lying to the American public, like spying
on Americans, like engaging in intense cronyism, like promoting and
condoning torture, and on and on and on.
Again, Bush is history.

--
John H

"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those
who are willing to work and give to those who would not."
Thomas Jefferson
So everything in history gets erased?
Using Bush's actions to legitimize Obama's actions is somewhat stupid.
No, it's really stupid.

Here is an example of a stupid comment: "So everything in history
gets erased?"

--
John H

Um, I didn't say "Bush is history". You've said on a number of occasions
that what Bush did is irrelevant because he's not president now.

I have come to realize that you really *don't* get it.


--
John H


John are you really trying to say that you didn't say that?

"SteveB" wrote in message
...

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"BAR" wrote in message
...

Obama is the president now. Why do you have to keep bringing up former
administrations?

Because those who ignore the past are doomed to repeat it.

So, how far back do we go? Nero? Adam and Eve?

Buy a vowel. Get a clue. You sound like one of my ex wives.

Steve


One of your ex-wives was a man??
It all makes sense now!