![]() |
Uh, oh, most conservatives aren't going to like this!!!!
"John H." wrote in message
... I can't speak for other people, but I'm not justifying any actions. I'm making a direct comparison. At the end of 8 (I'm hopeful) years, we can compare the records more completely. For now, there are some obvious comparisons possible. Call it what you will. It is what it is. "Bush screwed up, therefore Obama's screwups are OK." Give me a break. And, yet again, I have to disagree. No one is claiming that because Bush screwed up, Obama's mistakes are ok. Are you claiming that no comparisons are valid? Isn't that the basis for a program (a Bush program) called No Child Left Behind? Comparisons are benchmarks. They are totally valid. The issue is making justifiable comparisons. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Uh, oh, most conservatives aren't going to like this!!!!
"John H." wrote in message
... Bush's screwup were never OK. Thank you! I'm not going to ask which screwup was not ok, but.... lol -- Nom=de=Plume |
Uh, oh, most conservatives aren't going to like this!!!!
"JustWait" wrote in message
... Just think, a year ago, it was Clinton screwed up, therefore Bush's screwups are OK. Bull****... Just plain bull****... Actually, that's pretty accurate. One of the main reasons for Bush getting elected (sic) was "Clinton" fatigue. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Uh, oh, most conservatives aren't going to like this!!!!
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 10:56:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote: "John H." wrote in message .. . I can't speak for other people, but I'm not justifying any actions. I'm making a direct comparison. At the end of 8 (I'm hopeful) years, we can compare the records more completely. For now, there are some obvious comparisons possible. Call it what you will. It is what it is. "Bush screwed up, therefore Obama's screwups are OK." Give me a break. And, yet again, I have to disagree. No one is claiming that because Bush screwed up, Obama's mistakes are ok. Horse manure! That's the biggest laugh I've had in a month. Are you claiming that no comparisons are valid? Isn't that the basis for a program (a Bush program) called No Child Left Behind? Comparisons are benchmarks. They are totally valid. The issue is making justifiable comparisons. -- 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 |
Uh, oh, most conservatives aren't going to like this!!!!
On Aug 29, 1:57*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"John H." wrote in message ... Bush's screwup were never OK. Thank you! I'm not going to ask which screwup was not ok, but.... lol -- Nom=de=Plume Did I make a typo? Glad it gave you a chuckle. |
Uh, oh, most conservatives aren't going to like this!!!!
|
Uh, oh, most conservatives aren't going to like this!!!!
nom=de=plume wrote:
"John H." wrote in message ... I can't speak for other people, but I'm not justifying any actions. I'm making a direct comparison. At the end of 8 (I'm hopeful) years, we can compare the records more completely. For now, there are some obvious comparisons possible. Call it what you will. It is what it is. "Bush screwed up, therefore Obama's screwups are OK." Give me a break. And, yet again, I have to disagree. No one is claiming that because Bush screwed up, Obama's mistakes are ok. Are you claiming that no comparisons are valid? Isn't that the basis for a program (a Bush program) called No Child Left Behind? Comparisons are benchmarks. They are totally valid. The issue is making justifiable comparisons. Funny how No Child Left Behind winds up in Kennedy's top 10 legislative accomplishments. http://tinyurl.com/kns4ck Kennedy worked closely with President George W. Bush to advance the No Child Left Behind Act, one of Bush's earliest accomplishments and, critics say, his last meaningful attempt at bipartisanship. |
Uh, oh, most conservatives aren't going to like this!!!!
H the K wrote:
JustWait wrote: Nope, Armitage outed the agent to Novak. At least read a little before spewing out. You are the one who want's to assure that nobody is called guilty until convicted, but I guess when it comes to repubs you can call them "traitor who outed a CIA agent" because he is a republican, even though he got convicted of providing false information, that's all. Now if you want to convict someone of outing CIA agents, let's have an investigation into the recent activity by the ACLU following real covert agents home, photographing them and their families, and showing them to prisoners and admitted AlQueda agents at Gitmo. And before you deflect, please go to their page and read the admission in their own words. OJ is innocent even though he was found responsible in court, but Scooter is guilty of "treason" even though he didn't get convicted of anything near that.. Man, your double standard showing... Moron. Harry, nice refutation of the facts. |
Uh, oh, most conservatives aren't going to like this!!!!
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote: JustWait wrote: Nope, Armitage outed the agent to Novak. At least read a little before spewing out. You are the one who want's to assure that nobody is called guilty until convicted, but I guess when it comes to repubs you can call them "traitor who outed a CIA agent" because he is a republican, even though he got convicted of providing false information, that's all. Now if you want to convict someone of outing CIA agents, let's have an investigation into the recent activity by the ACLU following real covert agents home, photographing them and their families, and showing them to prisoners and admitted AlQueda agents at Gitmo. And before you deflect, please go to their page and read the admission in their own words. OJ is innocent even though he was found responsible in court, but Scooter is guilty of "treason" even though he didn't get convicted of anything near that.. Man, your double standard showing... Moron. Harry, nice refutation of the facts. "Moron" is all the moron deserves. |
Uh, oh, most conservatives aren't going to like this!!!!
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote: H the K wrote: JustWait wrote: Nope, Armitage outed the agent to Novak. At least read a little before spewing out. You are the one who want's to assure that nobody is called guilty until convicted, but I guess when it comes to repubs you can call them "traitor who outed a CIA agent" because he is a republican, even though he got convicted of providing false information, that's all. Now if you want to convict someone of outing CIA agents, let's have an investigation into the recent activity by the ACLU following real covert agents home, photographing them and their families, and showing them to prisoners and admitted AlQueda agents at Gitmo. And before you deflect, please go to their page and read the admission in their own words. OJ is innocent even though he was found responsible in court, but Scooter is guilty of "treason" even though he didn't get convicted of anything near that.. Man, your double standard showing... Moron. Harry, nice refutation of the facts. "Moron" is all the moron deserves. It means I can refute the facts presented so I'll just call you a name. It's third grade behavior. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:06 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com