On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:42:33 -0400, queenie wrote:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 18:24:33 -0500, "RD (The Sandman)"
wrote:

queenie wrote in
m:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:00:10 GMT, KK wrote:

In other words, hats off to Obama for honestly talking about his past
(unlike W who said some cop-out bull****, or Clinton with the oh-so-
clintony "didn't break the laws of my country" and later "I didn't
inhale") ... but F him for dismissing serious questions about
decriminialization and F him for ignoring the waste, expense, and
injustice of the 60% of federal prisoners who are non-violent drug
offenders.

He's been in office TEN months and he already has a lot on his plate
due to the disastrous policies of the previous administration. Give
him time. Right now, the wars, health care reform and the economy
come first. Geez!!

Bush's war was Iraq. Both the Democrats and Obama have been saying that
the right war was Afghanistan.....well, now he has it. Don't blame Bush
for the war that the liberals wanted and felt was the right one.

Was Bush president when those wars started or not? And were both wars
still going on when he left? I believe both answers are "Yes". And I
think if Bush stayed in Afghanistan and didn't veer off to Iraq, there
might not be any war going on now.


You're probably right. I'm with you on that one.




The economy faltered due to errors, lack of oversight and failures on
both sides of the aisle, not to mention greed on the part of real
estate, financial houses and many CEOs.

All under Bush's watch and his stupid tax cuts.

Oops, you lost me.


He even gave a tax
credit to people who bought the gas-guzzling Hummer.

As low regard as I have for SUVs, better a Hummer driver have the money
than a government agency.



The bottom line is there are problems Obama inherited and he has to
resolve them. And he cannot fix EVERYTHING in TEN fricking months!!!

He can't fix ANYTHING in ten months.

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:43:39 -0400, queenie
puked:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:27:41 -0400, "Scout"
wrote:

RD (The Sandman) wrote:
queenie wrote in
:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:00:10 GMT, KK wrote:

In other words, hats off to Obama for honestly talking about his
past (unlike W who said some cop-out bull****, or Clinton with the
oh-so- clintony "didn't break the laws of my country" and later "I
didn't inhale") ... but F him for dismissing serious questions about
decriminialization and F him for ignoring the waste, expense, and
injustice of the 60% of federal prisoners who are non-violent drug
offenders.

He's been in office TEN months and he already has a lot on his plate
due to the disastrous policies of the previous administration. Give
him time. Right now, the wars, health care reform and the economy
come first. Geez!!

Bush's war was Iraq. Both the Democrats and Obama have been saying
that the right war was Afghanistan.....well, now he has it. Don't
blame Bush for the war that the liberals wanted and felt was the
right one.

The economy faltered due to errors, lack of oversight and failures on
both sides of the aisle, not to mention greed on the part of real
estate, financial houses and many CEOs.

And the health care reform has NOTHING to do with Bush.

That's for damn sure. After all, the Republican party is the Party of
NO.


If it were, it would be better for the country than being what they
really are, the party of pretending to say NO, but actually stuffing
the stimulus with their pet projects, taking money from insurance and
health care professionals (just like the Dems) and going along with
health care, etc. They're just as bad as your Democrats.
--
lab~rat :-)
Do you want polite or do you want sincere?

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:19:23 -0700, jps puked:

Think real hard: if the government takes more of your money, will you be
able to hire more employees? or fewer?

If government takes another $5K of my $250K in gross earnings, you
think that's going to make a difference for me?

It would for me.
--
lab~rat :-)
Do you want polite or do you want sincere?

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 08:43:05 -0400, lab~rat :-) wrote:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:00:10 GMT, KK puked:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 11:20:22 -0400, lab~rat :-) wrote:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 12:53:05 GMT, KK puked:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 08:07:09 -0400, lab~rat :-) wrote:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:33:08 -0400, queenie
puked:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:13:31 -0400, "lab~rat :-)"
wrote:

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:59:14 -0400, queenie
puked:

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:18:18 -0500, "RD (The Sandman)"
wrote:

queenie wrote in
news:d8ard51tv37dg3lb0g6rotjkj667a9vvd0@4 ax.com:


That mess was caused by both sides of the aisle, not just one.

Bush tax cuts among other things. Still, Obama is doing what he
can to fix things.

He's not. He has an agenda that runs counter to fixing things.
You don't spend billions upon billions on pointless bull**** when
you inherit a deficit and fix anything.


First, I wouldn't have spent all that money on the stimulus package.
It hasn't netted a single job. I would have attached stipulations
to the bank bailout that they couldn't sit on the money, but had to
get it responsibly into the private sector to stimulate business and
home buying. I would target small businesses instead of using
trickle down economics and handing big bucks to huge corporations.
I would keep taxes low until the recession started heading up.
Health care would be off the table until we got a handle on
Afghanistan and the economy.

That's for starters.

I'd vote for you.

I have to warn you, I have a lot of skeletons in my closet, and
probably a lot of people that would come forward regaling the press
with witness of my misbehavior and sins.

OTOH, maybe that wouldn't hurt me...


Wouldn't hurt you in my esteem. People experimenting with substances -
especially when they're younger - doesn't seem to me to be a good
measure of their adult judgment. Except, that is, if *they* experiment
and then once in the seat of power, decide that it's okay to punish
others who do the same thing.

In other words, hats off to Obama for honestly talking about his past
(unlike W who said some cop-out bull****, or Clinton with the oh-so-
clintony "didn't break the laws of my country" and later "I didn't
inhale") ... but F him for dismissing serious questions about
decriminialization and F him for ignoring the waste, expense, and
injustice of the 60% of federal prisoners who are non-violent drug
offenders.

And I don't care if a candidate enjoys sex. I don't care if they're
married or single. Or divorced. And (I'm sure we'll part ways here) I
don't care if they're gay, either.

How does religion sit with ya?

Hmm. There's a line somewhere but I'm not sure how to define it.

It depends on a few things. How loony a religion it is, for one thing.
And maybe this is wrong, but to me cultural tradition makes up somewhat
for looniness, because raising a child in a certain religion skips that
whole critical analysis thing. I was raised Catholic but didn't think to
question it until I was nine or ten. I'm good friends with an Orthodox
Jewish guy whose entire environment was immersed in religion so much so
that questioning it would be like a fish thinking about living out of the
water.

So - I wouldn't vote for a Scientologist, ever. Someone whose philosophy
of life depends on a science-fiction-sounding religion created by a bad
science fiction writer who announced that he wanted to create a religion,
and which requires huge payments of its members to study its works, is
someone completely lacking in reason and unbased in reality.

Two members of semi-loony religions have been viable candidates recently
- Romney and Lieberman. And sorry, Big Lovers, but Mormonism is *this*
(holding my fingers very close together) close to Scientology. The
slightest research into Joseph Smith's life of bull****tery and the
insultingly stupid story that led to his religion would leave no
reasonable person with any doubt of its culty silliness.

Orthodox Judaism is a little different - Abraham's God is the same as
Jesus', the same as Mohammed's. In that sense, it's basic required
suspension-of-all-reason is the same as "mainstream" religions. The
difference, and source of its weirdness, is that its adherents pay far
too much attention (IMO, of course) to a group of alive-but-ancient men
whose interpretations of even more ancient books (which, though passed by
word of mouth for centuries from place to place and language to language,
are scrutinized for numerologist baloney depending on the placement and
arrangement of characters in the text, making Nostradamus dummies look
like Stephen Hawking) are held as the word of God, with the result that
they aren't allowed to turn on a light or push an elevator button on
Saturday. They also can't directly request that someone else do it, but
can stand near someone and wonder aloud "If only someone would turn on my
light, I could read my book".

I think that's all goofy - and if an Orthodox president won't ride in Air
Force One or push The Button on Saturday, he's out. But other than that,
to eliminate them would be to eliminate all Xtians, Jews, and Muslims.
I'm mostly okay with that, but it wouldn't leave any candidates anyone
else would vote for.

Clave wrote:
"RD (The Sandman)" wrote in message
...
"Clave" wrote in
news:fvOdnQFn4oHVMkLXnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@cablespeedmi .com:

"RD (The Sandman)" wrote in message
...

...

You said the Courts ruled that FOX can tell their people to lie...
Are you denying it?
I'm waiting for you to cite the actual case instead of blogs. Either do
it or you will be ignored.

Tacit concession accepted.

Jim


stinking bivalve exposed.

"Scout" wrote in
:

RD (The Sandman) wrote:
queenie wrote in
:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:00:10 GMT, KK wrote:

In other words, hats off to Obama for honestly talking about his
past (unlike W who said some cop-out bull****, or Clinton with the
oh-so- clintony "didn't break the laws of my country" and later "I
didn't inhale") ... but F him for dismissing serious questions about
decriminialization and F him for ignoring the waste, expense, and
injustice of the 60% of federal prisoners who are non-violent drug
offenders.

He's been in office TEN months and he already has a lot on his plate
due to the disastrous policies of the previous administration. Give
him time. Right now, the wars, health care reform and the economy
come first. Geez!!

Bush's war was Iraq. Both the Democrats and Obama have been saying
that the right war was Afghanistan.....well, now he has it. Don't
blame Bush for the war that the liberals wanted and felt was the
right one.

The economy faltered due to errors, lack of oversight and failures on
both sides of the aisle, not to mention greed on the part of real
estate, financial houses and many CEOs.

And the health care reform has NOTHING to do with Bush.

Bingo! It is needed but not the way it appears to be going.



--
Sleep well tonight,

RD (The Sandman)

Let's see if I have this healthcare thingy right. Congress is to pass
a plan written by a committee whose head has said he doesn't understand
it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it, signed by a president who
hasn't read it, with funding administered by a Treasury chief who didn't
pay his taxes because he didn't understand TurboTax, overseen by an obese
Surgeon General and financed by a country that's nearly broke.
What could possibly go wrong?

queenie wrote in
:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:27:41 -0400, "Scout"
wrote:

RD (The Sandman) wrote:
queenie wrote in
:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:00:10 GMT, KK wrote:

In other words, hats off to Obama for honestly talking about his
past (unlike W who said some cop-out bull****, or Clinton with the
oh-so- clintony "didn't break the laws of my country" and later "I
didn't inhale") ... but F him for dismissing serious questions
about
decriminialization and F him for ignoring the waste, expense, and
injustice of the 60% of federal prisoners who are non-violent drug
offenders.

He's been in office TEN months and he already has a lot on his plate
due to the disastrous policies of the previous administration. Give
him time. Right now, the wars, health care reform and the economy
come first. Geez!!

Bush's war was Iraq. Both the Democrats and Obama have been saying
that the right war was Afghanistan.....well, now he has it. Don't
blame Bush for the war that the liberals wanted and felt was the
right one.

The economy faltered due to errors, lack of oversight and failures on
both sides of the aisle, not to mention greed on the part of real
estate, financial houses and many CEOs.

And the health care reform has NOTHING to do with Bush.

That's for damn sure. After all, the Republican party is the Party of
NO.

Still getting your talking points from the Daily Kos?


--
Sleep well tonight,

RD (The Sandman)

Let's see if I have this healthcare thingy right. Congress is to pass
a plan written by a committee whose head has said he doesn't understand
it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it, signed by a president who
hasn't read it, with funding administered by a Treasury chief who didn't
pay his taxes because he didn't understand TurboTax, overseen by an obese
Surgeon General and financed by a country that's nearly broke.
What could possibly go wrong?

queenie wrote in
:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 18:24:33 -0500, "RD (The Sandman)"
wrote:

queenie wrote in
m:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:00:10 GMT, KK wrote:

In other words, hats off to Obama for honestly talking about his
past (unlike W who said some cop-out bull****, or Clinton with the
oh-so- clintony "didn't break the laws of my country" and later "I
didn't inhale") ... but F him for dismissing serious questions about
decriminialization and F him for ignoring the waste, expense, and
injustice of the 60% of federal prisoners who are non-violent drug
offenders.

He's been in office TEN months and he already has a lot on his plate
due to the disastrous policies of the previous administration. Give
him time. Right now, the wars, health care reform and the economy
come first. Geez!!

Bush's war was Iraq. Both the Democrats and Obama have been saying
that the right war was Afghanistan.....well, now he has it. Don't
blame Bush for the war that the liberals wanted and felt was the right
one.

Was Bush president when those wars started or not? And were both wars
still going on when he left? I believe both answers are "Yes".

How quickly you forget all the talk from Democrats about Afghanistan
being the right war.

And I
think if Bush stayed in Afghanistan and didn't veer off to Iraq, there
might not be any war going on now.

Perhaps, but one doesn't really know.

The economy faltered due to errors, lack of oversight and failures on
both sides of the aisle, not to mention greed on the part of real
estate, financial houses and many CEOs.

All under Bush's watch and his stupid tax cuts. He even gave a tax
credit to people who bought the gas-guzzling Hummer.

With errors from both sides of the aisle. After all, the biggest
collapse in real estate financing was Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae....under
oversight from Barney Frank and Chris Dodd as the House and Senate
Finance Committee chairmen respectively.

The bottom line is there are problems Obama inherited and he has to
resolve them. And he cannot fix EVERYTHING in TEN fricking months!!!

And not all of them are due to Bush. Until folks understand that there
were errors in regulation and oversight from both sides of the aisle, we
will never fully recover. All people will be too busy trying to place
blame on the other side.

--
Sleep well tonight,

RD (The Sandman)

Let's see if I have this healthcare thingy right. Congress is to pass
a plan written by a committee whose head has said he doesn't understand
it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it, signed by a president who
hasn't read it, with funding administered by a Treasury chief who didn't
pay his taxes because he didn't understand TurboTax, overseen by an obese
Surgeon General and financed by a country that's nearly broke.
What could possibly go wrong?

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 13:09:37 -0500, "RD (The Sandman)"
wrote:

queenie wrote in
:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:27:41 -0400, "Scout"
wrote:

And the health care reform has NOTHING to do with Bush.

That's for damn sure. After all, the Republican party is the Party of
NO.

Still getting your talking points from the Daily Kos?

Is that a site you think I'd be interested in? As far as the Party of
No is concerned, what have they done for you?

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 13:13:45 -0500, "RD (The Sandman)"
wrote:

queenie wrote in
:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 18:24:33 -0500, "RD (The Sandman)"
wrote:

queenie wrote in
:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:00:10 GMT, KK wrote:

In other words, hats off to Obama for honestly talking about his
past (unlike W who said some cop-out bull****, or Clinton with the
oh-so- clintony "didn't break the laws of my country" and later "I
didn't inhale") ... but F him for dismissing serious questions about
decriminialization and F him for ignoring the waste, expense, and
injustice of the 60% of federal prisoners who are non-violent drug
offenders.

He's been in office TEN months and he already has a lot on his plate
due to the disastrous policies of the previous administration. Give
him time. Right now, the wars, health care reform and the economy
come first. Geez!!

Bush's war was Iraq. Both the Democrats and Obama have been saying
that the right war was Afghanistan.....well, now he has it. Don't
blame Bush for the war that the liberals wanted and felt was the right
one.

But Obama never said war with Iraq was the right thing. Now he's
stuck with it. He's been in office ten months and people are bitching
like he's been in office for years.

Was Bush president when those wars started or not? And were both wars
still going on when he left? I believe both answers are "Yes".

How quickly you forget all the talk from Democrats about Afghanistan
being the right war.

What is it with you and the war in Afghanistan? Oh, you want to
remind everybody that Bush took his eye off Afghanistan and went to
Iraq and that's why so many soldiers have died unnecessarily.


All under Bush's watch and his stupid tax cuts. He even gave a tax
credit to people who bought the gas-guzzling Hummer.

With errors from both sides of the aisle. After all, the biggest
collapse in real estate financing was Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae....under
oversight from Barney Frank and Chris Dodd as the House and Senate
Finance Committee chairmen respectively.

The bottom line is there are problems Obama inherited and he has to
resolve them. And he cannot fix EVERYTHING in TEN fricking months!!!

And not all of them are due to Bush. Until folks understand that there
were errors in regulation and oversight from both sides of the aisle, we
will never fully recover. All people will be too busy trying to place
blame on the other side.

Republican had control of all three branches of government for six
years. They blew it big time and now they want to distract from that
by blaming Obama for not getting anything accomplished in less than a
year. That is why the Republicans, the Party of No, is determined to
see that Obama fails while they gave Bush a blank check to do whatever
he wanted.