To the editor:

I don't understand why the White House is so upset about the two party
crashers at Barack Obama's steak dinner the other night. Is it really
appropriate and politically correct to call them party crashers just
because they trespassed on Mr. Obama?

Does that make them criminals? Isn't that discrimination? Shouldn't
they be rewarded for such bold and brave behavior? Maybe they were
just trying to feed their family?

I would suggest that it's more appropriate to call them "undocumented
guests."

Just because they weren't officially invited doesn't mean they should
be treated like criminals. Maybe they should get free health care,
free housing, free legal services and free White House green cards so
next time they can enter legally. And they should be able to bring all
of their relatives and family members, too.

How can Mr. Obama be mad at them just because they crossed over some
arbitrary man-made border?

They were there only to do the things that regularly invited guests
didn't want to do. (Like hang out with Joe Biden.)

How can the White House punish these poor oppressed undocumented
visitors?

Brian K. Shoemaker

--

John H

"John H" wrote in message
...
To the editor:

I don't understand why the White House is so upset about the two party
crashers at Barack Obama's steak dinner the other night. Is it really
appropriate and politically correct to call them party crashers just
because they trespassed on Mr. Obama?

snip rest of crap....

John H


I'd like to see your reaction if someone popped into your house univited
looking for a free meal............
lets say a couple of those latinos who lived down the
street...................

On Dec 13, 8:55*am, John H wrote:
To the editor:

I don't understand why the White House is so upset about the two party
crashers at Barack Obama's steak dinner the other night. Is it really
appropriate and politically correct to call them party crashers just
because they trespassed on Mr. Obama?

Does that make them criminals? Isn't that discrimination? Shouldn't
they be rewarded for such bold and brave behavior? Maybe they were
just trying to feed their family?

I would suggest that it's more appropriate to call them "undocumented
guests."

Just because they weren't officially invited doesn't mean they should
be treated like criminals. Maybe they should get free health care,
free housing, free legal services and free White House green cards so
next time they can enter legally. And they should be able to bring all
of their relatives and family members, too.

How can Mr. Obama be mad at them just because they crossed over some
arbitrary man-made border?

They were there only to do the things that regularly invited guests
didn't want to do. (Like hang out with Joe Biden.)

How can the White House punish these poor oppressed undocumented
visitors?

Brian K. Shoemaker

--

John H

Pure reverse Harry.

On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 08:55:12 -0500, John H
wrote:

To the editor:

I don't understand why the White House is so upset about the two party
crashers at Barack Obama's steak dinner the other night. Is it really
appropriate and politically correct to call them party crashers just
because they trespassed on Mr. Obama?


of course, under bush, they would have been tortured, thrown in
prision and denied habeas corpus

unless they were rich in which case they would have been coddled and
schmoozed.

"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 08:55:12 -0500, John H
wrote:

To the editor:

I don't understand why the White House is so upset about the two party
crashers at Barack Obama's steak dinner the other night. Is it really
appropriate and politically correct to call them party crashers just
because they trespassed on Mr. Obama?


of course, under bush, they would have been tortured, thrown in
prision and denied habeas corpus

unless they were rich in which case they would have been coddled and
schmoozed.

.......and smooched if oil-Arabs.

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 08:55:12 -0500, John H
wrote:

To the editor:

I don't understand why the White House is so upset about the two party
crashers at Barack Obama's steak dinner the other night. Is it really
appropriate and politically correct to call them party crashers just
because they trespassed on Mr. Obama?


of course, under bush, they would have been tortured, thrown in
prision and denied habeas corpus

unless they were rich in which case they would have been coddled and
schmoozed.

Yeah, and when Clinton was in, they would have gotten the Lincoln
bedroom, a blow job, and access to all of our defense plans for China
and the middle east handed to them on a Hard Drive, what's your point?

"I am Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 08:55:12 -0500, John H
wrote:

To the editor:

I don't understand why the White House is so upset about the two party
crashers at Barack Obama's steak dinner the other night. Is it really
appropriate and politically correct to call them party crashers just
because they trespassed on Mr. Obama?


of course, under bush, they would have been tortured, thrown in
prision and denied habeas corpus

unless they were rich in which case they would have been coddled and
schmoozed.

Yeah, and when Clinton was in, they would have gotten the Lincoln
bedroom, a blow job, and access to all of our defense plans for China
and the middle east handed to them on a Hard Drive, what's your point?


Yeah, the difference is this happened recently, is a major breach in
presidential security, and Clinton was so last century.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On Dec 13, 7:41*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"I am Tosk" wrote in ...





In article ,
says...

On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 08:55:12 -0500, John H
wrote:

To the editor:

I don't understand why the White House is so upset about the two party
crashers at Barack Obama's steak dinner the other night. Is it really
appropriate and politically correct to call them party crashers just
because they trespassed on Mr. Obama?

of course, under bush, they would have been tortured, thrown in
prision and denied habeas corpus

unless they were rich in which case they would have been coddled and
schmoozed.

Yeah, and when Clinton was in, they would have gotten the Lincoln
bedroom, a blow job, and access to all of our defense plans for China
and the middle east handed to them on a Hard Drive, what's your point?

Yeah, the difference is this happened recently, is a major breach in
presidential security, and Clinton was so last century.

--
Nom=de=Plume- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Damn it you just don't get it EVERYTHING bad is the fault of some
liberal politician. Notice if you will, not one word mentioned about
Bush's gaffes, just went right to Clinton!

"Loogypicker" wrote in message
...
On Dec 13, 7:41 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"I am Tosk" wrote in
...





In article ,
says...

On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 08:55:12 -0500, John H
wrote:

To the editor:

I don't understand why the White House is so upset about the two party
crashers at Barack Obama's steak dinner the other night. Is it really
appropriate and politically correct to call them party crashers just
because they trespassed on Mr. Obama?

of course, under bush, they would have been tortured, thrown in
prision and denied habeas corpus

unless they were rich in which case they would have been coddled and
schmoozed.

Yeah, and when Clinton was in, they would have gotten the Lincoln
bedroom, a blow job, and access to all of our defense plans for China
and the middle east handed to them on a Hard Drive, what's your point?

Yeah, the difference is this happened recently, is a major breach in
presidential security, and Clinton was so last century.

--
Nom=de=Plume- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Damn it you just don't get it EVERYTHING bad is the fault of some
liberal politician. Notice if you will, not one word mentioned about
Bush's gaffes, just went right to Clinton!

Bush, apparently, doesn't actually exist any more.



--
Nom=de=Plume

On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 19:04:11 -0500, I am Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 08:55:12 -0500, John H
wrote:

To the editor:

I don't understand why the White House is so upset about the two party
crashers at Barack Obama's steak dinner the other night. Is it really
appropriate and politically correct to call them party crashers just
because they trespassed on Mr. Obama?


of course, under bush, they would have been tortured, thrown in
prision and denied habeas corpus

unless they were rich in which case they would have been coddled and
schmoozed.

Yeah, and when Clinton was in, they would have gotten the Lincoln
bedroom, a blow job, and access to all of our defense plans for China
and the middle east handed to them on a Hard Drive, what's your point?

clinton sold out hilary

bush sold out 100,000,000 hard working americans.

that's the point