Our next president?
 

On Dec 19, 12:10*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"TopBassDog" wrote in message

...
On Dec 19, 12:14 am, "nom=de=plume" wrote:



"TopBassDog" wrote in message

...
On Dec 18, 11:11 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

"TopBassDog" wrote in message

....
On Dec 18, 12:37 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

"Tim" wrote in message

...
On Dec 17, 12:45 pm, wrote:

On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:33:14 -0800, "nom=de=plume"

wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message
m...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP2p91dvm6M

Obama wouldn't stand a chance against this guy.

This guy has lots of great rhetoric but has proposed nothing of
substance.

Isn't that the definition of a politician?
I think he's got jsut a good of a chance as anyone else.

but he doesn't lie enough, probably.

The better the liar, the better the politician.

Why don't you think he doesn't lie enough?

Perhaps the better liar was a better politician in the past, but it
doesn't
cut it now.

--
Nom=de=Plume
You are correct. D'Plume. The executive branch of your government is
overflowing with honesty, integrity, and ethical virtue with no regard
to Kantian duty.

Never said that. Perhaps you need to get a reading lesson from someone.

--
Nom=de=Plume
Then, why didn't you say so?

Say what? I said, "Perhaps the better liar was a better politician in the
past, but it doesn't cut it now."

You then said, "The executive branch...."

Would like to clarify what exactly you're trying to say? Perhaps start
with
something that's not quite so lame.

--
Nom=de=Plume

And just whom all does your executive branch take in? OK, lets broaden
it to your legislative branch as well. Mostly the Judicial branch is
appointed so, that can't happen. *I noticed you come down a bit hard
on Bush and his VP. are they not the Exec branch as well? Now wouldn't
you be one of the first to brand them liars. Absolutely you would.

You have a phrase in the states concerning finding something very
lost. "Like finding a needle in a hay-stack," If I recall. *We have a
similar phrase, like "trying to find an honest man in parliament..."

Don't act so naive, D'Plume. I thought you were smarter than what you
let on.

But maybe not.

Not so lame? Then tighten up your splint.

Reply: Here's the definition of the executive branch, although I'm not sure
what that has to do with either your or my original comment.

I'm still waiting for a response that clarifies your claim.

If it makes you feel better, tell me I'm just average.

No, D'Plume. I would never say you are average.

Our next president?
 

On Dec 18, 9:04*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message

...



nom=de=plume wrote:
*wrote in message
om...

nom=de=plume wrote:

* wrote in message
m...

On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:33:14 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
* wrote:

* wrote in message
news:Xf2dnf3jiL9U4rTWnZ2dnUVZ_udi4p2d@gigane ws.com...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP2p91dvm6M

Obama wouldn't stand a chance against this guy.

This guy has lots of great rhetoric but has proposed nothing of
substance.

Isn't that the definition of a politician?

Not of a successful one, and certainly not these days.

West is running for Congress now. *Let him start there.

When/if he gets elected, he can try to accomplish something. It would be
nice to know what he actually is going to try and accomplish.

Amazing set up...

The same could be said for Obama and his failures.

Amazingly stupid response from you. He's ... umm... the president. He's
accomplished more than someone who might or might not get elected to
Congress just be being president.
--
Nom=de=Plume

"Amazingly stupid response from you."

Our next president?
 

"Rob" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...

nom=de=plume wrote:

wrote in message
...


nom=de=plume wrote:


wrote in message
...



On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:33:14 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:




wrote in message
...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP2p91dvm6M

Obama wouldn't stand a chance against this guy.





This guy has lots of great rhetoric but has proposed nothing of
substance.



Isn't that the definition of a politician?




Not of a successful one, and certainly not these days.




West is running for Congress now. Let him start there.


When/if he gets elected, he can try to accomplish something. It would
be
nice to know what he actually is going to try and accomplish.



Amazing set up...

The same could be said for Obama and his failures.

Amazingly stupid response from you. He's ... umm... the president. He's
accomplished more than someone who might or might not get elected to
Congress just be being president.

Once again, you don't read very well. Read your post again (and replace
"and" with "to" for proper English) and get back to me.

Rob


I think you're really losing it. I know it's hard for you, but try actually
thinking before you type.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Our next president?
 

"Rob" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Steve wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...

nom=de=plume wrote:

wrote in message
...


nom=de=plume wrote:


wrote in message
...



On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:33:14 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:




wrote in message
...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP2p91dvm6M

Obama wouldn't stand a chance against this guy.





This guy has lots of great rhetoric but has proposed nothing of
substance.



Isn't that the definition of a politician?




Not of a successful one, and certainly not these days.




West is running for Congress now. Let him start there.


When/if he gets elected, he can try to accomplish something. It would
be
nice to know what he actually is going to try and accomplish.



Amazing set up...

The same could be said for Obama and his failures.

I guess you haven't been keeping up. He's created millions of jobs.
He's
saved millions of homes from foreclosure. He's cut the national debt,
and
has a plan to have it down to zero by the time he leaves office.
Everyone
gets free health care, and by doing that, the debt will actually be
reduced until it starts saving so much money, there will be a huge
surplus
that we can send to underdeveloped countries to assuage our guilt over
being so successful.

At least, that's what the nurse just told me when I woke up from a coma
...............

Steve



I guess you haven't caught up... the economy is getting better, Iraq is
winding down, the job situation is improving. He's dealing with Gitmo.
Basically, he's attempting to fix the screwups from the previous adm.



"He's dealing with Gitmo". Now *that's* funny! Closing Gitmo was his
*first order* as the President. Almost a year later - NOTHING! This also
had *zero* to do with the previous administration. Why he gave it an
entire year is anyone's guess unless he realized there was no need for it.
In this video he has to ask his staff for clarification on something not
on the teleprompter.

He has a few weeks left...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8NJQa0pXPM


Actually, he's done quite a bit there. Perhaps you need to watch the news
(no, not Fox) from time to time.


--
Nom=de=Plume

Our next president?
 

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 00:06:12 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

On Dec 19, 12:14 am, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"TopBassDog" wrote in message

...
On Dec 18, 11:11 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:



"TopBassDog" wrote in message

...
On Dec 18, 12:37 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

"Tim" wrote in message

...
On Dec 17, 12:45 pm, wrote:

On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:33:14 -0800, "nom=de=plume"

wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message
m...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP2p91dvm6M

Obama wouldn't stand a chance against this guy.

This guy has lots of great rhetoric but has proposed nothing of
substance.

Isn't that the definition of a politician?
I think he's got jsut a good of a chance as anyone else.

but he doesn't lie enough, probably.

The better the liar, the better the politician.

Why don't you think he doesn't lie enough?

Perhaps the better liar was a better politician in the past, but it
doesn't
cut it now.

--
Nom=de=Plume
You are correct. D'Plume. The executive branch of your government is
overflowing with honesty, integrity, and ethical virtue with no
regard
to Kantian duty.

Never said that. Perhaps you need to get a reading lesson from
someone.

--
Nom=de=Plume
Then, why didn't you say so?

Say what? I said, "Perhaps the better liar was a better politician in
the
past, but it doesn't cut it now."

You then said, "The executive branch...."

Would like to clarify what exactly you're trying to say? Perhaps start
with
something that's not quite so lame.

--
Nom=de=Plume



And just whom all does your executive branch take in? OK, lets broaden
it to your legislative branch as well. Mostly the Judicial branch is
appointed so, that can't happen. I noticed you come down a bit hard
on Bush and his VP. are they not the Exec branch as well? Now wouldn't
you be one of the first to brand them liars. Absolutely you would.

You have a phrase in the states concerning finding something very
lost. "Like finding a needle in a hay-stack," If I recall. We have a
similar phrase, like "trying to find an honest man in parliament..."

Don't act so naive, D'Plume. I thought you were smarter than what you
let on.

But maybe not.

Not so lame? Then tighten up your splint.

I'm beginning to think the plum just may be Loogy in disguise, and
that you may be the Tosk in disguise.

The parallels are just unreal.

And funny as hell.
--

Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year!

John H


I'm beginning to realize that you didn't plonk me after all... you're still
scared though.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Our next president?
 

In article ,
om says...

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 00:06:12 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

On Dec 19, 12:14*am, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"TopBassDog" wrote in message

...
On Dec 18, 11:11 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:



"TopBassDog" wrote in message

...
On Dec 18, 12:37 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

"Tim" wrote in message

...
On Dec 17, 12:45 pm, wrote:

On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:33:14 -0800, "nom=de=plume"

wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message
m...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP2p91dvm6M

Obama wouldn't stand a chance against this guy.

This guy has lots of great rhetoric but has proposed nothing of
substance.

Isn't that the definition of a politician?
I think he's got jsut a good of a chance as anyone else.

but he doesn't lie enough, probably.

The better the liar, the better the politician.

Why don't you think he doesn't lie enough?

Perhaps the better liar was a better politician in the past, but it
doesn't
cut it now.

--
Nom=de=Plume
You are correct. D'Plume. The executive branch of your government is
overflowing with honesty, integrity, and ethical virtue with no regard
to Kantian duty.

Never said that. Perhaps you need to get a reading lesson from someone.

--
Nom=de=Plume
Then, why didn't you say so?

Say what? I said, "Perhaps the better liar was a better politician in the
past, but it doesn't cut it now."

You then said, "The executive branch...."

Would like to clarify what exactly you're trying to say? Perhaps start with
something that's not quite so lame.

--
Nom=de=Plume



And just whom all does your executive branch take in? OK, lets broaden
it to your legislative branch as well. Mostly the Judicial branch is
appointed so, that can't happen. I noticed you come down a bit hard
on Bush and his VP. are they not the Exec branch as well? Now wouldn't
you be one of the first to brand them liars. Absolutely you would.

You have a phrase in the states concerning finding something very
lost. "Like finding a needle in a hay-stack," If I recall. We have a
similar phrase, like "trying to find an honest man in parliament..."

Don't act so naive, D'Plume. I thought you were smarter than what you
let on.

But maybe not.

Not so lame? Then tighten up your splint.

I'm beginning to think the plum just may be Loogy in disguise, and
that you may be the Tosk in disguise.

The parallels are just unreal.

And funny as hell.

Sorry John, it ain't me...

I am Tosk!