"Canuck57" wrote in message
...
On 14/02/2010 3:20 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 14/02/2010 12:38 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
"John wrote in message
...
http://tinyurl.com/yhsqavk
--
*I never thought the greatest threat to the American way of life
would be our President!*

John H


And I'm sure there are those here who remember you marching on DC when
Bush
invaded Iraq for no reason.... You are a hypocrite.

What part of the democrat involvement that you choose to forget?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution

Don't worry, liberal-democrats do have short memories. Even Hillary was
FOR the resultion. Go figure.


So, when a group makes an error and admits it, that means it's ok for the
group that perpetrated the hoax to get off the hook.

Not at all. But democrat liberals will be saying it was Bush;s fault in
100 years from now. And it wasn't Bush that did the last years debt spend
and corruption bailouts. It was Obama that did. Doesn't mater how you
cut it, democrats provided the cash via congress, and a democrat president
is signing the checks.

Did you get stupid or were you born that way. Obama came into office _after_
TARP and after something like $1.3T

http://bailout.propublica.org/main/timeline/index


But really does not mater, just finished reading how congress quietly
passed a bill to prevent the US government from going into debt default,
turns out some of the US federal debt is coming up and no one is lending
them money any more. So congress has raised the ponzip fiat money debt
limit to $14.5 trillion. And many economists believe this is the break
point for the US.

Not to you. You're not an American, and you're not even allowed back in the
country.


The break point is where it can no longer be expected that the debt will
ever be paid off and still ahve a working government.

Which means be it this year or 5 years from now, the US currency will melt
down. And government owing $14.5 trillion can't afford 10% interest rates
so in fact, hyper-stagflation and a worthless greenback is looking more
like probability than possibility. US will be like Greece today, beggars.

Chicken Little is alive and well!

--
Nom=de=Plume

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


So, when a group makes an error and admits it, that means it's ok for the
group that perpetrated the hoax to get off the hook.


Quoting from Wiki:

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 is a United States Congressional statement
of policy calling for regime change in Iraq.[ It was signed into law by
President Bill Clinton.

The Act found that between 1980 and 1998 Iraq had:

1.. committed various and significant violations of International Law,
2.. had failed to comply with the obligations to which it had agreed
following the Gulf War and
3.. further had ignored Resolutions of the United Nations Security
Council.
"He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an
arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you
he'll use the arsenal.... President Clinton ~ 1998"

Bush lied?

Eisboch

On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 21:44:12 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


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


So, when a group makes an error and admits it, that means it's ok for the
group that perpetrated the hoax to get off the hook.


Quoting from Wiki:

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 is a United States Congressional statement
of policy calling for regime change in Iraq.[ It was signed into law by
President Bill Clinton.

The Act found that between 1980 and 1998 Iraq had:

1.. committed various and significant violations of International Law,
2.. had failed to comply with the obligations to which it had agreed
following the Gulf War and
3.. further had ignored Resolutions of the United Nations Security
Council.
"He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an
arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you
he'll use the arsenal.... President Clinton ~ 1998"

Bush lied?

yeah. because he was president AFTER clinton

and he had evidence...which he disregarded...that there were NO WMD's
in iraq.

clinton sent ZERO troops into iraq.

you right wingers....so let's summarize what you believe:

-obama's been president for 9 years
-clinton invaded iraq

amazing what you'll believe

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

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


So, when a group makes an error and admits it, that means it's ok for the
group that perpetrated the hoax to get off the hook.


Quoting from Wiki:

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 is a United States Congressional statement
of policy calling for regime change in Iraq.[ It was signed into law by
President Bill Clinton.

The Act found that between 1980 and 1998 Iraq had:

1.. committed various and significant violations of International Law,
2.. had failed to comply with the obligations to which it had agreed
following the Gulf War and
3.. further had ignored Resolutions of the United Nations Security
Council.
"He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an
arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee
you he'll use the arsenal.... President Clinton ~ 1998"

Bush lied?

Eisboch



And, Clinton invaded Iraq when? And, Bush claimed that WMDs where where?
Bush listened to Clinton about anything??? Keep defending Bush. You're doing
so well!


--
Nom=de=Plume

On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 21:44:12 -0500, Eisboch wrote:


Quoting from Wiki:

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 is a United States Congressional
statement of policy calling for regime change in Iraq.[ It was signed
into law by President Bill Clinton.

The Act found that between 1980 and 1998 Iraq had:

1.. committed various and significant violations of International Law,
2.. had failed to comply with the obligations to which it had agreed
following the Gulf War and
3.. further had ignored Resolutions of the United Nations Security
Council.
"He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an
arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee
you he'll use the arsenal.... President Clinton ~ 1998"

Bush lied?

Bush invaded Iraq in 1998? If he had, his argument about WMD might of
been accurate. The question remains, did Saddam have WMD in 2003? As it
was, in 1998, when Clinton bombed Iraq in Operation Desert Fox,
Republicans were claiming it was to distract the country from Clinton's
impeachment trial. Remember Wag the Dog?

On Feb 14, 4:20*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Canuck57" wrote in message

...



On 14/02/2010 12:38 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
"John *wrote in message
. ..
http://tinyurl.com/yhsqavk
--
*I never thought the greatest threat to the American way of life
would be our President!*

John H

And I'm sure there are those here who remember you marching on DC when
Bush
invaded Iraq for no reason.... You are a hypocrite.

What part of the democrat involvement that you choose to forget?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution

Don't worry, liberal-democrats do have short memories. *Even Hillary was
FOR the resultion. *Go figure.

So, when a group makes an error and admits it, that means it's ok for the
group that perpetrated the hoax to get off the hook.

--
Nom=de=Plume

D'Plume. Who has admitted to anything? Certainly no one is admitting
to making a 'mistake'

TopBassDog wrote:
On Feb 14, 4:20 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Canuck57" wrote in message

...



On 14/02/2010 12:38 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
"John wrote in message
...
http://tinyurl.com/yhsqavk
--
*I never thought the greatest threat to the American way of life
would be our President!*
John H
And I'm sure there are those here who remember you marching on DC when
Bush
invaded Iraq for no reason.... You are a hypocrite.
What part of the democrat involvement that you choose to forget?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution
Don't worry, liberal-democrats do have short memories. Even Hillary was
FOR the resultion. Go figure.
So, when a group makes an error and admits it, that means it's ok for the
group that perpetrated the hoax to get off the hook.

--
Nom=de=Plume

D'Plume. Who has admitted to anything? Certainly no one is admitting
to making a 'mistake'

Talking to reds just encourages them to talk some more.
Why give them a forum? They can blog at moveon.org or the NYT or NBC
and drown in their own misery without subjecting us to their whining.

'Bama - The liberal who can't hide his true colors

"TopBassDog" wrote in message
...
On Feb 14, 4:20 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Canuck57" wrote in message

...



On 14/02/2010 12:38 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
"John wrote in message
. ..
http://tinyurl.com/yhsqavk
--
*I never thought the greatest threat to the American way of life
would be our President!*

John H

And I'm sure there are those here who remember you marching on DC when
Bush
invaded Iraq for no reason.... You are a hypocrite.

What part of the democrat involvement that you choose to forget?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution

Don't worry, liberal-democrats do have short memories. Even Hillary was
FOR the resultion. Go figure.

So, when a group makes an error and admits it, that means it's ok for the
group that perpetrated the hoax to get off the hook.

--
Nom=de=Plume

D'Plume. Who has admitted to anything? Certainly no one is admitting
to making a 'mistake'


They've all admitted to making an error in judgement (except Obama and a few
others who was opposed to it). More revisionistic bs from the right... you
can't just accept the fact that Bush invaded for absolutely no reason with
made up intelligence.
--
Nom=de=Plume

On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 14:30:11 -0500, John H
wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/yhsqavk

actually he's not.

US troops are entering an area where terrorists are hiding behind
civilians

and no one killed more civilians than bush.

look at the hundreds of thousands dead in iraq

"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 14:30:11 -0500, John H
wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/yhsqavk

actually he's not.

US troops are entering an area where terrorists are hiding behind
civilians

and no one killed more civilians than bush.

look at the hundreds of thousands dead in iraq

That's so 2 years ago. The bushco followers have already rewritten history.