We *need* women in Combat roles...
 

On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 11:39:55 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

So you don't mind his narrow mindedness, his bigotry and his racism, got
it.

====

Let he who is without sin throw the first stone.

We *need* women in Combat roles...
 

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 11:39:55 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

So you don't mind his narrow mindedness, his bigotry and his racism, got
it.

====

Let he who is without sin throw the first stone.

Could you give specific examples, please? I can!

We *need* women in Combat roles...
 

On 2/15/13 3:14 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 11:39:55 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

So you don't mind his narrow mindedness, his bigotry and his racism, got
it.

====

Let he who is without sin throw the first stone.

Could you give specific examples, please? I can!



My King James bible has the phrase as:

"He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."
and it refers to jesus speaking out against imposition of the death
penalty, among other things.

--
I'm a *Liberal* because I knew militant christian fundamentalist racist
militaristic xenophobic corporate oligarchy wasn't going to work for me.

We *need* women in Combat roles...
 

On 2/15/2013 2:04 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 08:19:53 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

I can understand why we originally went into Afghanistan. But I
don't understand why we are still there, other than political deals.

Bush originally went to Afghanistan with a small tactical force, just
looking tor Bin Laden. He got in so much trouble from the left because
they missed him (supposedly because the mission was too small) that we
came in force.
In the end we got Bin Laden with a small tactical force. Everything
else we did in Afghanistan was counter productive.

You can say all you want about the Iraqi "mistake" but we did end up
with a quasi democratic government that is not threatening Israel (the
real goal).
Compared with what happened in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Iraq was a
raging success. Thousands of American lives lost and we are worse off
there now than we were in 2001 or even 2009


Their selfish needs outweigh the facts.. Bush may have been a much
better president, but harry didn't get an IPhone from him, sooooo...

We *need* women in Combat roles...
 

On 2/15/13 5:10 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:


Their selfish needs outweigh the facts.. Bush may have been a much
better president, but harry didn't get an IPhone from him, sooooo...


Dubya was the worst president in modern United States history. No one
was worse.

--
I'm a *Liberal* because I knew militant christian fundamentalist racist
militaristic xenophobic corporate oligarchy wasn't going to work for me.

We *need* women in Combat roles...
 

On Feb 15, 8:02*am, "F.O.A.D." wrote:


I like the modern "Rev. Al" a lot better than I liked the older model.
He's matured a lot.


Yeah, he looks like walking death

We *need* women in Combat roles...
 

In article om,
says...

On 2/15/2013 8:39 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/15/13 8:35 AM, Tim wrote:
On Feb 15, 5:39 am, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 2/15/13 6:24 AM, Tim wrote:









On Feb 14, 12:44 pm, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 2/14/13 1:38 PM, Urin Asshole wrote: On Thu, 14 Feb 2013
12:46:15 -0500, Salmonbait
wrote:

...and here's a good example of why!

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=722_1360164856

When are you going to sign up?

Johnny Boy Herring claims he served as a combat engineer during our
war
against Vietnam. I've asked him several times how many Vietnamese
people
he killed with explosives or even his rifle, but as far as I
recall, he
has never responded with the facts.

Harry, Engineers arn't combat troops, They build stuff like roads,
bridges, etc. not that doesn't mean they're not also trained in
fighting. Don't personally know, but with a bit of speculation, I'd
say John 'probably' didn't kill anybody.

I understand that, and I also understand they usually aren't
"engineers," as we think of that term in the construction industry.
Combat engineers also blow things up.

I had two great-uncles who were engineers. They both drove steam
locomotives at5 the turn of the last century



I have a relative who drove diesel locomotives, but he wasn't an engineer.

You also have a relative who is a social worker but not a real Doctor.

You claim to be a writer, but seriously, that title doesn't fit you
well, does it?

Did Harry's relative pay his taxes?

We *need* women in Combat roles...
 

On 2/15/2013 10:37 PM, BAR wrote:
In article om,
says...

On 2/15/2013 8:39 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/15/13 8:35 AM, Tim wrote:
On Feb 15, 5:39 am, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 2/15/13 6:24 AM, Tim wrote:









On Feb 14, 12:44 pm, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 2/14/13 1:38 PM, Urin Asshole wrote: On Thu, 14 Feb 2013
12:46:15 -0500, Salmonbait
wrote:

...and here's a good example of why!

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=722_1360164856

When are you going to sign up?

Johnny Boy Herring claims he served as a combat engineer during our
war
against Vietnam. I've asked him several times how many Vietnamese
people
he killed with explosives or even his rifle, but as far as I
recall, he
has never responded with the facts.

Harry, Engineers arn't combat troops, They build stuff like roads,
bridges, etc. not that doesn't mean they're not also trained in
fighting. Don't personally know, but with a bit of speculation, I'd
say John 'probably' didn't kill anybody.

I understand that, and I also understand they usually aren't
"engineers," as we think of that term in the construction industry.
Combat engineers also blow things up.

I had two great-uncles who were engineers. They both drove steam
locomotives at5 the turn of the last century



I have a relative who drove diesel locomotives, but he wasn't an engineer.

You also have a relative who is a social worker but not a real Doctor.

You claim to be a writer, but seriously, that title doesn't fit you
well, does it?

Did Harry's relative pay his taxes?


**** the taxes... I would be more concerened with the people and small
businesses he ****ed when he went bankrupt twice... Now he hides assets
while those folks pay his bills...

We *need* women in Combat roles...
 

In article ,
says...

Why can't she just admit that she doesn't agree with the policy?
This is an example of the dishonest flavor that some liberals exhibit.

All talking heads show "dishonesty." Because they're people. Matthews
and Shultz are probably the most "honest." But I disagree with all of
them on some points.
"Liberals" don't have the tunnel vision market locked up.
As you said, more views to digest.
What galls me the most is seeing a table full of millionaires on Morning
Joe talking about how it's perfectly reasonable to cut SS and Medicare
benefits for old poor folks. Just has to be done.
And at least half of the millionaires at the table are "Democrats."
What a bunch of ignorant dopes.


Al Sharpton does it often in his snarky kind of way, but sometimes
it's humorous. During the last election, he constantly referred to
Romney as "Willard" .... a poorly disguised attempt to make fun of
Romney's given name, even though Romney has been called "Mitt"
throughout his entire public life. Sharpton got great glee and
satisfaction calling him "Willard" however. Strange, considering
that Sharpton's given name is "Alfred".

Can't watch him much. He'a always yelling, so I flip to CNN or CSPAN.
Same with Maddow. She's another preacher, but worse. She'll often
spend 15 minutes straight just yakking - no guests. Her nagging voice
starts to grate. Her rhetorical device of repeating the same thing 10
times is likewise grating. Comes across as an egomaniac.

We *need* women in Combat roles...
 

On 2/16/2013 2:06 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 23:18:16 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

Because they're people. Matthews
and Shultz are probably the most "honest."

Huh?

Matthews just makes stuff up and he ignores anything that does not
support his rants,.

I watch his Sunday show and the weekend roll up of his weekly show.
There are always at least one or two boldfaced lies. He is Rush for
the lefties.


And "half of the millionaires are democrats".. LOL. Conservatives are
not hardly ever represented on MSNBC... Their idea of fair and balanced
is Louis Farrakahn, and Al Sharpton, Matthews and Maddow... and Matthews
is the conservative in the group... LOL!

The biggest reason folks "can't" watch Fox, is they can't stand the
right having a say in the matters....