We *need* women in Combat roles...
 

In article ,
says...

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.

You righties sure hate him, like lefties hate - what did you call him,
"Rush?" First name basis, eh? That's sweet.
But you'd have to give examples of Matthews lying.
I pretty much ignore unsupported accusations.
Some Youtube links would do. That's where all televised brazen lies end
up, for everybody to see. Shouldn't be hard.
Him putting his foot in his mouth and later apologizing doesn't count as
a lie. Neither is him disagreeing with your views, unless he's lying.
And it just won't work to claim Youtube is another "lib" MSM outlet.
So go for it.
I've often disagreed with Matthews. Especially when he went rabid over
Clinton "desecrating" the WH with the Lewinsky chick, then became a GWB
fan.
He's wised up since then. But I've never doubted his integrity.
Everybody has some wacko views. Hell, you're a gun nut.
Matthews could have been a priest, given his strong attachment to
Catholicism.
Doubt he'd go for the child molestation, so it's good he chose to do
something else.
You need to forget politics long enough to understand the definition of
"honest."

We *need* women in Combat roles...
 

On 2/16/13 6:30 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
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....


Some months ago, a university released a research study that indicated
the more you watch Fox News, the dumber you get. Obviously, Snotty was
one of those interviewed for the study.

It is Fox that uses the tagline "fair and balanced," and it uses it the
same way and for the same reason the old Soviet Union "official"
newspaper was named "Pravda." Most of MSNBC's commentators are
progressives, liberals, whatever, and the "station" makes no effort to
conceal that fact with a "bull****" tagline of "fair and balanced." The
network does, however, have a legitimate conservative morning anchor on
for three hours who presents a rational conservative viewpoint. His name
is Joe Scarborough. S.E. Cupp is a conservative host on an afternoon
show. Plus the network sprinkles in plenty of paid and unpaid
conservative commentators during the day, though they are not the rabid,
bat**** crazy folks you find on Fox.

It's funny that Snotty brings up Louis Farrakhan (not Farrakahn).
Farrakhan has been in semi-retirement for close to a decade because of
health issues. He still pops up once in a while, but he's certainly no
regular on MSNBC or anywhere else.

I don't watch Fox because it presents stupid viewpoints in a stupid way.
It's programmed for nitwits like...Scotty.


--
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 2/16/13 1:59 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 17:15:38 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

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

This is one of those things that time will tell.

People have rehabilitated Truman.



Truman had many accomplishments of significance, most of them good. The
only "good" thing I can recall about Dubya is that he increased research
spending on HIV/AIDs. Nothing is going to wash away the fact that his
administration lied us into two wars, not even the GOP/neocon efforts to
rewrite the history on those times.

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

We *need* women in Combat roles...
 

On 2/15/13 10:27 PM, Eisboch wrote:


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. 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".




The Rev. Al called the Mittster "Willard" because it is a name many
think is "highfalutin," or at least that is the explanation I recall
hearing somewhere.

I prefer thinking the Rev. was a fan of that 1970's horror film,
Willard, in which the "hero," named Willard, is a socially maladjusted
rich kid living in a mansion and whose only real friends are rats. In
the end, the rats turn on Willard. My guess is the Mittster reminded the
Rev. of the guy in the movie. The Mittster sure reminded me of the movie
Willard. Romney is...creepy.



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

We *need* women in Combat roles...
 

On 2/16/2013 7:38 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/16/13 6:30 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
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....


Some months ago, a university released a research study that indicated
the more you watch Fox News, the dumber you get. Obviously, Snotty was
one of those interviewed for the study.

It is Fox that uses the tagline "fair and balanced," and it uses it the
same way and for the same reason the old Soviet Union "official"
newspaper was named "Pravda." Most of MSNBC's commentators are
progressives, liberals, whatever, and the "station" makes no effort to
conceal that fact with a "bull****" tagline of "fair and balanced." The
network does, however, have a legitimate conservative morning anchor on
for three hours who presents a rational conservative viewpoint. His name
is Joe Scarborough. S.E. Cupp is a conservative host on an afternoon
show. Plus the network sprinkles in plenty of paid and unpaid
conservative commentators during the day, though they are not the rabid,
bat**** crazy folks you find on Fox.

It's funny that Snotty brings up Louis Farrakhan (not Farrakahn).
Farrakhan has been in semi-retirement for close to a decade because of
health issues. He still pops up once in a while, but he's certainly no
regular on MSNBC or anywhere else.

I don't watch Fox because it presents stupid viewpoints in a stupid way.
It's programmed for nitwits like...Scotty.



A university study, presented by the, fake where it matters, Dr. Krause.

We *need* women in Combat roles...
 

On 2/16/2013 7:57 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/15/13 10:27 PM, Eisboch wrote:


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. 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".




The Rev. Al called the Mittster "Willard" because it is a name many
think is "highfalutin," or at least that is the explanation I recall
hearing somewhere.

I prefer thinking the Rev. was a fan of that 1970's horror film,
Willard, in which the "hero," named Willard, is a socially maladjusted
rich kid living in a mansion and whose only real friends are rats. In
the end, the rats turn on Willard. My guess is the Mittster reminded the
Rev. of the guy in the movie. The Mittster sure reminded me of the movie
Willard. Romney is...creepy.




You are an odd little man, Krausie.

We *need* women in Combat roles...
 

In article ,
says...

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...

You stupid little fool!! Once again you go posting bull**** with no
facts. In reality, here ARE some facts, but then again, you'll ignore
them because you are insanely narrow minded to the right.

"Bush politicized parts of the government that should be nonpartisan.
From NASA to the Justice Department, professionals were forced out or
silenced if they departed from the true Republican way. What was good
for the Republican Party trumped what was good policy for the nation.
Every administration is political to some extent, but the Bush
administration took it too far. When Paul O'Neill was forced out at
Treasury, it was clear that every major decision would be determined by
Karl Rove's calculus"

"Bush squandered the budget surplus. Despite overwhelming evidence to
the contrary, Bush had a near-religious faith in the ability of tax cuts
to deliver prosperity. Tax cuts were the panacea that would cure all
ills. Economy too strong? Cut taxes. Economy too weak? Cut taxes. Stock
market falling? Cut dividend taxes. Investment weak? Cut capital gains
taxes. But tax cuts didn't make the economy stronger; they merely blew a
big hole in the budget. Now, when we could really use that surplus to
pay for the bailouts and the stimulus, it's gone"

"Bush comforted the comfortable and afflicted the afflicted. The Bush
years were the ultimate test of trickle-down economics, the theory that
says the government should favor the rich because the benefits will flow
down to the rest of us. The results of that experiment are clear: We've
had the weakest job growth since the 1930s. We've had the biggest
increase in debt ever. We've had the highest share of national income
going to profits since the 1920s. Income inequality has soared while our
public and private investment has slowed to a trickle. Instead of
building a fundamentally sound economy, Bush nurtured a Ponzi economy
based on get-rich-quick schemes"

"Bush rewarded incompetence. Because politics and personal loyalty were
all that counted, Bush appointed incompetent people to vital jobs. He
hired interns to run Iraq. He hired a horse expert to run the Federal
Emergency Management Agency. He wanted to hire Harriett Miers to be a
Supreme Court justice. Top jobs were reserved for sycophants, toadies
and failures."

"Bush lied us into war. Every argument for war against Iraq was a
delusion, and hundreds of thousands of lives have been lost as a
result.Saddam Hussein was not responsible for 9/11 in any way. He was
not a danger to the United States. The Bush administration ignored or
dismissed mountains of evidence that showed that Saddam was not building
an arsenal of chemical or nuclear weapons. Bush rushed to war without
giving diplomacy or weapons inspectors a chance. Later, administration
officials blew the cover of a CIA employee whose husband told the truth,
and then lied about their involvement"

Bush had the opportunity to be a great president. After 9/11, the nation
was as united as it had been since Pearl Harbor, and Bush rode a wave of
popularity that he could have used to turn around the nation's politics,
security and economy.

Instead of uniting us as he promised, he divided us instead

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?


Harry should answer that.

We *need* women in Combat roles...
 

On 2/16/2013 1:59 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 17:15:38 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

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

This is one of those things that time will tell.

People have rehabilitated Truman.


Carter still holds the title, but Clinton and O'Bama are close runner
ups. Mebbe O'Bama will get the prize when he's finished his "work". He
could put it on his mantle along side his peace prize.

We *need* women in Combat roles...
 

In article ,
says...

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....

I can't speak for others, but of course you think you can speak for all,
BUT my problem with FOX is the lies and deceipt that you narrow minded
faction of the right wing eats up with a spoon as truth. ****, you call
the lies and pablum that people like O'Reilly, Hannity, Rush, etc as
"news" and believe their lies because it fits your narrow minded agenda.