|
|
| Maxlugar |
Hey what would a Riffy Thread be without a little Ann?
If At First You Don't Appease Cry, Cry Again
By Ann Coulter
FrontPageMagazine.com | April 5, 2007
In light of the increasing noise from the fifth column in America, it is a serious question whether President Bush would have the will to deploy military force even to stop a deadly serious threat to the United States.
I'm speaking, of course, of Darfur.
Saddam's barbaric rape rooms, chemical attacks and torture those, liberals could live with. But now they want us to send troops to Darfur, a country from which no one anticipates terrorism anytime in the next millennium. If you're looking for a good definition of "no imminent threat," Darfur is it. The climate change "emergency," set to start taking effect sometime during the next century, is a more imminent threat to the United States than Darfur.
These people can't even wrap up genocide. We've been hearing about this slaughter in Darfur forever and they still haven't finished. The aggressors are moving like termites across that country. It's like genocide by committee. Who's running this holocaust in Darfur, FEMA?
This is truly a war in which we have absolutely no interest. But liberals want our boys to go fight scimitar-wielding dervishes. While the Democrats hold pointless hearings into what George Bush had for breakfast, Republicans should pass a law prohibiting liberals from mentioning Darfur until Horace Mann and Dalton are prepared to put up a battalion.
So no, Darfur is not the threat I was imagining.
I haven't even told you what that threat is though a hostage-taking, Holocaust-denying lunatic who doesn't own a necktie but is within two years of having a nuclear bomb comes to mind. You can already hear Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi saying, "If the Democrats were in charge, the use of military force wouldn't be necessary because we'd constructively engage them and appease their stated desire to kill us."
Damn that Bush! He's made people who hate our guts not like us.
In uplifting thought No. 57 about the war, liberals keep telling us that Iraqis are genetically indisposed to freedom, which I would characterize as the hard bigotry of low expectations. On this week, let us remember the message of Passover is that freedom doesn't come easy.
Moses had to grab Jews by the scruff of their necks and drag them to the desert for 40 years to get a generation capable of living in freedom and even then the Jews were complaining about it being too drafty. The first "stiff-necked" generation didn't even want to leave Egyptian captivity.
Once free, they complained about the food, which apparently compared unfavorably to the food back in Egypt. Kind of reminds you of liberals talking about Saddam's rape rooms.
Even in the desert, the Jews would not stop with the golden calves. God nearly let the whole lot of them perish in the desert, he was so angry about their idolatrous ways. Only when he had a new generation, born in freedom, that didn't complain about the food, did he lead them to the Promised Land. For you liberals still reading, this is all extensively covered in a book known as the "Bible."
(Also this week, we celebrate a fast-track to freedom that doesn't require 40 years in the desert, but as I recall, the suggestion that we convert Muslims to Christianity was shot down early on in this war.)
If you want a shorter rebuilding process, then we're going to have to wage less humane wars. The enemy as well as innocent civilians must be bombed into quivering terror. Otherwise, we displace aggression but don't destroy it.
Americans are weaker for having seen that kind of carnage in World War II. Recall that the Worst Generation was raised by the Greatest Generation. That tells you how awful war is. The Greatest Generation was so exhausted by the war, it didn't have the spine to stand up to pot-smoking, draft-dodging hippies occupying administration buildings. But enough about Bill Clinton. If we're going to have humane wars, they are going to take a little bit longer.
That wouldn't be so bad, except that it gives fifth columnists more time to demoralize Americans and convince them that we are losing a war in the paramount struggle of our time.
[Edited by Maxlugar] |
|
|
| Wikipedia Boy |
Hi everyone! To learn more about the Kurds click here!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurds |
|
|
| Wikipedia Boy |
Welcome to the Breakfast Show? What's Breakfast?
Wikipedia Boy can help!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakfast |
|
|
| The Pretentious Poet |
Wikipedia boy, wikipedia boy,
You bring the board so much joy.
You know your niche, your place, your station,
You bring the board its information.
You're bright and chipper, not a drag,
Despite the fact you look like a fag.
|
|
|
| glencar |
quote:
Maxlugar wrote:
Hey what would a Riffy Thread be without a little Ann?
If At First You Don't Appease Cry, Cry Again
By Ann Coulter
FrontPageMagazine.com | April 5, 2007
In light of the increasing noise from the fifth column in America, it is a serious question whether President Bush would have the will to deploy military force even to stop a deadly serious threat to the United States.
I'm speaking, of course, of Darfur.
Saddam's barbaric rape rooms, chemical attacks and torture those, liberals could live with. But now they want us to send troops to Darfur, a country from which no one anticipates terrorism anytime in the next millennium. If you're looking for a good definition of "no imminent threat," Darfur is it. The climate change "emergency," set to start taking effect sometime during the next century, is a more imminent threat to the United States than Darfur.
These people can't even wrap up genocide. We've been hearing about this slaughter in Darfur forever and they still haven't finished. The aggressors are moving like termites across that country. It's like genocide by committee. Who's running this holocaust in Darfur, FEMA?
This is truly a war in which we have absolutely no interest. But liberals want our boys to go fight scimitar-wielding dervishes. While the Democrats hold pointless hearings into what George Bush had for breakfast, Republicans should pass a law prohibiting liberals from mentioning Darfur until Horace Mann and Dalton are prepared to put up a battalion.
So no, Darfur is not the threat I was imagining.
I haven't even told you what that threat is though a hostage-taking, Holocaust-denying lunatic who doesn't own a necktie but is within two years of having a nuclear bomb comes to mind. You can already hear Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi saying, "If the Democrats were in charge, the use of military force wouldn't be necessary because we'd constructively engage them and appease their stated desire to kill us."
Damn that Bush! He's made people who hate our guts not like us.
In uplifting thought No. 57 about the war, liberals keep telling us that Iraqis are genetically indisposed to freedom, which I would characterize as the hard bigotry of low expectations. On this week, let us remember the message of Passover is that freedom doesn't come easy.
Moses had to grab Jews by the scruff of their necks and drag them to the desert for 40 years to get a generation capable of living in freedom and even then the Jews were complaining about it being too drafty. The first "stiff-necked" generation didn't even want to leave Egyptian captivity.
Once free, they complained about the food, which apparently compared unfavorably to the food back in Egypt. Kind of reminds you of liberals talking about Saddam's rape rooms.
Even in the desert, the Jews would not stop with the golden calves. God nearly let the whole lot of them perish in the desert, he was so angry about their idolatrous ways. Only when he had a new generation, born in freedom, that didn't complain about the food, did he lead them to the Promised Land. For you liberals still reading, this is all extensively covered in a book known as the "Bible."
(Also this week, we celebrate a fast-track to freedom that doesn't require 40 years in the desert, but as I recall, the suggestion that we convert Muslims to Christianity was shot down early on in this war.)
If you want a shorter rebuilding process, then we're going to have to wage less humane wars. The enemy as well as innocent civilians must be bombed into quivering terror. Otherwise, we displace aggression but don't destroy it.
Americans are weaker for having seen that kind of carnage in World War II. Recall that the Worst Generation was raised by the Greatest Generation. That tells you how awful war is. The Greatest Generation was so exhausted by the war, it didn't have the spine to stand up to pot-smoking, draft-dodging hippies occupying administration buildings. But enough about Bill Clinton. If we're going to have humane wars, they are going to take a little bit longer.
That wouldn't be so bad, except that it gives fifth columnists more time to demoralize Americans and convince them that we are losing a war in the paramount struggle of our time.
[Edited by Maxlugar]
Why Ann is on TV more often boggles my mind. Meanwhile "DC Cab" star Bill Maher has his own show. |
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
Starbuck wrote:
a few remarks:
seriously...you don't really believe this, now, do you? riffy? seriously? i don't really believe that you believe that. do you believe that? no. riffy? riffy, that quote right there makes cheney, rummy and wolfowitz look like placard carrying tree hugging liberals.
by that logic, all of the world's billion plus muslims should die because 19 men took out 3 thousand of our citizens.
Oh Bucky why do you exaggerate what I said? I never once suggested that all Muslims should be put to the sword! I merely said that we must attack them with the ferocity that they attack the rest of the world! When an ideology has so corrupted a people that they would use their own children as suicide/homicide bombers then any talk of negotiating with them is naive in the extreme!
We did not have to kill every German in order to win the European theater in WWII. However, we did get downright nasty with them at Dresden. That was a very deliberate attack in response to Germany's bombing of London and as a "message sender" to the entire German population. It made the point very clear. "If you continue to defy the will of the world then you will pay a heavy price,and we can, and will, attack you wherever we choose to."
We also did not have to kill every Japanese citizen to make them yield to the will of the world. Two well placed bombs killed tens of thousands of their citizens but in the end those bombs save millions of others who otherwise would surly have perished in a ground assault on Japan's mainland. The point was driven home with extreme violence in response to Japan's use of extreme violence.
Today's liberal limpwristers are content to try the slow bleed and appeasement method which has never once worked in the entire history of mankind when dealing with a radical fundamentalist tyrannical power. Hence you Bucky and your party are indeed the Neville Chamberlains of the 21 century. War is god damned ugly! Nobody in their right mind would ever want it, but in order to win war and to stop outright it we must be willing to use all the military power at our disposal to make war so intolerable that the enemy lays down their arms and their violent ideology.
Please try and imagine Peolsi,Reid,Durbin,Lehey,or any of "today's" Democrats ever agreeing to bomb Dresden,Hiroshima,and Nagasaki?! They would scream bloody murder and then try to impeach the sitting president. All the while undermining every policy he put forth. You know damned good and well that's true. We have become a country of appeasers because of the politically correct mindset that liberals have instilled in too many Americans. If we are too chickenshit to do what is necessary to win a war these days then we will deserve whatever befalls us. I'd advise you take a long hard look at what radical Islam is transforming Europe (and even London) into before you blindly go about preaching liberal platitudes of peace.
Wake up and smell the jihad Buckster! They don't want peace! They want quite the opposite in fact. Time to take them at their word and make them rethink that policy. "Chatting" with them is only going to embolden them.
Riffy |
|
|
| Wikipedia Boy |
quote:
The Pretentious Poet wrote:
Wikipedia boy, wikipedia boy,
You bring the board so much joy.
You know your niche, your place, your station,
You bring the board its information.
You're bright and chipper, not a drag,
Despite the fact you look like a fag.
WOW! Thanks for the big welcome!
Now let's all learn about Poets!
Come on and click here with me! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poet |
|
|
| monkey_man |
quote:
Riffhard wrote:
I merely said that we must attack them with the ferocity that they attack the rest of the world!
Riffy
Riffy do you think that our military has been holding back in Iraq and Afganistan? |
|
|
| Starbuck |
riffy!
this is such a distorted view of the situation. from my perspective, let me explain why.
first, we are not in the middle of a world war here. as an amateur war historian and someone who knows more than just a bit about WWII, it drives me nuts when people make comparisons between the islamofucks and the nazis. the germans overran a continent with their convential army and made inroads into a few other continents before they ended up collapsing in flames after six years of war. this is not to say the doings of islamic extremists are ok, but if you add up all of the people that have died needlessly as a result of islamic extremism it would probably equal the same amount of dead in one day at auschwitz when it was at its peak of productivity in the late fall of '43 or spring of '44. ablsolutely no comparison.
war is in its essence inherently uncivilized. however, the men making the decisions on how to fight the war - the politicians and generals away from the front - need to be responsible enought that they bring an element of civilization to the decision making process. this was not done at dresden and nagasaki. in a war which was by far the must just war in history to fight, it is ironic that two of the most brutal, barbaric and needless actions were carried out by the allies. dresden was completely unnecessary, as the war was all but lost for the germans at that time, and the city was nothing more than a hospital town. the generals that came up with that plan should have been imprisoned. likewise, it was obvious that the only reason truman dropped bomb #2 was to scare the piss out of the soviets. no value whatsoever, as the japs were about to surrender anyway. result? over 200 K useless deaths at a point in the war when it was already won. and don't try to tell me i'm some limpwristed liberal because i believe this - hiroshima was completely necessary and saved perhaps the same number of american lives that it took japanese lives.
part deux of this little monlogue is this: you can't defeat ideas with military hardware, and it is beyond me why the right in this country thinks you can. why do you think that if we drop a bomb on iran, the rest of the islamic world will realize how powerful we are and just acquiesce to our will? this has never happened in the history of humankind and it never will. you will undoubtedly bring up WWII again and say we beat the nazis, etc etc. however, our enemies in this conflict are not the same as that world war. the germans wore uniforms and had an official known command structure, there were front lines, etc etc. this war is completely different. don't you realize that the more people that die, the more we fuck around with their internal affairs, the stronger they become? they will never all of a sudden wake up and realize that the US is stronger and lay down their guns and live together in peace and harmony. it ain't going to happen.
lastly, i must say that i am not impressed with the leadership of the democratic party. the only worthwhile leader in the whole lot of us since the loss of wellstone (wonderful human being!) is obama. pelosi and reid are galvanizing the right against the left, especially by the trip to syria etc. she isn't a diplomat and shouldn't go galavanting off trying to become one. i do see her point, though: the war needs a new direction badly. it was poorly concieved and terribly planned from the get go. however, i'm not sure this is the way to handle it. |
|
|
| Maxlugar |
[quote]Starbuck wrote:
riffy!
first, we are not in the middle of a world war here. as an amateur war historian and someone who knows more than just a bit about WWII, it drives me nuts when people make comparisons between the islamofucks and the nazis. the germans overran a continent with their convential army and made inroads into a few other continents before they ended up collapsing in flames after six years of war. this is not to say the doings of islamic extremists are ok, but if you add up all of the people that have died needlessly as a result of islamic extremism it would probably equal the same amount of dead in one day at auschwitz when it was at its peak of productivity in the late fall of '43 or spring of '44. ablsolutely no comparison.
The Germans never flew commercial airliners into civilian office buildings. Look, if you can't see that these people are just as big a threat to us, than we can debate this no more. When they get a nuke they will try to use it. If they get five of them and take out NY, Washington, LA, Chicago and Houston we are in deep deep doo doo. They have promised to destroy us. They don't wear uniforms and have loads of money. And they are GLOBAL. It's an asymmetrical world war.
part deux of this little monlogue is this: you can't defeat ideas with military hardware, and it is beyond me why the right in this country thinks you can. why do you think that if we drop a bomb on iran, the rest of the islamic world will realize how powerful we are and just acquiesce to our will?
That's what we are doing! We are fighting with our main idea. Democracy. It's the long range solution. Without the west supporting dictators throughout the mideast and with elected governments answerable to these people, the west can not be blamed anymore. Iraq can become the model for this. That's why terrorists are making so much trouble there. They do not want it to work. Desperately. Just like the dems.
[Edited by Maxlugar] |
|
|
| glencar |
Excellent post! There aren't exact parallels since the world has changed over the past 70 years & not just due to "global warming"! Loose nukes are out there & these people don't need or even want to conduct a conventional army. They've done better w/o one. |
|
|
| monkey_man |
quote:
Riffhard wrote:
Who the fuck died and made Stretch Pelosi Secretary of State?! The gall of this bitch to go to Syria of all places during a global war on terror. This just further illustrates the the very real fact that her type lives in a 9/10/01 mindset. There is no war on terror! Bush just made that up! If only Democrats were in power they could negotiate with these radical Islamists perhaps Mohammad and Co.would give up strapping bombs to their sons and daughters and beheading people at will. That sounds reasonable! I'm sure that they disavow their violent 1,000 year history if only Cankles Clinton and Stretch Pelosi could "have a chat" with them! Fucking ignorant naive fools! All of them have a Nevile Chamberlain complex!
Riffy
Someone should have sent your diatribe to Rep Pitts before he went!
Pitts in Syria before Pelosi
But countys U.S. rep. draws less criticism
By Dave Pidgeon, Staff
Intelligencer Journal
Published: Apr 03, 2007 1:43 AM EST
LANCASTER COUNTY, Pa. - While U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's upcoming visit to Syria has caused the White House to bristle, a little-publicized rendezvous took place Sunday between Syria's president and Lancaster County's congressman.
And though Bush administration officials have been criticizing Pelosi, it's not clear what role the White House and the U.S. Department of State played when U.S. Rep. Joe Pitts and two other Republican congressmen met with Syrian President Bashar Assad.
Pitts is a Chester County Republican who represents Lancaster County.
Gabe Neville, Pitts' chief of staff, said Monday the conference between Assad and the three Republicans was intended to be "low profile."
"It was done in cooperation with the administration," he said.
However, White House spokesman Alex Conant said Monday the Bush administration as a blanket policy "discourages all of (Congress') visits" to Syria, a country believed by the White House to sponsor terrorism.
The House Speaker's office criticized the Bush administration for focusing their criticisms until Monday on Pelosi, the top House Democrat, for leading a congressional delegation to meet with Assad later this week.
"There's a Republican trip going before her, and no one is criticizing that," Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill said. "So clearly the White House's motives here are in question."
Details about Pitts' trip to Syria, including when the White House learned of it and whether and how the Department of State was involved, were not available from Neville, who said, "I'll let (Pitts) answer that when he gets back."
Neville also declined to divulge Pitts' return date, citing security concerns.
The Republicans' conference with Assad was first reported by The Associated Press in a story about Pelosi. Pitts' office made no public announcements preceding the Damascus visit.
The Bush administration has accused Syria of supporting terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah in their efforts against Israel, meddling in the affairs of nearby Lebanon and allowing foreign fighters to cross the Iraqi border to engage U.S. forces.
Administration critics from both political parties and the recent bipartisan Iraq Study Group have recommended open talks with Syria to resolve these issues.
Pelosi, in published reports, characterized her planned meeting with Assad as a "fact finding" mission through which her delegation can "hopefully build the confidence" between the United States and Syria.
Pelosi is leading a seven-member congressional delegation that includes six Democrats and one Republican through the Middle East with planned visits to Israel and Lebanon, as well as Syria.
Sunday, White House counselor Dan Bartlett said on CBS' "Face the Nation" that "most Americans would not think that the leader of the Democratic Party should be meeting with the heads of a state sponsor of terror."
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino, who last week called Pelosi's planned meeting with Assad a "bad idea," told White House reporters Monday she did not talk about the trio of Republicans in Syria because she was asked specifically about Pelosi.
Visits by high-profile American officials, like one conducted years ago by then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, do not deter Syria, Perino said.
"Syria uses these opportunities to flaunt photo opportunities around its country and around the region and around the world to say that they aren't isolated, that they don't need to change their behavior," she told reporters. "And it alleviates the pressure that we are trying to put on them to change their behavior."
E-mail: dpidgeon@lnpnews
|
|
|
| pdog |
quote:
glencar wrote:
Excellent post! There aren't exact parallels since the world has changed over the past 70 years & not just due to "global warming"! Loose nukes are out there & these people don't need or even want to conduct a conventional army. They've done better w/o one.
Loose nukes... That's what Valeie Plame worked on in The CIA... Ironic she was outed by people in the administration, who know this is one of the biggest threats in the world, and more ironic it was to get at her husband who was disputing claims that Iraq had a deal with Niger to get yellow cake...
This for me is the one thing, the single most unpatriotic event since we were attacked on Sept. 11th... Even Rosie's idiotic rants, or Hollyweird consiracy freakjobs pale in comparison, b/c this was treason at the highest levels...
If we take nuclear proliferation and the agents who work in the field serious, want to look for heroes in the war on terror, then we need to also realize, one of them was wronged, big time! |
|
|
| Starbuck |
what we need in this country is multiple parties. not just two. and we need to be less sophisticated in our politicking, just like the brits. i love watching the house of commons in action - you feel like they're going to start pelting blair with rotten tomatoes. and, we need to stop clapping so much during the state of the union addresses! |
|
|
| monkey_man |
quote:
Starbuck wrote:
what we need in this country is multiple parties. not just two. and we need to be less sophisticated in our politicking, just like the brits. i love watching the house of commons in action - you feel like they're going to start pelting blair with rotten tomatoes. and, we need to stop clapping so much during the state of the union addresses!
AMEN! |
|
|
| pdog |
quote:
Starbuck wrote:
what we need in this country is multiple parties. not just two. and we need to be less sophisticated in our politicking, just like the brits. i love watching the house of commons in action - you feel like they're going to start pelting blair with rotten tomatoes. and, we need to stop clapping so much during the state of the union addresses!
Never going to happen... Just like Obama will never be president b/c he's black. |
|
|
| glencar |
After his amazing fundraising quarter, I think he's a better bet to be Prez than that harridan y'all are pushin'. |
|
|
| Maxlugar |
quote:
pdog wrote:
Loose nukes... That's what Valeie Plame worked on in The CIA... Ironic she was outed by people in the administration, who know this is one of the biggest threats in the world, and more ironic it was to get at her husband who was disputing claims that Iraq had a deal with Niger to get yellow cake...
This for me is the one thing, the single most unpatriotic event since we were attacked on Sept. 11th... Even Rosie's idiotic rants, or Hollyweird consiracy freakjobs pale in comparison, b/c this was treason at the highest levels...
If we take nuclear proliferation and the agents who work in the field serious, want to look for heroes in the war on terror, then we need to also realize, one of them was wronged, big time!
Richard Armitage, an anti-Iraq war figure and frequent administration critic, "outed" Valerie Plame.
Enough already.
|
|
|
| glencar |
If she hadn't plastered her mug (albeit a nice mug!) on the VF cover, I'd have less trouble believing she was "outed." Armitage's actions have funded her for the rest of her life. |
|
|
| Starbuck |
quote:
Never going to happen... Just like Obama will never be president b/c he's black.
i disagree. the dude is bright, charismatic and has a great future. america doesn't know him well enough, however...he may run in 2016. that's his year - i feel it in my bones!
|
|
|
| Rodney_King |
quote:
Never going to happen... Just like Obama will never be president b/c he's black.
what...you got something against the negro?
|
|
|
| Maxlugar |
quote:
Starbuck wrote:
i disagree. the dude is bright, charismatic and has a great future. america doesn't know him well enough, however...he may run in 2016. that's his year - i feel it in my bones!
I still do not have much sense of what he believes in or wants to do with the country if president.
Shouldn't we know by now? |
|
|
| VoodooChileInWOnderl |
Riffhard is by far in my top list! and it was not just because he mentioned "ROCKS OFF" in the press conference (listened by millions) but 'cause the fact that he's as cool as the definition of cool is! |
|
|
| VoodooChileInWOnderl |
I met him in NYC under heavy and serious altered states and I hate the fact that there ain't no pictures or films or even movies about that historic event LOL |
|
|
| SweetVirginia |
|
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
monkey_man wrote:
Someone should have sent your diatribe to Rep Pitts before he went!
LOL! Oh come on monkey_man! You know good and well that there is a huge difference between a backbencher from Lancaster,Pa and the Speaker of the US House of Representatives! Lancaster is Amish country for god's sake! Make no mistake he was wrong to go as well,but to try and compare his little low key trip to the complete cluster fuck of a trip that Pelosi has undertaken is more than a little disingenuous. Please be a little intellectually honest about this thing monkey_man. The only reason that we even know about this Pitts moron is because Pelosi's camp is doing their level best to deflect the enormous amount of criticism that she's rightfully taking on. Even the very liberal Washington Post is slamming her for this purely political stunt. She said,with this trip,"The Democrat Party does not support our Commander In Chief in the war on terror." Hell, if that weren't bad enough the House then voted to strip the use of the term Global War on Terror from official texts! Is it any wonder why Republicans claim that the Dems are weak on National Defense?! They are! Glaringly so! If actions do indeed speak louder than words then what do you think her actions are saying loud and clear to the radical Islamists that want us all dead? She may as well be speaking French!
Who the hell does she think she is speaking for the USA? She is using this stunt as just one more opportunity to undermine Bush's stated objectives. She then had the gall to speak for Israel as well!! Israel is even trying to reel her in! The lady has no shame.
Yet all the liberals at Daily Kos and DU are jerking themselves dry while screaming, "What about Pitts?!" It's laughable really.
Riffy |
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
VoodooChileInWOnderl wrote:
I met him in NYC under heavy and serious altered states and I hate the fact that there ain't no pictures or films or even movies about that historic event LOL
Thanks so much G! I too am devastated that there are no pictures of that notorious evening at YOTI. Alas, I showed up after the photos had been taken and once the drinking had begun in earnest!
Riffy |
|
|
| VoodooChileInWOnderl |
Buddy... we have plenty of time to meet again and if possible take some pix or video of the event... are you going to Barcelona? Now they are not going to cancel and let me tell ya, this is a place to party high |
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
SweetVirginia wrote:
God bless ya SV! One day baby we got to meet! I'm thinking {{{{{SOR}}}}}!!!
Riffy |
|
|
| monkey_man |
quote:
Riffhard wrote:
LOL! Oh come on monkey_man! You know good and well that there is a huge difference between a backbencher from Lancaster,Pa and the Speaker of the US House of Representatives! Lancaster is Amish country for god's sake!
Riffy
And Darrell Issa's visit with Assad today? He doesn't count because because he's from the backwater city of San Diego???
Bless you Riffy! |
|
