quote:

---

rasputin56 wrote:


Yes, of course it didn't. "Analysis". Praytell, what was he (being KittyKiller, M.D. a/k/a SurrenderMonkee) referring to?

---

quote:

---

sirmoonie wrote:
"Approaching counterinsurgency by winning hearts and minds will ultimately be the answer. Military versus insurgency one-to-one doesn't sound like it can be won. It sounds to me ... that the Taliban is everywhere." Bill Frist


Who the hell goes into a war zone and announces to the troops that it doesn't sound like they can win? Couldn't he at least wait until he got back here and said it privately to whoever needed to know?

---

quote:

---

Brainbell Jangler wrote:
Excuse me for asking, but weren't these the guys with the ACTUAL link to Al Qaeda?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061003/ap_on_el_ge/afghanistan_frist_4
Frist-Omar in 2008!

---

quote:

---

telecaster wrote:


How would we know since the reporter neglected to use his quotes?

And this from someone who was going to put exact quotes from 40 different libs saying Saddam had and would use WMD into context! LOL! Funny shit

I know, I know, you could do it but you won't

---

quote:

---

rasputin56 wrote:


You've NEVER answered a question and merely deflect. Lamely,I might add, but deflect nevertheless nor provide anything to back up your blogfed assertions. I give you some credit for being one of the last of the lemmings who hasn't jumped ship and started stabbing your own in the back.

Now, feel free to run a search in snopes for wmd. At least you will find the context for your not so clever, widely spread cut and paste job. Now, go back to defending SurrenderMonkee and the other star of the Republican morality police.

---

quote:

---

Ten Thousand Motels wrote:
JUST PASS THE GAVEL.....THANKS FOLEY.

---

quote:

---

telecaster wrote:


Please. I answer every question every time and back up my statements 100% of the time

---

quote:

---

Ten Thousand Motels wrote:
Besides she's prettier than Hastert.

---

quote:

---

rasputin56 wrote:


Nice try. Just because you say it over and over again doesn't make it true. But please go and deflect. Thanks for playing. I better stop before you get hyper-emotional again and bring poor, defenseless livestock into your screed.
[Edited by rasputin56]

---

quote:

---

telecaster wrote:


Sure

Get back to us when you can tell us

1. The Dem plan
2. How you are more endangered
3. How we were lied into war
4. When you find the quotes from Frist
5. When you explain how we have "record" debt
6. Tell us how the Constitution is being trampled on
7. Provide evidence that Hastert knew about the sex emails 5yrs ago

Start there with these claims of yours that you have never attempted to back up

Bring it on

---

quote:

---

telecaster wrote:


Sure

Get back to us when you can tell us

1. The Dem plan
2. How you are more endangered
3. How we were lied into war
4. When you find the quotes from Frist
5. When you explain how we have "record" debt
6. Tell us how the Constitution is being trampled on
7. Provide evidence that Hastert knew about the sex emails 5yrs ago

Start there with these claims of yours that you have never attempted to back up

Bring it on

---

quote:

---

pdog wrote:


If you wanted to know, you could look at every candidates plans, believe it or not, everyone running for an office has to at least make pretend that have a platform... I know you won't, you'll demand it from us here.
Seriously Tele, do you really think, I'm an idiot? The political talking points you bring up, are coincidentaly the talking points Rush Limbaugh is spewing today and most days, along with other right wing pundits.
So Rush said The Dems have no plan, you agree and demand we tell you it?
I've asked you details on the war in Iraq, I still haven't gotten them... I don't expect you to, b/c I don't expect an answer to a rhetorical question. You're actually demanding one...
Defending the Republicans like Frist or Hastert is a lost cause...
Oops, I forgot, this is all a Democratic conspiracy! ABC is behind it... You sound like The Democrats did when The Republicans went after Clinton. Which at least for me, proves my position all along, both parties suck!
The only thing worse the The (R) & (D)'s is the fuckhead media who do their PR work for them. The people eating up the spillage are fucking sheep, who IMO, looking at who we elect, and our pop culture, deserve what we get....
May I quote George Bush?
"It's your money, you paid for it"
Pro-fucking-found!

---

quote:

---

rasputin56 wrote:


1. DNC.Gov or whatever the hell it is

Went there. www.dnc.org. No plans for Iraq and no plans for Iran. None
More tax increases however.

2. http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F40716F635550C778EDDA00894DE404482

"We assess that the global jihadist movement is decentralized, lacks a coherent global
strategy, and is becoming more diffuse."

Thanks for posting the link. That makes you more "endangered?"
Is this the same intel agencies that said Iraq had WMD that you are so upset about?


3. http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2005/06/19/newly_leaked_memos_add_to_debate_on_war_motives/

Not one line in that piece remotely mentioned we were "lied into war" as you claim. The only thing that comes close is some of the intel was "thin"
Come on, you can do better

4. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061002/ap_on_re_as/afghanistan_frist
Same quotes we have been arguing over for 24hrs. The AP reporters analysis

5. 1. 2004 (George W. Bush) $413 billion
2. 2003 (George W. Bush) $378 billion
3. 2005 (George W. Bush) $318 billion
4. 2006 (George W. Bush) $296 billion (projected)
5. 1992 (George H. W. Bush) $290 billion

Are you dyslexic? Can't you put things in order?
So if 2005 is less than 2004 that isn't a record debt, is it? Nice try.
Did you also see the 2005 debt is being reduced by 22% due to exploding revenues? Speaking of revenues I noticed you didn't mention them.
They are way up, 40% up over Clinton. And as a percent of GDP which is how you measure debt, Bush's 2.4% for 2005 is BELOW the average since WWII
But yet you are hysterical because it is a record! So are revenues.



6. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5260892.stm

Oh man. Bad day to be you. Didn't you hear the news today? The US appeals court issued a stay on this today. The program continues!

See also Military Commissions Act of 2006.
7. http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/04/foley.ap/index.html
My bad...3 yeaRS.

Yes. Everyone agress Hastert knew about the inappropriate emails 3 yrs ago.
Since there was no illegal activity and since Hastert had no obligation to notify anyone he handled it. No issue here.
BTW where is your evidence the Republicans "buried" this issue?

See you did it! You attempted to back up your statements.

Was that so hard??

---

quote:

---

rasputin56 wrote:


You're right. Both parties do suck. Unfortunately, we are stuck with them for the foreseable future. As long as money rules the game, both parties will be beholden to it rather than the American people and the country. It is now try to vote for the lesser of the two evils. But enough of your bitching, where the fuck is your plan to abolish the two party system? You must have a plan, right? Plan? Plan?

I thought so. Nothing. Another whiner with nothing to offer.

TIA

Stay The Course.™

---

quote:

---

telecaster wrote:
If you repeat something 1000 times it doesn't make it accurate or correct

---

quote:

---

Brainbell Jangler wrote:

---