Jump to content

Five years on you still look the same


Recommended Posts

Translation: Hi! I don't understand the issue, nor the resolution so I'm gonna give credit to my ideal!

 

Welcome to why you're a hypocrite.

I understand enough. Big government is saving the sacred private sector from itself. I'm just wondering if you are against that? I remember you were complaining how the government was taking too much of your earnings on investments from taxes, yet here they are saving your investments. Funny how that works, eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Way back when, Bush said it would cost about 50-60 billion to remove Saddam and install a Democratic government.

It's like Pep Boys. They always get you on the installation charges. Not to mention they always seem to find different stuff that is broken once they get in the hood. Or charge you for stuff that didn't need fixing. This whole war is really like having car trouble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's like Pep Boys. They always get you on the installation charges. Not to mention they always seem to find different stuff that is broken once they get in the hood. Or charge you for stuff that didn't need fixing. This whole war is really like having car trouble.

Too bad we don't have a Lemon law for war

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, you mean big government liberal programs don't worK?

 

 

I've heard non-sequitars on several occasions from you but you just topped yourself with that one.

 

 

I guess the "Surge" (sounds like a lame energy drink from the coca cola company don't it) is just working out dandy too.

The conservatives are really putting all their marbles on that one even though it shows absolutely no sign of fostering any political discourse in that country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard non-sequitars on several occasions from you but you just topped yourself with that one.

I guess the "Surge" (sounds like a lame energy drink from the coca cola company don't it) is just working out dandy too.

The conservatives are really putting all their marbles on that one even though it shows absolutely no sign of fostering any political discourse in that country.

I went down the river with him on this one once. In his opinion Iraq is a big government program like the war on poverty or something. I don't know who we bombed during the war on poverty, but you get the picture. I suppose he has a point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If only W were more like his father vis a vis Iraq.

 

GHWB and his administration responded to an actual invasion, built a real coalition, and worked it so that we were only responsible for 10% of the cost. Moreover, GHWB and Brent Scowcroft knew when to get the hell out and not get involved with the chaos that we have seen here.

 

By contrast, W has shown that he is no GHWB.

 

W has been an unmitigated disaster. Even one of the few good things he has done (lowering taxes) will probably be reversed as a result of the consequences of his other policies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand enough. Big government is saving the sacred private sector from itself.

Really? What are the long term ramifications of the decision? What were the symptoms that led up to the bailout?

I'm just wondering if you are against that? I remember you were complaining how the government was taking too much of your earnings on investments from taxes, yet here they are saving your investments. Funny how that works, eh?

Further proof that you have almost no clue what you're talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard non-sequitars on several occasions from you but you just topped yourself with that one.

Really? Why don't you explain exactly what you mean.

I guess the "Surge" (sounds like a lame energy drink from the coca cola company don't it) is just working out dandy too.

Do you have a point? Or just regurgitating something in an attempt to deflect from the issue at hand? I'm gonna guess "B".

The conservatives are really putting all their marbles on that one even though it shows absolutely no sign of fostering any political discourse in that country.

Why should it be any different over there than it is over here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went down the river with him on this one once. In his opinion Iraq is a big government program like the war on poverty or something. I don't know who we bombed during the war on poverty, but you get the picture. I suppose he has a point.

 

But for some reason, even though the war on poverty was lost a long time ago, you continue to support 'surge' after 'surge' of wasted efforts rather than admitting it was a mistake and you've been defeated.

 

Interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But for some reason, even though the war on poverty was lost a long time ago, you continue to support 'surge' after 'surge' of wasted efforts rather than admitting it was a mistake and you've been defeated.

 

Interesting.

 

But don't you understand? Sunburn missiles are fast...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went down the river with him on this one once. In his opinion Iraq is a big government program like the war on poverty or something. I don't know who we bombed during the war on poverty, but you get the picture. I suppose he has a point.

 

 

Really? Ha ha!

 

 

Yeah I guess an inane plan that sprang forth from the bowels of Billy Kristol's nutty Orwellian named Project for the New American Century group and the U of Chicago's neoconservative clan could be labeled as "big government".

 

 

...but "liberal"? Yeah I guess that's why noted "libs" like Wellstone, Feingold, Kennedy all voted against it while DLC conservative hacks like Clinton, Lieberman and Feinstein voted for it.

 

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll...&vote=00237

 

 

Did you see Bush's ridiculous unpaid infomercial this morning? Once again doing the "fight em there so we don't fight em here" routine.

 

What a looser! :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? Ha ha!

Yeah I guess an inane plan that sprang forth from the bowels of Billy Kristol's nutty Orwellian named Project for the New American Century group and the U of Chicago's neoconservative clan could be labeled as "big government".

...but "liberal"? Yeah I guess that's why noted "libs" like Wellstone, Feingold, Kennedy all voted against it while DLC conservative hacks like Clinton, Lieberman and Feinstein voted for it.

It has nothing to do with who started it or why, Sparky. Try looking at the world through something other than your "liberal love" glasses. It's still just another "program" that you end up with when you so readily cede power to a faceless bureaucracy. One of the byproducts, if you will. I don't expect you to get it because liberals just don't understand the term "consequences". Only idealism.

What a looser! :thumbsup:

Loser.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...