PDA

View Full Version : Obama = change



Bobbyrx
07-07-2008, 09:51 AM
I think I'm finally starting to see this "change" thing with Obama. Since he won the nomination and is no longer running against Hillary, he now is embracing the faith based initiative and proposing a second economic stimulus check. He also is not necessarily now going to pull our troops out the moment he is sworn in. Amazing. He's slowly morphing into.....you know who /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Deeman3
07-07-2008, 12:19 PM
The really wonderful thing is he is going to Nuke Pakistan. What more could you ask from a liberal?

mike60
07-07-2008, 12:34 PM
Thats really funny.


mike60

Gayle in MD
07-14-2008, 10:38 AM
He never said he was going to pull the troops out the moment he was sworn in. He said his goal was to get out as carefully as we got in recklessly, or words to that effect.

McCain, OTOH, has changed his position on torture, on global warming, on Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy, on abortion, on the evangelical movement, particular religious leaders, on a whole range of issues. No comment on that?

Gayle in Md.

sack316
07-14-2008, 11:32 AM
Well actually Obama campaigned on "16 months after taking office". Which, I still don't think could be a bad thing, had he not been so definite on that particular timetable. Maybe he shoulda said "I'd ideally like to get out within a reasonable time span such as 16 months, depending on the information I get from the ground". Which seems to be more closer to what he is getting at now... and I do respect that idea much more than just spewing words and false guarantees for political gain. But the problem with Obama, and his slight changes in his words from speech to speech, is that he simply comes off as saying whatever he thinks is best to say at the time for his campaign. When it seems people question the new statement, he quickly backtracks and thinks his newer words can just be undone because he says "well that's not exactly what I meant... I still stand by what I said a few months ago" or something to that effect.

I'm not big on either candidate... and given the state of things I'd even be willing to support someone from any party that I think would do well for our country. Unfortunately Obama has said and done nothing that makes me feel that way about him.

Sack

Gayle in MD
07-14-2008, 11:45 AM
Atleast he's not a 71 year old nut case, that will give us nothing but more blustering wrong headed foreign policy, tax breaks for the rich, and corporate welfare for the corporations that are robbing the rest of the country blind.

After watching what has happened to this country compliments of Republican policies, it is long past time for a change in the White House. This economy is a direct result of Republican policies, not only the mortgage mess, but all the debt, and loss of foreign respect, along with the loss of accountability from contractors, the wholesale theft we're dealing with in the global market, which allows China to rip us off daily, outsourcing of jobs, illegal immigrants to provide cheap labor, no protections for American workers, Gas through the roof, prescriptions through the roof, all of this is impacted by a Rwepublican Administration that only represents the rich corporate fascists in this country, who hide their money in the Carribbean, and fail miserably to represent the American workers in this country.

The Federal Government is completely dysfunctional under the Bush Administration, and he has grown it beyond all proportion, and used it as a political tool. McCain has the mentality of a dictator, and if he gets in there we're sunk for good.

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in Md.

sack316
07-14-2008, 12:23 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

After watching what has happened to this country compliments of Republican policies, it is long past time for a change in the White House. ..

Gayle in Md. </div></div>

Indeed Gayle. I recall as a kid, blowing bubbles. It was fun to do! And sometimes, in trying to blow a bigger bubble it would get huge! And it was so exciting and beautiful to see! But sometimes, I'd try to make it too big, and it would pop. Or the big one would manage to begin to fly, but would eventually collapse under it's own mass.

I know, I know, it's all Bush's and this admins fault. And before that, it was Bush Sr. And before that we'll put it on Ronnie. And things were so beautiful under the Clinton admin. But what so many people fail to see is, that just because the bubble didn't burst while Clinton was in ofice, doesn't mean that he didn't help blow it at all.

Sack (just realized he made a point about Clinton, using blowing something as a metaphor... and it wasn't intentional! ha!)

Deeman3
07-14-2008, 12:25 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Atleast he's not a 71 year old nut case, that will give us nothing but more blustering wrong headed foreign policy, tax breaks for the rich, and corporate welfare for the corporations that are robbing the rest of the country blind.

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Yes, once someone is over about 60, you certainly can't trust them.</span>

The Federal Government is completely dysfunctional under the Bush Administration, and he has grown it beyond all proportion, and used it as a political tool. McCain has the mentality of a dictator, and if he gets in there we're sunk for good.

Gayle in Md.

<span style="color: #FF0000">So, Gayle, how much do you thinnk Obama will shrink the size of government? Just wondering. </span> </div></div>

Gayle in MD
07-14-2008, 12:43 PM
Deeman,
I think a man who is running for the presidency ought to know that the Soviet Union isn't around anymore.

I think he ought not be at the very bottom of his class at Annapolis.

I think he ought to know which country is Sunni, and which is Shiia, and who the hell we're fighting against.

I think voting for insurance companies to provide coverage for men to have Viagra, and against them providing women with birth control, is definitely chauvanistic enough, but not being able to recall which side of the issue you voted for, is pretty bad, on such a basic issue.

I also don't think that those who supported Republicans these last thirty years ought to bring up the subject of shrinking government, reducing the national debt, or avoiding nation building.
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

sack316
07-14-2008, 12:45 PM
Who's need birth control if people couldn't afford viagra? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif It would be madness I say! Madness!

Sack

Deeman3
07-14-2008, 01:04 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I also don't think that those who supported Republicans these last thirty years ought to bring up the subject of shrinking government, reducing the national debt, or avoiding nation building.
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000">No, Gayle. I did bring up the size of government despite the fact that Bush has enlarged it beyond good conscience. I was not trying to say otherwise. I was really interested if you think Obama will shrink it or make it much bigger. The question is real because with a left congress and senate, the very real possibility of a vastly larger government may be in the offing.

Just because you come in behind a drunken sailor does not mean you have to do more of the same despite the recent tendencies of both sides of the political coin. Will Obama, on your opinion, offset his planned massive spending increases with equal reductions beyond the redistribution of the wealth of from the rich to the poor? This was a real question. </span>

Gayle in MD
07-14-2008, 01:09 PM
You can make fun all you wish, friend. Clinton balanced the budget, and left the country with a budget surplus, removed more people off the welfare rolls and into jobs, than any recent president. Kept us out of militarily unwinnable wars, is loved all over the world, and surely has a much higher rating than Bush.

Reagan sold arms to the contras, and lied about it. Reversed what should have been an on-going thrust for energy dependence waged originally by Carter, Gave amnesty to every illegal immigrant in this country, and left the country facing a recession so bad that Bush One had to go back on his "No new taxes" promises.

Bush Sr. encouraged an uprising in Iraq, and then left the people to die. Both Bush Sr. and REagan propped up despots in Iraq, and Iran.

Reagan destroyed everything that Carter tried to achieve in removing our foreign energy dependence, and sucked up to special interests. He was senile by the time we got rid of him, and even doctors admit that he was already in the throes of Alzheimers.

The Republicans always represent the wealthiest among us, and the corporate fascists, and the government charts prove that the country's wealth moves upward, and the middle class loses ground every time Republicans get control.

Just let a Republican get in there, and the country ends up in a recession, oil goes through the roof, weapons get spread all over the Middle East, dictators get propped up, the Military Industrial Complex starts wasting our tax dollars, the country slides into recession, and we lose ground on dealing with our energy issues, and domestic needs.

Now if you are interested in bubbles, take a look at what happened in Real Estate, and check out our problems in banking, pharmaceuticals, energy prices, foreign affairs, illegals, corruption, and jobs.

Republicans are bad for the country, period. Nixon, Reagan, both Bushes, all crooks, all liars, all tied to special interests that bilk the American tax payer.

What you guys got in lower taxes, you've payed for a thousand times over through Republican corruption.

Clinton, was a womanizer, and was far more intelligent than all four of them put together. I never gave a damn about what he did with his dick! I'd much rather we were dealing with an illicit W. blowjob, than 54 trillion dollars of debt, and five dollars a gallon for gasoline, hundreds of thousand in a mortgage mess, our tunnels and levies and bridges collapsing from neglect, China and Mexico poisoning us unchecked, and over four thousand dead Americans, over thrity thousand seriously injured young troops, and a quagmire in Iraq, with an uprising in Afghanistan.


READ MY LIPS!
Anyone who would vote for a hot headed, angry, punk Republican this time isn't playing with a full deck, bubbles or no bubbles. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif We're still dealing with a Republican punk that should never have been in the White House in the first place, and can't even speak the English language!

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
07-14-2008, 01:13 PM
Frankly, IMO, I think whatever he will do, it's too late.

04 was about the last chance we had to avoid what is now irreversible.

As for the government growing, I think the question is more like will the government collapse!

Gayle in Md.

LWW
07-14-2008, 01:29 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You can make fun all you wish, friend. Clinton balanced the budget, and left the country with a budget surplus

Gayle in Md. </div></div>
If this is true, then answer one simple question.

WHY did the national debt rise every single year of the Clinton administration?

LWW

sack316
07-14-2008, 01:41 PM
I wasn't saying Repubs haven't screwed a lot up. In fact you of all people know I've been on of the most willing from the right to admit this. And also my point was not to make fun of Bill's extra curricular activities (in fact I said it wasn't an intentional comparison... it just worked out that way--which I happened to find amusing lol!).

But what I don't like is the grandiose vision that the left has of Clinton without question, while at the same time putting ALL blame on any republican they see fit. Was Clinton a good president, yeah I think probably he was alright overall. But he wasn't perfect, he isn't good enough to be carved on a mountain or something... and he isn't this phenominal man that some try to make him out to be.

The left would have the picture painted as this in a nutshell: Carter... good. Then '81-'93, all bad. Then 8 years of awesomeness and utopian society. Then W.

OK, fine, see it how you want. But with the state of things that timeline just doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Of course a lot of blame can be laid on the doorsteps of republican leaders. But that doesn't mean all of it is... and it certainly doesn't mean the democratic leaders of the last 30 years have been perfect little angels fighting the good fight for the betterment of our country, only to be held down by those evil republicans.

My point is, it took a whole host of people to screw us up to the point we are at now. And it wasn't just the right that did it. And Bill, didn't make thinks all peachy and didn't not contribute to any of the problems.

Sack

Gayle in MD
07-14-2008, 01:56 PM
Sack,
You didn't offend me, friend.
Clinton was part of many solutions. Bush, has exacerbated every single one of our problems.

Does that make Clinton a saint? Hell no. All Presidents make mistakes. My point is that Republican policies, overall, are bad for America, period.

Also, both Republicans, and Democratics, have failed to bring our dependency on foreign fuels to the on-going national attention that should have dominated our policies over the last forty years, yes, but it WAS a democratic president, Jimmy Carter, who made the greatest effort to do so, and it was Republican foreign policies that have most disadvantaged America.

Reagan's amnesty policy for illegals, his dealings with corrupt dictators, secret dealings selling arms to despots, the worst of the worst, and his reversal of Carters energy policies, have led to a great deal of our most serious problems, today. Yet, he is glorified by the right like the best thing since Abraham!

Clinton was a good president, not a great president. We haven't had one of those since Kennedy, IMO.

Gayle in Md.

sack316
07-14-2008, 02:09 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sack,

Clinton was a good president, not a great president. We haven't had one of those since Kennedy, IMO.

Gayle in Md.

</div></div>

Now that, I think we agree on! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Sack

JWasson
07-16-2008, 09:42 AM
Ya'll, are scaring me with all that Liberal hogwash...
Reaganomics was so good that even the Clinton administration couldn't coumpletely destroy it.
They almost got the guns from the law abiding citizens though. Thank god we got a Republican in office to stop that crap. We can kiss them good bye the first time a liberal is back in office though expecially since the Democracks have control over congress.
I think Obama would sell us off (what Clinton didn't already sell off) to foreign interests in a heatbeat. I can't trust the man.

As far as this war goes, I've been over here in Iraq (that's where I'm at right at this moment) for three and a half years. I have been home only on short R&Rs twice a year for 10 days each. I spent 28 months living and working with the Iraqi people and I can tell you that what we are doing over here is working despite the lies and misinformation that the news media has been spreading to the people who are willing to listen to them.

We all have to vote our concience, but Obama scares the he11 out of me.

Deeman3
07-16-2008, 09:55 AM
Thank-you for your service.

Be careful, the left may hunt you down if you continue to spew the truth. But I bet they are not armed like you are! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Good Luck

Wally_in_Cincy
07-16-2008, 10:28 AM
JW,

Thank you for what you are doing. The majority of folks support you, despite the nut jobs you see on the tube.

LWW
07-16-2008, 11:36 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mike60</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thats really funny.


mike60 </div></div>
And true.

LWW

LWW
07-16-2008, 11:37 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sack,

Clinton was a good president, not a great president. We haven't had one of those since Kennedy, IMO.

Gayle in Md.

</div></div>

Now that, I think we agree on! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Sack </div></div>
What made Kennedy great?

LWW

sack316
07-16-2008, 12:34 PM
that I wasn't around then /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Sack

Deeman3
07-16-2008, 12:54 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=Gayle in MD]Sack,

</div></div>
What made Kennedy great?

LWW </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Good P.R., a great war record and plenty of women. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </span>

LWW
07-16-2008, 12:55 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=Gayle in MD]Sack,

</div></div>
What made Kennedy great?

LWW </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Good P.R., a great war record and plenty of women. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </span> </div></div>
I agree.

Let me rephrase the question ... what made him a great POTUS?

LWW

Wally_in_Cincy
07-16-2008, 03:19 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">


Let me rephrase the question ... what made him a great POTUS?

LWW </div></div>

He did cut taxes to stimulate the economy. I'm sure the lefties here are unaware of that or will deny it.

mike60
07-16-2008, 04:01 PM
Speaking of taxes:
On Aug. 10, 1993, President Clinton signed the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1993 into law. The act's purpose was to reduce by approximately $496 billion the federal deficit that would otherwise accumulate in fiscal years 1994 through 1998. In 1997, Clinton signed another tax act. The act, which cut taxes by $152 billion, included a cut in capital-gains tax for individuals, a $500 per child tax credit, and tax incentives for education.

mike60

Gayle in MD
07-16-2008, 05:31 PM
Not only that, but he had the good sense not to cut taxes, and wage a two wars at the same time!

Bush had made the biggest mess in history.

pooltchr
07-16-2008, 07:11 PM
The libs on here aren't interested in facts or the truth. Only in what the party tells them to think.

Thanks for your service. Watch your back, cover your buddies, and come home safe and proud of what you have accomplished!
Steve

mike60
07-16-2008, 07:36 PM
The rightwinger meme that only the right wing support the troops is nonsense. Cheerleading WAR, getting honest volunteer troops killed for the WAR PROFITEERS. Is very far from honorable. SO, stuff that rah-rah crap where the sun don't shine and bring the troops home to their families. That is supporting the troops. Idiotic leaders and brain dead
ditto twits make for idiotic policy.
I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU THINK, I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU POST IN PLACE OF LOGIC, I DON'T CARE IF YOU DITTOTWITS NEVER AGREE WITH ACTUAL FACTS.

I JUST DON'T CARE WHAT YOU DO, I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU WANT TO DO, AND IF ANYONE STEPS UP TO ME THEY NEED TO REMEMBER I DON'T CARE, BUT I WILL

SNAP YOU OFF AT THE SOCKS. This brought to you by Vets with PTSD. I've got an excuse, what's your damage?

mike60 peace loving and calm

pooltchr
07-17-2008, 04:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mike60</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> This brought to you by Vets with PTSD. I've got an excuse, what's your damage?

mike60 peace loving and calm
</div></div>

Actually, I went in with no problems, did 4 years, and came out without any emotional issues. What I did come out with is a huge respect for anyone who turns their life over to someone else in defense of our country. So I don't have any "damage" as a result of my service, so I don't really need an excuse.
Steve

Gayle in MD
07-17-2008, 05:31 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ya'll, are scaring me with all that Liberal hogwash...
Reaganomics was so good that even the Clinton administration couldn't coumpletely destroy it. <span style="color: #000066">Really? the government charts show quite clearly that the redistribution of wealth to the richest, left the poor and middle class in worse condition than when he took office, as always happens when Republican presidents take over. In fact, Bush One had to raise taxes to deal with the recession that Reagan's policies caused, breaking his famous "Read My Lips" promise. Not to mention, our illegal alien population soared, once they realized that thanks to RR, they could invade, illegally, and be granted citizenship. Like every Republican president, the lies he told about Iran Contra, after he armed some of the most inhumane despots and drug dealers around, are a part of our history, which the right wingnuts love ignore. </span>
They almost got the guns from the law abiding citizens though.

<span style="color: #000066">I believe it was Mr. Brady's wife, former Reagan appointee, and a Republican, who led the activities to get guns off the streets. </span>

Thank god we got a Republican in office to stop that crap. <span style="color: #000066">The president does not have the power to rule on the issue of who can and cannot have guns. The Supreme Court has that power, as Washington D.C. has just observed. </span> We can kiss them good bye the first time a liberal is back in office though expecially since the Democracks have control over congress.

<span style="color: #000066">Yes, and they have control mostly because the Repiglicans couldn't control their bribe taking, wasteful spending, expansion of government, and all round incompetence.</span>
I think Obama would sell us off (what Clinton didn't already sell off) to foreign interests in a heatbeat. I can't trust the man.

<span style="color: #000066">Interesting, since Bush has sold the country out to China, which along with the Arabs, is buying our country and China has been cheating us on the global market throughout Bush's term, but then, what can he do when we owe them a great deal of the unprecedented debt, more than all previous administrations combined, that he has been running up for the last seven plus years, waging a war, cutting taxes, and borrowing the money to pay for it. </span>

As far as this war goes, I've been over here in Iraq (that's where I'm at right at this moment) for three and a half years. <span style="color: #000066">I think all Americans, including Democratic Americans, and all those who are against the war in Iraq, support our troops, and are proud of their magnificent and effective efforts, although the failure of Republicans to provide them with propper equipment, and training, and a reasonable amount of time away from combat, has finally been improved by the Democratic slim majority, we are, many of us still against the policy of going to war in the wrong place, at the wrong time, against a country which never attacked us here on our shores, and think that getting bin Laden, the man who did plan and lead the attack, and his followers, al Qaeda, should have been the priority, not Saddam, a despot, I agree, but a despot who was empowered by Republican policies of Reagan and Bush One, and who had no WMD's, which was supposed to be the reason for the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Meanwhile, Al Qaeda has expanded, attacks around the world have increased, Afghanistan has fallen into the hands of taliban, which has also expanded, and we have been without enough troops to fight against the Center Of The War On Terror, due to the hasty and un-necessary invasion and occupation of Iraq. </span> I have been home only on short R&Rs twice a year for 10 days each. I spent 28 months living and working with the Iraqi people and I can tell you that what we are doing over here is working <span style="color: #000066">While we know that violence is down, and that our troops have performed their tasks with great bravery and honor, by and large, the purpose of the surge was to give Iraqis time to complete the political progress necessary to becoming an effective government, void of corruption, and joined in a National Agreement among the Sunni, Kurds, and Shiite, regarding oil, and other of their own requirements for a safe and democratic society, and that has not happened. There are still car bombs in Baghdad, and the Kurds have walked out of the talks again. These events have not been created or made up by the Press, they are true. The purpose of the surge, has so far failed, and if it had been successful, there would be no need to retain the majority of those additional troops who were sent to Iraq to provide enough safety for the Iraqi government to achieve political reconciliation, yet they remain beyond the levels which were present previous to the surge. </span> despite the lies and misinformation that the news media has been spreading to the people who are willing to listen to them. <span style="color: #000066">You must be watching Fox? </span> <span style="color: #000066">A free press is the Hallmark of a democratic Republic, a free society, for which you yourself are fighting to preserve, and many have lost their lives in order to report the truth about what our troops, such as you, have faced, and like you, are also heroes in service to their country. They have provided accurate assessments of the success and failure of the administration, but unfortunately, also, the miserable incompetence in the prosecution of this War of choice, in Iraq, by Rumsfeld, Bush and Cheney, who have all been keen throughout to paint a much rosier picture of the conditions on the ground, than was truthful. I am as thankful for the honorable service to our country by the journalists who have risked their lives in order to preserve our Democratic Republic, as I am to you, and every American soldier who struggles for our country, and is willing to give their lives in the best interests of America.

Gayle in Md. </span>



We all have to vote our concience, but Obama scares the he11 out of me.
</div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">Really? That's interesting, McCain scares the hell out of me. </span>

hondo
07-17-2008, 06:12 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Wally_in_Cincy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">JW,

Thank you for what you are doing. The majority of folks support you, despite the nut jobs you see on the tube. </div></div>

I think almost everybody supports the troops.
You make it sound like supporting the war is
the same as supporting he troops.
The same ole neo-con spin.
As for "nutjobs" not supporting the war, are you
talking about the over-whelming majority of Americans?

LWW
07-17-2008, 06:47 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mike60</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The rightwinger meme that only the right wing support the troops is nonsense. Cheerleading WAR, getting honest volunteer troops killed for the WAR PROFITEERS. Is very far from honorable. SO, stuff that rah-rah crap where the sun don't shine and bring the troops home to their families. That is supporting the troops. Idiotic leaders and brain dead
ditto twits make for idiotic policy.
I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU THINK, I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU POST IN PLACE OF LOGIC, I DON'T CARE IF YOU DITTOTWITS NEVER AGREE WITH ACTUAL FACTS.

I JUST DON'T CARE WHAT YOU DO, I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU WANT TO DO, AND IF ANYONE STEPS UP TO ME THEY NEED TO REMEMBER I DON'T CARE, BUT I WILL

SNAP YOU OFF AT THE SOCKS. This brought to you by Vets with PTSD. I've got an excuse, what's your damage?

mike60 peace loving and calm</div></div>
Is that what made you into what you are today?

LWW

mike60
07-17-2008, 11:18 PM
Toggled in for my fair share of abuse: And there it was. L DUB DUCKY gets all psyched about my PTSD. What a guy? No really, all the divergent views on this thread and he thinks only of me. Charming. I really enjoyed all the rant in caps with "SNAP YOU OFF AT THE SOCKS". One of my better rants if i must say so. L DUB ignores the WAR PROFITEERING and the wasted
lives of the TROOPS. But it really cares about my PTSD. A creature of habit L DUB. Nothing can sway it from it's imagined course. Carry on. Or as you were. Whatever.




<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mike60</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The rightwinger meme that only the right wing support the troops is nonsense. Cheerleading WAR, getting honest volunteer troops killed for the WAR PROFITEERS. Is very far from honorable. SO, stuff that rah-rah crap where the sun don't shine and bring the troops home to their families. That is supporting the troops. Idiotic leaders and brain dead
ditto twits make for idiotic policy.
I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU THINK, I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU POST IN PLACE OF LOGIC, I DON'T CARE IF YOU DITTOTWITS NEVER AGREE WITH ACTUAL FACTS.

I JUST DON'T CARE WHAT YOU DO, I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU WANT TO DO, AND IF ANYONE STEPS UP TO ME THEY NEED TO REMEMBER I DON'T CARE, BUT I WILL

SNAP YOU OFF AT THE SOCKS. This brought to you by Vets with PTSD. I've got an excuse, what's your damage?

mike60 peace loving and calm</div></div>
Is that what made you into what you are today?

LWW </div></div>


mike666 james kopp murdering scum doing forever as some guy's bitch

LWW
07-18-2008, 01:31 AM
You answered my question.

LWW