Democrats are for the common man

[L98Terror]

Senate millionaires
John Kerry, D-Massachusetts: $163,626,399
Herb Kohl, D-Wisconsin: $111,015,016
John Rockefeller, D -West Virginia: $81,648,018
Jon Corzine, D-New Jersey: $71,035,025
Dianne Feinstein, D-California: $26,377,109
Peter Fitzgerald, R-Illinois: $26,132,013
Frank Lautenberg, D-New Jersey $17,789,018
Bill Frist, R-Tennessee: $15,108,042
John Edwards, D-North Carolina: $12,844,029
Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts: $9,905,009
Jeff Bingaman, D-New Mexico: $7,981,015
Bob Graham, D-Florida: $7,691,052
Richard Shelby, R-Alabama: $7,085,012
Gordon Smith, R-Oregon: $6,429,011
Lincoln Chafee, R-Rhode Island: $6,296,010
Ben Nelson, D-Nebraska: $6,267,028
Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee: $4,823,018
Mike DeWine, R-Ohio: $4,308,093
Mark Dayton, D-Minnesota: $3,974,037
Ben Campbell, R-Colorado: $3,165,007
Chuck Hagel, R-Nebraska: $2,963,013
Olympia Snowe, R-Maine: $2,955,037
James Talent, R-Missouri: $2,843,031
Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania: $2,045,016
Judd Gregg, R-New Hampshire: $1,916,026
John McCain, R-Arizona: $1,838,010
James Inhofe, R-Oklahoma: $1,570,043
John Warner, R-Virginia: $1,545,039
Kay Bailey Hutchison, R - Texas: $1,513,046
Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky: $1,511,017
Harry Reid, D-Nevada: $1,500,040
Sam Brownback, R-Kansas: $1,491,018
Thomas Carper, D-Delaware: $1,482,017
Ted Stevens, R-Alaska: $1,417,013
Maria Cantwell, D-Washington: $1,264,999
Barbara Boxer, D-California: $1,172,003
Orrin Hatch, R-Utah: $1,086,023
Mary Landrieu, D-Louisiana: $1,080,014
Bill Nelson, D-Florida: $1,073,014
Charles Grassley, R-Iowa: $1,016,024
*These figures are base estimates provided by senators on their financial disclosure forms.




LOL 8 of the richest 10 are Democrats what do they know about the common man

[Golden]

BURNED

[91Notch]

LOL 8 of the richest 10 are Democrats what do they know about the common man

They know how to tax the $hit out of the common man while using loopholes to avoid paying a lot of taxes.

[Crazzy_Al]

Wrong forum. :D

[2001-WS6]

Probably. :)

Rick

[uluz2a6]

http://www.bartcop.com/reasons-2-vote.jpg

[L98Terror]

http://www.ejectejecteject.com/archives/wtc-4small.jpg

3000+ reasons not to

[82hatch]

http://www.ejectejecteject.com/archives/wtc-4small.jpg

3000+ reasons not to

I guess they just pretend it didn't happen.

[91Notch]

http://www.ejectejecteject.com/archives/wtc-4small.jpg

3000+ reasons not to

that's correct

[TTA]

http://www.ejectejecteject.com/archives/wtc-4small.jpg

3000+ reasons not to

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to L98Terror again.

[uluz2a6]

What was BUSH doing while AMERICA WAS UNDER ATTACK???

http://la.indymedia.org/uploads/2004/04/bush-911.jpg

[cASe SenSiTive]

I guess they just pretend it didn't happen.


I'm sorry... I forgot about all the Iraqis that were among the 9/11 hijackers.


But hey, all arabs are the same, right? :dontknow:

[cASe SenSiTive]

http://www.ejectejecteject.com/archives/wtc-4small.jpg

3000+ reasons not to


I wasn't aware that the Democrats were to blame for the 9/11 attacks. :dontknow:

I am aware that it was the Bush administration that pushed forward with the war against Iraq.

[L98Terror]

I'm sorry... I forgot about all the Iraqis that were among the 9/11 hijackers.


But hey, all arabs are the same, right? :dontknow:
Which of course stopped all attacks on US soil.

Mind you Clinton's lack of action & hand cuffing of the CIA set up the events of 9/11. Unless your stand is the whole thing was planned in the few months Bush was President.

The terrorist are now fighting the US in Iraq rather than in NYC.

[L98Terror]

I am aware that it was the Bush administration that pushed forward with the war against Iraq.

I am aware the the whole US was for the war against Iraq even the Democratic leadership has amitted to that, the only thing still up for discussion is how it will end.

BTW thanks for the thread :hijacked:

I would love to have you guys over to watch Fahrenheit 911 & Fahrenhype 911 back to back and discuss it

[cASe SenSiTive]

If you'll recall, the Republicans had control of Congress during much of Clinton's time in office. I don;t recall them spending much time discussing terrorism. They seemed to be too busy talking about BJs. :dontknow:

I also seem to recall Clinton firing cruise missles to try and take out some al Quaida camps/people, and when he did that everyone said he was "wagging the doig" and trying to divert attention away from the Lewinsky scandal.

[L98Terror]

I'm sorry... I forgot about all the Iraqis that were among the 9/11 hijackers.


But hey, all arabs are the same, right? :dontknow:

ARE AL QAEDA'S links to Saddam Hussein's Iraq just a fantasy of the Bush administration? Hardly. The Clinton administration also warned the American public about those ties and defended its response to al Qaeda terror by citing an Iraqi connection.



http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/527uwabl.asp

No connection at all I'm sure

Democrats who before the war discounted the possibility of any connection between Iraq and al Qaeda have largely fallen silent. And in recent days, two prowar Democrats have spoken openly about the relationship. Evan Bayh, a Democrat from Indiana who sits on the Intelligence Committee, told THE WEEKLY STANDARD, "the relationship seemed to have its roots in mutual exploitation. Saddam Hussein used terrorism for his own ends, and Osama bin Laden used a nation-state for the things that only a nation-state can provide."

And Joe Lieberman, the Connecticut Democrat and presidential candidate, discussed the connections in an appearance last week on MSNBC's "Hardball with Chris Matthews." Said Lieberman: "I want to be real clear about the connection with terrorists. I've seen a lot of evidence on this. There are extensive contacts between Saddam Hussein's government and al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. I never could reach the conclusion that [Saddam] was part of September 11. Don't get me wrong about that. But there was so much smoke there that it made me worry. And you know, some people say with a great facility, al Qaeda and Saddam could never get together. He is secular and they're theological. But there's something that tied them together. It's their hatred of us."

[cASe SenSiTive]

I am aware the the whole US was for the war against Iraq even the Democratic leadership has amitted to that, the only thing still up for discussion is how it will end.

BTW thanks for the thread :hijacked:

I would love to have you guys over to watch Fahrenheit 911 & Fahrenhype 911 back to back and discuss it


I'm not trying to play partisan politics, you are. :dontknow:
The Dems were idiots for letting themselves be strongarmed into the war in Iraq. They were afraid of looking like they didn't want to fight terrorism, and since Shrub&Co. had done such a great propaganda job on America, they went along and signed up for the war.

[cASe SenSiTive]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/527uwabl.asp

No connection at all I'm sure


That article is playing six degrees of seperation to connect Bin Laden and Saddam.:dontknow:

[L98Terror]

That article is playing six degrees of seperation to connect Bin Laden and Saddam.:dontknow:
Democrats who before the war discounted the possibility of any connection between Iraq and al Qaeda have largely fallen silent. And in recent days, two prowar Democrats have spoken openly about the relationship. Evan Bayh, a Democrat from Indiana who sits on the Intelligence Committee, told THE WEEKLY STANDARD, "the relationship seemed to have its roots in mutual exploitation. Saddam Hussein used terrorism for his own ends, and Osama bin Laden used a nation-state for the things that only a nation-state can provide."

And Joe Lieberman, the Connecticut Democrat and presidential candidate, discussed the connections in an appearance last week on MSNBC's "Hardball with Chris Matthews." Said Lieberman: "I want to be real clear about the connection with terrorists. I've seen a lot of evidence on this. There are extensive contacts between Saddam Hussein's government and al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. I never could reach the conclusion that [Saddam] was part of September 11. Don't get me wrong about that. But there was so much smoke there that it made me worry. And you know, some people say with a great facility, al Qaeda and Saddam could never get together. He is secular and they're theological. But there's something that tied them together. It's their hatred of us."
:dontknow:

[L98Terror]

I'm not trying to play partisan politics, you are. :dontknow:
The Dems were idiots for letting themselves be strongarmed into the war in Iraq. They were afraid of looking like they didn't want to fight terrorism, and since Shrub&Co. had done such a great propaganda job on America, they went along and signed up for the war.

I'm trying to make educated decisions based on the information that I read & watch the hard part is to see through the BS because we aren't getting the same info that the people in power get and even that is second hand. So I take the info I weed through decide what is BS and what may not be BS incorporate it with my beliefs and take a stand. I have yet to see a good argument for the other side I do see cartoons.

My basic belief is that they hate us and want to see us dead (because that's what they say) and if we don't kill them first they will kill us. I don't believe in a defensive posture if you can take out someone who wants you dead with minimal risk to you it needs to be done. I also truly believe if we weren't in Iraq we would be getting attacked in the US It keeps them on their toes, some believe if we weren't in Iraq that the people who want us dead would hold hands and sing songs around a camp fire. They wanted us dead before Iraq and they will want us dead after Iraq. Most people don't believe that life is as good as it is in the US (I've traveled a lot and I'm not shy about my beliefs I've gotten in many discussions with foreigners) I do think if they can convert Iraq it will help us and the instability in the middle east but it will be a long road. Most Europeans don't like America because we don't necessarily do what's in their best intrest we do what's in ours. An I believe we should always do what is best for the USA and fuck everyone else.

[cASe SenSiTive]

Sounds like a pretty slim "connection" to me. :dontknow:

[QUASAR]

Sounds like a pretty slim "connection" to me. :dontknow:

x2

"But there's something that tied them together. It's their hatred of us." I can agree to that. But, is there any concrete evedince? Sounds like alot of hype.

[L98Terror]

Sounds like a pretty slim "connection" to me. :dontknow:

It was good enough for Clinton:dontknow:

Now I'm not saying that Iraq was instrumental in 911 or even connected but I do believe there is a terrorist connection & maybe Iraq was the wrong choice maybe it should have been North Korea, Syria or Iran first:dontknow: That's why we have people in a position to make those decisions who am I to second guess. A true leader doesn't second guess they accept the decisions and if they were wrong try not to make the same ones again.

Does anyone really think Bush has all the info on everything? How much power does he really have? Hell I barley know what the hell is going on in my own household.

[82hatch]

I'm sorry... I forgot about all the Iraqis that were among the 9/11 hijackers.


But hey, all arabs are the same, right? :dontknow:

So what we should of done? You libs always bitch and moan how about some answers! It seems everyone was behind going to war-oh wait that was till the election came up and it was such a bad idea. Sorry we already tried the do nothing approach and that didn't work. Seems to me the did find wmd but not in the numbers though. Think it was pretty piss poor of them to back it and then try to do a 180 and say they are not for it. Not saying it's tied to 9/11 but you think Kerry would've had the backbone to make the tough decisions-I think not.

[82hatch]

I'm trying to make educated decisions based on the information that I read & watch the hard part is to see through the BS because we aren't getting the same info that the people in power get and even that is second hand. So I take the info I weed through decide what is BS and what may not be BS incorporate it with my beliefs and take a stand. I have yet to see a good argument for the other side I do see cartoons.

My basic belief is that they hate us and want to see us dead (because that's what they say) and if we don't kill them first they will kill us. I don't believe in a defensive posture if you can take out someone who wants you dead with minimal risk to you it needs to be done. I also truly believe if we weren't in Iraq we would be getting attacked in the US It keeps them on their toes, some believe if we weren't in Iraq that the people who want us dead would hold hands and sing songs around a camp fire. They wanted us dead before Iraq and they will want us dead after Iraq. Most people don't believe that life is as good as it is in the US (I've traveled a lot and I'm not shy about my beliefs I've gotten in many discussions with foreigners) I do think if they can convert Iraq it will help us and the instability in the middle east but it will be a long road. Most Europeans don't like America because we don't necessarily do what's in their best intrest we do what's in ours. An I believe we should always do what is best for the USA and fuck everyone else.

Very good points. :badass:

[Sean124]

So what we should of done? You libs always bitch and moan how about some answers! It seems everyone was behind going to war-oh wait that was till the election came up and it was such a bad idea. Sorry we already tried the do nothing approach and that didn't work. Seems to me the did find wmd but not in the numbers though. Think it was pretty piss poor of them to back it and then try to do a 180 and say they are not for it. Not saying it's tied to 9/11 but you think Kerry would've had the backbone to make the tough decisions-I think not.

The what we should have done was smashed Iran and Syria after finishing up afghnistan.

[cASe SenSiTive]

So what we should of done? You libs always bitch and moan how about some answers! It seems everyone was behind going to war-oh wait that was till the election came up and it was such a bad idea. Sorry we already tried the do nothing approach and that didn't work. Seems to me the did find wmd but not in the numbers though. Think it was pretty piss poor of them to back it and then try to do a 180 and say they are not for it. Not saying it's tied to 9/11 but you think Kerry would've had the backbone to make the tough decisions-I think not.

I was against the war in Iraq from the very start. Nothing to do with elections or partisanship. The administration had NO plans for what happened after we rolled in and took over. I was on this from the start, and none of the hawks could ever give me an answer other than the line about the Iraqi's greeting us with flowers and thanks. :rolleyes:
And I'm sick of all of this "would Kerry/Clinton/Gore/whoever have done better?" crap. Just because I don't agree with much of the current administration's policies does NOT mean that I was/am a supporter of the guys Bush ran against.

[cASe SenSiTive]

The what we should have done was smashed Iran and Syria after finishing up afghnistan.

:werd:
We still have a hot zone in Afghnistan, and because we have so many troops commited to Iraq, the Taliban is on the rise again there.

[82hatch]

I was against the war in Iraq from the very start. Nothing to do with elections or partisanship. The administration had NO plans for what happened after we rolled in and took over. I was on this from the start, and none of the hawks could ever give me an answer other than the line about the Iraqi's greeting us with flowers and thanks. :rolleyes:
And I'm sick of all of this "would Kerry/Clinton/Gore/whoever have done better?" crap. Just because I don't agree with much of the current administration's policies does NOT mean that I was/am a supporter of the guys Bush ran against.

I think it would've been a big mistake to not go in there. We would've been ripped for doing nothing. Iraq was warned numerous times and basically said "fuck you". I'm curious, who do you support? This doen't have to do with dem/rep I would've supported this no matter who was in office. Usually when I say I support the war I'm attacked by former Kerry backers-sorry to lump ya in with them.

[91Notch]

Were there because the UN is full of wussies that make up resolutions that they refuse to back up.

[L98Terror]

http://www.caglecartoons.com/images/preview/{E5B52D26-56FE-4FA0-8031-CD55D520DE1A}.gif

[uluz2a6]

http://www.bartcop.com/worst-disaster-ever-sm.jpg

[Ortontucky Terror]

how the fuck did this go from rich dems to libs saying iraq was a bad idea?

[L98Terror]

how the fuck did this go from rich dems to libs saying iraq was a bad idea?
It's the response to everything We shouldn't be in Iraq & it's Bushs fault :roll:

[Crazzy_Al]

It just shows how fucking stupid they are, they can only think about one thing at a time:dontknow:
Let's not generalize the entire bunch because ULUZ is a dumbass.

[uluz2a6]

We shouldn't be in Iraq & it's Bushs fault.

Well said!:icon_mrgr

[uluz2a6]

Let's not generalize the entire bunch because ULUZ is a dumbass.

LOL!!

If your gonna run your mouth, please go back to the pub!:pow:

[Crazzy_Al]

LOL!!

If your gonna run your mouth, please go back to the pub!:pow:
You are a dumbass.

[uluz2a6]

Crazzy_Al
post whore extreme-

[2QuickZ's]

Why is it conservatives are always the first ones to want to jump into a war or hang someone if something goes wrong? It's seems killing people is never a problem unless those people happen to be a fetus. :dontknow: It just always strikes me as odd that the conservatives typically promote:
1) A strong military (and will typically use that military at the drop of a hat)
2) Capital punishment (it's okay to kill as long as it is an eye for an eye, but all other killing not sanctioned by the government is against Gods will)

It seems a bit hypocritical to me. Actually, I happen to support both of those though.

Which of course stopped all attacks on US soil.

Mind you Clinton's lack of action & hand cuffing of the CIA set up the events of 9/11. Unless your stand is the whole thing was planned in the few months Bush was President.

The terrorist are now fighting the US in Iraq rather than in NYC. We all know there were no terrorists in existence before Clinton came into power! :lol: Lets stop with the finger pointing on why terrorists exist. It has nothing to do with Republican or Democrat, conservative, moderate or liberal. All of our leaders of the past 40 years have had some pretty shitty policies regarding the middle east. We made our bed, now we get to lie in it.

As for the comment about the terrorists being too busy fighting the US in Iraq to do anything here, do you really believe that? All that has happened by invading Iraq is we've moved the terrorist training ground from Afganistan to Iraq. For all of our sakes we better hope that country doesn't fall into Civil War or that whole region could wind up looking real ugly, real fast. While I feel the present outcome of this war was more than predictable, the fact of the matter is we find ourselves where we are today. I think pulling out now would make matters worse by further destabilizing the region. Bush has that one right. The problem is, we shouldn't be there to begin with.

[Crazzy_Al]

Crazzy_Al
post whore extreme-
Wow, you are good at finding random quotes and sayings on the web and copying and pasting them here.

[L98Terror]

Why is it conservatives are always the first ones to want to jump into a war or hang someone if something goes wrong? It's seems killing people is never a problem unless those people happen to be a fetus. :dontknow: It just always strikes me as odd that the conservatives typically promote:
1) A strong military (and will typically use that military at the drop of a hat)
2) Capital punishment (it's okay to kill as long as it is an eye for an eye, but all other killing not sanctioned by the government is against Gods will)

It seems a bit hypocritical to me. Actually, I happen to support both of those though.




I agree with both and I'm also Pro-abortion


We all know there were no terrorists in existence before Clinton came into power! :lol: Lets stop with the finger pointing on why terrorists exist. It has nothing to do with Republican or Democrat, conservative, moderate or liberal. All of our leaders of the past 40 years have had some pretty shitty policies regarding the middle east. We made our bed, now we get to lie in it.

As for the comment about the terrorists being too busy fighting the US in Iraq to do anything here, do you really believe that? All that has happened by invading Iraq is we've moved the terrorist training ground from Afganistan to Iraq. For all of our sakes we better hope that country doesn't fall into Civil War or that whole region could wind up looking real ugly, real fast. While I feel the present outcome of this war was more than predictable, the fact of the matter is we find ourselves where we are today. I think pulling out now would make matters worse by further destabilizing the region. Bush has that one right. The problem is, we shouldn't be there to begin with.

You are correct, I do think for every one we kill over there is one less that we will need to kill somewhere else, and if we pull out it will free up a lot of people that will try and kill Americans elsewhere. Do I think it will stop farther attacks? No but I believe it has slowed the threat down. Who will ever know. The choice to go into Iraq was unilateral and we can't turn back the clock so bitching that we never should have gone doesn't help anything.



I'm wondering what will happen when Iran gets bombed:dontknow:

[L98Terror]

Wow, you are good at finding random quotes and sayings on the web and copying and pasting them here.

He can copy and paste with the best of them have an original idea or think for himself that's another story:icon_mrgr

[uluz2a6]

Wow, you are good at finding random quotes and sayings on the web and copying and pasting them here.


Why are you STILL talking? Go to the pub and run your mouth.

[91Notch]

Why is it conservatives are always the first ones to want to jump into a war

:mmm:

WWII, no that was Roosevelt

Korean War, no that was Truman

Vietnam, no that was Kennedy

:icon_mrgr

[Crazzy_Al]

Why are you STILL talking? Go to the pub and run your mouth.
It's what I do. Learn to either:
1.) Deal with it
2.) Leave.

Those are your only two options.

[uluz2a6]

Go to the pub and run your mouth.

[L98Terror]

:mmm:

WWII, no that was Roosevelt

Korean War, no that was Truman

Vietnam, no that was Kennedy

:icon_mrgr
Owned

[Crazzy_Al]

Go to the pub and run your mouth.
Sit down and shut up...like an opinionless, and thoughtless bitch should. Please post more of OTHER PEOPLE'S opinions and thoughts. We're all waiting anxiously for them.

[2QuickZ's]

:mmm:

WWII, no that was Roosevelt

Korean War, no that was Truman

Vietnam, no that was Kennedy

:icon_mrgrGood points except the following:

WWII - FDR didn't want to go to war. He was drug into it (and I'm glad we were. I can't imagine the world today if we weren't)

Korean War - You are 100% correct. No argument here.

Vietnam - Nov. 1, 1955 - Eisenhower deploys the Military Assistance Advisory Group to train the South Vietnam Army. This marks the official beginning of American involvement in the war as recognized by the Vietnam Veterans Memorial.

Hmmm. Wasn't Eisenhower a Republican? On this one, I will still give you your point, though. The war did escalate drastically under Kennedy.

[uluz2a6]

Sit down and shut up...

Take your own advise...

[Foolsgold80z]

Take your own advise...

I'd like to ADVISE you that you spelled ADVICE wrong.:pow:

We will be at war with Iran soon enough, and I don't look forward to it.
It will be a much tougher job against a much more formidable enemy.
Look for them to not only lash out at Israel and our installations in Iraq
and Afganistan, but to cripple shipping in the Persian Gulf. They can seal off the Straits of Hormuz and have the capability to strike our ships in the Gulf with some pretty advance weapons like Silkworm and Exocet missiles.
This will be no cakewalk.

[Ortontucky Terror]

Why is it conservatives are always the first ones to want to jump into a war or hang someone if something goes wrong? It's seems killing people is never a problem unless those people happen to be a fetus. :dontknow: It just always strikes me as odd that the conservatives typically promote:
1) A strong military (and will typically use that military at the drop of a hat)
2) Capital punishment (it's okay to kill as long as it is an eye for an eye, but all other killing not sanctioned by the government is against Gods will)

It seems a bit hypocritical to me. Actually, I happen to support both of those though.



i support both of these, and im pro choice, pro abortion sounds so barbaric. and yes i also believe that most republicans are very hypocritical, its almost as if they dont even serve conservative values anymore.

[L98Terror]

i support both of these, and im pro choice, pro abortion sounds so barbaric. and yes i also believe that most republicans are very hypocritical, its almost as if they dont even serve conservative values anymore.
Most politicians are hypocritical Dem/Rep/Ind

[Belowme]

Which of course stopped all attacks on US soil.

Mind you Clinton's lack of action & hand cuffing of the CIA set up the events of 9/11. Unless your stand is the whole thing was planned in the few months Bush was President.

The terrorist are now fighting the US in Iraq rather than in NYC.

sans the attacks 30 something odd days after taking office, clinton kept this nation safe for 8 years!

you sound like a freaking parrot. log off of newsmax.com. your talking points are about as regurgetated as a cows dinner.

[Belowme]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/527uwabl.asp

No connection at all I'm sure

LMFAO!!! the weekly standard? a mouthpiece for you neo-con sheep!

even your pathetic moron in chief admitted recently that Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11 or terrorism!!!

The terrorists attacked us and killed 3,000 of our citizens before we started the freedom agenda in the Middle East. They were …
[B]Q: What did Iraqi have to do with that?
BUSH: What did Iraq have to do with what?
Q: The attacks upon the World Trade Center.
Bush: Nothing.

[Belowme]

:mmm:

WWII, no that was Roosevelt

Korean War, no that was Truman

Vietnam, no that was Kennedy

:icon_mrgr

ummm...no...

WWII...we were attacked by Japan...did you want us to sit idly by? my guess is yes :D

Korea... materialized well before 50...it was a culmination of the cold war...i thought you rightes were against the spread of communism...isn't that what truman was fighting for?

Vietnam...it was actually johnson that signed the war declaration...he was a war profiteer, just like the the shrub and the heart attack waiting to happen.

[cASe SenSiTive]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/527uwabl.asp

No connection at all I'm sure



Yep. No connection.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060908/pl_nm/iraq_usa_intelligence_dc_2

[cASe SenSiTive]

:dontknow:

[L98Terror]

LMFAO!!! the weekly standard? a mouthpiece for you neo-con sheep!

even your pathetic moron in chief admitted recently that Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11 or terrorism!!!

The terrorists attacked us and killed 3,000 of our citizens before we started the freedom agenda in the Middle East. They were …
[B]Q: What did Iraqi have to do with that?
BUSH: What did Iraq have to do with what?
Q: The attacks upon the World Trade Center.
Bush: Nothing.


I thought Bush was stupid and didn't know anything?

[L98Terror]

Yep. No connection.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060908/pl_nm/iraq_usa_intelligence_dc_2
:dontknow: I personally have no first hand knowledge either way.

[L98Terror]

sans the attacks 30 something odd days after taking office, clinton kept this nation safe for 8 years!



:crazy:
Good point you convinced me, the whole idea was conceived and planned in 30 days:dontknow:

[mdhmi]

These figures are base estimates provided by senators on their financial disclosure forms.

In other words, those numbers are -conservative-.

You would think having all those millions would make them more Pro Business.

[wide winger]

In other words, those numbers are -conservative-.

You would think having all those millions would make them more Pro Business.
Off camera they are, on camera they are not!