|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: Tim CrowleyTim Crowley
Date: Dec 26, 2006 14:17
> Pelosi LIED, You Incredible MORON.........That's the "Point", Little
> Retarded DORK
Did Pelosi say she would change the camera arraignment?
|
| |
|
| |
no comments
|
|
|
Author: Tim CrowleyTim Crowley
Date: Dec 26, 2006 14:16
Stephen Jay Morris wrote:
> NOT at all, You Incredible MORON.........Pelosi REFUSES to Make the
> Democrat Congress MORE TRANSPARENT like she "Claimed" she
> WOULD........In other words, PELOSI LIED, You Little Retarded
> DORK...........Heehee............DumbAss..........
What, exactly do you think makes Congress less transparant by using the
same fixed cameras they have always used? Why wasn't this an issue
for you before.
|
| |
|
| |
no comments
|
|
|
Author: SeawolfSeawolf
Date: Dec 26, 2006 14:16
>
> Seawolf wrote:
>>>
>>> Seawolf wrote:
>>>>> Will Santa leave lumps of shit in Bu$h, Cheney, KKKilgore, JaKKKazz,
>>>>> Oooze & Groggy Morron's xmas stockings?
>>>>>
>>>>> Wait ... they're all lumps of shit, so why leave shit for shit?!
>>>>>
>>>>> What WILL Santa leave for such turds? Feel free to list
>>>>> possibilities...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We could list the possibility that you've had your ass handed to you ...
|
| Show full article (2.49Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: Godzilla PimpGodzilla Pimp
Date: Dec 26, 2006 14:14
Personally, I'm in favor of old fashioned drawing and quartering. It goes
something like this.
The criminal is first hanged until he just become unconscious. Then he is
cut down and revived. His genitals are cut off and burned before him. Then,
his intestines are pulled out (drawn) and also burned before him. Finally,
he is tied to four horses and pulled apart.
This seems a bit too quick to me.
GP
|
| |
|
6 Comments |
|
|
Author: SeawolfSeawolf
Date: Dec 26, 2006 14:13
>
>> Outstanding plan! Worked for the Soviet Union, oh, wait...............
>>>Reply: Not only you are politically retarded but you are a
> Commie-phobe
Nope, just far more intelligent than you are it would seem........
Read your "plan" again. Then try reading some history and comparing your
"plan" to the former USSR.
>
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: Tim CrowleyTim Crowley
Date: Dec 26, 2006 14:13
Ken wrote:
> But this is supposed to be "the most ethical Congress ever." Let some
> sunshine in and let's see what happens, unless maybe you are scared shitless
> of the result.
Please explain exactly what you think is "unethical" about keeping the
same agreement that you never complained about before.
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: Tim CrowleyTim Crowley
Date: Dec 26, 2006 14:10
JakTheHammer wrote:
> In a Dec. 14 letter, C-SPAN CEO and Chairman Brian Lamb asked Pelosi to
> roll back the three-decade old practice that put the House Speaker in
> charge of the cameras. C-SPAN and the House reached the current
> agreement in 1979 when cameras were first introduced to the chamber. He
> wrote that he sought a similar agreement in 1994 when Republicans
> captured control of the House, but he did not get it.
And your problem with this is??? Did I ever hear you complain about
it before? Why all of a sudden. Don't answer, it's obvious your a
hypocrite.
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: The VicarThe Vicar
Date: Dec 26, 2006 13:57
> Adam Albright wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Dec 2006 19:54:02 GMT, David Hartung quixnet.net>
>> wrote:
>>>>> Adam Albright wrote:
>>>
>>>> The panel said it found "no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda
>>>> cooperated on attacks against the United States."
>>> And? I am aware of no one who is claiming that Iraq had anything to do
>>> with 911.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hartung, You're always such a cherry picking pansy ass.
>>>> Also from the above article:
>>>>
>>>> (referenced made to a earlier failed plot that would have added
>>>> hijacking up to 10 planes and attacking both the West and East coasts
>>>> of the US.) ...
|
| Show full article (3.62Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: Jeffrey TurnerJeffrey Turner
Date: Dec 26, 2006 13:56
Harry Dope wrote:
> How come Pres. Bush didn't order the destruction of Iraq cities like FDR
> did Germany? That's funny when you think about
What's funny is that you can make stuff up and think it's real.
> it. Japan attacked America but FDR destroyed nearly every house in Germany
> with bombing. Pres. Bush has ordered way
> too much restraint in the Iraq campaign to keep civilian casualties to a
> minimum.
It was the Brits, more than the US, who were responsible for the bombing
of German cities. And there was definite restraint when it came to
destroying the infrastructure that would be needed for services, and
hence effective governance, after the war. Part of the today's problem
is that Bush I showed no such restraint in his bombing of Baghdad,
probably because he had no intention of trying to run their country. Of
course, you twits cannot decide whether you're trying to help the Iraqis
with democracy or just trying to kill them and run their country for
your own purposes. You are probably far from the war you're so gung-ho
about.
--Jeff
|
| Show full article (1.14Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
|
|
|
Author: The VicarThe Vicar
Date: Dec 26, 2006 13:52
> Richard Eich wrote:
>> Harry Dope wrote:
>>> How come none of you dribbling liberals cant tell the American people
>>> why the muslims planned to attack America during the Clinton
>>> Administration?
>>
>> Because US troops remained in Saudi Arabia during the Clinton
>> administration, placed there by Bush '41 during Gulf War I.
>
> US troops were in Saudi Arabia at the request of the Saudi government. If
> this was truly the reason for the 911 attacks, they should have confined
> their attacks to military targets, and they should have also attacked the
> Saudi government.
Now you're trying to apply rational thought to irrational people. You asked
why they hate America and that's one of the reasons. whether we're at fault
or not is another story completely. do you think anyone would try to argue
AQ had a right to attack us?
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
