- This topic has 1,004 replies, 42 voices, and was last updated 13 years ago by
urbanrealtor.
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 13, 2009 at 7:22 AM #482991November 13, 2009 at 7:52 AM #482173
jficquette
Participant[quote=Casca]John, add to the list the decision this morning to try Khalid Sheik Mohammad (KSM), the 911 mastermind, in federal court in NYC. An absolute travesty of justice. Had the current course with the military tribunals been allowed to run in Gitmo, he was a month away from a death sentance. Now we’ll spend a prince’s ransom to both defend and prosecute him in a court where he will be allowed full constitutional protections. This fuck should have been dead a long time ago. There is evil upon the land.[/quote]
I know I know. Its pretty much hopeless until we can get rid of people like Pelosi, Reid, Dodd, Franks, Waxman, Waters et.al.
People want to blame Bush for all this but open minded people should see what he was going up against. Corrupt Media, Congress etc.
If the Government ran media wanted to they could destroy Obama in about one week considering all of the “talking points” available and they could do it with a fraction of the effort they used against Bush. Obama has real issues. Bush didn’t.
John
November 13, 2009 at 7:52 AM #482341Participant[quote=Casca]John, add to the list the decision this morning to try Khalid Sheik Mohammad (KSM), the 911 mastermind, in federal court in NYC. An absolute travesty of justice. Had the current course with the military tribunals been allowed to run in Gitmo, he was a month away from a death sentance. Now we’ll spend a prince’s ransom to both defend and prosecute him in a court where he will be allowed full constitutional protections. This fuck should have been dead a long time ago. There is evil upon the land.[/quote]
I know I know. Its pretty much hopeless until we can get rid of people like Pelosi, Reid, Dodd, Franks, Waxman, Waters et.al.
People want to blame Bush for all this but open minded people should see what he was going up against. Corrupt Media, Congress etc.
If the Government ran media wanted to they could destroy Obama in about one week considering all of the “talking points” available and they could do it with a fraction of the effort they used against Bush. Obama has real issues. Bush didn’t.
John
November 13, 2009 at 7:52 AM #482711Participant[quote=Casca]John, add to the list the decision this morning to try Khalid Sheik Mohammad (KSM), the 911 mastermind, in federal court in NYC. An absolute travesty of justice. Had the current course with the military tribunals been allowed to run in Gitmo, he was a month away from a death sentance. Now we’ll spend a prince’s ransom to both defend and prosecute him in a court where he will be allowed full constitutional protections. This fuck should have been dead a long time ago. There is evil upon the land.[/quote]
I know I know. Its pretty much hopeless until we can get rid of people like Pelosi, Reid, Dodd, Franks, Waxman, Waters et.al.
People want to blame Bush for all this but open minded people should see what he was going up against. Corrupt Media, Congress etc.
If the Government ran media wanted to they could destroy Obama in about one week considering all of the “talking points” available and they could do it with a fraction of the effort they used against Bush. Obama has real issues. Bush didn’t.
John
November 13, 2009 at 7:52 AM #482789Participant[quote=Casca]John, add to the list the decision this morning to try Khalid Sheik Mohammad (KSM), the 911 mastermind, in federal court in NYC. An absolute travesty of justice. Had the current course with the military tribunals been allowed to run in Gitmo, he was a month away from a death sentance. Now we’ll spend a prince’s ransom to both defend and prosecute him in a court where he will be allowed full constitutional protections. This fuck should have been dead a long time ago. There is evil upon the land.[/quote]
I know I know. Its pretty much hopeless until we can get rid of people like Pelosi, Reid, Dodd, Franks, Waxman, Waters et.al.
People want to blame Bush for all this but open minded people should see what he was going up against. Corrupt Media, Congress etc.
If the Government ran media wanted to they could destroy Obama in about one week considering all of the “talking points” available and they could do it with a fraction of the effort they used against Bush. Obama has real issues. Bush didn’t.
John
November 13, 2009 at 7:52 AM #483015Participant[quote=Casca]John, add to the list the decision this morning to try Khalid Sheik Mohammad (KSM), the 911 mastermind, in federal court in NYC. An absolute travesty of justice. Had the current course with the military tribunals been allowed to run in Gitmo, he was a month away from a death sentance. Now we’ll spend a prince’s ransom to both defend and prosecute him in a court where he will be allowed full constitutional protections. This fuck should have been dead a long time ago. There is evil upon the land.[/quote]
I know I know. Its pretty much hopeless until we can get rid of people like Pelosi, Reid, Dodd, Franks, Waxman, Waters et.al.
People want to blame Bush for all this but open minded people should see what he was going up against. Corrupt Media, Congress etc.
If the Government ran media wanted to they could destroy Obama in about one week considering all of the “talking points” available and they could do it with a fraction of the effort they used against Bush. Obama has real issues. Bush didn’t.
John
November 13, 2009 at 7:56 AM #482178Participant[quote=Portlock]I love the fact that Barack is in the White House, he’s a natural born leader. It’s clearly too early to judge his presidency. This guy, John Fiquette, is a bitter, partisan, divisive, whiner looking for attention.
[img_assist|nid=12303|title=John has 43 friends on Facebook|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=75][/quote]
Why did my post scare you to the extent that you wanted to “look me up”?
What is it about Democrats that they ignore issues and attack personalities?
Savage says Liberalism is a mental disorder. I have to agree. There is definitely something to how they think to make them the way they are.
John
November 13, 2009 at 7:56 AM #482346Participant[quote=Portlock]I love the fact that Barack is in the White House, he’s a natural born leader. It’s clearly too early to judge his presidency. This guy, John Fiquette, is a bitter, partisan, divisive, whiner looking for attention.
[img_assist|nid=12303|title=John has 43 friends on Facebook|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=75][/quote]
Why did my post scare you to the extent that you wanted to “look me up”?
What is it about Democrats that they ignore issues and attack personalities?
Savage says Liberalism is a mental disorder. I have to agree. There is definitely something to how they think to make them the way they are.
John
November 13, 2009 at 7:56 AM #482716Participant[quote=Portlock]I love the fact that Barack is in the White House, he’s a natural born leader. It’s clearly too early to judge his presidency. This guy, John Fiquette, is a bitter, partisan, divisive, whiner looking for attention.
[img_assist|nid=12303|title=John has 43 friends on Facebook|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=75][/quote]
Why did my post scare you to the extent that you wanted to “look me up”?
What is it about Democrats that they ignore issues and attack personalities?
Savage says Liberalism is a mental disorder. I have to agree. There is definitely something to how they think to make them the way they are.
John
November 13, 2009 at 7:56 AM #482794Participant[quote=Portlock]I love the fact that Barack is in the White House, he’s a natural born leader. It’s clearly too early to judge his presidency. This guy, John Fiquette, is a bitter, partisan, divisive, whiner looking for attention.
[img_assist|nid=12303|title=John has 43 friends on Facebook|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=75][/quote]
Why did my post scare you to the extent that you wanted to “look me up”?
What is it about Democrats that they ignore issues and attack personalities?
Savage says Liberalism is a mental disorder. I have to agree. There is definitely something to how they think to make them the way they are.
John
November 13, 2009 at 7:56 AM #483020Participant[quote=Portlock]I love the fact that Barack is in the White House, he’s a natural born leader. It’s clearly too early to judge his presidency. This guy, John Fiquette, is a bitter, partisan, divisive, whiner looking for attention.
[img_assist|nid=12303|title=John has 43 friends on Facebook|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=75][/quote]
Why did my post scare you to the extent that you wanted to “look me up”?
What is it about Democrats that they ignore issues and attack personalities?
Savage says Liberalism is a mental disorder. I have to agree. There is definitely something to how they think to make them the way they are.
John
November 13, 2009 at 8:40 AM #482207sd_t2
Participant[quote=jficquette]There is definitely something to how they think to make them the way they are.
John[/quote]
Yes, we could start with the fact that they think at all.
Neglecting Bush’s far more patronizing and offensive backrub of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, let’s focus on one of the few assertions you make that are provable/disprovable — the “doubling” of the national debt under Obama.
This handy tool from the Treasury will help expose your “fuzzy math”:
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np
Putting in Jan 21, 2009 and Nov 12, 2009 as the date range we get:
10.625 trillion and 11.987 trillion, respectively – a 12.8% increase in the national debt.
Putting in the Bush era – Jan 21, 2001 to Jan 20, 2009, however, we get:
5.728 trillion and 10.627 trillion, respectively — an 85.5% increase (that is, a near doubling) of the national debt.
So… whatever political stripe you choose to wear, do your homework and you’ll be more credible.
November 13, 2009 at 8:40 AM #482376Participant[quote=jficquette]There is definitely something to how they think to make them the way they are.
John[/quote]
Yes, we could start with the fact that they think at all.
Neglecting Bush’s far more patronizing and offensive backrub of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, let’s focus on one of the few assertions you make that are provable/disprovable — the “doubling” of the national debt under Obama.
This handy tool from the Treasury will help expose your “fuzzy math”:
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np
Putting in Jan 21, 2009 and Nov 12, 2009 as the date range we get:
10.625 trillion and 11.987 trillion, respectively – a 12.8% increase in the national debt.
Putting in the Bush era – Jan 21, 2001 to Jan 20, 2009, however, we get:
5.728 trillion and 10.627 trillion, respectively — an 85.5% increase (that is, a near doubling) of the national debt.
So… whatever political stripe you choose to wear, do your homework and you’ll be more credible.
November 13, 2009 at 8:40 AM #482745Participant[quote=jficquette]There is definitely something to how they think to make them the way they are.
John[/quote]
Yes, we could start with the fact that they think at all.
Neglecting Bush’s far more patronizing and offensive backrub of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, let’s focus on one of the few assertions you make that are provable/disprovable — the “doubling” of the national debt under Obama.
This handy tool from the Treasury will help expose your “fuzzy math”:
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np
Putting in Jan 21, 2009 and Nov 12, 2009 as the date range we get:
10.625 trillion and 11.987 trillion, respectively – a 12.8% increase in the national debt.
Putting in the Bush era – Jan 21, 2001 to Jan 20, 2009, however, we get:
5.728 trillion and 10.627 trillion, respectively — an 85.5% increase (that is, a near doubling) of the national debt.
So… whatever political stripe you choose to wear, do your homework and you’ll be more credible.
November 13, 2009 at 8:40 AM #482824Participant[quote=jficquette]There is definitely something to how they think to make them the way they are.
John[/quote]
Yes, we could start with the fact that they think at all.
Neglecting Bush’s far more patronizing and offensive backrub of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, let’s focus on one of the few assertions you make that are provable/disprovable — the “doubling” of the national debt under Obama.
This handy tool from the Treasury will help expose your “fuzzy math”:
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np
Putting in Jan 21, 2009 and Nov 12, 2009 as the date range we get:
10.625 trillion and 11.987 trillion, respectively – a 12.8% increase in the national debt.
Putting in the Bush era – Jan 21, 2001 to Jan 20, 2009, however, we get:
5.728 trillion and 10.627 trillion, respectively — an 85.5% increase (that is, a near doubling) of the national debt.
So… whatever political stripe you choose to wear, do your homework and you’ll be more credible.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.