Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 11, 2008 at 4:01 PM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237735July 11, 2008 at 4:01 PM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237868OC BurnsParticipant
The FISA vote was going to pass without Obama.
He had a chance to stand on principle.
Instead, he showed who he really represents.Those crooks are all on the same side. Republican v. Democrat is a distraction to keep the little ones hopeful.
Kill the 4th Amendment? Check.
Kill Iranian kids? Check.Big change coming, eh Barack?
July 11, 2008 at 4:01 PM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237876OC BurnsParticipantThe FISA vote was going to pass without Obama.
He had a chance to stand on principle.
Instead, he showed who he really represents.Those crooks are all on the same side. Republican v. Democrat is a distraction to keep the little ones hopeful.
Kill the 4th Amendment? Check.
Kill Iranian kids? Check.Big change coming, eh Barack?
July 11, 2008 at 4:01 PM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237925OC BurnsParticipantThe FISA vote was going to pass without Obama.
He had a chance to stand on principle.
Instead, he showed who he really represents.Those crooks are all on the same side. Republican v. Democrat is a distraction to keep the little ones hopeful.
Kill the 4th Amendment? Check.
Kill Iranian kids? Check.Big change coming, eh Barack?
July 11, 2008 at 4:01 PM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237937OC BurnsParticipantThe FISA vote was going to pass without Obama.
He had a chance to stand on principle.
Instead, he showed who he really represents.Those crooks are all on the same side. Republican v. Democrat is a distraction to keep the little ones hopeful.
Kill the 4th Amendment? Check.
Kill Iranian kids? Check.Big change coming, eh Barack?
July 11, 2008 at 2:42 PM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237680OC BurnsParticipant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]OC: Nope. I didn’t vote for Bush (either time) and find the actions of his Administration, especially regarding torture, rendition, willful destruction of our civil liberties and the woefully bad prosection of the war in Iraq to be reprehensible.
The fact that he is a Republican and Clinton was a Democrat have nothing to do with it.
I was simply speaking to a point made about “the blowjob” and how that really wasn’t the issue at all.[/quote]
I guess we agree then.
I wish Bush would get some head… maybe it’d mellow him out.
As a registered Dem, I am curious to see how the Dem voters will react when their candidate continues this destruction of America.
Because you are right…it has nothing to do with political party.
Hell…I’d vote for a guy like 2000 Bush today if I thought he was sincere. His campaign was a total lie… and so is Obama’s.
July 11, 2008 at 2:42 PM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237813OC BurnsParticipant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]OC: Nope. I didn’t vote for Bush (either time) and find the actions of his Administration, especially regarding torture, rendition, willful destruction of our civil liberties and the woefully bad prosection of the war in Iraq to be reprehensible.
The fact that he is a Republican and Clinton was a Democrat have nothing to do with it.
I was simply speaking to a point made about “the blowjob” and how that really wasn’t the issue at all.[/quote]
I guess we agree then.
I wish Bush would get some head… maybe it’d mellow him out.
As a registered Dem, I am curious to see how the Dem voters will react when their candidate continues this destruction of America.
Because you are right…it has nothing to do with political party.
Hell…I’d vote for a guy like 2000 Bush today if I thought he was sincere. His campaign was a total lie… and so is Obama’s.
July 11, 2008 at 2:42 PM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237822OC BurnsParticipant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]OC: Nope. I didn’t vote for Bush (either time) and find the actions of his Administration, especially regarding torture, rendition, willful destruction of our civil liberties and the woefully bad prosection of the war in Iraq to be reprehensible.
The fact that he is a Republican and Clinton was a Democrat have nothing to do with it.
I was simply speaking to a point made about “the blowjob” and how that really wasn’t the issue at all.[/quote]
I guess we agree then.
I wish Bush would get some head… maybe it’d mellow him out.
As a registered Dem, I am curious to see how the Dem voters will react when their candidate continues this destruction of America.
Because you are right…it has nothing to do with political party.
Hell…I’d vote for a guy like 2000 Bush today if I thought he was sincere. His campaign was a total lie… and so is Obama’s.
July 11, 2008 at 2:42 PM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237869OC BurnsParticipant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]OC: Nope. I didn’t vote for Bush (either time) and find the actions of his Administration, especially regarding torture, rendition, willful destruction of our civil liberties and the woefully bad prosection of the war in Iraq to be reprehensible.
The fact that he is a Republican and Clinton was a Democrat have nothing to do with it.
I was simply speaking to a point made about “the blowjob” and how that really wasn’t the issue at all.[/quote]
I guess we agree then.
I wish Bush would get some head… maybe it’d mellow him out.
As a registered Dem, I am curious to see how the Dem voters will react when their candidate continues this destruction of America.
Because you are right…it has nothing to do with political party.
Hell…I’d vote for a guy like 2000 Bush today if I thought he was sincere. His campaign was a total lie… and so is Obama’s.
July 11, 2008 at 2:42 PM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237882OC BurnsParticipant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]OC: Nope. I didn’t vote for Bush (either time) and find the actions of his Administration, especially regarding torture, rendition, willful destruction of our civil liberties and the woefully bad prosection of the war in Iraq to be reprehensible.
The fact that he is a Republican and Clinton was a Democrat have nothing to do with it.
I was simply speaking to a point made about “the blowjob” and how that really wasn’t the issue at all.[/quote]
I guess we agree then.
I wish Bush would get some head… maybe it’d mellow him out.
As a registered Dem, I am curious to see how the Dem voters will react when their candidate continues this destruction of America.
Because you are right…it has nothing to do with political party.
Hell…I’d vote for a guy like 2000 Bush today if I thought he was sincere. His campaign was a total lie… and so is Obama’s.
July 11, 2008 at 9:46 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237334OC BurnsParticipant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Peace: Ah, the nostalgia, indeed. And the mis-remembering. I think the whole “President suborning perjury” deal was a little more important than the blowjob itself.
Didn’t the Republicans, and Newt Gingrich specifically, also provide most of the good ideas (“Contract with America”) that Clinton stole and claimed for his own?
Yup, the halcyon days of yore.
[/quote]Ah yes…when lying, deceitful Presidents were viewed with scorn.
Those were the days.
Now we just look at their party affiliation.
July 11, 2008 at 9:46 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237467OC BurnsParticipant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Peace: Ah, the nostalgia, indeed. And the mis-remembering. I think the whole “President suborning perjury” deal was a little more important than the blowjob itself.
Didn’t the Republicans, and Newt Gingrich specifically, also provide most of the good ideas (“Contract with America”) that Clinton stole and claimed for his own?
Yup, the halcyon days of yore.
[/quote]Ah yes…when lying, deceitful Presidents were viewed with scorn.
Those were the days.
Now we just look at their party affiliation.
July 11, 2008 at 9:46 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237476OC BurnsParticipant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Peace: Ah, the nostalgia, indeed. And the mis-remembering. I think the whole “President suborning perjury” deal was a little more important than the blowjob itself.
Didn’t the Republicans, and Newt Gingrich specifically, also provide most of the good ideas (“Contract with America”) that Clinton stole and claimed for his own?
Yup, the halcyon days of yore.
[/quote]Ah yes…when lying, deceitful Presidents were viewed with scorn.
Those were the days.
Now we just look at their party affiliation.
July 11, 2008 at 9:46 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237524OC BurnsParticipant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Peace: Ah, the nostalgia, indeed. And the mis-remembering. I think the whole “President suborning perjury” deal was a little more important than the blowjob itself.
Didn’t the Republicans, and Newt Gingrich specifically, also provide most of the good ideas (“Contract with America”) that Clinton stole and claimed for his own?
Yup, the halcyon days of yore.
[/quote]Ah yes…when lying, deceitful Presidents were viewed with scorn.
Those were the days.
Now we just look at their party affiliation.
July 11, 2008 at 9:46 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237536OC BurnsParticipant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Peace: Ah, the nostalgia, indeed. And the mis-remembering. I think the whole “President suborning perjury” deal was a little more important than the blowjob itself.
Didn’t the Republicans, and Newt Gingrich specifically, also provide most of the good ideas (“Contract with America”) that Clinton stole and claimed for his own?
Yup, the halcyon days of yore.
[/quote]Ah yes…when lying, deceitful Presidents were viewed with scorn.
Those were the days.
Now we just look at their party affiliation.
-
AuthorPosts