Political signs - What to do with them after the election?

[Stormin Mormon]

And, what use would his signs be, after the election?

[Stormin Mormon]

Are Bush Cheney signs useful for anything?

[HeyBub]

First place I looked. Then the rest of the house.

Right now, I'm casting a suspicious eye on my neighbor.

Look, I'm just trying to make this world a better place. Surely you can't criticize my motives...

[Kurt Ullman]

Hong Kong was a British protectorate and they pulled out at the end of a 100-year treaty. Be hard to put either of those on the backs of ANY US person.

On the Canal Zone, I tend to agree (for about the only time) with the Late and Much Lamented SI Hyakawa Senator from California who said: "Of course it is ours we stole it fair and square". The Canal Zone was hardly a loss. Panama itself was a plus because we got rid of the dictator and the country itself has been doing much better economically and otherwise. And we got a chance to annoy Vatican Ambassadors by playing rock at their embassy until Noriega left. All in all a most satisfactory foray.

[olddog]

Yeah...you got a point: But by credible I mean not John Stewart and not Rush Limpbaugh.

I found this

...thanks anyway. :-)

olddog

[Kurt Ullman]

Yep. The lied into war part is a fallacy since (1). The intelligence was put together under the supervision of the lone holdover from the Clinton administration. So, it would have to be assumed that the holdover was in collusion with the GOP and that he sold his soul to Bush for the job. Hard to believe.. although we ARE talking about a Clinton appointee so may be you have a point (g(). 2).The raw intelligence was placed in a secured room in the Capital prior to the vote so Congresscritter could see it and judge for themselves, less than 1 did. 3)> Even the Freakin' French were not arguing at the time that SH did not have weapons, just that we should continue with the status quo. Largely because Elf, their large oil company was involved with oil for UN.. err kickbacks to SH, err. food deal. (The irony in this so delicious) $). The Iraqi high command was at least as surprised as anyone else by the lack of WMDs. Apparently the Sadamster was using the fact that "other general" were in command of WMD to keep them in line. 5). H certainly wasn't acting like a man w/o something to hide. One of those things that has been said over and over until accepted. Again "ignorant Bush core voter block".

[Kurt Ullman]

Not sure the context of this.

[Kurt Ullman]

Well, I can make a hat, or a brouche, or a epititom!

[Kurt Ullman]

Well, I can make a hat, or a brouche, or a epititom!

Kurt (@ least I'm consistent) Ullman

[Norminn]

Was that before or after the week that Chicago had ten drive-by murders in one week?

[Norminn]

Hope they played some "Meatloaf".

[Jim Yanik]

Kurt Ullman wrote in news:kurtullman- [e-mail]:

I do far more than watch Fox News. (and no talk radio,no O'Reilly,no Rush...) Anyone who thinks Time,Newsweek,CBS,NBC,ABC,or CNN are fair and balanced(not even close...) are oblivious.

Nate is citing all the typical LIBERAL,leftist talking points.But he claims to be "centrist". Well,the Soviet communists used to claim they were "progressives",just like the Liberals and DemocRATs of today. And there's lots of similarities between them.

Nate is SO blind.

[Jim Yanik]

Nate Nagel wrote in news: [e-mail]:

what lies were those? Do you even know the definition of "lie"?

Nate obviously doesn't know the definitions of many words. "torture"??

I bet McCain knows what "torture" is. Nate sure doesn't.

[Jim Yanik]

Kurt Ullman wrote in news:kurtullman- [e-mail]:

You omitted the info that many other allies information matched ours WRT Iraq.

the WMD material was moved to Syria.

Well,the leftists hear only what they want to hear,and anything that demonizes Bush(the "illegitimate President") HAS to be gospel. They repeat it over and over so it then becomes (to them) the "truth".

Liberals operate on feelings and not on rational thought.

Nate clearly didn't hear ALL the reasons Bush gave for the Iraq invasion. His Mainstream Media,all Bush haters,omitted or deemphasized much to aid in the demonization of Bush.(the MSM ARE >70% DemocRAT...)

[Nate Nagel]

And yet it's odd that the support of said allies started to dry up after we invaded Iraq...

Come on, be honest, when you turned on the TV and saw GWB sitting there telling us that US forces had just invaded Iraq, weren't you thinking exactly what I was - which was pretty much "WTF? Why the hell would he do THAT when we're already committed in Afghanistan? What the hell happened? Shit, this is all about his dad, isn't it?" Never mind that GHWB is on record as stating that the deliberately did not go after Saddam after our initial objectives in GW1 were met as that would destabilize the country and we didn't have the resources to rebuild it from the ground up etc.

Then it's good that GWB will be out of office before he has the chance to invade Syria on your intelligence and embarasses us even more.

There were really only two. WMD's and connections to Bin Laden. Both lies. The latter wasn't really an explicit lie, more of an attempt to associate the two by juxtaposing them in speeches, even though there was no connection between Saddam and Al-Qaida (then) IRL. Cheney did slip up once and made an explicit connection between the two on TV though, although nobody seemed to make any kind of big deal out of it for some reason.

There might have been other reasons for the invasion, but they were never presented to the American public.

[Jim Yanik]

Nate Nagel wrote in news: [e-mail]:

Ah,now we get into ad hominem attacks.

[Jim Yanik]

"Stormin Mormon" wrote in news:ge2fv7$c3v$ [e-mail]:

Nothing;they aren't my property.

[Jim Yanik]

Kurt Ullman wrote in news: [e-mail]:

Obama had his campaigm email supporters to get them to flood talk radio and TV shows where people were critizing Obama,to deny the opposing opinions to be aired.He asked the Justice Department to prosecute the NRA for running ads showing Obama's anti-gun record.He got Missouri officials to use their official powers to go after people whose opinions he didn't like.Obama favors bringing back the "Fairness Doctrine".

Obama claimed to "support the Second Amendment",yet didn't sign the Heller amicus brief as other DemocRATs did.He first said he believed DC was OK to ban guns,then reversed himself after the USSC ruled in favor of Heller.

[Jim Yanik]

Nate Nagel wrote in news: [e-mail]:

Meaning ones that don't disagree with you?

Hardly.

DemocRATs/liberals are noted for their "politically correct" speech codes (that actually suppress free speech)and "hate crime"(thoughtcrime) legislation. They are also for the Fairness Doctrine's return.

Liberals are the ones who give "pie attacks" and shout down conservative speakers and disrupt seminars so they cannot be heard. Liberals are full of Hate,and frequently show it.

[Jim Yanik]

Nate Nagel wrote in news: [e-mail]:

No,it's that you just don't LISTEN when they do tell the public.