[quote=csmelnix]

Mike I will provide quotes when you answer the questions I asked.  Maybe you need to watch Meet the Press someday when those officers are on it. 

[/quote]

If the mission isn't clear to you by now, repeating it again won't help you.

[quote=csmelnix]

Great comments sailor if it weren't for di&kheads like Mike, we wouldn't be in the mess we are in....we'll see reality in a few more yrs douchbag when progress still has moved toward an endstate there.

[/quote]

What are you, 12 years old?

[quote=csmelnix]

Here spin this:

[/quote]

Spin it? I won't even bother to read it the way you presented it. Neither will anyone else....

QUOTE=SonnyClips] I'm saying they are ding dongs. [/quote]

And you reach that conclusion via an objective, spin and distortion free process. And of course, the final blow is..... a hunting accident....

[quote=SonnyClips]
Everything you can say about Carter, Kerry or Teddy I would probably agree with. [/quote]

Then why keep complaining that the public rejected them for Bush?

[quote=SonnyClips]

Billy Clint on the other hand is a whole different matter. Hell you won't even mention him in your rants …....

[/quote]

ROFLMAO. We haven't mentioned him because he's past tense. You're no longer offering him as an alternative. OTOH, if you like, we could talk about how he, in the interest of making sure the world loved him, failed to do anything substantive against the terrorists who struck US citizens and property around the world. Good Ol' Bill, finger wet and in the breeze, looking for the political angle, and ignoring the work that had to be done... He could work a room, but that’s as far as it goes…

[quote=SonnyClips]

"... and I think thats why Yall seem to be climbing the walls at this criticism."

[/quote]

You mean rolling on the floor laughing...

There are two things in the last 15 years that have damaged the Democrats like nothing else. The first was Clinton triangulating himself into losing the Democratic House and Senate. A situation they haven't recovered from and won't for a long, long time.

The second is the BDS problem that's driven the loons in the party to grab control, pushing rational voices aside. That's a hicky the Democrats won't recover from for an even longer time. The moonbats now running the show all gather together with deep thinkers like Michael Moore and exchange conspiracy theories that make the vast middle (the people who, unlike you and I, don't care much about politics and the ones who actually decide elections) just roll their eyes and pull the lever for the GOP.

[quote=SonnyClips] Hell don't you think that he is the only one doing anything that actually helps us Liberals. If what you say holds any water then Bush is the best friend we got. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Obviously I disagree, Sonny. BDS has driven your party over the cliff. Did you happen to see the Alito hearings? The flap over wiretapping calls for AQ operatives? Michael Moore invited to sit in the presidential box at your convention? No, sorry, like Carville and Begala have said the turn by the Democrats away from the DLC has put them on the path to permanent minority status. I mean, Nancy Pelosi? The public thinks you guys just don't get it. You've certainly energized your far left wing base, but you isolated the public at the same time.

[quote=SonnyClips]
As far as <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Clinton is concerned he may be yesterdays news but being old hat doesn't keep you and BL from mentioning Teddy K and the Chappaquidic incident.

[/quote]

You may have noticed Teddy still serves in the Senate. He's your "conscience" and his latest, his incredible behavior at the Alito hearings, makes the point for us about what shambles the Democrats are in.

 [quote=SonnyClips] Bill does a helluva job drumming up goodwill for this country still and he has been more than kind to W.  [/quote]

I would agree. It’s a shame no one can talk any sense into JImmah Carter…

[quote=SonnyClips]

As far as the Dems being dead in the water I think you might find yourself suprised in the next few years and really only time will tell.

[/quote]

Again, sorry, Sonny, but you’re about to go through a dark period like you’ve never gone through before. You may have the op-ed page of the NY Times, most of Hollywood and the Micheal Moore/George Soros of the world, but the shift to the far left has made the Democrats unelectable at the top for a long time to come.

 [quote=SonnyClips]

Who do you think is going to be the standard bearer for the GOP. I think Barack may drop for the Dems and McCain did him a helluva favor by getting pissed at him, elevating him by showing that he is weighty enough to slug it out with a big ol politico.

[/quote]

Probably McCain, but as usual, I disagree with you on the specifics. McCain has earned, fairly or not, his “plain speech” label. People on both sides (outside we junkies) see him as a pure truth teller. I think Obama did himself a great disservice because he’s a relatively unknown, a blank slate, and now mister plain speaking says Obama is just another two faced political opportunist. I suspect Obama sees it that way too as he quickly jumped to change positions.

Also, just between us kids, Obama isn’t going anywhere. The Democrats are big about having a black face up front and center, playing the dishonest “we’ve always been with you” game with minorities while having “Sheets” as your Senate Minority Leader. But you’ve never been big on actually (unlike the GOP) putting blacks in positions of power.

[quote=SonnyClips]

 There is also rumbling that Lieberman might jump ship to join a McCain ticket, I wish he would he may be a great guy but he sure isn't much of a lib these days.

[/quote]

I feel for Joe. He’s saying what many responsible Democrats are saying, that it’s dangerous to twist BDS into an excuse to believe the GWOT is a fraud. With the fringe of the Democrats running the show and getting into Stalinist purges, he’s suddenly a fascist for NOT screaming like Kennedy that the war in Iraq was “invented in Texas”. If you drive the last of the visible, responsible Democrats out of your party, you might was well pack up your tents.

You just said it yourself. Here’s a guy that opposes Bush on almost every single domestic issue, yet he’s “isn’t much of a lib” because he sees the real danger we face and how we can’t wish it away.

[quote=SonnyClips]

The only way this works is if alot of people go to jail from the GOP and the country feels it needs to heal, then the GOP might see a need for McCain or Lieberman for that matter. [/quote]

Oh for crying out loud Sonny, how disconnected from reality are you? I mean I like you. You seem to have your eyes at least partially open, but “go to jail”? The public, for all the doubts they have about Bush, for all they (rightly) tire of war, they just don’t trust you guys with national security and that isn’t going to change anytime soon.

[quote=SonnyClips]What do you think of the former gov. from VA and Evan Bayh from IN for the Dems and a Giuliani/ McCain ticket for the GOP. [/quote]

Bayh has little going for him aside from being pretty and not being Kerry or any of the other usual suspects. I’d vote for Giuliani, but even if he got by the muggling the religious right would put on him, he may have too many skeletons. Who knows. I like McCain as well, but his penchant for “feel good” but stupid agendas like the tobacco nonsense, the “campaign finance reform” debacle, etc. make me pretty nervous. Then again, his love affair with the media would be over the second he looked as though he might win the GOP nomination because he’s pro-life. The knives would be drawn and quickly by those who currently hang on his every word.

[quote=SonnyClips]
I would be willing to bet my car that Obama is our first African American Prez whether or not that is in 08 or 12. I will let you beat up on the Idea before I explain why. [/quote]

Hmmm, so a one term Senator, black, will be elected in either ’08 or ’12. Bet your car, the exercise will be good for you.

BL from mentioning Teddy K and the Chappaquidic incident.

The reason I bring this up when you try to make ridiculous (heee heee pretzles) charges to demean the current administration is to give you some historical perspective.  You and Dude, while well meaning and I'm sure quite sincere, are so young that all a long time ago to you is last year. You have no real perspective or the ability to look at the long term consequences of the self serving actions of the extreme liberal elements of the Democratic party.   

I'll be willing to bet that you weren't even a gleam in your parents eyes in 1969 when Ted Kennedy cravenly killed a young woman and got away with it with no consequences to his privileged life. I was already in college.  To listen to that fat piece of dung lecture about morality is enough to make me want to puke.   The same goes for Clinton who abused the office of the President and lied under oath, a crime I might remind you for which many people go to jail.

Here is some historical perspective. I lived through the shame of the left forcing a defeat in the Vietnam War and making deaths of 50,000 men worthless.  One of whom was my fiancee and many of whom were my friends.  I see the same rush to blame America for everything and the attempt to force us to defeat in Iraq and it makes me mad.  The aging radicals (Cindy Sheehan) and others who hate America and see Communism/Socialism as the answer are grasping at this chance to re-live their faded glory. The Democrats see this war as a chance to grab for power.  The fact that they are attempting to make the deaths of brave men and women who have volunteered (not drafted) to serve in the military and the deaths of uncounted thousands of Iraqis worthless , means nothing to them.  So what if we weaken our country to the point that we openly invite acts of war to be committed in the US. So what if the consequences of their rush to defeat causes the deaths of more thousands as it did it Vietnam and Cambodia which was a direct result of the vacuum left by the withdrawal from Vietnam.

If the Democrats ever want to win a national election again, they have to jettison the Sheehan, Moore, Dean elements of the party.  The moderates and even the Republican base may not love Bush, but they love their own safety and recognize that the current trend of the Dems is only going to get us deeper and deeper in trouble.  The answer from the Democrats is usually more socialism, welfare programs and other things that appeal to the misguided altruism of people and nothing in the way of economic policy.

I don't know about Obama, other than he sounds just like any other weasel politician willing to stab some one in the back if it is to his own benefit. McCain will never have the support of conservatives since he supported legalizing the worst restriction on free speech, which will eventually be overturned by the Supreme Court.  Most conservatives view him as a turncoat.  I would love to see a Condi/Guiliani ticket for the GOP, but I believe that Condi really doesn't want to run.  That's too bad because the people who really want to be President shouldn't and the people who are smart enough to not put themselves into meat grinder are probably our best choices.

That's what I thought Mike, you are a fraud!

MikeB:

Yeah, you’re a “conservative”. Mouthing every fringe conspiracy theory about hidden agendas, the “blame America first” diatribe, the “we need an open dialogue”. All hallmarks of a conservative. Actually this is just a dodge on your part having hand your head handed to you on your “Bush let bin Laden’s family go” trope. I don’t recall anyone calling you a liberal. Liberal, “real conservative” (like Buchanan going after Bush for being a “closet liberal lime his father”) I couldn’t care less. The issue is your grasp on who we face and what should be done about it.

It's apparent you are misinterpreting my point and position.  I'm wasting my time with this.  Whatever......time to go make some $$$.

[quote=dude]

MikeB:

Yeah, you’re a “conservative”. Mouthing every fringe conspiracy theory about hidden agendas, the “blame America first” diatribe, the “we need an open dialogue”. All hallmarks of a conservative. Actually this is just a dodge on your part having hand your head handed to you on your “Bush let bin Laden’s family go” trope. I don’t recall anyone calling you a liberal. Liberal, “real conservative” (like Buchanan going after Bush for being a “closet liberal lime his father”) I couldn’t care less. The issue is your grasp on who we face and what should be done about it.

It's apparent you are misinterpreting my point and position.  I'm wasting my time with this.  Whatever......time to go make some $$$.

[/quote]

I doubt I misunderstand your position since I quoted you directly. Having said that, we'd all be better off making some $$$$$  

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=dude]

MikeB:

Yeah, you’re a “conservative”. Mouthing every fringe conspiracy theory about hidden agendas, the “blame America first” diatribe, the “we need an open dialogue”. All hallmarks of a conservative. Actually this is just a dodge on your part having hand your head handed to you on your “Bush let bin Laden’s family go” trope. I don’t recall anyone calling you a liberal. Liberal, “real conservative” (like Buchanan going after Bush for being a “closet liberal lime his father”) I couldn’t care less. The issue is your grasp on who we face and what should be done about it.

It's apparent you are misinterpreting my point and position.  I'm wasting my time with this.  Whatever......time to go make some $$$.

[/quote]

I doubt I misunderstand your position since I quoted you directly. Having said that, we'd all be better off making some $$$$$  

[/quote]

Also I'll add that it's not a fringe conspiracy theory to think that George Bush had some predetermined motive and used intelligence to support it.  In fact it's quite a mainstream belief amigo. 

Also, I wasn't trying to imply that Bush was directly responsible for letting the Saudi's leave (although indirectly he was).  I was just bringing up the fact that it happened for some reason (whether Richard Clarke authorised it or not) and curiously Bush happens to be good friends with many of these folks.  My bigger issue is with the Iraq war.  I don't believe that 911 was an inside job either.

[quote=SonnyClips]Anytime a less known politician is engaged in a tif with a older politician it winds up being a coup for the lesser known.[/quote]

That's not how I see it. As I see it Obama was a blank slate (to which people project many positive things) until a "trusted advisor" (to coin a phrase) told us all he was tow faced. Obama lost, and he proved that he lost by back tracking.

 [quote=SonnyClips]

Obama signs were in peoples yards next to Bush's.

[/quote]

To me that means people got a warm and fuzzy voting for a blank slate. It surely doesn't mean Obama, with a sigle term behind him is ready for prime time. IL went for Kerry and Obama ran against a laughable  candidate that the GOP couldn't get away from fast enough. I don't have anything yet, against him aside from what McCain pointed out, but he just isn't seasoned enough. For him to win Hilary would have to implode and then in the general, the GOP candidate would have to get caught with a dead girl or a live boy.

QUOTE=dude]

Also I'll add that it's not a fringe conspiracy theory to think that George Bush had some predetermined motive and used intelligence to support it. In fact it's quite a mainstream belief amigo. [/quote]

“Some predetermined agenda”? If by that you mean he wanted to go to war and was happy the intel supported it, fine. That’s mainstream. There’s a an element that says he “cherry picked” (whatever the frick that means, given the fact that he was told it was a “slam dunk” to prove) the intel. Then there’s the fringe that talks about “hidden agendas” and “exaggerated threats”.

[quote=dude]

Also, I wasn't trying to imply that Bush was directly responsible for letting the Saudi's leave (although indirectly he was). I was just bringing up the fact that it happened for some reason (whether Richard Clarke authorised it or not) and curiously Bush happens to be good friends with many of these folks.

[/quote]

Dude, you really should admit you bought a pig in a poke on that one. Not only did the White House not approve of the departure for suspicious reasons, the bin Ladens didn’t leave before the FBI talked to them and they didn’t leave before the flight restrictions were lifted. You were had and no less that two bi-partisan investigations say so.

The fact that you can't let it go, despite all the evidence says to me you're unwilling to face facts.

[quote=dude]

My bigger issue is with the Iraq war. I don't believe that 911 was an inside job either.

[/quote]

Dude, honestly, with all the respect I can muster, you traffic in some pretty bizarre stuff. I read you post on the other thread, and I have to say I find that your knee-jerk either blame-America-first-ism, or some form of BDS has clouded you judgment about the threat we face.

Please, in all sincerity, for sixty minutes, forget who the president is, forget about how we got into Iraq, forget all the Vietnam-open dialogue-what did we do to them stuff and do yourself a favor. Devote an hour to read what bin Laden and his fellow AQ types have written. Not what some US official says they said, what they’ve written and said themselves.

You can’t wish them away, you have to face what they themselves very clearly say are their aims. They killed 3,000 people in a single day. Their only disappointment is that they didn’t kill more. They want to kill every single non-believer and re-establish a medieval caliphate. If we were cowardly enough, and cared little enough about the fate of the rest of the world, we could pull every last American back into our borders, retreat from the rest of the world and they would still work towards 9/11 II. These are people who cheered when they saw the videotape of people jumping out of the twin towers to avoid dying in a fire.

::yawn::

Hilary is a corrupt bulldog and political opportunist.  That's why she fits in so well inside the Beltway.

Let's face it, most if not ALL politicians suck!

[quote=SonnyClips]We all suck. It's how the man keeps us down brotha Joe.[/quote]

Not even close! NASCAR sucks! Drafting is the only way these guys can pass each other at Daytona. Cars that don't suck, don't go.

…reminds me of the story about GM having problems selling the Nova in Mexico…“no va” literally means “it doesn’t go”.

Clipper...well, DUUUUUUUHHHHH!  I don't see how anyone could even try to spin that one any other way!

[quote=tjc45]

[quote=SonnyClips]We all suck. It's how the man keeps us down brotha Joe.[/quote]

Not even close! NASCAR sucks! Drafting is the only way these guys can pass each other at Daytona. Cars that don't suck, don't go.

[/quote]

No....Monica Lewinsky sucks.  Do you think she has any diamond earrings?

CS.. So if Bush is to blame for everything in IRAQ... He sure did kick some as. during the first week.  The only thing that slowed us down was Kerry, Dean, Dems and Kennedy who were chanting 50,000 will die going into Bagdad.

As for Syria and Iran... Are you this closed minded to think military is the only option. Right now the world is against Iran. Oh wait they have three allies in Syria, Hamas and North Korea. Syria just left Lebanon from political pressure.

Long live the anti Bushers of the world. To blind to realize he is gone in 3 years. Court and UN appointees are in place. Saddam and Taliban are gone. Patriot Act is in place. Bankruptcy and medicare reform took place. 4.7% unemployment. Market is strong. Housing is strong. GPD is strong. Terrorists you can run, but you cant hide (Pakistan drone kills 8 )! Taxes are cut.

Clinton fans… Please enlighten me what the great one did??? Of course besides all of the womanizing.

Sonny. Do you think this is Vietnam II?

Also Mike it's useless. People who voted for GORE hate BUSH. They enjoyed the years with a leader who said what we wanted to hear. They truly want to believe that Bush is worse then the terrorist themselves. For this we should say a prayer for them.