Why is no one talking about Phil Gramm's statement?

[gabosaurus]

He called the U.S. "a nation of whiners" and stated that the country is in an "emotional depression."
I am sure McCain loves having such a loose cannon as one of his primary supporters.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-trailgramm11-2008jul11,0,370415.story

[Kathianne]

He called the U.S. "a nation of whiners" and stated that the country is in an "emotional depression."
I am sure McCain loves having such a loose cannon as one of his primary supporters.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-trailgramm11-2008jul11,0,370415.story

Actually many are:

http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/5954.html

There's video, links, and more at site:


Gramm, McCain and Obama

Posted By Jonathan On July 10, 2008 @ 8:50 pm In Economics & Finance, Politics, USA | 15 Comments

[1] Phil Gramm spoke the truth. The economy is in a slow period, but the recession that many of us (including me) anticipated has not happened. IOW, despite significant structural problems in the economy (housing meltdown, inflation, oil prices, weak dollar and other policy mistakes), the economy is holding up. This is good news.

There is a disconnect between the real economy, which is doing OK, and the media picture of an economy about to fall into steep recession if not depression. It’s obvious what’s going on. First, the media industry is consolidating: old media businesses are failing, their employees either being laid off or worried about their jobs; new media businesses like Google are changing the fundamentals of the media industry. So there is a lot of fear and uncertainty among media people, and that uncertainty gets reflected in news reports and opinion columns.

Second, the big media are, as usual, doing their best to get the Democrat elected. This means that the economy is going to be terrible until the election, after which we will (assuming the Democrats win big) experience a remarkable recovery due to the farsighted policies of President Obama and the Democratic Congress.

Gramm was merely pointing out what was already obvious to serious observers. Maybe, for tactical political reasons, he shouldn’t have been as blunt as he was in the Washington Times interview, but that’s hindsight. The problem is that McCain immediately disassociated himself from Gramm in a way that weakens his campaign. Gramm, a former economics professor, is known for having a clue about economics. Indeed he was brought into McCain’s campaign to compensate for the candidate’s widely acknowledged weakness in this area. McCain’s hasty disavowal of Gramm therefore looked like a political panic. He was behaving like the old McCain, whose primary loyalty often appeared to be to the media and Democratic opinion. The media and Democrats decry what they see as a disastrous economy, therefore McCain could not allow Gramm’s reasonable statements to stand. He didn’t even try to spin them but flatly disavowed them. This was McCain at his worst.

The Gramm incident also showed Obama at his worst.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11658.html

http://lonestartimes.com/2008/07/10/phil-gramm-is-right/


It's a mixed bag, but there's lots more in msm and alternative.

[stephanie]

I guess he should of said he'd like to cut someones nuts off..:poke:

[avatar4321]

Senator Gramm is right.

[5stringJeff]

On economic policy, Phil Gramm is right on. McCain would be wise to listen to him instead of disavowing him.

[mundame]

Senator Gramm is right.


Of course he's right.


I haven't felt like this since Vietnam, and I don't think I felt so bad then!

[Joe Steel]

He called the U.S. "a nation of whiners" and stated that the country is in an "emotional depression."
I am sure McCain loves having such a loose cannon as one of his primary supporters.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-trailgramm11-2008jul11,0,370415.story

Everyone knows Gramm is an idiot.

[red states rule]

Phil is right, The US is becoming a nation of whiners. It is sad to see so many people expecting the government to take care of their needs, wants, desires, and problems

[avatar4321]

Everyone knows Gramm is an idiot.

He seems quite smart to me. Which means you are either uninformed or just lying because obviously everyone doesn't know that Gramm is an idiot.

[red states rule]

Libs may not like this poll (yes I understand it was a web poll guys)


Time.com Web Poll: Why, Yes, We Are a Nation of Whiners
By Ken Shepherd (Bio | Archive)
July 11, 2008 - 12:54 ET

Yes, it's unscientific and it is a Web poll, so it should be taken with a grain of salt, but a Time.com survey today finds 61 percent of respondents think that, yes, America is a nation of whiners.

The screen grab at right was taken shortly before 12:45 p.m. EDT. Around 12:30, when I first saw the poll, the numbers were similar: 60-40.

Here's how the question was worded: "As Phil Gramm suggests, is America a 'nation of whiners'?"

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2008/07/11/time-com-web-poll-why-yes-we-are-nation-whiners

[actsnoblemartin]

because you're a whiner gabs, and youre suffering a mental thread :laugh2:


He called the U.S. "a nation of whiners" and stated that the country is in an "emotional depression."
I am sure McCain loves having such a loose cannon as one of his primary supporters.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-trailgramm11-2008jul11,0,370415.story

[Hagbard Celine]

I guess he should of said he'd like to cut someones nuts off..:poke:

The point is that everyone's so partisan that nobody ever acknowledges the fact that this stuff is coming from both sides.

[actsnoblemartin]

but the question is, who is more evil :laugh2:

cause were all supposed to vote for the lesser of two evils?

:poke:

and does the evil of democrats get a pass because republicans arent perfects, and does the evil of republicans get a pass because democrats arent perfect, or is evil just evil

You are completely right about partisanship


The point is that everyone's so partisan that nobody ever acknowledges the fact that this stuff is coming from both sides.

[Little-Acorn]

Here's how the question was worded: "As Phil Gramm suggests, is America a 'nation of whiners'?"

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2008/07/11/time-com-web-poll-why-yes-we-are-nation-whiners

No, we are not a nation of whiners.

We are a nation where most people work pretty hard, enjoy pretty good success with a few mistakes and bad-luck incidents sprinkled through their lives, and do not do the kind of whining Gramm refers to....

...plus a statistical minority who don't work so hard, and so get whacked a lot harder by the mistakes and bad luck they have, and whine to the high heaven begging for Government to take over and shield them from the problems and trials of life.....

...plus an even smaller number who work hard but have a disproportionate number of mistakes and bad luck, and so wind up having very tough time, often through little fault of their own. Of these, some change their ways, accept the charity of frinds, neighbors, church etc., and eventually work their way back into relative prosperity; while others remain downtrodden, poor, and often overworked.

That's life, and the result of life. And no one has EVER found a way to change these results... except by restricting and taxing the first group more and more so that many of its members wind up in the third group, while paying some of the third group enough to boost a few of them into the first group... and paying large numbers of the second group which has NO effect of getting them out of that group. Net result: First group (the well off) gets smaller, third group has overall increase, second group remains the same, both in size and in news coverage.

No, we are not a nation of whiners. But we are a nation where a few whiners get much more media coverage than the much larger group of non-whiners, and so we LOOK like a nation of whiners to people who look at the headline on the front page rather than looking at the nation itself.

[April15]

He called the U.S. "a nation of whiners" and stated that the country is in an "emotional depression."
I am sure McCain loves having such a loose cannon as one of his primary supporters.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-trailgramm11-2008jul11,0,370415.story
All you have to do is know who said it and it is self explainetory.

[emmett]

He called the U.S. "a nation of whiners" and stated that the country is in an "emotional depression."
I am sure McCain loves having such a loose cannon as one of his primary supporters.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-trailgramm11-2008jul11,0,370415.story

Yes.....but he didn't say he wished to cut off John McCains balls for looking down on the white man:laugh2:

Get over it, the democratic party is a party of caterers. Half of their voters pay no income tax, 5 % ride to the polls in a mission van and most voters choose their candidates based on what they think they will get for free as a result. Eventually, these types of people's heros are going to screw up with a camera rolling.

Mr. Graham's statement are true. We have become a nation of whiners and I personally am very depressed about my government. According to the latest polls I share that feeling with 91% of the American public. I mustg say though that I have given NO consideration to cutting off anyone's testicles concerning this issue. Maybe a few child molestors, but then Democrats would never have that.

Maybe if you search some more blogs, headlines and chitchat rooms you can come up with something a little more comparable.

Maybe Hillary needs to warm up in the bullpen cause Obama may not get past the 7th inning of this contast.

[Abbey Marie]

On economic policy, Phil Gramm is right on. McCain would be wise to listen to him instead of disavowing him.

I agree.

Eventually, with all this disavowing, our nominees will stand for exactly nothing. Perhaps we are already there.

[actsnoblemartin]

what bothers me, is no one is considering what phil gramm is saying, and that bothers me.

atleast consider it instead of knee jerk.


Yes.....but he didn't say he wished to cut off John McCains balls for looking down on the white man:laugh2:

Get over it, the democratic party is a party of caterers. Half of their voters pay no income tax, 5 % ride to the polls in a mission van and most voters choose their candidates based on what they think they will get for free as a result. Eventually, these types of people's heros are going to screw up with a camera rolling.

Mr. Graham's statement are true. We have become a nation of whiners and I personally am very depressed about my government. According to the latest polls I share that feeling with 91% of the American public. I mustg say though that I have given NO consideration to cutting off anyone's testicles concerning this issue. Maybe a few child molestors, but then Democrats would never have that.

Maybe if you search some more blogs, headlines and chitchat rooms you can come up with something a little more comparable.

Maybe Hillary needs to warm up in the bullpen cause Obama may not get past the 7th inning of this contast.

[emmett]

Mr. Graham was merely echoing sentiment felt by many Americans at how government is failing and Americans seem to have become whiners......it's that simple.

The right and the left whine. We whine all the time. We whine on here. Ted Kennedy whines for 10 minutes before he actually asks a question of a potential supreme court justice at a confirmation hearing, you whine, I whine, we all whine.

Graham nailed it. We HAVE become a nation of whiners. Now, given the context of how it was brought to this board. As a rebuttal to Jesse Jackson having threatened to remove the testicles of his colleauge, Mr. Obama. A board member, who was very board obviously and had nothing to do, found this statement made by Mr. Graham and figured it was the closest (he/she) could come to offsetting the obvious damage done and have something to WHINE about. It was clearly indictative of the average democrat response to anything but was unable to attract an inkling of support from even the lefties on the board.

I call this phishing!

[Little-Acorn]

Maybe Hillary needs to warm up in the bullpen cause Obama may not get past the 7th inning of this contast.

An interesting statement, and one that might even come true. The Democrats have a long history of violating election law to ensure a victory at the polls.

Recall the 2002 election, where Robert Torricelli (D-NJ) was running for re-election to the U.S. Senate. He started fading in the polls, rumblings were increasing about his corruption and dishonesty etc. So the Dems simply decided that he would drop out of the race and they would put Frank Lautenberg on the ballot in NJ, despite the fact that the deadlines for doing either of those things, mandated by the NJ legislature, were long past.

Republicans sued, and the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled against them. The Court said that since such deadlines were arbitrarily set, they didn't have to be obeyed, and the NJ Supreme Court would change the law and set new deadlines letting the Dems swap in a more viable candidate. Republicans tried to appeal to the US Supreme Court, but that Court declined to take the case since it involved only a state court decision on state law in a state election.

Fast forward to 2008. If the Dems hold their convention and officially pick Obama as their nominee, and then he starts fading in the polls as Torricelli did, might they simply boot him out (sorry, "ask him to drop out") and put Hillary in instead, despite the mandate of their own primary elections and convention?

History shows that such skulduggery would not be beyond them. And since the Constitution contains no mention of political parties or nominating conventions, they might figure they can avoid the Supreme Court again and get away with it. Merely violating the wishes of their constituents, clearly would not bother them: winning at any cost, is their goal.

[mundame]

If the Dems hold their convention and officially pick Obama as their nominee, and then he starts fading in the polls as Torricelli did, might they simply boot him out (sorry, "ask him to drop out") and put Hillary in instead, despite the mandate of their own primary elections and convention?



Of course! THAT is exactly why Hillary only "suspended" her campaign.

Well, that and the possibility of assassination, obviously, since she kept mentioning it.


People predict what they want, you know.

[red states rule]

Mr. Graham was merely echoing sentiment felt by many Americans at how government is failing and Americans seem to have become whiners......it's that simple.

The right and the left whine. We whine all the time. We whine on here. Ted Kennedy whines for 10 minutes before he actually asks a question of a potential supreme court justice at a confirmation hearing, you whine, I whine, we all whine.

Graham nailed it. We HAVE become a nation of whiners. Now, given the context of how it was brought to this board. As a rebuttal to Jesse Jackson having threatened to remove the testicles of his colleauge, Mr. Obama. A board member, who was very board obviously and had nothing to do, found this statement made by Mr. Graham and figured it was the closest (he/she) could come to offsetting the obvious damage done and have something to WHINE about. It was clearly indictative of the average democrat response to anything but was unable to attract an inkling of support from even the lefties on the board.

I call this phishing!

You have the liberal media and Dems running around telling people not to worry - the rich will pay more in taxes - and the government will take care of you

No matter where you turn, Dems are telling people what a rotten life people are living. They have nothing good to say about America. They constantly recite their doom and gloom tales. The liberal media slants their stories to fit the template the Dems have set

I am not surprised some are buying it

[mundame]

No matter where you turn, Dems are telling people what a rotten life people are living. They have nothing good to say about America. They constantly recite their doom and gloom tales. The liberal media slants their stories to fit the template the Dems have set


I actually think global warming itself is a metaphor for how out-of-control and worried and anxious everyone feels because of Bush handling the whole 9/11 thing so badly, the wasted wars and and all. I think global warming is a sort of giant metaphor for people's worry, and as soon as Oobopaloobop gets in as Prez, global warming will fade away like dew when the sun comes out.

[red states rule]

I actually think global warming itself is a metaphor for how out-of-control and worried and anxious everyone feels because of Bush handling the whole 9/11 thing so badly, the wasted wars and and all. I think global warming is a sort of giant metaphor for people's worry, and as soon as Oobopaloobop gets in as Prez, global warming will fade away like dew when the sun comes out.

Yep, and Dems say it will only cost about $15 trillion to solve the non existent problem of global warming

What is funny, recenly I have seen where your TV causes global warming.

And now, even clean air cause global warming.

Getting back to the topic at hand, I learned awhile ago, if Dems can;t find a real issue to scare people into voting for them - they will invent one

Like they have with global warming

[h.rapbrown]

Phil Gram obviously doesn't know the difference from when people are whining or just plain mad as hell. Yeah, we're mad as hell. Bush and his republican government took us from peace and porosperity to the God awful mess we are now experiencing in just 8 short years. Heck of a job, Georgie.

Whining is what the RW loonies did when they found out that Bill got a blow job. Then to ease their sissified whining they tried to take down the government. You boys are some funny dudes lacking in character and a real sense of proportionality.

Blow job bad!
Killing 1.2 million Iraqis good!

[red states rule]

Phil Gram obviously doesn't know the difference from when people are whining or just plain mad as hell. Yeah, we're mad as hell. Bush and his republican government took us from peace and porosperity to the God awful mess we are now experiencing in just 8 short years. Heck of a job, Georgie.

Whining is what the RW loonies did when they found out that Bill got a blow job. Then to ease their sissified whining they tried to take down the government. You boys are some funny dudes lacking in character and a real sense of proportionality.

Blow job bad!
Killing 1.2 million Iraqis good!


So when libs scream how it is their right to have free healthcare, free college education, or $1/gal gas - what would you call it?

The messiah fails to tell the folls that swallow his crap SOMEONE has to pay for all his handouts.

You guy Bill lied under oath - which is perjury, and a felony

[Kathianne]

An interesting statement, and one that might even come true. The Democrats have a long history of violating election law to ensure a victory at the polls.

Recall the 2002 election, where Robert Torricelli (D-NJ) was running for re-election to the U.S. Senate. He started fading in the polls, rumblings were increasing about his corruption and dishonesty etc. So the Dems simply decided that he would drop out of the race and they would put Frank Lautenberg on the ballot in NJ, despite the fact that the deadlines for doing either of those things, mandated by the NJ legislature, were long past.

Republicans sued, and the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled against them. The Court said that since such deadlines were arbitrarily set, they didn't have to be obeyed, and the NJ Supreme Court would change the law and set new deadlines letting the Dems swap in a more viable candidate. Republicans tried to appeal to the US Supreme Court, but that Court declined to take the case since it involved only a state court decision on state law in a state election.

Fast forward to 2008. If the Dems hold their convention and officially pick Obama as their nominee, and then he starts fading in the polls as Torricelli did, might they simply boot him out (sorry, "ask him to drop out") and put Hillary in instead, despite the mandate of their own primary elections and convention?

History shows that such skulduggery would not be beyond them. And since the Constitution contains no mention of political parties or nominating conventions, they might figure they can avoid the Supreme Court again and get away with it. Merely violating the wishes of their constituents, clearly would not bother them: winning at any cost, is their goal.
While the constitution doesn't mention parties, the federalist paper #10 certainly does, one can find the influence upon the writing of the constitution, trying to avoid factions. Obviously they were unsuccessful with that.

[April15]

While the constitution doesn't mention parties, the federalist paper #10 certainly does, one can find the influence upon the writing of the constitution, trying to avoid factions. Obviously they were unsuccessful with that.Thank the uniter for dividing this nation.

[red states rule]

Thank the uniter for dividing this nation.

Libs divided the country with their hate and rage over losing in 2000. The hate and rage has grown on a daily basis ever since

[avatar4321]

Thank the uniter for dividing this nation.

Tell me something, why do people have to agree with you or they are a divider? Have you ever stopped to think that you are the problem?

Probably not.

[Kathianne]

Thank the uniter for dividing this nation.

I'm assuming you mean GWB? I try not to answer if unsure. Please clarify.

[April15]

Tell me something, why do people have to agree with you or they are a divider? Have you ever stopped to think that you are the problem?

Probably not.People do not have to agree with me. I like it when a person shows me where I am wrong. The obsticle to this nation being united again is GWB can not seem to get it through his thick skull he is Wrong on many counts.
On this issue Americans have chosen sides because of the magic word patriot. As in you are un patriotic if you don't support your president. This word makes the insecure afraid and they don't want to be un patriotic. They are forced to chose patriotism over common sense.

[April15]

I'm assuming you mean GWB? I try not to answer if unsure. Please clarify.Kathianne you win the prize with a correct response!

[red states rule]

People do not have to agree with me. I like it when a person shows me where I am wrong. The obsticle to this nation being united again is GWB can not seem to get it through his thick skull he is Wrong on many counts.
On this issue Americans have chosen sides because of the magic word patriot. As in you are un patriotic if you don't support your president. This word makes the insecure afraid and they don't want to be un patriotic. They are forced to chose patriotism over common sense.

So when you disagree with the messiah and libs toss out the racist charge - that is not dividing the country?

Or when the liberal media asks if a black man can overcome the nations racism - that is not dividing the country?

I remember well libs screaming how Republcians were unpatriotic because they "wanted to tear down the President" during the Clinton years. Well I did not hear any elected Republcinas saying Pres Clinton should be shot between the eyes like some elected Dems have said about Pres Bush

I do not recall any books or movies made during the Clinton years depicting the Presidents assassination

So who is the divider again?

[April15]

So when you disagree with the messiah and libs toss out the racist charge - that is not dividing the country?

Or when the liberal media asks if a black man can overcome the nations racism - that is not dividing the country?

I remember well libs screaming how Republcians were unpatriotic because they "wanted to tear down the President" during the Clinton years. Well I did not hear any elected Republcinas saying Pres Clinton should be shot between the eyes like some elected Dems have said about Pres Bush

I do not recall any books or movies made during the Clinton years depicting the Presidents assassination

So who is the divider again?Actually the democrats were calling republicans that wanted Ken Starr to investigate everything clinton did in his life assholes and dumbfucks but I don't recall un patriotic being tossed about.
I am the one who wanted bush shot but it is too late now. Most likely it will be our next president if he lives to be sworn in.
The divider is the imbicile in the oval office G Wrong Bush.

[red states rule]

Actually the democrats were calling republicans that wanted Ken Starr to investigate everything clinton did in his life assholes and dumbfucks but I don't recall un patriotic being tossed about.
I am the one who wanted bush shot but it is too late now. Most likely it will be our next president if he lives to be sworn in.
The divider is the imbicile in the oval office G Wrong Bush.

I can see by your desire to murder the President of the US, you are the "victim" here, and it is Pres Bush's fault you have an insane desire to commit murder

SO wanting to bring Bill to justice for perjury was not an issue for you? How typical

[April15]

I can see by your desire to murder the President of the US, you are the "victim" here, and it is Pres Bush's fault you have an insane desire to commit murder

SO wanting to bring Bill to justice for perjury was not an issue for you? How typicalThe world is the victim of GWB. To commit murder the animal being shot must be a human and Bush doesn't qualify for that description. Much like raygun didn't.
As to Clinton I find it hard to understand how an investigation into a land deal could wind up digging into his sexual practices, unless it was all for the purpose of emberassing him which I would not put past ****servatives at all!

[red states rule]

The world is the victim of GWB. To commit murder the animal being shot must be a human and Bush doesn't qualify for that description. Much like raygun didn't.
As to Clinton I find it hard to understand how an investigation into a land deal could wind up digging into his sexual practices, unless it was all for the purpose of emberassing him which I would not put past ****servatives at all!

You moonbats are a trip. The party that runs around and thumps their chest how THEY are the party of peace, the party that hates racism, and the "bug tent" party - are the most hate filled, most racist, and most intolerant buch I have ever seen

Your hate for Pres Bush is rooted in one thing. He beat your asses in 2 elections, and finally stood up to the terrorists that Bill Clinton ignored. Up until 9-11 Dems treated terrorism as a crime, and not an act of war

Bill was clearly guilty of perjury - which is a felony. But sicne he has a "D" at the end of his name. liberal moonbats like you give him a pass

Your double standards rule the day with you once again

[April15]

You moonbats are a trip. The party that runs around and thumps their chest how THEY are the party of peace, the party that hates racism, and the "bug tent" party - are the most hate filled, most racist, and most intolerant buch I have ever seen

Your hate for Pres Bush is rooted in one thing. He beat your asses in 2 elections, and finally stood up to the terrorists that Bill Clinton ignored. Up until 9-11 Dems treated terrorism as a crime, and not an act of war

Bill was clearly guilty of perjury - which is a felony. But sicne he has a "D" at the end of his name. liberal moonbats like you give him a pass

Your double standards rule the day with you once again
The acts of terrorism perpetraited on this nations property is a crime not an act of war. As for bush being appointed president that just put America into third world status in regards to elections. That people were stupid enough to elect him in 2004 is a sad comment on the nations intelligence as a whole.

[red states rule]

The acts of terrorism perpetraited on this nations property is a crime not an act of war. As for bush being appointed president that just put America into third world status in regards to elections. That people were stupid enough to elect him in 2004 is a sad comment on the nations intelligence as a whole.

You are a nutcase. You blame Pres Reagan becuase you could not manage your money and went bankrupt.

You alwats play the role of the victim, and find something to whine and lie about at the same time

You have advanced well past drinking the Kool Aid. You have moved on to the next level


http://www.lostwackys.com/images/PATCHES/kook.jpg

[April15]

You are a nutcase. You blame Pres Reagan becuase you could not manage your money and went bankrupt.

You alwats play the role of the victim, and find something to whine and lie about at the same time

You have advanced well past drinking the Kool Aid. You have moved on to the next level


http://www.lostwackys.com/images/PATCHES/kook.jpg
You claim I could not manage my money but the truth is because of rayguns policies I could not earn money. And I was not alone. I suffered through his being governor of California twice and this state is still trying to recover from his policies.

You just can't handle the truth about your hero.

[red states rule]

You claim I could not manage my money but the truth is because of rayguns policies I could not earn money. And I was not alone. I suffered through his being governor of California twice and this state is still trying to recover from his policies.

You just can't handle the truth about your hero.

Yea, I can see where those tax cuts reduced your income. Only tax increases on you, employers, corporations would have prevented you from screwing up your financies

I remember well how the voters hated his policies. He only won 49 states in his relection in 1984


http://uspoliticsguide.com/images/Presidents-history/1984-electoral-map.gif

[5stringJeff]

The acts of terrorism perpetraited on this nations property is a crime not an act of war. As for bush being appointed president that just put America into third world status in regards to elections. That people were stupid enough to elect him in 2004 is a sad comment on the nations intelligence as a whole.

Foreigners attacked both military and civilian targets, and you want to arrest them?

[April15]

Foreigners attacked both military and civilian targets, and you want to arrest them?And you know the nation that supported and engaged in these attacks? A group of religious fanatic people is not a nation.

[red states rule]

And you know the nation that supported and engaged in these attacks? A group of religious fanatic people is not a nation.

Which is why libs cant be trusted with the defense and security of the US. Libs do have the courage to stand up to terrorists - which is why groups like Hamas is backing the messiah

[5stringJeff]

And you know the nation that supported and engaged in these attacks? A group of religious fanatic people is not a nation.

Well, since they were being hosted and supported by the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, that was the right place to start. The fact that Bush has not carried the war into the mountains on the Afghan-Pakistan border in order to "finish the fight" and capture bin Laden is ridiculous.

[red states rule]

Well, since they were being hosted and supported by the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, that was the right place to start. The fact that Bush has not carried the war into the mountains on the Afghan-Pakistan border in order to "finish the fight" and capture bin Laden is ridiculous.

Obama does have a plan to attack Pakistan

http://www.nypost.com/seven/08022007/photos/obama.jpg

[5stringJeff]

Obama does have a plan to attack Pakistan

What the hell has Bush done about it? He's known OBL and the remnants of al Qaeda have been there since 2002.

[red states rule]

What the hell has Bush done about it? He's known OBL and the remnants of al Qaeda have been there since 2002.

Well, the Special Ops was working on a plan - until the NY Times printed the story and tipped off the terrorists

How do you know there is not a covert operation to get OBL? Rest assured if we got him today. libs would cry it was all done for the election, and not to bring his to justice

[5stringJeff]

Well, the Special Ops was working on a plan - until the NY Times printed the story and tipped off the terrorists

How do you know there is not a covert operation to get OBL? Rest assured if we got him today. libs would cry it was all done for the election, and not to bring his to justice

One operation in six years is not a serious effort.

[red states rule]

One operation in six years is not a serious effort.

Oh, you have access to what speacial op operations, and what the CIA is up to. Sorry I did not know you had such high sources

The messiah said he would attack Pakistan, so you can vote for him if you wish

[April15]

Well, since they were being hosted and supported by the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, that was the right place to start. The fact that Bush has not carried the war into the mountains on the Afghan-Pakistan border in order to "finish the fight" and capture bin Laden is ridiculous.Now this I can agree with whole heartedly! I think the rest of the nation would also even the whiny libs.

[red states rule]

Now this I can agree with whole heartedly! I think the rest of the nation would also even the whiny libs.

Left wing messiah worshippers will never go for it. They are to busy with their war on conservatives and capitalism

[April15]

Left wing messiah worshippers will never go for it. They are to busy with their war on conservatives and capitalismYou just can't stand it that 5stringjeff is right can you?

[red states rule]

You just can't stand it that 5stringjeff is right can you?

As I said, Special Ops had a plant to go in and get OBL, but the NY Times published it. If we got OBL today, I know for a fact libs would rant how it was timed for the election, they would worry if OBL could get a fair trial, and would scream if the death penalty was asked for