Dumb Dems
in [Golf]
|
Prev: Tiger is Cabalasian... Obama is a Mulatto
Next: Health care - thanks for reading this +++ : -) +++
From: dene on 26 Sep 2008 01:21 "Jack Hollis" <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:uj3od4ha8q80mfbj4g5mhnj06mecr1105e(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 13:33:39 -0700 (PDT), The_Professor <dbid(a)att.net> > wrote: > > >The Chuckster did > >not articulate anything (as he did as moderator of a debate...he > >articulated the specific Bush Doctrine his mind conjured up). > > It was a stupid question. Bingo!
From: dene on 26 Sep 2008 01:26 "The_Professor" <dbid(a)att.net> wrote in message news:1f6c65ef-17f2-4737-9f22-048035be4e55(a)z6g2000pre.googlegroups.com... On Sep 25, 9:20 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > Nope. I'm not in the least concerned with the U.S. elections. I'm having > some fun with a bunch of hypocrites.- Hide quoted text - One thing for sure. You've clearly joined the club. ----------------------------------------------------- Exactly. What could be more hypocritical than this Canadian couch surfer picking fights about American politics, as though he really cares? There lies a portion of his own hypocrisies. Can you imagine the absurdity if anyone on the board cared about Canadian politics, much less picked fights about it. Most, including me, do not know the name of the current Canadian P.M., or whether he's conservative or liberal. -Greg
From: Alan Baker on 26 Sep 2008 01:35 In article <6k39p4F5spr8U1(a)mid.individual.net>, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > "The_Professor" <dbid(a)att.net> wrote in message > news:1f6c65ef-17f2-4737-9f22-048035be4e55(a)z6g2000pre.googlegroups.com... > On Sep 25, 9:20 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > > > Nope. I'm not in the least concerned with the U.S. elections. I'm having > > some fun with a bunch of hypocrites.- Hide quoted text - > > One thing for sure. You've clearly joined the club. > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > Exactly. > > What could be more hypocritical than this Canadian couch surfer picking > fights about American politics, as though he really cares? There lies a > portion of his own hypocrisies. I don't care about the politics; I've made that clear. I just don't like hypocrisy. > > Can you imagine the absurdity if anyone on the board cared about Canadian > politics, much less picked fights about it. Most, including me, do not know > the name of the current Canadian P.M., or whether he's conservative or > liberal. That's because you're a typically ignorant American. Most wouldn't consider ignorance something to be proud of. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: Alan Baker on 26 Sep 2008 01:36 In article <6k39gfF5qkq6U1(a)mid.individual.net>, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > "Jack Hollis" <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote in message > news:uj3od4ha8q80mfbj4g5mhnj06mecr1105e(a)4ax.com... > > On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 13:33:39 -0700 (PDT), The_Professor <dbid(a)att.net> > > wrote: > > > > >The Chuckster did > > >not articulate anything (as he did as moderator of a debate...he > > >articulated the specific Bush Doctrine his mind conjured up). > > > > It was a stupid question. > > Bingo! How was it stupid to ask a Republican candidate about a Republican president's philosophies? -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: MNMikeW on 26 Sep 2008 08:52
"Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message news:alangbaker-87BD80.19212725092008@[74.223.185.199.nw.nuvox.net]... > In article > <ec41e2b7-02f3-4d08-987a-086e10c38b4a(a)a3g2000prm.googlegroups.com>, > The_Professor <dbid(a)att.net> wrote: > >> On Sep 25, 5:39 pm, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: >> > On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 08:45:14 -0500, the Moderator wrote: >> > > "William A. T. Clark" <cl...(a)nospammatsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in >> > > message >> > >news:clark-F7AC7E.07504625092008(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... >> > >> In article <nnDCk.1227$Jw....(a)nwrddc02.gnilink.net>, "Stapler" >> > >> <stap...(a)tmp.com> wrote: >> > >>> William Clark wrote: >> > >>> > In article <48DADA61.9C862...(a)att.net>, The Professor >> > >>> > <D...(a)att.net> >> > >>> > wrote: >> > >> > >>> >> So Dem VP Joe Biden is on national TV talking about President >> > >>> >> Roosevelt's TV address during the 1929 stock crash. What's he >> > >>> >> gonna >> > >>> >> do next, tell a guy in a wheelchair to stand up? Or has he done >> > >>> >> that already too? >> > >> > >>> >> What if Sarah Palin had done either of these things? >> > >> > >>> > There's no possibility of that - Sarah Palin doesn't even know >> > >>> > who >> > >>> > Roosevelt was. >> > >> > >>> Fuckhead. >> > >> > >> Another stellar contribution to informed debate. >> > >> > > Informed debate? You claim Palin does not know who Roosevelt was? >> > >> > Well, does she? She doesn't even know what the Bush Doctrine is, and >> > that's a hell of a lot more current.- Hide quoted text - >> > >> > - Show quoted text - >> >> There is no Bush Doctrine. There is only Charleski asking Bush >> questions. > > There is indeed a Bush doctrine. > > It details a philosophy that says the U.S. is allowed to unilaterally > and pre-emptively attack sovereign nations when it feels like it > (essentially). That's one version. |