Palin's Book Being Sold "AT BELOW COST" Prices
in [Golf]
|
Prev: Palin's book on top at amazon
Next: Was Pitts right?
From: bknight on 27 Nov 2009 19:28 On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 17:42:38 -0500, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: >In article <4b1010dd$0$4979$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, >nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... >The leaders of most of the counries throughout the world know that Obma >is a "hopeless retard". As if you had a scintilla of an idea of what anyone else thought. You're calling someone a retard? Ironic. BK
From: BAR on 27 Nov 2009 19:30 In article <4b101ff6$0$4976$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... > > On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 13:30:41 -0500, Frank Ketchum wrote: > > "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > > news:4b1010dd$0$4979$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > > > >> What I thought then and think now is that the President has much less > >> say over the country than people generally believe. I did not for one > >> second think that when Obama came in that everything would suddenly > >> be peachy keen. I don't agree with many of his policies. However he > >> is not a hopeless retard, so that's a big improvement in itself. > > > > I don't recall you making the case that the president really doesn't > > have as much say over the country when Bush was president. > > You kidding? Obama has more say in things than Bush ever did. Bush was > the mountain-biking President. That is, when he wasn't the golfing > President, or the vacationing at his "ranch" President, or the trying to > read someone else's speech off the teleprompter President. Bush's > handlers, specifically Cheney and the people under his influence, had a > great deal of power--as much as what lies in Obama's hands now--and were > much less restrained about abusing it. > > But of course power is relative. Arrayed against the office of the > President are military and corporate interests that severely limit the > the ability of any administration to impose real change. Administrations > come and go, but the people pulling the strings do not. > > > I seem remember you being in the chorus of the lunatic left going > > apoplectic over everything when Bush was president. > > You know Frank, your memory's not so good. I just asked myself why I care what a Canadian and Brit, living in the USA with no intentions of ever becoming US citizens, have to say about the US. I just answered my question.
From: Carbon on 27 Nov 2009 19:32 On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 19:30:10 -0500, BAR wrote: > In article <4b101ff6$0$4976$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, > nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... >> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 13:30:41 -0500, Frank Ketchum wrote: >> > "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message >> > news:4b1010dd$0$4979$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... >> > >> >> What I thought then and think now is that the President has much >> >> less say over the country than people generally believe. I did not >> >> for one second think that when Obama came in that everything would >> >> suddenly be peachy keen. I don't agree with many of his policies. >> >> However he is not a hopeless retard, so that's a big improvement >> >> in itself. >> > >> > I don't recall you making the case that the president really >> > doesn't have as much say over the country when Bush was president. >> >> You kidding? Obama has more say in things than Bush ever did. Bush >> was the mountain-biking President. That is, when he wasn't the >> golfing President, or the vacationing at his "ranch" President, or >> the trying to read someone else's speech off the teleprompter >> President. Bush's handlers, specifically Cheney and the people under >> his influence, had a great deal of power--as much as what lies in >> Obama's hands now--and were much less restrained about abusing it. >> >> But of course power is relative. Arrayed against the office of the >> President are military and corporate interests that severely limit >> the the ability of any administration to impose real change. >> Administrations come and go, but the people pulling the strings do >> not. >> >> > I seem remember you being in the chorus of the lunatic left going >> > apoplectic over everything when Bush was president. >> >> You know Frank, your memory's not so good. > > I just asked myself why I care what a Canadian and Brit, living in the > USA with no intentions of ever becoming US citizens, have to say about > the US. > > I just answered my question. Wow. William and I both win this one.
From: William Clark on 28 Nov 2009 10:01 In article <MPG.257a391cc09a0cc1989807(a)news.giganews.com>, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > In article <4b101ff6$0$4976$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, > nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... > > > > On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 13:30:41 -0500, Frank Ketchum wrote: > > > "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > > > news:4b1010dd$0$4979$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > > > > > >> What I thought then and think now is that the President has much less > > >> say over the country than people generally believe. I did not for one > > >> second think that when Obama came in that everything would suddenly > > >> be peachy keen. I don't agree with many of his policies. However he > > >> is not a hopeless retard, so that's a big improvement in itself. > > > > > > I don't recall you making the case that the president really doesn't > > > have as much say over the country when Bush was president. > > > > You kidding? Obama has more say in things than Bush ever did. Bush was > > the mountain-biking President. That is, when he wasn't the golfing > > President, or the vacationing at his "ranch" President, or the trying to > > read someone else's speech off the teleprompter President. Bush's > > handlers, specifically Cheney and the people under his influence, had a > > great deal of power--as much as what lies in Obama's hands now--and were > > much less restrained about abusing it. > > > > But of course power is relative. Arrayed against the office of the > > President are military and corporate interests that severely limit the > > the ability of any administration to impose real change. Administrations > > come and go, but the people pulling the strings do not. > > > > > I seem remember you being in the chorus of the lunatic left going > > > apoplectic over everything when Bush was president. > > > > You know Frank, your memory's not so good. > > I just asked myself why I care what a Canadian and Brit, living in the > USA with no intentions of ever becoming US citizens, have to say about > the US. > > I just answered my question. Then you need to ask yourself another question, which is why you are compelled to keep relying to them?
From: William Clark on 28 Nov 2009 10:02
In article <4b106fa0$0$4885$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 19:30:10 -0500, BAR wrote: > > In article <4b101ff6$0$4976$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, > > nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... > >> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 13:30:41 -0500, Frank Ketchum wrote: > >> > "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > >> > news:4b1010dd$0$4979$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > >> > > >> >> What I thought then and think now is that the President has much > >> >> less say over the country than people generally believe. I did not > >> >> for one second think that when Obama came in that everything would > >> >> suddenly be peachy keen. I don't agree with many of his policies. > >> >> However he is not a hopeless retard, so that's a big improvement > >> >> in itself. > >> > > >> > I don't recall you making the case that the president really > >> > doesn't have as much say over the country when Bush was president. > >> > >> You kidding? Obama has more say in things than Bush ever did. Bush > >> was the mountain-biking President. That is, when he wasn't the > >> golfing President, or the vacationing at his "ranch" President, or > >> the trying to read someone else's speech off the teleprompter > >> President. Bush's handlers, specifically Cheney and the people under > >> his influence, had a great deal of power--as much as what lies in > >> Obama's hands now--and were much less restrained about abusing it. > >> > >> But of course power is relative. Arrayed against the office of the > >> President are military and corporate interests that severely limit > >> the the ability of any administration to impose real change. > >> Administrations come and go, but the people pulling the strings do > >> not. > >> > >> > I seem remember you being in the chorus of the lunatic left going > >> > apoplectic over everything when Bush was president. > >> > >> You know Frank, your memory's not so good. > > > > I just asked myself why I care what a Canadian and Brit, living in the > > USA with no intentions of ever becoming US citizens, have to say about > > the US. > > > > I just answered my question. > > Wow. William and I both win this one. Hands down and going away. |