Now THATS an expensive blowjob! Plus the wrath of Hillary, poor Bill.

(03-26-2011, 08:03 PM)username Wrote:

(03-26-2011, 07:48 PM)Cracker Wrote:

(03-26-2011, 04:45 PM)Duchess Wrote:

(03-26-2011, 04:43 PM)Ordinary Peephole Wrote: Investigation into Clinton - 40 million dollars.
Investigation into ⁹⁄₁₁ - 3 million dollars.

Those numbers don't surprise me at all.

Really? Because they are bullshit:

Spent on Whitewater + Monica Lewinsky Investigations= $40 million
Spent on ⁹⁄₁₁ Commission= $15 million

Oh, yeah, then we went to war. It's in the billions now. That data was from 2005 or before.

Are we arguing about who can spend (or waste) the most money?

No, we are fighting the good fight against bullshit and those who swallow it hook, line, and sinker.

Carry on. They need all of you in the flock. hahahahaha

"Six years and more than $50 million in taxpayer money later, an independent counsel has concluded there is "insufficient evidence" to charge President Clinton and First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton with any criminal wrongdoing in the Whitewater land deal in Arkansas."

"Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr spent more than $6 million on the
Monica Lewinsky scandal and the overall investigation of President
Clinton is becoming the most expensive in history, congressional
auditors reported yesterday... Starr's expenditures totaled $6.2
million in the six months through last Sept. 30, up nearly 60 percent
from the $3.9 million in the previous six months, said the GAO
[General Accounting Office]. "


I have a thing about numbers and accuracy. While I am not claiming what I posted was correct, it is closer to the truth.

(03-26-2011, 08:16 PM)Cracker Wrote:

(03-26-2011, 08:03 PM)username Wrote:

(03-26-2011, 07:48 PM)Cracker Wrote:

(03-26-2011, 04:45 PM)Duchess Wrote:

(03-26-2011, 04:43 PM)Ordinary Peephole Wrote: Investigation into Clinton - 40 million dollars.
Investigation into ⁹⁄₁₁ - 3 million dollars.

Those numbers don't surprise me at all.

Really? Because they are bullshit:

Spent on Whitewater + Monica Lewinsky Investigations= $40 million
Spent on ⁹⁄₁₁ Commission= $15 million

Oh, yeah, then we went to war. It's in the billions now. That data was from 2005 or before.

Are we arguing about who can spend (or waste) the most money?

No, we are fighting the good fight against bullshit and those who swallow it hook, line, and sinker.

Carry on. They need all of you in the flock. hahahahaha

Fucking timed out bullshit. Never mind.

hahahaha!

The conservatives broke the board so you couldn't post.

Don't drink the orange kool-aid!

At least I'm getting the end game in Libya. We're going to reduce Gadhafi's fighting ability to that of the rebels (bye bye tanks, air capabilities etc.) and at the same time, bombard Gadhafi's army with incentives to switch sides (via flyers, hijacking their communication networks etc.). Basically, absent putting troops on the ground, doing everything we can to help the rebels win.

Interesting.

I wonder if Obama will admit that when he gives his speech Monday night.

[align=right]

(03-26-2011, 09:44 PM)Cracker Wrote: Don't drink the orange kool-aid!

Some people see black or white, I see gray. I honestly don't understand hardline views on either side. I vote based on what I think is best at a given time and the candidate's particular platform (that's true on the local, state and national level). I don't vote based on party lines.

You?

What Reagan said here

After Obama speaks lets see how different they are, or how much the same they are.

(03-26-2011, 10:26 PM)Maggot Wrote: After Obama speaks lets see how different they are, or how much the same they are.

Big difference though. Reagan was responding to what was perceived as a direct attack on Americans. Obama can't claim the same.

And, we have to justify why we're intervening in Libya but not Syria, Saudi Arabia etc.

(03-26-2011, 10:03 PM)username Wrote: [align=right]

(03-26-2011, 09:44 PM)Cracker Wrote: Don't drink the orange kool-aid!

Some people see black or white, I see gray. I honestly don't understand hardline views on either side. I vote based on what I think is best at a given time and the candidate's particular platform (that's true on the local, state and national level). I don't vote based on party lines.

You?

Fucking timed out mutherfucker.

I am a registered Libertarian. Have been for over 10 years. That said, I voted for Zell Miller every time, whether he was a D or R at that time. I will cross party lines and vote my conscience.

As the military runs itself and the Commander in Chief usually does what they suggest, I cast my vote based on fiscal policies. I never vote for a Robin Hood, whether she/he is a R or a D. If I want to donate my money to a cause, I'll do it on my own.

We need to fix the money issues we have. That is my number one concern. To do that, we are going to need immigration reform or a president that will protect our borders. Those will be my two sticking points over the next few election cycles, state and federal.

Sheesh, McCain and Lieberman on the tube pimping this war. McCain even compared it to the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

Dear God,
Please let our federal govt collapse and the constitution be restored so the empire comes to an end amen.

I am so fucking sick of these damn wars and the death and the debt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"There's no question that the rebels Americans are currently fighting for in Libya include in their ranks jihadis who in recent years traveled to Iraq and Afghanistan to kill Americans. The only question is whether that worries you or not.
Take Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, a leader of U.S.-supported rebels in the fighting for Adjabiya. His hometown, Darnah, has produced many jihadis, and after the Sept. 11 attacks al-Hasidi traveled to Afghanistan to fight the "foreign invasion" -- that is, the U.S. military. According to a report in Britain's Daily Telegraph, al-Hasidi says he was later captured in Pakistan, handed over to the U.S., then held in prison in Libya before being released in 2008.

In addition to fighting the U.S. in Afghanistan, al-Hasidi also says he recruited about two dozen men to fight the U.S. in Iraq.

Now al-Hasidi and his allies are moving toward Tripoli, which would not be possible without the military power of the United States. The men who devoted so much energy to killing Americans are now thankfully watching Americans kill for them.?



Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2...z1I3U78DPJ

They must be laughing their asses off at us and our retarded president.

"
Admiral James Stavridis, commander of NATO and overall chief of U.S. and coalition forces in the Libyan war, says American intelligence agents are "examining very closely" the rebel forces for whom U.S. forces have gone to war. So far, Stavridis says, the U.S. has discovered "flickers" of the presence of al Qaeda and other terrorist groups, although Stavridis calls the opposition leadership "responsible.""



Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/belt...z1I3V32jpO

We are supporting al Qaeda. Jesus Christ.

If you fucking people vote for Obama again, I am going to bitch slap you.

And now . . . Arming the "Rebels".

http://www.smh.com.au/world/us-set-to-gi...rom=smh_sb

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa...ya.rebels/


Yeah . . . the GOP and the Tea Party are the ONLY hawks!

I need a Dove Bar.

Son of a Bitch!!!!

Obama can't win with some people.

If he does nothing - "weak, he's no commander in chief!".
If he does something - "asshole, he's helping Al Qaeda!"

(03-30-2011, 11:54 AM)Ordinary Peephole Wrote: Obama can't win with some people.

If he does nothing - "weak, he's no commander in chief!".
If he does something - "asshole, he's helping Al Qaeda!"

Well . . . I'm kinda thinkin' Carter and Afghanistan.

http://www.activistmagazine.com/images/s...9-1581.jpg

http://www.activistmagazine.com/images/s...9-1579.jpg

Elephant or Ass . . . blood is on both.