OldMercsRule said:
funjumper said:
Plainsman said:
She's they to talk to the leaders about Isreal and Iraq. I guess she thinks the Secretary of State. Talk about an ego.
Try doing a Google search on Denny Hastert 1997 columbia meeting
[colour=blue]Hi Funjumper, Welcome to iboats! Question: Are you paid to blog for the Democrats? I did the google search did not find the cite, so please provide for us slow types. Thanks in advance![/colour]
Then post back your findings.
[colour=blue]Do you normally give orders to new forums you visit?[/colour]
If you get your undies in a bunch when the Speaker of the House visits foreign countries and meets with the government, against the wishes of the sitting president, you must have been pretty upset in 1997.
[colour=blue]Could not find the source doc. That said: this is a wonderfull refresher of the recent past. The 'Clintonistas' routinely trashed any and every historical party to defend the lawless Left Elite. A question or three for you. #1 Are you stateing it is illegal or wrong for a Speaker of the House of Representatives to travel and meet parties representing Heads of State or the Head of State? #2 Were we at WAR when this trip happened? #3 Had Columbia been named one of four PRIMARY States in the World, (axis of Evil) that sponsers State terroism? [/colour]
Hastert is on record as having told the Columbian Government, during his meeting, to bypass the Executive branch and deal directly with Congress via Hastert and his staff.
These activities were far beyond anything Pelosi has done.
[colour=blue]Hmmmmm, Really? I will comment after you provide the cite n' answer the above questions.[/colour]
Since Hastert is a righty, there was no undermining of the Executive Branch, etc, so on and so forth, as Pelosi is accused of, eh?
[colour=blue]I will answer when I have the facts SIR or Madame.[/colour]
The foul stench of right wing hypocrisy is overpowering. Do you smell it now?
[colour=blue]No.[/colour]
By the way, has anyone seen the photos of Condi and Laura in head scarves when visiting mosques in the Middle East? How about the photos of the female republicans that were on the trip with Pelosi? The ones that show the republicans in head scarves at the same time and place as Pelosi? No, you people wouldn't have seen the photos. You wouldn't dare look at anything that resembles factual reporting. Faux News is the way to go...
[colour=blue]Not interested in this part of yer post, Sorry.[/colour]
[colour=blue]I hope you choose to answer my challenge. Again Welcome. Respectfully, JR[/colour]
Follow the links to the documents. Interesting reading.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB69/part3.html#doc52
George Washington University isn't an unknown entity. Please note that the documents posted came through FOIA. That terrible law that promotes government accountabilty. What kind of evil people believe in and use something called the "Freedom of Information Act" to gather information on government activities? Questioning the government? Can you believe it?
That's un-American... NOT!!
[colour=blue]Hey Funjumper I actually looked up the document and read it. Did you? The reason I asked is the fact that ABSOLUTLY NOTHING IS COMPARABLE TO THE SHALLOW IDIOTIC POINT YOU WERE TRYING TO MAKE. :}:}:} George Washington University is a fine place. and I also like the FIOA, and I like to monitor and question the government as well. WHY ARE YOU USING SUCH A SNOTTY TONE? Did ya mention somethin about undies in a bunch, is that a problem for ya? Please be civil. This isn't a big deal: really![/colour]
The Speaker of the House can travel and meet with whomever they want. Depending on how the meetings are structured, they can be more or less productive. Apparently, if it is Republicans doing it, all is OK. If it is Democrats, is is way not OK. The stench is billowing again...
[colour=blue]This issue is 180 degrees from the Pelosi matter you pounded earlier. Are you OK? Got a temperature, or is it the underware you were talkin' about? Stench, what stench? Undies again?[/colour]
Congress has not declared war on any country.
[colour=blue]HEY there BUB! just how many wars have been declared since 1945? You have a problem with your brain or something?[/colour]
For the morons in the house, that means we are not "in a state of war", no matter how many times Shrub crows about the GWOT. I haven't bought any war bonds. I haven't been asked to pay higher taxes to pay for this "war". I haven't seen any company give up any of the profits that have accrued due to the war. (Oil companies and their record profits) No sacrifices have been made by the regular people of the USA (except for watching the war on TV, says Shrub).
What makes you think we are in a "state of war"?
Because Shrub says so?
Are you really that gullible?
[colour=blue]No I don't think I am. How 'bout you?[/colour] :}:}:}
The USA is currently engaged in an illegal occupation of Iraq. The occupation was was preceeded by a premeditated war of agression against Iraq, a country that posed no direct threat to the USA.
:}:}:}
Shrub can act like a twelve year old and call sovereign nations all the names that he can think of. If you believe what he says, you might think that "Axis of Evil" actually means something real.
[colour=blue]Ya know I do, actually.[/colour]
All the blowhard posturing in the world doesn't make what is said true. Unless, of course, you are a loyal Bushie. Then it is gospel.
[colour=blue]Hmmmm.[/colour] :}
Nice that you aren't interested in the part of the post that is the clearest demonstration of right wing hypocrisy.
In other words, according to you, don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up.
[colour=blue]No ya can't read my mind, don't know if you can read havin' read yer source material[/colour]. :}:}:}
All politicians are scumbags. Clinton was no saint. He is a Rhodes scholar. Do a google search if you don't know what that means. The man is a brilliant intellect with major character flaws. He has a depth of knowlege about economics and world history that puts Shrub (and most presidents) to shame. Much of what could have been accomplished by Clinton was thwarted by the Republicans. What would the health care situation be like now if the Clinton plan had passed in 1994?
[colour=blue]We would be in a DEFLATIONARY DEPRESION. If you take 1/6 of the private economy and nationalize it, (which doubles the size of the government), you would pay for all the health care stuff with tax dollars and be far less efficient. The way it was allowed to be, those very profitable companies, (best in the world BTW actually pay a lot of taxes). Does your brain work?[/colour]
Great people can have serious character flaws. Henry Ford was a virulent anti-semetic. Charles Lindbergh was pro Nazi and pro german, in the thirties.
Prescott Bush was Hitler's banker and did business with the Nazis right up until December 7, 1941.
[colour=blue]Prescott Bush was not Hitler's "banker". [/colour] :}:}:}
I wasn't real happy with Clinton during his administration. In hindsight, compared to the current pack of evil lying scumbags, Clinton ranks up there with Lincoln and Roosevelt. Shrub will be ranked alongside Hoover. The damage done to the USA in six years has been immense. It will take generations to fix the damage.
d
