| Topic: |
Science > Prophecies-Of-Nostradamus |
| User: |
"Marvin The Paranoid Android" |
| Date: |
25 Sep 2006 08:03:35 AM |
| Object: |
OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
Gosh -- how's that for ungrateful, huh? Rummy gave 'em a great job with
tons of perks and that's the thanks he gets for it.
But seriously, again I don't believe this is anything new to anyone who
doesn't buy into Bubble-Boys version of Reality. This is old news just
coming from someone who was there on the ground, commanding troops,
following the orders given to him and living with the results of those
orders.
How much more ammo do the Democrats need to blow the Reichpublicans out
of the water?
Legalizing torture, Intel agencies state Iraq war increased terrorism,
war profiteering, no WMD's, more torture now happening in Iraq then
under Saddam, internationally alienated, Bush considers the deaths and
destruction in Iraq as 'just a comma'
(http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/09/24/bush-dismisses-bloodshed-in-iraq-as-just-a-comma/),
Bin Laden???, disclosing a covert intel agent's identity, *not* firing
Rumsfeld, military tribunals, secret prisons outside U.S., the deficit,
cost of Iraq war, and it goes on -- is it Diebold or are a majority of
American's too lazy to think??
Cheers!
-- Marvie
--------------------------
Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld
By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent
1 hour, 36 minutes ago
Retired military officers on Monday are expected to bluntly accuse
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld of bungling the war in Iraq,
saying U.S. troops were sent to fight without the best equipment and
that critical facts were hidden from the public.
"I believe that Secretary Rumsfeld and others in the administration did
not tell the American people the truth for fear of losing support for
the war in Iraq," retired Maj. Gen. John R. S. Batiste said in remarks
prepared for a hearing by the Senate Democratic Policy Committee.
A second witness, retired Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, is expected to assess
Rumsfeld as "incompetent strategically, operationally and tactically
....."
"Mr. Rumsfeld and his immediate team must be replaced or we will see
two more years of extraordinarily bad decision-making," said his
testimony prepared for the hearing, to be held six weeks before the
Nov. 7 midterm elections in which the war is a central issue.
The conflict, now in its fourth year, has claimed the lives of more
than 2,600 American troops and cost more than $300 billion.
Full Article Here --
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060925/ap_on_go_co/iraq_democrats;_ylt=Ahs9rZoN1akizYE8qkErIfSs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OTB1amhuBHNlYwNtdHM-
.
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
25 Sep 2006 04:01:11 PM |
|
|
Marvin The Paranoid Android wrote:
Gosh -- how's that for ungrateful, huh? Rummy gave 'em a great job with
tons of perks and that's the thanks he gets for it.
But seriously, again I don't believe this is anything new to anyone who
doesn't buy into Bubble-Boys version of Reality. This is old news just
coming from someone who was there on the ground, commanding troops,
following the orders given to him and living with the results of those
orders.
How much more ammo do the Democrats need to blow the Reichpublicans out
of the water?
Maybe they need to come up with a positive program rather than just a
"Hate Bush" program. I thought I saw Woods say something about that
somewhere, and she's right for a change.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Marvin The Paranoid Android" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
25 Sep 2006 06:28:58 PM |
|
|
Steven Douglas wrote:
Marvin The Paranoid Android wrote:
Gosh -- how's that for ungrateful, huh? Rummy gave 'em a great job with
tons of perks and that's the thanks he gets for it.
But seriously, again I don't believe this is anything new to anyone who
doesn't buy into Bubble-Boys version of Reality. This is old news just
coming from someone who was there on the ground, commanding troops,
following the orders given to him and living with the results of those
orders.
How much more ammo do the Democrats need to blow the Reichpublicans out
of the water?
Maybe they need to come up with a positive program rather than just a
"Hate Bush" program. I thought I saw Woods say something about that
somewhere, and she's right for a change.
You sound like you're ready for a change too -- am I correct?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
25 Sep 2006 11:49:57 PM |
|
|
Marvin The Paranoid Android wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Marvin The Paranoid Android wrote:
Gosh -- how's that for ungrateful, huh? Rummy gave 'em a great job with
tons of perks and that's the thanks he gets for it.
But seriously, again I don't believe this is anything new to anyone who
doesn't buy into Bubble-Boys version of Reality. This is old news just
coming from someone who was there on the ground, commanding troops,
following the orders given to him and living with the results of those
orders.
How much more ammo do the Democrats need to blow the Reichpublicans out
of the water?
Maybe they need to come up with a positive program rather than just a
"Hate Bush" program. I thought I saw Woods say something about that
somewhere, and she's right for a change.
You sound like you're ready for a change too -- am I correct?
Well, not the type of change you're looking for. I do enjoy our two
party system, and I think it is important that there be a strong
opposition party. But if the Democrats don't come up with some positive
policies to run on (rather than just Bush bashing), they probably won't
take over Congress -- because US voters want to know where they're
going, not just "vote for us because we're not Bush."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Marvin The Paranoid Android" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
26 Sep 2006 07:41:37 AM |
|
|
Steven Douglas wrote:
Marvin The Paranoid Android wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Marvin The Paranoid Android wrote:
Gosh -- how's that for ungrateful, huh? Rummy gave 'em a great job with
tons of perks and that's the thanks he gets for it.
But seriously, again I don't believe this is anything new to anyone who
doesn't buy into Bubble-Boys version of Reality. This is old news just
coming from someone who was there on the ground, commanding troops,
following the orders given to him and living with the results of those
orders.
How much more ammo do the Democrats need to blow the Reichpublicans out
of the water?
Maybe they need to come up with a positive program rather than just a
"Hate Bush" program. I thought I saw Woods say something about that
somewhere, and she's right for a change.
You sound like you're ready for a change too -- am I correct?
Well, not the type of change you're looking for. I do enjoy our two
party system, and I think it is important that there be a strong
opposition party. But if the Democrats don't come up with some positive
policies to run on (rather than just Bush bashing), they probably won't
take over Congress -- because US voters want to know where they're
going, not just "vote for us because we're not Bush."
What you're stating about the Democrats can easily be applied to the
Republicans as well -- 'Stay the course' is a slogan, not a strategy
for victory. The military is no longer behind their leaders in the
Pentagram, it seems. They've left the troops under-equipped for the
task at hand.
The Dems, for their part are stating if you're not going to plan to win
(assuming 'winning' is still an option at this point) then withdraw in
an orderly fashion. They could leave reduced forces in Kuwait and Qatar
(or where ever they were based prior to invading).
I see now the Iraqi's are discussing a form of federalism -- there's
still disagreement, but for the killing to stop or subside there has to
be a political solution and I don't believe Bush has a crony handy
who's smart enough to help with that.
Just my thoughts.
The weather here's been surprisingly nice -- they were calling for rain
and the past two days have been all sunshine. Managed to cut my
ankle-high grass yesterday and cut some of a fallen oak tree along the
back of the property -- it fell victim to what may have been a small
tornado a couple of weeks ago.
Take care!
Cheers!
-- Marvie
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Marvin The Paranoid Android" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
25 Sep 2006 06:29:16 PM |
|
|
Steven Douglas wrote:
Marvin The Paranoid Android wrote:
Gosh -- how's that for ungrateful, huh? Rummy gave 'em a great job with
tons of perks and that's the thanks he gets for it.
But seriously, again I don't believe this is anything new to anyone who
doesn't buy into Bubble-Boys version of Reality. This is old news just
coming from someone who was there on the ground, commanding troops,
following the orders given to him and living with the results of those
orders.
How much more ammo do the Democrats need to blow the Reichpublicans out
of the water?
Maybe they need to come up with a positive program rather than just a
"Hate Bush" program. I thought I saw Woods say something about that
somewhere, and she's right for a change.
You sound like you're ready for a change too -- am I correct?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
26 Sep 2006 05:00:32 AM |
|
|
Steven Douglas wrote:
Maybe they need to come up with a positive
program rather than just a "Hate Bush"
program.
Try this on for size. It's reality:
You're a passanger in a bus when you happen to
notice that the driver just crashed into his third
tree. Another driver steps forward and shouts, "This
guy can't handle the bus! Let me drive!"
Do you...
A) Welcome a second driver, having witnessed for
yourself that the first driver is clearly incompetent.
B) Take the GOP approach and scream "We can't
take a risk on you because you haven't showed us
a plan!"
NOTE: At no time has the first driver, the one the
GOP wants to stick with, ever so much as hinted
at a plan.
I'd say that your position -- choice B) -- is insane.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
26 Sep 2006 09:54:51 AM |
|
|
JTEM wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Maybe they need to come up with a positive
program rather than just a "Hate Bush"
program.
Try this on for size. It's reality:
Actually, it's not.
You're a passanger in a bus when you happen to
notice that the driver just crashed into his third
tree. Another driver steps forward and shouts, "This
guy can't handle the bus! Let me drive!"
Do you...
A) Welcome a second driver, having witnessed for
yourself that the first driver is clearly incompetent.
B) Take the GOP approach and scream "We can't
take a risk on you because you haven't showed us
a plan!"
NOTE: At no time has the first driver, the one the
GOP wants to stick with, ever so much as hinted
at a plan.
I'd say that your position -- choice B) -- is insane.
I reject the entire comparison. It's invalid. Bush has not crashed the
bus (in terms that there hasn't been another terrorist attack on US
soil after 9/11). And I'm not going to trust someone else (who might
get a lot of people killed) until the other person comes up with some
valid reasons why I should trust him.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
26 Sep 2006 04:27:55 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 07:54:51 -0700, Steven Douglas wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Maybe they need to come up with a positive
program rather than just a "Hate Bush"
program.
Try this on for size. It's reality:
Actually, it's not.
You're a passanger in a bus when you happen to
notice that the driver just crashed into his third
tree. Another driver steps forward and shouts, "This
guy can't handle the bus! Let me drive!"
Do you...
A) Welcome a second driver, having witnessed for
yourself that the first driver is clearly incompetent.
B) Take the GOP approach and scream "We can't
take a risk on you because you haven't showed us
a plan!"
NOTE: At no time has the first driver, the one the
GOP wants to stick with, ever so much as hinted
at a plan.
I'd say that your position -- choice B) -- is insane.
I reject the entire comparison. It's invalid. Bush has not crashed the
bus (in terms that there hasn't been another terrorist attack on US
soil after 9/11). And I'm not going to trust someone else (who might
get a lot of people killed) until the other person comes up with some
valid reasons why I should trust him.
It was 8 years between the first bombing of the WTC and the second one. As
much as you'd like to think that you're "safe", someone who is really
motivated to commit an act of terrorism will more than likely be able to
do so, because our borders and ports are no safer than they were 5 years
ago.
Woods
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
26 Sep 2006 07:38:44 PM |
|
|
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, Woodswun
<woodswun@tepidmail.com> Spat the Words
On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 07:54:51 -0700, Steven Douglas wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Maybe they need to come up with a positive
program rather than just a "Hate Bush"
program.
Try this on for size. It's reality:
Actually, it's not.
You're a passanger in a bus when you happen to
notice that the driver just crashed into his third
tree. Another driver steps forward and shouts, "This
guy can't handle the bus! Let me drive!"
Do you...
A) Welcome a second driver, having witnessed for
yourself that the first driver is clearly incompetent.
B) Take the GOP approach and scream "We can't
take a risk on you because you haven't showed us
a plan!"
NOTE: At no time has the first driver, the one the
GOP wants to stick with, ever so much as hinted
at a plan.
I'd say that your position -- choice B) -- is insane.
I reject the entire comparison. It's invalid. Bush has not crashed the
bus (in terms that there hasn't been another terrorist attack on US
soil after 9/11). And I'm not going to trust someone else (who might
get a lot of people killed)
Stephen is suddenly getting a crisis of conscience about people
getting killed. Ah, the ironies never stop from the Bush fundies.
They are walking contradictions of themselves.
until the other person comes up with some
valid reasons why I should trust him.
It was 8 years between the first bombing of the WTC and the second one.
As
much as you'd like to think that you're "safe", someone who is really
motivated to commit an act of terrorism will more than likely be able to
do so, because our borders and ports are no safer than they were 5 years
ago.
Woods
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
26 Sep 2006 09:19:25 PM |
|
|
Woodswun wrote:
On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 07:54:51 -0700, Steven Douglas wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Maybe they need to come up with a positive
program rather than just a "Hate Bush"
program.
Try this on for size. It's reality:
Actually, it's not.
You're a passanger in a bus when you happen to
notice that the driver just crashed into his third
tree. Another driver steps forward and shouts, "This
guy can't handle the bus! Let me drive!"
Do you...
A) Welcome a second driver, having witnessed for
yourself that the first driver is clearly incompetent.
B) Take the GOP approach and scream "We can't
take a risk on you because you haven't showed us
a plan!"
NOTE: At no time has the first driver, the one the
GOP wants to stick with, ever so much as hinted
at a plan.
I'd say that your position -- choice B) -- is insane.
I reject the entire comparison. It's invalid. Bush has not crashed the
bus (in terms that there hasn't been another terrorist attack on US
soil after 9/11). And I'm not going to trust someone else (who might
get a lot of people killed) until the other person comes up with some
valid reasons why I should trust him.
It was 8 years between the first bombing of the WTC and the second one. As
much as you'd like to think that you're "safe", someone who is really
motivated to commit an act of terrorism will more than likely be able to
do so, because our borders and ports are no safer than they were 5 years
ago.
Isn't it odd that Lemke and Perseid seem to have developed a perception
that I'm living in some state of perpetual trembling fear, while your
perception is that I think I'm safe. How can it be that I've given two
such entirely different perceptions?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
27 Sep 2006 03:32:53 AM |
|
|
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Woodswun wrote:
On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 07:54:51 -0700, Steven Douglas wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Maybe they need to come up with a positive
program rather than just a "Hate Bush"
program.
Try this on for size. It's reality:
Actually, it's not.
You're a passanger in a bus when you happen to
notice that the driver just crashed into his third
tree. Another driver steps forward and shouts, "This
guy can't handle the bus! Let me drive!"
Do you...
A) Welcome a second driver, having witnessed for
yourself that the first driver is clearly incompetent.
B) Take the GOP approach and scream "We can't
take a risk on you because you haven't showed us
a plan!"
NOTE: At no time has the first driver, the one the
GOP wants to stick with, ever so much as hinted
at a plan.
I'd say that your position -- choice B) -- is insane.
I reject the entire comparison. It's invalid. Bush has not crashed
the
bus (in terms that there hasn't been another terrorist attack on US
soil after 9/11). And I'm not going to trust someone else (who might
get a lot of people killed) until the other person comes up with some
valid reasons why I should trust him.
It was 8 years between the first bombing of the WTC and the second one.
As
much as you'd like to think that you're "safe", someone who is really
motivated to commit an act of terrorism will more than likely be able
to
do so, because our borders and ports are no safer than they were 5
years
ago.
Isn't it odd that Lemke and Perseid seem to have developed a perception
that I'm living in some state of perpetual trembling fear,
.... not fear, but warped imagination and wishful thinking.
Once again, you've missed the mark.
while your
perception is that I think I'm safe. How can it be that I've given two
such entirely different perceptions?
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Lemke" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
27 Sep 2006 06:37:16 AM |
|
|
"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns984B19EBCA175rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...
... not fear, but warped imagination and wishful thinking.
Tsk, tsk, Randy. You're bursting the little bubble Steven created for
himself.
Mention the Bush propaganda sheet that lives in front of his face.
And it's not exasperation for me but disgust.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
27 Sep 2006 12:04:49 PM |
|
|
John Lemke wrote:
"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns984B19EBCA175rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...
... not fear, but warped imagination and wishful thinking.
Tsk, tsk, Randy. You're bursting the little bubble Steven created for
himself.
How is that? By first saying "fear" but then saying "not fear?" How is
that bursting some "bubble" I've supposedly created for myself?
Mention the Bush propaganda sheet that lives in front of his face.
I happen to have opinions that differ from your own. And I'm not alone.
As you know, there are multiple millions of Americans who are Bush's 40
percenters. And I'm not even one of those.
And it's not exasperation for me but disgust.
Let's just get back to what I said originally before Persed changed it
to exasperation -- you're intolerant of opinions that differ from your
own. Thanks for confirming that.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
27 Sep 2006 04:11:41 AM |
|
|
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Woodswun wrote:
On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 07:54:51 -0700, Steven Douglas wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Maybe they need to come up with a positive
program rather than just a "Hate Bush"
program.
Try this on for size. It's reality:
Actually, it's not.
You're a passanger in a bus when you happen to
notice that the driver just crashed into his third
tree. Another driver steps forward and shouts, "This
guy can't handle the bus! Let me drive!"
Do you...
A) Welcome a second driver, having witnessed for
yourself that the first driver is clearly incompetent.
B) Take the GOP approach and scream "We can't
take a risk on you because you haven't showed us
a plan!"
NOTE: At no time has the first driver, the one the
GOP wants to stick with, ever so much as hinted
at a plan.
I'd say that your position -- choice B) -- is insane.
I reject the entire comparison. It's invalid. Bush has not crashed
the
bus (in terms that there hasn't been another terrorist attack on US
soil after 9/11). And I'm not going to trust someone else (who might
get a lot of people killed) until the other person comes up with some
valid reasons why I should trust him.
It was 8 years between the first bombing of the WTC and the second one.
As
much as you'd like to think that you're "safe", someone who is really
motivated to commit an act of terrorism will more than likely be able
to
do so, because our borders and ports are no safer than they were 5
years
ago.
Isn't it odd that Lemke and Perseid seem to have developed a perception
that I'm living in some state of perpetual trembling fear,
... not fear, but warped imagination and wishful thinking.
That's right, just keep making it up as you go along. Earlier you
posted some remark about my "hate and fear" of terrorists. Then you
turn around a few hours later and say "not fear" ... why do you feel
the need to first deny, and then *spin* your own words?
Once again, you've missed the mark.
Wow, you're a real piece of work.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
27 Sep 2006 04:56:25 AM |
|
|
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Woodswun wrote:
On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 07:54:51 -0700, Steven Douglas wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Maybe they need to come up with a positive
program rather than just a "Hate Bush"
program.
Try this on for size. It's reality:
Actually, it's not.
You're a passanger in a bus when you happen to
notice that the driver just crashed into his third
tree. Another driver steps forward and shouts, "This
guy can't handle the bus! Let me drive!"
Do you...
A) Welcome a second driver, having witnessed for
yourself that the first driver is clearly incompetent.
B) Take the GOP approach and scream "We can't
take a risk on you because you haven't showed us
a plan!"
NOTE: At no time has the first driver, the one the
GOP wants to stick with, ever so much as hinted
at a plan.
I'd say that your position -- choice B) -- is insane.
I reject the entire comparison. It's invalid. Bush has not crashed
the
bus (in terms that there hasn't been another terrorist attack on
US
soil after 9/11). And I'm not going to trust someone else (who
might
get a lot of people killed) until the other person comes up with
some
valid reasons why I should trust him.
It was 8 years between the first bombing of the WTC and the second
one.
As
much as you'd like to think that you're "safe", someone who is
really
motivated to commit an act of terrorism will more than likely be
able
to
do so, because our borders and ports are no safer than they were 5
years
ago.
Isn't it odd that Lemke and Perseid seem to have developed a
perception
that I'm living in some state of perpetual trembling fear,
... not fear, but warped imagination and wishful thinking.
That's right, just keep making it up as you go along. Earlier you
posted some remark about my "hate and fear" of terrorists. Then you
turn around a few hours later and say "not fear" ... why do you feel
the need to first deny, and then *spin* your own words?
You don't hate and fear terrorists ?
Your warped imagination and wishful thinking, and that of
the other Bush fundies, is a dangerous way to lead a country.
I prefer to be grounded in reality.
Once again, you've missed the mark.
Wow, you're a real piece of work.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Lemke" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
27 Sep 2006 06:42:57 AM |
|
|
"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns984B28159A539rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...
You don't hate and fear terrorists ?
Your warped imagination and wishful thinking, and that of
the other Bush fundies, is a dangerous way to lead a country.
I prefer to be grounded in reality.
Isn't it fun to watch some smarmy little ***** play word games while tens of
thousands of people are dying in a mess created by a bunch of rich, lying
monkeys?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
27 Sep 2006 12:17:22 PM |
|
|
John Lemke wrote:
"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns984B28159A539rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...
You don't hate and fear terrorists ?
Your warped imagination and wishful thinking, and that of
the other Bush fundies, is a dangerous way to lead a country.
I prefer to be grounded in reality.
Isn't it fun to watch some smarmy little ***** play word games
No, I don't agree that it's fun -- the smarmy little ***** did make a few
inappropriately vulgar remarks a few days ago, and you've had nothing
but praise for the smarmy little ***** before and since.
while tens of thousands of people are dying in a mess created
by a bunch of rich, lying monkeys?
Such as Richard Gephardt, who said he didn't rely on Bush for his WMD
intelligence? Or Jay Rockefeller, who said we can't afford to wait for
further proof, because to wait for further proof could put Americans in
danger? Or Hillary Clinton, who said there was intelligence that
reported Saddam had rebuilt his WMD capability after the UN inspectors
left four years earlier? Or John Kerry? John Edwards? By the way, both
Rockefeller and Edwards said Saddam was not merely a threat, he was an
*imminent* threat. Are those the rich lying monkeys you're referring to?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
27 Sep 2006 05:02:58 AM |
|
|
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Woodswun wrote:
On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 07:54:51 -0700, Steven Douglas wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Maybe they need to come up with a positive
program rather than just a "Hate Bush"
program.
Try this on for size. It's reality:
Actually, it's not.
You're a passanger in a bus when you happen to
notice that the driver just crashed into his third
tree. Another driver steps forward and shouts, "This
guy can't handle the bus! Let me drive!"
Do you...
A) Welcome a second driver, having witnessed for
yourself that the first driver is clearly incompetent.
B) Take the GOP approach and scream "We can't
take a risk on you because you haven't showed us
a plan!"
NOTE: At no time has the first driver, the one the
GOP wants to stick with, ever so much as hinted
at a plan.
I'd say that your position -- choice B) -- is insane.
I reject the entire comparison. It's invalid. Bush has not crashed
the
bus (in terms that there hasn't been another terrorist attack on
US
soil after 9/11). And I'm not going to trust someone else (who
might
get a lot of people killed) until the other person comes up with
some
valid reasons why I should trust him.
It was 8 years between the first bombing of the WTC and the second
one.
As
much as you'd like to think that you're "safe", someone who is
really
motivated to commit an act of terrorism will more than likely be
able
to
do so, because our borders and ports are no safer than they were 5
years
ago.
Isn't it odd that Lemke and Perseid seem to have developed a
perception
that I'm living in some state of perpetual trembling fear,
... not fear, but warped imagination and wishful thinking.
That's right, just keep making it up as you go along. Earlier you
posted some remark about my "hate and fear" of terrorists. Then you
turn around a few hours later and say "not fear" ... why do you feel
the need to first deny, and then *spin* your own words?
You don't hate and fear terrorists ?
Why don't you make up your mind? First you say I fear them, then you
say I don't. Do I hate terrorists? Do I hate someone who would walk up
to a group of 35 people (22 women, 8 children, and 5 men) and blow them
all up? YES!
Your warped imagination and wishful thinking, and that of
the other Bush fundies, is a dangerous way to lead a country.
I prefer to be grounded in reality.
Let me know when you get there. As of now, you're far from it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
28 Sep 2006 03:04:32 AM |
|
|
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
That's right, just keep making it up as you go along. Earlier you
posted some remark about my "hate and fear" of terrorists. Then you
turn around a few hours later and say "not fear" ... why do you feel
the need to first deny, and then *spin* your own words?
You don't hate and fear terrorists ?
Why don't you make up your mind? First you say I fear them, then you
say I don't.
What I say doesn't really matter. It's what YOU say that defines
your position.
Do I hate terrorists? Do I hate someone who would walk up
to a group of 35 people (22 women, 8 children, and 5 men) and blow them
all up? YES!
So you DO hate and fear terrorists. Why don't you make up your
mind ?!?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
28 Sep 2006 09:42:03 AM |
|
|
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
That's right, just keep making it up as you go along. Earlier you
posted some remark about my "hate and fear" of terrorists. Then you
turn around a few hours later and say "not fear" ... why do you feel
the need to first deny, and then *spin* your own words?
You don't hate and fear terrorists ?
Why don't you make up your mind? First you say I fear them, then you
say I don't.
What I say doesn't really matter.
I've never seen you write words more true than that.
It's what YOU say that defines your position.
That's right, and for you and Lemke to mischaracterize my words, and to
have concluded that I live my life in fear, is wrong.
Do I hate terrorists? Do I hate someone who would walk up
to a group of 35 people (22 women, 8 children, and 5 men) and blow them
all up? YES!
So you DO hate and fear terrorists.
No, why don't you read my words and stop mischaracterizing them? I said
I HATE someone who would walk up to a group of 22 women, 8 children,
and 5 men, and blow them all up. You DON'T hate someone who would do
that?
As for fear, how do you think you'd have felt if you'd been trapped on
one of those burning floors of the World Trade Center? How do you think
the people who leaped to their deaths felt? What do you think they were
feeling? Now I don't go around fearing terrorists every waking moment
of my life. But I DO hate them, and I want them defeated. What do you
want?
Why don't you make up your mind ?!?
I have, a long time ago. I know where I stand on terrorism in Israel
(just as you do), and I feel the same way about terrorism everywhere
else (which, apparently, you don't).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
29 Sep 2006 07:17:32 AM |
|
|
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Stephen Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
Perseid wrote:
So you DO hate and fear terrorists.
No, why don't you read my words and stop mischaracterizing them?
Ah, but I thought you LIKED word games Stephen .
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
27 Sep 2006 08:05:02 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 19:19:25 -0700, Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 07:54:51 -0700, Steven Douglas wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Maybe they need to come up with a positive
program rather than just a "Hate Bush"
program.
Try this on for size. It's reality:
Actually, it's not.
You're a passanger in a bus when you happen to
notice that the driver just crashed into his third
tree. Another driver steps forward and shouts, "This
guy can't handle the bus! Let me drive!"
Do you...
A) Welcome a second driver, having witnessed for
yourself that the first driver is clearly incompetent.
B) Take the GOP approach and scream "We can't
take a risk on you because you haven't showed us
a plan!"
NOTE: At no time has the first driver, the one the
GOP wants to stick with, ever so much as hinted
at a plan.
I'd say that your position -- choice B) -- is insane.
I reject the entire comparison. It's invalid. Bush has not crashed the
bus (in terms that there hasn't been another terrorist attack on US
soil after 9/11). And I'm not going to trust someone else (who might
get a lot of people killed) until the other person comes up with some
valid reasons why I should trust him.
It was 8 years between the first bombing of the WTC and the second one. As
much as you'd like to think that you're "safe", someone who is really
motivated to commit an act of terrorism will more than likely be able to
do so, because our borders and ports are no safer than they were 5 years
ago.
Isn't it odd that Lemke and Perseid seem to have developed a perception
that I'm living in some state of perpetual trembling fear, while your
perception is that I think I'm safe. How can it be that I've given two
such entirely different perceptions?
Those are the two messages that Bush is sending out to America, so
therefore you have to follow both, right? You're safe when it comes to
Bush's past policies, but not safe when it comes to the possibility that
the eViL dEmOnCrAtS may take over Congress. Maybe you should watch The
Daily Show, they went into the conflicting messages that Bush is sending
very well.
Woods
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
27 Sep 2006 11:37:49 PM |
|
|
Woodswun wrote:
On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 19:19:25 -0700, Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 07:54:51 -0700, Steven Douglas wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Maybe they need to come up with a positive
program rather than just a "Hate Bush"
program.
Try this on for size. It's reality:
Actually, it's not.
You're a passanger in a bus when you happen to
notice that the driver just crashed into his third
tree. Another driver steps forward and shouts, "This
guy can't handle the bus! Let me drive!"
Do you...
A) Welcome a second driver, having witnessed for
yourself that the first driver is clearly incompetent.
B) Take the GOP approach and scream "We can't
take a risk on you because you haven't showed us
a plan!"
NOTE: At no time has the first driver, the one the
GOP wants to stick with, ever so much as hinted
at a plan.
I'd say that your position -- choice B) -- is insane.
I reject the entire comparison. It's invalid. Bush has not crashed the
bus (in terms that there hasn't been another terrorist attack on US
soil after 9/11). And I'm not going to trust someone else (who might
get a lot of people killed) until the other person comes up with some
valid reasons why I should trust him.
It was 8 years between the first bombing of the WTC and the second one. As
much as you'd like to think that you're "safe", someone who is really
motivated to commit an act of terrorism will more than likely be able to
do so, because our borders and ports are no safer than they were 5 years
ago.
Isn't it odd that Lemke and Perseid seem to have developed a perception
that I'm living in some state of perpetual trembling fear, while your
perception is that I think I'm safe. How can it be that I've given two
such entirely different perceptions?
Those are the two messages that Bush is sending out to America, so
therefore you have to follow both, right?
I do?
You're safe when it comes to Bush's past policies, but not safe when
it comes to the possibility that the eViL dEmOnCrAtS may take over
Congress. Maybe you should watch The Daily Show, they went into
the conflicting messages that Bush is sending very well.
You're right, I don't watch the Daily Show, so it's all news to me. So
tell me, am I safe (as you say I think I am) or should I be trembling
in fear (as Perseid and Lemke have said I think I am)?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
28 Sep 2006 08:26:21 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 21:37:49 -0700, Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 19:19:25 -0700, Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 07:54:51 -0700, Steven Douglas wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Maybe they need to come up with a positive
program rather than just a "Hate Bush"
program.
Try this on for size. It's reality:
Actually, it's not.
You're a passanger in a bus when you happen to
notice that the driver just crashed into his third
tree. Another driver steps forward and shouts, "This
guy can't handle the bus! Let me drive!"
Do you...
A) Welcome a second driver, having witnessed for
yourself that the first driver is clearly incompetent.
B) Take the GOP approach and scream "We can't
take a risk on you because you haven't showed us
a plan!"
NOTE: At no time has the first driver, the one the
GOP wants to stick with, ever so much as hinted
at a plan.
I'd say that your position -- choice B) -- is insane.
I reject the entire comparison. It's invalid. Bush has not crashed the
bus (in terms that there hasn't been another terrorist attack on US
soil after 9/11). And I'm not going to trust someone else (who might
get a lot of people killed) until the other person comes up with some
valid reasons why I should trust him.
It was 8 years between the first bombing of the WTC and the second one. As
much as you'd like to think that you're "safe", someone who is really
motivated to commit an act of terrorism will more than likely be able to
do so, because our borders and ports are no safer than they were 5 years
ago.
Isn't it odd that Lemke and Perseid seem to have developed a perception
that I'm living in some state of perpetual trembling fear, while your
perception is that I think I'm safe. How can it be that I've given two
such entirely different perceptions?
Those are the two messages that Bush is sending out to America, so
therefore you have to follow both, right?
I do?
You're safe when it comes to Bush's past policies, but not safe when
it comes to the possibility that the eViL dEmOnCrAtS may take over
Congress. Maybe you should watch The Daily Show, they went into
the conflicting messages that Bush is sending very well.
You're right, I don't watch the Daily Show, so it's all news to me. So
tell me, am I safe (as you say I think I am) or should I be trembling
in fear (as Perseid and Lemke have said I think I am)?
I think you need to stop touting the official Bush line so you don't look
like an idiot.
Woods
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Lemke" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
28 Sep 2006 11:08:42 PM |
|
|
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.09.29.01.26.19.747867@tepidmail.com...
I think you need to stop touting the official Bush line so you don't look
like an idiot.
Woods
"Steven Douglas" doesn't give a rat's ***** about looking like an idiot,
Woods.
"Steven Douglas" doesn't exist. A pseudonym doesn't require any pride.
"Steven Douglas" is a myth salesman. An anonymous myth salesman. He's not
really idiot enough to really believe the myth. His life is just totally
invested in the myth machine.
The idiots are the ones that buy what "Steven Douglas" is selling.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Charly the Bastard" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
28 Sep 2006 04:23:59 PM |
|
|
Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 19:19:25 -0700, Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 07:54:51 -0700, Steven Douglas wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Maybe they need to come up with a positive
program rather than just a "Hate Bush"
program.
Try this on for size. It's reality:
Actually, it's not.
You're a passanger in a bus when you happen to
notice that the driver just crashed into his third
tree. Another driver steps forward and shouts, "This
guy can't handle the bus! Let me drive!"
Do you...
A) Welcome a second driver, having witnessed for
yourself that the first driver is clearly incompetent.
B) Take the GOP approach and scream "We can't
take a risk on you because you haven't showed us
a plan!"
NOTE: At no time has the first driver, the one the
GOP wants to stick with, ever so much as hinted
at a plan.
I'd say that your position -- choice B) -- is insane.
I reject the entire comparison. It's invalid. Bush has not crashed the
bus (in terms that there hasn't been another terrorist attack on US
soil after 9/11). And I'm not going to trust someone else (who might
get a lot of people killed) until the other person comes up with some
valid reasons why I should trust him.
It was 8 years between the first bombing of the WTC and the second one. As
much as you'd like to think that you're "safe", someone who is really
motivated to commit an act of terrorism will more than likely be able to
do so, because our borders and ports are no safer than they were 5 years
ago.
Isn't it odd that Lemke and Perseid seem to have developed a perception
that I'm living in some state of perpetual trembling fear, while your
perception is that I think I'm safe. How can it be that I've given two
such entirely different perceptions?
Those are the two messages that Bush is sending out to America, so
therefore you have to follow both, right?
I do?
You're safe when it comes to Bush's past policies, but not safe when
it comes to the possibility that the eViL dEmOnCrAtS may take over
Congress. Maybe you should watch The Daily Show, they went into
the conflicting messages that Bush is sending very well.
You're right, I don't watch the Daily Show, so it's all news to me. So
tell me, am I safe (as you say I think I am) or should I be trembling
in fear (as Perseid and Lemke have said I think I am)?
You're safe (from the terrorsits). You're in mortal peril (from your own
government). Glass over the entire Middle East, that's the only way to 'be safe'.
Start with Mecca and Medina. After all, fifteen of the nineteen 9/11 hijackers were
Saudi nationals. Why should they get a break? Could it be that the Decider still
owes them money from that loan all those years ago? Turn Baghdad into a smoking
hole in the ground with a raised lip, and invite the jihadists to move right in.
They'll all be dead in a month from the radiation. My Abnormal Psych prof said that
sarcasm is wasted on the moronic, wanna bet that this concept shows up on the Five
O'Clock Follies in a month or so?
Charly
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
26 Sep 2006 10:46:14 AM |
|
|
Steven Douglas wrote:
I reject the entire comparison.
I know, I know: You reject reality and substitute
your own...
Bush has not crashed the bus (in terms that there
hasn't been another terrorist attack on US soil after
9/11).
Just in terms of Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, the economy
and terrorism in general...
And I'm not going to trust someone else (who might
get a lot of people killed)
If you don't consider thr 3,000 Americans Bush killed
on 9/11 to be a lot, what is your standard?
Oh, I'm sorry, you must be one of those idiots who
thinks 9/11 was a great "Success" for Bush...
But, enough of this back & forth. Detail for us Bush's
"Plan."
You claim a plan is necessary. You claim Bush meets
your standards. Well, what is Bush's plan?
Go on. Spell it out for us.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
26 Sep 2006 09:17:29 PM |
|
|
JTEM wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
I reject the entire comparison.
I know, I know: You reject reality and substitute
your own...
Bush has not crashed the bus (in terms that there
hasn't been another terrorist attack on US soil after
9/11).
Just in terms of Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, the economy
and terrorism in general...
And I'm not going to trust someone else (who might
get a lot of people killed)
If you don't consider thr 3,000 Americans Bush killed
on 9/11 to be a lot, what is your standard?
Oh, I'm sorry, you must be one of those idiots who
thinks 9/11 was a great "Success" for Bush...
But, enough of this back & forth. Detail for us Bush's
"Plan."
You claim a plan is necessary. You claim Bush meets
your standards. Well, what is Bush's plan?
Go on. Spell it out for us.
Bush's plan is to get the new democratic Iraqi government on its feet
so it can take over security. I'm not sure what the Democratic Party's
plan is in that regard. What I do believe will happen if the Democrats
take control of Congress is that we will abandon the Iraqi government
to the terrorists. And here's why I don't think that retreat would be
such a good idea:
[excerpt] We assess that the Iraq jihad is shaping a new generation of
terrorist leaders and operatives; perceived jihadist success there
would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere.
The Iraq conflict has become the "cause celebre" for jihadists,
breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and
cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement. Should
jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have
failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight.
[end excerpt]
http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/Declassified_NIE_Key_Judgments_092606.pdf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
27 Sep 2006 03:30:43 AM |
|
|
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
JTEM wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
I reject the entire comparison.
I know, I know: You reject reality and substitute
your own...
Bush has not crashed the bus (in terms that there
hasn't been another terrorist attack on US soil after
9/11).
Just in terms of Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, the economy
and terrorism in general...
And I'm not going to trust someone else (who might
get a lot of people killed)
If you don't consider thr 3,000 Americans Bush killed
on 9/11 to be a lot, what is your standard?
Oh, I'm sorry, you must be one of those idiots who
thinks 9/11 was a great "Success" for Bush...
But, enough of this back & forth. Detail for us Bush's
"Plan."
You claim a plan is necessary. You claim Bush meets
your standards. Well, what is Bush's plan?
Go on. Spell it out for us.
Bush's plan is to get the new democratic Iraqi government on its feet
so it can take over security. I'm not sure what the Democratic Party's
plan is in that regard. What I do believe will happen if the Democrats
take control of Congress is that we will abandon the Iraqi government
to the terrorists.
The Iraqi people are not terrorists, and if an Iraqi government
can't stand up to threats to its sovereignty without US support,
then it's not much of a goverment.
And here's why I don't think that retreat would be
such a good idea:
[excerpt] We assess that the Iraq jihad is shaping a new generation of
terrorist leaders and operatives; perceived jihadist success there
would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere.
The Iraq conflict has become the "cause celebre" for jihadists,
breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and
cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement. Should
jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have
failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight.
[end excerpt]
You left out the part where at present we ARE being perceived as
failing, so jihadism is growing. This is a failure of leadership,
the failure of George Bush.
http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-
srv/nation/documents/Declassified_NIE_
Key_Judgments_092606.pdf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: OH MY GOSH! -- Retired Officers To Criticize Rumsfeld |
27 Sep 2006 04:08:54 AM |
|
|
Perseid wrote:
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"
<dsteven@flashmail.com> Spat the Words
JTEM wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
I reject the entire comparison.
I know, I know: You reject reality and substitute
your own...
Bush has not crashed the bus (in terms that there
hasn't been another terrorist attack on US soil after
9/11).
Just in terms of Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, the economy
and terrorism in general...
And I'm not going to trust someone else (who might
get a lot of people killed)
If you don't consider thr 3,000 Americans Bush killed
on 9/11 to be a lot, what is your standard?
Oh, I'm sorry, you must be one of those idiots who
thinks 9/11 was a great "Success" for Bush...
But, enough of this back & forth. Detail for us Bush's
"Plan."
You claim a plan is necessary. You claim Bush meets
your standards. Well, what is Bush's plan?
Go on. Spell it out for us.
Bush's plan is to get the new democratic Iraqi government on its feet
so it can take over security. I'm not sure what the Democratic Party's
plan is in that regard. What I do believe will happen if the Democrats
take control of Congress is that we will abandon the Iraqi government
to the terrorists.
The Iraqi people are not terrorists,
You're right, the vast, vast, vast majority of the Iraqi people are not
terrorists. The vast, vast, vast majority of the Iraqi people want
their new fledging democracy to succeed while the tiny minority of
terrorists want it to fail. Which side are you on?
and if an Iraqi government
can't stand up to threats to its sovereignty without US support,
then it's not much of a goverment.
It's a fledgling democracy trying to get on its feet after decades of
tyrannical dictatorship has crippled that nation. What's wrong with
giving a friend a helping hand to get their democratic government on
its feet? You have something against that?
And here's why I don't think that retreat would be
such a good idea:
[excerpt] We assess that the Iraq jihad is shaping a new generation of
terrorist leaders and operatives; perceived jihadist success there
would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere.
The Iraq conflict has become the "cause celebre" for jihadists,
breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and
cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement. Should
jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have
failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight.
[end excerpt]
You left out the part where at present we ARE being perceived as
failing, so jihadism is growing.
Maybe you could quote the part where we are perceived as failing?
This is a failure of leadership, the failure of George Bush.
To cut & run now, as you apparently advocate, would be to hand a
victory to the terrorists and a defeat to Bush. Is that the outcome
you're hoping for?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
