Al Gore...Professional Cry Baby

[MadeinUSA]

When will this man ever learn that after losing the 2000 election and showing the world his immaturity and only popping his head above water every now and then to cry about something stupid and pointless, that the world has more pressing matters to solve than listening to his quacking from the middle of the pond?

[Edited by madeinusa on 01-16-2006 at 06:38 PM]

[skrewt]

He only gets airtime now for the same reason Howard Dean ever got airtime.
The press are no more than tabloids, they can't call Bush an evil terrorist, but they can report when someone else calls him that.
That's why they gave Dean so much attention during the last campaign. He was saying so many outrageous things that the press couldn't report enough of it.

This is exactly why Gore gets airtime now. To get on the news, all you have to do is say something completely outside of reality about GW. Proximity to the front page is directly proportional to your proximity to treason.

[MadeinUSA]

I thought when I was a child an adult, especially a public servant, is supposed to be mature and set an example when they get behind a podium. The older I get, the more these politicians show to me they are the most immature excuses of human flesh on the planet.

[air1]

I watched Al Gores speech last night on CSPAN. Man, what a great speech! Thanks god for people like Al Gore. His speech eloquently articulated the threats facing our country’s system of government by the current administrations power grabbing attempts and their illegal, unconstitutional practices.

After listening to Al Gore speak and comparing his reasoning and intelligence to that of Bush, he makes Bush look like an intellectual light weight.

[bootlen]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! LOLOLOLOL! :D:D:D:D

[geerair]

Absolutely brilliant speech. Higlighted Bush's attempt to set himself above the supreme law of the land. Flawless recitation of Bush crimes put in terms even the most lickspittle apologist for Bush could not fail to recognize. Gore said what needed to be said in a stirring, cogent manner.

For comic relief, read the transcript of Bush's MLK speech. Bush's speech would embarrass even a Junior High civics and public speaking class.

[skrewt]

Venom and hate spoken eloquently is not a substitute for the truth spoken with a stutter.

While Gore spoke with passion and clarity, it doesn't change the fact of his hypocrisy and the absolute hatred behind the lies.
I guess you have to be a democrat cool-aid drinker to swallow Al's spew.
BTW you got some on your chin Geer.

[geerair]

I drink Gatorade.

[James 3528]

Originally posted by geerair
Absolutely brilliant speech. Higlighted Bush's attempt to set himself above the supreme law of the land. Flawless recitation of Bush crimes put in terms even the most lickspittle apologist for Bush could not fail to recognize. Gore said what needed to be said in a stirring, cogent manner.

For comic relief, read the transcript of Bush's MLK speech. Bush's speech would embarrass even a Junior High civics and public speaking class.




Bush commited no crime. The fact that you think Al Gore did some thing brilliant show how fu*ked up your brilliant meter is.

[batdude]

Bush committed no crime?
check the 4th Amendment

CHIMPEACH!

[James 3528]

You can check all of them or in your case check with Michael Moore.

[James 3528]

Here Batlude

http://hvac-talk.com/vbb/showthread.php?threadid=93392

[geerair]

Originally posted by James 3528
Here Batlude

http://hvac-talk.com/vbb/showthread.php?threadid=93392 While you are there check the slice and dice of the article which NONE of the wingnuts could refute.

[bootlen]

Geer and batgirl, rant on. It's all gonna be on your face once the investigations have been completed. No laws are being broken...unless you're talking about a certain drowning at Chappaquiddick...and nothing immoral has happened...unless you're talking about a certain Harvard student who paid another student to take an exam for him.

[geerair]

What was that? Was it.......nope still no refutation.

[bootlen]

Farts do not need refutation.

[geerair]

Originally posted by bootlen
Farts do not need refutation. What was that? No, no still no refutation.

[RoBoTeq]

Al Gore can definitley speak better then President Bush. Unfortunately there is no substance to what he is saying.

First off, he is a bit late at the gate for this issue. What? Was he vacationing in a cave for the first weeks this issue came up or did he just figure out a way to get back in the limelight by using this issue to whine?

Al Gore and Mayor Nagin both came out with eloquent speaches this week and neither of them have a clue as to what is going on.

[MadeinUSA]

What I find to be so hilarious is the fact Al Gore had a chance to go up against Bush again in the 2004 election to win what he thought he had won in 2000, but did not have the balls to do so because he knew he would get beat again.

To float around in the middle of the pond and hurl baseless accusations against the president who is doing everything he can to protect this country only adds evidence to the fact he never had what it takes to lead this country in the first place. This is why he stays under the radar, but God bless him for coming out of the cave every once in a while to validate his utter stupidity to the nation.

[MadeinUSA]

Originally posted by RoBoTeq
Al Gore and Mayor Nagin both came out with eloquent speachesSpeaking of eloquent, I think it would eloquent if those two flew to Massachusetts and tied the knot. Now there would be something to talk about.

[geerair]

Gore nailed it. Even Republicans are starting to get nervous over King George's loopy version of unlimited presidential powers. Watch the rats desert this sinking ship.

[MadeinUSA]

Originally posted by geerair
Watch the rats desert this sinking ship. Why don’t you report back here when you have factual information on anyone deserting based on the wiretapping.

As far as deserting goes, go talk to clintonian. They didn’t desert in his administration, they just simply blew their heads off.

[renaissanse man]

Originally posted by air1
I watched Al Gores speech last night on CSPAN. Man, what a great speech! Thanks god for people like Al Gore. His speech eloquently articulated the threats facing our country’s system of government by the current administrations power grabbing attempts and their illegal, unconstitutional practices.

After listening to Al Gore speak and comparing his reasoning and intelligence to that of Bush, he makes Bush look like an intellectual light weight.Al Gore sounds like a gay waiter.

[geerair]

Originally posted by madeinusa
Why don’t you report back here when you have factual information on anyone deserting based on the wiretapping.No need chubby, just keep your eyes and ears glued to your favorite media outlets.

[MadeinUSA]

Originally posted by geerair
just keep your eyes and ears glued to your favorite media outlets.When Al is on the tube every 2 years, you better believe my eyes are glued to the TV. Occasions like this where you get to see a so-called educated ex-Vice President make a total fool out of himself is usually a once in a lifetime experience. Hopefully gore will have a long lived life so the entertainment will last a few more decades.

[RoBoTeq]

Originally posted by madeinusa

Originally posted by RoBoTeq
Al Gore and Mayor Nagin both came out with eloquent speachesSpeaking of eloquent, I think it would eloquent if those two flew to Massachusetts and tied the knot. Now there would be something to talk about.

Stop making me agree with you :D

[RoBoTeq]

No one wants to see any American political leader go overboard with infringing on the civil liberties that Americans enjoy under normal circumstances. we certainly do not need to go back to the days of Hoover's antics.

However; these are not normal times and we need to give those who we have put into office the opportunity to do what they feel is needed in order to protect us. The great thing about the way the United States government is set up is that it is in constant flux, changing as need be to the times.

Right now we need to be getting as much information on as many people who may have anything to do with conspiring against our country and our citizens. In doing so, we are going to step on a few civil liberties. We need to stop acting like a bunch of spoiled little brats that don't understand that freedom has a price and let our leaders do their job without hindering their every move.

We need to adhere to a little of the earlier war attitude that "loose lips, sink ships" and just do what needs to be done to weed out those who want to bring us down.

The same idiots that are crying about how the president is gatherin intelligence are the ones that *****ed about the president not having enough proper intelligence earlier on about Iraq. Just STFU and let the government do their job!

[johnl45]

Originally posted by bootlen
Geer and batgirl, rant on. It's all gonna be on your face once the investigations have been completed. No laws are being broken...unless you're talking about a certain drowning at Chappaquiddick...and nothing immoral has happened...unless you're talking about a certain Harvard student who paid another student to take an exam for him. Did the Whitehouse call you directly with this information, or just the usual you believe anything they say? When Clinton lied nobody died!

[bootlen]

Originally posted by johnl45
[QUOTE] When Clinton lied nobody died!

You really shouldn't use that mantra. It makes you sound light in the loafers, johnnie.

And it was never so much what Clinton did as what he did NOT do.

Face it. Clinton was a lousy President. W is a great one. Not perfect but better than most.

Time will play it all out. If I'm wrong, I'll be the first to say so. But something tells me I won't have to say anything.

The White House didn't have to call me. The laws area matter of public record. You need a call from the White House to read you what the law says? If so, you got bigger problems that you can solve here.

[James 3528]

Originally posted by johnl45
When Clinton lied nobody died! [/B]


Well, I guess it’s true. Sort of. Depends on what the meaning of “nobody” and “died” is.

If “nobody” means “U.S. troops” I guess it’s true, sort of.
I guess we did lose a few men in Somalia. But that was over 10 years ago, and the left has no sense of history. And I guess September 11 had not happend yet, but not for lack of trying.1993 WTC, 1996 and Millennium plots that were broken up. Of course we had the Cole, the ‘93 WTC, and African Embassy attacks… but those don’t count because, ah, erm… ahhh… We’ll just Move On already. Likewise, we didn’t manage to kill any members of Al Qaida while Clinton was in office, lying. So if “nobody” refers to “enemies of the United States,” it’s literally true. We didn’t kill any enemies of the United States while Clinton was in office.

[Edited by JAMES 3528 on 01-18-2006 at 10:26 AM]

[geerair]

Originally posted by RoBoTeq

Right now we need to be getting as much information on as many people who may have anything to do with conspiring against our country and our citizens. In doing so, we are going to step on a few civil liberties. We need to stop acting like a bunch of spoiled little brats that don't understand that freedom has a price and let our leaders do their job without hindering their every move. There is a perfectly legal way to gather intelligence. Provisions are in exsistence allowing the president to legally operate within the confines of the Constitution. The price of freedom does not include ignoring or bypassing the supreme law of the land. The price of freedom does not include cedeing unlimited powers to the president, allowing the president to seize unilaterally unlimited powers or suspending the constitution.



The same idiots that are crying about how the president is gatherin intelligence are the ones that *****ed about the president not having enough proper intelligence earlier on about Iraq. Just STFU and let the government do their job! Nope, the patriots who are unwilling to allow Bush to set himself above the law and trample the supreme law of the land are the ones who protested the fact that Bush had ample intelligence yet chose to ignore it.

[geerair]

Originally posted by johnl45 Did the Whitehouse call you directly with this information, or just the usual you believe anything they say? When Clinton lied nobody died! Why, didn't you know that the Bush butt- kissers have all become brilliant Constitutional scholars?

[bootlen]

Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by RoBoTeq

Right now we need to be getting as much information on as many people who may have anything to do with conspiring against our country and our citizens. In doing so, we are going to step on a few civil liberties. We need to stop acting like a bunch of spoiled little brats that don't understand that freedom has a price and let our leaders do their job without hindering their every move. There is a perfectly legal way to gather intelligence. Provisions are in exsistence allowing the president to legally operate within the confines of the Constitution. The price of freedom does not include ignoring or bypassing the supreme law of the land. The price of freedom does not include cedeing unlimited powers to the president, allowing the president to seize unilaterally unlimited powers or suspending the constitution.



The same idiots that are crying about how the president is gatherin intelligence are the ones that *****ed about the president not having enough proper intelligence earlier on about Iraq. Just STFU and let the government do their job! Nope, the patriots who are unwilling to allow Bush to set himself above the law and trample the supreme law of the land are the ones who protested the fact that Bush had ample intelligence yet chose to ignore it.

What? No refutation?

[bootlen]

Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by johnl45 Did the Whitehouse call you directly with this information, or just the usual you believe anything they say? When Clinton lied nobody died! Why, didn't you know that the Bush butt- kissers have all become brilliant Constitutional scholars?

What? Still no refutation?

[geerair]

When arch conservative Grover Norquist calls for investigations, the feces have hit the fan.

"Public hearings on the issue are essential to addressing the serious concerns raised by the alarming revelations of NSA eavesdropping." Grover Norquist, President, Americans for Tax Reform





Developing.........

[air1]

27MB MP3 file

http://news.globalfreepress.com/mp3/gore/2006/01/16/Gore_Constitutional_Crisis-01-16-06.96.mp3

[James 3528]

Originally posted by air1

27MB MP3 file

http://news.globalfreepress.com/mp3/gore/2006/01/16/Gore_Constitutional_Crisis-01-16-06.96.mp3

Yes, that was Geer's genius at work :D

[skrewt]

Originally posted by geerair
There is a perfectly legal way to gather intelligence. Provisions are in exsistence allowing the president to legally operate within the confines of the Constitution. The price of freedom does not include ignoring or bypassing the supreme law of the land. The price of freedom does not include cedeing unlimited powers to the president, allowing the president to seize unilaterally unlimited powers or suspending the constitution.


Nope, the patriots who are unwilling to allow Bush to set himself above the law and trample the supreme law of the land are the ones who protested the fact that Bush had ample intelligence yet chose to ignore it. [/B]


Bypassing the constitution and seizing unilateral power is clearly defined as "because the democrats say so".
Or at least that's good enough for Geer.
But that's ok as long as we can have open hearings where the democrats have a public forum to openly discuss the details of our intelligence gathering and national security procedures.

[johnl45]

Originally posted by bootlen

Originally posted by johnl45
[QUOTE] When Clinton lied nobody died!

You really shouldn't use that mantra. It makes you sound light in the loafers, johnnie.

And it was never so much what Clinton did as what he did NOT do.

Face it. Clinton was a lousy President. W is a great one. Not perfect but better than most.

Time will play it all out. If I'm wrong, I'll be the first to say so. But something tells me I won't have to say anything.

The White House didn't have to call me. The laws area matter of public record. You need a call from the White House to read you what the law says? If so, you got bigger problems that you can solve here.

As a typical right-winger the time for you to admit your wrong will never come without a brain transplant. Wrong is slapping you in the face now and you don’t know it wake up right-wingers your being shafted just like the rest of us..

[bootlen]

You are blind to what has already happened and you're talking about the future? HAH! HAHA!

Now that right there's funny, I don't care who ya are!

[batdude]

W is a great president? What a crock.
But whether he's the best or the worst concerns
me but little.
What worries me is that he apparently aims to be
the last.

(Important footnote----since he was never fairly
elected, he really is just a squatter on PA Ave.
His place among the presidential pantheon is therefore moot.
New and more appropriate public housing is what
he really deserves, a jail cell.)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060118/ap_on_go_pr_wh/white_house_abramoff;_ylt=AvWtfinLXf3x9.8i3xLwDNey Fz4D;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA

New Republican talking point: some Democrats are so
sleazy and corrupt that they can be mistaken for
Republicans!

[Edited by batdude on 01-18-2006 at 04:22 PM]

[James 3528]

Yes Bat'lude

Every one mistakes Barney in the Butt Franks and Ted off the bridge Kennedy as republicans

[geerair]

Originally posted by batdude
W is a great president? What a crock.
But whether he's the best or the worst concerns
me but little.
What worries me is that he apparently aims to be
the last.

(Important footnote----since he was never fairly
elected, he really is just a squatter on PA Ave.
His place among the presidential pantheon is therefore moot.
New and more appropriate public housing is what
he really deserves, a jail cell.)



New Republican talking point: some Democrats are so
sleazy and corrupt that they can be mistaken for
Republicans!Yeah, Abramoff reaches into the Whitehouse. Bush is doing a Sergeant Shultz rountine, "I Know Nothing." Hilarious

[Edited by geerair on 01-18-2006 at 06:15 PM]

[geerair]

Originally posted by skrewt

Originally posted by geerair
There is a perfectly legal way to gather intelligence. Provisions are in exsistence allowing the president to legally operate within the confines of the Constitution. The price of freedom does not include ignoring or bypassing the supreme law of the land. The price of freedom does not include cedeing unlimited powers to the president, allowing the president to seize unilaterally unlimited powers or suspending the constitution.


Nope, the patriots who are unwilling to allow Bush to set himself above the law and trample the supreme law of the land are the ones who protested the fact that Bush had ample intelligence yet chose to ignore it.


Bypassing the constitution and seizing unilateral power is clearly defined as "because the democrats say so".
Or at least that's good enough for Geer.
But that's ok as long as we can have open hearings where the democrats have a public forum to openly discuss the details of our intelligence gathering and national security procedures. [/B]The fact that conservatives and republicans are also calling for hearings negates your partisan whineing.

[geerair]

"The need to reform surveillance laws and practices adopted since 9/11 is more apparent now than ever. No one would deny the government the power it needs to protect us all, but when that power poses a threat to the basic rights that make our nation unique, its' exercise must be carefully momitored by Congress and the courts. This is not a partisan issue; it is an issue of safeguarding the fundamental freedoms of all Armericans so that future administrations do not interpret our laws in a way that pose constitutional concerns."

David Keene, Chairman, American Conservative Union.

[batdude]

Originally posted by James 3528
Yes Bat'lude

Every one mistakes Barney in the Butt Franks and Ted off the bridge Kennedy as republicans

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ya mean the same Barney Franks caught up in
the "White House midnight callboy tour" scandal?
that's an easy google/ thanks for the reminder.

As for Ted, at least he had the decency to carry on with females.
Ever wonder who was hiding in the White House closet w/
Gannon the Cannon during all those visits?
Maybe even someone who knew him well enough to frequently call on him by name
during press conferences, perhaps? (Which evokes a whole
new ghastly perspective on the actual "seat of power" while perhaps simultaneously yielding clues on a curious bowlegged gait.)

It's like they say, get another Bush in the White House and
get fairies prancing around the West Wing!

But, in fairness, that perversion is merely part and parcel of
that whole satanist Skull & Bones, Bohemian Grove lifestyle. Maybe we should not
be surprised.
It's just multi-generational family tradition.
You know, they're always talking about,
and get lots of mileage out of
"family values." So it must be REALLY important.

(In fact, we must admire any courageous individual who,
in furtherance of the no gays in the military policy,
would actually have the unparalleled integrity to desert.)

[MadeinUSA]

Let’s stay on the subject which is Al opening his mouth and making a fool out of himself when he has no facts to prove any laws were broken. In tern, all this accomplishes is a distraction for the people in office instead of letting them utilize precious time for matters at hand.

[bootlen]

Originally posted by geerair
"The need to reform surveillance laws and practices adopted since 9/11 is more apparent now than ever. No one would deny the government the power it needs to protect us all, but when that power poses a threat to the basic rights that make our nation unique, its' exercise must be carefully momitored by Congress and the courts. This is not a partisan issue; it is an issue of safeguarding the fundamental freedoms of all Armericans so that future administrations do not interpret our laws in a way that pose constitutional concerns."

David Keene, Chairman, American Conservative Union.

How, pray tell, is this "leaving the reservation"? They speak for the President on this issue.

W is not using it in a way that poses Constitutional concern. Only power greedy libs want to call it something it is not and do so putting our national security at great risk.

I welcome a full investigation. It would shut you up as has time on all issues with which you have had problems.

[geerair]

"Federal law clearly states that intelligence agents MUST HAVE A COURT ORDER to conduct electronic surveillance of Americans on these shores. Yet, the federal government overstepped the protections of the Constitution and the plain language of FISA to eavesdrop on American private comunications without any judicial checks and without proof that they are involved in terrorism."

Former Republican congressman Bob Barr

[bootlen]

Originally posted by geerair
"Federal law clearly states that intelligence agents MUST HAVE A COURT ORDER to conduct electronic surveillance of Americans on these shores. Yet, the federal government overstepped the protections of the Constitution and the plain language of FISA to eavesdrop on American private comunications without any judicial checks and without proof that they are involved in terrorism."

Former Republican congressman Bob Barr

Former. He is out of the loop. Good try, though.

[johnl45]

Originally posted by bootlen
You are blind to what has already happened and you're talking about the future? HAH! HAHA!

Now that right there's funny, I don't care who ya are! Cheney setup this so called war to make money for big corporations, if not why was his company BKR setting up a base camp 6 months before the war even started? Cheney sucked in Bush because he's too dumb to know the difference. Now our kid’s are being sacrificed so they can make lots of money. Cheney should be taken out and strung up in the Rose Garden for his crimes against America.

[bootlen]

Originally posted by johnl45

Originally posted by bootlen
You are blind to what has already happened and you're talking about the future? HAH! HAHA!

Now that right there's funny, I don't care who ya are! Cheney setup this so called war to make money for big corporations, if not why was his company BKR setting up a base camp 6 months before the war even started? Cheney sucked in Bush because he's too dumb to know the difference. Now our kid’s are being sacrificed so they can make lots of money. Cheney should be taken out and strung up in the Rose Garden for his crimes against America.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! OMG! My stomach hurts! Please stop, johnnie. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

[scrogdog]

Great. Another member of the tin foil hat crowd.

[geerair]

"If the law is not reformed, ordinary American's personal information could be swept into all-encompassing federal databases encroaching upon every aspect of their private lives. This is of particular concern to gun owners, whose rights, guaranteed under the second amendment, are currently being infringed upon under the Patriot Act's controversial record provisions."

Alan Gottlieb, Second Amendment Foundation

[geerair]

"If he (Bush) has the authority to go around the FISA court, which is a court to accommodate the law of the war on terror, the FISA act was--created by a court setup by the Chief Justice of the United States to allow a rapid response to requests for surveillance activity in the war on terror, I DON'T KNOW OF ANY LEGAL BASIS TO GO AROUND THAT. Even in a time of war you have to follow the process, because that's what a democracy is all about: a process.

Lindsey Graham, Republican-South Carolina-Lawyer

[bootlen]

Originally posted by geerair
"If he (Bush) has the authority to go around the FISA court, which is a court to accommodate the law of the war on terror, the FISA act was--created by a court setup by the Chief Justice of the United States to allow a rapid response to requests for surveillance activity in the war on terror, I DON'T KNOW OF ANY LEGAL BASIS TO GO AROUND THAT. Even in a time of war you have to follow the process, because that's what a democracy is all about: a process.

Lindsey Graham, Republican-South Carolina-Lawyer

No evidence W has done that. Evidence, matter of fact, is to the contrary.

Your tries are weakening...never mind boring.

[geerair]

"The president's decision to authorize the NSA's surveillance without complicity of a court or congress was a mistake perhaps caused by this administration's almost metabolic urge to keep congress unnecessarily distant and hence disgruntled."

George Will, Conservative pundit.

[bootlen]

Originally posted by geerair
"The president's decision to authorize the NSA's surveillance without complicity of a court or congress was a mistake perhaps caused by this administration's almost metabolic urge to keep congress unnecessarily distant and hence disgruntled."

George Will, Conservative pundit.

Another non-member of Congress not in the loop. Will is just that...a pundit.

Getting weaker by the post.

[James 3528]

Geer

Americans favor spying over dying.

Note: I said Americans

Which pretty much among other things, explains yours as well as a few others relentless anal attitude about being stuck on stupid.

[bigtime]

Its all partisan politics. If the same thing had happened eight years ago, the people who complain about it now would say it was neccesary and vice versa.

[bootlen]

Originally posted by bigtime
Its all partisan politics. If the same thing had happened eight years ago, the people who complain about it now would say it was neccesary and vice versa.

Not exactly. It was already going on then. Has been since GW.

[geerair]

"Bush ADMITS authorizing NSA to eavesdrop on Americans without Court approval."

Headlines from all media sources Dec.17, 2005

[geerair]

Originally posted by James 3528
Geer

Americans favor spying over dying.

Note: I said Americans

Which pretty much among other things, explains yours as well as a few others relentless anal attitude about being stuck on stupid. Give me liberty or give me death.

[James 3528]

You are free to kill yourself.

[geerair]

We don't even have that liberty.

[James 3528]

In your case. You have no where to go anyway if you did.

[geerair]

Like I said, no freedom.

[bootlen]

Originally posted by geerair
We don't even have that liberty.

Sure ya do. Supreme Court just said so.

[geerair]

Concerns terminally ill patients only. I am at the peak of health, well except for my knees, so still no freedom. Try again.

[bootlen]

So you consider suicide a basic right?

[geerair]

Certainly. You miss a 2 foot putt that costs you 20 bucks, you should have the right to fall on your putter.

[geerair]

Originally posted by geerair
"Bush ADMITS authorizing NSA to eavesdrop on Americans without Court approval."

Headlines from all media sources Dec.17, 2005 Still waiting for all that contrary evidence.

[RoBoTeq]

Originally posted by geerair
Concerns terminally ill patients only. I am at the peak of health, well except for my knees, so still no freedom. Try again.

Call me. We'll arrange to have your wishes granted. No charge but I will be taking photos.

[geerair]

Originally posted by RoBoTeq

Originally posted by geerair
Concerns terminally ill patients only. I am at the peak of health, well except for my knees, so still no freedom. Try again.

Call me. We'll arrange to have your wishes granted. No charge but I will be taking photos. You have a cure for inept putting?

[bootlen]

Originally posted by geerair
Certainly. You miss a 2 foot putt that costs you 20 bucks, you should have the right to fall on your putter.

So fall on yer putter. Dead men are never indicted.

[bootlen]

Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by geerair
"Bush ADMITS authorizing NSA to eavesdrop on Americans without Court approval."

Headlines from all media sources Dec.17, 2005 Still waiting for all that contrary evidence.

Hell, we're still waiting for your evidence. Something tells me we'll be waiting for a very long time. So far all you have is people saying bad things should never happen and a very vague reference to a suposed quote.

Maybe you should fall on yer putter, $20 lost bet or not.

[geerair]

What quote would that be boots?

[geerair]

Still waiting for Booties contrary evidence.

[RoBoTeq]

You are an idiot geer. I tried telling myself you just act like one, but I must concede that you really are an idiot.

[geerair]

Thanks, that kind of praise confirms I'm living right.

[bootlen]

Actually, I'd say yer living left...and not very well at that.

[James 3528]

Originally posted by RoBoTeq
You are an idiot geer. I tried telling myself you just act like one, but I must concede that you really are an idiot.

Can't you two see that you are in love with each other? You two even sound married.

[Edited by JAMES 3528 on 01-20-2006 at 07:26 AM]

[RoBoTeq]

Originally posted by James 3528

Originally posted by RoBoTeq
You are an idiot geer. I tried telling myself you just act like one, but I must concede that you really are an idiot.

Can't you two see that you are in love with each other? You two even sound married.

[Edited by JAMES 3528 on 01-20-2006 at 07:26 AM]

Please keep your homoerotic thoughts to yourself James. No one else is conjuring up that image.

[johnl45]

Originally posted by RoBoTeq

Originally posted by James 3528

Originally posted by RoBoTeq
You are an idiot geer. I tried telling myself you just act like one, but I must concede that you really are an idiot.

Can't you two see that you are in love with each other? You two even sound married.

[Edited by JAMES 3528 on 01-20-2006 at 07:26 AM]

Please keep your homoerotic thoughts to yourself James. No one else is conjuring up that image. We'll wait to see the photos you post of Geer.

[geerair]

"President Bush presents a clear and present danger to the rule of law. He cannot be trusted to conduct the war against Global Terrorism with decent respect for civil liberties and checks against executive abuses."

Bruce Fein, Deputy Attorney General under Ronald Reagan.

[bootlen]

Originally posted by geerair
"President Bush presents a clear and present danger to the rule of law. He cannot be trusted to conduct the war against Global Terrorism with decent respect for civil liberties and checks against executive abuses."

Bruce Fein, Deputy Attorney General under Ronald Reagan.

Not just out of the loop but senile.

[James 3528]

Socialist usually don't like attorney's

[geerair]

Originally posted by bootlen
Not just out of the loop but senile. The spectacle of conservatives eating their own kind is fascinating. This thread has been most enlightening.

[bootlen]

Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by bootlen
Not just out of the loop but senile. The spectacle of conservatives eating their own kind is fascinating. This thread has been most enlightening.

We call it being honest...something libs are clueless about. They call it eating their own. Whatever.

[RoBoTeq]

Why does geer post opinions as if they are absolute facts? So what if some people don't like what the President is doing. If it is not illegal, then it is not illegal. And it is not illegal until it is absolutely proven to be so and not just having opinions spouted out about it.

[geerair]

Originally posted by bootlen
We call it being honest...something libs are clueless about. They call it eating their own. Whatever. Of course, second only to the spectacle of eating of their own is the wildly convoluted rationalization proposed to excuse it.

[geerair]

"We write to express our profound concern about recent revelations that the United States government may have engaged in domestic electronic surveillance without appropriate legal authority. These allegations which the President, at least in part, confirmed this weekend requires immediate inquiry and action by the Senate."

Chuck Hagel, Republican, Nebraska
Olympia Snowe Republican, Maine

[James 3528]

Yes," may have" but didn't.

One of Geers edits


Joining Senator Feinstein on the letter were Senators Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), Carl Levin (D-Mich.), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).

[bootlen]

Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by bootlen
We call it being honest...something libs are clueless about. They call it eating their own. Whatever. Of course, second only to the spectacle of eating of their own is the wildly convoluted rationalization proposed to excuse it.

Like I said, "Whatever."

[geerair]

Originally posted by James 3528
Yes," may have" but didn't.

One of Geers edits


Joining Senator Feinstein on the letter were Senators Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), Carl Levin (D-Mich.), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).
WHIFFFFFFFFFFFFF.

[MadeinUSA]

8 pages and no proof of what Al said were true, except homophobic aspirations.

[the prophet]

what al gore said, seems to be true.

many people on both sides of the aisle seem to feel the same way.
what eventually happenes to the president because he has broken the law in this case is yet to be determined.
he has not been brought up on charges yet. But I am one who feels there needs to be an independant counsel to decide.
the justice dept with alberto gonzales has to recuse itself since he was surely part of the plan on this since he was a presidential legal councel.The republican controled congress also has no merrit considering the number of indictments and ethics violations as of late, they too have proven themselves to be untrustworty. The republican congress can't even get around to investigation the intelligence failures/lies that got us bogged down in iraq.
bush needs to be impeached.and for many distinct areas. If they can investigate all these various open investigations in one impeachment order, or if they need to break it up into areas where criminal crimes may have been commited and the ones where he may have commited outright acts of treason.

not only do the president and vice president need to be impeached. it seems that when the walls fall down, their loyal underlings are going to be taken down with them.

and the last 5 years have shown that the corrupt republican controled congress will never investigate itself, but since the veil is wearing thin and the american public is now ready to throw the republicans out in the 2006 election, the new democratically controled congress, will surely be lighting the fires under these republicans,when they set about toadress the obvious corruption of the republicans.The weight of the investigations that are now just rumors, will be surely coming out right before the election cycle....
the abramoff scandal(safavian,scanlon)
the valerie plame affair(the libby indictment, maybe rove,maybe bush and cheney)
the eavesdropping scandal
the bogus iraqi evidence of wmd
the medicare bill will become apparent, tauzin negotiating the bill with the pharma industry, while negotiating a multi million dollar job for himself at the same time
the energy crisis will become worse, and the energy bill will show itself to be written by lobbiests for industry.
the list will be sure to go on and on....

even the bush failure to go after bin laden in torah borah.. will sink the republican election effort...
the incompetence and corruption of the republicans, will mean a democratic win in the next election...
do all you knee jerk republicans really want the president to have un fettered power to do anything they want.. you want hillary and obama to have a blank check?

the tom delay indictment

frist could be in his own hot water

[Edited by the prophet on 01-22-2006 at 10:40 PM]

[MadeinUSA]

You should go back to your temple and get on your knees and continue to pray and see what other wild visions you can conjure up.

[geerair]

Question: "You don't think the 9/11 resolution gave the president the authority for this (warrantless wiretapping) program?

Answer: "It didn't in my vote. I voted for that resolution. That was a week after 9/11. There was nothing you were going to do to stop us from going to war in Afghanistan. There was no discussion in anything that I was around that gave the president broad surveillance authority with that resolution."

Senator Sam Brownback-Republican, Kansas

[geerair]

Originally posted by madeinusa
8 pages and no proof of what Al said were true, except homophobic aspirations. Bush confessed that he had ordered domestic warrantless wiretapping.

[MadeinUSA]

Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by madeinusa
8 pages and no proof of what Al said were true, except homophobic aspirations. Bush confessed that he had ordered domestic warrantless wiretapping. He stated AGAIN in his speech today he made congress aware of what was going on. That is not warrantless.

Go read a book. Maybe you will gain some intellect and come to the conclusion that sometimes you actually have to get down in the dirt with the enemy if you want to survive. If you think everythinhg has been done by the book in all administrations behind the scene in order to keep this country protected and safe all these years, then you are an idiot.

[geerair]

Originally posted by madeinusa He stated AGAIN in his speech today he made congress aware of what was going on. That is not warrantless.The Congressional Research Service has concluded that Bush violated the law by failing to keep Congress properly informed of the NSA program. Bush henchman informed only six congressman and swore them to secrecy thus breaching provisions of the National Security Act.

[geerair]

Originally posted by madeinusa
That is not warrantless.Domestic wiretaps were employed. No matter if Bush properly informed Congress (which he didn't) the wiretaps were warrantless and thus illegal under the fourth amendment.

[James 3528]

Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by madeinusa He stated AGAIN in his speech today he made congress aware of what was going on. That is not warrantless.The Congressional Research Service has concluded that Bush violated the law by failing to keep Congress properly informed of the NSA program. Bush henchman informed only six congressman and swore them to secrecy thus breaching provisions of the National Security Act.

So did Maxine Waters and Taliban Ted Kennedy....duh

[bootlen]

Originally posted by James 3528

Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by madeinusa He stated AGAIN in his speech today he made congress aware of what was going on. That is not warrantless.The Congressional Research Service has concluded that Bush violated the law by failing to keep Congress properly informed of the NSA program. Bush henchman informed only six congressman and swore them to secrecy thus breaching provisions of the National Security Act.

So did Maxine Waters and Taliban Ted Kennedy....duh

Well, hell. So did Osama.

[geerair]

Originally posted by James 3528
So did Maxine Waters and Taliban Ted Kennedy....duh They are guilty of not keeping Congress informed? You need to review the National Security Act......really!

[chillbilly]

Originally posted by madeinusa
When will this man ever learn that after losing the 2000 election and showing the world his immaturity and only popping his head above water every now and then to cry about something stupid and pointless, that the world has more pressing matters to solve than listening to his quacking from the middle of the pond?

[Edited by madeinusa on 01-16-2006 at 06:38 PM]




Yep, I agree. And all this coming on the minority stage in a shameless political ploy from a poor loser.
Everyone should be able to learn from the wisdom of Dr. King, but his memory celebrated has nothing to do with political grandstanding.
Al Gore...the guy who didn't even know who Osama Bin Laden was when he was doing his best to rake Ollie North over the coals. Ollie had to spell it out for him because he was too stupid to recognize enemies of his own country.
I thank God every day that he was not elected to lead this country and I pray that Hillary gets sent packing too.
She shouldn't even be a Senator, much less a President.

[the prophet]

bush telling a few of his dingleberries in congress, about his doings.. doesn't a warrant make.

even pat leahy said on sunday; he was there when congress gave the approval for a reaction against al queada. He was there when the administration asked specifically for broad meanings to that vote. And they were told,NO. They were fully aware they didn't have the right to wiretap without warrants.

they could have used the fisa procedures.. they could have asked for expanded powers when they put together the patriot act.... but they didn't.

this effort of the bush people to try and justify these wirtaps, is pathetic.

alberto gonzales, the little fascist... shows himself to be as unfamiliar with the law as ashcroft...this guys said... torture was ok.. then the stories came out.. and they retracted... now he is trying to excuse his lack of sense in allowing illegal wiretapping with arguements that have more holes than swiss cheese.....

the facts don't support the bush case.

no one knows how many thousands of people were wiretapped.... but in all that.. the bush people can only come up with one example of a plot they discovered... and that guy( the one who was going to try and destroy the brooklyn bridge by taking a torch and cutting the suspension cables)had such a bad plan, you can't even take him seriously....even if he could carry the large set of tanks up there with his torch(which he couldn't) he would run out of gas long before he really did anything...

and if these thousands of people were talking to al queada members, why doesn't the administration try to round these people up?

there is really no evidence they are actually trying to protect anything. their sheer incompetence ,makes their supposed effort to protect america as lame as that moron who thought he could take down the brooklyn bridge with a blow torch.

and after 5 years of lying about everything, and what they didn't lie about, they have misjudged, and came to false assumptions...they no longer have any benefit of doubt.

even when they say, "if we did this before 9-11, maybe we could have prevented that attack". that is a lie. a totally disingenuous statement. They had info before 9-11. they actually closed investigations of 9-11 hijackers. the most flagrant case being the robert wright/yasin al qadi/PTECH case from chicago where two of the hijackers were protected by the fbi superiors from washington, FROM the fbi case officers in chicago robert wright and john vincent, as well as an investigation by pat fitzgerald, the illinois atty general...all were told to close their investigations....in 2000.

they also had "eschelon" which was listening to osama's phone calls until 1998,when he found out from a trial of the first wtc bombing.. they were on to him.....

and now, we all know... that nothing is being discussed over the phone by real terrorists. they know all that stuff is open to tapping.

there are so many ways to look at the incompetence of this administration... and to think they keep up with the rationalizations for their crimes....

they need to be impeached,convicted and sent to jail. where they belong.

[chillbilly]

"We all know terrorists aren't communicating by phone"??
Did you really say that??Are you kidding me? Don't include me in your "we all know" scenario. Speak for yourself.
You liberal democrats are all the same.
You continually speak for all these different groups to garner support and then you abandon everyone to find middle ground.
Let's hear just one shred of preventative plan the Democrats have to defend this country. Just one.
They vote to authorize force. Didn't hear squat from them during the vote about an exit strategy. They (and everyone else) were told by the President then that it would take a long, concerted effort. What else is there to explain? Sorry America, there is no instant gratification on this one. OK?
The Democrat's style of defense is reaction.
And reaction alone is a sign of a weak nation.
The military in this country will go to hell in a handbasket rather briskly if we don't choose our President wisely and if we don't posess a good offensive strategy.
Bill Clinton couldn't lead the military, Al Gore couldn't.
Jimmy Carter couldn't, even though he served in it which is more than I can say for Clinton who was actually a pardoned, draft dodging felon.
The Democrats are weak in dealing with defense issues.
They have been weak for decades.
Military tactics show that an army that is not attacking and has decided to become passive is eventually going to be outflanked and/or attacked. If they continue to remain passive, they will be overrun.
I believe that the attacks that have resulted can largely be attributed to a passive government that lies to it's people.
If the executive branch deems it necessary to monitor suspected people of ANY activity or communication that is a threat and they act in a preventative manner, I'm all for it! Do I expect that some liberties will be violated. Yes, of course. There are many more people who feel the same way, but I won't speak for them. I'm an individual. I'll think for myself and decide for myself whether the invasion outweighs my country's obligation to protect and defend.

[Edited by chillbilly on 01-24-2006 at 09:43 PM]

[MadeinUSA]

Yeah, it is too bad the media doesn’t report equally so the nation can be as educated on both sides and who is truly representing them.

[James 3528]

Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by James 3528
So did Maxine Waters and Taliban Ted Kennedy....duh They are guilty of not keeping Congress informed? You need to review the National Security Act......really!

If we had any National Security, those two would be at Gitmo.