Political Forums  

Go Back   Political Forums > Current events
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

We appreciate your help

in keeping this site going.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 10-18-2009, 02:54 PM
merrylander's Avatar
merrylander merrylander is offline
Resident octogenarian
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
Actually it was more Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld that took us off to war.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 10-20-2009, 09:30 AM
BlueStreak's Avatar
BlueStreak BlueStreak is offline
Area Man
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
I think they just don't want to work for Limbaugh because he's a guy who gets paid way too much to sit on his ass and wag his tongue at a microphone-------that constantly bitches about others getting paid too much to do too little. That's why I hate his guts. At least the football players WORK for their money.

Maybe if he went out and got a real job with realistic blue collar pay, he'd change his tune a little?

Fuck Limbaugh.

Dave

P.s.
Rush has kids?
I didn't even know he's married.
Or is he.
Probably queer on top of it all.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 10-20-2009, 09:34 AM
BlueStreak's Avatar
BlueStreak BlueStreak is offline
Area Man
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles View Post
What exactly was Cheney's agenda? Please enlighten me.

Chas
Pandering to, and profiting from the "military industrial complex".
Some would say that's why we ended up in Iraq.

Dave
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 10-20-2009, 01:27 PM
d-ray657's Avatar
d-ray657 d-ray657 is offline
Loyal Opposition
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Johnson County, Kansas
Posts: 14,401
Thanks Dave, I forgot to answer that. I will add that the war criminal and his cronies used the opportunity to redefine patriotism to fit within the right-wing mold, questioning the patriotism of anyone who might disagree with his motives or methods; to move toward a police state with the miserably named "Patriot Act;" to have free reign to act in whatever circumstance that he was able to label as national security (including torture); to not only pander to the Industrial Military Complex, but the further integrate it into the government. His administration would relish in punishing those who questioned it - going to far as to threaten a person working on behalf of US security by disclosing her undercover activities, because her husband had accurately disputed the fictions that he advanced in support of the Iraq war.

Regards,

D-Ray
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 10-20-2009, 03:30 PM
Charles Charles is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueStreak View Post
Pandering to, and profiting from the "military industrial complex".
Some would say that's why we ended up in Iraq.

Dave
I suppose that's one way to look at it.

Chas
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:51 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.