but he can be had..

"Is life so dear or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?... I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" ~~ Patrick Henry
"Illegitimus non Carborundum"

...but I wonder how high their anxiety levels would be if the diet at Gitmo was changed exclusively to pork in order to bring this fiasco to an end?

is they (terrorist) are using our system against us. They get into our prison systems and then convert and radicalize the black population found there. It is like a virus.. They infect a 1000 cells then they are released like spores to go into our communitys like ticking time bombs. Each infected cell spreading to others..

That is why we have to cut out the cancer not SWALLOW it.

And as far as trials for Terrorist in our court system..all it is going to take is one Liberal Judge to throw out a conviction because the terrorist was not marandized at the time of capture.. Then poof they're free. But I believe they do not want to go free for the reasons stated above.

Let's see sitting in a cave eating snakes or strike out at America and then get 3 politically correct meals, with politically correct prayer times and politically correct medical treatments and all the while preach your particular brand of hate to a willing and captive audience and let the taxpayers fund it all..

MADNESS

"Is life so dear or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?... I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" ~~ Patrick Henry
"Illegitimus non Carborundum"

"REMEMBER one thing if the prevalent idea to make this all just a simple muder case then maybe just maybe..9/11 attacks would not have happened.

If SUDAN did in fact offer to arrest OBL and give him to Clinton than maybe 3000+ people may still be alive today."

No, Lindsey.... If Republican administrations of old had decided to read Presidential Daily Bulletins, especially those titled Al Qaeda determined to strike within The U.S. using airplanes," then possibly 9/11 would just be another day.
bu bu but Clinton..... Seriously?

Hack

Are you referring to the August 6th PDB? This is the one that supposedly came about because of Bush's inquiries at these briefings concerning any indications that Bin Laden was going to attack in the U.S. I've read this released briefing and it contained very little in specifics about attacks here. There is a mention about surveillance of some federal buildings in N.Y. and a mention about "hijacking a plane to have "Blind Shaykh" released. There seemed to be a great desire to harm us and some indications that Bin Lasen wanted to do it here, but I can't see how we could have prevented it. There were 70 investigations going on and we still didn't know what was about to hit us. I just don't understand your total dismissal of Clinton's decision to not take Bin Laden when he was offered.

If you are familiar with the difficulty in reading the PDB, you must be familiar with the difficulty in verifying Yemen's claims that they had Bin Laden. The argument started by Lindsey on preventing 9/11 is equally impossible to prove as mine..... stirring the pot we both are.

Stay warm,

Cheers,

Hack

I have heard Clinton make statements trying to explain his reasoning, though. AHHH, snow! Would love abit of it myself! I'm a cold-weather girl---hate the summer!

You can now go back to your regularly scheduled talking points..

Mind showing us some facts Hack besides 9/11 truther crap..

"Is life so dear or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?... I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" ~~ Patrick Henry
"Illegitimus non Carborundum"

"You can now go back to your regularly scheduled talking points.."
That got a laugh out of me. Seriously; because iot was witty, quick, and to the point!

Anyway, this aint "truther" stuff, but neither of our contentions are provable. Makes for good sparring though.

Hack

I do like sparring with you guys..

It is sort of like rubbing a cats fur the wrong way.. You know they don't like it.. but it's a guilty pleasure that you can't resist.

"Is life so dear or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?... I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" ~~ Patrick Henry
"Illegitimus non Carborundum"

I respect your opinions where offered, but if you are suggesting President Bush yielded to the desires of the phantom unnamed "liberals" in this statement:

"Well Duh again.. Military Tribunals came under immediate ATTACK by (drum roll please) Liberals who wanted these guys tried in Civilian court."

I can only offer laughter. Bush never caved to the desires of unnamed "liberals." Tom Ridge applauded the use of Federal Courts. Giuliani did as well. Remember the date on my link? 2002? That was AFTER 9/11/01. Republicans did not attack the use of Federal Courts for these cases until a democrat was in The White House.

But, your opinion has been logged and tabulated.

Hack

the Bush thingy was all you decided to defend.. Ok..

My Points therefore stand..

btw...

Bush Caves In To Liberals Again. What A Surprise

February 7, 2002

Deal on Charitable Giving May Disappoint Conservatives By Susan Jones CNSNews.com Morning Editor February 07, 2002
(CNSNews.com) - A bill intended to encourage charitable donations is moving forward, after the White House reportedly sweetened the deal with new spending so Democrats would vote for it.

Bush caves on Iraq benchmarks
BY KENNETH R. BAZINET DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

Friday, May 11th 2007, 4:00 AM

WASHINGTON - President Bush blinked under GOP pressure and agreed yesterday to negotiate with Democrats over benchmarks that measure progress in Iraq.

DeMint criticizes Bush cave-in on housing bill

NO Bush NEVER caved to the Liberals... Not EVER..He was just a PROGRESSIVE after all..

"Is life so dear or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?... I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" ~~ Patrick Henry
"Illegitimus non Carborundum"

Cut taxes to encourage business reinvestment and job growth. When 10% (actually much more) are unemployed and businesses are not certain how many new taxes are going to be dreamed up by this out of touch administration -THEY DON'T GO OUT AND HIRE MORE PEOPLE - IN FACT THEY LET PEOPLE GO. Exhibit A Home Depot and WalMart.

Just because Reagan did this with great success and he happens to be a Republican, doesn't automatically make it a bad idea for Dems.

Robert, how did tax cuts work for Ronald Reagan or Bush 43 for lowering the federal budget deficit? They did not. Why do you think the poll of 50 professional economists showed the need for an even bigger stimulus? The only people saying cut taxes only are politicians looking for votes. And the President appears to be moving their way. I guess he does listen to your side after all, not that any one of you will dare to break ranks and recognize that. But thanks for the contribution

Hack

There are sound economic results and theory about the affect of tax cuts on the economy. The big problem is: YOU HAVE TO CUT FEDERAL SPENDING EVEN MORE THAN THE CUTS at the same time, otherwise things like the principles behind the Laffer Curve or supply-side economics become failures and deficits run amok. Most Repubs have no problem with doing both tax cuts and increasing federal spending and growing the fed govt as fast as possible at the same time......that's what gets them elected and waving the flag for George W and then suddenly waking up and now saying it was somehow all wrong. They still don't understand that all of this started under Reagan and isn't a recent phenomena.

Cutting taxes also doesn't work if you want to exempt the very same people who create all the jobs in the first place by declaring they have "too much" already and can't benefit for tax cuts or reform of archaic BS like capital gains and estate taxes.

From Hack: Republicans have all but sold their souls in an effort to smear anything democrat. It's quite sad." the link is to a story of a possible attempt to tap Sen Mary Landreaux's phones or somehting like that. If these four individuals can define the republicans, do I get to pick 4 democrats to define the entire democratic party? It is not hard to find some of your brethern that would give you pause.
I am curious about the spending freeze and what it actually means. If the discretionary budgets in federal agencies were bumped up 30% this year, what good is a spending freeze? The new benchmark is much higher than heretofore. I am curious to see how this plays out beyond the sound bytes.
You want ideas from Republicans? If they give them, will they be greeted with "shut up I won the election"? Once again, just curious

Your party pushed the "lie of the year" in an effort to protect insurance companies from health care reform

Your party has graphically accelerated the use of filibusters to gum up the works of our government.

your party lies every time they say the stimulus hasn't helped our economy.

"President Obama's stimulus package saved jobs — but the government still needs to do more to breathe life into the economy, according to USA TODAY's quarterly survey of 50 economists."

Your party allows itself to be represented by people who think

The President has a deep seeded hatred of white people.

That poor kids must not be fed and allowed to breed like stray animals.

That torturing human beings in our custody is acceptable.

Wedge. You choose to be in a party that drags its knuckles while clogging the mechanisms of government; a party that says more military spending while clamoring about balancing a budget they have surely helped explode; a party that chooses to walk on gays, the poor, and RINOs aka independent thinking Republicans. That is the fact. Your post won't change it.

Hack

Thanks for sharing.

No ones party is perfect. Most of them need to be chucked out on their collective butts. 1)"Your party pushed the "lie of the year" in an effort to protect insurance companies from health care reform" cant be right. If the dems plans to require everyone to buy health ins. would have gone through, the care providers and insurance companies profits would have exploded! but Reps fought that. Obama is the one who bailled out the banks.... 2)"Your party has graphically accelerated the use of filibusters to gum up the works of our government" what evidence do you have to support that other than anecdotal? Besides, what choices did they have? The Dems pull every dirty trick in the book, calling midnight votes, bribing their own party members with taxpayer money, Pelosi even had the light shut off and the building cleared when reps wanted to debate some energy bill. And forget about letting a Rep actually get a bill to the floor. Wasnt she the one talking about civility and bipartisanship? Where is it? Does anyone really think that if some Reps had some great ideas any Dem would listen? 3)"your party lies every time they say the stimulus hasn't helped our economy." It depends on perspective. If you take the short view, yeah, some jobs have been saved. YAY! If you take the long view, Spending $415,000 to creat a government job that pays 50K a year, that in the private sector would only pay 30K isint a good thing. That money has to come from somewhere, and its coming from our pockets. Eventual we will have to pay it all back, with intrest. PLUS, the big kicker is that as soon as the stim money goes away, the job will go away too! So where is the benefit? If Obama had cut taxes, let people keep their own money and spend it, and built the economy up that way, i would be his biggest fan, Ayers be darned. Sure, revenue to the G would drop, but taking in less money or spending money you dont have still puts you into debt so whats the difference? The difference is that the quickest way to turn a dollar into a nickel is to give it to the G to handel and spend. Besides, I know better what to do with my money that Obama does. Or you. Why cant you get that?

Let me start by giving you an idea of how I operate.

I first read the subject line of a post and then read to determine if the subject line matches the body of work. I'll expound:

If you title a post "Take it down a notch," but then right this:

"The Dems pull every dirty trick in the book, calling midnight votes, bribing their own party members with taxpayer money,"

I have to determine that by "Kevin, take it down a notch," you really mean,

"Kevin, you really kicked us in the peanuts. I thought liberals just laid there and took getting beaten upon by us compassionate conservatives, but you dare to fight back with facts that I can't refute. So, that being said, I'll kick up some dust and mention Pelosi in my post for good measure."

Gotcha Renault. Point taken. I give you a link to a graph that shows vote by vote how republicans have out-filibustered democrats, and you call it "anecdotal?" Well, could you possibly be arguing from a very partisan position? Maybe?

Nice first chat, I must say

Hack

that's why we have a two-party system.

Both sides have worked well to gum it all up Kevin.. The Repubs just used the procedure a tad more.. Care to look up the history of the filibuster?

Like I told Nuk about Romney.. Hard to complain about the direction the ball is taking.. When you kicked it to begin with..

"Is life so dear or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?... I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" ~~ Patrick Henry
"Illegitimus non Carborundum"

I heard that very thing being discussed tonight, about having the benchmark already raised so much higher on discretionary spending. It seems that it locks in the higher spending, all under the guise of a "freeze". Oh, and I vote for Sandy Berger being one of those four Dems to define the Dem. Party. I guess STEALING from the National Archives just doesn't rate as a crime to some on this site.

Almost sounds like a lunch menu! Couldn't agree more about Berger--I worked every day with Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) like Berger heisted and if I had done the same thing, I would have faced what was called "10 & 10", that's 10 yers in the slammer and $10,000 fine. Yes, Berger got a fine, but that SOB should have been prosecuted to the fullest and gotten slammer time! Just normal Clinton leniency and failure to protect our nation's highest secrets.

as the Dems number one representative.

He preaches Healthcare for all but refuses to pay for his 2 yoa illegitimate daughter’s healthcare and when she has to get some major dental work done skips out on the $5,000.00 he owes forcing his "mistress" to pay for it which she can't.

So Healthcare is fine as long as someone else pays for it.

"Is life so dear or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?... I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" ~~ Patrick Henry
"Illegitimus non Carborundum"

"You can attempt to obfuscate the fact that the DEMS where the party of obstruction.. but just keep on pumping and humping there Hack.."

In bringing John Edwards into this, I see that you have learned the political value of "obfuscation." I'll consider myself rehired as your life coach. And we've made great progress today .

Hack

dental work would a two year old need that would cost $5,000---a set of dentures perhaps? While I don't in any way think that snake in the grass should be let off, I have no sympathy for the mistress. She worked before, in fact she was working when she 'worked' on that oil slick. With all the swag she got while they were hiding the truth (probably taxpayer money or money that should have gone to his kids), she could probably pay my and your dental bills to boot. I think she is nastier than slime and he is even slimier.. They really deserve each other---shame there are children who will be hurt by this ----and gee, this lying, smirking piece of dung might have been our POTUS. Thank God for that at least.

In these hard times people have to make those hard decisions! Don't you know how expensive John's haircuts are, for pete's sake?!? Besides, I am sure that Obama will step up and take care of this child's dental problems...eventually. Just got to plow through all those "broken" promises first!!

going through all 500 promises made..

91 as scored as being kept.. 41 of the 91 which he was given the "benefit" of the doubt.. Whatever that means..

"Is life so dear or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?... I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" ~~ Patrick Henry
"Illegitimus non Carborundum"