PDA

View Full Version : GW's got some rope a dope skills..



K.Bullock
12-15-2008, 10:29 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuyzA5dT5Kk&eurl=http://news.google.com/nwshp?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hl=en&tab=wn&feature=player_embedded

Patrick Johndrow
12-15-2008, 05:37 PM
I heard the guy got repeatedly tased for his effort plus his shoes were not returned....this guy may have the 2008 Dumbass Award locked up

Marvin S
12-15-2008, 06:28 PM
I heard the guy got repeatedly tased for his effort plus his shoes were not returned....this guy may have the 2008 Dumbass Award locked up

Why would you expect anything different from a reporter? :)

mjh345
12-15-2008, 07:18 PM
this guy may have the 2008 Dumbass Award locked up


Which guy, the one throwing the shoe, or the one he is aiming the shoe at?

Patrick Johndrow
12-15-2008, 07:21 PM
Which guy, the one throwing the shoe, or the one he is aiming the shoe at?

The one throwing the shoes...what an idiot...Two shoe on your head? What the hell?

K.Bullock
12-15-2008, 09:03 PM
I was impressed with GW's reaction time, that shoe was really moving. :D

YardleyLabs
12-15-2008, 09:16 PM
Personally, I wasn't surprised at all. I've always known he was a little dodgy.:D

Bob Gutermuth
12-15-2008, 09:18 PM
W dodged the shoes almost as well as Slick Willy dodged the draft

K.Bullock
12-15-2008, 09:33 PM
W dodged the shoes almost as well as Slick Willy dodged the draft
It's Yardley and Gutermuth neck and neck as they round the turn.:lol::lol::lol::lol:

Hoosier
12-15-2008, 10:08 PM
To bad Monica couldn't dodge like that. She wouldn't have ruined a perfectly good dress. And Bill could have lied without consequence:p

Bruce MacPherson
12-15-2008, 10:15 PM
And to think I stood up for you guys in Chris's thread.:)

backpasture
12-16-2008, 09:28 AM
W dodged the shoes almost as well as Slick Willy dodged the draft

Or as well as W himself dodged the draft.

K.Bullock
12-16-2008, 09:54 AM
Or as well as W himself dodged the draft.

Backpasture pulls ahead by a nose.:oops::lol:

Roger Perry
12-16-2008, 11:03 AM
I'm sure the reporter was just offering up his shoes as a Christmas present to President Bush for Bush's contrubution for freeing Iraq from Saddam. It probably took the poor reporter more than a year to save up enough money to buy the shoes.

Bob Gutermuth
12-16-2008, 11:13 AM
W is an honorably discharged veteran. Slick Willy went to a foreign country.

backpasture
12-16-2008, 11:55 AM
W is an honorably discharged veteran. Slick Willy went to Canada.

He 'went to Canada'? Not sure where you heard that, but it's not the case.

Clinton DID pull as many strings as he could, just like W (who had his family pull strings so he could jump the waiting list and get into the Texas Guard).

You are kidding yourself if you really think that Clinton was a 'draft dodger' and W was not.

W has rightfully earned his place on the list of draft dodging, pro-war Republican Chickenhawks, along with Dennis Hastert, Dick Armey, Tom Delay, Trent Lott, John Ashcroft, Newt Gingrich, Phil Gramm, Rush Limbaugh, Bill Bennett and, of course, Dick Cheney.

Hew
12-16-2008, 12:10 PM
He 'went to Canada'? Not sure where you heard that, but it's not the case.

Clinton DID pull as many strings as he could, just like W (who had his family pull strings so he could jump the waiting list and get into the Texas Guard).

You are kidding yourself if you really think that Clinton was a 'draft dodger' and W was not.

W has rightfully earned his place on the list of draft dodging, pro-war Republican Chickenhawks, along with Dennis Hastert, Dick Armey, Tom Delay, Trent Lott, John Ashcroft, Newt Gingrich, Phil Gramm, Rush Limbaugh, Bill Bennett and, of course, Dick Cheney.

Let me see if I've got this straight...people who serve/served in the National Guard are draft dodgers?

I've thoroughly enjoyed watching your cheese slip completely off your cracker in your last number of posts on multiple threads here. Hey, you and your homies have, for the past 8 years, thrown out all sort of scurrilous, half-baked charges and rants against Bush...and now you seem genuinely shocked/surprised that those chickens are coming home to roost.

BTW, please tell me that you've just been off your game a little in your last 5 posts or so and that for the next four years you're really not planning on including in every post about Obama some rehash of real or imagined grievances you have with Bush. Please?

Buzz
12-16-2008, 12:11 PM
W is pretty athletic. It must be from that grueling cheer leader training at Princeton. ;-)

Steve Amrein
12-16-2008, 12:35 PM
W dodged those shoes way better than Hillery was dodging sniper fire... oh yea er nevermind.

backpasture
12-16-2008, 01:47 PM
Let me see if I've got this straight...people who serve/served in the National Guard are draft dodgers?


C'mon, Hew. You're smarter than that, I think. You understand the difference between the Guard now, and the Guard then, and how many politically connected sons used the Guard to avoid Vietnam. Technically, neither Clinton nor Bush 'dodged the draft'. They both just used various schemes to stay out of Vietnam. It is laughable that the same people (talking about you, Bob) who will scream 'draft dodger' at Clinton will step up and defend Bush for the same.

I know how you like your straw men, though, Hew.



I've thoroughly enjoyed watching your cheese slip completely off your cracker in your last number of posts on multiple threads here. Hey, you and your homies have, for the past 8 years, thrown out all sort of scurrilous, half-baked charges and rants against Bush...and now you seem genuinely shocked/surprised that those chickens are coming home to roost.

Let's see.... Invading a sovereign country under false pretense, institutionalizing torture, 'Mission Accomplished'? Ya, I would say that is the moral equivalent to a non-existant 'Blago scandal' (which McCain, among others, has said is a load of crap.)



BTW, please tell me that you've just been off your game a little in your last 5 posts or so and that for the next four years you're really not planning on including in every post about Obama some rehash of real or imagined grievances you have with Bush. Please?

I'm not going to obsess over Bush if Bob G isn't going to obsess over Bill Clinton.... I believe that is what I was responding to. I'm more than happy to put the Bush nightmare in the rear view mirror and never have to think about it again.

Bob Gutermuth
12-16-2008, 02:12 PM
If you think the Bush years were a nightmare, just wait until the 'messiah's' coronation next month That is going to start a real nightmare.

backpasture
12-16-2008, 02:27 PM
If you think the Bush years were a nightmare, just wait until the 'messiah's' coronation next month That is going to start a real nightmare.

How do you want to measure progress? DJIA? Unemployment rate? Number of US soldiers killed each month? Number of Americans with access to health care? Number of homes in foreclosure? Number of US citizens who died from a terrorist attack on the president's watch? Change in home values? Number of detainees we torture? Number nuclear arms produced by rogue states? Number of countries we invade? Budget deficit? Trade deficit? National debt? Standardized test scores?

Which of those numbers do you 26%ers actually think are going to get worse under Obama?

Hew
12-16-2008, 02:33 PM
Let's see.... Invading a sovereign country under false pretense, institutionalizing torture, 'Mission Accomplished'? Ya, I would say that is the moral equivalent to a non-existant 'Blago scandal' (which McCain, among others, has said is a load of crap.)

I'm not going to obsess over Bush....
LOL. You can't go two consecutive paragraphs without obsessing about Bush. Your tone seems angrier these days, too. Almost like you're already growing weary of responding to the vitriol expressed for your boy Obami. Like I said, you guys sowed much of the nastiness with tripe like above (eg "invasion under false pretense")...stick around for the reapin'. ;-)

backpasture
12-16-2008, 02:36 PM
Like I said, you guys sowed much of the nastiness with tripe like above (eg "invasion under false pretense")...stick around for the reapin'. ;-)

Remind me why we were told we had to invade Iraq again....?

Hoosier
12-16-2008, 03:01 PM
Remind me why we were told we had to invade Iraq again....?

Because Saddam was an a--hole I think that was the reason. That's good enough for me. Oh and now we have Iran surrounded. That should come in handy when they step out of line.

Hew
12-16-2008, 03:01 PM
Remind me why we were told we had to invade Iraq again....?
Remind me who voted to invade Iraq?

backpasture
12-16-2008, 03:13 PM
Remind me who voted to invade Iraq?

You dodge questions as well as W dodges shoes.

K.Bullock
12-16-2008, 03:29 PM
Remind me who voted to invade Iraq?
H J RES 114 YEA-AND-NAY 10-Oct-2002 3:05 PM
QUESTION: On Passage
BILL TITLE: To Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq

Yeas Nays PRES NV
Republican 215 6 2
Democratic 81 126 1
Independent 1
TOTALS 296 133 3

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2002/roll455.xml ;)

Hew
12-16-2008, 03:38 PM
H J RES 114 YEA-AND-NAY 10-Oct-2002 3:05 PM
QUESTION: On Passage
BILL TITLE: To Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq

Yeas Nays PRES NV
Republican 215 6 2
Democratic 81 126 1
Independent 1
TOTALS 296 133 3

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2002/roll455.xml;)

And the Senate was even more bipartisan, with a plurality of democrats voting to invade Iraq...including Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, John Kerry, John Edwards, Tom Daschle, Chuck Schumer, and Dianne Feinstein. But it's "Bush's war of false pretense." :rolleyes:

Hew
12-16-2008, 03:40 PM
You dodge questions as well as W dodges shoes.
Yeah, you wouldn't want to wear out Google and get your answer yourself...particularly when it doesn't agree with your preconceived notion.

backpasture
12-16-2008, 03:55 PM
Yeah, you wouldn't want to wear out Google and get your answer yourself...particularly when it doesn't agree with your preconceived notion.


OK, then. I'll answer for you:

We went to war because Iraq had 'Weapons of Mass Destruction'. Turns out they did not. Turns out that lots of folks in the intelligence community didn't think they did. Turns out the Bush admin cherrypicked the data that supported their claims, while ignoring what didn't.
False pretense.

I think anyone who voted for the war shares the blame, though it's impossible to imagine a scenario where we would have gone in had the Bush admin not led the charge.

FWIW - Somehow the entire delegation from my little hayseed state was able to see that the 'intelligence' was absolute crap. That's cold comfort, though.

K.Bullock
12-16-2008, 03:58 PM
And the Senate was even more bipartisan, with a plurality of democrats voting to invade Iraq...including Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, John Kerry, John Edwards, Tom Daschle, Chuck Schumer, and Dianne Feinstein. But it's "Bush's war of false pretense." :rolleyes:



U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 107th Congress - 2nd Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Joint Resolution (H.J.Res. 114 )
Vote Number: 237 Vote Date: October 11, 2002, 12:50 AM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Joint Resolution Passed
Measure Number: H.J.Res. 114
Measure Title: A joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.
Vote Counts: YEAs 77 NAYs 23

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00237

Nearly every democrat who has run for president and was in that senate at the time voted for the war in Iraq ...that's interesting.

backpasture
12-16-2008, 04:03 PM
Nearly every democrat who has run for president and was in that senate at the time voted for the war in Iraq ...that's interesting.

Because they had political aspirations, and didn't want to get branded as 'soft' or 'anti-war'. They saw what happened politically to those who voted against the first Gulf War (no one who voted against ever had a shot at the Presidency because of their opposition). And, they bought the whole WMD story hook line and sinker, thinking that 'liberating' Iraq would be just like liberating Kuwait.

Pathetic.

Captain Mike D
12-16-2008, 04:26 PM
OK, then. I'll answer for you:

We went to war because Iraq had 'Weapons of Mass Destruction'. Turns out they did not. Turns out that lots of folks in the intelligence community didn't think they did. Turns out the Bush admin cherrypicked the data that supported their claims, while ignoring what didn't.
False pretense.

I think anyone who voted for the war shares the blame, though it's impossible to imagine a scenario where we would have gone in had the Bush admin not led the charge.

FWIW - Somehow the entire delegation from my little hayseed state was able to see that the 'intelligence' was absolute crap. That's cold comfort, though.

Whoa there "Big Shooter",

No reason to attempt to rewrite history to those who have lived and payed attention over the past few years.
You seem to be forgetting the numerous UN mandates that Saddam thumbed his nose at such as the weapons inspectors and violations of the No Fly Zones. Then there was also a little matter of the UN allowing him to sell oil for food to keep his people from starving which he diverted to further his own ambitions.
Lady Hillary and her tag along Bill, had spoken numerous times about the certainty that Saddam did indeed possess WMD.

You have to hand it to Saddam, he did fool the whole world, and most importantly he kept Iran at bay by fooling them too.

Hew
12-16-2008, 04:30 PM
Because they had political aspirations, and didn't want to get branded as 'soft' or 'anti-war'. They saw what happened politically to those who voted against the first Gulf War (no one who voted against ever had a shot at the Presidency because of their opposition). And, they bought the whole WMD story hook line and sinker, thinking that 'liberating' Iraq would be just like liberating Kuwait.

Pathetic.
Doesn't the above pretty much gut your argument that it was a war sold on false pretense?

Captain Mike D
12-16-2008, 04:43 PM
Because they had political aspirations, and didn't want to get branded as 'soft' or 'anti-war'. They saw what happened politically to those who voted against the first Gulf War (no one who voted against ever had a shot at the Presidency because of their opposition). And, they bought the whole WMD story hook line and sinker, thinking that 'liberating' Iraq would be just like liberating Kuwait.

Pathetic.

What would be pathetic is for anyone to support a Political Party whose members would vote for going to war BECAUSE of the above text.

Pathetic indeed.

backpasture
12-16-2008, 04:49 PM
Doesn't the above pretty much gut your argument that it was a war sold on false pretense?

Um, no.

Bush sold it on false pretense. Congress bought it on false pretense.

There were a susbstantial number of people in Congress (and elsewhere) who did NOT buy it. Many of those who voted FOR did it for political expediency. Others did it because they bought what they were sold rather than digging deeper.

Regardless of the reason, those that voted FOR the war made the wrong decision.

backpasture
12-16-2008, 04:53 PM
What would be pathetic is for anyone to support a Political Party whose members would vote for going to war BECAUSE of the above text.

Pathetic indeed.

Ya. That would be pathetic. In fact, just voting for a Political Party is pathetic, IMO. Which is why I vote for candidates, not parties.

And, I haven't voted for any candidate that voted for the war. For me, a vote for the war shows that you don't have the judgement necessary to hold high office.

backpasture
12-16-2008, 04:54 PM
You have to hand it to Saddam, he did fool the whole world, and most importantly he kept Iran at bay by fooling them too.

He didn't fool the whole world. But, he fooled enough of the fools running our government.

Steve
12-16-2008, 06:21 PM
Remind me why we were told we had to invade Iraq again....?

Because Bush wouldn't simply state that Iraq had violated the agreement signed at the end of Gulf War I. He felt that he needed to further justify going to war.

Everytime I read about them firing at our planes or refusing to let us inspect a building, I wondered why we wouldn't enforce the agreement. I always believed that we should have flattended any building that they refused to let us inspect. Looks like we have the upper hand in Iraq now. Wonder if Obama will try to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

PS a mission is a specific action during a conflict, not the entire conflict. It can be as small as one person collecting intel. When GWB said "Mission Accomplished" he was correct. The Iraqi military was completely routed.

Patrick Johndrow
12-16-2008, 06:51 PM
W dodged the shoes almost as well as Slick Willy dodged the draft

If that guy threw his shoes at Clinton I would have wanted those guys to tase the hell out of him. Not matter Obama, Clinton, Reagan, Bush 1 or 2 they are American Presidents and only WE throw shoes at them.

Captain Mike D
12-16-2008, 06:56 PM
For me, a vote for the war shows that you don't have the judgement necessary to hold high office.

And in turn this statement shows that you have been so indoctrinated by the liberal rant that you do not even know the reasons for us going to war.
The lack of WDM being found is a convenient theme played on by the Democrat party (to try and split the country and garner votes) as the only reason we went in, while in truth there were numerous reasons, as was even embraced by the UN.

Bruce MacPherson
12-16-2008, 07:15 PM
Regardless of the reason, those that voted FOR the war made the wrong decision.

I guess we'll have to let history make that call. I for one think it was the correct thing to do for a number of reasons, least among them being the weapons of mass destruction.

backpasture
12-18-2008, 03:39 PM
And in turn this statement shows that you have been so indoctrinated by the liberal rant that you do not even know the reasons for us going to war.
The lack of WDM being found is a convenient theme played on by the Democrat party (to try and split the country and garner votes) as the only reason we went in, while in truth there were numerous reasons, as was even embraced by the UN.


I'm not naive enough to think the reasons we were TOLD we were going to war weren't the reason we actually went. Hence the 'false pretenses'. Thank you for confirming that.

Thank God you folks who still think it was a good idea are a small minority in this country now.

Hoosier
12-18-2008, 03:52 PM
I think we'll appreciate the strategic position we're in when we invade Iran. That's the next move. So it's worth it to get Saddam out of the way, and launch from Iraq, Afghanistan, Turkey, the Gulf did I miss any. I think Obama will eventually be faced with that situation.

backpasture
12-18-2008, 04:25 PM
I think we'll appreciate the strategic position we're in when we invade Iran. That's the next move. So it's worth it to get Saddam out of the way, and launch from Iraq, Afghanistan, Turkey, the Gulf did I miss any. I think Obama will eventually be faced with that situation.


Awesome idea! Too bad we don't have enough troops to do such a thing. Minor detail, though. You headed down to your nearest recruitment office to sign up? I'm sure the Iranians will shower you with roses and greet you as a liberator.

Hoosier
12-18-2008, 04:35 PM
Mark my words we're gonna get tested. Within 6 months we're gonna get tested. Sound familiar? We'll need all you bleeding heart liberals support. Ring a bell. Yes I think we'll be needing some air bases in the area. Unless your VP was just blowing smoke up our asses

Bruce MacPherson
12-18-2008, 05:07 PM
I'm not naive enough to think the reasons we were TOLD we were going to war weren't the reason we actually went. Hence the 'false pretenses'. Thank you for confirming that.

Thank God you folks who still think it was a good idea are a small minority in this country now.

While I think people are war weary, if you phrase the question correctly I think you would find that the number of people actually opposing the war is much smaller than you seem to believe. Also, even if it is a small minority, which I do not believe, that would not nessecarily preclude the minority from being correct.
I would respect the arguments on the left far more if they would simply be honest about which wars, if any, they would be willing to fight and under what terms.