Comments on: White House Will Fight For War Powers
Bush Will Stand His Ground If Democrats Try To Revoke 2002 Authorization
Add a Comment See all 222 Comments
- Also - EX can't come to grips with other questions I've sent his way...
Posted by Lieberman181 at 04:50 PM : Feb 24, 2007
Such as what, lieberman? Give me a friggin' break!
Your silliness doesn't even make me break sweat, much less not come to grips with it....what a joke. - Reply to this comment
- hey lieberman,
Have you noticed how much shorter the line is getting at the Kool-Aid stand thesedays?
Aside from the fact that only 27% here in the states think your idol has his head screwed on tight, there are no more British lining up.
The Kool-Aid line just gets shorter and shorter.... - Reply to this comment
- Dodo Dallison,
Thank you. I do accept your thanks for MY service to the United States of America. Still not sure about yours, LOL.
As for your fellow surrender monkey and traitor, the proof is in the pudding. No record of active service - at least in the U.S. Armed Forces but plenty of advocacy for Islamofascism, and support of our enemy, NOT our troops - in Iraq and probably Afghanistan too.
Also - EX can't come to grips with other questions I've sent his way, always blowing hot air or doing the smoke and mirrors show. Seems to me if he can't spoke the true Marines on the ground in Baghdad, he needs to go and liberate Saigon.
By the way, you too Dodo Dally.
LOL
Posted by Lieberman181 at 04:50 PM : Feb 24, 2007
Put up the email, little man, that I asked your for hours ago and you'll have all the proof you need. Otherwise, shut you silly a$$ up with your inuendos. - Reply to this comment
- Dodo Dallison,
Thank you. I do accept your thanks for MY service to the United States of America. Still not sure about yours, LOL.
As for your fellow surrender monkey and traitor, the proof is in the pudding. No record of active service - at least in the U.S. Armed Forces but plenty of advocacy for Islamofascism, and support of our enemy, NOT our troops - in Iraq and probably Afghanistan too.
Also - EX can't come to grips with other questions I've sent his way, always blowing hot air or doing the smoke and mirrors show. Seems to me if he can't spoke the true Marines on the ground in Baghdad, he needs to go and liberate Saigon.
By the way, you too Dodo Dally.
LOL - Reply to this comment
- Say lieberman-
If I'm a traitor after having served my country in combat, what would you be considering you couldn't even make it into the reserves? - Reply to this comment
- the two traitors who call themselves "EX" Marines are now aboard. Guess they haven't liberate Saigon yet...probably won't either.
Posted by Lieberman181 at 02:57 PM : Feb 24, 2007
weren't you just complaining about insults about an hour ago, lieberman?
Rocks in glass houses, lieberman..... - Reply to this comment
- ATTENTION, ATTENTION. LET IT BE SAID HERE FIRST. THERE WILL BE A NEW PARTY IN THE RACE FOR THE WHITE HOUSE. DID YOU KNOW THAT. STAY TUNE.
- Reply to this comment
- Anything to try to help your team win, right? You'd rather carry water for them than to ever admit the liberals were right all along, right? Real patriotism...I see.
- Reply to this comment
- Mohammad ethnically cleansed the Jews from Medina:
http://libertyandculture.blogspot.com/2005/08/mohammeds-ethnic-cleansing.html
actions speak louder than words..........
and we all know that muslims won't do anything that isn't sanctioned in the quran........therefore the quran must have given them permission to slaughter the non muslims in sudan, philippines, thailand, russia, bali, yugoslavia, etc etc etc... all over the globe...
Suicide bombers follow Quran
Their preliminary finding is politically explosive: it's their "holy book" the Quran after all, according to intelligence briefings obtained by WND.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52184
TIMELINE OF ISLAMIC TERROR
http://library.thinkquest.org/CR0212088/tertime.htm
ISLAM ACTS OF PEACE!!!
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/default.htm#attacks
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks-2001-2003.htm
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks-2004.htm - Reply to this comment
- hey 181 must be your I.Q... anyway its so hard for you people to hear the TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH SO HELP YOU GOD.. WHAT I POSTED IS FOR ALL TO READ IF YOU CAN. JUST GO AND READ IT...
- Reply to this comment
- Bush has failed to declare war on the rats that invaded the KFC in NYC. What wrong? Surely he isn't going to try diplomacy first. Bring out the cats. No negotiations with terrorists!
- Reply to this comment
- the two traitors who call themselves "EX" Marines are now aboard. Guess they haven't liberate Saigon yet...probably won't either.
They're too busy giving aid and comfort to Osama.
Posted by Lieberman181
Once again, Lieberman, thank you for your service to our country.
Your insane right wing gibberish has surely done more to bring former conservatives to our cause than any other single person's efforts. All over the country republicans are saying, "I don't want to be associated with a nut like Lieberman, I'm changing my party affiliation." Just look at the polls, Lieberman, millions of former supporters of the Bush doctrine have changed their minds.
So, thank you, Lieberman. You are indeed an accidental hero. - Reply to this comment
- True. To which I respond, when did Hussein re-invade Kuwait?
Posted by formrusmcsgt
And, now that Vietnam has a stable and productive government shouldn't we continue that war? - Reply to this comment
- the two traitors who call themselves "EX" Marines are now aboard. Guess they haven't liberate Saigon yet...probably won't either.
They're too busy giving aid and comfort to Osama. - Reply to this comment
- Clementshagen,
How's Adolf? You should know.
Murtha is a crook - remember Abscam - and a traitor. Period. He DOES NOT support our troops.
Maybe their surrender, but he and Botox do not support them. As for the fallacious argument that he wants them to have the finest equipment, for what? To make sure the Iranians get it? Or maybe his aid and comfort friends in Al Qaeda?
If they did support our troops, they would support and call for a military victory. They do not.
As forthepeaple - lol. Sounds like someone forgot to lock the door on the Asylum today. Just more gibberish and pathetic fascist babble from a bozo.
Your friend and fellow crypto-Nazi James Baker, next to Hagel the Dem's favorite Republican is probably the only Republican making any money off the suffering - after all, his Syrian friends are paying him off well - You cry Halliburton all the time, bozos, yet nothing about Oil Can Baker's sordid deals including whitewashing Syria & the Palestinians over the murder of Americans on Pan Am Flight 103 - or his support of Arab Fascist regimes. Always Halliburton and Rumsfeld. Or Dem Jooz.
Get a brain, bozos and look around. It's Carter, the Clitons, Botox Nan and her ILLEGALS, traitor Murtha, Hanoi John Kerry & Baker waxing rich. But don't forget to slur Lieberman or make your insane comments about what Nazis Bush and Cheney are - when the real Nazis and Klansmen are warmly welcomed in Pelosi and Osama Barak Alabama - aka Steppin Fetchit's camp. - Reply to this comment
- We hear from the neocons their newest 'talking point'. "The war in Iraq is a continuation of the war that started in 1992."
Posted by dallison7 at 02:49 PM : Feb 24, 2007
True. To which I respond, when did Hussein re-invade Kuwait? - Reply to this comment
- We hear from the neocons their newest 'talking point'. "The war in Iraq is a continuation of the war that started in 1992."
The effort in 1992 was enacted to expel Iraqi troops from Kuwait. The current war was to eradicate Saddam's weapons of mass destruction... I mean to dispose an evil dictator... I mean to bring democracy to the Iraqi people.
IN both cases, 'MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!!!" - Reply to this comment
- formrusmcsgt.... nope.... it was congress...
Posted by lars008 at 11:57 AM : Feb 24, 2007
This is a list of legislation passed by the 92nd Congress. You will note that there is no legislation withdrawing troops from nor cutting funding for Viet Nam:
1971 December 18 - Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act
1971 December 23 - National Cancer Act
1972 February 7 - Federal Election Campaign Act
1972 March 24 - Equal Employment Opportunity Act
1972 June 23 - Title IX Amendment of the Higher Education Act
1972 October 6 - Federal Advisory Committee Act
1972 October 21 - Marine Mammal Protection Act
1972 October 27 - Consumer Product Safety Act
1972 October 27 - Noise Control Act
1972 October 27 - Coastal Zone Management Act
Nixon ended Viet Nam, not the 92nd Congress. - Reply to this comment
- lieberman why do you open your axsxs to talk. why dont you read h.j.114 and then just maybe you can talk. the president has no and i mean NO AUTHORIZATION to put any troops anywhere except iraq... sec.3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES. (a) defend the national security of the united states against the continuing theat POSED by IRAQ;(b) and enforce all relevant United Nations Council Resoltions regarding IRAQ. THAT IS ALL THE AUTHORITY MR PRESIDENT HAS. LOOKS LIKE WE DID ALL THAT BACK 3 YEARS AGO. THATS WHY EVERY REAL AMERICAN IS SO UPSET BECAUSE MR PRESIDENT/V.P./RUMFELD HAVE THE BLOOD OF OURS KIDS ON THERE HANDS AND THEY DONT CARE. WHAT MATTER TO THEM IS THE ALL MIGHTY $$$$$$$$$ THAT THEY ARE MAKING WITH OUR KIDS BLOOD. IT MURDER IN THE FIRST DECREE POINT BLANK.....
- Reply to this comment
- Once more into the breach, my conservative friends, this time armed with a nifty new state-of-the-art sound-byte (slow bleed has now replaced cut-n-run), accompanied by the typical drivel about who supports the troops. Murtha goes on record as saying troops should have more time between tours and that "stop-loss" policies should be abolished but he's against the troops? Murtha insists some of the countless billions being wasted on this war (stolen by war profiteers if you want to be candid) should instead be spent on equipment. But HE'S against the troops? Murtha says they should also have the finest in helmet liners, top-of-the-line body armor, and up-to-date Humvee armor, but they question his loyalty and patriotism? How could you send a soldier into battle in good conscience without the very best equipment? How can you have them come home injured after serving their country and not make sure they have the finest care (see Walter Reed stories)? People, wake up and pay attention. Who is really advocating for the safety, security, and care of the troops? If you say the Bush administration and in the same breath castigate Murtha, you simply have not been paying attention.
- Reply to this comment
