isnt isnt 28 years of clinton bush enuff?

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #294,098 by boxley 10/3/07 11:17:36 AM Reply	isnt isnt 28 years of clinton bush enuff? there is an entire generation of americans who have lived only under a bush/clinton regime, time for a change. I would prefer edwards, could live with thompson or obama but please if you love clintons so much, invite them to move to finland and run your shit. thanx, bill Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari? Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep reach me at [link\|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net\|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
Post #294,101 by Seamus 10/3/07 12:21:56 PM Reply	Re: isnt isnt 28 years of clinton bush enuff? Bill, this implies you are ready to see Sen. Clinton elected. 4 yrs of Bush + 8 yrs of Bill + 8 yrs of shrub is 20 years. You are ready for 8 more years? Or you also counting the 8 years of Reagan? As much as I would like to blame that on Bush, I don't think he much to with that. Back then, being the VP really was a useless occupation. Seamus
Post #294,120 by boxley 10/3/07 6:17:48 PM Reply	yer right, it just seemed like 28 years Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari? Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep reach me at [link\|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net\|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
Post #294,124 by bepatient 10/3/07 6:35:25 PM Reply	It will seem like alot longer, heaven forbid. Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry._{Adrian Belew}

More betrayus.... - (Simon_Jester) - (108) - Sept. 30, 2007, 10:17:08 AM EDT

Is he calling our generals traitors? - (Seamus) - Sept. 30, 2007, 10:26:09 AM EDT

a little long on hyperbole - (boxley) - (96) - Sept. 30, 2007, 10:33:43 AM EDT

I don't usually agree with you - (Seamus) - (95) - Sept. 30, 2007, 10:40:52 AM EDT

petraus like macnamara - (boxley) - (94) - Sept. 30, 2007, 08:03:08 PM EDT

What duties are those, Box? - (jb4) - Sept. 30, 2007, 10:40:39 PM EDT

Talk about chicken shit - (Seamus) - Oct. 1, 2007, 12:01:30 AM EDT

Your "will do what his boss tells him" kind of chicken... - (CRConrad) - (91) - Oct. 1, 2007, 03:12:44 AM EDT

so, they are loading iraqis into ovens now? -NT - (boxley) - (90) - Oct. 1, 2007, 09:51:41 AM EDT

No, not as far as I know. Why, does that somehow make... - (CRConrad) - (89) - Oct. 1, 2007, 10:50:04 AM EDT

try reading my original post - (boxley) - (88) - Oct. 1, 2007, 10:55:09 AM EDT

SIGH...It gets more and more wrong. - (CRConrad) - (87) - Oct. 1, 2007, 03:22:57 PM EDT

naw, the germans were cheering all the way thru 1941 - (boxley) - (86) - Oct. 1, 2007, 04:37:11 PM EDT

Uuh... Yes. Logic much, mr Sequitur Strawman? - (CRConrad) - (85) - Oct. 2, 2007, 02:41:43 AM EDT

were you not comparing a point in time? if not - (boxley) - (84) - Oct. 2, 2007, 10:23:31 AM EDT

Two, actually: Germany, 1932, and USA, 2007. - (CRConrad) - (83) - Oct. 2, 2007, 04:20:02 PM EDT

long as we dont invade russia in winter - (boxley) - (82) - Oct. 2, 2007, 08:52:31 PM EDT

WTF is WRONG with you? Are you stoned out of your... - (CRConrad) - (81) - Oct. 3, 2007, 03:59:59 AM EDT

Now THERE is a funny non-seq -NT - (bepatient) - (80) - Oct. 3, 2007, 06:57:15 AM EDT

Non? Seemed to follow pretty directly, dinnit? How not? -NT - (CRConrad) - Oct. 3, 2007, 07:28:17 AM EDT

Nah - (crazy) - (78) - Oct. 3, 2007, 07:42:58 AM EDT

the lady's penchant for petty revenge with all the - (boxley) - (77) - Oct. 3, 2007, 09:53:19 AM EDT

Nope, that still doesn't explain WHY you're so mad. - (CRConrad) - (17) - Oct. 3, 2007, 10:37:10 AM EDT

isnt isnt 28 years of clinton bush enuff? - (boxley) - (3) - Oct. 3, 2007, 11:17:36 AM EDT

Re: isnt isnt 28 years of clinton bush enuff? - (Seamus) - (2) - Oct. 3, 2007, 12:21:56 PM EDT

yer right, it just seemed like 28 years -NT - (boxley) - (1) - Oct. 3, 2007, 06:17:48 PM EDT

It will seem like alot longer, heaven forbid. -NT - (bepatient) - Oct. 3, 2007, 06:35:25 PM EDT

It's because of the pronoun - (Silverlock) - (1) - Oct. 3, 2007, 11:29:57 AM EDT

bullcrap - (boxley) - Oct. 3, 2007, 11:32:08 AM EDT

ms I dont know in charge of the gummint? - (boxley) - (10) - Oct. 3, 2007, 06:43:11 PM EDT

Um, her senior thesis isn't sealed any more. - (Another Scott) - Oct. 3, 2007, 07:59:11 PM EDT

Bravo! Yeah, that's *exactly* what I mean. - (CRConrad) - (8) - Oct. 4, 2007, 05:38:10 AM EDT

Hey, back in the day - My Gramma used to get reams of those - (Ashton) - (1) - Oct. 4, 2007, 07:32:40 AM EDT

Reminds me of a passage in NDCC. - (Another Scott) - Oct. 4, 2007, 07:57:56 AM EDT

funny, you seem ready to convict the current - (boxley) - (5) - Oct. 4, 2007, 09:48:34 AM EDT

When was she named an unindicted co-conspirator? -NT - (Seamus) - Oct. 4, 2007, 10:12:59 AM EDT

Uhh... "slim evidence" for the lies that got you into Iraq? - (CRConrad) - (3) - Oct. 4, 2007, 11:40:54 AM EDT

you gargle yer koolaid this am? - (boxley) - (2) - Oct. 4, 2007, 11:51:13 AM EDT

You're wrong AGAIN! - (CRConrad) - (1) - Oct. 4, 2007, 12:11:44 PM EDT

:-) -NT - (boxley) - Oct. 4, 2007, 12:18:12 PM EDT

As opposed to shrub's penchant for major revenge? - (crazy) - (54) - Oct. 3, 2007, 01:06:23 PM EDT

Fred still says Saddam had WMDs and a nuke program. - (Another Scott) - (53) - Oct. 3, 2007, 01:25:47 PM EDT

box doesn't care - (crazy) - (3) - Oct. 3, 2007, 03:09:43 PM EDT

Perhaps boxley is like me. - (Another Scott) - (1) - Oct. 3, 2007, 03:14:59 PM EDT

I did, once :-) - (imqwerky) - Oct. 3, 2007, 03:16:44 PM EDT

exactly -NT - (boxley) - Oct. 3, 2007, 06:18:48 PM EDT

Heck, alot of folks said that - (bepatient) - (48) - Oct. 3, 2007, 06:50:26 PM EDT

she's a whatever it takes kind of guy - (boxley) - Oct. 3, 2007, 07:51:01 PM EDT

He said it *two days* ago. He hasn't been paying attention. - (Another Scott) - (46) - Oct. 3, 2007, 08:02:56 PM EDT

the same she who admits she didnt read the intel report? -NT - (boxley) - (35) - Oct. 3, 2007, 09:52:16 PM EDT

How many did? - (Another Scott) - (34) - Oct. 3, 2007, 10:13:56 PM EDT

a lazy dimbulb is what we need - (boxley) - (33) - Oct. 4, 2007, 09:50:40 AM EDT

Yeah look at what Reagan did for the country - (Seamus) - (32) - Oct. 4, 2007, 10:01:51 AM EDT

dot com era, end of cold war yup all bad things -NT - (boxley) - (31) - Oct. 4, 2007, 11:23:14 AM EDT

Like the other Bill(Hmm,has anyone seen them both together?) - (CRConrad) - Oct. 4, 2007, 11:46:29 AM EDT

Reagan had nothing to do with the dot com era - (Seamus) - (29) - Oct. 4, 2007, 04:36:27 PM EDT

of course lowering taxes hurt the economy...right -NT - (boxley) - (28) - Oct. 4, 2007, 09:02:14 PM EDT

Reading for comprehension - try it some time - (Seamus) - (7) - Oct. 4, 2007, 09:52:35 PM EDT

Macroeconomics - study it sometime. -NT - (bepatient) - (1) - Oct. 4, 2007, 09:54:29 PM EDT

Wasn't the issue -NT - (Seamus) - Oct. 4, 2007, 09:56:00 PM EDT

reagan had nothing to do with the collapse of the sovs - (boxley) - (4) - Oct. 5, 2007, 09:12:41 AM EDT

Did you even read the paper by Yegor Gaidar? - (Seamus) - (3) - Oct. 5, 2007, 09:28:35 AM EDT

You must have something against - (bepatient) - (2) - Oct. 5, 2007, 10:01:45 AM EDT

No, its believing that you can cut taxes, increase spending - (Seamus) - Oct. 5, 2007, 12:40:59 PM EDT

HOW ROBUST IS THE CURRENT ECONOMIC EXPANSION? (new thread) - (Seamus) - Oct. 5, 2007, 01:05:44 PM EDT

The issue was did Reagan cause the collapse of the USSR - (Seamus) - (8) - Oct. 4, 2007, 10:21:15 PM EDT

can you say disinformatsya? probably not -NT - (boxley) - (7) - Oct. 5, 2007, 09:17:38 AM EDT

I forgot the AEI is all about spreading Russian - (Seamus) - (6) - Oct. 5, 2007, 09:36:19 AM EDT

if they are trying not to repeat past mistakes - (boxley) - (5) - Oct. 5, 2007, 09:45:24 AM EDT

A fear of Soviet control of the middle east wasn't a - (Seamus) - (4) - Oct. 5, 2007, 09:55:39 AM EDT

not for the saudis - (boxley) - (3) - Oct. 5, 2007, 09:59:33 AM EDT

Yeah the huge loss of oil revenue - (Seamus) - (2) - Oct. 5, 2007, 10:44:45 AM EDT

hate to break it to you - (boxley) - (1) - Oct. 5, 2007, 10:48:01 AM EDT

The idea is that the fall of oil prices - (Seamus) - Oct. 5, 2007, 12:31:18 PM EDT

The other issue was that Reagan caused the dot com era - (Seamus) - (10) - Oct. 4, 2007, 10:40:54 PM EDT

Maybe a more neutral source - (Seamus) - (9) - Oct. 4, 2007, 10:52:41 PM EDT

Wow, a complete ignorance of globalization - (bepatient) - (8) - Oct. 5, 2007, 07:32:41 AM EDT

So, what is it you're saying here? - (CRConrad) - (2) - Oct. 5, 2007, 07:58:11 AM EDT

Re: So, what is it you're saying here? - (bepatient) - (1) - Oct. 5, 2007, 09:59:06 AM EDT

The claim was that the Reagan deficits produced the - (Seamus) - Oct. 5, 2007, 10:40:47 AM EDT

A chaired professor and former Dept chairman - (Seamus) - (4) - Oct. 5, 2007, 09:16:46 AM EDT

dunno, alternate theories by walter williams are offered - (boxley) - (3) - Oct. 5, 2007, 09:23:57 AM EDT

Yes, a supply-sider. There the only ones left who - (Seamus) - (2) - Oct. 5, 2007, 09:47:12 AM EDT

well listening to hillary giving away money - (boxley) - (1) - Oct. 5, 2007, 10:45:49 AM EDT

A supply sider is someone who thinks stimulating - (Seamus) - Oct. 5, 2007, 01:24:23 PM EDT

Yes. - (bepatient) - (5) - Oct. 3, 2007, 10:17:54 PM EDT

Not hardly. Fred's an out of touch lightweight. -NT - (Another Scott) - (3) - Oct. 3, 2007, 10:20:25 PM EDT

We'll see if the party machinery can mold him - (bepatient) - (2) - Oct. 4, 2007, 09:04:45 AM EDT

I think the R machinery knows that none of them can win. ;-) -NT - (Another Scott) - Oct. 4, 2007, 10:04:10 AM EDT

They won't get a chance to mold him - (Seamus) - Oct. 4, 2007, 10:04:16 AM EDT

Apparently - (Simon_Jester) - Oct. 4, 2007, 10:07:51 PM EDT

In his defense, from all the transcripts I've seen, he... - (CRConrad) - (3) - Oct. 5, 2007, 02:41:34 AM EDT

Hmmm... - (Another Scott) - (2) - Oct. 5, 2007, 07:50:35 AM EDT

Ok, yup, in *that* sense he was wrong. - (CRConrad) - (1) - Oct. 5, 2007, 08:11:27 AM EDT

I'm not willing to give him a break. - (Another Scott) - Oct. 5, 2007, 08:53:46 AM EDT

Thank youm thank you, thank you! :) - (a6l6e6x) - (3) - Oct. 6, 2007, 04:17:37 PM EDT

Are you sure it wouldn't be...? - (CRConrad) - (2) - Oct. 6, 2007, 06:40:46 PM EDT

It's a legacy of the "Song Title Game". It's not recent. -NT - (Another Scott) - Oct. 6, 2007, 07:37:54 PM EDT

I'm a native European. - (a6l6e6x) - Oct. 6, 2007, 10:52:05 PM EDT

Main difference - (bepatient) - (9) - Sept. 30, 2007, 11:53:24 AM EDT

How much of a difference is this? Not much. -NT - (Seamus) - Sept. 30, 2007, 12:03:45 PM EDT

Actually, I don't believe that... - (Simon_Jester) - (7) - Sept. 30, 2007, 03:11:07 PM EDT

You don't believe an easily recognizable fact? - (bepatient) - (6) - Sept. 30, 2007, 07:31:59 PM EDT

<man type=straw /> - (jb4) - Sept. 30, 2007, 10:41:55 PM EDT

Re: You don't believe an easily recognizable fact? - (Simon_Jester) - (4) - Sept. 30, 2007, 11:35:31 PM EDT

You know... - (bepatient) - (3) - Oct. 1, 2007, 07:08:17 AM EDT

And you determined that how? - (hnick) - (2) - Oct. 1, 2007, 07:43:10 AM EDT

Simple really - (bepatient) - (1) - Oct. 1, 2007, 09:34:39 AM EDT

I do think some of your analysis is correct (new thread) - (Simon_Jester) - Oct. 2, 2007, 09:01:01 AM EDT

iwethey.org

This massage will self-rubout within a trice.
108 ms