Forum Discussion

You're correct, they should consult conservatives. The world would be a much better place then. Using the 8 ball might be better than consulting a liberal though...

Is there a difference between the two?

//Using the 8 ball might be better than consulting a liberal though... //

//Is there a difference between the two? //

Yeah, the liberal has less useful content...

So, is anyone on this thread planning on discussing Sandra Day O'Connor's career, pro and con, or is this some sort of bizzare pep rally where everyone chants "Liberals Suck" without actually, you know, making any arguments?

Well I think "Liberals Suck" is a very good summation, but then Sandra Day was known for her wishy washy stance if you want to talk about her. Where she was supposed to be a "moderate"(liberal term) most of her judgements usually leaned toward the less conservative decision. She got really adept at that "making laws off the cuff" thing the liberals are so fond of.

Other than that though, liberals suck.

"Wishy washy" and "judgements usually leaned toward the less conservative decision." So, care to support the first and tell me why the second is a bad thing?

>Other than that though, liberals suck.
Hey we can not all be taking bribes.

//Hey we can not all be taking bribes.//

Or receiving oral sex under the desk at the Oval office.

//Or recieving oral sex under the desk at the Oval office//

We should all be so lucky!

I'm sure Bill would agree with you, Stevie Mac! Bravo!

Lets see... What worse....
Two adults involved in a consential activite or illegaly taking bribes.
I do not know who taught you your ethics, but you might want your money back on that.

//Two adults involved in a consential activite //

Actually, Goot, those two adults were involved in CONSENSUAL ACTIVITY on GOVERNMENT time. Billy was on the clock, and that's a naughty thing. I wonder if Monica gave him a spanking...and if she did, did she do THAT on government time too?

By the way I got my money back when Bush authorized all those TAX CUTS.

Smoochies!

Government time eh? I wonder how much of that was wasted by Duke Cunningham when he was counting his illegaly got millions in return for votes for bad defense contracts.

Hmmm maybe you should do a poll, Goot. What's better to waste government time on, money counting or sex?

> Hmmm maybe you should do a poll, Goot. What's better to waste government time on, money counting or sex?
Maybe....

Speaking of which....
Hot of the presses:
Jan. 23, 2006 issue - Ohio Rep. Robert Ney personally lobbied the then Secretary of State Colin Powell to relax U.S. sanctions on Iran. Who asked him to? A convicted airplane broker who had just taken the congressman and a top aide on an expense-paid trip to London.

Whats with a Republican Congressman lobbying to US sanctions on a country whom we know for sure has admitted they are trying to build nuclear facilities. What? WMD are no longer bad in hand of one of the "Axis of Evil" ?
TJ? gt a take on that? (or you just gonna go with a smark alecky off the topic comment?)

Considering that you got that information from Newsweek, famous for "The Koran in the Toilet " scandel, it think that left wing spin is making you dizzy, sweetie. Better get off that merry-go-round before you get a tummy ache, precious.

Will see if this one is true. :)

At least Newsweek retracted the story which is more then I can say for O'Reilly's: "I'll let Al Queda bomb the Coit tower in SF".

Latest from the presses: Tom Delay support is falling fast. I guess folks do not like bribe takers.

//Latest from the presses: Tom Delay support is falling fast. I guess folks do not like bribe takers. //

But you said they liked the Clintons! I understand that Hillary was "associated" with Abramoff for a coupla' grand. <---(That's slang for $2000.00)

http://1010wins.com/topstories/local_story_005075047.html

"But Democratic Congressman Charles Rangel of Harlem, who received $36,000 in donations from Abramoff clients, says he's keeping the money."

Now see here's a Democrat that sticks to his guns! "It's MY money and I'm akeepin' it" he was heard to bray. (not really, just being silly here)

*sigh*

TJ:
Yet again. Taking donations is not a crime. EVERYONE takes donations, whether its from MoveOn.org (libs) or Amerfican Family Association (cons) , the problem is switching votes in response to those donations. Thats called bribery.

So the to reiterate just so you can fix it in your head:
Issue is not donations! its bribery!!!

So yours is a non argument.

//Taking donations is not a crime. EVERYONE takes donations//

Then why is most everyone (except Rangel of course)giving this money back, if it's not wrong? Sounds like they're all afraid of something. I'd love to tell you you're wrong more, Goot sweetie, but I have WORK to do. Huggies!

>Then why is most everyone (except Rangel of course)giving this money back, if it's not wrong?

I do not know why! You should ask them. But it sounds like they have something to hide.

>but I have WORK to do
have fun!!!
I am having cereal before I am off to work.

From this link...http://newsbusters.org/node/3449

"Abramoff didn't work just with Republicans. He oversaw a team of two dozen lobbyists at the law firm Greenberg Traurig that included many Democrats. Moreover, the campaign contributions that Abramoff directed from the tribes went to Democratic as well as Republican legislators."

Among the biggest beneficiaries were Capitol Hill's most powerful Democrats, including Thomas A. Daschle (S.D.) and Harry M. Reid (Nev.), the top two Senate Democrats at the time, Richard A. Gephardt (Mo.), then-leader of the House Democrats, and the two lawmakers in charge of raising funds for their Democratic colleagues in both chambers, according to a Washington Post study. "

Somehow, I don't think the liberally skewed media is going to get around to asking Daschle or Reid why they are giving their donations back.

//I am having cereal before I am off to work.//

You're a Fruit Loops man, aren't you? Though I can see you eating Cocoa Puffs too.

Ok. Once again! The issue is not donations it is BRIBERY!!!!!
What is not clear about that? Talking to you is like talking to a wall, you just do nto seem to be listening.

No democrats have switched votes based on those donations. More over just because some tribe gave donation to a democrats and have also at some point had dealing with Abramoff it does not mean he directed it. Also so far all the names gave up in his investigations are Republican. More over a number of news hosts asked Reid this about this (Meet the Press for one).

so once more so you can understand the points:

- Its not about donations but bribery.
- This is a Republiocan corruption scandal

I know Newsbusters (a purely conservative sponsored site) is trying to muddy it up. But its not working dear.

>cereal:
Cornflakes with nuts :)