Forum
  Classifieds
  News
  Localband
  Shows
  Show Pics
  Polls

  OT Threads
  Other News
  Movies
  VideoGames
  Videos
  TV
  Sports
  Gear
  /r/
  Food

  New Thread
  New Poll

E-mail

New site? Maybe some day.

Username:

SPAM Filter: re-type this

(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)

Message:

UBB enabled. HTML disabled Spam Filtering enabledIcons: (click image to insert) Show All - pop

b i u add: url image video(?)

:	post by ShadowSD at 2006-09-25 20:26:04

hungtableed said:

half the crap you accused me of, I never said - esp. about 'not getting hit since 9/11'

I only used the word you in the first sentence and just once, when I said "you guys' favorite talking points", using the term you guys broadly as people who defend neocon positions. I didn't mean it was anything you had said personally, sorry if it sounded like that; maybe I should have worded it differently.

hungtableed said:

- either way, Clinton failed getting bin laden because he was a panty wearing red commie liberal and did not have the testicular fortitude to bag him because he is far more concerned with his legacy and what people think of him. Bush, on the other hand, at least has the balls to use men in uniform to kill these bastards when the only action Clinton really took in regards to the military was cut their pay and veterans benefits.

Well, you haven't answered any of the points I just made that completely condradict that, so I'm not going to repeat them. But certainly, if no one here can give a reasonable answer to any of the points I've made, they clearly hold up.

Ultimately though, everyone who is defending Bush here needs to read the 9/11 commission report, written by both Republicans and Democrats, and see whose point of view it backs up.

[default homepage]

[print][

12:01:22am May 06,2024
load time 0.00680 secs/10 queries]

[search]

[refresh page]