Rich in Ohio Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 http://asia.news.yahoo.com/050412/ap/d89dhct00.html 302362[/snapback] What more needs to be said. these are two of the biggest fools in the senate. Nobody should be the least bit surprised by these ass-monkeys who call themselves senators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 What more needs to be said. these are two of the biggest fools in the senate. 302600[/snapback] They do have an awful lot of competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 What more needs to be said. these are two of the biggest fools in the senate. Nobody should be the least bit surprised by these ass-monkeys who call themselves senators. 302600[/snapback] Two of the three biggest. I wouldn't discredit Delay's foolishness by omitting him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted April 12, 2005 Author Share Posted April 12, 2005 Two of the three biggest. I wouldn't discredit Delay's foolishness by omitting him. 302638[/snapback] delay's not a senator, he's a congressman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 delay's not a senator, he's a congressman 302641[/snapback] Kerry=senator Senate - upper house of Congress Delay=representative House - lower house of Congress They're both congressmen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 delay's not a senator, he's a congressman 302641[/snapback] My mistake...I was thinking two of the three biggest fools in Congress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 delay's not a senator, he's a congressman 302641[/snapback] We can always toss in Kennedy, if you want to stick with the Senate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 The power I wield around here is amazing. I accept the tribute you pay me by worrying about what I'd say and preparing your talking points in case I said X, Y or Z. I'd personally wait for more information from a source closer to home if I cared in the first place. It does seem, after all, that when this same pub carries stories that run counter to the conservative view, it's panned, so one must not place too much credence in one report. However I had heard elsewhere that there was an issue with the treatment of a subordinate who was essentially the bearer of bad - or "unacceptable" tidings. The story I heard on NPR revolved around an ANALYST, not an operative in the field. If it's CIA policy that no employee ever is allowed to be identified as such then this is an issue. Currently it's a diversion. Kerry IS stupid though for believing what he heard given how crappy our entire intelligence network is, according to the Bush Administration. I mean, the poor Bush Administration invaded a country based on crappy intelligence - according to them and the reports they've commissioned. So, Kerry should have known better than to listen to anyone who works at the CIA. And Lugar is of course a Republican, thereby validating the earlier assertion that politicians are grandstanding buttheads. But then again so are many of you on this board. The Oracle has spoken. You may now all carry on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted April 12, 2005 Author Share Posted April 12, 2005 The power I wield around here is amazing. I accept the tribute you pay me by worrying about what I'd say and preparing your talking points in case I said X, Y or Z. I'd personally wait for more information from a source closer to home if I cared in the first place. It does seem, after all, that when this same pub carries stories that run counter to the conservative view, it's panned, so one must not place too much credence in one report. However I had heard elsewhere that there was an issue with the treatment of a subordinate who was essentially the bearer of bad - or "unacceptable" tidings. The story I heard on NPR revolved around an ANALYST, not an operative in the field. If it's CIA policy that no employee ever is allowed to be identified as such then this is an issue. Currently it's a diversion. Kerry IS stupid though for believing what he heard given how crappy our entire intelligence network is, according to the Bush Administration. I mean, the poor Bush Administration invaded a country based on crappy intelligence - according to them and the reports they've commissioned. So, Kerry should have known better than to listen to anyone who works at the CIA. And Lugar is of course a Republican, thereby validating the earlier assertion that politicians are grandstanding buttheads. But then again so are many of you on this board. The Oracle has spoken. You may now all carry on 302837[/snapback] needs more cowbell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 needs more cowbell 302842[/snapback] In case anyone was wondering, this is the best example of understatement on the board today. I especially like the "So, Kerry should have known better than to listen to anyone who works at the CIA." - part. As if John Kerry wasn't sitting on the Senate Intelligence Committee for the 8 years prior to the Iraq war - meetings he was absent for 77.6% of the time according to Factcheck.org. This includes missing EVERY MEETING the year AFTER the WTC was bombed the first time. Oh, that's right. He's a Democrat so he's not part of the problem. Facts suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 In case anyone was wondering, this is the best example of understatement on the board today. I especially like the "So, Kerry should have known better than to listen to anyone who works at the CIA." - part. As if John Kerry wasn't sitting on the Senate Intelligence Committee for the 8 years prior to the Iraq war - meetings he was absent for 77.6% of the time according to Factcheck.org. This includes missing EVERY MEETING the year AFTER the WTC was bombed the first time. Oh, that's right. He's a Democrat so he's not part of the problem. Facts suck. 302857[/snapback] He didn't need to attend the meetings. He had a "plan" to fix everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 As if John Kerry wasn't sitting on the Senate Intelligence Committee for the 8 years prior to the Iraq war - meetings he was absent for 77.6% of the time according to Factcheck.org. This includes missing EVERY MEETING the year AFTER the WTC was bombed the first time. 302857[/snapback] I had been all over FactCheck, had subscribed to their email newsletter in the run-up to the election and saw where both of them were plenty full of shiite, but I didn't realize that he missed every meeting following WTC-1. I know I'm setting up a punchline or two, but I wonder what he was up to or what he was doing. I mean, it is the Sen Intel Committee, and we had just been the target of a terrorist action. Learn something new everyday. Glad I didn't vote for him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted April 12, 2005 Author Share Posted April 12, 2005 I know I'm setting up a punchline or two,302886[/snapback] nah, too easy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 In case anyone was wondering, this is the best example of understatement on the board today. I especially like the "So, Kerry should have known better than to listen to anyone who works at the CIA." - part. As if John Kerry wasn't sitting on the Senate Intelligence Committee for the 8 years prior to the Iraq war - meetings he was absent for 77.6% of the time according to Factcheck.org. This includes missing EVERY MEETING the year AFTER the WTC was bombed the first time. Oh, that's right. He's a Democrat so he's not part of the problem. Facts suck. 302857[/snapback] I just double checked - the stats you give are for public hearings only. The actual Sen Intel Committee meetings are closed to the public and the records aren't a matter of public record. As such, saying he wasn't at any of the meetings isn't entirely accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich in Ohio Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 Two of the three biggest. I wouldn't discredit Delay's foolishness by omitting him. 302638[/snapback] hmmm, is Delay in the senate?????? Just curious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 hmmm, is Delay in the senate?????? Just curious 302925[/snapback] RMPL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 I just double checked - the stats you give are for public hearings only. The actual Sen Intel Committee meetings are closed to the public and the records aren't a matter of public record. As such, saying he wasn't at any of the meetings isn't entirely accurate. 302919[/snapback] The stats I gave aren't mine - they are direct from Factcheck.org. John Kerry could have requested the attendance record be made public and probably would have if it would've benefitted him. Apparently it didn't. Make your own judgement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 The stats I gave aren't mine - they are direct from Factcheck.org. John Kerry could have requested the attendance record be made public and probably would have if it would've benefitted him. Apparently it didn't. Make your own judgement. 302962[/snapback] I had double-checked them at FactCheck - and I noticed they said the same thing as far as requesting the attendance records. And I abso-frickin'-lutely believe that if it were of any real benefit to him that they would have been used. But kinda' like Bush's reserve service we'll never really know, we can only make assumptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Hedd Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 I had double-checked them at FactCheck - and I noticed they said the same thing as far as requesting the attendance records. And I abso-frickin'-lutely believe that if it were of any real benefit to him that they would have been used. But kinda' like Bush's reserve service we'll never really know, we can only make assumptions. 302985[/snapback] Bush was actually seen on base? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 Bush was actually seen on base? 302991[/snapback] Only when the bar was open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts