John Adams Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 BTW nice condensation. Your word choice proves my need to descend. I haven't had a good fight here since Bill in NYC and I made up. Don't go Friday soft on me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 He did. Except it was called, "03/03". You make it too !@#$ing easy sometimes: "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." Ex-President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." Ex-President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 "Iraq is a long way from [the USA], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Feb 18, 1998 "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998 "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 "Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 "There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001 "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons." Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force if necessary to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002 "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 "Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." Senator John Edwards (D-NC), October 10, 2002 "While the distance between the United States and Iraq is great, Saddam Hussein's ability to use his chemical and biological weapons against us is not constrained by geography - it can be accomplished in a number of different ways - which is what makes this threat so real and persuasive." Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), October 10, 2002 "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 "The essential facts are known. We know of the weapons in Saddam's possession: chemical, biological, and nuclear in time. We know of his unequaled willingness to use them. We know his history. His invasions of his neighbors. His dreams of achieving hegemonic control over the Arab world. His record of anti-American rage. His willingness to terrorize, to slaughter, to suppress his own people and others. We need not stretch to imagine nightmare scenarios in which Saddam makes common cause with the terrorists who want to kill us Americans and destroy our way of life." Senator Joseph Lieberman (D-CT), September 13, 2002 "Make no mistake: Saddam Hussein is a ruthless tyrant, and he must give up his weapons of mass destruction. We support the President in the course he has followed so far: working with Congress, working with the United Nations, insisting on strong and unfettered inspections. We must convince the world that Saddam Hussein is not America's problem alone; he is the world's problem. And we urge President Bush to stay this course for we are far stronger when we stand with other nations than when we stand alone." Governor Gary Locke (D-WA), January 28, 2003 Democratic Response to President Bush's "State of the Union" address Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 http://www.riehlworldview.com/photos/uncat...ma_for_prez.jpg I think that may be Wacka. This is something you must get immediately Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted April 3, 2009 Author Share Posted April 3, 2009 Your word choice proves my need to descend. I haven't had a good fight here since Bill in NYC and I made up. Don't go Friday soft on me. Just having some Friday Fun, Adams. Oh, and I always stay out of your pubescent American Idol threads, dont I? I dont go in there and make a mess like you are here. Go away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted April 3, 2009 Author Share Posted April 3, 2009 I think that may be Wacka. This is something you must get immediately The one with him fighting Darth Vader is sweet!! Nice Find Dog!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted April 3, 2009 Author Share Posted April 3, 2009 What do you mean "would" make you? You're already a loud, unabashed partisan blowhard who never listens or lets anyone else speak. The only difference is that he gets paid for it and (for some unknown reason) people listen to him. Besides, he doesn't get wet, he gets tingles. He's got the " thrill" baby!!! Matthews = FAG!! http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/checker.aspx?v=ydSUuzvkDk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 I dont want to dissapoint JA.... Nick Robinson: "A question for you both, if I may. The prime minister has repeatedly blamed the United States of America for causing this crisis. France and Germany both blame Britain and America for causing this crisis. Who is right? And isn't the debate about that at the heart of the debate about what to do now?" Brown immediately swivels to leave Obama in pole position. There is a four-second delay before Obama starts speaking [THANKS FOR NOTHING, GORDY BABY. REMIND ME TO HANG YOU OUT TO DRY ONE DAY.] Barack Obama: "I, I, would say that, er ... pause [i HAVEN'T A CLUE] ... if you look at ... pause [WHO IS THIS NICK ROBINSON JERK?] ... the, the sources of this crisis ... pause [JUST KEEP GOING, BUDDY] ... the United States certainly has some accounting to do with respect to . . . pause [i'M IN WAY TOO DEEP HERE] ... a regulatory system that was inadequate to the massive changes that have taken place in the global financial system ... pause, close eyes [THIS IS GOING TO GO DOWN LIKE A CROCK OF sh-- BACK HOME. HELP]. I think what is also true is that ... pause [i WANT NICK ROBINSON TO DISAPPEAR] ... here in Great Britain ... pause [sh--, GORDY'S THE HOST, DON'T LAND HIM IN IT] ... here in continental Europe ... pause [DAMN IT, BLAME EVERYONE.] ... around the world. We were seeing the same mismatch between the regulatory regimes that were in place and er ... pause [i'VE LOST MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT AGAIN] ... the highly integrated, er, global capital markets that have emerged ... pause [i'M REALLY WINGING IT NOW]. So at this point, I'm less interested in ... pause [YOU] ... identifying blame than fixing the problem. I think we've taken some very aggressive steps in the United States to do so, not just responding to the immediate crisis, ensuring banks are adequately capitalised, er, dealing with the enormous, er ... pause [WHY DIDN'T I QUIT WHILE I WAS AHEAD?] ... drop-off in demand and contraction that has taken place. More importantly, for the long term, making sure that we've got a set of, er, er, regulations that are up to the task, er, and that includes, er, a number that will be discussed at this summit. I think there's a lot of convergence between all the parties involved about the need, for example, to focus not on the legal form that a particular financial product takes or the institution it emerges from, but rather what's the risk involved, what's the function of this product and how do we regulate that adequately, much more effective coordination, er, between countries so we can, er, anticipate the risks that are involved there. Dealing with the, er, problem of derivatives markets, making sure we have set up systems, er, that can reduce some of the risks there. So, I actually think ... pause [FANTASTIC. I'VE LOST EVERYONE, INCLUDING MYSELF] ... there's enormous consensus that has emerged in terms of what we need to do now and, er ... pause [i'M OUTTA HERE. TIME FOR THE USUAL CLOSING BOLLOCKS] ... I'm a great believer in looking forwards than looking backwards. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/0...binson-question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Apparently, a helluva lot more recent than you. Since when does cum or any other kind of sexual fluid rise up from the bottom of your leg? Well see you're just assuming that Mathews has a dick and the way he's been fawning over Obama I assumed he didn't. My gaydar was pretty good PSF (pre San Francisco) but now it's pretty well tuned and that dude is pretty damn gay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Well see you're just assuming that Mathews has a dick and the way he's been fawning over Obama I assumed he didn't. My gaydar was pretty good PSF (pre San Francisco) but now it's pretty well tuned and that dude is pretty damn gay. Ummm... gays have dicks. But I was talking about females anyway. It doesn't come up their leg either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted April 3, 2009 Author Share Posted April 3, 2009 Ummm... gays have dicks. Your knowledge of this is well documented. Not that there's anything wrong with that, as far as you go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Here's a picture for you? http://media.ft.com/cms/c8e3e614-1fa4-11de...0144feabdc0.jpg (i don't know if its real or not) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Here's a picture for you?http://media.ft.com/cms/c8e3e614-1fa4-11de...0144feabdc0.jpg (i don't know if its real or not) That picture of Obama, Medved, and the other guy giving a thumbs up (don't recognize the face) looks like the final freeze scene from some 80s TV show And what's up with that black guy on the far right? He's looking down at Medved's butt with an "8 ways from Sunday" look on his face Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 That picture of Obama, Medved, and the other guy giving a thumbs up (don't recognize the face) looks like the final freeze scene from some 80s TV showPorno movie And what's up with that black guy on the far right? He's looking down at Medved's butt with an "8 ways from Sunday" look on his face The last time I saw something like that was where two guys were doing a women in motel room. They freeze framed it on them high fiving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 The last time I saw something like that was where two guys were doing a women in motel room. They freeze framed it on them high fiving. eh, i wouldn't go that far. I was thinking it looked more like something like .... If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire... The G20-Team. Obama = Hannibal Medvev = Face Other guy giving thumbs up = Murdoch Black guy checking out Medvev's butt = BA (character updated from tough guy to gay guy) And the minor characters: Suspicious looking Arab = Colonel Decker Chinese guy = That general guy played by Robert Vaughn that everybody ends up working for before getting canceled Gordon Brown = The fifth wheel guy added in the last episode that didn't really belong I love it when a bailout comes together Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 Check the link The video in the linked article shows the supposed bow at about :53. It is seemingly a situation where Obama dropped his contact lens or something. I think the rude part is that you can clearly read the Arab dude's lips when Obama leans over. He appears to say: "While you're down there...." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 Check the link The video in the linked article shows the supposed bow at about :53. It is seemingly a situation where Obama dropped his contact lens or something. I think the rude part is that you can clearly read the Arab dude's lips when Obama leans over. He appears to say: "While you're down there...." I got a kick out of the BaracksTeleprompter Blog, explaining what happened: Well I can settle this thing once and for all. So, to quote Big Guy, reading off of my screen, let me perfectly clear. Big Guy didn't bow down before Abdullah. It just looked that way because to kiss Abdullah's ring, Big O had to bend over. I hope this clarifies the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted April 9, 2009 Author Share Posted April 9, 2009 Check the link "shocking display of fealty to a foreign potentate" and said it violated centuries of American tradition of not deferring to royalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 "shocking display of fealty to a foreign potentate" and said it violated centuries of American tradition of not deferring to royalty. What the Washington Times forgot to mention is that George Bush bowed to him as well. It's like you freaking wingnuts are just coming up with any sschhiitt they can to be critical of Obama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 What the Washington Times forgot to mention is that George Bush bowed to him as well. It's like you freaking wingnuts are just coming up with any sschhiitt they can to be critical of Obama. Bush kissed him and held his hand. For all we know, in Saudi Arabia they are officially married now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 10, 2009 Share Posted April 10, 2009 THIS is why he bowed to the Saudis. They got this stuff down to a science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts