What grades would you give Cheney on Ethics and Honesty in the workplace? I would give him a solid F!
Record Income for Oil
- Thread starter djv
- Start date
Ocelot don't understand "if" question.
MC>"What grades would you give Cheney on Ethics and Honesty in the workplace? I would give him a solid F!"
Stevie> "Cheney is a self made crook. Actually, a bit higher than a crook, but I don't think they have invented a word to accurately describe the level of his crookedness."
--and you wonder why I come with the liberal logic and Kool Aid Kings all the time.
If this isn't classic example there is none.
Cheney has never to my knowledge been indicted for ANYTHING--yet your hype comes from left wing "allegations" and deem this man as low on totem pole to be pres
YET---YOU applaud and voted for a """PROVEN"--CONVICTED" impeached and disbarred felon-- found quity of pergury-obstructing justice-stuffing cigar up interns--pardoning ten most wanted for cash--among other thing to numerous to mention and you use the words Honesty-Ethics and Crook as negative traits to not vote for someone else---and you wonder where I come off with liberal logic phrase--Sheeez
MC>"What grades would you give Cheney on Ethics and Honesty in the workplace? I would give him a solid F!"
Stevie> "Cheney is a self made crook. Actually, a bit higher than a crook, but I don't think they have invented a word to accurately describe the level of his crookedness."
--and you wonder why I come with the liberal logic and Kool Aid Kings all the time.
If this isn't classic example there is none.
Cheney has never to my knowledge been indicted for ANYTHING--yet your hype comes from left wing "allegations" and deem this man as low on totem pole to be pres
YET---YOU applaud and voted for a """PROVEN"--CONVICTED" impeached and disbarred felon-- found quity of pergury-obstructing justice-stuffing cigar up interns--pardoning ten most wanted for cash--among other thing to numerous to mention and you use the words Honesty-Ethics and Crook as negative traits to not vote for someone else---and you wonder where I come off with liberal logic phrase--Sheeez
If you think that Cheney or Bush are honest and ethical businessmen or politicians then you need to stop sipping that Rush Limbaugh Codeine laced Kool Aid and tune out the myopic Fox News that has trouble reporting both sides of the coin. While I only voted for Clinton in 96 since he was a better choice over a inept Dole, how many deaths resulted from Clinton getting a BJ? How many deaths have resulted from Bush and Cheney distorting the truth in Iraq? How many G.O.P. Rep's that attacked CLinton were having affairs at the same time? It's hard to indite someone such as Cheney when they are above the law or in a position that he is in but then again we have never had a Kenneth Starr type of person assigned with unlimited resources to go after Cheney and Bush or more than likely the dirt would be turned over on them. The basis of Conservative logic is that it's okay if I do it but if you do it then it is wrong.
Very well said, MC......
I'm sure the parents of 1800 servicemen would prefer a president getting a blowjob over liars that sent thier boys off to the cemetary.
I'm sure the parents of 1800 servicemen would prefer a president getting a blowjob over liars that sent thier boys off to the cemetary.
I defended him--and in answer to--
How many deaths have resulted from Bush and Cheney distorting the truth in Iraq?
How many lives may be saved in long run?? You are no where near lives lost in one day on 911 from doing nothing>
Don't think anyone gives a hoot about anyone getting BJ--Marco If I was married to Hilliary I'd be looking for something else also--of course I wouldn't resort to force to get it.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Once again the Neocon can't defend Bush and Cheney so he attacks Clinton again. It's getting a little old.
Sorry if you misinterpreted Stevie--it wasn't intended to attack Clinton--it was intended to expose liberal mindset.
and on the 1800 servicemen --
Let me explain something Marco that evidently you and others somehow can't seem grasp. The military and presidents primary objective is to protect the citizens of the U.S.
When you join you swear an oath to that effect--now if there is any that would have reason to bitch it would be the parents and families of the next 3000 or 100,000 to die because we and our military did nothing.
So you tell me--which is the worser of evils 1,800 deaths incurred while doing ones job ---or thousands of death as result of not doing the job?
How many deaths have resulted from Bush and Cheney distorting the truth in Iraq?
How many lives may be saved in long run?? You are no where near lives lost in one day on 911 from doing nothing>
Don't think anyone gives a hoot about anyone getting BJ--Marco If I was married to Hilliary I'd be looking for something else also--of course I wouldn't resort to force to get it.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Once again the Neocon can't defend Bush and Cheney so he attacks Clinton again. It's getting a little old.
Sorry if you misinterpreted Stevie--it wasn't intended to attack Clinton--it was intended to expose liberal mindset.
and on the 1800 servicemen --
Let me explain something Marco that evidently you and others somehow can't seem grasp. The military and presidents primary objective is to protect the citizens of the U.S.
When you join you swear an oath to that effect--now if there is any that would have reason to bitch it would be the parents and families of the next 3000 or 100,000 to die because we and our military did nothing.
So you tell me--which is the worser of evils 1,800 deaths incurred while doing ones job ---or thousands of death as result of not doing the job?
DOGS THAT BARK said:
What does the invasion of Iraq have to do with 'protecting citizens of the US?'
The answer is 'nothing.'
If anybody can come up with a different answer, i'd love to hear it.
Saved how many in England, Egypt? If we were going to get caught up in this chit. We should at least taken over a few oil fields. And someone tell Bush his friends in oil and Saudi have now made enough money. Time to drop the prices. Wait it's not a election year.
and on the 1800 servicemen --
Let me explain something Marco that evidently you and others somehow can't seem grasp. The military and presidents primary objective is to protect the citizens of the U.S.
When you join you swear an oath to that effect--now if there is any that would have reason to bitch it would be the parents and families of the next 3000 or 100,000 to die because we and our military did nothing.
So you tell me--which is the worser of evils 1,800 deaths incurred while doing ones job ---or thousands of death as result of not doing the job
Twisted and distorted logic here, if the goal is to protect US citizens then why would you invade a country that has no direct links to financing terrorist, has never attacked a US citizen and cannot be linked to terrorism unless you use the Cheney witchhunt logic. Yes, 2,000 lost lives and 20,000 maimed soliders would be well worth the sacrifice of these honorable soliders if we were actually attacking a terrorist threat such as Afghan, Saudi Arabia or Syria, but the carnage that many communities and famalies have had to endure for a false and misleading war is not worth it.
Let me explain something Marco that evidently you and others somehow can't seem grasp. The military and presidents primary objective is to protect the citizens of the U.S.
When you join you swear an oath to that effect--now if there is any that would have reason to bitch it would be the parents and families of the next 3000 or 100,000 to die because we and our military did nothing.
So you tell me--which is the worser of evils 1,800 deaths incurred while doing ones job ---or thousands of death as result of not doing the job
Twisted and distorted logic here, if the goal is to protect US citizens then why would you invade a country that has no direct links to financing terrorist, has never attacked a US citizen and cannot be linked to terrorism unless you use the Cheney witchhunt logic. Yes, 2,000 lost lives and 20,000 maimed soliders would be well worth the sacrifice of these honorable soliders if we were actually attacking a terrorist threat such as Afghan, Saudi Arabia or Syria, but the carnage that many communities and famalies have had to endure for a false and misleading war is not worth it.
What does the invasion of Iraq have to do with 'protecting citizens of the US?'
The answer is 'nothing.'
If anybody can come up with a different answer, i'd love to hear it.
Answered that already for you ...but alas it is beyond your capacity to think sorry bud !
The answer is 'nothing.'
If anybody can come up with a different answer, i'd love to hear it.
Answered that already for you ...but alas it is beyond your capacity to think sorry bud !
Twisted and distorted logic here, if the goal is to protect US citizens then why would you invade a country that has no direct links to financing terrorist----
Maybe you didn't read it in NYT but for your info Saddam paid families of bombers $10,000 and then up it to $25,000--and I have also went into numerous reasons many times and if it didn't sink in then it won't now. Personally I don't care where we are fighting them as long as its not in my back yard.
Hard to believe Saddam and son are gone--we have now have iraqi's on our side--they are developing a democracy there as well as in afgan and there are those that think we are worse off there than when he was in power ---as if he wouldn't do anyting in his power to aid anyone against the U.S. or Isreal--but when you get bombarded with headlines from liberal media on how our troops and administration are the barbarians--and those that chop heads target children ect should be handled with kids gloves and given attorneys--you'll be looking through those rose colored glasses and nothing anyone says will change your mind.
It is sad to say-and by all means acusing no one here--but there are many people hoping we lose in Iraq for political reasons.--
Maybe you didn't read it in NYT but for your info Saddam paid families of bombers $10,000 and then up it to $25,000--and I have also went into numerous reasons many times and if it didn't sink in then it won't now. Personally I don't care where we are fighting them as long as its not in my back yard.
Hard to believe Saddam and son are gone--we have now have iraqi's on our side--they are developing a democracy there as well as in afgan and there are those that think we are worse off there than when he was in power ---as if he wouldn't do anyting in his power to aid anyone against the U.S. or Isreal--but when you get bombarded with headlines from liberal media on how our troops and administration are the barbarians--and those that chop heads target children ect should be handled with kids gloves and given attorneys--you'll be looking through those rose colored glasses and nothing anyone says will change your mind.
It is sad to say-and by all means acusing no one here--but there are many people hoping we lose in Iraq for political reasons.--
Again, lay off the Limbaugh Codeine Kool-Aid,Saddam offering is 2nd hand information and if it is true no one took the offer as no terrorist have been from Iraq. Yeah that Democracy is just flourishing in Iraq as we only lost 5 servicemen yesterday for a war based on lies. How about that Democracy in Afghanastan it's just like our framers of the constitution conceived you know with warlords holding power in different regions of the country and poppy seed still being allowed to be cultivated and sold. We should of stayed in Afghanastan and finished the job but instead we went into Iraq on lies and now we have two unstable regimes that will wither cost us billions of dollars over the next few years or else they will erupt into civil war (especially Iraq).
What does the invasion of Iraq have to do with 'protecting citizens of the US?'
Every bit as much and I believe even more than what we did in Korea started by a Democrat and turned to a cease fire by a
Republican .
Or
Vietnam also started by a Democrat and ended by a Republican
No need to go around and around again about WWII but this fits the mold as well .
Dam as far as our war history goes here in the US the peaceniks should be devout Republicans based on our history.
I want to hear from the anti Iraq war folk as to why Korea and Nam was so different ? Keep in mind I think we had good reason to get into both wars but niether were more important than Iraq.
Every bit as much and I believe even more than what we did in Korea started by a Democrat and turned to a cease fire by a
Republican .
Or
Vietnam also started by a Democrat and ended by a Republican
No need to go around and around again about WWII but this fits the mold as well .
Dam as far as our war history goes here in the US the peaceniks should be devout Republicans based on our history.
I want to hear from the anti Iraq war folk as to why Korea and Nam was so different ? Keep in mind I think we had good reason to get into both wars but niether were more important than Iraq.
I'm sorry Ike already had troops in Nam before Kennedy was elected.
Kennedy was handed a deck with a deal to protect the south. That was worked out in 1958. I'm afraid the Nam cycle was cast already in 58. Then the idiots Johnson and Nixon took it to levels that were no good. Unless we were going to let our boys fight to win. But our guys got sold out in 72/73 by our government.
Kennedy was handed a deck with a deal to protect the south. That was worked out in 1958. I'm afraid the Nam cycle was cast already in 58. Then the idiots Johnson and Nixon took it to levels that were no good. Unless we were going to let our boys fight to win. But our guys got sold out in 72/73 by our government.
DTB you are correct PTR. Only problem when you are retired you hold back a little. 50 shares was enough for me at the time. Now I kick my self for not doing the 100. For sure the way to win a little with these prices is join them don't fight it. Up more today.
djv said:
Doh ! Truman sent troops to Korea and Ike ended the war and pulled our troops. Korea started in 1950 3 years before Ike was elected we had men dying left and right by 1951. Ike sent military advisers to Nam to help strategically and I believe it was LBJ that sent in the troops to Nam ...... Besides you need to answer my question dont side track it answer the question !
Last edited:
---and for those who get their info on Saudi Arabia from Micheal Moore documentaries/Moveon.org
While it is no secret Saudi is the heart of mohobyism (Sp) saying the gov there backs Bin Laden is more than just far fetched--ask the next Moore deciple that tells you that--if it is so why has
Al-Queda had countless attacks on Suadi gov--
and why have Saudis already killed o rcaptured 18 of their top 26 terrorest there since 911--then ask the Moore/Clinton Kool Aid Klan how many they got in 8 years of looking the other way--maybe someone would like to share with us some FACTS of the terrorist killed or captured in his tenure--
Here is just the top dogs the Saudi's not got enough space to put the others---
Saudi Arabia's Most Wanted Terrorists
Top 26 Terrorists
Arab News*
(Al-Qaeda Terror Network In the Kingdom)
Ideologues
1) Faris Al-Zahrani (surrendered on Aug. 5 in Abha)
2) Abdullah Al-Rashoud (on the run)
3) Sultan Al-Otaibi (on the run)
4) Isa Al-Aushan (killed on July 20 in a shootout in Riyadh?s King Fahd District)
5) Abdul Majeed Al-Munie (killed in Riyadh?s Al-Nahda District on Oct. 12)
Leaders
1) Khaled Haj (killed on April 16 in Riyadh)
2) Abdul Aziz Al-Muqrin (former Al-Qaeda chief who was killed on June 18 in Riyadh)
3) Abdul Kareem Al-Majati (who is outside the Kingdom and is the mastermind behind the Casablanca explosions)
4) Saleh Al-Aufi (present commander of Al-Qaeda in the Kingdom)
5) Rakan Al-Saikhan (killed following the Faiha gun battle on April 12 in Riyadh)
Members
1) Bandar Al-Dakheel (on the run)
2) Faisal Al-Dakheel (killed along with Al-Muqrin on June 18)
3) Taleb Al-Taleb (on the run)
4) Abdullah Al-Subaie (on the run)
5) Saud Al-Otaibi (on the run)
6) Hussein Al-Haski (on the run)
7) Abdul Rahman Al-Yazji (on the run)
8) Aamir Al-Shahri (his body was found on Dec. 23 outside Riyadh)
9) Talal Anbari (killed on April 22 in Jeddah)
10) Ahmed Fadhli (killed on April 22 in Jeddah)
11) Khaled Al-Qurashi (killed on April 22 in Jeddah)
12) Mustafa Mubaraki (killed on April 22 in Jeddah)
13) Nasser Al-Rashed (killed in Faiha gun battle in Riyadh on April 12)
14) Ibrahim Al-Rayyes (killed on Dec. 6 in Riyadh)
15) Othman Al-Amri (surrendered on June 28 in Namas)
16) Mansour Faqeeh (surrendered on Dec. 30 in Najran)
We report--you decide
--and on MC'S --
"We should of stayed in Afghanastan and finished the job---
Would someone that he will listen to please inform him we are still in Afgan (never left)and please inform him of cost 911 had on economy not counting the lives.
While it is no secret Saudi is the heart of mohobyism (Sp) saying the gov there backs Bin Laden is more than just far fetched--ask the next Moore deciple that tells you that--if it is so why has
Al-Queda had countless attacks on Suadi gov--
and why have Saudis already killed o rcaptured 18 of their top 26 terrorest there since 911--then ask the Moore/Clinton Kool Aid Klan how many they got in 8 years of looking the other way--maybe someone would like to share with us some FACTS of the terrorist killed or captured in his tenure--
Here is just the top dogs the Saudi's not got enough space to put the others---
Saudi Arabia's Most Wanted Terrorists
Top 26 Terrorists
Arab News*
(Al-Qaeda Terror Network In the Kingdom)
Ideologues
1) Faris Al-Zahrani (surrendered on Aug. 5 in Abha)
2) Abdullah Al-Rashoud (on the run)
3) Sultan Al-Otaibi (on the run)
4) Isa Al-Aushan (killed on July 20 in a shootout in Riyadh?s King Fahd District)
5) Abdul Majeed Al-Munie (killed in Riyadh?s Al-Nahda District on Oct. 12)
Leaders
1) Khaled Haj (killed on April 16 in Riyadh)
2) Abdul Aziz Al-Muqrin (former Al-Qaeda chief who was killed on June 18 in Riyadh)
3) Abdul Kareem Al-Majati (who is outside the Kingdom and is the mastermind behind the Casablanca explosions)
4) Saleh Al-Aufi (present commander of Al-Qaeda in the Kingdom)
5) Rakan Al-Saikhan (killed following the Faiha gun battle on April 12 in Riyadh)
Members
1) Bandar Al-Dakheel (on the run)
2) Faisal Al-Dakheel (killed along with Al-Muqrin on June 18)
3) Taleb Al-Taleb (on the run)
4) Abdullah Al-Subaie (on the run)
5) Saud Al-Otaibi (on the run)
6) Hussein Al-Haski (on the run)
7) Abdul Rahman Al-Yazji (on the run)
8) Aamir Al-Shahri (his body was found on Dec. 23 outside Riyadh)
9) Talal Anbari (killed on April 22 in Jeddah)
10) Ahmed Fadhli (killed on April 22 in Jeddah)
11) Khaled Al-Qurashi (killed on April 22 in Jeddah)
12) Mustafa Mubaraki (killed on April 22 in Jeddah)
13) Nasser Al-Rashed (killed in Faiha gun battle in Riyadh on April 12)
14) Ibrahim Al-Rayyes (killed on Dec. 6 in Riyadh)
15) Othman Al-Amri (surrendered on June 28 in Namas)
16) Mansour Faqeeh (surrendered on Dec. 30 in Najran)
We report--you decide
--and on MC'S --
"We should of stayed in Afghanastan and finished the job---
Would someone that he will listen to please inform him we are still in Afgan (never left)and please inform him of cost 911 had on economy not counting the lives.
