Jump to content

Democrats hold 50/49 advantage in Senate.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

fruit.gif

 

Presidential press conference going on right now. It's so much more fun to listen to Bush speak when he's a neutered idiot instead of a dangerous lunatic. cool.gif

Posted (edited)

SUDDENLY, the press is emboldened to ask the president tough questions. Fucking Pussies. Where have they been for the last 6 years?

Edited by E-rock
Posted
SUDDENLY, the press is emboldened to ask the president tough questions. Fucking Pussies. Where have they been for the last 6 years?

Where have the voters been the last six years? Fucking pussies.

 

Ah the arrogant, condescending disdain of the liberals for the voters once again rears its ugly head. Keep it up and see how long you stay in power. hahaha.gif

Posted
Ah the arrogant, condescending disdain of the liberals for the voters once again rears its ugly head. Keep it up and see how long you stay in power. hahaha.gif

 

Arrogant and condescending was good for 6 years of Republicans hahaha.gif

Posted (edited)

Voters could have avoided the Iraq mess by choosing the more principled candidate two and six years ago. Instead, too many of them were driven by the same cultural filter that clouds your thinking.

Edited by tvashtarkatena
Posted
Ah the arrogant, condescending disdain of the liberals for the voters once again rears its ugly head. Keep it up and see how long you stay in power. hahaha.gif

 

Arrogant and condescending was good for 6 years of Republicans hahaha.gif

 

Really? It seems to me that when they lost, the liberals arrogantly called the electorate stupid backward rubes who didn't know their head from their ass. Now that they've won, the liberals have not changed their view of the voters one bit. They just think the voters have made "the right choice" this time around *despite* the fact that they are stupid rubes...

 

As for the last 3 congresses, they have not been arrogant one bit (excepting folks like Santorum and a few others who go beyond the pale). What they have been is calculating, and willing to sacrifice their "ideals" (or those they profess) at all costs just to win. Hence the pork-barrel spending and ridiculous deficit-laden budgets. If the voters want that, they can have the Dems do that job (they are so good at it).

Posted
Voters could have avoided the Iraq mess by choosing the more principled candidate two and six years ago. Instead, too many of them were driven by the same cultural filter that clouds your thinking.

 

you're such a clown. you have no idea what drives my decisions or whom I support. keep up your fantasy-land myopic vision of your "adversaries" Trashie, it'll get you nowhere (well, that's where I suspect you are anyways). wave.gif

Posted
Hence the pork-barrel spending and ridiculous deficit-laden budgets. If the voters want that, they can have the Dems do that job (they are so good at it).

 

Like during the Clinton years, when we ran a surplus?

 

raise taxes enough, and sure you can have a surplus. rolleyes.gif

Posted (edited)
. . . Hence the pork-barrel spending and ridiculous deficit-laden budgets. . .

 

Like the war in Iraq?

you are truly a moron

Luckily most voters were also morons yesterday...

 

 

Edited by tvashtarkatena
Posted
Hence the pork-barrel spending and ridiculous deficit-laden budgets. If the voters want that, they can have the Dems do that job (they are so good at it).

 

Like during the Clinton years, when we ran a surplus?

 

raise taxes enough, and sure you can have a surplus. rolleyes.gif

 

but you were speaking of the democrats' deficit-laden budgets, remember?

Posted
. . . Hence the pork-barrel spending and ridiculous deficit-laden budgets. . .

 

Like the war in Iraq?

you are truly a moron

Luckily most voters were also morons yesterday...

 

 

I guess I have to spell it out for you Trashie. Try and think, I know it's tough.

 

The war in Iraq is not what is referred to as pork-barrel spending. I'm not saying companies don't benefit from it, but that's not the motivation.

 

Overpriced, unnecessary building projects in WV signed off by your senile, former Klansman octagenerian senator, who has seniority and influence, well that is another matter...

Posted
Overpriced, unnecessary building projects in WV signed off by your senile, former Klansman octagenerian senator, who has seniority and influence, well that is another matter...

 

It's too bad Strom Thurmond is dead.

Posted

but you were speaking of the democrats' deficit-laden budgets, remember?

 

I'm thinking specifically of 1992-1994, Hilarycare, Clinton/Gore's/Kerry's/Kennedy's etc. litany of multi-billion dollar social engineering programs that they spout off at every public speeking opportunity, buying off their constituents with my money. It was the unholy alliance of Dems and Bush that brought us NCLB and the prescription drug benefit. I fear only more of the same to come. The possibilites are endless for ridiculous government expansion, deficits and/or higher taxes are what is on the Dem's agenda.

 

I hope I'm wrong. If they keep the tax rates as they are and just slice up the pie a little different, and even cut the deficit to zero, I will pleasantly surprised. Such an approach would be perfectly legitimate (change spending, don't increase it). I'm willing to be patient and see what happens. If the fu***ers raise the tax rates across the board, and cut into the Roth IRA limits (which have been raised every year or two under the Reps) or cut the child tax credit (again, thanks to the Reps), I'll be pissed to say the least.

 

I don't give a rat's ass about social politics, just keep the country safe, and economically stable, run a good budget, limit government, don't cut taxes and leave me the f*** alone. I don't see it happening though.

Posted
Overpriced, unnecessary building projects in WV signed off by your senile, former Klansman octagenerian senator, who has seniority and influence, well that is another matter...

 

It's too bad Strom Thurmond is dead.

 

I agree. He was in office way too long. It's ridiculous. Anyone over 3 terms (senate) is ridiculous.

Posted
I agree. He was in office way too long. It's ridiculous. Anyone over 3 terms (senate) is ridiculous.

 

Speaking of too long when's the party of small government going to ditch the welfare delegation from Alaska?

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...