why that was nice

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

those 2 are independants that align themselves with the democrats. tell me. how many times has the president been a democrat and the congress been a democrat majority as well? learn common sense.

while you might be able to claim that bernie sanders often sides with the democrats, the same argument cant be made for Lieberman

 

[HitManSE 10+ year member]

jeez so thats why the dollar is falling

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5232639329002339531

That explains quite a bit. Its long, but its something everyone should see.

You'll learn //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

As for Bush... wth is the point? everything that can possibly be said about the douchebag has already been said.

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

while you might be able to claim that bernie sanders often sides with the democrats, the same argument cant be made for Lieberman

i'm trying to find on google when the last we had a democrat majority and a democrat president sitting at the same time was. do you know? probably doesn't matter. todays democrats are nothing like my fathers and grandfathers democrats. whackos.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

"For many Democrats, the guiding conviction in foreign policy isn't pacifism or isolationism, it is distrust and disdain of Republicans in general, and President Bush in particular," Lieberman said at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies.

"In this regard, the Democratic foreign policy worldview has become defined by the same reflexive, blind opposition to the President that defined Republicans in the 1990s — even when it means repudiating the very principles and policies that Democrats as a party have stood for, at our best and strongest," Lieberman continued.

"Even as evidence has mounted that General Petraeus' new counterinsurgency strategy is succeeding, Democrats have remained emotionally invested in a narrative of defeat and retreat in Iraq, reluctant to acknowledge the progress we are now achieving, or even that that progress has enabled us to begin drawing down our troops there," he added.

Just as Lieberman was speaking, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced that the House will take up a temporary Iraq spending bill which will curb the war in Iraq. The plan, known as the "bridge," provides $50 billion for four months in Iraq and starts a withdrawal of troops to be completed by next December.

"This (war strategy) is not working. There is no light at the end of the tunnel. We must reverse it. We will again make a distinction ... to show a new direction in Iraq. The goal is ending it within a year and leave behind just a small force," Pelosi said.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

i'm trying to find on google when the last we had a democrat majority and a democrat president sitting at the same time was. do you know? probably doesn't matter. todays democrats are nothing like my fathers and grandfathers democrats. whackos.

iirc bill clinton the last dem president with a dem house.

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

bill clinton.

1994 huh. how long was that majority held?

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

The irony here is that they named her Lakshmi... This is one of the main Hindu gods whom that happen to be worshiping to at this very moment... Happy Diwali to any hindus on here. Lakshmi just happens to have 4 arms (see below).

what else are you going to name a four armed baby?

 

[bose301s 5,000+ posts]

1994 huh. how long was that majority held?

Well, considering the last president was in office with a dem house and senate yet you seem to claim that has never happened, you fail.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

1994 huh. how long was that majority held?

not very long after clinton took office, but it was the last time the dems controlled two of the three branches of government.

Prior to that it was carter.

The GOP took the house after 40 years of minority status in 1994 and the senate in 1995 iirc.

Their majority didn't hold too long.

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

Well, considering the last president was in office with a dem house and senate yet you seem to claim that has never happened, you fail.

i asked you also moron. all you had to do was say when it was. your lack of reading comprehension is astounding. i never said it didn't happen.

 

[iagrdshaka 5,000+ posts]

I would buy that kid and raise her to be a world class party ho. Think about it, 1 blowjob, 1 anal, 1 vaginal, 4 handjobs, and 2 footjobs all in one stupid manipulated *****!
I would be a pimp millionaire.

Thats one ***** I would not care to watch.

 

[iagrdshaka 5,000+ posts]

what else are you going to name a four armed baby?

Moonbeam?

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

not very long after clinton took office, but it was the last time the dems controlled two of the three branches of government.
Prior to that it was carter.

The GOP took the house after 40 years of minority status in 1994 and the senate in 1995 iirc.

Their majority didn't hold too long.

yeah. i seem to remember that bill had a hard time doing too much in his 8 years.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

kdcd you haven't proven yourself very well informed in these matters, yet you have voiced many strong opinions.

His hostility should be expected.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

yeah. i seem to remember that bill had a hard time doing too much in his 8 years.

No, he got a tremendous amount accomplished by grafting a number of loyal democrats unto a conservative majority and passed some of the most successful conservative policies in decades (welfare reform, NAFTA, and balanced budget). We already went over this, remember?