Body Language

Discussion in 'Politics' started by carpro, Jan 24, 2007.

  1. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,926
    Likes Received:
    296
    The body language of democrats at the state of the union address tells us a lot about what they think and what their plans are.


    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/24/AR2007012400024_pf.html

    Cheney and Pelosi Do the Two-Party Two-Step

    By Dana Milbank
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Wednesday, January 24, 2007; A01

    EXCERPT


    "First we must balance the federal budget," Bush said.

    Pelosi shot to her feet, followed slowly by Cheney.

    "We can do so without raising taxes," Bush continued.

    Cheney leapt up. Pelosi started to stand, then reconsidered and sat down.

    SNIP

    Bush called for the United States "to succeed in Iraq." Cheney again stood and clapped. Pelosi wiped her lips and remained seated, as did most Democrats



    They are dead set on seeing that we do not succeed in Iraq and they fully intend to raise taxes.
     
  2. bobbyd

    bobbyd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2004
    Messages:
    1,468
    Likes Received:
    0
    OK, so i wasn't the only person who noticed those things.
     
  3. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    So did about 70% of Americans. They've already seen what Bush calls success in Iraq.

    Three thousand good troops dead since he did his little "mission accomplished" strut on a carrier deck in a borrowed flight suit. More of that "success" is not what's wanted.

    Bush says he's responsible for messing up in Iraq. Now, he says if we just mess up a little harder, we'll be successful. He had his chance.
     
  4. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    Galatian,

    When most of the liberals were voting to send my fellow soldiers into harms way, I was against it. Your liberal leaders gave the votes necessary to go in . . . THEY WERE COWARDS THEN.

    Then liberals were campaigning for war and being used by saddam as guards on their weapons systems. Now the liberals are complaining . . .

    Ya'll can complain all ya' want AFTER YOU BRING MY TROOPS HOME WITH A WIN.

    Now all I ask is that liberals show courage like our soldiers in the field - let us finish this and finish it right.

    Quit the vacillation and the resulting loss of Americans - and support our troops so that you do not make the next Vietnam that you and your fellow liberals want to make.

    I am being convinced that liberals are only happy when they have messed everything up so bad that lots of Americans soldiers are dying so that liberals can feel that they have a cause.


     
  5. Petra-O IX

    Petra-O IX
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,086
    Likes Received:
    0
    If we give Bush one last chance to staighten up his messes he will want another last, last chance and then another.
    It's time to put a stop to his madness. Commanding the military is not one of his greatest talents.
     
  6. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't have any liberal leaders. I personally thought it was a bad idea, myself, although I did opine that getting rid of Saddam would be a good thing, if it could be done quickly and without a huge loss.

    About what? Being lied to about the purpose of the war? Incompetence on the part of the Bush administration? Corruption? The democrats and republicans who voted for the war, certainly did not realize what the clowns in the White House were going to do. In the end, they did the worst possible thing, almost every time, in Iraq. That is what liberals (and conservatives) who voted for the war are complaining about.

    That was possible, and it remained a possibility for a year or two after we went in. That is no longer possible. We can win every battle, but we will never win this war.

    There was a time to do that. But Bush let it slip by, and now there are some things that cannot be undone. You might as well try to patch together a broken egg.

    Only Bush can do that. But he is too weak to do it.

    "Supporting our troops" doesn't mean killing more of them so that Bush can save face.

    As you know, I'm a libertarian. And it's too late for the liberals to make this another Vietnam. Bush has already done it.

    Even if they wanted to do it, it would be too late. Bush beat them to it. If we let him, he will send many more to their deaths, in an adventure even his own intelligence people have told him has increased the danger of terrorism.

    :
    Barbarian on the democrats sitting when Bush proposes more of the same in Iraq.

    So did about 70% of Americans. They've already seen what Bush calls success in Iraq.

    Three thousand good troops dead since he did his little "mission accomplished" strut on a carrier deck in a borrowed flight suit. More of that "success" is not what's wanted.

    Bush says he's responsible for messing up in Iraq. Now, he says if we just mess up a little harder, we'll be successful. He had his chance.
     
  7. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    I was on the phone when it first started so had the sound down on the TV. It looked like a Catholic service with all the up and down.
     

Share This Page

Loading...