Proof Democrats want America to fail.

Nancy Soderberg, a former Clinton aide, was on Jon Stewarts show, promoting her new book. She basically came out and said, that we are winning in Iraq, but there is still hope we screw up Iran and North Korea.

washingtontimes.com...

The hate the left has for George Bush is pathetic. Anything good for America is bad for Democrats, and now they are admitting it.

This is all obvious to all here. Ask any liberal and he will admit he has contempt for nationalistic loyalty. He/she or heshe will comment that the third Reich was nationalistic fervor (insidiously comparing patriots with Nazis)

Here it is in a nutshell. Liberals want a one world government where everyone contributes to society and everyone is paid equally for their contribution to that society.

So if you go waving a national standard in front of a ACLU card carrying liberal, the bull (BS) will likely charge (fly).

Umm...let me quote this more accurately...right from the article no less.

"Well, there's still Iran and North Korea, don't forget. There's still hope for the rest of us ... There's always hope that this might not work."

I'm troubled by the dot dot dot there. That could mean they skipped portion of that statement. Luckily for The Daily Show is on right now. So, I will be back after I see her.

And that last line rhetoric was inversly-ish true for Republicans during most of the 90's...Anything good for America was bad for Republicans...

EDIT: Crud, this is the one with The Rock interview...

[edit on 3/3/2005 by OXmanK]

But your title is inherently dishonest. This proves that Soderberg wants America to fail...or more directly, the Republican party to fail. If they truly hated America, they would sound at least a little bit more different.

Not at all Oxmank, we just contributed it to Reagan's policies!

Ah ha!, that flashback must be painful.

So does that mean that all of the bad things we are facing are due to GHW Bush's policies? Two way street my friend. Remember, you can spin many stories...but it is down right difficult to spin history.

You think I love Bush? Well, I do enjoy bush (all that my wife will allow). GW is just too liberal for my liking. I have contempt for socialism-lite.

By the way, what bad things? I do not fear. If I am to be grateful to God for His blessings, should I not be grateful for difficulties as well?

Hardships strengthen. Do not effective workouts burn?


[edit on 3-3-2005 by Reaganwasourgreatest]

And God said, "Let the misunderstandings begin..."

I never said you liked Bush...you feeling guilty?

Well, if you are claiming all of the good things out of the 90's were due to Reagen, does that mean the problems of today are due to Bush 41? Why do I ask, because it was generally a great time for America during Clinton's reign. And if all eight years were due to Reagen, does that mean that it is GHW Bush's policies that have affected us since 2001? GWB's father's policies...The person who was in right after Reagen...The next in line for...oh I give up...You are a MORON to think that every great thing in the 90's were Reagen's doing anyhow.

Feeling guilty? That would be emotional. I base everything on logic except my faith, which I agree is illogical.

Your quote,"And God said, "Let the misunderstandings begin...""

Who's god are you talking about? I do not know of any such passage in the Bible. Did you make that up and if you did are you inferring that you are a god?

By the way, thanks for calling me a moron. I prefer fool for Christ. At least that way, the mods wont flag you. Free speech, I disapprove of flags.

Originally posted by OXmanK

And that last line rhetoric was inversly-ish true for Republicans during most of the 90's...Anything good for America was bad for Republicans...

[edit on 3/3/2005 by OXmanK]

That is not true, us Republicans know that the good times in the 90's started in 92 when Republicans got the majority in the House and the Senate, thanks to Clinton. Remember the "Contract with America?" So you are busted!

[edit on 3-3-2005 by Carseller4]

Have you zero capacity for humor?

But you never did answer it...the whole "Why do you think I think you like Bush?" After all, I never said it...

And I say let them flag me for speaking the truth from my perspective. You just seem to have a comprehension problem in some responses...

I will answer your question. You do deserve that.

Yes, I can not stand GHW Bush. the reason why I did not vote for W was I believe an acorn does not fall far from the tree.

No humor here, that is how I think.


Now answer my questions please.

[edit on 3-3-2005 by Reaganwasourgreatest]

That wasn't the question...I was just wondering why you thought that I thought you liked Bush? (I couldn't think of other way to word it.)

Yes, effective work outs do burn.

And nobody's God, because it was a little humor...sorry...

Carseller, fine, I'll give that to you...but it cannot entirely be attributed to Republicans. Remember, the highest elected leader in the country was a Democrat. He had to approve of everything that came through. And, no the Republicans did not hold enough seats to override a veto by Clinton. They held about as much stroke as the Democrats did. So, you are kinda busted too.

Republicans could not defeat Clinton based on the previous 6 years...so they went for the knees and assaulted his character so they could tarnish his otherwise, great run as President.

It was because you mentioned him panda. How did his name even come up in this thread? I do notice you think Clinton was great.

Do you have any idea how he push nuclear proliferation deliberately?

It would be a long thread so not to bore you, plus you would no doubt not believe it, I will let it lie for now. Please continue your love for the man who gave nuclear secrets to our enemies.

I personally believe he has been the best politician of my lifetime. I am doubtful of the proliferation arguement mainly because of all of the money spent on digging up all they could on Clinton. Now, he could be guiltier than sin, but he had some serious Damage Cover and cover up abilities. I admire only his political skills. The man was coated with teflon and had a political bullet proof vest. Even when it was obvious he had lied, his approval rating went up. Look, it wouldn't suprise me if it was true, but now I just have to question it.

it is late and I will get back with you on such from my personal experience or witness.

You can call me many things but a liar is not accurate.

I don't know, maybe I should just leave it alone. You are entitled to your hero. nevermind.... I can not prove it.

I do know what I witnessed.

Originally posted by Carseller4
Anything good for America is bad for Democrats, and now they are admitting it.

Why are you being intentionally dishonest?

Well? Why?

Originally posted by RANT

Originally posted by Carseller4
Anything good for America is bad for Democrats, and now they are admitting it.

Why are you being intentionally dishonest?

Well? Why?

Did you even read the column? If you didn't, Nancy Soderberg, a former Clinton aide, was hawking a book on some late night show.

Quote

"Well, there's still Iran and North Korea, don't forget. There's still hope for the rest of us ... There's always hope that this might not work."


Just wait till next week when gas prices go up. The democrats are going to throw a party!

Yeah, she was speaking for herself. Answer this: who is she representing?

Is she elected to some position?

Is she appointed to some position?

Does she have any real power...well other than the "pen"?

Is she someone who is high ranking?

I believe the answer to that is no. Then that means she does not represent Democrats at all. Outside of "all of us are representative of something" garbage. Someone who is not elected, appointed, or any other words, NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF DEMOCRATS proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Democrats in fact want America to fail. Bravo...good show. Nice try, pal.

So I move that the title should be amended to "Proof A Democrat wants America to fail" or "Proof Former Clinton Aide wants America to fail" or even this silly number "Who hates America? This Democrat!" But it should not read "Proof Democrats want America to fail" because it is an outright lie. Why? BECAUSE SHE DOESNT REPRESENT THE DEMOCRATS. She is a talking head. Much in the same as Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly. Would it be fair for me to start a thread that reads, "Proof Republicans are a bunch of pill poppers" or "Proof Republicans like to Sexually Harass People?"

You are a mental midget and a troll. Good-bye

Originally posted by Carseller4

Originally posted by RANT

Originally posted by Carseller4
Anything good for America is bad for Democrats, and now they are admitting it.

Why are you being intentionally dishonest?

Well? Why?

Did you even read the column? If you didn't, Nancy Soderberg, a former Clinton aide, was hawking a book on some late night show.

I saw the show.

So I knew what a lying, out of context, political hack you were the instant I opened your thread entitled "Proof Democrats Want America to Fail."

Did you read the link I gave you?