Still Hating America.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
We should have followed the clinton doctrine?

I know the basic facts here are very complicated, but U.S. troops were sent to Somalia in December, 1992, before Clinton took office, and the World Trade Center was attacked in September, 2001, after Clinton left office.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I know the basic facts here are very complicated, but U.S. troops were sent to Somalia in December, 1992, before Clinton took office, and the World Trade Center was attacked in September, 2001, after Clinton left office.

we were on Iraq. Listen to my link, it was a peace offering.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
They seem to have a bad relationship, and that man obviously doesn't handle pain well. Don't know what he thought that would accomplish.

He does, however, have a remarkably hairy chest.

S_A_M

That was really painful to listen to. Jesus.

[Replaced_Texan]

WTF?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
That was really painful to listen to. Jesus.

that must be one bad divorce. Can you imagine how distasteful it must be to be the lawyer facilitating Kim's attacks, or defending Alec?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

• Scenario: China, the world's preeminent superpower, invades and occupies Canada on a false pretense and lets it descend into civil war. The U.S., a developing nation without nuclear weapons, watches from next door. Then a senior Chinese official who could soon be the country's next president starts singing songs about "bombing the U.S." at political rallies. He gets laughs and applause.
  
  As an American, would you or would you not demand that Washington develop the ultimate deterrent against that madness?

The Cunning Realist

[Spanky]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Put down the hookah, Hatter. The sun will shine argyle before the nation will put that wretched lying whore* in the White House.

*Meant in the general sell-your-soul-for-a-vote sense and not as any comment on her sexuality (er, lack thereof).

Unless there is a dramatic change in the war she is going to be our next president.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Spanky
Unless there is a dramatic change in the war she is going to be our next president.

I know you have inside info I don't, but I don't see that happening based on what my limited inside info (cousin who's a PA GOP strategist) suggests.

You realize we're heading for civil war if she gets elected and tries what she'll think she can. It will be the end of the Democrat Party.

No more Bushes. No more Clintons. No more Kennedys.

[bi-partisanship fairy]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Bar Exam Question #4.

Given the following facts, how would you answer the listed questions below:

FACTS

• 1) People repeatedly ask Admin Slave to put poster Hank on ignore.
  
  2) Slave repeated tells said people that "no, that is a bad idea, and ignoring a valid poster, despite the fact you disagree with him, is a bad idea. Just scroll if you dont like him."
  
  3) Three plus years of the same. Rinse. Repeat.
  
  4) Slave goes on hiatus (i.e. becomes a corporate whore)
  
  5) Hank makes cheap gay jailhouse joke at his (repeated defender's) expense

Now, please check the best answer based upon the preceding facts

• A) Hank apologizes for such cheap shot
  
  B) Hank lays low, knowing that Slave will disappear after this post for a week
  
  C) Hank remains steadfast, knowing that a guy like Slave really doesn't give a fuck.
  
  D) Hank starts ending up on those "Land of Fu" requests.
  
  E) A,B and C, but not D
  
  F) I stopped reading at #3 above, if Slave is typing this after 12:01am PST.

In the spirit of bi-partisanship, how do you handle the ignore requests related to Ty? How about Penske?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
WTF?

Hank thinks Clinton caused 9/11.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Hank thinks Clinton caused 9/11.

actually, I think SS posts in such extreme hyperbolic tones that I don't see how to communicate with him other than to crank up the volume.

[Southern Patriot]

With those g*dd*mned liberal big-government FBIers raiding yet another God-fearing Republican Congressman today, I want to know: when is the Attorney General of the You-nited States or the President or even the big guy himself, Dick Cheney, going to stand up and replace some of these FBIers who go after God-fearing Republicans when we all know that the Democrat Party is the only corrupt (both morally and otherwise) party in the country?

And if they don't replace those FBIers who go in and raid poor unsuspecting God-fearing Congressmen, they ought to get rid of those US Attorneys who collaborate and cover for them. Damn US Attorneys ought to be investigating Democrats not Republicans.

I am outraged. This is no way for the FBI to behave. I think that agency has been taken over by the damn Reds.

[Southern Patriot]

Originally posted by bi-partisanship fairy
In the spirit of bi-partisanship, how do you handle the ignore requests related to Ty? How about Penske?

If people don't have the balls to not read that rubbish then they deserve what they read.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Southern Patriot
With those g*dd*mned liberal big-government FBIers raiding yet another God-fearing Republican Congressman today, I want to know: when is the Attorney General of the You-nited States or the President or even the big guy himself, Dick Cheney, going to stand up and replace some of these FBIers who go after God-fearing Republicans when we all know that the Democrat Party is the only corrupt (both morally and otherwise) party in the country?

And if they don't replace those FBIers who go in and raid poor unsuspecting God-fearing Congressmen, they ought to get rid of those US Attorneys who collaborate and cover for them. Damn US Attorneys ought to be investigating Democrats not Republicans.

I am outraged. This is no way for the FBI to behave. I think that agency has been taken over by the damn Reds.

the real question is whether the FBI investigates a law breaker if it turns out he is also a cross-dresser.

[Southern Patriot]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
the real question is whether the FBI investigates a law breaker if it turns out he is also a cross-dresser.

Well, now, I'd hope we don't judge people just on what they wear. That wouldn't be right. We ought to judge them on more fundamental things, like race or religion.

I apologize for the profanity in my earlier post. It is ungentlemanly and I appologize. I just can't understand why people would be upset about corrupt Republicans.