Calling all Belgians

In article ,
Jack Hollis wrote:

On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 22:00:00 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:

Payback's a bitch.

Who is Bush paying back?

The Democratic Congress for being such assholes.

That's true if you define "assholes" as "engaging in the oversight that Congress
is charged with by the Constitution." When you consider the 6 years of
rubber-stamping that Bush has had with both houses of Congress under Republican
rule, then I guess you can apply the phrase "payback is a bitch."

--
tanx,
Howard

Never take a tenant with a monkey.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

On Apr 5, 9:18 am, Bob Schwartz
wrote:
Bret wrote:
The USA is sending Belgium a new ambassador and I don't mean Jonathan
Page. Please give him the welcome he deserves. Please TP his house or
whatever the local customs dictate.

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002952.php

Bret

Great troll, well formed and with good potential. Tailor
made for guys like Bill C and Kunich. Good work.

Shame you didn't cross-post the **** out of it to maximize
the audience. I think that'll cut down the run time, but
we'll see.

Bob Schwartz

For a while there I thought you'd disabled the Kunich bot just to
spite me. I now see that he just needed some time to work up some
venom and an array of false factoids. I guess there's a tradeoff
between run time and QOR as with any industry.

Bret

On Apr 5, 8:33 pm, Howard Kveck wrote:
In article .com,

"Bret" wrote:
The USA is sending Belgium a new ambassador and I don't mean Jonathan
Page. Please give him the welcome he deserves. Please TP his house or
whatever the local customs dictate.

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002952.php

By the way, I think the proper greeting for him in Belgium doesn't utilize TP -
it would involve cowbells. All night long.

That works for me.

Bret

On Apr 5, 7:54 pm, Jack Hollis wrote:
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 22:00:00 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson

straight up lies about a veteran?

Who says they were lies? Perhaps it's Kerry who lied. Then again,
sometimes there are different versions of the truth. Not everyone
sees other people as the same. One person's idea of a hero can be
another's persons idea of a coward.

When conservatives turn to moral relativism, times
are desperate.

In any case, I'm sure that Sam Fox will make a wonderful Ambassador to
Belgium and if he doesn't, no one will know or care.

Kerry was being vindictive and Bush made him look like a powerless
fool. It's called twisting the knife.

In today's world of uncertainty, where new enemies can
spring up from anywhere and we must keep our allies
close, in this world ... it still doesn't matter who
is US Ambassador to Belgium. (Sorry, Belgians.) I'm
sure there is a fine career diplomatic corps at the
US Embassy to run the shop. So you're right about that,
but that's not the whole point. The only points of this
action are to throw Sam Fox a sinecure and to say
"**** you" to Congress. Now, while saying "**** you"
to Congress is very satisfying for a President, the
reasons Bush is saying it are 1) because he can
and 2) because it's the only thing left he _can_ do.

He's run out the string. Clinton came back after 1994,
but Clinton wasn't a lame duck or bogged down in a war.
So partisans shouldn't rejoice that Bush has nothing
better to do than give people the finger. Even I don't
rejoice. In principle, it's a bad thing to have the
president so isolated and out of options when he still
has to govern the country for almost two years.
(The caveat is that this administration hasn't done
very well with its options when it did have them, so
in practice, maybe it's not as bad as in principle.)

Ben
RBR Belgium Study Group

In article . com,
" wrote:

Now, while saying "**** you"
to Congress is very satisfying for a President, the
reasons Bush is saying it are 1) because he can
and 2) because it's the only thing left he _can_ do.

He's run out the string. Clinton came back after 1994,
but Clinton wasn't a lame duck or bogged down in a war.
So partisans shouldn't rejoice that Bush has nothing
better to do than give people the finger. Even I don't
rejoice. In principle, it's a bad thing to have the
president so isolated and out of options when he still
has to govern the country for almost two years.
(The caveat is that this administration hasn't done
very well with its options when it did have them, so
in practice, maybe it's not as bad as in principle.)

Greg Saunders has a nice take on it:

http://thismodernworld.com/3652

--
tanx,
Howard

Never take a tenant with a monkey.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

Bret wrote:

The USA is sending Belgium a new ambassador and I don't mean Jonathan
Page. Please give him the welcome he deserves. Please TP his house or
whatever the local customs dictate.

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002952.php

At least he's got a good i-rack:
http://www.samfoxvideo.com/Gallery/Sam-0117.jpg

Jack Hollis wrote:
Kerry takes it on the chin again.

It's an easy target.


--
E. Dronkert

On 5 Apr 2007 22:22:43 -0700, "
wrote:

The only points of this
action are to throw Sam Fox a sinecure and to say
"**** you" to Congress. Now, while saying "**** you"
to Congress is very satisfying for a President, the
reasons Bush is saying it are 1) because he can
and 2) because it's the only thing left he _can_ do.

There's more to it than that. It's also saying "If you can support
truely dirty work in politics you'll be rewarded."
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

On 5 Apr 2007 22:22:43 -0700, "
wrote:

it's a bad thing to have the
president so isolated and out of options

He has plenty of options. The problem for him with these options is
that they all involve admissions of major screw-ups, which he won't
do (though a more principaled leader would consider more seriously)
and possible legal jeopardy due to disclosure of illegal activities
among his crowd (which a more ethical leader would have as a much
smaller issue).

--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 23:02:45 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:

Who says they were lies? Perhaps it's Kerry who lied. Then again,
sometimes there are different versions of the truth.

Baloney in this case. Just plain baloney.

This sort of relativism "he said, she said" is so lame -- it;s the
retreat of the weak minded.

It's the weak minded who blindly believe one side over the other just
because they agree with them politically.