Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 35

Thread: The joke that is Terry McAuliffe

  1. #1

    The joke that is Terry McAuliffe

    This guy in the same breath just said that we left Afghanistan early and without completing the job AND that we should pull out of Iraq now before that job's done. Does he actually HEAR what he's saying?!

  2. #2
    [QUOTE][B]Does he actually HEAR what he's saying?![/B][/QUOTE]

    Of course he does.
    He, like most intelligent people know that , the solution to Iraq can not be achieved with our military presence in that country. They have achieved all that they can be expected to achieve. We set that country up for disaster. Thats why we should never have gone in the first place.

    George Bush on May 2003:

    [B]"On Thursday, I visited the USS Abraham Lincoln, now headed home after the longest carrier deployment in recent history. I delivered good news to the men and women who fought in the cause of freedom: their mission is
    [U]complete[/U] and major combat operations in Iraq have ended."[/B]

    George Bush Today:

    "[B]Before our mission in Iraq is accomplished, there will be tough days ahead." [/B]

    Does this guy listen to what [I]HE[/I] says!

  3. #3
    [QUOTE=kennyo7]Of course he does.
    He, like most intelligent people know that , the solution to Iraq can not be achieved with our military presence in that country. They have achieved all that they can be expected to achieve. We set that country up for disaster. Thats why we should never have gone in the first place.

    George Bush on May 2003:

    [B]"On Thursday, I visited the USS Abraham Lincoln, now headed home after the longest carrier deployment in recent history. I delivered good news to the men and women who fought in the cause of freedom: their mission is
    [U]complete[/U] and major combat operations in Iraq have ended."[/B]

    George Bush Today:

    "[B]Before our mission in Iraq is accomplished, there will be tough days ahead." [/B]

    Does this guy listen to what [I]HE[/I] says![/QUOTE]

    If your friends are only as intelligent as McAuliffe is then I understand completely why you rarely make sense.
    The first mission WAS completed and that was to rid Iraq of Hussein. To harp on this is once again the typical pathetic liberal line. The Democrats KNOW this is true, but want to make the country believe something otherwise. The second mission is to create the government there, hold elections (which occurred although you hate to admit it), and to get an IRAQI military presence large enough to sustain the country on its own. We're not done with that yet.

  4. #4
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Tampa
    Posts
    1,541
    [QUOTE]Kenny07: Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah[/QUOTE]

    Does [B]anyone[/B] listen to what he says?

  5. #5
    [QUOTE=Thor99]Does [B]anyone[/B] listen to what he says?[/QUOTE]

    Well, I listen because I feel sorry for anyone that is SO misinformed.

  6. #6
    [QUOTE][B]Does anyone listen to what he says?[/B][/QUOTE]

    Only those with a sense of reality.

  7. #7
    [QUOTE][B]The second mission is to create the government there, hold elections (which occurred although you hate to admit it), and to get an IRAQI military presence large enough to sustain the country on its own. We're not done with that yet.[/B][/QUOTE]

    I thought bush was against nation building?
    Funny but I dont recall nation building as one of the trumped up reasons the administration told us we had to invade Iraq for!

    Lets see ......i remember WMDs, Nuclear capabilities, ties to AQ, mushroom clouds....nope nothing about building a democracy!


    No I admit that Iraq is moving towards forming a government. Its the type of government that they are forming that makes me sick. To think our boys died to create an Islamic theocracy alligned with Iran makes me want to puke!

  8. #8
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    I miss Terry McClueless....he was such an assett in helping the libs get their azzez kicked every election....though furher howard dean will top mcClueless and his piss poor record the prior four years...

  9. #9
    Hey it could be worse

    At least we dont have that retard Scotty Mclellan geting up every time and making a complete a$$ out of himself. I love watching David Gregory mop the floor with poor Scotty.

    Too bad we havent seen him around as of late. I guess the BushCo. has been embarassed by him enough, so they put him in hiding with Darth Cheney

  10. #10
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=kennyo7]Hey it could be worse

    At least we dont have that retard Scotty Mclellan geting up every time and making a complete a$$ out of himself. I love watching David Gregory mop the floor with poor Scotty.

    Too bad we havent seen him around as of late. I guess the BushCo. has been embarassed by him enough, so they put him in hiding with Darth Cheney[/QUOTE]


    You're right....you have retard rat politicians making complete azzes out of themselves every day....I love watching dumbazz hypocrites like palagerist joe biden or jean kerri talk in circles on a daily basis...and don't forget heir hillary and fearless harry reid....

    it couldn't be worse for the rats.....they'd sell their sould to the devil to have Pol Pot be their WH spokeman.....only if they could win an election!! :yes:

    then again Pol Pot= communist\dictator\tyrant....just the kind of people the rats have affection for....
    Last edited by Come Back to NY; 11-30-2005 at 06:13 PM.

  11. #11
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    20,528
    [QUOTE=kennyo7]Of course he does.
    He, like most intelligent people know that , the solution to Iraq can not be achieved with our military presence in that country.[/QUOTE]

    You made a typo: "intelligent people" should read "psuedo-intellectual dipsh!ts". Its a very common error among the Loony Left.

  12. #12
    [QUOTE][B]You made a typo: "intelligent people" should read "psuedo-intellectual dipsh!ts". Its a very common error among the Loony Left.[/B][/QUOTE]

    Your right hoss. Now go back to watching the monster trucks/tractor pulls! Yeee Haw!

  13. #13
    [QUOTE=kennyo7]I thought bush was against nation building?
    Funny but I dont recall nation building as one of the trumped up reasons the administration told us we had to invade Iraq for!

    Lets see ......i remember WMDs, Nuclear capabilities, ties to AQ, mushroom clouds....nope nothing about building a democracy!


    No I admit that Iraq is moving towards forming a government. Its the type of government that they are forming that makes me sick. To think our boys died to create an Islamic theocracy alligned with Iran makes me want to puke![/QUOTE]

    So you think we should have made the same mistake we originally made in Afghanistan? You expected us to go into Iraq, unseat Hussein, search for WMDs and then withdraw leaving the country in an absolute disaster with NO leadership and NO security forces trained whatsoever? I know you've been saying we should have had a plan going into this, but THAT is clearly not a good one! Thank God (yes... I used God when talking about politics. lol) we had the sense to learn from history.

  14. #14
    [QUOTE][B]You expected us to go into Iraq, unseat Hussein, search for WMDs and then withdraw leaving the country in an absolute disaster with NO leadership and NO security forces trained whatsoever?[/B][/QUOTE]

    NO! I dont think we should have ever gone into Iraq to unseat Saddam! This was destined to be a disaster! That is why papa bush didnt do it the first time.


    [QUOTE][B]Thank God (yes... I used God when talking about politics. lol) we had the sense to learn from history.[/B][/QUOTE]

    It seems to me that we havent learned a damn thing from history. When has the US been successful in forcing a government onto foreign nations?

    Lets see.... the Shah of Iran? Nope......Saddam Hussein? Nope....... Ghadaffi? Nope..........The military dictatorship in Greece? Nope........Haiti? Nope.......Central America? Nope........................

    You cant force democracy at gunpoint! You cant force a foreign country to change its government! No foreign occupancy has been successful in defeating a resistance! History has proven this time and time again!

  15. #15
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [QUOTE=kennyo7]No foreign occupancy has been successful in defeating a resistance! History has proven this time and time again![/QUOTE]


    Care to elaborate or define your terms?

  16. #16
    [QUOTE][B]Care to elaborate or define your terms?[/B][/QUOTE]

    Name 1 that was successful

  17. #17
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [QUOTE=kennyo7]Name 1 that was successful[/QUOTE]
    I don't know what you mean by "foreign" or "occupancy" or "defeating" or "successful" or "resistance." Until you define and explain those terms, I cannot answer, and I cannot assess the validity of your assertion.

    I have asserted nothing. I am merely asking you to explain yourself since you have asserted something. Your response above is not valid. Your statement is not presumed to be accurate until it is disproven, it is presumed to be worthless unless supported. I work in finance and economics. You are in medicine. As such, you and I both know about confidence levels, and the fact that most studies and tests that assert more are often less powerful or less reliable, have have less significant p-values, or low R-squared figures. Is the data set reliable? Are the assumptions reasonable, or are they geared to fit the data set and thus produce an artificially high p-value? Typically, by asserting [I]less[/I], you can typically have more confidence in what it is you are asserting. You have asserted something very, very sweeping and broad, and have not defined your data set, assumptions, terms, etc. You are simply making noise at this point. This is a null program, a boast, statisically/scientifically speaking. It will remain so until you provide context, specific data, definitions, etc. I don't think you can really assert what you are trying to assert with any confidence. It may sound nice and be effective rhetoric, but it is simply nothing, in terms of practical value.
    Last edited by jets5ever; 12-01-2005 at 11:10 AM.

  18. #18
    [QUOTE=kennyo7]NO! I dont think we should have ever gone into Iraq to unseat Saddam! This was destined to be a disaster! That is why papa bush didnt do it the first time.




    It seems to me that we havent learned a damn thing from history. When has the US been successful in forcing a government onto foreign nations?

    Lets see.... the Shah of Iran? Nope......Saddam Hussein? Nope....... Ghadaffi? Nope..........The military dictatorship in Greece? Nope........Haiti? Nope.......Central America? Nope........................

    You cant force democracy at gunpoint! You cant force a foreign country to change its government! No foreign occupancy has been successful in defeating a resistance! History has proven this time and time again![/QUOTE]

    Hussein HAD to be unseated. What was the other option? To let him continue to produce WMDs and flip off the UN and the world? To become more powerful and more dangerous to the point where we really WOULD be screwed? When should we have said, "OK... enough of your bull****. Let the inspectors do their jobs COMPLETELY."
    What's a better goverment option other than a democracy? We're not forcing anything on anyone. We're trying to help a nation set up a goverment that is fair and includes everyone in the process. No other form of goverment gives them that ability. Your line is cute though... "You can't force democracy at gunpoint!"

  19. #19
    [QUOTE][B]To let him continue to produce WMDs and flip off the UN and the world? [/B] [/QUOTE]

    News to Ricky...
    He had no WMDs. His program to reconstitute nuclear weopans was primitive and at best 10-20 years away from developing anything significant. He was NOT a threat.

  20. #20
    [QUOTE][B]I don't know what you mean by "foreign" or "occupancy" or "defeating" or "successful" or "resistance." Until you define and explain those terms, I cannot answer, and I cannot assess the validity of your assertion.[/B][/QUOTE]


    Very simple:

    Has there ever been a situation where :

    Country A invades Country B, defeats and overthrows Country B's government. Then Country A occupies Country B and forms a government that will remain loyal to the ideals of country A. All this inspite of a group within Country B resisting the efforts of Country A and posing a threat (both by force and with politics)to the new government Country A is trying to form.

    Success= The new government of Country B (formed by Country A) can last for more than 10 years w/o the presence of Country A in country B.

    [QUOTE][B]Your response above is not valid. Your statement is not presumed to be accurate until it is disproven, it is presumed to be worthless unless supported.[/B][/QUOTE]

    Likewise, so is you statement that anti-war sentiment here is enabling our enemy and hurting our troops. Until you can support this, it is worthless.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us