Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Impeachobama.com


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#1 VaginalWartPuss

VaginalWartPuss

    Junior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 165 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 08:59 AM

already taken. actually IMPEACHOBAMA.com, .net, .org, .tv, and just about all of them are taken. would have been nice to sell in the future.

#2 Jangler

Jangler

    Its gonna be just like they say, them voices tell me so

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 46,751 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 09:03 AM

Is that a new Snapple flavor?

#3 VaginalWartPuss

VaginalWartPuss

    Junior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 165 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 09:17 AM

wouldnt suprise me. if it was good i would try it mixed with vodka.

#4 2jakefansinva

2jakefansinva

    Coach Jack Bolton

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,530 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 11:27 AM

Is that a new Snapple flavor?


Yeah....kinda like Hawaiian punch.

#5 Htar

Htar

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,599 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 02:44 PM

I, unlike the libs that couldn't get over it before Bush's term began, am willing to give him a shot.

I think if he begins to listen and follow Pelosi and Reid, he's done...I also think if we get hit by a terror attack in his first term he's done as well.

He gets a pass on the economy, no matter what. Nobody knows what to do about it or completely how we got to this point. I do not think bailing these companies and banks out is a good idea or will really work in the end.

#6 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,744 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 04:42 PM

You are full of poo. People were down on Bush when he announced that Iraq was part of Al Queida. Before that he was good for a laugh.

#7 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 12,398 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 04:47 PM

Shhhhhh. Complexity leads to fear.

#8 JoCoLoco

JoCoLoco

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 262 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 06:05 PM

The left had nothing but contempt for Bush from day 1. I've been hoping that conservatives rise above that nonsense since the election. I'm rooting for the guy, and my criticism of his performance, be it positive or negative, will be based on his decisions and the policies he enacts. It will not be based on the fact that I'm feeling sulky 'cause they didn't count the ballots for a fifth time.

#9 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,000 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 06:26 PM

I, unlike the libs that couldn't get over it before Bush's term began, am willing to give him a shot.

I think if he begins to listen and follow Pelosi and Reid, he's done...I also think if we get hit by a terror attack in his first term he's done as well.

He gets a pass on the economy, no matter what. Nobody knows what to do about it or completely how we got to this point. I do not think bailing these companies and banks out is a good idea or will really work in the end.


yea, i don't like snapple either.

#10 -Painted Fan-

-Painted Fan-

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 236 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 06:31 PM

Can you imagine the stress on the guy already? He knows that if he screws up, that blows it for any and all minorities' chances in the future (at least in this lifetime).
I didn't vote for the man, but I'm willing to give him a chance and see where he takes us.
As the saying goes, "Only time will tell."

#11 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,000 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 06:34 PM

Can you imagine the stress on the guy already? He knows that if he screws up, that blows it for any and all minorities' chances in the future (at least in this lifetime).
I didn't vote for the man, but I'm willing to give him a chance and see where he takes us.
As the saying goes, "Only time will tell."


you think that people who elected a minority for the first time in history would be dumb enough to think that "if he sucks than all minorities suck at presidenting, and I'll never vote for one again, no matter what?"

#12 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,744 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 06:41 PM

The left had nothing but contempt for Bush from day 1. I've been hoping that conservatives rise above that nonsense since the election. I'm rooting for the guy, and my criticism of his performance, be it positive or negative, will be based on his decisions and the policies he enacts. It will not be based on the fact that I'm feeling sulky 'cause they didn't count the ballots for a fifth time.


People on the left thought he was stupid. Because as far as having the intelligence to run a country, he is. Thats a lot different from "having it in for him". If that was the case, the outcry against him would have been strong when he wanted to go into Afganistan. Of course, you may be referring to the far left whackos, in which case I can tell you about 3 people I know who have referred to Tuesday as "Assassination Day".

#13 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,313 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 06:59 PM

Can you imagine the stress on the guy already? He knows that if he screws up, that blows it for any and all minorities' chances in the future (at least in this lifetime).
I didn't vote for the man, but I'm willing to give him a chance and see where he takes us.
As the saying goes, "Only time will tell."


I don't agree. Regardless of how good or bad Obama does, the demographics of the nation are changing and the chances for minorities will continue to improve.

#14 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,313 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 07:21 PM

People on the left thought he was stupid. Because as far as having the intelligence to run a country, he is. Thats a lot different from "having it in for him". If that was the case, the outcry against him would have been strong when he wanted to go into Afganistan. Of course, you may be referring to the far left whackos, in which case I can tell you about 3 people I know who have referred to Tuesday as "Assassination Day".


I don't like Bush, but I think its a mistake to say that he is stupid. He is definitely not on those on the left were seriously mistaken to think so. Thats probably why they lost the election in 04. I do think that his style of decision making and leadership is wrong for being president, but that doesn't necessarily indicate a lack of intelligence.

In truth, I think that GWB's problem was laziness. He didn't want to put in the time to study the issues, he wanted his subordinates to do that. That style of leadership works when you have competent subordinates, but Bush relied to much on Rumsfeld and Cheney. Notice how things in the DOD and Iraq improved when Rummy was removed and Gates came in. Gates is a competent advisor and administrator, so things improved. In the beginning, prior to 9-11, I think there was a certain amount of balance in the Whitehouse between Cheney and Rummy on one side and more competent, moderate advisors such as Powell and Rice on the other. But 9-11 tilted the balance towards the hardliners, and this led to a lot of mistakes on the part of the administration.

Edited by Davidson Deac II, 18 January 2009 - 07:25 PM.


#15 Matt Foley

Matt Foley

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,983 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 08:10 PM

I don't like Bush, but I think its a mistake to say that he is stupid. He is definitely not on those on the left were seriously mistaken to think so. Thats probably why they lost the election in 04. I do think that his style of decision making and leadership is wrong for being president, but that doesn't necessarily indicate a lack of intelligence.

In truth, I think that GWB's problem was laziness. He didn't want to put in the time to study the issues, he wanted his subordinates to do that. That style of leadership works when you have competent subordinates, but Bush relied to much on Rumsfeld and Cheney. Notice how things in the DOD and Iraq improved when Rummy was removed and Gates came in. Gates is a competent advisor and administrator, so things improved. In the beginning, prior to 9-11, I think there was a certain amount of balance in the Whitehouse between Cheney and Rummy on one side and more competent, moderate advisors such as Powell and Rice on the other. But 9-11 tilted the balance towards the hardliners, and this led to a lot of mistakes on the part of the administration.



Excellent analysis. On top of all that, Obama sucks big donkey balls.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.