Just as soon as she takes care of her Hsu problem. Now where did she place Vinnies gun?
2007-09-21 02:16:36
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋
I heard Columbia is considering backing out. WJ screwed over Iran with faulty nuc's and blocking the production of Persian Gulf oil offshore that set them back years. The Chinese now pay for the privilege in EU no less. Yet, Hill has China ties. She has ties to Chavez regarding oil also. She just might have alittle tea party with the lunatic. She has little respect for New Yorkers. Just a means to an end. You can be sure this President has seen the Moveon.org ad. Loved every word. Promotes failure in our government that includes both sides of the aisle. A nation divided. Music to his ears. Thank you.
** Noah you nailed it on the head, exactly why NOT to vote for Hill. No Change. If you believe Bush responsible for these lapses in policy go right back to Clinton. Nothing forward there. As a Senator and God forbid President.TY!
2007-09-21 09:24:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by Mele Kai 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Will Reagan, Bush I, Nixon, and Eisenhower join summit meetings to cozy up to commuist insurgency funding premieres of Russia and China? Will they bring a signed copy of "The communist Manifesto"?
There was once a time in this country when diplomacy and statesmanship was considered a good thing. To bad so many people have been brainwashed to think that talking equals weakness.
2007-09-21 09:24:42
·
answer #3
·
answered by Chance20_m 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Wow....anything to avoid dealing with real issues. No....Sen. Clinton isn't going to 'cozy' up with to the president of Iran....another BS ad hominum charge from the goofball, swift boatin', reactionary right wing talk show nitwits, halfwits and dimwits! Iran exists...it's dangerous mostly to itself and will have to be dealt with realistically....something that the Bush Junta has failed to do on every issue. How about simply defending your position? How about making an attempt to deal with the real problems of the decline of the American wage-earner? How about a real energy policy...not this oil/coal only nonsense that does zero to make our country a better place? Affordable health insurance? Why keep running away from the issue? What about the occupation of Iraq? Any clues when we can wrap that up? I don't think so! I know....you can attack an 'ad'.....that'll show 'em!
2007-09-21 09:28:11
·
answer #4
·
answered by Noah H 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Greetings. Why not? she accepts contributions from everywhere and has no morals so why not the president of Iran, even though she will side with Bush, the destroyer, to invade there. hopefully after she gets her campaign contrabution. and her view of the future? what view? to continue on this road to hell? seems that way. I have not heard anything original out of her yet. Hillary is not on the hill yet but she is already talking as if she were.
2007-09-21 09:18:01
·
answer #5
·
answered by Rich M 3
·
2⤊
2⤋
Why not?
condaleeza rice has offered great comfort to nazis.
What the republicans forget is that nazis are enemies to the United States, but they fell for their lines of being tough on terrorism, just as Germany fell for their line about being tough on communists.
It's too bad that republicans have been so wishy washy that they allowed the nazis to infiltrate the GOP.
.
.
.
2007-09-21 09:23:31
·
answer #6
·
answered by Brotherhood 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
Columbia threw the ROTC off the campus because of 'Don't-ask-don't-tell'.
I wonder if they have considered what happens to the openly gay in an Islamic Theocratic State?
Shouldn't Columbia hold the midget from Iran to the same gay standard they hold the military which protects their right to not listen to conservative speakers on campus?
2007-09-21 09:20:04
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋
Holy God!
This question and some of the answers is hard evidence that the American educational system is broken beyond repair.
2007-09-21 09:21:07
·
answer #8
·
answered by Tokoloshimani 5
·
2⤊
2⤋
Is that the best you got? Wow, I didn't realize the GOP was so afraid of her. Then again, she has a vision for the future, not a failed war on her hands.
All you've done is rant on about an innuendo that doesn't exist, as most neocons do on this board. But I guess when all you have as a platform is "stay the course" and the course had done nothing but fail, rants are the only option I suppose.
2007-09-21 09:14:09
·
answer #9
·
answered by Mitchell . 5
·
1⤊
6⤋
It's a shame that Columbia won't allow a Minuteman to speak but will invite an anti-American terrorism sponsor to do so.
2007-09-21 09:14:25
·
answer #10
·
answered by Still Beautifully Conservative 5
·
5⤊
3⤋
Let us see who eats crow. Remember how sure you are of this and come back later and tell us about it.
2007-09-21 09:49:34
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋