Things Your Media Momma Didn't Tell You

kathaksung

Under Surveillance
Joined
Nov 6, 2005
Messages
522
Reaction score
0
Mind control by selective news?

Quote, "Things Your Media Momma Didn't Tell You

Friday, June 15, 2007

The fact that most Americans oppose the war in Iraq, and want the president impeached, is testimony to the native intelligence and common sense of the citizens of this nation.

It sure isn't thanks to the quality of the news we're getting here in America.!

Here are some of the things you don't know if you just depend on the corporate media for your information:

Most Americans would like to see this president and vice president impeached and removed from office. Newsweek magazine published a scientific poll last October showing that 51 percent of us favor impeachment (including 29 percent of Republicans!), but the corporate media, which normally hasn't met a poll it won't publish, didn't publicize this one. And now, when the numbers supporting impeachment are surely even higher, you can't even pay a polling outfit to ask the question. No wonder most people who favor impeachment still think they're odd ducks.

There is a bill, filed in the House of Representatives on April 24 by Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), calling for the impeachment of Vice President Cheney. Since it was filed, it has gained six co-sponsors, including a member of the House Democratic leadership, Rep. Janice Shakowsky (D-IL). Most major media have ignored this important story completely. Most Americans also don't know that the Vermont State Senate voted overwhelmingly this spring to call on Congress to impeach the president.

The president has been declared a felon in federal court. Yet even after Federal District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor ruled last August that President Bush and the National Security Agency were committing serial Class A felonies and were violating both the First and Fourth Amendments by spying on Americans' communications without first obtaining warrants, Bush continued ordering the NSA to continue the patently illegal program for at least half a year. In reports on the spying program, the corporate media never mention that it has been declared a felonious activity by the federal court.

Fifteen Democratic Party state organizations have passed impeachment resolutions calling on Democrats in Congress to initiate impeachment proceedings against the president and vice president. The most recent of these, the Democratic Party of Oklahoma, passed its resolution at the party's annual convention on May 19. Other Democratic Party conventions, in states from Nevada and California to Massachusetts and North Carolina, have passed similar resolutions. Most have been ignored by the corporate media even in their own states.

Bush's so-called "coalition of the willing" is not so willing and is not really much of a coalition either. When's the last time you've heard how many countries are on board with the US in the war and occupation of Iraq? The reality? Britain, the only significant contributor of combat troops besides the U.S., is pulling out, as did Italy and Spain, and many other countries, like Denmark, Lithuania and others, plan to be out of Iraq by August or at the latest December. One indication of the seriousness of situation: The Pentagon no longer lists the countries that are members of the "coalition." The only mainstream report I've seen laying this out this collapse in international support for Bush's war was in USA Today last February.

The Homeland Security Department last year awarded Halliburton $385 million in a no-bid contract to construct prison camps designed to hold tens of thousands of unspecified prisoners in the event of domestic unrest. Meanwhile, President Bush has signed a bill altering the insurrection act so that he can declare martial rule and order active duty troops to take charge anywhere in the domestic US in the event of "public disorder." No one in the corporate media has reported on these developments or asked the White House to explain what it's all about.
There is evidence that Cheney, as CEO of Halliburton, was a patron of the Washington Madam whose client book of high-class call-girls is causing many in Washington political circles-mostly Republicans it appears, who apparently need to pay for their sex-to sweat. So far no mention of the Cheney angle in the corporate media, though they've been having fun with the broader story of a political sex scandal. No mention either of how a brave West Point cadet refused to shake Cheney's hand on stage when the vice president was handing out this year's diplomas at the Army's premiere academy.

Among the "worst of the worst" of the "evildoers" captured and held as "enemy combatants" at Guantanamo were children, some of them preteens and kids who were under 15 when captured and brought to Cuba-so many in fact that the military had to set up a special facility, called Camp Iguana, just for adolescent and pre-pubescent "fighters." The corporate media have barely reported on this atrocity (the New York Times ran only one article mentioning child captives, in June 2005). The only wider coverage of this outrage came recently when the government tried to prosecute one such alleged child "terrorist"-Omar Khadr-only to have the military judge in charge toss his case out because the government had misclassified him. Khadr, we learned, was captured in 2001 in Afghanistan at the ripe age of 15, making him one of the older child captives brought to and interrogated at Guantanamo. Under international law, the U.S. was supposed to treat this and other child soldiers as victims, not as war criminals. Khadr, a Canadian by birth, instead has spent five years doing hard time in US captivity.

Well-researched reports on the rampant theft of both the 2000 and 2004 elections, and on Republican plans for theft of the 2008 election, such as Mark Crispin Miller's Fooled Again, have gone unmentioned in the corporate media. Books on the subject, like Miller's and like Greg Palast's best selling Armed Madhouse, have never been reviewed.

.........

(http://www.freemarketnews.com/Analysis/154/7922/lindorff.asp?wid=154&nid=7922)
 
Really long, but I actually read it. Quite an interesting read. Now, I'm not American, but I want Bush out just like any other honest American. He's just like a little kid in a store who wants a Beyblade he can't get. It's saddening that he got in again. Was he voted in, or did he rig it?
 
Who the hell keeps lifting this guy's ban?
 
Check out Project Censored, which is an organization that attempts to make more public those news articles that do get written, and would seem to be of great import, but don't make it into the mainstream media. Their articles (and certainly the ones mentioned above) really make me question my blind faith in the system.
 
Check out Project Censored, which is an organization that attempts to make more public those news articles that do get written, and would seem to be of great import, but don't make it into the mainstream media. Their articles (and certainly the ones mentioned above) really make me question my blind faith in the system.

Looking at their website, perhaps there's a reason they're ignored/laughed at.
 
Was he voted in, or did he rig it?
The first election, its very clear that Al Gore won. The second election, its also clear that Bush won. Which is odd, because you would think the opposite would happen (public elects Bush, realizes mistake, Bush forced to rig election).
 
Well, Orwell was right... It just takes time.
 
Crazy as kathaksung is, there's probably some truth in what he's saying this time.
 
Eh. American mass media is crap. but, what kathaksung posted makes it seem as if republicans control the media, but it's both the democrats and republicans. And to me they are both bad.
 
Join peace march or criticize Bush will land you on "no-fly" list

Quote, "Professor who criticized Bush was told he was added to terrorist 'no-fly' list

Michael Roston

Published: Monday April 9, 2007


A top Constitutional scholar from Princeton who gave a televised speech that slammed President George W. Bush's executive overreach was recently told that he had been added to the Transportation Security Administration's terrorist watch list. He shared his experience this weekend at the law blog Balkinization.

(http://lapa.princeton.edu/peopledetail.php?ID=507)

Walter F. Murphy | Faculty Associate

Walter F. Murphy, the McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence, Emeritus, at Princeton University, attempted to check his luggage at the curbside in Albuquerque before boarding a plane to Newark, New Jersey. Murphy was told he could not use the service. [Can you all believe this crap! What happened to freedom of speech! This garbage has got to stop and stop now! We the people cannot just sit back and say well, it's not happening to me so I'll do something when it gets worse, etc. Send/write letters of protest to officials, form groups to fight this crap! Protest/march against this from happening! ETC.....]

"I was denied a boarding pass because I was on the Terrorist Watch list," he said.

When inquiring with a clerk why he was on the list, Murphy was asked if he had participated in any peace marches.

"We ban a lot of people from flying because of that," a clerk said.

Murphy then explained that he had not marched, but had "in September, 2006, given a lecture at Princeton, televised and put on the Web, highly critical of George Bush for his many violations of the Constitution."

The clerk responded, "That'll do it."

Murphy was allowed to board the plane, but was warned that his luggage would be "ransacked." On his return trip, his luggage was lost. [This is beyond total harassment, this is outright criminal!!!!]

Murphy is a decorated Marine who served in the Korean War and was a reservist for 19 years. Mark Graber, who presented the blog post, adds that there were other reasons that Murphy was an unlikely terror suspect.

"While he holds some opinions, most notably on welfare, similar to opinions held on the political left, he is a sharp critic of ROE V. WADE, and supported the Alito nomination," he wrote.

[I (IAM1) spoke with Mr. Murphy on April 11th 2007 and told him I supported him. He was very appreciative. He is a professional and an expert on/in our Constitution and we all need to support people like him who stand up for our Constitution!]

The blog post on Murphy's experience can be accessed at this link.

(http://balkin.blogspot.com/2007/04/another-enemy-of-people.html)
 
490. Ready for war (6/13/07)

VT massacre was done instead of war as a distract to the framed case on me . My revelation is so true that caused fierce reaction from Feds.

I was heavily harassed in internet. I frequently lose contact to internet and had to re-start the connection. I was repeatedly asked to log in the web (it used to be automatically log in) then was told "invalid user's name or password". Thus being banned to post. Though I have request a new password, I never received the reply e-mail. One open intimidation is like this:

TheDivineMsEm Sent: 5/1/2007 6:12 PM

Kathasung - I warned you before. Next mention of the Va Tech killings as some sort of "government conspiracy" will get you banned.

http://groups.msn.com/PoliticallyIncorrectCafe/general.msnw?

My posting at that site since was either deleted or removed.

And Feds obviously upgrade their operation. They used to shut down Bay Bridge for two days in the name of repair. This time they burned down one major exit Freeway of the Bay Bridge. Blocked the road for nearly a month.

The "terror attack" they planned to justify the war from last October to this March was a "dirty bomb attack". This time Feds will use a nuclear weapon. (see # 486)

The "terror attack" propaganda used to be aided by its loyal ally - British, now likely will extend to other European countries.

Quote, "US will extend Al Qaida terror attack into German

Sources told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa that US security men tested German security by trying to smuggle C4 plastic explosive past a checkpoint at Heiligendamm.

German surveillance machinery detected the tiny stash in a suitcase in a car and the Americans in plainclothes then identified themselves. German police declined comment."

<http://www.eux.tv/article.aspx?articleId=9424>

The war in Mid-east will be a vast one. Civil war in Lebanon; civil war in Palestine; civil war in Iraq and war with Iran.

The previous plan of Iran war was air strike at Iran's nuclear factory, now it will be a ground war. Then we saw in May, the House suddenly ended a confrontation with Bush administration, released the Iraq military fund. Bush got what he needed for Iran war. The expense for Iraq operation is about 56 billion each year. This time Bush got more than 100 billion, almost double than ordinary expense. What is extra money for? It's for Iran war.

One thing interesting is: almost at same time, Cindy Sheehan quits the anti-war movement. It may indicate that there will be a war. Feds does not want Bush being bothered by peace movement when Bush's population is in historical low.

Is Cindy Sheehan a false flag Feds set up to decompose the anti-war movement? Sheehan got popular in August 2005 when she settled camp outside Bush's Texas ranch. She then led the group to the north for a big anti-war protest. As we know, this was the time of hurricane Katrina and Rita hit the South America. On 9/24 hurricane landing date, there was also a big anti-war protest in Washington. In my case, 9/24 was also Feds' action date which used to be followed by a "terror attack". see "343. Killing two birds by one stone (9/17/05)"

If the framed drug case went successful, there would have been a big terror attack, (possibly dirty bomb attack) the anti-war movement would be humiliated.

Cindy Shehan's rising and elusion connected to two big plots planned by Feds. That's why I see her from another angle.
 
Media momma? My mom let me watch red dwarf when I was little.
 
I was heavily harassed in internet. I frequently lose contact to internet and had to re-start the connection. I was repeatedly asked to log in the web (it used to be automatically log in) then was told "invalid user's name or password".

Most people would attribute that to a crap ISP rather than tin-foily mysterious happenings on your internet line.

George W. Bush: "Quick, kathaksung is close to discovering our terrible, terrible secret! Mildy irritate him by dropping his connection to the internet several times a day!"
 
Kathaksung, you're doing what conspiracy theorists have been doing for a long time. Let me explain: Conspiracy theorists have a theory. That's what it starts with; a theory. All you need to do to claim that... You know what? I'm gonna give you an example:

I hold a strange opinion about horses: They're big, they're powerful, and they tend to crush anyone in their path(they have a habit of kicking people behind them and hitting people with their head) Now, if I am to turn my opinion of them being devious/evil into a conspiracy theory, it's really quite easy. Check it out: Statistics say that about 123 people are killed each year in horse-related incidents. What I did there was I brought what seems like a fact into my argument. But I found this on google, so it might not be at all. Next: People who try to ride horses often feel that the horse is unwilling and often experience falling off the horse. What I did there is I drew in a relatively negligible truth. And it's general knowledge that you shouldn't position yourself behind a horse as they have a tendency to kick when they're nervous.

Here is another example on the same subject by another person:
When I was little, I saw horses on tv and thought, 'wow! they look interesting! I'd like a horse!'. What they don't show you on tv is the pure hatred horses have for humans. I can't really blame them, as humans have ridden around on them, jammed spurs into their sides and beaten them with whips... but I never did that to them so they should leave me alone. Even those small horses that look harmless still have a burning hatred for humans.

Campaign Of Death
The horses are smart, as in they make the deaths appear to be 'accidents'. Here is a list of some things they are doing ON PURPOSE!

*
they throw people from them (Christopher Reeves)
*
they bite people (my cousin got bit)
*
they stampede and trample people to death
*
they phone me late at night and neigh messages of death at me
*
they pretend they are walking away, but instead deliever a kick of death to the human standing foolishly behind them
*
they invade dreams (DC once dreamt of being bit on the hand!)
*
they pretend they are going to jump over something but instead stop, causing the human to be flung over them and onto the ground where they can then stomp on them
*
they send me letters with threatening hoof prints on them

Warning signs of an impending attack:
If you're hanging around horses (I don't know why you would), then here are the warning signs to look out for.

*
snorting
*
stamping of the foot
*
flicking of the tail
*
trotting
*
neighing
*
threatening letters or phone calls

How do we stop this?
Short term: If you think there is an impending attack (which there will be at some point) then I suggest hiding from the horses.
Long term: We clear out a huge section of a country and give it to the horses so they may roam in peace. There is no other way without more violence and killings, which would suck.

Anyone who doesn't agree with this is one or more of the following:

*
a horse
*
a horse dressed up like a human
*
in denial
*
under the influence of a horse or horses
*
wants to be a horse

Do you recognize some of the things I mentioned being utilized here? Your theories are really not any better than the above as far as logic goes. Horses are still evil, though. Anyway, I'm not trying to ridicule you here, or at least I don't think I am, I'm just trying to put things into perspective, as it's sometimes needed.

Dude, conspiracy theories are harmless as long as you keep it to yourself. Some people need something to do, and sometimes it's fun to dig for strange things, conincidences, but you shouldn't complain about people not wanting to hear conspiracy theories about the school shootings... This is because it's a horrible thing to joke about, and you know that.
 
Civilian deaths: 600,000.

Quote, "Iraqi doctor risks life to study death

Epidemiologist's study says the number of war-related deaths in Iraq is 20 times the U.S. government's estimate

Jonathan Woodward
Vancouver Sun

Lafta, with British and American researchers, made headlines in 2006 with a study published in the British medical journal Lancet that estimated war-related deaths in Iraq totalled more than 600,000 -- some 20 times the American government's estimate.

Since that study was published, Lafta has tried twice to go to the University of Washington in Seattle to talk about his findings. The first time, in April, the American government would not grant him a visa.
A week later, SFU offered to let him speak on its campus and he obtained a Canadian visa, but a British official in Jordan refused to grant him a transit visa to change planes in London.

Last week, Lafta finally boarded a direct flight from Amman, Jordan, to Montreal to avoid going through the U.S. or Britain, the two countries leading the war effort. Today at 7 p.m., he will talk about how he conducted his research into war-related deaths as well as a new project -- looking at an alarming rise in deaths related to childhood leukemia in Basra, Iraq -- to an audience at SFU's Morris J. Wosk Centre for Dialogue.
Lafta says he has to drive on back roads in the early-morning hours, avoiding bomb-strewn highways and armed men at checkpoints, to get from his Baghdad office to Basra, in southern Iraq, where he does his research.
The killings are a side effect of the anarchy of war, he said. There are other devastating effects, from a lack of clean drinking water to the fact that many doctors have fled the country.

For the Lancet study, research teams went door to door to survey the populace. When their sample was extrapolated to the entire country, they came up with 654,965 Iraqis dead, or about 2.5 per cent of the population, 10 times higher than most estimates, and 20 times higher than the number the U.S. government uses. It's about 66 times higher than the number of deaths the average American believes have occurred, according to a recent survey: 9,800.

Lafta says he is not anti-American, but a "neutral researcher."
He described the Lancet study as the most complete available. "My numbers are scientific. Theirs [Americans' numbers] are politics," he said.

http://groups.msn.com/CurrentEvents...ssage=794333&LastModified=4675632041388892417
 
Listen to the internet radio or internation shortband radio broadcasts of the BBC for half an hour, the differences will shock you (no, NOT the accents).
 
Kathaksung, I seriously want to know: Did you give what I told you any consideration? As seemingly ridiculous as the article seems, it relies on the same method of logical deduction as you do. I explained it in my last post, hoping to get a response. Well, your choice.

Someone already replied to this when you posted it on abcnews. He posted it there, too. :
Sorry but the Lancet study has been repudiated last year as being a statistical farce.
Here are some accurate figures from a legitimate think tank that is also a liberal think tank
that has been doing this for the last four years.
"the Brookings Institution -Iraq Index -Tracking Variables of Reconstruction & Security in Post-Saddam Iraq.
Available at [http://www.www.brookings.edu/iraqindex.]
Most current edition July 19, 2007

These numbers do not include Iraqi civilians killed during major combat operations March 19, 2003-April 30, 2003.
Iraq Index Estimate using IBC Data – May 2003 – December 31, 2005, not including crime: 19,500
Iraq Index Estimate using IBC Data – May 2003 – December 31, 2005, including crime: 42,100
Iraq Index Estimate using UN Data – January 2006 – December 2006: 34,452
Iraq Index Cumulative Estimate using IBC and UN Data – May 2003 – December 31, 2006: 76,500
Iraq Body Count Cumulative Total Through 15 December 2006: 53,000 – 59,000
Mission for Iraq Human Rights Report covering these months. 2007 figures are estimates provided by the authors based on a steady rate ofviolent deaths occurring in January, followed by reduction for the month of February as a result of a drop in sectarian killings credited to Operation Fardh al-Qanoon. However, on April 11, 2007, General William Caldwell reported that overall casualties (killed and wounded) in Iraq were up 10% between February and March, despite a 26% drop in civilian casualties in Baghdad from January to March. This is reflected in the March estimate. During a press conference on April 26, Gen. David Petraeus, Commander of MNF-I, stated that from January to the end of April, sectarian murders were down two thirds in Baghdad. However, he also stated that overall violence against civilians has
remained largely unchanged.

plus I have to shout this because people like you just don't get it!
THE MAJORITY OF KILLINGS OF CIVILIANS IS BY THE THUG/BARBARIANS!

HERE READ EXACTLY WHO IS DOING THE KILLINGS!!!

07/25/07 KUNA: Gunmen kill 2 farmers in Kirkuk
Two Iraqi civilians were killed when unidentified armed men shot them in Kirkuk on
Wednesday and the son of a clan leader in the city was also kidnapped.

07/25/07 Reuters: Suicide bombs kill 50 in Iraq
US and Iraqi officials began work today to team up with Iran to find an end to the bloodshed in Iraq
whose security crisis was dramatised anew by two suicide bombs that killed 50 people.

again i'm shouting here but you evident'y aren't paying attention to facts:
THESE ARE JUST TWO NEWS STORIES WHERE THE THUG/BARBARIANS ARE DOING THE KILLING!
NOT THE US TROOPS!!
HOW STUPID!
Please answer these questions and if you don't it proves how absolutely ignorant you are of FACTS!!!
1) Do the thug/barbarians rescue the people that are killed by their bombs? NO!!!
2) Do the thug/barbarians have hospitals where people are treated? NO!!!!
3) Does the US troops use kids as decoys in cars planted with bombs NO... the THUGS do!!!

So when you grow up and recognize that the good guys are the ones who are taking care of the iraqis,
who freed the Iraqis from their despot and his sick sons that used electric drills on people and operated
rape rooms (you have evidently not talked to any Iraqi who will tell you even worse horror stories!)
4) Does the US troops serve a family a baked son forcing them to eat the son? NO! your thugs did though!

On Friday, Yon reported that al Qaeda served up a son for dinner to his own family— a barbarism reminiscent of Atreus (hence the "curse" on the House of Atreus) cooking (sans feet and hands) and then serving his twin brother's sons to their unsuspecting father Thyestes. So Yon reports a revolting modern-day Thysestean feast:

"The official reported that on a couple of occasions in Baqubah, al Qaeda invited to lunch families they wanted to convert to their way of thinking. In each instance, the family had a boy, he said, who was about 11-years-old. As LT David Wallach interpreted the man's words, I saw Wallach go blank and silent. He stopped interpreting for a moment. I asked Wallach, "What did he say?" Wallach said that at these luncheons, the families were sat down to eat. And then their boy was brought in with his mouth stuffed. The boy had been baked. Al Qaeda served the boy to his family.

What is striking about all this savagery—whether with the filmed beheadings of Westerners in Iraq to the recent flaming Johnny Storm human torch at Glasgow, screaming epithets as he sought to engulf bystanders and ignite his canisters — is the absolute silence of the West, either distracted by Paris and i-Phones or suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome and obsessed with Guantanamo.

It is hard to recall an enemy so savage and yet one so largely ignored by rich affluent and distracted elites as the radical jihadists, as we have to evoke everything from mythology to comic books to find analogies to their extra-human viciousness."
AND YOU DEFEND THESE THUG/BARBARIANS! HOW ABSOLUTELY SICKENING!
 
Nemesis6,

It seems you follow me everywhere. Fine, now to your reference, my reply:

1. In war crime court, we only prosecute those who activated the war as war criminal. Though the killing used to be carried out by ordinary soldiers. Hitler is war criminal not the soldiers. In Iraq war, Bush must take the responsibility not the others.

2. When you refer ABC's debate, you missing something. Here I complete it:

1. It doesn't matter about left or right. Is Hillary left? She had voted yes to authorize Bush the Iraq war power. Is Lieberman left? He beat the drum to attack Iran. So said left and right is only a fake cover up of a totalitarian. When the ruling class needs, both left and right come to serve.

2. So why the Brookings institution must be correct? Because it fits your demand? (by the way, your url link doesn't work) The figure is also a reference of others. Consider this government had started Iraq war based on lies, (this is the truth), so they have their support group work for them do cover up job too. And Bush needs a low death figure to save his reputation. And he has resource having accessories to beat the drum for him.

3. Another source to prove 600,000 a reasonable figure.

Quote, "Civilian death toll in Iraq put at 600,000 in disputed study

By Sabrina Tavernise and Donald G. McNeil

NewYork Times

Barghdad, Iraq - A team of U.S. and Iraqi public health researchers has estimated in a study released Tuesday that more than 600,000 civilians have died in violence across Iraq since the 2003 U.S. invasion.

But it is an estimate and not a precise count, and researchers acknowledged a margin of error that ranged from 426,369 to 793,663.

It is the second study by researchers from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. ....."

(San Jose Mercury News, Oct. 11, 2006)

Please don't call others liers. I only refer the figure from two sources, which seems agree with 600,000. So please respect those researchers. Are you a researcher? Or just a stone thrower?
 
Bush acheived what Saddam couldn't do:

U.N.: More than 4 million Iraqis displaced

Refugee agency warns number forced to leave because of [US] violence will rise 05 Jun 2007 More than 4 million Iraqis have now been displaced by violence in the country, the U.N. refugee agency said Tuesday, warning that the figure will continue to rise.
Article continues--

<http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19055852/>
 
Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction

Salon exclusive: Two former CIA officers say the president squelched top-secret intelligence, and a briefing by George Tenet, months before invading Iraq.
By Sidney Blumenthal

On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam's inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again.

Nor was the intelligence included in the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002, which stated categorically that Iraq possessed WMD.

No one in Congress was aware of the secret intelligence that Saddam had no WMD as the House of Representatives and the Senate voted, a week after the submission of the NIE, on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq. The information, moreover, was not circulated within the CIA among those agents involved in operations to prove whether Saddam had WMD.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2007/09/06/bush_wmd/index_np.html
 
The first election, its very clear that Al Gore won. The second election, its also clear that Bush won. Which is odd, because you would think the opposite would happen (public elects Bush, realizes mistake, Bush forced to rig election).

John Kerry couldnt even keep his decisions straight on what he wanted for lunch, let alone his standing on important platform policies...we re-voted Bush because he was the lesser evil...

And yeah, I think Gore won in 2000...I mean, Govenor Bush ordered how many recounts so that Bush became President Bush...man, theres more bush there than in the Vietnam bush...

Good thing I have a Bushmaster!
Photo2.jpg
 
John Kerry couldnt even keep his decisions straight on what he wanted for lunch, let alone his standing on important platform policies...we re-voted Bush because he was the lesser evil...

in what ****ing part of Bizarro world is this true? kerry the lesser of evil over bush? ... :LOL: oh that's ****ing rich ..you people relected bush because he had better spin doctors ..seriously how a president with one of the worst records to date retains any support is beyond me ..at this point I'm convinced he could swallow a baby whole on national tv and his approval rating would only dip slightly ..the only way he would fall in disfavor would be if he said something disparaging about christianity ...but that's not gonna happen
 
at this point I'm convinced he could swallow a baby whole on national tv and his approval rating would only dip slightly

LOFL!!!!!

"The baby was a key member of Al Qaida in Iraq"..."We got 'im"...

Woo...that's hilarious.
 
Back
Top