congrats Mr. President!

Help Support The Pipe:

dynamiteone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
3,607
So are you saying Bush still has Crawford? Hmmm. Thats funny considering how he bought a nice little house in Dallas.

Douche, your so fun to chat with. Its like playing checkers with an infant with you, except we all know an infant has a much higher IQ.
Ummmm, get some sleep, flammer. You are seeing and imagining things like your imaginary story about what I said. It just never works out for you attributing imaginary statements and positions of others. Just another on the long list of poor choices you make.
 

dynamiteone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
3,607
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/21/us/21crawford.html?_r=0

I guess you can't use it as a prop anymore when you aren't the president. Maybe he's too busy doing coke with the Cowboys?
Uhmmmm....the article YOU posted refers to HIS 1,400 acre ranch YOU said he sold. Care to comment or maybe retract your claim? Or will you ignore that one like the fact your hero aint batting for the gays to marry that you were asked about.
hummmmmmm?
 

dynamiteone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
3,607
Douche1,

He doesn't have Crawford anymore. It was a prop for idiots like you to make you think he was a average cowboy, down to earth, guy. Talk about duped "Now watch this drive!".

How's your move coming? Must suck to wake up everyday and realize 100% of the crap you listen to and write is just flat wrong.
Just a reminder for you.
 

Ready.Set.Jet

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2007
Messages
1,585
His prop is gone, fact. I guess he was successful in clearing all that brush he had during all that vacation time during the presidency.
 

dynamiteone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
3,607
His prop is gone, fact. I guess he was successful in clearing all that brush he had during all that vacation time during the presidency.
I'm just going by the article you hung your hat on: he either still has the place and you are wrong or he doesn't and you hung your hat on an inaccurate article. Seems you are in a quandry. Maybe you can clear the matter up. Hey, how 'bout Obama back peddling from gay marriage???
 

Ready.Set.Jet

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2007
Messages
1,585
You mean changing his stance like **** Cheney and every other politician? Besides, why would I care?
 

dynamiteone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
3,607
You mean changing his stance like **** Cheney and every other politician? Besides, why would I care?
Ohhhhhh....so now it's the ole "they all do it" defense. Why would you care? You're gay, want to marry your boy friend and thought Obama was your ticket to "ride"?

Meanwhile, back to the article: clear it up for us. YOU posted the article AND said Bush didn't own the ranch in a lame attempt to denigrate him. The article contradicts your claim.
 

Jetlinker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
7,934
Ohhhhhh....so now it's the ole "they all do it" defense. Why would you care? You're gay, want to marry your boy friend and thought Obama was your ticket to "ride"?

Meanwhile, back to the article: clear it up for us. YOU posted the article AND said Bush didn't own the ranch in a lame attempt to denigrate him. The article contradicts your claim.
I'm the gay one genious, and I knew from the beginning it would always be a state decided issue.
 

dynamiteone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
3,607
I'm the gay one genious, and I knew from the beginning it would always be a state decided issue.
His orientation was never an issue. The issue is Obama misleading (or lying) then closing the door.

He asked why he would care. I gave a plausible reason. Genious indeed, if I say so myself.

And you too thought Obama was going to support you. Now that he has fooled you, you just say it's a state thing.

Your bitching is over. If you want marriage benefits, move to a state that perverts itself with gay marriage. Afterall, it would always be a state decided issue....as should health care and a whole host of other crap drifting down from this corrupt, incompetent POTUS.
 
Last edited:

Jetlinker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
7,934
I didn't vote for Obama and if I had i would not expect him to force gay marriage from the federal level. He never stated he planned to do that, I never expected that. As usual you're just making sh*t up.
 

dynamiteone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
3,607
I didn't vote for Obama and if I had i would not expect him to force gay marriage from the federal level. He never stated he planned to do that, I never expected that. As usual you're just making sh*t up.
You're right. He never planned to. What you're missing or in denial about is he mislead folks like you that he would.

Regarding forcing something from the federal level: What do you think Obamacare is? How about health care from the federal level. What do you think the guy is trying to do with money?? Redistribute from the federal level.

If you didn't vote for Romney and didn't vote for Obama, you enabled Obama. Don't give your self a feel good, undeserved pass.
 

azpilot

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2004
Messages
2,487
If you didn't vote for Romney and didn't vote for Obama, you enabled Obama. Don't give your self a feel good, undeserved pass.
Oh please, sorry your hero didn't have enough people vote for him. If you don't like a candidate you shouldn't vote for them. A third, fourth, fifth party will never win if people are too chicken sh$t to vote for someone other than the status quo. So next time go out and try to convince more people that your candidate is the right person. If enough don't believe you to bad. Boo hoo....

We are screwed either way since neither the democrats or republicans want to fix anything. They know the reality is to painful and will just blame the other side for not wanting to do anything.
 

dynamiteone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
3,607
Oh please, sorry your hero didn't have enough people vote for him. If you don't like a candidate you shouldn't vote for them. A third, fourth, fifth party will never win if people are too chicken sh$t to vote for someone other than the status quo. So next time go out and try to convince more people that your candidate is the right person. If enough don't believe you to bad. Boo hoo....

We are screwed either way since neither the democrats or republicans want to fix anything. They know the reality is to painful and will just blame the other side for not wanting to do anything.
I am too. Unfortunately, it is going to cost those of us who actually have a job.

This time it was less about liking a candidate and more about acknowledging reality.

Reality was:

1. No third party candidate was going to win. No third, fourth or fifth party candidate will ever win. Period.

2. There was a huge Obama base that was going to vote for him because he was black and/or is giving your money to them and/or are defective in their thinking that liberalism/socialism works without recourse. Consider this; if just those on food stamps voted for Obama, that alone would explain over 70% of his vote. Then there is the inconvenient fact of racism that he got 93% of the black vote.

3. There were/are enough potential, and/or, actual voters who either won't or can't acknowledge the reality of #1 and #2, think possibly like you, then voted in such a way as to enable those in category 2 to prevail.

It was and is, what it is.
 

Jetlinker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
7,934
You still fail to acknowledge that the amount of money given in handouts is minuscule compared to the waste that is defense spending to have military presence where we have no business being involved. We can thank both sides for that, and that sole issue is why I vote libertarian.

How quick could we get our national debt under control if we left the Middle East the hell alone? I'm guessing the results would be surprising.
 

dynamiteone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
3,607
You still fail to acknowledge that the amount of money given in handouts is minuscule compared to the waste that is defense spending to have military presence where we have no business being involved. We can thank both sides for that, and that sole issue is why I vote libertarian.

How quick could we get our national debt under control if we left the Middle East the hell alone? I'm guessing the results would be surprising.
Handouts total over $1,000,000,000,000...that's one trillion bucks homeboy and that is in one year. there are single mothers with multiple kids and no idea where or who the father is collecting $35,000 and more a year in handouts and they don't turn their hand doing any kind of work but take home more than many full time military people do.

Educate yourself on what is instead of living in your cess pool of what you think it is. Reality bites.
 

Jetlinker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
7,934
Handouts total over $1,000,000,000,000...that's one trillion bucks homeboy and that is in one year. there are single mothers with multiple kids and no idea where or who the father is collecting $35,000 and more a year in handouts and they don't turn their hand doing any kind of work but take home more than many full time military people do.

Educate yourself on what is instead of living in your cess pool of what you think it is. Reality bites.
The libertarian party has a plan to address that issue as well. But you're too stuck on maintaining status quo. Like most of this country you allow yourself to be a sheep and contribute to the problem.
 

dynamiteone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
3,607
The libertarian party has a plan to address that issue as well. But you're too stuck on maintaining status quo. Like most of this country you allow yourself to be a sheep and contribute to the problem.
1. You make a claim about military spending being too high.

2. It is pointed out that welfare give a way to non productive lazy asses dwarfs military spending.

3. Your response is a no chance in hell party's position. Not that they don't have a valid point. They just aren't going to be calling any shots.

4. So, what's your response to the massive wealth transfer that dwarfs any military spending gripe. Common sense would suggest we start with that 1/3 of the spending which accounts for 100% of the deficit these past few years.
 

nixon

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Messages
4,680
Half the growth of our debt is due to two useless wars and thousands of Americans killed. What a ******* waste.
 

Latest posts

Top