Dude, I am so tiered of this lying, shitting, and carrying on. Where do you live, I might trade?
HEE HEE!!! Oh, thanks for the laugh, I needed that!
And Kerry Healey is more than 20 points behind Deval Patrick in the latest polls.
That’s a good question. I suppose they might cause the death of 650,000 people in Iraq.
Wait a minute, that’s already been done.
Same claim about Haggerd/Bush made on Rep. John Doolittle’s site.
Suddenly Jeff Gannon’s white house sleepovers make a lot more sense.
Haggard went on to add, “And on a personal level, it’s pretty much ended my career.”
Whenever I hear people saying “Of course, the reason all these preachers speak out so harshly against gay people is that they themselves are gay” I always think it’s a huge generalisation. But that seems to be less true every day…
How about publishing on the open web detailed information on how to build nuclear firing circuits and triggering explosives, as well as the radioactive cores of atom bombs? (Bush Doing a “Heckuva Job” Protecting Our Nation)
When Tony Snow said a couple weeks ago:
I doubt many of us realized that what he meant was that the president had decided to shorten the wait by teaching terrorists to build nukes.
Apparently is it a Republican tradition, beat up on the disabled:
Michael J. Fox
Tammy Duckworth
Max Cleland
The tension mounts, the anxiety builds, and we wait in suspense…Will Saddam be found guilty? By an extraordinary coincidence, that verdict is due on Sunday, and the White House waits in sharp anticipation…(How is it, one wonders, that this Administration enjoys so many a serendipitous coincidence? The benign hand of Providence, mayhap?..)
Interview with Larry Kudlow, transcript available here
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/11/02/snow-saddam-verdict/
Of course, should Saddam be found not guilty and carried out on the shoulders of an adoring crowd, this might represent a setback in our Iraq liberation policy. Time will tell.
(And noting posts above, it is not only the tension which mounts, but…no. Won’t do it. It would be wrong. Already going to Hell, don’t want to be on detention as well…)
Of course, should Saddam be found not guilty, it will be because the Iraqi populace wants to make the administration look weak and get the Democrats who’ll go easy on them into a better position. Damn Iraqis.
I don’t see any positive spin for the Bush administration coming off this (I realize that Bush is not running but this election seems to have turned into a referendum on his administration). The best case is that Saddam is found guilty which will hardly be a surprise verdict; I doubt it will change anyone’s vote. If there is a surprise verdict and Saddam is completely or even partially exonerated, it’s going to reflect badly on the administration’s claims that conditions in Iraq are improving. So if the White House had a hand in scheduling this verdict, I’m pretty sure they’d have postponed it a couple of weeks.
How can you trust such a manifestly ungrateful people?
Dunno, L’il Nemo, but my bet is the Bushiviks trumptet this verdict (which, despite my irony, is a pretty safe bet…very safe…its safe, you wouldn’t believe how safe…) to the very skies. What else he got, review his photo ops with the head of the American Association of Evangelical Sodomites?
I’m sure there’ll be spin but I doubt it’ll be effective spin - not the kind that influences undecided voters.
OK, how about this?
Eliminating the only oversight agency in charge of investigating the embezzlement of billions of dollars of taxpayer money–now that’s just fucking sick !
If the Republicans retain control after all this shit, I just fucking give up!
Invade Iran. 
From the above article:
"Susan Collins (R-Maine), who followed the bill closely as chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs, says she still does not know how the provision made its way into the conference report, which reconciles differences between House and Senate versions of a bill.
Neither the House nor the Senate version contained such a termination clause before the conference, all involved agree.
“It’s truly a mystery to me,” Collins said. “I looked at what I thought was the final version of the conference report, and that provision was not in at that time.”
“The one thing I can confirm is that this was a last-minute insertion,” Collins said."
. . . .
“The termination language was inserted into the bill by congressional staff members working for Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Hunter declared on Monday that he plans to run for president in 2008.”
Ahh, such a fine example of the structural beauty of parallelism – get rid of oversight without anyone knowing you are doing it. And running for President no less. Impressive uber-pork.
See here.
And here.
…all working on the assumption that black voters are so shallow to vote for a candidate solely by the color of his skin. Proving once again that the Republican Party assumes the populace have the IQ of goldfish and plan accordingly.
(Though I’m also inclined to question whether the “black democrats” really were. What kind of credentials can one present over the phone?)