• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

The buck stops here

Red Robin

Well-known member
Some of our "moderate, progressive" friends here have said time and time again about failures in President Bush's term in office that the buck stops here, meaning anything done under his watch is his fault. Where's the blame placed on the hillary campaign when the waitresses aren't tipped, questions are planted, money is taken from illegal sources, debates are botched...etc? Do you have two sets of criteria ? One for the republicans and one for your slimy friends? Will you vote for someone who's proven to be a failure by your own standards?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I was reading the Montana Dems blog the other day--and they don't believe that Hitlery can win in Montana, nor Obama--while they feel Edwards could if he is the Democrat candidate....

But like they said they may be surprised- as even tho Hitlery is unliked in this state- the memories/pains currently being caused by GW-- and the lack of a credible Republican candidate may get her more votes than many believe...Especially now since GW decided he would go on the veto kick--and each of issues he know decided to veto has huge negative impact on this state--SCHIPS- WORD-Farm Bill......

Right now it isn't a vote for Hillary to many--but instead a vote against GW....
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Hillary is not the President nor the Decider in Chief.


How do you know Bush would tip anyway?

I'd bet Cheney would tell the waitress to go " fduck herself"...and lordy help her if he's just come in from hunting!!!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve said:
OldTimer
-but instead a vote against GW....

Maybe someone should explain to the liberals that GW ain't running... :sure: :?

He's seen as the leadership of the Republican Party-- and represents what the Republican party has done in the past 7-12 years...No-- when the Dems win D.C. big in 08- it won't be a vote for Democrats or a certain Democratic candidate or even all the Democratic platform--but essentially a vote against the Republicans- and especially the neocons that GW has allowed to rule the roost...
 

Tex

Well-known member
GW isn't running, but his support staff in the Senate and House are.

As we speak, the republican leadership is blocking the Farm Bill while mischaracterizing it.

This republican leadership and any of their lemmings must go. Their days are numbered and GW is decreasing that number with his leadership.
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
I'd bet Cheney would tell the waitress to go

You never miss a chance to show your character. Your true colors come shining thru on a forum that kids read. You fit right in with Hillary and it is no wonder you support her. We need more of your character advocating her true colors as well.
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
I was reading the Montana Dems blog the other day--and they don't believe that Hitlery can win in Montana, nor Obama--while they feel Edwards could if he is the Democrat candidate....

But like they said they may be surprised- as even tho Hitlery is unliked in this state- the memories/pains currently being caused by GW-- and the lack of a credible Republican candidate may get her more votes than many believe...Especially now since GW decided he would go on the veto kick--and each of issues he know decided to veto has huge negative impact on this state--SCHIPS- WORD-Farm Bill......

Right now it isn't a vote for Hillary to many--but instead a vote against GW....
So you are saying that Montana as a whole isn't smart enough to figure out that regardless of who wins, Bush isn't going to be president? I find that hard to believe. Most People from Montana I know are brighter than that.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Red Robin said:
Oldtimer said:
I was reading the Montana Dems blog the other day--and they don't believe that Hitlery can win in Montana, nor Obama--while they feel Edwards could if he is the Democrat candidate....

But like they said they may be surprised- as even tho Hitlery is unliked in this state- the memories/pains currently being caused by GW-- and the lack of a credible Republican candidate may get her more votes than many believe...Especially now since GW decided he would go on the veto kick--and each of issues he know decided to veto has huge negative impact on this state--SCHIPS- WORD-Farm Bill......

Right now it isn't a vote for Hillary to many--but instead a vote against GW....
So you are saying that Montana as a whole isn't smart enough to figure out that regardless of who wins, Bush isn't going to be president? I find that hard to believe. Most People from Montana I know are brighter than that.

Are you sure, RR? :lol:
 

Tex

Well-known member
Red Robin said:
Goodpasture said:
Red Robin said:
How do you know Hillary wouldn't have made a bigger mess in iraq than Bush?
Because it is not possible to create a bigger mess than bush has created in Iraq
Is that just a talking point or do you have some credible evidence?

What, rr, you want him to push the Bush administration into creating a bigger mess to prove a point to you?
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Tex said:
Red Robin said:
Goodpasture said:
Because it is not possible to create a bigger mess than bush has created in Iraq
Is that just a talking point or do you have some credible evidence?

What, rr, you want him to push the Bush administration into creating a bigger mess to prove a point to you?
What? You don't make any sense tex. I want him to provide some credible evidence supporting his claims.
 

Tex

Well-known member
Red Robin said:
Tex said:
Red Robin said:
Is that just a talking point or do you have some credible evidence?

What, rr, you want him to push the Bush administration into creating a bigger mess to prove a point to you?
What? You don't make any sense tex. I want him to provide some credible evidence supporting his claims.

What kind of evidence? Do you want Hillary elected so he can prove it?

This reminds me of the old thing you would say as a kid, "Prove it!".
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Tex said:
Red Robin said:
Tex said:
What, rr, you want him to push the Bush administration into creating a bigger mess to prove a point to you?
What? You don't make any sense tex. I want him to provide some credible evidence supporting his claims.
What kind of evidence? Do you want Hillary elected so he can prove it?

This reminds me of the old thing you would say as a kid, "Prove it!".
It was his statement . I asked him if It was a TALKING POINT OR DOES HE HAVE EVIDENCE. What part of that do you not understand?
 

nonothing

Well-known member
Red Robin said:
Tex said:
Red Robin said:
What? You don't make any sense tex. I want him to provide some credible evidence supporting his claims.
What kind of evidence? Do you want Hillary elected so he can prove it?

This reminds me of the old thing you would say as a kid, "Prove it!".
It was his statement . I asked him if It was a TALKING POINT OR DOES HE HAVE EVIDENCE. What part of that do you not understand?

hey go easy on RR,at least he has admited that Iraq is a mess under the leadership of george W Bush....That in itself was a big step for RR...
 

Tex

Well-known member
Call it just a difference of opinion. That is all it is.

By the way, I personally don't think Hillary will do anything better than Bush.

We need a complete change.
 
Top