Montgomery Burns Posted February 18, 2006 Author Report Posted February 18, 2006 After his recent hysterical rant in front of a Saudi audience, I think it is time to call him al-Gore. Quote "Anybody who doesn't appreciate what America has done, and President Bush, let them go to hell!" -- Iraqi Betty Dawisha, after dropping her vote in the ballot box, wields The Cluebat™ to the anti-liberty crowd on Dec 13, 2005. "Call me crazy, but I think they [iraqis] were happy with thier [sic] dumpy homes before the USA levelled so many of them" -- Gerryhatrick, Feb 3, 2006.
Montgomery Burns Posted February 18, 2006 Author Report Posted February 18, 2006 double post....delete Quote "Anybody who doesn't appreciate what America has done, and President Bush, let them go to hell!" -- Iraqi Betty Dawisha, after dropping her vote in the ballot box, wields The Cluebat™ to the anti-liberty crowd on Dec 13, 2005. "Call me crazy, but I think they [iraqis] were happy with thier [sic] dumpy homes before the USA levelled so many of them" -- Gerryhatrick, Feb 3, 2006.
Hicksey Posted February 18, 2006 Report Posted February 18, 2006 After his recent hysterical rant in front of a Saudi audience, I think it is time to call him al-Gore. Al bin Nutso. Quote "If in passing, you never encounter anything that offends you, you are not living in a free society." - Rt. Hon. Kim Campbell - “In many respects, the government needs fewer rules, but rules that are consistently applied.” - Sheila Fraser, Former Auditor General.
Spike22 Posted February 18, 2006 Report Posted February 18, 2006 Gore's family warned him to watch out for Clinton. Clinton was interested in one person from day one: himself. Gore suffered from Kim Campbell syndrome. Clinton never ran the country. It was a power struggle between pollsters and his wife. Clinton was interested in plenty of people -- so long as they had a nice round behind, an ample bosom and were willing to screw an old man. What's wrong with this? At least he was entertaining Quote
kimmy Posted February 18, 2006 Report Posted February 18, 2006 Source: CanwestFormer U.S. vice-president Al Gore has accused the oil industry of financially backing the Tories and their "ultra-conservative leader" to protect its stake in Alberta's lucrative oilsands.Canadians, Gore said, should vigilantly keep watch over prime minister-designate Stephen Harper because he has a pro-oil agenda and wants to pull out of the Kyoto accord -- an international agreement to combat climate change. So, has Al Gore, or anybody else, yet provided even a shred of evidence to suggest that the Conservative Party of Canada and the oil industry have conspired to break Canada's election financing and political donations rules? For that matter, has Al Gore, or anybody else, even provided a reason to suspect that the Conservatives did actually outspend the Liberals? I actually kind of doubt that they did. I don't think the reason the Liberals campaign sucked is that they didn't spend enough money. I think it's that they spent their money foolishly. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
shoop Posted February 18, 2006 Report Posted February 18, 2006 kimmy, the one I heard was that the CPC was funded by U.S. Christian fundamentalists in the election. It's funny, and sad, because it is true. I am saddened by who told me this *fact* though. Somebody who should have been one of the famous Tim Horton's crowd that Harper was supposed to win over this election. How can we ever win people over if they are convincing themselves this crap is acatually true? So, has Al Gore, or anybody else, yet provided even a shred of evidence to suggest that the Conservative Party of Canada and the oil industry have conspired to break Canada's election financing and political donations rules? Quote
Hicksey Posted February 18, 2006 Report Posted February 18, 2006 Gore's family warned him to watch out for Clinton. Clinton was interested in one person from day one: himself. Gore suffered from Kim Campbell syndrome. Clinton never ran the country. It was a power struggle between pollsters and his wife. Clinton was interested in plenty of people -- so long as they had a nice round behind, an ample bosom and were willing to screw an old man. What's wrong with this? At least he was entertaining If you're an ordinary joe -- nothing -- so long as your wife approves and you're honest about it when asked under oath. But as the POTUS I think it is assumed one would operate at a higher level of discourse than that. Quote "If in passing, you never encounter anything that offends you, you are not living in a free society." - Rt. Hon. Kim Campbell - “In many respects, the government needs fewer rules, but rules that are consistently applied.” - Sheila Fraser, Former Auditor General.
tml12 Posted February 18, 2006 Report Posted February 18, 2006 Gore's family warned him to watch out for Clinton. Clinton was interested in one person from day one: himself. Gore suffered from Kim Campbell syndrome. Clinton never ran the country. It was a power struggle between pollsters and his wife. Clinton was interested in plenty of people -- so long as they had a nice round behind, an ample bosom and were willing to screw an old man. What's wrong with this? At least he was entertaining If you're an ordinary joe -- nothing -- so long as your wife approves and you're honest about it when asked under oath. But as the POTUS I think it is assumed one would operate at a higher level of discourse than that. I agree. Look, I don't say Clinton didn't do a lot of great things. But the fact is, the man cheated on his wife and set a terrible example for the country. His "horniness," if you will, ruined his presidency and hurt his legacy. All facts in, Clinton wasn't awful...but he wasn't moral either. Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
Hicksey Posted February 18, 2006 Report Posted February 18, 2006 Gore's family warned him to watch out for Clinton. Clinton was interested in one person from day one: himself. Gore suffered from Kim Campbell syndrome. Clinton never ran the country. It was a power struggle between pollsters and his wife. Clinton was interested in plenty of people -- so long as they had a nice round behind, an ample bosom and were willing to screw an old man. What's wrong with this? At least he was entertaining If you're an ordinary joe -- nothing -- so long as your wife approves and you're honest about it when asked under oath. But as the POTUS I think it is assumed one would operate at a higher level of discourse than that. I agree. Look, I don't say Clinton didn't do a lot of great things. But the fact is, the man cheated on his wife and set a terrible example for the country. His "horniness," if you will, ruined his presidency and hurt his legacy. All facts in, Clinton wasn't awful...but he wasn't moral either. Like Chretien's/Martin's Liberals, Clinton didn't really achieve anything in his time. They sat and watched really. Quote "If in passing, you never encounter anything that offends you, you are not living in a free society." - Rt. Hon. Kim Campbell - “In many respects, the government needs fewer rules, but rules that are consistently applied.” - Sheila Fraser, Former Auditor General.
tml12 Posted February 18, 2006 Report Posted February 18, 2006 Liberals and their ilk usually take credit for events that took place out of their control. Clinton was lucky--damn lucky--daddy Bush raised the taxes when he he did... Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
Hicksey Posted February 19, 2006 Report Posted February 19, 2006 Liberals and their ilk usually take credit for events that took place out of their control. Clinton was lucky--damn lucky--daddy Bush raised the taxes when he he did... Between NAFTA and the GST, so did Chretien and Martin. Of course they're claiming credit for something they inherited. Then when they decided killing the debt over a few years wouldn't be fast enough to support their growing ambitions, they looted the provinces to balance the budget. Any idiot can rob Peter to pay Paul. That they run on that record, and that they're proud of downloading their problems to the provinces, is just disgusting to me. Quote "If in passing, you never encounter anything that offends you, you are not living in a free society." - Rt. Hon. Kim Campbell - “In many respects, the government needs fewer rules, but rules that are consistently applied.” - Sheila Fraser, Former Auditor General.
tml12 Posted February 19, 2006 Report Posted February 19, 2006 Liberals and their ilk usually take credit for events that took place out of their control. Clinton was lucky--damn lucky--daddy Bush raised the taxes when he he did... Between NAFTA and the GST, so did Chretien and Martin. Of course they're claiming credit for something they inherited. Then when they decided killing the debt over a few years wouldn't be fast enough to support their growing ambitions, they looted the provinces to balance the budget. Any idiot can rob Peter to pay Paul. That they run on that record, and that they're proud of downloading their problems to the provinces, is just disgusting to me. I love the Liberals... 1993-1997=They use the CONSERVATIVE GST to beat the Conservatives, then break their promise, then balance the budget with it... 1997-2000=Chretien buys the 97 election with sposnorship money. Libs need to fix Quebec ridings to ensure victory against a western-based party, a Quebec-based party, and a party with two seats. 2000-2004=More corruption tax dollars wasted, more budget/healthcare cuts, Romanow report says healthcare funding needs to be restored to the original level if healthcare is to be saved as single tier... ...fast forward to 2006: Martin runs election campaign AGAINST GST cut and as head of a Liberal party who, he says, is the saviour of Medicare... Seems like the Chretien/Martin Liberals destroyed healthcare with the budget cuts while the GST poured money into Ottawa to save it (among other social programs)... Yes, irony is as much a political as it is a literary element... Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
Spike22 Posted February 22, 2006 Report Posted February 22, 2006 Between Gore or Bush who is the loonier one? Quote
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.