...and on his farm he blah blah blah, e i e i oh!

(V): (V): "Two Republican politicians have urged people to eat at a US fast food chain, amid a row over gay marriage." ... "So what's the kick back to Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee??"

answer, millions less than the kickback Obama received from the likes of solindra et al

(V): "Two Republican politicians have urged people to eat at a US fast food chain, amid a row over gay marriage." ... "So what's the kick back to Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee??"


Two free Chick Fil A coupons. One for Rick, and one for Mike. The coupons are free for anyone, but it still makes for a nice kick back... they can kick back and enjoy a scrumptious chick fil a sandwich.

(V): Saying something you KNOW isn't the case is lying. Saying something you believe to be the case isn't.

Wise Up

The Col: That wouldn't be a first!!

Artful Dodger: "I know you believe that Iamon lyme and I are one in the same but you can't be further from the truth. You're not even being clever about it."


Now now, alter ego, let's not be too hard on him. I like it when he complains to the moderator when we pretend to be the same person, and then comes back to imply that we are the same person. This guy is a laugh riot, and I really do look forward to his posts.

I'm not just saying that (V), I really really do.

Really...

Do.

Artful Dodger: Not assertions.. fact as shown by various inquiries in the UK. It was claimed that Iraq could attack UK forces in "45 minutes" by Blair in Parliament as one of the major reasons we as a country should attack and invade Iraq. That WAS A LIE.

"You made an incoherent statement regarding my use of the idiom carbon copy."

To you... but my knowledge is different, and in reference to what Russell Brand said regarding "Role Models".

"You're not even being clever about it."

I didn't intended to be.

(V): Assertions about lying aren't proof. neither is "blah blah blah"

You made an incoherent statement regarding my use of the idiom carbon copy. I corrected you. Simple as that.

I know you believe that Iamon lyme and I are one in the same but you can't be further from the truth. You're not even being clever about it.

BTW, proof is not just evidence open to interpretation but something solid, definitive, and just not just a "you say so."

If you have none, then drop it already. Who cares at this point. Isn't that horse dead enough for you?

Artful Dodger:

"The truth:
Did liberals believe that Iraq had WMDs?
YES

No, not in this country.. stereotyping because of US 'liberal' (but not really that liberal generally) is bad.

"Did liberals give their approval to invade Iraq?
YES"

Only because those in decision placement were lied to, they didn't think that Bush and Blair would tell such BIG lies.

"Its informal use simply means: somebody or something that is identical to or very much like somebody or something else."

I extrapolated on the use of the words. I know such a concept is big, but... maybe you and your alter ego could discuss it?

Iamon lyme: "had been there"..... Yes of course there was, The supply of the materials by the USA to Iraq for the purposes of using WMD's on Iranian troops is well documented. So is the reports from the weapons inspectors who said Saddam had gotten rid of them.

"That fact was conveniently ignored" by you.

The Col: And stop winking at me.

The Col: Having trouble following again?

Artful Dodger: If you keep this up, you will be left talking to yourself exclusively , not just half the time

Since they didn't find WMD's in Iraq, Bush lied.

The truth:
Did liberals believe that Iraq had WMDs?
YES

Did liberals give their approval to invade Iraq?
YES

Did conservatives think that Iraq had WMDs?
YES

Did conservatives give their approval to invade Iraq?
YES

Did other countries believe that Iraq had WMDs?
YES

Did Iraq have WMDs and use them on its people?
YES

Was it likely that Saddam was still hiding WMDs?
YES

Did we find any when we went into Iraq?
NO

Was any evidence found that WMDs had existed in Iraq?
YES

Does it follow (logically) that someone lied about WMDs in order to invade Iraq?
NO - That is stupid logic.

- we know Saddam was a liar. And he stonewalled inspectors at every turn. As a buffer in the Middle East, it was in Iraq's interest to keep the world guessing about WMDs. Also it served to keep Iran in check.

Was invading Iraq a mistake (in hindsight)?
Depends on whom you ask.

Are liberals morons for continuing to bring up WMDs?
YES.

Will they ever shut up about it?
NO - You can't fix stupid.

(V): You clearly don't understand the use of the idiom "carbon copy." (you might want to look that big word). Its informal use simply means: somebody or something that is identical to or very much like somebody or something else.

Class dismissed. You really do have bad luck when it comes to thinking.

(V): Yes, but you concluded with "radiation signiture" as though that was the only relevant tool.

You also said "I'm talking about actual intelligence, not the 'WMD' fiasco type".

You mean the "intelligence" that concluded because something wasn't there it was never there? There was plenty of evidence that those weapons had been there, and been there recently. That fact was conveniently ignored. The only mistake Bush made was to telegraph our intentions of taking looking around well in advance. Plenty of time for moving those weapons elsewhere. We actually caught up to a ship containing those weapons. It was reported but apparently underplayed, because no one seemed to think it was important. Maybe it's because by that time it was old news, and the main stream press felt the public was ready for the next new and exciting news story...

Iamon lyme: I said.. and I quote...

"Surely with the technology today regarding satellites, drones and other forms of spying and other 'intelligence' (I'm talking about actual intelligence, not the 'WMD' fiasco type) .....

... Those who can tell, can tell the difference between a nuclear power plant radiation signature and that of a weapon."

It is you who is over simplifying my statement, and not me over "how it's done".

(V): "... Those who can tell, can tell the difference between a nuclear power plant radiation signature and that of a weapon."


You are over simplifying how it's done. Energy signitures are only one tool Old fashioned sleuthing and connecting the dots has always been a part of gathering intelligence

By the way, here is me on my way to work... what intelligence are you able to gather from this surveillance photo?

??? If someone is a carbon copy... then they are a copy of someone's model?

Models aren't real, they are a man-made construct!!

mckinley: When a group of people get told from birth (original or 'born again' ) that certain scripture means 'X', n' that on pain of eternal damnation they must obey
............. manipulation of them is easy.

Frank Herbert's Dune 'reverend mothers' incarnate

The Col: and raises a good point. Even your last statement can be found easily on a Google search. So much for your complaint about an "original thought." Do you even think these things through before you say them?

So I'll ask you again: What follows from your previous statement about Romney not having an original thought?

Or were you just whining again? Quick, someone call the Wambulance! http://thewambulance.com/

Artful Dodger: ahh, the alter ego raises his head

Two Republican politicians have urged people to eat at a US fast food chain, amid a row over gay marriage.

Crowds flocked to outlets in several states after ex-presidential candidates Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee urged supporters of "traditional values" to eat at Chick-fil-A.

Boss Dan Cathy said in July he backed the "biblical definition of a family".

Mr Cathy also told the Baptist Press he thought those who supported gay marriage were "arrogant".

Chick-fil-A restaurants in cities across southern states of the US were reported to be bustling with customers who turned out in support of the chain.

The Houston Chronicle reported branches in Houston, Texas, were packed and another restaurant in Atlanta, Georgia, was said to be so busy two employees were needed to direct traffic in the car park.

Customers posted videos online expressing solidarity with Chick-fil-A, and social media sites including Twitter hummed with contributions to the discussion. One observer, Billy Hallowell, tweeted: "This country is so intriguing... and divided."

The effort on Wednesday was labelled "Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day", in response to criticism directed at the restaurant chain in the wake of Mr Cathy's comments.

"The goal is simple: let's affirm a business that operates on Christian principles and whose executives are willing to take a stand for the godly values we espouse by simply showing up and eating at Chick-fil-A," said Mr Huckabee, a Baptist minister and former governor of the state of Arkansas.

So what's the kick back to Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee??

Iamon lyme: Like Maggie or Bush. I think Obama has more brains then to have another war at the moment. Your military acknowledge that the USA cannot afford logistically to have another war now, or in the future until it pulls out of Afghanistan.

Surely with the technology today regarding satellites, drones and other forms of spying and other 'intelligence' (I'm talking about actual intelligence, not the 'WMD' fiasco type) .....

... Those who can tell, can tell the difference between a nuclear power plant radiation signature and that of a weapon.

I'd hate to see (now that Syria is no longer really a threat) Iran being bombed and that radiation being released into the environment, causing disease, mutation and death (to men, women and children {including unborn.. which I thought were sacred to conservatives}) for years after.

... I don't think Iran has the ability quite frankly to clean up such a mess. We've seen during the later part of the 20th century thousands of children getting leukaemia through 'kids' playing with nuclear 'toys'. That's why we have an agreement not to test nukes above ground.

anyway.. with precision tech the ability to target and kill any launch system is much cleaner. Iran isn't exactly abundant with long range missiles.

By the way, if the Iranian nuclear plant was really just for supplying power, it would have been up and running by now. What they are trying to do goes well beyond simply turning turbines for generating usable power... it's like if you saw a tank in my driveway, and I told you it's just for getting to work and back.

Besides, they don't need a nuclear plant for their power needs. With all of their oil and no self imposed restrictions, they could easily build an oil burning plant for generating electricity.

So with Irans leaders making no bones about how they want to destroy us, it seems to me they are almost begging us to turn their nuclear plant into a giant crater.

And guess what? Iran has already offered itself (its nuclear facility for generating clean affordable electricity) as a target for a military strike... if Obama decides he needs something like that to bolster his numbers. The only thing that could mess up that plan is if Israel beats him to it.

At this point I don't think any amount of spin can help Obama get re-elected. His only hope is to either start a war, or make a significant military strike close to election time.

But I doubt even that would work. He's burned too many people, and not many are curious to see what he might "accomplish" as a lame duck president. Considering everything he was willing to do before a re-election bid, what would he be willing to do if there was nothing to lose in a second term?

The Col: I doubt an original thought has ever passed your lips either. Is there really such a thing as an "original" thought? If you think you've had one, share it with us so I can show you that your "original" thought is really and old idea.

Obama hasn't had an original thought either. So what? What follows from that?

As for this nonsense statement: "...I don't think anyone knows what Romney really thinks or believes, he will basically say whatever that specific audience wants, or what is politically in his best interests"

If you are suggesting that this is unique to Romney, then you are mistaken. MOST politicians are like this. Clinton was a classic example. When playing to the far left wasn't politically expedient, he played to the middle (and accomplished much as a result). Obama plays to the far left all day long. What's different?

You are a walking, talking, liberal spouting talking points machine. Nothing about what you say is original or unique. You're just a carbon copy of a liberal where common sense and critical thinking take a back seat to partisan pontifications. Now I may be a carbon copy of a conservative thinker, but in my case, I'm right. (no pun intended).

The Col: ... Living in Canada you wouldn't know.

(V): I'm sure the munchies were part of the reason for her weight gain, not that I'd know first hand

The Col: Prescribed by her physician J.R. Reynolds!!

(V): Queen Victoria smoked hash from a hookah brought from the colonies?..........I knew it!

The Col: He'd have been more interesting... Queen Victoria would have voted for him, the royal stash was always full!!

(V): I would vote for the H & K Dubya, twice!

The Col: He's nicer in "Harold and Kumar escape from Guantanamo bay"...

.... But in that film he smokes......

The Col: So would I... This concept of politicians having to be squeaky clean is stupid.... They are human...or lizards??

Is that too Douglas Adams???

Iamon lyme: Actually, Dubya was deemed to be the guy most would like to have a beer with, remember? That is a charismatic trait

(V): When you consider the microscope that is placed on politicians these days, the pool is pretty limited to egomaniacs and narcissists.Frankly I would rather vote for a flawed genius instead of an empty suit without a soul

Iamon lyme: "you forgot Ronny, oops, St Ronny, and Dubya"

The democrats thought Dubya was charismatic?

I know that can't be what you meant. Just as I really don't give a rats tail how good someone looks on the cover of GQ if he's the president. No one looks good when they are dragging the country down, no matter how handsome or well spoken. Running for president is not supposed to be a beauty contest, but I'm afraid that's what it's become.

The Col: Joseph Smith... His religion at least seems have been 'blessed' at last by US Christians... Not sure about him though.. Last I heard he was of the Anti-ChRiSt.... A messenger of the devil and all his followers were bound for hell.

Anyone of the Mormon faith was a deluded fool, a Satanist, yada, yada, yada...

... values held gospel are more flexible when it comes to politics. I just wish they'd dump the duplicity.

..... eg, the Tampa Bay lap dancing clubs are gearing up for a quadrupling in custom during the republican conference this year... even to the extent of hiring a well known exotic dancer/porn actress who looks like Sarah Palin.

.... .... mmmmmmm

Iamon lyme: you forgot Ronny, oops, St Ronny, and Dubya

The Col: "The man has charisma to burn, it's one of his main assets"

It was the same with Bill Clinton. Charismatic. What else would anyone want from their president... as well as charm, grace, eloquence, clean, well spoken, regular pedicures, no visible nose hairs, shirt tucked in, strict adherence to what is printed on the teleprompter, basketball skills, putting in long hours on the golf course...

Man, there seems to be no end to presidential attributes.

(V): Many members of the Judeo/Christian groups don't consider Mormon to be a classic "religion" , but will support Romney anyway.That either describes the depth of hate they have for Obama, or an openmindedness rarely on disply otherwise

Iamon lyme: I think Obama can rightfully be called out for a number of things, but not being robotic.The man has charisma to burn, it's one of his main assets

...abou bo bo bo bo bo 'bout Obama.

^o^

Iamon lyme: Gore... Gore.... Gore... Gore... Gore.... Gore...

Get it?

The Col: lol Yeah, there's nothing robotic about Obama.. about Obama... about Obama...

The Col: mmm... I can't say I can agree with that, ever since the UK politicians all adopted a standard code of using their hands that is deemed... less aggressive. I think it's more a case of we get what they think we'll swallow, thus the return of immoral "by the book" expenses when the people of the UK said....

"who do you think you guys are?"

"I don't think anyone knows what Romney really thinks or believes, he will basically say whatever that specific audience wants...."

It has been noted by certain commentators that is the case to a degree with all parties. One did state it would interesting to see an atheist be President, yet being from the Judeo/Christian seems to a pre condition... an instant 'appeal' to 70%+ of Americans. That the Republican message is sermoned at churches as God's message.. well.

One day... a moral atheist not bound by 'the people of the book' will get to be Pres... I doubt though in my lifetime.