Liberal Forum

Given that you claimed, among many comical false claims, that spending was lowest under of Obama than any other modern president, you're obviously completely full of crap. Under Obama, annualized federal spending growth slowest in decades. A blatant lie that even Obama-fawning journalists refused to accept. Save your swill for other moonbats. I repeat, TARP was a one-time spending event. Your source dishonestly pretends otherwise. Obama and Dems boosted spending to roughly 25% of GDP and have fought to maintain every penny. Your silly propaganda is worthless. How many babies starved under Saddam Hussein? Why don't you have pictures of them? How many innocent Iraqis were butchered under him? He was directly responsible for the deaths of roughly 1 million Iraqis. You stupidly claimed that Iraqis were better off under that mass murderer than under freedom now. What an utter hack you are. So, IOW you're saying that you're okay with the use of depleted uranium and white phosphorus by the Bush administration, and the ensuing results on children? Saddam was a bad man, so that makes it okay in your eyes. I'm saying in the real world, there is a choice between evil and relative good. Saving 17 million Iraqis was a huge, if relative, good despite having to use depleted uranium, which has little health hazard. Your source is blatantly anti-American, anti-science Propaganda. Dishonest moonbats like you pretend Iraqis were better off under Saddam Hussein.

I'm saying in the real world, there is a choice between evil and relative good. Saving 17 million Iraqis was a huge, if relative, good despite having to use depleted uranium, which has little health hazard.Really, Puss? White phosphorous and depleted uranium have little health hazard?Is there anything you won't lie about?The effects have been well documented.I won't bother to post any more graphic images.They are fully available to those interested in the truth.I'm going to need to decontaminate this thread now to get rid of your filthy lying stench.

I'm watching the country roar toward national bankruptcy. One astute financial adviser I recently talked to expects a depression by around 2016. His clients are almost uniformly "terrified," no exaggeration. I'm watching Obama and Democrats ruin it politically forever. Why should I be mellow about that? Because there's nothing to be done--things are bad all over. It's time to learn to stop worrying and love the debt, my friend.

Because there's nothing to be done--things are bad all over. It's time to learn to stop worrying and love the debt, my friend.It took me all of one day to remember just what an annoying little POS Clem really is.It looks like the energy level of his manic episodes has increased exponentially.

Really, Puss? White phosphorous and depleted uranium have little health hazard? Is there anything you won't lie about? The effects have been well documented. I won't bother to post any more graphic images. They are fully available to those interested in the truth. I'm going to need to decontaminate this thread now to get rid of your filthy lying stench. I didn't write one single word about phosporous, liar. But yes, depleted uranium presents a minimal health hazard. Especially compared to a genocidal, war-starting, torturing, raping dictator. Tell everyone again how the Iraqi people were better off under Saddam Hussein. That's just so hilarious. Why don't you go de-contaminate yourself? Here's a little about the supposed risk from uranium. Several studies using cultured cells and laboratory rodents suggest the possibility of...... Wow! Several studies! "The possibility of..." Powerful science you have there, moonbat. It took me all of one day to remember just what an annoying little POS Clem really is. It looks like the energy level of his manic episodes has increased exponentially. What kind of psychotic would claim that 7 million Iraqis would be better off living under Saddam Hussein? Speaking of living in a parallel universe.

Are you honest enoughGonna stop ya RIGHT THERE and remind ya that you're talking to Glory Hole Clem. Tell everyone again how the Iraqi people were better off under Saddam Hussein. That's just so hilarious.Yes, nothing funnier, you retard, than the CIA putting a monster like saddaam over the iraqis, and then coming back under the pretext of "freeing them" from a CIA asset, and wreaking even greater havoc."Hilarious."You're a real sick little bathroom troll, Glory Hole. "U.S. forces in Baghdad might now be searching high and low for Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, but in the past Saddam was seen by U.S. intelligence services as a bulwark of anti-communism and they used him as their instrument for more than 40 years, according to former U.S. intelligence diplomats and intelligence officials."More... http://www.informati...article2849.htm

Tell everyone again how the Iraqi people were better off under Saddam Hussein. That's just so hilarious. Yes, nothing funnier, you retard, than..... Hey, way to ignore my point about Little Miss Marxist's lunacy. Nice job at once again avoiding reality! the CIA putting a monster like saddaam over the iraqis Not to bother you with actual facts, but they didn't do that. Any other fake history you'd like to offer? You're a real sick little bathroom troll, Glory Hole. Yes, everyone with common sense knows what a foul-mouthed psychotic you are.

And then, too, the pretense that we invaded Iraq to "free the iraqi people" is a claim that not one heterosexual male on earth would ever make. The ludicrousness of the My Little Pony explanation is too effeminate, too entirely lacking in manhood, too attached to childish and romantic notions for a man with a sac to ever utter. It is ONLY because Clem is a closet gay and a rest area troll that we are even diverted into a side argument about whether Saddam or the broken and ravaged torture pit we gave them were qualitatively "better" or "worse." It's like comparing cancer and emphesyma - something you would only find yourself arguing about if you converse with *** like Glory Hole. You're right. I am a gayboy liar. Edited for brevity, pig. Nice way to ignore the links and video I provided.

And then, too, the pretense that we invaded Iraq to "free the iraqi people" is a claim that not one heterosexual male on earth would ever make. The ludicrousness of the My Little Pony explanation is too effeminate, too entirely lacking in manhood, too attached to childish and romantic notions for a man with a sac to ever utter. It is ONLY because Clem is a closet gay and a rest area troll that we are even diverted into a side argument about whether Saddam or the broken and ravaged torture pit we gave them were qualitatively "better" or "worse." It's like comparing cancer and emphesyma - something you would only find yourself arguing about if you converse with *** like Glory Hole. Edited for brevity, pig. Nice way to ignore the links and video I provided. Contrary to your claim, the CIA didn't put Saddam Hussein into power. We did steal him out of the Soviet orbit and used him as a counter-weight against Iran, which any responsible president would have done. As usual, you show your utter lack of integrity at admitting your mistake. and your usual foul-mouthed bulls***.

Contrary to your claim, the CIA didn't put Saddam Hussein into power. We did steal him out of the Soviet orbit and used him as a counter-weight against Iran, which any responsible president would have done.As usual, you show your utter lack of integrity at admitting your mistake. and your usual foul-mouthed bulls***.Where did he get the biological weapons that we later used as a pretext for invasion, spewtard?

And then, too, the pretense that we invaded Iraq to "free the iraqi people" is a claim that not one heterosexual male on earth would ever make. The ludicrousness of the My Little Pony explanation is too effeminate, too entirely lacking in manhood, too attached to childish and romantic notions for a man with a sac to ever utter. In all fairness, what do they have left? The WMD fairy tale went out the window, didn't it? 8/26/02-Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction....Dick Cheney 9/12/02-Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons....George W. Bush 1/09/03-We know for a fact that there are weapons there......Ari Fleischer 1/28/03-In State of the Union, Bush says "the 16 words": "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." Bush adds Saddam has "tried to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production" and has "mobile biological weapons labs." 2/08/03-In radio address to the nation, Bush warns that "firsthand witnesses [read: Curveball] have informed us that Iraq has at least seven mobile factories" for germ warfare. 3/16/03-Cheney on Meet the Press: "We believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." 3/30/03-We know where they are. They are in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad......Donald Rumsfeld

In all fairness, what do they have left? Admit the obvious, i.e. that they made a mistake, and promise to be less sanguine about foreign military ventures in the future.

Admit the obvious, i.e. that they made a mistake, and promise to be less sanguine about foreign military ventures in the future.Yeah....okay.It's not like the same people are talking about bombing Iran or anything.ROFLMFAO

Obama Withdraws Caitlin Halligan's Nomination To D.C. Circuit CourtThe White House officially withdrew President Barack Obama's nomination of Caitlin Halligan to serve on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. A statement issued on Friday comes after repeated attempts to confirm the former New York state solicitor general were filibustered by Senate Republicans.In a statement, Obama said he was "deeply disappointed" that a minority of senators had blocked Halligan's nomination for almost two and a half years, and called the vacancies on what is arguably the country's second-highest federal court "unacceptable.""Today, I accepted Caitlin Halligan's request to withdraw as a nominee for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit," Obama said in an emailed statement. "This unjustified filibuster obstructed the majority of Senators from expressing their support. I am confident that with Caitlin's impressive qualifications and reputation, she would have served with distinction."Republicans objected to Halligan's nomination because of what they claim is her history of legal advocacy, having focused specifically on a lawsuit in which she participated that would make gun manufacturers legally accountable for criminal acts of gun violence.The most recent GOP filibuster incidentally came on the same day that Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) gained national media attention for his 13-hour talking filibuster. Democrats fell short of the required 60-vote threshold to end debate and bring Halligan's nomination to a vote, with only Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) breaking from her party in support of invoking cloture. Halligan was nominated on Sept. 29, 2010, to replace current Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts; her nomination was first filibustered in 2011.Shortly after the vote, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Halligan would "bring that activism to the court.""Because of her record of activism, giving Ms. Halligan a lifetime appointment on the D.C. Circuit is a bridge too far," McConnell said.Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) called it a "shame" that Republicans had succeeded in blocking an "extraordinarily well-qualified" woman, who he said would've made an "outstanding judge.""Caitlin Halligan is a woman who is extraordinarily well-qualified and amongst the most qualified judicial nominees I have seen from any administration," Leahy said in a statement. "It is a shame that narrow, special interests hold such influence that Senate Republicans for two years blocked an up-or-down vote on her confirmation."MOREDemocrats said that Republicans were interested mainly in stalling any appointments by President Obama to the influential court, which reviews many critical cases on government powers. They said that Republicans could not point to a single case of judicial activism on Ms. Halligans part, and that during her time as solicitor general, she was simply doing her job and acting in the interests of the State of New York.I challenge the other side to give me one instance where they disagree with something that Ms. Halligan stated as her own views as opposed to representing someone as a lawyer should, Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, the No. 3 Democrat, said on the Senate floor. Whats going on is our colleagues want to keep the second-most important court in the land, the D.C. Circuit, vacant, because right now there are four vacancies and the majority of those on the court have been appointees of Republican presidents and, in fact, are very conservative.http://www.nytimes.c...ligan.html?_r=0The D.C. Circuit is considered the nation's second-highest court, but it now has more vacancies than any other circuit court.Gone are the days when Republicans ran around insisting on an 'up or down vote' for one of George W. Bush's judicial nominees.Remember the 'Gang Of 14'?Only five members of the original Gang of 14 remain in the Senate — three Republicans, Susan Collins of Maine, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and John McCain of Arizona, and two Democrats, Mary L. Landrieu of Louisiana and Mark Pryor of Arkansas — and the three Republicans all voted against allowing a vote on Ms. Halligan.Hypocrites.

Standard.

The D.C. Circuit is considered the nation's second-highest court, but it now has more vacancies than any other circuit court. Gone are the days when Republicans ran around insisting on an 'up or down vote' for one of George W. Bush's judicial nominees. It's called politics, and the Democrats should learn from all this, instead of stupidly trying to reform the Filibuster system. They didn'thave to confirm the nominations of both Roberts (who is at least interesting in a scary villain sort of way) and Alito (who's simply an [butt opening]). Also, regarding this Halligan thing: you're going to get filibusters on the basis of gun-nut-enthusiasm when you try to legislate gun-control reforms.

Also, regarding this Halligan thing: you're going to get filibusters on the basis of gun-nut-enthusiasm when you try to legislate gun-control reforms.I agree with you, and I'm sure that the NRA was lobbying hard against her nomination, but as far as the lawsuit that would have made gun manufacturers legally accountable for criminal acts of gun violence, she was simply doing her job as solicitor general and acting in the interests of the State of New York.Isn't it funny that in 2005 Congress enacted a law, under heavy lobbying from the NRA and the gun industry, that gives gun manufacturers and dealers broad immunity from being sued?Which other industry enjoys such an immunity?

The NRA and its members, without many exceptions, are insane.

Isn't it funny that in 2005 Congress enacted a law, under heavy lobbying from the NRA and the gun industry, that gives gun manufacturers and dealers broad immunity from being sued? Which other industry enjoys such an immunity? Nothing unusual about it at all. It is appropriate under the Commerce Clause that manufacturers be protected from lawsuit harassment from politically corrupt politicians and trial lawyers. Who were intending to sue the gun industry for crimes committed by individuals, for which the industry had no culpability whatsoever. The WMD fairy tale went out the window, didn't it? "Fairy tale?" Obama's top intelligence adviser has said Syria holds WMDs made in Iraq. Why does Obama have someone who believes "fairy tales" in such an important position? Go ahead, tell your usual blatant lies. 8/26/02-Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction....Dick Cheney 9/12/02-Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons....George W. Bush 1/09/03-We know for a fact that there are weapons there......Ari Fleischer Gosh, why aren't you quoting Clinton, Hillary Clinton and all the top Democrats who said similar? Because you're a deceitful partisan hack. 1/28/03-In State of the Union, Bush says "the 16 words": "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." Bush adds Saddam has "tried to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production" and has "mobile biological weapons labs." The British report was true, moonbat. And it was the French who insisted that the aluminum tubes were meant for centrifuges. There was a heated debate about that, with US intelligence officials on both sides. How typically dishonest of you that you'd claim that Bush lied.