Oh, Tampon, Tampon, Tampon,(sp?)
RayGun Ronnie had little if nothing to do with ending the cold war Moral
and Economic bankruptcy (cold war expense and a ten year open war in
Afghanistan when the US actually backed and trained todays terrorist core)
did the trick you try to assign to the Alzhe
Oh, Annointed One, Annointed One, Annointed One...
When Ronald Reagan was elected in 1980, and 1984, he had a mandate from the
People. He ran on a platform of slapping anyone who even looked like a
Sandanista, and I am pretty sure that he went down there personally and
bitch slapped Manuel No
Please name one of Obamas core policies that does not fit the very
definition of a Marxist brand of socialism and we can discuss this
further. Until you can do so Keiths description will have to stand. /
Annointed One
If I may Butt - in on this one, Annointed One
Heath Care without a "publi
pains me to say this BUT the Republican establishment has needed a
good shaking up for a while now. Should be very interesting to see
how this all works out on Election Day. / Cold Water
I'm Independent, forever... but I do tend toward the Left in most
cases.. anyway. as a cautionary not
Cold,
"Yes! Imagine if Reagan had listened to "conventional wisdom"."
There would have been no Iran-Contra problem, Poppies would not be so
prevalent in Afghanistan, the Nicaraguans would have several hundred
thousand more "LIVE" citizens, etc.
Reagan may have been good for the domestic policie
Yes! Imagine if Reagan had listened to "conventional wisdom".
This came to mind after reading your comments today:
The Shining City Upon A Hill
On January 25, 1974
http://www.originofnations.org/books,%20papers/quotes%20etc/Reagan_The%20Shining%20City%20Upon%20A%20Hill%20speech.htm
- Or
*"The demise of the Republican Party as we know it" would be a very good and
Progressive occurance. Yes, it would.*
On 9/15/10, Keith In Tampa wrote:
>
> Hello Cold "Undaunted00" Water!!
>
> I agree. I do think that the Republicans have done some housecleaning,
> (not as much as I had hope
*It was a baiting, insulting, offensive, and officious question. Yes, it
was. *
On 9/15/10, Mark wrote:
>
> Then explain socialized medicine, the governments ownership of the majority
> of car companies, etc.
>
>
> It was a baiting question ONLY if the answer is not obvious and impossible
> to de
Hello Cold "Undaunted00" Water!!
I agree. I do think that the Republicans have done some housecleaning, (not
as much as I had hoped, but there has been some!!) and we are back to the
Reaganesque conservative libertarian policies that made not only our Party,
but our Nation great, and what our N
Then explain socialized medicine, the governments ownership of the majority
of car companies, etc.
It was a baiting question ONLY if the answer is not obvious and impossible
to defend.
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Tommy News wrote:
> *Bad and baiting question.*
> **
> *The answer is none.*
*Sagey, Sage, Sagey.*
**
*I disagree.
*
On 9/15/10, Sage2 wrote:
>
> Tommy! Tommy! Tommy!
>
> You folks haven't learned anything have you ! A republican
> backed by the Tea Party Express won the Senators seat in MA. from a
> crony democrat called Martha Coakley. The main stream republicans
*You could not be more wrong, Dick.*
On 9/15/10, dick thompson wrote:
>
> Surely you jest. The Democrats are the ones who want to take take
> take and all from the productive members of society and give give give to
> the non-productive members and spend spend spend on failed policies like
Tommy! Tommy! Tommy!
You folks haven't learned anything have you ! A republican
backed by the Tea Party Express won the Senators seat in MA. from a
crony democrat called Martha Coakley. The main stream republicans did
not support Scott Brown either with the exception of John McCain.
Again
*Bad and baiting question.*
**
*The answer is none.*
On 9/15/10, THE ANNOINTED ONE wrote:
>
> Tommy,
>
> Please name one of Obamas core policies that does not fit the very
> definition of a Marxist brand of socialism and we can discuss this
> further. Until you can do so Keiths description will
Tommy,
Please name one of Obamas core policies that does not fit the very
definition of a Marxist brand of socialism and we can discuss this
further. Until you can do so Keiths description will have to stand.
On Sep 15, 8:34 am, Tommy News wrote:
> *Democrats are not "Marxists".*
> **
> *Republi
It pains me to say this BUT the Republican establishment has needed a good
shaking up for a while now. Should be very interesting to see how this all
works out on Election Day.
CW
New SKYPE name: Undaunted00
- Original Message -
From: Keith In Tampa
To: politicalforum@googlegroups.
*Democrats are not "Marxists".*
**
*Republicans are self centered. They want a return to the failed Bush
policies, de-tax, de-regulate, take take take and blindly spend spend spend,
which got us into this mess.*
**
*I believe you are wrong, as usual.
*
On 9/15/10, Keith In Tampa wrote:
>
> I woul
O'Connell's GOP opponent voted with the Democrats more than with the
Republicans. He has paid the price. The Republican establishment is
already melting on their claim not to support her in the general
election. Voters are putting principles over party. Both parties
ignore this at their own peril.
I wouldn't count on that seat being in Democratic ("Marxist") hands come
November Tom! It's a brand new world, it's a brand new day, and Americans
have had all they can enjoy of yours and President Obama's "Change".
Clearly, it wasn't "Change That Anyone Believed In"; and as O'Donnell
represents,
19 matches
Mail list logo
