The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Down Range Cafe => Topic started by: CDR on April 12, 2009, 04:00:58 PM
-
Our tax dollars hard at work............. ::)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1168940/Obamas-fly-chef-860-miles-White-House--just-make-pizza.html
-
While I'm unemployed after being let go from a struggling company, he spends my money for this crap. This fellow isn't scoring any points with me, hell I've got to check my bank account to see if I can even afford pizza. >:( But I guess it's not as bad as all the money there spending on 'reset buttons' and Ipods and DVD's for foreigners. No offense foreigners, I just don't want to buy you any DVD's, go buy your own. ;)
-
Look, I know praising Obama on this board isn't the "done" thing. BUT as someone who might have been a chef (or at least a pretty good line cook) if I had made some different career choices, I've got to stand up for the man. (Hell, given my recent unemployment, cooking for a living is a live option, if the restaraunt business wasn't so slammed right now). Food is like art. It only thrives if people appreciate it, and that only happens if there is awareness and people think its "cool". There is reason that the food in a French or Italian truck stop is better than what you get here at home. The reason is that people expect fresh, not canned and can tell the difference. My friends have made fun of me because I spend one Sunday a month making my own beef and chicken stock as opposed to opening a can, but they sure do like my stews and soups and chiles. The thing is that by showing appreciation for American food and good ingredients, he is doing the equvilent of taking high school kids to a jazz concert or a museum, in broadening their horizons from rap and MTV. Michelle is doing the same with her garden. Taking a cue from Alice Waters (a great American chef who desperately needs a Presidential Medal of Freedom for her conributions) she is pointing out that food comes from the groud (not the freezer in super market) and will hopefully encourage folks to support their local farmers and artisans like butchers and bakers as opposed to buying Chinese and Mexican imports from wally world. I for one, am happy to spend a few bucks to help Americans understand the great culinary talent and potential we have.
FQ13 who is a little fanatical about food (not an apology just fair warning) ;D
-
I don't object to a gourmet pizza chef. But when so many are hurting and without a job you'd think the President of the United States would set an example in a certain level of frugality. Even if this was all paid for with his own money, you'd think it's a little over the top at this particular time.
AND
How the heck do you carry pizza dough on an airplane. You think if it was in carry-on, security would be all over it. ("YES SIR, WE BELIEVE YOU. IT'S NOT SOME WEIRD FORM OF C4, JUST PIZZA DOUGH.....R-I-G-H-T. YOU ALWAYS FLY WITH YOUR OWN PIZZA DOUGH???? WHITE HOUSE?? R I I I G H T.") And I can't imagine what the bomb sniffing dogs would do in baggage handling area.
-
IHow the heck do you carry pizza dough on an airplane. You think if it was in carry-on, security would be all over it. ("YES SIR, WE BELIEVE YOU. IT'S NOT SOME WEIRD FORM OF C4, JUST PIZZA DOUGH.....R-I-G-H-T. YOU ALWAYS FLY WITH YOUR OWN PIZZA DOUGH???? WHITE HOUSE?? R I I I G H T.") And I can't imagine what the bomb sniffing dogs would do in baggage handling area.
Sure can. Smacking of lips, bits of drool, canine voice saying "Its all clear boss".
FQ13
-
Well, it was either fly the chef to DC, or do like Klinoon I did and fly to his hairdresser and tie up air traffic on the western seaboard for a couple of hours. So Klintoon II did him one better, fly the awestruck mope to DC.
Sorry, FQ, wrong yet again - there are principles in play yet in this country, and this violates the crap out of a couple. For folks like you, though, this is OK, just Klintoon II trying to get by in his daily life doing what comes natural. Well, that part is right, for a thieving, lying Chicago politician.
Oops, got redundant there . . . .
-
Sorry, FQ, wrong yet again - there are principles in play yet in this country, and this violates the crap out of a couple. For folks like you, though, this is OK, just Klintoon II trying to get by in his daily life doing what comes natural. Well, that part is right, for a thieving, lying Chicago politician.
Oops, got redundant there . . . .
Well why don't you lay those out for us poor benighted souls then Pathfinder? Because the last time I checked the president wasn't just the head of the government, but also the head of state. To put it plainley he is not just the PM, but also the crown (queen if you want to take a cheap shot). In the latter capacity there are a lot of ceremonial duties, everything from state dinners, to the easter egg hunt, to calling the families of KIAs, to promoting the arts. I'm not really sure what "people like me" are other than educated, tolerant, live and let live, patriotic, gun toting, libertarian Christians. If you'd care to fill me in I'd be delighted to hear it.
FQ13, who wonders what he's done wrong now; stops wondering and decides not to give a f..k (sorry M'lette it needed to be said) ;D
-
to calling the families of KIAs,
That doesn't happen.
He also threw his Chicago boys under the bus by getting this guy from St. Louis. ( The are not to happy).
But this is standard politics,; Thank you for getting me here, don;t call us, we'll call you....
He is enjoying the perks that all POTUS have, however he complained about the auto CEO's flying private jets to DC,
but after all this is just pizza,....
-
Yep,
The country is hurting BUT I'm a rock star President so screw you little people, let me show you how to live large!
Now get on with your lives while I figure how much more I'm gonna put you in debt and how high I will raise your taxes to pay for it.
Yep. Obama, a man of the people! ::)
-
to calling the families of KIAs,
That doesn't happen.
He also threw his Chicago boys under the bus by getting this guy from St. Louis. ( The are not to happy).
But this is standard politics,; Thank you for getting me here, don;t call us, we'll call you....
He is enjoying the perks that all POTUS have, however he complained about the auto CEO's flying private jets to DC,
but after all this is just pizza,....
See, now thats a valid critique. I may just be from the South, but you dance with who brung you, and there has got be a Chi town pizza guy as good or better than the one he's bringing in. I also want to make it clear to folks who are getting a bit too personal in their responses (don't worry I can handle it with a smile) that I didn't vote for Obama as much as against the GOP. Agree or disagree you can't say the GOP didn't bring a lot of this on themselves. Also I really am serious about food.Just like we would all love it if Michelle were to take a course at gunsite, because that's our thing, I like the fact that the Pres is supporting American Chefs. There is no greater political agenda than that. I like food, I respect good chefs and I support giving them the respect they are due,period, full stop, end of agenda on this issue.
FQ13
-
Not to mention, this nimrod doesn't even realize that the best pizzeria in the country is in New York City on Spring Street........Lombardi's. The first pizzeria in America, opened in 1905, is still the best. It is exactly as the pizza sold in Naples including sauce made with imported San Marzano tomatoes grown only on Mt. Vesuvius and fresh hand made Buffalo Mozzarella. Instead Obama brings in deep dish pizza from the midwest....... ::) What a tool.
http://www.firstpizza.com/
-
Well why don't you lay those out for us poor benighted souls then Pathfinder? Because the last time I checked the president wasn't just the head of the government, but also the head of state. To put it plainley he is not just the PM, but also the crown (queen if you want to take a cheap shot). In the latter capacity there are a lot of ceremonial duties, everything from state dinners, to the easter egg hunt, to calling the families of KIAs, to promoting the arts. I'm not really sure what "people like me" are other than educated, tolerant, live and let live, patriotic, gun toting, libertarian Christians. If you'd care to fill me in I'd be delighted to hear it.
FQ13, who wonders what he's done wrong now; stops wondering and decides not to give f..k (sorry M'lette it needed to said) ;D
I looked for my comment on the thread that Rastus blessedly closed. It was about "moral equivalists" - you and LSIJ among others here. People like you who believe that everything is all right, nothing is wrong - just another point of view is all, and no more or less valid than my own.
Rubbish!
My comment about "folks like you" are those moral equivalists where there is no right or wrong, just leave me alone and do your own thing. Others have pointed out just how fallacious that thinking is. So it's OK with you if bho pulls stunts like -
- making $2 trillion disappear?
- appointing an untalented lap dog like Holder as AG?
- or even this pizza stunt?
18% of the workforce is out of work (unless you believe the gummint types who patronizingly tell us that it's only 7-8%) and he wastes time and money to fly a guy to DC just so Himself can have a gourmet pizza? You seriously see nothing wrong with this?
Like Aaron Tippin used to sing - if you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything.
I guess being "tolerant" means Tippin is wrong . . .
-
BO has been a self righteous little weasel since at least college, I'll leave the politics of this one to others.
My main comment is that the chicken and hot sauce pizza in the article sounds pretty good ;D
-
I looked for my comment on the thread that Rastus blessedly closed. It was about "moral equivalists" - you and LSIJ among others here. People like you who believe that everything is all right, nothing is wrong - just another point of view is all, and no more or less valid than my own.
Rubbish!
My comment about "folks like you" are those moral equivalists where there is no right or wrong, just leave me alone and do your own thing. Others have pointed out just how fallacious that thinking is. So it's OK with you if bho pulls stunts like -
- making $2 trillion disappear?
- appointing an untalented lap dog like Holder as AG?
- or even this pizza stunt?
18% of the workforce is out of work (unless you believe the gummint types who patronizingly tell us that it's only 7-8%) and he wastes time and money to fly a guy to DC just so Himself can have a gourmet pizza? You seriously see nothing wrong with this?
Like Aaron Tippin used to sing - if you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything.
I guess being "tolerant" means Tippin is wrong . . .
Ahh Pathfinder where to start? The thing is, I am sorely tempted to just flat out flame you, because I think that on this thead and by closing down debate on another YOU MY FRIEND have broken two very important rules. The rules are these
1: Debate is designed to educate. We don't lock horns to just win an argument. We do so to offer the knowledge we have and to learn what our opponent (not enemy) has to teach. We may or may not be convinced by the other sides views, but at least we''l be better informed at the end of the exersize.
2: We don't take it personally. I have said many times on this board that one of he things I like is how we can give each other a bloody nose on the politics thread and then help each other out with a pistol problem. You though, are coming very close to crossing that line. I would hope we can stay friends having a spirited debate but I do have issues with having my honor and values questioned over political choices that I made plain to everyone (repeatedly) on this board.
Now first of all, assuming that "moral equilalists" is even a word, I very much am not one. I am a lbertarian and a Christian. The problem that you and I have is that you see the world in black and white, good and evil. Its true that both exist, the Book (and life) tell us so. It (and life) also tells us that our ability to percieve it is limited. "We see through a glass but darkly". As someone who learned a lot from the Quakers from teaching at a Quaker college I know this. The best of us are tainted with original sin and the worst have that of Christ in them. I also know that the sin of pride is not in Gods top ten list of favorites. This is where you my friend (speaking the truth in love) have a problem. You seem not to have opponents but enemies, those who disagree with you are fools at best and traitors at worst and not to be listened but rather dismissed and ridiculed without even a seconds introspection to ask if you could be wrong. This is the crux of the problem. I have faith. You seem to demand certaintey. Unless you approach the world sayng I believe (and am willing to kill or die) for this, but I could be wrong and can be persuaded, you are no different than he barbarians we fight except that you read a different book than they do. It is that bit of humility, that knowledge that we are always fallible that we have FAITH and proper confidence, but never ceraintey, that distinguishs the patriot from he nationalist and the Christian from the fanatic.
I know I've been a bit harsh, but hey so were you. Lets hope this can be resolved amicably. If not, glocks at 20 paces. ;D
Fighingquaker13
-
FQ, I don't need faith, because I have certainty based on 6,000 years of human action and my God given gift of reason (the gift that, along with free will separates US from the rest of the animals )
1) Debate only serves to educate if both sides have valid arguments, when one side of the debate is composed of wishes and lies (as in the anti gun arguments or the BO campaign) It is the duty of the HONEST debater to show his opponent as a liar and an ass, discredit the lies and humiliate the wishful thinking.
2)We do indeed "take it personally" debate is NEVER about changing the mind of the debaters, it is about convincing the undecided. Just because any of us would be willing to help out any other (even TAB) with a gun question does not mean we are willing to put aside our beliefs. These are part of who and what each of us IS and unlike Quakers who are willing to die for their beliefs, we are prepared to DEFEND ours whether that means dying, killing or offending others.
-
FQ, I don't need faith, because I have certainty based on 6,000 years of human action and my God given gift of reason (the gift that, along with free will separates US from the rest of the animals )
1) Debate only serves to educate if both sides have valid arguments, when one side of the debate is composed of wishes and lies (as in the anti gun arguments or the BO campaign) It is the duty of the HONEST debater to show his opponent as a liar and an ass, discredit the lies and humiliate the wishful thinking.
2)We do indeed "take it personally" debate is NEVER about changing the mind of the debaters, it is about convincing the undecided. Just because any of us would be willing to help out any other (even TAB) with a gun question does not mean we are willing to put aside our beliefs. These are part of who and what each of us IS and unlike Quakers who are willing to die for their beliefs, we are prepared to DEFEND ours whether that means dying, killing or offending others.
Tom
I agree but you're partially (and only partially) wrong here. While public debate is about the undecideds, in groups like these, I like to think that minds can be changed. Hell you convinced me to get a laser (which I'd always considerd a rich boys toy) when I can afford one. My main problem is your assertion that we should show the debater to be "a liar and ass" this is known as argumentum ad hominum (a personal attack) which has nothing to do with the debate. Go after the idea, not the person, and always hope (not assume because then you'd be a fool) that minds can be changed. I know from experience that I have learned a lot from folks who just out debated me. I had to admit they were right and I was wrong and it didn't bother me to do so because I knew that they gave me some wisdom I didn't have before. I used to fence in college (part of the ROTC thing) and I never minded losing a match if it was an ass kicking. The close ones bothered me, but one where I was totally outclassed and could learn was something different. It was sort of like playing the back nine with Tiger, you're not going to win, but if you pay attention you can learn. Anyway, just my .02 Tom and as always trying to make board a fiendlier place when we disagree.
FQ13
-
Tom
I agree but you're partially (and only partially) wrong here. While public debate is about the undecideds, in groups like these, I like to think that minds can be changed. Hell you convinced me to get a laser (which I'd always considerd a rich boys toy) when I can afford one. My main problem is your assertion that we should show the debater to be "a liar and ass" this is known as argumentum ad hominum (a personal attack) which has nothing to do with the debate. Go after the idea, not the person, and always hope (not assume because then you'd be a fool) that minds can be changed. I know from experience that I have learned a lot from folks who just out debated me. I had to admit they were right and I was wrong and it didn't bother me to do so because I knew that they gave me some wisdom I didn't have before. I used to fence in college (part of the ROTC thing) and I never minded losing a match if it was an ass kicking. The close ones bothered me, but one where I was totally outclassed and could learn was something different. It was sort of like playing the back nine with Tiger, you're not going to win, but if you pay attention you can learn. Anyway, just my .02 Tom and as always trying to make board a fiendlier place when we disagree.
FQ13
You skipped an important part of the post.
FQ, I don't need faith, because I have certainty based on 6,000 years of human action and my God given gift of reason (the gift that, along with free will separates US from the rest of the animals )
1) Debate only serves to educate if both sides have valid arguments, when one side of the debate is composed of wishes and lies (as in the anti gun arguments or the BO campaign) It is the duty of the HONEST debater to show his opponent as a liar and an ass, discredit the lies and humiliate the wishful thinking.
2)We do indeed "take it personally" debate is NEVER about changing the mind of the debaters, it is about convincing the undecided. Just because any of us would be willing to help out any other (even TAB) with a gun question does not mean we are willing to put aside our beliefs. These are part of who and what each of us IS and unlike Quakers who are willing to die for their beliefs, we are prepared to DEFEND ours whether that means dying, killing or offending others.
-
Ahh Pathfinder where to start? The thing is, I am sorely tempted to just flat out flame you, because I think that on this thead and by closing down debate on another YOU MY FRIEND have broken two very important rules. The rules are these
1: Debate is designed to educate. We don't lock horns to just win an argument. We do so to offer the knowledge we have and to learn what our opponent (not enemy) has to teach. We may or may not be convinced by the other sides views, but at least we''l be better informed at the end of the exersize.
2: We don't take it personally. I have said many times on this board that one of he things I like is how we can give each other a bloody nose on the politics thread and then help each other out with a pistol problem. You though, are coming very close to crossing that line. I would hope we can stay friends having a spirited debate but I do have issues with having my honor and values questioned over political choices that I made plain to everyone (repeatedly) on this board.
Now first of all, assuming that "moral equilalists" is even a word, I very much am not one. I am a lbertarian and a Christian. The problem that you and I have is that you see the world in black and white, good and evil. Its true that both exist, the Book (and life) tell us so. It (and life) also tells us that our ability to percieve it is limited. "We see through a glass but darkly". ...............
Debate. A modernist idea. Pre-modernism was a Greek creation where they worshiped the idols created with their own hands, being both anti-God and anti-Bible. The Renaissance ls essentially a revival of Greek thought and this is the modernism that has crept into the Western mind. This period of Enlightenment, is an elevation of human reasoning over revelation and we are seeing the fruits of it as we depart from our foundation of Christianity....we are in a post-Christian era in this nation. People claim they are Christian without ever darkening a church door or cracking open a bible, but they know they are Christian because they reason in their minds what God is (which is idolatry, creating a god by their own reasoning, desires, ideas and not a discussion of an interpretation as is so often claimed).
How is it, when denying divinity of the Bible or portions thereof, that one would say he is a Christian? If a Christian's namesake, Jesus Christ, said there is but one path, one Godhead, how can one who claims to be a Christian deny his Namesake's truth when Jesus says that he is the way? According to Christ, there are not many paths "to the great river", but only the straight and narrow. Denial of Christ's truth disqualifies one from calling oneself a Christian, i.e. you are His antithesis.
The cardinal concept of modernism is that man's reasoning is supreme; it trumps the Bible and says there are no absolutes. Certainly modernism says there are no absolutes from God. When in mondernist thinking it becomes time for the enlightened to say, "Let us reason", their agreement of a "standard" is but temporal and worthless based upon the whims of a man or woman's reason. Reason brought us Hitler, Communism and other plaques.
There are absolutes, but they are not manmade.
Hence, I fall to : Timothy and Titus
1 Timothy 1:6
1 Timothy 1:7
2 Timothy 2:16 and finally,
Titus 3:9
Geoff, you had this on your heart, eh?
-
Debate. A modernist idea. Pre-modernism was a Greek creation where they worshiped the idols created with their own hands, being both anti-God and anti-Bible. The Renaissance ls essentially a revival of Greek thought and this is the modernism that has crept into the Western mind. This period of Enlightenment, is an elevation of human reasoning over revelation and we are seeing the fruits of it as we depart from our foundation of Christianity....we are in a post-Christian era in this nation. People claim they are Christian without ever darkening a church door or cracking open a bible, but they know they are Christian because they reason in their minds what God is (which is idolatry, creating a god by their own reasoning, desires, ideas and not a discussion of an interpretation as is so often claimed).
How is it, when denying divinity of the Bible or portions thereof, that one would say he is a Christian? If a Christian's namesake, Jesus Christ, said there is but one path, one Godhead, how can one who claims to be a Christian deny his Namesake's truth when Jesus says that he is the way? According to Christ, there are not many paths "to the great river", but only the straight and narrow. Denial of Christ's truth disqualifies one from calling oneself a Christian, i.e. you are His antithesis.
The cardinal concept of modernism is that man's reasoning is supreme; it trumps the Bible and says there are no absolutes. Certainly modernism says there are no absolutes from God. When in mondernist thinking it becomes time for the enlightened to say, "Let us reason", their agreement of a "standard" is but temporal and worthless based upon the whims of a man or woman's reason. Reason brought us Hitler, Communism and other plaques.
There are absolutes, but they are not manmade.
Hence, I fall to : Timothy and Titus
1 Timothy 1:6
1 Timothy 1:7
2 Timothy 2:16 and finally,
Titus 3:9
Geoff, you had this on your heart, eh?
Among other things, yes. 2 Timothy 4:1-8 as well. A few folks here have itching ears.
Pathfinder, who occasionally goes by the name Geoff, who is still wondering why FQ never addressed any of the points I raised, settling instead for lecture on debate? And who will have to go look up Titus 3:9, not familiar with that one.
-
Among other things, yes. 2 Timothy 4:1-8 as well. A few folks here have itching ears.
.........Titus 3:9, not familiar with that one.
Oh but you are...you reminded me of it just the other day!
-
Another one that applies, 1 Timothy 6:20.
-
Debate. A modernist idea. Pre-modernism was a Greek creation where they worshiped the idols created with their own hands, being both anti-God and anti-Bible. The Renaissance ls essentially a revival of Greek thought and this is the modernism that has crept into the Western mind. This period of Enlightenment, is an elevation of human reasoning over revelation and we are seeing the fruits of it as we depart from our foundation of Christianity....we are in a post-Christian era in this nation. People claim they are Christian without ever darkening a church door or cracking open a bible, but they know they are Christian because they reason in their minds what God is (which is idolatry, creating a god by their own reasoning, desires, ideas and not a discussion of an interpretation as is so often claimed).
How is it, when denying divinity of the Bible or portions thereof, that one would say he is a Christian? If a Christian's namesake, Jesus Christ, said there is but one path, one Godhead, how can one who claims to be a Christian deny his Namesake's truth when Jesus says that he is the way? According to Christ, there are not many paths "to the great river", but only the straight and narrow. Denial of Christ's truth disqualifies one from calling oneself a Christian, i.e. you are His antithesis.
The cardinal concept of modernism is that man's reasoning is supreme; it trumps the Bible and says there are no absolutes. Certainly modernism says there are no absolutes from God. When in mondernist thinking it becomes time for the enlightened to say, "Let us reason", their agreement of a "standard" is but temporal and worthless based upon the whims of a man or woman's reason. Reason brought us Hitler, Communism and other plaques.
There are absolutes, but they are not manmade.
Hence, I fall to : Timothy and Titus
1 Timothy 1:6
1 Timothy 1:7
2 Timothy 2:16 and finally,
Titus 3:9
Geoff, you had this on your heart, eh?
Rasutus and Pathfinder
I thank you for you post, because I now understand you. (Amazing what happens when you don't shut off debate and are man enough to actually listen to your opponent eh? ;)) We are in fundamental disagreement about one of the key debates in western Christianity, and that is the relative emphasis to put on Athens and Jerusalem. I would very much disagree with how you characterize the greek and western view of reason and debate and our inability to understand the divine by just looking at page 460, but your point is clear and valid. You are also far from alone, now and historically. I am assuming that you are a literalist Evangelical. You believe that Scripture is the place to go for all moral quetions (and I agree on this most of the time), but you also take it literrally. I am an Anglican (though with very strong Quaker sympathies). We believe that the Bible is inspired, authoritative and true, but that it was written by authorised witnesses doing their best to record events or revelations as they understood them, not directly by God (like the muslims believe of the Koran). Therefore we believe that we must be guided by the "three legged stool"of scripture, reason and tradition. It doesn't make us any less or more Christian than you, but just very different in our outlook. Now you can say that's WRONG and you're no real Christtian if you don't believe exactly as I do. I would say that I'll let God decide, and that you are suffering from a severe case of the sin of pride. The thing is that we won't know till we're dead, and then He will settle this debate, probably by laughing at both of us.
Fightingquaker13
PS Geoff The reason I didn't respond to your points was that I pretty much agree with you on the stimulus and Holder, everything except the pizza thing. I also know that you've hated Obama since the day he got the nomination, just as I hated W. since he defeated McCain version 1.0 in the GOP primary and that pretty much nothing will change your mind. I disagree, but sometimes you just find a politician you can't stand.
-
The Greek philosophers are pretty useless, we have advanced well past Euclidean geometry and math was the only area their thinking was valid in. Democracy never worked even in their time.
-
.
.
.
I also know that you've hated Obama since the day he got the nomination, ...
Ever get tired of being wrong, FQ?
I do not hate bho. I can't think of anyone I truly hate, no living person anyway.
On the other hand, I know bho, I do not trust him, I believe - and I think I have been proven right, that bho is one of the worst excuses for a president we have yet elected. I do waffle between thinking he is an empty suit controlled by Michelle and Emanuel and others, and the point that he is in fact close to the anti-Christ. He has the makings. In either case, I fear him, and I am seriously concerned for this great experiment in a Constitutional Republic that he is dismantelling. Is he doing it alone? No, of course not, he has lots of help, some of that help even hits double digit IQ on hot days, but he is leading the charge - or is the figurehead. In either case, he is a focal point.
-
All I know is my ass is out of a job, and the noble gentry of this country is doing pizza delivery by jet while I'm just looking for a job. And Obama is just the Jimmy Carter of the 2000's, the people were so fed up with the previous folks they elected this guy. But I'd take a timid peanut farming slow poke over this corrupt Chicago gangster any day. Hopefully the people will do the same and elect another Ronald Reagan after these mobsters, if this country even makes it another four years.
-
The Greek philosophers are pretty useless, we have advanced well past Euclidean geometry and math was the only area their thinking was valid in. Democracy never worked even in their time.
Tom you are right. As far as FQ, PM to you to spare the rest.
-
I hated him since I found out he was a Chicago democrat.
All I know is my ass is out of a job, and the noble gentry of this country is doing pizza delivery by jet while I'm just looking for a job. And Obama is just the Jimmy Carter of the 2000's, the people were so fed up with the previous folks they elected this guy. But I'd take a timid peanut farming slow poke over this corrupt Chicago gangster any day. Hopefully the people will do the same and elect another Ronald Reagan after these mobsters, if this country even makes it another four years.
You speak for me as well, I had OT until he got nominated, and I had a job until he got sworn in.