Obama, Bush, Clinton to travel to Sou...
First Prev
of 3
Next Last
LIbEralS

Minneapolis, MN

#53 Dec 16, 2013
redeemer wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't change facts are history !
Then stop trying.
redeemer

Saint Paul, MN

#54 Dec 16, 2013
LIbEralS wrote:
<quoted text>
Then stop trying.
And you stop tying!
Laura

Minneapolis, MN

#55 Dec 16, 2013
Furthermore Sadam Hussain claimed he had WMD, and Sadam could have been Obama's brother-in-law.
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#56 Dec 16, 2013
Laura wrote:
FYI,
CIA claimed Iraq had WMD.
Russia claimed Iraq had WMD.
Congress supported an Iraq invasion.
Everyone in the USA incuding Seantor Barrak Obama supprted the invasion of Iraq and Afghanstan AND the Afghanistan SURGE.
Candidate Obama PROMISED to pul the USA from Iraq and Afghanistan
To blame Bush for Obama's broken promises is just phocking stupid!!
I opposed Bush's invasion of Iraq AND Afghanistan BUT supported Obama's call to get out of both he11 wholes. So what does Obama do?
Obama stays the course and continues Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
He CLEARLY LIED, and MILLIONS HAVE DIED under Obama's watch.
What don't you get.. To blame Bush because Obama lied is very ignorant and just phocking dumb.
No, you are not told the "official" CIA story. I don't buy for a moment that all the people in the CIA are so stupid as to think Iraq had WMDs. They didn't and everybody knew it. There were inspectors on the grounds in Iraq, inspecting everywhere and they properly reported there were no WMDs. They went back and looked again and again, no weapons. But bush knew better. bush wanted war and was willing to lie to congress to get it.

Starting the wars is bush's fault and he should go to prison for it.

Now, as to Obama. He also lied as he said he would end those wars promptly. He didn't. We still have troops on the ground, getting shot at, shooting back. It is proper to hold that against him. Obama refused to even begin an investigation into the rampant criminality of the bush administration. It is proper to hold that against him as well.

Let's agree that we hold bush responsible for bush's actions, and hold Obama responsible for Obama's actions. Neither are worth supporting.

Finally, someone willing to actually criticize Obama for what he has done, instead of the fantasy nonsense from Fox News.
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#57 Dec 16, 2013
LIbEralS wrote:
<quoted text>
After FIVE YEARS it is still about BUSH? I think not...
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Laura

Minneapolis, MN

#58 Dec 16, 2013
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you are not told the "official" CIA story. I don't buy for a moment that all the people in the CIA are so stupid as to think Iraq had WMDs. They didn't and everybody knew it. There were inspectors on the grounds in Iraq, inspecting everywhere and they properly reported there were no WMDs. They went back and looked again and again, no weapons. But bush knew better. bush wanted war and was willing to lie to congress to get it.
Starting the wars is bush's fault and he should go to prison for it.
Now, as to Obama. He also lied as he said he would end those wars promptly. He didn't. We still have troops on the ground, getting shot at, shooting back. It is proper to hold that against him. Obama refused to even begin an investigation into the rampant criminality of the bush administration. It is proper to hold that against him as well.
Let's agree that we hold bush responsible for bush's actions, and hold Obama responsible for Obama's actions. Neither are worth supporting.
Finally, someone willing to actually criticize Obama for what he has done, instead of the fantasy nonsense from Fox News.
We can beat around the Bush all we want but when GW was president he took the heat for invading Iraq and now Obama IS president and he can take the heat for not getting us out.

Again: Russia, CIA, Sadam, other countries in the area ALL thought Sadam had WMD. Furthermore Democrats agreed to invade Iraq and Afghanistan as a result of the emotions following 911 and the WTC being destroyed.

As Move on would have it the current president is Barrak Obama NOT GW Bush. Let's work on consistancy and BLAME the current president for his/her actions.

As fara as the CIA goes, they were given the Boston bomber on a silver platter by Russia for Chris's sake and we watched the marathon turn into a blood bath, under Obama's watch BTW. Let's not forget Obama IS the forgiving president who thinks loveing our enemies will turn them into our friends, much like peanut salesman Carter.
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#59 Dec 16, 2013
Laura wrote:
<quoted text>
We can beat around the Bush all we want but when GW was president he took the heat for invading Iraq and now Obama IS president and he can take the heat for not getting us out.
Again: Russia, CIA, Sadam, other countries in the area ALL thought Sadam had WMD. Furthermore Democrats agreed to invade Iraq and Afghanistan as a result of the emotions following 911 and the WTC being destroyed.
As Move on would have it the current president is Barrak Obama NOT GW Bush. Let's work on consistancy and BLAME the current president for his/her actions.
As fara as the CIA goes, they were given the Boston bomber on a silver platter by Russia for Chris's sake and we watched the marathon turn into a blood bath, under Obama's watch BTW. Let's not forget Obama IS the forgiving president who thinks loveing our enemies will turn them into our friends, much like peanut salesman Carter.
bush took heat?? When was that? I must have missed it. He did whatever he wanted, He was not constrained by the law and he should have been sent to prison for life. I will always hold it against Pelosi that she said oversight of bush was off the table, no matter how many laws he broke.

Yes, let's hold Obama responsible for not ending the wars based on lies.

We will have to disagree about who knew what. Obviously, since they did not have any WMDs, your so called sources were wrong. Everyone knew Saddam did not have weapons. He only said he did because he was at war with Iran, and didn't want to invite an invasion. The inspectors proved to everyone there were no weapons. Saying somebody knew it, when it wasn't true, is simply to rewrite history to make excuses for bush.

Why did the democrats vote for bush's wars based on lies? I can't speak for them but I can speculate. Perhaps they bought bush's lies (I didn't). Perhaps they got kickbacks from the military industrial complex, perhaps they were threatened, like the Anthrax after 9/11. That is one reason I have a hard time voting for any democrat.

I don't believe the CIA makes public reports where they outline exactly all of their informants. They publish PR, nothing more.

As to Carter, he may not have been a very good president, but he was better by far than anyone who came after.
redeemer

Saint Paul, MN

#60 Dec 16, 2013
Laura wrote:
Furthermore Sadam Hussain claimed he had WMD, and Sadam could have been Obama's brother-in-law.
How did you fall through the educational safety net? Saddam is spell with D's. and how could Saddam have been Obama brother? please explain yourself?
liberal destruction

Saint Paul, MN

#61 Dec 17, 2013
redeemed wrote:
<quoted text>
Excellent Post, remember 911 MUSLIMS tried to destroy America not Christians. How could any American vote for someone named ( Barack Hussein Obama II ) think about it America - he is a muslim, no friend of Israel.
great post thanks for sharing
Laura

Minneapolis, MN

#62 Dec 17, 2013
redeemer wrote:
<quoted text>
How did you fall through the educational safety net? Saddam is spell with D's. and how could Saddam have been Obama brother? please explain yourself?
How did you fall through the educational safety net?

Sadam's last name is Hussain and Obama's middle name IS Hussain, get the drift?

You really are black, your IQ shows.
redeemer

Saint Paul, MN

#63 Dec 17, 2013
Laura wrote:
<quoted text>
How did you fall through the educational safety net?
Sadam's last name is Hussain and Obama's middle name IS Hussain, get the drift?
You really are black, your IQ shows.
Every woman that have a middle name ann does that make them sisters and why are you going all racial on me just because I corrected you on spelling Saddam name? and whats wrong with the name Hussain especially since this is a African topic.
And what about your babies daddies their blacker then me.

Once you go black you won't go backkk !

The sweeter the berry sweeter the juice!
redeemer

Saint Paul, MN

#64 Dec 18, 2013
Laura wrote:
Furthermore Sadam Hussain claimed he had WMD, and Sadam could have been Obama's brother-in-law.
could have been brother-in-law, with a muslim name like ( Barack Hussein Obama II ) nice Christian name ( NOT )! you know he is related.
redeemer

Saint Paul, MN

#65 Dec 18, 2013
As to Carter, he may not have been a very good president, but he was better by far than anyone who came after.

listen to this liberal bleeding heart socialist muslim lover, carter, did she say carter jim carter was the worst president, when President Regan crushed the peanut boy, the only state that he did not win was good OLD liberal mn, and just about lost as well, with out the red nose drunk walter who am I Mondale.

__________ the left is wrong again !
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
bush took heat?? When was that? I must have missed it. He did whatever he wanted, He was not constrained by the law and he should have been sent to prison for life. I will always hold it against Pelosi that she said oversight of bush was off the table, no matter how many laws he broke.
Yes, let's hold Obama responsible for not ending the wars based on lies.
We will have to disagree about who knew what. Obviously, since they did not have any WMDs, your so called sources were wrong. Everyone knew Saddam did not have weapons. He only said he did because he was at war with Iran, and didn't want to invite an invasion. The inspectors proved to everyone there were no weapons. Saying somebody knew it, when it wasn't true, is simply to rewrite history to make excuses for bush.
Why did the democrats vote for bush's wars based on lies? I can't speak for them but I can speculate. Perhaps they bought bush's lies (I didn't). Perhaps they got kickbacks from the military industrial complex, perhaps they were threatened, like the Anthrax after 9/11. That is one reason I have a hard time voting for any democrat.
I don't believe the CIA makes public reports where they outline exactly all of their informants. They publish PR, nothing more.
As to Carter, he may not have been a very good president, but he was better by far than anyone who came after.
Laura

Minneapolis, MN

#66 Dec 18, 2013
redeemer wrote:
<quoted text>
could have been brother-in-law, with a muslim name like ( Barack Hussein Obama II ) nice Christian name ( NOT )! you know he is related.
Obama said "Trayvon Martin could be HIS SON". And they don't even share names.
redeemer

Saint Paul, MN

#67 Dec 18, 2013
redeemer wrote:
As to Carter, he may not have been a very good president, but he was better by far than anyone who came after.
listen to this liberal bleeding heart socialist muslim lover, carter, did she say carter jim carter was the worst president, when President Regan crushed the peanut boy, the only state that he did not win was good OLD liberal mn, and just about lost as well, with out the red nose drunk walter who am I Mondale.
__________ the left is wrong again !
<quoted text>
You must be a wannabe mrs.redeemer since you love and admire me so much hahaha do you have a facebook page? would you like to meet a real man girl?Pretty girls have pretty curls but I like oreo's.
redeemer

Saint Paul, MN

#68 Dec 18, 2013
Laura wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama said "Trayvon Martin could be HIS SON". And they don't even share names.
That's a misquote liar and you know it but since your a fraud and a loney guy in drag and a republican lapdog I can understand your mental handicap and may I suggest that you commit yourself to the State mental hospital so that you can be near your peers retard.

Oh before I forget President Obama said that Trayvon Martin COULD HAVE been his son
deception is a lot easier then the awful truth fraud.
redeemer

Saint Paul, MN

#69 Dec 18, 2013
redeemer wrote:
As to Carter, he may not have been a very good president, but he was better by far than anyone who came after.
listen to this liberal bleeding heart socialist muslim lover, carter, did she say carter jim carter was the worst president, when President Regan crushed the peanut boy, the only state that he did not win was good OLD liberal mn, and just about lost as well, with out the red nose drunk walter who am I Mondale.
__________ the left is wrong again !
<quoted text>
Reagan not Regan was a vegetable when he was in office(carrot)
and Carter was betrayed by Reagan who also betrayed the USA by giving Iran jet parts
and arms so that the American hostages could be release on the day he took office.
And Fritz lost to Reagan because the Blacks in the democrat base did not support him
because of the way he mistreat Jesse Jackson and that was my idea and I really liked Fritz
he was my hometown guy and he was a upstart from HHH.
And I still kind of feel bad about how we did Mondale because I knew he did have a decent civil right record here in Minnesota and in the senate and as the VP but he got arrogant and thought that Blacks fear Reagan so much that we had to vote for him.
And even thought the rainbow (Jackson) lose we won because we won the Congress and we got out MLK Holiday for ever that's my work phony me.
Khonswaylow

Englewood, CO

#70 Dec 18, 2013
Laura wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama said "Trayvon Martin could be HIS SON". And they don't even share names.
When everyone looks alike it's hard for tribal members to remember who they had sex with.
redeemer

Saint Paul, MN

#71 Dec 20, 2013
Congrats Kanye and minister Louis F. for supporting Kanye for telling the truth about our history and the Jews history and for telling telling rabbi Foxmen to stick his anti-semetic BS to himself.

Oh well back to our xmas party I go.
redeemer

Minneapolis, MN

#72 Dec 20, 2013
redeemer wrote:
Congrats Kanye and minister Louis F. for supporting Kanye for telling the truth about our history and the Jews history and for telling telling rabbi Foxmen to stick his anti-semetic BS to himself.
Oh well back to our xmas party I go.
Hey fake redeemer, you're so full of BS so it's ok with you for Jews to be discrimiated against who do you think that you are coward? and why aren't you at your company Xmas party loser huh is because you don't a company to go too you welfare broke loser.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Minneapolis Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Im getting drunk 10 min Davycrockett 4
Another st.paul murder 1 hr USA now 3rd world 13
Lancaster Brand Turkey is a RIPOFF (Nov '11) 6 hr Edward Thomas 9
CBS, PBS star Charlie Rose suspended after sexu... 14 hr USA now 3rd world 16
Will This Finish Off The NFL? Wed cadescove99 36
Trump on UCLA basketball players: 'I should hav... Tue Cat Fan 5
Review: Crestview Property Maintenance Tue Bobtheman 1

Minneapolis Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Minneapolis Mortgages