For GOP only

[Texsox]

To this day I blame the Katrina disaster on the crooked ass, idiocit politicians of Louisiana. Bush could have done a better job but he was the man who got blamed for the local/state politicians being dumb as stone. And in some instances Bush was ready to do things and the local/state people were not ready to make immediate decisions and stalled (which again led to delays in the relief effort).

 

The whole thing was one big fiasco, but than again I say rebuilding an area that can be absolutely destroyed again (especially with the area being so vulnerable with broken levy's everywhere) is stupid as hell. Of course we needed to do something and my idea would have been scoffed at by everyone in New Orleans.

 

Yeah, too bad Bush couldn't overcome "crooked ass, idiotic politicians of Louisiana" and lead. If the President of the United States gets sidetracked by "crooked ass, idiotic politicians of Louisiana" then he isn't much of a leader. Do you seriously believe that Reagan would have allowed "crooked ass, idiotic politicians of Louisiana" to stop him?

 

But, taking your position then, you must give credit to the honest, intelligent politicians of New York instead of Bush for the response to 9/11. And that makes sense. I always wondered how he could have been so great at one, and sucked so bad at the other.

[Balta1701]

But, taking your position then, you must give credit to the honest, intelligent politicians of New York instead of Bush for the response to 9/11. And that makes sense. I always wondered how he could have been so great at one, and sucked so bad at the other.

I caught a replay of the first Saturday Night Live after the attacks a few months ago. Giuliani introducing Bernie Kerik as the head of the NYPD, standing next to him. I couldn't help but laugh.

[mr_genius]

I caught a replay of the first Saturday Night Live after the attacks a few months ago. Giuliani introducing Bernie Kerik as the head of the NYPD, standing next to him. I couldn't help but laugh.

 

 

dude, this is a GOP only thread

 

Edited November 9, 2006 by mr_genius

[Balta1701]

dude, this is a GOP only thread

 

Hey, I waited what, nearly a year before I got to 2 posts in this thread?

 

The way I figure it, now its the Democrats turn to become obnoxious, corrupt, out-of-touch pork-mongers, so I might as well get my feet wet in here.

[mr_genius]

Hey, I waited what, nearly a year before I got to 2 posts in this thread?

 

The way I figure it, now its the Democrats turn to become obnoxious, corrupt, out-of-touch pork-mongers, so I might as well get my feet wet in here.

 

 

 

sore winner

[Balta1701]

 

sore winner

Seriously, I'm not bragging. Barring legitimate campaign finance reform to the extent that all money is thrown out of politics, I give it about 6-8 years before the Dems are corrupt enough that they deserve to be thrown out, assuming they aren't beaten out of it beforehand. That's just how our system is built. People try to go into it with the best intentions, and there's just so much money being tossed around that within a few years, people start taking and taking and taking and taking.

 

Speaking of which, what happened to Rep. "Money in the Fridge" Jefferson? Ah, runoff election.

Edited November 9, 2006 by Balta1701

[mr_genius]

Speaking of which, what happened to Rep. "Money in the Fridge" Jefferson?

 

 

actually, i've never heard of him before.

[southsideirish71]

Seriously, I'm not bragging. Barring legitimate campaign finance reform to the extent that all money is thrown out of politics, I give it about 6-8 years before the Dems are corrupt enough that they deserve to be thrown out, assuming they aren't beaten out of it beforehand. That's just how our system is built. People try to go into it with the best intentions, and there's just so much money being tossed around that within a few years, people start taking and taking and taking and taking.

 

Speaking of which, what happened to Rep. "Money in the Fridge" Jefferson? Ah, runoff election.

 

 

I think they wont be able to control themselves.

 

They will put Conyers in a position that will allow him to move forward with articles of impeachment. He has been working on mock proceedings for years now, what in the name of god do you think he will do when he gets a chance.

 

I am just waiting for when they start to tax the living crap out of everything.

 

I love it how democratic strategists are on TV trying to paint Pelosi as a centrist. I have even seen some posters in Fillibuster try to do the same. If she is a centrist, Bush is a liberal.

[ptatc]

Yeah, too bad Bush couldn't overcome "crooked ass, idiotic politicians of Louisiana" and lead. If the President of the United States gets sidetracked by "crooked ass, idiotic politicians of Louisiana" then he isn't much of a leader. Do you seriously believe that Reagan would have allowed "crooked ass, idiotic politicians of Louisiana" to stop him?

But, taking your position then, you must give credit to the honest, intelligent politicians of New York instead of Bush for the response to 9/11. And that makes sense. I always wondered how he could have been so great at one, and sucked so bad at the other.

 

This was a matter for the legal system. legally the Federal Government couldn't do anything until the State governemnt declared the disaster and asked for help. This is where the delay occurred.

 

I think they wont be able to control themselves.

 

They will put Conyers in a position that will allow him to move forward with articles of impeachment. He has been working on mock proceedings for years now, what in the name of god do you think he will do when he gets a chance.

 

I am just waiting for when they start to tax the living crap out of everything.

 

I love it how democratic strategists are on TV trying to paint Pelosi as a centrist. I have even seen some posters in Fillibuster try to do the same. If she is a centrist, Bush is a liberal.

 

No truer words have ever been written. She is so far off the liberal deep end that the next few years are going to be an interesting dogfight, maybe even within the Dem party.

 

On that vein of thought since up delerious and up the my vomiting son, what does everyone think of many of the elected Dem representatives being ex-military and fairly conservative. I think this could lead to dissention in the Democratic rank with the leadership being an old guard very liberal group.

[Texsox]

This was a matter for the legal system. legally the Federal Government couldn't do anything until the State governemnt declared the disaster and asked for help. This is where the delay occurred.

 

We are talking leadership here. Are you suggesting if it was a federal response, he would have been the one on the phone ordering pizzas and blankets? I am talking the kind of leadership he displayed during 9/11. The bullhorn at ground zero. Rallying Americans, who I believe are all on the federal level, to help. Pushing LA to do better. Inspiring.

 

Leadership is the process in which a person influences others to achieve a task. If the President of the United States hides behind who is footing the bill, that is weak leadership.

[Chisoxfn]

Yeah, too bad Bush couldn't overcome "crooked ass, idiotic politicians of Louisiana" and lead. If the President of the United States gets sidetracked by "crooked ass, idiotic politicians of Louisiana" then he isn't much of a leader. Do you seriously believe that Reagan would have allowed "crooked ass, idiotic politicians of Louisiana" to stop him?

 

But, taking your position then, you must give credit to the honest, intelligent politicians of New York instead of Bush for the response to 9/11. And that makes sense. I always wondered how he could have been so great at one, and sucked so bad at the other.

Your damn right, Bush wouldn't have been able to do it by himself. He had another great man there (potential president) right with him to help lead. Its one thing when you are handcuffed by others and its another when you are helped by others.

 

Even the strongest and greatest leaders can't carry an entire nation on there backs. They need help from time to time (everyone does).

[southsider2k5]

Chuck Rangel, "who the hell wants to live in Mississippi?"

[NorthSideSox72]

Chuck Rangel, "who the hell wants to live in Mississippi?"

Damn that New York Times and the liberal media bias. They would never splash a story like that about a Democrat on their paper. Oh wait...

[Balta1701]

This was a matter for the legal system. legally the Federal Government couldn't do anything until the State governemnt declared the disaster and asked for help. This is where the delay occurred.

Interjecting with a small fact: a Federal state of emergency was asked for by Governor Blanco and declared by FEMA on Saturday, August 27th, 2005, almost 2 full days before the storm hit Louisiana. A state of emergency was declared at the state level on Friday. Here's the declaration, if you want it. Here's the request from the next day to the executive level. Therefore, this statement is incorrect.

Edited November 10, 2006 by Balta1701

[kapkomet]

Damn that New York Times and the liberal media bias. They would never splash a story like that about a Democrat on their paper. Oh wait...

It's always different, somehow.

[Texsox]

Your damn right, Bush wouldn't have been able to do it by himself. He had another great man there (potential president) right with him to help lead. Its one thing when you are handcuffed by others and its another when you are helped by others.

 

Even the strongest and greatest leaders can't carry an entire nation on there backs. They need help from time to time (everyone does).

 

And we couldn't have asked him to lead the elected leaders of LA, after all, he's only the President of the United States. He bows to them. Perhaps they needed to show some leadership with him. He couldn't have influenced their actions. Which is why we all agree that the President of the United States can not show any leadership around the world, after all, of he can't show any leadership with one of his states, how could he show any leadership with something in another country?

[mr_genius]

the democrats want to make Charles Rangel the chairman of the ways and means committee? this is going to be funny. the guy is completely incompetent.

Edited November 12, 2006 by mr_genius

[southsideirish71]

the democrats want to make Charles Rangel the chairman of the ways and means committee? this is going to be funny. the guy is completely incompetent.

 

And they are putting John Conyers, who has been posting mock impeachment trials, in charge of house judiciary committe. This is the same tool who wanted to impeach Reagan for invading Grenada.

[Texsox]

And they are putting John Conyers, who has been posting mock impeachment trials, in charge of house judiciary committe. This is the same tool who wanted to impeach Reagan for invading Grenada.

 

And thank God we invaded Grenada. Imagine what the world would have looked like if we hadn't.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

And thank God we invaded Grenada. Imagine what the world would have looked like if we hadn't.

Hey, Reagan was just looking out for those medical students!

[Texsox]

Where the hell is Granada?

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Where the hell is Granada?

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/gj.html

[mr_genius]

And thank God we invaded Grenada. Imagine what the world would have looked like if we hadn't.

 

not sure. oh, and can you imagine if Bill Clinton hadn't bombed Kosovo to raise his poll numbers? the world would have probably come to an end.

Edited November 15, 2006 by mr_genius

[southsider2k5]

HEEEEEEEE'S BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACK

 

From Drudge

 

FLASH: Trent Lott, ousted as Republican leader in the Senate two years ago because of a remark considered racially insensitive, won election Wednesday to the party's No. 2 leadership post by a single vote...

 

Glad to see we learned from our mistakes. Maybe the Libertarians need another voter afterall...

[southsider2k5]

Well so far we have deals by Blago and Barak on the Rezko list, next up, Luis Gutierrez

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/i...1&cset=true

 

CHICAGO -- U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez paid at least $60,000 less than his neighbors for a Chicago town home, but he says his friendship with the developer -- an indicted political fundraiser -- had nothing to do with his getting a financial break.

 

Gutierrez defended the deal to the Chicago Sun-Times Friday, one day after announcing he won't run for mayor of Chicago. He paid $434,900 for his town home on the city's North Side, while his neighbors paid between $495,000 and $660,000, sometimes for smaller residences, records show.

 

Fundraiser Antoin "Tony" Rezko has pleaded not guilty to charges he plotted to squeeze millions of dollars in kickbacks out of investment firms seeking state business. He also has pleaded not guilty to obtaining a $10.5 million loan from GE Capital through defrauding a group of investors.

 

Gutierrez, 52, told the Sun-Times he didn't talk to Rezko about the deal. Instead, the sale was handled by a salesperson for Rezko's company, Rezmar Corp.

 

"I walked in with my wife -- as any other consumer could have -- and purchased the unit at the listed price, with no considerations," he said. "In fact, the price had gone up from $399,000 to $434,000 within two or three weeks of the first showing."

 

He closed on the home in March 2003 and sold it last March for $610,000, netting a 40 percent profit -- far larger than other neighbors who have sold.

 

He characterized the deal he got on his home as a "pre-construction" discount because he agreed to buy in September 1999, before the 17 units were built. He said the homes were priced at $304,900 to $519,000 at the time and that other buyers also got discounts. No one paid as little as he did, however.

 

Rezko's family has donated more than $19,000 to Gutierrez's campaigns over the years.

 

Revelations about the congressman's real estate dealings with Rezko come not long after the Chicago Tribune reported that another politician -- Sen. Barack Obama -- closed on a $1.65 million Chicago home last year the same day Rezko and his wife bought a vacant lot next door.

 

In January, Obama paid Rezko $104,500 for part of his lot to balance the space between his house and a fence dividing the properties.

 

Obama has said the financial arrangements he and Rezko made were ethical and proper.