A CHINESE General Said what?

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by FORD
Nuclear war with China isn't realistically an issue, because NOBODY would survive that, and the Chinese aren't under any such illusion.

Conventional warfare against a nation that outnumbers us 8:1 is very troubling, however.

There is no War Game with them that we come out the victor

Mutually Assured Destruction is the term most often used

Besides, we're on our way to becoming a "wholely owned subsidiary" of China anyway

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Warham
Yes, since we never use ours, we'll loan them to China.

And the fall of Saigon was what again?

[Warham]

There's no war game where they come out the victor.

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Warham
There's no war game where they come out the victor.

Bullshit.

Convential ground forces = They Win

Are you really this stupid today?

[Warham]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
And the fall of Saigon was what again?

Quit living in the past, Lounge. Get with the times, man! Stop thinking about the good old days of Clinton, and move into the present day.

[Warham]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Bullshit.

Convential ground forces = They Win

Are you really this stupid today?

I guess you aren't paying attention, Lounge.

I said that we would never enter that kind of war with them. I SAID it would be all bombers and fighters.

The only stupid one here is the one who doesn't read the other's posts before he replies.

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Warham
Quit living in the past, Lounge. Get with the times, man! Stop thinking about the good old days of Clinton, and move into the present day.

Still can't come to grips with the fact we lost Viet Nam?

Care to learn from your mistakes? No?

I forgot, you're a Republican.

[Warham]

We've learned from our mistakes.

That's why we've been in control of the government since '94.

When are you libs going to learn from yours?

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Warham
We've learned from our mistakes.

That's why we've been in control of the government since '94.

When are you libs going to learn from yours?

No you haven't. The Senate is corrupt as it ever has been, the Administration is driven by an increasingly unpopular and discredited ideology, and your President can get nothing done any longer. He's blown his wad with his last Supreme Court card to play. Have fun for the rest of this term. Bush has only shown he's a stubborn fool and is incapable from learning his mistakes. It should be interesting with "mandate" boy's public approval ratings continuing to fall precipitously...

[Warham]

Do you remember the corruption in the Senate before the Republicans took control?

Some notable cases when the Democrats held the power, in case you thought that it was squeaky clean operation.

Jim Wright, 1989

In May 1989, following two intense years of ethics investigations, Rep. Jim Wright (D-Texas) became the first Speaker ever to be forced from office.

Wright, first elected to the House in 1954, came under scrutiny because of charges submitted by Gingrich that included intervening with regulators on behalf of contributors with interests in savings and loans, circumventing outside income limits in a book deal, improperly directing an aide to help write a book for him and accepting gifts from a business partner who allegedly benefited from federal appropriations backed by Wright.

In the spring of 1989, the House ethics committee charged the Speaker with violating 69 rules, and by mid-May it had become clear that censure was inevitable if he remained in office. On May 31, Wright announced he would step down as Speaker and resign from office.

The episode had significant political reverberations. It proved that the Congressional ethics process can provide a powerful political tool to a minority party willing to use it. The aggressive ethics attacks by a then-obscure backbencher helped rupture bipartisan comity and, indirectly, created the conditions for Gingrich himself to become Speaker — and be ousted for alleged ethical failings.

House Bank Scandal, 1991-1992

In 1990, then-Roll Call reporter Tim Burger alerted readers to troubling findings about the now-defunct House Members’ Bank. A General Accounting Office audit had shown that the facility had cashed hundreds of bad checks in a single year, putting the institution at risk for “material losses in the future.”

That initial GAO review turned up $200,000 worth of bad checks. House Sergeant-at-Arms Jack Russ, who ran the House Bank and had been treating Members’ overdrafts as salary advances, made promises to reform the system, which included no written procedures for check cashing. But he did little to actually improve matters.

By September 1991, GAO investigators handed a damning report to House leaders showing that the level of abuse was actually much worse. The audit agency had uncovered more than 4,000 bad checks written by House lawmakers. Two dozen Members had bounced checks worth more than $1,000.

While Russ blamed the excess of bounced checks on Members’ low salaries, the burgeoning scandal took on a life of its own.

Ultimately, 46 Members were discovered to have made 100-plus overdrafts — in effect, using the bank as their own petty cash fund. A report by the House ethics committee in April 1992 named 22 lawmakers who had “abused” their banking privileges, as well as dozens more who had overdrawn their accounts but were not deemed to have abused their privileges.

Voters were unforgiving. The scandal led to the retirement or defeat of more than 50 Members. “Nearly one-third of the House — the stewards of our tax dollars — were all bouncing checks worth more than $1,000, without even having to repay the debt,” said a spokeswoman for the Project on Government Oversight.

Worse, Reps. Albert Bustamante (D-Texas), Carl Christopher Perkins (D-Ky.) and Mary Rose Oakar (D-Ohio) and Del. Walter Fauntroy (D-D.C.) were convicted on House bank-related charges.

As a result of the scandal, the House Bank was shut down. Members and staffers can still do their banking inside the halls of Congress, but they are subject to the strict rules and procedures of the Wright Patman Congressional Federal Credit Union.

Of course, you could come back with Newt Gingrich. But the point has been made. It's no more corrupt now than it was before the GOP took control.

[Warham]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
No you haven't. The Senate is corrupt as it ever has been, the Administration is driven by an increasingly unpopular and discredited ideology, and your President can get nothing done any longer. He's blown his wad with his last Supreme Court card to play. Have fun for the rest of this term. Bush has only shown he's a stubborn fool and is incapable from learning his mistakes. It should be interesting with "mandate" boy's public approval ratings continuing to fall precipitously...

Bush never cared about the ratings, Nick, like Bubba did. Bush was elected twice, regardless of that 50% approval rating.

And even if Bush can't get anything else done in this term besides the two (likely) Supreme Court nominations, the next Republican will just take the reigns in three years.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Warham
Bush never cared about the ratings, Nick, like Bubba did. Bush was elected twice, regardless of that 50% approval rating.

And even if Bush can't get anything else done in this term besides the two (likely) Supreme Court nominations, the next Republican will just take the reigns in three years.

All evidence to the contrary, you don't get elected with a sub 50% rating. And did I mention that all of your speculative candidates are virtually unelectable for 08.'

We hear about HILLARY running, but gee, who are the REPUBLICAN names being mentioned? JEB BUSH?

BUHUHAWHAWHAWHAW!

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Warham
We've learned from our mistakes.

That's why we've been in control of the government since '94.

When are you libs going to learn from yours?

So, you've been "in control of" the Government since '94?

Did I read that right?

Okay.


SO MUCH FOR YOUR "BUSH WAS ONLY IN OFFICE 8 MONTHS, 9/11 IS ALL CLINTON'S FAULT" ARGUMENT


I'm so glad you're on the record as to being in control the last 11 years.

You sure fucked up alot of shit in 11 years. Asleep at the switch to say the least.

[kentuckyklira]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
It should be duely noted that CHINA really does not have a lot of ICBMs.

Says the same "Intelligence" that couldn´t prevent 9/11, and that knew there were WMDs to be found in Iraq!!??

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh


We hear about HILLARY running, but gee, who are the REPUBLICAN names being mentioned? JEB BUSH?

BUHUHAWHAWHAWHAW!

Jeb Bush

Rick Santorum

George Allen

3 candidates any Neo-Con shit-bag would be proud of:D