PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues WSJ: Does Not Look Good for Dems and Obama


HonestChieffan
06-24-2010, 04:56 AM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703900004575325263274951230.html

BucEyedPea
06-24-2010, 07:57 AM
Says the pro-dictatorship war street journal.

banyon
06-24-2010, 08:33 AM
Says the pro-dictatorship war street journal.

It's hard for me to picture these words being uttered without imagining the speaker has on a giant pair of red clown shoes. Perhaps a beanie with a spinner as well.

patteeu
06-24-2010, 09:09 AM
Says the pro-dictatorship war street journal.

Says someone [wearing clown shoes and a spinner thingy] who obviously didn't bother to read the article.

Taco John
06-24-2010, 09:12 AM
Says the pro-dictatorship war street journal.

I sometimes wonder what you intend to accomplish with statements like this. It's one thing to pick a fight. It's another to just offer your jaw.

Brainiac
06-24-2010, 09:19 AM
Says the pro-dictatorship war street journal.
That is a very puzzling comment, and I can see by the other posts that I am not the only one who is puzzled by it.

Most of us would classify ourselves as either liberal, moderate, or conservative. Sometimes I think you are a conservative, but that comment makes you sound like a liberal extremist.

What do you have against the Wall Street Journal?

Taco John
06-24-2010, 10:09 AM
That is a very puzzling comment, and I can see by the other posts that I am not the only one who is puzzled by it.

Most of us would classify ourselves as either liberal, moderate, or conservative. Sometimes I think you are a conservative, but that comment makes you sound like a liberal extremist.

What do you have against the Wall Street Journal?


In fairness to her, this is an over-simplification you've written. She's right, the WSJ has a pro-war agenda. War isn't a right or left issue. Being anti-senseless war doesn't make one a leftist.

But that said, I don't know why her comment belonged in this thread.

HonestChieffan
06-24-2010, 10:53 AM
Says the pro-dictatorship war street journal.

Drug related flashbacks can be a bugger. It will soon pass.

BucEyedPea
06-24-2010, 10:59 AM
I sometimes wonder what you intend to accomplish with statements like this. It's one thing to pick a fight. It's another to just offer your jaw.

That's what they call the WSJ on some libertarian sites. There's truth in it if you look at some things they wrote during Bush.
It belongs in this thread because it impeaches the source. They're not going to be for Obama if he doesn't do certain things and they want someone in to do their bidding. That someone is not someone mainstream America has in mind but more of what we got rid of in 2008. Another executive power grab for what they want who will favor global mercantilism including war with Iran. Just a reminder in a cheeky prankish way. I don't disagree with this article though. But I do like taking an occassional swipe at the WarStreet Journal.

Hey, this gets done to my sources too. If you can't beat 'em...join 'em.

BucEyedPea
06-24-2010, 11:05 AM
Drug related flashbacks can be a bugger. It will soon pass.

I don't use any recreational drugs and extremely minimal over the counter or prescription.
I also don't drink Establishment Republican Kool-Aid. Perhaps, I just need a swim in the oil that's beginning to enter the intra-coastal waterways here.

HonestChieffan
06-24-2010, 11:29 AM
I don't use any recreational drugs and extremely minimal over the counter or prescription.
I also don't drink Establishment Republican Kool-Aid. Perhaps, I just need a swim in the oil that's beginning to enter the intra-coastal waterways here.

Cool we need a first hand report. Take some pictures. I want to see if the coastline has been permanently slicked coated in mats of oil or not.

BucEyedPea
06-24-2010, 12:30 PM
Cool we need a first hand report. Take some pictures. I want to see if the coastline has been permanently slicked coated in mats of oil or not.

I heard it's moisturizing....better than petroleum jelly. That's the only reason I'm going.