I don't have a partisan memory. That is one instance you're talking about. I definitely don't remember, though, the Democrats literally opposing whatever bit of legislation that came along simply because Bush proposed it, no matter what that article might say. They absolutely did not do what the Republicans have been doing with Obama.
Yes they did. Through W's entire second term. Your memory is partisan.
".... Pelosi has embraced hard-knuckle partisanship, even if it means standing still. When Bush announced his Social Security plan last year, Pelosi told House Democrats they could never beat him in a straight-ahead, policy-against-policy debate because he had the megaphone of the presidency and was just coming off re-election. So the Democrats would thunderously attack Bush and argue there was no Social Security crisis and therefore no need for them to put out their own proposal. Some members were leery, concerned that Pelosi would make the Democrats look like the Party of No. As the spring of 2005 wore on, some pestered her every week, asking when they were going to release a rival plan. "Never. Is never good enough for you?" Pelosi defiantly said to one member. When Florida Democrat Robert Wexler publicly suggested raising Social Security taxes as the solution, Pelosi immediately chewed him out over the phone. Only one other Democrat signed on to his plan.
The Democrats won the Social Security battle Pelosi's way. That earned her credit with her colleagues, who have embraced her overall strategy. Throughout the past year, Pelosi has demanded that Democrats unanimously oppose g.o.p. bills."
Hopefully that will refresh your partisan memory.
'Welcome to Free Republic! Free Republic is the premier online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism on the web. We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America. And we always have fun doing it. Hoo-yah!'
Republicans hate Obama. Not because they really hate him. But because they have told it to each other so often that it has become true in their minds. The hatred and vitriol has become so excessive that it almost borders on being traitorous.
Like I said...I tried to post the article from Time but it was behind a paywall. Google steered me toward the full article at the Freerepublic. Time is the source and they are the furthest thing from conservative. Your memories are all partisan.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I don't have a partisan memory. That is one instance you're talking about. I definitely don't remember, though, the Democrats literally opposing whatever bit of legislation that came along simply because Bush proposed it, no matter what that article might say. They absolutely did not do what the Republicans have been doing with Obama.
Yes they did. Through W's entire second term. Your memory is partisan.
No caparison of democrats working with bush and Republicans number one strategy of complete partisanship to downright paralyzingly country. You provided an example of Democrats taking their traditional stance on SSN. Woopty fkn Doo. I do keep up with politics and was very in tune during Dubya's terms.
".... Pelosi has embraced hard-knuckle partisanship, even if it means standing still. When Bush announced his Social Security plan last year, Pelosi told House Democrats they could never beat him in a straight-ahead, policy-against-policy debate because he had the megaphone of the presidency and was just coming off re-election. So the Democrats would thunderously attack Bush and argue there was no Social Security crisis and therefore no need for them to put out their own proposal. Some members were leery, concerned that Pelosi would make the Democrats look like the Party of No. As the spring of 2005 wore on, some pestered her every week, asking when they were going to release a rival plan. "Never. Is never good enough for you?" Pelosi defiantly said to one member. When Florida Democrat Robert Wexler publicly suggested raising Social Security taxes as the solution, Pelosi immediately chewed him out over the phone. Only one other Democrat signed on to his plan.
The Democrats won the Social Security battle Pelosi's way. That earned her credit with her colleagues, who have embraced her overall strategy. Throughout the past year, Pelosi has demanded that Democrats unanimously oppose g.o.p. bills."
Hopefully that will refresh your partisan memory.
'Welcome to Free Republic! Free Republic is the premier online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism on the web. We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America. And we always have fun doing it. Hoo-yah!'
Republicans hate Obama. Not because they really hate him. But because they have told it to each other so often that it has become true in their minds. The hatred and vitriol has become so excessive that it almost borders on being traitorous.
Like I said...I tried to post the article from Time but it was behind a paywall. Google steered me toward the full article at the Freerepublic. Time is the source and they are the furthest thing from conservative. Your memories are all partisan.
My brother and I were both living abroad when we invaded Iraq. I remember my brother calling me and saying 'I hope we find these WMD's. I really do.' But there were no WMD's. It was made up to garner public support through fear to start a war. People had a right to be angry with Bush. It is completely different. That was a real reason.
Very good Doc on Showtime about CIA and all past directors are interviewed.Great insight into the WWMD nonsense and the interrogation stuff. A must watch with good data.
Obama's being undercut because nobody in DC had any faith in him anymore. This is bipartisan. He's stopped leading and plans on just riding out the rest of his term. Clint Eastwood's empty chair is now running the show.
yeah right...if he issues an executive order on guns will you change your mind?
Executive order's in a system of checks and balances is not leading.
Disagree...if the majority of the country supports it and Congress is unable to do anything then a leader makes it happen any way he can.
I get it...obstruction is horrible unless the guy you support is getting obstructed. Obama had a democratic super-majority for the first two years of his presidency and never even attempted to get a 61st vote in the senate. Stimulus, health care, you name it...you can't govern like a total partisan and expect to reach compromise later. Chickens coming home to roost.
I don't have a partisan memory. That is one instance you're talking about. I definitely don't remember, though, the Democrats literally opposing whatever bit of legislation that came along simply because Bush proposed it, no matter what that article might say. They absolutely did not do what the Republicans have been doing with Obama.
Yes they did. Through W's entire second term. Your memory is partisan.
No. I would say that your interpretation of the situation is what's partisan.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Obama's being undercut because nobody in DC had any faith in him anymore. This is bipartisan. He's stopped leading and plans on just riding out the rest of his term. Clint Eastwood's empty chair is now running the show.
yeah right...if he issues an executive order on guns will you change your mind?
Executive order's in a system of checks and balances is not leading.
Disagree...if the majority of the country supports it and Congress is unable to do anything then a leader makes it happen any way he can.
We weren't talking about a gun ban. I wasn't at least. I was referring to increased back ground checks, regulation on gun show sales, etc. that the majority of the NRA members support.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
I don't have a partisan memory. That is one instance you're talking about. I definitely don't remember, though, the Democrats literally opposing whatever bit of legislation that came along simply because Bush proposed it, no matter what that article might say. They absolutely did not do what the Republicans have been doing with Obama.
Yes they did. Through W's entire second term. Your memory is partisan.
No. I would say that your interpretation of the situation is what's partisan.
The only difference between obstruction now and obstruction then is that conservatives didn't whine about it back then.
I don't have a partisan memory. That is one instance you're talking about. I definitely don't remember, though, the Democrats literally opposing whatever bit of legislation that came along simply because Bush proposed it, no matter what that article might say. They absolutely did not do what the Republicans have been doing with Obama.
Yes they did. Through W's entire second term. Your memory is partisan.
No. I would say that your interpretation of the situation is what's partisan.
The only difference between obstruction now and obstruction then is that conservatives didn't whine about it back then.
I don't have a partisan memory. That is one instance you're talking about. I definitely don't remember, though, the Democrats literally opposing whatever bit of legislation that came along simply because Bush proposed it, no matter what that article might say. They absolutely did not do what the Republicans have been doing with Obama.
Yes they did. Through W's entire second term. Your memory is partisan.
No. I would say that your interpretation of the situation is what's partisan.
The only difference between obstruction now and obstruction then is that conservatives didn't whine about it back then.
That is HILARIOUS. Never have the Republicans not whined about something when they had the chance. The reason you didn't hear them whining about it all the time is because it wasn't being done to them all the time.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I don't have a partisan memory. That is one instance you're talking about. I definitely don't remember, though, the Democrats literally opposing whatever bit of legislation that came along simply because Bush proposed it, no matter what that article might say. They absolutely did not do what the Republicans have been doing with Obama.
Yes they did. Through W's entire second term. Your memory is partisan.
Big difference from what your party did though , their mission from day one was to obstruct Obama 2nd term for Bush day one for Obama you tell me how is that the same thing ....
I don't have a partisan memory. That is one instance you're talking about. I definitely don't remember, though, the Democrats literally opposing whatever bit of legislation that came along simply because Bush proposed it, no matter what that article might say. They absolutely did not do what the Republicans have been doing with Obama.
Yes they did. Through W's entire second term. Your memory is partisan.
Big difference from what your party did though , their mission from day one was to obstruct Obama 2nd term for Bush day one for Obama you tell me how is that the same thing ....
This is the key point. Democrats lined up and stood at attention for Bush after 9/11. Gave him more support and cooperation than he could have hoped for. Meanwhile, Republicans lined up against Obama from day one. Not at all the same thing.
I get it...obstruction is horrible unless the guy you support is getting obstructed. Obama had a democratic super-majority for the first two years of his presidency and never even attempted to get a 61st vote in the senate. Stimulus, health care, you name it...you can't govern like a total partisan and expect to reach compromise later. Chickens coming home to roost.
this is absolute bullshit.
please stop perpetuating this lie.
Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority
Mitt Romney's at it again -- shading the truth on CBS News' 60 Minutes.
In this video he's perpetuating the false Republican narrative that President Obama should have gotten more done during his first two years in office because he had a supermajority in the Senate.
A supermajority is a filibuster-proof 60 or more Senate seats, allowing one party to pass legislation without votes from the other,
Don't forget: the president needed a supermajority because of the Republicans' unprecedented use of the filibuster as an obstruction tactic -- they've used it more than 400 times.
But here's the deal -- the real deal -- there actually wasn't a two year supermajority.
This timeline shows the facts.
President Obama was sworn in on January 20, 2009 with just 58 Senators to support his agenda.
He should have had 59, but Republicans contested Al Franken's election in Minnesota and he didn't get seated for seven months.
The President's cause was helped in April when Pennsylvania's Republican Senator Arlen Specter switched parties.
That gave the President 59 votes -- still a vote shy of the super majority.
But one month later, Democratic Senator Byrd of West Virginia was hospitalized and was basically out of commission.
So while the President's number on paper was 59 Senators -- he was really working with just 58 Senators.
Then in July, Minnesota Senator Al Franken was finally sworn in, giving President Obama the magic 60 -- but only in theory, because Senator Byrd was still out.
In August, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died and the number went back down to 59 again until Paul Kirk temporarily filled Kennedy's seat in September.
Any pretense of a supermajority ended on February 4, 2010 when Republican Scott Brown was sworn into the seat Senator Kennedy once held.Do you see a two-year supermajority?
I didn't think so.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
I don't have a partisan memory. That is one instance you're talking about. I definitely don't remember, though, the Democrats literally opposing whatever bit of legislation that came along simply because Bush proposed it, no matter what that article might say. They absolutely did not do what the Republicans have been doing with Obama.
Yes they did. Through W's entire second term. Your memory is partisan.
No. I would say that your interpretation of the situation is what's partisan.
The only difference between obstruction now and obstruction then is that conservatives didn't whine about it back then.
what decade are you living in?
you are not american, so i would not expect you to know this, but democrats, when they had a majority under bush, were bullied into supporting bush's policies. the people who opposed the iraq invasion were called pussies and were publicly called out on it. you can't obstruct when you are contantly called out on it, like the minority gop did to the dems.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
I get it...obstruction is horrible unless the guy you support is getting obstructed. Obama had a democratic super-majority for the first two years of his presidency and never even attempted to get a 61st vote in the senate. Stimulus, health care, you name it...you can't govern like a total partisan and expect to reach compromise later. Chickens coming home to roost.
this is absolute bullshit.
please stop perpetuating this lie.
Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority
Mitt Romney's at it again -- shading the truth on CBS News' 60 Minutes.
In this video he's perpetuating the false Republican narrative that President Obama should have gotten more done during his first two years in office because he had a supermajority in the Senate.
A supermajority is a filibuster-proof 60 or more Senate seats, allowing one party to pass legislation without votes from the other,
Don't forget: the president needed a supermajority because of the Republicans' unprecedented use of the filibuster as an obstruction tactic -- they've used it more than 400 times.
But here's the deal -- the real deal -- there actually wasn't a two year supermajority.
This timeline shows the facts.
President Obama was sworn in on January 20, 2009 with just 58 Senators to support his agenda.
He should have had 59, but Republicans contested Al Franken's election in Minnesota and he didn't get seated for seven months.
The President's cause was helped in April when Pennsylvania's Republican Senator Arlen Specter switched parties.
That gave the President 59 votes -- still a vote shy of the super majority.
But one month later, Democratic Senator Byrd of West Virginia was hospitalized and was basically out of commission.
So while the President's number on paper was 59 Senators -- he was really working with just 58 Senators.
Then in July, Minnesota Senator Al Franken was finally sworn in, giving President Obama the magic 60 -- but only in theory, because Senator Byrd was still out.
In August, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died and the number went back down to 59 again until Paul Kirk temporarily filled Kennedy's seat in September.
Any pretense of a supermajority ended on February 4, 2010 when Republican Scott Brown was sworn into the seat Senator Kennedy once held.Do you see a two-year supermajority?
I get it...obstruction is horrible unless the guy you support is getting obstructed. Obama had a democratic super-majority for the first two years of his presidency and never even attempted to get a 61st vote in the senate. Stimulus, health care, you name it...you can't govern like a total partisan and expect to reach compromise later. Chickens coming home to roost.
this is absolute bullshit.
please stop perpetuating this lie.
Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority
Mitt Romney's at it again -- shading the truth on CBS News' 60 Minutes.
In this video he's perpetuating the false Republican narrative that President Obama should have gotten more done during his first two years in office because he had a supermajority in the Senate.
A supermajority is a filibuster-proof 60 or more Senate seats, allowing one party to pass legislation without votes from the other,
Don't forget: the president needed a supermajority because of the Republicans' unprecedented use of the filibuster as an obstruction tactic -- they've used it more than 400 times.
But here's the deal -- the real deal -- there actually wasn't a two year supermajority.
This timeline shows the facts.
President Obama was sworn in on January 20, 2009 with just 58 Senators to support his agenda.
He should have had 59, but Republicans contested Al Franken's election in Minnesota and he didn't get seated for seven months.
The President's cause was helped in April when Pennsylvania's Republican Senator Arlen Specter switched parties.
That gave the President 59 votes -- still a vote shy of the super majority.
But one month later, Democratic Senator Byrd of West Virginia was hospitalized and was basically out of commission.
So while the President's number on paper was 59 Senators -- he was really working with just 58 Senators.
Then in July, Minnesota Senator Al Franken was finally sworn in, giving President Obama the magic 60 -- but only in theory, because Senator Byrd was still out.
In August, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died and the number went back down to 59 again until Paul Kirk temporarily filled Kennedy's seat in September.
Any pretense of a supermajority ended on February 4, 2010 when Republican Scott Brown was sworn into the seat Senator Kennedy once held.Do you see a two-year supermajority?
I didn't think so.
Thanks....I knew that crap was debunked but didn't search for it.
The GOP is a master at lying. They have an entire news network that will let them say anything they want unchallenged. When the other news outlets (NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, etc.) challenge them it falls on deaf ears since so many GOP supporters live in the Fox News bubble.
The garbage that Fiorina stated in the debate is a perfect example. She totally made up shit about generals retiring because of disagreements with Obama and then when challenged on it she would not take it back. General Keane was even interviewed ON FOX and stated that he never did any work for Obama. Just fucking unreal.
The Democrats don't do this folks....I'm not saying they don't lie or stretch the truth but when they say something outright false and are called out on it they don't continue to say it over and over.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Lot of heads exploding on here. Soul, Gerns, Gambs, Jose, Jimmy, Gimme, Halifax...looks like every member of Broken Socialist Scene! Must have touched a nerve.
Actually I believe it might be your head exploding. You've been proven wrong. Why can't you grasp that?
If it isn't trolling its troll adjacent. Figure half the shit posted is fro personal amusement purposes only. Soem kind of merit in the rest. What kind, I have no idea.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Lot of heads exploding on here. Soul, Gerns, Gambs, Jose, Jimmy, Gimme, Halifax...looks like every member of Broken Socialist Scene! Must have touched a nerve.
no my head did not explode. i am just sick and tired of people like you spouting off complete and utter lies as truth. i am going to start calling you on it every time i see it. i should not have to debunk your posts, but since nobody else is doing it, and i have a lot of time, i might as well be the guy.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Lot of heads exploding on here. Soul, Gerns, Gambs, Jose, Jimmy, Gimme, Halifax...looks like every member of Broken Socialist Scene! Must have touched a nerve.
no my head did not explode. i am just sick and tired of people like you spouting off complete and utter lies as truth. i am going to start calling you on it every time i see it. i should not have to debunk your posts, but since nobody else is doing it, and i have a lot of time, i might as well be the guy.
Thanks for doing that I just don't have the time or sabby enough to get all the info needed to debunk most of the lies ....
Lot of heads exploding on here. Soul, Gerns, Gambs, Jose, Jimmy, Gimme, Halifax...looks like every member of Broken Socialist Scene! Must have touched a nerve.
My head has not exploded. I don't even know what you're referring to. And what is Broken Socialist Scene?
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Lot of heads exploding on here. Soul, Gerns, Gambs, Jose, Jimmy, Gimme, Halifax...looks like every member of Broken Socialist Scene! Must have touched a nerve.
My head has not exploded. I don't even know what you're referring to. And what is Broken Socialist Scene?
I think it's a band. I didn't know you all played together, that's pretty cool!
Anything you lose from being honest You never really had to begin with.
Sometimes it's not the song that makes you emotional it's the people and things that come to your mind when you hear it.
Lot of heads exploding on here. Soul, Gerns, Gambs, Jose, Jimmy, Gimme, Halifax...looks like every member of Broken Socialist Scene! Must have touched a nerve.
My head has not exploded. I don't even know what you're referring to. And what is Broken Socialist Scene?
I think it's a band. I didn't know you all played together, that's pretty cool!
Broken Social Scene...A Canadian band...a collective if you will. They're excellent.
Comments
But it absolutely worse to have the obstruction happen at the outset of a first term rather than a second term.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/now-oppose-assault-weapons-ban-doubts-stopping-lone/story?id=35778846
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
please stop perpetuating this lie.
Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jennifer-m-granholm/debunking-the-myth-obamas_b_1929869.html
Mitt Romney's at it again -- shading the truth on CBS News' 60 Minutes.
In this video he's perpetuating the false Republican narrative that President Obama should have gotten more done during his first two years in office because he had a supermajority in the Senate.
A supermajority is a filibuster-proof 60 or more Senate seats, allowing one party to pass legislation without votes from the other,
Don't forget: the president needed a supermajority because of the Republicans' unprecedented use of the filibuster as an obstruction tactic -- they've used it more than 400 times.
But here's the deal -- the real deal -- there actually wasn't a two year supermajority.
This timeline shows the facts.
President Obama was sworn in on January 20, 2009 with just 58 Senators to support his agenda.
He should have had 59, but Republicans contested Al Franken's election in Minnesota and he didn't get seated for seven months.
The President's cause was helped in April when Pennsylvania's Republican Senator Arlen Specter switched parties.
That gave the President 59 votes -- still a vote shy of the super majority.
But one month later, Democratic Senator Byrd of West Virginia was hospitalized and was basically out of commission.
So while the President's number on paper was 59 Senators -- he was really working with just 58 Senators.
Then in July, Minnesota Senator Al Franken was finally sworn in, giving President Obama the magic 60 -- but only in theory, because Senator Byrd was still out.
In August, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died and the number went back down to 59 again until Paul Kirk temporarily filled Kennedy's seat in September.
Any pretense of a supermajority ended on February 4, 2010 when Republican Scott Brown was sworn into the seat Senator Kennedy once held.Do you see a two-year supermajority?
I didn't think so.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
you are not american, so i would not expect you to know this, but democrats, when they had a majority under bush, were bullied into supporting bush's policies. the people who opposed the iraq invasion were called pussies and were publicly called out on it. you can't obstruct when you are contantly called out on it, like the minority gop did to the dems.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
The GOP is a master at lying. They have an entire news network that will let them say anything they want unchallenged. When the other news outlets (NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, etc.) challenge them it falls on deaf ears since so many GOP supporters live in the Fox News bubble.
The garbage that Fiorina stated in the debate is a perfect example. She totally made up shit about generals retiring because of disagreements with Obama and then when challenged on it she would not take it back. General Keane was even interviewed ON FOX and stated that he never did any work for Obama. Just fucking unreal.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/carly-fiorina-digs-claim-generals-retirement-due-obama/story?id=35808113
The Democrats don't do this folks....I'm not saying they don't lie or stretch the truth but when they say something outright false and are called out on it they don't continue to say it over and over.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
I've given up and shan't waste my time by laying the waste pipe through the sandkasten as I shout Halts Maul.
Facts have no relevance in the world of BS.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
You never really had to begin with.
Sometimes it's not the song that makes you emotional it's the people and things that come to your mind when you hear it.