Democrats SUCK!!

[The Troll]

I will anwer in any fashion I choose too.  Even if you believe I am not qualified.  I merely answered a question I asked to you, in MY own words.  Just for conservations sake,  I am sorry if I offended you in the fashion I answered it.  You have no idea of "how well read" I am, simply because you don't agree with me.

   WHAT YOU HAVE READ!  It is what you have read Henry and what you have listen to Henry.  A closed minded person who can't read between the lines, a bitch slap from the rich is a kiss to you.    My god wake up Henry. 

  Henry, you and a computer have a lot of things in common.  Computer, garbage in garbage out.  With you Shit in Shit out.  Like I have said in the past, Henry you don't know shit.   

[Palehorse]

I will anwer in any fashion I choose too.  . . .  You have no idea of "how well read" I am, simply because you don't agree with me.

And in so doing your mouth (words) are writing checks your ass cannot cash. Your position makes an awful lot of assumptions based upon conjecture, lies, and deceit; all of which you obtain from a very slanted group of so called "sources".

You off-handedly reject anything that does not endorse your world view and consistently reach conclusions that are not validated by solid sources or research. Your refusal to post sources or even do a modicum of research on those sources you do provide, proves this.

It is a free country and you have a right to your opinion, that much is true. However, recognize that your opinion is a direct reflection of yourself, and prudence dictates that one would be well advised to do their homework and exercise due diligence in expressing said opinion. Failure to do so erodes your credibility.

[Henry Hawk]

   WHAT YOU HAVE READ!  It is what you have read Henry and what you have listen to Henry.  A closed minded person who can't read between the lines, a bitch slap from the rich is a kiss to you.    My god wake up Henry. 

  Henry, you and a computer have a lot of things in common.  Computer, garbage in garbage out.  With you Shit in Shit out.  Like I have said in the past, Henry you don't know shit.   

Troll, of ALL people, PALLLEEESE do not lecture me about being closed minded...

[Bo D]

prudence dictates that one would be well advised to do their homework and exercise due diligence in expressing said opinion. Failure to do so erodes your credibility.

Perfect example here....

http://theunknownzone.dailynuisanceproductions.com/index.php?topic=17637.msg454889#msg454889

[Henry Hawk]

And in so doing your mouth (words) are writing checks your ass cannot cash. Your position makes an awful lot of assumptions based upon conjecture, lies, and deceit; all of which you obtain from a very slanted group of so called "sources".

You off-handedly reject anything that does not endorse your world view and consistently reach conclusions that are not validated by solid sources or research. Your refusal to post sources or even do a modicum of research on those sources you do provide, proves this.

It is a free country and you have a right to your opinion, that much is true. However, recognize that your opinion is a direct reflection of yourself, and prudence dictates that one would be well advised to do their homework and exercise due diligence in expressing said opinion. Failure to do so erodes your credibility.

That is simply not true Palehorse.  I 100% feel exactly the same as you do, regarding you and others on here.  I spend a great deal of time, talking to others and reading nearly every night.  I watch and listen to pundit shows on fox and MSNBC.  I like hearing what the other side is thinking.  That is what I first started this forum and the one's before it.  Trying to better understand those with opposing views. 

True, you and other have posted information on here with YOUR views, some facts and some just as fictious as you claim I put on here.  You clearly have an outright hatred for anything republican.  At least on a national level.  You have a hatred towards Christians.  You should reflect upon those words you said to me...
"However, recognize that your opinion is a direct reflection of yourself, and prudence dictates that one would be well advised to do their homework and exercise due diligence in expressing said opinion. Failure to do so erodes your credibility"
Please realize, you are on a forum with 97% folks who think as you do, so you do not get challanged much.  I do not try too, because, I feel as if I am not going to convince you of anything. 
I post the things I do, because I believe in them, based upon MY RESEARCH.  I am not alone.  I can direct you to another forum, where you would be challanged by some good, highly-educated, decent people.  I stand with nearly half the people in this country, just as you do.  I do not think you are idiots, though there are several among your side that are, just as there are on my side.

[Henry Hawk]

Perfect example here....

http://theunknownzone.dailynuisanceproductions.com/index.php?topic=17637.msg454889#msg454889

The attack on our ambassador was on Sept 11. It took him nearly two weeks to come to his conclusions.  He was at first saying it was just a bunch of upset muslim, angry over a movie.  Now, he is saying what the rest of us already knew, almost immediatley...that is was a terrorist attack.

[Bo D]

The attack on our ambassador was on Sept 11. It took him nearly two weeks to come to his conclusions.  He was at first saying it was just a bunch of upset muslim, angry over a movie.  Now, he is saying what the rest of us already knew, almost immediatley...that is was a terrorist attack.

BUT .... what you said is that they just admitted yesterday that it was a terrorist attack when the rest of the sane world knew that they formally acknowledged that on Sept. 26.

Don't you watch crime shows on TV? The good ones should teach that you don't go cowboy and shoot from the hip in an investigation. You explore the possibilities and consider the validity of ALL of them before you reach a conclusion.

[Palehorse]

The attack on our ambassador was on Sept 11. It took him nearly two weeks to come to his conclusions.  He was at first saying it was just a bunch of upset muslim, angry over a movie.  Now, he is saying what the rest of us already knew, almost immediatley...that is was a terrorist attack.

And another thing, you used a "cowboy shoot from the hip" story that trumped up a request for additional security at the embassy and attempted to drive blame for the decision to deny that request to the president.

The FACTS are that the decision was based upon the fact that the republican controlled congress imposed severe budgetary cuts upon the government which made adding additional security a fiscal impossibility. Moreover, even had the security been deployed the results would have been likely to be the same, as those forces would have still been outmanned.

[Henry Hawk]

The FACTS are that the decision was based upon the fact that the republican controlled congress imposed severe budgetary cuts upon the government which made adding additional security a fiscal impossibility. Moreover, even had the security been deployed the results would have been likely to be the same, as those forces would have still been outmanned.

Proof?

[Bo D]

Proof?

Where the hell is your proof of that idiotic statement ....

http://theunknownzone.dailynuisanceproductions.com/index.php?topic=17637.msg454889#msg454889

[Palehorse]

Proof?

Your much ballyhooed "hearing" that took place. Read about it, do a little research.

[Henry Hawk]

so the president has to await approval to defend one of his own men?  BULLSHIT! 

[Bo D]

BULLSHIT! 

Isn't that essentially what Bush said about the Constitution?

[Henry Hawk]

Isn't that essentially what Bush said about the Constitution?

Well, he had approval of congress

[Bo D]

Well, he had approval of congress

Here's what your Congress did ....

Scott Lilly, who spent three decades as a senior staffer for Democrats in Congress, often working on budget matters, and now a fellow at the Center for American Progress in DC, says the cuts sought by Congress have been steep since the new House sat in 2011.

The Worldwide Security Protection program (WSP), which the government says provides "core funding for the protection of life, property, and information of the Department of State," and a separate embassy security and construction budget, which in part improves fortifications, have both been under fire.

"In 2011 they came in and passed a continuing resolution for the remainder of that fiscal year. The House proposed $70 million cut in the WSP and they proposed a $204 million cut in Embassy security," says Mr. Lilly. "Then the next year, fiscal 2012, they cut worldwide security by $145 million and embassy security by $376 million. This year's bill is the same thing all over again. The House has cut the worldwide security budget $149 million below the request."

That would be the Republican-controlled House, Hank.