|
Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Hometown on October 16, 2006, 01:24:27 pm Dear Tulsa World,
Your endorsement today of John Sullivan has made Hometown very unhappy. You had been doing so well. And then your editorial board makes this rather serious mistake. Oh, I know you are only human but your monopoly here in Tulsa increases your responsibility to your readers. And today you failed us by endorsing a McCarthy-like careerist. I want to remind Tulsans that your endorsements have been fatally flawed before, like your October 10, 2004 glowing endorsement of George W. Bush for president. In that unfortunate endorsement the Tulsa World lauded Bush. You site the War in Iraq and you state that Bush has managed it well. If there is still anyone out there dense enough to think that Bush has managed Iraq well, then they will probably be in complete agreement with you about John Sullivan. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: aoxamaxoa on October 16, 2006, 01:25:46 pm quote: Snap! Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Conan71 on October 16, 2006, 02:56:04 pm quote: Did you even read the endorsement, or did you get stuck after the headline? They said they admired him because he doesn't turn his back on, nor a deaf ear to his critics. The writer pointed out that Sullivan has had philosophical differences with the World in the past, but is willing to listen. They also like that he's managed to get more staffers for the INS field office in OKC. (we now have 12 instead of 4 which is still just sticking a finger in the dike). At least Sullivan appears more open-minded than some of you guys on the board who bash Republicans for the sake of bashing Republicans and forsaking their ideas. Can we do better than Sullivan? likely so. I haven't seen another entrant into this race who looks like they'd be any better. Instead of sniping about the editorial pages, why don't you get involved in the local Democratic party and help recruit quality opponents? Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Hometown on October 16, 2006, 04:20:21 pm quote: That must be born in '71. Bless your heart. If you had followed my posts on this forum you would know that I have a long list of specific arguments with your party's mismanagment of the United States. But even in your party there is bad and worse. Sullivan is at the bottom of the worst category. Indeed the Tulsa World blasted Sullivan in a recent editorial for scaring elderly residents of an old folks home with unfounded stories about terrorists crossing the border. I can't explain their flip flop. Both Bush and Sullivan represent a far right radical element in your party. If you were old enough you would remember when my party lost touch with the mainstream of American life back at the height of the Liberal era. We corrected our course and recaptured the center. Now it's up to you Republicans to rid your party of the radicals that are taking all of you, and all of us, down with them. And you better get on the ball because things don't look so great out there. The obvious alternative to Sullivan is his opponent Alan Gentges. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Bledsoe on October 16, 2006, 05:20:45 pm My best guess on this issue......
TO: Tulsa World Editoral Board From: Robert (Bobbie) Lorton, III, publisher "You boys and girls may endorce candidates unless I say I want to endorce a candidate." Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Steve on October 16, 2006, 10:17:39 pm quote: Hi Hometown, I agree with you about the World's endorsement of Sullivan. A pity, for sure. I used to subscribe to the Tulsa Tribune up until they folded in the early 1990s. I then switched to the World, because I had no choice for a daily paper. I am of a generation that would be lost without the daily paper in hand. To me, there is just something comforting about the daily newspaper in hand, especially for local news, the TV and internet be damned. I often disagree with the World's editorial stances, but I don't think they have near the influence on the voting population today that newspapers used to have. Be that as it may, I agree with your opinion. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Cubs on October 16, 2006, 11:12:35 pm Vote Sullivan .... I already did
Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: AVERAGE JOE on October 17, 2006, 07:57:19 am quote: That's all the endorsement I need to vote for the other candidate... I went to the same school with Sullivan. I wouldn't vote him dogcatcher. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Conan71 on October 17, 2006, 08:32:56 am 'Scuse me, Hometown, your assumption as to my age is wrong, I was born in 1965, and I'm pretty well-versed in the political history of our country. Your condescending comments like "Bless your heart" are not necessary.
Your view of the political parties is very myopic. You bought the whole "Republicans are just now starting to come around to the black man" schtick hook, line, and sinker so I'd guess you are easy prey for the rest of their talking points. Saying that Bush and Sullivan are part of a radical far right element, only flies in the minds of very far-left thinking people who take their party's propaganda as pure gospel. Larger government and spending tax money like drunken sailors is hardly traditional radical right thinking. Just so you don't think I'm a party-line Republican- I don't believe our government should legislate morality. I'm pro-choice (it's pretty much a dead issue anyhow), I don't believe the government should meddle in civil union issues- hetero, gay, or ?, I don't believe the gov't should fund "faith-based" initiatives, I believe the government needs to quit talking about immigration and actually do something about it... need I go on? You offer no other support for your argument of Sullivan being the "bottom of the worst category" other than some speech he made at a nursing home that supposedly scared the bejeezus out of some residents. Please provide more instances and I will gladly consider your points. Tell me what Genteges stands for that is vastly different than Sullivan and at least I'll listen with an open mind. I just don't think the Democrats have brought a worthy opponent to the table this year. I've heard plenty about what the Republicans are doing wrong and very little of what Democrats will actually do to improve the country- it's typical. Is Sullivan always right? No. He speaks his mind and isn't afraid to express an opinion that goes against the leadership from time-to-time. Sure, he makes party-line votes just like Democrats do. He does represent the values of the majority of his constituency, which is what he is paid to do. In case you haven't noticed, the voting majority in this area is very conservative. If you don't like living in such a conservative congressional district there are plenty more liberal places to live. He's also been willing to break ranks with his GOP bretheren on the issues of immigration, which is an important issue to me and his stance reflects my own. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Hometown on October 17, 2006, 08:46:08 am quote: I'm a life long Democrat and I AM TULSA TO THE BONE. This is my hometown. It was my grandparents' and my parents' home. Tulsa made me who I am. Take a look around you. Tulsa is much more diverse that you seem to realize. What would a Democrat do? Can you remember anything beyond the last twenty-four hours? Peace, prosperity, consensus, bipartisan legislation, sanity. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: iplaw on October 18, 2006, 09:34:46 am Take off the rose-colored glasses and join us all back in reality whenever you're ready.
Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Hometown on October 18, 2006, 10:43:26 am quote: Rose colored glasses? Iplaw, you had to be a loser not to make a wad of money under Clinton – especially in your business. THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT ALAN GENTGES STANDS A REAL CHANCE OF WINNING. Recent polling found that 56% of the voters in District 1 are dissatisfied with the direction of the country. And a Republican businessman who pulled 25% of the GOP vote in the ’04 primary is running as an independent and will split the GOP vote. But I admit if you still love Bush and what he’s doing to us, you probably love Sullivan. Bush = Sullivan = bad news for Oklahoma Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: iplaw on October 18, 2006, 11:44:17 am quote: I make money regardless of who is in office... BTW, this Bush ecomony is stonger than at any time during the Clinton administration. * Record low unemployment. (Lower than the combined average of the last 30 years) * Record low interest rates. * Record high DOW Jones average. * Record high tax revenue. * GDP has increased by 3.5 percent, above historical rate of growth. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: rwarn17588 on October 18, 2006, 12:38:07 pm I don't think Sullivan makes any difference. I don't like him, but I don't see anything from the Democratic challenger that makes me want to vote for him. (I did like the fact he busted Sullivan's chops about his specious claims on the Mexican border.)
Unless the incumbent is stupid or incompetent, just being on the other party isn't enough for me to vote for you. You've gotta bring something to the table. Example: I think Jim Webb, who's running for Senate in Virginia against incumbent George Allen, is much better-qualified for the job. That's why Allen is scared of him. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Hometown on October 18, 2006, 01:09:37 pm quote: I like Alan Gentges, but in your case rwarn17588, what about voting for Gentges for the larger goal of bringing bipartisanship back to the Congress? Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: iplaw on October 18, 2006, 01:27:07 pm No one interested in bipartisanship ever runs for an office. Holding the two positions is mutually exclusive. If he hasn't figured that out yet, he hasn't been in politics long enough.
Bipartisanship for bipartisanship's sake gets no one anywhere. We all have points of exclusion that bipartisanship will not get us past. I know it feels good to say bipartisanship, but we need to live in the real world. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: rwarn17588 on October 18, 2006, 01:42:54 pm I could be making a leap, Hometown (correct me if I'm wrong), but I think you mean having a split legislature.
I like the idea of a split government. If you have one legislative branch that has the majority in one party and another that has the other party in the majority, that means less of a chance of ill-advised laws being passed. Even if the Democrats take both branches (very unlikely, IMO), you still have a check and balance with the president's veto power. A split government means compromise, and that's not necessarily a bad thing -- not by a long shot. I remember MoneyTalk radio host Bob Brinker saying during the latter portion of the Clinton years: "Gridlock in Washington is good. That means there's less of a chance of the Congress messing things up." Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Hometown on October 18, 2006, 01:55:13 pm quote: You’re right. I meant that a split legislature would force bipartisanship. I don’t think Sullivan intends to do a thing to help Bush find a new course. There is also the lesser of two evils argument. However you look at it, Alan Gentges is a vote for change. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Conan71 on October 18, 2006, 04:53:37 pm Right, and if the Democrats take the House, let me give you a little picture of what bi-partisanship will look like:
The house led by Nancy Pelosi will start a specious impeachment against President Bush, and not focus on issues that really do matter. If they succeed in impeachment, it will go to the Senate, where they will waste time deciding whether or not to remove Bush and tie up more time. In the end, it will be 2008, Bush will finish his term on schedule and all we will have to show for this next Congress is a two year legislative circle-jerk, and guess who will still have the majority in both houses? The special interests, lobbyists, and party-line politicians who don't have the b[:O]lls to step out of line and do what is really important for their constituents instead of getting involved in petty playground spite games. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the GOP brought this upon themselves for ever pursuing impeachment against Clinton. Stupid partisan games from both sides. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Hometown on October 19, 2006, 08:41:15 am quote: The leadership of the Democrats has stated that it is not interested in impeachment. Here's some literature I found on Gentges and partisanship: Gentges said he would like to offer his district an alternative, an independent voice that will question not only the Republicans but the Democrats, as well. "I think that what I represent is an independent voice," he said. A lifelong Democrat himself, Gentges referred to a quote by former President John F. Kennedy, saying it does not matter if the answer is from a Democrat or Republican, as long as it's the right answer. He said he will follow that policy while in office and, hopefully, adopt good ideas from anyone that may have one. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Conan71 on October 19, 2006, 09:32:03 am quote: Someone needs to communicate that to John Conyers then. "A few months ago, when there was speculation that Democrats planned to impeach Bush if they won the House, the party’s leadership moved quickly to stop the discussion. In May, a spokesman for House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi told the Washington Post that Pelosi had told her fellow Democrats “impeachment is off the table; she is not interested in pursuing it.” But Conyers, who would likely be the single-most important person in the undertaking, was never on board. “There’s no way I can predict whether there will ultimately be an impeachment proceeding underway or not,” he said last week in an interview with the liberal website tpmmmuckraker.com. “The Constitution in Crisis” is Conyers’s sign that, should the opportunity arise, he is ready to go." http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjVjM2M2N2U3ZjJlNTRiZmYzZjJkYzJiN2RlZGQyYjY= So far Pelosi has only made tepid comments about impeachment: "House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) said in an interview last week that a Democratic House would launch a series of investigations of the Bush administration, beginning with the White House's first-term energy task force and probably including the use of intelligence in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. Pelosi denied Republican allegations that a Democratic House would move quickly to impeach President Bush. But, she said of the planned investigations, "You never know where it leads to." May 7, 2006 WP. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/06/AR2006050601336_pf.html Pelosi has been curiously silent on this issue since May. Further suggested reading: http://www.democrats.com/node/10267 Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Hometown on October 19, 2006, 09:56:50 am quote: Thanks for bringing this to our attention: Pelosi had told her fellow Democrats “impeachment is off the table; she is not interested in pursuing it.” Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Conan71 on October 19, 2006, 10:07:39 am Then what would the point of investigations be if there is no ultimate goal of impeachment or censure other than a complete waste of time?
Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Hometown on October 19, 2006, 10:21:53 am quote: Sunshine, transparency, and balance. Bush and his buddys like Sullivan hate sunshine. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: iplaw on October 19, 2006, 10:30:16 am Ugh...maybe when we do actually get away from a two party system people will stop being such sloganeering partisans...
Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Hometown on October 19, 2006, 10:35:20 am quote: Slogans are symbols for complex ideas. Which Republican was it that said the facts don't matter? Or was that the details don't matter? It was your Reagan that showed us the power of symbols. Sunshine, really does mean something iplaw. I could spell it out in multiple pages but let's not kid ourselves about attention spans. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: iplaw on October 19, 2006, 10:41:05 am Not if the slogans or symbols are faulty or lack substance...
I think the ancient egyptians beat Regan to it anyways. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: aoxamaxoa on October 24, 2006, 10:01:27 am John Sullivan voted against every single environmental bill in 2005.
Vote for the democrat. It's about your children and grandchildren ...... Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: iplaw on October 24, 2006, 10:23:30 am You're assertion is pure unadulterated bullcrap. Repeat this:
Google is my friend Google is my friend Google is my friend Google is my friend Google is my friend Google is my friend http://www.capwiz.com/lcv/bio/keyvotes/?id=7230&congress=1092&lvl=C Though he has more - than +; you can clearly see that he voted for some environmentally friendly bills. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: aoxamaxoa on October 24, 2006, 10:34:08 am quote: Yes, he voted for big oil....and against the environmental regs affecting Green Country. Nice try though. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: aoxamaxoa on October 24, 2006, 10:35:45 am quote: you idiot....non of those qualify. Your comment and your google search do not tell the truth about the fact that Sullivan does zilch to help our local environment. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: iplaw on October 24, 2006, 10:40:55 am quote: "Non"...and I'm the idiot...nice typo webster. THE LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS ISN'T RELIABLE? Again, you make unequivocal statements of fact that don't hold water. Sullivan clearly voted for legislation that was considered pro-environment, but either you can't read or can't comprehend simple sentences on the web page that was linked to. Do you need to be reminded of your statement: quote: How 'bout you back up that claim with a run down of votes. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Conan71 on October 24, 2006, 10:45:56 am Aox-
Maybe Sullivan didn't like some of the pork hidden in those bills. "I will call you out on this one Conman. I am faairly certain these great leaders did not sign on originally due to the stuff between the lines or tacked onto the bill at the end. Whatever, history tells a different story than the one you are trying to con us into believing." It does happen, ya know. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: iplaw on October 24, 2006, 10:48:11 am Who are you to say that the League of Conservation Voters is unreliable authority concerning environmental issues?
Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: aoxamaxoa on October 24, 2006, 11:05:20 am quote: No not what happend. What went on is licking the Bush boots.... John is bad for Tulsa. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: aoxamaxoa on October 24, 2006, 11:08:06 am quote: "When it comes to the environment and energy, 2006 will be remembered for sky-rocketing gas prices, record-high oil company profits, an acknowledgement by even President Bush that America is addicted to oil, the Alaska BP pipeline spill, and a widespread recognition that human activity is causing global warming to happen far more quickly than previously thought. Unfortunately, as the League of Conservation Voters 2006 National Environmental Scorecard reflects, Congress did virtually nothing to help solve these problems, with little hope for anything positive to emerge from an anticipated lame duck session." http://www.lcv.org/scorecard/ You are truly a con artist...er sorry...a patent attorney? Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: iplaw on October 24, 2006, 11:12:01 am I ask you what evidence you have to back up your assertion that Sullivan voted against every environmental bill. You fail to provide anything to back that up.
When asked for evidence about Sullivan you provide me an excerpt about Bush. I highly suggest you back off the calls of "idiot" and "con artist." I have held back with you up until this point. I won't be so kind for very much longer. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: aoxamaxoa on October 24, 2006, 11:41:17 am BS... he votes against the bills to help clean or keep clean our air and water. He votes with the corporations controlling our food supplies.
No need to hold back. This is a political thread you hack. We have an election in just two weeks and it is imperative the country return to a government of accountability instead of a one party rule in Washington! Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Hometown on October 24, 2006, 12:18:22 pm quote: Oh come on. Let it rip. Show us how mean you can be iplaw. p.s. Why won't Sullivan let seniors get cheap drugs from Canada? Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Conan71 on October 24, 2006, 12:22:33 pm quote: Last time I checked, Sullivan wasn't in charge of that program. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: iplaw on October 24, 2006, 12:46:14 pm quote: I had more respect for you Hometown. That's just sad. What's even more sad is the fact that you are the only person on this board that sides with Aox. Beware the company you keep. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: iplaw on October 24, 2006, 12:47:41 pm quote: Do I need to speak monosylabically? Justify your assertion. Show us his voting record to back up your claim. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: aoxamaxoa on October 24, 2006, 01:55:42 pm quote: Divide and conquer....typical repub Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: iplaw on October 24, 2006, 01:56:45 pm You ever going to answer my question or are you gonna just keep hiding?
Substantiate your claims. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: aoxamaxoa on October 24, 2006, 01:57:52 pm quote: A voting record to support the lobyists that control Sullivan..... "There has long been talk about the rise of a "radical center," made up of voters essentially moderate in their philosophical leanings but radical in their disaffection with the status quo. This looks to be the year of the radical center. If it is, the Democrats will win. And if they win, their task will be to meet the aspirations of a diverse group of dissatisfied and disappointed Americans. Not an easy chore, but one that certainly beats being in the opposition." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/23/AR2006102301034.html Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: iplaw on October 24, 2006, 01:59:13 pm Nowhere in that story was the name John Sullivan ever mentione.
One last time. SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Hometown on October 24, 2006, 02:02:49 pm I'm with you aoxamaxoa.
Let those Republicans have it. Their greed has done serious damage to our country. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: aoxamaxoa on October 24, 2006, 02:05:05 pm quote: Sullivan has supported all legislation passed in an effort to deregulating electricity telling us it would make power companies more competetive which it has not done while it has increased the chances of global warming. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/23/business/23utility.html?_r=1&hp&ex=1161576000&en=eed40071cf6e6552&ei=5094&partner=homepage&oref=slogin You can do your demanding "support your claim" dance all day long and I will continue to tell you that John Sullivan is nothing but a rubber stamp. Just because you are a kinda attorney does not mean I have to be tried to prove that I know which way the wind blows.... Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: iplaw on October 24, 2006, 02:05:28 pm quote: Hey AOX, you have a buddy now. Maybe you won't feel so alone anymore. As for you Hometown...truly sad. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: iplaw on October 24, 2006, 02:06:29 pm quote: YOU FAILED AGAIN. BACK UP YOUR CLAIMS Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: aoxamaxoa on October 24, 2006, 02:40:08 pm John Sullivan has voted in lock step with his party, the regime, and against the democrats every time during the past two years.
His party will not allow environmental issues to be raised or amended as they control the agenda. Prior periods indicate Sullivans continued support of big business.... Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: iplaw on October 24, 2006, 02:42:57 pm OOOOhhh...A swing and a miss again. Strike 101.
Simple task. Find Sullivan's voting record and go from there. LCV says your claim is bogus. Are they right or are you? Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: aoxamaxoa on October 24, 2006, 02:58:58 pm John Sullivan has a lifetime AFL-CIO congressional voting record of voting wrong on working family issues 92 percent of the time. ... www.aflcio.org/issues/politics/labor2006/OK.cfm - 37k
Rated 0% by the ACLU, indicating an anti-civil rights voting record. Sullivan ... Click here for a summary of John Sullivan's positions on all issues. ... www.ontheissues.org/House/John_Sullivan_Civil_Rights.htm - 13k Rated 0% by SANE, indicating a pro-military voting record. Sullivan scores 0% by ... Click here for a summary of John Sullivan's positions on all issues. ... www.issues2000.org/House/John_Sullivan_Homeland_Security.htm - 18k - Rated 0% by APHA, indicating a anti-public health voting record. Sullivan scores 0% ... Click here for a summary of John Sullivan's positions on all issues. ... archive.ontheissues.org/House/John_Sullivan_Health_Care.htm - 14k - John Sullivan on Abortion. Click here for 7 full quotes on Abortion OR background on ... Rated 10% by the ARA, indicating an anti-senior voting record. ... www.ontheissues.org/House/John_Sullivan.htm - 75k The guys a terrible representative of the people. Now, major corporations are another story........ time for a change... Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: aoxamaxoa on October 24, 2006, 03:03:30 pm quote: I am right. While there may be no direct correlation between his voting and the negative impact it has on our air and water, his constant rubber stamp approach clearly indicates anti regulation while his funding comes mostly from two segments of industry...power companies and oil and gas companies. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Conan71 on October 24, 2006, 03:08:03 pm quote: Stop for a minute Aox, my BS meter broke right there. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: aoxamaxoa on October 24, 2006, 03:14:11 pm So, you agree. It is more important that he represents those that pay him for campaigns rather than those that he supposedly represents...
Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: iplaw on October 24, 2006, 03:17:30 pm FROM:
quote: TO: quote: That's what we in the medical community call a "brain fart" ladies and gentlemen. If I were a Democrat I'd be ashamed to have people like this in my party. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: aoxamaxoa on October 24, 2006, 03:27:51 pm My source is The Oklahoma Observer 9/25/06....take it up with them.
I stand by the fact that Sullivan has served a different master than his constituents. But I guess we will see how many voters get fooled again. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: snopes on October 24, 2006, 03:33:38 pm Aox, the definition of FAIR and BALANCED.
Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Conan71 on October 24, 2006, 03:35:49 pm Speaking of being beholden, I wonder if John Murtha's defense contractor supporters have asked for a refund:
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.asp?CID=N00001408&cycle=2002 Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: iplaw on October 24, 2006, 03:47:57 pm (http://i13.tinypic.com/2vvp5y1.jpg)
Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: aoxamaxoa on October 24, 2006, 03:48:25 pm quote: I do not think that is how the system works..... Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: Conan71 on October 24, 2006, 04:22:04 pm quote: Oklahoma Observer???? I thought Frosty Troy had been taking the eternal dirt nap for a few years now. Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: aoxamaxoa on October 27, 2006, 10:49:57 am http://www.internetweekly.org/2006/10/cartoon_gop_monster_parade.html
Title: World endorses George Bush then John Sullivan Post by: aoxamaxoa on October 28, 2006, 10:04:06 am The World is full of idiots.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmX23l0ouo8 |