Anti-War 100,000 - Pro-War 400

Yep. You stated exactly as I mentioned, that you take one position but continue to suggest Bush violated the Constitution. Thank you for being so bold and actually pointing that out.

I comprehended all your positions just fine

I didn't say you did, you reading comprehension genious! I said you offered one version (that given what the article said, you didn't feel he did) while continously suggesting he did. Pointed it out, bolded it, analyzed it, and you still deny it.

Looking foolish is your worry. I'm not here for a popularity contest like some. If I were, I'd take multiple positions on everything and deny them when confronted

BTW, what's your official position today? I hear the north wind is blowing

[edit] I almost forgot the best part:

It comes down to what is legal under the constitution, you appear to have no problem with the president breaking the constituion, I however do.

 

Gtech you are a fuxxing idiot, you realy are.

Your quotes brought up was the internal debate over how much power the president can or can not have. I have not changed my position, you however have in this political forum of being nothing more than a moron, part troll.

My positions remain the same!

If the article is the full story, of which I do not believe it is nor should any sane human being I support GWB and do not believe he violated the constitution.

I do not believe the constitution applies to foreigners, I do however believe it applies to all US citizens.

You give the president a blank check, I do not..............

Same position as always, but I'm sure you'll make a half ass attempt to try to claim it isnt..

Ghee wonder why nobody on your side agrees with you and has stayed out of the topic like the plague...Now fuxxing take your meds and reread the posts. You are making yourself looking like a fool of the highest degree.

 

Get your head out of the sand and look it up. Do a little bit of research. I did. It's all over the news AND the internet. I may not be what you want to hear, but it IS FACT.

I'll even help you...

11.5 million links on Google alone. (But they're all wrong and YOU are right, correct???)

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=bush+just+piece+of+paper&meta=

 

What are you, like 14??? 15???

 

So much for the ignore list, huh? I'm on it, now apparently I'm not.

They were your quotes. Your positions.

Ah, so having a year to fact check it and write it is ok, but it will take longer than a full year for the NYT to admit it was anything other than alqaida terrorists, which it reluctantly said, were the targets.

I do not believe the constitution applies to foreigners, I do however believe it applies to all US citizens.
[/quote]

Don't forget this one:

It comes down to what is legal under the constitution, you appear to have no problem with the president breaking the constituion, I however do.

Incorrect. I was not afriad of being wrong in taking my position by prefacing it with a non-existent condition. The article noted, relucatantly and at least half way in, that terrorists were the targets. Since I and many (but certainly not all) Americans are very much for going after terrorists and believe the president (whether Democrat or Republican) has an obligation to protect our country. Believe it or not, some of us do not believe that is a bad thing!

You mean this one? It comes down to what is legal under the constitution, you appear to have no problem with the president breaking the constituion, I however do.

I wonder why only you are concerned about it? I'll let you worry about your little popularity contest. Every post, always worried about how it will look. Insecure in your "iffy" positions? For it, against it, said it, didn't say it, on ignore, not on ignore? Nice, hrb!

I was for this post before I was against it!

 

What are you, a friend of Michael Jackson's? Is that how you chat on Yahoo?

 

Actually Gtech I came into the thread not signed in by mistake, I read your lame ass response and simply had to sign in and respond...

You are totally incorrect, you are taking the quotes completely out of context and inserting them into your own little twisted mind. I have already told you what the quotes were for...

Keep making yourself look like an idiot, I know I'm laughing my ass off as I'm sure many others on here are...

You're the type of guy I can see already if we ever met I'd beat...and not with words!

Now get a life and stop being such a lying prick, reread the fuxxing posts.

 

Doesn't look like 11.5 million to me:

real search

A big whopping 31 results. As I said earlier, just in it's infancy and note the nutjob sites.

What was that about sand? What news source is carrying this? Heh!

 

I have read a little and boy that is one funny onion article - I wonder if the onion wrote it first???

 

I see you are still in need of hand holding so I'm here for you Gtech, as far as holding your other parts though you'll need to get someone else for that.

I NEVER STATED I THOUGHT BUSH VIOLATED THE CONSTITUTION...

If you mistook a post for that you could have asked, and stated is this what you are saying. But no instead of that you decide to be a fuxxing prick and start this BS...

It's actually very funny as I'm on your side on the issue as far as what we know, I simply was arguing the 'how much power the president has' and 'previous executive orders'

Now get a life and reread them!

 

Yea, both times, right? That's the ticket! LOL!

Nope, the context I explained very clearly and it's quite obvious.

As I said, I'll let you worry about your little popularity contest! That's important to you. And thank you, for the numerous laughs you've given me as well. If you only had an idea of how much I've laughed watching you lie about your own words.

Oh, you big mean bully you! Resorting to internet threats now. Tack that on to your lies! Classy! How will that help you with your popularity contest?

It comes down to what is legal under the constitution, you appear to have no problem with the president breaking the constituion, I however do.

 

You were put on ignore last time I left

Actually to only you, shall we start a poll?

I unlike you think for myself, I do not have nor need cheerleaders.... My own words of which you are taking completely the incorrect way.

Not an internet threat, as you would say an 'observation' simply put I can tell you're someone I would not like in person...Not a threat, nothing more than an 'observation'

I stand behind this statement, you give a president a blank check, I don't...That is the intent of the statment, it's not my problem you've somehow twisted it in your sick mind to mean what you think it does.

 

I stumbled across a post last night on some site that had tracked down where it started, but I don't recall the site off hand. If I come across it, I'll post it.

 

Nothing new, hrb? No creativity?

Here's a good one! How about if you start whining that I'm deleting or modifying posts. An oldie, but a goodie!