# Nancy stay home



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I didn't catch the whole story. I am sitting typing and listening to the tv in another room. I didn't catch which country Nancy was currently in, Syria I think, anyway she was carrying a message from the head of Israel to the head of this other nation. Evidently she got it all screwed up. Either that or she thinks because she said it she can hold Israel to it. She better realize that on the world stage she better not try the dirty politics liberals do here at home or she will destroy American credibility. 
She said Israel was ready to talk with the Muslim nations, period. No, no, no, Nancy, there were stipulations you entirely forgot. What a dunce. She should take Jimmy the Dunce Carter and go on an extended vacation.

Does anyone have the full story? Sorry I didn't have patience enough to wait for the full story a second time.

Edit: 8:40 am Yup, it's Syria our gal pal Nancy is in. It looks like by the end of the day she could do a lot of damage. Basically it would appear she thinks she is the head of foreign relations for the United States. Condoleeza Rice and George Bush all rolled into one.


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

Quite frankly we could use a little more diplomacy. George W, the Texas gunslinger and his pull your weapons out and start shooting diplomacy has killed enough including a lot of innocent bystanders and it is time for a change in our approach to being a world leading democracy instead of a rampaging bunch of gunslingers. After seven years the American people have had enough and it is reflected by the polls so if someone trys a little diplomacy we should salute their efforts and not rip them a new one.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

We tried diplomacy in Iraq, do you remember the 17 United Nations resolutions? Rooster, just because you're a reasonable person don't assume other people are. Watch it now  Anyway, I think we need a mix of diplomacy and military action. I would offer diplomacy first to anyone, and continue it with people who really want to resolve problems. I don't think we will be able to use diplomacy with a large portion of the Muslims.

Rooster, what would you do when diplomacy fails? What would you do with a nation that backs terrorists who have killed Americans and are only interested in diplomacy as a stalling device while they develop nuclear weapons to kill more? At what point would you be willing to use military force? Seriously.

Muslim radicals will not change. Korea is currently as big a problem, but if they get a new leader (which may not be soon enough) the chance that they have two crazy people in a row isn't as great. The chance of getting a mentally balanced leader in the hardline Muslim countries isn't a bet to put your money on.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Saddam killed an lot more of his people intentionally, all of them innocent, than we have by accident.

The polls you love so much also say that Americans do not want to leave without winning, we lose this and we will be doing it again somewhere else with a lot more brutality than this thing.

The surge seems to be working by the way, much to the dismay of the far left that would rather lose if its in their domestic political interest.

Pelosi is part of that far left, a disgrace and stupid.

If someone like Liberaman doesn't get control of the Dems, and they keep allowing the far left to control them, they will end up looking very foolish in the long run.


----------



## Bgunit68 (Dec 26, 2006)

Plainsman, as usual, well spoken. At this point, people have to put aside whether we should be in Iraq. Too late, we are there. Damascus Nancy needs to remember we have troops fighting for her and the rest of us over there. Cutting funds and support to our troops just to get "your" way is NOT acceptable. If we pull our troops out now it will revert back to the way it was or worse. All those people American and Iraqi who gave theirs lives will have done it in vane. We are in a war. At this point Congress, The Senate or not even The President should be running the war. The only thing they should do is ask the Generals and commanders, fighting over there, what can we do? What can we send to help insure your safety? I love this country. It because of these men and women of the Military we can even say these thing. Pelosi, get your freakin "mightier-than-thou" head out of your...........


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

Sounds like we have the Colter bros. Frank, Jesse and the rest of the gang! Shoot the bastards then they will love America! You have me convinced!


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

> The President should be running the war.


Who do you think has been running the war?? That's one of our problems. Interesting to note that this war has gone on longer than both World Wars and can you say we are half way to being done?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

The president has been trying to run the war, but he is constantly hampered by liberals at every turn. We have been running a politically correct war. In other words were hitting them with powder puffs. We worry more about collateral damage to the enemy than Americans killed right here at home. This will lead to the war being much longer, and ironically more innocent people being killed than if we fought to win quickly.

No president republican or democrat will ever win if the opposing party will not let them win. Nancy is in Syria right now appeasing the enemy. The war will only last longer if she gives them more hope.

I'll make all of you a bet right now. If we get a democratic president a democratic congress, and we pull out of the mid-east we will see another successful terrorist attack in the United States. I would go so far as to say it would happen within the next eight years. Bush has successfully kept that from happening since 911. Liberals will hamstring the patriot act and other enforcement regulations to the point of making us vulnerable. Remember it was a liberal that wouldn't let government enforcement agencies share information.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

WWII was waged on many different fronts, 24/7. If you take all the battles of WWII, break them down into a few all out assaults with just a few hundred or a couple thousand troops in each assault, and the rest of the battles to just a few fire fights a week which is the type of fighting going on in Iraq then WWII at best couldn't have been won in less than 20 years. There were 406,000 Americans killed in just WWII alone and you're trying to compare the two? This is not WWI or WWII....... on the other hand if a few nations want to throw a few million troops into Iraq as was done in WWII then I'm confident the war will be over in a matters of days if not hours. Apples to oranges.


----------



## Gun Owner (Sep 9, 2005)

DJRooster said:


> Who do you think has been running the war?? That's one of our problems. Interesting to note that this war has gone on longer than both World Wars and can you say we are half way to being done?


WW2 started in 1939, and ended in 1945. Thats 6 years. We went into Iraq in 2003, and its now 2007. Thats 4 years. Nice math....

And for what its worth, if you knew your history you'd know that Americans stayed in Germany LONG after the official 1945 end of the war, and continued to battle various groups of Nazis that refused to admit defeat well into the 60s, possibly even the early 70s, but I cant remember that for sure. These groups would use improvised munitions for things like roadside bombs!! Imagine that!!

Seems to me you might oughta not use the world wars connection anymore.

Oh and lastly, 405399 Americans died in WW2. That doesnt count those who died providing security in Germany after the official end of the war. As of the latest count I can find, only 3267 Americans have died in Iraq.


----------



## adokken (Jan 28, 2003)

Three Repuglican Congressmen visited Syria just days before Pelosi, They met with the Syrian president, Bush sent Colin powell over there in 2003. We have had a continous dialogue with Syria for years under this administration. And if I am not mistaken there were two Repuglicans with Pelosi's group. Where do some of you get your information, let me guess Foux News right.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

The Bush administration has cut off dialogue with Syria for the last four years. That's why Colin Powell was the last official visit from the administration in 2003..... four years ago. The Bush administration has discouraged officials from going to Syria but has never stopped them. Representatives going on their fact finding junkets which happen all the time does not in any shape or form represent a dialogue and certainly not a continuos dialogue. Yes, three republicans did visit Syria last week. Do you know who they were?. Would anyone else recognize their name if you told us? does anyone really care? The answer to all questions is no and it doesn't matter because they were not on a sanctioned visit by the White House, thus no dialogue from the administration.

However, as a leader of the Democratic party, as speaker of the house, as the person third in line to the presidency, the symbolism of Pelosi's visit to Syria couldn't be more powerful. Pelosi has openly slammed the administration's policies not just towards Syria, but the entire Middle East. So there's no way in hell that she's there to represent US interests. Nancy Pelosi is there to represent the Democratic party's interests - and her own interests, which are, in no particular order, power, power, and power. Even then she managed to make a humiliating blunder and deliver the wrong message from Israel to Assad. The whole world is laughing at this woman&#8230;..well not everyone. Seems John Kerry thinks it is okay. Maybe a little Fox news watching is in order for you......... at least a better understanding of events would be available instead of the usual radical far left wing bs.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

adokken said:


> Three Repuglican Congressmen visited Syria just days before Pelosi, They met with the Syrian president, Bush sent Colin powell over there in 2003. We have had a continous dialogue with Syria for years under this administration. And if I am not mistaken there were two Repuglicans with Pelosi's group. Where do some of you get your information, let me guess Foux News right.


The republican senators should not be there either if they were not sent by the administration. That is why there is division of power. None of the supreme court justices should be there either, but that is more evident even to the ignorant. Under this division of power the administration decides who goes and who doesn't. If Bush didn't tell the republicans to go they are just as wrong as Nancy.

With that said I don't think the republicans that went had an agenda of destroying the presidents policy for political advantage. A hundred years ago people would have said exactly what this is. Working against Americas best interest and collaborating with the enemy would have been called treason. She has shown us how low she will go for power. Nice burak though.


----------



## adokken (Jan 28, 2003)

She has perfect right to go, after all she is representing another majority of the American electorate. No one can undo the damage to us that has been done to America by this bunch of Fascist that have been in control too long. But it does not hurt to try,I really do not care who is the next president as long as he remembers this is America and we do have a constitution and a Government of the people, I am embaressed every time this intellectualy deficient idividual we have now speaks. I know a few life long Republicans that feel the same way.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

Bush is at a lost as what to do with Iraqi, but Pelosi is just plain dangerous. She is right up there with Feinstein, Boxer and Hillary and that foursome is very dangerous to the 2nd amendment crowd and many others.


----------



## adokken (Jan 28, 2003)

The three Republicans were a officially approved delegation, it was done with the cooperation of this administration.

Now this administration is in the same bed as North Korea, they are letting North Korea sell military equipment to Ethiopia. Of course with money they borrowed from us. so we could just as well give the money to NK directly.

On another note, Bush just save the drug industry 62 million by taking away Wisconsins ability to negotiate cheaper prices for senior care. If that is compassionate conservatism I would hate to see the other one.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

> The three Republicans were a officially approved delegation, it was done with the cooperation of this administration.


I'm sure you have a source to back that up. I'd certainly like to read about it. I don't think they were......... not saying they weren't but I'd certainly like a source if it exists. When you do look for a source here is what you will find.

*"In our view, it is not the right time to have these sort of high-profile visitors to Syria," Sean McCormack, state department spokesman, said on Friday.

He said the state department tried to discourage Pelosi and the others from visiting Syria, but agreed to give their staff a pre-trip briefing.

Dana Perino, White House spokeswoman, said the house speaker "should take a step back and think about the message that it sends.

"This is a country that is a state sponsor of terror, one that is trying to disrupt the Siniora government in Lebanon and one that is allowing foreign fighters to flow into Iraq from its borders."

"the Iraq Study Group recommended a stepped-up diplomatic effort involving Syria and Iran to help calm the violence in Iraq.

The Bush administration has resisted that recommendation and condemned the politicians' visits". *



> Now this administration is in the same bed as North Korea, they are letting North Korea sell military equipment to Ethiopia. Of course with money they borrowed from us. so we could just as well give the money to NK directly.


Just how do you think we should stop them? Surely you can't mean that we should bomb them or go in like we did in Iraq. Since we don't have any trade with them we can't cut that off. Get real......... now as to the money we gave North Korea......... again what is the source for that. I'm sure you have one and would like to share it with us but as far as I know the only thing we ever gave North Korea was food aid to feed their starving people, and nuclear technology supplied by Jimmy Carter and bill Clinton



> On another note, Bush just save the drug industry 62 million by taking away Wisconsins ability to negotiate cheaper prices for senior care. If that is compassionate conservatism I would hate to see the other one.


OK........ lets see now. Bush must have introduced legislation, passed and signed it all by himself. Oh wait a minute I forgot. the President can't introduce legislation can he. He can only sign what ever congress approves and sends to him. Is that the kool-aid drinkers plan now, blame legislation passed by congress on the President. Personally I see your type of thinking and politics as the very reason this country is going down the crapper.



> as long as he remembers this is America and we do have a constitution and a Government of the people


You ever heard of separation of powers? If you get time read about it and then send a copy to queen Pelosi. Hell even the Washington Post which is no friend of the Presidents took a shot at how dumb a stunt Pelosi's trip was and thought she was over stepping her powers.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

adokken said:


> She has perfect right to go, after all she is representing another majority of the American electorate. No one can undo the damage to us that has been done to America by this bunch of Fascist that have been in control too long. But it does not hurt to try,I really do not care who is the next president as long as he remembers this is America and we do have a constitution and a Government of the people, I am embaressed every time this intellectualy deficient idividual we have now speaks. I know a few life long Republicans that feel the same way.


It's plain you don't understand adokken. Under the separtation of powers she does not have a perfect right to go. As a matter of fact she violated the constitution to the tune of a felony. You will never hear this from the liberal news, and Bush evidently knowing it would be unwise to stir the pot just let her go ahead. Perhaps he is just letting her make a fool of herself as she evidently has already accomplished.

I don't think she botched the message from Israel to Syria, I think she is such an arrogant jerk that she thought if she said it Israel would have to follow through. She thinks she can force her desires on another country. Botched my behind, pure and simple arrogance beyond belief.

What can you expect from a woman who wants all Christian religious symbols out of schools and courts, but wears a burka when she travels to the mid-east? I don't know why she can't respect us Christian sportsmen with firearms as much as she does Muslim terrorists seeking nuclear weapons.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

boy plainsman, you hit it on the head with pelosi, like i said, she is very dangerous!


----------



## adokken (Jan 28, 2003)

Some of the posters on here hate any Democrat so much that reason is foreign to their thinking process. It is a lesson in futility to have a dialogue
with most of them. Lets face it, Bush has created a comprehensive catastrophe across the middle east. We and our Grandchildren will be paying for his mistakes for generations. I think about what it was like after WW 2 when we delivered grain on ships to Europe and Japan, we were loved and respected even by Japan who had been our enemy. Now thanks to this administration we are hated world wide.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Adokken, I respect your loyalty to the democratic party, but the party you remember is long gone. Today's democratic party has sold it's soul for power. The republicans are only slightly better.

We were hated throughout the world long before Bush. Much of the world hates us because they want to be us. Our allies don't like us that much, because they would like to be us, our true enemies hate us even more. The greatest irony of all this is that the Muslims hate our lifestyle. The lifestyle they hate is the things the democrats love. Ask a Muslim about same sex marriage. Ask a Muslim about abortion. Ask a Muslim what he thinks of Hollywood. Why do you think they call us the Great Satan?



> Some of the posters on here hate any Democrat so much that reason is foreign to their thinking process.


I think that shoe fits you much better than I Adokken. It's Bush's fault for everything defies logic, yet we hear it like a worn mantra, with no verified evidence to support it. Also, I will be the first to admit there are democrats I like, but because I like some I don't overlook the treacherous. With the radicals controlling that party how can sportsman who want to keep their firearms support them?

Adokken, do you understand now why she shouldn't be there, unless at the request of a member of the administration. Do you understand that it violates the constitution? You say we hate so much we do not understand. Do you understand those constitutional objections we have with Nancy violating the separation of powers? What she is now doing is the duty of the administrative powers of our government, not the supreme court, nor congress. I would guess that you are so partisan you can admit that to yourself, but I hope I am wrong. These portions of the constitution are not to hinder your beloved Nancy, they are to protect the American people from to much power gained by either of the three divisions of our government. Personally I think the supreme court violates this part of the constitution when they try to legislate from the bench. That is pushed by democrats also. When they can't win in congress they try to ram it down our throats by using an activist judge.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

> we were loved and respected even by Japan who had been our enemy


As someone who lived in Japan for 7 years I can tell you first hand that is absolutely untrue. In our initial occupation of Japan we were hated even more so than the Iraqis feel about us now. If it hadn't of been for the brilliance of General MacArthur to allow the Emperor to remain in place as a symbol of their culture, the military to remain but as a defense force only with no constitutional authority and all the different religions and shrines to remain intact, things might have turned out differently. It wasn't until the late 50's that all the decisions of MacArthur came to a conclusion and the Japanese became one of our biggest allies. The Germans never did really accept us and if you just look closer, you can see that for yourself today. Of course the rest of Europe accepted us and what we could give them. They were a bombed out and defeated country that was starving to death and would have accepted anyone to get back on their feet. Except for France, all of those countries were very thankful for the help.


----------



## 280IM (Mar 28, 2005)

Are Nancy and Hanoi Jane room mates,pen pals, they seem to be a lot alike.


----------



## Bgunit68 (Dec 26, 2006)

Yeah, Adokken, this hatred for Americans came from Bush. Don't you remember when Clinton was in office we were having family picnics with the Taliban. You say our Grandchildren will be paying for this mistake. Get a grip. The 3000 innocent people that died Sept 11 whose mistake did they pay for? I have several friends in Iraq. What you see on TV and what they are telling me are two different stories. But let's see....where do a lot of these stories come from.. The AP. Humm they're not liberal at all. I don't agree with Bush on all issues but I support him as I do our troops. Like Plainsman has said it comes down to voting for the lesser of 2 evils. But in these times I want a president that will take no crap. God bless the GREATEST NATION IN THE WORLD! You don't like it move.


----------



## Bgunit68 (Dec 26, 2006)

Yeah 280IM. Hanoi Jane and Damascus Nancy!


----------



## Bore.224 (Mar 23, 2005)

IT all comes down to this in my opinion. If the America of today was fighting in WWII of yestarday we would be one of two things. 1. still fighting that war or 2. speaking German.

The left cry's bloody murder when when a stray bomb hits a hospital, so our spinless Goverment goes in soft :eyeroll: costing casualties on our side because of this. Then the left wing mind *****es when the war is not over yet uke: Truely the left is the real enemy !


----------



## Bore.224 (Mar 23, 2005)

adokken said:


> Some of the posters on here hate any Democrat so much that reason is foreign to their thinking process. It is a lesson in futility to have a dialogue
> with most of them. Lets face it, Bush has created a comprehensive catastrophe across the middle east. We and our Grandchildren will be paying for his mistakes for generations. I think about what it was like after WW 2 when we delivered grain on ships to Europe and Japan, we were loved and respected even by Japan who had been our enemy. Now thanks to this administration we are hated world wide.


Ok let's drop the Bomb and then you can ship all the grain and bandaids you want!

The reason it is futile to have dialogue is the left wing thinks with their heart not their mind.

Bush has not created a catastrophe, we were attacked and we have to react. Its a new kind of war we are fighting and the enemy knows our weakness and that weakness is the left wing mind.


----------

