Jurched said:
This whole thread is impossible to understand. I can't even tell who's being the sarcastic wise-ass and who's being the conservative and who's the bolshevik. This is the sort of half-assedism that pervades today's political rants.
Anyway, I won't let you faggits trash the Gipper! Appropriations were never proven illegal, they pissed off the ruling Demoncrats who didn't like someone side-stepping their leftist agenda.
Exactly, the demoncrats were ruling America, even though the Iran Contra scandal took place under a republican controlled Congress. Anyway what are we arguing about? I completely support Reagan's actions.
And yes, the appropriations were never proven illegal, despite the fact that Oliver Noth, John Poindexter, Caspar Weinberger, and others were convicted of lying to congress, obstruction of justice, conspiracy, and destroying government documents. But again, they were all completely justified because they were republicans, and republicans can do no wrong.
I don't know if you're uneducated or being a wise-ass again. Both suck. Everything you've said is wrong.
It's okay, you don't need to deny the fact that Ronald "God" Reagan propped the progressive democrat Saddam Hussein onto his throne, along with the USSR and France during the 80s. After all, we have pics of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Hussein.
But again, Reagan did the right thing by supporting the progressive dicator Hussein. Not too many people were killed during Saddam Hussein's genocide. It's not like there were mass graves or anything.
Jim Wright had the clout, he used it, not enough people were found guilty, he was made to look a total ass, he lost his job as a result. Real brilliant, those indictments.
Yes, and this means that the 137 or so people in the administration which were accused and indicted of criminal activity were all innocent. After all, the S&L scandal, Iran Contra, and the funding of bin Laden certainly prove that Reagan was an honorable and honest man.
You bet your yellow ass! Anyway, Latin America was military-based socialist, not Soviet-based socialist.
Yes, the fall of the Soviet Union had nothing to do with the fact that their economy was suffering under out of control spending from the past two decades, and it certainly had nothing to do with Gorbachev's reforms which Reagan took credit for.
Nope, everyone knows that Ronald Reagan swam over to the USSR and single-handedly brought down the Soviet Union like Rambo. This is why he needs to be on Mt. Rushmore.
I will keep saying it over and over to the bullhorn blowers of total bullshit:
OSAMA has his own money, he was never trained or supported by anyone!
Why can't you Brainless idiots deposit this fact in your heads?
It's okay, it's been proven that the Reagan administration and the CIA funded the Mujahidin between 82 and 88 (at which point bin Laden left). After all, how could Al Qaeda take over Kabul without their CIA training?
But clearly, the Russians were the evil ones to invade Afghanistan, and the CIA was right to support Islamic fundamentalists. History has proven that Islamic militants really aren't dangerous, and that commies want to destroy America.
Cool
. We are going to try and record in the summer if our schedules work out right. I have some demos that I will try and send you sometime. Some of my best work yet IMO. I had an interview for a new job yesterday in a different department also. I think it went well but it takes forever to hear back from them(I know from my past interviews) So if I get the job it would be a step up in pay and job title:Smokedev:
