JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JR North wrote:
Won't matter. NC is still on the Glass Bowl list.
JR


NotNow wrote:

That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and
used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got
those journalists released.
North Carolina??
Whatever the deal was, it was set up long before President Clinton got
his plane tickets...

And you know this how?

Well, because deals this big don't happen in 25 minutes in a room with
two men...

That's speculating at best. I asked how you KNEW this.

wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 12:52:27 -0400, H the K
wrote:

The 737 was "donated" for the
mission.

I bet the plane came from the CIA. Who else has a 737 with absolutely
no writing on it beyond a registration number (that may be bogus)?



Steve Bing, well-known Democratic Party fund-raiser and donor, and
father of actress Liz Hurley's baby.

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:46:49 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Little John wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 10:51:54 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Little John wrote:
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:56:58 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Little John wrote:
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:06:58 -0400, NotNow wrote:

That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used
that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those
journalists released.
Of course, we don't know (yet) what we gave them. Forgiveness for
developing nukes? Missile development details? Promises for reduced
penalties?

Or do you think it was just 'personality'? Remember, diplomacy is a
two-way street.
--

John H
The White House is saying Clinton went on his own. I didn't know he had
the authority to do any of the above. But, I do notice that without one
shred of evidence or even hearsay, you've swept it under the carpet as a
bad thing.
I said no such thing. My, you are good at attempting to put words in
the mouths of others.

Do you believe that diplomacy is a one way street? Do you really
believe Kim did thissimply as a reflection of North Korea's
"humanitarian and peaceloving policy"?
--

John H
Okay, so I was wrong. You like the fact that Clinton is a humanitarian
on a humanitarian mission and you like the fact that he was, indeed
great enough to get the reporters released.

Yes, you were wrong.

Are you changing your line from 'diplomacy' to 'humanitarian mission'?

Do you honestly believe Kim, Jong Il will get nothing out of this but
'charitable feelings'?
--

John H
I don't know John, perhaps we should have left those asshole sissy
journalists to die at the hands of Kim? Or would you suggest 10's of
billions in war debt?

I don't know either. But why make all the negative comments because
the questions are asked.

Why would you suggest the journalists be left to die? Do you think
Kim, JI would have allowed that? If so, then he's surely not one to do
things because he gets a 'charitable feeling'.

Tens of billions in war debt? From where? Hell, we'll have *trillions*
of 'vote buying' debt very soon. Personally, I'd rather spend a couple
billion taking away the nuclear option from Kim, JI. But I can also
understand that you may hold with the liberal philosophy that the bad
guys aren't really bad.
--

John H

Little John wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:46:49 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Little John wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 10:51:54 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Little John wrote:
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:56:58 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Little John wrote:
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:06:58 -0400, NotNow wrote:

That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used
that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those
journalists released.
Of course, we don't know (yet) what we gave them. Forgiveness for
developing nukes? Missile development details? Promises for reduced
penalties?

Or do you think it was just 'personality'? Remember, diplomacy is a
two-way street.
--

John H
The White House is saying Clinton went on his own. I didn't know he had
the authority to do any of the above. But, I do notice that without one
shred of evidence or even hearsay, you've swept it under the carpet as a
bad thing.
I said no such thing. My, you are good at attempting to put words in
the mouths of others.

Do you believe that diplomacy is a one way street? Do you really
believe Kim did thissimply as a reflection of North Korea's
"humanitarian and peaceloving policy"?
--

John H
Okay, so I was wrong. You like the fact that Clinton is a humanitarian
on a humanitarian mission and you like the fact that he was, indeed
great enough to get the reporters released.
Yes, you were wrong.

Are you changing your line from 'diplomacy' to 'humanitarian mission'?

Do you honestly believe Kim, Jong Il will get nothing out of this but
'charitable feelings'?
--

John H
I don't know John, perhaps we should have left those asshole sissy
journalists to die at the hands of Kim? Or would you suggest 10's of
billions in war debt?

I don't know either. But why make all the negative comments because
the questions are asked.

Why would you suggest the journalists be left to die?

Because Clinton did what he could do to get them released. And in narrow
mindedness, some here just can't except that because Oh, my God he's a
liberal........
I have never, ever heard you utter one statement here about any liberal
that wasn't negative. It's the reverse of Harry.

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:33:34 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Little John wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:46:49 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Little John wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 10:51:54 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Little John wrote:
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:56:58 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Little John wrote:
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:06:58 -0400, NotNow wrote:

That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used
that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those
journalists released.
Of course, we don't know (yet) what we gave them. Forgiveness for
developing nukes? Missile development details? Promises for reduced
penalties?

Or do you think it was just 'personality'? Remember, diplomacy is a
two-way street.
--

John H
The White House is saying Clinton went on his own. I didn't know he had
the authority to do any of the above. But, I do notice that without one
shred of evidence or even hearsay, you've swept it under the carpet as a
bad thing.
I said no such thing. My, you are good at attempting to put words in
the mouths of others.

Do you believe that diplomacy is a one way street? Do you really
believe Kim did thissimply as a reflection of North Korea's
"humanitarian and peaceloving policy"?
--

John H
Okay, so I was wrong. You like the fact that Clinton is a humanitarian
on a humanitarian mission and you like the fact that he was, indeed
great enough to get the reporters released.
Yes, you were wrong.

Are you changing your line from 'diplomacy' to 'humanitarian mission'?

Do you honestly believe Kim, Jong Il will get nothing out of this but
'charitable feelings'?
--

John H
I don't know John, perhaps we should have left those asshole sissy
journalists to die at the hands of Kim? Or would you suggest 10's of
billions in war debt?

I don't know either. But why make all the negative comments because
the questions are asked.

Why would you suggest the journalists be left to die?

Because Clinton did what he could do to get them released. And in narrow
mindedness, some here just can't except that because Oh, my God he's a
liberal........
I have never, ever heard you utter one statement here about any liberal
that wasn't negative. It's the reverse of Harry.

OK, maybe you're right.

Here goes...

"Obama can spend money faster than anyone I've ever heard of.?

How's that?
--

John H

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:42:55 -0400, Little John
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:33:34 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Little John wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:46:49 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Little John wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 10:51:54 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Little John wrote:
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:56:58 -0400, NotNow wrote:

Little John wrote:
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:06:58 -0400, NotNow wrote:

That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used
that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those
journalists released.
Of course, we don't know (yet) what we gave them. Forgiveness for
developing nukes? Missile development details? Promises for reduced
penalties?

Or do you think it was just 'personality'? Remember, diplomacy is a
two-way street.
--

John H
The White House is saying Clinton went on his own. I didn't know he had
the authority to do any of the above. But, I do notice that without one
shred of evidence or even hearsay, you've swept it under the carpet as a
bad thing.
I said no such thing. My, you are good at attempting to put words in
the mouths of others.

Do you believe that diplomacy is a one way street? Do you really
believe Kim did thissimply as a reflection of North Korea's
"humanitarian and peaceloving policy"?
--

John H
Okay, so I was wrong. You like the fact that Clinton is a humanitarian
on a humanitarian mission and you like the fact that he was, indeed
great enough to get the reporters released.
Yes, you were wrong.

Are you changing your line from 'diplomacy' to 'humanitarian mission'?

Do you honestly believe Kim, Jong Il will get nothing out of this but
'charitable feelings'?
--

John H
I don't know John, perhaps we should have left those asshole sissy
journalists to die at the hands of Kim? Or would you suggest 10's of
billions in war debt?

I don't know either. But why make all the negative comments because
the questions are asked.

Why would you suggest the journalists be left to die?

Because Clinton did what he could do to get them released. And in narrow
mindedness, some here just can't except that because Oh, my God he's a
liberal........
I have never, ever heard you utter one statement here about any liberal
that wasn't negative. It's the reverse of Harry.

OK, maybe you're right.

Here goes...

"Obama can spend money faster than anyone I've ever heard of.?

How's that?

Oh, I guess I could have said Pelosi's a cute little thing.

But being called the reverse of Harry is quite an honor. Thank you.
--

John H

H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:
NotNow wrote:
That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea,
and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called
diplomacy and got those journalists released.

Clinton was used.



Clinton got the young ladies out of North Korea. That's what
matters.

Where was your president, you know...Dubya...drunk?

What did Obama do to get them out? Absolutely nothing!



How would you know that?

Enlighten me.



Enlightening you would be a Sisyphean task.

Your grasp of politics as played, yes played, on the world stage is
staggeringly light.


This from a dummy who joined the marines instead of going to college?

It sucks when a guy you believe is dumber than you actually knows more
about the world than you do, isn't it Harry?

And it is Marines with a capital M.

BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:
NotNow wrote:
That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea,
and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called
diplomacy and got those journalists released.

Clinton was used.



Clinton got the young ladies out of North Korea. That's what
matters.

Where was your president, you know...Dubya...drunk?

What did Obama do to get them out? Absolutely nothing!



How would you know that?

Enlighten me.



Enlightening you would be a Sisyphean task.

Your grasp of politics as played, yes played, on the world stage is
staggeringly light.


This from a dummy who joined the marines instead of going to college?

It sucks when a guy you believe is dumber than you actually knows more
about the world than you do, isn't it Harry?

And it is Marines with a capital M.



A. If you are referring to yourself, I've not seen anything to
substantiate your claim.
'
B. Sorry, but "capital M" doesn't pass my who gives a **** test.
It is marines.

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:41:31 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:00:54 -0700, jps wrote:

We are not really sure what was in the bag, we just know who the bag
man was. I imagine we gave them a fat foreign aid package.
The lesson reaffirmed was, take hostages or threaten us and the US
will pay up.
That has been true at least since the Kennedy administration when JFK
gave Kruschev everything he wanted to get the missiles out of Cuba, in
spite of a lot of gothic theater and saber rattling.

We gave them a photo op. KJI made it into a state visit to bolster
his own image within the country. He's trying to manipulate handing
power to his son and he's not doing as well as he'd like in the being
worshipped department.

This was purely KJI proving that he had the stones and the leverage to
get a former president to come to NK.

If we gave them anything, it'd have come through the State Department
and official channels.

I am sure the concessions did come through the State Department. The
former president does speak to the SoS occasionally ... I imagine.

The deal was that Clinton's appearance would reflect well on dear
leader. That was payment enough.

H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:
NotNow wrote:
That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North
Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull****
called diplomacy and got those journalists released.

Clinton was used.



Clinton got the young ladies out of North Korea. That's what
matters.

Where was your president, you know...Dubya...drunk?

What did Obama do to get them out? Absolutely nothing!



How would you know that?

Enlighten me.



Enlightening you would be a Sisyphean task.

Your grasp of politics as played, yes played, on the world stage is
staggeringly light.


This from a dummy who joined the marines instead of going to college?

It sucks when a guy you believe is dumber than you actually knows more
about the world than you do, isn't it Harry?

And it is Marines with a capital M.



A. If you are referring to yourself, I've not seen anything to
substantiate your claim.
'
B. Sorry, but "capital M" doesn't pass my who gives a **** test.
It is marines.

That's what people find so dis-likable about you.