"I am Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 08:55:12 -0500, John H
wrote:

To the editor:

I don't understand why the White House is so upset about the two party
crashers at Barack Obama's steak dinner the other night. Is it really
appropriate and politically correct to call them party crashers just
because they trespassed on Mr. Obama?


of course, under bush, they would have been tortured, thrown in
prision and denied habeas corpus

unless they were rich in which case they would have been coddled and
schmoozed.

Yeah, and when Clinton was in, they would have gotten the Lincoln
bedroom, a blow job, and access to all of our defense plans for China
and the middle east handed to them on a Hard Drive, what's your point?


Yeah, the difference is this happened recently, is a major breach in
presidential security, and Clinton was so last century.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 19:04:11 -0500, I am Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 08:55:12 -0500, John H
wrote:

To the editor:

I don't understand why the White House is so upset about the two party
crashers at Barack Obama's steak dinner the other night. Is it really
appropriate and politically correct to call them party crashers just
because they trespassed on Mr. Obama?


of course, under bush, they would have been tortured, thrown in
prision and denied habeas corpus

unless they were rich in which case they would have been coddled and
schmoozed.

Yeah, and when Clinton was in, they would have gotten the Lincoln
bedroom, a blow job, and access to all of our defense plans for China
and the middle east handed to them on a Hard Drive, what's your point?

clinton sold out hilary

bush sold out 100,000,000 hard working americans.

that's the point

On Dec 13, 7:41*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"I am Tosk" wrote in ...





In article ,
says...

On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 08:55:12 -0500, John H
wrote:

To the editor:

I don't understand why the White House is so upset about the two party
crashers at Barack Obama's steak dinner the other night. Is it really
appropriate and politically correct to call them party crashers just
because they trespassed on Mr. Obama?

of course, under bush, they would have been tortured, thrown in
prision and denied habeas corpus

unless they were rich in which case they would have been coddled and
schmoozed.

Yeah, and when Clinton was in, they would have gotten the Lincoln
bedroom, a blow job, and access to all of our defense plans for China
and the middle east handed to them on a Hard Drive, what's your point?

Yeah, the difference is this happened recently, is a major breach in
presidential security, and Clinton was so last century.

--
Nom=de=Plume- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Damn it you just don't get it EVERYTHING bad is the fault of some
liberal politician. Notice if you will, not one word mentioned about
Bush's gaffes, just went right to Clinton!

"Loogypicker" wrote in message
...
On Dec 13, 7:41 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"I am Tosk" wrote in
...





In article ,
says...

On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 08:55:12 -0500, John H
wrote:

To the editor:

I don't understand why the White House is so upset about the two party
crashers at Barack Obama's steak dinner the other night. Is it really
appropriate and politically correct to call them party crashers just
because they trespassed on Mr. Obama?

of course, under bush, they would have been tortured, thrown in
prision and denied habeas corpus

unless they were rich in which case they would have been coddled and
schmoozed.

Yeah, and when Clinton was in, they would have gotten the Lincoln
bedroom, a blow job, and access to all of our defense plans for China
and the middle east handed to them on a Hard Drive, what's your point?

Yeah, the difference is this happened recently, is a major breach in
presidential security, and Clinton was so last century.

--
Nom=de=Plume- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Damn it you just don't get it EVERYTHING bad is the fault of some
liberal politician. Notice if you will, not one word mentioned about
Bush's gaffes, just went right to Clinton!

Bush, apparently, doesn't actually exist any more.



--
Nom=de=Plume

On Dec 14, 10:10*am, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Loogypicker" wrote in message

...
On Dec 13, 7:41 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:





"I am Tosk" wrote in
...

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 08:55:12 -0500, John H
wrote:

To the editor:

I don't understand why the White House is so upset about the two party
crashers at Barack Obama's steak dinner the other night. Is it really
appropriate and politically correct to call them party crashers just
because they trespassed on Mr. Obama?

of course, under bush, they would have been tortured, thrown in
prision and denied habeas corpus

unless they were rich in which case they would have been coddled and
schmoozed.

Yeah, and when Clinton was in, they would have gotten the Lincoln
bedroom, a blow job, and access to all of our defense plans for China
and the middle east handed to them on a Hard Drive, what's your point?

Yeah, the difference is this happened recently, is a major breach in
presidential security, and Clinton was so last century.

--
Nom=de=Plume- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
Damn it you just don't get it EVERYTHING bad is the fault of some
liberal politician. Notice if you will, not one word mentioned about
Bush's gaffes, just went right to Clinton!

Bush, apparently, doesn't actually exist any more.

--
Nom=de=Plume- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

He exists, it's just that some here can't believe that anyone on the
right ever done anything wrong.....