Re: Wartime role for overseas USAF Aggressor squadrons?
- From: "Daryl Hunt" <dhunt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 17:16:09 -0700
"Ed Rasimus" <rasimusSPAMLESS@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:0oh933lvufobhfv5a8fg7mrqsl1f7ga7dl@xxxxxxxxxx
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 22:27:17 -0400, "Flashnews" <skitech@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Ok Ed what is the problem with Harry ReidThe irresponsibility of declaring from the majority leader's seat of
the US Senate that "the war is lost" while 165,000 American fighting
men and women are engaged in conflict. That's what's wrong with Reid.
There was a cliche in the military, "lead, follow or get the hell out
of the way." Reid was never willing to lead or follow in combat, so he
should get out of the way of those who are willing and able to defend
the nation.
We don't agree on much but we do on that. I suggest that we tally up the BS
time lost that WE paid for and dock every single one of the Congress
Critters that much. Send them a bill and make them pay for it. The bill
that is pending is the most waste time they have done in a very, very long
time. Knowingly, they don't have the votes to override a veto and then
sending it forward where they already know it's going to be vetoed. Then
working on the real bill. Just how stupid do they think we are. Time to
throw all the bums out.
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Wartime role for overseas USAF Aggressor squadrons?
- Next by Date: Re: Wartime role for overseas USAF Aggressor squadrons?
- Previous by thread: Re: Wartime role for overseas USAF Aggressor squadrons?
- Next by thread: Re: Wartime role for overseas USAF Aggressor squadrons?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading