AUfan88 0 Posted June 5, 2006 Share Posted June 5, 2006 The Auburner Politics and SEC Coaches, I thoroughly enjoyed this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwise0022 1 Posted June 5, 2006 Share Posted June 5, 2006 Although I do not consider myself a redneck, I do find myself strangely intrigued by Ann Coulter. In all reality, she is a genius, named one of the 100 smartest private citizens. I'll take her on my political side over Hilary Clinton anyday. Dick Morris is also a genius. The Karl Rove of the Clinton Presidency. Anyone who can get a guy who has been accused of rape, money laundering, and nicknamed Bubba into the whitehouse has to be doing something right. Terry Bowden never says anything interesting. Shula and Hilary Clinton? Ouch. I hate Hilary but I feel bad for her having to be compared to him. Steve Spurrier reminds me of Cynthia Mckennie, wait no...Richard Jefferson (D) from Louisana. Don't ask me why, but I am sure Spurrier is cheating somehow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinCrimson 61 Posted June 5, 2006 Share Posted June 5, 2006 Wait, Houston Nutt and W have "moments of brilliance?" W tries to sell our ports to terrorists and Nutt loses to Vandy... and those are the successful days on the job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Eagle 96 10 Posted June 5, 2006 Share Posted June 5, 2006 Wait, Houston Nutt and W have "moments of brilliance?" W tries to sell our ports to terrorists and Nutt loses to Vandy... and those are the successful days on the job. 238532[/snapback] :huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinCrimson 61 Posted June 5, 2006 Share Posted June 5, 2006 Wait, Houston Nutt and W have "moments of brilliance?" W tries to sell our ports to terrorists and Nutt loses to Vandy... and those are the successful days on the job. 238532[/snapback] :huh: 238569[/snapback] The UAE ports deal... aka outsourcing the keys to America to a country that supports terrorism and was the native country of many of the 9/11 hijackers. But that's still prolly a better move than losing to Vandy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCTiger 0 Posted June 5, 2006 Share Posted June 5, 2006 Spurrier's Counterpart: The Weesle From the smirk, to the "Aw, shucks" attitude with the press, these two are peas in a pod. The difference is that when Spurrier was lured to DC to take control of a problematic organization and began making blunders, he found his way back home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boddatiger99 5 Posted June 5, 2006 Share Posted June 5, 2006 Spurrier's Counterpart: The Weesle From the smirk, to the "Aw, shucks" attitude with the press, these two are peas in a pod. The difference is that when Spurrier was lured to DC to take control of a problematic organization and began making blunders, he found his way back home. 238638[/snapback] Perfect. Nicely done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwise0022 1 Posted June 5, 2006 Share Posted June 5, 2006 Wait, Houston Nutt and W have "moments of brilliance?" W tries to sell our ports to terrorists and Nutt loses to Vandy... and those are the successful days on the job. 238532[/snapback] If you are accusing the state of Dubai as being a state of terrorists you had better have evidence to back it up, outside of what you have read on Moveon.org. True: money to the 9/11 terrorists was held in UAE banks. Also true: money to the 9/11 terrorists was distributed through US banks. Conclusion: the US is a terrorist nation...False. By the way, W doesn't own the ports, therefore, it is not his decision to sell the ports. All sales to foreign governments must be reviewed by the government. The Dubai Ports deal was reviewed and ok'd. W simply allowed those with the knowledge to ok the decision to conduct their business without interference. Anyone who knows anything about Dubai knows that they are trying to become more westernized. They are spending billions to become the worlds foremost vacation destination. It would not serve their overall goal to support terrorism. Not to get into a political debate, and I know many will disagree with me, but you cannot call a nation that has been the most supportive of the US in the region "terrorists". It makes you sound ignorant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcgufcm 4,107 Posted June 5, 2006 Share Posted June 5, 2006 israel is most supportive of the us, and they're from the region. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwise0022 1 Posted June 5, 2006 Share Posted June 5, 2006 israel is most supportive of the us, and they're from the region. 238653[/snapback] You are right. Edit in "Most supportive Islamic country in the region", sorry for any confusion this might have caused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKCAUB 0 Posted June 5, 2006 Share Posted June 5, 2006 Wait, Houston Nutt and W have "moments of brilliance?" W tries to sell our ports to terrorists and Nutt loses to Vandy... and those are the successful days on the job. 238532[/snapback] If you are accusing the state of Dubai as being a state of terrorists you had better have evidence to back it up, outside of what you have read on Moveon.org. True: money to the 9/11 terrorists was held in UAE banks. Also true: money to the 9/11 terrorists was distributed through US banks. Conclusion: the US is a terrorist nation...False. By the way, W doesn't own the ports, therefore, it is not his decision to sell the ports. All sales to foreign governments must be reviewed by the government. The Dubai Ports deal was reviewed and ok'd. W simply allowed those with the knowledge to ok the decision to conduct their business without interference. Anyone who knows anything about Dubai knows that they are trying to become more westernized. They are spending billions to become the worlds foremost vacation destination. It would not serve their overall goal to support terrorism. Not to get into a political debate, and I know many will disagree with me, but you cannot call a nation that has been the most supportive of the US in the region "terrorists". It makes you sound ignorant. 238650[/snapback] Good grief! Don't get me started! Political correctness run amoke. We shouldn't be letting anyone run our ports but US! Period! PLUS...they have a crappy football team in Dubai...and that's a fact! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwise0022 1 Posted June 5, 2006 Share Posted June 5, 2006 Wait, Houston Nutt and W have "moments of brilliance?" W tries to sell our ports to terrorists and Nutt loses to Vandy... and those are the successful days on the job. 238532[/snapback] If you are accusing the state of Dubai as being a state of terrorists you had better have evidence to back it up, outside of what you have read on Moveon.org. True: money to the 9/11 terrorists was held in UAE banks. Also true: money to the 9/11 terrorists was distributed through US banks. Conclusion: the US is a terrorist nation...False. By the way, W doesn't own the ports, therefore, it is not his decision to sell the ports. All sales to foreign governments must be reviewed by the government. The Dubai Ports deal was reviewed and ok'd. W simply allowed those with the knowledge to ok the decision to conduct their business without interference. Anyone who knows anything about Dubai knows that they are trying to become more westernized. They are spending billions to become the worlds foremost vacation destination. It would not serve their overall goal to support terrorism. Not to get into a political debate, and I know many will disagree with me, but you cannot call a nation that has been the most supportive of the US in the region "terrorists". It makes you sound ignorant. 238650[/snapback] Good grief! Don't get me started! Political correctness run amoke. We shouldn't be letting anyone run our ports but US! Period! PLUS...they have a crappy football team in Dubai...and that's a fact! 238666[/snapback] Funny you should say that. An English (meaning from Great Britain) company was running our ports before the company was bought by Dubai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Eagle 96 10 Posted June 5, 2006 Share Posted June 5, 2006 Wait, Houston Nutt and W have "moments of brilliance?" W tries to sell our ports to terrorists and Nutt loses to Vandy... and those are the successful days on the job. 238532[/snapback] If you are accusing the state of Dubai as being a state of terrorists you had better have evidence to back it up, outside of what you have read on Moveon.org. True: money to the 9/11 terrorists was held in UAE banks. Also true: money to the 9/11 terrorists was distributed through US banks. Conclusion: the US is a terrorist nation...False. By the way, W doesn't own the ports, therefore, it is not his decision to sell the ports. All sales to foreign governments must be reviewed by the government. The Dubai Ports deal was reviewed and ok'd. W simply allowed those with the knowledge to ok the decision to conduct their business without interference. Anyone who knows anything about Dubai knows that they are trying to become more westernized. They are spending billions to become the worlds foremost vacation destination. It would not serve their overall goal to support terrorism. Not to get into a political debate, and I know many will disagree with me, but you cannot call a nation that has been the most supportive of the US in the region "terrorists". It makes you sound ignorant. 238650[/snapback] What he said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinCrimson 61 Posted June 6, 2006 Share Posted June 6, 2006 Wait, Houston Nutt and W have "moments of brilliance?" W tries to sell our ports to terrorists and Nutt loses to Vandy... and those are the successful days on the job. 238532[/snapback] If you are accusing the state of Dubai as being a state of terrorists you had better have evidence to back it up, outside of what you have read on Moveon.org. True: money to the 9/11 terrorists was held in UAE banks. Also true: money to the 9/11 terrorists was distributed through US banks. Conclusion: the US is a terrorist nation...False. By the way, W doesn't own the ports, therefore, it is not his decision to sell the ports. All sales to foreign governments must be reviewed by the government. The Dubai Ports deal was reviewed and ok'd. W simply allowed those with the knowledge to ok the decision to conduct their business without interference. Anyone who knows anything about Dubai knows that they are trying to become more westernized. They are spending billions to become the worlds foremost vacation destination. It would not serve their overall goal to support terrorism. Not to get into a political debate, and I know many will disagree with me, but you cannot call a nation that has been the most supportive of the US in the region "terrorists". It makes you sound ignorant. 238650[/snapback] I don't care what they're "trying to become." The fact is that UAE has sponsored terrorism before. And while we're on the subject, it isn't solely the idea of a terrorism supporting nation being in charge of securing our ports, but the idea of ANY nation other than the good 'ol US of A being in charge of our national security boils my blood. I don't want England controlling them either. Political rant off, for the time being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tigrinum Major Posted June 6, 2006 Share Posted June 6, 2006 Boys. boys, take it to the political forum. Y'all are ruining my enjoyment of the humor in that link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinCrimson 61 Posted June 6, 2006 Share Posted June 6, 2006 Boys. boys, take it to the political forum. Y'all are ruining my enjoyment of the humor in that link. 238721[/snapback] You aren't going to add any words of wisdom, TM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tigrinum Major Posted June 6, 2006 Share Posted June 6, 2006 I have no wise words this evening. Just a headache and a morbid curiousity of just how bad the Yanks are going to beatthe Sox this evening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwise0022 1 Posted June 6, 2006 Share Posted June 6, 2006 Wait, Houston Nutt and W have "moments of brilliance?" W tries to sell our ports to terrorists and Nutt loses to Vandy... and those are the successful days on the job. 238532[/snapback] If you are accusing the state of Dubai as being a state of terrorists you had better have evidence to back it up, outside of what you have read on Moveon.org. True: money to the 9/11 terrorists was held in UAE banks. Also true: money to the 9/11 terrorists was distributed through US banks. Conclusion: the US is a terrorist nation...False. By the way, W doesn't own the ports, therefore, it is not his decision to sell the ports. All sales to foreign governments must be reviewed by the government. The Dubai Ports deal was reviewed and ok'd. W simply allowed those with the knowledge to ok the decision to conduct their business without interference. Anyone who knows anything about Dubai knows that they are trying to become more westernized. They are spending billions to become the worlds foremost vacation destination. It would not serve their overall goal to support terrorism. Not to get into a political debate, and I know many will disagree with me, but you cannot call a nation that has been the most supportive of the US in the region "terrorists". It makes you sound ignorant. 238650[/snapback] I don't care what they're "trying to become." The fact is that UAE has sponsored terrorism before. And while we're on the subject, it isn't solely the idea of a terrorism supporting nation being in charge of securing our ports, but the idea of ANY nation other than the good 'ol US of A being in charge of our national security boils my blood. I don't want England controlling them either. Political rant off, for the time being. 238719[/snapback] My problem with you is that your premise is wrong. The UAE would not have been in charge of port security, but rather port management. Do you really trust a bunch of teamsters to protect us, no! And neither does the government. That is why port security is not done by unionized US workers, or English workers, or UAE workers. Port security has been and will be the charge of the US government, as it should be. You clearly do not understand the reality of the situation and have bought into rank propoganda by the ultra liberal media. That is my problem with you sir. You didn't take the time to find out the truth, but rather excepted what was reported as truth. Anyone who thinks the Bush administration is incompetent on fighting terrorism need only look at the fact that no terrorist attacks have occurred in the USA for the last 5 years. Who would have thought that 5 years ago? You are a bandwagon jumper, and when you hear everyone else accusing the administration of incompetency, you assume that is the truth, just like almost everyone else. But you fail to realize reality, which is that the incompetency of this administration has improved our safety, which I am, and forever will be, grateful, regardless of what everyone else says. That sir, should preclude you from accusing our commander and chief of being incompetent while our fine men and women are in harms way. Show some respect, intelligence, and even, dare I say, patriotism. I expect at least that (even from a bama fan). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinCrimson 61 Posted June 6, 2006 Share Posted June 6, 2006 Wait, Houston Nutt and W have "moments of brilliance?" W tries to sell our ports to terrorists and Nutt loses to Vandy... and those are the successful days on the job. 238532[/snapback] If you are accusing the state of Dubai as being a state of terrorists you had better have evidence to back it up, outside of what you have read on Moveon.org. True: money to the 9/11 terrorists was held in UAE banks. Also true: money to the 9/11 terrorists was distributed through US banks. Conclusion: the US is a terrorist nation...False. By the way, W doesn't own the ports, therefore, it is not his decision to sell the ports. All sales to foreign governments must be reviewed by the government. The Dubai Ports deal was reviewed and ok'd. W simply allowed those with the knowledge to ok the decision to conduct their business without interference. Anyone who knows anything about Dubai knows that they are trying to become more westernized. They are spending billions to become the worlds foremost vacation destination. It would not serve their overall goal to support terrorism. Not to get into a political debate, and I know many will disagree with me, but you cannot call a nation that has been the most supportive of the US in the region "terrorists". It makes you sound ignorant. 238650[/snapback] I don't care what they're "trying to become." The fact is that UAE has sponsored terrorism before. And while we're on the subject, it isn't solely the idea of a terrorism supporting nation being in charge of securing our ports, but the idea of ANY nation other than the good 'ol US of A being in charge of our national security boils my blood. I don't want England controlling them either. Political rant off, for the time being. 238719[/snapback] My problem with you is that your premise is wrong. The UAE would not have been in charge of port security, but rather port management. Do you really trust a bunch of teamsters to protect us, no! And neither does the government. That is why port security is not done by unionized US workers, or English workers, or UAE workers. Port security has been and will be the charge of the US government, as it should be. You clearly do not understand the reality of the situation and have bought into rank propoganda by the ultra liberal media. That is my problem with you sir. You didn't take the time to find out the truth, but rather excepted what was reported as truth. Anyone who thinks the Bush administration is incompetent on fighting terrorism need only look at the fact that no terrorist attacks have occurred in the USA for the last 5 years. Who would have thought that 5 years ago? You are a bandwagon jumper, and when you hear everyone else accusing the administration of incompetency, you assume that is the truth, just like almost everyone else. But you fail to realize reality, which is that the incompetency of this administration has improved our safety, which I am, and forever will be, grateful, regardless of what everyone else says. That sir, should preclude you from accusing our commander and chief of being incompetent while our fine men and women are in harms way. Show some respect, intelligence, and even, dare I say, patriotism. I expect at least that (even from a bama fan). 238727[/snapback] I'll meet you in the political forum? Copy, paste, start a topic and I'll be there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CCTAU 3,332 Posted June 6, 2006 Share Posted June 6, 2006 Already been done. You are two months late. And still incorrect. I do like the Rumsy/Spurrier comparison. Funny how they grin alike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.