wow, wipe your nose off, the brown is showing!
Posted By: nm on 2009-02-22
In Reply to: Is that coming from personal experience? Perhaps you should actually LISTEN to the lady..... - Cyndiee
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Should be *wipe* not whip... :)
nm
Here's something to wipe the smile off your face. sm
She is an extremist as far as being pro-life. 
We will agree to disagree...I think she would wipe the floor with him.
Because he would underestimate her. Like I think many will. Time will tell.
Not if they have to pay thru the nose for
Or better yet, if the practice is stopped altogether.
OMG. How brown-nosed is that?
Quick! Go grab a washcloth!
not ALL monkeys are brown....
http://images.cafepress.com/image/6194195_125x125.jpg
Put them in some brown shirts and you know what
ya got! All hail the leader....
Hey! Brown Trout!
While you swim in your own personal toilet bowel of life, I wish you the ability to look up before it is too late and you swirl down into the great abyss where you will join others, just like you, who could never look up, either.
I'd do better than that! I think I'd send the brown
*
What did you think of PM Brown's speech
Don't get me wrong. I love England a lot (many of my family came from that country, have visited it and the people of England are wonderful people), but I caught PM Brown's speech the other day and I though it was... well "lame" for lack of a better term. He was kissing the behinds of the people to get funding from America his nose was covered in feces. I see he has also been studying President Obama's speeches and it was so blatantly obvious. President Obama is probably one of the greatest in giving speeches. No doubt about that, but this was clearly an imitation of Obama's past speeches. (We are not blue states and we are not red states, we are the United States). Here Mr. Brown says "There is no old Europe, there is no new Europe, there is only your friend Europe". The way he presented his speech all I could think of was that Obama's speech writers wrote it for him. All I thought of was how lame.
Just curious what your opinions are. Mine is that America does not have the funds to be sending money over to England. Unemployment is rising, home loss is on the rise and they are trying to have us send money to them??? Maybe I'm wrong about this but I just think it's very arrogant, as was his speech to congress.
I also heard that I guess it didn't go as well as England had planned because now The Queen is having a private meeting with Mr. Obama.
Just wondered what others opinions are.
Plus PM Brown is going blind. nm
xxx
Too bad we cant wiggle our nose
nm
Brown resigns from FEMA.
Probably Medal of Freedom from Bush.
and miffed over the way Campbell Brown
nm
Whew!! Brown eyes here. (sm)
But ya know what they say about people with brown eyes, so we're not safe, either. 
Brown shirts optional
x
cut off your nose to spite your face...
You better look beyond your bank account today at which you are asking for because if you get your way, you will NEVER have a bank account that is yours again. You will have nothing that will be your own. Socialism = public rather private ownership. In other words, if you have it, everyone else owns it! how's that for your bank account?
Obama and you thumb your nose at everything
nm
Get a room? Something on my nose? Simply
because I was polite to someone, chose to give one of the "nice" ones the benefit of the doubt while finding posts like yours uninformative, childish and a pure waste of keystrokes?
I agree, given the never-ending bitterness and hatefulness you have, it will all come back to bite you in the butt some day. One usually gets back what they give.
How truly sad for you...... really! pulled by a nose ring..
**
Brown-noser, suck-up. Kind of like sm
Britain's Blair does with Bush.
I would rather send a bunch of brown envelopes..
against people like you showing how full of (insert word here) you are.
I've followed some of the cases that ACLU sticks their nose in and to know that they are somehow sm
linked to the Democratic Party scares me. I do not see how they could defend NAMBLA if they are exploiting children. It's a disgrace to say the least.
Doesn't matter.....she stuck her nose out first
xx
All bow down to the great far left. You all can't see your nose to spite
You are hysterical, like there is a REASON I would have to "brown nose" someone else?....sm
No, I think for myself, thanks a lot, why don't you wipe the SMUG off your face, because it is really unattractive. If I find someone's post cogent and agree, I feel free to post, just as you feel free to make crude, crass, ignorant posts, to each his/her own.
Really well-said; subsidy and help is one thing, turning your nose up at....sm
honest jobs for your family and obligations is another, I guess because I came from a farming family and you did what you had to do to survive and took great pride in doing so....is all that gone with past generations?? I fear life has been way to easy and "instant" for far too many, they do not know the meaning of the word sacrifice, which was what helped bring the country out of the Great Depression. Good post!
Those kind of folks can't see past their nose....
00
Oh..........I seriously doubt that! Pulled by a nose ring!
--
You can click on any of the brown places in the post and it will take you to the link.nm
x
I saw the video of the interview with Bounds and Campbell Brown...
are you saying there is a clip of McCain throwing a fit?
You just don't get it. There are black, white, brown and purple Christians...sm
Muslims, Jews, etc. Some want McCain to win and some want Obama to win, hopefully not based on color, ethnicity or religion but on what they envision is best for our country.
Practice your lockstep and iron your brown shirt...
BTW, he won't be but a 1-term president.
King Bush thumbs his nose at the Constitution...again
House: Did President knowingly sign law that didn't pass?
RAW STORY
Published: Wednesday March 15, 2006
Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) has alleged in a letter to White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card that President Bush signed a version of the Budget Reconciliation Act that, in effect, did not pass the House of Representatives.
Further, Waxman says there is reason to believe that the Speaker of the House called President Bush before he signed the law, and alerted him that the version he was about to sign differed from the one that actually passed the House. If true, this would put the President in willful violation of the U.S. Constitution.
The full text of the letter follows:
March 15, 2006
The Honorable Andrew Card
Chief of Staff
The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. Card:
On February 8, 2006, President Bush signed into law a version of the Deficit Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 2005 that was different in substance from the version that passed the U.S. House of Representatives. Legal scholars have advised me that the substantive differences between the versions - which involve $2 billion in federal spending - mean that this bill did not meet the fundamental constitutional requirement that both Houses of Congress must pass any legislation signed into law by the President.
I am writing to learn what the President and his staff knew about this constitutional defect at the time the President signed the legislation.
Detailed background about the legislation and its constitutional defects are contained in a letter I sent last month to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, which I have enclosed with this letter.[1] In summary, the House-passed version of the legislation required the Medicare program to lease durable medical equipment, such as wheelchairs, for seniors and other beneficiaries for up to 36 months, while the version of the legislation signed by the President limited the duration of these leases to just 13 months. As the Congressional Budget Office reported, this seemingly small change from 36 months to 13 months has a disproportionately large budgetary impact, cutting Medicare outlays by $2 billion over the next five years.[2]
I understand that a call was made to the White House before the legislation was signed by the President advising the White House of the differences between the bills and seeking advice about how to proceed. My understanding is that the call was made either by the Speaker of the House to the President or by the senior staff of the Speaker to the senior staff of the President.
I would like to know whether my understanding is correct. If it is, the implications are serious.
The Presentment Clause of the U.S. Constitution states that before a bill can become law, it must be passed by both Houses of Congress.[3] When the President took the oath of office, he swore to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, which includes the Presentment Clause. If the President signed the Reconciliation Act knowing its constitutional infirmity, he would in effect be placing himself above the Constitution.
I do not raise this issue lightly. Given the gravity of the matter and the unusual circumstances surrounding the Reconciliation Act, Congress and the public need a straightforward explanation of what the President and his staff knew on February 8, when the legislation was signed into law.
Sincerely,
Henry A. Waxman Ranking Minority Member
Enclosure
[1] See Letter from Rep. Henry A. Waxman to Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (Feb. 14, 2006).
[2] See Letter from CBO Acting Director Donald Marron to Rep. John M. Spratt, Jr. (Feb. 13, 2006).
[3] U.S. Constitution, Article I, � 7.
In that case, I am truly impressed by her ability to get her nose up her own buttocks!
Maybe being a contortionist is her true calling in life!
Held my nose and watched the same O'Reilly blather
made his pathetic atempt to delcare war on the NY Times, Rasmussen, etc. This is what sore losers do when they feel themselves in freefall. O'Reilly got his drawers in an uproar because he and Focks are down in the ratings and is'nt used to the idea of being #3 behind Olbermann, Cooper et all. Poor Bill.
Grasping the straw outta that hippity-hop nose!
It's a freakin' joke! I guess religion went on a fire sale so now it's going to be hip-hop! What a pile!
Brown's Economic Plan in England Mirrors Obama's
As you read the piece (see link below) in the London Times, substitute "Obama" for Brown, and "Geithner" for "Darling". Then multiply the billions in pounds by 1.5 to change them to US dollars. You'll think you're reading about the US plan - and the same catastrophic results, among which the worst are:
1. A burden on future generations of unparalleled and unprincipled proportions.
2. An outflow of investment capital to other countries that do not penalize the engines of the economy.
What struck me about Brown's plan was his "soak the rich" approach, which exactly mirrors Obama's - i.e., hitting the "upper 2%" of the "wealthy". It is more than passing strange to me that this is the precise percentage that Obama proposes - and is equally doubtful. Given Brown's recent meetings with Obama, no one will ever convince me that he didn't get some tutoring from our superclown...er, I mean, superpresident.
Another thing that's striking is how Brown's proposals are structured so that the real pain will be imposed after the elections in GB next year. In Obama's case, most of the real pain has also been scheduled for the "out years" - meaning that the public won't begin to feel them until beyond 2011.
And finally, there is the criticism that Brown's program is based on a lot of rosy "recovery" predictions which are very doubtful. Exactly the same criticism has been leveled at Obama's program, and in our case the criticism has come not from the opposition party but from within the government itself, i.e. the Office of Management and Budget - which is considered to be a very credible source of information on this sort of thing
Cut and paste, or follow the link at the bottom: http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article6168950.ece?Submitted=true
.
As long as US keeps sticking it's nose into Middle East politics
their puppet of destabilization, these unfortunate incidents will continue unabated. The oil belongs to them. It's our problem, not theirs.
Yep - thumb your nose at the world and defy the Geneva Convention
that ought to protect our troops to a great degree, huh? No different than Saddam. Do what you want in the name of "protecting" the "homeland." BS
nm and you thumb your nose at everying - common sense - killing this country.nm
@
The pic isn't showing up for me so I am not
sure what one you are referring to, but I have seen video and pics of him saying the allegiance with his hand over his heart. There is a big snopes.com article about the whole thing and follows in line with with Chele said.
www.snopes.com/politics/obama/anthem.asp
I think that showing them would....(sm)
definitely make it more dangerous for our troops in the middle east. I'm not sure how the rest of the world would look at it though. Here's the problem I see. If the photos are very damning, then it would again bring to the forefront pressure (from the public as well as other countries) to do prosecutions. I'm not so sure Obama wants to deal with that pressure since he hasn't been too excited about prosecutions anyway.
I personally wish they would go ahead and get it all over with (prosecutions, that is). If we lose a couple dems in the process, well, then so be it. If they were in on it, then they need to go anyway.
I think that showing them would....(sm)
definitely make it more dangerous for our troops in the middle east. I'm not sure how the rest of the world would look at it though. Here's the problem I see. If the photos are very damning, then it would again bring to the forefront pressure (from the public as well as other countries) to do prosecutions. I'm not so sure Obama wants to deal with that pressure since he hasn't been too excited about prosecutions anyway.
I personally wish they would go ahead and get it all over with (prosecutions, that is). If we lose a couple dems in the process, well, then so be it. If they were in on it, then they need to go anyway.
your ignorance is showing...
Your ignorance is showing...
Your paranoia is showing again. sm
Some things never change.
Once again, your naivete is showing
There are many, many, many, many roles for non-military folks to assist in Iraq. I can provide you with the information if you are interested.
But once again, perhaps your far-far-far right-wing propanda doesn't mention that.
Please refrain from speculating about what I would or would not do....it makes you look very naive and child-like and simplistic in your understanding of the motives and personalities of people you bash on a forum. You have no knowledge of me, don't know why you pretend that you do.
That is how most of the media is showing it....
McCain speaks at every rally also. Same with Obama and Biden. Biden speaks first, then Obama. That is the way they have done it for years. The VP candidate speaks first, then the Pres. candidate when they are at the same venue.
Sounds like he is just showing how
much of a pig he really is.
my ignorance is showing!
Can you tell me what is ACORN? And what are the voter fraud issues with it? Sorry, but I just don't know this stuff and trying to get informed. I found some conflicting info while trying to do some research and alot of stuff I didn't understand so can someone break it down to simple terms for me? Thanks.
|
