Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

National Guard Patrolling the BorderFollow

#1 May 15 2006 at 7:53 PM Rating: Good
Drama Nerdvana
******
20,674 posts
If he wanted to distract people from the quagmire in Iraq he could just get himself blown by a fat intern, cost less money in the end.

F[Aliceblue][/Aliceblue]ucking clown shoes.

Smiley: oyvey
____________________________
Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
#2 May 15 2006 at 7:55 PM Rating: Good
Bhodi, the whole Queen thing, have you just experienced a lifestyle changing event you want to share with us? Smiley: laugh
#4 May 15 2006 at 8:08 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
5,677 posts
the Queen B wrote:
If he wanted to distract people from the quagmire in Iraq he could just get himself blown by a fat intern, cost less money in the end.

A Christian Conservative would never get blown by a fat intern. He would only have missionary sex with his wife.

No, this is about trying to placate the ever-increasing Latino vote for the Republican party and looking out for corporate America. This is a free pass for all the people in the country who are here illegally.



#5 May 15 2006 at 8:09 PM Rating: Good
Quote:
Anywho, I faintly remember something you said about leaving, or something to that effect. I liked you better when I was already starting to forget who you were.

Wait Bhodi or myself? Smiley: sly
#6 May 15 2006 at 8:14 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
You know. I'm frankly not totally clear on why some folks are so against using national guard at the borders. It's always presented as though we're "militarizing" the border or something. But the border patrol is a national organization. In a classic sense, you'd think people would be more concerned with a national police force guarding the border then the military doing it.

Just seems like it's a pretty irrelevant distinction.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#7 May 15 2006 at 8:15 PM Rating: Decent
*****
12,501 posts
Buffyisagoddess wrote:
Bhodi, the whole Queen thing, have you just experienced a lifestyle changing event you want to share with us? Smiley: laugh


It's like Eons using princess and talking about purple unicorns.
#8 May 15 2006 at 8:39 PM Rating: Good
Drama Nerdvana
******
20,674 posts
summary of all replies to the OP wrote:
I don't get it


Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
#10 May 15 2006 at 8:45 PM Rating: Good
Drama Nerdvana
******
20,674 posts
Khan?

Somebody is butthurt because I ignore them.

Cute
____________________________
Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
#12 May 15 2006 at 8:48 PM Rating: Good
Drama Nerdvana
******
20,674 posts
OMG I am sooo going to delete my 60 rogue /sob

/points and laughs at whats his face
____________________________
Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
#13 May 15 2006 at 8:48 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
5,677 posts
Oh sh[red][/red]it, sorry Bodhi. I see what you meant now.

Gratz on the new pair of shoes.
#15 May 15 2006 at 8:50 PM Rating: Good
Drama Nerdvana
******
20,674 posts
Child.

Only one step away from Feba.
____________________________
Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
#17 May 15 2006 at 8:59 PM Rating: Good
Drama Nerdvana
******
20,674 posts
Is placing Army/National Reserve along the Mexican border and requiring pass ports for all travel into Canada actually a sound immigration policy or more knee jerk reactionism from a inept leader which will end in failure and more deficit spending?
?
____________________________
Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
#18 May 15 2006 at 9:08 PM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
gbaji wrote:
You know. I'm frankly not totally clear on why some folks are so against using national guard at the borders. It's always presented as though we're "militarizing" the border or something. But the border patrol is a national organization. In a classic sense, you'd think people would be more concerned with a national police force guarding the border then the military doing it.

Just seems like it's a pretty irrelevant distinction.

You wouldn't believe the sh[Black][/Black]it that people focus on to distract from the focus of an argument.

Smiley: dubious
#19 May 15 2006 at 10:51 PM Rating: Good
I'll be the first to acknowldege the obvious fact that I'm drunk and therefore less than, but...

when did my country stop having a national guard that was useful for external threats? When did they become accesable for border patrol?

Don't say it was the moment when sand negroes blew up some purely symbolic towers in Time's Squeer. Our reserves are out there in case the enlisted an committed ***** don't cover it. Unless I'm pleasabtly mistaken we have a large noomber of willing warm boodies to throw tghemselves on Alla's suicide grenades. Basickally, the kids signed up to kill brown people across the ocean, not here on our home soil.

I for one foresee the first caualties of this race war, and those lives are entirely wasted. Just like the pigs who tried to stem the tide of crack back in da 80's.

Did I mention how much I've consumed this evenin'?
#20 May 15 2006 at 10:54 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Barkingturtle wrote:
Did I mention how much I've consumed this evenin'?

I really, really hope it was a whole lot.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#21 May 15 2006 at 10:59 PM Rating: Good
Honestly though, how disapponited would you be if you thought you signed up to kill foreigners and you ended up killing Mexicans? I'm mostly thinking of the children. No, I'm mostly pees drunk.
#22 May 15 2006 at 11:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
so does this mean you are done with the lurky lurky socky now?
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#23 May 15 2006 at 11:34 PM Rating: Good
Drama Nerdvana
******
20,674 posts
The lurky sock that I used to make like 3 non troll posts on the wow boards (and one in the feedback forum) ?

Yeah I'm done, now make with the Sage.

Or heaven help you I will make a post mocking Vancouver Jr!
____________________________
Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
#24 May 16 2006 at 3:32 AM Rating: Good
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,636 posts

Bodhi, in honor of your return, I've created this avatar.

#25 May 16 2006 at 4:35 PM Rating: Default
its a red herring designed to quell the rising tide of anti republican sentiment generated by the amnisty bill......atleast untill after the mid term elections.

6000 troops? rofl, ifyou had 1 man every 200 yards along the mexican border, then 3 shifts of them so it could be guarded 24/7. you would need around 60,000 troops.

red herring. you might even get a few photo ops of some hapless immigrants who were unfortunate enough to stumble across the sparsly positioned troops, but all it amounts to is a campaign to stop the bleeding in the polls, especially from people in their own party.

these troops are for YOU, not the immigrants.

and it wont be the first time this addministrition has used our troops to further a political agenda, will it? atleast the probability of someone getting killed with this agenda is remote.

what sickens me most is the independant media acting like tis is really a plan to sove our immigrant problem and not a political stunt. over half of you, according to polls, will actually think he is really trying get tough with immigrants (you know, the type that bilt this country).
#26 May 16 2006 at 5:21 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
shadowrelm wrote:
6000 troops? rofl, ifyou had 1 man every 200 yards along the mexican border, then 3 shifts of them so it could be guarded 24/7. you would need around 60,000 troops.


Um? So what? That's about 50% more bodies then we have now...

It's either an insignificantly small number, or it's overwhelming and "militarizing the border". Which is it?

What I'm kinda liking about this decision is that the Dems aren't sure which way to go with it just yet. After all, they've been the ones clammoring for the last 3 years to "use the military to make us safe at home". So they can't denounce it on that angle (well, they *can*, but then they're forced into the situation of basically admitting that the previous 3 years rhetoric was just that: rhetoric). That leaves them with the "it's not enough" angle, which is just plain silly given the sparse numbers of Border Patrol in relation to border already. In the process of making that argument, they'll essentially have to emphasize the problems with border security, which also falls right in line with what Republican's want.

Kind of a bright move for Bush. I'm surprised he came up with it.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 267 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (267)