« Gatorade Tiger: Instead of wasting scientists' time analyzing Tiger Woods' sweat, why not just sell his bodily fluids?Tiger Woods: One more round and I'm still looking like a prophet »


Comment from: BV [Visitor]
Ah Wolfie, what a wonderful way you have with words. Your oh-so-unsubtle attempt to take yet another liberal crack at the worth of 'trickle-down economics' was priceless...misguided and wrong as per usual....but still.

I think the Bald One was right in his blog today. You really SHOULD leave the promotional aspects of your 'undefeated season' scoop to him.

As for your position on what constitutes 'winning' at the Tavistock to maintain the "streak" - individual performance ONLY is what counts. Tiger is responsible for his OWN actions. He cannot be accountable if one of his teammates suddenly can't sink a putt to save their grandma. How hard is that to understand?
03/17/08 @ 10:40
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email

You asked, "How hard is that to understand?"

For a radical leftie like Willie, anything that doesn't reek of class envy is impossible to understand.

Also notice that he refers to the members of Isleworth as obscenely rich.

Funny,he never says the Hollywood left, George Soros, John Edwards, or Ted Kennedy are obscenely rich.

Willie probably views that gang as great philanthropists because of their sizable contributions to radical left-wing causes.
03/17/08 @ 10:55
Comment from: Kiel Christianson [Member] Email
Funny. Last time the Federal Reserve had to bail
out banks, one of the other Bush boys (Neil, "When
can I be President?" Bush) was responsible for
costing the US taxpayers a billion dollars. I'm
noticing a pattern...
03/17/08 @ 16:20
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email

I'm glad that you weren't asleep at the switch when Willy introduced his liberal diatribe.

Since you are in the mood for name dropping, maybe you remember two of Bill Clinton's favorite felons, Pincus Green and Marc Rich.

Alex USMC 1969-73
03/17/08 @ 17:23
Comment from: Josh [Visitor] Email
Are you supposed to be blogging about golf? Or did they pick you to rant about politics?
03/17/08 @ 22:49
Comment from: Kiel Christianson [Visitor] Email
Oh, Jarhead. So fun to trot out Clinton, who was never
that popular with folks like me. And since when did the two you named cost the US taxpayers billions of dollars? Nevertheless, even the likes of Alan Greenspan praises Clinton's economic policies and calls Bush's a complete abandonment of conservative ideals and economic responsibility.
03/17/08 @ 23:10
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email

Why do you liberals think it necessary to preface the name of a man like Alan Greenspan with the condescension of "even the likes of?"

Alex USMC 1969-73

03/18/08 @ 12:45
Comment from: Kiel Christianson [Member] Email
Because he's a conservative, he's a life-long Republican,
he's a smart guy, he's loyally served his country, and he's not afraid to call a spade a spade. It's not condescension, it's esteem for one who has principles to begin with,
and also sticks to them. At the same time, when evidence builds to a conclusion that he might not find comfortable, he is not so cowardly as to try to paint a pretty face on it. For example, in his book, he states that it is clear that the Iraq War is all about oil.
03/18/08 @ 17:32
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email

It never occurred to me that the invasion of Iraq was all about oil.

Now that explains all this cheap gasoline we are getting.

Alex USMC 1969-73
03/18/08 @ 20:09
Comment from: Traveler [Visitor] Email
I thought the government was doing us a favor by "helping us all become homeowners." Sounded so nice, didn't it? "Securitize" mortgages, thereby "spreading the risk around?" They also managed to spread the disaster around, like dysentery in open sewers. So much for government fine tuning the economy.
03/19/08 @ 12:59
Comment from: Jack [Visitor] Email

Haven't you heard ? The war is about weapons of mass destruction.

It was also about those Iraq citizens who invaded us on 9/11 or
were they from Saudi Arabia ?
03/19/08 @ 13:51
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email

No, I never heard that. Did you?

My understanding was that the USA was trying to rid the world of Saddam and his two sons and the rape rooms and mass graves.

Our guys did a pretty good job of those missions.

If you have got a problem with the job our guys did on Saddam, his sons, or the Taliban, I'd have to ask whose side are you on.

Alex USMC 1969-73
03/19/08 @ 17:18
Comment from: Julie [Visitor] Email
Keep your pants on Alex. Having an intact memory of the justifications given at the time the war started is not rooting for the other side. There were no doubt reasons other than WMD, both good and bad, but that was the one that was put forth by the civilian leadership at the time.
03/19/08 @ 18:08
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email

Since by your handle you appear to be a female, maybe you should keep your pants on.

How is it that you and the other lefties commenting are so cock sure that Saddam never had any such weapons? That they were not hidden in another country such as Syria? That they haven't yet been found in a country as large as Iraq?

Most of you lefties have never served a day in the military, yet you profess to have all sorts of knowledge of tactics and classified intelligence.

Alex USMC 1969-73
03/20/08 @ 09:34
Comment from: Julia [Visitor] Email
Thanks, Alex! Until reading your post, I had been relying on silly things like facts to form my opininions. Thanks for seting the record straight.
Bye now, back to my pantless activities.
03/20/08 @ 13:03
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email

You're welcome.

Now you can go back to posting on the Daily Kos.

Before you continue those activities of which you wrote, be ssure to take your medication.

Alex USMC 1969-73
03/20/08 @ 17:47

Comments are closed for this post.