TexasCHLforum.com

There will be plenty of time for vacation starting on January 21, 2013 when the Barracalypse is over.

USA1 wrote:There will be plenty of time for vacation starting on January 21, 2013 when the Barracalypse is over.

Hmm, and here I thought it was Obamageddon...

sjfcontrol wrote:

USA1 wrote:There will be plenty of time for vacation starting on January 21, 2013 when the Barracalypse is over.

Hmm, and here I thought it was Obamageddon...

That too!

Rush fan?

USA1 wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:

USA1 wrote:There will be plenty of time for vacation starting on January 21, 2013 when the Barracalypse is over.

Hmm, and here I thought it was Obamageddon...

That too!

Rush fan?

For years.

Look, this guy has to give time for his writers to prepare his speech and polish it, and disseminate it to the press, so they can critique it, and get back to his speech writers with changes, and maybe run it past a focus group...its all orchestrated and with bureaucracy, that sort of thing takes time...and this way, if something bad happens while he's out, he uses the excuse of being on vacation...and if something good happens, he says "See, I can handle things while I'm away"...(Libya, anyone?).

USA1 wrote:There will be plenty of time for vacation starting on January 21, 2013 when the Barracalypse is over.

The GOP is gonna' have to do a whole lot better than it did last time for that to happen.

Oldgringo wrote:

USA1 wrote:There will be plenty of time for vacation starting on January 21, 2013 when the Barracalypse is over.

The GOP is gonna' have to do a whole lot better than it did last time for that to happen.

BHO is gonna have to do whole lot better to keep his job. I for one don't see that happening.

fishman wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:

USA1 wrote:There will be plenty of time for vacation starting on January 21, 2013 when the Barracalypse is over.

The GOP is gonna' have to do a whole lot better than it did last time for that to happen.

BHO is gonna have to do whole lot better to keep his job. I for one don't see that happening.

The American public is so uninformed I could see him being reelected. Get ready for the classic demoractic press machine warfare though.

Minorities will be told Republicans want to hang and or deport them en mass for the color of their skin.
Poor people will be told Repubs want them to starve in the street while the rich get richer.
Old people will be told they will lose the benefits of the ponzi scheme known as social security unless they vote dem.

I expect the weak and gullible to fall in line and vote to save their own little niche interest, as they always do.

It's going to be a long campaign season.

74novaman wrote:

fishman wrote:[

The American public is so uninformed I could see him being reelected.

You got that right. I can just look to my adult kids and see that. They could care less as long as the food is there
when they want some and they are not required to stress themselves to get what they want when they want it.

Case in point about misinformed or better yet not informed. A few years back when the London subways where bombed. I asked my daughter
in law if she had heard about it? She said "Yes!!" I then asked her "where is London?" She honestly did not know.

When Russia invaded Georgia a few years back her sister was wondering what we were going to do about it. She thought that they invaded Georgia, you know the country
just north of Florida.

These my sound ridiculous and funny but it is like Jay Leno on his "Jay walks" asking people on the streets questions that they have not a clue.

Chuck

As an aside, we can thank the "progressive" education movement of the early 20th century for a lot of our current educational woes.

Guess progressives then were as bad as progressives now.

If you rob Peter to pay Paul you can pretty much count on Peter's support...no matter what. Since "Peter" makes up a decent portion of the electorate, I think he may once again have a chance.

The GOP is gonna' have to do a whole lot better than it did last time for that to happen.

BHO is gonna have to do whole lot better to keep his job. I for one don't see that happening.

74novaman wrote: The American public is so uninformed I could see him being reelected. Get ready for the classic demoractic press machine warfare though.

"Slam Dunk"

Jimmie Don Aycock represents Killeen where Luby's massacre occurred (and where Fort Hood massacre occurred) and in his words is "very pro second amendment" (except in certain random defenseless victim zones)
yet he voted against campus carry

Let us reiterate that this was an extremely hard vote for the Representative. Most of the constituents we heard from were against the amendment. (People from other Districts/States who faxed/called at the urging of a guy in New York, one in D.C. and John Woods)
This amendment pertained to college campuses and that is where the Representatives concerns lie. (Otherwise) He is a huge supporter of 2nd amendment rights

He's concerned because certain places "should" be defenseless victim zones, I guess that would be army bases, restaurants and college campuses, and who knows where else.

I sent Jimmie Don an e-mail today because today he made a press release that he's announcing that he's running again.

GregWHoward Greg Howard
I called Boehner's office. When they tried to blow me off, I mentioned answer would go to 20K people on twitter. They listened.


Greg Howard @GregWHoward retweeted to 20,235 followers:
_PatJohnson_ Pat Johnson
@GregWHoward There's a TX State Rep who is slowly learning too; serves Killeen, no one likes him any more, wants 2 b re-elected-doubtful ;)
Aug 22, 12:38 PM via web

http://centexunfilterednews.blogspot.co ... ns-on.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Jimmie Don Aycock,
You're running again?
Good luck with that, with the Luby's massacre in our district, you should have known better than to vote against campus carry. I know at LEAST several hundred who won't be voting for you now,

steveincowtown wrote:If you rob Peter to pay Paul you can pretty much count on Peter's support...no matter what. Since "Peter" makes up a decent portion of the electorate, I think he may once again have a chance.

Um, better read it again...

RockingRook wrote: Case in point about misinformed or better yet not informed. A few years back when the London subways where bombed. I asked my daughter
in law if she had heard about it? She said "Yes!!" I then asked her "where is London?" She honestly did not know.

When Russia invaded Georgia a few years back her sister was wondering what we were going to do about it. She thought that they invaded Georgia, you know the country
just north of Florida.

These my sound ridiculous and funny but it is like Jay Leno on his "Jay walks" asking people on the streets questions that they have not a clue.

Chuck

A few years ago I was talking to my high-school-age granddaughter. I happened to mention communism, and got a blank stare. She had no idea what I was talking about. And I consider her fairly bright -- most of the time, anyway.

74novaman wrote:

I expect the weak and gullible to fall in line and vote to save their own little niche interest, as they always do.

FYI, that's what the strong and learned do also. Now that you mention it, I can't think of anyone who doesn't vote to promote/save their own little niche interest. Can you?