Why Boehner needs to go! He's a drunk,corrupt and cheats on his wife!

Markle wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

newswatcher wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

newswatcher wrote:

Chrissy wrote:did you feel that way about Ted kennedy?

Remember when the excuse/rationalization/defense for former president Clinton was that he was able to compartmentalize his private and professional lives...now suddenly those that defended and excused are qiuck to blame others that have done the same things?...Far as known Speaker Boehner hasn't committed perjury about anything has he?...If he lies under oath during an investigation then so be it he's another law breaker that is sworn to uphold the laws and yet has no self control do do so...

He's a drunk that is third in command. A little worse than lying about an affair.

We had a DINGBATTED BROOMRIDER that was 3rd in command before him and if I remember anything about Tip O'Neill, it was the big red, bulbous orb of a nose he had because of his drinking issues.

When asked to find or provide proof......silence....Find it hard to believe that if this were in any way truthful the MSM would be going crazy but maybe 'nightmare' heard another voice...

http://www.examiner.com/article/scarborough-house-minority-leader-john-boehner-a-lazy-drunk-video

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/node/46773

http://www.pensitoreview.com/2010/03/22/was-boehner-drunk-during-his-shame-on-you-speech-before-health-care-vote/

All opinion pieces by Progressive sources. Keep trying.

PkrBum wrote:Progressivism = Govt solutions

There may be degrees... but no matter the motives... if you want the govt to "fix" subjective things...

you are a progressive and endorse a govt over individual power. Sooner or later the govt will rule over you too.

Sal wrote:

PkrBum wrote:Progressivism = Govt solutions

There may be degrees... but no matter the motives... if you want the govt to "fix" subjective things...

you are a progressive and endorse a govt over individual power. Sooner or later the govt will rule over you too.

Glibertarian pablum.

cool1 wrote:no one knows what goes on behind closed doors---

newswatcher wrote:

cool1 wrote:no one knows what goes on behind closed doors---

Charlie Rich????.....And that's the point...opinions..speculation...and just flat out lies are deemed credible by some posters here BUT when there's a post about a liberal that's not positive it's followed by...Link?...Proof...Faux News?....Horse____!...etc., It's not like the commercial...just because it's on the internet doesn't make it factual and opinions are like ___holes everyone has one and everyone else's stink...Opinions are alright but should be taken for what they are...

Dreamsglore wrote:

newswatcher wrote:

cool1 wrote:no one knows what goes on behind closed doors---

Charlie Rich????.....And that's the point...opinions..speculation...and just flat out lies are deemed credible by some posters here BUT when there's a post about a liberal that's not positive it's followed by...Link?...Proof...Faux News?....Horse____!...etc., It's not like the commercial...just because it's on the internet doesn't make it factual and opinions are like ___holes everyone has one and everyone else's stink...Opinions are alright but should be taken for what they are...

Shut up, twiddledee. Your opinions stink doubly because you have to use a sock to agree w/ yourself.

newswatcher wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

newswatcher wrote:

cool1 wrote:no one knows what goes on behind closed doors---

Charlie Rich????.....And that's the point...opinions..speculation...and just flat out lies are deemed credible by some posters here BUT when there's a post about a liberal that's not positive it's followed by...Link?...Proof...Faux News?....Horse____!...etc., It's not like the commercial...just because it's on the internet doesn't make it factual and opinions are like ___holes everyone has one and everyone else's stink...Opinions are alright but should be taken for what they are...

Shut up, twiddledee. Your opinions stink doubly because you have to use a sock to agree w/ yourself.

The nice part of 'nightmare'?....Never have to prove wrong 'nightmare' continues to post and proves herself wrong on a regular basis...

nochain wrote:This is a hilarious topic for thread about politicians! If disqualification for political office were to include being a drunk, corrupt, and a spouse cheater then it would be almost impossible to find anyone "clean" enough to hold office. Politicians by nature are corrupt - they sell their souls for campaign money and will use the system to reward their patrones. I smell just a wee odor of bias from the initiator of this thread, as usual.

Dreamsglore wrote:

nochain wrote:This is a hilarious topic for thread about politicians! If disqualification for political office were to include being a drunk, corrupt, and a spouse cheater then it would be almost impossible to find anyone "clean" enough to hold office. Politicians by nature are corrupt - they sell their souls for campaign money and will use the system to reward their patrones. I smell just a wee odor of bias from the initiator of this thread, as usual.

Of course,twiddledum ,you feel that way when you when you're twisting Clinton's cajones, right?

nochain wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

nochain wrote:This is a hilarious topic for thread about politicians! If disqualification for political office were to include being a drunk, corrupt, and a spouse cheater then it would be almost impossible to find anyone "clean" enough to hold office. Politicians by nature are corrupt - they sell their souls for campaign money and will use the system to reward their patrones. I smell just a wee odor of bias from the initiator of this thread, as usual.

Of course,twiddledum ,you feel that way when you when you're twisting Clinton's cajones, right?

Wrong AGAIN dimwit. That was Monica that twisted Clintons cajones - among other things. But you know what - I was very disappointed that the other Clinton didn't win in 08 - I was set to vote for her. One reason was Bill - he did some stupid things while in office but he did know how to work both sides of the aisle and get important things done, I always thought they would compliment each other. Instead we got a divisive incompetent. Oh well, so it goes as Vonnegut so perfectly summed things up.

newswatcher wrote:
If I disagreed with President Clinton one thing he did was know that he HAD to work with the other party to get things done...That trait of at least attempting to find common ground and work from there is gone..instead of getting something done and discuss future negotiations/compromises is GONE...

nochain wrote:
One reason was Bill - he did some stupid things while in office but he did know how to work both sides of the aisle and get important things done, Instead we got a divisive incompetent.

Dreamsglore wrote:

nochain wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

nochain wrote:This is a hilarious topic for thread about politicians! If disqualification for political office were to include being a drunk, corrupt, and a spouse cheater then it would be almost impossible to find anyone "clean" enough to hold office. Politicians by nature are corrupt - they sell their souls for campaign money and will use the system to reward their patrones. I smell just a wee odor of bias from the initiator of this thread, as usual.

Of course,twiddledum ,you feel that way when you when you're twisting Clinton's cajones, right?

Wrong AGAIN dimwit. That was Monica that twisted Clintons cajones - among other things. But you know what - I was very disappointed that the other Clinton didn't win in 08 - I was set to vote for her. One reason was Bill - he did some stupid things while in office but he did know how to work both sides of the aisle and get important things done, I always thought they would compliment each other. Instead we got a divisive incompetent. Oh well, so it goes as Vonnegut so perfectly summed things up.

So you were going to vote for Hillary because of Bill Clinton? Are you serious? What a slap to Hillary.

Sal wrote:Submitted for your consideration ...


Hambone yesterday ...

newswatcher wrote:
If I disagreed with President Clinton one thing he did was know that he HAD to work with the other party to get things done...That trait of at least attempting to find common ground and work from there is gone..instead of getting something done and discuss future negotiations/compromises is GONE...

Flippy today ...

nochain wrote:
One reason was Bill - he did some stupid things while in office but he did know how to work both sides of the aisle and get important things done, Instead we got a divisive incompetent.

nochain wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

nochain wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

nochain wrote:This is a hilarious topic for thread about politicians! If disqualification for political office were to include being a drunk, corrupt, and a spouse cheater then it would be almost impossible to find anyone "clean" enough to hold office. Politicians by nature are corrupt - they sell their souls for campaign money and will use the system to reward their patrones. I smell just a wee odor of bias from the initiator of this thread, as usual.

Of course,twiddledum ,you feel that way when you when you're twisting Clinton's cajones, right?

Wrong AGAIN dimwit. That was Monica that twisted Clintons cajones - among other things. But you know what - I was very disappointed that the other Clinton didn't win in 08 - I was set to vote for her. One reason was Bill - he did some stupid things while in office but he did know how to work both sides of the aisle and get important things done, I always thought they would compliment each other. Instead we got a divisive incompetent. Oh well, so it goes as Vonnegut so perfectly summed things up.

So you were going to vote for Hillary because of Bill Clinton? Are you serious? What a slap to Hillary.

You really are dense - I said I thought they would complement each other - big difference. If Hillary does in fact run this next time I will in all likelihood vote for her, she has plenty of experience and did a good job as Secstate (except for Benghazi). If the Titanic had been built with a substance as dense as that foreign material between your ears it would have shattered that iceberg and sailed merrily on its way.

Sal wrote:Submitted for your consideration ...


Hambone yesterday ...

newswatcher wrote:
If I disagreed with President Clinton one thing he did was know that he HAD to work with the other party to get things done...That trait of at least attempting to find common ground and work from there is gone..instead of getting something done and discuss future negotiations/compromises is GONE...

Flippy today ...

nochain wrote:
One reason was Bill - he did some stupid things while in office but he did know how to work both sides of the aisle and get important things done, Instead we got a divisive incompetent.

Dreamsglore wrote:

Sal wrote:Submitted for your consideration ...


Hambone yesterday ...

newswatcher wrote:
If I disagreed with President Clinton one thing he did was know that he HAD to work with the other party to get things done...That trait of at least attempting to find common ground and work from there is gone..instead of getting something done and discuss future negotiations/compromises is GONE...

Flippy today ...

nochain wrote:
One reason was Bill - he did some stupid things while in office but he did know how to work both sides of the aisle and get important things done, Instead we got a divisive incompetent.

Good one,Sal. Now all we need is twiddledum to come on and back himself up.

Sal wrote:It's the ...

Flippy & Hambone Show !!!

nochain wrote:

Sal wrote:It's the ...

Flippy & Hambone Show !!!

In contrast to the Sorry Sally and NightmaresUnlimited farcical back and forth. Posers like you two are too funny......But please keep posting, I need a laugh once in a while.

nochain wrote:

Sal wrote:It's the ...

Flippy & Hambone Show !!!

.............................

Talk about delusions of adequacy; you couldn't even carry Sal's thesaurus around for him, much less defeat him in a battle of words and wit.

Better go update your FB page and tell your girlfriends how you, like totally owned Sal. Don't worry about your lies or absurd expressions of rhetorical victory. FB understands and even encourages fabrication and exaggeration.

Two little girls on a mission.

William wrote:

nochain wrote:

Sal wrote:It's the ...

Flippy & Hambone Show !!!

.............................

Talk about delusions of adequacy; you couldn't even carry Sal's thesaurus around for him, much less defeat him in a battle of words and wit.

Better go update your FB page and tell your girlfriends how you, like totally owned Sal. Don't worry about your lies or absurd expressions of rhetorical victory. FB understands and even encourages fabrication and exaggeration.

Two little girls on a mission.

Naw, I'll leave the FB BS to childish boomerangs like you. Have you ever had an original thought or do you just troll around playing off others conversations? Just like a pimple faced teenybopper with no life, no expectation of improving your sorry position, and no hope of relieving the social interaction itch. You really should move off into the wilderness and commune with worms but you would probably bore them too. Tell me, were you bullied as a child? That might explain your ceaseless efforts to demean anyone and everything - except your fellow trolls that is. After all, there is someone for everyone - even someone as pitiful as you!

Dreamsglore wrote:http://freedombunker.com/2012/12/06/why-boehner-needs-to-go-hes-a-drunk-corrupt-and-cheats-on-his-wife/