Pelosi's face says it all

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Pelosi's face says it all 

"JimH" <askme DeleteThis @nope.com> wrote in message
news:479e90e0$0$6482$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Watch the State of the Union. Pelosi's body language is so telling.
>
> When she disagrees..............her mouth opens and she appears to gulp.
>
> Her smile also disappears when Bush is talking about subjects she
> disagrees with.
>
> Lastly, as the speech is going on her eyes drop from straight ahead to
> looking at the floor.
>
>


I love it when a reporter asks Bush a question he's not ready for (99% of
the questions), and he does this strange thing with his eyes as he tries to
look like he's got a grip.
 >> Stay informed about: Pelosi's face says it all 

On Jan 28, 9:35 pm, "JimH" <as... DeleteThis @nope.com> wrote:
> Watch the State of the Union.  Pelosi's body language is so telling.
>
> When she disagrees..............her mouth opens and she appears to gulp.
>
> Her smile also disappears when Bush is talking about subjects she disagrees
> with.
>
> Lastly, as the speech is going on her eyes drop from straight ahead to
> looking at the floor.

And your point is?
 >> Stay informed about: Pelosi's face says it all 

HK wrote:
> JimH wrote:
>> Watch the State of the Union. Pelosi's body language is so telling.
>>
>> When she disagrees..............her mouth opens and she appears to gulp.
>>
>> Her smile also disappears when Bush is talking about subjects she
>> disagrees with.
>>
>> Lastly, as the speech is going on her eyes drop from straight ahead to
>> looking at the floor.
>>
>>
>
>
> Hard to stay awake, as the State of the Union speech sounded like a
> regurgitation of previous Bush bullship.
>

Could you then truly explain to me how the other side has anything new
or specific or clearly defined to add? How exactly can they, or anyone
for that matter do it better? And to define 'better', just because it is
different, does not automatically assume it is better. It all depends on
your perspective...
 >> Stay informed about: Pelosi's face says it all 

"DownTime" <DownTime61 RemoveThis @comcast.net> wrote in message
news:r_6dnTDJUauW4wLanZ2dnUVZ_veinZ2d@comcast.com...
> HK wrote:
>> JimH wrote:
>>> Watch the State of the Union. Pelosi's body language is so telling.
>>>
>>> When she disagrees..............her mouth opens and she appears to gulp.
>>>
>>> Her smile also disappears when Bush is talking about subjects she
>>> disagrees with.
>>>
>>> Lastly, as the speech is going on her eyes drop from straight ahead to
>>> looking at the floor.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Hard to stay awake, as the State of the Union speech sounded like a
>> regurgitation of previous Bush bullship.
>>
>
> Could you then truly explain to me how the other side has anything new or
> specific or clearly defined to add? How exactly can they, or anyone for
> that matter do it better? And to define 'better', just because it is
> different, does not automatically assume it is better. It all depends on
> your perspective...

Did not see the faces as I listened to the speech as I drove home from L.A.
The sad part of the speech, is those items he brought up like earmarks (what
happened to Pork?) are great statements. He just should have started doing
the vetoing about 6.5 years ago.
 >> Stay informed about: Pelosi's face says it all 

Calif Bill wrote:
> "DownTime" <DownTime61 DeleteThis @comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:r_6dnTDJUauW4wLanZ2dnUVZ_veinZ2d@comcast.com...
>> HK wrote:
>>> JimH wrote:
>>>> Watch the State of the Union. Pelosi's body language is so telling.
>>>>
>>>> When she disagrees..............her mouth opens and she appears to gulp.
>>>>
>>>> Her smile also disappears when Bush is talking about subjects she
>>>> disagrees with.
>>>>
>>>> Lastly, as the speech is going on her eyes drop from straight ahead to
>>>> looking at the floor.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hard to stay awake, as the State of the Union speech sounded like a
>>> regurgitation of previous Bush bullship.
>>>
>> Could you then truly explain to me how the other side has anything new or
>> specific or clearly defined to add? How exactly can they, or anyone for
>> that matter do it better? And to define 'better', just because it is
>> different, does not automatically assume it is better. It all depends on
>> your perspective...
>
> Did not see the faces as I listened to the speech as I drove home from L.A.
> The sad part of the speech, is those items he brought up like earmarks (what
> happened to Pork?) are great statements. He just should have started doing
> the vetoing about 6.5 years ago.
>
>


Apparently Bush put off enforcing his earmark dictate until January
2009...in other words, he pushed it off onto the next President. He's
done that with ending the war in Iraq, economic recovery, and just about
everything else he has fu*ked up. The next guy or gal will have to
address the mess Bush is leaving behind.
 >> Stay informed about: Pelosi's face says it all 

"HK" <payer33859.RemoveThis@mypacks.net> wrote in message
news:609m9tF1p7n16U2@mid.individual.net...
> Calif Bill wrote:
>> "DownTime" <DownTime61.RemoveThis@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:r_6dnTDJUauW4wLanZ2dnUVZ_veinZ2d@comcast.com...
>>> HK wrote:
>>>> JimH wrote:
>>>>> Watch the State of the Union. Pelosi's body language is so telling.
>>>>>
>>>>> When she disagrees..............her mouth opens and she appears to
>>>>> gulp.
>>>>>
>>>>> Her smile also disappears when Bush is talking about subjects she
>>>>> disagrees with.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lastly, as the speech is going on her eyes drop from straight ahead to
>>>>> looking at the floor.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hard to stay awake, as the State of the Union speech sounded like a
>>>> regurgitation of previous Bush bullship.
>>>>
>>> Could you then truly explain to me how the other side has anything new
>>> or specific or clearly defined to add? How exactly can they, or anyone
>>> for that matter do it better? And to define 'better', just because it is
>>> different, does not automatically assume it is better. It all depends on
>>> your perspective...
>>
>> Did not see the faces as I listened to the speech as I drove home from
>> L.A. The sad part of the speech, is those items he brought up like
>> earmarks (what happened to Pork?) are great statements. He just should
>> have started doing the vetoing about 6.5 years ago.
>
>
> Apparently Bush put off enforcing his earmark dictate until January
> 2009...in other words, he pushed it off onto the next President. He's done
> that with ending the war in Iraq, economic recovery, and just about
> everything else he has fu*ked up. The next guy or gal will have to address
> the mess Bush is leaving behind.

We are screwed. Almost all the front runners are from Congress. That has a
lower rating than Bush, for good reason. They have overspent and overlawed
for a lot more than the last 7 years. All these candidates that came from
the Senate or House, should be disqualified as they have already shown their
incompetence.
 >> Stay informed about: Pelosi's face says it all 

Calif Bill wrote:
> "HK" <payer33859.TakeThisOut@mypacks.net> wrote in message
> news:609m9tF1p7n16U2@mid.individual.net...
>> Calif Bill wrote:
>>> "DownTime" <DownTime61.TakeThisOut@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>> news:r_6dnTDJUauW4wLanZ2dnUVZ_veinZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>> HK wrote:
>>>>> JimH wrote:
>>>>>> Watch the State of the Union. Pelosi's body language is so telling.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When she disagrees..............her mouth opens and she appears to
>>>>>> gulp.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Her smile also disappears when Bush is talking about subjects she
>>>>>> disagrees with.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lastly, as the speech is going on her eyes drop from straight ahead to
>>>>>> looking at the floor.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Hard to stay awake, as the State of the Union speech sounded like a
>>>>> regurgitation of previous Bush bullship.
>>>>>
>>>> Could you then truly explain to me how the other side has anything new
>>>> or specific or clearly defined to add? How exactly can they, or anyone
>>>> for that matter do it better? And to define 'better', just because it is
>>>> different, does not automatically assume it is better. It all depends on
>>>> your perspective...
>>> Did not see the faces as I listened to the speech as I drove home from
>>> L.A. The sad part of the speech, is those items he brought up like
>>> earmarks (what happened to Pork?) are great statements. He just should
>>> have started doing the vetoing about 6.5 years ago.
>>
>> Apparently Bush put off enforcing his earmark dictate until January
>> 2009...in other words, he pushed it off onto the next President. He's done
>> that with ending the war in Iraq, economic recovery, and just about
>> everything else he has fu*ked up. The next guy or gal will have to address
>> the mess Bush is leaving behind.
>
> We are screwed. Almost all the front runners are from Congress. That has a
> lower rating than Bush, for good reason. They have overspent and overlawed
> for a lot more than the last 7 years. All these candidates that came from
> the Senate or House, should be disqualified as they have already shown their
> incompetence.
>
>


Well, there is Romney, but he's worse than a congresscritter.
 >> Stay informed about: Pelosi's face says it all 

"HK" <payer33859.DeleteThis@mypacks.net> wrote in message
news:609n4vF1p0mo4U2@mid.individual.net...
> Calif Bill wrote:
>> "HK" <payer33859.DeleteThis@mypacks.net> wrote in message
>> news:609m9tF1p7n16U2@mid.individual.net...
>>> Calif Bill wrote:
>>>> "DownTime" <DownTime61.DeleteThis@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:r_6dnTDJUauW4wLanZ2dnUVZ_veinZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>>> HK wrote:
>>>>>> JimH wrote:
>>>>>>> Watch the State of the Union. Pelosi's body language is so telling.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When she disagrees..............her mouth opens and she appears to
>>>>>>> gulp.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Her smile also disappears when Bush is talking about subjects she
>>>>>>> disagrees with.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lastly, as the speech is going on her eyes drop from straight ahead
>>>>>>> to looking at the floor.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hard to stay awake, as the State of the Union speech sounded like a
>>>>>> regurgitation of previous Bush bullship.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Could you then truly explain to me how the other side has anything new
>>>>> or specific or clearly defined to add? How exactly can they, or anyone
>>>>> for that matter do it better? And to define 'better', just because it
>>>>> is different, does not automatically assume it is better. It all
>>>>> depends on your perspective...
>>>> Did not see the faces as I listened to the speech as I drove home from
>>>> L.A. The sad part of the speech, is those items he brought up like
>>>> earmarks (what happened to Pork?) are great statements. He just should
>>>> have started doing the vetoing about 6.5 years ago.
>>>
>>> Apparently Bush put off enforcing his earmark dictate until January
>>> 2009...in other words, he pushed it off onto the next President. He's
>>> done that with ending the war in Iraq, economic recovery, and just about
>>> everything else he has fu*ked up. The next guy or gal will have to
>>> address the mess Bush is leaving behind.
>>
>> We are screwed. Almost all the front runners are from Congress. That
>> has a lower rating than Bush, for good reason. They have overspent and
>> overlawed for a lot more than the last 7 years. All these candidates
>> that came from the Senate or House, should be disqualified as they have
>> already shown their incompetence.
>
>
> Well, there is Romney, but he's worse than a congresscritter.

He is at least a successful businessman. And did a good job with being CEO
of the Olympics in SLC. Seems as if he has more going for him than a couple
of lawyers. Especially one who has a bad memory as well as bad record
keeping.
 >> Stay informed about: Pelosi's face says it all 

Calif Bill wrote:
> "HK" <payer33859 DeleteThis @mypacks.net> wrote in message
> news:609n4vF1p0mo4U2@mid.individual.net...
>> Calif Bill wrote:
>>> "HK" <payer33859 DeleteThis @mypacks.net> wrote in message
>>> news:609m9tF1p7n16U2@mid.individual.net...
>>>> Calif Bill wrote:
>>>>> "DownTime" <DownTime61 DeleteThis @comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:r_6dnTDJUauW4wLanZ2dnUVZ_veinZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>>>> HK wrote:
>>>>>>> JimH wrote:
>>>>>>>> Watch the State of the Union. Pelosi's body language is so telling.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When she disagrees..............her mouth opens and she appears to
>>>>>>>> gulp.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Her smile also disappears when Bush is talking about subjects she
>>>>>>>> disagrees with.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Lastly, as the speech is going on her eyes drop from straight ahead
>>>>>>>> to looking at the floor.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hard to stay awake, as the State of the Union speech sounded like a
>>>>>>> regurgitation of previous Bush bullship.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could you then truly explain to me how the other side has anything new
>>>>>> or specific or clearly defined to add? How exactly can they, or anyone
>>>>>> for that matter do it better? And to define 'better', just because it
>>>>>> is different, does not automatically assume it is better. It all
>>>>>> depends on your perspective...
>>>>> Did not see the faces as I listened to the speech as I drove home from
>>>>> L.A. The sad part of the speech, is those items he brought up like
>>>>> earmarks (what happened to Pork?) are great statements. He just should
>>>>> have started doing the vetoing about 6.5 years ago.
>>>> Apparently Bush put off enforcing his earmark dictate until January
>>>> 2009...in other words, he pushed it off onto the next President. He's
>>>> done that with ending the war in Iraq, economic recovery, and just about
>>>> everything else he has fu*ked up. The next guy or gal will have to
>>>> address the mess Bush is leaving behind.
>>> We are screwed. Almost all the front runners are from Congress. That
>>> has a lower rating than Bush, for good reason. They have overspent and
>>> overlawed for a lot more than the last 7 years. All these candidates
>>> that came from the Senate or House, should be disqualified as they have
>>> already shown their incompetence.
>>
>> Well, there is Romney, but he's worse than a congresscritter.
>
> He is at least a successful businessman. And did a good job with being CEO
> of the Olympics in SLC. Seems as if he has more going for him than a couple
> of lawyers. Especially one who has a bad memory as well as bad record
> keeping.
>
>


Being a "successful businessman" is not important for a POTUS. The last
two "successful businessmen" we had as presidents, Bush and Bush, didn't
do much for the national economy. In fact, Bush II has steered us into a
slide.
 >> Stay informed about: Pelosi's face says it all 

"hk" <payer33859.RemoveThis@mypacks.net> wrote in message
news:wZGdnRMK_4iKVgLanZ2dnUVZ_uyinZ2d@comcast.com...
> Calif Bill wrote:
>> "HK" <payer33859.RemoveThis@mypacks.net> wrote in message
>> news:609n4vF1p0mo4U2@mid.individual.net...
>>> Calif Bill wrote:
>>>> "HK" <payer33859.RemoveThis@mypacks.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:609m9tF1p7n16U2@mid.individual.net...
>>>>> Calif Bill wrote:
>>>>>> "DownTime" <DownTime61.RemoveThis@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:r_6dnTDJUauW4wLanZ2dnUVZ_veinZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>>>>> HK wrote:
>>>>>>>> JimH wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Watch the State of the Union. Pelosi's body language is so
>>>>>>>>> telling.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When she disagrees..............her mouth opens and she appears to
>>>>>>>>> gulp.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Her smile also disappears when Bush is talking about subjects she
>>>>>>>>> disagrees with.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Lastly, as the speech is going on her eyes drop from straight
>>>>>>>>> ahead to looking at the floor.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hard to stay awake, as the State of the Union speech sounded like a
>>>>>>>> regurgitation of previous Bush bullship.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Could you then truly explain to me how the other side has anything
>>>>>>> new or specific or clearly defined to add? How exactly can they, or
>>>>>>> anyone for that matter do it better? And to define 'better', just
>>>>>>> because it is different, does not automatically assume it is better.
>>>>>>> It all depends on your perspective...
>>>>>> Did not see the faces as I listened to the speech as I drove home
>>>>>> from L.A. The sad part of the speech, is those items he brought up
>>>>>> like earmarks (what happened to Pork?) are great statements. He just
>>>>>> should have started doing the vetoing about 6.5 years ago.
>>>>> Apparently Bush put off enforcing his earmark dictate until January
>>>>> 2009...in other words, he pushed it off onto the next President. He's
>>>>> done that with ending the war in Iraq, economic recovery, and just
>>>>> about everything else he has fu*ked up. The next guy or gal will have
>>>>> to address the mess Bush is leaving behind.
>>>> We are screwed. Almost all the front runners are from Congress. That
>>>> has a lower rating than Bush, for good reason. They have overspent and
>>>> overlawed for a lot more than the last 7 years. All these candidates
>>>> that came from the Senate or House, should be disqualified as they have
>>>> already shown their incompetence.
>>>
>>> Well, there is Romney, but he's worse than a congresscritter.
>>
>> He is at least a successful businessman. And did a good job with being
>> CEO of the Olympics in SLC. Seems as if he has more going for him than a
>> couple of lawyers. Especially one who has a bad memory as well as bad
>> record keeping.
>
>
> Being a "successful businessman" is not important for a POTUS. The last
> two "successful businessmen" we had as presidents, Bush and Bush, didn't
> do much for the national economy. In fact, Bush II has steered us into a
> slide.
>
The politico's have not down well either. So I think Businessman rates much
higher.
 >> Stay informed about: Pelosi's face says it all 

On Jan 29, 8:04 pm, HK <payer33... RemoveThis @mypacks.net> wrote:

>
> I don't claim to be "rich," but I've done okay. We certainly do not need
> any tax breaks, not compared to those who earn a lot less than we do.-

but that's just it, Harry. the two things that the uber-rich and folks
on welfare have in common.

a) Neither has to worry about money,

b) Neither has to worry about tax's.
 >> Stay informed about: Pelosi's face says it all 

Calif Bill wrote:
> "hk" <payer33859.RemoveThis@mypacks.net> wrote in message
> news:wZGdnRMK_4iKVgLanZ2dnUVZ_uyinZ2d@comcast.com...
>> Calif Bill wrote:
>>> "HK" <payer33859.RemoveThis@mypacks.net> wrote in message
>>> news:609n4vF1p0mo4U2@mid.individual.net...
>>>> Calif Bill wrote:
>>>>> "HK" <payer33859.RemoveThis@mypacks.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:609m9tF1p7n16U2@mid.individual.net...
>>>>>> Calif Bill wrote:
>>>>>>> "DownTime" <DownTime61.RemoveThis@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:r_6dnTDJUauW4wLanZ2dnUVZ_veinZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>>>>>> HK wrote:
>>>>>>>>> JimH wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Watch the State of the Union. Pelosi's body language is so
>>>>>>>>>> telling.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When she disagrees..............her mouth opens and she appears to
>>>>>>>>>> gulp.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Her smile also disappears when Bush is talking about subjects she
>>>>>>>>>> disagrees with.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Lastly, as the speech is going on her eyes drop from straight
>>>>>>>>>> ahead to looking at the floor.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hard to stay awake, as the State of the Union speech sounded like a
>>>>>>>>> regurgitation of previous Bush bullship.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Could you then truly explain to me how the other side has anything
>>>>>>>> new or specific or clearly defined to add? How exactly can they, or
>>>>>>>> anyone for that matter do it better? And to define 'better', just
>>>>>>>> because it is different, does not automatically assume it is better.
>>>>>>>> It all depends on your perspective...
>>>>>>> Did not see the faces as I listened to the speech as I drove home
>>>>>>> from L.A. The sad part of the speech, is those items he brought up
>>>>>>> like earmarks (what happened to Pork?) are great statements. He just
>>>>>>> should have started doing the vetoing about 6.5 years ago.
>>>>>> Apparently Bush put off enforcing his earmark dictate until January
>>>>>> 2009...in other words, he pushed it off onto the next President. He's
>>>>>> done that with ending the war in Iraq, economic recovery, and just
>>>>>> about everything else he has fu*ked up. The next guy or gal will have
>>>>>> to address the mess Bush is leaving behind.
>>>>> We are screwed. Almost all the front runners are from Congress. That
>>>>> has a lower rating than Bush, for good reason. They have overspent and
>>>>> overlawed for a lot more than the last 7 years. All these candidates
>>>>> that came from the Senate or House, should be disqualified as they have
>>>>> already shown their incompetence.
>>>> Well, there is Romney, but he's worse than a congresscritter.
>>> He is at least a successful businessman. And did a good job with being
>>> CEO of the Olympics in SLC. Seems as if he has more going for him than a
>>> couple of lawyers. Especially one who has a bad memory as well as bad
>>> record keeping.
>>
>> Being a "successful businessman" is not important for a POTUS. The last
>> two "successful businessmen" we had as presidents, Bush and Bush, didn't
>> do much for the national economy. In fact, Bush II has steered us into a
>> slide.
>>
> The politico's have not down well either. So I think Businessman rates much
> higher.
>
>


On the basis of what? The three Republican presidents who have done the
best in my lifetime, Eisenhower, Nixon, and Reagan, were not businessmen.

The two Republican presidents who have done the worst, Bush and Bush,
are businessmen.


--
George W. Bush - Worst President Ever, to the very last minute of the
very last day of his term.
 >> Stay informed about: Pelosi's face says it all