Don't congratulate THIS democrat ... I'm sickened by these results! (nm)
Posted By: NO Obama Supporter on 2008-11-05
In Reply to: WE WON! Congratulations to ALL Democrats! Go. Obama! nm - aw
x
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
May I congratulate you, sm
You are an example of a "real" American. The hate that is being spread everywhere is going to be what destroys this country, not Obama. People are going to keep spreading this hateful rhetoric until some nut job makes them happy. Back in the 50s and 60s we hadn't heard about political correctness. John F. Kennedy was attacked for no other reason than that he was Catholic. Abortion and gay marriage sure wasn't an issue back then either. I would wager a bet that if we were back in the 50s and 60s people wouldn't be hiding behind the smoke screen of birth certificates, Ayers, abortion, gay marriage, etc. They would be calling the hatred what it is...the color of Obama's skin. 
Sickened and incredibly fed up
My son is one of the troops in Iraq. You have some nerve writing what you did when you have NO CLUE what is really going on. If you did, you wouldn't have posted what you did. People like you sicken me to no end. I'm proud that my son CHOSE to go to Iraq. You should see some of the pics that he has sent me where he is living among the Iraq people and how they are so thankful that he and other troops are there. You hear what the media wants you to hear. How else are you hearing anything? You're probably not. Those of us who have loved ones in Iraq know the real deal. What is so "telling" is that you don't have a clue. Maybe you need to hop a flight to Iraq and see what it's really about, then perhaps you would have a different viewpoint. It's interesting to me how people can mouth off as if they are so informed when the fact is they're not. And, of note, it wasn't our media that purported that Bhutto was killed by AL Qaida, it was the Pakistani government who made that suggestion.
MLK was a republican who was sickened by
xx
Martin Luther King would be sickened by him....
nm
The results are in....
and the Democrats have the majority. Let's see what they do with it.
New CNN poll results
Not to shabby after his week from he!!.
yes, I am doing this, but I get 'no results'...
not with all posted links, sometimes, especially when the links contains a lot of digits...
Great election results
My best friend from NY of 43 years, who is a republican and grew up in a republican household, called me last night..and we talked politics and she sounded more like a democrat..I was so glad! She talked about war without end, caused by Bush, corruption, by republicans, her two sons who are draft age, on and on..I have seen her growing politically since 9/11..At first she was all for the Iraqi war, then started doubting the information from Bushs WH..Im feeling pretty positive this morning..Arnold (how do you spell his last name, LOL) got defeated in his *special election*, democrats got voted in in NJ and Virginia (Virginia a red state)..The people realize the country is headed in the wrong direction and are showing this through their votes. The one thing I dont like is the Intelligent Design theory being voted in in Kansas. I believe in Darwins theory.
Rasmussen poll results:
Sarah Palin has made a good first impression. Before being named as John McCain’s running mate, 67% of voters didn’t know enough about the Alaska governor to have an opinion. After her debut in Dayton and a rush of media coverage, a new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds that 53% now have a favorable opinion of Palin while just 26% offer a less flattering assessment.
Palin earns positive reviews from 78% of Republicans, 26% of Democrats and 63% of unaffiliated voters. Obviously, these numbers will be subject to change as voters learn more about her in the coming weeks. Among all voters, 29% have a Very Favorable opinion of Palin while 9% hold a Very Unfavorable view.
By way of comparison, on the day he was selected as Barack Obama’s running mate, Delaware Senator Joseph Biden was viewed favorably by 43% of voters.
In the new survey, 35% of voters say the selection of Palin makes them more likely to vote for McCain while 33% say they are less likely to do so. Most Republicans say they are more likely to vote for Palin and most Democrats say the opposite. As for voters not affiliated with either major party, 37% are more likely to vote for McCain and 28% less likely to do so. Those numbers are a bit more positive than initial reaction to Biden.
After McCain's announcement, Clinton issued a statement saying, "We should all be proud of Governor Sarah Palin's historic nomination, and I congratulate her and Senator McCain. While their policies would take America in the wrong direction, Governor Palin will add an important new voice to the debate." Palin is now viewed favorably by 48% of women. That figure includes 80% of Republican women, 23% of Democratic women, and 61% of women not affiliated with either major party.
Polls are what they are and change like people change socks. However, these are good preliminary numbers. Time will tell how it all plays out.
Read these poll results
Obama stretches poll lead as Mickey Mouse enters fray
By Leonard Doyle in Washington
Thursday, 16 October 2008
AP
Barack Obama has a 14 per cent lead over John McCain in a New York Times/CBS poll
enlarge Related Articles
Watch last night's debate, in full
McCain scrapping to change course of election
The surburban nightmare that haunts McCain
Obama's Iraq plans vindicated as US agrees to pull out by 2011
Johann Hari: Scribbled in the margins: the character of the next President
Obama buys first video game campaign ads
US election diary
On The Campaign Trail
Print Email Search
Search
Go
Independent.co.uk Web
Bookmark & Share
Digg It
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
What are these?
Change font size: A | A | A
Barack Obama has opened a dramatic 14-point lead over John McCain in a new opinion poll, amid evidence that the McCain camp's character attacks are doing more to harm the Republican senator than his opponent.
A New York Times/CBS poll published yesterday shows that if the election was held now, 53 per cent of voters surveyed would vote for Obama compared to 39 per cent for McCain.
The poll also found that Republican attempts to smear Mr Obama by association with William Ayers, a 1960s radical, have hurt Mr McCain more than his rival. Voters also said they were turned off voting Republican by the choice of Governor Sarah Palin as the vice-presidential running mate.
Six out of 10 voters criticised John McCain for spending more time denouncing his opponent than explaining how he intended to lead the US at a time of unprecedented economic turmoil. The poll showed that anxiety about the economy and deep mistrust of George Bush have created a hostile environment for Mr McCain's campaign. Faced with an avalanche of bad news, the McCain campaign is seeking to capitalise on a voter scandal, which they say is an attempt to rig the 2008 vote. Democrats have a long "vote early, vote often" legacy to live down and the latest scandal has played into the hands of conservatives.
Thousands of fraudulent voter registrations were allegedly collected by a charitable organisation, Acorn, which helps people register for elections. The lists include such names as Batman, Mickey Mouse and the Dallas Cowboys football team.
There are no known examples of illegalities in early voting, but Acorn has become a rallying call for Republicans who are preparing for legal challenges to the election. They have smeared Senator Obama by association, because like Acorn, he was once a community organiser. Sarah Palin used the Acorn scandal to raise funds from Republicans, saying in an email: "We can't allow leftist groups like Acorn to steal the election."
The organisation admitted about3 per cent of the 1.3 million new voters who were enrolled by its 13,000 canvassers may be fraudulent. A spokesman, Steve Kest, said some canvassers had cheated but that the organisation has strict internal controls. "The incidence of voters registering and voting under false names is minimal," he said.
Mr Obama has distanced his campaign from Acorn, saying that fears of voter fraud in the 4 November election are wide of the mark. Canvassers "just went to the phone book or made up names and submitted false registrations to get paid," he told reporters.
Republican commentators were quick to denounce the New York Times/CBS poll yesterday, describing it as a predictably skewed view from two of the country's most liberal news organisations. But another poll, by SurveyUSA in five states where early voting is under way, reveals that Senator Obama leads by an average of 23 points among early voters in Iowa, New Mexico, Ohio, Georgia, and North Carolina.
The five states went to George Bush by an average of 6.5 points in 2004.
Greed may have disasterous results....sm
DC bars are going to stay open 24 hours a day for 4 days during the inauguration. I can see trouble on the way...........
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/12/05/police-union-fears-inaugural-chaos/
OTOH, maybe they can use the tax dollars to help offset the Big 3 bailout. 
He knows DC, knows how to get results, Congress, Senate,
Yeah. Sounds like a real scary threat. Do qualified, highly skilled and immensely experienced people such as this always intimidate you so?
Wow! I read the results, but didn't know the nay sayers were repugs...sm
I mean repubs. Interesting.
Obama admin. skeptical of Iran's election results.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/13/official-obama-administration-skeptical-irans-election-results/
U.S. officials are casting doubt over the results of Iran's election, in which the government declared President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the winner Saturday.
U.S. analysts find it "not credible" that challenger Mir Hossein Mousavi would have lost the balloting in his hometown or that a third candidate, Mehdi Karoubi, would have received less than 1 percent of the total vote, a senior U.S. officials told FOX News.
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khameini apparently has released a statement calling the results "final" and hailing the election as a legitimization of the regime and its elections.
Turnout appears to have reached 82 percent, an all-time high. But when asked if the turnout figures should be considered suspect, given the "not credible" counts for Mousavi and Karoubi, the official said: "Oh, it has to be [considered suspect]."
There are already reports of violence outside Mousavi's campaign headquarters, and of huge demonstrations for both sides in central Tehran, with Mousavi trying to make his way to the one in his behalf. Even if widespread violence occurs, analysts see no prospect that this event would lead to a full-scale attempt at revolution or the toppling of the regime.
The dominant view among Obama administration officials, though not uncontested, is that the regime will look so bad as a result of whipping up Iranian hopes for democracy and then squelching them that the regime may feel compelled to show some conciliatory response to President Obama's gestures of engagement.
Thank you Democrat
you are right. I'm wasting my time here.
Well said, Democrat! Well said.
Applauding. 
Thank you, Democrat
My fingers are crossed too, Democrat...I hope and pray for all of us that our country can repair itself..I have always been an optimist in life, until the last few years..Yes, I will think optimistically..with hope in my heart..Thank you for your post..you are so kind..
Same to you, Democrat!
Hope you had the best day ever! 
Thanks, Democrat.
I've been following this case and have written to the Governor in protest. Someone has to care about America's children. It's obvious this particular judge doesn't.
Thanks, Democrat.
He raises some very interesting points, doesn't he? I'm glad, too, that he wasn't fired. I wish somebody like him (or he) WOULD run for President because I'd vote for him, as well. After our invasion of Iraq, how DO other countries know they won't be next, and why wouldn't they want to protect themselves from an unwanted, uncalled-for American invasion?
We need someone who can straighten out America and make it a much better place and lead by example so other countries WANT to be like us, rather than having our form of *freedom* forced upon them.
No, actually that was DEMOCRAT.
You really need to stop obsessing on me, Nina. You've made your hatred of me known, but it's starting to get spooky. Please find another hobby. You're beginning to resemble a stalker.
At the very least, you might want to scan the board before accusing me of saying things I didn't. It will only take you a second, and you will appear to at least have some common sense and credibility if you do so. Right now, I seem to be your target, and your hateful obsession is quite transparent.
Have a lovely day, dear.
Thank you Democrat..
I have been trying to make 2 points about Churchill for 2 days but it is like free association here. I get everything and the kitchen sink back. As far as Coulter, I was just putting an article out there that I thought was humorous (intended only for liberals as it knew it would offend others and even the heading I posted was attacked) and somehow that morphed into I am attacking Coulter and defending Churchill. Talk about pretzel logic. Again, thanks for actually reading my posts and actually understanding what I said.
Thanks, Democrat.
I hadn't read the part where they included the US troops in the mix. What I read was that the Iraqi Prime Minister wanted amnesty only for terrorists who killed American soldiers and NO amnesty for terrorists who killed Iraqis. I felt this was a slap in the face to America, and that's the precise reason I'm so outraged over this.
It's interesting that you said that's what you *make of it.* Every time I've read something on this issue, I walked away just kind of scratching my head because I was unable to grasp an understanding of most of it. Even the bill itself that was voted on yesterday did nothing but express the *sense* of the Congress regarding this issue. How can it be so important to take up Senate time, including the debate and vote, when the end result is that they are EXPRESSING THEIR SENSE? Seems like a big waste of time to me and lends even more credibility to Harold Ford's view that it was nothing but a stunt.
What I don't understand is why 19 Republican senators would publicly place themselves in the position of voting their *sense* that they were in favor of letting terrorists off the hook when it comes to killing our soldiers, given that the majority of Iraqis think it's okay to kill Americans.
I suppose some sense could be made of the reasoning behind it if we were dealing with terrorists/insurgents that could be trusted, but with 65% of the general Iraqi population thinking it's okay to kill Americans and 88% of the Sunni population believing so, I don't feel comfortable placing any trust in them.
Democrat
I do not and did not excuse Mark Foley. He was wrong. What I have a problem with, is the same people who ask for his head are the same people who excuse the same behavior in Democrats who have done the same thing. Barney Frank...male prostitution ring out of his apartment. Not sure all of them were of legal age. Representative Studd. Had a sexual relationship (not internet) with a 17-year-old page. Not only not apologized for it, but accused critics of gay bashing and that his relationship, with a 17-year-old, mind you...was consensual. These are Democrats, and Democrats did not ask for their heads. But they ask for Foley's head. I am not excusing ANY of them. I find it odd that Democrats do not recognize a pedophile when he is a Democrat, but recognize him when he is a Republican.
No, extramarital affairs are not illegal. PERJURY is. In all 50 states. I didn't hear any Democrat, NOT ONE, asking for HIS head.
I can say without a doubt that they were ALL wrong, all morally corrupt, and all should pay for it. Clinton didn't, Studd didn't, Frank didn't. Foley IS. There is another BIG difference.
Same to you, Democrat! sm
Merry Merry Christmas and God Bless.
I am sorry, Democrat...I just don't get it....
You guys jump to champion Teddy when she has attacked me over and over, just like you claim some conservatives have attacked you...but it is okay for her, keep up the good fight. I am sorry, but that only tends to reinforce the feelings of most conservatives that liberals walk in lock step and support each other right or wrong. Please explain to me how it is okay for Teddy to call me a fool, tell me she cannot talk to someone who is mentally ill, has no common sense, that I defecated upon her...to name a few. Why is that okay for her, and you come along rah rah Teddy, and then complain when conservatives post similar, but not nearly as hateful...posts? Can you please explain to me why that is okay? Because, actually, in looking at your posts, you seemed a reasonable person and not prone to attacking anyone. Is it that same old well, I wouldn't do it myself, but if she wants to do it, I will support her thing?
Thanks Democrat..
Good to have yet another point of view. I have been reading Rabbi Kushner's Book, Overcoming Life's Disappointments. He uses the Old Testament (obviously) and Moses. What I really love about this guy is his working knowledge of so many faiths other than his own and how he can find, quite easily, the similarities...anyway, one thing I found interesting was that he said (and I certainly did not know) the Torah has 613 commandments and more of these deal with the poor (spiritually, physically, financially poor) than any other issue. Then along comes Jesus and what does he say??? My gosh, I think it is the same thing!!! I wish that some of the really right religious people (Dobson, Falwell, etc. could team up with Rick Warren, Al Sharpton, TD Jakes, Pope Benedict, Rabbi Kushner et al) and look at the issues that the Bible addresses other than abortion and same-sex marriage. The most mentioned virtue, it would seem, would be humility and the willingness to serve God by serving others, especially the least among us, no questions asked. In the Old Testament taking care of those in need was an obligation, not charity.
Democrat here
I do check in to see what's going on here once in a while but to be honest all the republican propaganda and lies disgust me. Thank God the majority of the country isn't buying into it.
I'm a democrat!!!!!!
And I am not one of the two that you say have posted here. But I am proud to be a dem!
I'm a democrat
I havent attacked anyone on here. I have no problem with the republicans. It takes both parties to run this country. I do feel that we have gotten off on the wrong track and I do feel that Bush has not done a great job. I dont feel that way specifically because he is a republican but because I just dont feel that he was the best guy for the job.
I will vote for Obama. If I had more choices, maybe I wouldnt vote for him. But McCain worries me and I feel that given my opinions of him, I have no choice but to vote for Obama.
I am a democrat
I did not vote for Obama. I have a question for those that did. Do you read the articles from Reuters and other papers from other parts of the world? Do you watch foreign news? Because I do. I have found that you cannot get the real picture just by relying on our news media and papers. If you want to get a true overview of what is going on, you have to go outside of us. Have you not read/heard the news on O? He does want to make our kids join some sort of community service organization. He stated that would be mandatory. He did have associations with people of a sordid nature that goes contrary to US benefit. And the minute that someone, anyone, posts something that they have read or heard about that man, people become angry and defensive. I am sorry that you all voted for O. Can you not see what is happening? Hitler was elected into office during a democratic state. I am not saying that O is Hitler, what I am saying is that someone with such extreme ideas has been elected to the highest power and there are many signs pointing to the fact that we are going to see some changes that even those that voted for him are not going to like. I think it will be subtle, until one day people are like, what happened to us? Also, McCain and Palin did not win, so let them be! I mean come on already, you guys won, let it die. I have never seen one person have such a following and a following that is so mean spirited. 
Duh! Wow, a democrat is saying that?
nm
I am and have always been a democrat, but
I don't agree with this at all. I guess I agree more with Clinton's 'don't ask, don't tell' stance. I also don't like how the whole 'gay movement' has attached itself to the Democrats. We need Democrats in power to help get us out of this economic nightmare created by the republicans, and this is distracting & costs us votes every time.
You might want to recheck that Democrat. sm
gt wished death on George Bush far below and again above! Not only that, she wished some pretty terrible things on Laura Bush and the daughters. Just because you didn't see it, doesn't mean it isn't so. The thing is, there are two boards. Nan and AG don't come here. Get the picture?
Hi, there, Democrat!!! Nice to see you again!
With respect to the 10% tax, I still think $9,000,000 of disposable income goes a lot farther than $9,000, and 10% of $10,000,000 is just a drop in the bucket, compared to 10% of $10,000.
Anyway, my understanding of the "Fair Tax" is that it isn't based on income. It's based on "consumption." It's (my paraphrasing) a federal sales tax instead of a federal income tax. And spending up to the poverty level is tax-free, with their "fair tax rebate."
So if someone can afford to buy that 2006 Ferrari, they can also afford to pay the tax. If someone can only afford a $500 1989 Mitsubishi, they will probably not have to pay any tax if it is considered under the poverty level.
This only addresses federal government tax issues, though. It doesn't even begin to touch state, county and local taxation.
And from what I've read, I haven't heard what percentage of tax they are proposing.
So I'm still not sure which I'm leaning towards. I'm actually sort of swaying between the 10% and the "fair tax."
Nice to see you here, thanks for the invitation, and I agree. We should debate here.
Wow, Democrat. I expected more from you. SM
 It gets personal because it's made personal. How you can't see that, I am not quite sure. As for your statement elsewhere that AG and I had left before, nope. Sorry, didn't happen. I didn't say I wasn't coming back either. Anyways, how much more personal can you get than wishing someone to die, and I am not talking about the president. It happened but the posts are gone. We all responded to the person who told Nan she was old and going to die and burn in hell. So I guess that's not personal, huh? Tell me how many times you have seen one of us do that. As far as debate, we give as good as we get. I thought you knew that, but guess I was wrong yet again. Oh well, live and learn!
In all honesty, Democrat. SM
How can you castigate someone for being on the liberal board when you are on the conservative board. Just pointing out a little pot-kettle scenario. Like Brunson, I won't be posting on here anymore. And like Brunson, hopefully you will return the favor. Have a nice evening.
Now Democrat, you know that isn't true. sm
And again with the "lock step", an allusion to Hitler and Nazis. Just can't help it, can you? It was posted on this board the conservative board by at least two conservative posters what they did not agree with Bush on, plus I posted it myself above. So not true.
That's yellow dog DEMOCRAT to you.
Yellow dog DEMOCRATS. Get it straight.
Democrat tried and true
LOLOLOLOLOLOL..I guess now Im being told by a conservative basically what I am, LOLOLOL..Oh, how sad..Sweetie pie, I know what I am and it is a living and breathing LIBERAL DEMORACT..and Im passing the word around the country (through the local democratic club) and I have so far converted two republicans to become democrats..So, geez, I guess Im your worse nightmare..YEEHHAAWW!!
Well, he was a Democrat. What would you expect?
Johnson didn't have a haves, have-more, elite base like Bush bragged about having. He just cared about normal everyday people. How I miss those days. 
Oh pshaw Democrat
You and I both know that anything I had to say would be blasted right out of the water, I would be called a racist, A LIAR, my entire family would be wished to burn in hell, and the list goes on. One simply cannot argue or reason with people on this board.
Very true, Democrat.
I predict though that Tillman and his entire family will be ripped to gossipy shreds by the Con pirhanas and his mom written off as a liar with a socialist agenda before the story is over with. That's how they operate, we've seen it over and over again. You can sort of set your watch by it.
Yes, Democrat, didn't you
on how many care packages you send? NOT! Your very patriotism is at stake here...possibly even your soul during the rapture! LOL! Can you say superficial? These people think that supporting the troops consists of sending them junk food and cigarettes and plastering *W* stickers on their 6-mile-a-gallon SUVs, while soldiers die on a daily basis so they can wave their little flags. Little minds that need to keep things so simple...just like their bubble-brained leader....waaaaaaaaaaaay too much cocaine, booze, and Kool-Aid.
Agree with you 100%, Democrat!
I haven't responded to some of the proposterous posts from the last couple of days because I have heard and responded to the same old worn-out shreiking arguments before. I do commend YOU, though, for your typically thoughtful, well-reasoned, logical replies. Thank you.
I agree entirely with you that in Iraq we have created a laboratory for even greater anti-American rage and don't see the threat going away if we continue on the same course. And what can one say for the following but be very afraid for this country, especially since Addington is one of the 2 who replaced Libby. May God forgive us.
Vice President for Torture
Wednesday, October 26, 2005; A18
VICE PRESIDENT Cheney is aggressively pursuing an initiative that may be unprecedented for an elected official of the executive branch: He is proposing that Congress legally authorize human rights abuses by Americans. Cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of prisoners is banned by an international treaty negotiated by the Reagan administration and ratified by the United States. The State Department annually issues a report criticizing other governments for violating it. Now Mr. Cheney is asking Congress to approve legal language that would allow the CIA to commit such abuses against foreign prisoners it is holding abroad. In other words, this vice president has become an open advocate of torture.
His position is not just some abstract defense of presidential power. The CIA is holding an unknown number of prisoners in secret detention centers abroad. In violation of the Geneva Conventions, it has refused to register those detainees with the International Red Cross or to allow visits by its inspectors. Its prisoners have disappeared, like the victims of some dictatorships. The Justice Department and the White House are known to have approved harsh interrogation techniques for some of these people, including waterboarding, or simulated drowning; mock execution; and the deliberate withholding of pain medication. CIA personnel have been implicated in the deaths during interrogation of at least four Afghan and Iraqi detainees. Official investigations have indicated that some aberrant practices by Army personnel in Iraq originated with the CIA. Yet no CIA personnel have been held accountable for this record, and there has never been a public report on the agency's performance.
It's not surprising that Mr. Cheney would be at the forefront of an attempt to ratify and legalize this shameful record. The vice president has been a prime mover behind the Bush administration's decision to violate the Geneva Conventions and the U.N. Convention Against Torture and to break with decades of past practice by the U.S. military. These decisions at the top have led to hundreds of documented cases of abuse, torture and homicide in Iraq and Afghanistan. Mr. Cheney's counsel, David S. Addington, was reportedly one of the principal authors of a legal memo justifying the torture of suspects. This summer Mr. Cheney told several Republican senators that President Bush would veto the annual defense spending bill if it contained language prohibiting the use of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment by any U.S. personnel.
The senators ignored Mr. Cheney's threats, and the amendment, sponsored by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), passed this month by a vote of 90 to 9. So now Mr. Cheney is trying to persuade members of a House-Senate conference committee to adopt language that would not just nullify the McCain amendment but would formally adopt cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment as a legal instrument of U.S. policy. The Senate's earlier vote suggests that it will not allow such a betrayal of American values. As for Mr. Cheney: He will be remembered as the vice president who campaigned for torture.
© 2005 The Washington Post Company
Maybe not, democrat, but the one below this by gt was aimed at vs.
and it was typical gt.
No, she's not the one posting under democrat. That would be me. And...sm
the most of us on the liberal board do not buy *impending doom* theory that you live by. I don't think America would cease to exist with John Kerry as president, but that's a whole nother argument.
Hope you had a wonderful holiday, and BTW when I posted the Happy Thanksgiving post it was meant to be a warm greeting to all concerned, and the response from the republican poster was smug and an in a *in your face* sarcasm if you look at it from a liberal perspective.
His exact words, *And I'm so thankful we have a REPUBLICAN president....pretty cool huh?*
Well to you and Pathguy, I think it would be good if we had a TRUSTWORTHY, COMPETENT president, but if REPUBLICAN is all that matters then pat yourselves on the back again and have a blessed Christmas :)
Democrat, I think it's a lost cause.
I think it works like this: Apparently when you reach a certain level of Christian understanding (perhaps like Bush where he has the power to look into souls, i.e. Putin) you can judge the validity of someone else's faith (Christian or otherwise) in spite of the fact that you've never even met them and know them only from a few posts on an internet board about politics. And then you see, it is their duty in the process of insulting your understanding to try and save your wretched little soul that's going to burn in hell anyway. Yup, got it figurrrred out.
So you're actually a Democrat!
Oh, sorry! It's just that critical thinking is so rare among those on the right it NEVER occurred to me that demonstrating a lack of it would place you anywhere else. My bad:) Unless, of course, you really are right of center, in which case I was spot on and no apology is necessary after all. Subject resolved!
Hope you will Democrat!
He really laid it out. One has to wonder, where was THIS Al Gore six years ago? Better late than never I suppose.
Yes, I agree with you, Democrat, on all you said.
|
