Our tea party friends
in [Golf]
|
Prev: Let us endeavor....
Next: I am Kenneth Gladney
From: Alan Baker on 8 Apr 2010 04:52 In article <2010040721573188497-noneofyourbusiness(a)allcom>, "R&B" <none_of_your_business(a)all.com> wrote: > On 2010-03-22 15:21:09 -0400, BAR said: > > > In article <teqeq5hj905930d6r6nu7kugrf0ip52iso(a)4ax.com>, > > bknight(a)conramp.net says... > >> > >> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:05:30 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > >>> You don't keep up with modern protest tactics Bobby. > >>> > >>> If your opposition won't shoot themselves in the foot then you go into > >>> the crowd and shoot them in the foot. > >>> > >> I guess there are those, like you, that think this way. There IS a > >> high road Bert. > > > > If you think the Democrats ever take the high road you are a fool. > > > > We are well past sitting back and accepting what a Congress with an > > approval rating nearing the single digits pushes upon us. > > > > We are well past sitting back and accepting what a President with an > > approval rating that is decreasing by a percentage point a day tells us > > what is best for us. > > > Then you're also well past sitting back and accepting what 53 percent > of the voters said at the polls in November 2008. > > You are no patriot. You are an anarchist, and an anti-government type. > You oppose the very government that a majority of Americans elected to > represent them. That is not merely my opinion. It's a fact. > > You are just another lunatic member of the Timothy McVeigh wing of the > radical Republican right. > > Randy Isn't it funny how all the republicans were all: "Support the president because he's the president" when Bush was in office, but suddenly the rules have changed... -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: BAR on 8 Apr 2010 07:42 In article <2010040721573188497-noneofyourbusiness(a)allcom>, none_of_your_business(a)all.com says... > > On 2010-03-22 15:21:09 -0400, BAR said: > > > In article <teqeq5hj905930d6r6nu7kugrf0ip52iso(a)4ax.com>, > > bknight(a)conramp.net says... > >> > >> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:05:30 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > >>> You don't keep up with modern protest tactics Bobby. > >>> > >>> If your opposition won't shoot themselves in the foot then you go into > >>> the crowd and shoot them in the foot. > >>> > >> I guess there are those, like you, that think this way. There IS a > >> high road Bert. > > > > If you think the Democrats ever take the high road you are a fool. > > > > We are well past sitting back and accepting what a Congress with an > > approval rating nearing the single digits pushes upon us. > > > > We are well past sitting back and accepting what a President with an > > approval rating that is decreasing by a percentage point a day tells us > > what is best for us. > > > Then you're also well past sitting back and accepting what 53 percent > of the voters said at the polls in November 2008. I am one of those who hopes every idea of Obama's fails. November 2010 is just a few months away and it will be time to correct the lunacy of November 2008. > You are no patriot. You are an anarchist, and an anti-government type. > You oppose the very government that a majority of Americans elected to > represent them. That is not merely my opinion. It's a fact. You are too funny. When you were whining and crying and complaining about Bush we all said the same thing about you. When the political winds are not in your favor in the future you fit your description of being the unpatriotic anarchist. > You are just another lunatic member of the Timothy McVeigh wing of the > radical Republican right. Your constant demonizing of those you do not agree with points to a deep seated mental health issue that is brewing in your anguished brain. Have you started wearing tin foil hats yet? Have you put up the tin foil back curtains? Your mental condition has really deteriorated over the past 3 or 4 years. Have you seen a psychiatrist yet? There are drugs to help even out your moods and make your days much more enjoyable.
From: William Clark on 8 Apr 2010 08:05 In article <824bgvFrm1U1(a)mid.individual.net>, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote: > "William Clark" <clark(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message > news:clark-9A0F91.16421407042010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > > In article <8241c9Ft2lU1(a)mid.individual.net>, > > "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > >> "William Clark" <clark(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message > >> news:clark-78112E.14084207042010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > >> > In article > >> > <576e9a46-6587-4a6a-8e29-d9f5a33f4c6a(a)r27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, > >> > Dinosaur_Sr <frostback(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> On Apr 6, 10:46 pm, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > >> >> > On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 07:51:39 +0000, assimilate wrote: > >> >> > > On 4-Apr-2010, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> > >> >> > > wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > >>> Are you trying to claim the NYT isn't biased? > >> >> > > >> >> > >> Compared to the Washington Times? Get real. > >> >> > > >> >> > > the only difference is the NYT is biased in the same way that you > >> >> > > are > >> >> > > >> >> > Everybody is biased. It's the degree of bias that matters. You would > >> >> > have to be incapable of rational thought to seriously equate a cult > >> >> > rag > >> >> > like the Wash Times to the NYT. > >> >> > >> >> The NYT, like the Wash Times, is deliberately biased. The bias is a > >> >> matter of policy, and both are extreme to my minds eye. I don't see a > >> >> difference. > >> > > >> > Where would you say the political bias of David Brooks lies? Thank you. > >> > >> So using your logic. Fox is not biased because Alan Colmes is on it. > > > > No, Fox News is entertainment TV, not a serious news channel. > > Yet another dodge. I guess that's why it kicks all the other "serious news" > channels asses every night. Indeed, because it isn't one. Apples and oranges.
From: Moderate on 8 Apr 2010 10:13 "R&B" <none_of_your_business(a)all.com> wrote in message news:2010040721573188497-noneofyourbusiness(a)allcom... > On 2010-03-22 15:21:09 -0400, BAR said: > >> In article <teqeq5hj905930d6r6nu7kugrf0ip52iso(a)4ax.com>, >> bknight(a)conramp.net says... >>> >>> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:05:30 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: >>>> You don't keep up with modern protest tactics Bobby. >>>> >>>> If your opposition won't shoot themselves in the foot then you go into >>>> the crowd and shoot them in the foot. >>>> >>> I guess there are those, like you, that think this way. There IS a >>> high road Bert. >> >> If you think the Democrats ever take the high road you are a fool. >> >> We are well past sitting back and accepting what a Congress with an >> approval rating nearing the single digits pushes upon us. >> >> We are well past sitting back and accepting what a President with an >> approval rating that is decreasing by a percentage point a day tells us >> what is best for us. > > > Then you're also well past sitting back and accepting what 53 percent of > the voters said at the polls in November 2008. > > You are no patriot. You are an anarchist, and an anti-government type. > You oppose the very government that a majority of Americans elected to > represent them. That is not merely my opinion. It's a fact. > > You are just another lunatic member of the Timothy McVeigh wing of the > radical Republican right. > > Randy Tim McVeigh wasn't a Republican.
From: MNMikeW on 8 Apr 2010 10:16
"Lloyd Parsons" <lloydparsons(a)mac.com> wrote in message news:lloydparsons-4042DE.19132907042010(a)news.eternal-september.org... > In article <MPG.2626dd3a9fdc95c8989db6(a)news.giganews.com>, > BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > >> In article <lloydparsons-803C65.17261107042010(a)news.eternal- >> september.org>, lloydparsons(a)mac.com says... >> > >> > In article <MPG.2626cf0a8870e5e1989db0(a)news.giganews.com>, >> > BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: >> > >> > > In article <clark-78112E.14084207042010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- >> > > state.edu>, clark(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu says... >> > > > >> > > > In article >> > > > <576e9a46-6587-4a6a-8e29-d9f5a33f4c6a(a)r27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, >> > > > Dinosaur_Sr <frostback(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > On Apr 6, 10:46 pm, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: >> > > > > > On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 07:51:39 +0000, assimilate wrote: >> > > > > > > On 4-Apr-2010, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> >> > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> Are you trying to claim the NYT isn't biased? >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Compared to the Washington Times? Get real. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > the only difference is the NYT is biased in the same way that >> > > > > > > you >> > > > > > > are >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Everybody is biased. It's the degree of bias that matters. You >> > > > > > would >> > > > > > have to be incapable of rational thought to seriously equate a >> > > > > > cult >> > > > > > rag >> > > > > > like the Wash Times to the NYT. >> > > > > >> > > > > The NYT, like the Wash Times, is deliberately biased. The bias is >> > > > > a >> > > > > matter of policy, and both are extreme to my minds eye. I don't >> > > > > see a >> > > > > difference. >> > > > >> > > > Where would you say the political bias of David Brooks lies? Thank >> > > > you. >> > > >> > > David Brooks is a wannabe, wannabe invited on the TV shows, wannabe >> > > invited to the parties, wannabe employed. >> > > >> > > Brooks is not a respected conservative intellectual by those on the >> > > right. >> > >> > I'm sure. You hold your respect for Limbaugh and Beck, right? :) >> >> Limbaugh is funny, Beck is annoying. > > Limbaugh IS funny at times, although I prefer my right-wing comedy fix > to come from Boortz. > > Beck is beyond annoying, he's certifiable! Yet he has his own show on > Fox. Makes you wonder... :) > > -- > Lloyd > > Well, Joy Behar has a show on CNN so there. |