Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
1. They did not "go after" Cheney's daughter.
2. Mentioning that someone is gay is not an attack.
3. The fundies are idiots. Any attempt to placate them is idiotic.
NO great love for fundies on a personal level, but even Obama has to pretend he believes in Talking Snakes.
There was no reason for them to bring it up at all. It wasn't relevent to anything.
It was in the debate they were having...haven't you even seen it?
Kerry answering a question:
With Respect to Mary Cheney
More on it:
Cheney's Daughter A Flash Point - CBS News
Edwards debate:
Edwards defends choice to mention Cheney's gay daughter in debate
(note...the Freeper comments are hysterical)
So...Kerry brought it up when asked about gays...and Edwards brought it up when asked about equality for all.
I suspect that what you are smelling is your own shit.
Ohhh, Cali, you feeling the butthurt, too, this morning.
Hey, Jeb Bush is running away from Romney faster than a box of missing ballots.
And Romney's going to release two years of tax returns after insisiting it was none of our business.
Heh, heh, heh... What a fun morning.
Obama would rather not talk about the economy at all. Period. He'd rather we all be talking about a guy who said that women aren't fit for combat, or we should have the death penalty for marijuana smokers, or the benefits of putting giant mirrors in space to light of the Interstate Highways. If Newt is the nominee, they are going to drag up every stupid thing he has ever said, and Republicans are going to be bitching and complaining about the "Lamestream Media" 24/7.
"If you are explaining, you're losing." - Lee Atwater.
That's Newt.
Wow, is that desperation I smell, Toto? I thought RomneyBot 2000 was inevitable and we'd all bettter learn to suck it up and love our magic underwear.
Now your boy loses one Caucus on an instant replay and a primary badly, and suddenly you are screaching that democracy has come to the GOP, and how dare you not do what we tell you to, and here's some obscure point that Newt made that I'll take out of context and hope it makes him look bad.
Fact is, most people don't trust the media, and when Newt goes after them for their bad behavior, it's golden.
Incidently, I think that Obama is going to win no matter who the GOP puts up. Simply, the voters don't vote out a president's party after one term very often. The last time it happened was in 1980. The last time it happened before that was 1892, and that was kind of questionable because you can argue about who had actually won in 1888.
The only way that Obama really loses is if the unemployment rate spikes above 9% again, and I don't think that's going to happen. If it does, it doesn't really matter who the GOP puts up. So why not elect an honest to God conservative instead of one who is conservative because a focus group told him to be?
I suspect that what you are smelling is your own shit.
No, he didn't. It was already common knowledge and Edwards was saying nice things about the Cheneys and their daughter in the comment. Apparently some people don't even want the word gay mentioned except as an insult...which is how they see it.
I often find that very odd myself. Posters on this forum, left and right, desperately try to insult others by calling them 'gay'. I've been "accused" of being gay on the board. I thought it was funny because, if you think that 'insults' me, you could not be more wrong. I'm not gay, but I have no issue with being 'accused' of it.
* The term "you" is used as 'board members', not bodecea as an individual.
It's an insult if you think being gay is a bad thing.
Go ahead and call me gay all you want. It doesn't bother me in the least.
(BTW...the only people I infer are gay are the closet cases....I have contempt for them)
Wow, is that desperation I smell, Toto? I thought RomneyBot 2000 was inevitable and we'd all bettter learn to suck it up and love our magic underwear.
Now your boy loses one Caucus on an instant replay and a primary badly, and suddenly you are screaching that democracy has come to the GOP, and how dare you not do what we tell you to, and here's some obscure point that Newt made that I'll take out of context and hope it makes him look bad.
Fact is, most people don't trust the media, and when Newt goes after them for their bad behavior, it's golden.
Incidently, I think that Obama is going to win no matter who the GOP puts up. Simply, the voters don't vote out a president's party after one term very often. The last time it happened was in 1980. The last time it happened before that was 1892, and that was kind of questionable because you can argue about who had actually won in 1888.
The only way that Obama really loses is if the unemployment rate spikes above 9% again, and I don't think that's going to happen. If it does, it doesn't really matter who the GOP puts up. So why not elect an honest to God conservative instead of one who is conservative because a focus group told him to be?
I suspect that what you are smelling is your own shit.
That's a whole lot of gloating for a guy who finished fourth in the previous two elections, and as a Southerner pretending to be a social conservative in a southern evangelical state, having won the same vote total where polls were for a month two weeks ago.
We'll see in Florida. Newt has been trailing by 20 points here for some time. If he comes back and wins, or even makes it close, then they'll have something to gloat about .
That's a whole lot of gloating for a guy who finished fourth in the previous two elections, and as a Southerner pretending to be a social conservative in a southern evangelical state, having won the same vote total where polls were for a month two weeks ago.
We'll see in Florida. Newt has been trailing by 20 points here for some time. If he comes back and wins, or even makes it close, then they'll have something to gloat about .
I suspect that what you are smelling is your own shit.
That's a whole lot of gloating for a guy who finished fourth in the previous two elections, and as a Southerner pretending to be a social conservative in a southern evangelical state, having won the same vote total where polls were for a month two weeks ago.
We'll see in Florida. Newt has been trailing by 20 points here for some time. If he comes back and wins, or even makes it close, then they'll have something to gloat about .
I haven't paid any attention to Florida yet. Who's polling what down there?
Florida is an interesting one though... there is not really a 'base' as such... at least not that I'm aware of.
Newt is running on Saul Alinsky, who has been dead since 1972!Wow, desperation is deep with this one.
I think it's stupidity. It's a 12 year old rumor. If the Democrats are running on 12year old rumors they have big problems because the GOP is going to run on the economy.
A twenty year old story where there is no way to prove the assertion right or wrong about a dead guy who was outed as being what we now consider wonderful and good.
This is weird and desperate.
What is your next big revelation. St Francis might have been kind to animals? That the square of the hypotenuse could be real close to the sum of the squares on the other two sides?
This the best you got?
