Letterman Flings Slime at 14-Year-Old Willow Palin

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, what I got out of this:

Letterman sucks, but the Palins suck more.

Nice job on using your daughter asswipes.



A new low to which you have sunk.. down near the drain! circling!
 
Last edited:
may i suggest you buy some punky brewster videos to help keep you "at bay" so you don't ruin some poor innocent kid's life by "manipulating" them?

Pelvis, this is yet another time that you've mentioned the same brewster bullshit. Now I don't know if you've been downing the Pabst like Barney Gumble or what, but I think your dinky little ass had better come up with something better, sport. :lol:

:thup:
 
This is what Ravi said (hence my previous quote useage)

"Because in her criticism of Letterman she implicated an entire group of people as sharing the blame when in reality no one at all besides Letterman is responsible for what he said nor has anyone else ever made such a comment about Palin's daughters.

She is using the situation to cry "bad hollywood!" In other words she is using her daughter to make cheap political talking points.

She's a total skank."

Note the bolded phrase...

So show me where "some" is defined as an "entire" group of people (a.k.a. ALL)?

All you need to do is change the parameters. Its quite easy.

Sarah Palin was, by definition, talking about ALL of a group of people. She was also, probably, talking about SOME of a different group of people.

Logic is fun!


The "all" she was talking about was those few who do meet the definition.

Which brings us back to: It's the absolute opposite of what Ravi is asserting...that she broadbrushed all of Hollywood. She was referring to "some" of the Hollywood crowd, and "all" can be applied only to the subgroup.

fucking idiot.

You know what she was referring too?:lol:

Ok then, mindreader.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top