"Witchcraft" Smears? Seriously,Is This What You Democrats Have Become?

[drsmith1072]

If you vote for Coons you vote for Obama and the Democratic majority policies, past and proposed.

If you vote for O'Donnell, you vote for mostly a reverse of all that.

That's the choice. All the rest is just schoolyard nitter natter.

Translation, I know nothing specifically about neither Coons nor O'Donnell's policies so I'll just shoot rightwing monkey speak and pretend I know.

Well all we have to go on is what each candidate has said they support. Coons supports higher taxes, more stimulus spending, more government controls, higher deficits if necessary.

O'Donnell doesn't.

So if you had to vote on those specific issues, how would you vote?

Most Americans WILL be voting on those specific issues come November.

To quote on fo your fellow partisan nutjobs

A post of talking points.

" same republican leadership that got us into this economic mess to begin with"

"do you honestly believe that the leadership will change or will the same people be in charge?? "

And you question someone elses partisanship?

LMAO.

Oh and I do think it's hilarious that meister thanked you for your baseless talking point even as he thanks jarhead for his post trying to call me out for talking points. LOL Thanks for the hypocrisy meister. LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

Do YOU have anything to offer regarding Coons?

You know, THE THINGS THAT REALLY MATTER. Lil' things like how he's going to FIX what the dem's have thoroughly fucked up......You know, lil' things like REAL ISSUES?

O'Donnel has clearly laid it out:

Fighting to reduce the size of government.

Doing away with wasteful spending.

Doing away with the fiasco of a healthcare bill. She was against it from the beginning.

Fighting the cap and tax BS......Castles major downfall.

Fighting doing away with the tax cuts.....She understands it will be a job killer.

And on and on and on.

So, lay out what Coons is going to do about the issues.

NICE attempt to change the topic but what you present as being clearly laid out are for the most part nothing but vague generalities and NO specifics which is about all that she has done. Why is it that the tea party lacks specifics about their agenda??

She will fight to reduce the size of government. HOW? If the republicans win the senate who will be in charge and will they do any different than the last group of republicans did when they had power?

Doing away with wasteful spending. Like what?? where will she vote to cut and can she IF elected have enough pull to do any of what you claim?

doing away with the healthcare bill. HOW? Since a dem is president and he passed it you would need a veto proof vote in order to repeal it so what are you plans for that and how does it work in REALITY?

Fighting cap and trade. The one issue that you listed where castle disagreed with the comments that you attribute to o'donnel. LOL

Fighting doing away with the tax cuts. No one is fighting to do away with ALL of the taxcuts. So why does the right continue to misrepresent this position and try to claim that the left wants to get rid of all of the taxcuts. LOL

And on and on and on. usually that means you ran out of spin and would like to try to give the impression that you have more when you don't LOL

Thanks for the spin. LOL

lol...so in other words, Smith, people should vote based strictly on what the candidate looks like because whatever they say they will attempt to do is all crap becuase one person cant do that alone.

Jeez...and you called it spin?

Just focusing on the REALITY of what she could accomplish if she wins to contrast the fiction presented by the lemmings who ignore said reality if it runs counter to their beliefs. BTW did you happen to notice how I asked for specifics and how you ran away from providing any?? LOL GJ troll.

Oh and thanks again for trying to put words into my mouth so you can attack me for something I NEVER said but that is typica of you when you can spin and respond to what was actually said. LOL

 

[Jarhead]

And yet in reality if you vote for o'donnel you are voting for the same republican leadership that got us into this economic mess to begin with. If the republicans regain control do you honestly believe that the leadership will change or will the same people be in charge??

However, thanks for your biased partisan opinions even though you claimed previously not to be a partisan. LOL Thanks for showing your true colors. LOL

A post of talking points.

" same republican leadership that got us into this economic mess to begin with"

"do you honestly believe that the leadership will change or will the same people be in charge?? "

And you question someone elses partisanship?

LMAO.

Jarhead, the quote is right, though, even if it is partisanship on the poster's part.

America does not want to go back to the GOP of then even more than it wants to get rid of the Dems. If the GOP cannot convince the voters it has changed and has new plans, it will remain in the minority.

I agree...
But my point was...
It is easy to claim that any GOP candidate is like those of the past....
But that is just some campaign talking point.

 

[drsmith1072]

I guess that the fact that she was invited on the show, Because of her work with SALT and because she was a Far Right Christian conservative is lost on you people.

She had a boyfriend who was a witch once in high school, so she must still be a witch now. That it. Silly.

Ayers is brought up and the response is "that was years ago. Now he is an ideal citizen"
Van Jones is brought up and the response is "that was back in the 90's. People change"

The left are nohing but a bunch of hypocrites as of late.

And how many on the right accept "that was years ago. now he is an ideal citizen" or "that was back in the 90's. People change" and no longer bring up ayers or jones??

So isn't it also hypocrital for those on the right to now expect the past to just go away when they refuse to apply that same standard to the left??

Thanks for exposing the hypocrisy of the right jarhead. Couldn't have done it without you. LOL

 

[Jarhead]

I guess that the fact that she was invited on the show, Because of her work with SALT and because she was a Far Right Christian conservative is lost on you people.

She had a boyfriend who was a witch once in high school, so she must still be a witch now. That it. Silly.

Ayers is brought up and the response is "that was years ago. Now he is an ideal citizen"
Van Jones is brought up and the response is "that was back in the 90's. People change"

The left are nohing but a bunch of hypocrites as of late.

And how many on the right accept "that was years ago. now he is an ideal citizen" or "that was back in the 90's. People change" and no longer bring up ayers or jones??

So isn't it also hypocrital for those on the right to now expect the past to just go away when they refuse to apply that same standard to the left??

Thanks for exposing the hypocrisy of the right jarhead. Couldn't have done it without you. LOL

You are correct.
It is on both sides.
And it gets us nowhere.

 

[drsmith1072]

NICE attempt to change the topic but what you present as being clearly laid out are for the most part nothing but vague generalities and NO specifics which is about all that she has done. Why is it that the tea party lacks specifics about their agenda??

She will fight to reduce the size of government. HOW? If the republicans win the senate who will be in charge and will they do any different than the last group of republicans did when they had power?

Doing away with wasteful spending. Like what?? where will she vote to cut and can she IF elected have enough pull to do any of what you claim?

doing away with the healthcare bill. HOW? Since a dem is president and he passed it you would need a veto proof vote in order to repeal it so what are you plans for that and how does it work in REALITY?

Fighting cap and trade. The one issue that you listed where castle disagreed with the comments that you attribute to o'donnel. LOL

Fighting doing away with the tax cuts. No one is fighting to do away with ALL of the taxcuts. So why does the right continue to misrepresent this position and try to claim that the left wants to get rid of all of the taxcuts. LOL

And on and on and on. usually that means you ran out of spin and would like to try to give the impression that you have more when you don't LOL

Thanks for the spin. LOL

lol...so in other words, Smith, people should vote based strictly on what the candidate looks like because whatever they say they will attempt to do is all crap becuase one person cant do that alone.

Jeez...and you called it spin?

Bingo!

Ya' beat me too it, marine!

Funny thing is, I haven't thrown my support behind O'donnell, yet!.....Have to hear more about her plans. Although I really liked what I heard from her last night.. I simply came up here to defend her against Dr and his fellow loons desperate attempts at nailing JELLO to the wall....Weak, whiney lil' ***** that they are, they must be chin checked on their abject lameness to skirt the issues and go into full attack mode......Hopefully we'll get to see some televised debates between her and the marxist...But then, he'll only agree to debates in friendly territory, as he laid out in a letter to her.....He's refusing to engage in debates backed by the Tea party movement....And we all know why.....He won't take real questions from real concerned citizens who are pissed the **** off......Those questions would deal with real issues. The dem's have no desire to touch those issues. Again, we all know why!

And notice how jester uses jarhead's trolling and avoidance to avoid providing the specifics that were asked for. Jester made claims about what he says o'donnell has clearly laid out so i asked for specifics and got nothing but the usual avoidance. Then come to find out that jester doesn't know much about her and yet tries to make claims about what she "clearly laid out."

Typical cowardly trolls. LOL

 

[Jarhead]

lol...so in other words, Smith, people should vote based strictly on what the candidate looks like because whatever they say they will attempt to do is all crap becuase one person cant do that alone.

Jeez...and you called it spin?

Bingo!

Ya' beat me too it, marine!

Funny thing is, I haven't thrown my support behind O'donnell, yet!.....Have to hear more about her plans. Although I really liked what I heard from her last night.. I simply came up here to defend her against Dr and his fellow loons desperate attempts at nailing JELLO to the wall....Weak, whiney lil' ***** that they are, they must be chin checked on their abject lameness to skirt the issues and go into full attack mode......Hopefully we'll get to see some televised debates between her and the marxist...But then, he'll only agree to debates in friendly territory, as he laid out in a letter to her.....He's refusing to engage in debates backed by the Tea party movement....And we all know why.....He won't take real questions from real concerned citizens who are pissed the **** off......Those questions would deal with real issues. The dem's have no desire to touch those issues. Again, we all know why!

And notice how jester uses jarhead's trolling and avoidance to avoid providing the specifics that were asked for. Jester made claims about what he says o'donnell has clearly laid out so i asked for specifics and got nothing but the usual avoidance. Then come to find out that jester doesn't know much about her and yet tries to make claims about what she "clearly laid out."

Typical cowardly trolls. LOL

I was not trolling. I made a direct comment to your assumption that one politician can not result in a major change so they should not ever say they want to change something.

It was not trolling. It was pointing out a flaw in your premise.

As for O'donnell...I live in New York. All I know aboiut her is she was the girlfriend of Samanthas Stevens' father.

 

[drsmith1072]

Coons was an ADULT when he wrote that article. Damn right it should be brought up!

How old was O'donnel?? I know that she now claims she was a teenager but in the clip from politically incorrect she was describing a pattern that seemed to continue for a while. So how long was she a witch that didn't join a coven?? LOL
The sad thing is that it is a joke as people laugh at the woman as she admitted that she only said it because maher wanted ratings. LOL what's even funnier is now she is backtracking from that too. Now she admits it but that "she didn't doing anything differently than lots of kids at that age." The shift in this argument alone shows that she lacks credibility.

The point is that it's quite hypocritical, especially for right wingers who excused bush for his 39 years of age youthful indescretions, to be bring up something a guy wrote in college in an attempt to attack him even as they make lame excuses for o'donnell's youthful indescretions. LOL Thanks for coninuing the trend of hypocrisy. LOL

Your desperation is laughable, dr.

When a candidiate made remarks when he was an ADULT, eluding to the fact that he's a straight up Marxist, that ******* matters, big time.

When a candidate admits she dabbled in witchcraft as a TEEN HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT, who ******* cares?

Oh, that's right!....You ******* care because your desperate and want nothing to do with dealing with real issues. AND WE ALL KNOW WHY!

An admitted marxist ducking real issues while trying to get re-elected?.....That's a major issue!

A candidate who happened to dabble in witchcraft as a TEEN HIGH school student?......That's a non-issue!

No desperation on my part but you must be desperate for attention or something considering the fact that you admit that you don't really know that much about o'donnell, even as you make claims about her while failing to provide specifics, and that you are only here to stalk me. LOL

Furthemore the fact that she was less than honest about it as an adult who claims that she would never lie is an isuue because it shows her lack of integrity, which based on that fact that she has NEVER held an office of any kind and her word is all you have to go on is a vital issue. If she can't be honest about that then why should anyone trust anything that she says??

 

[Meister]

Smitty's a pathetic trolling moron.
I'm admitting that this was a trolling post, but I'm still not lying about the buffoon.

 

[drsmith1072]

Bottom line:

Coons is on record as supporting the President's desire for more billions of stimulus spending, he supported the healthcare bill, he supports higher taxes, he doesn't seem to care about trillion dollar deficits that continue to climb.

O'Donnell is on record as opposing anything other than essential spending, will vote to repeal the healthcare bill and come up with something effective and productive; opposes higher taxes that will inhibit job creation and further stress the middle class, and wants to get back to a balanced budget and eliminate terrifying deficits.

It's a no brainer folks. You can continue to focus on all this schoolyard nonsense or you can focus on something that matters.

Yeah thanks for admitting you are a no brainer.

How can o'donnell be on record for any position?? Just because she says it, it doesn't make it so. She hasn't ever held an office so you have no idea how or what she will actually do when she gets there. Fact is that we have all heard this song and dance before and experienced how the right flip flopped on all of that once they were voted into power.

She has NO voting record, to say or imply that she does is an outright dishonesty and an example of pure partisanship as a righty rails against the left and blindly supports the right by spewing propganda laced with BS spin about how this inexperienced perpetual candidate will "come up with something effective and productive".
Furthermore, she has shown that she is NOT trustworthy yet your blind partisanship allows you to take everything she says as if it is written in stone as you blindly praiuse her and smear the democrat. Your true colors are showing.

Your fear of anything Tea Party is palpable.....They scare you to death......They are taking your beloved messiah, his cronies that you hold dear, and the entire loony liberal agenda that you hold so close to your heart, straight the **** outta dodge!

Seeing as though you're one of the clowns who vehemently argued that it was a nothing movement......And, as usual, you were completely wrong, I can clearly see why they scare the shit out of ya'.

HOW DARE THEY QUESTION ANYTHING OBAMA OR LIBERAL!

LMAO!

So, mr progressive, show us ALL how she is not trustworthy.

Provide concrete proof....no accusations, concrete proof!.......Or simply STFU!

Thanks for your usual cowardice, avoidance and dishonesty as you put words into my mouth. You be sure to let me know when you grow a pair and will actually debate a topic instead of merely engaging in your usual trolling tactics. LOL

I already have shown you, you are just too blind to see it. IF you actually took the time to READ what i wrote instead of just trying to attack me personally based on your made up BS, you would have already seen what you are asking me for.

 

[drsmith1072]

Mention what?

She clearly laid out all of the bullshit last night on Hannity.

a) Yes, she briefly dabbled in withcraft while in high school. Never really took it seriously. So what?

b) She paid her taxes. Has the letter from the IRS proving their clerical error. No harm there!

c) She lost her home due to financial hardships. So what?........She's not some elite fat cat like Obama, so she should have it used against her?.........That should disqualify her from office?

Face it, you ***** are grasping at straws instead of dealing with real issues facing this country, AND WE ALL KNOW WHY!

Got anything else?

LOL so she went on the biased and fluffer network for republcians that is foxnews and you actually believe all of what she said after cancelling several other inteviews and more than likely being coached on what she should and should say as hannety gave her softball questions?? Are you serious??

Oh and I love the lame excuses she gave as to why she gave hannety the interview after cancelling her others and saying that she wasn't going to do national interviews anymore. Once again showing how she lacks integrity and credibility.

Got anything REAL?? LOL

All of what she said is proven on her website.

The lies about not paying her taxes?....Fully debunked!

The lies about her house being foreclosed on?....Fully debunked!

The witchcraft crap?.......It's laughable!

Now, why would she not want to take her case from this point forward to the actual people who will be VOTING....and she may well be representing?

Why should she waste time being baselessly attacked by a completely biased liberal MSM who have no desire to discuss the real issues, and are in nothing more than desperation attack mode?

Even Pat Caddell, a brilliant dem strategist, said this morning that she's doing the right thing by avoiding the national media. Even he admitted that the MSM is acting like a bunch o' whipped dogs who are watching their cronies fail on so many levels and will never give her a fair shake......The same thing was basically said by another dem strategist last night on the same Hannity show.....But i'm sure you'll claim to have missed that part.

Seriously, you need to think before you speak. Because once again, you're making an ass of yourself. Your desperation is comical.

Got anything REAL? LOL.

I have already addressed and coutnered the spin from her website, she constantly puts the phrase "computer error" in quotes and yet NONE of the letters or transcripts that she cites have that phrase in it. SHE MADE IT UP.

Furthermore, she posts a letter about her appeal that was from jan 2010 and then in march she gets a letter stating she has a lien on her property but the funny thing is that the letter from jan 2010 mentions that he should be finished with her apopeal in march 2010. Then she provides a transcript of her conversation with an irs agent who is NOT the one in charge of her appeal who tells her that she needs to contact the agent in charge of her appeal and that the letter for the lien only goes out if you owe money.
Then only AFTER she paid what she owed in MAY 16, 2010 was the lein removed on MAY 19, 2010. So her spin that is was a "computer error" is baseless and unsupported based on what she has on her website.
Therefore any right wing hack that claims she has proof on her website is either gullible or dishonest because the proof is NOT there.

I provided all of this in a later post so I will have to wait and see if you actually had the cajones to respond to the content or if you ran away as you usually do.

 

[drsmith1072]

It's all on her website!....All this stupid shit put out by obviously desperate dem's have been debunked.

It's time they start dealing with real issues!

Actually a letter is there and it is about removing the lien but according to her own wesbite the lien was not removed until she paid her overdue taxes on may 16, 2010. The lien was placed on her prior to her paying her overdue taxes and was only removed on may 19, 2010 AFTER she had paid them.

The rest of the excuses listed on her site do not appear to have been substantiated. She claims that the IRS admitted to making a mistake with the lien but that is only an unsubstantiated claim. It seems to me that she got the lien for fauilure to pay and then got the lien removed AFTER she paid her overdue taxes. there is nothing in the letter that shows where the IRS admitted to a "computer error".
However, after that there is a transcript of her conversation with an irs agent but he does not call it an error. He says that the lien letter was sent out if there was nothing posted to block it and that she needs to contact the agent handling her previous appeal. He does not say "computer error" but he does say, "it's only there if you owe money" LOL

Then after that she posts a letter from jan 2010 and tries to claim that shows that it was a "computer error" because she claims was complying but does the letter not adress her actual conversations in march-may that she needed to have with the agent in charge of her appeal. I wonder why she doesn't have copies of those discussions??
IF they decided her appeal and found that she owed then the lien was legal and not a "computer error" but then she failed to provide any real info about the recent events concerning her appeal, payment and then removal of the lien, so the truth remains unknown.

How typical that you would take half the facts and make assumptions based on o'donnell's spin. LOL

LMAO!

Funny how you would take the fact that a lien was removed as being an admission of wrong doing on her part.

Funny how the IRS agent in that letter admitted that she most likely had relief due. Hence, the lien was removed in may of 2010.

Once again, no smoking gun.....Just baseless bullshit from you desperate loons.

No facts. No proof. No NOTHING!........It's a pattern with you!

Now, i'm still waiting for your PROOF that she's not "TRUSTWORTHY", as you say.

If ya' can't provide concrete proof, it's best you just STFU!

What is really funny is how you ignore the fact that she tries to claim that the lien was caused by a "computer error" when NOTHING that she posted supports such a claim. The part of the transcripts that her website highlights only says that the letter is sent out by computer and that it is only sent if you owe money. Her own website doesn't support her claims.

as for why the lien was removed the fact remains that it was only removed AFTER she paid what she owed according to her own website. Do you actually think that if you ignore the FACTS that they will go away? Although it is funny how you take a comment from a letter in JAN and try to claim that it definitely applies to an action taken AFTER a lien was placed on her property and AFTER she paid what she owed. That's quite a stretch even for a homer like you.

You have been given the proof you just refuse to see it. For instance, she tries to claim that the letter in january "proves that the lien was erroneous and a “computer error” " when that letter proves NOTHING of the kind. It is from january and in it the author states that he will more than likely finish her appeal in march which happens to be when the lien was placed on her property. She also tries to claim that she was in the appeals process and therfore could not have a lien on her property and yet she provided NO proof that she was still in the appeals process and her transcript of her conversation with an irs agent who is not the one in charge of her appeal could only offer his opinions on why he BELIEVED the lien was placed on her property as he told her that she needed to talk to the agent in charge of her appeal.
Did it ever occur to you that the agent might have finished his work on the appeal in march as he predicted, that the lien was justified based on his judgment and that is why the lien was applied in march?? Based on the fact that the lien was only removed AFTER she paid what she owed it would seem that is most likely the case.

If the lien was just a "computer error" then why would she have to pay off what she owed before the lien was removed??

 

[drsmith1072]

Baltimore, Maryland – Republican Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell used more than $20,000 in campaign funds to pay her rent and other personal expenses, according to a complaint filed Monday with the Federal Elections Commission.

Backed by tea party activists, O'Donnell upset longtime Rep. Mike Castle in Delaware's GOP Senate primary and will face Democrat Chris Coons in the battle for Vice President Joe Biden's former seat.

The complaint filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a nonpartisan watchdog group, is the latest in a series of allegations of financial irregularities involving O'Donnell, a conservative Christian activist and frequent candidate who has not had a steady job in years.

Christine O'Donnell: OK to use $20,000 in campaign funds to pay her rent? - Yahoo! News

The investigation just started, but I'm pretty sure she didn't do it as correctly as she'd stated.

By the way, O'donnell the Palin Clone didn't sit on a wiccan altar, it was a satanic one.

Notice how the complaint wasn't filed until AFTER she won the nomination. Why not before. Did they all of a sudden just pull this shit out of their collective asses?

Funny how the head of that so called "non partisan" entity told Anderson Cooper the other day that they most likely would not have filed had she not become the nominee, after he questioned her on it. Even liberal AC raised his eyebrows over that lil' nugget o' information!

Once again, YA' GOT NOTHIN'!


This is a failing "whitch hunt"....nothing more!

So because the investigation didn't come about until after she won the primary that means that the investigation doesn't count and is not real?? Does that standard apply to those on theleft too?? LOL As usual where your posts are concerned the only poster with nothing is YOU. LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

Just found it, the only time the phrase "computer error" is mentioned in anything o'donnell has on her website it was coming out of her mouth. The IRS never said it but that didn't stop her from claiming that they did.

IRS: Talk to your appeals officer he should be able to see what happened and then figure it out…. cause once the balance goes away, if he’s going to clear out the balance due, then everything should be fine.

Christine: right.

IRS: But he needs to put everything on the computer.

Christine: right. OK….which I thought he did and he’s quite a competent man….so…..maybe it was some sort of computer error or something like that.

IRS: Just call him back and let him know what happened there.

and yet no where on her site does she show any of the conversations that she had with the actual agent in charge of her appeal or the lien. Imagine that.

 

[drsmith1072]

Clinton was attacked for blatantly lying!...And as we all witnessed later on, lying was his forte.....Fully proving the neccessity to attack his first lie.......Until there are charges filed against O'donnell, you've got NOTHING but "Allegations". You've got NOTHING on her "spending habits".

It's time you fools start dealing with REAL ISSUES.......You fools have forty one days to save your loony liberal agenda, and your loony liberal president........Attacking on baseless grounds ain't going to cut it.......Just ask Castle!

WOW you really aren't bright are you?? You admit to claiming clinton was attacked for lying before you witnessed him lying. GJ hack. LOL Typical right wing hypocrisy as they believe the left is guilty until proven by the hand of God that they are innocent where as they will defend the righties even when proof shows that they are being dishonest.

Thanks again for the laughs troll. LOL

Um actually Clinton has since admitted on more than one occasion that he lied. So who is being Dishonest?

Um the point that you are obviously missing is that jester was claiming that the initial attacks on clinton were justified because it was proven later that he lied. So are you OK will guilty until proven innocent like jester or not?? Can we apply that standard to righty candidates as well? LOL

So why don't you answer your own question about who is being Dishonest but then you could just be too stupid to get it. So it may not be your fault that you just don't get it. I would apologize but later on my opinions of you just might be justified.
I guess we will have to wait and see, won't we? LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

Did you happen to notice THIS little gem under her "proof" that it was an IRS error?

Exactly, she made claims that were not supported by the documentation that she provided and these moronic partisan lemmings bought it hook, line and sinker. LOL

They completely ignore the fact that none of her documention admits to a "computer error" even though her website puts that in quotes many times. They also ignore the fact that she was referred back to the agent handling her appeal and yet not one of her documents actually pertains to her conversations with that agent.
She's being less than honest but these hacks don't seem to care.

So, ya' got PROOF that it wasn't a computer error or, are you just talking out of your ass yet again?

You're the one trying to make this out to be some major scandal.....Provide the proof, or STFU!.....You're making yourself look as bad as the troofer and birfer loons!

LMAO!

What you are missing here, or ingoring out of sheer dishonesty, is that o'donnell claimed it was a "computer error" and then failed to show that to be the case. In fact she tried to claim that the irs told her it was a "computer error" and yet according to her own website SHE was the one who questioned "maybe it was some sort of computer error" and the agent she was talking to told her she needed to contact the agent in charge of her appeal.

She claims that she would never lie and then lies as she tries to claim that it was a "computer error" and that the IRS told her it was when they never did according to what she has posted on her own website.

These are the FACTS from her own website and they show that she is not being honest. Whether you choose to accept them or not won't change them or make them go away.

 

[drsmith1072]

Clinton was attacked for blatantly lying!...And as we all witnessed later on, lying was his forte.....Fully proving the neccessity to attack his first lie.......Until there are charges filed against O'donnell, you've got NOTHING but "Allegations". You've got NOTHING on her "spending habits".

It's time you fools start dealing with REAL ISSUES.......You fools have forty one days to save your loony liberal agenda, and your loony liberal president........Attacking on baseless grounds ain't going to cut it.......Just ask Castle!

WOW you really aren't bright are you?? You admit to claiming clinton was attacked for lying before you witnessed him lying. GJ hack. LOL Typical right wing hypocrisy as they believe the left is guilty until proven by the hand of God that they are innocent where as they will defend the righties even when proof shows that they are being dishonest.

Thanks again for the laughs troll. LOL

Hey dumbass. You're obviously one of very few people who bought into that "I never inhaled" bullshit....Seriously, is the so called "brilliant Bill" so stupid as to not know the whole point of takin' a drag o' weed is to ******* INHALE IT?....I mean he was a Rhodes Scholar for christ sakes.........Damn Right it was an Obvious lie. And he was rightfully called out for it.....And as I said, he fully proved later on, yet again in front of the american people, that lying was his forte...."I NEVER had sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky!"

LMAO!

Really?? when and where did I say I believed "I never inhaled"?? Oh you mean I didn't but this is nothing but yet another of your lame attempts to put words into my mouth. Got it. GJ hack but it doesn't change the fact that your previous post was beyond mentally challegned but thazt it usual for you isn't it? LOL

Oh and since we are on the subject what happened in that thread where you claimed that never referred to anyone as un-American or unpatriotic and then later called code pinkers just that?? LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

You should see how Democrats treat gays that oppose them, awful.

Not only gays but also straight men and women, minorities, media types, pundits, fundraisers, rally organizers and attendees, and fellow Democrats. You toe the line and repeat the slogans or you're scum.

And yet it the fact that the right has a category to define those who dare not toe the line as they try to oust or exclude them would seem to counter you partisan spin.

In case you missed it that category is RiNO.

 

[Meister]

<chirp>

 

[drsmith1072]

If you vote for Coons you vote for Obama and the Democratic majority policies, past and proposed.

If you vote for O'Donnell, you vote for mostly a reverse of all that.

That's the choice. All the rest is just schoolyard nitter natter.

And yet in reality if you vote for o'donnel you are voting for the same republican leadership that got us into this economic mess to begin with. If the republicans regain control do you honestly believe that the leadership will change or will the same people be in charge??

However, thanks for your biased partisan opinions even though you claimed previously not to be a partisan. LOL Thanks for showing your true colors. LOL

A post of talking points.

" same republican leadership that got us into this economic mess to begin with"

"do you honestly believe that the leadership will change or will the same people be in charge?? "

And you question someone elses partisanship?

LMAO.

Hey jarhead, did you happen to notice that the post I was responding to was nothing but "A post of talking points" or in your zeal to come at me did you miss that fact?? Speaking of the previous post why didn't you call foxfyre out for his "post of talking points"?

BTW can you address what you call talking point? I have to ask because the fact remains that the same leadership that was in charge for most of W's presidency will still be in power if the republicans win based on how much support hey currently have within the party so how is that a talking point??
If the leadership won't be the same then who will replace the old leadership?? Got anything real or is trolling all that you have to offer??

p.s. I called out foxfyre for his partisanship because in another thread he claimed that he wasn't a partisan and yet the content of his posts show otherwise. Are you caught up yet or do i need to simplify it even more so you can understand it??