Judge reaches a decision in Palin vs. New York Times case

[Conservative65]

Yep, you're bisexual alright. I couldn't have sex with another man, not because I choose not to -- but because I find it so repulsive. I do not choose to find it repulsive, I'm just wired that way. That it's something you simply choose not to do means it's something you could just as easily choose to do. That makes you bisexual.

Poor conflicted "conservative". He is making the same ignorant mistakes in understanding that narrow minded people always make. To him the act of sex defines your identity. He doesn't understand that it's not about sex, but emotion.

It defines whether you're a faggot or not. You chose to be a homo. I chose to be a hetero. There is no in between. Just like being pregnant. You either are or you aren't. There is no in between.

If someone finds something repulsive, it involves a choice unless you're arguing that everyone is born with whether or not they find something repulsive as already being determined for them. Are you?

Nutcase.... being pregnant is a binary condition. Who you sleep with is not. Unlike being pregnant, where one either is or isn't, there are 4 possibilities (regarding genders) for people with whom they may engage in sex.

If the possibility one chooses is of the same sex, their a homo even if only one time regardless of how many times they sleep with the opposite sex. I'm going by the definition. You, someone that says he follows them, are ignoring it. What makes you smarter than Webster where you can put conditions on whether the definition applies.

But you're illiterate, as you've already proven.

Watch as i demonstrate again....

The definition of a homosexual is someone sexually attracted to the opposite sex. So you, in typical brain-dead conservative fashion takes that to mean if a man sleeps with a 1000 women, he's still gay if he sleeps with even 1 man.

Moron... the definition of heterosexual is someone sexually attracted to the opposite sexual. So applying your brain-dead conservative abuse of the English language means if a flaming faggot sleeps with 1000 men, he's straight if he sleeps with just one woman.

So either that makes sense to you, which only serves to verify how rightarded you are, or your whole world of conservatard definitions regarding sexuality comes crumbling down.

And if you have an IQ of at least double digits, it will now dawn on you why there's a third category known as bisexual, applied to those who are attracted to both genders.

If you're attracted to the same gender, you're a homo by DEFINITION.

 

[Faun]

Words have meaning. Your redefinitions don't. No one is bound by your own personal lexicon.

Not when those meanings are invalid.

LOL

According to you, not according to the English language.

According to good old fashioned common sense not some social science excuse for why freaks are anything but freaks.

That's ok. To many, you're a freak; so I guess it's all copacetic.

Difference is I've given no one a reason to think that. You have.

I abide by the laws, support my family, contribute to my community, AND am married to someone of the opposite sex. Seems, though, you defining freak by your standards rather than that of the dictionary.

Seawytch says she's a lesbian ... what laws has she broken?

 

[Conservative65]

Not when those meanings are invalid.

LOL

According to you, not according to the English language.

According to good old fashioned common sense not some social science excuse for why freaks are anything but freaks.

That's ok. To many, you're a freak; so I guess it's all copacetic.

Difference is I've given no one a reason to think that. You have.

I abide by the laws, support my family, contribute to my community, AND am married to someone of the opposite sex. Seems, though, you defining freak by your standards rather than that of the dictionary.

Seawytch says she's a lesbian ... what laws has she broken?

Diverting?

I said she's a freak for choosing to be one. What laws have I broken?

 

[Faun]

Now you're lying. It's not that I don't understand your definition, it's that I reject it because it conflicts with the real definition and I choose to speak English, not conservatard. And I no more choose to find having sex with another man repulsive as I can choose to have a 200 IQ.

But you can choose to suck another man's cock. That makes you bisexual.

If truly understood it, you'd accept it.

You choose to think faggots were born that way. Next thing you'll tell me is when you were born whether or not you liked the color red had been determined? What clothes you like? What hairstyle you wear?

If you find anything repulsive, it involves a choice. Otherwise, you're admitting you act on the same level as dogs.

Where you get that I personally can choose to do that is beyond me. That I chose not to means I'm heterosexual. While there are those that do choose to do that, I'm not one of them. That's reserved for those that choose to be faggots.

Why on Earth would I choose your made up definitions over that of a dictionary's? You suffer from delusions of grandeur that you know better than Websters. That alone is enough reason to laugh at you and ignore your conservatard definitions.

As far as where I get that you're bisexual, again, you said it's your choice to be straight. If you're choosing, then you can equally choose to be gay.

Me? I didn't choose to be straight, it's just the way I am. Just like I didn't choose to have two arms, that's just the way I am.

Were you born knowing something was repulsive? Your previous response indicates you believe that you were.

Nope, just like I wasn't born with teeth either, but I was wired for them to grow. Not everything is fully developed at birth, though the predisposition already exists.

If I choose not to be attracted men and choose to be attracted to women, that means I'm not bisexual. You talk about going by definitions. I don't meet the definition of bisexual. You're arguing definitions based on you not thinking it's a choice. They are two different things.

Of course you're bisexual. It's a choice for you. That means tomorrow, you could choose to suck a cock. I could not because being heterosexual is not a choice I made, I just am. Just like I didn't choose to have teeth, they just grew.

Funny how those that claim everything else in life is a choice but sexual orientation.

Nutcase, I already pointed out not everything else in life is a choice.

I chose women just like I chose to service the whore you married. Remember, son, the next time you kiss her, the taste you get will be the residue from the cum I left there last time I let her suck my dick.

Report me like a good little coward. Doing so proves you're not man enough to defend the ****.

LOL

You poor thing, you reveal I'm getting under your skin. Me, I merely laugh at you.

As far as my wife goes, we've been over this already. You don't know her and can only fantasize about being with her. I don't blame you for that but the reality is that she's way too smart and sassy to ever go near a conservative like you.

 

[Faun]

There most certainly is such a thing as bisexual...

There most certain is not. I've explained it once. Maybe you missed it or choose not to accept reality. A man can be with 1000 women and that doesn't make him a great lover. However, if he's ever with one man, he's a faggot. Why do you ignore the definition of homosexual? It says sexually attracted to someone of your own sex. No parameters as to how many time it has to be or conditions under which it takes place.

Again, for the sake of clarity, that's your definition, not the definition.

For the sake of clarity, seems your definition of freak not THE definition of freak is what you went by classifying me. Thanks for playing, hypocrite.

I didn't call you a freak. But I will call you illiterate, as you just demonstrated for the forum.

I will call you a coward and an Obama NL. You've proven both.

LOL

You poor thing, bless your heart.

 

[Faun]

Poor conflicted "conservative". He is making the same ignorant mistakes in understanding that narrow minded people always make. To him the act of sex defines your identity. He doesn't understand that it's not about sex, but emotion.

It defines whether you're a faggot or not. You chose to be a homo. I chose to be a hetero. There is no in between. Just like being pregnant. You either are or you aren't. There is no in between.

If someone finds something repulsive, it involves a choice unless you're arguing that everyone is born with whether or not they find something repulsive as already being determined for them. Are you?

Nutcase.... being pregnant is a binary condition. Who you sleep with is not. Unlike being pregnant, where one either is or isn't, there are 4 possibilities (regarding genders) for people with whom they may engage in sex.

If the possibility one chooses is of the same sex, their a homo even if only one time regardless of how many times they sleep with the opposite sex. I'm going by the definition. You, someone that says he follows them, are ignoring it. What makes you smarter than Webster where you can put conditions on whether the definition applies.

But you're illiterate, as you've already proven.

Watch as i demonstrate again....

The definition of a homosexual is someone sexually attracted to the opposite sex. So you, in typical brain-dead conservative fashion takes that to mean if a man sleeps with a 1000 women, he's still gay if he sleeps with even 1 man.

Moron... the definition of heterosexual is someone sexually attracted to the opposite sexual. So applying your brain-dead conservative abuse of the English language means if a flaming faggot sleeps with 1000 men, he's straight if he sleeps with just one woman.

So either that makes sense to you, which only serves to verify how rightarded you are, or your whole world of conservatard definitions regarding sexuality comes crumbling down.

And if you have an IQ of at least double digits, it will now dawn on you why there's a third category known as bisexual, applied to those who are attracted to both genders.

If you're attracted to the same gender, you're a homo by DEFINITION.

If you're attracted to the opposite gender, you're straight by definition.

See how that works?

 

[Conservative65]

If truly understood it, you'd accept it.

You choose to think faggots were born that way. Next thing you'll tell me is when you were born whether or not you liked the color red had been determined? What clothes you like? What hairstyle you wear?

If you find anything repulsive, it involves a choice. Otherwise, you're admitting you act on the same level as dogs.

Where you get that I personally can choose to do that is beyond me. That I chose not to means I'm heterosexual. While there are those that do choose to do that, I'm not one of them. That's reserved for those that choose to be faggots.

Why on Earth would I choose your made up definitions over that of a dictionary's? You suffer from delusions of grandeur that you know better than Websters. That alone is enough reason to laugh at you and ignore your conservatard definitions.

As far as where I get that you're bisexual, again, you said it's your choice to be straight. If you're choosing, then you can equally choose to be gay.

Me? I didn't choose to be straight, it's just the way I am. Just like I didn't choose to have two arms, that's just the way I am.

Were you born knowing something was repulsive? Your previous response indicates you believe that you were.

Nope, just like I wasn't born with teeth either, but I was wired for them to grow. Not everything is fully developed at birth, though the predisposition already exists.

If I choose not to be attracted men and choose to be attracted to women, that means I'm not bisexual. You talk about going by definitions. I don't meet the definition of bisexual. You're arguing definitions based on you not thinking it's a choice. They are two different things.

Of course you're bisexual. It's a choice for you. That means tomorrow, you could choose to suck a cock. I could not because being heterosexual is not a choice I made, I just am. Just like I didn't choose to have teeth, they just grew.

Funny how those that claim everything else in life is a choice but sexual orientation.

Nutcase, I already pointed out not everything else in life is a choice.

I chose women just like I chose to service the whore you married. Remember, son, the next time you kiss her, the taste you get will be the residue from the cum I left there last time I let her suck my dick.

Report me like a good little coward. Doing so proves you're not man enough to defend the ****.

LOL

You poor thing, you reveal I'm getting under your skin. Me, I merely laugh at you.

As far as my wife goes, we've been over this already. You don't know her and can only fantasize about being with her. I don't blame you for that but the reality is that she's way too smart and sassy to ever go near a conservative like you.

She can't be smart. I fucked her brains out and let her suck the sassy out of my dick. You'll taste it next time you kiss her. You can watch next time if you like to see how a real man treats her.

 

[Conservative65]

There most certain is not. I've explained it once. Maybe you missed it or choose not to accept reality. A man can be with 1000 women and that doesn't make him a great lover. However, if he's ever with one man, he's a faggot. Why do you ignore the definition of homosexual? It says sexually attracted to someone of your own sex. No parameters as to how many time it has to be or conditions under which it takes place.

Again, for the sake of clarity, that's your definition, not the definition.

For the sake of clarity, seems your definition of freak not THE definition of freak is what you went by classifying me. Thanks for playing, hypocrite.

I didn't call you a freak. But I will call you illiterate, as you just demonstrated for the forum.

I will call you a coward and an Obama NL. You've proven both.

LOL

You poor thing, bless your heart.

I added her to the same list you've been on for years.

 

[Faun]

LOL

According to you, not according to the English language.

According to good old fashioned common sense not some social science excuse for why freaks are anything but freaks.

That's ok. To many, you're a freak; so I guess it's all copacetic.

Difference is I've given no one a reason to think that. You have.

I abide by the laws, support my family, contribute to my community, AND am married to someone of the opposite sex. Seems, though, you defining freak by your standards rather than that of the dictionary.

Seawytch says she's a lesbian ... what laws has she broken?

Diverting?

I said she's a freak for choosing to be one. What laws have I broken?

I haven't said you broke any laws.

 

[Conservative65]

It defines whether you're a faggot or not. You chose to be a homo. I chose to be a hetero. There is no in between. Just like being pregnant. You either are or you aren't. There is no in between.

If someone finds something repulsive, it involves a choice unless you're arguing that everyone is born with whether or not they find something repulsive as already being determined for them. Are you?

Nutcase.... being pregnant is a binary condition. Who you sleep with is not. Unlike being pregnant, where one either is or isn't, there are 4 possibilities (regarding genders) for people with whom they may engage in sex.

If the possibility one chooses is of the same sex, their a homo even if only one time regardless of how many times they sleep with the opposite sex. I'm going by the definition. You, someone that says he follows them, are ignoring it. What makes you smarter than Webster where you can put conditions on whether the definition applies.

But you're illiterate, as you've already proven.

Watch as i demonstrate again....

The definition of a homosexual is someone sexually attracted to the opposite sex. So you, in typical brain-dead conservative fashion takes that to mean if a man sleeps with a 1000 women, he's still gay if he sleeps with even 1 man.

Moron... the definition of heterosexual is someone sexually attracted to the opposite sexual. So applying your brain-dead conservative abuse of the English language means if a flaming faggot sleeps with 1000 men, he's straight if he sleeps with just one woman.

So either that makes sense to you, which only serves to verify how rightarded you are, or your whole world of conservatard definitions regarding sexuality comes crumbling down.

And if you have an IQ of at least double digits, it will now dawn on you why there's a third category known as bisexual, applied to those who are attracted to both genders.

If you're attracted to the same gender, you're a homo by DEFINITION.

If you're attracted to the opposite gender, you're straight by definition.

See how that works?

That's why I'm straight. I chose the opposite gender. I question whether or not you are since you support someone being attracted to the same gender as being normal and acceptable. Want to tell us something? It's OK if you want to. I'll be there to take care of your wife for you.

 

[Faun]

Why on Earth would I choose your made up definitions over that of a dictionary's? You suffer from delusions of grandeur that you know better than Websters. That alone is enough reason to laugh at you and ignore your conservatard definitions.

As far as where I get that you're bisexual, again, you said it's your choice to be straight. If you're choosing, then you can equally choose to be gay.

Me? I didn't choose to be straight, it's just the way I am. Just like I didn't choose to have two arms, that's just the way I am.

Were you born knowing something was repulsive? Your previous response indicates you believe that you were.

Nope, just like I wasn't born with teeth either, but I was wired for them to grow. Not everything is fully developed at birth, though the predisposition already exists.

If I choose not to be attracted men and choose to be attracted to women, that means I'm not bisexual. You talk about going by definitions. I don't meet the definition of bisexual. You're arguing definitions based on you not thinking it's a choice. They are two different things.

Of course you're bisexual. It's a choice for you. That means tomorrow, you could choose to suck a cock. I could not because being heterosexual is not a choice I made, I just am. Just like I didn't choose to have teeth, they just grew.

Funny how those that claim everything else in life is a choice but sexual orientation.

Nutcase, I already pointed out not everything else in life is a choice.

I chose women just like I chose to service the whore you married. Remember, son, the next time you kiss her, the taste you get will be the residue from the cum I left there last time I let her suck my dick.

Report me like a good little coward. Doing so proves you're not man enough to defend the ****.

LOL

You poor thing, you reveal I'm getting under your skin. Me, I merely laugh at you.

As far as my wife goes, we've been over this already. You don't know her and can only fantasize about being with her. I don't blame you for that but the reality is that she's way too smart and sassy to ever go near a conservative like you.

She can't be smart. I fucked her brains out and let her suck the sassy out of my dick. You'll taste it next time you kiss her. You can watch next time if you like to see how a real man treats her.

That's quite the imagination you've got there, but as we've firmly established, you have zero knowledge of who my wife is. The sad reality of that is these hallucinations you're dreaming up stem from nowhere but your own mind.

Are you a man of faith?

 

[Conservative65]

Were you born knowing something was repulsive? Your previous response indicates you believe that you were.

Nope, just like I wasn't born with teeth either, but I was wired for them to grow. Not everything is fully developed at birth, though the predisposition already exists.

If I choose not to be attracted men and choose to be attracted to women, that means I'm not bisexual. You talk about going by definitions. I don't meet the definition of bisexual. You're arguing definitions based on you not thinking it's a choice. They are two different things.

Of course you're bisexual. It's a choice for you. That means tomorrow, you could choose to suck a cock. I could not because being heterosexual is not a choice I made, I just am. Just like I didn't choose to have teeth, they just grew.

Funny how those that claim everything else in life is a choice but sexual orientation.

Nutcase, I already pointed out not everything else in life is a choice.

I chose women just like I chose to service the whore you married. Remember, son, the next time you kiss her, the taste you get will be the residue from the cum I left there last time I let her suck my dick.

Report me like a good little coward. Doing so proves you're not man enough to defend the ****.

LOL

You poor thing, you reveal I'm getting under your skin. Me, I merely laugh at you.

As far as my wife goes, we've been over this already. You don't know her and can only fantasize about being with her. I don't blame you for that but the reality is that she's way too smart and sassy to ever go near a conservative like you.

She can't be smart. I fucked her brains out and let her suck the sassy out of my dick. You'll taste it next time you kiss her. You can watch next time if you like to see how a real man treats her.

That's quite the imagination you've got there, but as we've firmly established, you have zero knowledge of who my wife is. The sad reality of that is these hallucinations you're dreaming up stem from nowhere but your own mind.

Are you a man of faith?

You have claimed I have no knowledge of who she is. Reality says otherwise but whatever makes you feel better.

If you were absolutely sure, you wouldn't keep claiming it's not true.

 

[Faun]

Nope, just like I wasn't born with teeth either, but I was wired for them to grow. Not everything is fully developed at birth, though the predisposition already exists.

Of course you're bisexual. It's a choice for you. That means tomorrow, you could choose to suck a cock. I could not because being heterosexual is not a choice I made, I just am. Just like I didn't choose to have teeth, they just grew.

Nutcase, I already pointed out not everything else in life is a choice.

I chose women just like I chose to service the whore you married. Remember, son, the next time you kiss her, the taste you get will be the residue from the cum I left there last time I let her suck my dick.

Report me like a good little coward. Doing so proves you're not man enough to defend the ****.

LOL

You poor thing, you reveal I'm getting under your skin. Me, I merely laugh at you.

As far as my wife goes, we've been over this already. You don't know her and can only fantasize about being with her. I don't blame you for that but the reality is that she's way too smart and sassy to ever go near a conservative like you.

She can't be smart. I fucked her brains out and let her suck the sassy out of my dick. You'll taste it next time you kiss her. You can watch next time if you like to see how a real man treats her.

That's quite the imagination you've got there, but as we've firmly established, you have zero knowledge of who my wife is. The sad reality of that is these hallucinations you're dreaming up stem from nowhere but your own mind.

Are you a man of faith?

You have claimed I have no knowledge of who she is. Reality says otherwise but whatever makes you feel better.

LOL

I've already proven you don't know her. And now you prove you're living in a world of dementia where you think your hallucinations are "reality."

And check this out... I know you're trying to get under my skin, but since all you're really doing is making a fool of yourself, all you're actually achieving is entertaining me and getting me to laugh at you.

 

[Faun]

Were you born knowing something was repulsive? Your previous response indicates you believe that you were.

Nope, just like I wasn't born with teeth either, but I was wired for them to grow. Not everything is fully developed at birth, though the predisposition already exists.

If I choose not to be attracted men and choose to be attracted to women, that means I'm not bisexual. You talk about going by definitions. I don't meet the definition of bisexual. You're arguing definitions based on you not thinking it's a choice. They are two different things.

Of course you're bisexual. It's a choice for you. That means tomorrow, you could choose to suck a cock. I could not because being heterosexual is not a choice I made, I just am. Just like I didn't choose to have teeth, they just grew.

Funny how those that claim everything else in life is a choice but sexual orientation.

Nutcase, I already pointed out not everything else in life is a choice.

I chose women just like I chose to service the whore you married. Remember, son, the next time you kiss her, the taste you get will be the residue from the cum I left there last time I let her suck my dick.

Report me like a good little coward. Doing so proves you're not man enough to defend the ****.

LOL

You poor thing, you reveal I'm getting under your skin. Me, I merely laugh at you.

As far as my wife goes, we've been over this already. You don't know her and can only fantasize about being with her. I don't blame you for that but the reality is that she's way too smart and sassy to ever go near a conservative like you.

She can't be smart. I fucked her brains out and let her suck the sassy out of my dick. You'll taste it next time you kiss her. You can watch next time if you like to see how a real man treats her.

That's quite the imagination you've got there, but as we've firmly established, you have zero knowledge of who my wife is. The sad reality of that is these hallucinations you're dreaming up stem from nowhere but your own mind.

Are you a man of faith?

Why no answer, brain-dead conservative?

Are you a man of faith?

 

[Seawytch]

You could, you just chose not to. Determining something is repulsive is a CHOICE.

No such thing as a bisexual. I've explained it. If you're too fucking stupid to understand, not my problem 2nd class freak lover.

Now you're lying. It's not that I don't understand your definition, it's that I reject it because it conflicts with the real definition and I choose to speak English, not conservatard. And I no more choose to find having sex with another man repulsive as I can choose to have a 200 IQ.

But you can choose to suck another man's cock. That makes you bisexual.

If truly understood it, you'd accept it.

You choose to think faggots were born that way. Next thing you'll tell me is when you were born whether or not you liked the color red had been determined? What clothes you like? What hairstyle you wear?

If you find anything repulsive, it involves a choice. Otherwise, you're admitting you act on the same level as dogs.

Where you get that I personally can choose to do that is beyond me. That I chose not to means I'm heterosexual. While there are those that do choose to do that, I'm not one of them. That's reserved for those that choose to be faggots.

Why on Earth would I choose your made up definitions over that of a dictionary's? You suffer from delusions of grandeur that you know better than Websters. That alone is enough reason to laugh at you and ignore your conservatard definitions.

As far as where I get that you're bisexual, again, you said it's your choice to be straight. If you're choosing, then you can equally choose to be gay.

Me? I didn't choose to be straight, it's just the way I am. Just like I didn't choose to have two arms, that's just the way I am.

Were you born knowing something was repulsive? Your previous response indicates you believe that you were.

Nope, just like I wasn't born with teeth either, but I was wired for them to grow. Not everything is fully developed at birth, though the predisposition already exists.

If I choose not to be attracted men and choose to be attracted to women, that means I'm not bisexual. You talk about going by definitions. I don't meet the definition of bisexual. You're arguing definitions based on you not thinking it's a choice. They are two different things.

Of course you're bisexual. It's a choice for you. That means tomorrow, you could choose to suck a cock. I could not because being heterosexual is not a choice I made, I just am. Just like I didn't choose to have teeth, they just grew.

Funny how those that claim everything else in life is a choice but sexual orientation.

Nutcase, I already pointed out not everything else in life is a choice.

Actually, both of you could choose to suck cock. It would not make you gay. You have to ENJOY the sucking, not just being sucked. You also usually want to kiss them, passionately (with lots of tongue). Apparently "conservative" ca do that. Bisexual.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

For the second time this month, fringe kooks lose in court.

New York Times Beats Sarah Palin Defamation Lawsuit

See Berniebot vs. DNC

Sell the Sizzle, Not the Steak

As for that anti-democratic manifesto, the US Constitution, follow the money. The reason its first Amendment let the press runs wild was to enable the rich who owned the newspapers to make even more money selling sensationalism.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

At the time the NYT had some standing as a news source. Now it doesn't much matter as a mouth-piece of the DNC.

High and Mighty Lowlife

It's been printing convoluted doubletalk for a long time. At the risk of vomiting all over the files, I checked out its editorials about the preview to 9/11 during the last week of February, 1973.

A Libyan airliner had gone offcourse deep into Israeli territory. Israeli jets tried to signal the pilot to turn it back towards Egypt, but he failed to respond. So they shot it down, because Mossad (a grown-up version of the CIA) had discovered that the Arabs were planning to hijack an airliner and fly it into a building, killing hundreds of people.

The self-hating Jews at the New York Times threw a hissy fit, accusing the Israelis of making up excuses so they could play trigger-happy tough guys, acting as out of control as the terrorists did, and violating the Woody Allen image they wanted all nice Jewish boys to take as a role model.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Not to worry, there's another lawsuit already:

NY Times must face defamation lawsuit over professor's slavery comments

Also, I hope Palin appeals.

Hug a Thug

I wish self-defense hero George Zimmerman had won his lawsuit against the media that tried to sneak across the image of Trayvon as an adorable twelve-year-old.

 

[busybee01]

I don't recall my journalism textbooks saying even though you know it's a lie at the time you print it, it's not libel. They clearly intended to harm her reputation and earning power without a shred of evidence....all the ingredients for a successful lawsuit. Seems the new standard is you can say anything, no matter how perverse about somebody as long as you quickly retract it. No wonder the MSM is little more than tabloid crap anymore and the leftist trash here abides by it as long as it's aimed at an "enemy".

Tom, its more complicated than that. The NYT was gonna win that case even if they weren't right. Palin had to prove actual malice and willful disregard for the truth. That is a much higher standard than knowing it was false. You can't infer malice and willful disregard. You have to have actual evidence. Emails and such. Don't argue with me about it if you don't like it, argue with the Supreme Court. I can give you their address if you'd like.

I don't need the USSC to set you straight. There was obviously a political bias easily proven by other stories and editorials they did on her. The law is principally based on what an ordinary person would do or say or believe. How far afield would you have to be to believe the clip-art registration marks (not bullseyes) were targeting politicians for snipers? It's absurd and they knew it. No emails are necessary to prove malice aforethought. All Palin was required to prove was that she was harmed financially.....the pain and suffering caused by being accused of inciting violence and murder goes without saying. The judge had no right to dismiss this case based on a quick retraction...you can't and I can't find case law to substantiate that.

The NY Times is allowed to express a position even if it is wrong. Their argument was that it created a environment for something like that to happen. Palin has not been harmed by it. The only reason she filed it was to stay in the public eye.

 

[Conservative65]

I chose women just like I chose to service the whore you married. Remember, son, the next time you kiss her, the taste you get will be the residue from the cum I left there last time I let her suck my dick.

Report me like a good little coward. Doing so proves you're not man enough to defend the ****.

LOL

You poor thing, you reveal I'm getting under your skin. Me, I merely laugh at you.

As far as my wife goes, we've been over this already. You don't know her and can only fantasize about being with her. I don't blame you for that but the reality is that she's way too smart and sassy to ever go near a conservative like you.

She can't be smart. I fucked her brains out and let her suck the sassy out of my dick. You'll taste it next time you kiss her. You can watch next time if you like to see how a real man treats her.

That's quite the imagination you've got there, but as we've firmly established, you have zero knowledge of who my wife is. The sad reality of that is these hallucinations you're dreaming up stem from nowhere but your own mind.

Are you a man of faith?

You have claimed I have no knowledge of who she is. Reality says otherwise but whatever makes you feel better.

LOL

I've already proven you don't know her. And now you prove you're living in a world of dementia where you think your hallucinations are "reality."

And check this out... I know you're trying to get und, but since all you're really doing is making a fool of yourself, all you're actually achieving is entertaining me and getting me to laugh at you.

If, as you say, you've proven what you claim, why do you keep trying to prove it to me? I'm laughing at you because your continued responses to something you say is untrue tells me that you aren't really sure. If you're absolutely sure, why do you think you need to keep saying something?