Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
When we hack others including allies, perhaps being hacked should be expected.
"When we hack others including allies, perhaps being hacked should be expected."
This thread has noting to do with hacking, you dope.
Read carefully: it is documentation that, as usual, the Left is guilty of exactly what they blame the other side for.
I've observed that the very dumbest of posters tend to be of the 'moral equivalency' sort.
Do you guys have some kind of organization, with special handshakes and secret decoder rings?
So how does this new type of morality play out exactly? When one side gets absolved of sin and stinky hijinks just because "the other did it first"?? Doesn't that just open the drain into which American politics goes?
I guess the question becomes did the cluenessless of the Dems CONTRIBUTE to their rape by the Russians? Spying on political operations is STANDARD procedure in intelligence. A party that wants to lead the country, probably shouldn't be coordinating a campaign on Gmail huh? Or setting up illegal servers to get around security protocols. I know for a FACT, that if unsecured communications links are carried into foreign countries like Ms Clinton did -- that you can GUARANTEE -- they WILL be compromised.
I think, most ALL (both sides) of our "leadership" is that stupid. I truly do.
I don't give a toss about Ted Kennedy, plus not all Republicans are of the same opinion about Trumputin.Democrats have kicked up quite a fuss, claiming some sort of collusion between Trump supporters and some Russian efforts to get Mr. Trump elected.
Of course they have no proof, but, the Democrats have authored this mantra:
“The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it’s the seriousness of the charge that matters.”[ Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill, folks. Remember the left's battle cry: "The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it's the seriousness of the charge that matters." You simply need to make a harsh, totally unfounded charge, and that's reason enough to investigate. ]
Hence, their argument has more twists and turns in that position than in Nadia Comaneci's floor routine!
But.....there is documented evidence of exactly that: offers to have foreign influence change the course of United States elections!!!
It's by the Democrats.
" It was a May 14, 1983 letter from the head of the KGB, Viktor Chebrikov, to the head of the USSR, the odious Yuri Andropov, with the highest level of classification. Chebrikov relayed to Andropov an offer from Senator Ted Kennedy, presented by Kennedy’s old friend and law-school buddy, John Tunney, a former Democratic senator from California, to reach out to the Soviet leadership at the height of a very hot time in the Cold War. According to Chebrikov, Kennedy was deeply troubled by the deteriorating relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union, which he believed was bringing us perilously close to nuclear confrontation. Kennedy, according to Chebrikov, blamed this situation not on the Soviet leadership but on the American president---Ronald Reagan. Not only was the USSR not to blame, but, said Chebrikov, Kennedy was, quite the contrary, “very impressed” with Andropov.
The thrust of the letter is that Reagan had to be stopped, meaning his alleged aggressive defense policies, which then ranged from the Pershing IIs to the MX to SDI, and even his re-election bid, needed to be stopped. It was Ronald Reagan who was the hindrance to peace. That view of Reagan is consistent with things that Kennedy said and wrote at the time, including articles in sources like Rolling Stone (March 1984) and in a speeches like his March 24, 1983 remarks on the Senate floor the day after Reagan’s SDI speech, which he lambasted as “misleading Red-Scare tactics and reckless Star Wars schemes.”
Even more interesting than Kennedy’s diagnosis was the prescription: According to Chebrikov, Kennedy suggested a number of PR moves to help the Soviets in terms of their public image with the American public. He reportedly believed that the Soviet problem was a communication problem, resulting from an inability to counter Reagan’s (not the USSR’s) “propaganda.” If only Americans could get through Reagan’s smokescreen and hear the Soviets’ peaceful intentions." http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=30980
Just one more proof of the adage....'to know what the Democrats are doing, listen to what they blame the other side for."
so you're ok that he killed a young lady while intoxicated? Mary Jo Kopechne. I see you have no morals like the folks of Massachusetts. Glad we have that out in the open now.I don't give a toss about Ted Kennedy, plus not all Republicans are of the same opinion about Trumputin.Democrats have kicked up quite a fuss, claiming some sort of collusion between Trump supporters and some Russian efforts to get Mr. Trump elected.
Of course they have no proof, but, the Democrats have authored this mantra:
“The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it’s the seriousness of the charge that matters.”[ Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill, folks. Remember the left's battle cry: "The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it's the seriousness of the charge that matters." You simply need to make a harsh, totally unfounded charge, and that's reason enough to investigate. ]
Hence, their argument has more twists and turns in that position than in Nadia Comaneci's floor routine!
But.....there is documented evidence of exactly that: offers to have foreign influence change the course of United States elections!!!
It's by the Democrats.
" It was a May 14, 1983 letter from the head of the KGB, Viktor Chebrikov, to the head of the USSR, the odious Yuri Andropov, with the highest level of classification. Chebrikov relayed to Andropov an offer from Senator Ted Kennedy, presented by Kennedy’s old friend and law-school buddy, John Tunney, a former Democratic senator from California, to reach out to the Soviet leadership at the height of a very hot time in the Cold War. According to Chebrikov, Kennedy was deeply troubled by the deteriorating relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union, which he believed was bringing us perilously close to nuclear confrontation. Kennedy, according to Chebrikov, blamed this situation not on the Soviet leadership but on the American president---Ronald Reagan. Not only was the USSR not to blame, but, said Chebrikov, Kennedy was, quite the contrary, “very impressed” with Andropov.
The thrust of the letter is that Reagan had to be stopped, meaning his alleged aggressive defense policies, which then ranged from the Pershing IIs to the MX to SDI, and even his re-election bid, needed to be stopped. It was Ronald Reagan who was the hindrance to peace. That view of Reagan is consistent with things that Kennedy said and wrote at the time, including articles in sources like Rolling Stone (March 1984) and in a speeches like his March 24, 1983 remarks on the Senate floor the day after Reagan’s SDI speech, which he lambasted as “misleading Red-Scare tactics and reckless Star Wars schemes.”
Even more interesting than Kennedy’s diagnosis was the prescription: According to Chebrikov, Kennedy suggested a number of PR moves to help the Soviets in terms of their public image with the American public. He reportedly believed that the Soviet problem was a communication problem, resulting from an inability to counter Reagan’s (not the USSR’s) “propaganda.” If only Americans could get through Reagan’s smokescreen and hear the Soviets’ peaceful intentions." http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=30980
Just one more proof of the adage....'to know what the Democrats are doing, listen to what they blame the other side for."
No, I meant that I don't like Ted Kennedy, and therefore don't care about what he did or not, because I am against him in any case.so you're ok that he killed a young lady while intoxicated? Mary Jo Kopechne. I see you have no morals like the folks of Massachusetts. Glad we have that out in the open now.I don't give a toss about Ted Kennedy, plus not all Republicans are of the same opinion about Trumputin.Democrats have kicked up quite a fuss, claiming some sort of collusion between Trump supporters and some Russian efforts to get Mr. Trump elected.
Of course they have no proof, but, the Democrats have authored this mantra:
“The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it’s the seriousness of the charge that matters.”[ Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill, folks. Remember the left's battle cry: "The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it's the seriousness of the charge that matters." You simply need to make a harsh, totally unfounded charge, and that's reason enough to investigate. ]
Hence, their argument has more twists and turns in that position than in Nadia Comaneci's floor routine!
But.....there is documented evidence of exactly that: offers to have foreign influence change the course of United States elections!!!
It's by the Democrats.
" It was a May 14, 1983 letter from the head of the KGB, Viktor Chebrikov, to the head of the USSR, the odious Yuri Andropov, with the highest level of classification. Chebrikov relayed to Andropov an offer from Senator Ted Kennedy, presented by Kennedy’s old friend and law-school buddy, John Tunney, a former Democratic senator from California, to reach out to the Soviet leadership at the height of a very hot time in the Cold War. According to Chebrikov, Kennedy was deeply troubled by the deteriorating relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union, which he believed was bringing us perilously close to nuclear confrontation. Kennedy, according to Chebrikov, blamed this situation not on the Soviet leadership but on the American president---Ronald Reagan. Not only was the USSR not to blame, but, said Chebrikov, Kennedy was, quite the contrary, “very impressed” with Andropov.
The thrust of the letter is that Reagan had to be stopped, meaning his alleged aggressive defense policies, which then ranged from the Pershing IIs to the MX to SDI, and even his re-election bid, needed to be stopped. It was Ronald Reagan who was the hindrance to peace. That view of Reagan is consistent with things that Kennedy said and wrote at the time, including articles in sources like Rolling Stone (March 1984) and in a speeches like his March 24, 1983 remarks on the Senate floor the day after Reagan’s SDI speech, which he lambasted as “misleading Red-Scare tactics and reckless Star Wars schemes.”
Even more interesting than Kennedy’s diagnosis was the prescription: According to Chebrikov, Kennedy suggested a number of PR moves to help the Soviets in terms of their public image with the American public. He reportedly believed that the Soviet problem was a communication problem, resulting from an inability to counter Reagan’s (not the USSR’s) “propaganda.” If only Americans could get through Reagan’s smokescreen and hear the Soviets’ peaceful intentions." http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=30980
Just one more proof of the adage....'to know what the Democrats are doing, listen to what they blame the other side for."
Democrats have kicked up quite a fuss, claiming some sort of collusion between Trump supporters and some Russian efforts to get Mr. Trump elected.
Of course they have no proof, but, the Democrats have authored this mantra:
“The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it’s the seriousness of the charge that matters.”[ Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill, folks. Remember the left's battle cry: "The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it's the seriousness of the charge that matters." You simply need to make a harsh, totally unfounded charge, and that's reason enough to investigate. ]
Hence, their argument has more twists and turns in that position than in Nadia Comaneci's floor routine!
But.....there is documented evidence of exactly that: offers to have foreign influence change the course of United States elections!!!
It's by the Democrats.
" It was a May 14, 1983 letter from the head of the KGB, Viktor Chebrikov, to the head of the USSR, the odious Yuri Andropov, with the highest level of classification. Chebrikov relayed to Andropov an offer from Senator Ted Kennedy, presented by Kennedy’s old friend and law-school buddy, John Tunney, a former Democratic senator from California, to reach out to the Soviet leadership at the height of a very hot time in the Cold War. According to Chebrikov, Kennedy was deeply troubled by the deteriorating relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union, which he believed was bringing us perilously close to nuclear confrontation. Kennedy, according to Chebrikov, blamed this situation not on the Soviet leadership but on the American president---Ronald Reagan. Not only was the USSR not to blame, but, said Chebrikov, Kennedy was, quite the contrary, “very impressed” with Andropov.
The thrust of the letter is that Reagan had to be stopped, meaning his alleged aggressive defense policies, which then ranged from the Pershing IIs to the MX to SDI, and even his re-election bid, needed to be stopped. It was Ronald Reagan who was the hindrance to peace. That view of Reagan is consistent with things that Kennedy said and wrote at the time, including articles in sources like Rolling Stone (March 1984) and in a speeches like his March 24, 1983 remarks on the Senate floor the day after Reagan’s SDI speech, which he lambasted as “misleading Red-Scare tactics and reckless Star Wars schemes.”
Even more interesting than Kennedy’s diagnosis was the prescription: According to Chebrikov, Kennedy suggested a number of PR moves to help the Soviets in terms of their public image with the American public. He reportedly believed that the Soviet problem was a communication problem, resulting from an inability to counter Reagan’s (not the USSR’s) “propaganda.” If only Americans could get through Reagan’s smokescreen and hear the Soviets’ peaceful intentions." http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=30980
Just one more proof of the adage....'to know what the Democrats are doing, listen to what they blame the other side for."
If Putin was hacking it seems he'd want Hildabeast to win. She can be bought off with a few hundred million donation to her foundation. Trump can't be bought.
I do sorta' wonder what Bill's wife woulda' charged for the nuclear codes......
Shouldn't take much, she gave away our nuclear response time for free
No, I meant that I don't like Ted Kennedy, and therefore don't care about what he did or not, because I am against him in any case.so you're ok that he killed a young lady while intoxicated? Mary Jo Kopechne. I see you have no morals like the folks of Massachusetts. Glad we have that out in the open now.I don't give a toss about Ted Kennedy, plus not all Republicans are of the same opinion about Trumputin.Democrats have kicked up quite a fuss, claiming some sort of collusion between Trump supporters and some Russian efforts to get Mr. Trump elected.
Of course they have no proof, but, the Democrats have authored this mantra:
“The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it’s the seriousness of the charge that matters.”[ Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill, folks. Remember the left's battle cry: "The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it's the seriousness of the charge that matters." You simply need to make a harsh, totally unfounded charge, and that's reason enough to investigate. ]
Hence, their argument has more twists and turns in that position than in Nadia Comaneci's floor routine!
But.....there is documented evidence of exactly that: offers to have foreign influence change the course of United States elections!!!
It's by the Democrats.
" It was a May 14, 1983 letter from the head of the KGB, Viktor Chebrikov, to the head of the USSR, the odious Yuri Andropov, with the highest level of classification. Chebrikov relayed to Andropov an offer from Senator Ted Kennedy, presented by Kennedy’s old friend and law-school buddy, John Tunney, a former Democratic senator from California, to reach out to the Soviet leadership at the height of a very hot time in the Cold War. According to Chebrikov, Kennedy was deeply troubled by the deteriorating relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union, which he believed was bringing us perilously close to nuclear confrontation. Kennedy, according to Chebrikov, blamed this situation not on the Soviet leadership but on the American president---Ronald Reagan. Not only was the USSR not to blame, but, said Chebrikov, Kennedy was, quite the contrary, “very impressed” with Andropov.
The thrust of the letter is that Reagan had to be stopped, meaning his alleged aggressive defense policies, which then ranged from the Pershing IIs to the MX to SDI, and even his re-election bid, needed to be stopped. It was Ronald Reagan who was the hindrance to peace. That view of Reagan is consistent with things that Kennedy said and wrote at the time, including articles in sources like Rolling Stone (March 1984) and in a speeches like his March 24, 1983 remarks on the Senate floor the day after Reagan’s SDI speech, which he lambasted as “misleading Red-Scare tactics and reckless Star Wars schemes.”
Even more interesting than Kennedy’s diagnosis was the prescription: According to Chebrikov, Kennedy suggested a number of PR moves to help the Soviets in terms of their public image with the American public. He reportedly believed that the Soviet problem was a communication problem, resulting from an inability to counter Reagan’s (not the USSR’s) “propaganda.” If only Americans could get through Reagan’s smokescreen and hear the Soviets’ peaceful intentions." http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=30980
Just one more proof of the adage....'to know what the Democrats are doing, listen to what they blame the other side for."
Politics is about compromise, you can't always get what you want.No, I meant that I don't like Ted Kennedy, and therefore don't care about what he did or not, because I am against him in any case.so you're ok that he killed a young lady while intoxicated? Mary Jo Kopechne. I see you have no morals like the folks of Massachusetts. Glad we have that out in the open now.I don't give a toss about Ted Kennedy, plus not all Republicans are of the same opinion about Trumputin.Democrats have kicked up quite a fuss, claiming some sort of collusion between Trump supporters and some Russian efforts to get Mr. Trump elected.
Of course they have no proof, but, the Democrats have authored this mantra:
“The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it’s the seriousness of the charge that matters.”[ Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill, folks. Remember the left's battle cry: "The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it's the seriousness of the charge that matters." You simply need to make a harsh, totally unfounded charge, and that's reason enough to investigate. ]
Hence, their argument has more twists and turns in that position than in Nadia Comaneci's floor routine!
But.....there is documented evidence of exactly that: offers to have foreign influence change the course of United States elections!!!
It's by the Democrats.
" It was a May 14, 1983 letter from the head of the KGB, Viktor Chebrikov, to the head of the USSR, the odious Yuri Andropov, with the highest level of classification. Chebrikov relayed to Andropov an offer from Senator Ted Kennedy, presented by Kennedy’s old friend and law-school buddy, John Tunney, a former Democratic senator from California, to reach out to the Soviet leadership at the height of a very hot time in the Cold War. According to Chebrikov, Kennedy was deeply troubled by the deteriorating relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union, which he believed was bringing us perilously close to nuclear confrontation. Kennedy, according to Chebrikov, blamed this situation not on the Soviet leadership but on the American president---Ronald Reagan. Not only was the USSR not to blame, but, said Chebrikov, Kennedy was, quite the contrary, “very impressed” with Andropov.
The thrust of the letter is that Reagan had to be stopped, meaning his alleged aggressive defense policies, which then ranged from the Pershing IIs to the MX to SDI, and even his re-election bid, needed to be stopped. It was Ronald Reagan who was the hindrance to peace. That view of Reagan is consistent with things that Kennedy said and wrote at the time, including articles in sources like Rolling Stone (March 1984) and in a speeches like his March 24, 1983 remarks on the Senate floor the day after Reagan’s SDI speech, which he lambasted as “misleading Red-Scare tactics and reckless Star Wars schemes.”
Even more interesting than Kennedy’s diagnosis was the prescription: According to Chebrikov, Kennedy suggested a number of PR moves to help the Soviets in terms of their public image with the American public. He reportedly believed that the Soviet problem was a communication problem, resulting from an inability to counter Reagan’s (not the USSR’s) “propaganda.” If only Americans could get through Reagan’s smokescreen and hear the Soviets’ peaceful intentions." http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=30980
Just one more proof of the adage....'to know what the Democrats are doing, listen to what they blame the other side for."
He was responsible for Obama getting the Democrat nomination.
Did you vote for Obama?
If you did....your post becomes ...let's just say 'meaningless.'
Democrats have kicked up quite a fuss, claiming some sort of collusion between Trump supporters and some Russian efforts to get Mr. Trump elected.
Of course they have no proof, but, the Democrats have authored this mantra:
“The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it’s the seriousness of the charge that matters.”[ Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill, folks. Remember the left's battle cry: "The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it's the seriousness of the charge that matters." You simply need to make a harsh, totally unfounded charge, and that's reason enough to investigate. ]
Hence, their argument has more twists and turns in that position than in Nadia Comaneci's floor routine!
But.....there is documented evidence of exactly that: offers to have foreign influence change the course of United States elections!!!
It's by the Democrats.
" It was a May 14, 1983 letter from the head of the KGB, Viktor Chebrikov, to the head of the USSR, the odious Yuri Andropov, with the highest level of classification. Chebrikov relayed to Andropov an offer from Senator Ted Kennedy, presented by Kennedy’s old friend and law-school buddy, John Tunney, a former Democratic senator from California, to reach out to the Soviet leadership at the height of a very hot time in the Cold War. According to Chebrikov, Kennedy was deeply troubled by the deteriorating relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union, which he believed was bringing us perilously close to nuclear confrontation. Kennedy, according to Chebrikov, blamed this situation not on the Soviet leadership but on the American president---Ronald Reagan. Not only was the USSR not to blame, but, said Chebrikov, Kennedy was, quite the contrary, “very impressed” with Andropov.
The thrust of the letter is that Reagan had to be stopped, meaning his alleged aggressive defense policies, which then ranged from the Pershing IIs to the MX to SDI, and even his re-election bid, needed to be stopped. It was Ronald Reagan who was the hindrance to peace. That view of Reagan is consistent with things that Kennedy said and wrote at the time, including articles in sources like Rolling Stone (March 1984) and in a speeches like his March 24, 1983 remarks on the Senate floor the day after Reagan’s SDI speech, which he lambasted as “misleading Red-Scare tactics and reckless Star Wars schemes.”
Even more interesting than Kennedy’s diagnosis was the prescription: According to Chebrikov, Kennedy suggested a number of PR moves to help the Soviets in terms of their public image with the American public. He reportedly believed that the Soviet problem was a communication problem, resulting from an inability to counter Reagan’s (not the USSR’s) “propaganda.” If only Americans could get through Reagan’s smokescreen and hear the Soviets’ peaceful intentions." http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=30980
Just one more proof of the adage....'to know what the Democrats are doing, listen to what they blame the other side for."
This post got fifteen - FIFTEEN -- accolades.
More proof this place is just a GOP circle-jerk. Democrats, you have zero margin for error. Can't fight Putin in Syria because that's being the "founder of ISIS". Can't fight ISIS with Assad/Putin, because that's "soft on Russia."
But the GOP? Fuck it, grab a few pussies, appoint Vladimir's personal RimJobber as secretary of state, and it's all good in the hood! #VoterIntegrity #NotForUs #CinnamonHitlerAllTheWay
Politics is about compromise, you can't always get what you want.No, I meant that I don't like Ted Kennedy, and therefore don't care about what he did or not, because I am against him in any case.so you're ok that he killed a young lady while intoxicated? Mary Jo Kopechne. I see you have no morals like the folks of Massachusetts. Glad we have that out in the open now.I don't give a toss about Ted Kennedy, plus not all Republicans are of the same opinion about Trumputin.Democrats have kicked up quite a fuss, claiming some sort of collusion between Trump supporters and some Russian efforts to get Mr. Trump elected.
Of course they have no proof, but, the Democrats have authored this mantra:
“The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it’s the seriousness of the charge that matters.”[ Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill, folks. Remember the left's battle cry: "The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it's the seriousness of the charge that matters." You simply need to make a harsh, totally unfounded charge, and that's reason enough to investigate. ]
Hence, their argument has more twists and turns in that position than in Nadia Comaneci's floor routine!
But.....there is documented evidence of exactly that: offers to have foreign influence change the course of United States elections!!!
It's by the Democrats.
" It was a May 14, 1983 letter from the head of the KGB, Viktor Chebrikov, to the head of the USSR, the odious Yuri Andropov, with the highest level of classification. Chebrikov relayed to Andropov an offer from Senator Ted Kennedy, presented by Kennedy’s old friend and law-school buddy, John Tunney, a former Democratic senator from California, to reach out to the Soviet leadership at the height of a very hot time in the Cold War. According to Chebrikov, Kennedy was deeply troubled by the deteriorating relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union, which he believed was bringing us perilously close to nuclear confrontation. Kennedy, according to Chebrikov, blamed this situation not on the Soviet leadership but on the American president---Ronald Reagan. Not only was the USSR not to blame, but, said Chebrikov, Kennedy was, quite the contrary, “very impressed” with Andropov.
The thrust of the letter is that Reagan had to be stopped, meaning his alleged aggressive defense policies, which then ranged from the Pershing IIs to the MX to SDI, and even his re-election bid, needed to be stopped. It was Ronald Reagan who was the hindrance to peace. That view of Reagan is consistent with things that Kennedy said and wrote at the time, including articles in sources like Rolling Stone (March 1984) and in a speeches like his March 24, 1983 remarks on the Senate floor the day after Reagan’s SDI speech, which he lambasted as “misleading Red-Scare tactics and reckless Star Wars schemes.”
Even more interesting than Kennedy’s diagnosis was the prescription: According to Chebrikov, Kennedy suggested a number of PR moves to help the Soviets in terms of their public image with the American public. He reportedly believed that the Soviet problem was a communication problem, resulting from an inability to counter Reagan’s (not the USSR’s) “propaganda.” If only Americans could get through Reagan’s smokescreen and hear the Soviets’ peaceful intentions." http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=30980
Just one more proof of the adage....'to know what the Democrats are doing, listen to what they blame the other side for."
He was responsible for Obama getting the Democrat nomination.
Did you vote for Obama?
If you did....your post becomes ...let's just say 'meaningless.'
Politics is about compromise, you can't always get what you want.No, I meant that I don't like Ted Kennedy, and therefore don't care about what he did or not, because I am against him in any case.so you're ok that he killed a young lady while intoxicated? Mary Jo Kopechne. I see you have no morals like the folks of Massachusetts. Glad we have that out in the open now.I don't give a toss about Ted Kennedy, plus not all Republicans are of the same opinion about Trumputin.
He was responsible for Obama getting the Democrat nomination.
Did you vote for Obama?
If you did....your post becomes ...let's just say 'meaningless.'
Pretty flimsy excuse for reporting a murderer.
Kinda like this one:
Politics is about compromise, you can't always get what you want.No, I meant that I don't like Ted Kennedy, and therefore don't care about what he did or not, because I am against him in any case.so you're ok that he killed a young lady while intoxicated? Mary Jo Kopechne. I see you have no morals like the folks of Massachusetts. Glad we have that out in the open now.
He was responsible for Obama getting the Democrat nomination.
Did you vote for Obama?
If you did....your post becomes ...let's just say 'meaningless.'
Pretty flimsy excuse for reporting a murderer.
Kinda like this one:
So Obama was helped by a scumbag, does that mean Obama committed murder?
Do you agree 100% on everything with every politician you ever voted for?
Politics is about compromise, you can't always get what you want.No, I meant that I don't like Ted Kennedy, and therefore don't care about what he did or not, because I am against him in any case.so you're ok that he killed a young lady while intoxicated? Mary Jo Kopechne. I see you have no morals like the folks of Massachusetts. Glad we have that out in the open now.
He was responsible for Obama getting the Democrat nomination.
Did you vote for Obama?
If you did....your post becomes ...let's just say 'meaningless.'
Pretty flimsy excuse for reporting a murderer.
Kinda like this one:
So Obama was helped by a scumbag, does that mean Obama committed murder?
Do you agree 100% on everything with every politician you ever voted for?
Politics is about compromise, you can't always get what you want.No, I meant that I don't like Ted Kennedy, and therefore don't care about what he did or not, because I am against him in any case.so you're ok that he killed a young lady while intoxicated? Mary Jo Kopechne. I see you have no morals like the folks of Massachusetts. Glad we have that out in the open now.
He was responsible for Obama getting the Democrat nomination.
Did you vote for Obama?
If you did....your post becomes ...let's just say 'meaningless.'
Pretty flimsy excuse for reporting a murderer.
Kinda like this one:
So Obama was helped by a scumbag, does that mean Obama committed murder?
Do you agree 100% on everything with every politician you ever voted for?
Politics is about compromise, you can't always get what you want.No, I meant that I don't like Ted Kennedy, and therefore don't care about what he did or not, because I am against him in any case.
He was responsible for Obama getting the Democrat nomination.
Did you vote for Obama?
If you did....your post becomes ...let's just say 'meaningless.'
Pretty flimsy excuse for reporting a murderer.
Kinda like this one:
So Obama was helped by a scumbag, does that mean Obama committed murder?
Do you agree 100% on everything with every politician you ever voted for?
Stop trying to hide.
Obama is the worst and most destructive President in modern history.
He has an unbroken record of failure in both domestic and foreign policies.
The above represents an indictment of everyone who voted for him.
Politics is about compromise, you can't always get what you want.No, I meant that I don't like Ted Kennedy, and therefore don't care about what he did or not, because I am against him in any case.
He was responsible for Obama getting the Democrat nomination.
Did you vote for Obama?
If you did....your post becomes ...let's just say 'meaningless.'
Pretty flimsy excuse for reporting a murderer.
Kinda like this one:
So Obama was helped by a scumbag, does that mean Obama committed murder?
Do you agree 100% on everything with every politician you ever voted for?
Yet you hold Trump supporters to that standard ...
Politics is about compromise, you can't always get what you want.No, I meant that I don't like Ted Kennedy, and therefore don't care about what he did or not, because I am against him in any case.
He was responsible for Obama getting the Democrat nomination.
Did you vote for Obama?
If you did....your post becomes ...let's just say 'meaningless.'
Pretty flimsy excuse for reporting a murderer.
Kinda like this one:
So Obama was helped by a scumbag, does that mean Obama committed murder?
Do you agree 100% on everything with every politician you ever voted for?
"The other side's scumbags are worse than my side's scumbags."
Politics is about compromise, you can't always get what you want.He was responsible for Obama getting the Democrat nomination.
Did you vote for Obama?
If you did....your post becomes ...let's just say 'meaningless.'
Pretty flimsy excuse for reporting a murderer.
Kinda like this one:
So Obama was helped by a scumbag, does that mean Obama committed murder?
Do you agree 100% on everything with every politician you ever voted for?
Stop trying to hide.
Obama is the worst and most destructive President in modern history.
He has an unbroken record of failure in both domestic and foreign policies.
The above represents an indictment of everyone who voted for him.
Why have a healthy and open democratic society when you can hate about half of your felllow citizens.
What is clear is that the American people have lost all respect and confidence in the left. They view the left as dishonest and corrupt. It speaks VOLUMES about the left that the American people would choose Trump over a former first lady, senator, and SOS. Logically Hillary should have mopped the floor with Trump, but she and her party are 'that' awful.
