The Democrat War Against Free Speech

[hadit]

Not 'just a few laws'....or 'shouldn't abridge'.....because the Founders had no intention of forming a government based on 'whatever government says, goes.'

And george Washington turned around and said, let there be a whickey tax...

The popular vote means as much as the amount of time an American football team controls the ball. It's a fun statistic, but meaningless when compared to the number of points scored.

It's not. The EC was a product of compromise, it strongly suggests the will of the people in the aggregate. The EC is obsolete and should be repealed.

Notice how the far left drones want the Electoral College repealed after the 2000 elections..

Wow I thought we were only here since 1776.. 2000 elections = 8,000 years...

Not according to the far left their history on that starts at the year 2000..

You also showed that you do not understand the history of the US..

The electoral college had nothing to do with who was president after the 2000 elections...

Of course it did. Why would it not?

 

[hadit]

That's because she uses Ann Coulter as a bench mark...

Ann Coulter is extremely smart, and extremely funny.

You? Not so much....

Coulter is a comedian, but you guys don't get the joke. And she was right about Romney. You ran him and you lost.

Which of her dozen or so best sellers did you like best?

Least?

....of the ones you've read, of course.

I never read her. It's unnecessary since all her books are the same cut and paste.

Very interesting. You simultaneously claim knowledge about a subject while admitting you know nothing about the subject.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

That's because she uses Ann Coulter as a bench mark...

Ann Coulter is extremely smart, and extremely funny.

You? Not so much....

Coulter is a comedian, but you guys don't get the joke. And she was right about Romney. You ran him and you lost.

Which of her dozen or so best sellers did you like best?

Least?

....of the ones you've read, of course.

I never read her. It's unnecessary since all her books are the same cut and paste.

Very interesting. You simultaneously claim knowledge about a subject while admitting you know nothing about the subject.

I read her book reviews but didn't want to poison my mind. She's a hack, but a good one at taking in that cash from morons.

 

[hadit]

I don't conform to your narrow template of political appropriateness, it's true.

You don't conform to basic integrity. Accusing others of demagoguery whilst you openly engage in slander is a level of hypocrisy you embrace.

The irony of it is amusing.

But to assume that those who fail to erode down to such a restrictive pattern of political ideology are foolish betrays a chauvinism rarely seen outside dive bars, trailer parks and Special Education busses.

I'm sure that you felt the random mixture of phases would appear erudite; sadly you have once again communicated nothing at all.

My apologies to Mr. Petty.

I’m working on the mathematical formula to calculate- to the second- the time between mention of ‘Coulter’ and a lefty using some sort of vicious personal attack.

The equation seems to involve lots of zeros behind the decimal point.

Thanks for helping with the research.

It really doesn't take much to demolish the left's claim to be tolerant, charitable and open minded. Simply mentioning a few names like Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, or FOX News is usually enough to prompt them foaming at the mouth, rolling around on the floor and spewing hate speech like it was going out of style.

 

[hadit]

Ann Coulter is extremely smart, and extremely funny.

You? Not so much....

Coulter is a comedian, but you guys don't get the joke. And she was right about Romney. You ran him and you lost.

Which of her dozen or so best sellers did you like best?

Least?

....of the ones you've read, of course.

I never read her. It's unnecessary since all her books are the same cut and paste.

Very interesting. You simultaneously claim knowledge about a subject while admitting you know nothing about the subject.

I read her book reviews but didn't want to poison my mind. She's a hack, but a good one at taking in that cash from morons.

So, IOW, your information about her books comes from what other people SAY about her books, not from the books themselves.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I don't conform to your narrow template of political appropriateness, it's true.

You don't conform to basic integrity. Accusing others of demagoguery whilst you openly engage in slander is a level of hypocrisy you embrace.

The irony of it is amusing.

But to assume that those who fail to erode down to such a restrictive pattern of political ideology are foolish betrays a chauvinism rarely seen outside dive bars, trailer parks and Special Education busses.

I'm sure that you felt the random mixture of phases would appear erudite; sadly you have once again communicated nothing at all.

My apologies to Mr. Petty.

I’m working on the mathematical formula to calculate- to the second- the time between mention of ‘Coulter’ and a lefty using some sort of vicious personal attack.

The equation seems to involve lots of zeros behind the decimal point.

Thanks for helping with the research.

It really doesn't take much to demolish the left's claim to be tolerant, charitable and open minded. Simply mentioning a few names like Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, or FOX News is usually enough to prompt them foaming at the mouth, rolling around on the floor and spewing hate speech like it was going out of style.

Tolerance stops at intolerance, now you know.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Coulter is a comedian, but you guys don't get the joke. And she was right about Romney. You ran him and you lost.

Which of her dozen or so best sellers did you like best?

Least?

....of the ones you've read, of course.

I never read her. It's unnecessary since all her books are the same cut and paste.

Very interesting. You simultaneously claim knowledge about a subject while admitting you know nothing about the subject.

I read her book reviews but didn't want to poison my mind. She's a hack, but a good one at taking in that cash from morons.

So, IOW, your information about her books comes from what other people SAY about her books, not from the books themselves.

In her case, that is correct. I don't read hacks, I don't watch them either.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Which of her dozen or so best sellers did you like best?

Least?

....of the ones you've read, of course.

I never read her. It's unnecessary since all her books are the same cut and paste.

Very interesting. You simultaneously claim knowledge about a subject while admitting you know nothing about the subject.

I read her book reviews but didn't want to poison my mind. She's a hack, but a good one at taking in that cash from morons.

So, IOW, your information about her books comes from what other people SAY about her books, not from the books themselves.

In her case, that is correct. I don't read hacks, I don't watch them either.

I do.

Can't wait for your next post.

 

[hadit]

I don't conform to your narrow template of political appropriateness, it's true.

You don't conform to basic integrity. Accusing others of demagoguery whilst you openly engage in slander is a level of hypocrisy you embrace.

The irony of it is amusing.

But to assume that those who fail to erode down to such a restrictive pattern of political ideology are foolish betrays a chauvinism rarely seen outside dive bars, trailer parks and Special Education busses.

I'm sure that you felt the random mixture of phases would appear erudite; sadly you have once again communicated nothing at all.

My apologies to Mr. Petty.

I’m working on the mathematical formula to calculate- to the second- the time between mention of ‘Coulter’ and a lefty using some sort of vicious personal attack.

The equation seems to involve lots of zeros behind the decimal point.

Thanks for helping with the research.

It really doesn't take much to demolish the left's claim to be tolerant, charitable and open minded. Simply mentioning a few names like Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, or FOX News is usually enough to prompt them foaming at the mouth, rolling around on the floor and spewing hate speech like it was going out of style.

Tolerance stops at intolerance, now you know.

Right, so you can tolerate anything except someone not tolerating something you tolerate. IOW, someone who disagrees with you.

 

[hadit]

Which of her dozen or so best sellers did you like best?

Least?

....of the ones you've read, of course.

I never read her. It's unnecessary since all her books are the same cut and paste.

Very interesting. You simultaneously claim knowledge about a subject while admitting you know nothing about the subject.

I read her book reviews but didn't want to poison my mind. She's a hack, but a good one at taking in that cash from morons.

So, IOW, your information about her books comes from what other people SAY about her books, not from the books themselves.

In her case, that is correct. I don't read hacks, I don't watch them either.

Right, you just make assumptions about them, including whether they are hacks.

 

[Impenitent]

Why no defense of your assertions?

Could it be the blog you ripped them off from didn't cover every possibility?

Why have you inserted this lie?

Could it be you've been hurt by what I've revealed about your....limitations?


Good.

What should I infer from your sudden deathly silence?

" I noticed that all our Liberal/Progressive/Democrat pals are deathly silent about

1. ....a Democrat Congressman suing to keep some group from advertising that his vote authorized funds for abortion....
none of the Leftists defending him???
...
Where are all the Leftist posts supporting this unconstitutional power grab???


Where is all that vaunted Leftist 'critical thinking'????"

Won't defend? Or can't?

You cur, are you now scampering away from "Could it be the blog you ripped them off from didn't cover every possibility?"

Speak up, low-life.

That is what I inferred from your "deathly silence" on the Dem defamation case.

BTW, how is Glen Beck doing on his? Is he asserting, as would you, freedom of speech?

That's right, scurry away, you dog.

The only thing ever 'ripped off' was any diploma you ever got.

At least Beck, Coulter, and the rest can point to the profit motive for their vapid ideology. After all, the bottom line is book sales.

Which begs the question, why do you do it? Apparently, there is no book deal in the making.

Were you, perhaps, kidnapped as a child by members of the John Birch Society? That would explain the Stockholm Syndrome. Or bi-polar disorder? Do these threads make you feel manic? Or do you only start them when you are? Why do you fashion yourself as a superhero?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Why have you inserted this lie?

Could it be you've been hurt by what I've revealed about your....limitations?


Good.

What should I infer from your sudden deathly silence?

" I noticed that all our Liberal/Progressive/Democrat pals are deathly silent about

1. ....a Democrat Congressman suing to keep some group from advertising that his vote authorized funds for abortion....
none of the Leftists defending him???
...
Where are all the Leftist posts supporting this unconstitutional power grab???


Where is all that vaunted Leftist 'critical thinking'????"

Won't defend? Or can't?

You cur, are you now scampering away from "Could it be the blog you ripped them off from didn't cover every possibility?"

Speak up, low-life.

That is what I inferred from your "deathly silence" on the Dem defamation case.

BTW, how is Glen Beck doing on his? Is he asserting, as would you, freedom of speech?

That's right, scurry away, you dog.

The only thing ever 'ripped off' was any diploma you ever got.

At least Beck, Coulter, and the rest can point to the profit motive for their vapid ideology. After all, the bottom line is book sales.

Which begs the question, why do you do it? Apparently, there is no book deal in the making.

Were you, perhaps, kidnapped as a child by members of the John Birch Society? That would explain the Stockholm Syndrome. Or bi-polar disorder? Do these threads make you feel manic? Or do you only start them when you are? Why do you fashion yourself as a superhero?

You seem to be making every effort to cloud the fact that you lied about me.

Unfortunately for you it is an indelible stain.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The famous book-burners of all time were the left wing Nazis party.

I bet you approve eh?

Not a left wing Nazi here. I'm more inclined to burning a Islamic terrorist.

You'll burn whatever you can get your hands on, Islamic person, Islamic book, Islamic building. You're the kind of Nazi Hitler loved.

>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<

..........................

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

if there was a DISAGREE button i would not have to go to all this trouble to post my disagreement !!

we need a DISAGREE icon/button !!!!!!

Only those incapable of writing a thoughtful, concise and clear rebuttal need a button, evidenced by those who need to rely on cartoons and emoticons. Reasoned responses take time and thought, hysterical ones only require a release of emotion.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Ah yes, a great broad spectrum statement for the intelligentsia meme foundation...

Evidence necessary?

The Libs voted for a proven failure in both domestic and foreign policy attempts.....TWICE!!!

Those were not "Libs" who voted for G. W. Bush, nor were the five who gave him the office of POTUS even though he had lost the popular vote.

The popular vote means as much as the amount of time an American football team controls the ball. It's a fun statistic, but meaningless when compared to the number of points scored.

It's not. The EC was a product of compromise, it strongly suggests the will of the people in the aggregate. The EC is obsolete and should be repealed.

Whether it should be repealed or not is moot because it represents the rules in play at the time, and to complain that a president should not have been elected because he/she didn't get the majority popular vote is meaningless.

Meaningless? Only to the partisans who supported Bush. If a Supreme Court divided 5-4 with a liberal majority had decided for Gore, we would never, ever hear the end of it.

I doubt very much a President Gore would have so easily sent our troops into harms way, as his experience in Vietnam lead him to understand how war impacts the native civilian population as well as the occupying nation.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I don't conform to your narrow template of political appropriateness, it's true.

You don't conform to basic integrity. Accusing others of demagoguery whilst you openly engage in slander is a level of hypocrisy you embrace.

The irony of it is amusing.

But to assume that those who fail to erode down to such a restrictive pattern of political ideology are foolish betrays a chauvinism rarely seen outside dive bars, trailer parks and Special Education busses.

I'm sure that you felt the random mixture of phases would appear erudite; sadly you have once again communicated nothing at all.

My apologies to Mr. Petty.

I’m working on the mathematical formula to calculate- to the second- the time between mention of ‘Coulter’ and a lefty using some sort of vicious personal attack.

The equation seems to involve lots of zeros behind the decimal point.

Thanks for helping with the research.

It really doesn't take much to demolish the left's claim to be tolerant, charitable and open minded. Simply mentioning a few names like Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, or FOX News is usually enough to prompt them foaming at the mouth, rolling around on the floor and spewing hate speech like it was going out of style.

Open minded does not describe the words of Coulter, Limbaugh or the talking heads at Fox News, the latter echo each other from segment to segment. Such is really quite funny, sadly, the same is true of CNN and MSNBC; that is why the curious (and not the willfully ignorant) need to watch the BBC and the News Hour on PBS to fully understand current events biased free.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

Open minded does not describe the words of Coulter, Limbaugh or the talking heads at Fox News, the latter echo each other from segment to segment. Such is really quite funny, sadly, the same is true of CNN and MSNBC; that is why the curious (and not the willfully ignorant) need to watch the BBC and the News Hour on PBS to fully understand current events biased free.

So, you may not agree with what others have to say, so you'll fight to the death to silence them?

Yep, you're a democrat alright.

 

[Wry Catcher]

[

Open minded does not describe the words of Coulter, Limbaugh or the talking heads at Fox News, the latter echo each other from segment to segment. Such is really quite funny, sadly, the same is true of CNN and MSNBC; that is why the curious (and not the willfully ignorant) need to watch the BBC and the News Hour on PBS to fully understand current events biased free.

So, you may not agree with what others have to say, so you'll fight to the death to silence them?

Yep, you're a democrat alright.

I'll not "fight to the death"; I will however point out hypocrisy, hyperbole, half-truths and propaganda when I hear it or read it.

Your post, for example, states a motive I do not have; I have no desire to silence anyone of them: Limbaugh has already begun to self destruct, Coulter has a limited following (even some serial killers have a larger fan base, YES, hyperbole has its place) and Fox News, when compared to the News Hour and even the Network News is fluff, written for the true believers, not the curious.

 

[hadit]

Evidence necessary?

The Libs voted for a proven failure in both domestic and foreign policy attempts.....TWICE!!!

Those were not "Libs" who voted for G. W. Bush, nor were the five who gave him the office of POTUS even though he had lost the popular vote.

The popular vote means as much as the amount of time an American football team controls the ball. It's a fun statistic, but meaningless when compared to the number of points scored.

It's not. The EC was a product of compromise, it strongly suggests the will of the people in the aggregate. The EC is obsolete and should be repealed.

Whether it should be repealed or not is moot because it represents the rules in play at the time, and to complain that a president should not have been elected because he/she didn't get the majority popular vote is meaningless.

Meaningless? Only to the partisans who supported Bush. If a Supreme Court divided 5-4 with a liberal majority had decided for Gore, we would never, ever hear the end of it.

I doubt very much a President Gore would have so easily sent our troops into harms way, as his experience in Vietnam lead him to understand how war impacts the native civilian population as well as the occupying nation.

What if, what if, what if. Pointless because it didn't turn out that way. The bottom line remains, the electoral college is what elects presidents, not the popular vote (quickest way to letting the big cities pick the POTUS every election, BTW), and that's the end of the story.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Open minded does not describe the words of Coulter, Limbaugh or the talking heads at Fox News, the latter echo each other from segment to segment. Such is really quite funny, sadly, the same is true of CNN and MSNBC; that is why the curious (and not the willfully ignorant) need to watch the BBC and the News Hour on PBS to fully understand current events biased free.

So, you may not agree with what others have to say, so you'll fight to the death to silence them?

The way to undo those morons is to just let them speak. Only the drones listen to them anyway.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I'll not "fight to the death"; I will however point out hypocrisy, hyperbole, half-truths and propaganda when I hear it or read it.

Will you fight to THEIR death to silence the enemies of the party? You can't allow people to say things harmful to the party.

Your post, for example, states a motive I do not have; I have no desire to silence anyone of them: Limbaugh has already begun to self destruct, Coulter has a limited following (even some serial killers have a larger fan base, YES, hyperbole has its place) and Fox News, when compared to the News Hour and even the Network News is fluff, written for the true believers, not the curious.

You seek to silence those who speak against your party. What is your motive in seeking to strip freedom of speech from others? I didn't speak to that, only to the fact that you indeed seek to silence opposing views.