Stop 'Speaker Pelosi'

[JLB]

http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/10/29/225542.shtml?s=icp

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is making an appeal to Republicans, raising the specter of Democratic Rep. Nancy Pelosi becoming the next speaker of the House.

In an e-mail sent Sunday to GOP supporters via the Republican National Committee, Gingrich says: "The choice we make on November 7th will write the history books for generations to come. Will everything you've worked so hard to accomplish be lost to the San Francisco values of would-be Speaker Nancy Pelosi? ... The future of our country is too important to be left to Democrats who represent an attitude of appeasement, surrender, and weakness. ...

[deconstruction]

Congress battle zone
What a divisive fellow
Gingrich is a tool!

[Meathead]

you know i was starting to believe maybe newt could fully complete the rehabilitation of the terrible image i used to have of him but if this is true then that alone would pretty much flush his chance to ever get my vote

another bald faced lie. and based on the same tired, lame, worn out, and invalid talking points so thinly veiled they are insulting

frankly im surprised and disappointed he would stoop that low

[bigr]

San Fransisco values? Isn't that reprehensible enough of a statement.

I'll take SF values over Deep South values anyday.

[Jetsy]

San Fransisco values? Isn't that reprehensible enough of a statement.

I'll take SF values over Deep South values anyday.

Only because you're 21 and don't know diddly squat about anything.

[Gibby]

I would stop Nancy but thats up to CA voters.

[Gibby]

Especially those in her district as they are the only ones that count.

[Gibby]

Too bad Newt, and maybe America, but they like her.

[pmoon6]

San Fransisco values? Isn't that reprehensible enough of a statement.

I'll take SF values over Deep South values anyday.What values are those? Please drop the soap?

Do you know any southern folks or do you just rely on the media to give you the stereotypes.

[Gibby]

What values are those? Please drop the soap?

Do you know any southern folks or do you just rely on the media to give you the stereotypes.

Good question, please answer the man bigr.

[35Pete]

What values are those? Please drop the soap?

Do you know any southern folks or do you just rely on the media to give you the stereotypes.

His bigotry isn't really "bigotry". Southern folk are not one of the "politically protected" groups.

[bigr]

I was born and raised in the South for the first 13 years of my life. The only "stereotypes" I remember from living in South Carolina that I can speak to truly is that at one point, Mlk Jr day was not a holiday and the Confederate flag was in the state flag. As soon as the Confederate Flag was taken down from the state flag, it came straight to everyone's lawn. Was everyone in the South racist? No, clearly not. However, is there a love and respect for a racist culture with a good chunk of people, yes sir.

With that being said when Southern Hospitality is good, it's great. I don't want to disrespect a region without giving it its props as well. Living in DC now (I went to undergrad in Cali), it's been great travelling down South a bit.

I'm not trying to say everyone from the South is a hick, I was making the point that what Gingrich is saying is ridiculous. Do you ever hear dems or anyone in general straight up saying to the media, "we don't want southern values in the house?" I'm almost angrier at the statement than the reasons behind it.

People's stereotypes of SF is that it is some hippie city filled with gay people, so if someone from SF is in charge of the house, the whole country will turn into SF. Personally, I think SF is a great city. Anyone who has been there know the stereotypes are blown way out of proportion. (Much like what people say about the South.)

So what I said might have been thought of as an attack on the south, but honestly, living across the nation as I have; I'd prefer someone from SF in charge of the house. SF is the most progressive city in the US imo, and I'm not talking about gay marriage or any of those issues, I'm talking about attempting goals that progress the city as a whole. Making the whole city wireless for free (Huge for Business) and possibly free health care. We are America damnit, the country that went to the moon first, we should have pride being on the cutting edge.

[35Pete]

I was born and raised in the South for the first 13 years of my life. The only "stereotypes" I remember from living in South Carolina that I can speak to truly is that at one point, Mlk Jr day was not a holiday and the Confederate flag was in the state flag. As soon as the Confederate Flag was taken down from the state flag, it came straight to everyone's lawn. Was everyone in the South racist? No, clearly not. However, is there a love and respect for a racist culture with a good chunk of people, yes sir.

With that being said when Southern Hospitality is good, it's great. I don't want to disrespect a region without giving it its props as well. Living in DC now (I went to undergrad in Cali), it's been great travelling down South a bit.

I'm not trying to say everyone from the South is a hick, I was making the point that what Gingrich is saying is ridiculous. Do you ever hear dems or anyone in general straight up saying to the media, "we don't want southern values in the house?" I'm almost angrier at the statement than the reasons behind it.

People's stereotypes of SF is that it is some hippie city filled with gay people, so if someone from SF is in charge of the house, the whole country will turn into SF. Personally, I think SF is a great city. Anyone who has been there know the stereotypes are blown way out of proportion. (Much like what people say about the South.)

So what I said might have been thought of as an attack on the south, but honestly, living across the nation as I have; I'd prefer someone from SF in charge of the house. SF is the most progressive city in the US imo, and I'm not talking about gay marriage or any of those issues, I'm talking about attempting goals that progress the city as a whole. Making the whole city wireless for free (Huge for Business) and possibly free health care. We are America damnit, the country that went to the moon first, we should have pride being on the cutting edge.

SF as a local government has the perogative to make the city wireless. And if they want to give out healthcare then that too is their perogative.

But the pesky little constitution prevents the fed from having the authority to do that.

And calling something "progressive" is an insult, not a badge of honor. Means retards are running the show.

[Gibby]

Going to split hairs with you now Big R, but the Confederate flag has never been the state flag of SC

[Gibby]

A confederate flag did fly over the capitol but it wasn't the state flag.

[Gibby]

Truth be told that wasn't even a confederate flag per say. It was the battle flag. The confederate national flag was at first a flag with a blue field and single blue star. Then they had one that was a red bar, white bar, red bar and a box with stars representing all states with a successionist government. 15, I believe was the final standard. Then they switched to having the battle flag with a white field, then because this looked like a surrender flag they added a veritical white bar. That being said the SC flag has never portrayed in any way shape or form a confederate flag.

[bigr]

I don't care how you justifiy it, the confederate symbol was incorporated in the state flag. I didn't mean to say it was the WHOLE flag, but it was a prominent part.

I was there when it was taken down, and I was happy about that. Then, I became pretty unhappy at how all my neighbors put it up on the porch, haha.

[Gibby]

I'll even go a step further, IMHO -especially since several hundred thousand Blacks and mostly poor whites, who never owned slaves as they were too damn poor themselves to do so, fought for the confederacy and since Lee Himself was among the first to free his slaves ,almost twelve years before US Grant, the Confederate Battle Flag did not become a symbol of racism until the 1960s. This was the decade, if you recall, when George Wallace used segregation to get elected governor of a state crawling with KKK. If he hadn't used this flag as a symbol of ignorance and hatred then the flag wouldn't have the stigma it now has attached to it.

[bigr]

Either way the flag was disgraceful, we can agree on that much can't we?

And 35Pete, I wouldn't consider the word "progressive" as an insult. The base root meaning of the word refers to improvement, don't you agree.

I prefer progress, don't you? If they are the retards, what does that make the Republican leadership? I'm not some super Democrat, I personally think the two-party system is a sham. I just think there needs to be a change for sure, just look at the state of this country.

And while I understand that SF's local gov't is behind its recent changes, I wa just making the point that SF values aren't all wrapped up in social issues like gay marriage.

[Gibby]

I don't care how you justifiy it, the confederate symbol was incorporated in the state flag. I didn't mean to say it was the WHOLE flag, but it was a prominent part.

I was there when it was taken down, and I was happy about that. Then, I became pretty unhappy at how all my neighbors put it up on the porch, haha.

No, it wasn't on the flag and it never has been. I ask you to show me where the confederate flag is on this.

[Gibby]

Here is its predecessor

[Gibby]

If you mean this one. Then you are wrong about it being confederate and here is what Flags of the world has to say "This is definitely a cross between the Confederate and South Carolina flag. This is not an official anything. Ever since the movement to remove the confederate flag from the Georgia State flag, various flags have been made. I Ain't Coming Down, Heritage not Hate and "state" confederate flags. We sell the Confed/South Carolina and Confed/North Carolina. I suppose flags are a way of making a statement and some people are doing just that."

[Gibby]

And absolutely free of charge, some history of SC. In the 19th century because of a lucrative slave trade, cotton exports, as well as shipping, textiles, and manufacture they were the only state with the ability to possibly have survived as an independent nation. They started bucking for succession in the 1830s with Andrew Jackson and continued to vie for it and push the nation towards civil war for nearly 30 years. Their reasons for succession were far more about money than slavery. Just thought you'd like to know, but again what do I know I'm just a historian.

[Gibby]

Oh and because you will be curious here is that link to Flags of the world I got the info from. http://fotw.vexillum.com/flags/us-sc.html#his

[bigr]

Well call me wrong, but like I said, looking at that flag; a good half is a symbol that as a person of color, I'm not a fan of.

It's a disgraceful flag, and it's good that it's no longer there.

[35Pete]

Either way the flag was disgraceful, we can agree on that much can't we?

And 35Pete, I wouldn't consider the word "progressive" as an insult. The base root meaning of the word refers to improvement, don't you agree.

I prefer progress, don't you? If they are the retards, what does that make the Republican leadership? I'm not some super Democrat, I personally think the two-party system is a sham. I just think there needs to be a change for sure, just look at the state of this country.

And while I understand that SF's local gov't is behind its recent changes, I wa just making the point that SF values aren't all wrapped up in social issues like gay marriage.

IT's an oxymoron Bigr. The hard right could call themselves the virtuists. Would that justify their objectives?

Improvement in what sense? Violating the constitution at every turn because the rabble rousers don't trust their fellow man one damn bit so they feel the need to have everyone and everything regulated? I don't call that progression in any sense of the word. Hell, makes King George look altrusitic in comparison.

[Gibby]

Oh and if you want here is even more information about the SC state flag.

http://home.freeuk.com/gazkhan/blank_state.htm

[Gibby]

Well call me wrong, but like I said, looking at that flag; a good half is a symbol that as a person of color, I'm not a fan of.

It's a disgraceful flag, and it's good that it's no longer there.

Tell me was it the state flag that caused all the chaos in SC or was it the Rebel Flag? I always thought that the NAACP was able to effect economic pressure and social pressure on SC because of the battle flag and not a state flag. I myself have a problem with states flying confederate flags -as the Rebel flag shows rebellion from the Republic which is bad enough on its own. I agree those who go about with Confederate flags today tend to be racist pigs who do it for no better reason than to stir up trouble and support their ignorant hatred. So while I disagree with you on flag history I can understand your ire against how the flag is used currently and has been used since the end of the war. Especially with the stupidity and dastardly acts of the KKK and neo nazi punk groups as well as a slew of segregationist governments.

[bigr]

Phantom - flag debate 5,000 is over. I was wrong in making a blanket statement on the confederate flag being the state flag, what I meant to say it at one point played a point in the flag.

35 Pete: Second, Constitution changes? Everything regulated? Please delve into that idea more, and where do you feel they don't trust their fellow man?

[bigr]

Tell me was it the state flag that caused all the chaos in SC or was it the Rebel Flag? I always thought that the NAACP was able to effect economic pressure and social pressure on SC because of the battle flag and not a state flag. I myself have a problem with states flying confederate flags -as the Rebel flag shows rebellion from the Republic which is bad enough on its own. I agree those who go about with Confederate flags today tend to be racist pigs who do it for no better reason than to stir up trouble and support their ignorant hatred. So while I disagree with you on flag history I can understand your ire against how the flag is used currently and has been used since the end of the war. Especially with the stupidity and dastardly acts of the KKK and neo nazi punk groups as well as a slew of segregationist governments.

agreed! haha

[Angus]

What values are those? Please drop the soap?

Do you know any southern folks or do you just rely on the media to give you the stereotypes.


...and the phrase "San Francisco vlaues" isn't itself a stereotype?

[deconstruction]

Truth be told that wasn't even a confederate flag per say. It was the battle flag. The confederate national flag was at first a flag with a blue field and single blue star. Then they had one that was a red bar, white bar, red bar and a box with stars representing all states with a successionist government. 15, I believe was the final standard. Then they switched to having the battle flag with a white field, then because this looked like a surrender flag they added a veritical white bar. That being said the SC flag has never portrayed in any way shape or form a confederate flag.

So, what you're trying to rationalize here is that bigotry has inspired counter bigotry.

What's wrong with Pelosi? What is she, evil grandmother?

[deconstruction]

Only because you're 21 and don't know diddly squat about anything.

And we're supposed to take it that you're older and wiser?

[Gibby]

So, what you're trying to rationalize here is that bigotry has inspired counter bigotry.

What's wrong with Pelosi? What is she, evil grandmother?

Where in the section you lifted do you see me saying bigotry inspires bigotry>

As for Pelosi she's not evil but I wouldn't say she is stable either.

[deconstruction]

Just a general comment, not specific to highlighted section.

She can't be any crazier than what we got now.

[Gibby]

She can't be any crazier than what we got now.

Have to agree with you there.

[pmoon6]

I was born and raised in the South for the first 13 years of my life. The only "stereotypes" I remember from living in South Carolina that I can speak to truly is that at one point, Mlk Jr day was not a holiday and the Confederate flag was in the state flag. As soon as the Confederate Flag was taken down from the state flag, it came straight to everyone's lawn. Was everyone in the South racist? No, clearly not. However, is there a love and respect for a racist culture with a good chunk of people, yes sir.

With that being said when Southern Hospitality is good, it's great. I don't want to disrespect a region without giving it its props as well. Living in DC now (I went to undergrad in Cali), it's been great travelling down South a bit.

I'm not trying to say everyone from the South is a hick, I was making the point that what Gingrich is saying is ridiculous. Do you ever hear dems or anyone in general straight up saying to the media, "we don't want southern values in the house?" I'm almost angrier at the statement than the reasons behind it.

People's stereotypes of SF is that it is some hippie city filled with gay people, so if someone from SF is in charge of the house, the whole country will turn into SF. Personally, I think SF is a great city. Anyone who has been there know the stereotypes are blown way out of proportion. (Much like what people say about the South.)

So what I said might have been thought of as an attack on the south, but honestly, living across the nation as I have; I'd prefer someone from SF in charge of the house. SF is the most progressive city in the US imo, and I'm not talking about gay marriage or any of those issues, I'm talking about attempting goals that progress the city as a whole. Making the whole city wireless for free (Huge for Business) and possibly free health care. We are America damnit, the country that went to the moon first, we should have pride being on the cutting edge.That's good to know and as Angus pointed out, I don't think you can stereotype a region as having certain values. San Francisco is a great town, but they do have some whack job politicians as does most any place in the country.

The South is too often characterized as a bunch of gun totin' rednecks with green teeth and IQ's of a dog. That has not been my experience. Sure you have some, but the vast majority are hard working people who have no trouble lending a helping hand when need be.

[Gibby]

That's good to know and as Angus pointed out, I don't think you can stereotype a region as having certain values. San Francisco is a great town, but they do have some whack job politicians as does most any place in the country.

The South is too often characterized as a bunch of gun totin' rednecks with green teeth and IQ's of a dog. That has not been my experience. Sure you have some, but the vast majority are hard working people who have no trouble lending a helping hand when need be.

I concur.

[shiva2999]

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/11/wolcott200611

Politics
Red State Babylon
If the blue states are sinkholes of moral decay, as right-wing pundits insist, how come red states lead the nation in violent crime, divorce, illegitimacy, and incarceration, among other evils? To a bus-riding innocent on Manhattan's stroller-filled Upper West Side, it looks like a case of hypocrisy meets stupidity.
by James Wolcott November 2006

In contemporary lore, the good people of the red states walk in Jesus's sandals while the rest of us are following Satan into the licking flames. Twenty-plus years of conservative propaganda have convinced millions of Republicans and their pet Beltway pundits that they inherited the legacy of frontier values and dwell in baptismal light, unlike modern Democrats, who crawled out from under rocks and prefer the ambiguous dark, where there's no right or wrong, only "personal choices." Newt Gingrich once spouted that Susan Smith's murder of her two children in 1994 was a sign of the evil that liberal Democrats had wrought: "I think that the mother killing the two children in South Carolina vividly reminds every American how sick the society is getting and how much we need to change things.... The only way you get change is to vote Republican." According to the gospel of Saint Newt, William J. Bennett, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Michael Savage, and similar blowholes, the dying raptures of Sodom and Gomorrah can be found in the cultural duchies of the blue states. Here sin and moral sloth have set up shop, and venereal outbreaks of trendy ideas go unchecked. Conservative pundits and politicians regularly jeer that these Jurassic Parks of geriatric do-gooders and brainwashed college students don't represent the "real" America—the God-fearing, flag-waving, decent-living, high-octane, steeped-in-common-sense, everyday-low-prices heartland. Yet even as blue states hug the coasts and red states spread like a bloodstain across America's outstretched body, the influence of these elitist enclaves remains pervasive, corrosive, rotting away the pillars of moral order and foisting abortion, divorce, pornography, gay marriage, snail-darter environmentalism, secular humanism, dovish appeasement, moral relativism, and Rosie O'Donnell's TV comeback upon a once virile nation. The very names of the enclaves breeding such bacteria make the nostril hairs quiver. Hollywood. Berkeley. San Francisco. Madison, Wisconsin. Cambridge, Massachusetts. Martha's Vineyard. Georgetown. And, worst of all, New York City, especially Manhattan, most especially its Upper West Side, disparaged by its critics as the outpatient clinic for last-gasp liberalism.

It's so unjust.

...more...

[Gibby]

You're Canadian and by virtue of this fact and this fact alone you are barred from having an opinion about the USA. So go away before I start making nutty and equally invalid claims about KANADA and canadiens.

[shiva2999]

Did you go to church and lie to God again yesterday Gibby?


http://www.nybooks.com/articles/19590

A Country Ruled by Faith
By Garry Wills

The right wing in America likes to think that the United States government was, at its inception, highly religious, specifically highly Christian, and even more specifically highly biblical. That was not true of that government or any later government—until 2000, when the fiction of the past became the reality of the present. George W. Bush was not only born-again, like Jimmy Carter. His religious conversion came late, and took place in the political setting of Billy Graham's ministry to the powerful. He was converted during a stroll with Graham on his father's Kennebunkport compound. It is true that Dwight Eisenhower was guided to baptism by Graham. But Eisenhower was a famous and formed man, the principal military figure of World War II, the leader of NATO, the president of Columbia University—his change in religious orientation was just an addition to many prior achievements. Bush's conversion at a comparatively young stage in his life was a wrenching away from mainly wasted years. He joined a Bible study culture in Texas that was unlike anything Eisenhower bought into.

Bush was a saved alcoholic—and here, too, he had no predecessor in the White House. Ulysses Grant conquered the bottle, but not with the help of Jesus. Other presidents were evangelicals. Three of them belonged to the Disciples of Christ—James Garfield, Lyndon Johnson, and Ronald Reagan. But none of the three— nor any of the other forty-two presidents preceding Bush (including his father)—would have answered a campaign debate question as he did. Asked who was his favorite philosopher, he said "Jesus Christ." And why? "Because he changed my heart." Over and over, when he said anything good about someone else—including Vladimir Putin—he said it was because "he has a good heart," which is evangelical-speak (as in "condoms cannot change your heart"). Bush talks evangelical talk as no other president has, including Jimmy Carter, who also talked the language of the secular Enlightenment culture that evangelists despise. Bush told various evangelical groups that he felt God had called him to run for president in 2000: "I know it won't be easy on me or my family, but God wants me to do it."[1]

Bush promised his evangelical followers faith-based social services, which he called "compassionate conservatism." He went beyond that to give them a faith-based war, faith-based law enforcement, faith-based education, faith-based medicine, and faith-based science.

...more...

[petals]

Did you go to church and lie to God again yesterday Gibby?


http://www.nybooks.com/articles/19590

A Country Ruled by Faith
By Garry Wills

The right wing in America likes to think that the United States government was, at its inception, highly religious, specifically highly Christian, and even more specifically highly biblical. That was not true of that government or any later government—until 2000, when the fiction of the past became the reality of the present. George W. Bush was not only born-again, like Jimmy Carter. His religious conversion came late, and took place in the political setting of Billy Graham's ministry to the powerful. He was converted during a stroll with Graham on his father's Kennebunkport compound. It is true that Dwight Eisenhower was guided to baptism by Graham. But Eisenhower was a famous and formed man, the principal military figure of World War II, the leader of NATO, the president of Columbia University—his change in religious orientation was just an addition to many prior achievements. Bush's conversion at a comparatively young stage in his life was a wrenching away from mainly wasted years. He joined a Bible study culture in Texas that was unlike anything Eisenhower bought into.

Bush was a saved alcoholic—and here, too, he had no predecessor in the White House. Ulysses Grant conquered the bottle, but not with the help of Jesus. Other presidents were evangelicals. Three of them belonged to the Disciples of Christ—James Garfield, Lyndon Johnson, and Ronald Reagan. But none of the three— nor any of the other forty-two presidents preceding Bush (including his father)—would have answered a campaign debate question as he did. Asked who was his favorite philosopher, he said "Jesus Christ." And why? "Because he changed my heart." Over and over, when he said anything good about someone else—including Vladimir Putin—he said it was because "he has a good heart," which is evangelical-speak (as in "condoms cannot change your heart"). Bush talks evangelical talk as no other president has, including Jimmy Carter, who also talked the language of the secular Enlightenment culture that evangelists despise. Bush told various evangelical groups that he felt God had called him to run for president in 2000: "I know it won't be easy on me or my family, but God wants me to do it."[1]

Bush promised his evangelical followers faith-based social services, which he called "compassionate conservatism." He went beyond that to give them a faith-based war, faith-based law enforcement, faith-based education, faith-based medicine, and faith-based science.

...more...


This actually sounds like an intresting read. Thanks for the post - now I will have to go and buy.

I see nothing wrong with having some faith, we all need it sometimes.

[Gibby]

refer to post 40

[shiva2999]

I see nothing wrong with having some faith, we all need it sometimes.

Jesus preferred deeds over faith.

Faith is all fine and good but when it's used to excuse bad behaviour Satan smiles.

[petals]

Jesus preferred deeds over faith.

Faith is all fine and good but when it's used to excuse bad behaviour Satan smiles.


Satan smiles when one does a deed for Jesus with the wrong intentions.

You do a good deed because it comes from the heart, not because it earns you a spot in Heaven.

You have faith that people will one day see the difference.

[JLB]

"A House under Speaker Pelosi and a Senate under Majority Leader Harry Reid would be a disaster for America. The key Democrat leaders who would be in control of how much you pay in taxes, defense funding, and investigations against the President and the War on Terror are some of the most liberal, out-of-the-mainstream members of their party. They haven't changed. In fact, they've become even more liberal and beholden to the special interests who bankroll them."

[shiva2999]

Satan smiles when one does a deed for Jesus with the wrong intentions.

You do a good deed because it comes from the heart, not because it earns you a spot in Heaven.

You have faith that people will one day see the difference.

I agree 100%.

[Gibby]

Jesus preferred deeds over faith.

Faith is all fine and good but when it's used to excuse bad behaviour Satan smiles.

he preferred both. Shall I rake you with the words in red alone or do I have to bring in Paul as well. You fool nobody shivester you have no issue and are trying to switch the issue. Sorry but it ain't gonna happen.

[shiva2999]

"A House under Speaker Pelosi and a Senate under Majority Leader Harry Reid would be a disaster for America. The key Democrat leaders who would be in control of how much you pay in taxes, defense funding, and investigations against the President and the War on Terror are some of the most liberal, out-of-the-mainstream members of their party. They haven't changed. In fact, they've become even more liberal and beholden to the special interests who bankroll them."

Nancy Pelosi is more dangerous than Osama.

[petals]

I agree 100%.

WOW! You are agreeing with me? I feel so honored! Shiva is in 100% agreement with me!!! :partysmilies:

[Gibby]

Nancy Pelosi is more dangerous than Osama.

you're really that stupid?

[shiva2999]

he preferred both. Shall I rake you with the words in red alone or do I have to bring in Paul as well. You fool nobody shivester you have no issue and are trying to switch the issue. Sorry but it ain't gonna happen.

LOL! You cannot "prefer" both dumbass.

Please, bring in Paul.

I always love to hear from the # 1 villain in human history.

[shiva2999]

you're really that stupid?

No, but you are.

[shiva2999]

WOW! You are agreeing with me? I feel so honored! Shiva is in 100% agreement with me!!! :partysmilies:

Don't have an aneurysm.

[Gibby]

No, but you are.

resorting to insults, again in American politics you have no say. Bug off you Canadian.

[Gibby]

Don't have an aneurysm.

why the hell would she?

[petals]

Don't have an aneurysm.

I will try to refrain myself. So does this mean we can be friends now? I think we got started off on the wrong foot?

[petals]

resorting to insults, again in American politics you have no say. Bug off you Canadian.

Now be nice, he adds a good mix too!

[jimmifli]

Nancy Pelosi is more dangerous than Osama.
Why?

[Gibby]

Why?

he's a sheep. He knows not. Baaaaaaaaaa

[shiva2999]

I will try to refrain myself. So does this mean we can be friends now? I think we got started off on the wrong foot?

Of course we can be friends, I never said we couldn't.

Contrary to what the Sanctuary cultists tell you, I'm one of the nicer people on the board IMO. I get no pleasure out of fighting with people.

But my worldview is, shall we say, unorthodox (and I mean that in the exact sense).

[shiva2999]

Why?

Gee, is it No Sarcasm Monday around here?

Did I miss the announcement?

[Gibby]

Of course we can be friends, I never said we couldn't.

Contrary to what the Sanctuary cultists tell you, I'm one of the nicer people on the board IMO. I get no pleasure out of fighting with people.

But my worldview is, shall we say, unorthodox (and I mean that in the exact sense).

essentially he shoots porno and and is a self agrandizing egotistical megalomaniac.

[jimmifli]

he's a sheep. He knows not. Baaaaaaaaaa
The goal of every poster in this forum should be to raise the level of discourse. To teach others and to learn from them.

You do none of those things.

[Gibby]

The goal of every poster in this forum should be to raise the level of discourse. To teach others and to learn from them.

You do none of those things.

Yes I do, when I receive the right material. you and shiva don't qualify.

[shiva2999]

essentially he shoots porno and and is a self agrandizing egotistical megalomaniac.

Sigh.

[JLB]

Gee, is it No Sarcasm Monday around here?

Did I miss the announcement?

I knew Shiva shocking nobody knew it.
Better training programs pay more attention to detail.
You deserve more respect than that even I know that.
Or Happy Halloween I wonder if anybody will get that tomorrow.:arizona:
Pelosi is a skank by the way was that sarcasm?

[jimmifli]

Gee, is it No Sarcasm Monday around here?

Did I miss the announcement?
Sorry you missed the memo, it should've gone out first thing this morning.

I listened to some democrat this morning who spouted a bunch of nonsense about her being a terrible speaker and leading the Dems down a terrible path.

She seems to be strongly disliked by some in her party for her stance against impeachment. I thought you might be commenting on that.

[Gibby]

Sigh.

I often say that about you.

[shiva2999]

Sorry you missed the memo, it should've gone out first thing this morning.

I listened to some democrat this morning who spouted a bunch of nonsense about her being a terrible speaker and leading the Dems down a terrible path.

She seems to be strongly disliked by some in her party for her stance against impeachment. I thought you might be commenting on that.

Nancy Pelosi doesn't thrill me but it could be worse.

This is just another pre election talking point that will be used to justify the theft of the election.

[shiva2999]

Pelosi is a skank by the way was that sarcasm?

Who cares?

[Gibby]

again, you are canadian. You can't vote and you are obviously jealous. I couldn't give a flying :upyours: about your opinion of our political apparatus.

[JLB]

Who cares?

Exactly!!:arizona:

[shiva2999]

I often say that about you.

Were you nasty, bitter and stupid before you entered the service of Satan?

[JLB]

again, you are canadian. You can't vote and you are obviously jealous. I couldn't give a flying :upyours: about your opinion of our political apparatus.

Now thats not sarcasm am I right Gibby?:arizona:

[Gibby]

Now thats not sarcasm am I right Gibby?:arizona:

you're as astute as ever.

[Gibby]

Were you nasty, bitter and stupid before you entered the service of Satan?

Oh, ain't it cute. Someone's jealous. :D

[JLB]

Nancy Pelosi doesn't thrill me but it could be worse.

This is just another pre election talking point that will be used to justify the theft of the election.


ROFLMAO!! YOUR RIGHT!!!

[Gibby]

Exactly!!:arizona:

my sentiments as well.

[35Pete]

Talk about no shame.

If the liberals win the election then "the people have spoken".
If the liberals lose the election then "it was stolen".

Incredibly shameless I tell you.

[petals]

Talk about no shame.

If the liberals win the election then "the people have spoken".
If the liberals lose the election then "it was stolen".

Incredibly shameless I tell you.

Funny - very well put!

[Gibby]

Talk about no shame.

If the liberals win the election then "the people have spoken".
If the liberals lose the election then "it was stolen".

Incredibly shameless I tell you.

right on.

[JLB]

Talk about no shame.

If the liberals win the election then "the people have spoken".
If the liberals lose the election then "it was stolen".

Incredibly shameless I tell you.

Allow me to make it complete you are correct.

[Gibby]

This is just another pre election talking point that will be used to justify the theft of the election.

Speaking of election theft.

http://buffalorange.com/showthread.php?t=100201

[ckg68]

Talk about no shame.

If the liberals win the election then "the people have spoken".
If the liberals lose the election then "it was stolen".

Incredibly shameless I tell you.

For the right,just substitute "Hugo Chavez helped steal it!" for "it was stolen" and nothing changes.

[deconstruction]

Talk about no shame.

If the liberals win the election then "the people have spoken".
If the liberals lose the election then "it was stolen".

Incredibly shameless I tell you.

a) Democrats baby, not liberal.
b) losing means that some people are still not paying attention.

[uppy]

I am going to laugh my ass off, like I did after the last three elections when

the demos come up on the losing end once again.

The Rage from the left will be hysterical.

[uppy]

Of course we can be friends, I never said we couldn't.

Contrary to what the Sanctuary cultists tell you, I'm one of the nicer people on the board IMO. I get no pleasure out of fighting with people.

But my worldview is, shall we say, unorthodox (and I mean that in the exact sense).


I like you Shiva,however you are not one of the nicer people on the board.

[Gibby]

I like you Shiva,however you are not one of the nicer people on the board.

Have to agree here.

[shiva2999]

LOL!

Sanctuary cultists.

[Gibby]

hi ya shivester, don't you wish you could vote?

[mark3274]

http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/10/29/225542.shtml?s=icp

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is making an appeal to Republicans, raising the specter of Democratic Rep. Nancy Pelosi becoming the next speaker of the House.

In an e-mail sent Sunday to GOP supporters via the Republican National Committee, Gingrich says: "The choice we make on November 7th will write the history books for generations to come. Will everything you've worked so hard to accomplish be lost to the San Francisco values of would-be Speaker Nancy Pelosi? ... The future of our country is too important to be left to Democrats who represent an attitude of appeasement, surrender, and weakness. ...

and what have you worked so hard for?????? sending young men to die in IRAQ for nothing yes thats something you have worked hard for lol

Iraq is going to IRAN on a silver platter and you can do nothing to stop it.

[Gibby]

I'm not leaving. I was going to but shiva and his fan club including certain mods can go do unmentionable acts to themselves.

[JLB]

and what have you worked so hard for?????? sending young men to die in IRAQ for nothing yes thats something you have worked hard for lol

Iraq is going to IRAN on a silver platter and you can do nothing to stop it.

Why do you use lol when attempting to be serious?
You might be right about Iraq.
I don't think you actually have any idea where I stand.
You act happy about Iraq the silver platter you can't do nothing about it statement what's your point?