On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 13:44:36 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Oct 2012 11:38:30 -0400, "Don't smoke; eat well; exercise;
> die anyway" <EatDrink&BeMe...@AnywhereAnytime.net> wrote:
>>> Name ANY issue of RUmney---that he hasn't argued for (or against) from
>>> either side.
>>Still no citation from you or any of the other deranged moonbats.
> Even morons are expected to be able to listen, read, or watch Media
> and be able to understand something they're exposed to.
> Last 12 months, are you saying you've never heard Shitt Rumney argue
> for Repeal of HC reform, then adopt a position he wont---then actually
> say he would "keep some of it", then again get rid of it all?
> How about his positions on the 47%---doubling down in defending his
> statements---then backing off and saying he "was wrong"---then back
> again explainng why he was right?
> On and on and on
> Every fucking position has changed back and forth.
Where did he lie during the debate when he kicked Obama's ass?
On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 16:16:12 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Oct 2012 16:43:35 -0400, "Don't smoke; eat well; exercise;
> die anyway" <EatDrink&BeMe...@AnywhereAnytime.net> wrote:
>>On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 13:44:36 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>>> On Fri, 5 Oct 2012 11:38:30 -0400, "Don't smoke; eat well; exercise;
>>> die anyway" <EatDrink&BeMe...@AnywhereAnytime.net> wrote:
>>>>> Name ANY issue of RUmney---that he hasn't argued for (or against) from
>>>>> either side.
>>>>Still no citation from you or any of the other deranged moonbats.
>>> Even morons are expected to be able to listen, read, or watch Media
>>> and be able to understand something they're exposed to.
>>> Last 12 months, are you saying you've never heard Shitt Rumney argue
>>> for Repeal of HC reform, then adopt a position he wont---then actually
>>> say he would "keep some of it", then again get rid of it all?
>>> How about his positions on the 47%---doubling down in defending his
>>> statements---then backing off and saying he "was wrong"---then back
>>> again explainng why he was right?
>>> On and on and on
>>> Every fucking position has changed back and forth.
>>Where did he lie during the debate when he kicked Obama's ass?
> Most of his presentation was a reversal of his former political
> stances related to Health care, Taxes, and the economy.
If true, Odumbo would have called him on it.
> No one can (or should) engage in a totally absurd universe where the
> candidate simply has no set of principles he believes in.
As opposed to one who firmly believes in redistribution, flaunting the
Constitution, and apology tours.
Speaking of forked tongues, did ya get a load of Zippy's 2008 "post racial"
speech embracing all Americans vis-a-vis his 2007 ebonics-laced diatribe
lavishing praise on Rev'rum Wright and condemning "racist" America for
ignoring the blacks during Katrina?
die anyway" <EatDrink&BeMe...@AnywhereAnytime.net> wrote:
>On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 16:16:12 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>> On Fri, 5 Oct 2012 16:43:35 -0400, "Don't smoke; eat well; exercise;
>> die anyway" <EatDrink&BeMe...@AnywhereAnytime.net> wrote:
>>>On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 13:44:36 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 5 Oct 2012 11:38:30 -0400, "Don't smoke; eat well; exercise;
>>>> die anyway" <EatDrink&BeMe...@AnywhereAnytime.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Name ANY issue of RUmney---that he hasn't argued for (or against) from
>>>>>> either side.
>>>>>Still no citation from you or any of the other deranged moonbats.
>>>> Even morons are expected to be able to listen, read, or watch Media
>>>> and be able to understand something they're exposed to.
>>>> Last 12 months, are you saying you've never heard Shitt Rumney argue
>>>> for Repeal of HC reform, then adopt a position he wont---then actually
>>>> say he would "keep some of it", then again get rid of it all?
>>>> How about his positions on the 47%---doubling down in defending his
>>>> statements---then backing off and saying he "was wrong"---then back
>>>> again explainng why he was right?
>>>> On and on and on
>>>> Every fucking position has changed back and forth.
>>>Where did he lie during the debate when he kicked Obama's ass?
>> Most of his presentation was a reversal of his former political
>> stances related to Health care, Taxes, and the economy.
>If true, Odumbo would have called him on it.
>> No one can (or should) engage in a totally absurd universe where the
>> candidate simply has no set of principles he believes in.
>As opposed to one who firmly believes in redistribution, flaunting the
>Constitution, and apology tours.
>Speaking of forked tongues, did ya get a load of Zippy's 2008 "post racial"
>speech embracing all Americans vis-a-vis his 2007 ebonics-laced diatribe
>lavishing praise on Rev'rum Wright and condemning "racist" America for
>ignoring the blacks during Katrina?
Bingo
The true Obama was on 'stage' on Wednesday. John Senunu said it
perfectly.
>>On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 16:16:12 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>>> On Fri, 5 Oct 2012 16:43:35 -0400, "Don't smoke; eat well; exercise;
>>> die anyway" <EatDrink&BeMe...@AnywhereAnytime.net> wrote:
>>>>On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 13:44:36 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 5 Oct 2012 11:38:30 -0400, "Don't smoke; eat well; exercise;
>>>>> die anyway" <EatDrink&BeMe...@AnywhereAnytime.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> Name ANY issue of RUmney---that he hasn't argued for (or against) from
>>>>>>> either side.
>>>>>>Still no citation from you or any of the other deranged moonbats.
>>>>> Even morons are expected to be able to listen, read, or watch Media
>>>>> and be able to understand something they're exposed to.
>>>>> Last 12 months, are you saying you've never heard Shitt Rumney argue
>>>>> for Repeal of HC reform, then adopt a position he wont---then actually
>>>>> say he would "keep some of it", then again get rid of it all?
>>>>> How about his positions on the 47%---doubling down in defending his
>>>>> statements---then backing off and saying he "was wrong"---then back
>>>>> again explainng why he was right?
>>>>> On and on and on
>>>>> Every fucking position has changed back and forth.
>>>>Where did he lie during the debate when he kicked Obama's ass?
>>> Most of his presentation was a reversal of his former political
>>> stances related to Health care, Taxes, and the economy.
>>If true, Odumbo would have called him on it.
>>> No one can (or should) engage in a totally absurd universe where the
>>> candidate simply has no set of principles he believes in.
>>As opposed to one who firmly believes in redistribution, flaunting the
>>Constitution, and apology tours.
>>Speaking of forked tongues, did ya get a load of Zippy's 2008 "post racial"
>>speech embracing all Americans vis-a-vis his 2007 ebonics-laced diatribe
>>lavishing praise on Rev'rum Wright and condemning "racist" America for
>>ignoring the blacks during Katrina?
>Bingo
>The true Obama was on 'stage' on Wednesday. John Senunu said it
>perfectly.
CB
NOTE: My use of the word 'nigger' is of a character description. In no way do I use the word to disparage Black people. When I use "nigger" to describe low down and ugly people I refer to Webster's Dictionary before the age of Political Correctness, around 1978. Nigger described
low down and ugly people and that's how I use it with people who post 'vulgarity'. Look up that word.
On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 21:10:44 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Oct 2012 20:24:09 -0400, "Don't smoke; eat well; exercise;
> die anyway" <EatDrink&BeMe...@AnywhereAnytime.net> wrote:
>>> Most of his presentation was a reversal of his former political
>>> stances related to Health care, Taxes, and the economy.
>>If true, Odumbo would have called him on it.
> WHy?
> That would look stupid---to have a pissing match with a fucking liar
> and idiot.
The strategy of calling Odumbo a liar and stupid worked pretty well for
Mitt at the debate, eh.
> Had he done so---the yappers at faux would be accusing Obama of being
> vicious, confrontational, and anything else they could think up.
That has never mattered to Odumbo before. I mean he has always ignored
everything: the conservative media, the will of the people, the
Constitution ...
Know what I'm saying?
> Nope, the national news (REAL news) is tearing Schitt Rumney a new
> asshole and breaking down his behavior and lies without Obama having
> to do that.
Oh, you mean Salon, Mother Jones, and Vanity Fair. OK, good point.
On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 21:12:48 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 22:00:31 -0400, Obama's Legion of Flash Mobs @
>7/11.nig wrote:
>>>Speaking of forked tongues, did ya get a load of Zippy's 2008 "post racial"
>>>speech embracing all Americans vis-a-vis his 2007 ebonics-laced diatribe
>>>lavishing praise on Rev'rum Wright and condemning "racist" America for
>>>ignoring the blacks during Katrina?
>You mean that OLD, OLD nonsense that had nothing to do with anything?
>Charley Barta---Racist (and friend of PAJAMAFOOL) states:
>>To appose racial mixing is respecting race not putting it
>>down. People are different, in skin color and belief. We are not mutts like some
>>mono-culture. - CB
>"Fuck you nigger" - CB
>"To appose racial mixing is respecting race not putting it down. People are >different, in skin color and belief. We are not mutts like some mono-culture."
>- white supremacist CB
I keep hearing from democrat pundents that Romney lied. If this is
true then Obama won the debate by keeping silent. However, the
pundents are not specific about these lies. Is it possible that since
Romney didn't live down up to the image democrats paint him, this means Romney misrepresented himself? IOW the democrates represented him
one way and he failed to conform, so he lied.
On Oct 11, 9:16 am, "R.Dean" <R.D...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I keep hearing from democrat pundents that Romney lied. If this is
> true then Obama won the debate by keeping silent. However, the
> pundents are not specific about these lies.
The incredible amount of oblivion required to stay inside the GOP
bubble is amazing.
Every hour after the debate sees another blog with another _specific_
lie.
And where's the surprise, when they are all the standard official Fox
Noise Big Lies that we have all heard over and over again before?
Things like "ObamaCare added a trillion to the deficit..."
On Oct 11, 12:16 pm, "R.Dean" <R.D...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I keep hearing from democrat pundents that Romney lied. If this is
> true then Obama won the debate by keeping silent. However, the
> pundents are not specific about these lies. Is it possible that since
> Romney didn't live down up to the image democrats paint him, this means
> Romney misrepresented himself? IOW the democrates represented him
> one way and he failed to conform, so he lied.
Listening to liberals talk about lying is like getting cooking advice
from Jeff Dahmer.
On Oct 6, 3:39 am, "Don't smoke; eat well; exercise; die anyway"
<EatDrink&BeMe...@AnywhereAnytime.net> wrote:
> That has never mattered to Odumbo before. I mean he has always ignored
> everything: the conservative media, the will of the people, the
> Constitution ...
You wouldn't happen to have a _specific_ citation for Obama ignoring
this vaunted sacred Constitution, would you?
(And ignoring the "conservative media" is how he gets his job done.)
Or maybe you'd prefer Dubya reading teleprompters while stoned on
pills...
> On Oct 11, 9:16 am, "R.Dean" <R.D...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I keep hearing from democrat pundents that Romney lied. If this is
>> true then Obama won the debate by keeping silent. However, the
>> pundents are not specific about these lies.
> The incredible amount of oblivion required to stay inside the GOP
> bubble is amazing.
> Every hour after the debate sees another blog with another _specific_
> lie.
> And where's the surprise, when they are all the standard official Fox
> Noise Big Lies that we have all heard over and over again before?
> Things like "ObamaCare added a trillion to the deficit..."
Really? That's a lie? I surprised it's only a trillion.
