porn …

See Online Stream Videos At http://www.Bestvideosclip.com...

I have seen much worse here even to the point of members making inappropiate remarks about MM.

That does not make your comment any more appropriate or mature.

It’s your reputation and you have to live with

I’ll be glad to live with it.
If the majority of the other commentators and hosts here think maintaining a certain level of maturity and decorum on serious subjects is a bad thing, I’m willing to accept their disdain.

I’m so pleased that you don’t care if you get an apology for me calling your juvenile comments juvenile, because it isn’t going to happen.

You can have the last tirade if you wish.

LegendHasIt on May 5, 2007 at 2:18 AM

Well, you obviously haven’t comprehended my position concerning fred and THAT makes it reeeeal hard to take you seriously, especially when you start with the childish complaints about dicks and balls. If that bothers you, it’s time for you to shut the computer down and climb back under your bed because I have seen much worse here even to the point of members making inappropiate remarks about MM.

Don’t try to pretend that the issue I was refering to was the topic of this thread. You chose to insert yourself into a conversation and made an assine comment about my position on freddie and his groupies.

You were and still are WRONG. So, grow up and apologize, or don’t, because I really could not care less. It’s your reputation and you have to live with it.

See, this is the problem with getting in on an issue late. You obviously have not read most of what I have written, but i’ll give you a pass on your accusation as I know how these things work.
csdeven on May 4, 2007 at 11:15 PM

Gee, thanks for giving me a pass; I REALLY appreciate it….

Not only have I read most of what you have written (here) on the subject; it tends to be the same thing over and over again. So all we have to do is read one of your posts on the subject and we pretty much get your point on all of them.

And as far as getting in on the issue late… Scroll up and you will find which one of us ‘came late to the issue’.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, and I don’t disagree with many of your points. But that juvenile comment about the’meaning’ of the exclaimation point was way over the line IMO. That kind of thing is more typical over at the DU… Or amongst 7th graders.

That’s an easy one. MSNBC, of course.

MSNBC won by obfuscating all the conservatives’ defining issues, such as military preparedness, homeland defense, balancing the budget, public education and school choice, intellectual diversity on campus, individual integrity versus group identity, equal opportunity versus equal outcomes (racial quotas and reverse discrimination), thought control through hate crime legislation, Fairness Doctrine versus First Amendment, etc.

Yeah, we get it that you hate Fred Thompson and have nothing but disdain for anyone that thinks he might be a good candidate and leader.
LegendHasIt on May 4, 2007 at 7:48 PM

See, this is the problem with getting in on an issue late. You obviously have not read most of what I have written, but i’ll give you a pass on your accusation as I know how these things work.

The issue is that fred wins debates and is voted for in polls, when he isn’t even a candidate, is comical and I poke fun at the mindset.

What I notice is happeneing is these same people who are gaa-gaa over fred, get completely a$$broke when I point out the guy is not a viable candidate.

He is not, because he has not announced. Now, if someone would like to define fred as a good candidate to be a candidate for POTUS, then that would be accurate and a discussable point.

I can’t wait to see what he says tonight. I suspect more of the same ear tickling rhetoric, but he might susprise me and actually announce. Then of course, he can be compared to his already running compition.

Entelechy on May 4, 2007 at 6:53 PM

Which causes you to continue to repeat yourself. Isn’t THAT interesting?

Paul and McCain are completely out for me. I like Paul’s IRS bashing, but don’t agree with isolationism (see the years 1938-9 for details). McCain I can’t trust; he claims we need campaign finance reform, yet American Indians don’t have to comply and we all know where he doesn’t stand on illegal immigration. As someone said above, David Byrne! LOL

Giuliani was a bit tired with his “When I was mayor…” and the repetitive recitation of his stats. I don’t feel like his campaign moved forward last night.

I was pleasantly surprised by Thompson; he had some good lines in there and his welfare reform record is impressive. Hunter needs more airtime, he’s a good guy, I agree with him a often and liked his trade/China answer. Tancredo, although a little nervous and treated rudely by Chris “The Mouth” Matthews, still came off well; I don’t think we can underestimate the importance of curbing illegal immigration.

Brownback I thought was a bit of a social morality pusher, but I liked several other things he said, particularly about Social Security numbers meaning something. Gilmore was decent, I agree with his 9-12 week abortion window, as I am a little more middle of the road on that topic. I would give him a second look.

Huckabee I liked before the debate, having heard him on Hannity’s show, and I still liked him a lot after the debate. It was great to hear him advocate more power pushed down to the states, and “people are great not government”.

Romney was also a pleasant surprise. Unlike someone above, I got the impression that Romney is smart, and thinks well on his feet. He looked up to date on topics (particularly stem cell research), without seeming supercilious.

I was actually heartened by the debate. Despite Matthews trying to get them nattering at each other and failing misererably, and the inanity of several of the questions (“What don’t you like about America”? “Karl Rove” “Terri Schiavo”, etc etc) when serious pressing matters are afoot, I thought for the most part the candidates looked good. They didn’t seem like deer in klieg headlights, and their answers (except for a few comments by Paul and some of McCain’s grandstanding), were thoughtful. Giuliani looked stunned when asked the Sunni/Shia question, but did well.

I think the GOP lot, on the whole, is a heck of a lot better than what the Dems offer. Billary? You’re joking, right? Obama? Nothing here, move along. Edwards? The poster child for arrogance and class warfare. Kucinich? Peace this, you tool.

Fred! should throw his hat in quickly or just bow out. He’ll muddy the water too much with a late entry after the current lineup has already debated several times. It’s not good to be too much of a tease.

and

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/601ewvvj.asp

Are good editorials by Noonan and Barnes. Good point about constant comparisons about Reagan

The people that have a hard-on over fred have put the “!” after his name because it …….
csdeven on May 4, 2007 at 2:26 PM

That was really juvenile.
Yeah, we get it that you hate Fred Thompson and have nothing but disdain for anyone that thinks he might be a good candidate and leader.

Yeah, I wish he would declare oficially. But I also see the potential strategy in holding off too.

Can’t speak for anyone else, but I started using the exclamation point as a sort of a good natured parody, (even though I have high hopes for Fred!).

Even if Fred! might not be the perfect candidate, at least he will add some ‘spice’ to a rather uninspiring field where the overall best candidate from a policy standpoint hasn’t a ‘snowball’s chance’ (barring direct intervention by God).

Entelechy on May 4, 2007 at 6:53 PM

Merci

There are good reasons, and most of us know what they are, for him waiting until June. Do some research. Otherwise you sound like you’re just repeating yourself.

ron paul was a joke….he was the only one I truly thought was an idiot and didn’t belong up there.

What’s with the exclamation point at the end of Fred!?
Darnell Clayton on May 4, 2007 at 1:55 PM

The people that have a hard-on over fred have put the “!” after his name because it looks like a dick and balls.

And you’re right about fred. He was nowhere to be seen last night because he is still thinking about contemplating the idea of wondering if he might make a decision to consider the thought of running. These fred supporters are starting to remind me of the beatles groupies of the 60′s. Ripping their hair out, screaming and crying over someone who isn’t even a candidate. I waiting for them to start swarming his limo when he shows up to the forums where he gets to hit softball questions out of the park.

Once he actually announces his intention to run and has to actually face his compitition, he becomes viable, but until then, all he offers is so much ear tickling rhetoric that any non-candidate can espouse too.

What’s with the exclamation point at the end of Fred!?

That’s just how it’s spelled: Fred!

Watch C-Span tonight, at 11:30p.m. Peggy Noonan is right. I know it better from the Left’s reaction than from what Peggy writes.

He’s the man.
If he can’t do it…
Then Fred Thompson can Obama will be president.

Sorry, until Fred! (the fence sitter) announces he’s running, then we can assume that he is not really in it.

You can only be president if you first throw in your hat.

PS

What’s with the exclamation point at the end of Fred!? I mean, Yahoo! has this, and they are second to Google. Is he starting a trend?

They stood earnestly in a row, combed, primped and prepped, as Nancy Reagan gazed up at them with courteous interest. But behind the hopeful candidates, a dwarfing shadow loomed, a shadow almost palpable in its power to remind Republicans of the days when men were men and the party was united. His power is only increased by his absence. But enough about Fred Thompson.

I’m suspicious of Romney’s Mass. credentials too, but give credit where credit is due.

LegendHasIt on May 4, 2007 at 12:26 AM

I think it’s definitely healthy to do more research and be suspicious of someone that gets elected to a liberal state. However, California (the state that has given us Senators Boxer & Feinstein and SotH Pelosi) gave us Governor and then President Reagan.

So, getting elected by a liberal state shouldn’t be a deal killer. In fact, it could be a positive, when you consider that the country is split about 50/50. Nominating a candidate that has the ability to draw votes from independents and conservative Democrats is not at all a bad idea (as long as this ‘uniter’ is a conservative & not a wolf in Republican’s clothing).

when olberdouche, the pear-shaped orange premature ejaculator, had to come back and announce that guliani had indeed answered correctly, he looked as if he had just been served with an irs audit. he was pissed off and diissapointed.

but here’s the thing which i find most interesting. the difference between the two reactions demonstrates that olberman didn’t know the difference between sunni and shia.

I think that Matthews came off as an ass and I changed the channel the moment Oberdouche came on.

… sort of.