connorin's Comments (70)
New TIME Cover on Glenn Beck Ignores Facts, and Worse
Commented Sep 22, 2009 at 13:23:57 in Media
“try google”
New TIME Cover on Glenn Beck Ignores Facts, and Worse
Commented Sep 18, 2009 at 10:01:13 in Media
“Gee,facts are facts...re ally? Beck had proof on everything he said about Jones and yet you guys simply said it was hate and smears. Nat Geo and Popular Mechanics have thoroughly debunked the claims of 9/11 truthers with facts and yet a good third of the left believe in the 9/11 turther movement. I believe it was Big Ed who said on his show that he never saw any Bush/Hitler references at lefty protests during the previous administration, but simply go into Google image search and type Bush Hitler and viola tons of pics pop up.
Until you can appreciate that fatcs don't always or only back up lefty claims, I suggest you sit at the kiddie table.”
Until you can appreciate that fatcs don't always or only back up lefty claims, I suggest you sit at the kiddie table.”
fabucat replied on Sep 20, 2009 at 22:55:44
“Oh really? Did Beck ever back up his claim that Van Jones was a convicted felon? (crickets chirping). Nope, I didn't think so. That's a claim that we liberals call a "lie."”
swimbiker replied on Sep 19, 2009 at 16:33:37
“Van Jones said he believed in the conspiracy once but no longer believes in it. Are you saying that you don't accept that fact? To say that Van Jones in 2009 espouses something that he has renounced IS a smear. That's what a smear is!
No, a good third of the left do not believe in the Truther Movement. That is simply something you made up. If you want to sit at the adult table, you have got to stop making stuff up to make your statements sound better. Or provide proof....”
No, a good third of the left do not believe in the Truther Movement. That is simply something you made up. If you want to sit at the adult table, you have got to stop making stuff up to make your statements sound better. Or provide proof....”
Eykis replied on Sep 18, 2009 at 11:41:36
“Beckanoia LIES and DISTORTS every time he opens his mouth.
Yesterday, when making fun of Pelosi's admonishment regarding violence in the late 70s, Beckanoia used the Jim Jones Guyana Massacre (Jones was from SF) rather than mention the GAY Harvey Milk and SF Mayor Massacre.
BTW, for all you fools who use the kool-aid references: it DISRESPECTS the innocents MURDERED by Jim Jones, so STOP IT.”
Yesterday, when making fun of Pelosi's admonishment regarding violence in the late 70s, Beckanoia used the Jim Jones Guyana Massacre (Jones was from SF) rather than mention the GAY Harvey Milk and SF Mayor Massacre.
BTW, for all you fools who use the kool-aid references: it DISRESPECTS the innocents MURDERED by Jim Jones, so STOP IT.”
kathy001 replied on Sep 18, 2009 at 11:30:12
“Facts that are twisted or taken out of context are no longer facts. Facts that initially had no sinister meaning, that are deliberately "interpreted" to be sinister and frightening are no longer facts.”
Limbaugh Yells "Nazi" (And The Press Yawns)
Commented Aug 11, 2009 at 11:44:45 in Media
“Dems call anything associated with the previous administration Nazi and fascist and its OK...repub licans say it about this admin and it is evil incarnate and must be stopped... it is an interesting psychological world you live in”
MikeDu replied on Aug 11, 2009 at 12:49:48
“"Dems call anything associated with the previous administration Nazi and fascist and its OK."
The comparison didn't spring from thin air. You're disregarding out the FACT of Bush's systematic torturing of prisoners, his wholesale domestic spying and stripping American of civil liberties, his contempt for the constitution, the million innocent dead in Iraq, imprisonment without charge or access to councel, his jingoistic hyper-nationalism. Any REASONABLE person whould associate such policies wish fascism. Why don't you?”
The comparison didn't spring from thin air. You're disregarding out the FACT of Bush's systematic torturing of prisoners, his wholesale domestic spying and stripping American of civil liberties, his contempt for the constitution, the million innocent dead in Iraq, imprisonment without charge or access to councel, his jingoistic hyper-nationalism. Any REASONABLE person whould associate such policies wish fascism. Why don't you?”
omahajim replied on Aug 11, 2009 at 12:00:34
“yep. and you lost in 2008. big time. elections have consequences. the republicans are so busy trying to keep the former administration out of prison that they dont get anything done. that and the fact that they are racists does not do much for their chances in 2010.
best of luck in the deep south. stay there.”
best of luck in the deep south. stay there.”
captainkona replied on Aug 11, 2009 at 11:50:07
“It's called reality. They were Fascists, Obama is not.
Simple as that.”
Simple as that.”
How Much More Pathetic Can the Washington Post Get? Sarah Palin
Commented Jul 14, 2009 at 16:02:41 in Media
“Said those that question not "the ONE"”
How Much More Pathetic Can the Washington Post Get? Sarah Palin
Commented Jul 14, 2009 at 16:02:05 in Media
“as compared to Barack um ah well uh Obama without his prized teleprompter”
boobarella replied on Jul 14, 2009 at 16:21:02
“How do you know he didnt write whats on the teleprompter? No matter what you say you know as well as I that Pres Obama is an educated, well spoken man.”
portwes replied on Jul 14, 2009 at 16:07:29
“A teleprompter does not equate to ghostwriter, dumbo. I'm pretty sure the editor of Harvard Law Review and professor of Constitutional Law can write his own speeches, and may need a teleprompter unless he committed the whole thing to memory. Unlike Palin, who rambles on for 15 minutes without using a single period, because she has no idea what constitutes a sentence!”
How Much More Pathetic Can the Washington Post Get? Sarah Palin
Commented Jul 14, 2009 at 15:58:12 in Media
“Except those that have gone back to kill more”
FirstBiteBooks replied on Jul 14, 2009 at 17:56:35
“You mean the ones who were hired by Cheney as part of the assassination ring?”
How Much More Pathetic Can the Washington Post Get? Sarah Palin
Commented Jul 14, 2009 at 15:57:32 in Media
“and you scare us, thinking that O and Teddy, and Harry and Nancy have all of the answers for all of us great unwashed and feel it is best to rush through all this legislation without reading it of course before the American public sees exactly what it is doing to the economy”
How Much More Pathetic Can the Washington Post Get? Sarah Palin
Commented Jul 14, 2009 at 15:54:17 in Media
“Where does Art get the authority to write about it?”
How Much More Pathetic Can the Washington Post Get? Sarah Palin
Commented Jul 14, 2009 at 15:52:39 in Media
“But its OK for the guy who thinks there are 53 states become president and try to impose these economy killing laws?”
elr50 replied on Jul 14, 2009 at 17:04:39
“And just what guy are you talking about? It sure isn't Obama. Check your facts and check your brain.”
Pinchy replied on Jul 14, 2009 at 16:07:51
“Or for a guy who says tornados and Tsunamis are the result of Billy Bob driving his SUV to the local Texas BBQ burger joint.”
CTtransplant replied on Jul 14, 2009 at 15:57:25
“Please re-check your 'facts...”
David Letterman Apology Redux: Shame on Dave for Buckling Under to Palin's Lies
Commented Jun 16, 2009 at 13:24:53 in Media
“Once again, all of you seem to blame Palin for this...why ? She came to NY to attend a function and enjoy herself with her 14 yr old daughter. Did she ask for Dave to refer to her as "slutty"? Did she ask for a sexual reference to be made about anyone in her family much less the 14 yr old that was in attendance at the specified game?”
KayJay90 replied on Jun 17, 2009 at 18:41:09
“"Did she ask for a sexual reference to be made about anyone in her family much less the 14 yr old that was in attendance at the specified game?"
Three-part answer: 1) By parading the pregnant teen daughter in front of the nation at the convention, then allowing the same teen post-delivery daughter to interview with Greta V-S saying abstinence doesn't work, then angling for a Candies abstinence-only promotion tour for the same daughter now a teen mother...I 'd say Yes.
2) Unfortunately for Sarah Palin, there is no visual evidence that Willow Palin was in the photo ops before the Yankee game on Sunday June 7th (VERY unusual for Sarah Palin to hide her offspring from cameras), or visual evidence that she was with her parents and the Giulianis during the game (hard to believe that Sarah Palin would allow the 14 year old to sit elsewhere or to roam freely throughout the ballpark -- especially considering the milieu of David Letterman's joke).
3) There were absolutely NO Palins in the ballpark during the time frame of David Letterman's joke -- the 7th inning stretch. They (whether it was only 2 Palins, or 3) left the ballpark during the 6th inning.
I think Sarah Palin lied about Willow Palin even being at the ballgame, as she lies about so many other things.”
Three-part answer: 1) By parading the pregnant teen daughter in front of the nation at the convention, then allowing the same teen post-delivery daughter to interview with Greta V-S saying abstinence doesn't work, then angling for a Candies abstinence-only promotion tour for the same daughter now a teen mother...I
2) Unfortunately for Sarah Palin, there is no visual evidence that Willow Palin was in the photo ops before the Yankee game on Sunday June 7th (VERY unusual for Sarah Palin to hide her offspring from cameras), or visual evidence that she was with her parents and the Giulianis during the game (hard to believe that Sarah Palin would allow the 14 year old to sit elsewhere or to roam freely throughout the ballpark -- especially considering the milieu of David Letterman's joke).
3) There were absolutely NO Palins in the ballpark during the time frame of David Letterman's joke -- the 7th inning stretch. They (whether it was only 2 Palins, or 3) left the ballpark during the 6th inning.
I think Sarah Palin lied about Willow Palin even being at the ballgame, as she lies about so many other things.”
KayJay90 replied on Jun 17, 2009 at 18:40:40
“"Did she ask for Dave to refer to her as 'slutty'? "
At the Autism Walk speech she wore cork-soled 3" high heeled open toe sandals and red polish with little stars painted on her toenails.. ..and a miniskirt and sweatshirt jacket.... and hair extensions.
Maybe.....”
At the Autism Walk speech she wore cork-soled 3" high heeled open toe sandals and red polish with little stars painted on her toenails..
Maybe.....”
laocoon replied on Jun 16, 2009 at 15:52:13
“DID ANY OF US ASK HER TO RUN AND MAKE THE COMMENTS SHE MADE. DID ANYONE ASK HER TO CLAIM OBAMA WAS A TERRORIST. DID I ASK HER TO SAY I WAS NOT A REAL AMERICAN? IF YOU CAN CRITICIZE LETTERMAN WHY CANT WE ALL CRITICIZE HER.”
punkindmb replied on Jun 16, 2009 at 14:17:53
“Of course she didn't ask for it; that would be unseemly, even for a media hog like her. But she sure did flog that horse., when the getting got good. I'm sure she'll pepper her statements with references to Letterman, much like gop like to pepper in 9-11. Now if only she can kill two birds with one stone and combine the two....hmm m”
kathy001 replied on Jun 16, 2009 at 14:01:43
“Yes, to all of the above. Palin continually puts herself in the spotlight and she keeps her family in the spotlight. She apparently craves publicity like I crave chocolate. When you are in the public eye that much and when you do the things that Palin does for publicity, you then become the target of comedians. That's just the way it is. Ask anyone who's ever been lampooned by a comedian.”
petera63 replied on Jun 16, 2009 at 13:47:19
“You cannot seriously expect reasonable answers to your reasonable questions. .. not on this site.”
mediamarv replied on Jun 16, 2009 at 13:41:50
“The answer to your questions is a resounding "yes" because she chose to be a public figure and paraded her family over and over, thus making them part of the campaign and her story.
I saw the Letterman show and it was obvious what the joke was about. Palin is using her family once again to stay in the spotlight for purely political purposes. She has no respect for her family, as her actions have shown. She is still under the McCain campaign delusion that she matters.
She is the only mother that I know of who would knowingly put her family second to her political obsession.”
I saw the Letterman show and it was obvious what the joke was about. Palin is using her family once again to stay in the spotlight for purely political purposes. She has no respect for her family, as her actions have shown. She is still under the McCain campaign delusion that she matters.
She is the only mother that I know of who would knowingly put her family second to her political obsession.”
Should Letterman Be Fired for a Joke?
Commented Jun 15, 2009 at 15:27:44 in Media
“George,
I am a Republican and have no desire for Dave to be fired. It was tasteless and ugly and he should have just taken the lump for his remark that he probably thought was toward Bristol, then discovered to (I hope) his horror that the one in attendence was the 14 year old Willow.
My biggest problem with the situation is that there was more outrage and hollering going on from the left, women's groups, and the MSM when Bill O'Reilly laughingly compared Helen Thomas to the Wicked Witch from the Wizaed of Oz fame.
Those on the left would seem far less contrived in their responses if they even equated their outrage to the two situations even though the crack about Ms Thomas did not involve a minor and what would be, bu definition, a criminal act.”
I am a Republican and have no desire for Dave to be fired. It was tasteless and ugly and he should have just taken the lump for his remark that he probably thought was toward Bristol, then discovered to (I hope) his horror that the one in attendence was the 14 year old Willow.
My biggest problem with the situation is that there was more outrage and hollering going on from the left, women's groups, and the MSM when Bill O'Reilly laughingly compared Helen Thomas to the Wicked Witch from the Wizaed of Oz fame.
Those on the left would seem far less contrived in their responses if they even equated their outrage to the two situations even though the crack about Ms Thomas did not involve a minor and what would be, bu definition, a criminal act.”
franksters replied on Jun 15, 2009 at 16:27:54
“Dear Connorin, I beg to differ. Many of us on the 'left' as you say, are not pleased with Mr. Letterman's joke albeit that it was intended to be directed about Bristol, who is not a minor, and who obviously is not a virgin. Sarah Palin is causing the uproar here and purposely twisting around a bad joke delivered by a late-night comedian to her gain. The real uproar, should have been over Sarah's insistence upon promoting violence during her campaign rallies in the fall, and her references to our President as a terrorist. That behavior is much more shameful and dangerous than the poor remark of a late-night comedian. Think about that. Where was YOUR outrage then? And please, oh, please convince Sarah to go away.”
Mercury, Like the Planet, Gets Around
Commented Apr 22, 2009 at 12:57:50 in Green
“Yep, you are right! The companies were the ones that pushed and pushed for the new CFL lights to replace the others. They pushed Congress to ban the old incandesant bulbs.
As far as emotion trumping reason, you have your parties backward. Republicans are for an all of the above choice for energy so that things can evolve to different forms of energy production as well as allieviating the need for as much foreign sources of energy.
If we follow the emotions as dems do, we will tumble down the same road Europe is tripping down. Their environmental regulations based on the same international treaty that Congress refused to approve in the 90's have led to nothing but economic hardship.”
As far as emotion trumping reason, you have your parties backward. Republicans are for an all of the above choice for energy so that things can evolve to different forms of energy production as well as allieviating the need for as much foreign sources of energy.
If we follow the emotions as dems do, we will tumble down the same road Europe is tripping down. Their environmental regulations based on the same international treaty that Congress refused to approve in the 90's have led to nothing but economic hardship.”
Mercury, Like the Planet, Gets Around
Commented Apr 22, 2009 at 11:07:49 in Green
“http://www .youtube.c om/watch?v =e-LOtKIIK cg
A republican in Congress (Ted Poe) mocked these environmentally endorsed bulbs in a speech last year. Thanks green earthers for working to ban regular light bulbs in exchange for these good for us light bulbs! Nice to see how behind the curve you guys really are.”
A republican in Congress (Ted Poe) mocked these environmentally endorsed bulbs in a speech last year. Thanks green earthers for working to ban regular light bulbs in exchange for these good for us light bulbs! Nice to see how behind the curve you guys really are.”
GallopingCat replied on Apr 22, 2009 at 11:53:46
“1. Was it the "green earthers" fault that companies replaced one kind of light bulb with another?
2. Do Republicans care about the environment?
The answer to the first is obviously no. But companies often deceive the public to sell a product.
The answer to the second is obviously maybe. But emotion seems to trump reason with Republicans these days. You would think that the lessons learned with cost savings regarding recycling in business would open them up to the massive amount of profit that greening can mean to America.
Although Poe is right to make fun of the ludicrous dangers of CFLs, he seems oblivious to the result of 300 million people doing whatever they want. If there was no energy problems, fine. But you can bet that people will complain bitterly if we go back to the brown outs of just a few years ago.
That's the cycle of regulation in America:
1. The government asks people to voluntarily conserve energy.
2. Americans won't do it.
3. Brownouts, fuel shortages, etc.
4. Americans complain because of energy shortages.
4. The government forces Americans to conserve energy by passing laws.
5. Americans complain because their choices are limited.
Americans do have a choice regardless of Mr. Poe says. They just refuse to make the right ones.”
2. Do Republicans care about the environment?
The answer to the first is obviously no. But companies often deceive the public to sell a product.
The answer to the second is obviously maybe. But emotion seems to trump reason with Republicans these days. You would think that the lessons learned with cost savings regarding recycling in business would open them up to the massive amount of profit that greening can mean to America.
Although Poe is right to make fun of the ludicrous dangers of CFLs, he seems oblivious to the result of 300 million people doing whatever they want. If there was no energy problems, fine. But you can bet that people will complain bitterly if we go back to the brown outs of just a few years ago.
That's the cycle of regulation in America:
1. The government asks people to voluntarily conserve energy.
2. Americans won't do it.
3. Brownouts, fuel shortages, etc.
4. Americans complain because of energy shortages.
4. The government forces Americans to conserve energy by passing laws.
5. Americans complain because their choices are limited.
Americans do have a choice regardless of Mr. Poe says. They just refuse to make the right ones.”
Why I Called Justice Scalia A Homophobe
Commented Mar 31, 2009 at 12:31:04 in Politics
“Its noce to have a Judicial and Constitutional scholar like you on this site.”
Why I Called Justice Scalia A Homophobe
Commented Mar 30, 2009 at 13:20:11 in Politics
“If my "lies" have been disproven. ..show it. Apparently you cannot or won't, or are you simply afraid to try?”
Corporate Sponsors Won't Stand for Bill O'Reilly's Ambush Journalism
Commented Mar 27, 2009 at 15:43:47 in Media
“Really?
I have seen a number of your posts lately and you are the one you seems to continually spew hatred, not I. My post shows two quotes from the site provided and a question that can hardly be considered controversial or incorrect. For this you resort to name calling, always a great debate tactic. Show how any part of the above post emits any sense of hate.
Good Luck”
I have seen a number of your posts lately and you are the one you seems to continually spew hatred, not I. My post shows two quotes from the site provided and a question that can hardly be considered controversial or incorrect. For this you resort to name calling, always a great debate tactic. Show how any part of the above post emits any sense of hate.
Good Luck”
realpolitic replied on Mar 29, 2009 at 22:03:57
“Doesn't O'Reilly ever give you the night off?”
Corporate Sponsors Won't Stand for Bill O'Reilly's Ambush Journalism
Commented Mar 27, 2009 at 13:22:20 in Media
“from the thinksocialist link you provided:
"Schirmer — speaking for himself and not on behalf of Ford..."
Ohhhhh...d o you really think that at big corporations across America you can't find a wide range of views on any subject much less this one?
Also from the site:
UpdateMark Truby, Director of Corporate Communications at Ford Motor Company, tells ThinkProgress that Shirmer’s “comments don’t represent the view of Ford Motor Company."”
"Schirmer — speaking for himself and not on behalf of Ford..."
Ohhhhh...d
Also from the site:
UpdateMark Truby, Director of Corporate Communications at Ford Motor Company, tells ThinkProgress that Shirmer’s “comments don’t represent the view of Ford Motor Company."”
realpolitic replied on Mar 29, 2009 at 22:04:51
“If O'Reilly loses a major advertiser each times he stalks someone, I think Jesse Waters will soon have to find a real job!”
marignymitch replied on Mar 27, 2009 at 15:03:25
“That settles that. Ford endorses Orally's embuses.”
cinesimon replied on Mar 27, 2009 at 14:54:55
“You poor little person.
How much hate you emit, and how obvious it is that you're deflecting your own self hatred issues.”
How much hate you emit, and how obvious it is that you're deflecting your own self hatred issues.”
Why I Called Justice Scalia A Homophobe
Commented Mar 27, 2009 at 13:05:31 in Politics
“Oh, BTW...than k for not disagreeing with me on the Barney is incompetent thing!”
Why I Called Justice Scalia A Homophobe
Commented Mar 27, 2009 at 13:04:40 in Politics
“So you say name calling is ok if bourne out by the facts, then you call me a name while admitting you don't know me. So you admit your name calling is NOT ok. BTW have you tried to research why Scalia wrote what he did?”
Why I Called Justice Scalia A Homophobe
Commented Mar 27, 2009 at 12:58:35 in Politics
“See my response to lexicon... .
once again
prove me wrong”
once again
prove me wrong”
palmseast replied on Mar 28, 2009 at 18:16:31
“No need. Your lies have already been disproven. Just repeating a lie will never make it fact, something American conservatives in their innate dishonesty never learn.”
Why I Called Justice Scalia A Homophobe
Commented Mar 27, 2009 at 12:58:05 in Politics
“Over 8 years he did finally fill a number of positions, however, PACKED is an overstatment by any strech of the imagination. But then again the idea that the dems blocked only "A HANDFUL" is as well.
As I keep begging many posters here, DO SOME RESEARCH ELSEWHERE THAN BLUE BLOGS!
Your gift for exaggeration is in obvious evidence as well to your claims on Clinton. Replace Clinton with Bush in that statement and you are far more accurate.. .including the litmus test part!
My memory is fine as are my researching skills, you need to work on yours just a tad and strive for a bit more accuracy in place of rhetoric.”
As I keep begging many posters here, DO SOME RESEARCH ELSEWHERE THAN BLUE BLOGS!
Your gift for exaggeration is in obvious evidence as well to your claims on Clinton. Replace Clinton with Bush in that statement and you are far more accurate..
My memory is fine as are my researching skills, you need to work on yours just a tad and strive for a bit more accuracy in place of rhetoric.”
Why I Called Justice Scalia A Homophobe
Commented Mar 27, 2009 at 09:02:29 in Politics
“WHAT?????
Do you have any idea what Bush went thru in trying to appoint judges during his administration? Even when dems were in the minority, they impeded the proceedings because the republicans did not have a super majority. Numerous appointees finally just took their names out of consideration because of the sheer length of time things were delayed.
On the other hand, republicans during the current administration have sometimes spoken out sharply, but they have still approved with flying colors such ethically challenged individuals as Geithner, Holder, and Clinton. The republicans have not voted down any appointment so far, but they have brought attention to some of the skeletons in the closets of some of the appointees who then dropped out of their own accord.
Once again, cinesimon, learn the facts not just the blue blog rhetoric.”
Do you have any idea what Bush went thru in trying to appoint judges during his administration? Even when dems were in the minority, they impeded the proceedings because the republicans did not have a super majority. Numerous appointees finally just took their names out of consideration because of the sheer length of time things were delayed.
On the other hand, republicans during the current administration have sometimes spoken out sharply, but they have still approved with flying colors such ethically challenged individuals as Geithner, Holder, and Clinton. The republicans have not voted down any appointment so far, but they have brought attention to some of the skeletons in the closets of some of the appointees who then dropped out of their own accord.
Once again, cinesimon, learn the facts not just the blue blog rhetoric.”
the-lexicon replied on Mar 27, 2009 at 11:06:14
“It is you who is walking on thin air here!
Bush PACKED the lower courts with idealogue judges. He appointed SCORES of judges that were approved.
The democrats blocked A HANDFUL of appointees to circuit benches.
A HANDFUL.
The republican congress during Clinton's presidency left HUGE SWATHS of the federal judiciary unfilled. They rejected many many qualified names, but, oh, god forbid that any LITMUS TEST should be applied!
you have selctive, situational memory.
lexicon”
Bush PACKED the lower courts with idealogue judges. He appointed SCORES of judges that were approved.
The democrats blocked A HANDFUL of appointees to circuit benches.
A HANDFUL.
The republican congress during Clinton's presidency left HUGE SWATHS of the federal judiciary unfilled. They rejected many many qualified names, but, oh, god forbid that any LITMUS TEST should be applied!
you have selctive, situational memory.
lexicon”
cinesimon replied on Mar 27, 2009 at 10:56:04
“Selective memory - the right wing theme.”
Why I Called Justice Scalia A Homophobe
Commented Mar 27, 2009 at 08:53:30 in Politics
“Barney,
I could care less that you, a supposedly dignified member of Congress, stoop to name calling (especially the same week you tell others to grow up). I do care that you are apparently incompetent at your job. For the good of the nation, RESIGN.”
I could care less that you, a supposedly dignified member of Congress, stoop to name calling (especially the same week you tell others to grow up). I do care that you are apparently incompetent at your job. For the good of the nation, RESIGN.”
Skott1 replied on Mar 27, 2009 at 13:30:07
“Come on . . . the man just gave an intelligent and scholarly essay on his beliefs and all you can come away with is that he conducted some schoolyard type name calling?”
teddyj replied on Mar 27, 2009 at 10:12:19
“It's not name calling if it's born out by the facts. Rep. Frank goes to great lengths to demonstrate exactly why he called Justice Scalia a homophobe. I can think of few things more dignified than for standing up for the minority knowing that he will face criticism from dolts (see, name calling - I don't actually know you) like you.”
eden4barack08 replied on Mar 27, 2009 at 09:37:48
“ho·mo·pho·bia
Pronunciation:
ˌhō-mə-ˈfō-bē-ə
Function:
noun
Date:
1969
: irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals
How is that "name calling"?”
Pronunciation:
ˌhō-mə-ˈfō-bē-ə
Function:
noun
Date:
1969
: irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals
How is that "name calling"?”
Why I Called Justice Scalia A Homophobe
Commented Mar 26, 2009 at 13:49:09 in Politics
“FYI, the Bill of Rights are the FIRST TEN amendments to the US Constitution. The other poster mentioned the 13th and the 19th.”
Why I Called Justice Scalia A Homophobe
Commented Mar 26, 2009 at 13:46:50 in Politics
“Once again changing the topic of discussion, huh?
From what I read on Rush's operation CHAOS, it accomplished very much what he and his listeners wanted. He wanted the dems to attack each other for as long as possible. So how is that against their own self interest?
Also, in many republican primaries, numerous dems voted for McCain so that whomever the dems sent, they would be up against the least conservative republican possible. Do you have any righteous indignation against those dems as well?”
From what I read on Rush's operation CHAOS, it accomplished very much what he and his listeners wanted. He wanted the dems to attack each other for as long as possible. So how is that against their own self interest?
Also, in many republican primaries, numerous dems voted for McCain so that whomever the dems sent, they would be up against the least conservative republican possible. Do you have any righteous indignation against those dems as well?”


