Republicans are tards

[Lucky... 0]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100321/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_protest

They are just little babies who whine and disrupt when they don't get thier way. For the US Reps to cheer and clap when an ahole disrupts a session is beyond words. Of course Joe "you lie" Wilson is a hero for his televised disruption of the presidents address to congress, so I expect little and am never really dissapointed.

This reinforces my opinion that the Republican mentality is merely that of a teenage boy; pathetic.

[pbwing 0]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm beginning to think you really don't like Republicans...

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm beginning to think you really don't like Republicans...

I'm on the fence

[rhaig 0]

yes, of course he hates them. But his choice of wording indicates either a rather unhealthy obsession of republican hatred, or he's trolling for kneejerk responses.

--
Rob

[thedude325 0]

Politicians are tards.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

yes, of course he hates them. But his choice of wording indicates either a rather unhealthy obsession of republican hatred, or he's trolling for kneejerk responses.

And your focus on my grammar rather than the substantive message that federal Republican politicians are rule-breaking when they don't get their way as a protocol of behavior shows the typical strawman-initiating Republican that I knew you were. Address the Republican House members and/or Joe Wilson. Oh, you don't wanna; precisely - your acquiesence is shouting your feelings.

[billvon 2,426]

>And your focus on my grammar rather than the substantive message that
> federal Republican politicians are rule-breaking when they don't get their
> way . . .

As are democrats. Neither side has a monopoly on dirty tricks.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

>And your focus on my grammar rather than the substantive message that
> federal Republican politicians are rule-breaking when they don't get their
> way . . .

As are democrats. Neither side has a monopoly on dirty tricks.

I wasn't really talking dirty tricks here and of course both use them, I can cite far more from the right tho. But here I'm talking disruption as part of the protocol of high-level political behavior. That's not a dirty trick, that's just immature and at that level inexcusable.

[loumeinhart 0]

Hate to blow out your candle Zimbo but I'm not the tard here. I'm a registered republican (for now) and was a teenage boy 10 years ago. So you twice called me "tard" which we all know is short for "REtard." I've seen some retards and I'm definately not a retard. I'm also too good looking to be retarded.

Maybe I'm a little Ritarded sometimes (a music term meant to slow down tempo), and there's nothing wrong with that.

[kallend 1,646]

Quote

>And your focus on my grammar rather than the substantive message that
> federal Republican politicians are rule-breaking when they don't get their
> way . . .

As are democrats. Neither side has a monopoly on dirty tricks.

True, but if you look the scorecard on, say, Snopes, Factcheck, etc. it appears that the GOP outscores the Dems by a hefty margin in the circulation of lies and half-truths.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Hate to blow out your candle Zimbo but I'm not the tard here.

If ya didn't recognoze my profile as levity/sarcasm/false, then......

Quote

I'm a registered republican (for now)...

So am I.

Quote

...and was a teenage boy 10 years ago.

That explains volumes.

Quote

So you twice called me "tard" which we all know is short for "REtard."

I never called you either, it was a generalization. But ya can't figure that out......

Quote

I've seen some retards and I'm definately not a retard.

What's that about takes one to know one? JK

Quote

I've seen some retards and I'm definately not a retard. I'm also too good looking to be retarded.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

The idea here was not to focus on the tard statement, but the fact that federal Republican politicians actually interrupt the congress and even the president in the most formal of sessions.

[billvon 2,426]

>True, but if you look the scorecard on, say, Snopes, Factcheck, etc. it
>appears that the GOP outscores the Dems by a hefty margin in the
>circulation of lies and half-truths.

Not lately. Whatever party is in power tends to be the ones doing the most deceiving for the simple reason that there are more of them (and deception is a trait of a small but significant number of politicians.)

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

>True, but if you look the scorecard on, say, Snopes, Factcheck, etc. it
>appears that the GOP outscores the Dems by a hefty margin in the
>circulation of lies and half-truths.

Not lately. Whatever party is in power tends to be the ones doing the most deceiving for the simple reason that there are more of them (and deception is a trait of a small but significant number of politicians.)

Regardless of the lie count, which would be impossible to score anyway, look at the types of lies and the depravity these lies rank.

Repubs:

- Nixon, Agnew = election scandal/evesdropping, tax evasion, bribery, etc

- Ford = took the VP/P role only after he promised to pardon Nixon, after Nixon pardoned Agnew.

- GWB = lied to congress about intel to go into a >1 trillion dollar war, 4200 lives and counting.

- Reagan = lied about Iran/Contra; trading arms for hostages.

- Libby and friends = lied about outing a fed agent, then was commuted on a 30 mo prison term.

- Clinton = lied about cumming all over a dress, leading to a stain that just wouldn't come out.


So I think the depth of these lies, regardless of the number which is not ascertainable, are clear that the Repugs are, well, repugnant.

[riddler 0]

Quote

True, but if you look the scorecard on, say, Snopes, Factcheck, etc. it appears that the GOP outscores the Dems by a hefty margin in the circulation of lies and half-truths.

Just means that Republicans were quicker to adopt the Internet than Democrats. The democrats are probably still having debates about whether this new fangled email thingy is a good way to go. Supportive democrats are trying to woo Hispanic representatives with promises of immigration reform in order to get them behind their spam campaign.

But judging by my mom, it seems clear to me that Republicans are more likely to believe the trash that circulates on the 'net.

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

True, but if you look the scorecard on, say, Snopes, Factcheck, etc. it appears that the GOP outscores the Dems by a hefty margin in the circulation of lies and half-truths.

Just means that Republicans were quicker to adopt the InternetS than Democrats. The democrats are probably still having debates about whether this new fangled email thingy is a good way to go. Supportive democrats are trying to woo Hispanic representatives with promises of immigration reform in order to get them behind their spam campaign.

But judging by my mom, it seems clear to me that Republicans are more likely to believe the trash that circulates on the 'net.

fIXED IT

[rhaig 0]

Quote

Quote

yes, of course he hates them. But his choice of wording indicates either a rather unhealthy obsession of republican hatred, or he's trolling for kneejerk responses.

And your focus on my grammar rather than the substantive message that federal Republican politicians are rule-breaking when they don't get their way as a protocol of behavior shows the typical strawman-initiating Republican that I knew you were. Address the Republican House members and/or Joe Wilson. Oh, you don't wanna; precisely - your acquiesence is shouting your feelings.

did I say grammar? No, I said "wording". Meaning (I may not have been clear enough for you) that the words you chose show there was emotion behind the message (real or fake depends on whether you're obsessed with hating republicans or you're trolling for kneejerks).

I've said before that spelling and grammar flames are the lowest form of argument. I was not being the grammar nazi. (though if you found a mistake and that's why you're being so defensive I don't care either)


politicians are tards.

--
Rob

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

yes, of course he hates them. But his choice of wording indicates either a rather unhealthy obsession of republican hatred, or he's trolling for kneejerk responses.

And your focus on my grammar rather than the substantive message that federal Republican politicians are rule-breaking when they don't get their way as a protocol of behavior shows the typical strawman-initiating Republican that I knew you were. Address the Republican House members and/or Joe Wilson. Oh, you don't wanna; precisely - your acquiesence is shouting your feelings.

did I say grammar? No, I said "wording". Meaning (I may not have been clear enough for you) that the words you chose show there was emotion behind the message (real or fake depends on whether you're obsessed with hating republicans or you're trolling for kneejerks).

I've said before that spelling and grammar flames are the lowest form of argument. I was not being the grammar nazi. (though if you found a mistake and that's why you're being so defensive I don't care either)


politicians are tards.

I wasn't grammar naziing. Care to comment on the behavior of the Republican Congressmen, or not so much? Show where Dems have been so brash.

[rhaig 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

yes, of course he hates them. But his choice of wording indicates either a rather unhealthy obsession of republican hatred, or he's trolling for kneejerk responses.

And your focus on my grammar rather than the substantive message that federal Republican politicians are rule-breaking when they don't get their way as a protocol of behavior shows the typical strawman-initiating Republican that I knew you were. Address the Republican House members and/or Joe Wilson. Oh, you don't wanna; precisely - your acquiesence is shouting your feelings.

did I say grammar? No, I said "wording". Meaning (I may not have been clear enough for you) that the words you chose show there was emotion behind the message (real or fake depends on whether you're obsessed with hating republicans or you're trolling for kneejerks).

I've said before that spelling and grammar flames are the lowest form of argument. I was not being the grammar nazi. (though if you found a mistake and that's why you're being so defensive I don't care either)


politicians are tards.

I wasn't grammar naziing. Care to comment on the behavior of the Republican Congressmen, or not so much? Show where Dems have been so brash.

I don't see how you think I was calling you a grammar nazi. perhaps you do have a comprehension problem as others have suggested.

all the congressmen are interested in is re-election. They quit caring what their constituents wanted a long time ago and do what they think will get them re-elected. I don't care which side they're on, they listen more to lobbyists than the people who elected them. They all will pull dirty tricks to get done what the media will publicize as good which will get them re-elected.

edit:
oh... I see where you thought I was calling you the grammar nazi.... I was meaning that you might have found an error in your grammar that you were being defensive about. Not that you found one in mine and that's what got your panties in a wad.

--
Rob

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

yes, of course he hates them. But his choice of wording indicates either a rather unhealthy obsession of republican hatred, or he's trolling for kneejerk responses.

And your focus on my grammar rather than the substantive message that federal Republican politicians are rule-breaking when they don't get their way as a protocol of behavior shows the typical strawman-initiating Republican that I knew you were. Address the Republican House members and/or Joe Wilson. Oh, you don't wanna; precisely - your acquiesence is shouting your feelings.

did I say grammar? No, I said "wording". Meaning (I may not have been clear enough for you) that the words you chose show there was emotion behind the message (real or fake depends on whether you're obsessed with hating republicans or you're trolling for kneejerks).

I've said before that spelling and grammar flames are the lowest form of argument. I was not being the grammar nazi. (though if you found a mistake and that's why you're being so defensive I don't care either)


politicians are tards.

I wasn't grammar naziing. Care to comment on the behavior of the Republican Congressmen, or not so much? Show where Dems have been so brash.

I don't see how you think I was calling you a grammar nazi. perhaps you do have a comprehension problem as others have suggested.

all the congressmen are interested in is re-election. They quit caring what their constituents wanted a long time ago and do what they think will get them re-elected. I don't care which side they're on, they listen more to lobbyists than the people who elected them. They all will pull dirty tricks to get done what the media will publicize as good which will get them re-elected.

edit:
oh... I see where you thought I was calling you the grammar nazi.... I was meaning that you might have found an error in your grammar that you were being defensive about. Not that you found one in mine and that's what got your panties in a wad.

Really? STRONG inuendo = quit accusation. In case you have a short memory: (though if you found a mistake and that's why you're being so defensive I don't care either)


Perhaps the stress of just having all that pseudo success the Republitards bragged about with their little Kennedy seat won bt the R's and what, 2 or 3 gov seats as being the ringing of the bell of the shift of change in US politics. See, as Michael Moore said, people are drawn to the Repubs not due to their policies, but due to their united focus, even if bulldogging. People are drawn to winners and the R's shove shit thru like tax cuts and the D's have just sat there like losers. Now the D's have grown balls and in that respect become like the R's; now you don't like it.

Apparently, as you errantly say, the Dem politicians have decided to risk reelection under your terms; most voted for the HC Bill.

Dude, drop the grammar Nazi BS; no one was being that.

As I keep asking: Care to comment on the behavior of the Republican Congressmen, or not so much? Show where Dems have been so brash.

I'm not talking dirty tricks, I'm talking about disruption, that is not a dirty trick, but total lack of respect for the process. I don't see you commenting on that.

[rhaig 0]

Quote

Really? STRONG inuendo = quit accusation. In case you have a short memory: (though if you found a mistake and that's why you're being so defensive I don't care either)


did you read my edit?? or did you just post in haste?

Quote

Now the D's have grown balls and in that respect become like the R's; now you don't like it.

you assume I don't like it. I like politicians with balls to stand up for their constituents. They think that's what they want, fine. I think many are doing it because it will play well in the press, and don't have any idea what their constituents think about the issue.

Quote

Dude, drop the grammar Nazi BS; no one was being that.

hey... you brought up grammar first. consider it dropped.
***

As I keep asking: Care to comment on the behavior of the Republican Congressmen, or not so much? Show where Dems have been so brash.

I'm not talking dirty tricks, I'm talking about disruption, that is not a dirty trick, but total lack of respect for the process. I don't see you commenting on that.

ok... you don't want me to talk down on all of the politicians at once in my answer.... I see the game.

How about this then. The disruptive republicans you're referring to will not get my vote in the next election. That's the strongest say I can have in the matter. Vote-em out. Process is there for a reason, and it should be followed.

I'll also say this. Any of the politicians supporting the dirty tricks played by either party are out only for themselves and have abandoned their constituents.

--
Rob

[FallingOsh 0]

Quote

Regardless of the lie count, which would be impossible to score anyway,

So it's admittedly impossible to score. You're just spewing personal opinion based on the unscorable.

--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.

[Anvilbrother 0]

Ooh were so sorry that someone disrupted your royal party, would you rather people keep their opinions to themselves? Sounds like another country where people fear to express their opinions for having their head removed. Your so bought by them...

Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along,