Lots to admire in them reformin' mavericks.....

On Oct 11, 8:20*am, JR wrote:
Peaceful Bill wrote:
JR wrote:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27105917/

- JR

MSNBC!!??!!??!

ROTFLMAO. *ZERO credibility.

OK. How 'bout:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/11/us...rooper.html?hp

Oh, no. Of course not. *NYT, only the U.S.'s newspaper of record,
recognized globally as such, and therefore, of course, for the
red-blooded Murcan illiterate, of ZERO credibity,

so.....

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10...sed-power-firi...

Fox News. *You brown-shirts like that 'un, no?

Spin THAT, Sparky.

- JR

The trouble is you all try to "spin" something or other. Extremely
naive to expect that personal motivation would be completely ignored
by somebody in a situation like that. More or less everybody would do
the same thing.

There is no doubt that the trooper was dangerous and needed firing,
there was no doubt that Monegan did not want to do it, and was
pressured into it.

Does not say much about Palin though, except that she is loyal to her
family.

"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...
Whatyathink about Biden being such a cheap skate? Don't hear much
about that in the press do ya?

Dave


because it isn't an accurate report. I suspect that 'report' you cite
doesn't include Catholic Charities.
Tom
p.s. Why is this any excuse for Palin's abuse of power??

"Peaceful Bill" wrote in message
...
JR wrote:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27105917/

- JR

MSNBC!!??!!??!

ROTFLMAO. ZERO credibility.

simmer down, Bill. They were reporting a publicly filed
document. Questioning their credibility under such conditions make you look
like an ideologically driven idiot. Which, apparently, you seem determined
to be.
Tom

On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 02:50:10 -0400, JR wrote:

So I'm not misunderstood, when I say "scoundrels", the Marines
are definitely excluded.

Uh, to us sailors they are. d;o)

Eat well.

Dave

On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 11:31:40 GMT, "Tom Littleton"
wrote:

p.s. Why is this any excuse for Palin's abuse of power??

It wasn't and isn't an excuse for Palin's actions. If she did wrong,
she should pay for it. If Obama does wrong, he too should pay for it.
His connection with Acorn (talk about voting fraud!) is played up very
little in the press, as is his connection with Ayers and others.

Dave

"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...
His connection with Acorn (talk about voting fraud!) is played up very
little in the press, as is his connection with Ayers and others.

Dave


I would disagree on both counts, David. The ACORN thing is being played up
in both the print and TV. My sense is that they are a loose cannon, with
their own agenda(trying to curry favor with the likely winning candidate),
as those actions in NO way resemble the registration drives I've been
involved in all year. As for the
Ayers thing, it was already trotted out, and vetted during the Hillary
primary battle. That dog just doesn't really hunt, as it has been proven
clearly that there is little in the way of a tangible political connection
or obligation between Obama and Ayers. Hell, if we start tarring people over
every questionable character they ever crossed paths with, or shared a
dinner with, the pool of viable candidates would be limited to nuns and
maybe a third of all seminary studentsg
Tom

On Oct 11, 2:53*pm, Dave LaCourse wrote:
On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 11:31:40 GMT, "Tom Littleton"
wrote:

p.s. Why is this any excuse for Palin's abuse of power??

It wasn't and isn't an excuse for Palin's actions. *If she did wrong,
she should pay for it. *If Obama does wrong, he too should pay for it.
His connection with Acorn (talk about voting fraud!) is played up very
little in the press, as is his connection with Ayers and others.

Dave

Just as a matter of mild interest, what´s your excuse for abusing this
group, and freedom of speech, to abuse and defame others? What do you
imagine you have to gain from it? Do you even know why you did it?

Of course, it is invariably a mistake to attribute something to evil
which may be just as easily explained by stupidity, and I suppose that
is the reason here. You certainly are stupid LaCourse, there can be no
doubt of that.

You did wrong LaCourse, very wrong. Do you think you ought to be made
to pay for it?

On Oct 11, 3:03*pm, "Tom Littleton" wrote:
"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message

... His connection with Acorn (talk about voting fraud!) is played up very
little in the press, as is his connection with Ayers and others.

Dave

I would disagree on both counts, David. The ACORN thing is being played up
in both the print and TV. My sense is that they are a loose cannon, with
their own agenda(trying to curry favor with the likely winning candidate),
as those actions in NO way resemble the registration drives I've been
involved in all year. As for the
Ayers thing, it was already trotted out, and vetted during the Hillary
primary battle. That dog just doesn't really hunt, as it has been proven
clearly that there is little in the way of a tangible political connection
or obligation between Obama and Ayers. Hell, if we start tarring people over
every questionable character they ever crossed paths with, or shared a
dinner with, the pool of viable candidates would be limited to nuns and
maybe a third of all seminary studentsg
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Tom

As we all know perfectly well you nasty lying mother****er, you tar
people and lie about them for no other reason than that you happen to
feel like it.

What do you think ought to be done with a nasty stupid **** who does
something like that?

Hell, if we start tarring people over
every questionable character they ever crossed paths with, or shared a
dinner with, the pool of viable candidates would be limited to nuns and
maybe a third of all seminary studentsg
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Tom

I've already been told that my proposed run for Cass County Dog
Catcher won't fly 'cause I hang out here.
Frank Reid
(hell, they didn't even mention the attempted murder charge)

On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 13:03:25 GMT, "Tom Littleton"
wrote:

I would disagree on both counts, David. The ACORN thing is being played up
in both the print and TV. My sense is that they are a loose cannon, with
their own agenda(trying to curry favor with the likely winning candidate),
as those actions in NO way resemble the registration drives I've been
involved in all year.

Congress tried to slip them $500,000 in that bill that was rejected.
Who put *that* pork into the bill? I'm betting it wasn't a Republican
or a McCain supporter.