"Voidless Mass Of Soundbites"

[Guest]

That's the description that Joe Scarborough gave to the Romney campaign this morning.

That's a damning criticism from a member of the Tea Party before there was a Tea Party. Like a lot of us, Scarborough cries out for stronger leadership of the GOP, both in Congress as well as from the presidential candidate.

That's been my feeling for a long time. I'll vote for Romney, but I'm not happy about it. He does not appear to be the strong leader that this country is crying out for. He was the best from among the likes of Michelle Bachman, Herman Cain, Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich and the like, but that's not saying much.

As Scarborough said, Romney seems to be embracing the campaign slogan the media used to describe Walter Mondale's campaign in 1984....Dare to be cautious!

Where are our strong leaders, those skilled in politics? Compare the candidates we have to choose from to the likes of FDR, Harry Truman, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, even Richard Nixon. Those guys all had plans, principles, and were able to convince both the public and the Congress to follow them. They all didn't always have the political advantage, but they all achieved notable legislative and foreign policy successes. They said what they thought, made decisions they thought best for the country....and weren't afraid to take responsibility for them!

Where the heck are those people today?

[Guest]

This from the very liberal Huffington Post.

How Joe Scarborough Went From Conservative Congressman To Liberal Favorite Talk Show Host (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/14/how-joe-scarborough-went_n_112533.html)

[Guest]

This from the very liberal Huffington Post.

How Joe Scarborough Went From Conservative Congressman To Liberal Favorite Talk Show Host (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/14/how-joe-scarborough-went_n_112533.html)

Ah the old right-wing staple, if you don't like the message, attack the messenger. Scarborough seems like a very independent thinker, which is, of course, verboten among the don't deviate from the message right.

[Guest]

This from the very liberal Huffington Post.

How Joe Scarborough Went From Conservative Congressman To Liberal Favorite Talk Show Host (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/14/how-joe-scarborough-went_n_112533.html)
Like Coach, I'm not at all surprised that you Attack Scarborough, but avoid commenting on the veracity of Scarborough's description, completely bypassing any comment on Romney's campaign pledges. I think I know why--because there aren't any!

So let's agree to disagree on whether or not Scarborough is a conservative or a newfound liberal. What's left on the table are the planks in Romney's campaign platform. What's left are his plans for the country that he sets forth after criticizing all that Obama has done, saying he will "repeal and replace" many of them.

So go ahead, Richie, enlighten us all with some specifics that you've been able to find from Romney's campaign. What are his plans for replacing ObamaCare? Specifically, where and how will he cut government spending? How long will it be before we return to having a balanced federal budget? If he cuts taxes, what are the elements of his tax reform plan that will keep revenue neutral? What specifics has he set forth on any of those questions?

I'd love to know the answer to any of those questions left open after hearing and reading the "voidless mass of soundbites" that seem to be Romney's platform.

[Guest]

Richie will not have the answers and I would be surprised at any response because Romney has no positions on anything. It's why he will lose.

[Guest]

Isnt PERCEPTION something to behold.....our perception of Romney today....

In 2008, during the primary AND the general election campaign, our current President promised on so many occasions a comprehensive immigrant policy. He controlled both houses of congress but did NOTHING, NOR did he actually attempt to do anything.

Then, he deported in 3 years more than the previous administration had in 8 years.

He is now PERCEIVED as the saviour for immigration because of one speech where he did or rather said something but gave no details, no rules on how to do it or avoid doing it !!!

PERCEPTION is wonderful...makes it easy if we do not have to face reality !!!

What this has to do with this thread is how the media has molded two different perceptions of two different men.

[Guest]

You guys kill me. So pompous. Again, I'm honored to be bigger than the story that you 2 "esteemed" poster need to stomp on me personally, and make me bigger than the story. I guess with my personality it's perfectly understandable.

A post calls Scarborough a Tea Party pioneer and refers to him as conservative.

Without comment, I submit a story by the most liberal website there may be, about how Scarborough has morphed into a liberal talk show host, and you say that it's me attacking Scarborough?

If you were honest in your commentary, you could say it's the Huffington Post "attacking" Scarborough.

I'm glad you realize that calling Scarborugh a liberal is attacking him. Nobody want to be slimed with that label. A "liberal"; omg!!

[Guest]

I am sure they are out there somewhere, but could someone link or direct me to President Obama's specific plans for

entitlement

tax reform

Thanks

Not his relection website please but where he has spelled these out

[Guest]

I usually watch Morning Joe but not today but in my reading, there is another version of some of the things that Joe said today....Maybe you just missed it or were out of the room...

"Joe Scarborough flipped out over the 2012 election after blasting campaign finance at length on Monday's "Morning Joe."

Brzezinski was reading an op-ed criticizing Republican donors when Scarborough let loose on campaign spending. He called it a "perversion of the political system," and proceeded to criticize both parties.

"Can I just blow myself up right here?" Scarborough said. "This is a really gross campaign. You got all of these people spending billions of dollars, you got two candidates who are saying nothing." He alleged that both Romney and Obama are merely giving boring speeches without offering any concrete plans for health care, Social Security or jobs.

"They're saying nothing, but they're spending more money than ever before to say it," Scarborough blasted. "This is a gross, repulsive campaign that is sound and fury signifying nothing."

Joe Scarborough: 'This Is A Gross, Repulsive Campaign' (VIDEO) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/25/joe-scarborough-campaign-2012-spending_n_1624230.html)

Just saying.....you sure missed the part that made the blogs !!!!

Actually, I have been unable to locate that "voidless mass of soundbites" anywhere thus far

[Guest]

You guys kill me. So pompous. Again, I'm honored to be bigger than the story that you 2 "esteemed" poster need to stomp on me personally, and make me bigger than the story. I guess with my personality it's perfectly understandable.

A post calls Scarborough a Tea Party pioneer and refers to him as conservative.

Without comment, I submit a story by the most liberal website there may be, about how Scarborough has morphed into a liberal talk show host, and you say that it's me attacking Scarborough?

If you were honest in your commentary, you could say it's the Huffington Post "attacking" Scarborough.

I'm glad you realize that calling Scarborugh a liberal is attacking him. Nobody want to be slimed with that label. A "liberal"; omg!!

Personally, I don't find you "bigger than the story", it is only your ego that is bigger than anything that I can see. Interesting you see me to be pompous, it must mean you see me as an equal.
"Without comment", you mean you post a story without caveat and expect that we would assume you are not in agreement?
It's the Huffington Post attacking Scarborough.... Did you read your own link? The story was exerpted in Huffington Post and appeared in it's entirety in New York Magazine, by the way, four years ago.

[Guest]

I usually watch Morning Joe but not today but in my reading, there is another version of some of the things that Joe said today....Maybe you just missed it or were out of the room...

"Joe Scarborough flipped out over the 2012 election after blasting campaign finance at length on Monday's "Morning Joe."

Brzezinski was reading an op-ed criticizing Republican donors when Scarborough let loose on campaign spending. He called it a "perversion of the political system," and proceeded to criticize both parties.

"Can I just blow myself up right here?" Scarborough said. "This is a really gross campaign. You got all of these people spending billions of dollars, you got two candidates who are saying nothing." He alleged that both Romney and Obama are merely giving boring speeches without offering any concrete plans for health care, Social Security or jobs.

"They're saying nothing, but they're spending more money than ever before to say it," Scarborough blasted. "This is a gross, repulsive campaign that is sound and fury signifying nothing."

Joe Scarborough: 'This Is A Gross, Repulsive Campaign' (VIDEO) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/25/joe-scarborough-campaign-2012-spending_n_1624230.html)

Just saying.....you sure missed the part that made the blogs !!!!

Actually, I have been unable to locate that "voidless mass of soundbites" anywhere thus farJoe was correct on that one too, Bucco. As I've said here many times, the Citizens United decision, letting loose the hundreds of millions of private money into both campaigns will likely change the American electoral process forever.

But thanks again for exhibiting your deep suspicion that anything I say is pro-Obama, pro-Democrat, and somehow carries a hidden meaning...even though I intend to vote for Romney.

Joe's comment (rant) on the "voidless mass..." was in the 6-7 AM hour.

[Guest]

Joe was correct on that one too, Bucco. As I've said here many times, the Citizens United decision, letting loose the hundreds of millions of private money into both campaigns will likely change the American electoral process forever.

But thanks again for exhibiting your deep suspicion that anything I say is pro-Obama, pro-Democrat, and somehow carries a hidden meaning...even though I intend to vote for Romney.

Joe's comment (rant) on the "voidless mass..." was in the 6-7 AM hour.

I too plan to vote for Romney ----- UNLESS, he begins to cowtow to grover norquist and the tea party too strongly. If he shows signs of standing for independent conservative thinking I'll be with him.

[Guest]

Joe was correct on that one too, Bucco. As I've said here many times, the Citizens United decision, letting loose the hundreds of millions of private money into both campaigns will likely change the American electoral process forever.

But thanks again for exhibiting your deep suspicion that anything I say is pro-Obama, pro-Democrat, and somehow carries a hidden meaning...even though I intend to vote for Romney.

Joe's comment (rant) on the "voidless mass..." was in the 6-7 AM hour.


I just watched at their website a rant he made in the MUST READ OP EDS on a NYT editorial criticizing spending by one Romney donor. He then railed on both campaigns and actually I think leaned more on Obama for no specifics on any issues, but cannot find what you are reporting

I do not WANT to be suspicious but let me be up front. You rail on issues and pretty much always point a finger at, or as in this case use someone elses finger at the Republican side. This post is a perfect example of what I said the other day. The issue is the spending by both sides, both pacs but your posts are always slanted ONE WAY and very very specific.

Then when I bring it up you say oh yeah that is correct also...you did it on a couple congressional bills and you do it all the time with Obama and Romney

It is your right to post whatever you want and to believe whatever you want, but it is becoming more than a trend with these posts...you alter your presentation to lean one way. Then later you make an "endorsement" of your Romney vote sound almost like an Obama sound bite. You can post any darn thing you want and say whatever you want to say....but every time I go off checking I find things like this...you give only the percentage of the story that will criticize one side only.

I will keep looking for the quote you attribute him to and/or a video of it.....been all over their website with no luck.

But you are a smarter man than someone to be twisting a show in order to condemn one person. I do not like nor can defend Obama, but even I have not nor will not do that, an I try very hard to put things into perspective.

I sincerely hope that my suspicions are totally unfounded


PS...I neglected to add a link for the video I referred to. Cant imagin this and the other on the same show but....

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/ns/msnbc_tv-morning_joe/

[Guest]

I too plan to vote for Romney ----- UNLESS, he begins to cowtow to grover norquist and the tea party too strongly. If he shows signs of standing for independent conservative thinking I'll be with him.

My vote will be, as it was last election, a anti Obama vote.

BUT when I speak of the media, I have great concerns about that. They, the media, are painting Romney into a corner, NOT he himself. If you notice those who post on here that are just parroting the party soundbites and such, it is much the same about him and then when you actually check it out, you find it is just garbage.

This is a good example...they rant about BOTH candidates....MOSTLY Obama and his total lack of specifics and it comes out anti Romney. That point, by the way was also made very clearly on Morning Joe this morning...ie, the money is bad unless the Democrats have it. He said that he has been saying that for years and most on the panel agreed with him.

This is not a defense of Romney...not meant to ....but I cannot stand out of context, just a bit of a lie, kind of statements. And frankly, I think Romney is in trouble because of the media painting and the fact that in the debates he will not be able to turn it around on the glib one. Facts is they discussed THAT on Morning Joe this morning...I watched that on a video clip where the amount of time given for the debates will not be enough for either of them to give specifics.

Ok...will go away, but his kind of thread is what annoys me more than the obvious little ads for Obama....tell the truth is my plea. For example, Obama has been the worse thing that has ever been in office relative to the immigrants and he lied to them, yet he is painted as the wonderful one by the media.

health care...I backed Obama on this forum actually..on his proposals and his mission, both of which he lied on and made it political and then he lost me but I have supported him in some issues and say it. I do not paint pictures that are fuzzy ! You catch me telling a lie, you tell me. You catch me presenting something out of context, you tell me

[Guest]

I suspect that many of the posters here have read biographies on some of our past presidents. If you recall many of them started out with many critics but eventually won them over. And it is a given that history is kinder to past presidents then some may deserve.

In my opinion voters can now pass judgement on Obama because he has had his 15 minutes in the sun and has failed miserably.

Romney on the other hand is in campaign mode. It requires give and take between candidate and voter for a variety of reasons including not turning voters off too soon before a candidate has had an opportunity to build his/her programs.

FDR was a favorite but not one of my favorites. History was kinder to him than he deserved. Many of his policies during the depression were wrong and prolonged it. Clinton would have also failed miserably but for the six years that he had to work with a Republican Congress. History also favors him more than he deserves. Nixon was a total disaster short of his opening negotiations with China. Kennedy was popular only and revered due to his demise. Truman is a favorite of mine because he could be trusted and stood by his decisions many of which carried high consequences. Ronald Reagan is my favorite because he reintroduced patriotism and pride in America and brought propserity back to America.

I believe that Romney will make a good president because he has the intelligence, experience in problem solving and decision making, humble but confident,understands the economy and is very ehtical. He unlike Obama works to build things and concensus whereas Obama's background as an organizer was alwaysto tear down and divide.

[Guest]

I suspect that many of the posters here have read biographies on some of our past presidents. If you recall many of them started out with many critics but eventually won them over. And it is a given that history is kinder to past presidents then some may deserve.

In my opinion voters can now pass judgement on Obama because he has had his 15 minutes in the sun and has failed miserably.

Romney on the other hand is in campaign mode. It requires give and take between candidate and voter for a variety of reasons including not turning voters off too soon before a candidate has had an opportunity to build his/her programs.

FDR was a favorite but not one of my favorites. History was kinder to him than he deserved. Many of his policies during the depression were wrong and prolonged it. Clinton would have also failed miserably but for the six years that he had to work with a Republican Congress. History also favors him more than he deserves. Nixon was a total disaster short of his opening negotiations with China. Kennedy was popular only and revered due to his demise. Truman is a favorite of mine because he could be trusted and stood by his decisions many of which carried high consequences. Ronald Reagan is my favorite because he reintroduced patriotism and pride in America and brought propserity back to America.

I believe that Romney will make a good president because he has the intelligence, experience in problem solving and decision making, humble but confident,understands the economy and is very ehtical. He unlike Obama works to build things and concensus whereas Obama's background as an organizer was alwaysto tear down and divide.

Hope you are right Rubi.................time will tell. BTW Truman is my favorite, for much the same reasons, plus we are both Missourians.

[Guest]

Hope you are right Rubi.................time will tell. BTW Truman is my favorite, for much the same reasons, plus we are both Missourians.

Truman....the reluctant President...if you havent read the book on his life, I suggest it.

What Romney has to do that this president could have done is spend his energy in getting the house and senate on the same page.

If you read about HOW he handled the Olympic problem, he exhibited many of the qualities being discussed !

[Guest]

Truman....the reluctant President...if you havent read the book on his life, I suggest it.

What Romney has to do that this president could have done is spend his energy in getting the house and senate on the same page.

If you read about HOW he handled the Olympic problem, he exhibited many of the qualities being discussed !

I have read a couple books on his life, as well as a couple on Kansas City politics in which he was prominently featured. The part that is really fascinating is the period prior to his national political career. He was backed for judge of jackson county (Greater KC MO.) by the pendergast machine, but refused to do their bidding after he was in office. Still pendergast admired him. At the University of Missouri in 1964 when his name was brought up in a political science class, he was booed by many in the lecture hall. Funny how those perceptions change with time.

[Guest]

Personally, I don't find you "bigger than the story", it is only your ego that is bigger than anything that I can see. Interesting you see me to be pompous, it must mean you see me as an equal.
"Without comment", you mean you post a story without caveat and expect that we would assume you are not in agreement?
It's the Huffington Post attacking Scarborough.... Did you read your own link? The story was exerpted in Huffington Post and appeared in it's entirety in New York Magazine, by the way, four years ago.

I do agree with the story, but it's still your liberal Huffington Post that posted it, and then you also say it was a story in the very liberal New York magazine.

Case closed. The liberal New York Magazine and the liberal Huffington Post recognise one of their own.

You make this too easy Ed.

[Guest]

Just wondering.

I haven't found much specificity, other than his long list of rants against Obama. If Richie can find some specific plans on how he'll address some of the big issues facing the country, maybe I could get a little more excited about the guy.

[Guest]

Just wondering.

I haven't found much specificity, other than his long list of rants against Obama. If Richie can find some specific plans on how he'll address some of the big issues facing the country, maybe I could get a little more excited about the guy.

I also have received NO response to my inquiry about Obama specifics !!!!!!!

Just want to stay in line !!!!

Nor can I find that quote or video VK !

[Guest]

A little more from Morning Joe...

"MSNBC’s Morning Joe co-host Joe Scarborough fell into some hot water earlier this month when he made a sweeping (and inaccurate) generalization about the NYT‘s election coverage. His assertion, that the NYT had not reported on former Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry‘s wealth to the extent that the paper has on current Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, was backed up by TIME‘s Mark Halperin. Halperin said he didn’t “recall” extensive reporting by the NYT on Kerry’s wealth.

This morning, Scarborough’s co-host Mika Brzezinski read an excerpt from a NYT Sunday editorial specifically criticizing Sheldon Adelson, a multi-billionaire who has said he may donate $100 million to defeat President Barack Obama‘s reelection bid.

“I think it’s unfortunate that you only get one side of the story on the editorial page. Where are all the [liberal billionaire and Democratic donor] George Soros editorials?” Scarborough said indignantly, apparently not having learned anything from the last time he went down this road. But Halperin, unwilling to be a fool for the second time, was more cautious. “There might have been some. I’m sure our friends at the Times will send them to us,” he said.

To be sure, we weren’t able to find any NYT editorials calling out the influence of Soros’ donations in elections. Kudos to Halperin for not blindly backing the host."

https://www.google.com/#q=ROMNEY+ON+WHAT+POLICIES&hl=en&prmd=imvnsu&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ei=iirqT_fXJoWS9QSP24AG&ved=0CFIQ_AUoBA&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=9b0c709f7a171400&biw=1227&bih=502

[Guest]

Just wondering. Has Richie Posted Any Specifics On The Romney Campaign Yet?
I haven't found much specificity, other than his long list of rants against Obama. If Richie can find some specific plans on how he'll address some of the big issues facing the country, maybe I could get a little more excited about the guy.

You're kidding me right? Why do you want me to post Romney promises or plans or ideas or whatever it is you think I'm supposed to research for you O' Fearless Romney Voter??

I don't need to do that. There's no way I'm voting for President Peron......I mean Obama, and that's all I've got to say about it. I don't need to justify Romney's qualifications or platform because for me it's irrelevant.

The one thing I know is that Romney is an All-American freedom loving capitalist who understands the private sector. There's not one of those things that applies to Obama.

I'm sorry if my immense distaste for the Obama Presidency is irking you.

Someone would get the outrageous idea you're one of those ardent supporters of Obama looking to trip me up on the Romney candidacy, and we all know that's not true............don't we?

[Guest]

I also have received NO response to my inquiry about Obama specifics !!!!!!!

Just want to stay in line !!!!

Nor can I find that quote or video VK !Bucco, I watched it live this morning. His statement was during the first hour of the program. I wrote down his quote.

Now either you're going to believe me when I quoted him or not. Either way is OK with me. But I don't intend to jump thru hoops trying to retrieve a video clip for you just because you don't get up early enough in the morning to watch the show yourself. Whether I do or don't won't change your vote or mine anyway. I've got lots better things to do with my time.

Sorry.

[Guest]

Bucco, I watched it live this morning. His statement was during the first hour of the program. I wrote down his quote.

Now either you're going to believe me when I quoted him or not. Either way is OK with me. But I don't intend to jump thru hoops trying to retrieve a video clip for you just because you don't get up early enough in the morning to watch the show yourself. Whether I do or don't won't change your vote or mine anyway. I've got lots better things to do with my time.

Sorry.

You do not need to do a thing but did you notice that when asked pointed questions we either get your last sentence or the dreaded...

"This is so unimportant when compared to the critical issues facing the country and our political leaders that it doesn't justify a response." (your quote so often on here)

Point is, from my point of view, conversation to you seems to be, at least based on what I see...what YOU and where YOU want the conversation to go.

I just do not understand...if you get any objections, the conversation is over with you.

[Guest]

You're kidding me right? Why do you want me to post Romney promises or plans or ideas or whatever it is you think I'm supposed to research for you...I don't need to do that...that's all I've got to say about it. I don't need to justify Romney's qualifications or platform because for me it's irrelevant...OK, with that statement I guess we can figure out the veracity of some of the baseless claims you make almost daily.

By the way, you don't irk me, even one little bit. My reaction to your posts is more sympathetic than anything else.

[Guest]

You do not need to do a thing but did you notice that when asked pointed questions we either get your last sentence or the dreaded...

"This is so unimportant when compared to the critical issues facing the country and our political leaders that it doesn't justify a response." (your quote so often on here)

Point is, from my point of view, conversation to you seems to be, at least based on what I see...what YOU and where YOU want the conversation to go.

I just do not understand...if you get any objections, the conversation is over with you.Bucco, what you asked me to do was research the quote I used for you. I suggested you do it yourself. If you feel that ends the conversation on the subject, consider it ended.

[Guest]

Bucco, what you asked me to do was research the quote I used for you. I suggested you do it yourself. If you feel that ends the conversation on the subject, consider it ended.

No comments on the Obama plans.....wherein Romney was criticized in this thread and on Morning Joe ?

No comments on the money issue brought up by Scarborough and the NY Times supposed bias ?

All relate to the same show, and the same subject, UNLESS this is simply to call out ONLY Romney !!!

And you did expound a lot on Romney !

[Guest]

OK, with that statement I guess we can figure out the veracity of some of the baseless claims you make almost daily.

By the way, you don't irk me, even one little bit. My reaction to your posts is more sympathetic than anything else.

Nice little bit of editing of my quote. It was a short post, there was no need to truncate it , but I know why you did. It's a cheap ploy.

Your first sentence is ridiculous. The "veracity" of my claims? What a joke.

My point was clear and concise. I don't need to blather endlessly as you do. The time for all the concerns that you're kvetching about was in the Republican Primary, and that boat has sailed, I'm so sorry to tell you.

Romney is the candidate. What else do I need to know. You think any amount of useless rhetoric from you, or some other liberal moderate, is going to change my mind and make me think that Peron, I mean Obama, is worth considering so that he can devote another 4 years to devolving this nation of ours?

[Guest]

Nice little bit of editing of my quote. It was a short post, there was no need to truncate it , but I know why you did. It's a cheap ploy.

Your first sentence is ridiculous. The "veracity" of my claims? What a joke.

My point was clear and concise. I don't need to blather endlessly as you do. The time for all the concerns that you're kvetching about was in the Republican Primary, and that boat has sailed, I'm so sorry to tell you.

Romney is the candidate. What else do I need to know. You think any amount of useless rhetoric from you, or some other liberal moderate, is going to change my mind and make me think that Peron, I mean Obama, is worth considering so that he can devote another 4 years to devolving this nation of ours?

There may be three people M/L on this board that agree with or care about your thoughts and some 313+ million people in this country who will never know who you are or care. As for me, I am way beyond caring what you think, I only answer your posts because of your misrepresentions, and snide efforts at insult - that and because I find it amusing.

[Guest]

There may be three people M/L on this board that agree with or care about your thoughts and some 313+ million people in this country who will never know who you are or care.

ooooooo, what a brilliant thought. I'm always amazed at how these gems just pop into your head.

I am so glad to be in your craw. Pleases me more than you know.

[Guest]

ooooooo, what a brilliant thought. I'm always amazed at how these gems just pop into your head.

I am so glad to be in your craw. Pleases me more than you know.

Ha, as I added to the above quoted post. "As for me, I am way beyond caring what you think, I only answer your posts because of your misrepresentions, and snide efforts at insult - that and because I find it amusing." You are not in my craw, don't flatter yourself, however I feel pretty confident VK and myself are in yours. You are amusing in a perverse and ridiculous way.

[Guest]

Ha, as I added to the above quoted post. "As for me, I am way beyond caring what you think, I only answer your posts because of your misrepresentions, and snide efforts at insult - that and because I find it amusing." You are not in my craw, don't flatter yourself, however I feel pretty confident VK and myself are in yours. You are amusing in a perverse and ridiculous way.

Great, glad we got that cleared up. In my craw; can't happen. I'm confident in my opinions and in myself, and you guys are just there for my amusement.

I love debating liberals who refuse to admit who they are. It's so much fun.

Later.

[Guest]

Great, glad we got that cleared up. In my craw; can't happen. I'm confident in my opinions and in myself, and you guys are just there for my amusement.

I love debating liberals who refuse to admit who they are. It's so much fun.

Later.

You just can't quit me, can you? By the way, that confidence - it's really misguided arrogance sorry to say.

[Guest]

You just can't quit me, can you? By the way, that confidence - it's really misguided arrogance sorry to say.

You and VK always personally address me first when I post. What more is there to say?

[Guest]

Great, glad we got that cleared up. In my craw; can't happen. I'm confident in my opinions and in myself, and you guys are just there for my amusement.

I love debating liberals who refuse to admit who they are. It's so much fun.

Later.

I love debating people who sucked off the union teat for their working life, took their union pension, and then turned on their union pals. Classy!

[Guest]

I love debating people who sucked off the union teat for their working life, took their union pension, and then turned on their union pals. Classy!

Ah, now you show your true colors and a decided lack of class. Thanks for the demonstration for all our intrepid posters.

[Guest]

Ah, now you show your true colors and a decided lack of class. Thanks for the demonstration for all our intrepid posters.

I think VK is probably more serious minded than I, but you should see me laugh at my computer as I read your posts and compose mine. You are a hoot. I hope my fun isn't disturbing to the millions of folks who read this forum.

[Guest]

Play nice my friends! :kiss:

[Guest]

Play nice my friends! :kiss:

That's no fun. How are the walleyes biting Dale?

[Guest]

I think VK is probably more serious minded than I, but you should see me laugh at my computer as I read your posts and compose mine. You are a hoot. I hope my fun isn't disturbing to the millions of folks who read this forum.

Whatever. A silly bit of tripe it is.

[Guest]

Whatever. A silly bit of tripe it is.

Even though you "got nothin" you still can't help get the last post in. You are indefatigable as well as being a cartoon character.

[Guest]

That's no fun. How are the walleyes biting Dale?

Not a fisherman myself....but live close to some of the best walleye fishing in MN.

[Guest]

Even though you "got nothin" you still can't help get the last post in. You are indefatigable as well as being a cartoon character.

You're starting to make it a habit to call me names. You've showing a really mean streak here and I know you're pleased with yourself.

Now you can go ahead and respond with another puerile remark.

[Guest]

Not a fisherman myself....but live close to some of the best walleye fishing in MN.

And some of the best golf courses.

[Guest]

This discussion has become far too personal, even for the political forum. Please get back on topic or the thread will be closed.

Discuss the topic and not each other.


Moderator

[Guest]

Na na na na na na. :confused:

[Guest]

And some of the best golf courses.

Yep.....and most of them bring me to my knees. :o

[Guest]

Yep.....and most of them bring me to my knees. :o
Or double me over with laughter...regardless of whether it's the "back" or the "forth" post.