REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Where have all the liberals gone?

POSTED BY: GEEZER
UPDATED: Saturday, June 15, 2013 19:38
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1922
PAGE 1 of 1

Saturday, June 15, 2013 1:55 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

The left turns compliant on violating civil liberties


Where have all the liberals gone?

President Obama, who as a Democratic senator accused the Bush administration of violating civil liberties in the name of security, now vigorously defends his own administration’s collection of Americans’ phone records and Internet activities.

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said he thinks Congress has done sufficient intelligence oversight. His evidence? Opinion polls.

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi defended the programs’ legality and said she wants Edward Snowden prosecuted for leaking details of the secret operations.

Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the Senate intelligence committee, accused Snowden of treason and defended false testimony given to her committee by the director of national intelligence, who in March had denied the programs’ existence.

With some exceptions, progressive lawmakers and the liberal commentariat have been passive and acquiescent toward the secret spying programs, which would have infuriated the left had they been the work of a Republican administration.

When libertarian Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) introduced legislation last week to curb the surveillance powers, he had no co-sponsors. When he held a news conference this week to unveil a lawsuit claiming the surveillance is unconstitutional, five members of Congress joined him — all Republicans.

I kept looking for liberal dissent — and then, on Wednesday morning, the news wires reported that a group called Voice of Resistance was meeting outside the Capitol, where demonstrators would proclaim Snowden a hero and flog an effigy of Republican Rep. Peter King (N.Y.), one of the first to brand Snowden a traitor. I arrived at the appointed place and time but found no protest. Instead, there were six journalists and a lone demonstrator, who was wearing an antiabortion baseball cap. He told me the group was actually a right-wing outfit. “The others are parking the car,” he explained, before turning the topic to Rush Limbaugh.

Polling this week by The Post and Pew Research Center produced discouraging evidence that Democrats have shed their suspicion of government overreach now that one of their own is in charge. Sixty-nine percent of Democrats say that terrorism investigations should trump privacy as the government’s main concern, compared with 51?percent in 2006, when the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program had come to light. Then, 37?percent of Democrats found the NSA’s actions acceptable, compared with 64?percent now. (Republicans went in the other direction, suddenly becoming more privacy-conscious.)

Certainly, there are differences between now and then. Today, the program operates under court supervision and has at least the veneer of congressional approval (the administration circumvents the law’s requirement that only “relevant” records can be collected by claiming that all phone records of all Americans are relevant). And it remains to be seen whether Snowden is a true whistleblower or somebody who means his country harm.

Yet it is jarring to see the left so compliant now that the surveillance has been sanctioned by a Democratic president. Even if the programs ultimately prove defensible, isn’t it worth finding out what they really are, before liberals accept a suspension of civil liberties they may come to regret?

The weakness of the liberals’ argument for standing down was displayed by Reid, who assured reporters this week that Senate intelligence committee members “have done their very utmost, in my opinion, to conduct oversight. And that’s why the American people, in polls — two polls that I saw today — support what is happening with trying to stop terrorists from doing bad things to us.”

While Reid tests the political winds to determine which constitutional rights Americans should have, those who should be overseeing the program are instead defending it with a just-trust-me logic. Feinstein declared that “these programs are within the law.” The top Democrat on the House intelligence committee, C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger (Md.), promised that “we’re not violating any constitutional rights.” Both said they’d like to see more about the program declassified, but their past efforts to produce more disclosure have been weak.

There are a few Democrats who have upheld the party’s tradition of championing civil liberties — such as John Conyers (Mich.), who is introducing a bill with conservative Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) to curtail the program, and Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), who with Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) introduced legislation backed by eight senators requiring more disclosure of secret court rulings.

But the Conyers bill is likely to go nowhere in the House, and Reid was cool to the Merkley proposal, saying only that “I’ll be happy to take a look.”

If he does look, he’ll find that they’re doing what progressives should do: Protecting the people from a too-secretive government.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-the-left-turns-com
pliant-on-violating-civil-liberties/2013/06/14/8c30d91a-d4d2-11e2-a73e-826d299ff459_story.html?hpid=z5

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 15, 2013 2:17 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


The Occubabies are just waitng for orders.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 15, 2013 2:31 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
The Occubabies are just waitng for orders.




What's interesting is to read through the comments associated with this editorial.

There's plenty of liberals stating that you shouldn't expect privacy on the phone or internet anyway, so what's the big fuss.

Then there are those who claim that Reid, Feinstein, Pelosi, etc. aren't really liberals, and don't represent Democrats.

And there's the usual "But Bush..."

Plus the obligatory name calling.


"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 15, 2013 4:05 AM

TWO

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
The Occubabies are just waitng for orders.

I hope Democrats in Congress flip-flop, once they know the real facts, not simply what Obama claims for his personal convenience. "On Prism, partisanship and propaganda" www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/14/nsa-partisanship-propagan
da-prism
Quote:


Democratic Rep. Loretta Sanchez said after Congress on Wednesday was given a classified briefing by NSA officials on the agency's previously secret surveillance activities:

"What we learned in there is significantly more than what is out in the media today. . . . I can't speak to what we learned in there, and I don't know if there are other leaks, if there's more information somewhere, if somebody else is going to step up, but I will tell you that I believe it's the tip of the iceberg . . . . I think it's just broader than most people even realize, and I think that's, in one way, what astounded most of us, too."

The Congresswoman is absolutely right: what we have reported thus far is merely "the tip of the iceberg" of what the NSA is doing in spying on Americans and the world. She's also right that when it comes to NSA spying, "there is significantly more than what is out in the media today", and that's exactly what we're working to rectify.

But just consider what she's saying: as a member of Congress, she had no idea how invasive and vast the NSA's surveillance activities are. Sen. Jon Tester, who is a member of the Homeland Security Committee, said the same thing, telling MSNBC about the disclosures that "I don't see how that compromises the security of this country whatsoever" and adding: "quite frankly, it helps people like me become aware of a situation that I wasn't aware of before because I don't sit on that Intelligence Committee."

How can anyone think that it's remotely healthy in a democracy to have the NSA building a massive spying apparatus about which even members of Congress, including Senators on the Homeland Security Committee, are totally ignorant and find "astounding" when they learn of them? How can anyone claim with a straight face that there is robust oversight when even members of the Senate Intelligence Committee are so constrained in their ability to act that they are reduced to issuing vague, impotent warnings to the public about what they call radical "secret law" enabling domestic spying that would "stun" Americans to learn about it, but are barred to disclose what it is they're so alarmed by?



The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity," where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 15, 2013 4:36 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Apparently, liberals have gone here...

We Refused to Be Part of the NSA's Dark Blanket

FOCUS | Edward Snowden's Second Interview From Hong Kong

America's Secret Surveillance Empire - Violation of Earth Constitution?

Edward Snowden: Saving Us From the United Stasi of America

More Americans See Snowden As a 'Patriot' Than Traitor

How to Protect Your Communications From the NSA

NSA Mines User Data of Facebook, Google and Others

more...
http://readersupportednews.org/

You went to the Washington Post, fer chrissakes! And they, in turn, looked at Congress, the MSM, and registered Democrats as "liberals"? That's like looking at Republicans to find out where all the isolationist Libertarians went.

Quote:

With some exceptions, progressive lawmakers...Feinstein... Reid... Pelosi

I wrote to Diane Feinstein before authorization of use of force (Iraq), urging her to vote "no". I got back a smarmy form email saying that, well, as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, she had information that I didn't have, and therefore her decisions were just way more intelligent than mine. What an ass. Feinstein, IMHO, has NEVER been a "liberal", "progressive", "lefist" or whatever you want to call it, in terms of "national security". Neither has Reid. And Pelosi is pretty 50-50.

Quote:

I kept looking for liberal dissent..

I could have told him where to look, but he kept looking on the ceiling and in his shoes.

Quote:

and the liberal commentariat

Who? It would be nice to know who's in this category, according to him. He clearly doesn't listen to Pacifica Radio or watch LinkTV or read RSN or look into roughly a dozen TRULY liberal media. Maybe he means Rachel Maddow as his single example. Who the fuck knows?

Quote:

have been passive and acquiescent toward the secret spying programs, which would have infuriated the left had they been the work of a Republican administration.

Not having had the time, it would be interesting to see a real, fair comparison of between how politicians voted "then" and how they voted "now". But that's not what this article does. It picks three individuals out of 535. Like the snippet of Maxine Waters, my radar goes up whenever an article unbalances its information so heavily. Maybe the author really DOES have a point to make, but we'd never know from this data.

Quote:

Yet it is jarring to see the left so compliant now that the surveillance has been sanctioned by a Democratic president.
Registered Democrats represent "the left"? What is this guy on?

Quote:

Sixty-nine percent of Democrats say that terrorism investigations should trump privacy as the government’s main concern, compared with 51?percent in 2006, when the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program had come to light. Then, 37?percent of Democrats found the NSA’s actions acceptable, compared with 64?percent now. (Republicans went in the other direction, suddenly becoming more privacy-conscious.)
So neither Democrats nor Republicans fully represent principled positions. The article, which is pretty cagey about the Republicans ACTUAL position in 2006, fails to mention this

Quote:

In 2006, 75 percent [registered Republicans] said the program was acceptable, and 23 percent said it was not. Now 52 percent find it acceptable, and 47 percent unacceptable.
As far as I can tell, registered Republicans as whole are even shittier than Dems, with only 23% taking a principled stand on privacy, no matter who is in office.

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/10/n-s-a-monitoring-and-pa
rtisan-hypocrisy
/

Anyway, I could go on, but I think you get my points:

"Liberals" and "the left" are not represented by registered Dems or the MSM. Why he keeps referring to people like Feinstein and Reid as "liberals" is so far beyond the truth, clearly he's invested in selling this lie.

As a whole, registered Dems take a more principled position on privacy (31% finding intrusion unacceptable when Obama is in office) than Republicans (23% finding in unacceptable when Bush was in office) but neither party's registered members are stellar. Which pretty much tracks their voting record: Overall, Dems are better than Repubs, but even in the Dem party it doesn't make a majority. That's why I vote person-by-person.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 15, 2013 5:28 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Anyway, I could go on, but I think you get my points:

"Liberals" and "the left" are not represented by registered Dems or the MSM. Why he keeps referring to people like Feinstein and Reid as "liberals" is so far beyond the truth, clearly he's invested in selling this lie.



Depends on how you define "liberals" or "the left". In 2011, 37% of Democrats considered themselves liberals. http://www.gallup.com/poll/150611/Democrats-Liberal-Less-White-2008.as
px


To most people, Democrats are "the left" of our political spectrum.

And the MSM, rather than on-line sources relatively few people follow, are generally considered the voices of liberals and the left.

You can set your own guidelines as to what's 'liberal' or 'left', but for most folks, it's the Democrats, as they're the major political party closest to those descriptors, and pretty much the only way 'liberals' or 'the left' of any variety are gonna get representation.

Think of it in comparison to the way some folks describe conservatives as Bible-thumping, anti-abortion, anti-womens/gay/minority rights, fascists. If you're an agnostic, pro-reproductive rights, pro-equal rights, free-market supporter, you still get rolled up in that label.


"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 15, 2013 5:50 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

To most people, Democrats are "the left" of our political spectrum.
I can't help what "most people" think. "Most people" believe in fairy dust, or guardian angels, or whatever the fuck they call it. A Libertarian would not like being portrayed as a Republican. A lefist is not a liberal, and liberal is not a Democrat. Even Democrats realize there are centrists and leftists. And the writer of this article surely knows the differentiation and - rather than making a true attempt to educate the public- pushes a falsehood.

For those of you who may not know, there is a leftish-wing of the Democratic Party, and there are the centrists. "The Democratic left wing" are not "leftists", and "the left" is not a unified, undifferentiated mass of non-republicans which can be labeled interchangeably as "progressives", "leftists", "liberals" and "Democrats". The real left tends to look at what used to be called "liberals" with some suspicion, as old-style "liberals" tend to not want change... they tend to want to smooth over essential differences in interest, which is the source of all real conflict. As "humanoid" means "only looking like a human" and rhymes with "hemorrhoid", some of my more leftist friends refer to liberals as "liberaloids". So even I use the term "liberal" with hesitation, because it's been redfined by the right to mean so many things, I'm not sure what it really does mean anymore.

And deliberately conflating terms, as this author does, doesn't help the discussion.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 15, 2013 5:54 AM

WHOZIT


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Apparently, liberals have gone here...

We Refused to Be Part of the NSA's Dark Blanket

FOCUS | Edward Snowden's Second Interview From Hong Kong

America's Secret Surveillance Empire - Violation of Earth Constitution?

Edward Snowden: Saving Us From the United Stasi of America

More Americans See Snowden As a 'Patriot' Than Traitor

How to Protect Your Communications From the NSA

NSA Mines User Data of Facebook, Google and Others

more...
http://readersupportednews.org/

You went to the Washington Post, fer chrissakes! And they, in turn, looked at Congress, the MSM, and registered Democrats as "liberals"? That's like looking at Republicans to find out where all the isolationist Libertarians went.

Quote:

With some exceptions, progressive lawmakers...Feinstein... Reid... Pelosi

I wrote to Diane Feinstein before authorization of use of force (Iraq), urging her to vote "no". I got back a smarmy form email saying that, well, as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, she had information that I didn't have, and therefore her decisions were just way more intelligent than mine. What an ass. Feinstein, IMHO, has NEVER been a "liberal", "progressive", "lefist" or whatever you want to call it, in terms of "national security". Neither has Reid. And Pelosi is pretty 50-50.

Quote:

I kept looking for liberal dissent..

I could have told him where to look, but he kept looking on the ceiling and in his shoes.

Quote:

and the liberal commentariat

Who? It would be nice to know who's in this category, according to him. He clearly doesn't listen to Pacifica Radio or watch LinkTV or read RSN or look into roughly a dozen TRULY liberal media. Maybe he means Rachel Maddow as his single example. Who the fuck knows?

Quote:

have been passive and acquiescent toward the secret spying programs, which would have infuriated the left had they been the work of a Republican administration.

Not having had the time, it would be interesting to see a real, fair comparison of between how politicians voted "then" and how they voted "now". But that's not what this article does. It picks three individuals out of 535. Like the snippet of Maxine Waters, my radar goes up whenever an article unbalances its information so heavily. Maybe the author really DOES have a point to make, but we'd never know from this data.

Quote:

Yet it is jarring to see the left so compliant now that the surveillance has been sanctioned by a Democratic president.
Registered Democrats represent "the left"? What is this guy on?

Quote:

Sixty-nine percent of Democrats say that terrorism investigations should trump privacy as the government’s main concern, compared with 51?percent in 2006, when the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program had come to light. Then, 37?percent of Democrats found the NSA’s actions acceptable, compared with 64?percent now. (Republicans went in the other direction, suddenly becoming more privacy-conscious.)
So neither Democrats nor Republicans fully represent principled positions. The article, which is pretty cagey about the Republicans ACTUAL position in 2006, fails to mention this

Quote:

In 2006, 75 percent [registered Republicans] said the program was acceptable, and 23 percent said it was not. Now 52 percent find it acceptable, and 47 percent unacceptable.
As far as I can tell, registered Republicans as whole are even shittier than Dems, with only 23% taking a principled stand on privacy, no matter who is in office.

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/10/n-s-a-monitoring-and-pa
rtisan-hypocrisy
/

Anyway, I could go on, but I think you get my points:

"Liberals" and "the left" are not represented by registered Dems or the MSM. Why he keeps referring to people like Feinstein and Reid as "liberals" is so far beyond the truth, clearly he's invested in selling this lie.

As a whole, registered Dems take a more principled position on privacy (31% finding intrusion unacceptable when Obama is in office) than Republicans (23% finding in unacceptable when Bush was in office) but neither party's registered members are stellar. Which pretty much tracks their voting record: Overall, Dems are better than Repubs, but even in the Dem party it doesn't make a majority. That's why I vote person-by-person.





Libs haven't gone, we finally found an issue that we all agree on. We should enjoy this while it lasts, mid-terms are coming soon and we'll all be enemys again before we know it.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 15, 2013 6:10 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Libs haven't gone, we finally found an issue that we all agree on.
What mean this "we", Kimo Sabe? I have no idea who you are, what you stand for, and who you're affiliated with, but I DO know that you behave pretty trollishly. Why should I ally with YOU?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 15, 2013 6:33 AM

WHOZIT


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:

Libs haven't gone, we finally found an issue that we all agree on.
What mean this "we", Kimo Sabe? I have no idea who you are, what you stand for, and who you're affiliated with, but I DO know that you behave pretty trollishly. Why should I ally with YOU?



Well that didn't last long, as for me being a troll, trust me when I say I don't live under a bridge.

Even though ALL these scandals have been done by libs, you'll vote the the Democrat ticket next year. Even though you may dislike what the libs have done, there's is no way you could vote Republican. What's funny is everything you libs say we would do, the left has done.

They lied about Benghazi

Obama's IRS harassed the Tea Party and other right-wing groups

Obama's NSA collected ALL our phone numbers

Obama's DOJ bugged the MSM

Everything you libs said Bush and the Republicans would do, but next November you'll vote Democrat because we arn't hip or cool and want women to have back alley abortions with rusty pliers.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 15, 2013 6:37 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I can't help what "most people" think.



But, unfortunately, you have to deal with it.

If most people consider Democrats to be liberals or leftists, that's what the media is gonna call them. When Milbank uses those terms, pretty much everyone reading his column gets that he means Democrats, whether they consider liberals to be the same as Democrats or not. Even if you don't consider Reid, Pelosi, Obama, et al to be liberals or on the left as Milbank labeled them, there's not much doubt they're Democrats.

And would the point of the article really have changed that much if Milbank had used "Democrats" rather than "Liberals" or "The Left" all the way through? It's still the same people doing the same stuff, regardless of the label you tag them with.


"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 15, 2013 7:34 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


The point of the article is, supposedly, to bring some information to the reader, no? What would it have cost the author to consistently use the term "Democrat" when that is exactly who he was referring to? Conflating terms as he does is a clear sign that this author intends to mislead rather than inform.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 15, 2013 7:37 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Even though ALL these scandals have been done by libs, you'll vote the the Democrat ticket next year.
Well, that didn't last long. I didn't vote the Dem ticket last year, what makes you think I would next year?

As far as you being a troll, I'm merely commenting on your behavior here, not on your political affiliation.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 15, 2013 9:00 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!




DHS insider: It’s about to get very ugly
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/55749




In Firefly the Alliance merged the US flag with the flag of Communist China

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 15, 2013 9:29 AM

WHOZIT


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:

Even though ALL these scandals have been done by libs, you'll vote the the Democrat ticket next year.
Well, that didn't last long. I didn't vote the Dem ticket last year, what makes you think I would next year?

As far as you being a troll, I'm merely commenting on your behavior here, not on your political affiliation.



We're all Browncoats here, always.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 15, 2013 10:24 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The point of the article is, supposedly, to bring some information to the reader, no? What would it have cost the author to consistently use the term "Democrat" when that is exactly who he was referring to? Conflating terms as he does is a clear sign that this author intends to mislead rather than inform.



Pretty much all the MSM uses "liberal" as a synonym for Democrat and "the Left" as a synonym for the Democratic Party.

Sorry.




"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 15, 2013 2:48 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The point of the article is, supposedly, to bring some information to the reader, no? What would it have cost the author to consistently use the term "Democrat" when that is exactly who he was referring to? Conflating terms as he does is a clear sign that this author intends to mislead rather than inform.



Pretty much all the MSM uses "liberal" as a synonym for Democrat and "the Left" as a synonym for the Democratic Party.

Sorry.




In the same way "teabagger" or "libertarian" means "Republican", right? They're all the same group, really, and have no differences.



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 15, 2013 5:16 PM

WHOZIT


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:

Libs haven't gone, we finally found an issue that we all agree on.
What mean this "we", Kimo Sabe? I have no idea who you are, what you stand for, and who you're affiliated with, but I DO know that you behave pretty trollishly. Why should I ally with YOU?



I was just thinking, (It hurt) who the fuck are you? I'm a troll Kimo Suckit!? I'm done trying to make peace with you lib douchebags. You are the enemy! we will never be friends EVER! I'm done! I don't care about the Browncoats thing, now I want Demorats to go away! SUCK IT!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 15, 2013 7:38 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

I don't care about the Browncoats thing
What are you doing here??
Quote:

now I want Demorats to go away! SUCK IT!
Good thing I'm not a Dem, then!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Russia says 60 dead, 145 injured in concert hall raid; Islamic State group claims responsibility
Fri, March 29, 2024 00:45 - 56 posts
Elections; 2024
Fri, March 29, 2024 00:33 - 2075 posts
Long List of Celebrities that are Still Here
Fri, March 29, 2024 00:00 - 1 posts
BUILD BACK BETTER!
Thu, March 28, 2024 23:51 - 10 posts
China
Thu, March 28, 2024 22:10 - 447 posts
Biden
Thu, March 28, 2024 22:03 - 853 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, March 28, 2024 17:24 - 3413 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, March 28, 2024 17:20 - 6155 posts
Well... He was no longer useful to the DNC or the Ukraine Money Laundering Scheme... So justice was served
Thu, March 28, 2024 12:44 - 1 posts
Salon: NBC's Ronna blunder: A failed attempt to appeal to MAGA voters — except they hate her too
Thu, March 28, 2024 07:04 - 1 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Wed, March 27, 2024 23:21 - 987 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Wed, March 27, 2024 15:03 - 824 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL