A MAJOR LEFTIST MEDIA ASSHOLE DOES THE COUNTRY A FAVOR

[texaspackerbacker]

Tim Russert, one the worst of the worst--kicked off of a heart attack.

Before you forum leftist hypocrites get all pious about not speaking ill of the dead or whatever, You KNOW if it was Rush Limbaugh or some other good American who died, you would be pissing all over them too.

So good riddance to an America-hating piece of shit who represents the worst of the worst--the leftist mainstream media which has done and continues to do so much to harm this country.

[LL2]

Hey, I consider myself a republican voter and conservative for the most part, but I never rejoice in hearing the news of someone dying. No matter who they are, unless it's a child molester, wife beater, or that dude that raped his daughter in a dungeon for 20 years.

[Oscar]

The man was 58 years old. Shitty post Tex.

[GoPackGo]

Tex belongs in the....
http://cache.gawker.com/assets/resources/2006/10/Douchebag1.jpg
for this post

[texaspackerbacker]

Hey, I consider myself a republican voter and conservative for the most part, but I never rejoice in hearing the news of someone dying. No matter who they are, unless it's a child molester, wife beater, or that dude that raped his daughter in a dungeon for 20 years.

And you wouldn't want to include "poisoner of the electorate to the detriment of America and Americans" in that? Arguably, Russert harmed far more people than the examples you cited.

And yeah, I plead guilty to a "shitty post"--jumping on the grave of even a scumbag like that. What I am doing is basically a pre-emptive attack before anybody in here starts in with the praise for the shithead that I am even hearing on Fox right now.

It is his sick damned kind who have done more to hurt this country than any politician, even left wing, as he came with the guise of objectivity and lack of bias. May he rot in hell for that!

[GoPackGo]

The guys body is still warm and you're pissing on it on an internet forum for Packer fans. You sir, are very misguided.

[packinpatland]

I had personally 'run into' Tim Russert many times. He and his family have a home on Nantucket. This man was a gentleman.......a gentle man.

Tex, your post is quite possibly the worst post I have ever read here at PR. Only someone whose belly drags as they 'walk' would ever consisder posting such.

[texaspackerbacker]

I've managed to hit four other forums so far too.

No apologies. When I think of the harm done to this country by the LEFT-BIASED MAINSTREAM MEDIA--of which Russert was one of the worst in terms of maximum influence with people, it makes my blood boil.

He was a sick damned America-hater who spread his sick damned America-hate to a large segment of the electorate.

And you just KNOW that if some decent pro-American media person--Rush, Hannity, whoever--died, leftists who be spewing as bad shit as I am--the only difference is that they'd be wrong.

[FavreChild]

May he rot in hell

Hey, right back at ya.

Of course, I don't believe in hell because I am a CRAZY liberal atheist.

Just think, Tex, all the fond farewells for the great American, Tim Russert, will inspire thousands of Americans to follow his example and strive for an even better country.

Cheers to Tim Russert for his contributions to American politics and journalism. R.I.P.

[GoPackGo]

I've managed to hit four other forums so far too.

No apologies. When I think of the harm done to this country by the LEFT-BIASED MAINSTREAM MEDIA--of which Russert was one of the worst in terms of maximum influence with people, it makes my blood boil.

He was a sick damned America-hater who spread his sick damned America-hate to a large segment of the electorate.

And you just KNOW that if some decent pro-American media person--Rush, Hannity, whoever--died, leftists who be spewing as bad shit as I am--the only difference is that they'd be wrong.

I'm listening to the Hannity show right now and he's dedicating his whole show to Russert. He speaks very highly of Russert. What The Fucks your problem?!

[SkinBasket]

We're going to fight about dead people now? This is weird.

People make too much out of dead people.

[GoPackGo]

We're going to fight about dead people now? This is weird.

People make too much out of dead people.

i'm bored and dreaming about happy hour. I really don't care

[LL2]

Hey, I consider myself a republican voter and conservative for the most part, but I never rejoice in hearing the news of someone dying. No matter who they are, unless it's a child molester, wife beater, or that dude that raped his daughter in a dungeon for 20 years.

And you wouldn't want to include "poisoner of the electorate to the detriment of America and Americans" in that?

Was he more of a "poisoner" of the minds than Charles Manson, Warren Jeffs, or David Koresh. Certainly they are not on TV every week like Russert, but calling someone a "poisoner" is a very subjective thing.

[packinpatland]

I've managed to hit four other forums so far too.

No apologies. When I think of the harm done to this country by the LEFT-BIASED MAINSTREAM MEDIA--of which Russert was one of the worst in terms of maximum influence with people, it makes my blood boil.

He was a sick damned America-hater who spread his sick damned America-hate to a large segment of the electorate.

And you just KNOW that if some decent pro-American media person--Rush, Hannity, whoever--died, leftists who be spewing as bad shit as I am--the only difference is that they'd be wrong.

I comforted to know that anyone with more than your ounce of brains would and does disagree with you.

[SkinBasket]

We're going to fight about dead people now? This is weird.

People make too much out of dead people.

i'm bored and dreaming about happy hour. I really don't care

And I doubt Russert cares anymore than you do right now. Let tex hate him. Let others celebrate him. Let others mourn him. It doesn't really matter. He was a man and he died, like the rest of us will some day.

I'll celebrate when Harlan dies because I know he would be disappointed if I didn't.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

That's our Tex. All class all the time.

[Freak Out]

If you hate LEFT-BIASED MAINSTREAM MEDIA then you are no better than any other AMERICA HATING SCUMBAG. Our Nations open speech and press make us what we are.

[packers11]

I hate the left but damn... that is a pretty harsh statement...

the only person I can think of off the top of my head that I would be pleased if dead is Osama Bin Laden... Other than that, no matter how much I disagree with his point of views, I am not happy with anyone dying especially because he was so young (only 58) and of all the pain and suffering it puts on his loved ones...

[packers11]

for example : Keith Olbermann... I wish someone would just beat the shit out of him, hes the most obnoxious reporter out there...

I would never wish him death or be happy if he did indeed die, no matter how idiotic he sounds on T.V. every night...

But it all comes down to morals , you indeed have very different ones than me :lol:

[texaspackerbacker]

That's the beauty of a forum like this. Even Hannity has to has to get all nicey nice about leftist trash like Russert. But thanks to that freedom of speech--which if the left had their way, they would curtail, I can tell it like it is.

It isn't only Russert. It is the whole bunch of GOD DAMNED AMERICA-HATING PIECES OF SHIT IN THE SICK LEFT-SATURATED MAINSTREAM MEDIA THAT HAS CORRUPTED THE ELECTORATE and put all of the great things in this country INCLUDING freedom of speech and press at risk.

I don't blame most of you criticizing me, as likely, most of you would be similarly critical of some leftist who would be similarly disrespectful of let's say, George W. Bush or Rush Limbaugh or whoever if they died.

The difference, though, as I said, is that Russert and his sick kind REALLY HAVE HARMED THIS COUNTRY SIGNIFICANTLY by subtly corrupting the electorate to support policies and candidates who have damaged and who continue to damage this country.

Packers11 brings up Olberman. Hell yeah, he's every bit as bad as Russert. He, however, doesn't even make a pretense of objectivity. Therefore, he is not near as effective at influencing people/voters in the wrong/anti-American direction. The better comparison is Walter Cronkite, who damn near lost the Cold War for America, and probably DID lose the Vietnam War by his horrendous--but subtle skewing of the electorate.

[3irty1]

This is the last time I open a thread that has a subject written in all caps.

[Freak Out]

That's the beauty of a forum like this. Even Hannity has to has to get all nicey nice about leftist trash like Russert. But thanks to that freedom of speech--which if the left had their way, they would curtail, I can tell it like it is.

It isn't only Russert. It is the whole bunch of GOD DAMNED AMERICA-HATING PIECES OF SHIT IN THE SICK LEFT-SATURATED MAINSTREAM MEDIA THAT HAS CORRUPTED THE ELECTORATE and put all of the great things in this country INCLUDING freedom of speech and press at risk.

I don't blame most of you criticizing me, as likely, most of you would be similarly critical of some leftist who would be similarly disrespectful of let's say, George W. Bush or Rush Limbaugh or whoever if they died.

The difference, though, as I said, is that Russert and his sick kind REALLY HAVE HARMED THIS COUNTRY SIGNIFICANTLY by subtly corrupting the electorate to support policies and candidates who have damaged and who continue to damage this country.

Packers11 brings up Olberman. Hell yeah, he's every bit as bad as Russert. He, however, doesn't even make a pretense of objectivity. Therefore, he is not near as effective at influencing people/voters in the wrong/anti-American direction. The better comparison is Walter Cronkite, who damn near lost the Cold War for America, and probably DID lose the Vietnam War by his horrendous--but subtle skewing of the electorate.

Texas....who watched Meet the Press?

[red]

This is the last time I open a thread that has a subject written in all caps.

if mad would just get us that fucking ignore button we would all be happy

it could go back to being just like the good ole days. before the latest JSO takeover

i didn't watch russert much, but i really liked the fact that he was under control and didn't try and brainwash you by screaming at the top of his lungs for an hour, and throwing an obnoxious fit

[red]

where's the outrage from tex's little right wing buddy that he brought over with him from jso?

he cried like a little bitch when i said i wished bill o'rielly would die

but not a peep when his idol jumps up and down because someone (who has more class then bill could ever imagine he has)dies

[Charles Woodson]

This is the last time I open a thread that has a subject written in all caps.

Thats what i keep trying to tell myself

But really, Tex what makes you think that you have more of a right to live than he does?

[Deputy Nutz]

Who gives a flying fuck what Tex thinks.

[falco]

Who gives a flying fuck what Tex thinks.

exactly - tex hated the civil rights workers too

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Who gives a flying fuck what Tex thinks.

I do, you ass.

His ruminations are like blessings from the buddha.

[MJZiggy]

Tex, I gotta tell you, as Americans we're all supposed to be on the same side regardless of ideology. I've been irritated with your good guy-bad guy/our side vs. their side for a while now and I believe I've even called you on it once or twice, but damn, man! This is a new low. There comes a time to put politics aside. You call them America hating, but your absolute loathing of any person who expresses an idea that does not agree with yours shows me that you are the worst of the America haters mainly because of your hysteria over what half the country thinks, and I'm not just suggesting you hate the ideas, no. Indeed you hate the PEOPLE who express them. What a repulsive way to be.

My sympathies to the Russert family. I only saw his work a few times but from what I saw he was a good journalist. (and completely undeserving of such a hate-filled tirade.)

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Tex, I gotta tell you, as Americans we're all supposed to be on the same side regardless of ideology. I've been irritated with your good guy-bad guy/our side vs. their side for a while now and I believe I've even called you on it once or twice, but damn, man! This is a new low. There comes a time to put politics aside. You call them America hating, but your absolute loathing of any person who expresses an idea that does not agree with yours shows me that you are the worst of the America haters mainly because of your hysteria over what half the country thinks, and I'm not just suggesting you hate the ideas, no. Indeed you hate the PEOPLE who express them. What a repulsive way to be.

My sympathies to the Russert family. I only saw his work a few times but from what I saw he was a good journalist. (and completely undeserving of such a hate-filled tirade.)

This post is why i love you...my ardor burns stronger than ever. What size rock do you require?

[FavreChild]

I've been irritated with your good guy-bad guy/our side vs. their side for a while now

Polarization is a classic propaganda strategy, and it holds no validity. Of course, propaganda is fine when "normal good American" radicals like him use it. They have to put "us" in our place, you know.

[MJZiggy]

I've been irritated with your good guy-bad guy/our side vs. their side for a while now

Polarization is a classic propaganda strategy, and it holds no validity. Of course, propaganda is fine when "normal good American" radicals like him use it. They have to put "us" in our place, you know.

Propaganda only works if someone believes it. He wants people to discuss issues with him but how can you respect him enough to discuss issues with him when he posts such absolute shit? And anyone who knows me knows the futility of trying to "put me in my place."

And Ty, this is not the time.

[bobblehead]

Dude, I can't even think of a possible response that is fitting.

I have typed 3 paragraphs and deleted them cuz I just can't think of anything I can say that will make you get it.

I'll just settle for dude, wtf is going on in your head?

[FavreChild]

He wants people to discuss issues with him but how can you respect him enough to discuss issues with him when he posts such absolute shit?

I know; I don't even bother engaging him. He has no interest in genuine debate. No willingness to make concessions. No ability to try to see things from a different side. His viewpoints aren't always wrong (although I personally disagree with him almost always), but the way he argues them is. (Oh, and by the way, I also have just a little bit of expertise in propaganda use and analysis.)

But anyway....we agree. (And so does everyone else, apparently.)

I'm sure there is a thread about the perfect male or basements full of shit that is more deserving of my attention...

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I've been irritated with your good guy-bad guy/our side vs. their side for a while now

Polarization is a classic propaganda strategy, and it holds no validity. Of course, propaganda is fine when "normal good American" radicals like him use it. They have to put "us" in our place, you know.

Propaganda only works if someone believes it. He wants people to discuss issues with him but how can you respect him enough to discuss issues with him when he posts such absolute shit? And anyone who knows me knows the futility of trying to "put me in my place."

And Ty, this is not the time.

Why? That time of the month?

"Nobody puts MJZiggy in a corner."

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Dude, I can't even think of a possible response that is fitting.

I have typed 3 paragraphs and deleted them cuz I just can't think of anything I can say that will make you get it.

I'll just settle for dude, wtf is going on in your head?

Bobble,

You are new here..and maybe you didn't see his posts like this on JS.

Now, perhaps you understand why I have asked you about why you don't question his civility. Those of us in the know, knew it was only a matter of time before something like this would be posted.

I know you don't align yourself with tex completely, but maybe now you'll understand why i have repeatedly questioned any alignment with him.

You and your positions are done a disservice by even being associated with him.

[bobblehead]

Dude, I can't even think of a possible response that is fitting.

I have typed 3 paragraphs and deleted them cuz I just can't think of anything I can say that will make you get it.

I'll just settle for dude, wtf is going on in your head?

Bobble,

You are new here..and maybe you didn't see his posts like this on JS.

Now, perhaps you understand why I have asked you about why you don't question his civility. Those of us in the know, knew it was only a matter of time before something like this would be posted.

I know you don't align yourself with tex completely, but maybe now you'll understand why i have repeatedly questioned any alignment with him.

You and your positions are done a disservice by even being associated with him.

Ty, I have always called him out. You just don't want to acknowledge that. I may not have done it in the same way I do #1PF when I am trying to get him to make a point, but I have refuted tex more often than I have you, and you are just as deserving of it, you just fail to see it.

YOU have associated me with him, and that is exactly why I say you don't see it. Economically he is correct for the most part. Socially he has been wrong for the most part. If you are associating me with him because he is right sometimes shame on you. He probably associates me with you because I agreed with you about blackwater, and if he does shame on him.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Dude, I can't even think of a possible response that is fitting.

I have typed 3 paragraphs and deleted them cuz I just can't think of anything I can say that will make you get it.

I'll just settle for dude, wtf is going on in your head?

Bobble,

You are new here..and maybe you didn't see his posts like this on JS.

Now, perhaps you understand why I have asked you about why you don't question his civility. Those of us in the know, knew it was only a matter of time before something like this would be posted.

I know you don't align yourself with tex completely, but maybe now you'll understand why i have repeatedly questioned any alignment with him.

You and your positions are done a disservice by even being associated with him.

Ty, I have always called him out. You just don't want to acknowledge that. I may not have done it in the same way I do #1PF when I am trying to get him to make a point, but I have refuted tex more often than I have you, and you are just as deserving of it, you just fail to see it.

YOU have associated me with him, and that is exactly why I say you don't see it. Economically he is correct for the most part. Socially he has been wrong for the most part. If you are associating me with him because he is right sometimes shame on you. He probably associates me with you because I agreed with you about blackwater, and if he does shame on him.

Bobble,

You haven't called him out for his ATTITUDE. THat is the crux of the matter and all i was talking about.

YOu made your point about racists and conservs...my point would be that if you hang with tex or appear to..that what you say gets dismissed or mitigated by him...same for a lib with tank. Sorry...prolly isn't fair, but life isn't fair, and you can only expect so much from people.

Econ: Econ is not a science..so to say anybody is correct is...well, a bit tenuous.

Me: I don't hate anybody. I don't call people america haters, etc. You may not like my humor, but it is only meant to be funny or illuminate a point. At the end of the day, i could have a beer with just about anybody on this forum (not saying the would want to have a beer with me)..except that doesn't apply for Tex..because he truly does hate people.

ONe of my best friends is very far on the right..constantly would tell me how Buchanon would be the best prez..yet, i can maintain a friendship with him. And, he doesn't view me as someone who should be exterminated or deported...all positions tex has taken.

Tex couldn't do that..or even want to.

[bobblehead]

Tex is very wrong in his rhetoric, especially where people being harmed is concerned. If I haven't said that plainly before, I apologize, I hope I have been clear enough about it here.

I guess I'm guilty of some things. If he makes a point I disagree with and calls the left names I don't feel offended because I'm not the left, I simply go about refuting his point factually.

If the left makes a point and "attacks" me I'm gonna be quick to feel offended, point it out, and then go about refuting the point. Perhaps my not defending you guys makes you lump me with him...I don't think that is fair, but I can see your point.

As far as economics go, you were the one saying it was math in a different thread, and it is. Its the way we define the parameters that make it an "art", but some things are still irrefuteable, such as overbearing tax burden and regulation harm the economic progression. Same as global warming is a mathematical model, but how you put in the parameters can change the outcomes. (also, guessing at the equations can change things in both cases).

I don't think you are a hater. I do think you are just as arrogant as I am. We both hate admitting when we are wrong (which is worse for you, since I'm mostly right :) )

I too have friends who are far left, and they are good people, as was russert. Tex has a problem where he equates all leftists with the very few who are basically nothing more than the lefts version of David Duke types. That is just as wrong as equating conservatives as rascists. Hope you understand that Tex.

I also have realized that where I am motivated to post on forums like this to hopefully make people understand what good policy might be, and inspire them to research issues and vote out the politicians I call pigs, Tex is here to rant and blow off steam.

Anyway, we have both given this thread more ink than it deserves.

[GBRulz]

Tex belongs in the....
http://cache.gawker.com/assets/resources/2006/10/Douchebag1.jpg
for this post

I'll drink to that.

:glug:

it takes one sick son-of-a-bitch to applaud someone else's death.

[SkinBasket]

it takes one sick son-of-a-bitch to applaud someone else's death.

Again. Who the fuck cares? I'm sure if I were dead and conscious of it, I would be highly entertained by someone celebrating my death. He's dead. Get over it.

[oregonpackfan]

Tex,

Your original post of this thread is just reprehensible. Though Russert was a Democrat, he did his best to be as objective as possible.

As an interviewer, he was noted for being a dogged interviewer for people who were not being honest with their answers, be they conservatives or progressives.

As PIP stated, Russert was indeed a gentlemen. He wrote a touching story about he and his aging father. It was entitled "Me and Big Russ" or "Big Russ and Me"(I can't remember which).

It is obvious you did not like his political leanings. Maybe you should go and re-read the First Amendment to calm yourself down.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Pretty classless thread.

[texaspackerbacker]

Well, I thank you all for proving my point.

The fact that an America-hating scumbag like Russert has such a following among supposed moderates displays the subtle effectiveness of his sick kind.

The crap spewed by him and the rest of the sickly anti-American mainstream media has made possible the rotten Congressional majority we have and the ridiculously anti-American Dem/lib candidate we are in danger of being saddled with. And so many even beyond the obvious loons of the left won't even acknowledge the media bias.

Maybe I'm wrong to be so blatant in spelling out how bad the guy was when his damn corpse isn't even in the ground, but I ask you, what kind of crap do you think would our idiot leftists be spewing if it was Limbaugh or Bush who died? And even THAT would not be an example of the moral equivalence the left incessantly rants about, because unlike asshole Russert, those guys love America and have moved it in a positive direction.

[texaspackerbacker]

Tex,

Your original post of this thread is just reprehensible. Though Russert was a Democrat, he did his best to be as objective as possible.

As an interviewer, he was noted for being a dogged interviewer for people who were not being honest with their answers, be they conservatives or progressives.

As PIP stated, Russert was indeed a gentlemen. He wrote a touching story about he and his aging father. It was entitled "Me and Big Russ" or "Big Russ and Me"(I can't remember which).

It is obvious you did not like his political leanings. Maybe you should go and re-read the First Amendment to calm yourself down.

Oregon, he did his best to SEEM as objective as possible. And therein lies the reason why he was so dangerous and harmful to the country. And if you don't believe that, just read through these posts at how many people not nearly as liberal as you who THOUGHT he was something other than the total America-hating leftist scumbag that he was.

If Hitler had written a "touching story about HIS father" would you mourn his death?

The First Amendment is exactly what I'm putting to good use--while a bunch of others--including many in the forum and out who would probably be called conservative and pro-American are acting like damn politicians. Well, I'm not running for anything. I'm telling it like it is--expressing my disgust for somebody that has done so much to harm my/our country.

[oregonpackfan]

Tex,

Your original post of this thread is just reprehensible. Though Russert was a Democrat, he did his best to be as objective as possible.

As an interviewer, he was noted for being a dogged interviewer for people who were not being honest with their answers, be they conservatives or progressives.

As PIP stated, Russert was indeed a gentlemen. He wrote a touching story about he and his aging father. It was entitled "Me and Big Russ" or "Big Russ and Me"(I can't remember which).

It is obvious you did not like his political leanings. Maybe you should go and re-read the First Amendment to calm yourself down.

Oregon, he did his best to SEEM as objective as possible. And therein lies the reason why he was so dangerous and harmful to the country. And if you don't believe that, just read through these posts at how many people not nearly as liberal as you who THOUGHT he was something other than the total America-hating leftist scumbag that he was.

If Hitler had written a "touching story about HIS father" would you mourn his death?

The First Amendment is exactly what I'm putting to good use--while a bunch of others--including many in the forum and out who would probably be called conservative and pro-American are acting like damn politicians. Well, I'm not running for anything. I'm telling it like it is--expressing my disgust for somebody that has done so much to harm my/our country.

Texas,

NBC Dateline just released an excellent tribute to Russert which documented his professional, family, and personal life.

He received tributes on this program from people of all walks of life and both sides of the political spectrum including conservatives John McCain, Newt Gingrich, and George W. Bush.

Russert ended a reflection of his that despite all the political arguments in which he was involved, "What a great country!"

That "What a great country" proclamation hardly seems like a statement from someone who allegedly hates America and wants to tear it down. No, Tim Russert loved America.

[LEWCWA]

Tex wants what best for tex--he could give 2 shits about America. He cares about his America.

[MJZiggy]

But he hates the real America.

[FavreChild]

Oregon, he did his best to SEEM as objective as possible. And therein lies the reason why he was so dangerous and harmful to the country. And if you don't believe that, just read through these posts at how many people not nearly as liberal as you who THOUGHT he was something other than the total America-hating leftist scumbag that he was.

If Hitler had written a "touching story about HIS father" would you mourn his death?

Yeah, OPF - don't you realize we are all just being brainwashed by the evil genius Tim Russert, and we're all just too stoooopid to know it? That's right, Tex, we're all just dupes, and you're the only intelligent American to know what's really going on.

(Claiming a "liberal conspiracy" - another propaganda technique. Not valid.)

But comparing Russert to Hitler - now that's the most blatant propaganda technique of all - and also, invalid. Um, pretty sure Russert didn't believe in exterminating millions of Americans (which I'm sure Tex would gladly support, on the other hand). Talk about a red herring; real sound reasoning there.

Next time, come heavy or don't come at all. (I'd prefer the latter, personally.)

[MJZiggy]

it takes one sick son-of-a-bitch to applaud someone else's death.

Again. Who the fuck cares? I'm sure if I were dead and conscious of it, I would be highly entertained by someone celebrating my death. He's dead. Get over it.

Skin, it's not necessarily about the guy who died. You don't speak ill of the dead out of respect for their survivors. I have a loose family tie with Michael Kelly who was killed over there in 2003. We have no way of knowing whether someone personally close to Tim Russert posts here. The man does have a family and there are New Yorkers who post here. If your family member or close personal friend dies, I'm not going to run around telling you what a piece of shit I thought they were. It would just add to your pain.

[retailguy]

Tex. I just don't know what to say. I'm so far right, I'm in danger of falling off the scale, but, I couldn't think of a liberal that I would talk like this about in death.

Certainly not Tim Russert.

Tex, in the grand scheme of life and death, Politics is NOT this important. It's not.

I'm disappointed in you, your position, your excersize of your right to free speech, and your belief that this is "fair game".

Today, I'm ashamed to associate you as part of the republican party. We don't need to gloat over things like this. :cry:

I'll miss Tim Russert. At least he voiced his opinion, even when it was wrong. If we all did that, this county would be a better place.

[digitaldean]

Wow. I skip checking in to PR for 1 day and all this
:shtf:

Tex, I, for one, think that Russert was not, repeat, not the subversive you make him out to be. Some of the questions I have seen him give on MTP or the debates have been a little out there. But I have also seen him put a libs feet to the fire also.

I am a conservative that wants as small a gov't as possible and not having people thrusting political correctness in my face every time.

That being said, rejoicing at the demise of another human being... man that's just flat out cold.

First Amendment rights should be observed. Your opinion carries the same weight as everyone elses. But let's keep in mind that this site was set up for the benefit of all. Let's not make this place the reincarnation of JSO. I can not stand to see this descend in what that muckhole became.

Wishing ill on others or rejoicing in their demise shows a lack of humanity that is creeping more and more into this society. Case in point, Nancy Reagan hurts herself in a fall that necessitates hospitalization. Then goons on Huffington Post throw out bilge against her and her late husband Pres. Reagan and cheer at her injury. It's just as stupid as the morons who cheered at my high school the day Pres. Reagan was shot.

If I posted what Tex did to someone opposite of my beliefs, it reflects one thing... I haven't learned one single thing from my Christian upbringing.

Anyone that rejoices in the pain of others, whatever side of the political spectrum they're from, deserves whatever moral indignation that gets heaped upon them.

Tex, I wish no ill will on you. I am glad when you speak out to champion those conservative beliefs you hold to. But the discourse of ideas needs to be devoid of the hate that this thread brings out. It needs more common sense, another trait severely lacking in our society.

It's bad enough having politicians spew this drivel, let's hope we the people are smarter than that.

[Harlan Huckleby]

it takes one sick son-of-a-bitch to applaud someone else's death.

Again. Who the fuck cares? I'm sure if I were dead and conscious of it, I would be highly entertained by someone celebrating my death. He's dead. Get over it.

I partially agree with your cynacism. When somebody dies that you see on TV, people want a piece of the grieving action. Its entertainment. Everybody light a candle, a candle in the wind. I was dreading the afternmath of the Tim Russert tradgedy, because he so likeable and public.

But then again, its not like the emotions people feel aren't real. I about went into a coma when Jerry Garcia died - why? I don't know him. I thought he was a very intelligent and gentle person. I'm sure many people have a simlar admiration for Tim Russert, so they feel a loss as if they really knew him.

[Harlan Huckleby]

That being said, rejoicing at the demise of another human being... man that's just flat out cold.

Tex evidently sees Tim Russert much like some people in this forum see Michael Vick.

I don't get it, but I think that explains his sentiment.

[texaspackerbacker]

Tex,

Your original post of this thread is just reprehensible. Though Russert was a Democrat, he did his best to be as objective as possible.

As an interviewer, he was noted for being a dogged interviewer for people who were not being honest with their answers, be they conservatives or progressives.

As PIP stated, Russert was indeed a gentlemen. He wrote a touching story about he and his aging father. It was entitled "Me and Big Russ" or "Big Russ and Me"(I can't remember which).

It is obvious you did not like his political leanings. Maybe you should go and re-read the First Amendment to calm yourself down.

Oregon, he did his best to SEEM as objective as possible. And therein lies the reason why he was so dangerous and harmful to the country. And if you don't believe that, just read through these posts at how many people not nearly as liberal as you who THOUGHT he was something other than the total America-hating leftist scumbag that he was.

If Hitler had written a "touching story about HIS father" would you mourn his death?

The First Amendment is exactly what I'm putting to good use--while a bunch of others--including many in the forum and out who would probably be called conservative and pro-American are acting like damn politicians. Well, I'm not running for anything. I'm telling it like it is--expressing my disgust for somebody that has done so much to harm my/our country.

Texas,

NBC Dateline just released an excellent tribute to Russert which documented his professional, family, and personal life.

He received tributes on this program from people of all walks of life and both sides of the political spectrum including conservatives John McCain, Newt Gingrich, and George W. Bush.

Russert ended a reflection of his that despite all the political arguments in which he was involved, "What a great country!"

That "What a great country" proclamation hardly seems like a statement from someone who allegedly hates America and wants to tear it down. No, Tim Russert loved America.

Oregon, as i said, I'm not a politician--or even subject to the whims of manipulation of the public--like Bush, McCain, Hannity, or whoever else said nice things about this piece of scum, Russert.

I see I'm continuing to get criticized by a bunch of people in here--some I tend to respect, others not much. The fact is, I don't do forums to win popularity contests. I tell it like it is--which I will give SOME of you who are posting against me here credit for doing too.

The fact is, there is a big world out there of people who aren't scared to speak ill of somebody the left propped up as an icon and who don't feel the need to be politically correct or whatever.

The bottom line here, as Harlan and maybe a couple of others figured out, is that I certainly do see this asshole Russert like ...... Michael Vick? some weird example there. Michael Vick apparently harmed what, 200-300 dogs? And the liberal media says "hate him", so a lot of people hate him. Well, multiply Vick times whatever the harm is worth of potentially ruining this country and killing millions, and that is what I hold Russert responsible for--hnot him alone, but his sick kind--the wolves in sheep's clothing of the leftist mainstream media who have brought us a horrendously liberal Congress and the prospect of a Dem/lib president who in this nuclear age, could literally throw it all away--our freedom, our prosperity, even our lives.

How? Why? You may ask.

Can we agree 9/11 was a bad thing? Can we further agree that repeats of 9/11, possibly multiple, possibly with worse weapons--chemical, biological, nuclear--would be a worse thing? Can we even agree that taking out several of our cities with terrorist nukes who affect EVERYBODY--not just the millions killed and others directly harmed--I'm talking about no more freedom, no more normalcy, no more enjoyment of life?

Now for the hard part that I'm sure you libs won't agree with, but it's true just the same. That scenario of horrors is INFINITELY more likely with an Obama or other leftist presidency--their stated policies, their votes against security, their overal de-prioritizing defeating the terrorist enemy ALL make terrorist hits in this country much more likely.

Where do Russert and the other assholes of the leftist mainstream media come in? THEY have corrupted the political climate to where that scenario is far more likely. One of my detractors above said something like "politics doesn't matter". WRONG! Politics is how things get done in this country--how CHANGE happens--even most liberals know that.

I love America and the great life we all have in America, and I don't want to see that destroyed. The death of Russert eliminated one major force toward the destruction of America and our way of life.

[Charles Woodson]

How? Why? You may ask.

Can we agree 9/11 was a bad thing? Can we further agree that repeats of 9/11, possibly multiple, possibly with worse weapons--chemical, biological, nuclear--would be a worse thing? Can we even agree that taking out several of our cities with terrorist nukes who affect EVERYBODY--not just the millions killed and others directly harmed--I'm talking about no more freedom, no more normalcy, no more enjoyment of life?



If thats what your basing your hatred on then thats very extreme. Now i admit to not knowing much on this guy, but first off i can guarantee you that that would never happen. Reason? because the population wouldn't let it. America is not some place run like a tyranny, but its a democracy/republic whatever the hell you want to call it, I mean you act as if Electing Obama would be the end of the world. Im not defending him, hell i cant even vote yet and even if i could i would for McCain. But im saying that if Obama starts corrupting things, he would be removed.

[BallHawk]

Just a simple question for Tex.

Do you give a damn that the guy has a family? That his son just graduated from college and this happens? That he died two days before Father's Day and now his wife and son will have no one?

Of course you don't. You're a sad old man who's convinced that every media pundit who dares differ from your opinion is a scumbag that deserves to die.

It's pathetic and so are you for even implying that Russert's death is a good thing. The man was a force in American politics and above that a great man who was involved in charity and other events for the greater good.

I pity you, Tex. I really do.

[bobblehead]

I wasn't gonna waste any more on this thread, but tex let me say this.

I actually UNDERSTAND your point, in a way I hope you don't misinterpret as condoning this I even agree with some of it.

That being said, pissing on someones grave is not a way to make a point, it will NEVER convince anyone or accomplish ANYTHING other than to make people dismiss everything else you say. (and make you look like a jack-ass)

You think Russert hates america, I think he is a very decent person who is guilty of bad political judgement. The same probably goes for Obama although I can't "know" him yet.

You do a disservice to yourself and everything you stand for when you celebrate someones death because you disagree with him.

Now, all you leftists forgive me, this is directed at tex, not you.

First off, you gotta realize most of the very liberal left media actually believe that crap, they are brainwashed in school and by their surroundings. They are by and large very good people who happen to have bought swampland in florida. You should be feeling sorry for them, not hating them. You shoud do everything you can to point out why the long standing polocies of the left have failed over and over again, rescue them!!

Some might just get it, some might never get it, and if your lucky you will become a much better adjusted person and possibly learn something along the way.

All that this post shows is that you have managed to stumble into the correct philosophy through luck and not through logical thought, cuz logical thought would have precluded you from hating a guy like russert even if you disagree with him.

You come across as very bitter and angry in this post (among other things) and that is sad. I don't know you, and I won't try to judge you, but one thing I can tell you for certain is if you lose that anger and learn to embrace even those you disagree with you will be a much happier person. I'm not naive about love peace and happiness solving everything, but I'll save the bombs for the terrorists and I'll give russert some respect.

I know some on this forum disagree with me and might not like a few things I said here, I hope you can let it slide in this instance and take it out on me in some other thread where I might be inclined to put more ink on, I am done with this one.

[texaspackerbacker]

Now, all you leftists forgive me, this is directed at tex, not you.

First off, you gotta realize most of the very liberal left media actually believe that crap, they are brainwashed in school and by their surroundings. They are by and large very good people who happen to have bought swampland in florida. You should be feeling sorry for them, not hating them. You shoud do everything you can to point out why the long standing polocies of the left have failed over and over again, rescue them.
_________________________________________
Bobblehead, WHY do you feel the need to APOLOGIZE for this? Either you believe what you say, or you don't. Are YOU a politician? Are YOU in a popularity contest? Do YOU beieve in the idiocy of political correctness?

As I said in the other thread, there's a helluva lot at stake here in terms of destroying our way of life. Whatever Russert's attitude or Obama's attitude or whatever, it's the RESULT of the horrendous SHIT they are pushing that counts--and in the case of Russert, the subtle ability to influence the electorate while having this bogus image of objectivity.

[texaspackerbacker]

Just a simple question for Tex.

Do you give a damn that the guy has a family? That his son just graduated from college and this happens? That he died two days before Father's Day and now his wife and son will have no one?

Of course you don't. You're a sad old man who's convinced that every media pundit who dares differ from your opinion is a scumbag that deserves to die.

It's pathetic and so are you for even implying that Russert's death is a good thing. The man was a force in American politics and above that a great man who was involved in charity and other events for the greater good.

I pity you, Tex. I really do.

Ballhawk, I don't know about you, but I can put my "give a damn" factor in perspective--MUCH MUCH less significant than the HARM done to the country by the likes of Russert.

Would YOU give a damn about the "family" or whatever if Rush Limbaugh died? Or George W. Bush? Maybe you would, I don't know you, but a helluva lot of those on the despicable left side--which you may or may not be--would NOT. Did you, for example feel sorry for "poor Saddam Hussein" when his two sons were killed?

There's a whole lot of very selective "giving a damn" going around? Why is it usually the liberals and socialists who get the benefit of it? Maybe because THEY control the media?

[red]

GO FUCK YOURSELF YOU GERIATRIC PIECE OF SHIT!!!!!!!!

there, i said it. we're all thinking it. but i won't hold back

go back to JSO, you've fucked this forum up enough. since you've shown up you've managed to take all the fun right out of this site and turned everyone against each other. hell, theres a lot of posters that barely even show face around here anymore

[BallHawk]

Ballhawk, I don't know about you, but I can put my "give a damn" factor in perspective--MUCH MUCH less significant than the HARM done to the country by the likes of Russert.

Would YOU give a damn about the "family" or whatever if Rush Limbaugh died? Or George W. Bush? Maybe you would, I don't know you, but a helluva lot of those on the despicable left side--which you may or may not be--would NOT. Did you, for example feel sorry for "poor Saddam Hussein" when his two sons were killed?

There's a whole lot of very selective "giving a damn" going around? Why is it usually the liberals and socialists who get the benefit of it? Maybe because THEY control the media?

Yes, Tex, if those two people mentioned above died I would care about the families. Family ranks about politics, Tex. I think Limbaugh is a fat sack of shit but I know that he has a family and that if he died he would be missed. BTW, Tim Russert and Rush Limbaugh were good friends so there's an example of two polar opposites of the political spectrum still getting along. Tex, there's much more to life than liberals, conservatives, media pundits, etc. I think you fail to see that.

[texaspackerbacker]

How? Why? You may ask.

Can we agree 9/11 was a bad thing? Can we further agree that repeats of 9/11, possibly multiple, possibly with worse weapons--chemical, biological, nuclear--would be a worse thing? Can we even agree that taking out several of our cities with terrorist nukes who affect EVERYBODY--not just the millions killed and others directly harmed--I'm talking about no more freedom, no more normalcy, no more enjoyment of life?



If thats what your basing your hatred on then thats very extreme. Now i admit to not knowing much on this guy, but first off i can guarantee you that that would never happen. Reason? because the population wouldn't let it. America is not some place run like a tyranny, but its a democracy/republic whatever the hell you want to call it, I mean you act as if Electing Obama would be the end of the world. Im not defending him, hell i cant even vote yet and even if i could i would for McCain. But im saying that if Obama starts corrupting things, he would be removed.

So YOU are going to "guarantee" that we somehow AREN'T infinitely more likely to have horrendous acts of terror with Obama or some other leftist as president? And YOU are going to "guarantee" that if those horrors DID happen that our freedom and everything else wouldn't go down the drain? Are you familiar with the TV show Jericho? It was put out by liberals, but it still did give a pretty clear pictue of the demise of our freedoms, etc. with even a limited nuclear scenario.

I'm not saying electing Obama WOULD be the end of the world, or more accurately, the end of the American way of life. I'm just saying it would make that a helluva lot more likely. And as for "removing" Obama, all I can say is, YOU said it, not me.

[Deputy Nutz]

Now, all you leftists forgive me, this is directed at tex, not you.

First off, you gotta realize most of the very liberal left media actually believe that crap, they are brainwashed in school and by their surroundings. They are by and large very good people who happen to have bought swampland in florida. You should be feeling sorry for them, not hating them. You shoud do everything you can to point out why the long standing polocies of the left have failed over and over again, rescue them.
_________________________________________
Bobblehead, WHY do you feel the need to APOLOGIZE for this? Either you believe what you say, or you don't. Are YOU a politician? Are YOU in a popularity contest? Do YOU beieve in the idiocy of political correctness?

As I said in the other thread, there's a helluva lot at stake here in terms of destroying our way of life. Whatever Russert's attitude or Obama's attitude or whatever, it's the RESULT of the horrendous SHIT they are pushing that counts--and in the case of Russert, the subtle ability to influence the electorate while having this bogus image of objectivity.


Unlike you, Bobblehead actually feels part of the community we have constructed here and although it is important for him to get his ideas across he probably enjoys and respects some of the "leftist" posters around here outside of the political spectrum threads. If he decides that his opinions are better and more important than anyone elses on this forum and railroads his opinions without regard to others position and feelings, then he loses his respect on this forum with others, and they tune him out, it is the way things work around here.

For some reason he understands how things work around here, too bad you don't because when you first showed up there were many happy to see you, unfortunately now they hold you in distain.

[Charles Woodson]

How? Why? You may ask.

Can we agree 9/11 was a bad thing? Can we further agree that repeats of 9/11, possibly multiple, possibly with worse weapons--chemical, biological, nuclear--would be a worse thing? Can we even agree that taking out several of our cities with terrorist nukes who affect EVERYBODY--not just the millions killed and others directly harmed--I'm talking about no more freedom, no more normalcy, no more enjoyment of life?



If thats what your basing your hatred on then thats very extreme. Now i admit to not knowing much on this guy, but first off i can guarantee you that that would never happen. Reason? because the population wouldn't let it. America is not some place run like a tyranny, but its a democracy/republic whatever the hell you want to call it, I mean you act as if Electing Obama would be the end of the world. Im not defending him, hell i cant even vote yet and even if i could i would for McCain. But im saying that if Obama starts corrupting things, he would be removed.

So YOU are going to "guarantee" that we somehow AREN'T infinitely more likely to have horrendous acts of terror with Obama or some other leftist as president? And YOU are going to "guarantee" that if those horrors DID happen that our freedom and everything else wouldn't go down the drain? Are you familiar with the TV show Jericho? It was put out by liberals, but it still did give a pretty clear pictue of the demise of our freedoms, etc. with even a limited nuclear scenario.

I'm not saying electing Obama WOULD be the end of the world, or more accurately, the end of the American way of life. I'm just saying it would make that a helluva lot more likely. And as for "removing" Obama, all I can say is, YOU said it, not me.

Im sorry but if your scared of what you previously said, then you have major problems man, The secound problem is your basing your shit of a SCRIPTED TV show. I dont know what else i can tell you besides the fact that "the american life" wont dissapear with whoever is elected.

Back to the original guy, Tex you keep using this Harm that hes done.. Please give me an effin sample of what your talking about

[texaspackerbacker]

"Scared of what I previously said"? Could you explain what you mean by that?

I used the scenario in Jericho as hopefully something liberals could comprehend--since the show was put out by a bunch of libs. Never mind the show. Just go with the idea that nulcear acts of terror in several of our cities would have a bunch of seriously bad consequences, INCLUDING the destruction of our rights and freedoms. You're not actually gonna dispute that now, are you?

I guess you haven't been reading my posts about the harm Russert and the leftist mainstream media in general has done. They have poisoned the electorate to where extremist positions and candidates are now electable. Thus, we have a sick leftist majority in Congress, an all out anti-American Marxist/socialist at the top of the Dem ticket, a situation where disparaging and disrespecting America, Christianity, etc. are now pushed so much by the liberal eltiists in the media and entertainment community that a bunch of crap previously considered depraved and evil is threatening to become mainstream. Thankyou Mr. Russert and your rotten kind.

[GrnBay007]

1. While sitting at your desk in front of your computer, lift your right foot off the floor and make clockwise circles.

2. Now, while doing this, draw the number '6' in the air with your right hand. Your foot will change direction.

EVERYONE SMILE......... :P

[Harlan Huckleby]

it made me urinate.

[GrnBay007]

it made me urinate.

Did you smile? :D

[oregonpackfan]

it made me urinate.

Great thought, Harlan! Perhaps we should all collectively piss on this whole thread! :(

[texaspackerbacker]

Now, all you leftists forgive me, this is directed at tex, not you.

First off, you gotta realize most of the very liberal left media actually believe that crap, they are brainwashed in school and by their surroundings. They are by and large very good people who happen to have bought swampland in florida. You should be feeling sorry for them, not hating them. You shoud do everything you can to point out why the long standing polocies of the left have failed over and over again, rescue them.
_________________________________________
Bobblehead, WHY do you feel the need to APOLOGIZE for this? Either you believe what you say, or you don't. Are YOU a politician? Are YOU in a popularity contest? Do YOU beieve in the idiocy of political correctness?

As I said in the other thread, there's a helluva lot at stake here in terms of destroying our way of life. Whatever Russert's attitude or Obama's attitude or whatever, it's the RESULT of the horrendous SHIT they are pushing that counts--and in the case of Russert, the subtle ability to influence the electorate while having this bogus image of objectivity.


Unlike you, Bobblehead actually feels part of the community we have constructed here and although it is important for him to get his ideas across he probably enjoys and respects some of the "leftist" posters around here outside of the political spectrum threads. If he decides that his opinions are better and more important than anyone elses on this forum and railroads his opinions without regard to others position and feelings, then he loses his respect on this forum with others, and they tune him out, it is the way things work around here.

For some reason he understands how things work around here, too bad you don't because when you first showed up there were many happy to see you, unfortunately now they hold you in distain.

No offense to you, Nutz, or any of the other posters who I tend to respect around here--I'd put that at about 57.4% of ya'all, but I don't join forums to be part of some "community". To a great extent, that's what took me so long (finally triggered by the demise of JSOnline) to come over here--what I perceived as a cliquishness that I didn't care for. Several people told me that was changed, and to a great extent, I think it has.

But I say again, I don't post silly crap to be popular. I tell it like it is, ESPECIALLY when the stakes are so high. You take the incipid CHANGE movement that assholes like Russert have a large part in promoting, and it potentially could destroy everything--including little luxuries like being able to post in forums like this--both the ruination of the technology aspect and the freedom aspect. I think that sort of thing is a little more important than stuff like "community", don't you?

[Harlan Huckleby]

hgo back to JSO, you've fucked this forum up enough. since you've shown up you've managed to take all the fun right out of this site and turned everyone against each other. hell, theres a lot of posters that barely even show face around here anymore

I really don't understand this. If you don't like somebody, ignore their posts.

I think people who got ulcers over tank, or now accuse Tex of "turning everyone against each other" should look at themselves.

Try and be tolerant, and don't let some poster have power over you.

[Tarlam!]

1. While sitting at your desk in front of your computer, lift your right foot off the floor and make clockwise circles.

2. Now, while doing this, draw the number '6' in the air with your right hand. Your foot will change direction.

EVERYONE SMILE......... :P

OMG, that worked!

[3irty1]

1. While sitting at your desk in front of your computer, lift your right foot off the floor and make clockwise circles.

2. Now, while doing this, draw the number '6' in the air with your right hand. Your foot will change direction.

EVERYONE SMILE......... :P

OMG, that worked!

It worked for me too!

[3irty1]

it made me urinate.

Great thought, Harlan! Perhaps we should all collectively piss on this whole thread! :(

Green and Golden shower?

[swede]

Now, all you leftists forgive me, this is directed at tex, not you.

First off, you gotta realize most of the very liberal left media actually believe that crap, they are brainwashed in school and by their surroundings. They are by and large very good people who happen to have bought swampland in florida. You should be feeling sorry for them, not hating them. You shoud do everything you can to point out why the long standing polocies of the left have failed over and over again, rescue them.
_________________________________________
Bobblehead, WHY do you feel the need to APOLOGIZE for this? Either you believe what you say, or you don't. Are YOU a politician? Are YOU in a popularity contest? Do YOU beieve in the idiocy of political correctness?

As I said in the other thread, there's a helluva lot at stake here in terms of destroying our way of life. Whatever Russert's attitude or Obama's attitude or whatever, it's the RESULT of the horrendous SHIT they are pushing that counts--and in the case of Russert, the subtle ability to influence the electorate while having this bogus image of objectivity.


Unlike you, Bobblehead actually feels part of the community we have constructed here and although it is important for him to get his ideas across he probably enjoys and respects some of the "leftist" posters around here outside of the political spectrum threads. If he decides that his opinions are better and more important than anyone elses on this forum and railroads his opinions without regard to others position and feelings, then he loses his respect on this forum with others, and they tune him out, it is the way things work around here.

For some reason he understands how things work around here, too bad you don't because when you first showed up there were many happy to see you, unfortunately now they hold you in distain.

QFT


Tex, I am a conservative in favor of lower taxes, a strong national defense, smaller federal government, and judges that uphold the constitution and refrain from legislating.

Your lack of respect and compassion toward others, particularly in this thread, reinforce an ugly sterotype that makes my job harder.

If you're a Christian, please consider that disagreements, at certain points along the way, must be subordinated to more important responsibilities of charity and kindness.

[texaspackerbacker]

Swede, you obviously are part of the solid majority in here that I tend to respect.

I think if you consider most of what I post, my record for "compassion" is pretty good. Just ask Bobblehead, who thinks I cross the line or at least blur the liberal/conservative line regarding spending (NOT taxing) to make sure we don't have poverty and deprivation in this country.

What I am about to say about America, American dominance, American Exceptionalism, etc.is probably preaching to the choir regarding you. Without America being on top--tearing us down and making us more like the rest of the world--as is the stated policy of Obama and others like him--would reduce American compassion and ability to save the world--as we have for nearly a century and continue to do from tyranny, poverty, depravity, and ignorance. If America goes down, the whole world suffers. THAT is the potential legacy of Obama and his kind, and THAT is what the subtle EVIL of Russert and his kind would bring.

So when I go off and rant about how rotten the guy was--as a member of and indeed one of the most effective members of that evil institution that is the left-saturated mainstream media, that is why I consider it justified--the harm he did and would have continued to do--INCLUDING the end of American dominance/compassion.

On a personal level, therefore, I had about as much compassion for Russert as I did for Saddam Hussein, etc/

[packinpatland]

This article about Tim Russert is one of the fairest and most objective I've read so far.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25192854/

Rest in Peace Tim

[sheepshead]

Jesus H. Christ. And couple of you idiots have the nerve to slam me. Holy Shit!

[oregonpackfan]

So when I go off and rant about how rotten the guy was--as a member of and indeed one of the most effective members of that evil institution that is the left-saturated mainstream media, that is why I consider it justified--the harm he did and would have continued to do--INCLUDING the end of American dominance/compassion.

[/quote]

I find it interest how so many conservatives label the media as "leftist" or "liberal" when so much of the media is actually controlled by the right.

Fox News is heavily slanted towards the right.

If you listen to talk radio, most of the hosts range from the conservative right to the radical right such as Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Mike Savage.

Whether he realizes it or not, I believe Texas does not advocate a democracy for America, he supports a totalitarian form of government where the political leaders control the media and where political dissent is squashed.

[BallHawk]

2+2=5

[hoosier]

I find it interest how so many conservatives label the media as "leftist" or "liberal" when so much of the media is actually controlled by the right.

Fox News is heavily slanted towards the right.

If you listen to talk radio, most of the hosts range from the conservative right to the radical right such as Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Mike Savage.

Whether he realizes it or not, I believe Texas does not advocate a democracy for America, he supports a totalitarian form of government where the political leaders control the media and where political dissent is squashed.

Yes, undoubtedly the media's corporate ownership is generally conservative. But the intellectual component, it seems to me, tends toward the left, despite some very notable exceptions. Another interesting thing about the Right's constant complaining about "msm" bias--the assumption that the average person is too stupid or too lazy and will inevitably be corrupted by it. When they're not saying that, they're complaining about "liberal elitism" :P

[mraynrand]

Econ is not a science..so to say anybody is correct is...well, a bit tenuous.


Interesting, and revealing.

[mraynrand]

GO FUCK YOURSELF YOU GERIATRIC PIECE OF SHIT!!!!!!!!

there, i said it. we're all thinking it. but i won't hold back

go back to JSO, you've fucked this forum up enough. since you've shown up you've managed to take all the fun right out of this site and turned everyone against each other. hell, theres a lot of posters that barely even show face around here anymore

Why read or respond? If everyone hates this guy so much, why do they generate 8 pages of responses? It's just like TANK - everyone hates the guy, can't stand him, yet takes 10 pages of responses to explain how much they hate him and how much they hate responding to him. Stop reading and responding and the guy will stop posting. Don't you get it?

[sheepshead]

So when I go off and rant about how rotten the guy was--as a member of and indeed one of the most effective members of that evil institution that is the left-saturated mainstream media, that is why I consider it justified--the harm he did and would have continued to do--INCLUDING the end of American dominance/compassion.



I find it interest how so many conservatives label the media as "leftist" or "liberal" when so much of the media is actually controlled by the right.

Fox News is heavily slanted towards the right.

If you listen to talk radio, most of the hosts range from the conservative right to the radical right such as Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Mike Savage.

Whether he realizes it or not, I believe Texas does not advocate a democracy for America, he supports a totalitarian form of government where the political leaders control the media and where political dissent is squashed.[/quote]


Your take on Fox is off. You must be a left leaning liberal to have that view of Fox. The rest of the media IS left leaning which includes much larger entities like the 3 TV networks, the rest of radio and their hourly news casts, NPR which you and I pay for ,the rest of cable news, (you mentioned one channel albeit the largest)every major newspaper, magazine (including SI)the USA today and ..where most outlets including internet home pages get their news...the wire services - AP and the like. Your math is fuzzy at best.

[mraynrand]

But I say again, I don't post silly crap to be popular. I tell it like it is, ESPECIALLY when the stakes are so high.

But the approach you take, using the type of language you use and displaying the naked hatred obviously results in everyone hating you and your approach. So, as an ambassador of the far right, how does that help your cause in any way? As a conservative, I can see that you do far more damage to the cause than any good you might do in pointing out things like bias in the media. Was Russert biased? Of course he was. Is that a reason to celebrate his death? I think not. It's one thing to be honest about his legacy and his bias (which existed, but wasn't nearly as acute as others in the media), and a whole other issue to celebrate someone's death - EVEN IF you think he was bad for the U.S. You like to meet and golf with soldiers returning from Iraq, Tex. I've heard many of these same guys tell me, in response to questions like "doesn't it frustrate you to hear Democrats say bad things about you, etc." that these folks are Americans too, and that they protect ALL Americans, even those with whom they disagree. I agree that the far left has done and is damaging America, but you're never going to get anyone to listen to you if you celebrate the death of a fellow American. You can dislike people, and disagree with them, without being spiteful and callous.

[mraynrand]

Yes, undoubtedly the media's corporate ownership is generally conservative.
You base this on what?

[Gunakor]

GO FUCK YOURSELF YOU GERIATRIC PIECE OF SHIT!!!!!!!!

there, i said it. we're all thinking it. but i won't hold back

go back to JSO, you've fucked this forum up enough. since you've shown up you've managed to take all the fun right out of this site and turned everyone against each other. hell, theres a lot of posters that barely even show face around here anymore

Why read or respond? If everyone hates this guy so much, why do they generate 8 pages of responses? It's just like TANK - everyone hates the guy, can't stand him, yet takes 10 pages of responses to explain how much they hate him and how much they hate responding to him. Stop reading and responding and the guy will stop posting. Don't you get it?


Tank would not have stopped, and neither will Tex.

Reread Red's post - particularly the last line. People have indeed stopped responding to him. I have stopped engaging him in debate as well, because it is impossible to debate him on anything. He's right, we're wrong, case closed. No room for discussion. Many others have stopped debating him for this reason as well, but it won't change anything. A good political thread will always be poisoned by one of Tex's rants, whether Tex starts the thread or not. So, for those of us interested in this years election and wish to converse about it, Tex is impossible to avoid.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Econ is not a science..so to say anybody is correct is...well, a bit tenuous.


Interesting, and revealing.

Thank you, mr. obtuse.

Econ, as bobble correctly pointed out has components of being an art. There is math..no doubt..but, grasping at exactly what is going on at an exact moment is highly subjective.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

So when I go off and rant about how rotten the guy was--as a member of and indeed one of the most effective members of that evil institution that is the left-saturated mainstream media, that is why I consider it justified--the harm he did and would have continued to do--INCLUDING the end of American dominance/compassion.



I find it interest how so many conservatives label the media as "leftist" or "liberal" when so much of the media is actually controlled by the right.

Fox News is heavily slanted towards the right.

If you listen to talk radio, most of the hosts range from the conservative right to the radical right such as Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Mike Savage.

Whether he realizes it or not, I believe Texas does not advocate a democracy for America, he supports a totalitarian form of government where the political leaders control the media and where political dissent is squashed.


Your take on Fox is off. You must be a left leaning liberal to have that view of Fox. The rest of the media IS left leaning which includes much larger entities like the 3 TV networks, the rest of radio and their hourly news casts, NPR which you and I pay for ,the rest of cable news, (you mentioned one channel albeit the largest)every major newspaper, magazine (including SI)the USA today and ..where most outlets including internet home pages get their news...the wire services - AP and the like. Your math is fuzzy at best.[/quote]

Right. The whole media is left leaning, except for the truth sayers at Fox..which are objective. :roll:

It is almost impossible for me to believe you can actually say that with a straight face. A network run by Roger Ailes. LOL

Convenient for you to ignore radio.

Finally, stop your complaining about the liberal media. The news divisions are owned by CORPORATIONS. Corporations that want to make money. Obviously, if they continue to operate as they do..they are making money...satisfying their customers...or else they would lose money...and that wouldn't please their corporate masters.

Are you against the free market? If you or anyone else doesn't like what is out there...feel free to start your own websites (oops, convenient for you to ignore the tons of conservative websites), conservative magazines (oops, convenient for you to leave out those), or news networks (oops, convenient for you to either lie about fox, or to ignore other outlets like CBN).

[Tyrone Bigguns]

But I say again, I don't post silly crap to be popular. I tell it like it is, ESPECIALLY when the stakes are so high.

But the approach you take, using the type of language you use and displaying the naked hatred obviously results in everyone hating you and your approach. So, as an ambassador of the far right, how does that help your cause in any way? As a conservative, I can see that you do far more damage to the cause than any good you might do in pointing out things like bias in the media. Was Russert biased? Of course he was. Is that a reason to celebrate his death? I think not. It's one thing to be honest about his legacy and his bias (which existed, but wasn't nearly as acute as others in the media), and a whole other issue to celebrate someone's death - EVEN IF you think he was bad for the U.S. You like to meet and golf with soldiers returning from Iraq, Tex. I've heard many of these same guys tell me, in response to questions like "doesn't it frustrate you to hear Democrats say bad things about you, etc." that these folks are Americans too, and that they protect ALL Americans, even those with whom they disagree. I agree that the far left has done and is damaging America, but you're never going to get anyone to listen to you if you celebrate the death of a fellow American. You can dislike people, and disagree with them, without being spiteful and callous.

QFT.

[PackFan#1]

It's just like TANK - everyone hates the guy, can't stand him, yet takes 10 pages of responses to explain how much they hate him and how much they hate responding to him.

I hate Tank/APB. I am glad he's banned.

[sheepshead]

So when I go off and rant about how rotten the guy was--as a member of and indeed one of the most effective members of that evil institution that is the left-saturated mainstream media, that is why I consider it justified--the harm he did and would have continued to do--INCLUDING the end of American dominance/compassion.



I find it interest how so many conservatives label the media as "leftist" or "liberal" when so much of the media is actually controlled by the right.

Fox News is heavily slanted towards the right.

If you listen to talk radio, most of the hosts range from the conservative right to the radical right such as Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Mike Savage.

Whether he realizes it or not, I believe Texas does not advocate a democracy for America, he supports a totalitarian form of government where the political leaders control the media and where political dissent is squashed.


Your take on Fox is off. You must be a left leaning liberal to have that view of Fox. The rest of the media IS left leaning which includes much larger entities like the 3 TV networks, the rest of radio and their hourly news casts, NPR which you and I pay for ,the rest of cable news, (you mentioned one channel albeit the largest)every major newspaper, magazine (including SI)the USA today and ..where most outlets including internet home pages get their news...the wire services - AP and the like. Your math is fuzzy at best.

Right. The whole media is left leaning, except for the truth sayers at Fox..which are objective. :roll:

It is almost impossible for me to believe you can actually say that with a straight face. A network run by Roger Ailes. LOL

Convenient for you to ignore radio.

Finally, stop your complaining about the liberal media. The news divisions are owned by CORPORATIONS. Corporations that want to make money. Obviously, if they continue to operate as they do..they are making money...satisfying their customers...or else they would lose money...and that wouldn't please their corporate masters.

Are you against the free market? If you or anyone else doesn't like what is out there...feel free to start your own websites (oops, convenient for you to ignore the tons of conservative websites), conservative magazines (oops, convenient for you to leave out those), or news networks (oops, convenient for you to either lie about fox, or to ignore other outlets like CBN).[/quote]

I didnt ignore radio at all, reread the post and if you think of it objectively, you have not had anything else to compare it to in your lifetime because it's been all left leaning for years. So when compared to everything else, it appears right wing. Call Fox right wing if you want but he was off base in attempting to paint a picture of an overall balanced media in this country. How in the world did a do-nothing radical like BHO get his parties nomination in the first place...??

[Tyrone Bigguns]

So when I go off and rant about how rotten the guy was--as a member of and indeed one of the most effective members of that evil institution that is the left-saturated mainstream media, that is why I consider it justified--the harm he did and would have continued to do--INCLUDING the end of American dominance/compassion.



I find it interest how so many conservatives label the media as "leftist" or "liberal" when so much of the media is actually controlled by the right.

Fox News is heavily slanted towards the right.

If you listen to talk radio, most of the hosts range from the conservative right to the radical right such as Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Mike Savage.

Whether he realizes it or not, I believe Texas does not advocate a democracy for America, he supports a totalitarian form of government where the political leaders control the media and where political dissent is squashed.


Your take on Fox is off. You must be a left leaning liberal to have that view of Fox. The rest of the media IS left leaning which includes much larger entities like the 3 TV networks, the rest of radio and their hourly news casts, NPR which you and I pay for ,the rest of cable news, (you mentioned one channel albeit the largest)every major newspaper, magazine (including SI)the USA today and ..where most outlets including internet home pages get their news...the wire services - AP and the like. Your math is fuzzy at best.

Right. The whole media is left leaning, except for the truth sayers at Fox..which are objective. :roll:

It is almost impossible for me to believe you can actually say that with a straight face. A network run by Roger Ailes. LOL

Convenient for you to ignore radio.

Finally, stop your complaining about the liberal media. The news divisions are owned by CORPORATIONS. Corporations that want to make money. Obviously, if they continue to operate as they do..they are making money...satisfying their customers...or else they would lose money...and that wouldn't please their corporate masters.

Are you against the free market? If you or anyone else doesn't like what is out there...feel free to start your own websites (oops, convenient for you to ignore the tons of conservative websites), conservative magazines (oops, convenient for you to leave out those), or news networks (oops, convenient for you to either lie about fox, or to ignore other outlets like CBN).

I didnt ignore radio at all, reread the post and if you think of it objectively, you have not had anything else to compare it to in your lifetime because it's been all left leaning for years. So when compared to everything else, it appears right wing. Call Fox right wing if you want but he was off base in attempting to paint a picture of an overall balanced media in this country. How in the world did a do-nothing radical like BHO get his parties nomination in the first place...??[/quote]

In my lifetime. What are you talking about. There have always been conservative magazines, the Christian Science monitor, etc.

Plenty of conservative talk radio..or bible thumpers on the air.

Appears right wing...right. IT IS RIGHT WING.

BHO: How in the world. Umm, the same way a do-nothing loser like Bush got elected. If you have the ability to be objective..you would ask the same about him. 5 years of being gov in a state that severely limits gubernatorial power hardly qualifies him for being pres..anymore than BHO.

And, at least BHO succeeded in college, law school, etc. The man was successful..as opposed to Bush who never succeed at anything..cept being a minority partner in the Rangers.

Lest you take this as an attack on all repubs..that isn't what i'm saying. Jeb would have been a more qualified candidate..so would about 100 others.

[Scott Campbell]

It's just like TANK - everyone hates the guy, can't stand him, yet takes 10 pages of responses to explain how much they hate him and how much they hate responding to him.

I hate Tank/APB. I am glad he's banned.


I miss the old version. This new version is kind of limp.

[bobblehead]

It's just like TANK - everyone hates the guy, can't stand him, yet takes 10 pages of responses to explain how much they hate him and how much they hate responding to him.

I hate Tank/APB. I am glad he's banned.

And your join date is amazingly right in line with his banning.

[bobblehead]

now let me really launch tyrone.

for the most part the radio is right wing because the left wing AS A RULE doesn't want discussion and/or debate on the ideas. They don't crave information and education like the right, and that is why fox is the most popular news station and the top 20 or so radio shows are all right wing.

Al Franken on radio...please. That whole air america thing failed miserably because the vast majority of the left is more interested in american idol than discussing political merit.

I started in on a lady recently about why she is a democrat after she went on a vitriolic rant about evil closed minded republicans, I stayed respectful, massaged her into about 3 sentences of debate and she finally got red and spouted "well, I'm a single issue voter and nobody is going to tell me what to do with my body and I don't wanna talk about it anymore".

Oh, she was happy to call bush a war criminal, and label conservatives closed minded, but when it came time to actually discuss it she didn't want to talk about it, and I know the libs who actually get on a website and post their opinion and do their best to back it up don't fall into this category, but in the general populace they do.

BTW, mraynrand....is that henry reardon on your avatar?

[mraynrand]

Bobble - The Painting is an idealized John Galt.

------

For everyone to ponder: A short blurb from Thomas Sowell, one of the brilliant rational-thought conservative stars:

"Only with Tim Russert's sudden death at the age of 58 has his true stature as a landmark journalist become as widely recognized as it has long deserved to be.

To ask who will replace him as host of "Meet the Press" is to confront the reality that there is no one comparable on the horizon. Those of us who have followed "Meet the Press" since the long ago days of Lawrence Spivak know that Russert was the best of some very good hosts.

What made Tim Russert special was not some trademark catchword or contrived persona. What you saw was what you got-- a down to earth guy who came on the air having thoroughly researched the subject and having a keen insight into politics and politicians. "

RIP and Godspeed, Mr. Russert.

[bobblehead]

been awhile since I read it, thought reardon was described with the red hair, and surprisingly the only thing I remember about galt in the book was that he was the one who worked at the railroad and talked to the one employee in the dining room. I just can't recall a physical description, I might have to find it and read it again.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

now let me really launch tyrone.

for the most part the radio is right wing because the left wing AS A RULE doesn't want discussion and/or debate on the ideas. They don't crave information and education like the right, and that is why fox is the most popular news station and the top 20 or so radio shows are all right wing.

Al Franken on radio...please. That whole air america thing failed miserably because the vast majority of the left is more interested in american idol than discussing political merit.

I started in on a lady recently about why she is a democrat after she went on a vitriolic rant about evil closed minded republicans, I stayed respectful, massaged her into about 3 sentences of debate and she finally got red and spouted "well, I'm a single issue voter and nobody is going to tell me what to do with my body and I don't wanna talk about it anymore".

Oh, she was happy to call bush a war criminal, and label conservatives closed minded, but when it came time to actually discuss it she didn't want to talk about it, and I know the libs who actually get on a website and post their opinion and do their best to back it up don't fall into this category, but in the general populace they do.

BTW, mraynrand....is that henry reardon on your avatar?

1. Discussion: Oh, lord. Could you be more general and cliched?
2. Idol: Oh, yeah, it is the left watching idol. :roll:
3. Lady: Sounds like you were talking with Tex's evil doppelganger.

If you really want to discuss things, posts like this only make you appear closeminded and dismissive of liberals...as if they have some sorta group think. Liberals...exist in many forms, with many different issues. They semi coexist under the big tent..but, they all don't support each other's issue.

People that tend to have one thought process and ideals are the conservatives. That is why it is easier to rally/manipulate them.

[texaspackerbacker]

Oregon, it's absolutely incredible that you could CONTINUE to be so much in denial. You have just listed the miniscule exceptions to the left-extremist saturated mainstream media--Fox, which, contrary to what you said, actually bends over backwards to avoid slanted reporting of the news, and Rush Limbaugh--along with some Rush wannabes who comprise talk radio. They, however, unlike the God damned mainstream media, make no pretense of being anything but biased--the counter to the devilishly subtle mainstream media--what Russert was and so many others continue to be--wolves in sheep's clothing--slanting wha t is passed off as objective news coverage.

And the bottom line is that there are a helluva lot of THEM, compared to only one Fox--which doesn't even stoop to the same level of bias.

You know that's true, Oregon, unless you really are completely out of touch.

[packinpatland]

Bending over backwards? Fox, on Mrs. Obama.

"Fox News called her “Obama’s baby mama,” a derogatory term for an unwed mother. Christopher Hitchens , a Slate columnist, claimed — with scant evidence — that her college thesis proved she was once influenced by black separatism. National Review presented her as a scowling “Mrs. Grievance.”

[sheepshead]

So when I go off and rant about how rotten the guy was--as a member of and indeed one of the most effective members of that evil institution that is the left-saturated mainstream media, that is why I consider it justified--the harm he did and would have continued to do--INCLUDING the end of American dominance/compassion.



I find it interest how so many conservatives label the media as "leftist" or "liberal" when so much of the media is actually controlled by the right.

Fox News is heavily slanted towards the right.

If you listen to talk radio, most of the hosts range from the conservative right to the radical right such as Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Mike Savage.

Whether he realizes it or not, I believe Texas does not advocate a democracy for America, he supports a totalitarian form of government where the political leaders control the media and where political dissent is squashed.


Your take on Fox is off. You must be a left leaning liberal to have that view of Fox. The rest of the media IS left leaning which includes much larger entities like the 3 TV networks, the rest of radio and their hourly news casts, NPR which you and I pay for ,the rest of cable news, (you mentioned one channel albeit the largest)every major newspaper, magazine (including SI)the USA today and ..where most outlets including internet home pages get their news...the wire services - AP and the like. Your math is fuzzy at best.

Right. The whole media is left leaning, except for the truth sayers at Fox..which are objective. :roll:

It is almost impossible for me to believe you can actually say that with a straight face. A network run by Roger Ailes. LOL

Convenient for you to ignore radio.

Finally, stop your complaining about the liberal media. The news divisions are owned by CORPORATIONS. Corporations that want to make money. Obviously, if they continue to operate as they do..they are making money...satisfying their customers...or else they would lose money...and that wouldn't please their corporate masters.

Are you against the free market? If you or anyone else doesn't like what is out there...feel free to start your own websites (oops, convenient for you to ignore the tons of conservative websites), conservative magazines (oops, convenient for you to leave out those), or news networks (oops, convenient for you to either lie about fox, or to ignore other outlets like CBN).

I didnt ignore radio at all, reread the post and if you think of it objectively, you have not had anything else to compare it to in your lifetime because it's been all left leaning for years. So when compared to everything else, it appears right wing. Call Fox right wing if you want but he was off base in attempting to paint a picture of an overall balanced media in this country. How in the world did a do-nothing radical like BHO get his parties nomination in the first place...??

In my lifetime. What are you talking about. There have always been conservative magazines, the Christian Science monitor, etc.

Plenty of conservative talk radio..or bible thumpers on the air.

Appears right wing...right. IT IS RIGHT WING.

BHO: How in the world. Umm, the same way a do-nothing loser like Bush got elected. If you have the ability to be objective..you would ask the same about him. 5 years of being gov in a state that severely limits gubernatorial power hardly qualifies him for being pres..anymore than BHO.

And, at least BHO succeeded in college, law school, etc. The man was successful..as opposed to Bush who never succeed at anything..cept being a minority partner in the Rangers.

Lest you take this as an attack on all repubs..that isn't what i'm saying. Jeb would have been a more qualified candidate..so would about 100 others.

[/quote]



psssssssssst...George Bush isn't running for president.

[sheepshead]

Here is who BHO is running against Bigguns:

Many on the Left have been attacking John McCain viciously. Not his Senate record or positions on the major issues so much, as they have been attacking him for his service in Vietnam. Given Barack Obama's lack of significant accomplishment in anything other than selling books and making speeches, it is hardly surprising that he and his followers would regard McCain's most distinctive service as a threat to Obama's ambition. It is also apparent that most Obama supporters have no real idea of what McCain did as a Navy officer that sets him apart from so many of his fellow veterans. I have written before that I disagree with a number of McCain's political positions, and I dislike the way he has treated fellow Republicans, especially President Bush. None of that, however, diminishes what John McCain accomplished as a prisoner of war in Vietnam.

On October 26, 1967, Lieutenant Commander John McCain was shot down during his twenty-third mission in an A-4 Skyhawk bomber over Hanoi. Commander McCain was on that mission as part of his long service to the United States; he graduated from the US Naval Academy at Annapolis in 1958, and remained on active duty despite having his plane literally shot out from under him in an accidental missile discharge from another plane on the deck of the USS Forrestal earlier that year.

The destruction of his jet caused McCain serious injuries. He broke bones in both arms, one leg, and landed in a lake. Once he reached shore, the already injured McCain was attacked and beaten by North Vietnamese soldiers, one using a rifle butt to dislocate hs shoulder while another bayonetted him. He was denied medical treatment for four days, during which time he was beaten and interrogated using real torture methods, not the stuff liberals like to call 'torture' now. McCain refused to give information beyond his name, rank, and serial number. It was only when the North Vietnamese realized that McCain's father was a senior Admiral that he received medical treatment, and it was not much even there. No anesthesia or antibiotics were used, and the bones were not even set for another half-week.

Up to this point, John McCain's story is that of an honorable man who suffered from conditions of war and cruel abuse. What follows is where we see his heroism.

- continued -

The North Vietnamese understood that Commander McCain's father was Admiral McCain, and from the beginning tried to use this for propaganda purposes. While men like John Kerry played the system in order to go home early from the war, Commander McCain repeatedly refused special treatment and offers to be set free ahead of men he knew had been longer in captivity. He also refused attempts by the North Vietnamese to use him in propaganda films, and for this was designated for "special treatment", a regimen of regular torture and deprivation that killed most men who suffered it. In the first six weeks of his imprisonment, McCain lost 50 pounds and temporarily the use of his arms and legs; when he was finally allowed to share a cell with two other officers, his condition was so grave that they did not expect him to survive for more than a week. His fellow officers nursed McCain to somewhat better health, and for this were assigned to different quarters. McCain again refused to cooperate with the North Vietnamese and he was locked in a muddy room with no windows, a tin roof and only two holes drilled in to keep him from suffocating, and McCain was kept there for two years.

Unknown to the Communists, McCain had already started his work from the inside. He had memorized the names of all 335 men he knew to be prisoners in North Vietnam, and when Major Norris Overly, USAF, was released he carried McCain's information with him. Even in prison, John McCain continued to serve his country.

In mid-1968, the North Vietnamese decided that if they released McCain, it would not only show them as merciful but suggest that American 'elites' expected to be treated better than ordinary soldiers. But Commander McCain consistently refused to play along, refusing to be released unless every man who had served as long as him was also released, and refusing on all occasions to say a single bad thing about the United States or the war effort. Despite his solitary confinement, McCain used a tap code to make contact with Ernie Brace, a civilian pilot shot down over Laos. Brace had been badly abused by the Communists and was in bad shape emotionally. McCain worked to restore Brace's spirit and confidence, and in so doing bolstered his own.

In June of 1968, the Communists again tried to talk McCain into accepting special treatment, and in return McCain said he'd be glad to go - after all the men he knew had been waiting longer. They tried again in July, after Mccain's father became CINCPAC. McCain again refused, for which he was beaten, his ribs cracked and one of his arms rebroken, and after which he was left bound between beating sessions for another four days. To shame him, the Communists left McCain naked and unfed.

McCain knew what could happen in the prisons, like Dick Stratton's being burned with cigarettes and his fingernails pulled. He knew men who had been beaten to death, like Ed Atterberry. Punishment in a Communist prison was brutal and swift, yet even so McCain continued to resist his captors, tapping out communication and encouragement to other prisoners, as a true officer leads his men. Commander McCain was beaten for refusing to lie about conditions in the prison, for resisting the Communists' propaganda programs, for communicating with other prisoners, and often for no reason other than he was a man they could not defeat, could never own. McCain refused to meet with antiwar delegations, refused to cooperate with nations like France who supported the Communists, and always - always - refused to accept anything that was not provided for all his fellow prisoners. McCain was tortured for holding church services, for praying, for singing the National Anthem, for refusing to admit "war crimes", and for cheering when Nixon ordered the bombing of Hanoi. McCain was no Superman, he felt every burn and cut and bruise and scrape of bone and tearing of ligament. Yet over and over and over again, he chose to accept torture rather than put himself ahead of his fellow prisoners, or his country.

On March 14, 1973, John McCain was finally released by North Vietnam, as one of the final prisoners to return home. He faced months of surgery and physical therapy to rebuild his body, but his spirit was unbroken and his mission fulflled. Whatever one thinks of John McCain's politics, he was and is a hero, and anyone who cannot admit that is a poor shell of a human being, too dismal to count as a true person, let alone an American.

Sources: Wikipedia, "John McCain: An American Odyssey" by Robert Timburg, US News & World Report (May 14 1973 issue)

[woodbuck27]

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=tim_russert_stop_the_inanity

[Tyrone Bigguns]

So when I go off and rant about how rotten the guy was--as a member of and indeed one of the most effective members of that evil institution that is the left-saturated mainstream media, that is why I consider it justified--the harm he did and would have continued to do--INCLUDING the end of American dominance/compassion.



I find it interest how so many conservatives label the media as "leftist" or "liberal" when so much of the media is actually controlled by the right.

Fox News is heavily slanted towards the right.

If you listen to talk radio, most of the hosts range from the conservative right to the radical right such as Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Mike Savage.

Whether he realizes it or not, I believe Texas does not advocate a democracy for America, he supports a totalitarian form of government where the political leaders control the media and where political dissent is squashed.


Your take on Fox is off. You must be a left leaning liberal to have that view of Fox. The rest of the media IS left leaning which includes much larger entities like the 3 TV networks, the rest of radio and their hourly news casts, NPR which you and I pay for ,the rest of cable news, (you mentioned one channel albeit the largest)every major newspaper, magazine (including SI)the USA today and ..where most outlets including internet home pages get their news...the wire services - AP and the like. Your math is fuzzy at best.

Right. The whole media is left leaning, except for the truth sayers at Fox..which are objective. :roll:

It is almost impossible for me to believe you can actually say that with a straight face. A network run by Roger Ailes. LOL

Convenient for you to ignore radio.

Finally, stop your complaining about the liberal media. The news divisions are owned by CORPORATIONS. Corporations that want to make money. Obviously, if they continue to operate as they do..they are making money...satisfying their customers...or else they would lose money...and that wouldn't please their corporate masters.

Are you against the free market? If you or anyone else doesn't like what is out there...feel free to start your own websites (oops, convenient for you to ignore the tons of conservative websites), conservative magazines (oops, convenient for you to leave out those), or news networks (oops, convenient for you to either lie about fox, or to ignore other outlets like CBN).

I didnt ignore radio at all, reread the post and if you think of it objectively, you have not had anything else to compare it to in your lifetime because it's been all left leaning for years. So when compared to everything else, it appears right wing. Call Fox right wing if you want but he was off base in attempting to paint a picture of an overall balanced media in this country. How in the world did a do-nothing radical like BHO get his parties nomination in the first place...??

In my lifetime. What are you talking about. There have always been conservative magazines, the Christian Science monitor, etc.

Plenty of conservative talk radio..or bible thumpers on the air.

Appears right wing...right. IT IS RIGHT WING.

BHO: How in the world. Umm, the same way a do-nothing loser like Bush got elected. If you have the ability to be objective..you would ask the same about him. 5 years of being gov in a state that severely limits gubernatorial power hardly qualifies him for being pres..anymore than BHO.

And, at least BHO succeeded in college, law school, etc. The man was successful..as opposed to Bush who never succeed at anything..cept being a minority partner in the Rangers.

Lest you take this as an attack on all repubs..that isn't what i'm saying. Jeb would have been a more qualified candidate..so would about 100 others.





psssssssssst...George Bush isn't running for president.[/quote]

pssssst...try to figure out the analogy. Wow. You are dense.

You asked how BHO could get the nomination...the answer can be found in HOW BUSH GOT THE NOMINATION.

[sheepshead]

As usual it doesn't take long for a liberal to resort to name calling. Your BDS is clouding your judgment, but take comfort in the fact that you're not alone.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

As usual it doesn't take long for a liberal to resort to name calling. Your BDS is clouding your judgment, but take comfort in the fact that you're not alone.

And, as usual, a conservative can't figure out a simple analogy, realizes that he is competely defeated..so decides to make a strawman argument.

Stop posting. You are embarrassing yourself and your fellow conservatives.

P.S. I saved your email. So, unless you want me to embarrass you further..i wouldn't continue to be a hypocrite about name calling.

Game, Set, Match.

[mraynrand]

Qualifications hardly matter. What a candidate believes, what they intend to do, and with whom they surround themselves in the administration matters far more. BHO is essentially a second generation campus radical, a constitutional law professor who argues that empathy for the poor and single moms should be the primary qualification for his Supreme Court nominees. That should tell you everything you need to know about how his 'qualifications' affect his ideology.

[sheepshead]

Bigguns..you're right, I'm just not equipped to argue with a sixth grade education and someone that veers off topic at every reply. But go ahead, have the last word-you win.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Bigguns..you're right, I'm just not equipped to argue with a sixth grade education and someone that veers off topic at every reply. But go ahead, have the last word-you win.

I see you are takin the high road again..i thought you didn't name call?

Sounds more like you don't wanna get embarrassed about that friendly email you sent me.

[sheepshead]

Please post anything and everything if it makes you happy. I don't recall engaging in name calling with you but perhaps I did.

(for your information, your analogy is fucked. Bush was a 2 term Governor of the second largest state in the Union and would be the 15th largest economy in the world. Governors lead and manage and have people reporting to them, lots of people. Senators lead no one and besides their staff, have no one reporting to them. They are litigators. Mr. Obama is one of my Senators. He won virtually unopposed after the Tribune (Libune) smeared his opponent into quitting the race. As Mike Ditka says, "If I would've run, no one would have heard of Barack Obama. He hasn't accomplished a single thing in the Senate that anyone can point to. He has been busy being propped up by Hollywood and the Media as the second coming.)

[MateoInMex]

That's the beauty of a forum like this. Even Hannity has to has to get all nicey nice about leftist trash like Russert. But thanks to that freedom of speech--which if the left had their way, they would curtail, I can tell it like it is.

It isn't only Russert. It is the whole bunch of GOD DAMNED AMERICA-HATING PIECES OF SHIT IN THE SICK LEFT-SATURATED MAINSTREAM MEDIA THAT HAS CORRUPTED THE ELECTORATE and put all of the great things in this country INCLUDING freedom of speech and press at risk.

I don't blame most of you criticizing me, as likely, most of you would be similarly critical of some leftist who would be similarly disrespectful of let's say, George W. Bush or Rush Limbaugh or whoever if they died.

The difference, though, as I said, is that Russert and his sick kind REALLY HAVE HARMED THIS COUNTRY SIGNIFICANTLY by subtly corrupting the electorate to support policies and candidates who have damaged and who continue to damage this country.

Packers11 brings up Olberman. Hell yeah, he's every bit as bad as Russert. He, however, doesn't even make a pretense of objectivity. Therefore, he is not near as effective at influencing people/voters in the wrong/anti-American direction. The better comparison is Walter Cronkite, who damn near lost the Cold War for America, and probably DID lose the Vietnam War by his horrendous--but subtle skewing of the electorate.


Dude, you seriously need to get laid!

Why are you in four political forums wasting your time? I will send you $8 dollars to your residence in Texas if you sign a promisary note saying you will cross the border and spend it on an 8 dollar Rodeo Basket F***!!

If you don't go back to Texas with a smile on your face, I will do nothing more than question your sexuality...not that there's anything wrong with that!

You obviously have a lot of hatred built up, I have no idea why. Maybe some liberal diddled you on the playground in Kindergarten, or maybe a "Lefty Wacko" took you to a "legit" massage parlor. I have no clue...but after 5 years of JSONLINE and you joining 3 years later ...everything with you is conspiratorial and hatred. You must be a blast at parties!

Dude. . . live a little!!! This world will still be around when you're gone!!! Have some fun!!! Go explore Anal, take a dive in the funpool of group sex!!! Take the rest of the posting year off and go get laid!!

I gurantee you will thank me for this!!!

Remember my post to you about 3 years ago when you went off on some tagent about "Liberal Scum"?

We're not Watoosie, We're not Spartans, We're Americans...with a capital A!!! (Go Rent STRIPES, buy a 12 pack and relax!!! Your government rants on web forums are useless and have been for years. I'm just trying to help you my little right-wing buddy!

:o)

[The Leaper]

People that tend to have one thought process and ideals are the conservatives.

So I guess the kind of narrow thinking you just showed in that sentence proves how open minded you are???

Attempting to label all conservatives as one-minded robots is a typical liberal viewpoint...and a dangerously flawed one at that.

[mraynrand]

People that tend to have one thought process and ideals are the conservatives.

So I guess the kind of narrow thinking you just showed in that sentence proves how open minded you are???

Attempting to label all conservatives as one-minded robots is a typical liberal viewpoint...and a dangerously flawed one at that.

"Only the Sith Think in Absolutes"

[Tyrone Bigguns]

People that tend to have one thought process and ideals are the conservatives.

So I guess the kind of narrow thinking you just showed in that sentence proves how open minded you are???

Attempting to label all conservatives as one-minded robots is a typical liberal viewpoint...and a dangerously flawed one at that.

YOu label it narrow thinking..lol. It is generally accepted notion of politics.

Conservs generally agree on econ, social issues, etc. Is there diversity..of course. But, you can't even begin to compare that to the separate factions that exist in the dem party...labor has no relation to eco, etc.

P.S. who ever said robotic. Talk about a leap. Maybe that is how you came to your avatar.

[texaspackerbacker]

That's the beauty of a forum like this. Even Hannity has to has to get all nicey nice about leftist trash like Russert. But thanks to that freedom of speech--which if the left had their way, they would curtail, I can tell it like it is.

It isn't only Russert. It is the whole bunch of GOD DAMNED AMERICA-HATING PIECES OF SHIT IN THE SICK LEFT-SATURATED MAINSTREAM MEDIA THAT HAS CORRUPTED THE ELECTORATE and put all of the great things in this country INCLUDING freedom of speech and press at risk.

I don't blame most of you criticizing me, as likely, most of you would be similarly critical of some leftist who would be similarly disrespectful of let's say, George W. Bush or Rush Limbaugh or whoever if they died.

The difference, though, as I said, is that Russert and his sick kind REALLY HAVE HARMED THIS COUNTRY SIGNIFICANTLY by subtly corrupting the electorate to support policies and candidates who have damaged and who continue to damage this country.

Packers11 brings up Olberman. Hell yeah, he's every bit as bad as Russert. He, however, doesn't even make a pretense of objectivity. Therefore, he is not near as effective at influencing people/voters in the wrong/anti-American direction. The better comparison is Walter Cronkite, who damn near lost the Cold War for America, and probably DID lose the Vietnam War by his horrendous--but subtle skewing of the electorate.


Dude, you seriously need to get laid!

Why are you in four political forums wasting your time? I will send you $8 dollars to your residence in Texas if you sign a promisary note saying you will cross the border and spend it on an 8 dollar Rodeo Basket F***!!

If you don't go back to Texas with a smile on your face, I will do nothing more than question your sexuality...not that there's anything wrong with that!

You obviously have a lot of hatred built up, I have no idea why. Maybe some liberal diddled you on the playground in Kindergarten, or maybe a "Lefty Wacko" took you to a "legit" massage parlor. I have no clue...but after 5 years of JSONLINE and you joining 3 years later ...everything with you is conspiratorial and hatred. You must be a blast at parties!

Dude. . . live a little!!! This world will still be around when you're gone!!! Have some fun!!! Go explore Anal, take a dive in the funpool of group sex!!! Take the rest of the posting year off and go get laid!!

I gurantee you will thank me for this!!!

Remember my post to you about 3 years ago when you went off on some tagent about "Liberal Scum"?

We're not Watoosie, We're not Spartans, We're Americans...with a capital A!!! (Go Rent STRIPES, buy a 12 pack and relax!!! Your government rants on web forums are useless and have been for years. I'm just trying to help you my little right-wing buddy!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for your good intentions, Mateo. I'm getting all I need, thanks. Long ago, I crossed that border a couple of times--and came back with the smile you speak of.

What YOU don't seem to understand is that just a half step below sex in the pleasure hierarchy is arguing politics. Hence, the reason I am so thankful for this and other forums.

What you also don't seem to understand is that I'm all about NORMALCY--not losing the fabulously wonderful life we all have--as there is a distinct possibility of if the wrong side gets in power this time around.

When I "go off on a tangent" and rant about leftist scum like Russert, Obama, etc., it is with that in mind--the logical extension of all they stand for is the LOSS of all the freedom and enjoyment we have--ultimately including sports, political discussion, and yes, probably even sex



:o)

[bobblehead]

Tyrone, you are way off base with your description. Most conservatives are VERY liberal on social issues right up to the point where you want us to PAY for all the results of that "open mindedness" the left pushes.

I am all for gay rights, blacks rights, I'm pro choice (though I like the 11 week rule for certain biological reasons), and I'm pretty liberal on all the social issues...right up until you want me to prove my openness by paying for peoples bad choices.

Your signature shows me that you equate consevatives with religious whackos, and that is about as fair as me labelling all liberals with green freaks.

Let me clue you in to something that may piss off some religious people...we accept them into our ranks so that the left won't completely screw up this country with their socialist agenda. Many of us don't think homosexuality is a sin, but we do believe that the fundamentals of the judeo christian lifestyle is advantageous to the individual and society. We don't care if you choose to live differently, just don't ask us to pay for it.

[texaspackerbacker]

Interesting philosophical manifesto, Bobblehead. It was so syrupy and even-handed that you could be running for office.

You, with your libertarian leanings are probably just a bit closer to the liberal slant on social issues than most conservatives. Even I--being slightly less in that direction than you, am probably less "out there" on social issues than most conservatives.

Myself, I would stop short of saying I don't see homosexuality as a sin--given the fact that the Bible calls it an abomination. I think most conservatives wouldn't agree with you on that one. My own position, however, is that the whole issue is rather insignificant, and that homosexuals should be left alone to practice their "abomination"--just that it should NOT be portrayed as mainstream or OK or morally equivalent.

Similarly, with abortion, I'd stop short of being pro-choice. Either a fetus is a living person--who shouldn't be murdered, or it isn't. It's kind of an all or nothing situation. Then again, killing is a part of life, isn't it--war, capital punishment, cheatin' spouses that "need killin'"? My position here too, is that in the grand scheme of things, the whole abortion issue just isn't very important. And then, of course, you have the angle that if none of those tens of millions had been aborted, a large enough percentage would have had liberal gnes and would have reached voting age that we probably would have been saddled with a Gore or Kerry presidency--either of which would have damaged the country beyond repair. So maybe abortion is God's will, given the fact that He is pro-American.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Tyrone, you are way off base with your description. Most conservatives are VERY liberal on social issues right up to the point where you want us to PAY for all the results of that "open mindedness" the left pushes.

I am all for gay rights, blacks rights, I'm pro choice (though I like the 11 week rule for certain biological reasons), and I'm pretty liberal on all the social issues...right up until you want me to prove my openness by paying for peoples bad choices.

Your signature shows me that you equate consevatives with religious whackos, and that is about as fair as me labelling all liberals with green freaks.

Let me clue you in to something that may piss off some religious people...we accept them into our ranks so that the left won't completely screw up this country with their socialist agenda. Many of us don't think homosexuality is a sin, but we do believe that the fundamentals of the judeo christian lifestyle is advantageous to the individual and society. We don't care if you choose to live differently, just don't ask us to pay for it.

Let me clue you in. The republican party is far more unified under thought then dems. For you to argue this is insane. That is the point.

Who said anything about conservs and social issues. What a leap.

The point was simply that very little unites the dems...it is a myriad of disparate interests. Are you trying to tell me that if i'm a believer in Peta that i would support unions. Or if woman's reproductie rights are my big issue that i'll support eco issues? They have no linkage.

Sig: Again, your bias limits you. How you can equate my sig with conservs is..well bogling. Are you trying to say that liberals don't read the bible, koran or Torah. BTW, i'm sure those east coast liberal Jews sure would like you to explain that to them. Yikes.

The sig is from a song by Bright Eyes. Nothing more.

The problem with conservs..not all, but those like Tex..is that they believe lilberals have some sorta communist agenda. Far from it. And, for liberals...the ones you don't like..they believe conservs are all racists and have sheets waiting to be put on. Far from it. But, you show your colors by talking about socialism. Get serious.

P.S. We love it when you invoke the judeo christian thing. One, the judeo part is quite limited...as jews don't even come close to having the same views...jews are not conservs. They don't veiw sex the same, nor do they have the same view on homo marriage.

[mraynrand]

Let me clue you in. The republican party is far more unified under thought then dems. For you to argue this is insane. That is the point.

.....
We love it when you invoke the judeo christian thing. One, the judeo part is quite limited...as jews don't even come close to having the same views...jews are not conservs. They don't veiw sex the same, nor do they have the same view on homo marriage.

Interesting. If you note, Bobble never brought up repubs and dems. He was talking conservatives and liberals. Seems like this is a distinction you always bring up when other people mix the two. But I'm intrigued that you think the Dem party is split - could you expand on that. What are the major lines of thought among dems that split them apart? Who are the pols who fracture the party? Joe Lieberman? Ted Strickland?

About the Judeo Christian ethic/tradition. It's a historical fact. It's not dependent on or relevant to modern changing ethical views of jewish people who have fallen away or who are practicing but who are all over the map on belief. The Judeo Christian ethic follows from the law of the Old testament, with the message of Christ - love your God, salvation through grace, the beatitudes, love your brother as yourself. Law and Salvation. Whether it survives current ethical trends (like Richard Rorty's 'free consensus' John Rawls 'veil of ignorance' or the Orwellian assaults on meaning (like gay 'marriage') is yet to be seen, but I'm not optimistic.

[texaspackerbacker]

Tyrone, you are way off base with your description. Most conservatives are VERY liberal on social issues right up to the point where you want us to PAY for all the results of that "open mindedness" the left pushes.

I am all for gay rights, blacks rights, I'm pro choice (though I like the 11 week rule for certain biological reasons), and I'm pretty liberal on all the social issues...right up until you want me to prove my openness by paying for peoples bad choices.

Your signature shows me that you equate consevatives with religious whackos, and that is about as fair as me labelling all liberals with green freaks.

Let me clue you in to something that may piss off some religious people...we accept them into our ranks so that the left won't completely screw up this country with their socialist agenda. Many of us don't think homosexuality is a sin, but we do believe that the fundamentals of the judeo christian lifestyle is advantageous to the individual and society. We don't care if you choose to live differently, just don't ask us to pay for it.

Let me clue you in. The republican party is far more unified under thought then dems. For you to argue this is insane. That is the point.

Who said anything about conservs and social issues. What a leap.

The point was simply that very little unites the dems...it is a myriad of disparate interests. Are you trying to tell me that if i'm a believer in Peta that i would support unions. Or if woman's reproductie rights are my big issue that i'll support eco issues? They have no linkage.

Sig: Again, your bias limits you. How you can equate my sig with conservs is..well bogling. Are you trying to say that liberals don't read the bible, koran or Torah. BTW, i'm sure those east coast liberal Jews sure would like you to explain that to them. Yikes.

The sig is from a song by Bright Eyes. Nothing more.

The problem with conservs..not all, but those like Tex..is that they believe lilberals have some sorta communist agenda. Far from it. And, for liberals...the ones you don't like..they believe conservs are all racists and have sheets waiting to be put on. Far from it. But, you show your colors by talking about socialism. Get serious.

P.S. We love it when you invoke the judeo christian thing. One, the judeo part is quite limited...as jews don't even come close to having the same views...jews are not conservs. They don't veiw sex the same, nor do they have the same view on homo marriage.

Tyrone, are you close enough to lucidity to notice the trend here?

Bobblehead and I and practically any conservatives are willing, in fact, downright anxious to spell out exactly what our positions are. National conservatives the same thing--we are PROUD of our beliefs and confident that anytime they are correctly articulated, the vast majority of those exposed to them will see the wisdom in what we say.

You, on the other hand, and practically all liberals/leftists/whatever you want to call yourselves, adamantly refuse to even say what you are for. You came about as close as you or any of your kind ever come in the post above by mischaracterizing conservative positions and by vaguely alluding to a few things you do not think.

I tried with a whole thread about political issues to draw you guys out--to get you to articulate what you are FOR, but neither you nor any of the rest of your kind would do it. How about now--without me making any disparaging remarks about leftist genitalia or anything like that, you coming out of the liberal closet and giving a simple little statement of what you are for and against, but especially what you're for?

[sooner6600]

Adding a little Okie humor here.

Will Rodgers once said; I am not a member of an organized party.
I am a democrat.

- - - - - - - -

Well done; Will.

[bobblehead]

Tyrone-

After a long discussion you and I had on another thread you stated something to the effect of, I can't be for the republican party in its present form due to its intolerance. We had specifically been talking about race issues, and the religious right. Couple that in with your sig, and I don't think I made that big of a leap in logic.

Also, I didn't say we aren't more unified than the left, I was merely making the point we are not in lock step, the left has positions all over the map, many in direct contradiction with each other...it drives me batty, so you don't have to convince me that they are more diverse in their beliefs.

Tex's post hits it right head on...trying to get a lib to actually make a stance instead of simply attacking conservative issues is like jacking off with sandpaper...its much to painful to do just to get the desired result.

As far as conserves and social issues, I was merely pointing out how a lot of conservatives differ from the "lockstep" party line, I wasn't addressing anything you said.

Now, that being said, I don't think all libs have socialist or communistic desires, but I think a good hefty percentage of them do, or at the very least they desire the power of control over me and my money. Those few do their damndest to label consevatives close minded, rascist, bigoted, homophobe, or any other thing to try and brainwash the youth(and some adults) into buying into their party as somehow the "enlightened" ones. This helps them win elections and further their destructive tendencies economically.

Again, the Judeo Christian thing. Strong family, consequences for your actions, responsibility ect...these are all the things that give you a better chance in life. The left will tell you I'm "judging" behavior outside of these boundries, I'm NOT!! I simply can intellectually acknowledge that they are advantageous and refuse to want to support someone who makes bad choices. You can get knocked up at 17 if you want, you can drop outta high school, you can be pissed at the man, but don't whine about how society somehow owes you better than a job at wal-mart.

[texaspackerbacker]

Now I understand why you are such a POLISHED poster, Bobblehead.

Sooner, in case I forgot to say earlier, welcome aboard. It's been a while since the old days at JSOnline.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Tyrone-

After a long discussion you and I had on another thread you stated something to the effect of, I can't be for the republican party in its present form due to its intolerance. We had specifically been talking about race issues, and the religious right. Couple that in with your sig, and I don't think I made that big of a leap in logic.

Also, I didn't say we aren't more unified than the left, I was merely making the point we are not in lock step, the left has positions all over the map, many in direct contradiction with each other...it drives me batty, so you don't have to convince me that they are more diverse in their beliefs.

Tex's post hits it right head on...trying to get a lib to actually make a stance instead of simply attacking conservative issues is like jacking off with sandpaper...its much to painful to do just to get the desired result.

As far as conserves and social issues, I was merely pointing out how a lot of conservatives differ from the "lockstep" party line, I wasn't addressing anything you said.

Now, that being said, I don't think all libs have socialist or communistic desires, but I think a good hefty percentage of them do, or at the very least they desire the power of control over me and my money. Those few do their damndest to label consevatives close minded, rascist, bigoted, homophobe, or any other thing to try and brainwash the youth(and some adults) into buying into their party as somehow the "enlightened" ones. This helps them win elections and further their destructive tendencies economically.

Again, the Judeo Christian thing. Strong family, consequences for your actions, responsibility ect...these are all the things that give you a better chance in life. The left will tell you I'm "judging" behavior outside of these boundries, I'm NOT!! I simply can intellectually acknowledge that they are advantageous and refuse to want to support someone who makes bad choices. You can get knocked up at 17 if you want, you can drop outta high school, you can be pissed at the man, but don't whine about how society somehow owes you better than a job at wal-mart.

1. I disagree about your leap. But, no biggie.

2. What is the point of saying that conservs/repubs arent' lock step? Who suggested otherwise. Perhaps if you read where is STATED that there was diversity you would then understand why someone then feels like you are arguing to prove that is more diverse than the liberals/dems.

3. Dem party. Agreed...and that was the whole point of what is said. I stated liberals...for which there is huge differences. If we are talking classical liberalism and classical conservatism..then i would say both are equal. But, you and i both know we are talking in regards to what is going on today...liberal means tree hugger, baby murder, commie/socialist,e tc.

4. Judeo..perhaps if you knew more about the religion you wouldn't have those viewpoints...or could then understand why in a Jewish country...conservatism doesn't dominate.

My point was that to even suggest judeo christian is a joke..better to say old testament and christian..since christians, for the most part, have no interest in really following judeo values.

A few decades ago, Christian preachers would NEVER describe a moral system in terms of being 'Judeo-Christian' or having 'Judeo-Christian' values. The term would simply be 'Christian,' or often, 'Godly,' which implied 'Christian.'

But now, 'Judeo-Christian' almost seems MORE popular as a descriptive term than 'Christian' alone. How often do you hear the phrase 'This nation was founded on Judeo-Christian values' as opposed to 'This nation was founded on Christian values'?

Why is this? Did any of the 'founding fathers' describe themselves as 'Judeo-Christians?'

The term "Judeo-Christian" was invented during World War II, when Christians started realizing how rude it was to rail against the Nazis for violating "Christian decency" since so many of the Nazi victims were Jewish. It was a superficial attempt to appear diverse and inclusive. Usually when I see the term used, the author actually is only talking about Christianity, and thus denies the truly different nature of Judaism.

[Harlan Huckleby]

The term "Judeo-Christian" was invented during World War II, when Christians started realizing how rude it was to rail against the Nazis for violating "Christian decency" since so many of the Nazi victims were Jewish. It was a superficial attempt to appear diverse and inclusive. Usually when I see the term used, the author actually is only talking about Christianity, and thus denies the truly different nature of Judaism.

I was railing about this a while back, it's pretty funny. The next time I hear a Jew refer to their "Judeo-Christian" values will be the first. Somehow it is always a Christmas-tree-in-every-government-office advocate like Bill O'Reilly who use "Judeo-Christian."

And why don't they ever say our country was founded on "Judeo-Islamic-Christian" values? After all, the Muslims are the children of Abraham just as much as the Christians.

[th87]

Okay Tex. So you're celebrating the death of an American who disagrees with you.

Which can be logically extended to say you'd celebrate the death of every American who disagrees with you.

That being the case, how does this make you different from say, oh, the terrorists?

[MJZiggy]

Hey, TH, I was wondering when you were gonna pop in. Welcome to PR, finest forum on the web!

[th87]

Thanks, Zig - it's good to see you.

I've just been following things here from afar. I thought the time was finally right to join the ranks!

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Thanks, Zig - it's good to see you.

I've just been following things here from afar. I thought the time was finally right to join the ranks!

which ranks are you joining?

The ranks of the good, normal, conservative american lovin Packer Rats.

The ranks of the evil, despicable, liberal american hating Packer rats.

[Joemailman]

This call for a poll.

[PackFan#1]

Quick, somebody invite St. Lou, thePack, Lamboo, RobertJ, AbeForman and Anti-Polar Bear!

[Scott Campbell]

Thanks, Zig - it's good to see you.

I've just been following things here from afar. I thought the time was finally right to join the ranks!



It's been a long time - welcome!

[GrnBay007]

Good to see you here TH. Welcome to PR!

[bobblehead]

Tyrone-

After a long discussion you and I had on another thread you stated something to the effect of, I can't be for the republican party in its present form due to its intolerance. We had specifically been talking about race issues, and the religious right. Couple that in with your sig, and I don't think I made that big of a leap in logic.

Also, I didn't say we aren't more unified than the left, I was merely making the point we are not in lock step, the left has positions all over the map, many in direct contradiction with each other...it drives me batty, so you don't have to convince me that they are more diverse in their beliefs.

Tex's post hits it right head on...trying to get a lib to actually make a stance instead of simply attacking conservative issues is like jacking off with sandpaper...its much to painful to do just to get the desired result.

As far as conserves and social issues, I was merely pointing out how a lot of conservatives differ from the "lockstep" party line, I wasn't addressing anything you said.

Now, that being said, I don't think all libs have socialist or communistic desires, but I think a good hefty percentage of them do, or at the very least they desire the power of control over me and my money. Those few do their damndest to label consevatives close minded, rascist, bigoted, homophobe, or any other thing to try and brainwash the youth(and some adults) into buying into their party as somehow the "enlightened" ones. This helps them win elections and further their destructive tendencies economically.

Again, the Judeo Christian thing. Strong family, consequences for your actions, responsibility ect...these are all the things that give you a better chance in life. The left will tell you I'm "judging" behavior outside of these boundries, I'm NOT!! I simply can intellectually acknowledge that they are advantageous and refuse to want to support someone who makes bad choices. You can get knocked up at 17 if you want, you can drop outta high school, you can be pissed at the man, but don't whine about how society somehow owes you better than a job at wal-mart.

1. I disagree about your leap. But, no biggie.

2. What is the point of saying that conservs/repubs arent' lock step? Who suggested otherwise. Perhaps if you read where is STATED that there was diversity you would then understand why someone then feels like you are arguing to prove that is more diverse than the liberals/dems.

3. Dem party. Agreed...and that was the whole point of what is said. I stated liberals...for which there is huge differences. If we are talking classical liberalism and classical conservatism..then i would say both are equal. But, you and i both know we are talking in regards to what is going on today...liberal means tree hugger, baby murder, commie/socialist,e tc.

4. Judeo..perhaps if you knew more about the religion you wouldn't have those viewpoints...or could then understand why in a Jewish country...conservatism doesn't dominate.

My point was that to even suggest judeo christian is a joke..better to say old testament and christian..since christians, for the most part, have no interest in really following judeo values.

A few decades ago, Christian preachers would NEVER describe a moral system in terms of being 'Judeo-Christian' or having 'Judeo-Christian' values. The term would simply be 'Christian,' or often, 'Godly,' which implied 'Christian.'

But now, 'Judeo-Christian' almost seems MORE popular as a descriptive term than 'Christian' alone. How often do you hear the phrase 'This nation was founded on Judeo-Christian values' as opposed to 'This nation was founded on Christian values'?

Why is this? Did any of the 'founding fathers' describe themselves as 'Judeo-Christians?'

The term "Judeo-Christian" was invented during World War II, when Christians started realizing how rude it was to rail against the Nazis for violating "Christian decency" since so many of the Nazi victims were Jewish. It was a superficial attempt to appear diverse and inclusive. Usually when I see the term used, the author actually is only talking about Christianity, and thus denies the truly different nature of Judaism.

I am neither judeo or christian so I was referring ONLY to the values of both religions. I guess I could also include budhism or other peaceful religions, but I admit, I am somewhat brainwashed by the term being used excessively.

As for the rest, we are merely arguing shades of grey, some of which we agree, and others where the differences aren't significant or important.

Oh, you could be right about if I knew more about the jewish religion, I don't know, I have always been curious why the jewish people tend to vote democrat.

[texaspackerbacker]

Quick, somebody invite St. Lou, thePack, Lamboo, RobertJ, AbeForman and Anti-Polar Bear!

PF#1, you can quit the charade. Anti-Polar Bear is here. Look in the mirror.

th87, welcome aboard. I hope to see more posts from you--my worthiest opponent probably ever.

As for your logic above, not exactly. It's not so much that I disagreed with Russert. It's the vile effectiveness of his leftist subtlety in corrupting the electorate (him and the rest of the left-saturated mainstream media) that earned him my hate.

Look at it like this: Mussolini was probably just as bad a person as Hitler, but Hitler was more effective in his evil deeds. Therefore, he gets the wrath of history. Likewise with Russert compared to just any old dumbass who has the gall to disagree with me. And no, I don't want you dead, even though you are more effective in your leftward logic than the rest of these ..... woebegone miscreants.

[bobblehead]

Okay Tex. So you're celebrating the death of an American who disagrees with you.

Which can be logically extended to say you'd celebrate the death of every American who disagrees with you.

That being the case, how does this make you different from say, oh, the terrorists?

I've been very clear where I stand on this, but it can NOT be logically extended that way. That is your logical extension, but not the one I would conclude (or many people who are trying to figure out wth he was thinking)

[the_idle_threat]

Welcome to the forum, TH. :wave:

[mraynrand]

I tried with a whole thread about political issues to draw you guys out--to get you to articulate what you are FOR, but neither you nor any of the rest of your kind would do it. How about now--without me making any disparaging remarks about leftist genitalia or anything like that, you coming out of the liberal closet and giving a simple little statement of what you are for and against, but especially what you're for?

The crickets are chirping away as we await the unveiling of Tyrone "Fifteenth Wonder" Bigguns' "What I believe and Why" post. Don't hold your breath, Tex.

[Zool]

I'm for the soul... the cock...the pussy... the small of a woman's back... the hangin' curveball... high fiber... good scotch... I believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. I'm for a Constitutional amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated hitter. I'm for the sweet spot, soft core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve, and I'm for long, slow, deep, soft, wet kisses that last three days. Goodnight.

[bobblehead]

So you don't think for yourself you just paraphrase a washed up BBall player? :P

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Tyrone-

After a long discussion you and I had on another thread you stated something to the effect of, I can't be for the republican party in its present form due to its intolerance. We had specifically been talking about race issues, and the religious right. Couple that in with your sig, and I don't think I made that big of a leap in logic.

Also, I didn't say we aren't more unified than the left, I was merely making the point we are not in lock step, the left has positions all over the map, many in direct contradiction with each other...it drives me batty, so you don't have to convince me that they are more diverse in their beliefs.

Tex's post hits it right head on...trying to get a lib to actually make a stance instead of simply attacking conservative issues is like jacking off with sandpaper...its much to painful to do just to get the desired result.

As far as conserves and social issues, I was merely pointing out how a lot of conservatives differ from the "lockstep" party line, I wasn't addressing anything you said.

Now, that being said, I don't think all libs have socialist or communistic desires, but I think a good hefty percentage of them do, or at the very least they desire the power of control over me and my money. Those few do their damndest to label consevatives close minded, rascist, bigoted, homophobe, or any other thing to try and brainwash the youth(and some adults) into buying into their party as somehow the "enlightened" ones. This helps them win elections and further their destructive tendencies economically.

Again, the Judeo Christian thing. Strong family, consequences for your actions, responsibility ect...these are all the things that give you a better chance in life. The left will tell you I'm "judging" behavior outside of these boundries, I'm NOT!! I simply can intellectually acknowledge that they are advantageous and refuse to want to support someone who makes bad choices. You can get knocked up at 17 if you want, you can drop outta high school, you can be pissed at the man, but don't whine about how society somehow owes you better than a job at wal-mart.

1. I disagree about your leap. But, no biggie.

2. What is the point of saying that conservs/repubs arent' lock step? Who suggested otherwise. Perhaps if you read where is STATED that there was diversity you would then understand why someone then feels like you are arguing to prove that is more diverse than the liberals/dems.

3. Dem party. Agreed...and that was the whole point of what is said. I stated liberals...for which there is huge differences. If we are talking classical liberalism and classical conservatism..then i would say both are equal. But, you and i both know we are talking in regards to what is going on today...liberal means tree hugger, baby murder, commie/socialist,e tc.

4. Judeo..perhaps if you knew more about the religion you wouldn't have those viewpoints...or could then understand why in a Jewish country...conservatism doesn't dominate.

My point was that to even suggest judeo christian is a joke..better to say old testament and christian..since christians, for the most part, have no interest in really following judeo values.

A few decades ago, Christian preachers would NEVER describe a moral system in terms of being 'Judeo-Christian' or having 'Judeo-Christian' values. The term would simply be 'Christian,' or often, 'Godly,' which implied 'Christian.'

But now, 'Judeo-Christian' almost seems MORE popular as a descriptive term than 'Christian' alone. How often do you hear the phrase 'This nation was founded on Judeo-Christian values' as opposed to 'This nation was founded on Christian values'?

Why is this? Did any of the 'founding fathers' describe themselves as 'Judeo-Christians?'

The term "Judeo-Christian" was invented during World War II, when Christians started realizing how rude it was to rail against the Nazis for violating "Christian decency" since so many of the Nazi victims were Jewish. It was a superficial attempt to appear diverse and inclusive. Usually when I see the term used, the author actually is only talking about Christianity, and thus denies the truly different nature of Judaism.



Oh, you could be right about if I knew more about the jewish religion, I don't know, I have always been curious why the jewish people tend to vote democrat.

Because they hate america and all it stands for.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I tried with a whole thread about political issues to draw you guys out--to get you to articulate what you are FOR, but neither you nor any of the rest of your kind would do it. How about now--without me making any disparaging remarks about leftist genitalia or anything like that, you coming out of the liberal closet and giving a simple little statement of what you are for and against, but especially what you're for?

The crickets are chirping away as we await the unveiling of Tyrone "Fifteenth Wonder" Bigguns' "What I believe and Why" post. Don't hold your breath, Tex.

Oh, the reverse psychology is working. :roll:

Perhaps i don't engage with Tex because, i, like the rest of the "america hating" left realize there is no point.

Nah, that couldn't be it.

[mraynrand]

I tried with a whole thread about political issues to draw you guys out--to get you to articulate what you are FOR, but neither you nor any of the rest of your kind would do it. How about now--without me making any disparaging remarks about leftist genitalia or anything like that, you coming out of the liberal closet and giving a simple little statement of what you are for and against, but especially what you're for?

The crickets are chirping away as we await the unveiling of Tyrone "Fifteenth Wonder" Bigguns' "What I believe and Why" post. Don't hold your breath, Tex.

Oh, the reverse psychology is working. :roll:

Perhaps i don't engage with Tex because, i, like the rest of the "america hating" left realize there is no point.

Nah, that couldn't be it.

Yeah pass it off as a psychological ploy, that's the ticket. Still waiting.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I tried with a whole thread about political issues to draw you guys out--to get you to articulate what you are FOR, but neither you nor any of the rest of your kind would do it. How about now--without me making any disparaging remarks about leftist genitalia or anything like that, you coming out of the liberal closet and giving a simple little statement of what you are for and against, but especially what you're for?

The crickets are chirping away as we await the unveiling of Tyrone "Fifteenth Wonder" Bigguns' "What I believe and Why" post. Don't hold your breath, Tex.

Oh, the reverse psychology is working. :roll:

Perhaps i don't engage with Tex because, i, like the rest of the "america hating" left realize there is no point.

Nah, that couldn't be it.

Yeah pass it off as a psychological ploy, that's the ticket. Still waiting.

Look, my friend, perhaps you haven't noticed, but i try as hard as possible not to respond to tex...there isn't a point. I could tell him the sky is blue, and he would refute it....claiming that liberal scientists couldn't be trusted..and that the liberal media had convinced us all that it was blue.

What is the point of responding to him?

[mraynrand]

What is the point of responding to him?

That's a reasonable question. The answer is whether you care or not to address the point - make a positive statement about what you stand for - like you did re: energy initiatives on another thread. Tex wouldn't be the only one to read it and react to it. It really comes down to whether it's something you want to do or not.

[texaspackerbacker]

Tyrone, you know damn well you never say anything of substance in any context--not just to me. I don't think you have the intellectual capability.

Beyond that, though, is the shame factor--the necessity for all liberals, whether it is the forum flunkies we have around here or their heroes, the national politicians and media types to hush up their true agenda--to run and hide and NEVER come right out a say what they are FOR.

The last time I can remember a liberal really coming out and detailing what they were FOR was the Hillary-care debacle back during the Clinton Administration. America simply doesn't like what the liberals stand for when it is spelled out for them.

I wouldn't expect any intelligent response from you, Tyrone. It is kinda sad, though, that the rest of our libs don't think enough of their own political beliefs to articulate them for us.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

What is the point of responding to him?

That's a reasonable question. The answer is whether you care or not to address the point - make a positive statement about what you stand for - like you did re: energy initiatives on another thread. Tex wouldn't be the only one to read it and react to it. It really comes down to whether it's something you want to do or not.

Rand,

Well, tex just answered the question for you as to why i need not post..i never provide any substance...nor do i have the intellect.

I, like others, choose or try not to choose..to engage with Tex.

So, when you mention Tex...and that the crickets are chirping..well, you come across as quite stupid...as you quite clearly see that i do engage with yourself, bobble, etc.

To make it out as..character flaw, lack of ability, fear, etc...that is..well, stupid...and lame.

[mraynrand]

To make it out as..character flaw, lack of ability, fear, etc...that is..well, stupid...and lame.

I did nothing of the sort. I think I was pretty clear in pointing out that I didn't think you would do it - as in 'don't hold your breath'. I think I will be proven correct.

[texaspackerbacker]

Let me get this straight, Tyrone. Are you claiming that you somehow AREN'T a pea-brain who is incapable of articulating the liberal position--or anything else for that matter?

Perhaps you should provide some evidence :lol: .

[Tarlam!]

Thanks, Zig - it's good to see you.

I've just been following things here from afar. I thought the time was finally right to join the ranks!

Welcome, th87!

It's about time you found your way to the promised land!

[MadtownPacker]

Thanks, Zig - it's good to see you.

I've just been following things here from afar. I thought the time was finally right to join the ranks!

Welcome, th87!

It's about time you found your way to the promised land!TH87 is here???? Damn where is he at? He is the only person on here besides me who bumps E-40.

[th87]

Thanks, Zig - it's good to see you.

I've just been following things here from afar. I thought the time was finally right to join the ranks!

Welcome, th87!

It's about time you found your way to the promised land!TH87 is here???? Damn where is he at? He is the only person on here besides me who bumps E-40.

Can't go wrong with 40-Watter. Good to see you, MTP and Tarlam.

Now to the latest arguments. I see TB's point - articulating his position wouldn't be productive in the least, since people have pretty much made up their minds on all issues. In fact, I don't even know why people (me included) really get into these debates. Maybe it sharpens our skills or something.

As far as what I believe, I could really care less about the inner-workings of the politics. The results are largely the same, where if Obama's in office, we'll get results sliiiiiiiiiiightly to the left of what we have now, and if McCain's in, we'll get sliiiiiiiightly less left than Obama. It doesn't really matter. The country will run just as it has, regardless. It would be cool to see a Black president though.

I don't believe the hype that going Republican will keep us safe, whereas going Democrat will spell disaster. Those are classic fear tactics designed to prey on our sensibilities. The bottom line is that everybody wants to be safe, and either "team" will do whatever it takes to make that possible, sensibly.

Partisanship is for the weak. It's like adopting a Packers-Bears rivalry, but in all aspects of your life. That prevents open-mindedness, which in turn, stunts growth.

[texaspackerbacker]

TH87, stop by a little more often.

Obama is not/would not be "sliiightly" more left. He is the most extreme leftist who remotely has a chance at the presidency--even more so than Algore or Kerry--both of whom were pretty damned extreme themselves.

He is at very least the leftist equivalent of Rush Limbaugh or Jesse Helms. He is actually more like the equivalent of David Duke.

My question for you is this: would you be spouting this "Partisanship is for the weak" crap if one of those guys was trying to ease his way in by running and hiding from his extremist agenda? Actually, it wouldn't be necessary, for Rush, at least, because his views REFLECT those of the American people, unlike Obama and the rest of the left, whose goal is to con their way into power, then inflict and elitist and socialist agenda on people that is contrary to all of the views and values of the American people.

And as for a black president being "cool", hell yeah, Condoleeza, J.C. Watts, or Michael Steele would be wonderful for the country in every way--just NOT an extremist left wing asshole like Obama.

[digitaldean]

I could endorse JC Watts or Michael Steele in a heartbeat. Rice may be a logical choice also, but her ties to Pres. Bush are just the recipe for the "3rd Bush term" critics (which is a pitifully weak talking point).

[bobblehead]

Thanks, Zig - it's good to see you.

I've just been following things here from afar. I thought the time was finally right to join the ranks!

Welcome, th87!

It's about time you found your way to the promised land!TH87 is here???? Damn where is he at? He is the only person on here besides me who bumps E-40.

Can't go wrong with 40-Watter. Good to see you, MTP and Tarlam.

Now to the latest arguments. I see TB's point - articulating his position wouldn't be productive in the least, since people have pretty much made up their minds on all issues. In fact, I don't even know why people (me included) really get into these debates. Maybe it sharpens our skills or something.

As far as what I believe, I could really care less about the inner-workings of the politics. The results are largely the same, where if Obama's in office, we'll get results sliiiiiiiiiiightly to the left of what we have now, and if McCain's in, we'll get sliiiiiiiightly less left than Obama. It doesn't really matter. The country will run just as it has, regardless. It would be cool to see a Black president though.

I don't believe the hype that going Republican will keep us safe, whereas going Democrat will spell disaster. Those are classic fear tactics designed to prey on our sensibilities. The bottom line is that everybody wants to be safe, and either "team" will do whatever it takes to make that possible, sensibly.

Partisanship is for the weak. It's like adopting a Packers-Bears rivalry, but in all aspects of your life. That prevents open-mindedness, which in turn, stunts growth.

Actually wishy washy middle of the road statements are for the weak. Those that stake out a position and defend it intellectually are much stronger. Whenever someone tells me they are a "moderate" or "independent" I tend to think they refuse to put the effort into educating themselves and/or can't defend an arguement because they lack the fundamental ability to think past trying to placate everyone.

When someone tells me they are a democrat or liberal I think they are simply misinformed and misguided, but at least they bother to take a side.

If you really believe partisan is for the weak explain this. I believe firmly in a conservative stance on a position and the other side is flat out fundamentally wrong (pick a topic, not important). Someone on the left feels the exact same way about his/her position, but is the EXACT opposite of me. How is being partisan when I fully believe they are wrong weak....should I admit that 2+2=5 just to be moderate....should the other side??

All the talk of "bipartisan effort" is really code for "conservatives should cave so we are in agreement".

When gingrich was the speaker we had 2 VERY contrasting visions on how our society should operate and thru PARTISANSHIP we balanced a budget, had 4% growth for several years and cut a LOT of gov't waste. Now that we have two very similar "bipartisan" parties ...look at where we are.

[mraynrand]

Harold Ramis now rests with Tim Russert

[Freak Out]

Hell of a bump Rand. :)

[Bretsky]

HOLY CRAP I thought that ole geezer...aka...Texaspackerbacker was back

[Kiwon]

Harold Ramis now rests with Tim Russert

Wow, I must be naive and/or getting older. What did Harold Ramis do to deserve the 'Obituary by Tex' treatment?

Spare no gory detail. :drma:

[mraynrand]

Wow, I must be naive and/or getting older. What did Harold Ramis do to deserve the 'Obituary by Tex' treatment?

Spare no gory detail. :drma:

ask The Skinbasket, who was mighty happy that Ramis took a sharp turn in the direction of increased entropy.

[woodbuck27]

I'm for the soul... the cock...the pussy... the small of a woman's back... the hangin' curveball... high fiber... good scotch... I believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. I'm for a Constitutional amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated hitter. I'm for the sweet spot, soft core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve, and I'm for long, slow, deep, soft, wet kisses that last three days. Goodnight.

In what episode of Trailer Park Boys did Bubbles say that?

He's a lot more than pussies.

[woodbuck27]

Is this Romper Room or FYI?

Or .................................................. ..............have I entered the Twilight Zone!?

Politics shuuutiiinks !

[mraynrand]

Is this Romper Room or FYI?

Or .................................................. ..............have I entered the Twilight Zone!?

Politics shuuutiiinks !

this thread actually predates FYI. Hilarious.

[Freak Out]

Funny stuff in here.

[HowardRoark]

It works

[HowardRoark]

1. While sitting at your desk in front of your computer, lift your right foot off the floor and make clockwise circles.

2. Now, while doing this, draw the number '6' in the air with your right hand. Your foot will change direction.

EVERYONE SMILE......... :P

this

[texaspackerbacker]

I saw this interesting thread title - not remembering that it was my work from long ago in JSOnline hahaha.

[woodbuck27]

I just re-read this thread;

lots of emotion here:

I then decided to look closer at the man that Tim Russert at least appeared to be:

** He appears a little shaky in terms of forthrightness and the identity of Central Intelligence Agency officer Valerie Plame (Mrs. Joseph C. Wilson).

ie Tim Russert testified previously, and again in United States v. I. Lewis Libby, that he would neither testify whether he spoke with Libby nor would he describe the conversation.

** It appears that he was a noted and talented interviewer that knew when to avoid the "HOT TOPIC" that would rock the world of those in power. ( See the Iraq War)

** I withhold commentary in terms of anything and Tim Russert involving Sex, Religion or Politics but I'll make this basic statement regarding proper journalism:

I don't believe that journalists should cross the line playing politics even as difficult as that may be or must make every effort to maintain journalistic integrity.

** Tim Russert appears to have been a devout family man and member of his community in terms of service.

** Tim Russert appears to be a man I could have a few beers with and discuss Pro Sports. We both share a passion for beer and that can lead to terrific conversation (s). His passion for his favourite teams in MLB ( as a youth the Yankees and later in life the Washington Nationals (formerly my beloved Montreal Expos) and the NFL and his undaunted support for the Buffalo Bills; the NHL and the Buffalo Sabres would afford us a lot to discuss.

** He and I grew up in strong Irish American (He) and (Me) Irish Canadian societies. His father and mine had a lot in common and we shared a Family education in terms of maintaining strong family values with the encouragement of strong faith and hard persevering work.

** We both shared a passion for stories about homicide detectives and how they competently conduct their cases.

** We both share compassion for the struggling and/or lost souls. Tim Russert and street kids and me the plight of the homeless. We would both agree on the vital importance of youth and a strong future for our Nation's.

** Tim Russert went out of this life with a heart attack. I lost two great men in my life...both my maternal Grand Father and Father to heart attacks.

IMO the manner in which his funeral was conducted isn't in any way shape or form what I wish personally. I hope for a quiet funeral and people in attendance that will smile / laugh in memory of the person I attempted to be.

As a final note I'll offer this personal comment without judgement:

No man should ever piss on another mans grave. Do we really know the struggle of even the worst of mankind?

[mraynrand]

IMO the manner in which his funeral was conducted isn't in any way shape or form what I wish personally. I hope for a quiet funeral and people in attendance that will smile / laugh in memory of the person I attempted to be.

I will be there smiling and laughing!

[woodbuck27]

I will be there smiling and laughing!

Then..... buyer beware !

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTUMqb0tKg71mcMtEf_NmSHCJbpfqrBk mGiPfoiXBFCxtIO7EmY

Watch out for the dog. He's a big eater.

[Deputy Nutz]

Tex is so fucked in the heads that he can't tell the difference between this forum and the old JSO. He doesn't remember where posted shit and thinks it all magically pops up where he is currently posting.

[MadtownPacker]

All that young putang has him thinking it's the 90s.

[texaspackerbacker]

I see my name is being taken in vain again. Oh well .......

It's strange how the mind works. I put forum posting completely out of my mind for years, and basically forgot this place - and only vague memories of JSOnline. Madtown, I guess you got me pegged right hahahaha.

BTW, I stand by my original assessment of that asshole Russert. Since this is Romper Room and not F.Y.I., I won't say which political direction he leaned so badly or which direction the mainstream media in general is biased toward hahahaha, as if it needed sayin', but that wannabe Walter Cronkite did the country a favor by kicking off at such a young age - before he could propagandize more people just like the supreme asshole, Cronkite himself.

[mraynrand]

Dude, you seriously need to get laid! Dude. . . live a little!!! This world will still be around when you're gone!!! Have some fun!!! Go explore Anal, take a dive in the funpool of group sex!!! Take the rest of the posting year off and go get laid!! Your government rants on web forums are useless and have been for years. I'm just trying to help you my little right-wing buddy!

gotta love this departed packerrat. A lot of wisdom wrapped up in an endless stream of vulgarity.

[Deputy Nutz]

I change my tune, I am glad he is dead and an asshole.

[Deputy Nutz]

Is it bad that I wished death on a dog breeder the other day?

[mraynrand]

Is it bad that I wished death on a dog breeder the other day?

It depends on the breeder. Some of those people are essentially pimps.

[mraynrand]

Look, my friend, perhaps you haven't noticed, but i try as hard as possible not to respond to tex...there isn't a point. I could tell him the sky is blue, and he would refute it....claiming that liberal scientists couldn't be trusted..and that the liberal media had convinced us all that it was blue.

What is the point of responding to him?

Good point Ty. I shoulda listened to you. BTW, where are you? :)

[mraynrand]

Tex, I am a conservative in favor of lower taxes, a strong national defense, smaller federal government, and judges that uphold the constitution and refrain from legislating.

Your lack of respect and compassion toward others, particularly in this thread, reinforce an ugly sterotype that makes my job harder.

If you're a Christian, please consider that disagreements, at certain points along the way, must be subordinated to more important responsibilities of charity and kindness.

I shoulda listened to Swede. BTW, Swede my friend, where are you?

[mraynrand]

Why read or respond? If everyone hates this guy so much, why do they generate 8 pages of responses? It's just like TANK - everyone hates the guy, can't stand him, yet takes 10 pages of responses to explain how much they hate him and how much they hate responding to him. Stop reading and responding and the guy will stop posting. Don't you get it?

I shoulda listened to me. BTW Rand, where are you?

[George Cumby]

As if there weren't ample evidence that TPB was an odious, despicable, hate filled and despicable soul, Rand digs this gem up......

[texaspackerbacker]

hahahahahaha I have to thank the pathetic loon for reviving my words. Suffice it to say, I stand by all of it - especially the title of the thread.

[woodbuck27]

http://content7.flixster.com/question/38/64/66/3864665_std.jpg

" I was reading this the other day and amongst published researchers, there is agreement that the Left includes:

anarchists, communists, socialists, anti-capitalists, anti-imperialists, anti-racists, democratic socialists, greens, left-libertarians, social democrats, progressives and social liberals.

Researchers agreed that that the Right includes:

fascists, racists, Nazis, capitalists, monarchists, nationalists, neoconservatives, neoliberals, reactionaries, imperialists, right-libertarians and conservatives.

I'm confused.......I'm ambidextrous."

"By the way...... to condemn a dead man isn't wise."

[mraynrand]

I'm confused.......

no argument here. That was a totally confused post for sure.

[woodbuck27]

no argument here. That was a totally confused post for sure.

Hey man when your IQ is in the 160 range simpler people may not get it.

[mraynrand]

Hey man when your IQ is in the 160 range simpler people may not get it.

we're not here for true confessions.

[George Cumby]

"to condemn a dead man isn't wise."

Sage words, Woody.

You may be generally crazy, but I think your heart is in the right place.

Unlike the greasy stain that started this abortion of a thread.

[woodbuck27]

"to condemn a dead man isn't wise."

Sage words, Woody.

You may be generally crazy, but I think your heart is in the right place.

Unlike the greasy stain that started this abortion of a thread.

OK .....you've challenged me George:

What the heck does that mean? I'm generally crazy. WOW !

If I was to believe your assessment of me:

woodbuck27's crazy. What a crazy member I am. I've received the label as being crazy. :whaa:

Terrific ! The fact is: Hardly any of us really now the other George Cumby.

I'll inform you George Cumby of the TRUTH. I know that I'm a decent person who has Packerrats best interests in my heart. U claim I'm crazy......... yet all my life I've risen to the level best described as 'A Leader'.... A Winner'.. 'a compassionate and giving person'...'generous' etc. etc. that's all positive.

Is that all BS !?

Let's examine my record here:

I've been a member here since the inception of Packerrats and how many member endeavour to make as much of a positive contribution as I've demonstrated. That contribution has been with style and generally positive.

I've proven myself a dedicated Green Bay Packer fan. I've been all of that since 1958....or 58 years. How many member can claim such a long standing loyalty to any Pro Team?

I contribute a lot that's intended to be humorous if you have the ability to interpret many of my posts as such and without bias. I'm a Canadian Maritimer and my style of humor may be unrecognized or misinterpreted.

I'm crazy ...yet have contributed more posts than likely 99% of all the remainder of the membership.

I'm crazy.... yet I'm a two time Pro Pickem Champion and a runner up and finished third each on three other occasions. What's that..?... eight trophies since 2006. Yup being CRAZY sure helped me and all the analysis such a record demands. Being CRAZY.... I'm guessing .....helps me be competitive. Competence has little to do with it.

The fact is no matter what endeavour to do...I'm a winner because I have the right attitude ability and prepare for such a positive outcome.

I'm crazy yet chosen often in my lifetime to lead others and to be a wise mentor.

I post with an edge and don't take crap from any other member that ever decides to match wits with me. I know I'm well capable and experienced enough to debate in a style that will certainly offer entertainment. Frankly I've always been able to meet a mental challenge. Academically I've often been a class leader even at the University level ..but I'm deemed crazy by you George Cumby.

I'll inform you of what I feel I am:

Misunderstood and targeted here. That's a fact I live with, endure here. BFD. :-)

[George Cumby]

Yup. Crazy.

But still a good guy at heart.

Love you, Wood, don't ever change.

Packerrats needs you, Woody, don't ever leave.