Gonzales, Bush & Cheney
This letter has not been edited.
You only have to follow the laws if you aren't the one that made them.
Posted by Larry on August 8, 2007 02:14 PMYou can tell that letter writer David Clark is in the US hating wing of the Democrat party.He is highly offended that his friends, the terrorists, were tortured.Most Democrats are bothered by the torture because it hurts their effort to help the terrorists win the war.The coward wing of the party cringed when they heard of panties being put on terrorists heads.Being cowards they thought that was horrifying.
Posted by An American on August 8, 2007 02:55 PM"An American," like most Repuglicans, fights like a girl. What a coward you are! Can't even come up with any new talking points. Better go listen to Rush some more for some fresh ideas. Better yet, drink some Drano!
The list of crimes and malfeasance of the Bushies fills volumes.
They ignore accountability, subpoenas, and the will of the people.
They have nothing but contempt for the citizens of this country. Their fraudulent war is causing terrible damage to us, and having no deterrent effect on Islamic Jihad.
Bush and his supporters are traitors and frauds. Give up politics, "An American," you're embarrassing yourself. Why don't you send some money to bin Laden? His Jihadists love you, because you Repugs have dropped the ball, so you can pay attention to your real goal, dismantling the Federal Government.
Posted by Adam on August 8, 2007 04:58 PMUn American is off of his meds again.
How are your conversations with Hitler and Stalin going? Is the reception through that helmet fashioned from Big Mac wrappers, egg cartons, and old lotto scratch tickets still strong? Let us know after you sneak past the guards at the public library again.
Posted by YooHoo on August 8, 2007 05:03 PMAdam,
"The list of crimes and malfeasance of the Bushies fills volumes".
You are correct they should all be arrested and put on trial.
Oh hell, we can't do that because we have no proof. If the Dems had any proof what so ever of your allegations they would have done something.
Get off your soapbox and find some proof that will hold up in a court of law. Until that time find a new talking point
Posted by jgd777 on August 8, 2007 05:35 PMadam you make my heart dance with joy know that you have your short so up in a twist.
did your boy bill ever figure out the meaning of 'is'?
I agree lets tear donw gitmo and do just what the dems favorite terrorist do with the ones they capture. CUT OFF THIER HEADS AND LET CNN BROAD CAST IT. that is much better that putting panties on their heads.
you know I bet if you work it just right you could be the intern for hillary and staqy under her desk.
just enjoy it while you can
AA is in his cups again - it's that time of day. He's slurring his words.
"An American," read this question carefully, then stop yapping.
Which is worse: A)"Losing" 190,000 firearms and $20 billion reconstruction money, or B) calling those who criticize it "terrorists" ?
These are both the actions of your incompetent, immoral, lying party, and I'd just like to know which of these two you think is more despicable. Can you sober up long enough to answer that?
***SUPPORT OUR TROOPS***
***VETERAN FOR IMPEACHING REPIGLICANS***
***GOD BLESS AMERICA***
davy,If Bush and Cheney are breaking laws so are cops arresting men who rape little boys.Oh I forgot,there are liberal judges letting these guys off on probation,there reasoning,it's not a crime it's a life style.Please get a clue..
Posted by bart on August 8, 2007 07:57 PMNo matter what the crimes Bush, Cheney, Gonzales etc. do the 25% that still support these people like UnAmerican, Bart etc. will always defend them. It sounds to me like Bart and UnAmerican would be all for torturing and killing anybody who disagrees with their party and ideas. Anbody who spews the traitor, coward America haters card in every post has some serious issues. Over and over I see these guys on these posts and there is never any conversation and trading of ideas, it is always the same America hating cowards of the left, it doesn't really look too good for you guys, you seem very angry and immature. But that's just my opinion..
Posted by Mike D. on August 8, 2007 08:32 PMRepubliscum cowards could watch Bush shoot a U.S. soldier in the head and write the Bin Laden family a check, and they'd still drop to their knees to suck his tiny prick.
Posted by on August 8, 2007 09:38 PMmikey,what law was broken?But again during the clinton adm. all attorneys were firered including two who were investigating his illegal activities.og 1 of many impeachable offences.
Posted by Keith on August 8, 2007 09:41 PMPost 09:38, it’s spelled Republican heroes.
Poor kid! Did you have to watch your mother do that to strangers often? It’s fashionable only between liberal presidents and interns you know.
the difference with Clinton was a man/woman thing. Republicans apparently only go for the man/man thing. Foley, the head of the Young Republicans etc.
Posted by It's True on August 9, 2007 07:18 AMYou know, for hating Clinton so much republicans sure like to use him as a scapegoat for anything this administration does. Sounds to me like you should be praising him, otherwise you wouldn't have any points at all.
Posted by Larry on August 9, 2007 07:45 AMI'm waiting for the day when some wingnut or the other publishes a list of "hateful" actions and/or utterances. So those of us who can think and speak in phrases not composed and approved by rush,the savage weiner, oreilly, hannity or one of the other keyboardists at the mighty wiingnut wurlitzer will know what to avoid in the future. As it is it seems as if "hate' or hateful" is merely any thought or utterance not properly worshipful of their demigod and his crew of incompetent cronies.It's a tactic to cut off debate and discussion sort of like calling anyone who voices misgivings about the ill-considered madcap military misadventure in the mess-o-potamia a "traitor" or "terrist(phonetic spelling from bush pronunciation) sympathizer/enabler. I don't hold out much hope of that happening because I don't believe any of the wingnuts really know what they're talking about when those phrases/words get tossed about. They're just good little imprinted authoritarians and say what they're told to say.
Posted by patrick on August 9, 2007 08:32 AMpatrick,shouldn't you be taking the trash out for your mommy.
Posted by bart on August 9, 2007 09:41 AMAnd there you have the absolute best, most intelligent rebuttal to patrick's post.
Posted by Larry on August 9, 2007 10:20 AMMany of you wonder way these Democrats get so mad when they read my postings.Look at the words they use,the anger.This is because I am on target.They are trying to deal with what they know they are,cowards and US haters.I am making them face the truth and that causes great pain.Look how calm I am.I am not calling them names.I am only telling the truth.What the Democrats do and say helps the terrorists and they know it.If you asked a terrorist which party do you consider your friend the Republicans or Democrats they would say Democrats.Everybody knows this is a fact.Ask yourself which party would the terrorists vote for if they could? The Democrat party would be their choice.These are facts .This is why they hate my postings so much.I do not have to debate them on their lies just go to the facts.
Posted by An American on August 9, 2007 10:26 AMWhat makes these facts?
Posted by Larry on August 9, 2007 10:29 AMLarry,
I've always said that "bart", "AnAmerican", and now "Uno" - on another line - stand at the forefront of spokesmen for the Republican/conservative positions, along with the individual whose name when included seems to get the "Blog Owner" so upset as to with-hold printing of postings. When this "Big 3" (since it is possible that "bart" and he-who-must-not-be-named are one and the same person) get together - or even when one of them is posting - the heart, mind, and whateve passes for a "soul" of everything Republican/conservative is presented, as you say, in the "absolute best, and most (Republican/conservative) intelligent" way.
The Republicans/conservatives should be very proud that they have such excellent representation on the forum.
Posted by Old Grouch on August 9, 2007 10:34 AMHere is another fact.The Democrats hate Gonzales,Bush and Cheney more than they hate the terrorists.Their postings prove this fact.What does that tell you?My enemies,enemy is my friend.That is why they are helping the terrorists win the war.
Posted by An American on August 9, 2007 10:42 AMKeith is correct. I listened to W. Bush this morning on his press conference and he made it clear that he can't hold Alberto accountable because he hasn't done anything to be held accountable.
From my own perspective, W. is correct: Find a doctrine in law that says the master is accountable for the wrongs of his employee. I'll spare you the Latin. Find wrongdoing in Alberto and the blood-sucking vampire should have that stake driven through his heart.
Abandon your quest to find Alberto guilty of wrongdoing. He is a lap dog. He does the will of W. Bush. Keith's brilliant assessment is buttressed by W.'s confessions: "I am right; the entire world is wrong." Hang in there, Keith. You are one hellovavisionary.
Deicide Corner: “A religion, even if it calls itself the religion of love, must be hard and unloving to those who do not belong to it.”
-- Sigmund Freud
RG: Deicide, etc.,
It would come under "respondeat superior" in Torts, among other places.
Posted by Old Grouch on August 9, 2007 11:08 AMRG
Do you read any religious writers other than Freud?
Posted by James Jones on August 9, 2007 11:08 AMLarry asks "What makes these facts?" My answer is something the Democrats do not have "Common sense".
So because the terrorists want the war in Iraq to continue so that they can wear down the US military, it makes sense for you to keep the war in Iraq going, and the democrats are the ones giving comfort to these people?
Posted by Larry on August 9, 2007 11:16 AMLarry,
The terroirsts are not trying to wear down the military. They know they can never win that battle.
They are, however, working to wear down the Democrats. That appears to be working -accept for Sen. Liebreman. But then, the Senator isn't a Democrat any more is he?
Posted by James Jones on August 9, 2007 11:36 AMWorking to wear down the democrats?, here I thought terrorists hated all Americans, it's good to know that they are not trying to wear down their republican friends.
Posted by Larry on August 9, 2007 11:52 AMWhere do you get these ideas Larry? The terrorists want us to leave Iraq so they can get the stronghold.
They also know whats going on over here with the dems in congress wanting to pull the plug. They have most modern forms of communication over there. It's not as if the middle east is like Gilligan's Island with limited communications. They hear how the dems are trying to gain power by preaching anti-Iraq rhetoric.
And that's exactly what the terrorists want.
Posted by KW on August 9, 2007 12:03 PMThank you James for answering the question from Larry.The reason people like Larry can't admit to understanding common sense is because if they do it will hurt their agenda to help the terrorists.They have to come up with distorted theories to justify what they are doing.No one with a lick of "common sense" would say the terrorist want us to stay in Iraq but the Democrats have to make stupid statements like this to cover up what they really are.US haters and cowards.I think the more I get them to talk the more I am proven right.Class dismissed.
Posted by An American on August 9, 2007 12:08 PMAn American,
That would explain why there is so little discussion about the consequences of losing in Iraq among the Democrats who would be the Commander in Chief.
Posted by James Jones on August 9, 2007 12:24 PMThank you KW, and what would would the terrorists get if they had a stronghold in Iraq? OIL!!! ding ding ding!!! Can't have that now can we. An agenda to help the terrorists? And what exactly would that be? The only distorted theories that are being spewed here is that what we are doing in Iraq is right and that we are "fighting them over there so we don't fight them here". It's beyond obvious to everybody by now that this poster who dares call himself an American is simply a social studies class project. Trying to find the "dark side of patriotism" by saying how everybody who doesn't agree with them are cowards and traitors. But it seems that a person who wants a war to continue as long as they or anybody they care about don't have to fight in it, is a brave person.
Posted by Larry on August 9, 2007 12:25 PMLarry,
It appears that the Bushite/Republican/conservative claque has now called out its secondary line of "big guns", to further amplify that "absolute best and most (Republican/conservative) intelligent" presentation of position. While not quite at the level of the earlier mentioned Big 3, KW and James Jones certainly do have a place among those who are at the forefront of spokesmanship for anything and everything Bushite/Republican/conservative.
Could they be in the running for a place with the Big 3? Or even attempting to displace them as principal spokesmen? Stay tuned for further developments.
Posted by Old Grouch on August 9, 2007 12:28 PMPlease tell me what the consequenses would be for "losing" in Iraq.
Would it be because we would have terrorists running down main street blowing people up?
Would it be because they would take over our country?
Would it be because then we'd all have to be praying to Mecca for the rest of our lives?
Do any of you really believe any of these theories?
Posted by Larry on August 9, 2007 12:30 PMLarry,
You were right all along they hate Republicans too. Their goal is to subjugate by terrorizing the population. The Democrats are the subject not the object.
Posted by James Jones on August 9, 2007 12:33 PMSince the democrats cannot come up with a logical argument it would appear they have resorted once AGAIN to name calling i.e. "republiscums", "repiglicans"....
Here's an idea: Quit acting like a 2 year old.....
Posted by Heather on August 9, 2007 12:46 PMSo what is it that makes you think that we would just go belly up and say "yep, you can take over our country"? Are you that weak that you wouldn't be able to fight them over here if they were stupid enough to try?
Posted by Larry on August 9, 2007 12:48 PMI see that Un American snuck by the guards at the public library again and is back for our entertainment. Channeling Mussolini this time, eh? or maybe some delusion of military service? I see that he keeps referring to "us" in Iraq, when the closest he'll ever come to Iraq is writing the word in a blog. But it's not the first time he's daydreamed. He's the guy on the corner with the sign stating "Veteran", when he was draft dodging with the other cowards of this Administration. A prime example of how the terrorists win the war...they keep at it, knowing that once a coward, always a coward, and these cowards always run for cover. They did it back then, and they do it now, hiding behind "patriotism" and the blood of courageous soldiers, other people's children.
Why haven't Bush's daughters enlisted? Because they learned cowardice from their father. Zero guts. Why isn't Un American in a foxhole right now? Because he's always been a coward, and the voices in his head scare the hell out of him. So he shares them here by attacking others.
We don't hate Un American. We think hes/shes/its pathetic, and hope he/she/it gets help.
Posted by YooHoo on August 9, 2007 12:57 PMOh! Goody!
Another round of, "The flying carpets are coming! The flying carpets are coming! Help! Help! And the great bronze horses powered by the djinn! The flying carpets are coming!"
Larry,
Of course, if we don't "win" in Iraq they will come marching over here. That's the whole crux of the Republican/conservative position today.
Don't bother pointing out the lack of transport, naval, air, or other. Don't bother pointing out the lack of cohesive command, much less any semblance of cohesive purpose among those in the ranks. Don't bother to point out lack of arms, armament, armor, and all the other necssary supplies. Don't bother to point out the problem of having to also conquer Europe, and Aisia all the way through China as well. Don't bother to deal with FACTS AND REALITY!
The whole Bush/Republican/conservative position on/in Iraq is based on the Chicken Little proclamation: "Help! Help! The flying carpets are coming!"
And, we'll go right on sacrificing American lives, and wasting American resources - till doomsday if possible - to keep the country cowering under the bed, or hiding in the bomb shelters and root cellars, with that threat, just as long as Bush and his followers can hold on. (Or at least until Bush and his claque finally control the oil, which is by far the most important reason for the whole Iraq quagmire in the first place.)
Posted by Old Grouch on August 9, 2007 01:14 PMKW, this could possibly be the most hysterical thing you've ever written:
"hey also know whats going on over here with the dems in congress wanting to pull the plug. They have most modern forms of communication over there. It's not as if the middle east is like Gilligan's Island with limited communications. They hear how the dems are trying to gain power by preaching anti-Iraq rhetoric."
Congrats on raising the bar once again!
Posted by Charles B on August 9, 2007 02:11 PMLarry - You're the one who made the statement:
So because the terrorists want the war in Iraq to continue so that they can wear down the US military, it makes sense for you to keep the war in Iraq going"
But when I explain to you the terrorists want us gone, rather than to stay as you implied, you respond with:
"Thank you KW, and what would would the terrorists get if they had a stronghold in Iraq? OIL!!! ding ding ding!!! Can't have that now can we."
You act as if you never made the first statement.
Is this a normal tactic when your called out for making a blatently false accusation or just your own special way of running from your mistakes?
Posted by KW on August 9, 2007 02:36 PMPerhaps you've heard of a man named Zaqwari, I don't know how you actually spell it, thanking Allah for sending US troops to Iraq so that the evil west would be bogged down in the region for years to come. But I'm sure you think that "that's just what they want you to think". I made the oil comment because I saw the statement about how democrats never bring up the consequenses for leaving Iraq. And the reason is because the only consequence would be the loss of control of the oil. They were two completely different statements for the purposes of two completely different topics. I never acted like I didn't make that statement.
Posted by Larry on August 9, 2007 02:44 PMLarry: "Please tell me what the consequenses would be for "losing" in Iraq."
How about with al Qaeda not being engaged, it allows them to put more effort toward striking the US again. I'm not talking about them "taking over" as liberals always like to say in their efforts to discredit, but we're talking about increased chance of another 9/11 or something much worse if they get their hands on the right weapons.
But apparently your ok with 3000+ innocent americans getting murdered once in awhile just as long as you get your armchair generals wish of losing in Iraq.
Thanks Larry, your viewpoint is so much clearer now.
Posted by KW on August 9, 2007 02:45 PMWow, you are so far up your own butt it's ridiculous. So I'll take this sentence by sentence. The plans to strike the US again are already underway, and if we would actually go after the people responsible then it wouldn't be an issue. Instead we are playing ref in a civil war. The "taking over" statement has been used by republicans for about 3 years as given a reason why not to pull back. Remember the "fight them over there so we don't fight them here" slogan? That was repeated to death by the republicans, luckily nobody believes it anymore. So why aren't you in favor of going after terrorists instead? The only way there will be an increased chance of another 9/11 or worse is if we spend all of our time in a place that is not of any consequence except for the oil.
Obviously it's you who is ok with 3000+ American soldiers dead once in a while just as long as you can send other people to fight in a war that had nothing to with protecting America.
Posted by Larry on August 9, 2007 02:59 PMLarry: "I never acted like I didn't make that statement."
Oh, sorry Larry. I just figured you did becasue when I refuted your point you responded by changing your stance on the topic, and then claimed you were just talking about a different topic.
I'll make a point not to expect you to stay on topic in the future. Especially when your called on making a false statement.
Larry: "So why aren't you in favor of going after terrorists instead?"
Aha, the old "theres no al Qaeda in Iraq" analagy." Talking about having ones head up ones butt, you sure do make a prime example of yourself.
Thanks for the sacrifice.
Boy you certainly don't like being proven wrong do you. The topic was already changed since that's what you guys do best. When I make a statement and somebody changes the topic, I will go with that since I made the false assumption that they were trying to make a point about something. I also need to point out that you didn't refute anything.
You said, the terrorists want us to leave Iraq so they can get a stronghold. I asked a stronghold of what? I know you didn't want to say oil, but you have no other reason for being there. And suddenly somehow I changed the subject? Again, I never said there is no al queda in Iraq, but I'm going to use one of your favorite talking points "well, they're there now". So you would rather stay in Iraq and kill the pawns of al queda, you know, the ones they recruited a couple months ago, instead of going to say pakistan or back to afganistan to find the senior leaders. For some reason you gave up the thinking of cutting off the head will kill the body.
Sure, I hope that the 3000+ dead soldiers will appease your god for next few months.
Posted by Larry on August 9, 2007 03:39 PMLarry - I realize you post so much blather that's it's hard to keep track of what you said and when you said it so here's a little refresher for ya...
Larry :
"So because the terrorists want the war in Iraq to continue so that they can wear down the US military, it makes sense for you to keep the war in Iraq going"
But when I explain to you the terrorists want us gone so they can get a stronghold, rather than to stay as you implied, you respond with:
"Thank you KW, and what would would the terrorists get if they had a stronghold in Iraq? OIL!!! ding ding ding!!! Can't have that now can we."
Nobody changed topics on you Larry like you say, I was responding directly to your statement and when I did YOU changed your take on the subject.
Now, do you agree your statement that al Qaeda prefers we stay in Iraq to be completely false and pretty much made up as a lame excuse for why we should leave Iraq?
Hmmm?
Not at all, since all of the senior leaders of al queda was praising Allah for sending US troops there. There is absolutely no way you can possibly try to say that al queda wants us to leave. They have been thanking whatever god they believe in that there is a war in Iraq. It has been the greatest recruiting tool in the history of the movement.
So you tell me, what stronghold would they get?
Posted by Larry on August 9, 2007 03:59 PMlarry,you meatball,a mexican terrorist group al queda does not praise allah.Wake up meatballs,every time you try to state one of your dribbles as fact it's already been proven that it was a made up liberal lie,some of these that you meatballs repeat have been proven lies years ago.We need to send you idiots to Mexico,like a foreigh exchange system,we send Mexico our idiots in exchange they send us honest people who want to work.
Posted by bart on August 9, 2007 08:16 PMThis one brought out all the Bush Bootlickers I see.
Posted by A True American on August 9, 2007 08:44 PMIt’s so convenient to minimize the threat of an enemy. Charlemagne is the reason Europe isn’t worshipping the Muslim god right now. Minimizing the threat of a religion that evangelizes by the sword is foolhardy at best. The Rights this Republic grants its citizens are not granted to citizens of other nations nor terrorists. The liberals would have you believe the threat does not exist. What they do not realize is they have the most to lose. The Muslims are not tolerant, and compromise is only used as a means to an end.
Posted by kobetabber on August 9, 2007 09:08 PMI missed the torrent of anger when Clinton had 73? attorneys fired. Oh yea, selective anger is a progressive attribute.
Posted by kobetabber on August 9, 2007 09:14 PMThere is no US-hating wing in the United Staes, unless it is the Republicans whose platform is based on hate, bigotry, racism, intolerance, corruption and condemning anyone who opposes them. The hatred I read in these blogs comes from the Republicans, the majority of the name calling comes from the Republicans and rightwingers. Calling anyone who opposes Bush and the war un-American and traitors is similar to what all dictators have done in the past. Well, in the rightwingers eyes 70% of this country must be traitiors. A bunch of that 70% is made up of the veterans who fought for this country and the freedoms that Bush is so eager to strip away from us. We oppose the war and all we can do is protest to support our point. I suggest everyone who supports the WAR should enlist to show their strength and support. Go ahead right wing boys and girls, even those rightwingers who are closet cowards can enlist and still get $20K in a bonus now. No takers? That doesn't surprise me, its easy for cowards to love a war as long as someone else is doing the fighting and the dying.
Posted by Loves America on August 10, 2007 06:18 AMThanks Old Grouch. Here is another sentiment expressed by Justice Kirschbaum to his class at DU: "Tell the judge the topic and he will tell you how it will turn out and evidence has nothing to do with it." I didn't believe the Judge at the time; I believe him now having gone through trials to the bench where even perjury is rewarded pursuant to the Judge's common sense a.k.a. his bias and prejudice. Back to the subject matter:
The worn out rebuttal: Clinton fired all of his predecessors attorneys: yes. All in-coming Presidents fire all attorneys; however, they don't fire a few a few years later because they are doing their job too well. Bush compelled Alberto to fire eight because they were going after Republicans as their work description demanded: Prosecute the lawbreakers irrespective of party affiliation.
Deicide Corner: The evangelical assault on secular values at home is no less dangerous than its Islamic variant. -- Pierre Tristam -- This expression may be deemed Latin for "Christianity is America's Taliban."
*Believers in religious dogma have not risen over the ape status. Their skulls still look like they are a million years old: vary ape-like.
Thanks to Old Grouch for the hue in blue by filling in Web address
Posted by RG r22037@yahoo Deicide and *Risen Ape http://www.geocities.com/r22037/think.html on August 10, 2007 10:34 AMHey,you thought the Democrats were just cowards on the war issue.Not true.Go to letter "God,guns,gays & Dems." and see how these same Dems. are wetting their pants over people owning guns.How they try to hide behind women and children to take your right away.Democrats are not just cowards on the war.They are cowards on all issues.Class dismimmed.
Posted by An American on August 10, 2007 11:24 AMI doubt we are wetting our pants, tho some of us are concerned over psychotic hate mongers like An(ti) American above with a gun in his hand. Even though there is always the pleasant possibility that he will shoot himself (what a happy thought!) before someone else.. A nut like him having a gun, yes that is scary. Responsible gun owners do not bother me. I hope gunowners realize that having someone like An American endorsing their cause works against it, not for it.
Posted by Big Bad Wolf on August 10, 2007 12:07 PMBush's parrot, KW, came up with this gem:
" Larry: "Please tell me what the consequenses would be for "losing" in Iraq."
How about with al Qaeda not being engaged, it allows them to put more effort toward striking the US again."
News flash, little green, feathered one: The vast majority of Al Qaeda in Iraq is comprised of... IRAQIS - surprise! Meanwhile as we are expending our time, money, effort & young women & men in that civil war, the REAL leaders of Al Qaeda (you know, Osama & the other guys that Bush "doesn't think that much about") - in places like Pakistan , Afghanistan & Indonesia - are sitting back and plotting against the US & thanking their lucky stars that the strongest nation on earth has such a stupid leader.
And I'll repeat: KW, bart/keith and Un-American - you're such armchair heroes - why don't you get off your yellow asses & out of the la-z-boy and go do YOUR part in this war. You're such cheerleaders we should give you each a set of pom-poms. Or maybe I was wrong about you, KW & you're not parrots, just CHICKENS.
Posted by drew on August 10, 2007 02:06 PMSeriously, you shouldn't even bother addressing un American. This is a social studies class project to try to find the "dark side of patroitism". The posts are being used as bait to see how far people can be pushed. Same with keith and bart.
Posted by Larry on August 10, 2007 02:20 PMdrew:
"And I'll repeat"
That's pretty much all you do, drew. You just need to expand your intelligence more so you'll quit sounding like the pet parrot at moveon.
Posted by KW on August 10, 2007 03:01 PMLarry,
An American is a poor man's KW, but he has a saving grace in that he doesn't dress up his true beliefs in robes of faux-impartiality and pseudo intellectualism like KW.
They are similar in that trying to teach them anything is fruitless.
Posted by Charles B on August 10, 2007 06:40 PM