Wow! You mean there are anonymous people on the internet that are haters and bigots? People who frequent liberal blog sites? I don't know anyone who is deluded enough to think there aren't whack jobs on both ends of the political spectrum. We've all seen it, even right here on JU. I've seen more hateful things than what he listed as examples coming from both sides of the aisle. I respect Lanny Davis, but for him
I just love how all of her Democratic pals like Hillary are talking down to Lieberman and sucking up to Lamont. What exactly do you expect them to do? Should they support someone who left their party, or the man who legitimately won the primary to represent their party? Almost every Democrat said tha
who? where did he do it? ands at what funeral, was he joined in by many others in condemning something? Paul Wellstone is dead. He is referring to the memorial service for Wellstone. From Wikipedia; The 20,000 capacity memorial service for Wellstone and the other victims of the crash was held in Williams Arena at the Univers
Because I wasn't responding to that! "What" I was responding to I quoted! And I'll do so again. Ahhh, another lame attempt to weasel away from being wrong, again. It doesn't really matter though, because I get so much amusement from your butchery of language. <img src="http://images.s
The last figures recorded by he Connecticut Secretary of State were approx. 1.95 million registered voters with approx. 650,000 being Democrat, as of last year. I assume that would leave approx. 1.3 million Republicans and Independents, along with a smattering of various other parties of no consequence. The voter turnout
Kind of hard to get a "majority" of Americans when you're only referring to CT, ain't it? I mean it was only a "state" primary, and CT is after all primarily a "blue" state! Once again, you show your lack of reading comprehension skills. Why don't you show the post that I quoted, and was responding to with that? <TABLE cellpaddi
I was talking about the overall rate, not "some towns". And in any event, it does nothing to negate my point that it was far less than 50% since even if the high figure is used, then he only got about 24% of the democrat voters. Far less than 50%. And since democrats are not 100% of Connecticut voters, it cannot be translate
Just another example of how far out of touch with mainstream America the DEMONCRAPS are, Senator Leiberman agreed with the Demoncraps 90% of the time, but that is not enough for the left wing loons like DAVAD. Just another example of how out of touch with reality you are. A clear majority of America doe
Way less since only about 15-20% of the democrats even voted in the primary. But then if he runs (as appears certain) as an independant, and wins, then Terp's statement is correct. Since he was representing the PEOPLE of Connecticut, not just the democrats. Where did you see the figures of 15-20%? Some towns reported turnout in excess of 50%.<
Still, Lieberman is a man that has represented his constituents very well. What are you basing that on? I think the fact that less than 50% of Democrats voted for him in this primary would indicate that they didn't feel he represented them well. Why would they want someone else representing them if he
Now why don't you give them the "real reason" it was voted down? Because "Chucky Schumer" (D) added junk to the bill that was unacceptable. Go here and find out the rest of the missing info. Thanks for making my point for me. <img src="http://images.stardock.com/JU/smiles/Tongue.g
It is interesting you did not mention the Stoop Jackson amendment. It actually has more relevance. How do you figure?
Will the public see through it all and realize just how disgusting the political games the Democrats are playing are? I doubt it. As usual the Democratic talking points will continue to say they are *for* an increase in the minimum wage and Republicans aren't for one, even though in this just (failed to pass) taken vote in the U.
JoeUser Forums
I believe this as the terrorists have no conscience, morals, ethics, or scruples... much like the American democratic party and her far left liberals. With statements like that, you have made yourself as much of a joke as col gene, only residing at the opposite end of the spectrum.
I don't see EITHER party as being pro minority, frankly, davad; for that matter, I don't see either party as being a party "of the people", but the elected individuals usually wind up being what manby consider "the lesser of two evils". The question then arises, which evils do you consider "lesser"? <B
<img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 200px;" src="http://i.a.cnn.net/nascar/2006/news/headlines/cup/01/02/daytona.countdown.ala/Charles.Barkley.193.jp
Good enough that most main stream media hasn't bothered to really even comment on it. (That's where/when you can tell that the President has done well, when the MSM can't be bothered to address the news at all since they know it would be considered a positive thing). It was in all the newspapers and on
Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman boldly made the following statement yesterday; "The situation seems far more stable than when I was here two or three years ago," he said in an interview in the fortified Green Zone. "The security seems better, people are more relaxed. There is an optimism, at least among the people I talked to." Bodman
I know I'm one of your so-called 1/3 who thinks stem cell research is an affront to nature and should be banned. I'm curious as to what makes stem-cell research an affront to nature?
You have been convicted of thought crime against the Holy Empire of America and sentenced to a prolonged stretch of hard labor building the "Freedom Wall" between Texas and Mexico. Speaking of the "Freedom Wall", did anyone else see Steve King(R-IA) a couple days ago, showing a model of his proposed wa
A few days back I saw an <a href="http://youtube.com/watch?v=4bZJ1TvBqLE&search=lewis
This is a great example of one of my main issues with blogs and online forums. People often don't feel like they have to treat others in the same manner here as they do in real life. I don't think I've ever said anything to someone online that I wouldn't also say to their face. I often wonder whether other people pay the same respect to me. It is admirable that you went out of your way to let Brian X know that you were wrong and apologize. I would just hope that you would offer that
I read a really good article titled The State Secrets That Weren't Secret by Joe Conason about this last week. Here are some excerpts; Ever since the appearance of the Times report on the SWIFT consortium's cooperation with US counter-terror agencies, right-wing commentators have been screaming about the alleged damage done to our national security interests. The president has joined this angry chorus, but neither he nor anyone else has mentioned anything specific -- almost
Anyway, regardless of the links' validity, what does this announcement say about the state of our economy? What does this say to all the people who scream "tax cut for the rich"? Sounds like good news, but I'll wait for official word before getting too giddy. <img src="http://images.stardock
guess you didn't look much. I didn't look at all, I just said the links don't work.