Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Posting it twice doesn't make it any more relevant. It's still from 2007, Little Something Or Other.
You're making me feel bad for you.
I noticed the same thing earlier: Little-Acorn posting something twice! I thought I was going crazy and still happened to have my reply in my word processor so reposted my reply (which I subsequently deleted after I realized that the second posting was just a desperation move by Little-Acorn). What's with that? Is that kind of silliness supposed to mean something? ???
I noticed the same thing earlier: Little-Acorn posting something twice! I thought I was going crazy and still happened to have my reply in my word processor so reposted my reply (which I subsequently deleted after I realized that the second posting was just a desperation move by Little-Acorn). What's with that? Is that kind of silliness supposed to mean something? ???
It means he's off his meds or something. Seriously. I worry about him.
Right, because being a Senator for 8 years and Secretary of State for 4 years doesn't count.
Senator - vote every once in a while.
Secretary of State - fly around the world, talk to people over Perrier and cheese cubes, while your underlings do all the real work, with an occasional "what difference does it make" thrown in for good measure.
In what way does that remotely prepare one to be the commander in chief of the armed forces and the chief executive of the United States?
They are making the right move by banning NBC and CNN. The moderators for these networks are biased against the GOP. They would ask hard questions loaded against the GOP such as,
"How would you strengthen the economy for the middle class"?
"What's your position on the future of Medicare and Social Security"?
"How about those illegal immigrants"?
"Why do you want to eliminate the food stamp program and divert the funds to farm subsidies for NOT growing crops"?
It is my understanding that the GOP is looking to have their debates on Comedy Central and Nickelodeon right after the popular Sponge Bob Square Pants reruns.
Tough questions are fine, I'm sure. They just don't want to be sandbagged. Can't say that I blame them, and I have very little doubt that CNN and/or NBC would try it.
What's wrong with wanting honest and fair moderation in their debates?
Looking at the current field, it appears as if it's ultimately in the GOP's best interest to have as few people as possible watch the debate. So - shrewd move.
That is funny. More people tune in to FOX for their news than CNN and NBC combined.
It is my understanding that the GOP is looking to have their debates on Comedy Central and Nickelodeon right after the popular Sponge Bob Square Pants reruns.
If they replaced "Gumball" with the GOP 'debate', that will only guarantee that 8 - 14 y.o. kids will become lifetime Democrats.
"Daddy, those mean, angry men are scaring me."
"It's OK son, that debate is the WWF of politics - it's all fake"
Major political party refuses to debate on network that airs views of the other side
The only thing that isn't common knowledge about this development is....
...it's not Republicans that are refusing to debate on a network like CNN or NBC, which only airs views agreeing with the Democrat party.
Guess which party is refusing... thus continuing a long trend?
Yep, it's the Democrat candidates, who consistently refuse to come to a debate on Fox News - the only network which consistently airs BOTH sides' views in a debate and lets them argue it out on the air.
The Democrats just can't stand the opposition getting ANY air time.
The New York Times reports on this appalling behavior.
When Fox News tried to set up a Democratic presidential debate with the Congressional Black Caucus, it watched its effort crumble after bloggers and liberal groups complained that Democrats should not appear on a network that, they said, had a history of belittling Democrats and promoting Republicans on its airwaves.
Three Democrats announced they would not participate: Hillary Rodham Clinton, John Edwards and Barack Obama.
On Tuesday night, Republicans in South Carolina participated in a feisty debate sponsored by Fox News that even Democrats said was anything but a free ride for their opponents: The Fox questioners hammered the Republicans on issues ranging from abortion to government spending to the war on terror.
Given that, one of the Republican presidential contenders, Rudolph W. Giuliani, called on Democrats to reconsider their refusal. “The Democrats should debate on Fox,” Mr. Giuliani said in an interview. “I think they would get a good chance to explain themselves. If the Republicans candidates are willing to debate on MSNBC and CNN, the Democrats should be willing to debate on Fox. I don’t think they’d want us to look like the bolder group of candidates.”
Great point. Also, remember when Obama blacklisted FoxNews? What short memories these Democrats have.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
