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.
I thought this writer really pegged Obama. I do not agree with the entire article, as Clinton was a good president and nothing like Obama. The writer's attacks on Clinton show he is partisan. The writer's opinion on Obama, however, seems spot on.
I always get the feeling that they treat this just as the do a football game. Cheerleading for a team regardless of how bad or how many team members are on steroids. Blind devotion. No critical thinking. Facts do not matter and a party's stance is of no signifigance. They get their talking points du juor from the psycho talkers such as Lim-bore, Frau Pallin, Michelle "Crazy Eyes" Malkin, Sean Insanity and Glen "Jim Jones" Beck. There are others, but we all know who they are.
And what exactly do you call your type of "cheerleading" for the Obamanation of an adminstration we have?
Blind devotion? No critical thinking? Facts do not matter and a party's stance is of ALL the signifigance?
I always get the feeling that they treat this just as the do a football game. Cheerleading for a team regardless of how bad or how many team members are on steroids. Blind devotion. No critical thinking. Facts do not matter and a party's stance is of no signifigance. They get their talking points du juor from the psycho talkers such as Lim-bore, Frau Pallin, Michelle "Crazy Eyes" Malkin, Sean Insanity and Glen "Jim Jones" Beck. There are others, but we all know who they are.
I think you have made an excellent point. Just as when I boldly predict that my beloved Cubbies will "do it next year" when I know full well that I will not live to see that day, they prattle their silly, goofy, babble...surely knowing full well that it makes them look ridiculous and prevents anything they say from being taken seriously.
I thought this writer really pegged Obama. I do not agree with the entire article, as Clinton was a good president and nothing like Obama. The writer's attacks on Clinton show he is partisan. The writer's opinion on Obama, however, seems spot on.
Okay, but I still don't see the rage. Perhaps the author's title is a bit misleading?
And it is your 3 opinions that it is BS. So where do we go from here?
Well you all can go back to your circle jerk. I think I'll pay my mortgage and my outrageous health insurance premium. Then maybe read something thoughtful and balanced to wash the taste out of my mouth.
Well you all can go back to your circle jerk. I think I'll pay my mortgage and my outrageous health insurance premium. Then maybe read something thoughtful and balanced to wash the taste out of my mouth.
ok... How about have a nice big glass of grape soda and dream about haniging out with Barack Obama. That ought to cool your jets and make you all tingly.
ok... How about have a nice big glass of grape soda and dream about haniging out with Barack Obama. That ought to cool your jets and make you all tingly.
Grape soda is a lot more palatable a drink than Kool-Aid.
And what exactly do you call your type of "cheerleading" for the Obamanation of an adminstration we have?
Blind devotion? No critical thinking? Facts do not matter and a party's stance is of ALL the signifigance?
If you search my previous threads and posts, it is clear that I do not support an issue because of a particular party. I have praised Obama when I thought it was deserved just as I have criticized him. I have always been open about my feelings about Clinton and my disappointment in his NAFTA agreements. If a person does not vote or form an opinion on a reprentative's voting record, they are not prepared to praise or criticize them. Many on this thread, right wing in particular, do not really care what the representative's or candidate's stance is, as long as they have an "R" on their jersey, they are acceptable and their views, no matter how reprehensible, are cheered.
If you search my previous threads and posts, it is clear that I do not support an issue because of a particular party. I have praised Obama when I thought it was deserved just as I have criticized him. I have always been open about my feelings about Clinton and my disappointment in his NAFTA agreements. If a person does not vote or form an opinion on a reprentative's voting record, they are not prepared to praise or criticize them. Many on this thread, right wing in particular, do not really care what the representative's or candidate's stance is, as long as they have an "R" on their jersey, they are acceptable and their views, no matter how reprehensible, are cheered.
I'm glad to hear you are not one of them, neither am I. I strongly believe that nobody agrees with ANYONE 100% of the time on everything. You will find them here though,,,,partisan hacks who think their reps don't need to read any bills before voting on them because they think that if their party wrote them, they must be good enough.
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.
