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.
Because it ticks me off in general to see innocent people vilified. And in this case, the people being vilified are among those who already receive some to the shortest ends of the stick that society has to offer. Then there's the due process thing. Charged is convicted. No matter how thin or flimsy the evidence (if any, in this case) may be. There's no principle and certainly no American principle in that.
You have no evidence to back your claims. You have manufactued rumor and innuendo that you for no discernible reason choose to accept as gospel. Lower standards have rarely been seen. All I have done is continue to point that fact out. You, in turn, present no evidence, but merely continue to call your gospel true. You're a lot closer to the garbage can than I am.
How crude. I don't have an affiliation. I don't have a predisposition. I am willing to accept anything and everything that you may honestly establish a convincing case for. You haven't established anything yet in this thread but your willingness to rely on and cling to the unverified and the unsubstantiated. That's not a particularly strong showing on your part.
It ticks you off "in general" SO BAD that you know intricate details of ACORN on your own free will and your own free time?
Saganista, I call bullsh*t. Plain and simple bullsh*t.
You're not fooling anyone. Give it up.
And no, you're not "willing to accept anything and everything that you may honestly establish a convincing case for." How do I know this? Because, as a pilot and an engineer, I know my profession quite well. I could throw around theory that would make your head spin. You wouldn't know the first thing about the subject. In other words, I know how to do my job quite well. And you know how to do your job quite well, which is to come to this forum and defend policy matters when they are embarrassing or shed some sort of negative light on this Administration.
It's clear as day. And it's embarrassing for you to outright deny it under the guise of some twisted hobby of yours to defend Barack Obama and ACORN.
Mindnumbingly embarrassing.
Last edited by AeroGuyDC; 04-23-2010 at 07:21 PM..
It ticks you off "in general" SO BAD that you know intricate details of ACORN on your own free will and your own free time? Saganista, I call bullsh*t. Plain and simple bullsh*t. You're not fooling anyone. Give it up. And no, you're not "willing to accept anything and everything that you may honestly establish a convincing case for." How do I know this? Because, as a pilot and an engineer, I know my profession quite well. I could throw around theory that would make your head spin. You wouldn't know the first thing about the subject. In other words, I know how to do my job quite well. And you know how to do your job quite well, which is to come to this forum and defend policy matters when they are embarrassing or shed some sort of negative light on this Administration. It's clear as day. And it's embarrassing for you to outright deny it under the guise of some twisted hobby of yours to defend Barack Obama and ACORN. Mindnumbingly embarrassing.
I'm sorry to hear that your horizons are so limited as to be unable to imagine that there are persons able to carry on a full professional life while still being well-informed on a variety of topics of the day. There are places however where this is not so much uncommon as it is expected.
Whatever the levels of your piloting and engineering skiils, they will not have taught you so much about my reactions to "honestly establishing a convincing case" as having actually done such a thing would have. Sadly, the mere repetition of unsubstantiated, propagandist gossip, rumor, and innuendo does not meet those criteria.
If it makes you feel better, feel free to maintain the illusion that there are actually people paid to go about the internet making right-wingers look silly. I mean, how much could the pay actually be, given the difficulty of the task?
Originally Posted by WatermelonRat View Post
She speaks for nobody but herself. Stop trying to tie random individuals to all people on the left. ACORN is not nearly as influential as you think it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillysB
Uhhhh, Bertha Lewis does indeed speak for ACORN and everything ACORN stands for.
The Socialist doesn't fall far from the ACORN tree
No, and actually, you're only the second person to ask. As I told the earlier inquirer, I don't have a website under this name. Would you like me to create one? You could join the fan club, and receive a monthly newsletter and important e-mail updates...
FYI: The person calling themselves "Saganista" who is posting on this site is not the same Saganista from the website Saganista's Guerrilla Artistry I have not read any of his/her/ posts so can't say whether I agree or disagree. I logged on here to simply clarify things, not join in the debate. Thanks, The Original Saganista.
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.
