Rusty: Imagine if Obama had told the truth about Obamacare during those elections, and told us that it would significantly increase the national debt, result in huge profits for a few health insurance companies....while increasing the number of uninsured, forcing employers to fire people, and mandating worse health care for many.
Obama's claims are the big lie of the last election(s). Not Romney's claim about the Big 3 shipping jobs to China under Obama's auto industry bailout.
Yet, the leftist Polifact site has not retracted the false claim (Romney was correct) and they are quite soft on Obama's lies.
Shaw, who has become quite unhinged lately, seems to want "Polifact" to become the arbiter of what political speech should be allowed or not. Scary.
In Shaw's version of the Constitution, the first two parts of the Bill of Rights are to be ignored totally. Perhaps more too.
Shaw has no integrity, she whines about fake account stalkers going after her, but loves what WD does.
She is also quick to dismiss the Constitutional process and rule of law: wanting Obama to make up for his weakness as a leader by granting him ability to rule by decree and get around Congress.
As per a recent discussion at RN, she seems to want the government to censor expression of opinion and facts just because the left disapproves them.
I've always said your stuff about her ass ...and worse...is way out of line. Shaw, or a fake Shaw, is holding me personally responsible for your words. I guess it is not enough that I criticize it.... I suppose Shaw wants me to remove your words from Will's blog or something? Sheesh. In contrast to this, she is actually cheering WD's fake ID games. Hypocrite.
Shaw is highly opinionated, very articulate, and generally backs her statements and opinions with supporting copy or link.
I do not agree with much of her economic and fiscal positions, her desire for an.ever growing statist federal government, and her strong support for the ACA. However, I respect Shaw for her intelligence, her consistency, and her INTEGRITY. She has the same right to express her strong opinions you both have to express yours.
Your cheap personal shots at Shaw are not only out of line Rusty they are immature and say more about your character than they say about her character.
Really, the pot should not call the kettle black. Or put another way people who live in glass houses should throw stones.
Look in the mirror fellows. One shouldn't criticize another's backyard unless their own is perfectly pristine.
Hey RN....stuff it up your pompous ass......Shaw is a partisan fat c__t...and you kissing her ass doesn't change a friggin thing......and sport,your act is wearing quite thin.
dmarks....Shaw is a partisan hack...nothing more,nothing less.If it came to light that Obama molested his two daughters Shaw would search for a reason to exonerate him,she is the lowest of the lows.
and RN runs around trying to be eveyone's buddy yet never taking a firm stance on anything.Just dropping his nuggets of self professed pompous inane wisdom.
RN: Unlike Shaw, I condemn all of the fake blogger ID games. That is integrity and consistency. Her views on this seem to be based on whether it not the target of this crap is conservative or liberal (seen in her applause of WD's Barlowe games). That is a distinct lack of integrity.
Also, her linking to Democratic Party campaign sites to support her arguments isn't anything to be proud of...any more than it would be good for conservatives to link to Limbaugh as a source.
Rusty: Your use of extreme and sexist profanity to describe Shaw is not merely similar to calling her the N-word if she happened to be black, it is exactly on the same level. Very much out of line. Whether or not any of us is a partisan hack has nothing to do with this.
As for RN, Rusty, he has a right to choose his own friends, I think...
---------------- RN said: "...Look in the mirror fellows..."
I can with clear conscience. Shaw cannot. She complains when she is the target of the fakers, but specifically applauds WD when he does it. In this she has no integrity.
I have no problem, now as always, condemning those who are doing this to Shaw... and also WD, who does something quite similar.
If Shaw really did have "integrity", she would have condemned W Sanders ID games instead of enthusiastically endorse them.
dmarks, I applaud your standing against the comments made by Rusty. Your description of them as sexist profanity is correct. It speaks to Rusty's lack of character and respect, both for himself as well as Shaw. Vulgar sexist profanity is what one uses when they have nothing else.
Now, perhaps I missed it but when and where did Shaw enthusiastically endorse Dervish Sanders I'D games? It is possible she believes there is insufficient evidence to conclusively indict DS. If this so I personally disagree with her assessment. However, I do not agree she lacks integrity.
Shaw is guilty of being a partisan, just as Rusty is. But she has the good sense and decency not to go around calling him a twisted dick in retaliation for his crude vulgar characterization of her. I on the other hand have zero compunction in calling Rusty that.
BTW Rusty, is that a strong enough position and statement for ya?
RN,how is it sexist profanity when you describe someone exactly as they are....Shaw is a fat c__t from Boston....that is descriptive,not derogatory.
RN,you may want to continue applauding "the fat c__nt from Boston's" political wisdom while waiting for someone to use the jaws of life to pry your lips off her ample ass......I choose not to.
18 comments:
Does the term cluster fuck apply to the administering of Obamacare?
Rusty: Imagine if Obama had told the truth about Obamacare during those elections, and told us that it would significantly increase the national debt, result in huge profits for a few health insurance companies....while increasing the number of uninsured, forcing employers to fire people, and mandating worse health care for many.
Obama's claims are the big lie of the last election(s). Not Romney's claim about the Big 3 shipping jobs to China under Obama's auto industry bailout.
Yet, the leftist Polifact site has not retracted the false claim (Romney was correct) and they are quite soft on Obama's lies.
Shaw, who has become quite unhinged lately, seems to want "Polifact" to become the arbiter of what political speech should be allowed or not. Scary.
In Shaw's version of the Constitution, the first two parts of the Bill of Rights are to be ignored totally. Perhaps more too.
Shaw....the fat c__t from Boston,a fan of WD's writtings....that should tell you all you need to know about her.
Shaw has no integrity, she whines about fake account stalkers going after her, but loves what WD does.
She is also quick to dismiss the Constitutional process and rule of law: wanting Obama to make up for his weakness as a leader by granting him ability to rule by decree and get around Congress.
As per a recent discussion at RN, she seems to want the government to censor expression of opinion and facts just because the left disapproves them.
It's all scary, and politics at its worst.
Wow... Shaw read this, Rusty... and sent me an email with glowing praise of you...or maybe it was WD posing as Shaw...lol.
She hates me since I ran the "Guess How Big Shaw's Ass Is" contest last year.
I was going to run the "Guess How Many Regular Sized Marsh mellows Shaw Can Fit In Her Mouth" contest this year.
I've always said your stuff about her ass ...and worse...is way out of line. Shaw, or a fake Shaw, is holding me personally responsible for your words. I guess it is not enough that I criticize it.... I suppose Shaw wants me to remove your words from Will's blog or something? Sheesh. In contrast to this, she is actually cheering WD's fake ID games. Hypocrite.
Shaw is highly opinionated, very articulate, and generally backs her statements and opinions with supporting copy or link.
I do not agree with much of her economic and fiscal positions, her desire for an.ever growing statist federal government, and her strong support for the ACA. However, I respect Shaw for her intelligence, her consistency, and her INTEGRITY. She has the same right to express her strong opinions you both have to express yours.
Your cheap personal shots at Shaw are not only out of line Rusty they are immature and say more about your character than they say about her character.
Really, the pot should not call the kettle black. Or put another way people who live in glass houses should throw stones.
Look in the mirror fellows. One shouldn't criticize another's backyard unless their own is perfectly pristine.
Hey RN....stuff it up your pompous ass......Shaw is a partisan fat c__t...and you kissing her ass doesn't change a friggin thing......and sport,your act is wearing quite thin.
dmarks....Shaw is a partisan hack...nothing more,nothing less.If it came to light that Obama molested his two daughters Shaw would search for a reason to exonerate him,she is the lowest of the lows.
and RN runs around trying to be eveyone's buddy yet never taking a firm stance on anything.Just dropping his nuggets of self professed pompous inane wisdom.
RN: Unlike Shaw, I condemn all of the fake blogger ID games. That is integrity and consistency. Her views on this seem to be based on whether it not the target of this crap is conservative or liberal (seen in her applause of WD's Barlowe games). That is a distinct lack of integrity.
Also, her linking to Democratic Party campaign sites to support her arguments isn't anything to be proud of...any more than it would be good for conservatives to link to Limbaugh as a source.
I guess that I'm the only person who doesn't have a strong opinion about Shaw these days.
Rusty: Your use of extreme and sexist profanity to describe Shaw is not merely similar to calling her the N-word if she happened to be black, it is exactly on the same level. Very much out of line. Whether or not any of us is a partisan hack has nothing to do with this.
As for RN, Rusty, he has a right to choose his own friends, I think...
----------------
RN said: "...Look in the mirror fellows..."
I can with clear conscience. Shaw cannot. She complains when she is the target of the fakers, but specifically applauds WD when he does it. In this she has no integrity.
I have no problem, now as always, condemning those who are doing this to Shaw... and also WD, who does something quite similar.
If Shaw really did have "integrity", she would have condemned W Sanders ID games instead of enthusiastically endorse them.
Thoughts are totally reciprocated Rusty. But at least I have some decency. You have none.
dmarks, I applaud your standing against the comments made by Rusty. Your description of them as sexist profanity is correct. It speaks to Rusty's lack of character and respect, both for himself as well as Shaw. Vulgar sexist profanity is what one uses when they have nothing else.
Now, perhaps I missed it but when and where did Shaw enthusiastically endorse Dervish Sanders I'D games? It is possible she believes there is insufficient evidence to conclusively indict DS. If this so I personally disagree with her assessment. However, I do not agree she lacks integrity.
Shaw is guilty of being a partisan, just as Rusty is. But she has the good sense and decency not to go around calling him a twisted dick in retaliation for his crude vulgar characterization of her. I on the other hand have zero compunction in calling Rusty that.
BTW Rusty, is that a strong enough position and statement for ya?
Ahhh....RN,the pussy in wolf
clothing.
RN,how is it sexist profanity when you describe someone exactly as they are....Shaw is a fat c__t from Boston....that is descriptive,not derogatory.
RN,you may want to continue applauding "the fat c__nt from Boston's" political wisdom while waiting for someone to use the jaws of life to pry your lips off her ample ass......I choose not to.
Good day sparky.
Proving once again ShackleTurd you complete lack of character and decency.
Please continue commenting and further proving me correct about you.
Have a delightful time spunky.
Post a Comment