SuperJerk

My favorite part: In spite of it all, much of the media saw a credible performance. I could quote the hosannas of some of my colleagues, but I spare them the infamy that will surely follow them to their graves. (The debate's moderator, Gwen Ifill, used the occasion to catch up on some sleep.) Many of them judged Palin simply as a performer and inferred that this would go over well in homes with aboveground swimming pools. Oh, snap. Also... Is that you, Uncle Ruckus?

Any state government that increases sales taxes deserves to be ridiculed. Sales taxes are the absolutely the most unfair way to raise revenue of any form of taxation.

Don't forget, the second debate is tomorrow night.

Looking back...okay, you're right, I don't.

California had both Republican and Democratic governors during that time. Mostly Republicans, though. To be fair, the worst hit while Gray Davis (the ONLY Democratic governor from 1983-2003) was in office, though. (Just saying.)

"Why put in trillions when you can put in...millions?"

http://www.atom.com/spotlights/kung_fu_election/

OMG SCANDAL~!!!111one Something Funnye going on with Illinios social services grants? But, wait, there's more! We're supposed to believe Obama provided state money to an organization that helped with job training and adult literacy? And I guess next they'll tell us its just a coincidence his wife's cousin was director of the agency at the time? Oh. Nevermind, then.

William Kristol did a phone interview with Sarah Palin, and apparently spend half of it talking about Williams Ayers and Jeremiah Wright. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/06/opinion/...amp;oref=slogin If this doesn't prove that the New York Times is a liberal rag, nothing will. Also...

Factcheck.org is already on the case.

It wasn't fear, and my originally founding the Pit had absolutely nothing to do with political ideaology of any kind. TSM, like most message boards, has always had problems with enforcing its rules consistently. Mike got banned not because he actually broke any of the rules, but just because he was a conservative asshole. Buncha people didn't take kindly to that, for various reasons. It wasn't just "oh, they PH3ARED our liberalism". I personally am not a conservative, so it always amuses me whenever the Pit is portrayed as some kind of conservative boys' treehouse which they formed in order to hide from the shining leftist light of righteousness. Hell, come on over sometime, poor Eric and Jobber are mighty overworked trying to represent their side all by themselves. But don't kid yourself: that board was started in defense of freedom of expression, not to shelter the poor abused dregs of the Republican party, crying into their coors lite while jerking off to photoshopped nudes of Ann Coulter. So now can we get back to ejaculating our steaming hot pearly white misogyny all over Sarah Palin's glasses? I wasn't trying to knock your intentions for starting the place, I've just never completely understood why it turned into a conservative magnet.

Letterman is gunning for Palin now, apparently...

One guy gets banned and suddenly everyone...or rather, mostly just people from his end of the political spectrum...begin to fear for their posting lives? Doesn't quite make sense.

Which, if you stop to think about it for more than 5 seconds, never made any sense.

The reason this board has a liberal bias is because most (not all) of the conservatives that used to post here got tired of letting their ideas compete in the marketplace of ideas and went off to start their own board. As I said before, I want a variety of opinions, becuase I want ot see how well my views stand up to competition. I just wish the competition was better than certain people who shall remain nameless. Where did this happen? Legit question. Surprised I didn't catch any shit when I said I specifically wasn't voting for McCain simply because he has a woman as a running mate. As far as the argument between myself and the moderator goes, I'd rather just forget it ever happened. I just want some consistency...same rules for everybody.

Okay, so... MARVIN IS A RETARD. Not acceptable. MARVIN IS A RETARD BECAUSE HE THINKS BOYCOTTING A BANK IS A TERRORIST ACT. Acceptable?

A couple of weeks ago I complained to another poster that he'd gone too far ---an official board moderator no less--- because he'd brought up problems I'd had in my marriage as proof the problem I had with certain female politicians was that she was a woman. I was told that this was perfectly acceptable. So, if I can have my irrelevant personal problems used against me in this thread, Marvin should be able to handle being called a "retard" for equating boycotting a bank with terrorism.

As opposed to the other posters on the board, who finish watching Keith Olbermann and try to make sense of his retardation. The last five pages of this thread are HILARIOUS libera-babble. Let's just be honest here -- both Palin and Biden have no idea what they're talking about. Anyone who tries to state otherwise is nothing more than a biased party hack.

And I think you qualify as at least somewhat stupid.

You dont find it funny that she's using facts obtained from an article in the New York Times (same article I linked to) to attack Obama? 99% of the time its the other way around. Here's the article the New York Times ran Saturday about Ayers and Obama: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/us/polit...04ayers.html?hp How Mrs. Palin could have came to the conclusion she did about Ayers and Obama, based on this article, I have no idea.

Fuck you, Marvin. Fuck you.

Compare and contrast. Last February... Yesterday... McCain's response from February... McCain's response now? Who knows.

Barack Obama knows a guy that was part of a group that blew up a bathroom and a statue almost 40 years ago. WHO. GIVES. A. FUCK? You have to really hate Obama to think this has any relevance to the 2008 presidential election.

I'm not getting the all the "towel" references you two are using. And I'm not defending the Weathermen's ideas or methods, but you need to keep some perspective. The only people the Weathermen ever blew up were themselves by accident. We're hardly talking about al Qaeda, Hezbollah, or the I.R.A. here. And Palen said terrorists...who is she referring to besides Ayers?

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/...alin.attack.cnn