Guest hunger4unger Report post Posted February 21, 2004 Mike got owned again. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Justice 0 Report post Posted February 21, 2004 Mike got owned again. ... Uh, did I miss this or something or did the posts get deleted? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted February 21, 2004 Mike got owned again. Hey, congrats. Your avatar now makes your posts worth taking a look at. I mean, you utter lack of intellectual thought doesn't help -- but, hey, can't go wrong with boobs. Ironically, on another board, there is a guy with an IDENTICAL avatar. Even more ironically, that guy is ALSO a total blithering idiot. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest thebigjig Report post Posted February 21, 2004 But back to the discussion of radical tactics... it's kind of the pot calling the kettle black here to criticize the democrats for attacking Bush in this fashion, when Bush's advisor Karl Rove is the KING of dirty disgusting heel tactics... and thats no secret, nor can it really be debated because the facts speak for themselves Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted February 21, 2004 But back to the discussion of radical tactics... it's kind of the pot calling the kettle black here to criticize the democrats for attacking Bush in this fashion, when Bush's advisor Karl Rove is the KING of dirty disgusting heel tactics... and thats no secret, nor can it really be debated because the facts speak for themselves Chris LeHane owns Karl Rove when it comes to being a dirty prick. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted February 21, 2004 Chris LeHane owns Karl Rove when it comes to being a dirty prick. Why? Because the facts speak for themselves?... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest thebigjig Report post Posted February 21, 2004 Chris LeHane owns Karl Rove when it comes to being a dirty prick. Why? Because the facts speak for themselves?... Nice answer But there's one key difference... employed and unemployed. I may be wrong here and correct me if I am because I havent heard anything about him in a month or so, but isn't Lehane out of a job at the present moment? Last I heard, he jumped to Clark, and Clark is gone now Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted February 21, 2004 Well if Lehane is out of job then the facts speak for themselves that Rove is the dirtier player since his guy was able to get (se)elected. ROFLMAO2004! And I'm glad he's on my team... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spicy McHaggis 0 Report post Posted February 21, 2004 ...the facts speak for themselves When you use that phrase, you have to come up with some, you know, EVIDENCE to support it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest thebigjig Report post Posted February 22, 2004 ...the facts speak for themselves When you use that phrase, you have to come up with some, you know, EVIDENCE to support it. I'm not going to do your homework for you, but I'll point you in the right direction Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove made George W Bush Presidential. Here's the link if you're interested...it's a FASCINATING read However, I will give you just a taste... something I've mentioned in passing before... in the 2000 south carolina primary, Rove used push polling throughout the state, spreading rumors that John McCain was the illigitimate father of a black love child... I couldnt make this stuff up if I tried Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vern Gagne 0 Report post Posted February 22, 2004 Does anyone have proof that Karl Rove had anything to do with the rumors about John McCaine? From what i've heard it was school in South Carolina completley seperate from the George W. Bush. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted February 22, 2004 ...the facts speak for themselves When you use that phrase, you have to come up with some, you know, EVIDENCE to support it. I'm not going to do your homework for you, but I'll point you in the right direction Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove made George W Bush Presidential. Here's the link if you're interested...it's a FASCINATING read However, I will give you just a taste... something I've mentioned in passing before... in the 2000 south carolina primary, Rove used push polling throughout the state, spreading rumors that John McCain was the illigitimate father of a black love child... I couldnt make this stuff up if I tried OK, the book is a pile o' trash. If it were a serious book, the books that readers bought also would have contained some actual political books. Instead, you get Molly Ivins borderline illegible read, Conason's joke attempt at writing, etc. There is a reason for that. And has anybody actually been able to prove that Rove was behind anything in SC? -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest thebigjig Report post Posted February 22, 2004 Does anyone have proof that Karl Rove had anything to do with the rumors about John McCaine? From what i've heard it was school in South Carolina completley seperate from the George W. Bush. Just read the book... Rove learned from the masters of political deception... George HW and his advisors, who used the same technique Of course, I'm not saying this stuff doesn't happen among the Democrats... but the Democrats aren't in power right now, so they are not my target. And just to show you that I consider myself fair... it'll be a cold day in hell before I vote for Hillary Clinton Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest thebigjig Report post Posted February 22, 2004 ...the facts speak for themselves When you use that phrase, you have to come up with some, you know, EVIDENCE to support it. I'm not going to do your homework for you, but I'll point you in the right direction Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove made George W Bush Presidential. Here's the link if you're interested...it's a FASCINATING read However, I will give you just a taste... something I've mentioned in passing before... in the 2000 south carolina primary, Rove used push polling throughout the state, spreading rumors that John McCain was the illigitimate father of a black love child... I couldnt make this stuff up if I tried OK, the book is a pile o' trash. If it were a serious book, the books that readers bought also would have contained some actual political books. Instead, you get Molly Ivins borderline illegible read, Conason's joke attempt at writing, etc. There is a reason for that. And has anybody actually been able to prove that Rove was behind anything in SC? -=Mike So you're judging the book... by it's readers?! That seems almost as radical as judging a book by the proverbial cover... I take it you haven't read the book?? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted February 22, 2004 ...the facts speak for themselves When you use that phrase, you have to come up with some, you know, EVIDENCE to support it. I'm not going to do your homework for you, but I'll point you in the right direction Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove made George W Bush Presidential. Here's the link if you're interested...it's a FASCINATING read However, I will give you just a taste... something I've mentioned in passing before... in the 2000 south carolina primary, Rove used push polling throughout the state, spreading rumors that John McCain was the illigitimate father of a black love child... I couldnt make this stuff up if I tried OK, the book is a pile o' trash. If it were a serious book, the books that readers bought also would have contained some actual political books. Instead, you get Molly Ivins borderline illegible read, Conason's joke attempt at writing, etc. There is a reason for that. And has anybody actually been able to prove that Rove was behind anything in SC? -=Mike So you're judging the book... by it's readers?! That seems almost as radical as judging a book by the proverbial cover... I take it you haven't read the book?? I wouldn't need to eat a bird droppings & sauerkraut sandwich to know I wouldn't enjoy it. I wouldn't need to get raped to know I wouldn't like it. If told you to read Emmett Tyrell's bio of Bill Clinton (or Hillary) --- would YOU take it seriously? I'd sincerely hope not. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest thebigjig Report post Posted February 22, 2004 Nice melodramatic answer to a quite serious question... you just refuse to read anything that goes against your jaded conservative philosophy. I on the other hand have read the republican point of view... being a former republican myself And I'm not aware of this book... but I wouldn't pass off on reading it. You see, I can read books written by authors that I dont particularly agree with... some of the books that I've read, that I completely dissagree with everything the author says, shapes my opinions and gives me ammo in certain debates. You would gain respect from me if you read the book, and then chopped it apart with your own opinions and facts, instead of saying "well I refuse to read it because the people on Amazon.com that said they read it, don't read books that I think they should... oh and because I dont want to read anything that might persuade me in a different direction if I allowed myself to be reasonable" And your comment on Molly Ivins, shows me you haven't read anything of hers either... but its okay, I wont hold that against you Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted February 22, 2004 Nice melodramatic answer to a quite serious question That was a SERIOUS question? Wow. ... you just refuse to read anything that goes against your jaded conservative philosophy. I on the other hand have read the republican point of view... being a former republican myself Yup, that's me. Tons of cynicism tied up in a nice, cute bundle. And I'm not aware of this book... but I wouldn't pass off on reading it. You should be. Tyrell is a psychotic Clinton hater. You can sum up the book before you even open the cover. "Clinton = Evil" Why spend time to read several hundred pages going into detail about it? You see, I can read books written by authors that I dont particularly agree with... some of the books that I've read, that I completely dissagree with everything the author says, shapes my opinions and gives me ammo in certain debates. You would gain respect from me if you read the book I will have to live with that huge hole in my life there. , and then chopped it apart with your own opinions and facts, instead of saying "well I refuse to read it because the people on Amazon.com that said they read it, don't read books that I think they should... oh and because I dont want to read anything that might persuade me in a different direction if I allowed myself to be reasonable" "Bush is dumb. Rove is evil. Rove is the mastermind." Why should I waste the time or money to buy and reada book that can be defined in 3 short sentences? Seems a bit wasteful. And your comment on Molly Ivins, shows me you haven't read anything of hers either... but its okay, I wont hold that against you Actually, I have read some of her stuff. And I regret doing it painfully. Five minutes of my life I'll never get back. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites