Printable View
I know Diamond Joe Lieberman hasnt done very much videogame bashing the past few years (or maybe he has? I think Hils is doing more of that), but hes currently involved in a very bitter primary with a Mr. Ned Lamont.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/e...CTION=POLITICS
Check the results here.
Its not unreasonable to say a loss from an entrenched senator would be a huge shock to the insider Beltway DC crew. Good, I say.
Closer than I thought.
His popularity here has been on a steady decline for a while now. He has said if he loses the primary he will run as an indipendent.
Can't wait to see him out on his ass.
His support for the war is going to ruin him in his own party.
Wow, do you CT folks think Lamont will pull it out?
Eh, its looking like its over. 87% reporting and its Lamont - 51.84% and Lieberman - 48.16%. Its been about that since like 70%. Joe would have to get like 65% of the remaining uncounted votes and that is basically impossible (he's not a Republican and Diebold isn't counting the ballots).Quote:
Originally Posted by sleeveboy
The lame thing is that Joementum is gonna run as an independent in the main election... what a fucking loser. Respect the will of your party's voters (especially with the huge turnout this primary has gotten).
Lieberman has always been a schmuck, one of the shining examples of the democratic party. This is the problem, hopefully the solution starts now. He sucks off republicans at the bar, and now it's going to knock him out, finally.
See Diff, I can be a fair conservative, I like the two party system.
Agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
And it took damn near long enough to get his ass out.
It's a pity Stone doesn't post here anymore.
With the Mel Gibson DUI, Joe Lieberman's flameout, and the Iraq war going to shit, it's like his entire worldview has imploded.
Ding Dong the witch is dead, he's conceded.
LOLLER at democrat's leadership.
I feel bad for the bastard. That one issue (that issue being the war) has put him under a negative light. I'm not too sure on his politics but they couldn't have been that bad.
I dont know why you have to say things like this. You should love the guy. Joe was defeated because he has been acting TOO NEOCONSERVATIVE in the eyes of Nutmeg Staters. He also has been OPPOSING Democrats like it was 1996 (when they were in power). He has contributed to a fracturing of the Democratic party that rendered it impotent to wage a decent opposition to Republicans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
It is no accident that a lot of prominent neocons have been rooting for Joe - Fox News put up some hilariously inflammatory propaganda today (here) and Sean Hannity was raving like a loon about the possibilities of Joe losing. Joe is one of their own. It's a defeat for the neocons and Republicans as much as anyone.
edit: oh, and something like two-thirds of Americans oppose the war right now and want a timetable for withdrawal at the least. Bush, Lieberman, and the neocon's position is the far right fringe. Their attempts to paint Lamont as a lunatic leftie failed - because he's the centrist here.
GTFO, seriously.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
If you're going to post in this thread, at least say something intelligent. We don't need a dumber version of Yoshi.
I have spoken on the issue, see above.
Lieberman is nothing but a closet republican sycophant.
He's done nothing sound for the party and drained it's coffers on his little "video games" chase.
We have no need for Lieberman, he's no Zel Miller.
It just goes to show you... you fuck with our videogames, and you go DOWN.
Others should learn the lesson.
Buh-bye Lieberman. Try not to be a sore fucking loser pissing all your dignity away on the way out.
Oh. Too late I see.
Weren't there polls saying that Joe would win easily in a three-way race as an independant?
That was before he actually lost. It was a hypothetical based on how he looked before he was beaten by a nobody. This cost him a lot of credibility, so I'd bet if you were to ask the exact same question tomorrow the results would be quite different.
He seems really out of touch. It's amazing the different six years makes.
the eternal problem with independents is that they leech votes from the guy they are closest to politicly, so him running would do little more than split the democrats, probably not an even split, but for a guy who has been there for a long time, im sure he could pull in favors and make noise. the best thing he could do for his party is to accept defeat gracefully and take a high paying job from one of the guys he undoubtedly did favors for when he was in office.Quote:
Originally Posted by Melf
It's official. Lieberman, you lose.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060809/...mary_elections
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/...ies/index.html
Lieberman is a sore loser.Quote:
We've just finished the first half and the Lamont team is ahead, but, in the second half, our team -- Team Connecticut -- is going to surge forward to victory in November. ... For the sake of our state, our country and my party, I cannot, I will not let this result stand.
This is so beautiful. The Democrats move even farther from reality. How fucking out of touch are registered Democrats who vote in primaries that they keep moving left, far beyond electable candidates? I'm not complaining, mind you. The more whacko those idiots get, the more their party is marginalized.
Tell me what position of Lamont's is far left. As I said before his position on the war is shared by the vast majority of Americans (click).Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
The reality is that he is the centrist and Lieberman is the far right neocon not representing the views of his electorate. So he got voted out in favor of someone who does. That's called, you know... democracy (not that modern Republicans know or care much about that).
No, his position on the war is shared but the vast majority of fucking pollster, which have proven time and time again to be so far off reality it's not funny. Get it right.
LOL!Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
That's Colbert-esque, really - "I dont have much use for facts. What matters is how I feel".
I feel that Americans are for the war in Iraq so they must be. The fact that every poll says they aren't is irrelevant.
You are pathetic.
No,
Pollsters haven't predicted an election right in 8 years. Remember how CNN touted Kerry's lead? Or Lieberman's lead?
First of all, exit polls aren't the same as opinion polls.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
That said.
Opinion polls are used by policymakers to gauge opinions. Thousands, I am sure, are taken every year on all matter of subject. Every poll nowadays says most Americans are not in favor of the Iraq war and want at least a timetable for withdrawal. Its been like this since, oh, mid 2005.
Now you have a brain, I think. So you know that if you posit something and it happens, it might be a fluke. If it happens twice, it likely is not. If it happens over and over again for an entire year with every result backing up the original hypothesis it's legit. Reality: Americans don't want the Iraq war.
Now... Regarding exit polls.
Most polls were giving a lead to Lamont over the past week or two (see here: http://politicalwire.com/archives/20...ead_by_10.html).
And exit polls are pretty much a science. The UN and other organizations use them to determine the fairness and honesty of elections. The reason why we knew something was amiss in Ukraine was because the exit polls didn't jive with the official tallies. When that happens, it's a really, really good sign that the election was rigged. But that's another issue that doesn't belong in this thread.
No doubt about exit polls, but there is no "exit" poll for the war on Iraq.
You poll the midwest, they are for the war, you poll the Coasts they are against it. Networks like Fox and CNN poll where it's convenient to show support for their position. That's old news.
Fox News polls aren't even positive for the President nowadays.
http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm (click around the site).
Fox polls are generally consistent with everyone else's. Why? Because if there's were totally out there and out on left field then they would have even less credibility. If everyone says Bush has an approval of 35% and Fox says 45% then that would be nonsense. Polls are the one thing they don't seem to fudge (though they fudge the reporting on them).
They will fudge them more and more the closer it comes to election time. The approval for the war will be over 50% by the time our next president is ready to go.
:lol: :lol: :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
If Lieberman is far right, then I must have wrapped around three times and still passed him a fourth.
LOLLERS, I'm in orbit then.
I'm going to vote for Lieberman in November.
He's done good things for CT.
My feelings exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Quote:
Originally Posted by JefmcC
Let me loan you a dollar so you can buy a clue.
Lieberman has been on Washington's dick for the last 2 years. No matter what he has done in the past, he hasn't done shit lately.
I don't know if you live in CT, but I do. I know what's up with Lieberman thank you very much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Leiberman A) isn't a democrat and B) isn't a good candidate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
I respect that but honestly aren't you turned off by what Lieberman is doing? He lost in a fair election. A fair election where the people of his party said they want someone else to represent them in Washington. You can't get a clearer message. Instead of respecting that choice he cravenly decides that he doesn't want to leave and that the people of his state and his party are not good enough to make that decision. It's disgusting, breathtakingly arrogant, and a microcosm for everything wrong with Washington: full of pampered buffoons drunk on power who feel they are entitled to keep their taxpayer funded jobs and staffs for as long as they want.Quote:
Originally Posted by jefmcc
If this happened in NJ and I liked the guy that lost I would never vote for him. It's despicable.
And apparently you'd just spend that dollar on horrendous child cliches, anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
I'm enjoying how neocons are so shocked by the left going with people who represent the left's interests rather than the right's. When was the last time the right gave two shits about voting for a moderate?
Democrats and Republicans alike are trying to distance themselves from Bush and co at this point because they don't want to tie themselves to that sinking ship, and at this point in his run he's not much of a threat to convince them otherwise. His pet issues have been losing steam (no matter how much he's been trying to pump them up) with him being on the losing end of stem cell research and the Iraq war, and his approval ratings, while a bit higher than their all time low a few months ago, are still looking pathetic.
Other then supposedly helping to keep the sub base open, what?Quote:
Originally Posted by JefmcC
Bush is a moderate, which is why I didn't want him to be the candidate in 2000. His dad was even more moderate.Quote:
Originally Posted by sethsez
LAWLQuote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
He also helps secure orders for Black Hawks. I work for Sikorsky. There are also hundreds of suppliers all over CT that benefit from defence contracts, both at Electric Boat and all the United Technologies companies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildkat
The slow job growth in CT is more due to the insane cost of doing business here, not something Lieberman can control in Washington. That's something the CT government needs to address. But I don't expect a shake up as our governor is the most liked in US history.
I also completely disagree with Lamont about how we get out of Iraq. We can't just pull up and leave.
I should clarify that I don't exactly agree with how or why the USA went into Iraq. What we should have done is a different arguement from what we need to do now. Do we need to get out of Iraq, yes. I happen to agree with Lieberman on him time table.
All of that is understandable, Jeff, but don't you think it's a tad arrogant (not to mention selfish and childish) to continue running after you lose?
That would be like Bush going, "We should amend the constitution so that I can run again. Since I've done such a good job I would be letting the American people down if they didn't have a chance for me to be in charge again."
Is it wrong to say that i never trusted Lieberman because of his religion and support of Isreal? His presidential aspirations always scared me. I'm glad this will finally put an end to those too.
It's a bold move for him and could cost him his career, that's for sure. I guess he wants to leave it up to the voters in CT, and not a bunch of media fed left wing nut jobs? It will be interesting to see how the unaffiliated CT voters go with this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Ned Lamont comes off to me as a millionare turned left wing activest.
After all this is over, no one is going to even care or think about CT ever again, except for the people of CT. If anything, Lamont will get elected to Senate and make a fool out of himself.
130,000 citizens of Connecticut voted for Lamont. Are you gonna seriously say those people are all "media fed left wing nut jobs"? Give me a break! That statement is just ridiculous, I dont know what to say.Quote:
Originally Posted by JefmcC
http://abcnews.blogs.com/theworldnewser/
George Stephanopoulos wrote on ABC New's blog that Karl Rove gave Lieberman a call today about helping him out. We all know how Karl Rove works. Is he a CT voter?
Democrats don't want Joe, he should respect them (after all they put him in DC for 18 years) and pack up his shinebox and go home. Winning a few elections doesn't give you a seat forever. This is not a monarchy (yet...).
What, like Lieberman hasn't?Quote:
Originally Posted by JefmcC
IBTN (ouch that hurts)
Lieberman will not win as an independent either, he's clinging on to his "lifestyle" with both hands, apparently he wants the lobbyist dollars.
That's not a fair analogy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Calliander
Yeah, it's a little arrogant but I don't think it's childish at all. He's a career politician, what's he supposed to do? He's putting his entire life on the line and letting the voters of CT decide if they want him, not just the Democratic party. Or more accurately, the ultra left Democrats.
I think Lamont did as well as he did because he embraced the internet better than Lieberman. Lamont got a LOT of support from bloggers and other young voters. Young voters that IMO fail to see the bigger picture.
Alright, that's more Lieberman talk than I ever cared to do. I'm glad he's still making a go of it and I'll vote for him. However if Lamont wins it we'll see what some fresh millionare blood can do in Washington. There are two sides to everything and even though I don't like Lamont much, a yappy dog in the Senate might help something.
IDBTN. He wants to be president and empower Isreal even further. This means the end of that dream.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
that's not really anyone's problem. Im sure he could find some work.Quote:
Yeah, it's a little arrogant but I don't think it's childish at all. He's a career politician, what's he supposed to do?
Nonsense. He played by the rules, the rules include a Democratic Primary to pick the strongest candidate, the Democrats didnt pick him. Primaries are not new things. He's weakening the Democratic Party by forcing Lamont to fight him and his accusations again. If everybody ignored primary results they didnt like it would be chaos.Quote:
He's putting his entire life on the line and letting the voters of CT decide if they want him, not just the Democratic party. Or more accurately, the ultra left Democrats.
LOL at this!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/...ite/index.html
Like I said post 1, he's going to ruin your next election.
If he run's as an independent in the next election, he'll rob votes away from Hillary or whomever you're party decides to run. Time for the 'crats to organize against this pile of dogshit.
I'm tired of all this serious talk. I suck cause I like Joe Lieberman. Boo me, HORRAY BEER!!!
This is funny:
http://arwenlune.orcon.net.nz/pics/p..._lieberman.jpg
Wow, perhaps Lucas was inspired by this guy?
I don't understand this. Clearly Lieberman can run again if he wishes. It's distasteful but there's nothing stopping him from running independently while the Democratic party backs another pony. He's changed no laws.Quote:
Originally Posted by Calliander
For Bush to be elected a third time into Presidency he'd have to go through a very long process in order for it to happen.
I can kinda see what you were trying to get at but not really.
I'm not a Democrat. The only thing the Dems running Hillary will do is secure the election for the Republicans. If they DO run Hillary, I hope the Rs run McCain.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
I have a feeling the next presidential election is going to be between two shit heads.
You could run OJ Simpson against Hillary and she'd lose.
Southern American ain't standin' for no woman in office.
I don't think even the traditional lefty states would vote her in. She's just too much of a smarmy douchebag.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
When I watched Reagan's funeral and the bitch was laughing, I wanted to someone to smack her upside the head with nine inches of limpdick.
To be fair, Reagan's funeral was a media circus. Far from a traditional somber funeral. Who know's why she laughed. Maybe she felt her cock move and it made her giggle. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Bad news for Hils, a lot of polling is coming up extremely bad for her. People just hate her and I think she's realizing that. I doubt she'll run in 2008, and if she does she will falter early in the primary process.
Yeah, the idea that the left loves her is false. The right loves her far more than we do because they know she hasn't got a chance, and even if you listen to most liberals talk about her running for president it's with a sense of grim resignation. We liked Bill, that bitch was just along for the ride and some of his good luck rubbed off on her.
Too bad that's all you guys got right now, nobody is really sticking out in terms of the 08 platform.
And who do you guys have? Both sides have a few interesting people who would be way too easy to bring down. It's not as though someone's going against Bush again.
Nobody is anywhere. They're waiting on the results of 2006.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Bingo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Hey guys, Joe Lieberman's new campaign website is up:
http://www.connecticutforlieberman.com/
Stop it Diff, are you praying for a mystery candidate to pop up from nowhere to contend for presidency? You're fooling yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Obama? LOL
Lieberman? Out
Clinton? BINGO
You seem to be under the impression that the republicans have anyone solid lined up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Despite all the cries of IT'S GONNA BE HILLARY, nobody actually wants her. Remember when Howard Dean was a sure thing and nobody else stood a chance?
This is just nonsense. You dont keep up with the Democratic on-goings so stop saying shit just to be inflammatory. A simple google search can give you any number of names for each party.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
And NO, even the people who could be considering a run aren't working on it. R or D. How the 2006 election unfolds matters a LOT.
You are annoying and dense. Stop wasting everybody's time by posting this horse shit.
McCain and Rudy G own your asses.
I'd vote for Gulliani if he ran.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
LOL, who are you suggesting would even have a chance.
Oh goody, another year of political flip-flopping accusations. Oh well, at least it'll be directed at your guy this time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Your mom, provided the old film of her in that horse gangbang doesn't come to light.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff
edit: by old, I mean last week.
She's a conservative.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
So's Lieberman and that didn't stop him from being a Democrat for 18 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Good point.
See if Diff would spend more time thinking and less time trying to come up with catchy sentences to put people down, he would realize that the democratic party has never been weaker. They infight, position themselves over each other, and make stupid anti-war remarks that have no politcal point except mudslinging. They are barely viable now,and I don't see that changing in the next year. Keep holding on to the dream Diff, if it makes you feel better.
Edit: Oh yeah, love the news coverage as well, how many lies are they going to be caught in this month? Over under is 10.
Open up YOUR eyes, and you'll see the Republicans are infighting and bickering, the Neoconservative movement is collapsing, Iraq is a terrorist breeding ground because of Neocons, New Orleans is still a mess, the deficit is out of control, and the economy is on thin ice. Bush is a pariah, his policies (domestic and foreign) have virtually all failed, and everyone is racing to escape his shadow. Except they can't, because they kissed his ass for five years.
The next decade is gonna be ugly, for everyone.
on that note this thread is a disaster, thanks Biff. Got-next pls.
"RINO" ring a bell? Remember all the shit that McCain got when he was running for president?Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
So do republicans. This is a non-point in politics.Quote:
position themselves over each other,
And speaking out against a war that's costing us billions and we never should have gotten involved with in the first place, ina ddition to distracting us from a goal we should be working on.Quote:
and make stupid anti-war remarks that have no politcal point except mudslinging.
Except for support for the current republican establishment freefalling thanks to it giving everyone something to be pissed off about, from war to gas to stem cells to out of control spending to wiretaps and spying on citizens to homeland security being a joke to terrible border security and on and on and on. The smart republicans are regrouping and distancing themselves from the current administration who're just making enemies left and right, here and abroad.Quote:
They are barely viable now,
Yes Diff, if Kerry was in office, New Orleans would have never happened, our industry would explode with new jobs, Disneyland would be opening their first theme park in Iraq, and you'd get laid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Where would the needed support from New Orleans have came when Kerry was in office? How about Jobs? Iraq? Your pathetic shallow minded viewpoint doesn't allow you to see that fact that I don't like Bush, but I like the conservative way. Liberals always call someone who disagrees with them a Bushite, a product of the party's ignorance.
Back in the real world, everybody hates Bush, however people love McCain and Rudy G, and they would have to anal rape a goat on live TV to give a Democrat a chance.
You're parties swaying line doesn't make anybody feel warm and fuzzy, and the threat of huge tax hikes is repelling corporate American, which now Diff, outnumbers your precious union votes.
Dumbass.
Not enough to pick him over Bush.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba
Bush isn't coming back Sethsez
Yes, I'm aware.
Well your point is moot.
The point is that McCain doesn't get the wide love that people seem to think, much like Hillary. Neocons see him as a RINO, democrats would rather just stick with their own guy.
That's every presidential election.Quote:
Originally Posted by JefmcC
So far Lamont's said that Lieberman is a Bush crony for supporting the war effort (while criticizing the way Bush has handled it), said that Lieberman doesn't want us to have health insurance (because he doesn't support socialized health care), and implied that Lieberman is a member of the religious right (because Lieberman isn't "enlightened" enough to be an athiest). Lamont's running a sleazy Daily Show campaign catered to the radical left and squeezed out a primary win with his endless war chest and hoardes of uninformed college turds.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
It would be irresponsible of Lieberman to not run as an independant to keep this sack of shit out of office. Lieberman will win as an independent; he'll get almost half the registered Democrat vote, almost all of the swing votes, and probably some Republican votes too.
It's funny, Democrats always whine about the lack of "bipartisan politics" in our country but as soon as a Democrat works with Republicans he gets tossed out on his ear. Supporting the war in Iraq doesn't make you a radical neocon, despite the ramblings of the far left. There's a huge population of whacked out communist lefties here in CT, but there's also a huge population of independent voters that don't talk to pollsters or advertise their agendas. They just go vote for the common sense candidate, and that's Lieberman.
LOL douchebaggies.Quote:
Originally Posted by sleeveboy
There's a difference between "working with" someone and capitulating to their every whim while attacking those in your own party that don't. Lieberman did the latter.Quote:
It's funny, Democrats always whine about the lack of "bipartisan politics" in our country but as soon as a Democrat works with Republicans he gets tossed out on his ear.
He lost in a fair PRIMARY election where the fringe nutcases that have taken over his party kicked him out for not mindlessly attacking Bush every chance he got. The people of our state WANT him to run again and that will be clear when he wins election as an independent. I agree that Congress is fucked up and needs a giant kick in the ass, but Lieberman is not the problem. He works hard for CT and the people here know that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
P.S. you look retarded when you call a pro-choice, pro-gay rights democrat a radical neocon.
Right to choose and gay rights dont matter to the neocon agenda. To the neocons its how much you support endless war and bombing campaigns against brown people, how much you kowtow to Israel, and whether or not you let the President do whatever he wants. Lieberman is socially liberal, definitely. But he's also a hardline neocon on the issues that matter to neocons and thats why neocons (Hannity, Coulter, Limbaugh, etc.) have been defending him.Quote:
P.S. you look retarded when you call a pro-choice, pro-gay rights democrat a radical neocon.
And apparantly the "radical left" (haw) makes up the majority of Connecticut's voters, making him the proper person to represent them.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Fun fact: incumbants have far far far more at their disposal than challengers do thanks to endless regulations that almost always favor the incumbant. His "war chest" is one of the only ways to win these days, unfortunately.Quote:
and squeezed out a primary win with his endless war chest
Oh come on, republicans don't do the same thing constantly? They tar and feather thier own all the time, and frankly I don't consider Lieberman much of a democrat. You can't look like a duck, walk like a duck, quack like a duck and then try to convince me you're a goose.Quote:
It's funny, Democrats always whine about the lack of "bipartisan politics" in our country but as soon as a Democrat works with Republicans he gets tossed out on his ear.
And with record turnouts (highest in the state's history) and plenty of people switching their affiliation to democrat just to vote in this primary, Lamont (a no-name) still won against an 18 year incumbant.Quote:
there's also a huge population of independent voters that don't talk to pollsters or advertise their agendas.
That's flat out wrong. Lieberman supports the war but he's called out Bush countless times for his faulty management of the war and opposed Bush on tons of other issues, most recently the ban on gay marriage. He's attacked the fringe radical leftists that put their personal hatred for George Bush before the good of the country they've been elected to protect, and rightly so. Bill Clinton himself has been out endorsing Lieberman as a loyal Democrat. Have you even seen the commercials Lamont's been running?Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Fixed.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
You just have no comprehension of what a Neocon is if you think Ann Coulter (the woman that writes books about the evils of abortion, athiesm, and homosexuality) is a neocon. Conservatives have defended Lieberman because he's the victim of a shameless betrayal by the radical leftists that took over his party; they're attacking the radical left by defending Lieberman, not the other way around.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Stop saying things like "Neocons like bombing brown people", it's stupid and it doesn't add anything to the discussion.
I know Joe voted not guilty on his impeachment, but he didnt he trot out a lot of the "values are being compromised" garbage that Republicans were spewing back then?
Bill Kristol is practically jerking off to the conflict in Lebanon right now.Quote:
Stop saying things like "Neocons like bombing brown people", it's stupid and it doesn't add anything to the discussion.
edit: stop trying to seize the high ground with "dont use inflammatory language it doesnt 'add anything to the conversation'". It's your bread and butter. Fuck off.
edit2: you look retarded when you say that a guy that takes the same position in Iraq as 60% of Americans is a "radical leftist". Or when you say anything else, for that matter.
edit3: LOL times a million at the idea of the virtuous neoconservative pundits rushing to defend an embattled Democratic senator "under attack" from Democrat voters. That is parody, isn't it?