« Back to story "The McCain Strategy to Split the Democratic Convention"

Story Comments

Posted by: mesodude 1 year, 2 months ago

This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.

All Comments Share Story Report

63%
mesodude1 year, 2 months ago

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

This didn't just begin with Obama's VP pick. Both the right wing media and the msm (for its own reasons) has been trying to whip up controversy between Obama and Hillary supporters where none exists. Sadly some have fallen for it. The GOP doesn't need to exploit race. It only needs to exploit the extremely poorly educated and from what I've observed, they have a very large pool from which to choose their prey. ;-(

(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 3) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
Reply
30 Replies

loading ...
- 65%
  tchef1 year, 2 months ago
  
  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
  
  They had too much fun with the primary and don't want it to end. Besides what does the Republican party have to offer us? Four more years of Bush's failed policies, that's what!
  
  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
  Reply
  7 Replies
  
  loading ...
  - 20%
    DropkickaLib1 year, 2 months ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    He isn't running again.
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    6 Replies
    
    loading ...
    - 33%
      mesodude1 year, 2 months ago
      
      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
      
      We know you want to forget Bush (who with even half a brain wouldn't?) and you want all reminders of your reckless political judgement behind you but it ain't gonna happen. Bush destroyed our country and we will NEVER forgive him, or forget it (or let you cons forget it). You're out of your mind if you think you can get off that easily after what you've done to our country. Out of your mind...
      
      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
      Reply
      5 Replies
      
      loading ...
      - 0%
        DropkickaLib1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Nah, my judgement is fine. I'll never let you Libbots forget your numerous acts of treason and anti-Americanism.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 7) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        4 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        0%
        mesodude1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        What perplexes me is that you always fail to mention all the compelling reasons anyone (other than you and your fellow keyboard commando cons --who aren't risking their lives or sacrificing anything for the mission and the troops you claim to support) should care what you think qualifies as "treason" or "anti-Americanism." Why are you convinced that your opinions alone carry any weight?
        
        --Here, let me help you understand how an argument works...I provide facts:
        
        The number of Americans who claim they support our "war on terrorism" but are not serving or sacrificing in any meaningful way is far, FAR greater (exponentially so) than the number that *is* actually serving and sacrificing.
        
        --And then you attempt to provide a counter-argument (as opposed to your opinions) which disputes my facts. Your turn...
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 6) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        3 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        Neutral
        DropkickaLib1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        A tired excuse from a traitor who wouldn't get his soft pink a$$ out of his computer chair for any other reason than to switch on his porno flick. For one thing, I'm too old to join the military now. I am, however, employed and paying a heavy tax burden, which puts me head and shoulders over the vast majority of the embittered, unemployed libs I see here. So we should draft the majority of the American public? Take an economics class and get back to me. Learn to read first. You gave zero facts. No hard data. You simply repeated DNC talking points.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 9) (recursion depth : 7) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        2 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        Neutral
        mesodude1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        "A tired excuse from a traitor who wouldn't get his soft pink a$$ out of his computer chair for any other reason than to switch on his porno flick.
        
        Oh my... Apparently the urgency for remedial debate class is more like an EMERGENCY. DK, I stated a fact (that only a tiny sliver of the populace is putting their lives on the line or sacrificing in any meaningful way to support this so called war on terror that we're spending trillions of dollars on and which is being billed by those on the right as the battle of the 21 Century) and your response is that you're too old to serve in the military, you think your taxes are too high, you work hard for the money (so I better treat you right, I guess), a draft is a bad idea, and I'm a fat, lonely traitor who is fond of adult videos.
        
        First, that was way harsh. I am many things but I'm not a traitor. I'm on a diet and I'm thinking about planning to see a shrink about my shameful addiction to porn (which is really not that bad...maybe I watch four or five movies--a day...or seven...well, seventeen if it's the weekend, ok...but that's down from one every hour for most of last year...I'm not watching as few as I'd like to be but I'm getting there...and it's just a matter of time before I reach my goal...or die of old age...so maybe I should give up on the idea of thinking about quitting? I'm so conflicted...anyway, who are you to judge me?!! ;-x
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 10) (recursion depth : 8) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        Neutral
        mesodude1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Oops...I was so flustered that you called me a chubby porn addict who hates America, that I totally forgot to address the rest of your post. Anyhoo...You're all over the place with your response, DK. All I'm saying is that as a country, our actions don't match our rhetoric. You cons want to compare Saddam to Hitler and haul out all these references to WWII but we're so NOT behaving like we did as a country during WWII. And how can people who are basically living their lives unaltered by the so called war on terrorism worry about how expensive gas is or how high their taxes are (when people are dying for the struggle you claim is sooooo important that we have to stay there indefinitely and spend unlimited trillions of dollars on)?
        
        With all due respect, you cons are very narrow-minded sometimes. Who the hell said anything about a draft? I want to draft our @sses out of Iraq. That's the only kind of draft I'm interested in. But all you can think about is how we should have approached the WAR differently. We should have approached it differently by NOT GOING IN THE FIRST FREAKING PLACE!
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 10) (recursion depth : 8) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
- 60%
  jordan111 year, 2 months ago
  
  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
  
  You're so right. This is a non issue, made an issue by the morons in the media, and the moron's even ask people they invite on their so called 'news' shows why everyone is talking about it! Dumb. No other word for people who influence public opinion these days. Just plain dumb.
  
  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
  Reply
  0 Replies
  
  loading ...
- JoseMadreComment removed: Hard Banned16 Replies
  - 71%
    mesodude1 year, 2 months ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    What's truly sad about your comment is that from the many posts of yours I've read, not only am I convinced you're a prime example of the exploitable I'm talking about (you have NO concept of what constitutes legitimate debate whatsoever) but it's those *you* blindly support that deliberately legislate and play politics in ways that insure that the already exploited of all political stripes (think McCain and his lovely philosophy behind shortchanging military on the GI bill) are kept down and dumb. Ahh... But I remember your claim to fame is that you drive a Mercedes, right Jose? So I guess that must mean your life as a member of the Republican "team" is rewarding. Go team! ;-(
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    13 Replies
    
    loading ...
    - 40%
      Endoscopy1 year, 2 months ago
      
      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
      
      Well this is funny. Liberals who push for the Fairness Doctrine censorship talk about legitimate debate. Your view is that anything different than the liberal concepts is criminal or evil. You say we Blindly support people. But you never give any credence to the fact that we vote for those who support what we believe in.
      
      Get a life beyond those closed in walls of super liberal thinking. Kind of hard when the top of the ticket is the most liberal senator and his running mate has voted the same why he did on the items that Obama actually voted on. Democrats for the first time are ignoring the moderates by this move.
      
      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
      Reply
      12 Replies
      
      loading ...
      - 50%
        miklkit1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        You are accusing US of stifling free speech?!?!?!? You republicons have attacked a major network for reporting something you didn't like. (NBC?) And you are attacking Madonna for a show she put on in another country! You are so full of shiit your eyes are brown.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 7) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        8 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        Neutral
        DropkickaLib1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        You DenOrats are liars! You want to silence everyone more successful on the airwaves who is always a Conservative.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 6) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        4 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        0%
        mesodude1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        "You want to silence everyone more successful on the airwaves who is always a Conservative."
        
        --What *facts* can you provide to support your *opinions*? Do you know? Do you even know what the Fairness Doctrine is?What, for example is wrong with the concept of a network like C-SPAN, for example, in which all sides of the political spectrum are represented equally? In what way does this approach "silence" any point of view? Please explain. Thanks.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 9) (recursion depth : 7) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        3 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        Neutral
        Endoscopy1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        I remember how it was done when it was law a while back. Read the below post. You are the one talking in ignorance.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 10) (recursion depth : 8) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        Neutral
        DropkickaLib1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Look at the ratings for talk radio anytime, simpleton. No libs anywhere near the top. The unFairness Doctrine is a tool of authoritarians like Nasty Pelnazi aimed at silencing freedom of speech. She's so much more competent to judge the content of the air than the listening public, right? They need guidance and brainwashing in order to become servile enough to turn over all their property to the state.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 10) (recursion depth : 8) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        loading ...
        
        Neutral
        mesodude1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        "Look at the ratings for talk radio anytime, simpleton. No libs anywhere near the top."
        
        Very scientific.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 11) (recursion depth : 9) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        Neutral
        Endoscopy1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Attacking Madona, Obama, McCain, or any other public figure is fair game. That is not censorship but expressing an opinion. The Fairness Doctrine is censorship.
        
        Which party leaders are talking about bringing back the Fairness Doctrine? Do any of you know what that means? Why would it only be for Radio?
        
        When implemented in the past it meant if ANYBODY talked about something political or even somewhat controversial then EVERY group could get equal time for a response. If a Democrat talked about a topic for 30 minutes then the opposition parties would line up for their turn.
        Republican, Libertarian, Greenpeace, ......Nazi, KKK etc.
        
        Depending on the situation they might have between 10 to 30 people demanding that equal time. Guess what happened to radio under that law. Managers refused to let any talk on because if anything was said wrong here come the other opinions. All music. That is real censorship. So why do the liberals want to censor conservative talk radio with this foolish law that would also silence any liberal as well?
        
        If they try this on only one media then the courts will get loaded with law suits. If they do it on all media then this site will disappear.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 6) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        2 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        100%
        Lurch1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        The Fairness Doctrine is not censorship. lmao.
        
        How could you possibly write that? That`s like saying war is peace, or black is white.
        
        How on earth do you justify calling required reporting of both sides `censorship`?
        
        Do you have no clue about the meaning of censorship or the meaning of the Fairness Doctrine? Lots of websites can educate on either or both if it is that bad.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 9) (recursion depth : 7) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        loading ...
        
        Neutral
        Endoscopy1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        So if the law makes it so station managers will not allow political talk because of the repercussions that is not defacto censorship? What twilight zone are you living in.
        
        Keep in mind that for each political point of view expressed EVERY other point of view would have equal FREE time to respond. Every nut group would get in line for that free time. A station would go broke doing that. They can only sell adds to companies that want to buy adds for programs they view as having big ratings. Not many would pay to broadcast the rantings of the KKK, Nazi, PETA, etc.
        
        Talk radio is preponderantly conservative.
        
        The Fairness Doctrine would erase talk radio.
        
        Explain how that is not real censorship.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 10) (recursion depth : 8) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
      - 100%
        mesodude1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        "Liberals who push for the Fairness Doctrine censorship talk about legitimate debate."
        
        --Statements like these (and most of your post) are a perfect example of what I mean by failure to comprehend the concept of defending an argument. Your *belief* that the Fairness Doctrine represents censorship is an opinion. This is not a fact and it does not substantiate any argument.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 7) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        loading ...
        
        0%
        Endoscopy1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Ignorance abounds. What do you think it means? What I saw before was not an opinion it was fact.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 6) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
      - 100%
        Lurch1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        By claiming the Fairness Doctrine is censorship, you betray your own ignorance about what either term means.
        
        Your statement is an obvious and desperate attempt to make an argument where none exists, and you know it. You have no ground to stand on, or you would have come up with something at least a tiny bit plausible.
        
        Come back when you actually have an argument that works in this dimension.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 7) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
  - 80%
    UnusualSuspect1 year, 2 months ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    Wait until Obama's opponent picks Tom Ridge for VP...talk about a house divided...conservatives will be moaning about his pro-choice stance...cursing Obama;s opponent for picking Ridge in the first place...LOL...
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    1 Reply
    
    loading ...
    - 33%
      Endoscopy1 year, 2 months ago
      
      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
      
      Gee we have a mind reader here. Do you sell that to people because you could get big bucks for it.
      
      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
      Reply
      0 Replies
      
      loading ...
- 13%
  DropkickaLib1 year, 2 months ago
  
  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
  
  Right because it takes a great deal of education to tell blacks to vote for the black guy and to do everything possible to allow illegals to vote.
  
  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
  Reply
  3 Replies
  
  loading ...
  - 71%
    mesodude1 year, 2 months ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    Thanks...That reminds me that when the ignore function returns I can also look forward to disregarding the unusually high concentration of foaming bigots who haunt this site.
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    2 Replies
    
    loading ...
    - 20%
      Endoscopy1 year, 2 months ago
      
      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
      
      Start ignoring yourself.
      
      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
      Reply
      0 Replies
      
      loading ...
    - 0%
      DropkickaLib1 year, 2 months ago
      
      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
      
      You can block yourself?
      
      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
      Reply
      0 Replies
      
      loading ...

Post Reply

You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.

People Who Liked This Comment (12)

People Who Didn't Like This Comment (7)

Submit a Story

Advertisement