Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

(This is the forums archive - If you want to get back to the main site simply click the banner above and you will be taken to our homepage.)

Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums is the Ultimate Online Resource for Owners and Enthusiasts of American Luxury Cars. Feel free to browse through our archive - but make sure you make it back to our main site - Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

Cadillac XLR : Cadillac CTS : Cadillac : 2005 Cadillac STS : Cadillac Forums : 2000 Lincoln LS : Lincoln Mark VIII : Lincoln Mark VII : Car Wax
Lincoln Town Car : Lincoln Air Suspension : Lincoln Continental : Lemon Law : Do It Yourself Car Repair : Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums : Mesothelioma

Back to the Archive Main Page

Pages: 1

Funny how it's always a Democrat that says stuff like this...

(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: fossten

The party of tolerance and understanding and enlightenment

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

Thursday, June 1, 2006 5:49 p.m. EDT

NY Dem: Put 'Bullet Between Bush's Eyes'

In an outrageous remark that has at least one Republican calling for his resignation, New York State Comptroller Alan Hevesi said Thursday that a fellow New York Democrat would "put a bullet between the president's eyes if he could get away with it."

Introducing Sen. Charles Schumer at commencement exercises at New York City's Queens College, Hevesi began:

"The man who, how do I phrase this diplomatically, who will put a bullet between the president's eyes if he could get away with it. The toughest senator, the best representative. A great, great member of the Congress of the United States."

Hours later, Hevesi was forced to issue an apology.

"I apologize to the president of the United States" and to the fellow state politician, Sen. Charles Schumer, he said, in quotes picked up by the Associated Press.

"I am not a person of violence. I am apologizing as abjectly as I can. There is no excuse for it. It was beyond dumb."

"I do speak extemporaneously," Hevesi tried to explain. "And I've never said anything like this."

Though Schumer spokeswoman Risa Heller said the senator was satisfied with Hevesi's apology, there's no indication that he objected to the remarks at the time.

The incident prompted at least one Republican to call on Hevesi to resign his office.

"Threats against the president are no joke, and this incident raises real concerns about Alan Hevesi's fitness to hold public office," GOP Comptroller nominee J. Christopher Callaghan complained.

Posted by: pepperman

that dip stick should resign from office.

Posted by: MAC1

Hevesi's comment is one reason why I'm looking to vote purely republican for the first time in my voting life. Why? Because I am sick and tired of hearing the democrats spew continuous assaults, one after another; yet, have nothing to offer, except maybe higher taxes and weak national security. It's disgusting!

Posted by: raVeneyes

Well at least he only *said* that a bullet would be put between someone's eyes, instead of actually shooting someone in the face.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by raVeneyes

Well at least he only *said* that a bullet would be put between someone's eyes, instead of actually shooting someone in the face.

I feel like I'm talking to a five-year-old right now.

That is the weakest, lamest, most pathetic argument I've ever heard on this forum. You have to be an apologist for the stupid to even take up that side.

Three things:

1. "Put a bullet between his eyes" is an American idiom which clearly means shoot someone in the face. It doesn't mean "take a bullet and gently place it up against his forehead, fastening it with crazy glue." Even a 10-year-old knows that.
2. If what he said wasn't wrong, why did he give such an abject apology?
3. He didn't use the passive voice, i.e. "a bullet would be put", he used the active voice, "he would put a bullet." Big difference.

Back to English school for you.

Posted by: MonsterMark

He threatened the President of the United States. See you in two years pal after you get out of jail.

Posted by: MonsterMark

Quote:

Originally Posted by raVeneyes

Well at least he only *said* that a bullet would be put between someone's eyes, instead of actually shooting someone in the face.

Don't know quite how to 'read' your statement.

Is this something we should allow to go unpunished in politics?
Is it OK, because after all, he was talking about Bush? Right?

The Left are the evil and mean-spirited ones dividing this Country.

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonsterMark

You know what's sad? One Democrat says something stupid and somehow it blankets what every Democrat in the entire country thinks by several people in this forum. While if a Republican gets caught saying something stupid, it's an isolated incident.

And yes, I agree what he said was beyond stupid, he may disapprove, dislike or even hate Bush, but he should at least give Bush the respect that the presidency entails and not say something that could be a thinly viled threat, especially since he's a politician.

And on the topic of this thread title, didn't some yahoo Republican cowboy politician say years ago that he wanted to shoot Clinton dead? It was brought up in here before and don't remember anyone on the right being upset over that.

Posted by: thamarkman

Too bad he apologized, someone in politics almost found some balls.
Gotta give the guy credit though, he knows what should be done.

Posted by: MonsterMark

Quote:

Originally Posted by thamarkman

Too bad he apologized, someone in politics almost found some balls.
Gotta give the guy credit though, he knows what should be done.

OK. If you say so.

Posted by: raVeneyes

Quote:

Originally Posted by raVeneyes

Well at least he only *said* that a bullet would be put between someone's eyes, instead of actually shooting someone in the face.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonsterMark

Don't know quite how to 'read' your statement.

"Pellets hit him in the face and chest, but he never lost consciousness,"

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/12/cheney/

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95DevilleNS

You know what's sad? One Democrat says something stupid and somehow it blankets what every Democrat in the entire country thinks by several people in this forum. While if a Republican gets caught saying something stupid, it's an isolated incident.

Are you KIDDING? Haven't you heard of the so-called "CULTURE OF CORRUPTION?"

What about the full court press Cheney got after his hunting accident? He was accused, among other things, of being drunk.

If you'll find me the article where the Republican said that about Clinton, I'd be interested in seeing it.

Posted by: MonsterMark

Quote:

Originally Posted by raVeneyes

"Pellets hit him in the face and chest, but he never lost consciousness,"

Thanks.

I see you can't delineate between intent and accident.

It's crystal clear now.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonsterMark

Thanks.

I see you can't delineate between intent and accident.

It's crystal clear now.

Nor between pellets and a bullet.

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Not sure where Cheney being accused of misconduct blanketed the whole of the Republican party... My only grudge against that is he didn't notify the authorities right away which is required by law when you shoot someone, even on accident. But I also will not dismiss the possibility of him being drunk or under the influence to some degree, possibly why he waited (sobering up) to inform the authorities. He should of followed protocol and the issue wouldn't have blown up in his face (no pun intended).

It was sometime back, I do not remember who posted it, but I'll give it a shot. As I recall, the man in question was doing an interview (during Clintons term) and when the subject of Clinton came up, he made that comment.

Posted by: JohnnyBz00LS

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonsterMark

Thanks.

I see you can't delineate between intent and accident.

It's crystal clear now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Nor between pellets and a bullet.

And you guys can't delineate between talk and action.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyBz00LS

And you guys can't delineate between talk and action.

That's funny. The United States Uniform Code REQUIRES that there be no delineation in situations like this.

§ 871. Threats against President and successors to the Presidency

(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully deposits for conveyance in the mail or for a delivery from any post office or by any letter carrier any letter, paper, writing, print, missive, or document containing any threat to take the life of, to kidnap, or to inflict bodily harm upon the President of the United States, the President-elect, the Vice President or other officer next in the order of succession to the office of President of the United States, or the Vice President-elect, or knowingly and willfully otherwise makes any such threat against the President, President-elect, Vice President or other officer next in the order of succession to the office of President, or Vice President-elect, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

(b) The terms “President-elect” and “Vice President-elect” as used in this section shall mean such persons as are the apparent successful candidates for the offices of President and Vice President, respectively, as ascertained from the results of the general elections held to determine the electors of President and Vice President in accordance with title 3, United States Code, sections 1 and 2. The phrase “other officer next in the order of succession to the office of President” as used in this section shall mean the person next in the order of succession to act as President in accordance with title 3, United States Code, sections 19 and 20.

Once again, Johnny, you're on the wrong side of the issue.

Posted by: MAC1

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95DevilleNS

Not sure where Cheney being accused of misconduct blanketed the whole of the Republican party.

The "culture of corruption" accusation stemmed from Cheney's shooting incident. After Cheney failed to report the incident to the media, the democrats claimed that such failure is just part of a "culture of corruption" in the Bush administration. They went on to claim that Cheney's failure to report the incident was symtomatic of the Bush administrations believe that they are above the law and can do anything they want. The "culture of corruption" accusation was quickly expanded to include congressional republicans in general.

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAC1

The "culture of corruption" accusation stemmed from Cheney's shooting incident. After Cheney failed to report the incident to the media, the democrats claimed that such failure is just part of a "culture of corruption" in the Bush administration. They went on to claim that Cheney's failure to report the incident was symtomatic of the Bush administrations believe that they are above the law and can do anything they want. The "culture of corruption" accusation was quickly expanded to include congressional republicans in general.

If that's the case, they have a valid arguement, Cheney is 2nd in command for the entire country. He should be setting a good example. Also, some Republicans have voiced similar concerns with the Bush admin.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAC1

While hating to disagree with you, I must point out one slight correction: The Cheney incident merely continued the warpath of the "Culture of Corruption." The 'Ronnie Earle witch hunt for Tom DeLay' incident sparked it. Then it went on to Abramoff, etc. But William Jefferson, D-La. gets ignored in all this.

Posted by: JohnnyBz00LS

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

That's funny. The United States Uniform Code REQUIRES that there be no delineation in situations like this.

Well, if you want to get technical, Hevesi did not directly threaten BuSh, he said that a 3rd person would shoot BuSh "if he could get away with it". So its doubtful that Hevesi could even get fined.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Once again, Johnny, you're on the wrong side of the issue.

Don't pretend to know me, because you don't. I agree 100% that it was a stupid thing to say, for several reasons. But that is neither here nor there. All my post was was an attempt to draw your attention to the fact that raVeneyes' sigh of relief went right over your heads. But as usual, you attempt to twist it into something it is not and make a big argument out of nothing. Sad.

Posted by: stang99x

If any republican ever stated anything even remotely close to this statement, there'd be a public lynching. I've never heard so much bull

spewed from one side of the area in all my life. They are so power hungary they'll say anything, no matter the repercussion, to get a momentary favorable view. Just like that bitch from the dixie chicks, she should be deported.

Posted by: KharmaDog

NewsMax.com is joke.

It's a place where people who exist at the most extreme right can feel comfortable reading garbage from others with like minds.

Reading and revelling propaganda, whether written by those on the left or the right, is a pastime for the cowardly and ignorant.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by KharmaDog

NewsMax.com is joke.

It's a place where people who exist at the most extreme right can feel comfortable reading garbage from others with like minds.

Reading and revelling propaganda, whether written by those on the left or the right, is a pastime for the cowardly and ignorant.

What propaganda? Are you saying NewsMax faked this story?

Okay, fine. How about the New York (DNC) Times then? Would you believe it if they reported it?

Mea Culpa for Remark on President and a Bullet

By RAYMOND HERNANDEZ and CONRAD MULCAHY
Published: June 2, 2006

The New York State comptroller, Alan G. Hevesi, apologized yesterday for making a comment about the possibility of Senator Charles E. Schumer putting "a bullet between the president's eyes, if he could get away with it."

Calling the comment "incredibly stupid and moronic," Mr. Hevesi insisted that he is "not a person of violence."

"Nobody feels worse about this than I do," Mr. Hevesi, a Democrat, said during a news conference in Midtown. "I have made thousands of speeches. And I have never done anything like that."

Mr. Hevesi made the comment earlier in the day at a commencement ceremony at Queens College, where he took a moment to praise Mr. Schumer, who was also speaking there, for the senator's willingness to challenge the policies of President Bush.

"What I intended to say is that Chuck Schumer is incredibly smart, courageous, willing even to stand up to the president of the United States on issues of public policy," Mr. Hevesi said at the news conference. "What came out of my mouth is that Chuck Schumer is smart and brave and capable of putting a bullet between the president's eyes."

Mr. Hevesi apologized to President Bush and Mr. Schumer, as well as to Queens College graduates and their families "if I put any cloud over the joyous occasion."

Risa Heller, a spokeswoman for Mr. Schumer, said: "Comptroller Hevesi was trying to make a point. He went way too far and it was inappropriate and wrong. He has apologized to both the senator and the president and we believe that ends the matter."

Mr. Hevesi said he hoped his apology had reached the president. The White House did not comment on the matter.

Mr. Hevesi's remark occurred on the same day that Republicans nominated J. Christopher Callaghan, the Saratoga County treasurer, as their candidate to challenge Mr. Hevesi this fall. Mr. Hevesi is expected to win re-election easily.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/02/ny.../02remark.html

One thing you're going to have to learn here, my friend: Bashing a news story isn't the same as criticizing an op-ed.

You would do well to learn the difference.

The problem is that much of the time the NYT and lib media tends to write op-eds as news stories. In this case, however, they both reported the story as plain vanilla, thereby obviating your opinion.

Your statement about NewsMax isn't relevant in this case. Go find an op-ed and then you can say all you want about bias.

Posted by: KharmaDog

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

What propaganda? Are you saying NewsMax faked this story?

No I did not say that. I said that that sight is a joke and that it is one of the types of many sites that both the Right and the left use to squew stories and opinons so that they may appeael to their radical bases.

You can't see that?

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by KharmaDog

I don't take your word for anything, especially when you don't cite examples that make your point.

To quote Tom Sawyer (again): "Just you sayin' it don't make it so."

Posted by: KharmaDog

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

I don't take your word for anything, especially when you don't cite examples that make your point.

To quote Tom Sawyer (again): "Just you sayin' it don't make it so."

Well, then keep your head in the sand. That's your choice, what do I care if you like to sound like an idiot.

If you can't see the bias of that site then you are a simpletone not worth conversing with.

Posted by: Vitas

Stale, but if the shoe fits...:

The Great Triangulator Strikes Again

Yesterday, the Financial Times reported that former President Bill Clinton has played an instrumental role in advising top officials from the United Arab Emirates on how to assuage growing US concerns over the Dubai ports deal. Earlier this week, Mr. Clinton called the UAE a “good ally to America,” and offered his recommendation to Dubai leaders that they propose a 45-day delay to allow for an intensive investigation.

This comes as no surprise. After all, Mr. Clinton is no stranger to UAE bigwigs (nor their bank accounts). Not only has the sheikdom contributed to Clinton’s own presidential library, it opened its wallet rather wide on repeated occasions for the "Man from Hope," reportedly paying him over a half million dollars for two speeches he delivered in Dubai in 2002 and 2005.

The plot thickens. As Bob Novak writes in Townhall today, Mr. Clinton was until recently, pushing for his former press secretary and close friend, Joe Lockhart to be hired by the UAE to defend the controversial ports deal. Lockhart was gunning for the big bucks and hoped his former boss could help him land a gig as Washington’s spokesman for the UAE-owned company, Dubai Ports World.

(An interesting aside: According to Novak, “Lockhart did not flatly deny to me that Clinton had made a pitch for him, but instead said he did not know whether the former president was involved.” But according to Novak, “UAE sources, contending that Lockhart priced himself out of the market, asserted there was no question but that Clinton had intervened on his behalf and added it was not possible that Lockhart had not known about his former chief's intervention".)

Hillary, on the other hand, has been blowing her whistle at the head of the anti-Dubai pandering parade. Mrs. Clinton has vociferously positioned herself as a vocal opponent to the ports deal. The junior senator from New York with eyes on the Oval Office prize said on her website, "Our port security is too important to place in the hands of foreign governments.” She is also working on legislation that will prohibit the sale of ports to foreign governments. And at a speech in Manhattan this past weekend, Hillary called the Dubai deal "emblematic of a larger problem" of ceding "some of our fiscal sovereignty."

This is where the infamous Clinton triangulation begins.

As the Financial Times reports, Mr. Clinton’s spokesman has just gone on record saying that the former president supports Hillary’s position against the ports deal. And that “ideally,” state-owned companies would not own US port operations.

What’s that you say?

How does Bill Clinton support Hillary’s crystal-clear position against the Dubai ports deal, while simultaneously offering strategic counsel and advice (and high-priced personnel) to officials from Dubai who want the deal to go through?

This is business as usual for the Clintons. Triangulation 101. When you put Bill and Hillary together, what you’re left with is a frighteningly contradictory and confusing political portrait. Something Salvador Dali might have rendered. And if Bill and Hillary ever get the chance to set up shop at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue again, this is what it’ll be like—over and over again.

No one will understand what they’re really doing and what they’re really saying.

Posted by svarga on Thursday, March 02 @ 14:29:40 EST (40 reads)

http://www.moneypolitics.com/

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by KharmaDog

What's a simpletone? Is that the opposite of a complex tone?

Typical mindless liberal rhetoric. You have no way to back up your statements, so you resorted to name calling. And it only took you THREE WHOLE POSTS!

Posted by: KharmaDog

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

What's a simpletone? Is that the opposite of a complex tone?

Excellent. Attacking a typo. Excellent strategy to try and look like an intelligent person. Actually it just makes you look like a petty loser.

Good luck with that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Typical mindless liberal rhetoric. You have no way to back up your statements, so you resorted to name calling. And it only took you THREE WHOLE POSTS!

I'm not a liberal zippy. If you read my posts you would have figured that out. But maybe it's safer to just st and assume tht you know what everyone is thinking and what they believe. It saves you from having to do much thinking yourself.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by KharmaDog

Excellent. Attacking a typo. Excellent strategy to try and look like an intelligent person. Actually it just makes you look like a petty loser.

Good luck with that.

Interesting. You take offense that I criticized your poor spelling of a word directed at me as an insult. What does that make you look like? A hypocrite? A pot calling the kettle black? A double-standard bearer? A person who dishes out but cannot take same? A petty loser?

We'll let the admin be the judge. Or haven't you read the rules yet?

Posted by: DixieRambler

Quote:

Originally Posted by KharmaDog

You again! I think I'll go get another cold beverage because......you bore me!

Posted by: KharmaDog

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Interesting. You take offense that I criticized your poor spelling of a word directed at me as an insult.

I don't take offense to it, I just think it is pathetic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

What does that make you look like? A hypocrite? A pot calling the kettle black? A double-standard bearer? A person who dishes out but cannot take same? A petty loser?

Oh, the irony.

Posted by: stang99x

Fossten, he doesn't sound like a liberal, more like a commie

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by stang99x

Fossten, he doesn't sound like a liberal, more like a commie

I know you're the new right wing cohort, but stay out of it; they'll handle the tension themselves. Commie...Are we in the cold war again?

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95DevilleNS

I know you're the new right wing cohort, but stay out of it; they'll handle the tension themselves. Commie...Are we in the cold war again?

LOL I know what you're trying to say, Deville, but don't forget Cuba, NK, China, and Vietnam, right?

Posted by: MonsterMark

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95DevilleNS

I know you're the new right wing cohort,

Are you saying my recruiting efforts are paying off?

Posted by: MonsterMark

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95DevilleNS

they'll handle the tension themselves.

Ya, after all, they are only at the 'honeymoon' stage.

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

LOL I know what you're trying to say, Deville, but don't forget Cuba, NK, China, and Vietnam, right?

Bah, those are commie 'light' countries, Atkins communism, diet Bolsheviks the margarine of Marxism if you will.

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonsterMark

Are you saying my recruiting efforts are paying off?

Unfortunately, yes...

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95DevilleNS

Bah, those are commie 'light' countries, Atkins communism, diet Bolsheviks the margarine of Marxism if you will.

Excuse me???

Cuba, Vietnam and NK have populations that are starving b/c of the dictatorship's iron grip and poor economic policies. China still executes political prisoners for dissenting and they even got Google to censor their own citizens from posting free speech.

Commie light my a$$.

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Exactly, they aren't really communist but more on the likes of a dictatorship. In true communist ideals (even though it will never work) citizens are treated equally and fairly. Ever watch the Smufs as a child; especially the first season episodes? That was true communism. Smurfs = Communist, scary huh?

Papa Smurf: Long beard like Marx, all knowing all caring father figure. Do you think it was a coincidence we wore red?
Brainy Smurf: Outcast, liked to think for himself, often hated, never really fit in because his views didn't flow with the rest of the community. Wore glasses identical to Leon Trotsky.
Vanity Smurf: Stereotypical homosexual, was disliked by the rest for being different and for being selfish.
Lazy Smurf: Was disliked because he was lazy and didn't contribute to the community.
Handy Smurf: The most valuable smurf around yet he was never awarded for his above average skills and contributions but was happy to do so.
All other smurfs: They did different jobs and received equal shares.
Gargamel: Stereotypical Jewish archtype, big nose, greedy and his his single goal in life was trying to turn the smurfs into gold for personal gain.
Azrael: Gargamels cohort, fatcat a.k.a. America... Evil incarnate.

Posted by: bufordtpisser

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95DevilleNS

But damn Deville, you are quoting things from SouthPark and the Smurfs. No damn wonder the Dumbocrats are in so much trouble, they count people like you as members.

"That's all Folks"

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

But damn Deville, you are quoting things from SouthPark and the Smurfs. No damn wonder the Dumbocrats are in so much trouble, they count people like you as members.

"That's all Folks"

ROTFLMAO

Buford, that was PRICELESS!

YOU TOTALLY RE-AFFIRMED THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD.

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

But damn Deville, you are quoting things from SouthPark and the Smurfs. No damn wonder the Dumbocrats are in so much trouble, they count people like you as members.

"That's all Folks"

No wonder the Republicans so often are likened to a bunch of pompous a$$holes. They have people like you that are too ignorant and arrogant to see light humor for what it is. Oh well.

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

ROTFLMAO

Buford, that was PRICELESS!

YOU TOTALLY RE-AFFIRMED THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD.

See, I expected more from you... Even though I disagree with you often I never considered you to be a 'stupid' person. But with a comment like that, I gues it's safe to say 'birds of a feather flock together' even if it is cliche.

(See my response to Buford incase that flew over your head)

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95DevilleNS

Isn't it time for South Park reruns to start? Why are you still typing?

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Isn't it time for South Park reruns to start? Why are you still typing?

"Hi, my names Fossten, Fossten Gump..... Mama says they was magic shoes. They could take me anywhere. "

Posted by: Calabrio

For the record, I think South Park is one of the smartest television shows on T.V. And I also think that their social commentary is not only hillarious, but usually dead on right.

Posted by: bufordtpisser

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95DevilleNS

No wonder the Republicans so often are likened to a bunch of pompous a$$holes. They have people like you that are too ignorant and arrogant to see light humor for what it is. Oh well.

A pompous

. But then again I admit my faults. I am pompous, but I am very good at everything that I do in life. What you call arrogance, I call self confidence. And I can go through life without quoting cartoons.

You should go have a conversation with your talking piece of $hit. Or better yet, go find Smurfette because "You are in more dire need of a bluejob than any man in history".

Deeba deeba deeba, Thats all folks.

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calabrio

For the record, I think South Park is one of the smartest television shows on T.V. And I also think that their social commentary is not only hillarious, but usually dead on right.

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

A pompous

. But then again I admit my faults. I am pompous, but I am very good at everything that I do in life. What you call arrogance, I call self confidence.

Good for you???

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

And I can go through life without quoting cartoons.

And I suppose you're certain of that since you're 'self confident'....

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

You should go have a conversation with your talking piece of $hit. Or better yet, go find Smurfette because "You are in more dire need of a bluejob than any man in history".

Hmmm, you insult me for wathcing South Park; yet you know about the talking poop... I think I know what your problem is now. You tried watching the show and just couldn't follow it, the wit and banter where too much; am I correct?

As a man much smarter than myself said "their social commentary is not only hillarious, but usually dead on right." and I can't disagree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

Or better yet, go find Smurfette because "You are in more dire need of a bluejob than any man in history".

Self confidence and totch notch humor; you're a winner pal!

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

Deeba deeba deeba, Thats all folks.

Wait a damn minute! You said "And I can go through life without quoting cartoons."; so it turns out you're nothing but hypocrite and a liar. Like you said above "...but I am very good at everything that I do in life.". You know; I can't disagree.

I should also point out, not all cartoons (animation) are silly childrens shows. A few examples if you will:

-South Park
-The Simpsons
-Family Guy
-King of the Hill (which I'm pretty sure you watch)

Posted by: TheDude

Edit:

Posted by: fossten

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

Friday, June 9, 2006 11:30 a.m. EDT
Dems Leave Doggie Doo in Rep. Musgrave's Office

Republican U.S. Rep. Marilyn Musgrave's re-election campaign was already heated, and it just got smelly as well: Her staff accused a Democratic activist Thursday of leaving an envelope full of dog feces at Musgrave's Greeley office.

Musgrave spokesman Shaun Kenney said someone stuffed the envelope through the mail slot in the door on May 31 and then sped away in a car. Kenney said most of the preprinted return address was blacked out, but staffers used the nine-digit ZIP code to trace it to Kathleen Ensz, a Weld County Democratic volunteer.

Ensz told The Associated Press she left the envelope at Musgrave's office but said it "wasn't in the office doors, it was in the foyer." Asked what she meant by the act, she declined comment.

Kenney demanded an apology from Musgrave's likely Democratic opponent, state Rep. Angela Paccione of Fort Collins.

Paccione spokesman James Thompson denied the campaign had anything to do with it.

"We find that kind of act to be completely deplorable," he said. "We're not in the business of dirty tricks like that. This type of thing is really out of our control, but of course we'll do anything that we can to discourage this."

Thompson said Ensz, vice chairwoman of a state Senate district committee for the county Democratic Party, has no formal ties to the Paccione campaign.

Kenney said police were asked to investigate. A police spokesman did not immediately return a call.

Posted by: JohnnyBz00LS

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calabrio

For the record, I think South Park is one of the smartest television shows on T.V. And I also think that their social commentary is not only hillarious, but usually dead on right.

And to think the creators of South Park are homosexuals, oh my!