LAT Editors: Who Can Heal This Rift?

I actually really liked the lead editorial in the Los Angeles Times today. I realize they’re cutting editorial staff left and right to align themselves with the new paradigm, but apparently they still have an editor or two who’s thinking about what it all means.

From Bringing us together.

McCain since has tried to cool off his supporters, but he lit this fire — he and no one else is responsible for those who shriek at Palin’s rallies, who proclaim that Obama is an Arab and who wish him harm. This campaign is more crass and more virulent because McCain made it so. That Palin has ended up alienating not only moderates but also conservatives is this race’s enduring irony.

On the question of who will best bind up this torn nation, we are far more troubled by what we know about McCain than what we don’t know about Obama. It is proper to admire McCain’s service to his nation — as a military man and as a senator — and he deserves our respect. On the question of who best can reunite us, however, we cannot put our faith in a man who has done so much to drive us apart.

46 Responses to “LAT Editors: Who Can Heal This Rift?”

  1. knarlyknight Says:

    Today is federal election day in Canada.

    The highlights of sleaze from our campaign was the conservative website showing an illustration of an arctic puffin pooping on the Liberal leader, and the conservative campaign mis-characterizing the Liberal’s green shift as nothing but a disasterous new tax on carbon.

    The Liberal’s only sleaze was characterizing the Conservative leader as a George Bush syncophant, but then again it’s not slander if it is true.

    You can expect more of the same (i.e. minority Conservative government fending off both the Liberal party and the leftist New Democrat party hoardes.)

    Highlights that have us chewing on our hockey pucks include:

    – the possibility that the first Green party member (their Leader, Elizabeth May) will be elected, in part because the Liberal party declined to run a candidate in that riding to help galvanize the centre and left-of-centre vote against the slightly leading multi-term candidate and Conservative Cabinet minister, Peter Mackay.

    – the possibility that existing trends of falling government support in the polls might have acccelerated in the last 48 hours to the point where the front-running Conservatives will lose to the Liberals (very doubtful)

    We’ll know the results shortly after 7 pm Pacific Standard Time.

    I voted by paper ballot and vouched for my spouse who did not have her Id with her. Total time to vote (including additional paper work to fill out and have voucher verified): less than 5 minutes.

    End result: expecting no significant change in government.

    NL, anything to add?

  2. shcb Says:

    That is the most ridiculous article I have read in a long time. Obama is a uniter because D’s and R’s respected him in Illinois and criticized McCain for supporting the war in Iraq (McCain turned out to be correct) but McCain is a divider because he went against his party in campaign finance reform. Huh? I didn’t see the need to read any further.

    As far as I can see Obama has crossed the line on one, count ‘em one bill where he was author or co-author. That bill was generally supported by the Bush administration and Republicans. It was such a minor housecleaning bill Obama’s mane wasn’t even mentioned in the paragraph or two the New York Times devoted to it.

    Why is it divisive to mention a candidates ties to a terrorist and a bigoted pastor (all true) but not divisive to blather on and on about a running mate being stupid when she isn’t.

    You see if a liberal beats his opponent he is a uniter, if a conservative beats his opponent he is a divider.

    I’ll be the uniter of this blog, why don’t all of you vote for McCain and then we can all be united.

  3. enkidu Says:

    So we finally found all them WMDz???
    praise jeebuz! just in time to save McBush’s rancid bacon!

    Seriously tho wwnj, Obama was right on the Iraq War (shouldn’t ever have gone in, more than time to get the hell out) while McBush was right on the surge (pour 10s of thousands of extra troops and 100s of billions into bribes to make the Sunnis stop fighting long enough for us to have our election).

    Obama was right on Iraq: it was a terrible mistake to ever invade and occupy an arab nation. No need for the war, no need for a surge. Check and mate.

    Ayers? Wright? That’s all ya got? Really? Please tell us what McCain will do instead of just tearing down the other guy with smears and lies.

    Hey, wwnj do you like how Christopher Buckley had to resign from the National Review because he backed Obama? You should read his statement.

  4. shcb Says:

    well it’s hard to debate Obama’s voting record (he doesn’t have much of one) so what else is there?

  5. knarlyknight Says:

    in case anyone cares, Canada’s third federal election in 3 yrs brought no surprises and similar results to the last election: a minority government (opposition parties have more members of parliament combined than has the governing party.)

    SHCB is still maintaining that supporting the Iraq invasion in 2003 wasn’t a totally stupid position! Or was that a joke?

    No WMD; – No Iraqi links to 911; – No real ties to al Qaeda; – No nuclear program; – No reliable long range missile delivery systems of note; – sweet gezus, Saddam was less of a threat to the USA than Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (Mad Cow) is now.

    Yet the USA has borrowed nearly (over?) a Trillion dollars on the effort that has “achieved” these results:

    an Iraqi government idealogically tied to Iran and determined to expel American influence;

    hundreds of thousands of civilian killed and wounded (at least) and over four thousand Americans killed; near total destruction of Iraqi infrastructure (power, water, sewer);

    dramatic increases in the rate of horrific birth deformities amoung the population in the war zone (effects of spent US uranium tipped weaponery);

    destruction and loss of priceless artifacts and world heritage sites;

    years of disruption in Iraqi oil supplies contributing to worldwide price increases and (more power to America’s oil producing adversaries);

    scorn and derision from the rest of the world who had been 100% behind America after 911 but now oppose America’s foreign policy follies;

    a reduction in influence elsewhere and for some time due to the military being occupied in Iraq, equipment being used up, and over-extended by such measures as stop-loss deployments;

    obscene levels of wealth transfers from taxpayers to Cheney linked Halliburton / KBR and other profiteering war contractors;

    moral decay amoung American troops as exhibited in Abu Ghraib and elsewhere in Iraq;

    plus untold spin-off suffering resulting from the environmental and spiritual disaster that is the Iraq mistakes that McSame supports.

    Until people like Bush and McSame can learn to admit their major mistakes, there is little chance of healing the rifts. Until then, we may as well join Enkidu in ridiculing the wwnj policy follies.

  6. shcb Says:

    We killed many thousands of terrorists, we secured a major strategic location, and we have started something resembling democracy in an are that has none. Our enemies depend on a lack of democracy so this is no small feat. Yup I call that success. So, yup, I agree with the decision.

    Back to the subject

  7. enkidu Says:

    We sank about a trillion and a half into Iraq so far. Maybe as much as $3 trillion when its all said and done (and we are out of there). Global costs could be as much as $6 trillion by some estimates, but just ignore reality dear wwnj.
    We killed about a million Iraqis (and a few thousand trrrrsts or fedajeen or rebels or whatever). Some estimates have it at a few hundred thousand.
    We lost 4000+ US soldiers and a bunch more of our allies (from Moldovia or whatever)

    We could have knocked over Saddam with a well placed fart (or diplomatic initiative if I have to play nice to wwnj’s kookoo).

    There were no WMDs (the stated reason for invading and occupying Iraq)

    btw – how is the search for that deadralive fella Osama bin Forgotten?
    Are you going to trot out another OBF endorsement for the R candidate?
    Or are we going to kill the #2 AQ leader (yet again)?

    I am betting on a Iran ‘incident’ in the next 3 weeks.

    And really, that Malkin list is pathetic
    and those mug shots from 2004 (nothing from 2008 huh? curious ;-)
    a punk threw some salad dressing at Pat Buchannan – boo hoo!
    a redneck used a powertool to cut down a bush-cheney sign? boo hoo!
    two guys threw cream pies at mAnn Coutler? boo hoo hoo!
    grow a pair. really.

  8. enkidu Says:

    it is to laugh
    NPR just announced that we have killed the #2 AQ in Iraq guy!
    one Mr Mohammed Mohammed II (basically insert arab guy name here)

    life imitates art

  9. shcb Says:

    good, so yesterdays #3 is now #2, hope we kill that #2 too.

  10. knarlyknight Says:

    shcb, in other words under the Republican rule America is engaged in a war that will never end. You could learn some things from The War Nerd, see some of his older articles about fighting the Shia, at One of the lessons is that some groups like the Shia recruit and/or breed fighters faster than their enemies can kill them.

    So your violence is a bloody waste of money, time and your resources.

    It’s been nearly 6 years of war and the Iraqi’s want America out more than ever. In the meantime, Taliban attacks in Afghanistan are at record levels since the 2001 invasion and they’ve re-taken much of the territory including the provinces around Kabul. As fast as you are plugging one hole the water is re-directed and pours with greater force from another. It’s about time someone with a mind for the big picture, (i.e. not McSame) was given the chance to find a more fundamental way to still the waters and make good use of the floodwaters for a change.

  11. NorthernLite Says:

    knarly, I added my thoughts on our election, but they didn’t get posted.

    It was bascially this: I voted Conservative becasue the NDP is too far to the left and the Liberal Party is pretty much right beside them these days.

    I actually think Stephen Harper is the best leader out of the bunch (and that ain’t saying much), but perhaps the Liberals will finally elect a new leader and move the party back towards the centre. We still have the strongest banking system in the G8 and the country’s finances are in good shape, still running surpluses. Having the Conservative Party contained by a minority government bodes well for us too.

    Our own version of Barack Obama started to materialize last night though – Justin Trudeau was elected to parliment. Give this kid a few years and he’ll be a star of hope for the new generation. That’s my prediction anyways.

  12. NorthernLite Says:

    I had a link to Trudeau’s bio, maybe that’s why it never went through. Thought maybe I was being punished by an admin for voting Conservative ;)

  13. knarlyknight Says:

    We share the same thoughts on Justin, the leftyness of NDP and the Liberals needing to be more centrist.

    I’d disagree in that the Conservatives’ fortune in not having a banking system is, as much as anything else, a function of their not having enough time to deregulate the industry to the same extent as the USA had done. That was not for lack of trying (since recently we’ve had US institutions e.g. Wells Fargo, Capital One selling more higher risk credit products in Canada.) There was a lot of rhetoric from Harper in years past about the joys of deregulating the financial / credit industry. Also I think the conservatives’ crime & drug positions are simply appeals to the emotions of the uninformed and will serve no purpose except to grow the police and prison industry by throwing more money at tried and failed policies. I also think their positions on Afghanistan are lost causes (and Iraq for that matter), we might as well let the Russians go back into Afghanistan to sort things out, or let the Chinese have a go at the Taliban for a change.

    Like you, I’m content with the conservatives being in power as long as they are restrained by the opposition; although I am sad that I won’t get to enjoy the Liberal promises of $1300 tax breaks within a re-grown Garden of Eden where we copulate all day long while our kids attend universal daycares and govvernment grown medical marijuana is liberally prescribed for all that ails us.

  14. knarlyknight Says:

    should have been “Conservatives’ fortune in not having a Cdn. banking system failure

  15. knarlyknight Says:

    Saw the last half of the 3rd and final debate, Obama didn’t do too well, but he did okay. I was impressed how he stuck to issues and demonstrating areas of similarities between his ideas and McCain’s that can be built upon.

    When forced by McCain to address Ayers and Acorn he dispatched both topics succinctly, showing them for what they were: Republican sleaze tactics intended to distract from real issues. Obama shone the light on them by pointing out that by virtue of their being the very centerpiece of McCain’s campaign for the past few weeks they are more of a reflection of McCain’s (lousy) campaign than about him.

    McCain did a good job of showing that, after his long political career and this short campaign he has become a petty, angry, manipulative and frustrated little old fart. Nice freudian slip though, calling Obama “Senator Government”. LOL. Clearly, a tired and angry old man.

  16. knarlyknight Says:

    One of these two men will become president, who will Americans pick? ?

  17. leftbehind Says:

    Let’s return to the original point of the post for a moment, if we may. Having read the LA Times editorial, I find myself wondering what all this “binding a torn nation” crap’s really about. Is the point honestly that we should all start respecting each other more and work together, or isn’t this just another way of saying that it would be nice if Obama’s detractors would pipe down once he’s elected and give him an easier time of it than Bush’s detractors gave him? Four years ago, a lot people we know and love were bawling and squalling and going on and on and on about what a bunch of fat, lazy welfare cases half the country was because Little Lord Fauntleroy couldn’t get himself elected. If Obama fucks this up, and he still might – Democrats are ever masters of “snatching defeat from the jaws of victory” – everybody’s expecting the same crybaby routine from the same crybabies, even those crybabies themselves. The response of much of the Democratic rank and file to the outcome of the last two elections has been about as manly as nine guys fucking ten guys – but you ain’t seen nothing until the Republicans, besotted with their past victories and flush with the self importance of the Holy Mission, lose this next one. All these Dems that have been dishing out their “poor little me” schtick for the last eight years are finally going to trip and fall into the goalpost and make a touchdown, only to have their moment soured by obstructionist grousing from the other side. Why can’t we all just get along?

    And who is it that wants to get along, anyway? Us? People like us? JBC tells us the blogosphere is going to replace the mainstream media – a half-a-million rabid partisans flaming each other across the internet – what a wonderful tool for reunification and peacemaking! Maybe all of us, as contributors to the blogosphere, can work towards binding this torn nation- who’ll take the first step? Who’ll be our Ambassador of Peace? How about Enkidu? He’s a peaceful sort of guy who gets along with everyone who isn’t Republican, religious, gay, politically to the right of the MC5, from a small town or from an unfashionable part of the country. He’s more than qualified to reach across the aisle and bring us all together. What about me? I’m cute and cuddly and play well with all the other children…don’t I? What about Knarly? Or SHCB? Now there’s a couple of guys unshackled by the constraints of partisan groupthink.

  18. leftbehind Says:

    The fact is, if this country is reunified – and it really needs to be, it won’t be people like us who do it, and I seriously doubt it’ll ultimately be Barack Obama or John McCain. The Healing will come when hotheads and partisans like us have fallen out of fashion, and make no mistake – we are falling out of fashion. Good riddance to us.

  19. NorthernLite Says:


  20. knarlyknight Says:

    I’ve never agreed with Lefty more. Cheers too.

  21. J.A.Y.S.O.N. Says:

    I had tried before here…

  22. knarlyknight Says:


    Yours was an awesome effort on what a cynic (me) would call a hopeless task.

    Also, your timing was a off: the vitriol that preceeded your attempt was still stinking up this site; there was little willingness to co-operate while, for example, some of the Republicans here were still defending Senator Larry Craig’s “wide stance” and right to solicit for lewd behaviour in a public place where minors may be present.

  23. Craig Says:

    For a laugh, everyone should check out the clips of McCain and Obama at a charity dinner this week (Alfred Smith Memorial dinner). Both were quite funny and got off some good-natured zingers about each other as well as themselves. It’s on the Drudge Report.

  24. leftbehind Says:

    Yes, Knarly – by all means, let’s watch you (ahem) pull Larry Craig out of your ass again. You and Inky wear that fucker around your neck like a talisman.

  25. leftbehind Says:

    If you don’t want Larry Craig fooling around in a public bathroom, why don’t you just take him back to your place, next time and stop going on about it?

  26. knarlyknight Says:

    What a sorry little troll.

  27. leftbehind Says:

    What a sorry little come-back.

  28. leftbehind Says:

    And while we’re indulging your Larry Craig fixation for the eleventy-billionth time. let’s clarify something once and for all. First off, there wasn’t any “Republican” involved, that I recall, in any of our entirely too numerous Larry Craig arguments, except me, and I never defended anything Larry Craig did or didn’t do in public or wherever; I simply objected to the use of homophobic language. When Jesse Jackson got caught cheating on his wife and fathering a child out of wedlock, I did not defend him, but neither would I let anyone call him a racist epithet in my presence, nor allow anyone to use his actions to make blanket statements about the black race. Should it not follow that my handling of the Larry Craig affair should be consistent with that? I don’t defend Larry Craig’s actions, but I’ll not let anyone use homophobic epithets towards him in my presence, nor will I allow them to use his actions to make blanket statements regarding homosexuals as a group. Even you must understand this on some level.

  29. leftbehind Says:

    …and i also don’t understand what Larry Craig has to do with a mine cave-in, 9-11, owl worship, Richard Nixon or any of the countless other topics you and Inky have (free) associated it with over the long months. There are teenage boys who aren’t as fixated on Miley Cyrus as you two clowns are on Larry Craig…

  30. enkidu Says:

    Craig – that you feel drudge is a valid site to visit says so much about where you get your ‘information’. But then you bemoan the tone in a previous posting? really? huh

    and yes those clips are both very funny (I viewed them earlier elsewhere)

  31. Craig Says:

    Wow, what an smug, judgemental and assuming statement, enkidu! I’m not sure when I ever said Drudge was some bastion of fairness and balance. I just happened to see this posting in which the two candidates were acting in a somewhat less calculated way, and thought it might be a welcome change to the ugly partisanship that has preoccupied so many of us. So much for good intentions, huh Enkidu?

    Enjoy your ranting and divisiveness.

  32. enkidu Says:

    wow – talk about can’t take a joke, huh

  33. knarlyknight Says:


    Don’t fret, it’s just the impending global economic collapse – it has everyone a little tense lately. Next time add a little emoticon, everyone just loves those things.

    Wouldn’t it be great if we could all get together in one room for a group therapy session?

    Sarcasm ending now.

  34. leftbehind Says:

    Craig – All that Inky’s trying to say is that is more fun and informative than Drudge -calm down! Personally, I’m a big fan of Prison Planet. You get all the news there in a fair and balanced presentation- it’s just really hard to read, what with you having to turn your screen upside down, then view it sideways through a mirror at a 30 degree angle until the pentagram above the girl’s head becomes clearly visible…

  35. shcb Says:

    I’ll throw in my two cents worth here, I don’t see why everyone thinks this why can’t we get along mantra is either achievable or desirable.

    By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.

    There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects.

    There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence; the other, by giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests.

    It could never be more truly said than of the first remedy, that it was worse than the disease. Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires. But it could not be less folly to abolish liberty, which is essential to political life, because it nourishes faction, than it would be to wish the annihilation of air, which is essential to animal life, because it imparts to fire its destructive agency.

    The second expedient is as impracticable as the first would be unwise. As long as the reason of man continues fallible, and he is at liberty to exercise it, different opinions will be formed. As long as the connection subsists between his reason and his self-love, his opinions and his passions will have a reciprocal influence on each other; and the former will be objects to which the latter will attach themselves. The diversity in the faculties of men, from which the rights of property originate, is not less an insuperable obstacle to a uniformity of interests. The protection of these faculties is the first object of government. From the protection of different and unequal faculties of acquiring property, the possession of different degrees and kinds of property immediately results; and from the influence of these on the sentiments and views of the respective proprietors, ensues a division of the society into different interests and parties.

    I think Madison was correct, the only way we can all agree is if we are forced to agree. If I held a gun to Knarly, or Enky, or Jayson I could probably get them to agree that we should eliminate corporate tax, we should tax the lower 40% of Americans that don’t pay anything now. Jayson would probably agree we should eliminate unions forever even though his parents have benefited from them all their lives. I’ve never asked LB what his stance is on gay marriage, but I assume he is for it, with enough physical force I could probably get him to band with me against it. But instead of using violence we use words and discuss these issues, we compromise, we put off the short term gains of our chosen faction for a more conducive political atmosphere in the future. This is how civilized people act.

    Part of the problem we have here is that the history of the United States as most people know it started with the invention of television. Joe Biden’s starts in 1929 watching FDR (and Palin’s the dummy) for the rest of us it is probably about the Cronkite era. This coincidentally was about the time the far left started taking over the Democratic party. Remember the minority (huge minority) Republican party forced the majority democratic party to enact the Civil Rights Act of 1964 if you’re curious haw that is possible read the rest of Federalist 10

    During the next 30 or 40 years the country was the country was essentially 50% liberal (Democrat really, liberals were slowly taking the party) and 35% conservative. The media followed academia in spitting out little liberals who told the folks what they needed to hear and what they needed to learn. Then along came a couple guys from the Midwest that both moved to California. They eventually both moved to the east coast, one to Washington and one to New York. Rush and Ron gave the 15% a voice and we decided we didn’t need to be polite to the people who were ruining our country. We hadn’t been wrong. Our teachers had told us we were wrong, Uncle Walt told us we were wrong, but we weren’t. Our fore fathers had toiled and died to make our country the greatest in the world and after only a few decades these wimps were going to give it back to the Europeans and turn us into the socialist wimps the French would envy.

    This is when the press decided we had become a divided nation. We are no more divided now than any other time. Nor would we want to be. If the most liberal Senator in Washington is elected president he will be seen as a uniter, not because he is, he has no record of being so, but because the left will correctly read it as a sign that the nation is moving to the left, and they are winning.

  36. enkidu Says:

    look shcb, it is nice that you like to read the Federalist Papers and pretend that makes you superior to us “little liberals”, but it simply doesn’t make it so. I read that link, then the rest of your post. Were yu drinking heavily when you posted this? Just askin. I have no idea how Fed10 relates to the civil rights act of 1964, but I would point out that CRA’64 is nearly 50 years ago. I am more concerned with the last 8 years and the next 8.

    Of concern however is your constant use of violent imagery and wish fulfillment. “If I held a gun to Knarly or Enky” um don’t you think coercion at the point of a gun is more Mao’s thing? Or are you now a commie?

    Rush and Ron? A fat, drug addled bloviator and a senile alzheimers patient are your pinnacles of conservatism? Reagan wasn’t a cowboy, he was an actor who played cowboys. These two extremists gave voice to the 15% all right, but it wasn’t the 15% of INDs and undecided, it was the 15% of radical right wing partisans. Oh but Ronnie gave nice speeches…

    Obama is not the most liberal Senator (except for that one skewed assessment by some ultra wwnj group with an agenda). There are plenty of examples of Obama working across party lines, but no example will be good enough for the extremist partisan tool.

    And we won’t come together when there are 15% of Duhmurkkkuhnz who feel the need to make death threats against a voter registration org and Obama:

    America will not move very far forward until we as a nation repudiate radical conservatism, reject the neocon warpig machine and banish the Rethugglicans to their proper status as a 15% wingnut faction on the fringes of polite society.

    ps – I see no reason to be polite to someone who constantly threatens me (or anyone who disagrees with him) with violence or worse.

  37. shcb Says:


    I don’t use the Federalist papers to show I’m smarter, that is what liberals do, I don’t underestimate my opponents. I just find it interesting that people think this is so unique when the founders anticipated it so many years ago. I also think it shows how naïve people are to think either side is going to get along with the other, or that is even desirable.

  38. enkidu Says:

    ah yes, you Rs is sooo much smarter, yup yup (didn’t blink)

    we won’t ‘heal the rift’ when partisan douchebaggery is such that when Obama gives a speech in Ohio, right wing nutjobs and numbskulls complain about the “O” flag behind Obama: he wants ter replace ol glory w his heathen mooslman O flag!!11!1!!!

    note to complete morans: the “O” flag is the “O”fficial state flag of “O”hio
    dumber than half a sack of hammers

  39. enkidu Says:

    Here is Rush Dimbulb in his own words
    (has he made it to Pegler’s lofty status yet?)
    I can see why you think of this blob of protoplasm as your hero

    enjoy those youtube videos!
    and have a nice day

  40. NorthernLite Says:

    This is why America has a better chance of becoming united under Obama. This a a response “robocall” to McCain’s earlier sleaze call:

    Hi, this is Jeri Watermolen, calling for the Campaign for Change. I live in Green Bay and, like you, I’ve been getting sleazy phone calls and mail from John McCain and his supporters viciously — and falsely — attacking Barack Obama. I used to support John McCain because he honorably served our country — but this year he’s running a dishonorable campaign. We know McCain will continue many of Bush’s policies, and now he’s using George Bush’s divisive tactics. In fact, he hired the Bush strategists whose attacks even McCain once called hateful.

    Barack Obama will turn the page on these negative politics and stand up for the middle class. That’s the change we need, and it’s why I have changed my mind about John McCain. Join me in voting for Barack Obama. Paid for the Campaign for Change, a project of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, and authorized by Obama for America.

    Just comparing the demeanour and tone of these two men, it’s obvious who will come closest to being a uniter.

    The 15-20 per cent of Americans who won’t vote for a n***er and who still think Bush is an awesome president will never become friends with Obama Republicans, Independents and Democrats. Just the way it is.

    But the rest of the country and much of the world will be much more united. You can bet when people disagree with him, Obama won’t call them unpatriotic, smear them, bash them, destroy their careers, etc.

    That alone will go along way in bringing people together. My two cents.

  41. shcb Says:

    so what did McCain’s call say?

  42. NorthernLite Says:

    Actually there have been several. Here’s one:

    I’m sure you’ll love that one. It’s the politics of yesterday and right up your alley.

  43. shcb Says:

    yeah, that sounds good to me, it certainly is the truth.

  44. NorthernLite Says:

    Of course, you’re in that 15-20 per cent group I referred to earlier.

    But I hope you’re coming to grips and have accepted the fact that you’re about to be led by a black, socialist, muslim, terrorist. He will be your President.

    LOL – It’s like shcb’s worst nightmare is coming true. Can’t help but laugh.

  45. shcb Says:

    well, he is just as black as my grandkids so no problem there, I don’t care about his religion, I am concerned with his anti-American friends and yes I hate his socialism so you’re 1.5 for four

  46. leftbehind Says:

    It’s not SHCB’s reading of the Federalist Papers that makes him superior to you, Inky. It’s just that toilet paper thing…

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.