Where's LadyLove?

Jump to Last Post 1-31 of 31 discussions (180 posts)

66
AnnCeeposted 13 years ago
Did she lose her job???
report
1. 0
  Texasbetaposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  THAT is PRICELESS! I thought I was the only one who knew she was a hired poster. Ann - you've surprised me. Why did you continue to pump her posts when you knew she was getting paid to write them? Weird. Oh well. I guess everyone was in on it.
  report
  60
  DTR0005posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Well we all had our suspicions.
  report
71
Cagsilposted 13 years ago
I could see that as a possibility. She wasn't very effective.
report
1. 0
  Texasbetaposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  They hire those people to "control the online dialogue." To me, LALO was pretty bad at it, or lazy rather. She never really posted a legitimate argument...just a link from a wackjob website, then her only posts were simplistic : "nuh-uh, Obama did it", type of statements. Maybe her boss actually read a few of them and realized she only spent about 30 minutes a day on it.
  report
  91
  Jean Bakulaposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I thought it was odd too, that she was just a disgruntled Republican that hated Obama no matter what he did. I stayed out of it.
  report
70
tritrainposted 13 years ago
I think she's guarding a bridge somewhere.
report
1. 60
  Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I know! It was the Rapture!
  
  Somebody check if the church lady is gone, too.
  report
  60
  DTR0005posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Sister Brenda is alive and well...
  report
  0
  jerrylposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Doug, Maybe she was ridin one of those shetlands I was talkin about. LOL
  report
78
Mighty Momposted 13 years ago
I heard she got a new job as a producer for Glenn Beck's new show....
report
1. 0
  jerrylposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Naw, I heard that one of the requirements for that job, was extensive experience as a test pilot at a broom factory. But then again..............
  report
74
Eaglekiwiposted 13 years ago
Probably return under new name
report
61
SomewayOuttaHereposted 13 years ago
...i figure she's visiting Recommend1 in China........
report
0
PrettyPantherposted 13 years ago
I assumed she was such a success here that Sarah Palin hired her to do her Facebook posts and twitter feeds.
report
1. 63
  kmackey32posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Yea I think thats it too....
  report
2. 60
  Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  That's catty. (I like it, though.)
  report
  78
  Mighty Momposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Of course it's catty!
  What else would you expect from Pretty PANTHER!
  Mrrrroooowwwwww!!!
  report
0
Sophia Angeliqueposted 13 years ago
You are so funny!!!!
report
61
Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years ago
report
75
Reality Bytesposted 13 years ago
Perhaps she simply grew tired of being ganged up on within these forums.

Just perhaps you are all wrong! It is possible that Lady love was simply posting to an internet forum?
report
1. 71
  Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Yes it is possible, as to what you say. It's just either part isn't likely.
  
  She didn't seem the type who really worried about ganging up on in a computer-related forum. I could see it, if she was in a room(physically) with people, then fear would have some effect.
  
  Otherwise, it wouldn't matter. As for just being another poster? Her actions went above and beyond the actions of the average poster. Therefore, it's unlikely- not to mention- the junk she was saying, was too specific.
  report
2. 61
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  
  report
  57
  Mark Knowlesposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Lefty Libtards dunnit agin, innit.
  report
3. 60
  DTR0005posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  No.. not very likely. NO ONE has that much time and venom unless there is a paycheck involved.
  report
  66
  AnnCeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  What you see as venom others see as the simple truth about the mysterious and problematic Present Obama.
  report
  60
  DTR0005posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Careful AnnCee - that Tea Party paranoia will come back to bite you guys...
  report
  75
  Reality Bytesposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Possibly, but accusations are meaningless without some proof?
  report
  72
  Jeff Berndtposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Surely you underestimate the human potential for venom.
  report
66
AnnCeeposted 13 years ago
Liberals are paranoid.

Nobody needs to pay conservatives to speak their minds.

Liberals to get out the vote on the other hand? They like those handy cash cards.

report
1. 60
  DTR0005posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  We are.. and the birthers are sane.
  report
60
knolyourselfposted 13 years ago
"Eight ACORN workers pleaded guilty". Eight by the news accounts just before the election - thought was eight thousand. Didn't hurt the T Partly any.
report
66
AnnCeeposted 13 years ago
Good heavens the Identity Theft web site was warning Americans about you liberals and your methods for selecting Barack Obama.

http://www.identitytheft.com/article/ac … tion_fraud

Sad how Socialists get power. Starting at the top with the Fed and the IMF and all the way down to ACORN. Bad stuff.
report
1. 61
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Somebody remind me about Bush and the hanging chads please. I'm a bit fuzzy on the details.
  report
  66
  AnnCeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Chads are small stuff. Believe me, you wouldn't have liked a President Kerry on 9/11.
  
  report
  0
  PrettyPantherposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Perhaps there wouldn't have been a 9/11 with a President Kerry.
  
  "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice."
  report
  62
  Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  ha!
  
  Yeah, i'm sure that the muslims would have thought "gee, I know that we've been bombed by the US for almost a century now, but they DID just elect Kerry! Oh well! Guess we can't bomb them!"
  report
  0
  PrettyPantherposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Um, what I meant was that perhaps Kerry would have been more diligent about the warnings that came across his desk prior to the attack.
  report
  66
  AnnCeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah he would have been real diligent and bombed an aspirin factory or something.
  report
  0
  PrettyPantherposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, that makes sense.
  report
  61
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  How does one "aspire" to be a factory?
  report
  61
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Bit of a head ache that one
  report
  61
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Quick edit by the aspirererer...
  report
  60
  DTR0005posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Wonder if he would have spent us a trillion in debt with two unfunded wars? just curious...loll You Conservatives kind of back off that one real quick I have noticed. It gets brought up all the time but never gets addressed by the Right.
  Then again, if Little Bush hadn't been in office, 9/11 may have never occured. We will never know... Then again, nahhhh considering how tight the Bush family is/was with the Saudi Royal Family. Hell Osama's brother-in-law was the one who loaned Little Bush the money for his first wrecked oil company....
  report
  60
  DTR0005posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  The man was a FISCAL GENIUS - no other time in American history have we fought a war, let along two wars simultaneously, without raising taxes... Living in the Shadow of Ronald Wilson Reagan I imagine...
  report
  66
  AnnCeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, he's part of the same damned crowd, remember?
  report
  77
  lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Can't follow those dots, must concentrate on birth-certificate
  Can't follow those dots, must concentrate on birth-certificate
  Can't follow those dots, must concentrate on birth-certificate
  report
  68
  bgamallposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  If we had Kerry there would not have been a 911. See this site http://killtown.911review.org and learn some shocking truth. I just accept that which I can understand and that which is verified. And check this one report of the families who don't believe the government: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtDYuQw3 … re=related
  report
  77
  lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Can't read that, must concentrate on ACORN
  Can't read that, must concentrate on ACORN
  Can't read that, must concentrate on ACORN
  report
  66
  Ralph Deedsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  That's how Bush beat Gore in Florida thanks to Secretary of State Katherine Harris and the U.S. Supreme Court which reversed the Florida Supreme Court's reversing Harris's certification of Bush as the winner.
  
  Bush v. Gore The hanging chad
  
  http://news.yahoo.com/s/ac/20101208/pl_ … nging_chad
  report
  77
  lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Must not contemplate--must concentrate on Kerry
  Must not contemplate--must concentrate on Kerry
  Must not contemplate--must concentrate on Kerry
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Here, I'll help.
  
  There was this thing called an election.
  
  The whole point of the election was to acquire the most electoral votes, each state has a certain number of these electoral votes.
  
  George W Bush and Al Gore were in a tight race in the State of Florida, when the count was over it was determined that G.W. Bush won the electoral votes and the Presidency.
  
  But Al Gore was unhappy about Bush winning so he demanded a recount which G.W Bush won again.
  
  At this point Gore decided to go to court for the right to telepathically decide who a voter voted for. The democrat heavy Florida Supreme Court said this was ok.
  
  Finally this case reached the Supreme court of the United States and the competent judges ruled that the election had been final and ordered the officials in Florida to certify G.W. Bush the winner.
  
  And liberals have been beside themselves ever since.
  report
  72
  Jeff Berndtposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Interesting spin.
  
  "But Al Gore was unhappy about Bush winning so he demanded a recount which G.W Bush won again."
  
  Rather, the count was very close, within the statistical margin of error, and given the closeness of the election, and the suspicious actions on the part of W's cronies in Fla, Gore asked for a recount, which is pretty standard when the count is that close, no matter who is ahead. But Gore did it wrong: rather than ask for a recount of Florida, he asked for a targeted recount.
  
  "The democrat heavy Florida Supreme Court said this was ok."
  As they should have, since a recount in a close election is S.O.P., but they ought to have rules that all of Florida would be recounted.
  
  Then W's crowd sued to stop the targeted recount, and not do any recount at all.
  
  There were so many wrong decisions by so many parties it's really hard to say who was the wrongest. Even the SCOTUS made a wrong decision when they ruled that the recount would stop and the first count would stand, in effect ruling that no, the actual count of the votes in Florida aren't important, and W should be president. It is, I believe, the first presidential election to be won by decision.
  
  "And [people who care about democracy] have been beside themselves ever since."
  There, fixed it for you.
  report
  77
  lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Not ONE mention of Kathryn Harris....some memory!
  
  How about the whole expose done by the Rollign Stone magazine--didn't Ann Cee use Rolling Stone a source in an anti-Obama thread?
  
  You know--in England, they have Stone Henge.
  In America, we have Stone Heads.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  "Not ONE mention of Kathryn Harris....some memory!"
  
  Why do you bother?
  report
  78
  Mighty Momposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  We bother because it deserves to be remembered.
  Having just recently watched "Fair Game," my indignation over Bush and all the evil he perpetrated (starting with stealing the 2000 election) is back top-of-mind.
  
  You may engage in euphoric recall of the Bush regime. But I don't and neither does LMC and many others here.
  
  Go ahead. Take your best shot, Jim. I'm sure you've got a stinging comeback for me. Go for it.
  report
  77
  lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Here's his come-back: "But look at Obama!"
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  "(starting with stealing the 2000 election)"
  
  That would be the election that he won both the count and recount.
  
  Tricky devil ain't he?
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  "We bother because it deserves to be remembered."
  
  What deserves to be remembered?
  
  Somebody doing their job happens everyday, well, in Republican places anyway.
  report
  78
  Mighty Momposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Did you see the movie "W"?
  They did a pretty fair rendition of Ms. Harris.
  I wonder what she's up to these days?
  I think she's giving workshops -- that county clerk in Waukesha County, WI who gave a press conference to announce she'd "found" 7,000+ votes 20 hours after the fact -- instead of reporting it to her BOSS -- yeah, she's cut from the same dubious cloth as Kathryn Harris.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  "yeah, she's cut from the same dubious cloth as Kathryn Harris."
  
  Honesty is only a dubious trait to a democrat.
  
  Take that GOV Walker!
  
  Classic.
  report
  77
  lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Au Contraire!
  Just look what happened to both Harris, and that woman who said Clinton wanted a BJ from her!
  
  Both of them got make-overs, sexed themselves up..courtesy of the GOP.
  
  Harris got a promotion....nice hack job.
  Other lady (name?) got her 15 minutes of fame...in which we learned she had posed nude for a girly magazine!
  report
  78
  Mighty Momposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Apparently we're not the only ones who see the similarity between Ms. Harris and Ms. Nicklaus of WI.
  
  Feel free to read the whole article. I've excerpted the relevant lines.
  
  http://uselectionnews.org/wi-a-preview- … es/852617/
  
  Similarities between the battle for the swing state of Florida during the 2000 Presidential Election and the Waukesha County judicial election that took place last week could be indicative of the early results from key states in the 2012 Presidential Election next year.
  
  The votes were so close that differences reported in just a handful of counties could swing the race in favor of either conservative Judge David Prosser or liberal JoAnne Kleoppenburg, and both campaigns were thrust into the national spotlight because of a single issue, WI Governor Scott Walker’s battle against public sector unions.
  
  Then, at the last moment, after Kloppenburg was unofficially claimed to be the winner, Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nicklaus reportedly found thousands of unsaved votes on her personal computer, similar to the cases of late discovered and “dimpled chad” ballots that pushed Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris into the public’s eye and make her the butt of poll jokes to this day.
  
  Prosser’s team has hired Republican lawyer Ben Ginsburg and Kloppenburg’s campaign has added Democrat Marc Elias to their ranks in order to debate the legitimacy of the 14,000 votes discovered by Nicklaus, as well as to defend each side in a federal investigation that was called for by Wisconsin Representative Tammy Baldwin, a Democrat from the 2nd District. Nicklaus has refused to step down and released a statement Tuesday that she will finish out her term, amid calls for her resignation.
  The break down for the Supreme Court election showed much closer results, with 32 counties for Kloppenburg and 27 for Prosser, and the residents of WI divided almost perfectly in half.
  
  As to "Take THAT Governor Walker" -- yes, the people of Wisconsin are not taking his anti-union bullying lying down!
  
  Republicans are likely to claim a victory for Prosser as a vicarious victory for Walker if the legal battles, which could last the length of the summer months, turn out in favorite of the conservative incumbent.
  Democrats could claim a win for their side in the fact that no one expected the judicial race to be so close, Prosser was chosen with almost 100% of the vote in 2001, and had no major competition in that race.
  
  The heavily divided state will likely be entangled in recount, recall and election battles through July or even August, as amid the chaos of protests in Madison and recount battles in Waukesha, three WI state Senators have already faced demands for recall from both sides. Republicans Dan Kapanke and Randy Hopper have already had petitions filed against them by Democrats, and on Saturday State Representative Jennifer Shilling offered to “stand up to the Governor” and challenge Kapanke’s seat. Republicans claim they have enough signatures to mount a petition for recall against Democratic State Senator Robert Wirch, but as of Wednesday nothing has been filed.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  "As to "Take THAT Governor Walker" -- yes, the people of Wisconsin are not taking his anti-union bullying lying down!"
  
  You are correct about that, they are cheering him on.
  
  As for the rest.
  
  Too long didn't read.
  report
  77
  lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  My mother lives in an Independent Living facility....
  With a LOT of Republicans...
  
  Friday night they are showing Inside Job.
  
  She invited us to come see it......
  
  Wouldn't I love to go! I haven't seen a sea of red angry faces in a while...not since the last Tea-Bagger rally!!
  report
60
knolyourselfposted 13 years ago
I'm thinking you all miss LadyLove.
report
1. 0
  PrettyPantherposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I think AnnCee does.
  report
  60
  DTR0005posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  It's like picking a scab - you know it will bleed and hurt, but you just have to.... Lady Love...lol
  report
2. 66
  AnnCeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  O course they do. Where's the bell??????
  
  Insert "spew" for drool.
  report
  60
  DTR0005posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  report
62
Evan G Rogersposted 13 years ago
I"m still waiting for proof that she was a paid poster.

No one's produced any when challenged.

maybe she's *gasp* on vacation?
report
1. 60
  DTR0005posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Check with Trump's boys...
  report
  62
  Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  so, in other words, ... "no proof"
  report
  61
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Since when was proof needed on these forums?
  report
2. 61
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  
  From what?
  report
  61
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Most likely her employers found out how much of their time she spent on the internet and had words.
  report
  61
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Employers?
  report
  61
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You know, the ones she claimed employed her as a sales person or something like that.
  report
  62
  Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  damned profit seeking bastards!
  report
  61
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  They probably are but that doesn't give anybody the moral or legal right to rip them off.
  report
  62
  Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I HATE BEING ENCOURAGED TO GIVE PEOPLE WHAT THEY WANT!!!
  
  DAMNED PROFITS!!
  report
3. 72
  Jeff Berndtposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  There is no such proof; only speculation. It's funny to joke about it, but that's about all.
  report
60
knolyourselfposted 13 years ago
"I"m still waiting for proof that she was a paid poster." You will have to hire a private
detective. Columbo would be fun.
report
1. 66
  AnnCeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  . . . . .One more thing. . .
  report
2. 62
  Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  So, in other words: "Mighty mom made a random comment about her being a hired poster, and we're all parroting it"
  report
  60
  DTR0005posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Evan, no.. Mighty Mom didn't have anything to do with it. I think quite a few people suspected she was a paid poster.
  report
  62
  Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I might be mistaken, but this entire discussion started the minute that Mighty Mom posted that LALO got banned for being a paid poster about a week ago.
  
  Still have seen no proof.
  report
  60
  DTR0005posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Let me back up a minute. Before Lady Love went awol from the forums, there were many comments and speculation as to whether she was a paid "plant," etc. This was all prior to her depriving us of her company.
  report
  78
  Mighty Momposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I NEVER said LaLo got banned for being a paid poster!
  Nor did I ever claim she was not born in America or is a Muslim, for that matter.
  
  I said she appeared to be gone from HP and mistakenly stated her account was gone (and apologized for my mistake).
  
  There had been much speculation that she is/was a paid poster.
  And there was much speculation as to whether that constitutes spam and is against HP terms of service.
  
  It seems that she has voluntarily moved on to a different stomping ground.....
  report
  60
  DTR0005posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Hell?
  report
  60
  Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Not likely. The infernal kingdom has SOME standards....
  report
  72
  Jeff Berndtposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  "I NEVER said LaLo got banned for being a paid poster!"
  
  Well, you did kind of strongly imply it.
  
  I thought you were joking, honestly.
  report
60
knolyourselfposted 13 years ago
If Bush weren't in office 9/11 wouldn't have happened. The Bush gang did it, although think Bush himself being so dumb, was kept out of the loop reading what goat stories.
report
1. 77
  lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Blame Obama!
  Blame Obama!
  Blame Obama!
  report
66
AnnCeeposted 13 years ago
Funny how most who follow lady_love158 around and dump on her threads don't actually start discussions of their own. . .

report
1. 60
  DTR0005posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  They were wonderfully intellectual forums AnnCee. Just take the word "Obama" and add one of the following adjectives: socialist, consitution-hater, freedom-hater, communist, Kenyan - voila! -
  
  There's your forum topic.
  report
  77
  lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Don't forget "Liberals".....said dripping with venomous sneering disgust....Oh E-gads luvvy--I have sh*t on my shoes.
  report
0
PrettyPantherposted 13 years ago
I don't care if she was paid or not and never suggested she was. I just thought she was like the socially clueless nerd who doesn't know when to shut up when others start yawning at his endless monologues about obscure trivia.
report
1. 66
  AnnCeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Oh I know! It's so-o-o-o-o boring. Let's all do something else, kay?
  
  report
  0
  PrettyPantherposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  LOL! You brought it up and we're having fun with it. What did you expect? An actual answer to your question?
  
  (GUFFAW)
  report
  66
  AnnCeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  What, still here?
  
  Yes, I'm really expecting a serious answer, PP.
  
  (SNORT)
  report
  0
  PrettyPantherposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  From who, exactly?
  
  Yes, still here, taking a break from gardening, barn cleaning, and cooking. Your excuse?
  report
  66
  AnnCeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Some break,PP. Don't let that muck get too deep.
  
  The fact is none of you argue with the news articles Lady posts. You hardly comment on them.
  
  You just whine about them and make unfounded accusations.
  
  It's a little amusing.
  
  She posts a news article and all of you coming squealing and spewing.
  
  Just sayin . . .
  report
  61
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Funny, I must have missed the news articles she posted. All I ever saw was propaganda and conjecture.
  report
  66
  AnnCeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I don't believe you ever even looked, John. Certainly never dispute anything but the source and Lady's motives.
  report
  61
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Then you'd be wrong. I read most,if not all the links she posted.
  When I did more than dispute the source then Lady Love would abandon the topic and start another one off,neatly avoiding any testing of her ludicrous claims.
  report
  66
  AnnCeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I'll be watching then.
  report
  61
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Bit late now unless she's coming back
  report
  0
  Sophia Angeliqueposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  John, I agree. I read numerous of the links she posted. I posted links which queries her sources, etc. She would never come back to me. Her links were nothing more than propaganda...
  report
  60
  DannyMaioposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  AMEN!!!
  report
  62
  Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Good ol' "propaganda"
  
  "another opinion I don't agree with"
  report
  0
  PrettyPantherposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  That's an interesting interpretation. I can't speak for everyone but after reading 4 or 5 of her links, I stopped trying. Her links not only did not support her posts, they often didn't even relate. Most were opinion pieces with very little facts to back them up.
  report
  60
  DTR0005posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Most of us read her links. We just scratched our heads as we tried to connect the dots. You know, 2 +2 = Socialist. It's the new Tea Party math!
  report
  0
  PrettyPantherposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Here is an example of us "libs" trying to engage ladylove. I remember it clearly because it was the moment I decided to stop trying to have a rational discussion with her. The topic should have been relatively nonpolitical (at least I thought so) because it had to do with decreasing our dependence on big agriculture and returning to backyard and community gardens as our primary source of produce.
  
  You can read the thread here (http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/69262?p … ost1513988), but what triggered my decision to never again waste my time with her was this:
  
  AnnCee, you can continue to try and paint poor LaLo as the victim of us whiny, childish liberals but I'm certain many other examples of this type of response from LaLo could be found.
  report
  84
  rebekahELLEposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  LALO a victim? With all of her terrible comments on people simply because they don't 'think' like she does? I've never read anything so ridiculous. She dished it out until people said, enough. She doesn't run the political forum and she tried to.
  report
60
knolyourselfposted 13 years ago
"The fact is none of you argue with the news articles Lady posts." Am I nuts. Am I going to discuss non-sense.
report
65
superwagsposted 13 years ago
Yeah, I haven't read any tawdry, banal, Obama-bashing nonsense for a few days now. I'm getting withdrawl symptoms.I'll do my own:

"Obama wrecks economy, beats children and burnt copy of Anne Frank's Diary. Is there just no limit to this man's depravity?!

www.obscurerightwingnonsense.com"
report
1. 61
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I followed your link. It leads to a girl-on-girl porn site.
  
  See you later...
  report
  60
  DTR0005posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Bonus
  report
  60
  Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks Wags & Ron..
  
  Did you catch the video of the Pain look-alike with the Bachman look-alike?
  
  I think they were look-alikes...
  Maybe I better watch it again.
  report
  66
  AnnCeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Classy.
  report
  60
  Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  It makes my day to know I brightened yours.
  report
  72
  Jeff Berndtposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  No it doesn't.
  
  "Sorry, we can't find "www.obscurerightwingnonsense.com". We suggest that you check the spelling of the web address or search above."
  
  Unsubstantiated rumor?
  report
  61
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Yes..
  
  or maybe uncontrollable obsession.
  report
  72
  Jeff Berndtposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  report
61
mikelongposted 13 years ago
I would wager that had not Bush/Cheney been in the White House, even though the attacks would have occurred, I don't see an invasion of Iraq happening...

Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice were key figures to selling the deliberate misinformation campaign that led us to a multi-hundred dollar investment there every fiscal year...

Of course, I am completely underscoring Mr. Cheney...and his carryover cronyism from the Nixon days...along with Rumsfeld..

The way the 2000 Administration was lined up perfectly for the foreign policy that "was thrust upon" them is too coincidental for my liking...

The Project for the New American Century gang were all at key levers of power....and the "Pearl Harbor like" event they called for in their own publications happened precisely when they needed it to.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_fo … an_Century

It is also important to remember that "Muslims" as a blanket term does not exist... Those who carried out the attacks, from what we know, represent a fringe element of Arab elites.. The deep pockets of the Saudi's...who U.S. tax dollars protect directly and indirectly, enable a deep grasp into poor neighboring nations.... We trained their intelligence services, influence, and wealth..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arab … _relations
report
1. 77
  lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Nixon?
  Rumsfeld?
  Cheney?
  
  You don't say???
  WHY haven't these sleuths ferreted that out??
  report
2. 59
  S Leretsehposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  HOLY COW! It's snowed in HELL! I agree with Miguel's ENTIRE post here. Very astute observation Miguel. There''s hope for you yet.
  report
66
AnnCeeposted 13 years ago
She's not wrong about the liberal, progressive and socialist modus operandi, PP. History bears this out over and over again. And it turns out to destroy people's lives over and over. Look at your heroes and look at their results. Look at the poverty stricken inner cities, those places that were supposed to be wonderful, modern housing developments for the poor. Look at the states where they have held power for years. The facts bear out lady's words.
report
1. 0
  PrettyPantherposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  So, you think it's an acceptable tactic, when conversing with an individual, to make assumptions about their beliefs based upon some negative stereotype?
  
  Based upon your response, that seems to be what you think, but you can correct me if I am wrong. You know, people with opposing ideas actually do have rational conversations with each other and arrive at solutions to serious problems.
  
  Somehow, I manage to do it in real life quite a lot. I seriously doubt that LaLo ever does.
  report
  66
  AnnCeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You don't know a thing about LaLo, obviously. Any more than she knows about you. It is arrogant and insane to think that you do. You people make these constant personal comments as if you were little gods who can read minds and peer into people's lives.
  
  Furthermore, my comment was about a political ideology and the practices used by those who cleave to it and the clearly visible results that can be ascribed to those practices. I wasn't TALKING ABOUT YOU.
  
  NOT LIKE YOU TALK ABOUT PEOPLE AS IF YOU KNOW SQUAT ABOUT THEM. AND AS IF THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF A POLITICAL DISCUSSION BOARD.
  report
  0
  PrettyPantherposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Sigh... I'm trying to get you to see that in an attempt to have a rational conversation, interjecting what liberals think and what conservatives think, as though they all think alike, instead of responding to the individual is not productive and effectively damages any attempt at conversation.
  
  I am basing my assessment on trying to have a conversation with her and her inability to address me as in individual, that's all. You're right; I could be completely wrong, but I don't think it's an illogical conclusion given her online persona. Do you?
  report
  66
  AnnCeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  We are not discussing individuals on a political forum. This is where ideologies, policies, political figures, current events are discussed.
  
  This is not about having individual discussions about personal things. This is not about attacking persons who are not political figures.
  
  It isn't primarily a chat forum.
  report
  0
  PrettyPantherposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Of course we are not discussing individuals, except of course, you did ask about LaLo, who is an individual. That's how this all started, remember?
  
  But, aside from that, how can you have a productive discussion about anything--current events, policies, whatever--if you view other people on a forum as representatives of an ideology instead of intelligent individuals who may have something worthwhile to say?
  report
  0
  Sophia Angeliqueposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  PP. Nice point.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  "So, you think it's an acceptable tactic, when conversing with an individual, to make assumptions about their beliefs based upon some negative stereotype?"
  
  Tactic?
  
  I think she made a reasonable assumption based on many things you have written in the forums.
  
  If its negative its your fault.
  report
  0
  PrettyPantherposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Well, Jim, that doesn't surprise me since you once said I am indistinguishable from a few other liberal posters here. Great minds think alike, eh?
  report
2. 49
  texasbeta2002posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Hmmm...look at Texas, run by conservatives, and have a larger deficit than California. In fact, California is run by a conservative. Actually, I think most of the states are...AAAAANNNNNDDDDD, they are broke. Nice.
  report
66
AnnCeeposted 13 years ago
I'm sure lady_love158 was banned. I never saw an instance of her snapping back despite all the personal attacks and badgering but there you go. If she did snap back, she'd be banned.

I've experienced that myself. I was called a liar today. No ban that I know of. I called someone a liar. Banned. I asked someone if they checked for news behind his eyelids since he so clearly was not aware of the news concerning the particular situation. Banned. It's clearly not a level playing field.

But that's what happens when you espouse Christian values or conservative values. Look at what you liberals do to Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman. Amazing. And you don't even feel a sting of conscience about it. You'd say these things in front of your children. You'd teach them to say these things and have this attitude. You'd be frothing if 1/100th of that poisonous venom and vile innuendo were directed at a liberal atheist.
report
1. 0
  PrettyPantherposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I was banned for calling someone pathetic. I'm sure the playing field is level. This was after she accused me of hating soldiers (I am married to a veteran who retired from the military) and calling them murderers, when I did not. Which is worse?
  report
  66
  AnnCeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I don't care. Enough with this personal crap on a political discussion board. Some people need to find a chat line.
  report
  0
  PrettyPantherposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I have a purpose in doing this. I'm trying to see you as an individual and I'm trying to get you to see me as one, rather than as some representation of "liberal."
  
  That's all. I guess it isn't working.
  report
2. 59
  dingdondingdonposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You think liberals and democrats who oppose Palin don't suffer consequences? Have you forgotten Gabrielle Giffords and the people who were murdered at her rally so quickly? Because their families have not.
  report
  61
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  That comment is absolutely ludicrous and has no factual basis to support it.
  report
3. 0
  jerrylposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  AnnCee, You talk about christian values and about what liberals do to Palin and Bachman, and how they do not feel a sting of conscience about it.
  
  How quickly you forget! What about that rant of yours on the Obama family
  attending church just to hear a pro-palestinian speaker, when they in fact attended an earlier church service! You twisted the article you were quoting, into something it didn't say, just to put bad light on the 1st family.
  
  You yourself admitted to asking someone if he checked for news behind their eyelids, since he so clearly was not aware of the news concerning the particular situation!
  
  Doesn't this ring of (THE POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK)?
  
  You are complaining about others because they, in your eyes, are doing the same things you do!
  report
4. 72
  Jeff Berndtposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  "I was called a liar today. No ban that I know of. I called someone a liar. Banned."
  
  Hmmm. Speculation only, but did the person who 'called you a liar' say, "You're a liar AnnCee!" or did he say, "You said something that's not true, AnnCee!"
  
  There's a difference.
  report
  66
  AnnCeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, I'm aware of how you parse your words for maximum damage and minimum consequence. It's an art.
  report
  61
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  It's not parsing, it's correct use of the English language. The two statements mean two entirely different things.
  report
  72
  Jeff Berndtposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  And that right there is an excellent way of calling me mealy-mouthed without actually saying it. Well done!
  
  But check it out: what I said in my previous post explains the difference between attacking someone's position or someone's ideas, and attacking the person himself or herself. In a political debate, people expect to have their ideas attacked, or they should expect that, anyway. People also reasonably expect that their characters will not be attacked (though this is becoming more unrealistic, reasonable though it may be).
  
  So, are you willing to satisfy my curiosity? Did the non-banned person call you a liar, or did he merely say that one of your statements is false? One attacks the idea, the other attacks the person.
  
  "The sky is red."
  "You're a lying liar who tells lies."
  vs
  "The sky is red."
  "That's not true; the sky is blue. Go look."
  report
  66
  AnnCeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You can judge for yourself.
  
  I've reported that too.
  
  This forum is no fun anymore.
  report
  49
  texasbeta2002posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Nope, I didn't. I just said, You are a liar.
  report
  72
  Jeff Berndtposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Okay. Just curious. Thanks!
  report
5. 49
  texasbeta2002posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Actually, I called you a liar, and I was banned....so, again, you are incorrect.
  
  However, as long as corporations skate the tax code, I can skate a ban.
  
  Now, in this same thread, you are called out for distorting an article, and you just ignore it. The proof is actually right in your posted thread, and in the article you list.
  So, tell me....what does that make you?
  report
66
AnnCeeposted 13 years ago
I appreciate what you are saying, PP. However, I am interested in ideas, events and political figures. I want to talk about facts and ideas and opinions. I am not interested in getting to know people. That is a dangerous thing to do online. And it quickly spills over into personal discussions rather than more general discussions in an open forum. The only thing I want to know about you is your opinions about specific political topics and ideas. Political discussion.

And yes, I did bring up lady_love158 because I am troubled by all the personal attacks against her on this forum.

She was banned for a month because she went off on Moonbeam apparently. I can't find the post in question or if I have found it I sure as hell don't recognize it as any sort of personal attack.

Gotta go now.
report
1. 0
  PrettyPantherposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I think you misunderstand the point I am trying to make. I'm not talking about getting to know people personally. I'm talking about treating them as individuals, not ideologies. Reading their posts and trying not to leap to wild assumptions based upon what you think a liberal or a conservative believes.
  
  That is all.
  report
  60
  Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You are a better person than I am for trying. For her it's black and white with victimization as a topping.
  
  Do you have any idea how many times I have been banned? So stow the carp that LaLo is the victim.
  report
  78
  Mighty Momposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Oh sure Doug. Compare yourself to LaLo. Ha ha!
  You may have been banned 639 times. That seems about right, although it's probably way low (sorry to say).
  But .. have you ever been banned for a whole MONTH?
  Imagine 30 long days and nights without any forum contact.
  THAT'S serious bannage reserved for only the most specialest offenders.
  So if it's true that that is where LaLo is, there's really no disputing that she IS the biggest victim evah !
  report
  60
  DTR0005posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I really feel left out - I have yet to be banned. I mean I have tried my best to be an ass - any suggestions?
  report
  61
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You have just personally attacked yourself, which should result in a ban. You should report it.
  report
66
AnnCeeposted 13 years ago
That is a very sick statement. There is no proof. The man is crazy and he has nothing to do with Palin. People who say such things should be ashamed of themselves. But as liberals I understand that shame went overboard long ago.
report
1. 77
  lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Actually Ann, there is a link between the two. As a conspiracy-believer, you might like this!
  
  A college professor in San Fransisco was getting threats very much like the ones Giffords was getting...so much so, that the police went there to investigate.
  Turns out, this professor had gotten in Palin's cross-hairs, because he was questioning the amount of money she wanted to speak at an event.
  
  This was written in the San Jose Mercury News.
  report
78
Mighty Momposted 13 years ago
I may be misunderstanding your meaning here.
California is run by Jerry Brown. He's hardly conservative!
Doesn't change the fact that our state is broke, tho!

So I guess that makes you... half mistaken. I would not presume to suggest a deliberate "lie" on this one.
report
1. 61
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You've been reported.
  report
  61
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  And so have you
  report
  61
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I'm telling!!!
  report
  78
  Mighty Momposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I know you are, but what am I?
  report
  61
  John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I'll have to report that as well
  report
  61
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Good. HP staff has nothing better to do than monitor manners in the forums.
  report
78
Mighty Momposted 13 years ago
And I have a general question on the "lies & liars" point.
It is quite common here to see generalized LIARS statements.
Example: Liberals LIE. Liberals are LIARS. Liberals need to stop spreading LIES.
Now, if I identify myself with that political persuasion, is that accusation personal against me?
Am I not being called a LIAR by virtue of affiliation?

I can't remember the name for this logic but it goes like this:
All Ds are Liars
You are a D
Therefore, you are a Liar.
report
1. 61
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  That's a lie
  report
  78
  Mighty Momposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  pants on fire!!!
  report
  72
  Jeff Berndtposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You're all a pack of trouser arsonists.
  report
78
Mighty Momposted 13 years ago
I can't wait around for the formal communication from Admin (although with so many reports, I'm sure it's coming ).
I'm hereby banning myself
Gotta go watch Obama's debt-cutting plan.

Carry on, my fellow non-truth tellers, fibbers, fabricators, falsifiers and prevaricators
report
1. 61
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I'm reporting that
  report
  60
  DTR0005posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I feel compelled to report your self-abuse.
  report
  61
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Pleeeease not to Mommy.
  report
78
Mighty Momposted 13 years ago
NOT TRUE! Some are trouser dousers!

Seriously -- GREAT LINE, JEFF!
report
77
lovemychrisposted 13 years ago
Gosh--I didn't need to read it all!
Just this:

"Then, at the last moment, after Kloppenburg was unofficially claimed to be the winner, Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nicklaus reportedly found thousands of unsaved votes on her personal computer, similar to the cases of late discovered and “dimpled chad” ballots that pushed Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris into the public’s eye"

My MY...like a little Mighty Mouse, huh?
"Here I come to save the day!!"

Let's see if SHE gets a make-over and a promotion....
report

Closed to reply

jump to first post

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

Where's LadyLove?

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies