jump to last post 1-15 of 15 discussions (169 posts)

Alright, we get it

  1. Evan G Rogers profile image82
    Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago

    Alright, Lady Love, we get it.

    Obama is evil

    can you stop posting a new "obama is evil" news article every 20 minutes?

    1. bgamall profile image84
      bgamallposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Lol. She is obsessed.

    2. weholdthesetruths profile image61
      weholdthesetruthsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      she'll quit when the "walker is the devil" and "republicans are nazis" and "tea party is racist" nonsense stops.

      1. Ralph Deeds profile image72
        Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        For some reason I doubt it.

        1. lady_love158 profile image59
          lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Lol! I'm a girl on a mission converting liberals to the conservative way! I'm like the Mother Teresa of politics! Lol

          1. John Holden profile image60
            John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            You'd do a lot better if you gave up on the insults and general decrying of everything and everybody that isn't of the extreme right.
            Mother Theresa you ain't Lady. You are actually rather like the bad smell at the banquet smile

      2. profile image0
        Motown2Chitownposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Love it when Republicans are called "Nazis."  Especially since Nazis were members of the National Socialist Party (way to the left of where the actual Republican usually sits).  Insults, accusations, assumptions are simply hurled willy-nilly at anyone and everyone.  Maybe actually trying to wrap our heads around what someone believes would get us a little further ahead in the debate.  But that would require listening, a skill so few of us have actually mastered.

        Just a thought.

        1. kerryg profile image87
          kerrygposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          "Insults, accusations, assumptions are simply hurled willy-nilly at anyone and everyone."

          That's kind of ironic coming from someone who just claimed Nazis were socialists. In fact, one of the very first thing they did on attaining power was to throw socialists in concentration camps, years before doing the same to the Jews.

          1. profile image0
            Motown2Chitownposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Um, I said that Nazis were members of the National Socialist party.  That was meant to be neither an insult nor an accusation.  It was just a statement of fact, not a claim.  Whether Nazis were socialists or not isn't what I was getting at.  I was simply pointing out that "Nazi" was originally a slang term coined by Germans to describe members of the National Socialist PARTY.  Neither did I give an opinion of socialists OR republicans, or any indication whatsoever about my own personal beliefs.

            But thank you for your response.  I think it very accurately illustrates the point I was trying to make.

            Enjoy the debate.

            1. kerryg profile image87
              kerrygposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Fair enough, but you also claimed that Nazis were "way to the left of where the actual Republican usually sits," which is simply not true. Fascism is a right wing authoritarian ideology taken to extremes; Stalinism is the left wing equivalent.

              http://i51.tinypic.com/2v2zj47.gif

              1. profile image0
                Motown2Chitownposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Actually, I admit that was worded poorly - and perhaps I should have stated my understanding that socialists are further left than where the actual republican usually sits.  It is quite possible that I do not understand socialism correctly.  That said, I once again apologize for having offended anyone by poorly wording the comment.  But I reiterate that I did not say that Nazis were socialists.

                Let me RESTATE my parenthetical aside simply for purposes of clarification so that others may not be offended:

                (and from what I understand, socialism is way to the left of where the actual republican usually sits)

                As to the Fascism/Stalinism thing, thank you.  I understand that quite clearly.  Which I why I always find it amusing that Republicans who are extremists are described as Nazis, when in actually they should be called Fascists.  Maybe I should have just said that in the first place instead of encouraging a productive dialog (the kind where BOTH parties listen) among folks of unlike mind.

                Seems like that might have been more along the lines of what the forum posters were looking for.

                1. kerryg profile image87
                  kerrygposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  It's generally a good idea to stay away from the Nazi comparisons in general. First of all, it violates Godwin's Law, which will get you immediately dismissed as a noob on a lot of forums, and secondly, people get awfully prickly about it. As you just discovered. lol

                  These days liberals and progressives actually get called Nazis much more than conservatives, partly because of the "National Socialist" thing and partly because the far right likes to sling around accusations and insinuations with little or no basis in fact. Think of Limbaugh's characterization of feminists as "feminazis," for example, despite the fact that the Nazi party was very clear in its preference that women (good Aryan women, anyway) stay barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen.

                  "I admit that was worded poorly"

                  It was, and whether you yourself are liberal or conservative, it's a good idea to watch that in here. There's a troll with multiple sock puppets who hangs around and specializes in grabbing things out of context and twisting them into something that sounds evil. He mostly directs it against liberals, but he's happy to take it out on our resident libertarian-anarchist and anyone else he happens to disagree with as well. Plus, it leads to misunderstandings even among people with good intentions. wink

                  1. profile image0
                    Motown2Chitownposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Frankly, I don't give a flying fig if someone immediately dismisses me as a noob in any forum (here or elsewhere).  I'm not looking for accolades, assent to my point of view, or anything really.  More or less, I'm thinking out loud.  Choose to acknowledge or dismiss it.  I leave that to the reader.

                    As to watching how I word things - I'm not a huge fan of being politically correct.  I certainly do NOT want to offend someone, and if I do so, I will almost always apologize for having done so.

                    As to reiterating that it was poorly worded, thank you for that.  I must not have been clear in making the statement myself.  It most definitely needed to be repeated and rubbed in. wink

                    Wow, that was fun.  Once again, a painfully learned lesson about why it's best to simply peruse the forums and not actively participate in them.

                2. Jeff Berndt profile image91
                  Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  "Which I why I always find it amusing that Republicans who are extremists are described as Nazis, when in actually they should be called Fascists."
                  The Nazis were Fascist. roll

                  "I'm not a huge fan of being politically correct." Are you a fan of being factually correct? Because in spite of the fact that "Nazi" is an abbreviation of National Socialist Party, they were about as socialist as the German Democratic Republic (East Germany, that is) was democratic. The Nazi party embraced a Fascist ideology. They were right-wing, and not socialist in their policies or practices by any stretch of the imagination.

                  But of course, thanks to conservative talk radio, we're going to get a bunch of people who think "Gee-golly, they must have been socialists, 'cuz it says "Socialist" right on the label!" and thinking that liberal = Socialist = Nazi.

                  Utter foolishness.

              2. Evan G Rogers profile image82
                Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Good post on the chart.

                But the problem is that this chart only really measures 2 variables, whereas each politician has hundreds of variables.

                Thus: Don't rely on votes, vote with dollars. embrace anarchy.

                1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
                  Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  How do you embrace a total vacuum?

                  1. Evan G Rogers profile image82
                    Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Anarchy ain't a vacuum, bud.

        2. Cagsil profile image61
          Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Nazi = Dictatorship = Tyranny = Pure Unadulterated Communism(everything controlled by those in power).

          Which, when you really think about it- pretty much describes almost all government entities. lol lol

        3. John Holden profile image60
          John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Here, before you make a fool of yourself by claiming that because Hitler took over a party called National Socialists he was a socialist read this;-

          http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-hitler.htm

          1. profile image0
            Motown2Chitownposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I'd rather not, but thank you for the offer.

            I did not say that Hitler was a socialist.  Actually didn't mention Hitler at all, and didn't plan to.  I SAID that Nazis were members of a PARTY that called itself - for good or ill - the National Socialist party.  Please read the comment again.  Even when I read it as quoted in your post, I do not see a statement that Hitler or the Nazis WERE socialists - again, only that they belonged to a party that had the word socialist in its title.

            Thank you for the warning about making myself look foolish.  I'll certainly take it to heart.

    3. Jeff Berndt profile image91
      Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Maybe if we ignore her she'll go away?

      1. John Holden profile image60
        John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        It's worth a try smile

        1. Moonchild60 profile image84
          Moonchild60posted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Absolutely, I am all for it.

      2. May PL profile image87
        May PLposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        big_smile big_smile big_smile

    4. Misha profile image74
      Mishaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      LOL there should be at least a sign of balance. For a hundred or so libs singing praise to Obama, there is a handful of conservatives who do the opposite. smile

      1. I am DB Cooper profile image71
        I am DB Cooperposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I just scanned the first page of the forums and found 2 threads started by people with a liberal slant and 2 started by people with a conservative slant. On the Politics and Social Issues forum it was much different. Of the 27 topics on the first page that were started with a clear political bias, 18 of them were conservative and 9 were liberal.

        1. Jeff Berndt profile image91
          Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Oh, don't go throwing facts into the mix; you'll freak people out and they'll start calling you a liberal shill.

          1. lady_love158 profile image59
            lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

            So an unscientific methodology by a biased and subjective individual is somehow transformed into "facts" by the liberal brain? Now I understand where the facts on the left come from!

            1. Jeff Berndt profile image91
              Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Yeah, I see how you might consider techniques like "gathering data" and "counting" to be unscientific, especially when they give results that disagree with your narrative. Luckily, DB told us how he got his results, so anyone can go and verify his data. That's how science works.

              If you disagree with his conclusions, go and count for yourself.

              1. lady_love158 profile image59
                lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                If it were just counting Jeff I'd agree but first he had to qualify that a post was biased then he had to make a judgement as to which way so there are two opportunities for error now the sample size the first page was also arbitrary and could easily have been skewed. You know for an intelectual elite you sure have a talent for missing the obvious... gee maybe the left really isn't brilliant?

                1. Cagsil profile image61
                  Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Well, it's common knowledge the right isn't much better. lol

                2. Jeff Berndt profile image91
                  Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  "first he had to qualify that a post was biased then he had to make a judgement as to which way so there are two opportunities for error"
                  Not error but subjectivity.
                  There's a difference.
                  To stand up to real peer review, he'd have to list the threads, list the people who started them, and declare whether each one was liberal or conservative.

                  That way we can look at each thread and see if most of us agree that the threads were liberal-leaning or conservative-leaning. If most of us agree, then his assessment is pretty good. If most of us don't, either he's a bad judge of what it means to be liberal and conservative, or he deliberately miscast posts to be conservative when they aren't. Those questions are merely hypothetical, though, because nobody has bothered to do an actual peer review; they've just complained about his efforts without doing anything themselves.

                  "now the sample size the first page was also arbitrary..."
                  Yes, he didn't cherry-pick. He just took a random sample.

                  He could have taken the second page only. Or the first five pages. Or every other page from one to ten. Either way, he shared his methodology with us and we can duplicate his observations with our own.

                  "...and could easily have been skewed."
                  Could be. But here's the thing: Misha made a (completely) unsubstantiated claim that there were tons of people "singing praises to Obama" and "only a handful of conservatives" to counter them. BD went and gathered some data, sharing with us his methodology, and showed, based on the data gathered, that Misha was utterly wrong. That's what happened. You don't have to like it, but it still happened.

                  If you think BD's methodology is unscientific, do what peer reviewers do:
                  1) duplicate his experiment using his methodology and see what your results are, and compare them to his. If they match, explain why. If they don't, explain why.
                  2) Create a better experiment and go do it. Remember to share your methodology and results so that we can duplicate your findings independently.

                  Of course, based on your posts, you don't seem to value actual data unless you can either spin it to support your worldview. You seem to prefer fake data (whether you invent it yourself or someone else did) that supports your narrative. That's cool, but don't be surprised when someone with real data comes along, exposes your fake data, and makes you looks silly.

                  Of course, all this is probably futile effort on my part, but perhaps there's a lurker or two reading this who will gain a better understanding of how to gather data and draw conclusions therefrom.

                  1. lady_love158 profile image59
                    lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    To you all data is fake if it doesn't come from the left. Here you esentially agree db methods are flawed but acceptable... go figure!

            2. John Holden profile image60
              John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Well, it seems to work for you!

        2. Misha profile image74
          Mishaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          LOL I went on and re-checked your count. I looked at thread original posters.

          My Results:

          On a front page - parity 2-2
          On Politics page
          Conservatives - 19
          Liberals - 13
          Lady Love - 9

          If you exclude her posts, the balance will shift towards liberals, so she is a valuable asset in conservatives camp. smile

          1. John Holden profile image60
            John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            But how much is the liberal slant prompted by Lady Love's postings?

            1. Jeff Berndt profile image91
              Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              No fair moving the goalposts, John. Besides, it really doesn't matter in the scope of this little informal experiment.

              1. John Holden profile image60
                John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I'd disagree Jeff. If a post of the right generates a post on the left that wouldn't otherwise have happened then it has to matter.

          2. Jeff Berndt profile image91
            Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Hey, someone went and counted! Good for you, Sir! I mean that sincerely.

            Here's a question for you: is LaLo's count a subset of the conservative count, or is it in addition to the other conservative posts? Serious question, 'cos if you remove the posts of any one conservative poster, the balance will shift toward the liberals either a little or a lot. If you remove LaLo's posts, does the balance shift toward the liberal side or does it tip the balance all the way over to the liberal side?

            As for your assessment that LaLo is a valuable asset in the conservative camp, I would remind you that quality and quantity have a complex relationship...smile

            1. Misha profile image74
              Mishaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              LOL Yes, her count is included, so without her conservatives only had 10 threads at the time of count, while liberals had 13. And the quality is all more or less the same across the board on political forum, if you ask me. smile

    5. lady_love158 profile image59
      lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Awww the anarchist is upset! Maybe you should form a government to outlaw free speech since it never occured to you not to bother reading my posts. Oh and it might serve you better if you didn't exagerate how many posts I make.

  2. Cagsil profile image61
    Cagsilposted 6 years ago

    And, like this post is going to make her stop some how? roll

    1. profile image0
      kimberlyslyricsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      lol  lol  lol  lol  lol

  3. Ron Montgomery profile image59
    Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago

    She'll never quit now.  Today 8 justices ruled that speech like hers is protected under the 1st amendment.

    1. weholdthesetruths profile image61
      weholdthesetruthsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      And that speech like yours is protected, as well. 

      Are you having some kind of issue with this?

  4. Doug Hughes profile image60
    Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago

    Thank you, Evan for saying what I was thinking.

  5. kerryg profile image87
    kerrygposted 6 years ago

    Yeah, the moderators should just start a thread called "Reasons Obama is Evil" or something and merge every one of her threads in there.

    1. profile image62
      ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Is that what happened when Bush was President?

      1. kerryg profile image87
        kerrygposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Did any one person post 5-10 threads a day bashing him for almost identical reasons in every thread? tongue

        1. Jeff Berndt profile image91
          Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          You forgot the quotation marks around the word "reasons." smile

        2. profile image62
          ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I dunno, you tell me.

          1. lovemychris profile image78
            lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            No, they didn't. And if they did, they were called anti-American traitors.

            1. profile image62
              ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Excuse me, I wasn't asking you. I was asking kerryg. Thank you.

              1. Jeff Berndt profile image91
                Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Public discussion sometimes involve the public. I know, crazy, right?

              2. Ron Montgomery profile image59
                Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Yeah!  Let's all take a cruise on the SS Sockpuppet.

              3. Moonchild60 profile image84
                Moonchild60posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                But you are right lovemyvchris.  They were called anti-american terrorits.

          2. kerryg profile image87
            kerrygposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Speaking as someone who's been here roughly twice as long as you and LMC combined, the answer is no, not that I remember.

            Most hubbers - liberal and conservative - have the self-control to refrain from starting new threads on the same topic more than once a day. tongue

            1. profile image62
              ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              If you say so, ok. So, if I put "Bush" into the search field I won't come up with dozens if not hundreds of threads bashing the former president?

              1. Jeff Berndt profile image91
                Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                go check.

              2. kerryg profile image87
                kerrygposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Of course you will. That's not the point.

                Maybe you have bad eyesight, so just in case, I've highlighted the relevant parts of my earlier comments to help you out:

                Did any one person POST 5-10 THREADS A DAY bashing him for almost identical reasons in every thread?

                Most hubbers - liberal and conservative - have the self-control to refrain from starting new threads on the same topic MORE THAN ONCE A DAY.

                1. profile image62
                  ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I'm willing to take your word on it, given your experience. Just to be clear, you are saying that no one - When Bush was President or after - ever started more than one thread per day on a very similar topic for the purposes of criticizing him?

                  1. kerryg profile image87
                    kerrygposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Ordinarily I'd qualify my answer, but I'm rather interested to see what you turn up to prove me wrong, so off with you, little doggie. Go find me someone who started 5-10 threads per day bashing Bush.

                  2. Jeff Berndt profile image91
                    Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Dude, seriously. What she said was that most hubbers have the self control to limit themselves to starting only one thread on a given topic on a given day. Not that nobody did.

                    Probably some liberal nutjob spammed the forums just like LaLo is doing lately. But that hypothetical nutjob is (or would have been) unusual, just as LaLo is unusual.

  6. lady_love158 profile image59
    lady_love158posted 6 years ago

    Lol!! I love it!! All the lefties upset that America knows the truth about their mesiah!! They can't stand to be shown they made a horrible choice... they elected a radical socialist narcissist liar to lead the country and all he's doing us destroying her and everything we all hold dear like our liberty... the whole world thinks he's a joke... he's weak and they ignore everything he says! Like Quaidafy is going to step down because Obama told him to??? Lol What's he going to do if he doesn't, apologize vigorously? Lol

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
      Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You really should hire an editor.

      1. Jeff Berndt profile image91
        Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        And perhaps a psychologist.

        1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
          Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Even pointless, rambling rants should be checked for proper grammar, word usage, and spelling.  No wonder Republicans hate teachers.

          1. Jeff Berndt profile image91
            Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            lol

          2. lady_love158 profile image59
            lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Lol if that's all you can find fault with then my work is done and the truth is out there!

            1. Jeff Berndt profile image91
              Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Your work is done. Good job. Now go take a nice long vacation in the land of reality.

              1. profile image62
                ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                So, is this how it works around here? The like-minded pile on anyone who has a different point of view? Gang up for  personal snipes and petty insults? That's not the basis of a serious discussion.

                1. lady_love158 profile image59
                  lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Lol!!  That's what the left always does when they gave no defense of the truth!

                  1. AnnCee profile image77
                    AnnCeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    To be fair, this thread doesn't pretend to be anything but a dog pile.  http://images.clipartof.com/small/443574-Royalty-Free-RF-Clip-Art-Illustration-Of-A-Cartoon-Dogs-Jumping-In-A-Pile.jpg

                  2. Moonchild60 profile image84
                    Moonchild60posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Sometimes I read your childish remarks and obsessive need to believe that you are correct and and wonder, does she know how entertaining she is?  This is why we respond.  It's fun.

                2. Jeff Berndt profile image91
                  Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Different points of view are great. I rarely agree with Evan Rogers ideas about what US policy should be, for example.

                  But Evan and I both understand the difference between fantasy and reality.

                  When Evan and I disagree, it's not because he's making stuff up. It's because he looks at the same facts and comes to a different conclusion.

                  Different opinions are cool; everyone is entitled to their own. Different facts, however, are symptoms of a loss of touch with reality, and that sort of thing is at best merely unhelpful noise.

                  1. profile image62
                    ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    So, is that a "yes" to my questions then?

    2. earnestshub profile image89
      earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Actually, the whole world love him! He is popular in all the major developed nation simply because he is not an extremist on foreign policy so is not making problems for Americas allies.
      He has also been "guilty" of dragging selfish Americans in to the 21st century joining countries like Australia who have had fantastic free health for more than 40 years.

      1. Eaglekiwi profile image75
        Eaglekiwiposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Couldn't agree with you more Earnest.
        Many countries breathed a sigh of relief with the possibilty of finally a U.S President that wasnt trigger happy.

        In fact LL outrageous remarks that Pres.Obama is not liked International is a pure fabrication.

        On the contrary I read that the reason George Bush doesnt travel too much is because he's worried he will be arrested for being a war criminal yikes

  7. manlypoetryman profile image76
    manlypoetrymanposted 6 years ago

    Joe Biden is evil! How's that for a change of pace!

    1. lady_love158 profile image59
      lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Lol!! He's too stupid to be evil!

  8. Eaglekiwi profile image75
    Eaglekiwiposted 6 years ago

    Maybe LL gets paid per click wink

    If thats the case George is not happy!

    1. lady_love158 profile image59
      lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Lol I'd love to get paid for this but it's satisfaction enough just driving you libs crazy! Lol

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
        Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Who drove you Miss Daisy?

      2. Eaglekiwi profile image75
        Eaglekiwiposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Im not American,but if I were Id probably vote for Charlie Sheen

        lol

        Hes the one getting all the attention and all the big bucks for what ...sitting on his ..asssssk ya mother for 6pence to see the big giraffe with whiskers on his hind legs and whiskers on his asssss..k ya mother for 6pence...

        skips out humming a lil ditty

        1. Jim Hunter profile image59
          Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          "Im not American,but if I were Id probably vote for Charlie Sheen"

          Of that I have no doubt.

          1. profile image62
            ShortStoryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Sheen couldn't run for President because he was not born on the planet Earth.

      3. Moonchild60 profile image84
        Moonchild60posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I don't think it drives libs crazy....doesn't bother me.  I already know Republicans are gifted at "spin" and are hypocrites.  Doesn't bother me much anymore.  It's just a fact of life I have learned to live with.

        1. lady_love158 profile image59
          lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Ya... sure... roll lol

  9. AnnCee profile image77
    AnnCeeposted 6 years ago

    Keep on posting, lady.  He's a train wreck and there are new examples of his ineptitude every day.


    Let's not move along.

    You notice how Obama supporters never actually support Obama?

    They just attack those who don't support him.

    1. lady_love158 profile image59
      lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Lol! I know!!  And it makes me laugh when they all come at me!! It's like circus clowns in a chinese fire drill ... they keep misdirecting changing the subject posting lies anything so ling as they don't have to face the truth! Lol

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
        Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        So Ling?  So ling to you too.

        1. Jim Hunter profile image59
          Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          So Ling is one of the Chinese fireman.

          You don't like Chinese fireman?

          1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
            Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I love'em.  I even bought the calendar.

        2. AnnCee profile image77
          AnnCeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          RAcist!!  mad

      2. AnnCee profile image77
        AnnCeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Same thing all over the internet.  Same thing with the professional journalists

        Bankrupt ideology.  They've got nothing to play but hate and the race card.

        1. Jeff Berndt profile image91
          Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Projection at its finest.

          1. Jim Hunter profile image59
            Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Denial at its finest.

            1. Jeff Berndt profile image91
              Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Flattery at its sincere-est.





              ("Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery," for those of you taking notes at home.)

          2. AnnCee profile image77
            AnnCeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Deflection at its finest.

            Glad you feel flattered.  How do you feel about this smile? big_smile

        2. lovemychris profile image78
          lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Oh, you mean like saying Obama grew up in Kenya and didn't play baseball and wasn't a boy-scout huh?

          Trying to make him "The Other".....

          We're on to you!!!!!


          Specially since we know where Ole Huckabee played.....you will find out soon enough if he keeps on with his talking points.

          He is NOT a nice man.

          1. Jim Hunter profile image59
            Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            "We're on to you!!!!!"

            No you're not.

            1. lovemychris profile image78
              lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              You especially!

              monkeyseeasmonkeydo

              1. Jim Hunter profile image59
                Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Damn...foiled again roll

                1. AnnCee profile image77
                  AnnCeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  She really got you, Jim.  http://www.gamestracker.com/images/emoticons/embarrassed-o.gif Better drink your koolaid like a good boy now.  http://www.emoticonshut.com/emoticons/People/nurse.gif

                  1. lovemychris profile image78
                    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Oh he does. That's why we're on to him, get it?? smile

                    Same with you.

    2. lovemychris profile image78
      lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Excuse me, where have you been?

      BTW---how does that compute with someone (Misha), who said that there are far more Obama loving threads than LL's hating ones?

      You just want it all ways, don't you?

  10. mikelong profile image85
    mikelongposted 6 years ago

    "Arrogance is a trait of the left" <--- Lady of unLove


    -Really....

    Arrogance isn't a human characteristic that transcends political affiliation/identity?


    It is this type of minescule, lazy, arrogant, and foolhardy way of thinking that is trying to convince people of what is "right" and "wrong"?

    Lady...enjoy your stay atop the hubpages forum poster listings....you work so hard for it....at least your fingers do...

    Keep those blinders on tight, and don't let the validated arguments of those you oppose sink in.... It is your own arrogance, Lady, that betrays you...

    http://www.timspivey.com/.a/6a00d83452885d69e20133ede997d2970b-320pi

    [

    1. lady_love158 profile image59
      lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Oh wait! Isn't this where you inject Cheney and Halliburton and how Regan deregulated trucking causing Mexicans to work in warehouses for minimum wages while there wivesand daughters were forced into prostitution by rich CA tourists seeking pot in tijuana?? Lol

  11. Cagsil profile image61
    Cagsilposted 6 years ago

    I guess the ironic part is people are complaining about each side of the argument but many fail to realize it is ALL politicians that spout off distortion and misinformation.

    lol lol lol lol lol

    1. manlypoetryman profile image76
      manlypoetrymanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Amen to that one! I don't trust but 2 politicians...and i have my doubts on 1 and 1/2 of them...for sure!

  12. mikelong profile image85
    mikelongposted 6 years ago

    "Oh wait! Isn't this where you inject Cheney and Halliburton and how Regan deregulated trucking causing Mexicans to work in warehouses for minimum wages while there wivesand daughters were forced into prostitution by rich CA tourists seeking pot in tijuana?? Lol"<---Lady


    Wow....you laugh at reality...  You, again, betray your own arrogance, animosity for others and prejudice towards those you don't like.

    The President is talking with Mexico's President about opening the borders to Mexican drivers...

    Lady, you mock the deregulated trucking industry....but this already weakened jobline is about to get worse....

    And yet you forget, or you never actually knew, that it is our logistics network that makes us so valuable...and it was those jobs, goods movement, along with our manufacturing that formed the bedrock of the Baby Boomer middle class.... 

    Lazy Loveless I think you should be renamed...

    Perhaps you should have your life transported to Tijuana....or to Juarez....and maybe your daughters, if you have any, should be working in the maquilas....and God forbid she, or they, should end up like so many other brutally raped, murdered, and dismembered girls in that city....look it up Lady...minimum government at its best...Ciudad Juarez....

    And your hypocrisy is topped off with your rants against Obama...your calls for him to be charges with a crime or to be removed from office....but you still think that the far worse....the actual criminal activity of politicians is some kind of "water under the bridge" joke....

    Why not make an example out of those we actually know committed wrongful acts, and who benefitted through obvious ocnflict of interest....who sent young Americans to die in places they never should have been....

    No Lady, you are right.......real cronies should get a pass, and then, like Cheney, be able to speak at Tea Party conventions to chants of "We Want Dick!" for president....this man can become a "face of conservatism" today...and his deranged daughter can be given the "conservative" benefit of a doubt as well....

    Again Lady, your own arrogance and hypocrisy knows no bounds....

    1. Moonchild60 profile image84
      Moonchild60posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I am applauding.  This was excellent and sadly, true.

  13. Mighty Mom profile image91
    Mighty Momposted 6 years ago

    What about if we don't count OPs with the word "Obama" in the title? I bet we get a very, very different outcome lol

  14. Doug Hughes profile image60
    Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago

    Looking at the first two pages of posts on the Politics forum, l come up with an even dozen posts from LaO with Obama in the title.

    BTW she has neglected to do an Obama post today with this title:

    "Obama adds 220,000 jobs in Feb - Unemployment under 9%"

    1. AnnCee profile image77
      AnnCeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Oh gad!!!   I'll come to lady's aid right away!!

    2. lady_love158 profile image59
      lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Um... the rate is dropping because the universe of unemployed is shrinking... the don't count people that have given up or whose benefits ran out... so the headline rate is a lie and Obama is manipulating the numbers as he ramps up for reekection... but let's not let facts get in the way.

  15. Evan G Rogers profile image82
    Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago

    150 posts on here?

    Holy crap.

    1. lady_love158 profile image59
      lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Lol! Yeah trashing me is good for your hub score!

      1. Evan G Rogers profile image82
        Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        lol, i just got sick of a new list of hubs that were all just "I hate obama"

 
working