» »
»
» But the left’s extreme hate/anger at him has been counterproductive. The
» left has been so clumsy & stupid about attacking GWB that they actually
» succeded in making him more sympathetic to some people.
»
And Brainless continually makes your point by coming up with these stupid ridiculous attack points that are nothing but his idiotic opinions based from his direct link connection to George Soros’s ass. It amazes me how juvenile his rhetoric is becoming. Every time he opens his mouth he seem to put his foot into it deeper and deeper.
» You assume too much, Maneless.
»
» I have no use for GWB. I certainly never considered voting for him in
» either election.
»
»
» But the left’s extreme hate/anger at him has been counterproductive. The
» left has been so clumsy & stupid about attacking GWB that they actually
» succeded in making him more sympathetic to some people.
»
» This guy is the son of an oil-baron & former president, and he actually
» looked like an UNDERDOG in the eyes of a lot of the red-state voters
» during both of his elections. That’s pretty amazing.
I disagree. I think that both sides attack each other during elections. That’s politics. Kerry was mercilessly attacked but he didn’t win. Attacks against a candidate are not generally why a particular candidate wins, although sometimes attacks can make a difference in some elections. Kerry may have actually been attacked more and and worse than Bush. Look at the Swift Boat stuff that basically called Kerry a liar and a coward, by challenging his claimed military heroics. That stuff against Kerry was mean and false. But the public still voted for Bush.
The reason Bush won is that at that the republicans have put together a powerful coalition of racists, war mongers, evil southern rednecks, extremist religious fanatics, and grubby greedy rich people. All of these groups together make up a majority of Americans, and majority rules. Now the dems are trying to break up that coalition by pointing out to Christians that the republican policy includes needless war, and by pointing out to the rich that republican policy makes the value of their US dollars go down. Dems have a good point on both issues and it’s a good strategy because Christians don’t support needless killing and that is what is going on in Iraq and the rich don’t like it that their US dollars are dropping in value compared to foreign currency and the rich don’t like it that there’s a threat of recession. Retial sales look bad this year and that also disturbs a lot of republican business leaders. So the dems could pull enough traditional republican voters (Christians and rich people) to tip the scales in their favor this next election. Dems will never get any meaningful number of southern redneck/racist votes though, because that group is unshakably republican. Still, dems could get some Christian votes and a few of the “rich” votes. There is also the “discomfort” factor. Voters are very uneasy about the economy and Iraq.
» » You assume too much, Maneless.
» »
» » I have no use for GWB. I certainly never considered voting for him in
» » either election.
» »
» »
» » But the left’s extreme hate/anger at him has been counterproductive.
» The
» » left has been so clumsy & stupid about attacking GWB that they actually
» » succeded in making him more sympathetic to some people.
» »
» » This guy is the son of an oil-baron & former president, and he actually
» » looked like an UNDERDOG in the eyes of a lot of the red-state voters
» » during both of his elections. That’s pretty amazing.
»
»
» I disagree. I think that both sides attack each other during elections.
» That’s politics. Kerry was mercilessly attacked but he didn’t win.
» Attacks against a candidate are not generally why a particular candidate
» wins, although sometimes attacks can make a difference in some elections.
» Kerry may have actually been attacked more and and worse than Bush. Look
» at the Swift Boat stuff that basically called Kerry a liar and a coward,
» by challenging his claimed military heroics. That stuff against Kerry was
» mean and false. But the public still voted for Bush.
»
» The reason Bush won is that at that the republicans have put together a
» powerful coalition of racists, war mongers, evil southern rednecks,
» extremist religious fanatics, and grubby greedy rich people. All of these
» groups together make up a majority of Americans, and majority rules. Now
» the dems are trying to break up that coalition by pointing out to
» Christians that the republican policy includes needless war, and by
» pointing out to the rich that republican policy makes the value of their
» US dollars go down. Dems have a good point on both issues and it’s a good
» strategy because Christians don’t support needless killing and that is what
» is going on in Iraq and the rich don’t like it that their US dollars are
» dropping in value compared to foreign currency and the rich don’t like it
» that there’s a threat of recession. Retial sales look bad this year and
» that also disturbs a lot of republican business leaders. So the dems
» could pull enough traditional republican voters (Christians and rich
» people) to tip the scales in their favor this next election. Dems will
» never get any meaningful number of southern redneck/racist votes though,
» because that group is unshakably republican. Still, dems could get some
» Christian votes and a few of the “rich” votes. There is also the
» “discomfort” factor. Voters are very uneasy about the economy and Iraq.
» The reason Bush won is that at that the republicans have put together a
» powerful coalition of racists, war mongers, evil southern rednecks,
» extremist religious fanatics, and grubby greedy rich people. All of these
» groups together make up a majority of Americans, and majority rules. Now
» the dems are trying to break up that coalition by pointing out to
» Christians that the republican policy includes needless war, and by
» pointing out to the rich that republican policy makes the value of their
» US dollars go down. Dems have a good point on both issues and it’s a good
» strategy because Christians don’t support needless killing and that is what
» is going on in Iraq and the rich don’t like it that their US dollars are
» dropping in value compared to foreign currency and the rich don’t like it
» that there’s a threat of recession. Retial sales look bad this year and
» that also disturbs a lot of republican business leaders. So the dems
» could pull enough traditional republican voters (Christians and rich
» people) to tip the scales in their favor this next election. Dems will
» never get any meaningful number of southern redneck/racist votes though,
» because that group is unshakably republican. Still, dems could get some
» Christian votes and a few of the “rich” votes. There is also the
» “discomfort” factor. Voters are very uneasy about the economy and Iraq.
Is this what you learned in Kindergarten this week?
John Kerry basically tried to run his entire campaign off one single issue that was from 30 years ago. And then Kerry & the Dems were actually SUPRISED and unprepared when the GOP finally started trying to poke holes in those facts after being beaten over the head with them for several months straight.
A lot of 12-year-olds would have run a better campaign than that. Literally.
Kerry was just a diversion tactic. The Democratic party made him the candidate in 2004 because he wasn’t a serious candidate. The Clinton machine controls that party and they didn’t want any other formidable Democratic candidates in the picture to put Hillary’s 2008 run in jepoardy.
» John Kerry basically tried to run his entire campaign off one single issue
» that was from 30 years ago. And then Kerry & the Dems were actually
» SUPRISED and unprepared when the GOP finally started trying to poke holes
» in those facts after being beaten over the head with them for several
» months straight.
Typical repub…you don’t know what you’re talking about. Kerry talked about all the issues. Of couse he tried to take advantage of his active duty service record, but any candidate would have done the same thing. Some veterans are mad at Kerry because of his anti Viet Nam statements and the repubs got those veterans who are mad at Kerry to lie about Kerry. That got veterans all across America mad at Kerry and that was very helpful for getting Bush re-elected. Kerry told the truth about his war record it was the republicans and Viet Nam veterans who are angry at Kerry who lied.
»
» A lot of 12-year-olds would have run a better campaign than that.
» Literally.
Kerry didn’t deal with republicans attacks very well, but give some credit to the republican party because they are really good at their game-winning tactic of lying and tricking dumb people into voting for them. That’s why you voted for them moron. They got you to vote for them and then they inhibited stem cell reserach, keeping you bald longer than you had to be bald, and made people the butt of their jokes. The jokes on you fool.
»
»
»
» Kerry was just a diversion tactic. The Democratic party made him the
» candidate in 2004 because he wasn’t a serious candidate. The Clinton
» machine controls that party and they didn’t want any other formidable
» Democratic candidates in the picture to put Hillary’s 2008 run in
» jepoardy.
I can’t figure out if this “Kerry was just a diversion tactic” paragraph is stupid, paranoid, or crazy. Maybe it’s all 3. Anyway, it’s your kind of stupidity and craziness that republicans count on to get people like you to vote for them.
» » John Kerry basically tried to run his entire campaign off one single
» issue
» » that was from 30 years ago. And then Kerry & the Dems were actually
» » SUPRISED and unprepared when the GOP finally started trying to poke
» holes
» » in those facts after being beaten over the head with them for several
» » months straight.
»
»
» Typical repub…you don’t know what you’re talking about. Kerry talked
» about all the issues. Of couse he tried to take advantage of his active
» duty service record, but any candidate would have done the same thing.
» Some veterans are mad at Kerry because of his anti Viet Nam statements and
» the repubs got those veterans who are mad at Kerry to lie about Kerry.
» That got veterans all across America mad at Kerry and that was very
» helpful for getting Bush re-elected. Kerry told the truth about his war
» record it was the republicans and Viet Nam veterans who are angry at Kerry
» who lied.
»
»
»
» »
» » A lot of 12-year-olds would have run a better campaign than that.
» » Literally.
»
»
» Kerry didn’t deal with republicans attacks very well, but give some credit
» to the republican party because they are really good at their game-winning
» tactic of lying and tricking dumb people into voting for them. That’s why
» you voted for them moron. They got you to vote for them and then they
» inhibited stem cell reserach, keeping you bald longer than you had to be
» bald, and made people the butt of their jokes. The jokes on you fool.
»
»
» »
» »
» »
» » Kerry was just a diversion tactic. The Democratic party made him the
» » candidate in 2004 because he wasn’t a serious candidate. The Clinton
» » machine controls that party and they didn’t want any other formidable
» » Democratic candidates in the picture to put Hillary’s 2008 run in
» » jepoardy.
»
»
» I can’t figure out if this “Kerry was just a diversion tactic” paragraph
» is stupid, paranoid, or crazy. Maybe it’s all 3. Anyway, it’s your kind
» of stupidity and craziness that republicans count on to get people like
» you to vote for them.
Do you know whats so ironic Brainless? You go off on a rage here criticising “dumb people” for voting Republican when in fact you are so fucking stupid that you get mixed up with Cal and me. If you read what he said, you Moron, he cant stand GWB! So what it boils down to is that anyone that can formulate their own opinion on an issue instead of accepting your delusional shit is a Moron in your book. How silly.
»
»
» Do you know whats so ironic Brainless? You go off on a rage here
» criticising “dumb people” for voting Republican when in fact you are so
» fucking stupid that you get mixed up with Cal and me. If you read what he
» said, you Moron, he cant stand GWB! So what it boils down to is that
» anyone that can formulate their own opinion on an issue instead of
» accepting your delusional shit is a Moron in your book. How silly.
no moron, you don’t get my point. My point is taht I do not believe
he truly dislikes Bush. I think he is lying when he says he isnt for Bush.
If he was truly against Bush he wouldn’t have made the lame comment that Bush is unfairly blamed for everything, a comment he made by saying that Bush sunk the titanic. My point is that, just like you, he is truly a Bush/repub supporter, and it is repubs/Bush who has delayed the scientific advances that could have grown him hair and also it is repub(bush) who rubs bald guys noses in it that they are bald. Now do you get it idiot? I don’t believe him when he says he doesnt support Bush. Do you understand yet your moron?
And this means that I didn’t mix up which person I was talking to. I knew I was talking to him and I believe he is a bush supporter. Do you get it yet shit-for-brains?
Oh and before I forget: Happy Holidays shit-for-brains.
What’s really depressing here is that I’m NOT a secret Bush-lover.
I’m just a normally-intelligent person who clearly saw all the problems with the Bush administration from the start but also finds severe problems with the current Democratic party.
And Maneless, when faced with a moderate like me, finds it easier to believe that a Bush-lover is conspiring against him than to believe a viewpoint like mine EVEN EXISTS.
Witness the reason the Democrats can’t even beat what is probably the single worst administration that the US has had in the last 100 years.
»
» And Maneless, when faced with a moderate like me, finds it easier to
» believe that a Bush-lover is conspiring against him than to believe a
» viewpoint like mine EVEN EXISTS.
»
»
That’s why he is called Brainless. This kind of logic is too advanced for his small pea sized brain. Most people that find it hard to rationalize, revert to the all mighty “conspiracy” for solace.
This is an advertising site for paid
advertisers to showcase successful hair restoration results only. It is not the
mandate of this site to engage in the discussion of failed, unsuccessful
procedures, lawsuits, litigations, refunds or complaint cases. Surgical hair
restoration procedures carry risks. Please do thorough research, consult your
own physician and investigate a doctor's background carefully before making a
decision. By proceeding to use our site, you agree to abide by our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy at http://hairsite.com/terms-of-use/ where you can also find a list of HairSite's sponsoring physicians.