Home› A Moving Train

Ron Paul's SORE LOSERS

sweetpotatosweetpotato Posts: 1,278
edited April 2008 in A Moving Train
I've noticed that, almost without exception, every person posting flaming threads about Obama are Ron Paul's sore loser supporters. Instead of looking at the candidates and really analyzing what's best for the country (of the choices left, Obama is, btw), they'd rather tear Obama down with these Fox-worthy threads and rants.

I suggest you find a hobby as a more productive avenue for venting your pent-up energy and obvious frustration. Maybe needlepoint.
"Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."

"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore

"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
Post edited by Unknown User on
«134

Comments

  • RolandTD20KdrummerRolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    sweetpotato wrote:
    I've noticed that, almost without exception, every person posting flaming threads about Obama are Ron Paul's sore loser supporters. Instead of looking at the candidates and really analyzing what's best for the country (of the choices left, Obama is, btw), they'd rather tear Obama down with these Fox-worthy threads and rants.

    I suggest you find a hobby as a more productive avenue for venting your pent-up energy and obvious frustration. Maybe needlepoint.


    I think you're off your hat personally.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • RolandTD20KdrummerRolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    :d j/k

    :D

    Odd can't make a smiley as the first character...it worked on the second lne...where's the bug report feature...
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • AbookamongstthemanyAbookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    Bullshit! I'm not a Paul backer though I respect and agree with some of his stances. I think most of us are disillusioned with the Democratic party and are Nader supporters, actually.

    I speak out against Obama for numerous reasons all of which I've stated here repeatedly and none of which have anything to do with being a sore loser of anything but rather it's about having a strong conviction that standing behind my principles is more important than supporting a Dem that would result in me abandoning them.

    this thread highlights the reasons I'm against Obama the best I think

    http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=275309

    I suggest you stop assuming to know why people dislike Obama and look at the points being brought up in those threads and address them.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • AnonAnon Posts: 11,175
    sweetpotato wrote:
    I've noticed that, almost without exception, every person posting flaming threads about Obama are Ron Paul's sore loser supporters. Instead of looking at the candidates and really analyzing what's best for the country (of the choices left, Obama is, btw), they'd rather tear Obama down with these Fox-worthy threads and rants.

    I suggest you find a hobby as a more productive avenue for venting your pent-up energy and obvious frustration. Maybe needlepoint.
    Disagree. A few of them might be Kucinich supporters :). My best friend is a Paul supporter and she's awesome :). Seriously though, some good points have been raised for debate, but some very poor ones too.

    I guess what irks me the most, is the insinuation that all Obama supporters must be sheep. There are no more Obama sheep than there are Mccain or Nader sheep. If someone says that they are voting Obama because they believe he offers the best solution for them, then that's ok in my book. Same as if they say Nader or McCain does. If that's what they believe well good luck with that. I think it would be reasonable to assume that most people that post on a political section of a message board have got some pretty firm beliefs already. It's respectful to be open to hear other peoples views, but unrealistic to expect that you are going to change their minds.

    So i say ok, good luck with putting your point across, thanks for sharing, but don't turn around and insult my intelligence by saying i must be a sheep because i'm not. I'm voting for who i want to.
  • AbookamongstthemanyAbookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    Pj_Gurl wrote:
    Disagree. A few of them might be Kucinich supporters :). My best friend is a Paul supporter and she's awesome :). Seriously though, some good points have been raised for debate, but some very poor ones too.

    I guess what irks me the most, is the insinuation that all Obama supporters must be sheep. There are no more Obama sheep than there are Mccain or Nader sheep. If someone says that they are voting Obama because they believe he offers the best solution for them, then that's ok in my book. Same as if they say Nader or McCain does. If that's what they believe well good luck with that. I think it would be reasonable to assume that most people that post on a political section of a message board have got some pretty firm beliefs already. It's respectful to be open to hear other peoples views, but unrealistic to expect that you are going to change their minds.

    So i say ok, good luck with putting your point across, thanks for sharing, but don't turn around and insult my intelligence by saying i must be a sheep because i'm not. I'm voting for who i want to.


    I have never meant to imply anyone supporting Obama was a sheep. I do however dislike when people use the terms 'viable' and 'electable' when coming into these debates because those are media ploys. The people can elect anyone they please without the media telling them before a candidate has even got out there and had a chance to campaign that this person is just not electable....don't the voters get to decide that in Nov? Everyone should decide for themselves based on their own personal views who is good enough to get their vote and I don't believe anyone should not support someone based on this claim of 'unelectable.

    The rest is just debating which candidate represents what issue the best, which one's are lying, what their record shows, who's funding them...things like that. A lot of us have our minds made up but others don't and so these issues should be brought up often and discussed....the media sure isn't going to bother.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • sweetpotatosweetpotato Posts: 1,278
    i never said anyone was a "sheep". jeesh. i say what i mean, you really don't have to read between lines or add anything. i am referring specifically to roland and drifting, so if i irked you other two then, sorry. maybe i should have been more specific.

    on the other hand, SOME nader supporters can be as kooky as paul supporters, imo. it approaches cult status. i think nader is a great guy, very smart, has a good heart and has only the best intentions. but he'll NEVER WIN, so actually supporting him in his run for president is a waste of time, imo. he'd be more effective if he chose a candidate to support and worked hard to inform him or her of the issues he himself holds dear and is obviously well versed in. but instead, his ego forces him to put his own name in the pot. he's not above self-promotion, trust me folks. anyone who's willing to run for office has a bit of politician in him, even your fearless leader, nader.

    on yet another hand :) i think that this country NEEDS more than two political parties, and that's another thing nader and his suporters could do to actually bring about change - promote a third party and put up viable candidates, and EARLY, not so late in the game that most voters don't even take them as serious candidates, and not someone who has such a strong history of irritating people on both sides of the aisle. they'd need someone young, fresh, smart... like a nader, 40 years ago.
    "Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."

    "Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore

    "i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
    ~ed, 8/7
  • AnonAnon Posts: 11,175
    sweetpotato wrote:
    i never said anyone was a "sheep". jeesh. i say what i mean, you really don't have to read between lines or add anything. i am referring specifically to roland and drifting, so if i irked you other two then, sorry. maybe i should have been more specific.
    It's all good, you never irked me! I was just having my own little cry ;) and took advantage of your thread to do that!
  • AbookamongstthemanyAbookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    sweetpotato wrote:
    i never said anyone was a "sheep". jeesh. i say what i mean, you really don't have to read between lines or add anything. i am referring specifically to roland and drifting, so if i irked you other two then, sorry. maybe i should have been more specific.

    on the other hand, SOME nader supporters can be as kooky as paul supporters, imo. it approaches cult status. i think nader is a great guy, very smart, has a good heart and has only the best intentions. but he'll NEVER WIN, so actually supporting him in his run for president is a waste of time, imo. he'd be more effective if he chose a candidate to support and worked hard to inform him or her of the issues he himself holds dear and is obviously well versed in. but instead, his ego forces him to put his own name in the pot. he's not above self-promotion, trust me folks. anyone who's willing to run for office has a bit of politician in him, even your fearless leader, nader.

    on yet another hand :) i think that this country NEEDS more than two political parties, and that's another thing nader and his suporters could do to actually bring about change - promote a third party and put up viable candidates, and EARLY, not so late in the game that most voters don't even take them as serious candidates, and not someone who has such a strong history of irritating people on both sides of the aisle. they'd need someone young, fresh, smart... like a nader, 40 years ago.


    Every candidate, including Obama, has fanatical, annoying fans. And the rest of your post is based on silly generalizations of Nader and have no substance and nothing to do with the issues. As if the Dems simply deserve anyone's vote just because they are running and aren't a Rep...now that is the definition of ego!!

    http://forums.pearljam.com/showpost.php?p=5313608&postcount=126

    I don't care how old Nader is the man knows his stuff, he is extremely intelligent, dedicated, articulate and has a record including decades of accomplishments he's fought against the odds for and won for the common citizen. His stances on the issues are the closest match to mine....so he gets my vote. And I will never consider it a waste to have my vote reflect my true voice and the ideals I hold dear. And I'm really getting tired of having to say this over and over again.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • DriftingByTheStormDriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
    sweetpotato wrote:
    ii am referring specifically to roland and drifting

    you already knew who the fuck we supported,
    and for the record both of "us" were just as vehemenently against Obama BEFORE Paul became a non-factor as we have been after.

    The only difference now is you don't see us keeping our thoughts in Ron Paul threads, because there are none.

    Instead the proliferation of Obamoron threads is greater now than it ever has been, and it is just as "obnoxious" to people like "us" as all the "paultard" threads were to people like "you".

    So get the fuck over it,
    and get the fuck over yourself.
    :cool:
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • RolandTD20KdrummerRolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    what drifting just said. I posted a pro Obama thread yesterday, and I've already said I like his pastor...

    so yeah get ovah it already...

    sigh...
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • NevermindNevermind Posts: 1,006
    Im voting for Obama because eddie and the rest of the band are...
  • Rats of MultaRats of Multa Posts: 250
    sweetpotato wrote:
    i never said anyone was a "sheep". jeesh. i say what i mean, you really don't have to read between lines or add anything. i am referring specifically to roland and drifting, so if i irked you other two then, sorry. maybe i should have been more specific.

    on the other hand, SOME nader supporters can be as kooky as paul supporters, imo. it approaches cult status. i think nader is a great guy, very smart, has a good heart and has only the best intentions. but he'll NEVER WIN, so actually supporting him in his run for president is a waste of time, imo. he'd be more effective if he chose a candidate to support and worked hard to inform him or her of the issues he himself holds dear and is obviously well versed in. but instead, his ego forces him to put his own name in the pot. he's not above self-promotion, trust me folks. anyone who's willing to run for office has a bit of politician in him, even your fearless leader, nader.

    on yet another hand :) i think that this country NEEDS more than two political parties, and that's another thing nader and his suporters could do to actually bring about change - promote a third party and put up viable candidates, and EARLY, not so late in the game that most voters don't even take them as serious candidates, and not someone who has such a strong history of irritating people on both sides of the aisle. they'd need someone young, fresh, smart... like a nader, 40 years ago.


    woah.



    what is wrong with cult status?
    we don’t know just where our bones will rest,
    to dust i guess,
    forgotten and absorbed into the earth below,..
  • sweetpotatosweetpotato Posts: 1,278
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    Every candidate, including Obama, has fanatical, annoying fans. And the rest of your post is based on silly generalizations of Nader and have no substance and nothing to do with the issues. As if the Dems simply deserve anyone's vote just because they are running and aren't a Rep...now that is the definition of ego!!

    http://forums.pearljam.com/showpost.php?p=5313608&postcount=126

    I don't care how old Nader is the man knows his stuff, he is extremely intelligent, dedicated, articulate and has a record including decades of accomplishments he's fought against the odds for and won for the common citizen. His stances on the issues are the closest match to mine....so he gets my vote. And I will never consider it a waste to have my vote reflect my true voice and the ideals I hold dear. And I'm really getting tired of having to say this over and over again.

    Even if he croaks before his first 100 days? :D

    FIRST OF ALL, RELAX. Jesus Christ, Nader supporters are as itchy for a fight as Paul supporters. Seriously, I appreciate your enthusiasm, but you can calm the fuck DOWN. I'm not asking you to explain yourself- I don't give a rat's ass who you vote for. If you want to vote with your gut and ignore the fact that you're throwing your vote away, go right ahead. There's a REAL election at stake here, one that Dems can LOSE if more people like you keep your heads in the clouds and force the rest of us logical folk pull all the weight. I think Ralph is brilliant, as I've stated before, but the country won't elect him. That's just reality. Sorry to be the one to bring it up. I'm interested in supporting a candidate who has a real chance at WINNING, not just in making a point. It's possible to do good AND get elected, and I think Barack Obama is the guy who can do it.
    "Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."

    "Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore

    "i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
    ~ed, 8/7
  • sweetpotatosweetpotato Posts: 1,278
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    what drifting just said. I posted a pro Obama thread yesterday, and I've already said I like his pastor...

    so yeah get ovah it already...

    sigh...

    "and for the record both of "us" were just as vehemenently against Obama BEFORE Paul became a non-factor as we have been after."


    um, actually, drifting just said he hates obama. so, you hate him too, but you're posting threads that are FOR him? :confused: which is it?
    "Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."

    "Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore

    "i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
    ~ed, 8/7
  • DriftingByTheStormDriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
    sweetpotato wrote:
    I'm not asking you to explain yourself- I don't give a rat's ass who you vote for.

    No.
    You're only interested in starting shit, stirring the pot, and ragging on people for having a prinicpled stance - giving them a hard time for refusing to throw their vote away on "the lesser of two evils".

    Besides, its pretty bankrupt of you to profess you could give a rats ass who people vote for, and follow that with
    sweetpoonanie wrote:
    There's a REAL election at stake here, one that Dems can LOSE if more people like you keep your heads in the clouds and force the rest of us logical folk pull all the weight.

    So could you care less, or are you upset because you feel like Obama should win, and its going to be "our" fault if he doesn't, because we have our "heads in the clouds"?

    I'm glad you think Obama is the right choice,
    and super thrilled you are exercising your right to vote for him.

    I just happen to think you are supremely delluded.

    And for the record, i blame people like you for the shape this country is in. The "lesser of two evils", or "picking the best of the worst, because they are the 'most electable' " mentality IS what causes no "second tier" candidate to ever rise to the top.

    The media tells you who you can and can't vote for (who is 'electable') and you, the people who refuse to just pick an honest bloke, make it so.

    So go ahead.
    Have fun pulling my weight.

    I hope you get what you wanted with Obama (assuming they don't just stick Hillary in there anyhow), and i can't wait to hear your take on things a year or two from now when we are still over in Iraq, and when negative-dick has changed in this country. I can't wait to hear all the excuses you will make, and all the bullshit "reasoning" you will bring up to justify the continuance of war in the middle east, the shit stirring with iran, and the future mess we will continue to sink in to. Further, i can't wait to see how you will rally behind your little friend if and when we get attacked by "terrorists" again, and say, "Yeah, so what if we had to attack Iran. THEY attacked us. What would you do?"

    In otherwords, TPTB will continue to provide their man (or woman, whichever gets "elected") with "valid" reasons for furthering their agenda, and you will continue to swallow it whole, always thinking your boy is the great savior for it.

    So enjoy it.
    I'll be holding my breathe from the sideline...
    ... or not.

    :D
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • jeffbrjeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    sweetpotato wrote:
    I'm interested in supporting aa candidate who has a real chance at WINNING, not just in making a point.

    Yeah, screw principle. Let's try to pick a winner!
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • DriftingByTheStormDriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
    jeffbr wrote:
    Yeah, screw principle. Let's try to pick a winner!

    exactly.
    and i can not wait to hear the retort, which surely will begin with something to the effect of, "That is NOT what i meant..."

    really,
    because that is what you said.
    :rolleyes:
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • RolandTD20KdrummerRolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    Hey let's all start whining endlessly about all the endless Obama threads ruining the forum and making experience so rough and intolerable to be here...

    has anyone complained yet?

    all I can say is thank god I'm not a bleedin bellyaching anti democratic hypocrite... hehe :D:D
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • fuckfuck Posts: 4,069
    I was going to respond...

    ...but then I saw DriftingByTheStorm's post and I think what I was planning on saying has already been said... and I'm not even a Ron Paul supporter. The whole "lesser of two evils" thing really pisses me off though.
  • RolandTD20KdrummerRolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    sweetpotato wrote:
    "and for the record both of "us" were just as vehemenently against Obama BEFORE Paul became a non-factor as we have been after."


    um, actually, drifting just said he hates obama. so, you hate him too, but you're posting threads that are FOR him? :confused: which is it?

    What I'm not allowed to say something positive for some reason? He makes some good points, (I have my reservations) and my point being the "SORE LOSER" thing is total and utter bullshit.

    So this thread is essentially ridiculous by default before you posted it.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • unsungunsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    I'm voting for Ron Paul because he believes in what I believe in and isn't just some sound-bite media blow boy.

    I like my money, Ron Paul would help me keep it, Obama wants me to donate it to those who are lazy and won't work.

    Ron Paul knows that illegal aliens should be punished and not rewarded for breaking our laws, Obama wants to give them the keys.

    Bottom line is I will vote for Ron Paul because he is the only person worthy of my vote and the only one who wouldn't make me puke for doing so.
  • sweetpotatosweetpotato Posts: 1,278
    jeffbr wrote:
    Yeah, screw principle. Let's try to pick a winner!

    do you prefer that mccain get elected?
    "Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."

    "Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore

    "i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
    ~ed, 8/7
  • sweetpotatosweetpotato Posts: 1,278
    _FiveAgainstOne_ wrote:
    I was going to respond...

    ...but then I saw DriftingByTheStorm's post and I think what I was planning on saying has already been said... and I'm not even a Ron Paul supporter. The whole "lesser of two evils" thing really pisses me off though.

    if anyone's deluded, it's you people. just what exactly do you think will be the result of your voting for ralph nader? in terms of election results. just wondering.
    "Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."

    "Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore

    "i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
    ~ed, 8/7
  • sweetpotatosweetpotato Posts: 1,278
    DriftingByTheStorm wrote:
    exactly.
    and i can not wait to hear the retort, which surely will begin with something to the effect of, "That is NOT what i meant..."

    really,
    because that is what you said.
    :rolleyes:

    dumbass, i have said already, many times in different posts, that i think obama IS principled and a good candidate. i'm not voting against my principles! maybe against YOUR deluded principles, but that's a different story.

    i think ralph nader has some great ideas. let's encourage president obama to give him a cabinet position.
    "Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."

    "Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore

    "i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
    ~ed, 8/7
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117
    hey abook... has the nader camp gotten back to you about his large investments in war stocks and multinational companies on wall street... you know, the same ones he rails against?

    i am serious, i am wondering if they got back to you yet...
  • jeffbrjeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    sweetpotato wrote:
    do you prefer that mccain get elected?

    I prefer that none of the "big 3" media whores get elected. I understand that isn't the reality. But I haven't voted for the "lesser of the evils" for quite some time. The major parties alway pit dumb against dumber and hope that we'll take that seriously. If you like Barry, then go for it. I'm sure he'll be happy to have your vote. But don't act like it is an enlightened vote and that the rest of us have our heads in the clouds. It is a compromise vote for the Democrat candidate.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • sweetpotatosweetpotato Posts: 1,278
    jeffbr wrote:
    I prefer that none of the "big 3" media whores get elected. I understand that isn't the reality. But I haven't voted for the "lesser of the evils" for quite some time. The major parties alway pit dumb against dumber and hope that we'll take that seriously. If you like Barry, then go for it. I'm sure he'll be happy to have your vote. But don't act like it is an enlightened vote and that the rest of us have our heads in the clouds. It is a compromise vote for the Democrat candidate.

    everything in life is a compromise, i hate to break that to you. only young, idealistic, impractical people like yourselves believe otherwise. it's WONDERFUL to have ideals! hooray for ideals!! no one's criticizing that desire and drive. but at a certain point in our adult lives, we need to face reality, and make our choices accordingly.

    i'd like to live in Taos, NM for instance, and survive off my art. but guess what? unless i'm willing to starve- and have my children starve, too- i need to come up with a PLAN B. it may not be Plan A, may not contain ALL of my dreams and desires, but if i'm smart and thoughtful and honest with myself, i can find a way to live my passions AND feed my children. it's not fucking rocket science. it's called growing up.
    "Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."

    "Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore

    "i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
    ~ed, 8/7
  • sweetpotatosweetpotato Posts: 1,278
    sweetpotato wrote:
    if anyone's deluded, it's you people. just what exactly do you think will be the result of your voting for ralph nader? in terms of election results. just wondering.

    waiting hours now for realistic answers... and finds none.

    quelle surprise.
    "Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."

    "Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore

    "i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
    ~ed, 8/7
  • sweetpotatosweetpotato Posts: 1,278
    i found this article, and it says what i've been trying to say:

    http://www.alternet.org/election08/77649/

    and while THIS thread began as a poke at paultards, abook decided to have a meltdown all over it and turn it into a nader debate. so i've posted the article in its entirety here:

    http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=279423
    "Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."

    "Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore

    "i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
    ~ed, 8/7
  • RolandTD20KdrummerRolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    Is this turd still floating?
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
Sign In or Register to comment.