• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF Interim Thread of cunning stunts and desperate punts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Y

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Lol, Obama picks up a point and Mccain drops 1 in Gallup and now we can move off the ledge.

backlash in action
 
A

AniHawk

Member
Y2Kev said:
Lol, Obama picks up a point and Mccain drops 1 in Gallup and now we can move off the ledge.

backlash in action
Click to expand...

I guess they did go too negative too early if this keeps up. The only place left to turn to was lies.
 
T

Tamanon

Banned
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=a1J0tfV3XJYs&refer=politics

Sept. 13 (Bloomberg) -- Senator John McCain has drawn some of the biggest crowds of his presidential campaign since adding Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to his ticket on Aug. 29. Now officials say they can't substantiate the figures McCain's aides are claiming.

McCain aide Kimmie Lipscomb told reporters on Sept. 10 that an outdoor rally in Fairfax City, Virginia, drew 23,000 people, attributing the crowd estimate to a fire marshal.

Fairfax City Fire Marshal Andrew Wilson said his office did not supply that number to the campaign and could not confirm it. Wilson, in an interview, said the fire department does not monitor attendance at outdoor events.

In recent days, journalists attending the rallies have been raising questions about the crowd estimates with the campaign. In a story on Sept. 11 about Palin's attraction for some Virginia women voters, Washington Post reporter Marc Fisher estimated the crowd to be 8,000, not the 23,000 cited by the campaign.
Click to expand...

Wha? And then claiming the Secret Service is telling them how big the crowds are, which they don't do.
 
C

Crayon Shinchan

Aquafina Fanboy
AniHawk said:
I guess they did go too negative too early if this keeps up. The only place left to turn to was lies.
Click to expand...

At this rate, there's no way McCain will be able to actually get back on track and run the campaign in the style he wants.

I kinda feel bad for him now... he's going to lose it, even after selling out his soul, and he's going to lament how his good name and credibility went up in a puff of smoke listening to the very same snakes that used the same shit on him 8 years ago.
 
R

Revengeance

Member
Just got back from the Obama Manchester appearance. The vibe was great, people dancing to the music, everyone chatting and discussing politics, smiles all around. The park was pretty packed, but I was up near the front, and couldn't really gauge just how many people were there. Obama focused on the economy, but also hit McCain for trying to claim that he'll be a reformer, and on his claims that he won't let lobbyists run Washington (rightfully pointing out that they're running his campaign). Watching the speech in person made me remember why I believe. Some pictures.

2853007225_1e76556807.jpg


2853006991_a48546ec7b.jpg


2853006519_e87cfb4ed2.jpg
 
R

reilo

learning some important life lessons from magical Negroes
Holy shit at Paul Begala's Bush impression on Real Time. That shit was spot on.

:lol
 
S

speculawyer

Member
JayDubya said:
It's not "cryptic bullshit," so don't be a retard.
Click to expand...
It is totally cryptic bullshit. No one know what this 'strict constructionist' crap is other than it being a code-word for "I want to over-turn Roe v. Wade."

WTF is 'strict constructionist' on computer encryption? Times change and you need to adjust to it. And even by this 'strict constructionist' crap, over-turning Roe v. Wade is complete bullshit since abortions privately took place back in those days . . . a fact they like to ignore.

And this 'not legislate from the Bench' is bullshit as they overturn laws even more than liberal judges.
 
T

TheKingsCrown

Banned
mckmas8808 said:
LIES, LIES, and more LIES should be their campaign theme. 8,000 people aint shit! To bad the TV media will keep reporting the 23K number.
Click to expand...
I still don't get why Obama isn't forming his entire campaign around this theme now. He literally can say "John Mccain went from being a war hero in our country to a liar as soon as he saw the opportunity to become president of the united states" and it would CORRECT. It wouldn't even be POLITICS.
 
D

Diablos

Member
Door2Dawn said:
Uh,Obama didn't gain a point in the gallup.
Click to expand...
Looks like McCain lost a point, though.

Branduil said:
If McCain loses(he probably will), I think Huckabee will be the leading candidate for the next election.
Click to expand...
The most likely 2012 GOP pool of candidates will probably be...

-Jindal
-Huckabee
-Palin
-Romney

Maybe Rudy. But I doubt it.
 
V

vitaflo

Member
NetMapel said:
wtf he said that ? God those conservatives are so fucked up...
Click to expand...

Palin said it too, in the Gibson interview.

GIBSON: Roe v. Wade, do you think it should be reversed?

PALIN: I think it should and I think that states should be able to decide that issue... I am pro-life.

GIBSON: John McCain would allow abortion in cases of rape and incest. Do you believe in it only in the case where the life of the mother is in danger?

PALIN: That is my personal opinion.

GIBSON: Would you change and accept it in rape and incest?

PALIN: My personal opinion is that abortion allowed if the life of the mother is endangered.
Click to expand...
 
T

Trakdown

Member
TheKingsCrown said:
I still don't get why Obama isn't forming his entire campaign around this theme now. He literally can say "John Mccain went from being a war hero in our country to a liar as soon as he saw the opportunity to become president of the united states" and it would CORRECT. It wouldn't even be POLITICS.
Click to expand...

Especially since McCain is, if I'm not mistaken, still riding in the Straight Talk Express.
 
C

capslock

Is jealous of Matlock's emoticon
Excerpts from the ABC interview.

Facepalm.gif

Sarah Palin on Reform:

GIBSON: Didn't George Bush come to Washington eight years ago talking about reforming Washington in the same kind of language? Ran as something of a maverick actually; came to Washington. Eight years, hasn't changed the ethos in Washington particularly. Why are you any different?

PALIN: Well, we're promising the reform. And we are mavericks. There's no doubt in anybody's mind now across America, who's paying attention to the presidential race here, that I am a Washington outsider. I mean, look at where you are. I'm a Washington outsider. I do not have those allegiances to the power brokers, to the lobbyists. We need someone like that in Washington, someone committed to the American people and implementing their will, not the power brokers' will.

GIBSON: You mentioned in the three principles that you'll change spending. You also talked about taxes. Why do you both keep saying that Obama is going to raise people's taxes? It's been pretty clear what he intends. He's talked about middle-class tax cuts, extending Bush tax cuts on everything but people who own or earn more than $250,000 a year -- cuts taxes on over 91 percent of the country. Why do you keep saying he's going to raise people's taxes?

PALIN: Well, I would argue with the whole premise of that, that his mission is to not increase taxes. He's had 94 opportunities to either vote for a tax cut or not support tax increases. And 94 times, he's been on the other side of what I believe the majority of Americans want.

Sarah Palin on Congressional Spending and the ''Bridge to Nowhere':

GIBSON: One of John McCain's central campaign arguments, tenets of his campaign, is eliminating earmarks, getting rid of them. Are you with John McCain on that?

PALIN: I certainly am. And of course the poster child for the earmarks was Alaska's, what people in the lower 48 refer to as the bridge to nowhere. First it was a bridge to community with an airport in southeast Alaska. But that was excessive. And an earmark -- an earmark like that, not even supported necessarily by the majority of Alaskans. We killed that earmark. We killed that project...

GIBSON: You have said continually, since he chose you as his vice presidential nominee, that I said to Congress, thanks but not thanks. If we're going to build that bridge, we'll build it ourselves.

PALIN: Right.

GIBSON: But it's now pretty clearly documented. You supported that bridge before you opposed it. You were wearing a T-shirt in the 2006 campaign, showed your support for the bidge to nowhere.

PALIN: I was wearing a T-shirt with the Zip code of the community that was asking for that bridge. Not all the people in that community even were asking for a $400 million or $300 million bridge.

GIBSON: But you turned against it after Congress had basically pulled the plug on it; after it became apparent that the state was going to have to pay for it, not the Congress; and after it became a national embarrassment to the state of Alaska. So do you want to revise and extend your remarks?

PALIN: It has always been an embarrassment that abuse of the ear form -- earmark process has been accepted in Congress. And that's what John McCain has fought. And that's what I joined him in fighting. It's been an embarrassment, not just Alaska's projects. But McCain gives example after example after example. I mean, every state has their embarrassment. And, as I've said over and over, if Alaska wants that bridge, $300 million, $400 million dollars, over to that island with an airport, we'll find a way to build it ourselves. The rest of the country doesn't have to build that for us.

GIBSON: But you were for it before you were against it. You were solidly for it for quite some period of time...

PALIN: I was ...

GIBSON: ... until Congress pulled the plug.

PALIN: I was for infrastructure being built in the state. And it's not inappropriate for a mayor or for a governor to request and to work with their Congress and their congressmen, their congresswomen, to plug into the federal budget along with every other state a share of the federal budget for infrastructure.

GIBSON: Right.

PALIN: What I supported was the link between a community and its airport. And we have found that link now.

GIBSON: But you didn't say no to Congress, well build it ourselves until after they pulled the plug. Correct?

PALIN: No, because Congress still allowed those dollars to come into Alaska. They did.

GIBSON: Well, but ...

PALIN: Transportation fund dollars still came into Alaska. It was our choice, Charlie, whether we were going to spend it on a bridge or not. And I said, thanks, but no thanks. We're not going to spend it on the bridge.

***

PALIN: And now obviously, Charlie, with the federal government saying, no, the rest of the nation does not want to fund that project. You have a choice. You either read the writing on the wall and understand okay, yes, that, that project's going nowhere. And the state isn't willing to fund that project. So what good does it do to continue to support something that circumstances have so drastically changed? You call an audible, and you deal in reality, and you move on. And, Charlie, we killed the bridge to nowhere and that's the bottom line.

GIBSON: The state of Alaska, under OMB figures in 2008, got $155 million in earmarks for a population of 670,000. That's $231 per person in Alaska. The state of Illinois, Obama's state, got $22 per person. You got 10 times per person as much. How does that square with your reforms?

PALIN: We have drastically, drastically reduced our earmark request since I came into office.

GIBSON: But you still have multiple of any other state.

PALIN: We sure are -- and this is what -- you go out and you ask any Alaskan this. This is what I've been telling Alaskans for these years that I've been in office, is no more.

GIBSON: Governor, this year, requested $3.2 million for researching the genetics of harbor seals, money to study the mating habits of crabs. Isn't that exactly the kind of thing that John McCain is objecting to?

PALIN: Those requests, through our research divisions and fish and game and our wildlife departments and our universities, those research requests did come through that system, but wanting it to be in the light of day, not behind closed doors, with lobbyists making deals with Congress to stick things in there under the public radar. That's the abuse that we're going to stop. That's what John McCain has promised over and over for these years and that's what I'm joining him, also, saying, you're right, the abuse of earmarks, it's un-American, it's undemocratic, and it's not going to be accepted in a McCain-Palin administration. Earmark abuse will stop.
Click to expand...
 
mckmas8808

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
TheKingsCrown said:
I still don't get why Obama isn't forming his entire campaign around this theme now. He literally can say "John Mccain went from being a war hero in our country to a liar as soon as he saw the opportunity to become president of the united states" and it would CORRECT. It wouldn't even be POLITICS.
Click to expand...


He's probably letting the lies build up over time. And quite frankly saying that about McCain in stomp speeches will cause alot of news coverage so I'm guessing he's waiting for the best time to do it.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
capslock said:
Excerpts from the ABC interview.

Facepalm.gif
Click to expand...
About a quarter of the way through that interview I would have said "Can you please stop saying my name? I'm the person you talking directly to so there is no reason to repeatedly mention my name."

It is so annoying. Charlie, Chaaar-leee, CHAR-LEEEEEE!
 
J

JayDubya

Banned
speculawyer said:
It is totally cryptic bullshit. No one know what this 'strict constructionist' crap is other than it being a code-word for "I want to over-turn Roe v. Wade."
Click to expand...

*yells obscenities at computer screen*

WTF is 'strict constructionist' on computer encryption? Times change and you need to adjust to it. And even by this 'strict constructionist' crap, over-turning Roe v. Wade is complete bullshit since abortions privately took place back in those days . . . a fact they like to ignore.
Click to expand...

We ignore that fact? Really? People that want to return jurisdiction over the penal code to the states regarding what forms of homicide in their jurisdiction are justifiable... don't understand that there were some states where abortion was legally permissible, justifiable homicide?

We don't?

When we say the matter should be returned to the states, we mean the matter should be returned to the states. It's not rocket surgery. It's not cryptic. You'd have to be one dense motherfucker to not get it.

And this 'not legislate from the Bench' is bullshit as they overturn laws even more than liberal judges.
Click to expand...

LFTB has nothing to do with overturning existing law. And I'm quite sure I could cite plenty of examples where Stevens, Breyer et. al. didn't give a damn about stare decisis when to do so would be inconvenient for wielding the Constitution to shoving their values down the throats of all 50 states.
 
N

NetMapel

Guilty White Male Mods Gave Me This Tag
JayDubya said:
It's not "cryptic bullshit," so don't be a retard.

Roe should be overturned and the matter returned to the states. The case has been made, many a time, by many people, including by quite a few supporters of legal abortion that can recognize bad jurisprudence when they see it. The decision was based on nothing substantive within the text of the Constitution, only the values of the SCotUS members involved.

If you're ignorant of the opposition's argument at this point, the problem lies with you, and only you.
Click to expand...
For the last time, you and your wife don't have to get abortion if you don't want to, that's entirely fine with me. However, please don't limit other people's choice of getting an abortion when they are in dire needs. Leaving it up to the states will only mean red states people rush to blue states to get an abortion. You think people are just going to magically stop aborting babies because the law said so ? You conveniently used this exactly same reasoning to state your stands on supporting people getting guns legally because, as you have stated, criminals will find ways to get guns one way or another (mostly illegally). Yet, you cannot recognize that the same holds true for abortion as well ? You think women want and like aborting their children ? They only abort as their last resort, and taking this freedom away from them is criminal. Nevermind your "holier-than-thou" stands that life begins at conception, the reality is that being pregnant is a lengthy and hard process that not all families can live comfortably through. If you're so supportive of women putting their children through adoption instead, have you donated to those adoption agencies ? Do you plan to adopt a child ?
 
T

Tamanon

Banned
PALIN: And now obviously, Charlie, with the federal government saying, no, the rest of the nation does not want to fund that project. You have a choice. You either read the writing on the wall and understand okay, yes, that, that project's going nowhere. And the state isn't willing to fund that project. So what good does it do to continue to support something that circumstances have so drastically changed? You call an audible, and you deal in reality, and you move on. And, Charlie, we killed the bridge to nowhere and that's the bottom line.

GIBSON: The state of Alaska, under OMB figures in 2008, got $155 million in earmarks for a population of 670,000. That's $231 per person in Alaska. The state of Illinois, Obama's state, got $22 per person. You got 10 times per person as much. How does that square with your reforms?

PALIN: We have drastically, drastically reduced our earmark request since I came into office.

GIBSON: But you still have multiple of any other state.

PALIN: We sure are -- and this is what -- you go out and you ask any Alaskan this. This is what I've been telling Alaskans for these years that I've been in office, is no more.

GIBSON: Governor, this year, requested $3.2 million for researching the genetics of harbor seals, money to study the mating habits of crabs. Isn't that exactly the kind of thing that John McCain is objecting to?

PALIN: Those requests, through our research divisions and fish and game and our wildlife departments and our universities, those research requests did come through that system, but wanting it to be in the light of day, not behind closed doors, with lobbyists making deals with Congress to stick things in there under the public radar. That's the abuse that we're going to stop. That's what John McCain has promised over and over for these years and that's what I'm joining him, also, saying, you're right, the abuse of earmarks, it's un-American, it's undemocratic, and it's not going to be accepted in a McCain-Palin administration. Earmark abuse will stop.
Click to expand...

This is one of the most hilarious interview segments.:lol
 
V

vitaflo

Member
TheKingsCrown said:
I still don't get why Obama isn't forming his entire campaign around this theme now. He literally can say "John Mccain went from being a war hero in our country to a liar as soon as he saw the opportunity to become president of the united states" and it would CORRECT. It wouldn't even be POLITICS.
Click to expand...

Because McCain is getting caught in his own web of lies. You can only go super negative for so long with made up bullshit. Usually it happens the last week of the campaign so that people can't call you on it in time. They're playing that hand way too early. There's enough time for people to come to their senses and say "wait a second now".
 
B

bob_arctor

Tough_Smooth
speculawyer said:
It is totally cryptic bullshit. No one know what this 'strict constructionist' crap is other than it being a code-word for "I want to over-turn Roe v. Wade."

WTF is 'strict constructionist' on computer encryption? Times change and you need to adjust to it. And even by this 'strict constructionist' crap, over-turning Roe v. Wade is complete bullshit since abortions privately took place back in those days . . . a fact they like to ignore.

And this 'not legislate from the Bench' is bullshit as they overturn laws even more than liberal judges.
Click to expand...

Look, why bother? Jay thinks doctors who perform abortions are hit men. That's pretty much the end of any back and forth on it unless you're a sucker for verbal ping-pong of the eternal variety. He's in the minority and it's not gonna get overturned. *washes hands*
 
T

Trakdown

Member
speculawyer said:
About a quarter of the way through that interview I would have said "Can you please stop saying my name? I'm the person you talking directly to so there is no reason to repeatedly mention my name."

It is so annoying. Charlie, Chaaar-leee, CHAR-LEEEEEE!
Click to expand...

It's a pretty common tactic, actually. Biden used it on meet the press.

Although Biden's voice is infinitely less grating.
 
C

Cloudy

Banned
I don't understand how the Repubs can utter that "She can see Russia from Alaska" talking point with a straight face and people accept it. I swear this country is full of morons :(
 
D

Deku

Banned
080913DailyUpdateGraph1_iiiii.gif


We're now far out enough that if the streams cross in the next few days, Obama would have gotten the bigger bounce of the two, despite having his bounce cut short by Palin and the RNC.
 
A

Agent Icebeezy

Welcome beautful toddler, Madison Elizabeth, to the horde!
speculawyer said:
About a quarter of the way through that interview I would have said "Can you please stop saying my name? I'm the person you talking directly to so there is no reason to repeatedly mention my name."

It is so annoying. Charlie, Chaaar-leee, CHAR-LEEEEEE!
Click to expand...

When people try to bullshit through something like an interview, they hang on to a word or name to get through it. It is a talltale sign that someone is out of their league.
 
V

vitaflo

Member
Cloudy said:
I don't understand how the Repubs can utter that "She can see Russia from Alaska" talking point with a straight face and people accept it. I swear this country is full of morons :(
Click to expand...

These are the same people who wore bandaids with purple hearts on them in '04 mocking Kerry's service. Nothing is too low for them.
 
P

polyh3dron

Banned
Revengeance said:
Obama focused on the economy, but also hit McCain for trying to claim that he'll be a reformer, and on his claims that he won't let lobbyists run Washington (rightfully pointing out that they're running his campaign).
Click to expand...
OK he's been pointing this out for a long time though. If he and his campaign think that only repeating this is "hitting hard", they're crazy. Also, if he's going to go down this road he should continue to use the lipstick on a pig line, it's already been proven that everyone else including Johnny McLie has used it and it is a prime example of the Republicans' phony outrage.
 
A

Agent Icebeezy

Welcome beautful toddler, Madison Elizabeth, to the horde!
polyh3dron said:
OK he's been pointing this out for a long time though. If he and his campaign think that only repeating this is "hitting hard", they're crazy.
Click to expand...

It's the surrogates fucking job but they are acting like pussies about this. Biden does it, but the media doesn't give a shit about him
 
T

Tamanon

Banned
maximum360 said:
Is Greenspan now on the Obama train? He doesn't seem to fazed by economic plan: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aKZG._gG2NVI&refer=politics

I'm thinking in a week or two the 'Palintology' wave will take a nose-dive. She'll still have the base but independents may get more turned off as time goes on.
Click to expand...

He's of the same belief that McCain claimed to used to have. Don't cut taxes if you're not going to cut spending. Cutting "earmarks" won't do shit for the budget.
 
R

reilo

learning some important life lessons from magical Negroes
kkaabboomm said:
really? REALLY? they can't tell the difference between 23,000 people

IMG_1741.preview.jpg
Click to expand...

Wait. University of Kentucky stadium holds more people than a professional NBA arena?
 
T

Tamanon

Banned
reilo said:
Wait. University of Kentucky stadium holds more people than a professional NBA arena?
Click to expand...

Makes sense, they don't have to sell out as many games. But yeah, they seat 23,500 there, about 3k more than Staples Center.
 
K

kkaabboomm

Member
Tamanon said:
Makes sense, they don't have to sell out as many games. But yeah, they seat 23,500 there, about 3k more than Staples Center.
Click to expand...

"Capacity 23,500"
thats the official capacity, we cram 24,000+ in though for some games--24,465 is the record....(and it is always sold out, always. it may not always be full for some piss-poor games like against tennessee tech or something, but it is always sold out)

but thats besides the point. 23,000 is way more than 8,000. not even close. i dont understand how estimates could be so off
 
J

JayDubya

Banned
Hey, if Bob wants to bring things up along these lines, and you want to fuss at me, bring your A-game, because I'm always up for this.

NetMapel said:
For the last time, you and your wife don't have to get abortion if you don't want to, that's entirely fine with me. However, please don't limit other people's choice of getting an abortion when they are in dire needs.
Click to expand...

:lol @ "For the last time." Oh, I get it, you're super duper serious, and this is the end of it. "LET THIS BE OUR FINAL BATTLE" or some shit. Where's that He-Man screencap?

I'm all about personal choice, but aggressive homicide is not a private, personal choice, it is a social evil. The fact that was trussed up as related to the right to privacy by Blackmun does not make it so. Point in fact, I'm not sure how the Supreme Court believes they can enforce an un-enumerated right, as defined by an un-enumerated right, as interpreted by how they think an amendment would have been written if it was written by themselves.

Legal abortion is a social evil and a human rights abuse. The 1800s equivalent is saying "Don't tell me I can't own slaves! You don't have to own one if you don't want to!"

Leaving it up to the states will only mean red states people rush to blue states to get an abortion.
Click to expand...
It also means that contract killers cannot legally practice in my state, and strongly encourages people who feel that hiring them is ethically appropriate to GTFO.

I don't want to be a "slave state." We were quite happy being on the side of the angels down here in Texas before Blackmun decided he was the law [/Judge Dredd].

You think people are just going to magically stop aborting babies because the law said so ? You conveniently used this exactly same reasoning to state your stands on supporting people getting guns legally because, as you have stated, criminals will find ways to get guns one way or another (mostly illegally).
Click to expand...

Of course not. There's always a black market for anything.

With guns and drugs, the argument of "people will do it anyway" has always played second fiddle to me next to "there's absolutely no reason for people to restrict the freedom of the individual when they're not hurting any one else."

There are some things, however - slavery, child porn, abortion, etc. - that fundamentally violate human rights, and while there always will be a black market for these things, that is not a relevant fact regarding their legality / illegality.

Yet, you cannot recognize that the same holds true for abortion as well ? You think women want and like aborting their children ? They only abort as their last resort, and taking this freedom away from them is criminal.
Click to expand...

Only in a state of total barbarism or anarchy would the freedom to kill others on a whim without just cause, without self-defense, be regarded as a neccessary freedom.

Nevermind your "holier-than-thou" stands that life begins at conception
Click to expand...

You mean the scientific stand? Oh, I'm sorry, I can read a Biology text, my bad.

The reality is that being pregnant is a lengthy and hard process that not all families can live comfortably through. If you're so supportive of women putting their children through adoption instead, have you donated to those adoption agencies ? Do you plan to adopt a child ?
Click to expand...

The wife and I have donated to relevant charities and we've frequently discussed adoption and informed our parents of our intention about the relative likelihood of doing so at some point in the future.

That about cover it, Mapel?
 
T

TDG

Banned
Funky Papa said:
And GAF breathes again. We truly are a bunch a chicken littles :lol
Click to expand...
Speak for yourself.

But hey, now that the convention bump is proving to just be a convention bump (as I tried to tell the people on the ledges), the thread is becoming readable again, so I'm happy.
 
T

TheKingsCrown

Banned
kkaabboomm said:
"Capacity 23,500"
thats the official capacity, we cram 24,000+ in though for some games--24,465 is the record....(and it is always sold out, always. it may not always be full for some piss-poor games like against tennessee tech or something, but it is always sold out)

but thats besides the point. 23,000 is way more than 8,000. not even close. i dont understand how estimates could be so off
Click to expand...


"Truth" squad
 
S

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
JayDubya said:
We were quite happy being on the side of the angels down here in Texas before Blackmun decided he was the law [/Judge Dredd].
Click to expand...


I thought you were an atheist. Not a dig. Srsly thought you were.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
RNC suspending GOP Feb '16 debate with NBC (Because lol CNBC)
2 3 4 5
212
19K
OuterLimits replied
  • Locked
The Democratic National Committee Chair Debate |OT| - Dem One: A Politics Story
2
79
8K
kirblar replied
  • Locked
NYT: G.O.P. Urges Donald Trump to Broaden Outreach to Black Voters
2 3 4
178
21K
mckmas8808 replied
  • Locked
Hillary Clinton retweets Slate voter guide calling her most corrupt candidate
3
4K
ModBot replied
  • Locked
NYT: "Trump-Size Idea for a New President: Build Something Inspiring"
2
74
9K
jerry113 replied
Top Bottom