http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040830/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_convention_rdp&cid=694&ncid=716
I've seen more stories about prominent Republican figures who don't adhere strictly to a party line lately than I care to think about.
Is this an indication of deliberate distancing or genuine diversity?
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Republicans not walking party line
Republicans not walking party lineFollow
It's quite simple: It's a ploy to appear moderate to the masses. Quite frankly, the Republicans have gone so far to the right because they are in power. When you get power you shift to your base (crazy conservative whacko's like Varus) because you're driving policy. You see it generally more on the state level because your candidates are generally endorsed by your base (they are the ones that attend primaries and caucuses in general). The base tends to be the most radical or reactionary element of the party as they are generally the ones that are most impassioned and involved.
When you're out of power you generally become more moderate to appeal to more voters to allow yourself the chance to garner more votes from the middle to get into power.
It's the nature of politics.
The Republicans realize that their best chance is to appear moderate to try to garner votes from undecideds, independants, and conservative Democrats. They have their base locked up and don't need to worry about pleasing them, for the most part. It's not like they're going to vote for Nader or Kerry or whoever the Libs are throwing out there.
It's a sign of one of two things: good political sense or running scared. I'd like to think it's running scared...
Grady
When you're out of power you generally become more moderate to appeal to more voters to allow yourself the chance to garner more votes from the middle to get into power.
It's the nature of politics.
The Republicans realize that their best chance is to appear moderate to try to garner votes from undecideds, independants, and conservative Democrats. They have their base locked up and don't need to worry about pleasing them, for the most part. It's not like they're going to vote for Nader or Kerry or whoever the Libs are throwing out there.
It's a sign of one of two things: good political sense or running scared. I'd like to think it's running scared...
Grady
I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked, dragging themselves through the negro streets at dawn looking for an angry fix, angelheaded hipsters burning for the ancient heavenly connection to the starry dynamo in the machin ery of night.
Grady's right, appeal to the middle.
On a similar note, Cokie Roberts was talking about incumbent presidents and the platforms on which they run on NPR. The talk was mostly an analysis of incumbent president speeches during the conventions.
Normally, she said, the incumbent president runs on the theme "You've never had it so good."
She then quickly added that Bush can't do that, so he has to use the theme "You've never been so safe."
We'll see.
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=3875903
On a similar note, Cokie Roberts was talking about incumbent presidents and the platforms on which they run on NPR. The talk was mostly an analysis of incumbent president speeches during the conventions.
Normally, she said, the incumbent president runs on the theme "You've never had it so good."
She then quickly added that Bush can't do that, so he has to use the theme "You've never been so safe."
We'll see.
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=3875903
If he makes it a referendum on his presidency, it's over. He'll make a speech talking about how much safer we are, but he'll continue to advocate 527's and other groups to bash Kerry constantly. That will make the race more about "you want THIS GUY (a villyfied Kerry) over me???".
Grady
Grady
I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked, dragging themselves through the negro streets at dawn looking for an angry fix, angelheaded hipsters burning for the ancient heavenly connection to the starry dynamo in the machin ery of night.
I believe the Republican party's Big Tent platform is an honest effort to include conservatives of all stripes.
Totem
Totem
Really? You believe that? Somehow, I don't think you're that naive.
You're entitled to believe what you want, but we've seen what lengths they'll go to discredit moderate members who don't tow the party line. One of them is speaking during these festivities.
Grady
You're entitled to believe what you want, but we've seen what lengths they'll go to discredit moderate members who don't tow the party line. One of them is speaking during these festivities.
Grady
I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked, dragging themselves through the negro streets at dawn looking for an angry fix, angelheaded hipsters burning for the ancient heavenly connection to the starry dynamo in the machin ery of night.
Yes, there are hardliners in the party-- and they can be a very vocal and forceful group --but I think the core of the Republican Party is fiscally conservative and socially laissez faire. It has long been this way and I don't see this changing any time soon. Republicans want social issues to remain at the status quo with small changes effected rather than large cultural changes.
Feel free to jump on that statement by highlighting the civil right movement, but it was conservatives who actually began the movement. On the other hand, the counter culture of the '60's gravitates to the Democratic Party with all its' massive social unrest that that era embraced. The problem is, for youth, slow change is never enough. It doesn't reach enough, quick enough, far enough. I believe you can't legislate morality, but that doesn't mean you have to throw over the traces either.
Totem
Feel free to jump on that statement by highlighting the civil right movement, but it was conservatives who actually began the movement. On the other hand, the counter culture of the '60's gravitates to the Democratic Party with all its' massive social unrest that that era embraced. The problem is, for youth, slow change is never enough. It doesn't reach enough, quick enough, far enough. I believe you can't legislate morality, but that doesn't mean you have to throw over the traces either.
Totem
I believe the Republican party's Big Tent platform is an honest effort to include conservatives of all stripes
Try reading the ******* platform next time before you make statements that make you look like you have no idea what you're talking about.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Totem, when I was a Republican/Libertarian, that was exactly what I thought. That party is no more.
In Minnesota, the DFL is the moderate party socially and fiscally. I have no problems with a decent tax rate at a state level (which is were things should be done). I'm not a big fan of large federal government spending, however, nor federal taxation.
Minnesota used to be a great state to live in. Thanks to the GOP it's just not that great anymore.
Grady
Edited, Mon Aug 30 16:32:54 2004 by Grady
In Minnesota, the DFL is the moderate party socially and fiscally. I have no problems with a decent tax rate at a state level (which is were things should be done). I'm not a big fan of large federal government spending, however, nor federal taxation.
Minnesota used to be a great state to live in. Thanks to the GOP it's just not that great anymore.
Grady
Edited, Mon Aug 30 16:32:54 2004 by Grady
I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked, dragging themselves through the negro streets at dawn looking for an angry fix, angelheaded hipsters burning for the ancient heavenly connection to the starry dynamo in the machin ery of night.
TStephens wrote:
Is this an indication of deliberate distancing or genuine diversity?
It's genuine diversity.
Grady. Your observations are partically correct. But most of that is perception.
A party will have a wide variance of viewpoints within it. However, when a party is in power, it's detractors will *always* point to the hardline position of the party when attempting to villify it. Thus, when the more moderate members of that party speak they are seen as "not toeing the party line" or some such.
The reality is that the party line was never that hardline, but the other guys will make it seem that way to regain power if they can.
If I had a dollar for everytime that Smash called me a "sucker" for voting for a party that supposedly doesn't help me, I'd be a really wealthy person. So, we either conclude that something like 80% of the entire Republican voting block is filled up with "suckers", or we have to conclude that maybe that line of thinking is false, and there's more to the party then the hardline position tossed out there by the Dems as an easy strawman to argue against.
I'd suggest that the latter is vastly more likely, but you're free to disagree. If nothing else, if 80% of the party believes in a more moderate position, then the party platform *will* reflect that belief and not the extreme. Just a thought...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
So, we either conclude that something like 80% of the entire Republican voting block is filled up with "suckers", or we have to conclude that maybe that line of thinking is false, and there's more to the party then the hardline position tossed out there by the Dems as an easy strawman to argue against.
The Strawman is called the Republican Party Platform.
You should perhaps consider reading it, sometime, seeing as you're voting for them and all.
I don't think 80% of the Republican voting block are sucjers, more along the lines of 30%.
There're the poor and lower middle class people who don't want thier money going to Welfare, then there are the jack off on a flag people who see the GOP as tough guys, then there are people like you, middle class workers who think they're benefiting from tax cuts for the ultra rich who end up paying the tab for the tax cuts a few years down the line.
If you want to understand who you are voting for when you vote for Bush, take a look at his Judicial appointments. They are all informed by a clear Crhistian Right true believer.
Bush spends a tremendous amount of government money, causes a massive debt, runs the most secretive Excuate in history and supports a far right Christian agenda.
He's not a moderate. His father was. If this election was between Kerry and Bush Sr. it'd be an average contest where the outcome wasn't terribly important. That's not the case, however.
Take the blinders off.
Sucker.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Smasharoo wrote:
So, we either conclude that something like 80% of the entire Republican voting block is filled up with "suckers", or we have to conclude that maybe that line of thinking is false, and there's more to the party then the hardline position tossed out there by the Dems as an easy strawman to argue against.
The Strawman is called the Republican Party Platform.
You should perhaps consider reading it, sometime, seeing as you're voting for them and all.
I don't think 80% of the Republican voting block are sucjers, more along the lines of 30%.
Yet oddly, you have a hard time finding that 70% who fit your "vision" of what the Republican party "really is" according to Smasharoo.
Hmmm...
Quote:
There're the poor and lower middle class people who don't want thier money going to Welfare, then there are the jack off on a flag people who see the GOP as tough guys, then there are people like you, middle class workers who think they're benefiting from tax cuts for the ultra rich who end up paying the tab for the tax cuts a few years down the line.
Ah. Or maybe they understand that success should be earned rather then given. Maybe they also honestly accept that if the work they do is worth X amount per hour in wages, then that what they should earn.
Maybe they also understand that the Republican party policies mean that if they are successful, they'll actually get to keep most of what they earn instead of having to give it away to others.
If it was just about doing what's best for you, then we'd all be voting based on our own greed Smash. That may be the Dem position (you're poor, and we're going to help you), but the Rep party line is a whole different dynamic Smash. We do what we believe is the right thing, not just the thing that benefits us personally the most.
Quote:
If you want to understand who you are voting for when you vote for Bush, take a look at his Judicial appointments. They are all informed by a clear Crhistian Right true believer.
Really?! Which explains why the leaders of the Methodist Church, of which Bush is a member, have publically condemned the war in Iraq?
If he's the religious right wing nut, but anyone who disagrees with his policies are just people who aren't in the know, or in the power structure, then exactly who's religious policies is he following?
Your argument's starting to look a bit squirrely about here Smash.
Quote:
Bush spends a tremendous amount of government money, causes a massive debt, runs the most secretive Excuate in history and supports a far right Christian agenda.
See statement above. Same thing. Who's religious agenda is he pushing if they don't agree with everything he's doing?
Quote:
He's not a moderate. His father was. If this election was between Kerry and Bush Sr. it'd be an average contest where the outcome wasn't terribly important. That's not the case, however.
Take the blinders off.
Sucker.
Take the blinders off.
Sucker.
Yup. Here we go again.
So let me get this straight. We've got this mysterious group of Republican leaders who are doing things for their own benefit, but not for those who vote for them, and just suckering those voting blocks while they pursue their own agenda instead.
So they lie to the military voting block because Bush, you know, slacked off in the national guard instead of serving. And hey. They're actually putting US soldiers in harms way, and who wants to die in a war, right?
And they're lying to the religious right, cause they allowed them to believe that he was their guy, but then he does a bunch of stuff they don't agree with either.
And they're lying to the fiscal conservatives because his economic plan doesn't match standard supply side economics.
And that's not to mention all the Republicans who don't agree with Supply side concepts in the first place (Eisenhower'd be rolling in his grave, right?).
And all those Republicans who aren't part of the religious right, well they get screwed because he's clearly going to push for overturning Roe v Wade, and getting prayer back in school like it belongs.
Um. Smash. Exactly what *is* the agenda if it's not any of those things at all?
Ever think that maybe there's just a broad set of people who are Republican, and the party policies reflect a little bit of all of them?
Yeah. That kinda makes more sense, doesn't it?
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Really?! Which explains why the leaders of the Methodist Church, of which Bush is a member, have publically condemned the war in Iraq?
If he's the religious right wing nut, but anyone who disagrees with his policies are just people who aren't in the know, or in the power structure, then exactly who's religious policies is he following?
Your argument's starting to look a bit squirrely about here Smash.
This is the best argument you can come up with to demonstrate that Bush isn't tied to the Christian Right?
Are you serious? Tell me you're kidding.
This the best you could come up with?
Honestly?
Read the platform yet, Sucker?
Give it a read and them paste the parts you agree with. See how that goes.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Take a long educated look at Schwarzenegger. He's the model Republican of 20 years in the future. The old Vietnam era crowd will move on. There's a new generation of conservatives coming through that will HOPEFULLY follow the lead of genuine moderates such as Schwarzenneger and McCain. They're simply ahead of their time.
I also think the Dems will see the light after a Kerry defeat. The Dems will hopefully embrace more moderate ideologies. This will make for a great era of politics. IMHO for what its worth, I think the Dems put together as liberal a ticket as possible gambling on Americans voting more against Bush in this election rather than for whatever candidates they can slap together. Kerry/Edwards represent the worst of the worst in the Dems. precisely for the reason that the far left can ram whoever down our throats coated with some Anti-Bush sugar.
I also think the Dems will see the light after a Kerry defeat. The Dems will hopefully embrace more moderate ideologies. This will make for a great era of politics. IMHO for what its worth, I think the Dems put together as liberal a ticket as possible gambling on Americans voting more against Bush in this election rather than for whatever candidates they can slap together. Kerry/Edwards represent the worst of the worst in the Dems. precisely for the reason that the far left can ram whoever down our throats coated with some Anti-Bush sugar.
Quote:
I also think the Dems will see the light after a Kerry defeat.
Bwa-ha-ha! Smash has running bet...wanna get in Lefein?
Smasharoo wrote:
Really?! Which explains why the leaders of the Methodist Church, of which Bush is a member, have publically condemned the war in Iraq?
If he's the religious right wing nut, but anyone who disagrees with his policies are just people who aren't in the know, or in the power structure, then exactly who's religious policies is he following?
Your argument's starting to look a bit squirrely about here Smash.
This is the best argument you can come up with to demonstrate that Bush isn't tied to the Christian Right?
Are you serious? Tell me you're kidding.
This the best you could come up with?
Honestly?
Read the platform yet, Sucker?
Give it a read and them paste the parts you agree with. See how that goes.
Depends on what you mean by "tied" Smash. It's a vague term (which I've come to expect from you).
Do you mean "tied" in that he happens to be a Methodist? Ok. Find me a president that didn't have some sort of personal religious views and we can talk.
Do you mean "tied" in that he'll make policy based on what his church believes is correct? Then explain why the major policy action of his term is in opposition to what his church believes is correct?
Can't have it both ways Smash. He's either a patsy for the Methodist Church, or he's not.
Again. It makes a hell of a lot more sense to see that the Republican party is made up of a whole variety of different groups with different opinions on things, and Bush (and the platform) is a position that appeals to as many of those positions as possible.
Saying that a particular set of Republicans isn't part of the platform simply because they don't get 100% of what they want is ridiculous. You are picking and choosing things that support your position and ignoring everything else. Guess what? NO single voting group in a party gets everything they want. That's not really a bad thing IMO.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Do you mean "tied" in that he'll make policy based on what his church believes is correct? Then explain why the major policy action of his term is in opposition to what his church believes is correct?
Can't have it both ways Smash. He's either a patsy for the Methodist Church, or he's not.
Contrary to what you'd like to reprsent, because it would make your ludicrous argument more effective, the Methodist church is not the sole standard bearer for the Christian Right.
Most of the Christian Right belives strongly in the war.
Taking the position of a Methodrist, and then arguing that Bush isn't a tool of the Christian Right because he disagrees with one issue with said Methodist is such a spurrious argument that I'm amazed even you, king of spurrious arguments, would make it.
You are pretty desperate on this one, though. When all the facts are against you, iot's important to dig up whatever sort of whacko comparison that you can. Aryan Nations are part of the Christain Right and they belive in killing Black people. Bush doesn't belive in that, so he's not supporting the Christian Right Agenda!
Why don't you list your impression of the Christian Rigth agenda and then tell me where Bush differs.
How would that be?
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Weren't you the one in a previous thread who made a comment to the fact that sinch Bush was a devote Methodist, and Methodists were hardcore RR (along with a list of what the Methodist agenda was), that Bush was therefore defacto toeing the RR line?
Wouldn't showing a Bush policy that breaks from those of his own church kinda disprove that assessement?
Yeah. I think it does. It shows me a president who's making choices based on what he thinks is best for the country as a whole, not just what his personal beliefs are, or the beliefs of his religion.
I'm still curious Smash. Isn't finding a ton of Reps who don't have the same exact positions on everything as Bush an indication that the Rep party as an entity has a pretty diverse set of views?
I just don't understand how on the one hand you can insist that it's "all about one agenda", but then point out tons of Reps with different agendas. Which is it?
I particularly love whenever a moderate Rep comes along, you say he's really a Democrat who happens to take the name Republican for one reason or another. Um... Ever think that maybe the fact is that you personally don't disagree with all things Republican but can't accept that, so you call them Dems in Rep clothing instead?
Yeah. I think so. Keep those blinders on though. It's really amusing sometimes...
Wouldn't showing a Bush policy that breaks from those of his own church kinda disprove that assessement?
Yeah. I think it does. It shows me a president who's making choices based on what he thinks is best for the country as a whole, not just what his personal beliefs are, or the beliefs of his religion.
I'm still curious Smash. Isn't finding a ton of Reps who don't have the same exact positions on everything as Bush an indication that the Rep party as an entity has a pretty diverse set of views?
I just don't understand how on the one hand you can insist that it's "all about one agenda", but then point out tons of Reps with different agendas. Which is it?
I particularly love whenever a moderate Rep comes along, you say he's really a Democrat who happens to take the name Republican for one reason or another. Um... Ever think that maybe the fact is that you personally don't disagree with all things Republican but can't accept that, so you call them Dems in Rep clothing instead?
Yeah. I think so. Keep those blinders on though. It's really amusing sometimes...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Weren't you the one in a previous thread who made a comment to the fact that sinch Bush was a devote Methodist, and Methodists were hardcore RR (along with a list of what the Methodist agenda was), that Bush was therefore defacto toeing the RR line?
Um, no.
Kind of fucks up the whole argument when you start with a false premise, eh?
Folks?
Heh.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
I particularly love whenever a moderate Rep comes along, you say he's really a Democrat who happens to take the name Republican for one reason or another. Um... Ever think that maybe the fact is that you personally don't disagree with all things Republican but can't accept that, so you call them Dems in Rep clothing instead?
Ever think that the fact that your beliefs align with about 6 out of 400 members of the party you support might indicate that you're a little confused?
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Actually I believe a Kerry defeat would be good for the Dems in the long run. I'm sure that sounds crazy, but polarization in that party is at an all time high.
Actually I believe a Kerry defeat would be good for the Dems in the long run. I'm sure that sounds crazy, but polarization in that party is at an all time high.
Being very active in Democratic politics, I think can say that's patently false.
Unity is at an all time high. I'm not saying that as lip service, it's true. Bush has unified the Democratic Party like never before.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Ah yes, BUSH has unified the party like never before.... What happens when there is no Bush though? I think you guys need to find some super glue, not crazy glue.
Ah yes, BUSH has unified the party like never before.... What happens when there is no Bush though?
We'll argue about stuff while running the free world, I guess.
I can live with that.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Hahaha, as partisan as I might be coming across I think it's in my country's best interest to have two strong parties. America deserves the best choices..... not choosing between the worst. I support Bush, I dont necessarily think he's the best thing since peanutbutter and jelly.
Hahaha, as partisan as I might be coming across I think it's in my country's best interest to have two strong parties. America deserves the best choices..... not choosing between the worst
There are two choices. One for people who care about and understand the issues, and the GOP.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Recent Visitors: 193
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (193)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Republicans not walking party line
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC