Sweating to the oldies

Ben Nelson says Washington needs to be cut off from its credit card binge!

Well, 1996 Ben Nelson felt that way, anyway. 2010 Nelson? Not so much.

Note the 1996 Nelson for Senate ad (when Nebraskans rejected Nelson for Senate):

Ah 1996. Remember when every candidate had a printed “plan”? And it was in one of those plastic binders in which you would submit your “Huckleberry Finn” book report? (And how about that hair!)

But it is cute how Nelson says, “No more credit cards for Washington!”, right?

Because 2010 Ben Nelson is the one who was the deciding vote for credit-card busting ObamaCare. (Maybe he thought he was using the Discover Card for the Cornhusker Kickback.)

And then Nelson voted for the debt crushing porkulus-stimulus that was supposed to lower unemployment and provide for “shovel-ready” jobs. ‘Member that?

Yup, that was Nelson with the other girls at the Mall, where he comes home pleading, “But Barry said I HAD to get this $600 blouse because it was 20% off!”

You know, there is a way to actually take away Nelson’s credit card this time…

***

The OWH put up a piece on Sunday, and it was one of those that really grinds our gears (to paraphrase Peter Griffin). They whined about Congressman Lee Terry raising campaign money. Because it’s bad and it’s during the never-ending budget negotiations, and at a golf course!

But not just any golf course, the OWH tells us. At TPC Avenel — “an upscale Washington-area golf course.”

Big. Freaking. Deal.

Keep in mind, this is the same paper that will gauge Terry’s re-election and campaign on how much cash he has raised for the quarter. And it would be a sign of his weakness if he could not pull in those big dollars from Washington, or that he is not playing with the big-boys, or some such nonsense.

These type of stories always grate on us. They have no level of reality and are simply supposed to make you envious about a politician who does not go around in sack-cloth and ashes. They lead you to think Terry is lining his gold-lined pockets with more gold and taking his own cut-of-the-top of that $500 donation — instead of giving it directly to Channel 7 to run campaign ads.

Oh, but to be fair, they get news about what all the other area pols are doing for their campaigns this week.

Well, except they can’t get ahold of Ben Nelson’s campaign spokesman.

It was unclear whether any events had been planned for Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., who is up for re-election in 2012. Nelson’s office referred questions about fundraising to a campaign spokesman, who could not be reached.

Riiiiiight.

Think about that a minute kids. When was the last time you couldn’t reach someone by cell phone or text or email? When all three are in their pocket pretty much 24-7. So unless Nelson’s campaign flak — whose only job is to talk to the media — was in the shower while SCUBA diving, he/she/it has their phone on their hip.

So it is not that this person “could not be reached”, of course It is that they were ignoring the call/questions. But why….

Well, maybe their were trying to figure out that credit card debt…

***

And we have to give a shout-out to Don Stenberg whose campaign pulled a weird little mini-scoop the other day.

Stenberg had an interview with nationally syndicated radio talk show host Mark Levin (Rush Limbaugh always referred to him as “F. Lee Levin”. He’s the guy who sounds like he’s yelling at those kids to stay off his lawn).

Towards the end of the interview, Levin asked if he could give Stenberg his endorsement (which Stenberg flatly rejected. Ha! We kid.). You can hear the whole interview here.

Not the hugest coup in the world, but a nice deal for Don to toss around, on a little bit of the national stage.

***

Get ready to sweat this week. And while you are sweating and making your Amazon purchases via Leavenworth Street’s link (yeah, not much of a segue there…), we just want to thank those of you who have been making those purchases. Your support is VERY appreciated and we thank you for helping us keep the electricity flowing here on Leavenworth Street.

Now back to sweating.

61 comments

  1. Clyde the Glide says:

    Hey Ben its election time. Do you want the usual election shipment now. In 1996 you were our best customer.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Joe Morton is a talentless, partisan hack of a “reporter.”

    For starters, Ben Nelson’s press secretary is one Jake Thompson, formerly of the Omaha World-Herald and a co-worker of Joe Morton. I’m sure it was really hard for them to connect on this (wink, wink.)

    Secondly, Ben Nelson has been raising millions in campaign cash during a period where he and his senate buddies have failed to pass a budget in more than 800 DAYS. Responsibility for this “crisis” lies exclusively with Nelson and Senate Dems – a fact Morton and the OWH continues to ignore.

    It’s examples like this that prove why Nelson will be tough to beat – Walton and Morton, the LJS and the OWH, are in the bag. Nelson will continue to receive a free pass from these folks.

  3. Old Joe says:

    How is it a “weird little mini-scoop” for Stenberg to get the endorsement from a Reagan Conservative, former chief of staff to Ed Meese, and the host of the 4th largest radio audience in America?

  4. Planned Parenthood says:

    Thank you Ben Nelson for voting for Obamacare!!! HHS today announced that the morning after pill will a mandated insurance coverage requirement for all private insurance plans next year. Get this NO COPAY!!!!! Think of all those public employees that will use taxpayer dollars to fund Plan B abortions through their insurance plan. Brilliant Ben, we could not have done it without you!!!

  5. Pro-Life Voter says:

    This proves it. Ben Nelson is pro-abortion, Period! Free Abortion pills are mandated by the Federal government as “preventative medicine” under Obamacare. Thank you Ben Nelson for accomplishing Planned Parenthoods goals.

  6. Speaking for Reagan... says:

    I love the Libs who come on here and try to speak “for” Reagan to diminish the Tea Party or candidates.

    Maybe you should go back and listen to what Reagan had to say throughout is political proigression. There are dozens and dozens of speeches available. May of which were as radical for the time as you want to believe the Tea Party is now.

    So, speak for yourself! You are no Reagan.

  7. FPS says:

    Hey Pro Life Voter & PP,

    You Redneck Nebraskans are like Animals the way you breed irresponsibly! Don’t you realize that the basic problem with the World is OVER POPULATION??? Get your heads out of your A holes already & try to educate your feral children & yourselves to think with your heads & not your genitals!! This isn’t 1840 you might have noticed????

    BTW SS, What’s with your ECO moving letters codex, you can’t possibly be Earth Friendly? I thought all GOPERS want to destroy or RAPE the Earth for the $$$$ that they can be buried with comes the FIRE NEXT TIME????

  8. RWP says:

    The really interesting question will be how the Benator votes tonight. So far he has voted no on CCB, no on the Boehner bill, and no on the Reid alternative. It’s looking like he’s one of those uncompromising, fractious radicals the newspapers have been warning us about, putting his extremist principles over the business of practical politics.

    HAHAHAHAHA!

  9. Logan 5 says:

    That’s right FPS. We have too many people. I suggest you save the earth by offing yourself. See you at Carolsel.

  10. Ricky says:

    How unseemly that Rep Terry will put on a 500 dollar apiece golf fundraiser while the fate of the nation rides on the votes of the House and Senate on that very day.
    Social Security checks and checks to the military might not go out but Lee Terry will cavort with lobbyists to get their money and hear there concerns of the moment.
    What a different world Terry and the other lawmakers live in Washington, while the rest of the country has to hear about their squabbling for weeks.
    I will be happy when Omaha will be represented by a Democrat in the House of Representatives for a change.

    Ricky From Omaha

  11. RWP says:

    According to his unofficial Press Secretary Don Walton, Nelson will vote no, again, on the debt ceiling increase. LOL! Shame to break a hot streak! Too bad he didn’t figure out how to vote no until after Obamacare passed!

  12. RWP says:

    Meanwhile, Jane has a new hawt cowboy. This one’s a bit older than Scott, but every bit as authentic. He lives just down he road from me, in the Lincoln suburb of Martell, a nifty ten minute drive from Trader Joes, where you can buy organic beef jerky and sarsparilla.

    Stand with Randy, y’all.

  13. anonymous says:

    Google State of Nebraska Votercheck. According to Secretary of State John Gale it looks like Gerard Harbison is STILL not a registered voter.

  14. RWP says:

    Nope. That’s not what John Gale says at all.

    I could, I suppose, scan in my voter registration card. But why would I, when y’all are so amusing chasing you tails?

    BTW, I rhink Jane’s new cowboy would vote at the former Martell High School, my local poling place.

  15. Macdaddy says:

    Ricky, you may want to scare up a candidate, first. Oops, I forgot. Isn’t the guy who runs the DMV, to whom I pay hundreds upon hundreds of dollars to every year for no discernible purpose, running in the Dem column?

  16. Ricky says:

    Yessir Macdaddy John Ewing Douglas County Treasurer has said he is running for the House.
    I sure hope he gets it, time for a change and the House can not be more dysfunctional than it is now right?
    Rep Terry can not possibly look more out of touch than he does now. Too bad the Nebraska Legislature led by Scott Laughtenbaugh gerry mandered a district so that Terry has a reliable Sarpy County base to count.
    That’s pretty sad.

    ricky from omaha

  17. Sweetwater Woods says:

    In regard to the Omaha World-Herald:

    If I would never, in a million years, pay to subscribe to the New York Times….the newspaper that simply cannot write a straight, factual news story if it’s life depended on it…..then why in the world do I continue to subcribe to the OWH? I challenge readers to check every day to see how many of the news stories in the first section of the OWH come directly from the New York Times. Believe it or not, I have taken to simply throwing away the first section the very minute I see another “news” story from the New York Times.

    Is there no other news source that the leading newspaper in Nebraska could use for it’s news stories?

  18. MacDaddy says:

    Sweetwater, it’s worse than that. I often read those stories in the News section 2 or 3 DAYS after I read them on the internet.

  19. Kortezzi says:

    Ricky, the 2nd district wasn’t Gerrymandered. It is contiguous and compact. And Sarpy was already split before. Just because the lines change doesn’t mean they were drawn in violation of redistricting principles.

    But before you go thinking it will help Lee Terry, ask yourself this: Won’t a more suburban district help the Tea Partiers leaning to the GOP side knock him out of the primary? Lee hasn’t done much to distinguish himself as a conservative or a leader, and he’s ripe for a challenge from his Right.

    That said, I’d put Ewing’s chances at about 1 in 4 at best. I am glad Anne Boyle didn’t jump in, as she would have been a formidable opponent in the general. Now that Ewing’s in, she will stay out.

  20. Anonymous says:

    SW, let’s clarify. Is it that the NY Times cannot write a straight, factual news story or rather that the facts don’t agree with your world view, so the facts must be wrong?

  21. Sweetwater Woods says:

    Anonymous at 10:11: Answer: it is that the NYT CANNOT WRITE A STRAIGHT, FACTUAL NEWS STORY.

  22. Anonymous says:

    Benita is finished, such a putz.

    Terry will win again………

    The Legislature is lucky to have a Senator with Brains, Backbone, and Vision. Thanks Scott!

    Oh and Ricky, hahahahahahahahahaha you are pretty funny, ok not so much.

    RWP- This whole thing about you being registered and all is a pretty worn out shtick.

    SS- Thanks for being here and doing what you all do.

  23. ROFL@Ricky says:

    At some point the embarrassment of being wrong numerous times will set in with rational folks. Not with ol’ Ricky. This guy is a hoot!

  24. Dennis says:

    Congratulations to Leavenworth St., NewNebraska.net and Winterized for making the Washington Post’s list of the best state political blogs!

  25. FPS says:

    Denny @2:19
    Pretty SLIM Pickins in NE huh? And coming from a GOPER rag like the WP, it’s nothing to brag about! They might have done better just to ignore NE altogether, I’m sure no one would have noticed, that is except you & a few other cavemen!

    Nice move by the RED Dem Nelson voting NO on the Ceiling. This way he get to suck both the Wackjob TPers butts as well as the Progressives. Course he’s not going to mention PROGRESSIVES to anyone. It’s funny how INSANE that whole mess was. Just a taste of what’s to come from the AW TPers!! STUPID IS, AS STUPID DOES!!! Guess Who?

  26. Anonymous says:

    Okay, FPS, I will guess.

    Hmm, by your quote, I guess you are F. Gump. How’s the shrimping?

  27. Anonymostly says:

    Anonymous idiot at post 25, what’s pretty worn schtick is that asshats like you continue to bring up whether RWP is a registered voter or not. I’ve been reading this site for awhile now and I have never once seen RWP raise the issue. Sure, he’s responded to it. But it’s always the trolls like yourself who raise the issue.

    Let me ask you this: What difference does it make if he votes or not? The arguments he makes stand on their own merit. Why don’t you pathetic libs just argue the points that he makes? (Because you can’t? Aha! I think I’m on to something!)

    You’re half right. The act has worn thin. But who keeps bringing it up?

  28. Anonymostly says:

    FPS, the “irresponsible breeding” going on out there is actually being performed by all those so-called “single mothers” who get knocked up without being married and then stick the llittle bastards (look it up in the dictionary) on Medicaid at taxpayer expense. And then they place those future inmates in taxpayer-funded daycares at their schools so that all their skank friends can ooh and aah at how much fun it must be to be a single mother. And then they turn to taxpayer-funded legal machinery to hunt down the baby daddy for child support payments. And they bleed the taxpayers for their headstart programs and their school lunch programs and all the extra services like special ed that their children require because fetal alcohol syndrome just kind of does that to a kid.

    Yeah, it isn’t 1840. I noticed. Which is too bad, because back in 1840, most people had common sense and weren’t afraid to administer a little tough love to those who needed it. I don’t want to have to pay for your mistakes. I don’t want to have to shoulder the cost of your self-inflicted wounds. We could cut a lot of social security checks for people who lived productive lives if we didn’t have to shoulder the burden of the real irresponsible breeders out there.

  29. Unknownymous says:

    I’m with you, Anonymostly. The tax payers could save billions of dollars if we just had vans equipped to provide free abortion services that we could send out to every neighborhood. They could even equip them with bells like the old time ice cream trucks. I can already hear them playing “Rock-a-bye-bye Baby.” It would eliminate the need for all those expensive socialist programs for all the “bastards” and free up space in prisons for croocked bankers and politicians.

  30. Omaha Independent says:

    @question
    We hold our nose and vote. Terry is actually Glen Cunningham’s ghost.

    BTW, looks like the Tea Party won this round. Will it start raining jobs now?

    Omaha Independent

  31. Anonymostly says:

    Unknowing, your post reflects a fundamental difference of opinion between us as to the proper role of government. If your skank kid wants an abortion, it’s her right. But don’t make me pay for it. I don’t think government should do for people that which they can do for themselves. Government is generally inefficient and wasteful. Bureaucratic inertia prevents government from responding quickly to changing circumstances. Government should do those things that people cannot do for themselves: build roads; provide for police and fire service; maintain a standing military; operate a judical system.

    If we provide free abortion services, we are, again, saving people from the consequences of their own voluntary conduct. There are better options. There are far more married couples out there wishing to adopt than there are babies placed for adoption. We could wipe out chronic poverty in America tomorrow if women would get married before having children or give up their illegitimate kids for adoption.

    And yet, between 1979 and 2003, we went from about 600,000 babies being born out of wedlock, with about a quarter of them put up for adoption, to 1.5 million illegitimate births with fewer than 1 percent of them (14,000) given up for adoption. Thing is, society has to do more for the offspring of unwed mothers than for the children of married couples. An article on the front page of the Lincoln paper a couple of weeks ago talked about how many millions of dollars the state has to shell out on behalf of unwed moms and their illegitimate kids, but it probably underestimated the scope of the problem by a lot. A 2008 study led by Georgia State University economist Benjamin Scafidi conservatively estimated that single mothers cost the U.S. taxpayer $112 billion every year.

    Only someone daft or uninformed would try to defend the insitution of unwed motherhood. Various studies have shown that children raised by a single mother comprise about 70 percent of juvenile murderers, delinquents, teenaged mothers, drug abusers, dropouts, suicides and runaways. According to a study by the Progressive Policy Institute, if you control for single motherhood, the difference between black and white crime rates disappears.

    Fortunately, the children of adoptive married parents turn out even better on average than even the biological children of married parents. So, instead of advocating taxpayer funded (coerced) abortion, why not advocate for adoption?

  32. Anonymous says:

    Anamostly- since this is a nice family oriented spot on the internet, and since we are both being anon, I won’t take up your challenge. Kinda of funny how people have such positions that they denigrate those whom they wish without fear of reprisal. But hey it’s the new American way. Thanks to the ACLU and other organizations who have made the freedom of speech argument so long and strong that there is no concern over reprisals. I believe you have the Right of freedom of speech, but you aren’t protected at all times for all things you say………. oh well the good with the not so good. Yet we do agree on at least one thing I suppose, the downfall of the Great American Experiment has been the object of the Liberal types and they are really scum.

  33. FPS says:

    Annoying @ 8:39

    Interesting how you go back to frame 1 in trying to justify IRRESPONSIBLE behavior by advocating adoption over abortion both of which are basically the same in relation to the basic problem. Your racist indictment of Blacks totally overlooks the fact that poor as well as affluent whites also fall prey to the problem. Nice that you point out the rise in numbers from 79 – 03. You will note that those years were years primarily under GOPER rule. I wonder what they jumped to under Wackjob GWB & his Abstinence vs EDUCATION/PREVENTION agenda. What you cave people fail to understand is that Humans are Animals 1st. & only Saints way, way, way down the educational line.

  34. FPS says:

    Annoying @ 8:39

    FYI; the rate of OOW births jumped about 10% per year since 1970 but dropped under Clinton to 5% then jumped again to about 12% under the President with the most paid for personal abortions GWB!

    To be fair to the pre 1960 #’s, I would surmise that social pressure dictated that all the potential OOW birth #’s were lower because of “Shotgun” weddings. I would also surmise that you yourself would have been in that same boat had you not yourself had a “Shotgun” wedding. Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong!

  35. Ricky says:

    Normally I am against term limits, but seeing how they will get Scott L (can’t spell that name) out of the Nebraska Legislature (if it was not for an appointment by the Gov he would not be in there in the first place), along with Tony (no relation) Fulton, Neanderthal Mark Christianson, Mike “Fetal Pain” Flood and Abbie “never seen a building I can’t climb down on my bad knee” Cornett, term limits are looking better and better all the time.
    Maybe there should be one in Congress so somebody other than Mr Terry can lead Omaha and Douglas County, a piece of blue in a red state.
    PS Mr Sweeper I love your capta, easiest one I have seen

    ricky from omaha

  36. Unknownymous says:

    I think it’s even deeper than that with Anonamushy, FPS.

    You’re probably right about the shot gun wedding, but from the fixation he has about NOT tracking down the children’s fathers, it looks like maybe he has a couple of sons who are supposed to be sending checks to the county attorney for child support. It just ain’t fair that his boys should have to support the “bastard” children of those 14 year old girls his sons molested. Along with the ice-cream-truck abortion clinics, we probably need a fleet of dog-catcher style trucks to hunt down Anonamushy’s sons and castrate them.

  37. Anonymostly says:

    Fetid Piece of S__t posting at #39 and #40, you wacko liberal nutjobs really are pathetic. Amusing, but pathetic. First of all, I reject your initial premise that we have a problem with over-population in this country. Birthrates have been steadily declining here since the earlly 50s. Right now, we’re not even at replacement levels. So … I go back to my point that the truly irresponsible breeding is that which is being accomplished by women who get knocked up by men they aren’t married to. You’re own mother, for example. (Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.)

    And you’re OOW birth rate stats are just made up. Dooood, an increase of 10% per year since 1970 until Clinton took office? That would mean at least 220% of all births were out of wedlock by 1992. Sorry. You’re wrong. Current OOW birthrate is 41%. And the fact of the matter — not your made-up facts but real facts from the CDC — is that OOW birthrate has steadily increased since at least the ’40s. (And I frankly don’t think that who the President is has anything at all to do with OOW birth rates, but feel free to try to make that case.)

    Finally, I love the way you wacko lib nutjobs cavalierly throw around charges of racism. My comments contained no “indictment of blacks.” Puh-lease. I’m suggesting that blacks are not inherently more prone to committing crimes than whites. In fact, I’m saying they’re not. I’m saying that if you control for the element of single motherhood, differences — objectively measured differences, according to statistics kept by the Dept. of Justice as opposed to your made-up stuff — in crime rates between blacks and whites entirely disappear. In other words, the differences in crime rates correspond more to illegitimacy than race. Duh. Such an imbecile, you are.

  38. Anonymostly says:

    “fixation … about NOT tracking down the children’s fathers …” LOL, Unknowing at post #43. I’m curious how you define “fixation.” The fact I never mentioned it means I’m fixated on it. Riiiiiight. Typical whacko, liberal nutjob playbook — personal attack in lieu of substance. That’s weak. Really weak. But it’s what I’ve come to expect out of the lunatic fringe on the left. You and Fetid Piece of Sh__ really represent.

  39. Brian T. Osborn says:

    Ricky,
    We already have term limits. It is called the vote. If Americans are too stupid or too lazy to apply it correctly, then that is the problem. Yesterday, a high-school classmate posted on his Facebook page that old Ronald Reagan bon mot that goes, “In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” I replied by asking whether Reagan’s comment was a mea culpa, given that he was the head of the government.
    The important thing to remember is that the Government ‘R’ Us. If it is dysfunctional, it is because we are not doing our duty as citizens by paying attention to what is going on, electing responsible representatives, then holding their feet to the fire for the way they perform in office. We allow ourselves to be swayed by professional rhetoric, paid for by special interest groups and corporations, rather than following our hearts, minds and upbringing. We allow our emotions to be manipulated by pundits and rented mouthpieces, then vote the way their patrons decide, rather than the way logic would dictate.
    I’ve been quiet on the blogs of late because I am thoroughly disgusted with both Republicans and Democrats. I considered myself to be a Yellow Dog Democrat, but have found my own party in this state to be run by dogmatic oligarchs that could give a rat’s ass about what the people want. They listen only to what those with the most money have to say, not those with the best ideas. I am certain the same thing holds true for the other side of the aisle.
    I wasted four years of my life in an attempt to sway the NDP to follow the path set for it by its legally elected representatives, and all I got for it was a drained bank account and disappointment. I could no longer compete with the attorneys in Lincoln and Omaha that make all the decisions and expect absolute fealty from their “followers.” They can throw away more money in a day than I earn in a year. I expected to incite the grassroots to rise up and take charge, only to find them more than willing to be herded into their pens and led to the slaughter. I could no longer attend meetings where the most important thing on the agenda was to have the powdered donuts – or the glazed, and maintain my self-respect.
    Maybe, someday, I will again get involved in politics on an organizational level. In the meantime, I will keep myself busy by sharpening my pitchfork and preparing my torches.

  40. Folks,
    I like passion. And a spirited discussion.
    But please work on your tone and temper while frantically typing.
    Otherwise, I will begin to hit the delete button on all those words you worked so hard on.
    Thanks.
    -Ed.

  41. Unknownymous says:

    Anonymostly,

    It’s obvious that when you start on one of your rants your brain and mouth are not connected. Check your post August 2, 2011 at 11:12 PM.

    “And then they turn to taxpayer-funded legal machinery to hunt down the baby daddy for child support payments.”

    The way you spew BS – without even knowing what you have said – is a good indication that your own mother may have been either a chihuahua or a pomeranian.

  42. Anonymostly says:

    I think the psychological phenomenon is called “projection,” Unknownymous. It’s the process of assigning your faults to someone else and then criticizing them for it. Not once did I ever say we shouldn’t track down the baby daddy. I did suggest that it costs taxpayers money to do it but I never said it shouldn’t be done. Of course, if skanks out there weren’t going around getting knocked up without being married, we wouldn’t have to spend so much of that money. So, as far as your brain and your mouth not being connected …

    Oh, and just love the continued personal attacks. Seems to be about all you libs have in your arsenal. Do you also have a clever school bus analogy to offer in lieu of facts and substance? So, now my mom is a chihuahua, huh? Nice try. I think the psychologists would say that my posts are hitting a little too close to your home rather than the other way around. Do you know who your father is?

  43. Anonymostly says:

    For the record, Mander, the whacko lib FPS was the one who launched into a diatribe on “irresponsible breeding” that got this discussion started. I simply provided insight, backed up with actual facts rather than appeals to emotion that the libs in this forum use as a substitute for facts, as to what the real “irresponsible breeding is that goes on in this country.

  44. Unknownymous says:

    My guess is any psychologist who examined this series of posts would be most alarmed at your obvious problem with women. Constantly referring to them as “skanks” is rather revealing. You don’t seem to think it necessary to hold the fathers of all those “bastards” you’re obsessing over accountable for anything.

    Is the problem that you never managed to make a connection with any of those “skanks” you’re so obsessed with? Or is it a deeper problem? Do you resent your mother because you feel like she favored the other puppies in your litter?

  45. Unknownymous says:

    Sorry, all.

    I owe you a couple of these, ‘ ‘ and a couple of these, e e. I was in a rush to get to the punch line.

  46. Anonymostly says:

    Unknowingly, is that really the best you can do? You’re throwing punches at thin air. You continue to miss the mark. But you just keep at it, OK? We want everyone to see that you bring nothing to the discussion. Like I said previously, you whacko lib nutjobs are pathetic. Amusing, but pathetic. And when I say amusing, that means we’re laughing at you, not with you.

  47. Anonimosity says:

    Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not! Y’are too! Am not!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>