No Wonder So Many Democrats Skipped Their National Convention

Wasserman-Schultz-Crazy-eyes-AP-edited

The Democrat National Convention has be a spectacle to behold so far, and as much as Republicans have jeered Demcorats in touch election races like Senate candidate Heidi Heitkamp and House candidate Pam Gulleson here in North Dakota, it’s looking like they were smart to skip it.

The first day of the convention yesterday featured abortionpalooza and leftist feminists parading to the stage to browbeat the nation on the “war on women” juxtaposed with a adoring video tribute to a man best known, aside from his Senate career, for adultery and drowning his mistress. And, believe it or not, today was worse.

Here’s DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz telling not one but four lies about the events at the convention today. First she claimed that the language about Israel was removed from the party’s platform because the platform is long and it got overlooked, but that’s hard to believe given how much scrutiny this issue gets. Then she tried to claim that it was changed to reflect President Obama’s views, except as Allah notes the President doesn’t really have a position. Then Wasserman-Schultz claims there was no dissent on the floor over the re-insertion of the Israel and “God” language (don’t believe your lying eyes) and, finally, claims there was 2/3’s majority support for putting the language back in the platform.

Which, clearly, was not the case. CNN’s Anderson Cooper described Wasserman-Schultz as living in an “alternate universe.”

And what do the Democrats have to look forward to tomorrow? The spectacle of President Obama forced to give his acceptance speech not in the grandiose setting of the 73,000 seat Bank of America stadium but rather a venue with 72% less capacity, a move made based on the not-all-that-believable excuse that the weather, and not lackluster attendance numbers, was the cause.

Republicans saw some dissent from delegates at their convention, but by comparison to the train wreck Democrats are staging, their event went swimmingly.

Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters. He writes a weekly column for several North Dakota newspapers, and also serves as a policy fellow for the North Dakota Policy Council.

Related posts

  • Dakotacyr

    Is this another one of your funny pics? Degrading as usual. And the hall is so packed that the fire Marshall is. It allowing anyone else in the building.

    • Jay

      I’d advise looking at the last two sentences in your post, Dakota. They make even less sense than your usual DNC talk point-generated fare.

    • DakotaStrong

      Dude, if you noticed, Rob had a couple of nice photos of Heidi today. He also has some others that he displays at times on other days. At least he shows both sides, and not just one.

    • Bat One

      The crowd is there for Bill Clinton. Which is kinda funny when you consider that A) Bubba and Obama pretty much despise each other and are wrestling for control of the party, and B) The campaign which trumpets “Forward” as its slogan hauls out not a dynamic up and comer for the keynote address but Clinton who was elected 20 years ago and whose moderate policies’ (remember triangulation?) success make Obama’s progressive policies all that more failures by comparison.

    • Thresherman

      Well the people that they bused in for the speech at the stadium whose name cannot be mentioned had to go somewhere. But then again we are talking about the same attendance as a Bison Football home game.

    • RCND

      I have seen worse in the main stream media. This one actually isn’t too bad.

    • mikemc1970

      Is it really Rob’s fault that she doesn’t wash her hair? The greaser look was over in the 50’s.

      • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

        The greaser look was over in the 50’s.

        • robert108

          That’s the Ivy League look, propagandist, but pay no attention to the truth, and just keep lying.

    • leh

      Right…you and emil….right. Don’t you people believe your lying eyes! I MUST put in the !

  • sbark

    Interveiws cancelled by the Dem’cat leadership
    the Dem’cat “muslim contingent” screaming in disent at putting God and Israel back into the Leftist platform…….
    The more I read about Hillary and Huma—-and then look at Obama
    ——the Dem’cats had the muslim infiltration into our top level govts pegged either way
    This Huma / Hillary relationship has as much dark-side as obama’s trips to Man Country in Chicago and then add in her ties to Muslim Brotherhood to top it off.

    Either way—-muslim brotherhood sets policy in this regime.

    • $8194357

      2 tru 4 skool

    • borborygmi

      Proof is wanting. Paranoia, bigotry or both rearing their heads.

      • sbark

        Huma’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood is beyond question—-why did 5 in congress raise the security issue. Huma’s family ties to Frank Marshall Davis is beyond question.
        The Huma marriage to the pervert Anthony Weiner was a cover for her long time relationship to Hillary………..
        Funny the Left even worries about “proof”——-you still beleive the 100 plus flat out lies pushed on S.Palin——and 4 yrs later none have been proven true……..

        Being a Dem’cat is a life of being deceived as necessary by the more radical Liberals, and a life of deceiving society in general on a continuous basis.

  • Thresherman

    If the head of the RNC got caught in as many blatant lies as Debbie Wasserman-Snaggletooth has in the last 2 days, the media would be giving it 24/7 coverage. But as one columnist put it, the media is having a love affair with Obama.

    • Neiman

      Now be nice, I heard she took first place, blue ribbon in a local dog show. Congratulations are in order.

      • leh

        PLEASE!!! I have three dogs (2 Danes and 1 mix breed) and any one of the three would beat her into the ground! Please do not bad mouth my dogs!!!!!!!!!

        • borborygmi

          WHen Dems fear conservative women they make fun of them, name call, comments on there looks…….oh wait apparently the same goes for the witty commentators on this blog, why do you fear women?

          • robert108

            The magnitude of the lying smears directed at Sarah Palin makes your attempt at equivalence a very bad joke.
            Nice try at “everybody does it”, though.

          • borborygmi

            Nice lie again r108 “everybody does it” THAT Quote is attributed to who?

          • robert108

            When you try to justify your bad act by claiming the other guys are doing the same thing, that’s a variety of the “everybody does it” rationalization, common among liberals.
            You owe me an apology for being so dense.

          • borborygmi

            The magnitude of the lying smears directed at Sarah Palin makes your attempt at equivalence a very bad joke……Yet you make a claim to prove you are what you hate. “oh wait apparently the same goes for the witty commentators on this blog” which would at most allude to the witty commentators on this blog and since you find offense you are ageeing that you are one of those commentators and then you prove it by the above statement . At the least the statement would be directed at those who made ‘witty’ comments on this thread Dictionary: r108 look under Dense.

          • robert108

            I’ve never claimed to be witty; only true and accurate. I also don’t claim immunity from blame by blaming others.

          • Neiman

            Lighten the heck up!

          • borborygmi

            Conscience bothering you. Jesus looking over your shoulder. Lighten up? Sometimes being that good Christian isn’t much fun is it.

          • Neiman

            No it is not bothering me at all!

            Christianity is not about “fun,” it is about salvation and eternity.

          • HG
        • Neiman

          Bow wow, arf, woof, bow woof – that is I am so sorry all dogs in dog talk for insulting you.

          • borborygmi

            Jesus: “Bow wow, arf, woof, bow woof – that is I am so sorry all dogs in dog talk for insulting you” ahhhhhh “Christians” acting Christlike

          • robert108

            So now you’re posing as the morality police? Very ironic for a left winger.

          • borborygmi

            Is it irony or is it hypocrisy that conservatives have complained about Dems calling women names yet Conservatives do the same thing.

          • robert108

            Even if that’s true, how does that excuse liberals for doing it?

          • borborygmi

            It doesn’t . The “they did it so now I can “argument is rather childish isn’t it. IF you abhor what the other person is doing why would you want to do it? Especially when you consider it morally wrong. Doesn’t say much about your morals does it?

          • robert108

            My point exactly. The entire Democrat argument against Romney’s American economic policies is based on the lie that American free enterprise caused the crash, which is a blatant lie.
            BTW, I never made that argument, liberals do, so you owe me another apology for a false accusation.
            Again, I don’t accept you as any sort of moral authority, due to the fact that you are a moral relativist. To qualify as a moral authority, you have to be able to tell the difference between right and wrong.

          • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

            You lie!
            It was not American free enterprise caused the crash, it was the bush/gop deregulation of the American free enterprise that caused the crash and one of it’s architects admitted as much.

            Greenspan Says He Was Wrong On Regulation

            “You found that your view of the world, your ideology was not right, it was not working?” said Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), the committee chairman.

            “Absolutely, precisely,” Greenspan said. “You know, that’s precisely the reason I was shocked, because I have been going for 40 years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well.”

            “I made a mistake,” Greenspan said, “in presuming that the self-interests of organizations, specifically banks and others, were such as that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms.”

            Greenspan repeatedly used his control over the levers of the economy — especially cutting interest rates — to deal with problems. When the financial system in many emerging countries imploded in 1998, he cut rates to protect the U.S. economy. When the dot-com bubble burst, he used the same tack, even more aggressively.

            Indeed, the housing bubble, which was fueled by low interest rates, helped keep the 2001 recession relatively mild, as construction and other real estate-related activity soared in the first several years of this decade.

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/23/AR2008102300193_2.html

          • robert108

            Wrong again. It was the Democrat affirmative action home mortgage mandates that built the bubble, and Chuck Shumer’s false rumor of a bank run that actually triggered the crash. It was govt meddling in the market to obtain a politically correct outcome, as always.

          • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

            Not according to the facts, Big 180 McCain voter.

            as the Fed slashed interest rates to nearly record lows from 2001 until mid-2004, housing prices climbed far faster than inflation or household income year after year. By 2004, a growing number of economists were warning that a speculative bubble in home prices and home construction was under way, which posed the risk of a housing bust.

            Mr. Greenspan brushed aside worries about a potential bubble, arguing that housing prices had never endured a nationwide decline and that a bust was highly unlikely.

            Mr. Greenspan, along with most other banking regulators in Washington, also resisted calls for tighter regulation of subprime mortgages and other high-risk exotic mortgages that allowed people to borrow far more than they could afford.

            The Federal Reserve had broad authority to prohibit deceptive lending practices under a 1994 law called the Home Owner Equity Protection Act . But it took little action during the long housing boom, and fewer than 1 percent of all mortgages were subjected to restrictions under that law.

            Many Republican lawmakers on the oversight committee tried to blame the mortgage meltdown on the unchecked growth of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the giant government-sponsored mortgage-finance companies that were placed in a government conservatorship last month. Republicans have
            argued that Democratic lawmakers blocked measures to reform the companies.

            But Mr. Greenspan, who was first appointed by President Ronald Reagan, placed far more blame on the Wall Street companies that bundled subprime mortgages into pools and sold them as mortgage-backed securities. Global demand for the securities was so high, he said, that Wall Street companies pressured lenders to lower their standards and produce more “paper.”

            “The evidence strongly suggests that without the excess demand from securitizers, subprime mortgage originations
            (undeniably the original source of the crisis) would have been far
            smaller and defaults accordingly far lower,” he said.

            This year, the Fed greatly tightened its restrictions. But by that time, the subprime market as well as the market for other kinds of exotic mortgages had already been wiped out.

            http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/business/economy/24panel.html

          • robert108

            Your cherry-picked, incomplete analysis is false. The CRA was written to correct a problem that never existed: institutional racism in the home mortgage market. It was given legal teeth by the Fair Housing Act of 1968, which established statistical “proof”, instead of cross-examined evidence in court as a basis for punishment.
            Using this hammer, both the Carter and Clinton administrations pressured big lenders to write loans that didn’t qualify under responsible lending standards, which generated a blizzard of bad paper, which was then covered up by being bought up by Fannie and Freddie, along with a huge expansion of the derivatives market, where bad loans were packaged with good loans, and sold as a good product. This is what caused the bubble by generating a false demand signal for new housing and morgages, which was finally popped by Chuck Shumer in the Fall of ’08 with a false rumor of a bank run in NJ, which popped the gigantic bubble and caused the crash. It was not the result of any economic policies, it was the result of bad regulations, but the Democrats are, so far, successfully demagoging it to be about “Wall Street”, the Bush economy, and the general deficiencies, according to obama, of the American free enterprise system, using Marxist dogma as a yardstick.
            All you’ve got is a little copy and paste from a partisan hack.

          • borborygmi

            Your definition of Moral Relativist? Mine: morality is relative to time, space, place such that even the most basic “Thou shalt not kill” is not morally wrong relative to the circumstances of the situation.

          • borborygmi

            Perhaps you can school me what is right and wrong. You have offered opinion as I have, nothing more nothing less. What makes you the authority figure on morality that you feel I should be silenced.

          • borborygmi

            Did you feel the ‘joke’ was morally wrong? Why so defensive?

      • borborygmi

        Jesus: “Now be nice, I heard she took first place, blue ribbon in a local dog show. Congratulations are in order” Very Christian comment.

        • robert108

          Are you going to school us about being a Christian, now?

          • borborygmi

            Apparently it is needed. Before you write, speak , act, think shouldn’t you ask yourself would Jesus Christ my Savior, Son of the Father, path to Redemption do this. Apparently the Spirit is Willing but the Flesh is indeed weak. So endeth the 1st part of the lesson.
            4 years ago some (notice I didn’t say all just for you) on this blog and others were commenting how then candidate Obama had taken the American Flag of his Plane. A quick fact check showed that indeed the American Flag was on his plane and were actually larger then McCains but the picture that was shown as proof was actually taken from such an angle that the wings obscured the Flag. A very nice Christian young man had forwarded to me an Email Complaining about Obamas lack of Patriotism. I replied with a photo showing the plane with an American Flag on it. My response to him those that propigate the lie are no better then the liars that first circulated the lie. He thanked me and would watch what he forwarded. So endeth the 2nd part of the lesson. Please consider yourself schooled.

          • Neiman

            Before you dare school anyone on Christianity, let us look at your antichrist, murderous associations. A party that kicked God out of the public square and that booed His Name for being in their party platform. The party and candidate that has murdered over 50 million helpless, innocent babies, Obama even defending pulling them half out and stabbing them in the brain with scissors to kill them. Or that tells God His people should not have the land and holy City He gave them, because Mahdi Obama wants to give all or part of it to the Muslims, the people that are godless idolaters. Or the party and candidate that promote homosexuality and gay marriage and adoptions. No school master, school yourself first by examining your antichrist, murderous associates.

          • borborygmi

            Nice deflection but we are talking about your soul, your Christianity, your spirituality, what you have done and what you have failed to do. You know soul searching. Can you honestly look at yourself in the mirror after making derogatory comments and say “Jesus would be okay with that” You keep looking for the devil but perchance he is looking over your shoulder and telling you “go ahead make the claim, write the words, it won’t do you any harm.”

            My affiliations, beliefs, spirituality, have absolutely nothing to do with you and your actions. What happened to ‘free will’? Did the Chairwoman personally attack you, say something about your looks? What happened to ‘personal responsibility’? Aren’t you responsible for what you think, write. Again being a Christian entails acting like a Christian. You can stand on the highest mount and claim you are a Christian but you actions belie your hollow words. It all starts with asking yourself the question ; What would Jesus do? I can’t answer that question for you, no one can. Accordingly the righteous path is a narrow path to the left and right are damnation, in the middle everlasting life.

          • robert108

            As a liberal moral relativist, you have no standing to lecture anyone about Christianity.

          • borborygmi

            I shouldn’t have to but you if you believe in free will, personal responsibility, perhaps you could point out where I am wrong in my argument. Are you Christian? Do you ask yourself would Christ do this? I don’t believe you need to back off on logical arguments, get mad fight for what you think is right. Christ did as much in the Temple. When you make comments that are just mean spirited …Well would Christ to that?

          • robert108

            I’m sorry if you feel compelled to by hypocritical, but that’s your decision; or maybe you claim that you were “born that way”. Is that it?

          • robert108

            You’re wrong to be giving a self-righteous lecture to anyone on this subject.

          • borborygmi

            opinion is all you offer?You feel you have a standing to lecture me on moral relativity?

          • Neiman

            A. It was freaking humor, I cannot help it if Democrats are humor deprived.
            B. You got slapped down, because I exposed you as being unable to lecture anyone on Christianity, considering your many evil associations and beliefs.
            C. You don’t even understand Christianity. It is about sinners being saved by faith alone in Christ alone, not becoming saints in living perfect lives. You passage was given to show the impossibility of living the Christian life by works of the flesh. If I tried to “act” like a Christian by your liberal, non-Christian standards, I too would murder babies and approve of the homosexual lifestyle among other things.

          • borborygmi

            I know it was freaking humor. Would Christ do it? Simple question you have to ask yourself. Please show where my argument is wrong. ” It is about sinners being saved by faith alone in Christ alone, not becoming saints in living perfect lives. ” Really thats the best you can do. Talk about moral relativism. Doesn’t that leave it open to what you can do. I have faith in Christ alone but I can break any commandments I want? Just ask your self would Christ do this? It is your conscience, It is your free will choice it is your personal responsibility.

          • Neiman

            So your Jesus, when you ask him/her what to do, they say aborting babies is a good thing, so Jesus would abort babies? Your Jesus would say when you ask about homosexuality, “I created them that way, celebrate their sodomy and let them marry?” Your Jesus would say when you ask about Nature’s God, “Hey I would kick Him out of the public square too?”

            So, you are saying salvation is something to be earned by good works, Jesus did not save us, because we have to be co-redeemers with Him, following a long list of things to do and not to do, or we go to hell? Doesn’t that make Him a failure as a Savior, a failed God?

            You know nothing of the Christian faith.

            You still did not answer why you are qualified morally to teach anyone the Christian faith.

          • borborygmi

            If you believe that you can lead sinful life not act Christian LIke, not follow the Commandments and just ask for Jesus forgiveness I think you are wrong. I agree you shouldn’t have to lead a “life of a Saint”
            it is most likely impossible when you consider the frailty of the human condition but should it be up to you to do your best. When you do, think, write, comment anything do you ask yourself “Is this what Jesus would do? ” It is about sinners being saved by faith alone in Christ alone, not becoming saints in living perfect lives.” This statement leaves me to believe that you believe you can do anything and you will be saved by asking forgiveness. That makes you different from a Libertarian how?

          • Neiman

            I did NOT say you could willfully continue to lead a sinful life.If He did not pay for all your sins, then which ones did He pay for and which ones did He not pay for, then at what point do you cross the line into a sin or too many sins or a type of sin and lose your salvation? What are the exact rules? I want you to give me, by Scripture, the exact rules and at what point you go too far and are bot saved. Or, is it like a yoyo?

            You do not ask Jesus what would you should do with your every act, do you? So, who are you to tell anyone else? If salvation is to be gained by works of the flesh or must be maintained by works of the flesh, where is faith? What good is faith? You ares aying, ‘I believe Jesus died for my sin, but I have to work to buy that salvation and/or keep from losing it?’ So, you believe Jesus saved you, but not completely, right? Are you even a Christian at all?

            Think about it, please. If Paul, by the Holy Spirit says salvation is by faith alone and not of works of the flesh, then which is it – faith or works? If James said salvation is by faith but you have to have works or you are not saved, which is it, faith or works?

            Still you have not offered any credentials to show how you are qualified to lecture anyone on what a Christian is or is not like.

          • borborygmi

            You keep on trying to make this about me. You are responsible for what you say, act do, write comment on correct? You made a ‘joke’
            according to you. I was just wondering would Jesus approve? It doesn’t matter what I think as far as the rules for going to far are. Are you comfortable with your joke. How far do YOU feel you can go and not fall from grace? This is between ypu and your Savior. You lecture a lot about how people are not Christian, in league with the devil etc. yet you can’t define what is too much. There are some sins that are your measuring sticks which is great. The big sins are easy the small sins are tougher to define such as an innocuous little ‘joke’. Once again just ask your self would Jesus do this, say this write this. What credentials do you have to lecture me or anyone else? If you don’t act Christ like in your everyday life why should anyone listen to what have to say.
            If James and Paul say salvation is by faith and not works then what does it matter how one acts, what ones works are?
            Surely you must try to live up to the Commandments or don’t they count. Perhaps there is a definition of what “works” are that has to be established first. All in all doesn’t it come down to “What would Jesus do” Civility perhaps?

          • robert108

            It is about you, and your attempt to make self-righteous judgments on others, when you have no standing as a virtuous person, much less as a Christian. Your words are empty, since they are just meant to be personal attack.

          • Neiman

            No, you appointed yourself a Christian authority to school people about Christianity and you made claims about what Christians should or should not do or should or should not be, now it is up to you to back up your school master approach.

            That’s right I made a joke about the Liar-In-Chief of the RNC, you took it personally, perhaps lusting after her in your heart? Then you got on your pretend Christian high horse and are either afraid to defend what you said or simply are ignorant of the Christian faith. Not one answer, just one accusation after another.

            I can define exactly what is too much sin for a true Christian that, by God’s Grace, by faith alone, in Christ alone has accepted His Salvation – nothing. That’s right as sin abounds, Grace abounds all the more, sin cannot ever be greater than God’s Grace. But, you have no knowledge of Christ or Salvation at all, or your would know that fact.

            Can we then sin all we want and still be saved? Yes, theoretically! But, if our repentance and salvation experience are genuine, would we ever, could we ever long be comfortable in any sin at all? If your repentance and salvation experience were genuine and you are part of God’s family, Him being your Father, what is He doing while you sin in the flesh, nothing? Is He a neglectful, abusive Father that would not bring you to His rod of divine correction, would He not allow circumstances in your life, by His Spirit and His Word, drive you back to repentance and step by step conform your life to the image of Christ? Is that your God, a distant, neglectful Father? The Bible says He disciplines those He loves and His Discipline brings about proper correction of the Christian’s life, all in His Grace, but never is the believers rightful place as a child of God, secure in their salvation, brought into question. Read about the Prodigal son.

            I have said these things many times, but they can only be understood by those that have been born anew of His Spirit, He says only such true children can discern divine truth. You dare school others and judge little sins and big sins, while as a liberal, as an accessory, you are guilty of the mass murder of helpless, innocent children and of approving the damnable homosexual lifestyle. Clean up your own dirty house first, you are on my back about gnats (joke), while you have Sequoia sized logs in both your eyes and they are covered in blood.

            Civility? Like screaming that Herod was an adulterer and his wife an adulteress, like that kind of civility? Like using a whip of cords to beat money changers and kicking over their tables, that kind of civility? That kind of civility, or challenging wickedness so boldly a man is stoned, beaten and crucified, you mean that kind of civility?

            People by the billions are going to hell, they are screaming like you for civility and that damnable word toleration, Christians are in a war for souls and to confront sin, to oppose demons like Gay Bob and call people to repentance, we will never seem civil or kind, not until on their knees people do repent and thank the person for being bold and setting civility aside to win their souls for Christ. You liberals condone child murders in the tens of millions and coddle hell bound homosexuals and pat yourselves on the back for not offending them, while Christians love them and want them saved and will endure all sorts of attacks and accusations if only a single soul finds Christ and His Salvation. Pardon me if civility is not high on my list or priorities.

          • robert108

            You have not established your credibility to lecture anyone about Christianity, especially since you are at least a moral relativist.
            You still owe me an apology for your false accusation.

          • borborygmi

            Why would I apologize when I am Correct. Prove to me were my argument is false.

          • robert108

            Trying to change the subject to wriggle out of responsibility for your false accusation? I correctly identified you using the “everybody does it” rationalization, you called me a liar, and I explained what I meant that you purposely twisted. Again, you owe me an apology for your lying smear.
            After lecturing us on morality, do you have the morality to apologize for your false accusation?

          • borborygmi

            If I was wrong I would apologize. I am not. Your WORDS”The magnitude of the lying smears directed at Sarah Palin makes your attempt at equivalence a very bad joke” This indicates you buy into they did it so can we just not as bad. Sorry to use your own words to prove you wrong. You owe me an apology.

          • robert108

            No, it doesn’t, but you are trying to change the subject again. You made a false accusation against me, and just made another one, so that’s two apologies you owe me, if you are the virtuous person you are posing as.
            As to your attempt to change the subject, it’s just about relative attack. I clearly stated that the vicious smear attacks on Sarah were far worse than your example, and it’s true. This is an invitation for you to do some self-examination, to see why you are being so self-righteous when you are guilty of far worse.

          • borborygmi

            I merely asked a question would Jesus do this, write this say this. Why would you take that as a personal attack? Perhaps you could school me on moral relativity? Lets take the Commandment Thou Shalt not Kill. That is pretty straight forward yet man has killed fellow man since the beginning. The morality of the killing is relative to time, place, circumstance . Who, how, what, when, where.

          • borborygmi

            Borborygmi: Is it irony or is it hypocrisy that conservatives have complained about Dems calling women names yet Conservatives do the same thing.” r108: EVEN IF THAT’S TRUE, how does that excuse liberals for doing it?” (capitalization is mine)….Looks like confession time to me. Response Borborygmi: It doesn’t . The “they did it so now I can “argument is rather childish isn’t it…..
            On Sarah Palin you use the same argument except it is altered to “what we did isn’t nearly as bad as what liberals did, apparently quantity and quality makes a difference, :” Mommmmm Jimmy took three cookies and I only took one so I am not as bad as him.”
            Why the disparaging remarks at all? Would Jesus do it?

  • SigFan

    If she was just stupid or just ugly she might be tolerable. Stupidity combined with ugly is more than anyone needs to be subjected to.

    • borborygmi

      Another classy conservative statement

      • robert108

        Her looks are a matter of taste, but what comes out of her piehole is in very bad taste; total lies.

  • mickey_moussaoui

    Talk about birth control…that’s one ugly face. She’s a two bagger.

    • borborygmi

      keeping it classy as usual.

  • HG

    If republicans will get the video out there of dems booing and jeering over the inclusion of one single reference to God in their platform, its over for dems in Nov.
    I thought it couldn’t get any worse than removing the reference to God from the platform, but then they went and tried to put it back in. What a spectacle.

  • borborygmi

    sounds like the controllers of the DNC have something in common with the controllers of the RNC. Steamrolling

    • HG

      Wouldn’t it be nice if that all this turned out to be? Too bad for democrats the vast majority of Americans are convinced there is a Creator and that our rights come from Him. That makes this far, far worse for dems than you’re willing to admit.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Willis-Forster/100002880371309 Willis Forster

    She looks like Medusa but it is just a picture, if you saw her naked , would you turn to stone?

Top