 |
| Observational Therapist |
Progressives, including the press, have destroyed their credibility
They have proven themselves unable to face facts, as George Orwell would say. Even when someone forces the facts upon them, like a broken adding machine, they are unable to derive the logical conclusion.
Victor Davis Hanson has written a brilliant piece that sums it up nicely, The Fantasy House of Barack Obama:
By Fantasy House I do not mean — or rather only mean — Barack Obama’s La-La land in which Austrians speak Austrian, Hawaii is in Asia, Afghans speak Arabic, the Maldives lie off Argentina, there are seven additional states, servicemen are zombie corpse-men, and Kansas twisters kill 10,000 at a time.
$ More people are unemployed now under Obama than during the Bush years
$ Median income has fallen under Obama
$ Gas prices have doubled under Obama
$ Grocery bills are at least 20% higher under Obama, growing 8% just this past year
$ Cash for Clunkers destroyed perfectly good used cars, driving up prices in that market
$ Obama is a record breaker: He's wracked up more debt in four years than any other president
If this is what progressives call success, I'd hate so see how far in the crapper we'd have to fall for them to call it failure. Reviewing Obama's record makes me nostalgic for George Bush, since that president's record beats Obama's in every aspect, including less Middle Eastern hatred towards the US.
VDH closes by telling us... "Do not take council of your fears"
And I say amen to that. You can't eat hope and change. The hard left hallelujah choir is beyond reason, but there are still plenty of sensible, thinking people open to facing the facts. Let's bring those facts to them.
59 comments:
Slaughter. It wasn't a slaughter, it was a MASSACRE! Mitt Romney put on the most commanding presidential debate performances ever!
It is going to take a whole lot of spin to overcome one good debate!
I'm not sure which is more torturous...the theater of the debates, or the theater of the post-debate spin.
I’ve never seen the Mitt Romney I saw last night. Romney attacked. President Obama never attacked back. When Romney,spoke, he looked straight at the president When Obama spoke,he looked down or away or at moderator, but never in Romney's face.
Obama seemed annoyed, or should I say that he looked DEFEATED! He must have known as we all did that things wasn't going his way.
Romney dominated the debate exchange after exchange. He clearly was the winner by far. Like the NY Yankees demolished the Boston Red Sox. Romney demolished, and all but destroyed Obama and left the Progressives cringing in their seats. Obama sucked and he knew it himself as we all did. .
There was No tingle down Chris Matthew's leg tonight? And I wonder if Moochelle was SO proud of him now!
That was exactly what Romney had to do and he did it in spades.
The second debate should be even better, Romney is going to slam him with his LACK of foreign policy.
Without a teleprompter to back him up he was WORTHLESS.,
Thank you Stevie for showing up and providing a vivid example.
Steve said...
The fact that you don't understand why we are where we are defines your stupidity
Steve, Don't Make Yourself Sound Even Dumber than You Already Do. But you are doing a very good job at it trying to defend a Fart in a Blizzard. ..
Romney had Obama on the ropes and Obama couldn't get loose or even hide. Or were you watching totally different debate then everyone else was.... Obama looked and sounded bored, confused, clueless, and humiliated for the entire hour & a half. And you are calling me (us) stupid? What a freaken joke you are.
I have to say this before I dash off to work (on little-to-no sleep)....
It was embarrassing for me to watch Obama last night. I'm not an Obama supporter, as all here know. However, Obama came across as totally incompetent in last night's debate. How in the hell did we ever end up with this guy as the President of our nation?
BTW, I make the comment above not only as an American but also as one who has taught policy debate for over 10 years.
Great job Mitt, that's what happens when you have real knowledge of the facts and you can talk freely, without the lies, excuses, and spins or when you just read from a teleprompter that someone else wrote for you.
I guess that Barack came prepared to debate John McCain. Surprise. Last night we saw a Confused, bewildered, intimidated, and completely lost Obama without his teleprompter! . Is this what you want to re-elect?
Romney was in complete control from the beginning to the end. And summed it up perfectly.
Obama looked like a scared Rabbit, and his body language showed it..
Romney took it to him and made Obama look as if he didn't want to be there !
I wonder how Michelle felt watching her husband getting spanked on their anniversary?
And one more thing....
How in the hell did Obama get through Harvard Law School and yet fall flat on his face in last night's debate?
I wonder what Barack and Michelle ate as their anniversary dinner last night... could it have been Crow?
Expect the media to continue to go after Romney, "with our knives out!"
Talk about a confession to the American public vis a vis "media bias". lol!
I have to give credit to Jim Lehrer, he did a good job and was impartial. I also have to give CNN props for calling it straight.
Even the MSNBC nutballs knew their god had failed. The thrill is gone from Chris Matthew's leg...
The fun part is watching Obama's team trying to spin this their way.
Here's an example of their Ploofian strategy of telling a big lie long enough...
"(Romney) was on defense all night long," said David Plouffe, a senior adviser to the president.
I laughed out loud when I read that. It's sad and pathetic. It they weren't such shameless progressive statists bent on irreparably changing the nation, I'd feel sorry for them.
As Mitt Romney Crushed Barack Obama in First Presidential Debate and delivered a Knockout punch. Because of the shameless and miserable performance by Obama. The pathetic Progressives are already starting their SPIN games. When Mitt Romney said that he even wanted to stop funding NPR, the Progressives are accusing him of Killing Sesame Street!
When CNN admits Mitt won, you know it was a blowout...
5 Things We Learned from the Presidential Debate
Even likely libertarian voters are expected to go 70% for Romney. Obama is toast!
While description is largely correct, Silverfiddle, what the American public never does is ask, "Why".
You merely attribute causation to descriptive variables. No,no,no.
So the proles, very much including the fringe right, stay stupid and malleable. Not good.
I am not going to say I will vote for one or the other. I actually don't like any one of the major candidates or thier vice presidential picks. Romney ruled the debate and President Obama looked out of place. Romney is impatient and interupted "looked like he took some lesson from Mr. O'reilly"-let have some respect here!! President Obama could get no gound and used all he had to make himself look strong and presented weakly.
Redneck Ron
The Thoughts, and the Cop Out of a Defeated Progressive.
In the aftermath of Mitt Romney Crushing Barack Obama
This is a comment I read on a Progressive's blog!!
Anonymous said...
"Much serious policy was discussed at Wednesday night’s first Presidential Debate, and the incoming fact-checks are proving many of Mitt’s statements (and denials) false.
Still, much of a debate is won on likeability, and while Obama’s has had better form, he still comes across as the humble and measured leader that he is.
On the other hand, Romney acted like an unrestrained lap dog, interrupting Obama during his time to speak and talking over the moderator, fighting hard to get in more words. Romney was so aggressive that the moderator had to silence him by saying 'Let’s not' (hear anymore)."
Shaw...don't forget...the goopers love loud-mouthed bullies...they think it's a sign of strength...just look at gingrich and christie...and a bunch of other fast-talking, charlatans...and where they are today...
And this Progressive MORON didn’t even have the Guts or the Balls to use his or her name, but signed it “Anonymous “ I knew that the Lefties would be angry But, the lefties are IMPLODING! Even Clint Eastwood's chair gave a better performance! As for Barack Obama, his head bowed down, his lips were all puffed out, he was pissed-off, he was lost, he looked defeated. All this while Mitt Romney looked right into Barack’s eyes, and looked very presidential may I add. What happened to Obama’s nose in the air? This was not John McCain he was debating!
Yes, Romney ruled the debate and President Obama looked out of place!
Ducky: I have repeatedly said it goes deeper than President Obama.
A Billy Joel would say, he didn't start the fire, but he sure has thrown gasoline on it.
We are suffering systemic problems
Read and discuss FreeThinke's review of last night's performance:
http://freethinkesblog.blogspot.com/?zx=da63e836789862c5
~ FreeThinke
PS: Jim Leher was anything BUT unbiased and even-handed. - FT
Ducky here, you sound pretty stupid here today trying to defend you pitiful excuse for a president. You like the rest of the Democrats, Liberals, Progressives pride themselves on their domestic policies. This debate should have been a democraper advantage. But Obama could not defend his stupidity of wasting $90 billion on failed green energy so the recipients would contribute to his campaign. Obama will never be ready. To bad for him that Teleprompters are not allowed in a debate.
Your hero Obama looked like a lost puppy, he was lost for words and it showed. No doubt it is even more apparent that the empty suit is not enough anymore.
Christmas came early for us Republicans.
" Romney is impatient and interupted "looked like he took some lesson from Mr. O'reilly"-let have some respect here!"
Exactly how much moonshine did imbibe last night, Mr. Schubert?
You have to have been totally out of it to dare say such a thing in the face of Jim Lehrer's repeated attempts to derail or deter Governor Romney's attempts to respond to President Obama's repeated lies and unfounded accusations.
If you don't know who you ought to vote for by NOW, for CHRISSAKES take my advice and PLEASE DON'T VOTE at ALL.
You don't deserve the franchise.
~ FT
“I can’t believe I’m saying this,” tweeted Bill Maher, “But Obama looks like he DOES need a teleprompter.”
Different this time because Obama actually has a record to run on where last time it was just a slogan. Romney did a good job of defining his time as Governor. As a rumored lawyer Obama should have known never ask a question you don't know the answer to. He seemed to forget that Romney governed with a decisively democrat state legislature and got something done.
We have to keep in mind that swiftboat beat bush in the first debate so Romney still has two more debates to win.
Stevie,
I will admit I did make a mistake yesterday by saying the obama media has already declared him the winner.
Madcow declared there was no winner
Ed Shults was beside himself that obama looked terrible
Al Sharpton declared Obama the winner, surprising
Matthews was sobbing
Now the spinmeisters are saying Romney was mean, if you consider facts mean, he was.
Steve said...
"Another liar as president? That worked out so well when we elected Bush. A president so despicable, even Republiscums won't mention his name"
LOL, after that miserable performance .from YOUR messiah last night all you can do or say is Blame Bush again. You really are a sorry assed, pathetic moron. And you really do not have the creditability that deserves an answer.
I find it both intriguing and humorous when political partisans jump up and down claiming that the opposition lies and spins, yet their candidate doesn't.
All the while prepping the victimhood excuse machine for a possible defeat.
Anyone making book that Anita Davis is a Farmer clone?
Can these progressives be any more stupid as they have been responding to the debate on the progressives blogs? Naw!
"Anyone making book that Anita Davis is a Farmer clone?"
Not sure about that, but it certainly isn't very ladylike...or mature.
Anyone making book that Anita Davis is a Farmer clone?
I'd like a piece of that action, duckman. Orioles playoff tickets?
@Anita...
You GO, girl! ;)
Best come back of the night "You said you get a deduction for taking a plant overseas,” Romney said. “Look, I’ve been in business for 25 years. I have no idea what you’re talking about."
"That worked out so well when we elected Bush"
Even Obama has a hard time running against Bush again yet you continue. Obama is now trying to make himself into Clinton according to several times he referenced him last night.
I was very impressed with Mitt Romney, granted on my blog, I pretty much just made fun of Obama, but I was in such a happy mood. I was very proud on how Romney conducted himself, professional, direct and to the point.
He was not intimidated and was absolutely ready for anything Obama threw at him.
Obama on the other hand, well, those who watched the debate knows exactly how he behaved. Pathetic, petulant and irritable.
I saw part of the debate, Romney whipped obozo real good. But I supposed what else could he have done, like you said obozo is such a failure, he has little to no accomplishments and finally he has to answer for it.
Shame on the media lick-spittles for giving this fraud a free ride for so long.
I sure hope you folks and Romney wins over obozo, your future depends on it.
The First Debate: Mitt Romney's Five Biggest Lies
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-first-debate-mitt-romneys-five-biggest-lies-20121004#ixzz28MozOCJd
At Last Night’s Debate: Romney Told 27 Myths In 38 Minutes
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/10/04/958801/at-last-nights-debate-romney-told-27-myths-in-38-minutes/
Romney increasingly panned on substance, lies
http://americablog.com/2012/10/romney-increasingly-panned-on-substance.html
By losing last night’s debate, Obama may have won the election
http://americablog.com/2012/10/romney-didnt-win-obama-lost-theres-a-difference.html
I swear, at one point I looked up and Obama was nodding in agreement with Romney as he was skewering him.
Nodding off is more like it. I think he must have been drugged up for the occasion.
Somnabulistic Obooboo was a good part of the evening, but even semi-conscious with a head full of stale air, nothing could stop him from TALKING and TALKING and TALKING and TALKING and TALKING.
Verbose Vacuity has always been his style.
This is awkward:
“While we respect the rights of each campaign to make its case to voters, AARP has never consented to the use of its name by any candidate or political campaign,”
http://blog.aarp.org/2012/10/04/aarps-statement-on-the-denver-presidential-debate/
Silver, I have to admit, it's amazing how well you write for someone who apparently was born just a little less than four years ago.
JMJ
This is how some on the left have become SO unhinged at what took place last night, SAD
I just clicked on the link that Mark Adams left in this thread.
Ye, gods!
Are these people making this accusation completely out of their damned minds???
so interesting to hear even some on the left, today on the news, say Obama's wrong about his having so many people; and breaking it down, and having to admit, very sheepishly " we have to say that's wrong"
Ya, it's nice to talk about jobs but to not mention lost jobs or people who've stopped looking is just plain evil. Particularly for those poor people who must find work soon.
Romney resonated with them...no doubt about it. Heck, he resonated with Bill Maher!
:-)
@Leticia -- I was very proud on how Romney conducted himself ...
----
Were you also proud of how he lied through his teeth and moved to the center.
Who's the real Romney, Leticia?
Good one, Jersey.
Elect Mittens - He made the bobsleds run on time.
@Freethinker --- Nodding off is more like it. I think he must have been drugged up for the occasion.
----
Wait for it, Freethinker. I'm telling you, he's pulling a rope-a-dope.
Vote for Obama, his wife went to the Olympics in London!
He's a dope on the ropes alright!
10 Pieces Of Proof That Mitt Romney Thinks You're Stupid
1) “I don’t have a $5 trillion tax cut. I don’t have a tax cut of a scale that you’re talking about.” A Tax Policy Center analysis of Romney’s proposal for a 20 percent across-the-board tax cut in all federal income tax rates, eliminating the Alternative Minimum Tax, eliminating the estate tax and other tax reductions, would reduce federal revenue $480 billion in 2015. This amount to $5 trillion over the decade.
2) “My view is that we ought to provide tax relief to people in the middle class. But I’m not going to reduce the share of taxes paid by high-income people.” If Romney hopes to provide tax relief to the middle class, then his $5 trillion tax cut would add to the deficit. There are not enough deductions in the tax code that primarily benefit rich people to make his math work.
3) “The president’s put it in place as much public debt — almost as much debt held by the public as all prior presidents combined.” This is not even close to being true. When Obama took office, the national debt stood at $10.626 trillion. Now the national debt is over $16 trillion. That $5.374 trillion increase is nowhere near as much debt as all the other presidents combined.
4) “What we do have right now is a setting where I’d like to bring money from overseas back to this country.” Romney’s plan to shift the country to a territorial tax system would allow corporations to do business and make profits overseas without ever being taxed on it in the United States. This encourages American companies to invest abroad and could cost the country up to 800,000 jobs.
5) “I want to take that $716 billion you’ve cut and put it back into Medicare…. But the idea of cutting $716 billion from Medicare to be able to balance the additional cost of Obamacare is, in my opinion, a mistake. There’s that number again. Romney is claiming that Obamacare siphons off $716 billion from Medicare, to the detriment of beneficiaries. In actuality, that money is saved primarily through reducing over-payments to insurance companies under Medicare Advantage, not payments to beneficiaries. Paul Ryan’s budget plan keeps those same cuts, but directs them toward tax cuts for the rich and deficit reduction.
6) “What I support is no change for current retirees and near-retirees to Medicare.” Here is how Romney’s Medicare plan will affect current seniors: 1) by repealing Obamacare, the 16 million seniors receiving preventive benefits without deductibles or co-pays and are saving $3.9 billion on prescription drugs will see a cost increase, 2) “premium support” will increase premiums for existing beneficiaries as private insurers lure healthier seniors out of the traditional Medicare program, 3) Romney/Ryan would also lower Medicaid spending significantly beginning next year, shifting federal spending to states and beneficiaries, and increasing costs for the 9 million Medicare recipients who are dependent on Medicaid.
7) “Well, I would repeal and replace it. We’re not going to get rid of all regulation. You have to have regulation. And there are some parts of Dodd-Frank that make all the sense in the world.” Romney has previously called for full repeal of Dodd-Frank, a law whose specific purpose is to regulate banks. MF Global’s use of customer funds to pay for its own trading losses is just one bit of proof that the financial industry isn’t responsible enough to protect consumers without regulation.
8) “But I wouldn’t designate five banks as too big to fail and give them a blank check. That’s one of the unintended consequences of Dodd-Frank… We need to get rid of that provision because it’s killing regional and small banks. They’re getting hurt.” The law merely says that the biggest, systemically risky banks need to abide by more stringent regulations. If those banks fail, they will be unwound by a new process in the Dodd-Frank law that protects taxpayers from having to pony up for a bailout.
9) “I like the way we did it [health care] in Massachusetts…What were some differences? We didn’t raise taxes.” Romney raised fees, but he can claim that he didn’t increase taxes because the federal government funded almost half of his reforms.
10) “Preexisting conditions are covered under my plan.” Only people who are continuously insured would not be discriminated against because they suffer from pre-existing conditions. This protection would not be extended to people who are currently uninsured.
" ... I'm telling you, [Obama's] pulling a rope-a-dope."
SHAZAM!
Rush Limbaugh calls it right yet again -- as always.
That is EXACTLY what Rush SAID people of your perverted political persuasion would start saying in response to last night's TKO of President Obother.
EXACTLY -- word for word.
Must you ALWAYS run true to type, Canardo? Must you ALWAYS be so stultefyingly predictable?
It's so BAAAAAAAAAAAWRING!!!
~ FT
Waah! My candidate got his ass waxed!
And that's about all your whining fabrications amount to.
1)"Romney’s proposal for a 20 percent across-the-board tax cut in all federal income tax rates,"
Except that is complete and utter bullshit... and is not Romney's proposal. Romney's proposal is a 20% across the board cut on MARGINAL tax rates.
Go here and educate yourself on what a marginal tax rate is:
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/MarginalTaxRates.html
2) "There are not enough deductions in the tax code that primarily benefit rich people to make his math work."
Nor are there enough rich people to pay for your la-la-fantasy land politics... Which is why Obama added 6 Trillion to the debt in 4 years. Hey... wouldn't that be $12 Trillion over a decade?
3)"“The president’s put it in place as much public debt — almost as much debt held by the public as all prior presidents combined.” This is not even close to being true"
It's not even close to be relevant. You know what's relevant?
"When Obama took office, the national debt stood at $10.626 trillion. Now the national debt is over $16 trillion."
AN INCREASE OF 60%
4)"This encourages American companies to invest abroad and could cost the country up to 800,000 jobs."
The Facts: Biden overstated the case. His 800,000 jobs number is based on a study conducted by one expert, Kimberly Clausing, an economics professor at Reed College in Portland, Oregon. Her July analysis examined the effects of a “pure” territorial system under which U.S. companies would face no domestic taxes on their foreign income.
The clearest Republican proposal on the issue has come from Representative Dave Camp of Michigan, the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. It would exempt 95 percent of foreign income and includes provisions opposed by companies that prevent them from shifting profits outside the U.S. That’s not the pure proposal that Clausing analyzed.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-09-06/biden-overstates-impact-of-romney-s-tax-plan-reality-check#p2
5) "In actuality, that money is saved primarily through reducing over-payments to insurance companies under Medicare Advantage, not payments to beneficiaries"
“So you’ve got a document where Barack Obama is saying we’ve got to cut Medicare $250 billion, which I think is responsible. But his campaign team is going out there every day saying, ‘Watch out. We’re not going to cut Medicare, but Mitt Romney is.’”
Woodward replied: “Yeah, and, I mean, it’s not just his campaign team. It’s the president himself.
In an interview Woodward conducted with Obama in July 2011 may explain it. Asked about a meeting he had on Medicare with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)Obama said:
"All the Democrats felt that for Democrats to join with Republicans in anything that could be painted as a Medicare cut when there was a huge difference between Democratic and Republican positions on Medicare generally was bad politics. It’s an untenable position to say we’re not going to do anything on Medicare and Medicaid when that’s one of the biggest drivers of our budget deficit."
ObamaCare “cut” $716 billion in future Medicare spending — money that Obama is turning around and spending on other programs while pretending that he is saving money. Still, the fact remains that Obama is, in Washington terms, cutting Medicare and planning to cut it some more — all the while pretending that he is not and castigating Romney for suggesting that Medicare spending might have to be reined in soon.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/health-care/item/13109-obama-plans-to-cut-medicare-bob-woodward-says
6)Obamacare cut $716 billion from Medicare in order to fund $1.9 trillion in new health care spending.
Of the $716 billion in cuts, $415 billion come in the form of “updates to fee-for-service payment rates,” a euphemism for reducing Medicare’s payments to doctors and hospitals. But what happens when you reduce payments to doctors? Doctors stop being willing to see Medicare patients. And if you can’t actually get a doctor’s appointment, what does it really matter what your insurance plan covers on paper?
A Health Affairs study was conducted by Sandra Decker, an economist at the National Center for Health Statistics, a unit of the Centers for Disease Control.
Decker pulled data from the CDC’s 2011 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey in order to calculate the percentage of physicians who accept new patients, based on patients’ insurance status. She found that primary care doctors were 73 percent more likely to reject Medicaid patients relative to the privately insured (34 percent rejection rate vs. 20 percent) and specialists were 63 percent more likely to reject Medicaid patients (28 to 17).
As the saying goes, there ain't no such thing as a free lunch. Health care professionals are not compelled to accept patients at medicare rates, nor are they likely to do so as the ratio between compensation and cost increases.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2012/08/07/health-affairs-study-one-third-of-doctors-wont-accept-new-medicaid-patients/
7) "a law whose specific purpose is to regulate banks"
You seem to confuse purpose with effect, just because the purpose of a law is to regulate, doesn't mean it is effective regulation.
"proof that the financial industry isn’t responsible enough to protect consumers without regulation"
And who said it was?
"there are some parts of Dodd-Frank that make all the sense in the world"
You realize you are arguing against your own strawmen right?
8) You are correct, Romney was wrong: 188 not 122 small banks have failed in the time period cited. The issue is not direct effects of Dodd-Frank, like the defenders of the bill like to use in its defense, the issue is indirect effects. How does a small or regional bank compete against a "bank that's too big to fail" and underwritten by the government?
If I agree to cover your losses at the blackjack table... are you going to bet less or more?
9) (1) half of Medicare’s administrative costs are booked by other federal agencies; and (2) On a per-beneficiary basis, despite this advantage, Medicare spends more on administrative costs than private plans do.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2011/06/30/the-myth-of-medicares-low-administrative-costs/
Between 2006 and 2010, “employer-sponsored health-care premiums for a family rose about 19% in Massachusetts, while they rose about 22% in the US as a whole.”
10) In Massachusetts, the state's health reform laws already protect people with pre-existing conditions from being denied coverage or charged higher rates.
http://www.massresources.org/pcip.html
As Ducky says "Pitch til you win"
and to be more precise, 6 Trillion every four years would be 15 Trillion a decade.
Cheers!
Liberalmaniac:
Stop regurgitating your red propaganda here. We're tired of of seeing you embarrassed because you can't defend the BS you post here.
Remember folks, Romney believes regulations create free markets (wtf?) and that we can grow the economy big enough to keep the government on its back. (wtf?)
Key words in the tax policy centers piece here liberalmann:
“we estimate the degree to which individual income tax expenditures would have to be limited”
“We do not score Governor Romney’s plan directly”
“This is true even when we bias our assumptions about which and whose tax expenditures are reduced to make the resulting tax system as progressive as possible.”
“For instance, even when we assume that tax breaks – like the charitable deduction, mortgage interest deduction, and the exclusion for health insurance – are completely eliminated for higher-income households first”
“In addition, we also assess whether these results hold if we assume that revenue reductions are partially offset by higher economic growth.”
“Estimate”, “do not score directly”,” bias our assumptions”, “we assume”, “we assess these results… if we assume”.
The report is all based on assumption, not facts.
Wish you'd send that splendid collection of data to Shaw Kenawe at Progressive Eruptions, Finntann, but of course she'd NEVER publish it, but IF on the off change she did, she'd simply dismiss it as "lies' and 'fabrications" by right wing crackpots.
The left has its OWN set of facts you know -- and they insist we d to, so no honest discussion i possible. They occupy a parallel universe where "our' information doesn't count.
STREWTH!
~ FT
Post a Comment