AAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh... I am sooo tired of listening to people talk...
Rosie Odonnell is insane
Collapse
X
-
Hey, that is NOT the american way! Americans should never think about the consequences of decades of sticking their nose where it doesn't belong. The american way is never to ask WHY something happened and what can they do to avoid it happening again. The american way is to keep on keeping on, just be as oblivious as always and be shocked when something happens again in the future...LOLI stand for not fucking with other people or, on a national level, not fucking with other countries.
Your fucking with other countries got you 9/11.... no doubt in the future it will get you more of the same. For every action there are consequences. When are you going to wake up and realise that?
Dont start nuthin' and there wont be nuthin'
Remember folks, Rosie and blondie are on a talk show on television. Their job is to get more eyeballs to watch their little show. The more eyeballs they get the more thier network can charge in advertising. So, the "views" on the view will be exaggerated and I'm sure the producers are loving every minute of Rosie and blondie because they hear the cash register going "cha ching-cha ching".
Bush is not a complete moron, he's a puppet, but not a complete moron. He did manage to get the "war on terror" to be fought somewhere other then North America, which was brilliant and probably saved millions of american lives. As a terrorist if you want to fight with americans now, you just go to the mid east and start shooting. It's a lot cheaper then a flight across the ocean...
Comment
-
Comment
-
Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush! Impeach Bush!ISeekGirls.com since 2005Comment
-
LOL...this coming from the KING of degrading people. Here is what you go on to say in THIS THREAD alone:
...you cant out a coherent sentence together
...you certainly are ignorant
...the less intelligent poor Democratic half
...jelly minded people like yourself
...this is going to shock your fragile teenage brain
...you are nothing but a sheep
...no wonder you are a broke motherfucker

51-566-514
Comment
-
No, Bush and crew have no intention of leaving... and even if the dems take control, you watch.. they won't leave either.. Permanent bases have been built there and they won't be given up anytime soon.I don't believe Bush has any plans to leave. It's been said for a long time that the US has way too many vested interests in the Middle East and the best way to see that they stay protected is by military intervention. You don't get much better than by occupying a country in the thick of it. This goes double for Bush though, and I don't think I need to explain why.
http://newamericancentury.org/
That's the think tank that was formed before Bush took power and you'll recognise many of the people involved with it. Read the document Rebuilding Americas Defenses and you'll begin to understand the entire plan... Part of it is to form a significant ground force in the middle east so they can shift carrier groups to asia.Comment
-
and just look at the size of that head!
~ Webair Dedicated Cloud Serversâ„¢ ~ WEBAIR VSYSâ„¢ Virtual Hosting Platform ~ Superior CDN Network ~
~ Managed Dedicated hosting Specialists ~ DISCOUNT DOMAIN NAMES! ~ WEBAIR FUSION IO MANAGED CLOUD SERVERS! ~
ICQ: 243116321 - TWITTER - @WEBAIRINC - E-Mail: [email protected]Comment
-
-
-
I think it's pretty funny how some people label democrats or liberals as "poor people". Especially when the more wealthy areas in the US with the highest property values are the ones that seem to vote for the democratic party time after time, while the right wing christian trailer park areas vote republican.
Last edited by stev0; 03-30-2007, 02:31 PM.Comment
-
And here I was thinking I was the only one who noticed that...I think it's pretty funny how some people label democrats or liberals as "poor people". Especially when the more wealthy areas in the US with the highest property values are the ones that seem to vote for the democratic party time after time, while the right wing christian trailer park areas vote republican.

Comment
-
really tho this thread is useless without a nude pic of rosie
my sig caught gonoherpasyphilaids and died
Comment
-
How would you know anything about Americans than what you see on TV? Historically most people who vote for Democrats are POOR, certainly there are some rich people but most of those people live in the major city bubbles and are sheltered from the reality of normal life. You dont know what you are talking about, just that you see a few hollywood celebrities vote Democratic. The average Democrat makes less than the average Republican.I think it's pretty funny how some people label democrats or liberals as "poor people". Especially when the more wealthy areas in the US with the highest property values are the ones that seem to vote for the democratic party time after time, while the right wing christian trailer park areas vote republican.Comment
-
Comment
-
Please provide a link to a source to back this up.How would you know anything about Americans than what you see on TV? Historically most people who vote for Democrats are POOR, certainly there are some rich people but most of those people live in the major city bubbles and are sheltered from the reality of normal life. You dont know what you are talking about, just that you see a few hollywood celebrities vote Democratic. The average Democrat makes less than the average Republican.Comment
-
Forgot:
Christians for Porn....
Splum is .... forget it!I know that Asspimple is stoopid ... As he says, it is a FACT !
But I can't figure out how he can breathe or type , at the same time ....Comment
-
I dont need a link you dimwit its common knowledge, I would CHALLENGE you to find information that says otherwise. You cant seriously believe the "average" Democratic voter makes more than the "average" Republican voter?
Comment
-
So, you're the one saying "why do you have to get so degrading all of a sudden? Got anger management?" and yet call me a dimwit for asking for proof?
And, with chest puffed out all proud, you say that I should post proof to counter your lack of proof? And yet you call me the dimwit?
Tell you what, you stated the "fact" of yours, so you prove it. It's not up to me to prove otherwise.
I know, you can't prove it, but hey... don't bite my head off for it. Just admit you're wrong.Comment
-
Donald Trump on Imus in the Morning said Rosie should be fired for what she said about 9/11. Then The Don went on a rant about how much a waste of space Rosie is. It was pretty funny.

Comment
-
Source and link... and I don't need to know your websites....
oups, sorry, I hadn't seen it
http://www.buzzflash.com/contributor..._GOP_Lies.html
I know that Asspimple is stoopid ... As he says, it is a FACT !
But I can't figure out how he can breathe or type , at the same time ....Comment
-
Do I have to prove that the moon isnt made of cheese for you as well?
(I have not done research on these sources below they just popped up near the top along with thousands of other results for this subject)
http://people-press.org/commentary/d...AnalysisID=114
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=945
I called you a dimwit because your obvious lack of knowledge of the United States electorate. You owe me an apology.Last edited by Splum; 03-30-2007, 04:32 PM.Comment
-
#1 Your "source" is liberal commentary not hard dataSource and link... and I don't need to know your websites....
oups, sorry, I hadn't seen it http://www.buzzflash.com/contributor..._GOP_Lies.html 
#2 Your "source" doesnt even address my comment
#3 Im sorry I am not speaking your language here: Baaaa Baaa Baaa baabaaaComment
-
.... I hear a sheep ...... Anybody into GoatSex... Splum is here....
When YOU bring up facts, you back them up, otherwise they are only at best Urban Legends....The GOP has historically been the party of both Main Street and Wall Street. But over the past decade, the plutocrats have increasingly become Democrats. Billionaires for Bush are increasingly outnumbered by billionaires who hate Bush. And Republicans in limousines are being outpaced by Democrats in Lear Jets.
With soft-money contributions banned, the super rich can now hope to sway elections with large checks to 527 advocacy groups such as MoveOn.org, Americans Coming Together, and the Media Fund, and by bundling contributions to candidates. Over the last four elections, the Democrats have dominated on both accounts. Consider these numbers, from the nonpartisan, non-profit Center for Responsive Politics (CRP):
Thus far in 2006, 17 of the top 25 contributors to 527 advocacy groups are funding liberal/Democratic causes, including liberal billionaires George Soros, and Peter Lewis.
In 2004, Democrats made up 15 of the 25 individuals who gave more than $2 million to 527 groups. Of the Senate and House candidates who received ?bundled? contributions that year, 9 out of the top 10 in the Senate and 8 out of 10 in the House were Democrats.
In 2002, those who gave a million dollars or more gave $36 million to the Democrats and only $3 million to Republicans, a 12:1 ratio. Those who gave $10,000 or more gave $140 million to the Democrats and just $111 million to Republicans. Of the top 10 individual contributors to candidates that year, only one gave to Republicans.
In 2000, Bush?s ?Pioneers? received considerable press for their efforts to raise $100,000 each for the campaign. But the really big donors that year were Democrats. According to the lefty Mother Jones magazine, 18 of the top 25 individual donors to political campaigns were Democrats. In recent years, the Left has been obsessed with the role that the oil and natural-gas industry plays in funding the Republican candidates. Republicans are ?in oil companies? pockets,? says the DNC in one press release. In 2004, according to the CRP, the oil and gas industry pumped $25 million into campaigns, 80 percent of it to the GOP.
But that pales in comparison to industries and interests that fund the Democratic party. That same year lawyers gave $182 million (75 percent to Democrats) and Hollywood donated $32 million (70 percent to Democrats).
Despite all of the rhetoric about rich Republicans, the GOP today is largely a party funded by middle-class voters. The average contribution to the GOP hovers around $50, almost identical with the much ballyhooed Internet ?grassroots? presidential campaign of Howard Dean in 2004. The Democrats for some reason won?t release comparable figures.
But the super-rich are not just giving to Democrats, they are increasingly running for office. In the Senate, often called a millionaires club, those with the really big money are Democrats. Of the five U.S. senators worth more than $25 million (John Kerry, Herb, Kohl, John Rockefeller, Dianne Feinstein, and Lincoln Chafee) according to Roll Call, only Chafee is a Republican.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...E0MjNlMDJiZTY=
Not because you say it, it becomes a thruth . I can relate that listening to Bush repeat and repeat and repeat lies , you believed they were thruth..Only the simple mind like yours are affected tough ....
BTW, what websites you run ?
I know that Asspimple is stoopid ... As he says, it is a FACT !
But I can't figure out how he can breathe or type , at the same time ....Comment
-
Again you cite a "source" that doesnt even address the specific comment. The comment was that "Average Republican voters have a higher income than Democratic voters"
To address and refute my comment you cite this article
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...E0MjNlMDJiZTY=
Which simply says WHERE candidates are getting contributions from. Most voters NEVER donate a dime to any candidate so I dont even see how your source even remotely correlates with my statement. Hell that was a pathetic try to debunk me directfiesta.
Comment
-
"On the other hand, Enterprisers and Liberals ha whose political opinions mix no better than oil and water ha have a surprising amount of common ground both economically and educationally. These groups are the wealthiest and best educated in the typology. Roughly four-in-ten Enterprisers and Liberals (41% each) have annual household incomes of at least $75,000; only the Upbeats (39%) have about as many people in that income category. "Do I have to prove that the moon isnt made of cheese for you as well?
(I have not done research on these sources below they just popped up near the top along with thousands of other results for this subject)
http://people-press.org/commentary/d...AnalysisID=114
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=945
I called you a dimwit because your obvious lack of knowledge of the United States electorate. You owe me an apology.
Interesting huh?
I also found this interesting... must explain your stance:
"Indeed, when it comes to explaining partisanship, income is not nearly as powerful a factor as the familiar stereotype would suggest. To find out its relative influence, Pew conducted a multiple regression analysis of survey data it has collected on party identification since January of 2004. This is a statistical technique that measures the relative impact of each of a set of factors on a phenomenon of interest.
The analysis (see table) shows that of six demographic traits often linked to partisanship, race is the most influential driver of party identification, and frequency of church attendance is the second most important. Income, union membership and gender are of roughly equal importance, and education is least important."
Anyway, continue on dimwit... until you give me anything of substance, I'll just keep thinking of you in the same way that everyone else is thinking of the blonde in that video.
Comment
-
Porn websites, but what would you know about porn websites?
http://www.pdghosting.com/adult/content/view/13/32/Note: Pornography and sex-related merchandising are prohibited on any PDG HOSTING Internet Services serverComment
-
I did give you substance but I realize you are a simpleton and need the direct evidence quoted neatly:
http://people-press.org/commentary/d...AnalysisID=114
Upper Income Quintile (Annual household income above approx. $92,000, in 2005 dollars): In 2005, the GOP edge over Democrats among people in this income bracket is 38%-27% (with the remainder unaffiliated with either major party); back in 1992, the GOP edge was nearly identical, 37%-26%.
Upper Middle Income Quintile (Annual household income of approx. $58,000 to $92,000): The Republicans have a small edge over Democrats among all people in this bracket, 36%-31%, and a larger edge among whites, 40%-27%. Back in 1992, the GOP's margins were smaller among all people (32%-29%) and among whites (34%-26%).
Middle Income Quintile (Annual household income of approx. $35,000 to $58,000): Among whites in this bracket, Republicans have opened up an 8 percentage point margin over Democrats (36%-28%), up from the 4 percentage point margin the GOP enjoyed in 1992 (32%-28%). When nonwhites are included, the overall public in this income range is divided almost evenly (33% Democrat, 32% Republican).
Lower Middle Income Quintile (Annual household income of approx. $19,000 to $35,000): Here is where the GOP gains have been strongest. Republicans still trail Democrats among all people in this bracket by 35%-28%, but the GOP now leads among whites in this bracket, by a slim 33%-29%. Back in 1992, the Democrats led the GOP among whites by 33%-28% and among all people by 38%-24%.
Lower Income Quintile (Annual household income below approx. $19,000): Republicans continue to trail by sizable margins in this income bracket. Currently the Democrats enjoy a 42%-20% advantage overall, comparable to their 43%-18% edge in 1992. Among whites, the Democratic edge is 37%-24% now and had been 37%-22% back in 1992.Comment
-
Just a liar as all your friends ;Porn websites, but what would you know about porn websites?
http://www.pdghosting.com/adult/content/view/13/32/
End of your quote:
" EXCEPT those on servers that have clearly stated that such content is allowed upon signing up."
BTW, look at the header, tough I am actually finishing the new site....
So happens we segregate mainstream from porn for many reasons, none of which your small brain can comprehend...
So , what do you do that is so secret ....I know that Asspimple is stoopid ... As he says, it is a FACT !
But I can't figure out how he can breathe or type , at the same time ....Comment
-
Comment
-
So you've posted a source that no one's ever heard of. That's great. And then called me names despite me simply asking for proof. You're the big man. You win. I'll never ever ask for a link to a source of proof ever again for fear of being called a dimwit immediately after.I did give you substance but I realize you are a simpleton and need the direct evidence quoted neatly:
http://people-press.org/commentary/d...AnalysisID=114
Although... that being said, I still am missing out on this part.... "Historically most people who vote for Democrats are POOR"
Where's the historical information? Anything dating back 100 years to present would be fine. Feel free to post sources that no one has heard of.Comment
-
Rosie is a mindless drone whose swallowed too much of Michael Moor's kool aide..
She wants to exercise her freedom of speech, fine but she needs to stop blatantly lying about 9/11, everything she says has been refuted by facts yet she keeps bumping her gums like a broken record.
the bitch needs to shut it
http://www.popularmechanics.com/blog...s/4213805.htmlComment
-
Ah, so this is the route of the problem. You only hear/read what you want to hear/read... and skip the rest.
No wonder Bush has you wrapped around his little finger. Personally, there's this dimwit thing I do called thinking... and refuse to be told what to think/believe.
But if it works for you, then who am I to judge. Enjoy your force fed life
Comment
-
Splum, on FoxNews, in a few minutes, Hannity is showing a compilation of the past 6 months of Rosie's outrageous moments...
Don't miss it .....
And, yes, I watch often O'Reilly and Hannity ..... ( 2 - 3 times a week )I know that Asspimple is stoopid ... As he says, it is a FACT !
But I can't figure out how he can breathe or type , at the same time ....Comment
-
It may surprise you to learn I dont like Hannity nor do I frequently watch any sort of news program. Most of my daily news intake comes from internet sources.Comment
-
Comment
-
Rosie, as much as I dislike her, really did sound saner than the blonde girlComment
-
Most you probably already know, CNN Drudge etc
My favorite "conservative blog" is http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/
My favorite "liberal blog" is http://www.huffingtonpost.com
All the social bookmarking places are good places for tech stuff just dont click any of the political/religious links on these sites http://www.reddit.com http://www.digg.comComment
-
You are obviously a terrorist appeaser, anti-American or just plain kook.
9/11 was NOT an "inside job" or "american based conspiracy"
The British hostages taken are not a false flag operation.Last edited by Splum; 03-30-2007, 09:19 PM.Comment
-
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." - Theodore RooseveltComment
-
-
Oh stop with this fucking quote already, Teddy Roosevelt wasnt talking about aiding and appeasing the enemy by spreading enemy propaganda. People like you give our enemies SUPPORT to continue to defy the United States all under the guise of your "free speech". You do realize some speech is unprotected dont you? One day I hope appeasing the enemy during war time is a punishable crime.Comment
-
You should do some research on who writes what you sheep read.Roosevelt was anti-american ;) http://www.heartheissues.com/differentworlds.html
Liberal radio personality http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Pakman
Why dont you just post something from Michael Moore or Al Franken so we can really see how you feel.Comment
-
150 terrorist appeasers
That disgusting loud mouthed fat pig Rosie is obviously more attractive to you but hey to each his own, Ill take Elizabeth ANY time.Originally posted by pornopeteThe only show Elizabeth Hasselback should be on should be on the playboy channel - "The giant douche hour"Last edited by Splum; 03-31-2007, 07:24 AM.Comment









Comment