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? :1orglaugh

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.

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.
:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

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

:1orglaugh

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.

#1 Your "source" is liberal commentary not hard data
#2 Your "source" doesnt even address my comment
#3 Im sorry I am not speaking your language here: Baaaa Baaa Baaa baabaaa

.... 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....

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 .... :2 cents:


BTW, what websites you run ? :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

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. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

"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. "

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. :glugglug

Porn websites, but what would you know about porn websites?

http://www.pdghosting.com/adult/content/view/13/32/

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

Just a liar as all your friends ;

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 obviously intellectually destroy you on all levels but it is funny that you have this burning desire to know more about me, that makes me feel all warm inside thank you directfiesta. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

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.

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.

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.html

Yes I know.

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 :glugglug

I win. Toodloo. :p

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 )

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.

What sources?
I need new reading material.

Rosie, as much as I dislike her, really did sound saner than the blonde girl

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.com

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.

"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 Roosevelt

Roosevelt was anti-american ;)


http://www.heartheissues.com/images/iraq-alqaeda.gif
http://www.heartheissues.com/differentworlds.html

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.

You should do some research on who writes what you sheep read.
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.

good for her :thumbsup

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.

she is nobody.. she just runs that big fat mouth of hers.

Hey buddy,
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pag.../epolls.0.html

Looks pretty close to me, more people making under $15,000/year are voting democrat but that's a tiny portion of the population. Most likely people collecting welfare on disability and such.

Given the margin of error, everything over 50k/year is split evenly, your argument is disproved.


If you really want to get down to the numbers, the largest portion of the population (22%) is making between 50 and 75 thousand per year, AND voting democrat.

$50-75,000 (22%) 50% democrat 48% republican

It's time for a picture!
http://www.picum.com/ggj/sheeple.jpg

Nice spin but I already proved my statement earlier in this thread, also your "source page" there proves I am right as well. Nothing like reviving a thread days later to try to sneak in a false attack against facts ehh buddy? Im on top of your steaming pile of shit tho.

Ok sure here ya go terrorist appeaser!
http://img14.imagevenue.com/loc827/t..._122_827lo.jpg

Doesn't sound like you're a fan of free speech or the first amendment. It is always funny that the ones who rattle their sabers the most over "fighting for freedom" are the ones that don't seem to like the principles of freedom.

What you are suggesting is akin to what Saddam used to do. That anyone who disagrees with the government be punished. I thought this was what we were "freeing the Iraqis" from? Perhaps finding a blog post you can copy and paste that isn't hypocritical would be best.

She is a little wacko.

is this news?

You people take it too far, for one we are in the midst of a war, dissenting opinions are fine but when you ACTIVELY aid and abet our enemies you BECOME an enemy of the state. I am not talking about peace rallies, anti-war conferences I am talking about propaganda over the internet, distributing anti-American movies, and helping the enemy spread anti-American propaganda around the world. There will come a time where your appeasement will hurt this country and its probably coming soon.
This isnt about "free speech" its about HATE SPEECH against your own people.

So you don't believe in free speech. That's just what I'm trying to get at. I'm not sure why you put yourself through the pains of living in a country that has it though. You'd probably enjoy Russia or China much more. They have very similar beliefs to you.

Please explain how I've actively aided and abetted the enemy. Is it my having an opinion? You do know that if people didn't have an opinion against the government, you'd be flying a British flag outside your house. We'd also have slaves, women wouldn't be allowed to vote, and Asians would be locked up in internment camps.

As for the pom-poms and flag waving, I don't really care. I'm not into the whole nationalistic pride. Sure it's a good tactic to rally sheep (just ask Nazi Germany, Stalin Soviet Union, and even present day Iran), but I pay for the government and I'll say whatever the fuck I want about it. They work for me, not some arbitrary entity you have concocted in your mind. The American public spoke in November, and will continue to speak.