On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 10:33:27 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 10:06:04 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 09:24:13 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 08:31:38 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

Had I seen it or heard of it, I'd have been just as righteously
indignant.

A rhetorical question, then:

What does that say about the thoroughness of the news outlets you use?

I don't limit myself. I didn't see it, or read about it. Perhaps I
should listen to Ed Schultz a litte more?

Why not? He makes as much sense as Glenn Beck and I don't have to
listen to him weep through the show like the latter crybaby is prone
to do. But, then, I wouldn't be listening to either one of them
expecting FACTS.... and I wouldn't quote either one of them as BEING
factual.

Surprisingly, I don't even recall any of the liberals here, you
included, mentioning it.

Oh, so now I am a liberal. Couldn't you think of a more inflammatory
epithet? Oh... no, of course you couldn't!

And no, I didn't post anything about it. I don't come here to start a
bunch of political crap.... I'll leave that to you, Harry, JPS, and
wf3h.

--

John H