In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:53:49 -0500, I am Perfect wrote:

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 11:21:48 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch
wrote:

On Feb 18, 2:17*pm, jps wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 11:11:29 -0800, wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 12:26:17 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 09:00:23 -0800, jps wrote:

You think using a majority to supress the people and
votes of the opposition is fair play?

Oh like the 111th congress? You folks said the republicans should suck
it up and go along. When they didn't you said they were
obstructionists.
Aren't the Wisconsin democrats shutting down the government?
Where is your outrage?
I wonder what their constitution says about legislators who abandon
their jobs? Perhaps the governor can simply replace them. In real
life, I imagine all they have to do is walk through and spit in the
lobby to demonstrate that they are still working.

We are going to be entering uncharted territory though. Nobody really
knows what happens when a state files for bankruptcy. How do they
discharge their debts when they don't have the money and they can't
just print it like the federal government does. Will they try to print
some kind of scrip and see if people would take it? Are they just
going to tell their debtors to sue them?

We better get used to questions like this because the whole country
has a "Greece" moment coming. I doubt our protests will be as peaceful
as Egypt or even Greece. It might be more like Warsaw 1944 except the
populace is better armed. *;-)

There's no "Greece" or Egypt "moment" coming. That's a paranoid
fantasy.

For some it's a sexual fantasy involving their big guns.

A true liberal, jps wishes violence against those he disagrees with.
Do the Libs really want to incite violence against those who support
the constitution?

Ah, yes, wrap yourself in the flag and the constitution. You'd better
because you've got no clothes otherwise.

Accusing libs of wanting to incite violence is laughable. It's the
knee jerk wingers who resort to threats and violence when they can't
win. Who are the idiots who open carry when the president is coming
to visit? Are those liberals or "conservatives?"

Who marches with signs about blood being necessary to keep the tree of
freedom alive? Those are liberals? For someone with a brain, you
sure have some insane ideas. If you're an idiot savant, your gift is
surely not in understanding politics or people.

One guy with a long gun, compared to this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71gsn...layer_embedded

Here is another "brave" liberal, attacking old women...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVFdaz_VUJE

Here is another advocate of "free speech"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBDqG...1&feature=fvwp

I wonder if our friend Donnie was in this crowd?

http://www.breitbart.tv/hate-rally-p...ca-with-trash-
left-behind/

Plonk away, but these are the facts. Liberals including the one in the
Whitehouse are doing everything you have suggested above. Here it is in
full color. The best you have is Pelosi lying about something she said
happened on the steps of congress and one guy with a long gun that saw a
rally and stopped by as far as you know.

You keep saying the conservatives are the ones pushing violence and
destruction yet the video shows just the opposite.

Please show what facts you have that Pelosi lied.

I sure hope that was a joke.

No, I'd like you to tell me how you know that Pelosi lied about
something happening on the steps of congress.

There was at least a dozen cameras rolling, the slurs never happened. A
group even offered 150,000 dollars to anybody who could produce proof
beyond what Pelosi made up as she was threatening the folks at the
Capitol with the huge mallet, trolling for "B" roll.

That's not proof that she lied and you know it.

It is as much proof as Pelosi and the known activists she was with have
to the initial accusation. In fact, I believe the video tape(s) are
clear proof that she lied. Her story was destroyed several ways from
daylight, when the tapes came out.

Because a camera wasn't on an incident is proof that it didn't
happen???? I guess that rules out a LOT of things in life. The creation
of the world, to start with.

There were nearly a dozen video angles of that particular point in time,
from many vantagepoints. It is clear that in this case, she lied.

Bull****. Like I said, because a camera didn't catch something doesn't
mean that it didn't happen. You have NO proof that she lied about that
incident and you know it, or you should know it.

But you are wrong. Every angle was covered during the event, video and
audio were quite clear. The story as she told it did not add up and the
audio was conclusive. That's why with a dozen or more professional
videographers, several working for Pelosi herself as she trolled for an
incident, even with $100,000 on the line, not one shred of audio or
video even came close to squaring with Pelosi's story, much less any
evidence of it's truthfulness. She made it up, she lied, period.

Are you really trying to say that every single utterence by someone was
covered? HORSE****. You have NO PROOF that that she lied.