|
Ms. Bachmann is running
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:55:09 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 14/06/2011 12:23 PM, wrote: On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 11:34:31 -0600, wrote: On 13/06/2011 8:38 PM, wrote: Looks like she's going to announce "soon." I sure how Palin announces. Then, we'll see just who is the craziest. Wow, old news idiot. I don't follow the news of right-wing freaks moment to moment, unlike some here. She announced during the debate. I was watching. http://uglydemocrats.com/democrats/U.../Helen-Thomas/ Bachmann is much easier and appealing on the eyes. And, that's all you care about, which is why you're destitute and living in a trailer park. |
Ms. Bachmann is running
In article ,
says... On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 19:21:28 -0400, I_am_Tosk wrote: In article , says... On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 14:31:32 -0400, I_am_Tosk wrote: In article , says... Most of the right-wingers don't want to let women have access to birth control no less to abortion. Where the hell did you hear that? It's total bullship! Most of the conservatives I know are social liberals... Just not "progressives" like you. the GOP is now in favor of banning abortion even in cases of rape or incest. they're fanatical women haters Bullship. when are you going to learn that you're ALWAYS wrong when you challenge me? http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2...ine_rape.p hp http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0...te_C andidate you right wingers need to keep up with how truly ****ed up your beliefs are They are not "the GOP"... of course you still don't even know what "Wall St." so I expect you to just spew.. -- Team Rowdy Mouse, Banned from the Mall for life! |
Ms. Bachmann is running
In article ,
says... Harryk wrote: On 6/14/11 2:31 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote: In , says... Most of the right-wingers don't want to let women have access to birth control no less to abortion. Where the hell did you hear that? It's total bullship! Most of the conservatives I know are social liberals... Just not "progressives" like you. You really ought to stay away from making politically oriented posts...we already know you are a simple-minded fool; you're just reinforcing it. Most conservatives are not social liberals, and most conservatives are opposed to all manner of womens' reproductive rights, beginning with proper sex education and information and help with contraception. What a ****ing ignorant moron you are. Your daughter ought to get herself emancipated. You have experience with that, eh? Yes, we all remember his wailing when his whole family abandoned him... -- Team Rowdy Mouse, Banned from the Mall for life! |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 22:48:16 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote: In article , says... the GOP is now in favor of banning abortion even in cases of rape or incest. they're fanatical women haters Bullship. when are you going to learn that you're ALWAYS wrong when you challenge me? http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2...ine_rape.p hp http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0...te_C andidate you right wingers need to keep up with how truly ****ed up your beliefs are They are not "the GOP"... of course you still don't even know what "Wall St." so I expect you to just spew.. bachman's not a republican? who knew! guess she was just masquerading during the debate this week, huh? and YOU seem never to have been on wall street so it's no surprise you give them cover. |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On 6/15/11 5:59 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 22:48:16 -0400, I_am_Tosk wrote: In , says... the GOP is now in favor of banning abortion even in cases of rape or incest. they're fanatical women haters Bullship. when are you going to learn that you're ALWAYS wrong when you challenge me? http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2...ine_rape.p hp http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0...te_C andidate you right wingers need to keep up with how truly ****ed up your beliefs are They are not "the GOP"... of course you still don't even know what "Wall St." so I expect you to just spew.. bachman's not a republican? who knew! guess she was just masquerading during the debate this week, huh? and YOU seem never to have been on wall street so it's no surprise you give them cover. Ingerfool thinks *he* decides who the Republicans are. A few years ago, he was telling us his rules for who Christians were. In both instances, his logic was faulty. But what would you expect from an uneducated little schmuck like him? Every GOP presidential candidate wannabe is opposed to women's reproductive rights, and that opposition doesn't just begin and end with absolute opposition to abortion. That our little fool here thinks otherwise is only reflective of his ignorance. -- Want to discuss recreational boating and fishing in a forum where personal insults are not allowed? http://groups.google.com/group/rec-boating-fishing |
Ms. Bachmann is running
|
Ms. Bachmann is running
In article , payer33859
@mypacks.net says... On 6/14/11 4:57 PM, wrote: On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:31:54 -0400, wrote: On 6/14/11 4:19 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote: In article8ZCdne0OtIRSLmrQnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer33859 @mypacks.net says... On 6/14/11 2:31 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote: In , says... Most of the right-wingers don't want to let women have access to birth control no less to abortion. Where the hell did you hear that? It's total bullship! Most of the conservatives I know are social liberals... Just not "progressives" like you. You really ought to stay away from making politically oriented posts...we already know you are a simple-minded fool; you're just reinforcing it. Most conservatives are not social liberals, Harry, please learn to read.. I said most conservatives "I know".. you dumbass.. thus, the rest of your tripe is worthless... Most conservatives you know, eh? That must be some group. I can just imagine... I wonder if it's the same group that brings guns to town hall meetings? Here's a thought...the people he knows who claim to be conservatives aren't...they're just afraid if they tell Tosk they're moderates, he'll firebomb their house. Accusing someone of arson huh? Interesting...... |
Ms. Bachmann is running
In article ,
says... On 6/15/11 5:59 AM, wf3h wrote: On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 22:48:16 -0400, I_am_Tosk wrote: In , says... the GOP is now in favor of banning abortion even in cases of rape or incest. they're fanatical women haters Bullship. when are you going to learn that you're ALWAYS wrong when you challenge me? http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2...ine_rape.p hp http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0...te_C andidate you right wingers need to keep up with how truly ****ed up your beliefs are They are not "the GOP"... of course you still don't even know what "Wall St." so I expect you to just spew.. bachman's not a republican? who knew! guess she was just masquerading during the debate this week, huh? and YOU seem never to have been on wall street so it's no surprise you give them cover. Ingerfool thinks *he* decides who the Republicans are. A few years ago, he was telling us his rules for who Christians were. In both instances, his logic was faulty. But what would you expect from an uneducated little schmuck like him? Every GOP presidential candidate wannabe is opposed to women's reproductive rights, and that opposition doesn't just begin and end with absolute opposition to abortion. That our little fool here thinks otherwise is only reflective of his ignorance. Take your name calling and insulting over to your new group, asswipe. |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On 6/15/11 8:05 AM, BAR wrote:
In , says... Looks like she's going to announce "soon." I sure how Palin announces. Then, we'll see just who is the craziest. Doesn't Bachmann and Palin running say something good for the women's movement? Wouldn't it be great for NOW to have a woman break through the final glass ceiling? Or, is NOW just another left leaning partisan group that only cares about women who are of the correct political affiliation instead of promoting women in general? Most of us who care would prefer female candidates who are well-educated, well-informed and who are not demagogues who appeal to the basest instincts of the basest people. It doesn't do the womens' movement any good to promote the intellectually incompetent. -- Want to discuss recreational boating and fishing in a forum where personal insults are not allowed? http://groups.google.com/group/rec-boating-fishing |
Ms. Bachmann is running
In article ,
says... In article , says... Looks like she's going to announce "soon." I sure how Palin announces. Then, we'll see just who is the craziest. Doesn't Bachmann and Palin running say something good for the women's movement? Wouldn't it be great for NOW to have a woman break through the final glass ceiling? Or, is NOW just another left leaning partisan group that only cares about women who are of the correct political affiliation instead of promoting women in general? Do you really have to ask that question. The national organization for "liberal" women is a joke... Just like the ACLU. -- Team Rowdy Mouse, Banned from the Mall for life! |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On 6/15/11 8:54 AM, I_am_Tosk wrote:
In om, says... In , says... Looks like she's going to announce "soon." I sure how Palin announces. Then, we'll see just who is the craziest. Doesn't Bachmann and Palin running say something good for the women's movement? Wouldn't it be great for NOW to have a woman break through the final glass ceiling? Or, is NOW just another left leaning partisan group that only cares about women who are of the correct political affiliation instead of promoting women in general? Do you really have to ask that question. The national organization for "liberal" women is a joke... Just like the ACLU. As you are unaware of the purposes of either organization, it's no surprise that this is yet another area of confusion for you. You're really too ill-informed, ignorant and stupid to be commenting on politics. Perhaps you ought to run for office in your local tea party. -- Want to discuss recreational boating and fishing in a forum where personal insults are not allowed? http://groups.google.com/group/rec-boating-fishing |
Ms. Bachmann is running
In article ,
says... On 6/15/11 8:54 AM, I_am_Tosk wrote: In om, says... In , says... Looks like she's going to announce "soon." I sure how Palin announces. Then, we'll see just who is the craziest. Doesn't Bachmann and Palin running say something good for the women's movement? Wouldn't it be great for NOW to have a woman break through the final glass ceiling? Or, is NOW just another left leaning partisan group that only cares about women who are of the correct political affiliation instead of promoting women in general? Do you really have to ask that question. The national organization for "liberal" women is a joke... Just like the ACLU. As you are unaware of the purposes of either organization, it's no surprise that this is yet another area of confusion for you. You're really too ill-informed, ignorant and stupid to be commenting on politics. Perhaps you ought to run for office in your local tea party. Take your insulting and name calling to your own group. |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On 6/15/11 8:05 AM, BAR wrote:
In , says... Looks like she's going to announce "soon." I sure how Palin announces. Then, we'll see just who is the craziest. Doesn't Bachmann and Palin running say something good for the women's movement? Wouldn't it be great for NOW to have a woman break through the final glass ceiling? Or, is NOW just another left leaning partisan group that only cares about women who are of the correct political affiliation instead of promoting women in general? Because you are too intellectually lazy to find the answer to your own questions about why neither Palin nor Bachmann would be supported by NOW, here are the organization's positions: NOW's Priority Issues Constitutional Equality Amendment: Equality in pay, job opportunities, political structure, social security and education will remain an elusive dream without a guarantee of equality in the U.S. Constitution. The progress we have made—and must continue to make—towards women's equality can be lost at any time because those advances depend on legislation that can be (and has been) weakened or repealed by Congress. Although we did not succeed in ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment, winning a constitutional guarantee of equality for women remains one of NOW's top priorities. Not supported by Palin or Bachmann Reproductive Rights: NOW affirms that reproductive rights are issues of life and death for women, not mere matters of choice. NOW fully supports access to safe and legal abortion, to effective birth control and emergency contraception, to reproductive health services and education for all women. We oppose attempts to restrict these rights through legislation, regulation or Constitutional amendment. Opposed by Palin and Bachmann Racism: NOW condemns the racism that inflicts a double burden of race and sex discrimination on women of color. Seeing human rights as indivisible, we are committed to identifying and fighting against those barriers to equality and justice that are imposed by racism. A leader in the struggle for civil rights since its inception in 1966, NOW is committed to diversifying our movement, and we continue to fight for equal opportunities for women of color in all areas including employment, education and reproductive rights. Lesbian Rights: NOW is committed to fighting discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity in all areas, including employment, housing, public accommodations, health services, child custody and military policies. NOW is committed to educational efforts that combat the adverse effects of homophobia, promote positive images in the media and ultimately ensure civil rights protection for all. NOW asserts the right of lesbians to live their lives with dignity and security, and the rights of equal marriage for all. Opposed by Palin and Bachmann. Violence Against Women: NOW is unique in its approach to the issue of violence against women, emphasizing that there are many interrelated aspects to the issue—domestic violence; sexual assault; sexual harassment; violence at abortion clinics; hate crimes across lines of gender, sexuality and race; the gender bias in our judicial system that further victimizes survivors of violence; and the violence of poverty emphasized by the radical right's attacks on poor women and children—all of which result from society's attitudes toward women and efforts to "keep women in their place." Opposed by Palin and Bachmann. Economic Justice: NOW advocates for wide range of economic justice issues affecting women, from the glass ceiling to the sticky floor of poverty. These include welfare reform, livable wages, job discrimination, pay equity, housing, social security and pension reform, and much more. Opposed by Palin and Bachmann. Why would NOW support either of these women when both are diametrically opposed to its important positions? -- Want to discuss recreational boating and fishing in a forum where personal insults are not allowed? http://groups.google.com/group/rec-boating-fishing |
Ms. Bachmann is running
In article ,
says... On 6/15/11 8:05 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... Looks like she's going to announce "soon." I sure how Palin announces. Then, we'll see just who is the craziest. Doesn't Bachmann and Palin running say something good for the women's movement? Wouldn't it be great for NOW to have a woman break through the final glass ceiling? Or, is NOW just another left leaning partisan group that only cares about women who are of the correct political affiliation instead of promoting women in general? Because you are too intellectually lazy to find the answer to your own questions about why neither Palin nor Bachmann would be supported by NOW, here are the organization's positions: NOW's Priority Issues Constitutional Equality Amendment: Equality in pay, job opportunities, political structure, social security and education will remain an elusive dream without a guarantee of equality in the U.S. Constitution. The progress we have made?and must continue to make?towards women's equality can be lost at any time because those advances depend on legislation that can be (and has been) weakened or repealed by Congress. Although we did not succeed in ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment, winning a constitutional guarantee of equality for women remains one of NOW's top priorities. Not supported by Palin or Bachmann Reproductive Rights: NOW affirms that reproductive rights are issues of life and death for women, not mere matters of choice. NOW fully supports access to safe and legal abortion, to effective birth control and emergency contraception, to reproductive health services and education for all women. We oppose attempts to restrict these rights through legislation, regulation or Constitutional amendment. Opposed by Palin and Bachmann Racism: NOW condemns the racism that inflicts a double burden of race and sex discrimination on women of color. Seeing human rights as indivisible, we are committed to identifying and fighting against those barriers to equality and justice that are imposed by racism. A leader in the struggle for civil rights since its inception in 1966, NOW is committed to diversifying our movement, and we continue to fight for equal opportunities for women of color in all areas including employment, education and reproductive rights. Lesbian Rights: NOW is committed to fighting discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity in all areas, including employment, housing, public accommodations, health services, child custody and military policies. NOW is committed to educational efforts that combat the adverse effects of homophobia, promote positive images in the media and ultimately ensure civil rights protection for all. NOW asserts the right of lesbians to live their lives with dignity and security, and the rights of equal marriage for all. Opposed by Palin and Bachmann. Violence Against Women: NOW is unique in its approach to the issue of violence against women, emphasizing that there are many interrelated aspects to the issue?domestic violence; sexual assault; sexual harassment; violence at abortion clinics; hate crimes across lines of gender, sexuality and race; the gender bias in our judicial system that further victimizes survivors of violence; and the violence of poverty emphasized by the radical right's attacks on poor women and children?all of which result from society's attitudes toward women and efforts to "keep women in their place." Opposed by Palin and Bachmann. Economic Justice: NOW advocates for wide range of economic justice issues affecting women, from the glass ceiling to the sticky floor of poverty. These include welfare reform, livable wages, job discrimination, pay equity, housing, social security and pension reform, and much more. Opposed by Palin and Bachmann. Why would NOW support either of these women when both are diametrically opposed to its important positions? Take your political bull**** back to your own fantastic group asshole. |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On 14/06/2011 3:32 PM, Harryk wrote:
On 6/14/11 4:57 PM, wrote: On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:31:54 -0400, wrote: On 6/14/11 4:19 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote: In article8ZCdne0OtIRSLmrQnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer33859 @mypacks.net says... On 6/14/11 2:31 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote: In , says... Most of the right-wingers don't want to let women have access to birth control no less to abortion. Where the hell did you hear that? It's total bullship! Most of the conservatives I know are social liberals... Just not "progressives" like you. You really ought to stay away from making politically oriented posts...we already know you are a simple-minded fool; you're just reinforcing it. Most conservatives are not social liberals, Harry, please learn to read.. I said most conservatives "I know".. you dumbass.. thus, the rest of your tripe is worthless... Most conservatives you know, eh? That must be some group. I can just imagine... I wonder if it's the same group that brings guns to town hall meetings? Here's a thought...the people he knows who claim to be conservatives aren't...they're just afraid if they tell Tosk they're moderates, he'll firebomb their house. Are you threatening Tosk by escalating to violence? Harryk, you should be checked into a loonie bin. -- Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem. |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 08:05:14 -0400, BAR wrote:
In article , says... Looks like she's going to announce "soon." I sure how Palin announces. Then, we'll see just who is the craziest. Doesn't Bachmann and Palin running say something good for the women's movement? Wouldn't it be great for NOW to have a woman break through the final glass ceiling? Or, is NOW just another left leaning partisan group that only cares about women who are of the correct political affiliation instead of promoting women in general? Why would you think it would be otherwise? Oh wait, we're supposed to judge people just by their gender? I'm not allowed to disagree with them because their women? Or, are you just another right-wing asshole, looking for some way to put people down. |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 10:05:43 -0400, Harryk
wrote: On 6/15/11 8:54 AM, I_am_Tosk wrote: In om, says... In , says... Looks like she's going to announce "soon." I sure how Palin announces. Then, we'll see just who is the craziest. Doesn't Bachmann and Palin running say something good for the women's movement? Wouldn't it be great for NOW to have a woman break through the final glass ceiling? Or, is NOW just another left leaning partisan group that only cares about women who are of the correct political affiliation instead of promoting women in general? Do you really have to ask that question. The national organization for "liberal" women is a joke... Just like the ACLU. As you are unaware of the purposes of either organization, it's no surprise that this is yet another area of confusion for you. You're really too ill-informed, ignorant and stupid to be commenting on politics. Perhaps you ought to run for office in your local tea party. He's a stalker/moron who thinks it makes him look smart to put down women. |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 12:42:32 -0400, Harryk
wrote: On 6/15/11 8:05 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... Looks like she's going to announce "soon." I sure how Palin announces. Then, we'll see just who is the craziest. Doesn't Bachmann and Palin running say something good for the women's movement? Wouldn't it be great for NOW to have a woman break through the final glass ceiling? Or, is NOW just another left leaning partisan group that only cares about women who are of the correct political affiliation instead of promoting women in general? Because you are too intellectually lazy to find the answer to your own questions about why neither Palin nor Bachmann would be supported by NOW, here are the organization's positions: NOW's Priority Issues Constitutional Equality Amendment: Equality in pay, job opportunities, political structure, social security and education will remain an elusive dream without a guarantee of equality in the U.S. Constitution. The progress we have made—and must continue to make—towards women's equality can be lost at any time because those advances depend on legislation that can be (and has been) weakened or repealed by Congress. Although we did not succeed in ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment, winning a constitutional guarantee of equality for women remains one of NOW's top priorities. Not supported by Palin or Bachmann Reproductive Rights: NOW affirms that reproductive rights are issues of life and death for women, not mere matters of choice. NOW fully supports access to safe and legal abortion, to effective birth control and emergency contraception, to reproductive health services and education for all women. We oppose attempts to restrict these rights through legislation, regulation or Constitutional amendment. Opposed by Palin and Bachmann Racism: NOW condemns the racism that inflicts a double burden of race and sex discrimination on women of color. Seeing human rights as indivisible, we are committed to identifying and fighting against those barriers to equality and justice that are imposed by racism. A leader in the struggle for civil rights since its inception in 1966, NOW is committed to diversifying our movement, and we continue to fight for equal opportunities for women of color in all areas including employment, education and reproductive rights. Lesbian Rights: NOW is committed to fighting discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity in all areas, including employment, housing, public accommodations, health services, child custody and military policies. NOW is committed to educational efforts that combat the adverse effects of homophobia, promote positive images in the media and ultimately ensure civil rights protection for all. NOW asserts the right of lesbians to live their lives with dignity and security, and the rights of equal marriage for all. Opposed by Palin and Bachmann. Violence Against Women: NOW is unique in its approach to the issue of violence against women, emphasizing that there are many interrelated aspects to the issue—domestic violence; sexual assault; sexual harassment; violence at abortion clinics; hate crimes across lines of gender, sexuality and race; the gender bias in our judicial system that further victimizes survivors of violence; and the violence of poverty emphasized by the radical right's attacks on poor women and children—all of which result from society's attitudes toward women and efforts to "keep women in their place." Opposed by Palin and Bachmann. Economic Justice: NOW advocates for wide range of economic justice issues affecting women, from the glass ceiling to the sticky floor of poverty. These include welfare reform, livable wages, job discrimination, pay equity, housing, social security and pension reform, and much more. Opposed by Palin and Bachmann. Why would NOW support either of these women when both are diametrically opposed to its important positions? All true, but I do think it is good that they're out there and able to do what they're doing, even if I vehemently disagree with their positions. |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On 15/06/2011 10:42 AM, Harryk wrote nonsense...
Hey harryk, with your slander and bashing of Palin, your a woman hater. We all know liberal fleabaggers would also like to manage womens pussies. A real problem today be it right or left, is the insatiable need to needlessly control others. Using a womans pussy as a political issue with all the more important issues out there is a sign of debtors denial, myopic and mindless deflection from the real issues. USA is like the Titanic, once thought unsinkable. Here you liberal fleabaggers and right religious zealots are worried about a womans pussy while the holds fill up with cold debt waters. Yep, the ship is sinking and all you nosy, noisy pathetic people can think about are laws on a woman's pussy. Pathetic. When gasoline is $100 a gallon because the USD isn't worth crap, well, then you can still talk pussy. Real men don't try to bully women. Maybe if we had 80% women in government, maybe they can tell us men how to use our cocks. What a dumb argument. A nation of stupid fools. You should be hammering questions like "Why hasn't $4 trillion shown any results?" "Are we going to avoid Einstein's definition of insanity and get some real changes as clearly debt-bailout-spend is not working?". Hey, women might have more kids and fewer abortions if the families of America had more income, less taxes, a more stable economy, better jobs, good education.... Don't get distracted from the real issues. Government/Bank corrupt economics is the only issue the people should be worried about this election. Your economic viability depends on it. -- Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem. |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On 6/15/11 2:28 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 14/06/2011 3:32 PM, Harryk wrote: On 6/14/11 4:57 PM, wrote: On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:31:54 -0400, wrote: On 6/14/11 4:19 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote: In article8ZCdne0OtIRSLmrQnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer33859 @mypacks.net says... On 6/14/11 2:31 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote: In , says... Most of the right-wingers don't want to let women have access to birth control no less to abortion. Where the hell did you hear that? It's total bullship! Most of the conservatives I know are social liberals... Just not "progressives" like you. You really ought to stay away from making politically oriented posts...we already know you are a simple-minded fool; you're just reinforcing it. Most conservatives are not social liberals, Harry, please learn to read.. I said most conservatives "I know".. you dumbass.. thus, the rest of your tripe is worthless... Most conservatives you know, eh? That must be some group. I can just imagine... I wonder if it's the same group that brings guns to town hall meetings? Here's a thought...the people he knows who claim to be conservatives aren't...they're just afraid if they tell Tosk they're moderates, he'll firebomb their house. Are you threatening Tosk by escalating to violence? Harryk, you should be checked into a loonie bin. Uh...you need to take what remaining synapses you have in for a dusting and cleaning. -- Want to discuss recreational boating and fishing in a forum where personal insults are not allowed? http://groups.google.com/group/rec-boating-fishing |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On 6/15/11 2:53 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 15/06/2011 10:42 AM, Harryk wrote nonsense... Hey harryk, with your slander and bashing of Palin, your a woman hater. We all know liberal fleabaggers would also like to manage womens pussies. A real problem today be it right or left, is the insatiable need to needlessly control others. Using a womans pussy as a political issue with all the more important issues out there is a sign of debtors denial, myopic and mindless deflection from the real issues. Whatever meds you are taking, Canuck...they're aren't working for you. USA is like the Titanic, once thought unsinkable. Here you liberal fleabaggers and right religious zealots are worried about a womans pussy while the holds fill up with cold debt waters. Yep, the ship is sinking and all you nosy, noisy pathetic people can think about are laws on a woman's pussy. Pathetic. When gasoline is $100 a gallon because the USD isn't worth crap, well, then you can still talk pussy. Real men don't try to bully women. Maybe if we had 80% women in government, maybe they can tell us men how to use our cocks. What a dumb argument. A nation of stupid fools. You should be hammering questions like "Why hasn't $4 trillion shown any results?" "Are we going to avoid Einstein's definition of insanity and get some real changes as clearly debt-bailout-spend is not working?". Hey, women might have more kids and fewer abortions if the families of America had more income, less taxes, a more stable economy, better jobs, good education.... Don't get distracted from the real issues. Government/Bank corrupt economics is the only issue the people should be worried about this election. Your economic viability depends on it. Any remaining doubts about Canuck's emotional stability? -- Want to discuss recreational boating and fishing in a forum where personal insults are not allowed? http://groups.google.com/group/rec-boating-fishing |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On 6/15/11 2:53 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 15/06/2011 10:42 AM, Harryk wrote nonsense... Hey harryk, with your slander and bashing of Palin, your a woman hater. Palin is an ill-educated, ignorant demagogue who appeals only to the basest fears of simple-minded Americans. The woman doesn't even have a junior high school student's knowledge of U.S. history. No wonder someone like you admires her; you're just her type. -- Want to discuss recreational boating and fishing in a forum where personal insults are not allowed? http://groups.google.com/group/rec-boating-fishing |
Ms. Bachmann is running
In article , payer33859
@mypacks.net says... On 6/15/11 2:53 PM, Canuck57 wrote: On 15/06/2011 10:42 AM, Harryk wrote nonsense... Hey harryk, with your slander and bashing of Palin, your a woman hater. We all know liberal fleabaggers would also like to manage womens pussies. A real problem today be it right or left, is the insatiable need to needlessly control others. Using a womans pussy as a political issue with all the more important issues out there is a sign of debtors denial, myopic and mindless deflection from the real issues. Whatever meds you are taking, Canuck...they're aren't working for you. USA is like the Titanic, once thought unsinkable. Here you liberal fleabaggers and right religious zealots are worried about a womans pussy while the holds fill up with cold debt waters. Yep, the ship is sinking and all you nosy, noisy pathetic people can think about are laws on a woman's pussy. Pathetic. When gasoline is $100 a gallon because the USD isn't worth crap, well, then you can still talk pussy. Real men don't try to bully women. Maybe if we had 80% women in government, maybe they can tell us men how to use our cocks. What a dumb argument. A nation of stupid fools. You should be hammering questions like "Why hasn't $4 trillion shown any results?" "Are we going to avoid Einstein's definition of insanity and get some real changes as clearly debt-bailout-spend is not working?". Hey, women might have more kids and fewer abortions if the families of America had more income, less taxes, a more stable economy, better jobs, good education.... Don't get distracted from the real issues. Government/Bank corrupt economics is the only issue the people should be worried about this election. Your economic viability depends on it. Any remaining doubts about Canuck's emotional stability? There sure aren't any about your's. What happened to you new group? Why not go there and stay? |
Ms. Bachmann is running
In article , payer33859
@mypacks.net says... On 6/15/11 2:28 PM, Canuck57 wrote: On 14/06/2011 3:32 PM, Harryk wrote: On 6/14/11 4:57 PM, wrote: On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:31:54 -0400, wrote: On 6/14/11 4:19 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote: In article8ZCdne0OtIRSLmrQnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer33859 @mypacks.net says... On 6/14/11 2:31 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote: In , says... Most of the right-wingers don't want to let women have access to birth control no less to abortion. Where the hell did you hear that? It's total bullship! Most of the conservatives I know are social liberals... Just not "progressives" like you. You really ought to stay away from making politically oriented posts...we already know you are a simple-minded fool; you're just reinforcing it. Most conservatives are not social liberals, Harry, please learn to read.. I said most conservatives "I know".. you dumbass.. thus, the rest of your tripe is worthless... Most conservatives you know, eh? That must be some group. I can just imagine... I wonder if it's the same group that brings guns to town hall meetings? Here's a thought...the people he knows who claim to be conservatives aren't...they're just afraid if they tell Tosk they're moderates, he'll firebomb their house. Are you threatening Tosk by escalating to violence? Harryk, you should be checked into a loonie bin. Uh...you need to take what remaining synapses you have in for a dusting and cleaning. Well, look, Harry posting "personal insults".... Who'd have thought.... |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 12:53:38 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 15/06/2011 10:42 AM, Harryk wrote nonsense... Hey harryk, with your slander and bashing of Palin, your a woman hater. We all know liberal fleabaggers would also like to manage womens pussies. A real problem today be it right or left, is the insatiable need to needlessly control others. Using a womans pussy as a political issue with all the more important issues out there is a sign of debtors denial, myopic and mindless deflection from the real issues. USA is like the Titanic, once thought unsinkable. Here you liberal fleabaggers and right religious zealots are worried about a womans pussy while the holds fill up with cold debt waters. Yep, the ship is sinking and all you nosy, noisy pathetic people can think about are laws on a woman's pussy. Pathetic. When gasoline is $100 a gallon because the USD isn't worth crap, well, then you can still talk pussy. Real men don't try to bully women. Maybe if we had 80% women in government, maybe they can tell us men how to use our cocks. What a dumb argument. A nation of stupid fools. You should be hammering questions like "Why hasn't $4 trillion shown any results?" "Are we going to avoid Einstein's definition of insanity and get some real changes as clearly debt-bailout-spend is not working?". Hey, women might have more kids and fewer abortions if the families of America had more income, less taxes, a more stable economy, better jobs, good education.... Don't get distracted from the real issues. Government/Bank corrupt economics is the only issue the people should be worried about this election. Your economic viability depends on it. You are like the iceberg.. cold and dumb. |
Ms. Bachmann is running
|
Ms. Bachmann is running
On 15/06/2011 1:14 PM, Harryk wrote:
On 6/15/11 2:53 PM, Canuck57 wrote: On 15/06/2011 10:42 AM, Harryk wrote nonsense... Hey harryk, with your slander and bashing of Palin, your a woman hater. Palin is an ill-educated, ignorant demagogue who appeals only to the basest fears of simple-minded Americans. The woman doesn't even have a junior high school student's knowledge of U.S. history. No wonder someone like you admires her; you're just her type. But she has one value I consider her strength. She is honest. And the last thing DC wants is honest and practical to sit in the oval office. -- Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem. |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On 6/15/11 6:54 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 15/06/2011 1:14 PM, Harryk wrote: On 6/15/11 2:53 PM, Canuck57 wrote: On 15/06/2011 10:42 AM, Harryk wrote nonsense... Hey harryk, with your slander and bashing of Palin, your a woman hater. Palin is an ill-educated, ignorant demagogue who appeals only to the basest fears of simple-minded Americans. The woman doesn't even have a junior high school student's knowledge of U.S. history. No wonder someone like you admires her; you're just her type. But she has one value I consider her strength. She is honest. And the last thing DC wants is honest and practical to sit in the oval office. Honest? Palin? Palin is a demagogue. Honesty is not part of demagoguery. Also, she's been caught telling dozens of whoppers. -- Want to discuss recreational boating and fishing in a forum where personal insults are not allowed? http://groups.google.com/group/rec-boating-fishing |
Ms. Bachmann is running
In article , says...
On 6/15/2011 2:46 PM, wrote: Why would you think it would be otherwise? Oh wait, we're supposed to judge people just by their gender? I'm not allowed to disagree with them because their women? Or, are you just another right-wing asshole, looking for some way to put people down. Their women? Who's women? Left wing assholes do the same thing. You are a left wing asshole, aren't you? Plum is a bigot, on several levels... -- Team Rowdy Mouse, Banned from the Mall for life! |
Ms. Bachmann is running
In article ,
says... On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 10:05:43 -0400, Harryk wrote: On 6/15/11 8:54 AM, I_am_Tosk wrote: In om, says... In , says... Looks like she's going to announce "soon." I sure how Palin announces. Then, we'll see just who is the craziest. Doesn't Bachmann and Palin running say something good for the women's movement? Wouldn't it be great for NOW to have a woman break through the final glass ceiling? Or, is NOW just another left leaning partisan group that only cares about women who are of the correct political affiliation instead of promoting women in general? Do you really have to ask that question. The national organization for "liberal" women is a joke... Just like the ACLU. As you are unaware of the purposes of either organization, it's no surprise that this is yet another area of confusion for you. You're really too ill-informed, ignorant and stupid to be commenting on politics. Perhaps you ought to run for office in your local tea party. He's a stalker/moron who thinks it makes him look smart to put down women. Stalker? Who have I stalked.. Oh right, you made it up... -- Team Rowdy Mouse, Banned from the Mall for life! |
Ms. Bachmann is running
In article , payer33859
@mypacks.net says... On 6/15/11 2:53 PM, Canuck57 wrote: On 15/06/2011 10:42 AM, Harryk wrote nonsense... Hey harryk, with your slander and bashing of Palin, your a woman hater. Palin is an ill-educated, ignorant demagogue who appeals only to the basest fears of simple-minded Americans. The woman doesn't even have a junior high school student's knowledge of U.S. history. No wonder someone like you admires her; you're just her type. Blah, blah, blah, blah..... same **** for a decade. Lies, slander, trolls, and more lies.... We get it Harry Krause, you are a dirtbag... -- Team Rowdy Mouse, Banned from the Mall for life! |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 08:05:14 -0400, BAR wrote:
In article , says... Looks like she's going to announce "soon." I sure how Palin announces. Then, we'll see just who is the craziest. Doesn't Bachmann and Palin running say something good for the women's movement? Wouldn't it be great for NOW to have a woman break through the final glass ceiling? Or, is NOW just another left leaning partisan group that only cares about women who are of the correct political affiliation instead of promoting women in general? the sexist thinks women who want to sell out women to big govt are feminists the right wing is nothing but a big govt wet dream |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On 6/15/11 9:02 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote:
In article4MmdnUK86cY9mWTQnZ2dnUVZ_ogAAAAA@earthlink .com, payer33859 @mypacks.net says... On 6/15/11 2:53 PM, Canuck57 wrote: On 15/06/2011 10:42 AM, Harryk wrote nonsense... Hey harryk, with your slander and bashing of Palin, your a woman hater. Palin is an ill-educated, ignorant demagogue who appeals only to the basest fears of simple-minded Americans. The woman doesn't even have a junior high school student's knowledge of U.S. history. No wonder someone like you admires her; you're just her type. Blah, blah, blah, blah..... same **** for a decade. Lies, slander, trolls, and more lies.... We get it Harry Krause, you are a dirtbag... We sure know what you are...Mr. Tent. -- Want to discuss recreational boating and fishing in a forum where personal insults are not allowed? http://groups.google.com/group/rec-boating-fishing |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On 15/06/2011 7:43 PM, Harryk wrote:
On 6/15/11 9:02 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote: In article4MmdnUK86cY9mWTQnZ2dnUVZ_ogAAAAA@earthlink .com, payer33859 @mypacks.net says... On 6/15/11 2:53 PM, Canuck57 wrote: On 15/06/2011 10:42 AM, Harryk wrote nonsense... Hey harryk, with your slander and bashing of Palin, your a woman hater. Palin is an ill-educated, ignorant demagogue who appeals only to the basest fears of simple-minded Americans. The woman doesn't even have a junior high school student's knowledge of U.S. history. No wonder someone like you admires her; you're just her type. Blah, blah, blah, blah..... same **** for a decade. Lies, slander, trolls, and more lies.... We get it Harry Krause, you are a dirtbag... We sure know what you are...Mr. Tent. Hey dirtbag, Tosk was right. -- Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem. |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On 15/06/2011 6:59 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote:
In , says... On 6/15/2011 2:46 PM, wrote: Why would you think it would be otherwise? Oh wait, we're supposed to judge people just by their gender? I'm not allowed to disagree with them because their women? Or, are you just another right-wing asshole, looking for some way to put people down. Their women? Who's women? Left wing assholes do the same thing. You are a left wing asshole, aren't you? Plum is a bigot, on several levels... Yep, a certified bigot and racist. -- Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem. |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 20:12:52 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 15/06/2011 6:59 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote: In , says... On 6/15/2011 2:46 PM, wrote: Why would you think it would be otherwise? Oh wait, we're supposed to judge people just by their gender? I'm not allowed to disagree with them because their women? Or, are you just another right-wing asshole, looking for some way to put people down. Their women? Who's women? Left wing assholes do the same thing. You are a left wing asshole, aren't you? Plum is a bigot, on several levels... Yep, a certified bigot and racist. Why don't you compare Obama to Hitler again. I'm sure that'll make your point more effectively. |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On 6/15/2011 9:43 PM, Harryk wrote:
On 6/15/11 9:02 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote: In article4MmdnUK86cY9mWTQnZ2dnUVZ_ogAAAAA@earthlink .com, payer33859 @mypacks.net says... On 6/15/11 2:53 PM, Canuck57 wrote: On 15/06/2011 10:42 AM, Harryk wrote nonsense... Hey harryk, with your slander and bashing of Palin, your a woman hater. Palin is an ill-educated, ignorant demagogue who appeals only to the basest fears of simple-minded Americans. The woman doesn't even have a junior high school student's knowledge of U.S. history. No wonder someone like you admires her; you're just her type. Blah, blah, blah, blah..... same **** for a decade. Lies, slander, trolls, and more lies.... We get it Harry Krause, you are a dirtbag... We sure know what you are...Mr. Tent. We sure know what you are ... Mr. lock your wife out of the head. No wonder she refuses to take the surname of an asshole. She was dumb to hook up with you and even dumber to stay with you. |
Ms. Bachmann is running
On Jun 14, 1:22*pm, wrote:
Most of the right-wingers don't want to let women have access to birth control no less to abortion. I see you've renewed your stupid pill prescription, D'Plume. |
Ms. Bachmann is running
In article 3cc266f7-c2d7-478d-a2d6-
, says... On Jun 14, 1:22*pm, wrote: Most of the right-wingers don't want to let women have access to birth control no less to abortion. I see you've renewed your stupid pill prescription, D'Plume. I'll bet Plume's uterus has been destroyed by the number of abortions performed on her. I bet that she couldn't get pregnant regardless of how hard she tried. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:34 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com