Since the election of President Barack Obama, there has been a steady stream of bull. No, let’s call it what it is coming out of the leadership of one of our national political parties, lies. Now these liars have turned their interest to stopping health care reform. However, in reviewing the history of this party, this is not a surprise. So what has this political party given us or tried to make sure we did not have?
They gave us Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover and the Great Depression. Its candidate Richard Nixon gave us Watergate and the first time a sitting president resigned. Their man Ronald Reagan gave us “trickle-down economics,” the Iran Contra scandal, huge tax cuts for the rich, and a $7 trillion in national debt. Yes that’s with a “t,” my friends. This was followed later by George W. Bush, who gave us a war we didn’t need to fight, more than 4,000 dead military personnel because of it, more huge tax cuts for the rich and an almost $11 trillion national debt. Just think of it, between Reagan and Bush these two, so called, “fiscal conservatives” left us with almost $18 trillion in deficits.
For this so called “moral majority” party, they have recently managed to have governors and elected officials end or damage their public careers by sex scandals; from cheating on their wives, marrying their mistresses, having sex in bathrooms, or going to Latin American on taxpayer dollars to be with their “soul mate.” This party is a living example of “do as I say, not as I do.”
On the public policy arena this national political party opposed and therefore tried to make sure we didn’t have: Social Security, unemployment insurance, the civil rights bill, Medicare and Medicaid, the Family Leave Act, just to mention a few. Programs millions of Americans count on today. Now they’re trying to stop heath care reform, so it’s no surprise!This “grand old party” also provided the leadership in de-regulating the savings and loan industry, which we fondly remember as the S&L scandal, costing us $165 billion to resolve; the deregulation of the financial services and insurance industries; which have given us the worst economic crisis since the last economic crisis they played a leadership role in, the Great Depression. To say these guys are fiscally responsible is an oxymoron. They simply are not!
Now some of its leaders and right-wing talk-show host supporters are misrepresenting the facts about health care reform. To get what they want or to keep the American people from benefiting from progressive legislation, lies and fear are the basis for their anti-health care campaign. They didn’t mind spending two trillion dollars on a war that never needed to be fought, or bailing out their friends in the banking and investing industries to the tune of $700 billion. But, spend $1 trillion over the next 10 years on the American people and all of a sudden they are worried about deficits.
In short, this national political party is responsible for more deficit spending, tax favoritism and financial scandals than the other political party, by leaps and bounds! They have been against most everything that benefits the average American and for public policies and laws that favor the rich and powerful. It’s no wonder they are leading the lies and half-truths about health care reform. Could it be the $14.5 million they have received in campaign contributions from the health care and the drug industries, or is it one more example of their undeclared war on the people of this country? It’s time for health care reform now!
Mike Schmidt
This article appears in Aug 27 – Sep 2, 2009.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
Bravo Mr. Schmidt, Bravo!!!
Well said – but brace yourself…. here come the skinheads!
It’s so nice to see something written by someone who appears to have somewhat of an education. What we hear from the neo-cons is filled with racist comments and bad grammar.
Yeah, one could talk about the Kennedy brothers, and their “morals”, or Clinton, Barney Frank, Gary Sutton, etc.
One could talk about the 53 trillion dollar unfunded debt for Social Security, and Medicare.
One could talk about the affairs of the current governor of NY, or his predecessor.
One could talk about how the national debt will double, and maybe triple, in the next 10 years under Obama’s plans.
One could talk about how it was the Democrats who controlled both Houses when the 700 billion dollar bailout was passed, and how Obama supported it, and the majority of Republicans voted against it.
Why, one could even talk about the consistent lie about Republicans opposing Civil Rights.
One could. However, he would then be called a “skinhead”, “racist”, “uneducated”, or whatever denigrating term the leftwing loonies could come up with.
One could, however, you would still be in denial, ignorant, and “useful idiots”.
Thank you Mr. Schmidt for your excellent letter – the country needs to recognize what a pariah the Republican Party is – how it is not only anti-American values but decidedly Un-American: how it is the party of the rich, the “trickle-down-lie”, the party of wedge-issue ploys for drawing in the right wing fanatics and evangelicals: the party that loves the military industrial complex and the billions it wangles from the taxpayer by instilling fear into the populace – but let’s not forget that some Democrats mentioned above shagged some other people, got drunk, got laid, took a bribe…. er, kind of normal behavior compared to what the Reprehensicans get up to!!!
Hey PP, and others, lets be honest now. This is what you really want to say isn’t it:
“We, the working people of the United States, face tremendous problems today: exploitation, oppression, racism, sexism, a deteriorating environment and infrastructure, huge budget deficits, and a government dominated by the most vicious elements of big capital and its political operatives. This government, despite its rhetoric about making Americans safe, has wasted hundreds of billions on the invasion and occupation of Iraq while it cut money for maintaining the levees – leading directly to the disaster that Hurricane Katrina wreaked on the people of New Orleans and much of the Gulf Coast. Their callous disregard for African Americans, for poor people, for the elderly, and for all those unable to evacuate on their own exemplifies their inhumane disregard for the lives of all working people.
We as a country face serious choices: militarism and imperialism or peace, increased wealth for the few or justice and equality for the many, increased power in the hands of the super-rich or expansion of democracy for the vast majority, ultra-right domination of all branches of government which deals with problems by increasing exploitation and oppression or progressive electoral coalitions that seek real solutions in the interests of all working people.
The working class and all who work for a living – the vast majority of the people – face a relentless, vicious, and amoral enemy: the capitalist class. Our country is oppressed by one of the most controlling, despicable, entrenched capitalist ruling classes ever, concentrating enormous political, economic, and military power in the hands of a few transnational corporations. These corporations seek to steal, embezzle, extort, and scheme all wealth from the tens of millions of working people, from small businesses and family farmers, from men, women, and children, from seniors and youth, and from the employed, underemployed, and unemployed. They exploit people as workers on the job and the same people as consumers at the checkout counter. Their foremost weapon to maintain their dominance is racism, used to divide working people and achieve extra profits. They work hard to extend ultra-right control over the government and government policy.
The ultra-right is led by the most reactionary, militaristic, racist, anti-democratic sectors of the transnationals. They gain support for their ultra-right agenda from other political trends and social groups, most of which are misled as to their real interests, sometimes blinded by the propaganda of fear and scapegoating.”
Read more from your fellow travelers here:
http://cpusa.org/article.view/758
I read the CPA piece above and I’m damned if I can find a single error in it…. whatever you do Koprophagous Ken don’t spread this around or everyone will want to be a Kommunist!
Of course not PP, you are incapable of separating bull from truth especially when it comes to denigrating the right.
Lets just take the reference to racism, and the role of the “ultra right”. First off, the “ultra right” consists of a very small minority, and has nothing to do with Conservatives even if you would desire to paint all Conservatives with that brush.
Next, it was the Democrats that supported racism, and still do, in the early turn of the century. It was Democrats that supported segregation, Jim Crow Laws, poll taxes for Blacks, killing of Blacks that desired to vote Republican, etc., and the oppression of the Blacks. And even today it is the Democrat Party that continues to do so with their programs, and with their comments.
Most recently we saw a Presidential candidate use racism as part of his campaign. Remember that speech he gave that said if one opposed him it was because he was Black? And even now we see claims that if one opposes his anti-American agenda then one must be a racist. Then there was the Gates issue, and now in Atlanta Georgia Blacks are calling on other Blacks to vote against a mayoral Candidate simply because she is White.
Blacks kill more Blacks then Whites do by double the numbers. Blacks introduce Black children to drugs. Blacks pimp out their women, and White women, far more then do Whites. Over 30% of all abortions are performed on Black women, and 75% of Black children born are without fathers. In the DC area 75% of all Black children conceived are aborted.
The we have the fine examples of Al Sharpton, and Jackson. Look at Sharptons record with Twana Brawley, the Duke Lacrosse players, the Black/Korean riots in Harlem, the Imus firing, etc. And yet he was one of your nominees for President.
Then there is Charlie Rangel. He is using 4 rent control apartments for his own personal use, two for offices, and two for his private residence. And then there is his tax fraud. So, those 4 apartments are not going to the poor for which they were intended.
We saw how Pelosi opposed a federal minimum wage for the territories of Guam, Puerto Rico, etc., simply to benefit her friends, and family. And most of those residents are also Black.
And, when you speak of corporations, Kerry, Kennedy, Pelosi, Feinstein (who hires illegals for her families hotels), Boxer, the Johnson Family, the Rockefellors, etc. Yet no mention of them.
Years ago Lenin adopted a policy of appealing to the “benevolent” attitude of Americans. He called them “useful idiots”, and you most certainly demonstrate why.
And the American people as a whole understand what Communism is even if you don’t, and they will fight against it unlike your other hero FDR who promoted it.
Actually Krazzzzy Koprophagous Ken, the American People don’t know the first thing about Kommunism – and obviously, neither do you.
Secondly – why do you keep bringing up Democrats (as if they are synonymous with “liberals” which of course they’re not) and Republicans…. I don’t see anywhere above they were mentioned…hmmm, do you prehaps have a fixation? A compulsion? A fanaticism?
As for Komrad FDR, wasn’t he a Democrat? Why is he relevant to the Konversation?
And what dark recess of your addled little brain did this kome from?
“Blacks kill more Blacks then Whites do by double the numbers. Blacks introduce Black children to drugs. Blacks pimp out their women, and White women, far more then do Whites. Over 30% of all abortions are performed on Black women, and 75% of Black children born are without fathers. In the DC area 75% of all Black children conceived are aborted” …. your walnut sized brain jumped from Kommunism to Abortion via a side trip through your hatred of Blacks! You’re so special, Ken… they must have loved you in COCC.
Are you the Chamber of Commerce Mike Schmidt? The one who so powerfully supported the BAT boondoggle that loses $15 per ride.
The P Pooper says:
Actually Krazzzzy Koprophagous Ken, the American People don’t know the first thing about Kommunism – and obviously, neither do you.”
Well, why not explain it to me then since obviously you know how successful it has been where it has been tried. Maybe you can explain all of the deaths under its tyranny, or how much freedom people have.
“Secondly – why do you keep bringing up Democrats (as if they are synonymous with “liberals” which of course they’re not) and Republicans…. I don’t see anywhere above they were mentioned…hmmm, do you prehaps have a fixation? A compulsion? A fanaticism?”
I don’t see any place where “liberal” is mentioned. Does you dyslexia place it in there somewhere? Or is it just your drug induced delusions?
Now, when one mentions “rightwing” just which party are they referring to?
“As for Komrad FDR, wasn’t he a Democrat? Why is he relevant to the Konversation?”
The conversation is about Communism which FDR supported.
“And what dark recess of your addled little brain did this kome from?
“Blacks kill more Blacks then Whites do by double the numbers. Blacks introduce Black children to drugs. Blacks pimp out their women, and White women, far more then do Whites. Over 30% of all abortions are performed on Black women, and 75% of Black children born are without fathers. In the DC area 75% of all Black children conceived are aborted” …. your walnut sized brain jumped from Kommunism to Abortion via a side trip through your hatred of Blacks! You’re so special, Ken… they must have loved you in COCC.”
Wrong again pimple brain. The discussion was about the oppression of the Black race, and other minorities, by the “ultra rightwing”. And the statistics come from the CDC, DOJ, and other sources if you care to get your head out of your ass, and do some honest research.
You must mean the CCC which you attended.
“The tone and tendency of liberalism…is to attack the institutions of the country under the name of reform and to make war on the manners and customs (and freedom) of the people under the pretext of progress.” –Disraeli,
Mr. Swipies,
Your post in which you assert that Democrats supported racism in the past displays a complete ignorance toward the history of the political parties. The conservatives and liberal factions have switched in the past… for example when Lincoln was a Republican, he was part of the more progressive party. In the early 1900s, the Democrats became quite strong in the South and indeed supported racist ideas, but this all shifted during the Civil Rights-era. For an example of this, look at Strom Thurmond, who became a Republican in 1964 in reaction to the Democrats' support of the Civil Rights movement.
Sir, I think it's great that you're getting your voice out on this forum, but it doesn't help anyone if you don't have the very ground level understanding of U.S. political history.
Also, I can't see how I, or any other Central Oregonian with a conscience, should sit back and let you dish out this vague and non-cited statistics about the evils of black people. Even if these are cold hard facts, your point falls flat because this information has nothing to do with the conversation, but rather seem part of your desire to make sure you get some dirt out on “blacks.” You seem to have little if any understanding of urban America. Do you think black poverty comes from a desire to be poor? Or that black crime comes from a desire to be violent? Or could it be linked to the fact that this is a group of people who are one generation removed from not being allowed fair access to simple rights, like voting, or public transportation?
Then you say that Al Sparpton was “your nominee for president.” This isn't true. He ran for president several times but was never even close to nominated. This would be like saying that Patrick Buchanon was the Republican nominee… which he never was.
Again, I suppose it's a testament to our free-speech rights that you have the opportunity to dominate the discussion on the website of the Source, a publication whose editorial views you so wholeheartedly disagree with. But please, think a bit before you write, take a stab at some political history and keep the misinformation to a minimum.
Thanks!
Ted Ronson says:
Mr. Swipies,
Your post in which you assert that Democrats supported racism in the past displays a complete ignorance toward the history of the political parties. The conservatives and liberal factions have switched in the past… for example when Lincoln was a Republican, he was part of the more progressive party. In the early 1900s, the Democrats became quite strong in the South and indeed supported racist ideas, but this all shifted during the Civil Rights-era. For an example of this, look at Strom Thurmond, who became a Republican in 1964 in reaction to the Democrats' support of the Civil Rights movement.”
I suppose you would not agree that it was the Republican party that supported the abolition movement beginning in the 1850’s. While Lincoln could be called a “progressive”, and one could claim that the freeing of slaves was a “progressive” act, it cannot be denied that it was not till the late 1960’s that the Democrat Party even put civil rights for Blacks on their party platform. Nor can it be said that the “progressive” nature of Lincoln is the same as the “progressive” movement of today.
You use the example of Strom Thurmond. However, you do not mention the number of Klansmen, such as Byrd, Hollings, etc., that have held office in the Democrat Party. Nor do you mention that it was the Democrat “Gang of 13”, which had one Republican member, Thurmond, that opposed the Civil Rights Act. In fact, a greater percentage of Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act, 82% of Republicans as compared to 63% of Democrats who controlled the Senate.
“Sir, I think it's great that you're getting your voice out on this forum, but it doesn't help anyone if you don't have the very ground level understanding of U.S. political history.”
Well, that may be so, however, it appears to be better then your understanding.
“Also, I can't see how I, or any other Central Oregonian with a conscience, should sit back and let you dish out this vague and non-cited statistics about the evils of black people. Even if these are cold hard facts, your point falls flat because this information has nothing to do with the conversation, but rather seem part of your desire to make sure you get some dirt out on “blacks.””
Why is that? The point was the oppression of the Black people, and the idea that it is the Republican party, and by extension Conservatives, that are responsible for said oppression. Every point I made was in regards to actions taken by the Democrat party, not the GOP.
For an example, Planned Parenthood was started by Margaret Sanger a supporter of eugenics, and now supported by the Democrats.
If you have ever bothered to watch C-Span, and programs where Black leaders speak of the problems within the Black community, leaders such as Bill Cosby, Herbert Cain, amongst others, then you would know the facts too.
However, to question what I have said without any other rebuttal then to insinuate that I am a “racist” is typical of the leftwing drone.
“You seem to have little if any understanding of urban America. Do you think black poverty comes from a desire to be poor? Or that black crime comes from a desire to be violent? Or could it be linked to the fact that this is a group of people who are one generation removed from not being allowed fair access to simple rights, like voting, or public transportation?”
Ahh, then again, it was not till the Democrats put such an emphasis on the welfare programs for Blacks, admittedly others also, that the troubles began. It used to be that Blacks had a much more Conservative view of life, more religious beliefs, more family values. At one point, prior to the 1980’s, 75% of Black children were born to two parent families. Now 75% are illegitimate.
And I fail to see how being “one generation removed” has to do with anything. If anything, you would think they would be better off with the vastly improved opportunities. I would ask you to look at the treatment of the Chinese, and Japanese, in this country. Should they not have gone down the same path?
“Then you say that Al Sharpton was “your nominee for president.” This isn't true. He ran for president several times but was never even close to nominated. This would be like saying that Patrick Buchanon was the Republican nominee… which he never was.”
Sorry, you are right. However, to say that the Democrat Party did not support him, and does not support him, would be equally disingenuous.
“Again, I suppose it's a testament to our free-speech rights that you have the opportunity to dominate the discussion on the website of the Source, a publication whose editorial views you so wholeheartedly disagree with. But please, think a bit before you write, take a stab at some political history and keep the misinformation to a minimum.”
I’d give you that same advice, however, it would be wasted since it is not true history you are interested in.
Definition: “Fact”: what Ken says
Definition: “lie”: what others say that contradicts Ken
Definition: “liberal”: people who believe in or think things that Ken doesn’t like
Definition: “Drone”: a person who doesn’t think the same as Ken and ALL his Conservative friends
Definition: “Research”: material Ken found on a website that supports his arguments
Definition: “Classical Liberal”: someone Ken admires who unfortunately has all the attributes of a Liberal but Ken doesn’t have the moral spine to admit it
Definition: “elitist”: someone better educated than Ken – this class contains an enormous number of people
First of all, thanks to Mr. Schmidt, great letter. Also, it’s good to see Mr. Ronson, PP, et al., in support of sanity and logic. I’ve been off this exchange for a bit and am sad to see that Mr. Swipies still remains a fountain of misinformation. He still has not gotten a handle on Republicans now (Nixon, Bush 1 and 2, Reagan, Cheney and the rest)vs. Republicans then (Lincoln on up to Teddy Roosevelt). After reading his posts (now and when he was lambasting me) I’m thoroughly convinced that the sky is some other color than blue in Mr. Swipies world. It does not matter that he is presented with truth, fact and logic, he will not accept it. Mr. Swipies believes that liberals were opposed to civil rights for blacks and women. No, fact or statement of logic can shake him from his belief. Unfortunately, he also believes that liberals are working against the best interest of average Americans, and (God forbid) Mr. Swipies, himself. Folks, I’ve said prayers for this man and apparently need to renew my efforts. However, instead of praying for him to grasp reality, I will just pray that his views do not influence anyone to join in lockstep with his unbelievably absurd world-view.
The icing on the cake is that Mr. Swipies does not understand that people such as Mr. Schmidt, Ronson, PP and myself stand for open dialogue and open airing of opposing viewpoints. Folks like Swipies seem to love nothing more than squelching anything but their own fabricated realities and refuse to validate anything but their own “horseblinder” positions. In the end, the sad irony is that Mr. Swipies works very hard against his own best interests. That is of course unless he’s some kind of corporate fat-cat that is amused with playing around with sincere people trying to have meaningful dialogue. Maybe the Source should consider banning trolls. I’m beginning to think Swipies could be one, but don’t let me stifle his free speech. All I can say is Swipies, at least appreciated the forum you’re given due to a liberal mind-set. God knows those of your ilk would never do the same.
PP says:
Definition: “Fact”: what Ken says
Definition: “lie”: what others say that contradicts Ken
Definition: “liberal”: people who believe in or think things that Ken doesn’t like
Definition: “Drone”: a person who doesn’t think the same as Ken and ALL his Conservative friends
Definition: “Research”: material Ken found on a website that supports his arguments
Definition: “Classical Liberal”: someone Ken admires who unfortunately has all the attributes of a Liberal but Ken doesn’t have the moral spine to admit it
Definition: “elitist”: someone better educated than Ken – this class contains an enormous number of people ”
Yes, there are better educated people then me. Too bad that none of them post in this forum
However, you once again have demonstrated, along with Mr. Jasper, your inability to factually debate any matter. All you can do it try to denigrate another with your falsehoods, never using any facts. Jasper declares your ilk stand for “open dialogue”, however, in your limited abilities this means never having to post any information that disagrees with what I have said aside form your “opinion” which is worthless.
Then too, when you fail it is typical for you to resort to your usual tactics which I why I can honestly say you are liars.
Let us take your somewhat dimwitted “definitions”. All along I have said that the Classical Liberal is not the same as the “liberal” of today, and I even used your dictionary definition to prove such. In fact, liberalism of today is anathema to the Classical Liberal. The “lack of spine” for any admission is on your behalf.
Then there is the research issue. I read many different sites such as Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute, Manhatten Institute, Brookings, Stratford, American Enterprise Institute, etc. I read articles by Walter E. Williams, Larry Elders, Thomas Sowell, if I want to knwo the Black situation in America. This is contrary to your reading of race mongers such as Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, DailyKos, MoveOn.org, etc. Then too, I watch C-Span, Lou Dobbs, O’Reilly (the one you hate yet continues to have a growing audience while your favorites like Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow, Keith Obermann, etc., are losing audiences), and others such as on CNBC.
So, all in all, I believe I have a better view of the world then you. It is just too bad that you would not try to widen your horizons a bit to be better equipped to prove me wrong if you can.
My response to Ronson has not been disproven by you which must be quite frustrating since you know I am right. If you had any actual facts to the contrary you would have posted them instead of your usual bit of tripe.
This is an example of an article written by one of those you would refer to as an “Uncle Tom”:
http://townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2006/03/08/pandering_to_blacks?page=full&comments=true
In response to a question from the audience: “I need you to tell us what distinguishes Democrats from Republicans right now,” Sen. Clinton answered, “When you look at the way the House of Representatives has been run, it has been run like a plantation, and you know what I’m talking about . . . ” Though the audience was largely black, I doubt whether any of the attendees had any plantation experience.
Sen. Clinton was simply employing the Democrats’ political rope-a-dope for blacks.
As Professor Steele asks in his Wall Street Journal editorial, “Hillary’s Plantation”: “Must blacks have their slave past rubbed in their face simply for Hillary Clinton to make a little hay against modern-day Republicans?” Steele also asks, “Does she really see us as she projects us — as a people so backward that our support can be won with a simple plantation reference, and the implication that Republicans are racist?”
Sen. Clinton is not alone with such demeaning pandering.
Before a predominantly black audience, during his 2004 presidential bid, Sen. John Kerry said, in reference to so many more blacks in prison than college, “That’s unacceptable, but it’s not their fault.” Aside from Kerry being factually wrong about more blacks being in prison than in college, his vision differs little from one that holds blacks as a rudderless, victimized people who cannot control their destiny and whose best hope depends upon the benevolence of white people.
I wonder whether Kerry would have told a white audience that jailed white people were faultless. Kerry’s other black-audience-only gambit was seen after he addressed the NAACP’s 95th annual convention in Philadelphia; he gave the audience the black power clenched-fist salute.
The subtitle to Professor Steele’s article is “Hillary Clinton reveals her fear of Condi Rice.” He explains that Democrat liberalism has survived decades past the credibility of its ideas because it captured black resentment as an exclusive source of its power.
That power will be gone the very day that a significant number of blacks cease to be a people of grievance.
I think the Source editors have been giving Mr. Swipies considerable protection…. several posts of mine, directed at his points have not been posted. Whereas I would fight for his right to speak what passes as his mind, I feel it is a mistake to protect him from the righteous backlash of those who love freedom itself. He would surely not do the same for us.
It has been a privilege for me, and an experience, to have encountered one such as Kenneth Swipies on this post. Rarely does on encounter nowadays a man (I’m assuming we are dealing with a man) who combines such a despicable set of personal and intellectual attributes with such a low level of self-awareness and culture. He is trash of whatever color – a 21st Century brownshirt. He is valuable, especially for me as a European, but to us all, in that he reminds us of why WWII was fought and why Fascism had to be defeated and erased (well, clearly, almost erased) from the face of the Earth.
Those who have disagreed with Swipies on this post have been called “elitist” (hilariously by one who refuses to define it), boors, liars, cheats, idiots and whatever other derogatory label he felt like applying. Acting like a crazed pit-bull bitch, he even attacked the one right wing fool who came on to support him (Mr. USA, USA, USA). He has continuously backtracked, stated that he had “proved” such and such, or “won” such and such an argument as if to say something over and over again is tantamount to proving its truth. The tactic will be familiar to students of history and the one used by the Nazis against the Jews, Gypsies, “mentally deficient” and homosexuals – all of whom they shipped in boxcars to horrible deaths in the Camps.
Luckily, we live in post-Enlightenment Liberal times and we are able to voice our disgust at Mr. Swipies and his ilk. It has been an experience dealing with him as I said, but long after logging off, the stench of Authoritarianism and Totalitarianism that he trails behind him lingers.
Good one Krazy Ken!!!! Didn’t see that coming!
“Yes, there are better educated people then me. Too bad that none of them post in this forum”
HAW, HAW, HAW
Shortall, do you ever tire of lying, and denigrating another? How many nicks are you willing to use other then the three you now use? Or is it four?
While I did not respond to your attacks in my first letter due to the fact that I did not know this forum existed, here is your third post to that letter:
“Richard Shortall , July 02, 2009
HBM maybe you’re right, I don’t know why I bother, but bother I do. Somewhere down deep inside me there lives a flicker of Hope that these idiots don’t really believe what they say they believe – were I to be convinced that most of them do, this country would not only be doomed, but would be a very unpleasant place in which to live. So I explain, I define, I clarify… sometimes I ridicule (this is seldom a challenge) and I explain again. The hope is that every so often a mean-spirited, hard-hearted, unschooled tighty-righty-whitey will seize upon the opportunity to divest himself of the profound bigotry drilled into him (it’s usually, but not always a “him”) by his ol’ Daddy, or Uncle Mike or whoever it was, go read some books and deliver an awful jolt to his encrusted brain by engaging is some thinking for the first time in his unexamined lift.
That’s my hope, but it’s all uphill. Here, it seems, ignorance is not only bliss, it’s power”
When I read it I noticed the “tighty-righty-whitey” comment which is just one of the other nicks you use. Kind of sounds like you lied about not posting in response to me, lol
And all one has to do is read your last post in this thread to understand who the tight assed, hatefilled, ones are.
“And all one has to do is read your last post in this thread to understand who the tight assed, hatefilled, ones are” Yes one does, and well done to you on managing to read it, for it describes you! To a “t”.
Nuff said, you bore.