Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#166183 Aug 3, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>They're the ones who need to forgive me...for marrying a California democrat.
:)
Hey.

I resemble that remark.

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#166184 Aug 3, 2013
Pernrider wrote:
<quoted text>
So, in effect, you voted for Clinton both times. Well, at least you didn't sully yourself by voting for Bush the elder.
I didn't vote for HW or Bob Dole, so technically, I did vote for Clinton twice.

Republicans don't have a lock on my vote, I'm an Independent. If they insist on putting up loser candidates, I'll shop elsewhere, as I have.

I can honestly say I wasn't sure who I was going to vote for in 2008 until I was in the voting booth. McCain only got my vote because I wasn't enthused with any of the third party candidates AND he had Sarah Palin as his running mate. obama didn't get my vote because he had some shady associates AND Joe Biden was his running mate,(Joe was my Senator for 36 years, so I knew what a loser he was).

Although he was weak in some areas, overall I was satisfied with George W. Bush, and gave him my vote twice. But then, he was running against AlGore and John Kerry. The Democrats made those choices EASY.

I enthusiastically voted for Mitt Romney. I thought he was exactly what our floundering obama economy needed, and, after four years, I knew what king obama was.

If the Republicans put up a quality conservative candidate, like a Dr. Benjamin Carson, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul or even Sarah Palin, not only will they get my vote, I'll knock on doors and make phone calls for them. Put up another John McCain type... I'll have to shop around.

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#166185 Aug 3, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>They're the ones who need to forgive me...for marrying a California democrat.
:)
Democrats aren't all bad, believe it or not, I was one for over 40 years... and my wife married me too.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#166186 Aug 4, 2013
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
Democrats aren't all bad, believe it or not, I was one for over 40 years... and my wife married me too.
I didn't divorce the guy for his political affiliation...

:)

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#166188 Aug 4, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey.
I resemble that remark.
Sucks to be you, Nerd...
:)

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#166189 Aug 4, 2013
Happy Birthday to Kenyan Muslims everywhere!!!

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#166190 Aug 4, 2013
Pernrider wrote:
<quoted text>
I would not vote before I'd have voted for Obama. McCain made/makes me ill but no way would I have ever pulled that lever for Obama.
Pin a cookie on you! Do you prefer oatmeal, or pfeffernuise?

Democracy isn't a spectator sport.
If you don't vote, you shouldn't bitch.

JMO

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#166191 Aug 4, 2013
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
Unfortunately, Travon resorted to violence, and attacked Mr. Zimmerman, who was faithfully performing his neighborhood watch duties, from ambush.
Two points of self-serving misinformation here:

1. Zimmerman was NOT "...faithfully performing his neighborhood watch duties." From the Sanford PD Neighborhood Watch Manual: "What you will
not do is get physically involved with any activity you report or
apprehension of any suspicious persons. This is the job of the law
enforcement agency." (p.3) and "Do not take any risks to prevent a
crime or try to make an arrest. The responsibility for apprehending criminals belongs to the police department." (p.15) He was advised not to follow, and did so anyway.

Zimmerman was in fact acting as an armed vigilante. He's free, so why white-wash what happened?

2...."from ambush"? Here you've decided to choose Zimmerman's story of being jumped from ambush, as opposed to Zimmerman's alternate (and videotaped) story of the boy walking down the sidewalk.
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>I think Mr. Zimmerman showed remarkable restraint with his weapon, even though he was being savagely beaten by his attacker.
Restraint? He shot the boy point-blank in the heart. Where's the restraint, because he didn't pistol-whip the body as well?

Again, you've selected that which serves your prejudice. Zimmerman was punched, no doubt. According to expert forensic testimony, Zimmerman was far from being "savagely beaten." He had a bloody nose, and a couple scrapes to his head from wrestling on the ground. I will concede, though, that to a wimp that might qualify as a "savage beating".
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>However, once Travon saw the weapon, and reached for it, Mr. Zimmerman was forced to use the weapon to defend his life.
Not so much. Again you hyper-select this, and disregard that. According to Zimmerman, on video, his weapon was on his >right rear hip<.

According to eyewitnesses, at one point Zimmerman was on top. We know that eventually Martin was on top. What we have here is a typical relatively even match where they are grappling around with first one and then the other on top. The only difference being one was a screaming pussy with a concealed weapon.

When Martin was on top, Zimmerman, by his own words, was wriggling around to the point that the boy's knees were up to Zimmerman's armpit. This would place the weapon >behind< Martin, AND at least partially behind Zimmerman's right hip. According to this scenario, provided by Zimmerman himself, it is most plausible that the first time Martin saw the weapon was when Zimmerman reached for it.

Among the several failures of the prosecution, they utterly failed to present the question as to why, if the fight took place in the one spot as described by Zimmerman, why was Martin's dead body lying fifteen feet away from that spot? Obviously much more went on in that tragic 13 minutes than Zimmerman's testimony chose to reveal.
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>End of story.
Not so much. The beginning of the story is a silent creep watching and then following a boy walking home in the rain at night. The end of the story is a boy being killed for standing his ground against a nervous coward with a gun on a dark rainy night. There's a reason that the initial lead investigator wanted to bring manslaughter charges that night. Unfortunately he was over-ridden by superiors.

But it probably didn't matter. The prosecution had to prove that Zimmerman had prior malicious intent. I don't think he did. The defense only had to demonstrate that Zimmerman feared for his life. It was obvious he was fearful, from the moment he rolled up his car window rather than simply identify himself and ask the boy what he was doing. The fault lies in the ambiguous application of "Stand Your Ground" law, which had he lived, could have been the boy's defense equally.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#166192 Aug 4, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Law enforcement types, cops, sheriffs, prison guards, tend to be Republicans--authoritarian personality.
I know.

Teachers in Red states tend to be authoritarian too - they keep their jobs longer that way - regardless of their teaching skills. As long as the kids are cowed and quiet, and the classwork gets done, the actual quality of learning they accomplish is pretty much irrelevant.

Sad.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#166193 Aug 4, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>Two points of self-serving misinformation here:
1. Zimmerman was NOT "...faithfully performing his neighborhood watch duties." From the Sanford PD Neighborhood Watch Manual: "What you will
not do is get physically involved with any activity you report or
apprehension of any suspicious persons. This is the job of the law
enforcement agency." (p.3) and "Do not take any risks to prevent a
crime or try to make an arrest. The responsibility for apprehending criminals belongs to the police department." (p.15) He was advised not to follow, and did so anyway.
Zimmerman was in fact acting as an armed vigilante. He's free, so why white-wash what happened?
2...."from ambush"? Here you've decided to choose Zimmerman's story of being jumped from ambush, as opposed to Zimmerman's alternate (and videotaped) story of the boy walking down the sidewalk.
<quoted text>Restraint? He shot the boy point-blank in the heart. Where's the restraint, because he didn't pistol-whip the body as well?
Again, you've selected that which serves your prejudice. Zimmerman was punched, no doubt. According to expert forensic testimony, Zimmerman was far from being "savagely beaten." He had a bloody nose, and a couple scrapes to his head from wrestling on the ground. I will concede, though, that to a wimp that might qualify as a "savage beating".
<quoted text>Not so much. Again you hyper-select this, and disregard that. According to Zimmerman, on video, his weapon was on his >right rear hip<.
According to eyewitnesses, at one point Zimmerman was on top. We know that eventually Martin was on top. What we have here is a typical relatively even match where they are grappling around with first one and then the other on top. The only difference being one was a screaming pussy with a concealed weapon.
When Martin was on top, Zimmerman, by his own words, was wriggling around to the point that the boy's knees were up to Zimmerman's armpit. This would place the weapon >behind< Martin, AND at least partially behind Zimmerman's right hip. According to this scenario, provided by Zimmerman himself, it is most plausible that the first time Martin saw the weapon was when Zimmerman reached for it.
Among the several failures of the prosecution, they utterly failed to present the question as to why, if the fight took place in the one spot as described by Zimmerman, why was Martin's dead body lying fifteen feet away from that spot? Obviously much more went on in that tragic 13 minutes than Zimmerman's testimony chose to reveal.
<quoted text>Not so much. The beginning of the story is a silent creep watching and then following a boy walking home in the rain at night. The end of the story is a boy being killed for standing his ground against a nervous coward with a gun on a dark rainy night. There's a reason that the initial lead investigator wanted to bring manslaughter charges that night. Unfortunately he was over-ridden by superiors.
But it probably didn't matter. The prosecution had to prove that Zimmerman had prior malicious intent. I don't think he did. The defense only had to demonstrate that Zimmerman feared for his life. It was obvious he was fearful, from the moment he rolled up his car window rather than simply identify himself and ask the boy what he was doing. The fault lies in the ambiguous application of "Stand Your Ground" law, which had he lived, could have been the boy's defense equally.
There you go again, with the inconvenient facts, Hip. You pesky little skeeter, you...

I keep trying to tell you, they're ALLERGIC to those, but you keep spooning them up anyhow....

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#166194 Aug 4, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>There you go again, with the inconvenient facts, Hip. You pesky little skeeter, you...
I keep trying to tell you, they're ALLERGIC to those, but you keep spooning them up anyhow....
The unconscious(?) need to white-wash the acquitted whilst slurring the dead speaks volumes, I think.

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#166195 Aug 4, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>There you go again, with the inconvenient facts, Hip. You pesky little skeeter, you...
I keep trying to tell you, they're ALLERGIC to those, but you keep spooning them up anyhow....
I quit reading Hips nonsense when it became obvious he was sikply parroting mediamatters BS, as I'm sure his "facts" are in that message. Again, no reason for me to bother reading them, as I can just go to the mediamatters site, and get them firsthand.

Of course, since it's about the assailant Travon Martin, Hip probably has a lot of Al Sharpton "facts" mixed in, with a little sprinkling of Jesse Jackson.

However, I am surprised that you also disagree with the actual facts brought out in the Zimmerman trial, and with the statements of Rachael Jeanel that came out in later interviews. You're not getting your "facts" from NBC, are you?
UidiotRaceMAKEWO RLDPEACE

United States

#166196 Aug 4, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>I know.
Teachers in Red states tend to be authoritarian too - they keep their jobs longer that way - regardless of their teaching skills. As long as the kids are cowed and quiet, and the classwork gets done, the actual quality of learning they accomplish is pretty much irrelevant.
Sad.
Not only that most of Red States are WELFARE States.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#166197 Aug 4, 2013
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
I quit reading Hips nonsense when it became obvious he was sikply parroting mediamatters BS, as I'm sure his "facts" are in that message. Again, no reason for me to bother reading them, as I can just go to the mediamatters site, and get them firsthand.
Of course, since it's about the assailant Travon Martin, Hip probably has a lot of Al Sharpton "facts" mixed in, with a little sprinkling of Jesse Jackson.
However, I am surprised that you also disagree with the actual facts brought out in the Zimmerman trial, and with the statements of Rachael Jeanel that came out in later interviews. You're not getting your "facts" from NBC, are you?
Hear no evil, see no evil.
UidiotRaceMAKEWO RLDPEACE

Richmond Hill, NY

#166198 Aug 4, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hear no evil, see no evil.
AND , Speak no evil...
UidiotRaceMAKEWO RLDPEACE

United States

#166199 Aug 4, 2013
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't vote for HW or Bob Dole, so technically, I did vote for Clinton twice.
Republicans don't have a lock on my vote, I'm an Independent. If they insist on putting up loser candidates, I'll shop elsewhere, as I have.
I can honestly say I wasn't sure who I was going to vote for in 2008 until I was in the voting booth. McCain only got my vote because I wasn't enthused with any of the third party candidates AND he had Sarah Palin as his running mate. obama didn't get my vote because he had some shady associates AND Joe Biden was his running mate,(Joe was my Senator for 36 years, so I knew what a loser he was).
Although he was weak in some areas, overall I was satisfied with George W. Bush, and gave him my vote twice. But then, he was running against AlGore and John Kerry. The Democrats made those choices EASY.
I enthusiastically voted for Mitt Romney. I thought he was exactly what our floundering obama economy needed, and, after four years, I knew what king obama was.
If the Republicans put up a quality conservative candidate, like a Dr. Benjamin Carson, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul or even Sarah Palin, not only will they get my vote, I'll knock on doors and make phone calls for them. Put up another John McCain type... I'll have to shop around.
Why you lie to Pern like thaT, YOU SUPPORT RIGHT WING AGENDAS, u NO INDEPENDENT.

nOT A cOMMIE ORa fAcIST AND SURE NOT RELIGIOUS

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#166200 Aug 4, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hear no evil, see no evil.
More like, hear no nonsense, see no nonsense.

But don't let me stop you from digesting more BS, by now I thought you'd be full of it. But then, you are.

“On a sailing ship to nowhere”

Since: Jun 07

Colorado

#166201 Aug 4, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>I know.
Teachers in Red states tend to be authoritarian too - they keep their jobs longer that way - regardless of their teaching skills. As long as the kids are cowed and quiet, and the classwork gets done, the actual quality of learning they accomplish is pretty much irrelevant.
Sad.
You have lost your mind and you are just spewing stupidity here. Kids cowed by a teacher? LOL!

“On a sailing ship to nowhere”

Since: Jun 07

Colorado

#166202 Aug 4, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>There you go again, with the inconvenient facts, Hip. You pesky little skeeter, you...
I keep trying to tell you, they're ALLERGIC to those, but you keep spooning them up anyhow....
You wouldn't know how to present a fact if it walked up and introduced itself.
UidiotRaceMAKEWO RLDPEACE

United States

#166203 Aug 4, 2013
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
More like, hear no nonsense, see no nonsense.
But don't let me stop you from digesting more BS, by now I thought you'd be full of it. But then, you are.
Interjecting were catcher laft off.

Seek truth, Hear the truth, Truth be told. U shills are real Hyprocrite , racist ... are ruining the US and world with your war machines.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 2 min Charlie Sheen 265,593
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 5 min Stilgar Fifrawi 779,331
Will the False Prophet come from the Vatican??? 8 min Liam 28
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 10 min Gods r Delusions ... 560,753
Thousands march in Holocaust memorial (Apr '06) 10 min Just American 61
Hispanic Women are Racist (Sep '12) 16 min Herstory 35
Why do BLACK People hate Mexicans so much? (Dec '13) 20 min Just American 1,033
Gay snapchat names 3 hr edm732 188
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 4 hr Qu_innocence 605,392
More from around the web