drnykterstein

Ya, I wanted to see the rest of that.

Your posts makes everyone around here lose enough brain cells as it is. What, do you want the poor guy to revert into a mental coma from having to spend even more time reading your drivel?

Did enough people compare Palin to Quayle that you felt you wanted to play, and made some non-existent connection between Obama and Quayle. You keep mentioning Hussain as if it was an insult. I have to tell you, in this melting pot that is the United States of America, the name Hussain is as American as the Greek name George. Unless you are naming your kid Squanto or something you have no claim to any name being of foreign origin. You disrespectful racist. I'm sure we could all find some names to call Palin, if we wanted to stoop to your level.

I just like how when I said "IQ of a George Bush", you knew right off it was meant as an insult.

Who here has actually watched a Cardinals game lately. (and if so, why???)

More clear then? She's got the IQ of a George Bush (pick either one, don't matter)

Another 700 Billion, but they give it to real people instead of the wall street idiots. (NO, YOU DOPE, I'M NOT SERIOUS!!)

What has happened here is that you are unable to rebuttal my original assertion that it's hard to see how Palin qualifies as bright. You have then resorted to nitpicking on spelling in order to attempt to console yourself that you are right about something. I find it amusing, and if you want to condone me for a spelling error on an internet message board, then go right ahead. I won't be offended by it. But don't fault me if I have a hard time taking you serious.

No DC Tom got it exactly right. They agreed exactly on that.

Are you being serious? I can't tell. Your statement are very crayonz-like.

Your lack of intellectual honesty on the things your hold against Obama is impressive. Ya, your right, he thinks there are 57 states, and did not make a slip of the tongue. He's so dumb, he doesn't know what a pre-schooler knows!

BIDEN: Absolutely. Do I support granting same-sex benefits? Absolutely positively. Look, in an Obama-Biden administration, there will be absolutely no distinction from a constitutional standpoint or a legal standpoint between a same-sex and a heterosexual couple. The fact of the matter is that under the Constitution we should be granted -- same-sex couples should be able to have visitation rights in the hospitals, joint ownership of property, life insurance policies, et cetera. That's only fair. It's what the Constitution calls for. And so we do support it. We do support making sure that committed couples in a same-sex marriage are guaranteed the same constitutional benefits as it relates to their property rights, their rights of visitation, their rights to insurance, their rights of ownership as heterosexual couples do. IFILL: Governor, would you support expanding that beyond Alaska to the rest of the nation? PALIN: Well, not if it goes closer and closer towards redefining the traditional definition of marriage between one man and one woman. And unfortunately that's sometimes where those steps lead. But I also want to clarify, if there's any kind of suggestion at all from my answer that I would be anything but tolerant of adults in America choosing their partners, choosing relationships that they deem best for themselves, you know, I am tolerant and I have a very diverse family and group of friends and even within that group you would see some who may not agree with me on this issue, some very dear friends who don't agree with me on this issue. But in that tolerance also, no one would ever propose, not in a McCain-Palin administration, to do anything to prohibit, say, visitations in a hospital or contracts being signed, negotiated between parties. But I will tell Americans straight up that I don't support defining marriage as anything but between one man and one woman, and I think through nuances we can go round and round about what that actually means. But I'm being as straight up with Americans as I can in my non- support for anything but a traditional definition of marriage. IFILL: Let's try to avoid nuance, Senator. Do you support gay marriage? BIDEN: No. Barack Obama nor I support redefining from a civil side what constitutes marriage. We do not support that. That is basically the decision to be able to be able to be left to faiths and people who practice their faiths the determination what you call it. The bottom line though is, and I'm glad to hear the governor, I take her at her word, obviously, that she think there should be no civil rights distinction, none whatsoever, between a committed gay couple and a committed heterosexual couple. If that's the case, we really don't have a difference. IFILL: Is that what your said? PALIN: Your question to him was whether he supported gay marriage and my answer is the same as his and it is that I do not. IFILL: Wonderful. You agree. On that note, let's move to foreign policy.

FYI, The Senator was not saying that Biden did get his ass kicked, he's saying Biden could (or would?) get his ass kicked if Palin was a bit more experienced. Which to me is still silly, but a different scenario altogether that what you are thinking.

Can we just agree that they both sucked, and there is no winner (the terrorists? cuz we're going to get a moron VP). The part I bolded: Isn't that all of what she'll be doing if elected? That is not a viable excuse. I'm somewhat (read: extremely) skeptical on your kicking Biden's ass all over the stage claim.

18 years later, and I'm still in the first stage . Sounds about right.

1. You posted the same link twice. 2. That was very interesting. I hear a lot about the porks added to this Bill, I was curious what they were exactly. That's pretty crazy. What does it mean that they proposed essentially the same Bill twice, but since the 2nd time it had pork added on, it is likely to get passed?

like this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xG1aOORf8Pc&NR=1

Hey tell me something.. I watched that video, and then clicked on a few others... WTF is this : Three people who are voting for Obama are doing dumb things, .. so Obama should not be elected? I don't get it. (not that I even really think what they are doing is dumb, I can't really comment on something I've not researched) And in that video.. did McCain.com side with conspiracy theorists?

You drunk? Stop making threads

Hehe, If I did that, my post would not be as funny. (Yes, setting myself up for the "It wasn't funny in the first place", let's have it)

What kick we talking about? I'm not following you guys.... <-- (obligitory sarcasm signal, for the dumb poster who will inevitably not see the sarcasm on their own)

I don't see any Republican bias in that posting. None at all.

The truth of Palin comes out!

Yah my head is also being scratched because of that.