3rdnlng Posted March 17, 2012 Author Posted March 17, 2012 Neither. Both sides stink. COMPLETELY So, you're a priest?
Adam Posted March 17, 2012 Posted March 17, 2012 So, you're a priest? No, but I listened to Judas Priest, when I was in high school
3rdnlng Posted March 17, 2012 Author Posted March 17, 2012 No, but I listened to Judas Priest, when I was in high school Well, not to confuse you anymore but here's one for you: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2012/03/fraud-flukes-obama-endorsed-ows-vaj.html
Adam Posted March 17, 2012 Posted March 17, 2012 Well, not to confuse you anymore but here's one for you: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2012/03/fraud-flukes-obama-endorsed-ows-vaj.html Yes, I read about this already. I am fed up with the garbage on both sides. They are both a joke
3rdnlng Posted March 17, 2012 Author Posted March 17, 2012 Yes, I read about this already. I am fed up with the garbage on both sides. They are both a joke I say this in a friendly manner, but dammit your "stand" is "maybe".
Adam Posted March 17, 2012 Posted March 17, 2012 I say this in a friendly manner, but dammit your "stand" is "maybe". No- it is a definitely. Both sides are definitely rubbish.
3rdnlng Posted March 17, 2012 Author Posted March 17, 2012 No- it is a definitely. Both sides are definitely rubbish. So, you are sort of like "bi" politically? Sometimes you like one and sometimes you like the other? Sometimes beef and sometimes fish?
Adam Posted March 17, 2012 Posted March 17, 2012 So, you are sort of like "bi" politically? Sometimes you like one and sometimes you like the other? Sometimes beef and sometimes fish? I don't consider it that way. I just go with my conscience on issues, I don't really like either side, and even when I consider one side morally right, I think they are doing it more for political reasons than anything else. I think this issue is being used for political leverage on both sides of the aisle, more than concern over what they say they are fighting for.
3rdnlng Posted March 17, 2012 Author Posted March 17, 2012 I don't consider it that way. I just go with my conscience on issues, I don't really like either side, and even when I consider one side morally right, I think they are doing it more for political reasons than anything else. I think this issue is being used for political leverage on both sides of the aisle, more than concern over what they say they are fighting for. I have a hard time reconciling the "conscience" bit here. Obviously, Ms. Fluke doesn't have much of one. It looks like she would take it either way for free contraceptives for her friends.
Adam Posted March 17, 2012 Posted March 17, 2012 I have a hard time reconciling the "conscience" bit here. Obviously, Ms. Fluke doesn't have much of one. It looks like she would take it either way for free contraceptives for her friends. I don't disagree with calling her out, but I am just saying that both sides are arguing more for political leverage for the election than for any cause. That's a real shame.
3rdnlng Posted March 17, 2012 Author Posted March 17, 2012 I don't disagree with calling her out, but I am just saying that both sides are arguing more for political leverage for the election than for any cause. That's a real shame. So, the dems try to turn what was a hearing about separation of church and state into a women's health issue and it just becomes both sides are arguing for political leverage? Adam, get off the f'n fence and take a stand for once. Again, equivicate, equivicate, dance to the music!
Adam Posted March 17, 2012 Posted March 17, 2012 (edited) So, the dems try to turn what was a hearing about separation of church and state into a women's health issue and it just becomes both sides are arguing for political leverage? Adam, get off the f'n fence and take a stand for once. Again, equivicate, equivicate, dance to the music! Sorry but your definition of equivocate isn't in the dictionary of a sane person. I guess everything that isn't left wing or right wing is equivocating. Sorry, but I prefer to think for myself. Edited March 17, 2012 by Adam
3rdnlng Posted March 17, 2012 Author Posted March 17, 2012 Sorry but your definition of equivocate isn't in the dictionary of a sane person. I guess everything that isn't left wing or right wing is equivocating. Sorry, but I prefer to think for myself. Yes, you are thinking for yourself, as long as it is well within the parameters of .02 percent of the center.
Adam Posted March 17, 2012 Posted March 17, 2012 Yes, you are thinking for yourself, as long as it is well within the parameters of .02 percent of the center. Couldn't care less where that puts me. I don't think politically, like these other people do. Right is right, wrong is wrong- and that puts democrats and republicans on the same side.
3rdnlng Posted March 17, 2012 Author Posted March 17, 2012 Couldn't care less where that puts me. I don't think politically, like these other people do. Right is right, wrong is wrong- and that puts democrats and republicans on the same side. Sorry Adam. I give up. Seems like you are looking forward to a double penetration.
DC Tom Posted March 17, 2012 Posted March 17, 2012 Sorry Adam. I give up. Seems like you are looking forward to a double penetration. Your posts are increasingly developing a disconcerting concern with mildly deviant sexuality with respect to other posters.
Buftex Posted March 17, 2012 Posted March 17, 2012 Your posts are increasingly developing a disconcerting concern with mildly deviant sexuality with respect to other posters. You're only now noticing that?
/dev/null Posted March 17, 2012 Posted March 17, 2012 Yes, you are thinking for yourself, as long as it is well within the parameters of .023.5 percent of the center. Corrected for TSW Orthodoxy
Alaska Darin Posted March 17, 2012 Posted March 17, 2012 Your posts are increasingly developing a disconcerting concern with mildly deviant sexuality with respect to other posters. It's apparently his version of "tapping the other dude's foot under the stall wall."
Recommended Posts