dlowan wrote:Monte Cargo wrote:dlowan wrote:candidone1 wrote:Yeah, I just finshed wiping her slime off my monitor.
Amazing how she did that.
I have said in another thread that LSM has earned from me silence. Perhaps you'll join me.
Perhaps others will join us.
Oh she has earned it indeed.
I will join you.....but sometimes she puts the devil in me.
It's dumb, I know.
Don't feed the troll.
What is it with you? Every last post of yours on this thread is nasty, baiting and taunting and offers no contribution on the subject. If you are that heated over the fact that Nancy Pelosi gets criticized, perhaps you should walk away from the board for a few hours and come back when you're a little more capable of posting reasonably. Ten pages of nasty posts is obsession, dear.
Nancy Pelosi's criticisms come from the superlatives she has uttered. It takes a lot of moxie for someone to call themselves the most ethical Congress in history, only to immediately turn around after saying that to try to arm-twist votes for a corrupt old drunk like John Murtha, or a convicted bribe-taker like Alcee Hastings.
You may see the most honest person in politics when you look into Nancy Pelosi's eyes, but she's burning karma for making some extraordinarily ill-planned declarations. Now she's got leadership and some pizzazz, to get where she is in such a short time, but the free press is going to roll and if you can't hack that, I suggest you get out of the way and let the free press go.
Lol!!!!!
Ah, for the first time I tangle with you, and you are, predictably, full of it.
a. Yes, my posts here on this thread are nasty, because I am actually seriously outraged at the kind of slime this cretin posts re accusations of paedophilia.
Here's a suggestion...before sliming me, you may wish to spend a wee amount of time figuring out why I might react thus to lies re this. Hint: I work with the victims of paedophiles. Therefore I regard it very seriously and find sliming lies about it utterly sickening. Do you support such lies? Why? What defence do you have? What effect do you think these lies have? Why do you support them?
I can't afford to think of this stuff as a cretinous political tool, it is very real to me, and people who fefend false accusations re it make me want to vomit, because they degrade and falsify the reality.
b. Why should I walk away? If you agree with the sliming, give evidence. NOW! Otherwise, you are complicit in this degredation of political discourse, and I consider you no different to the slime madam.
Do you have no regard for reasoned political discourse in your country?
I have little knowledge of Ms pelosi, however, I do see that degraded political discourse in your country, such as you appear to support, has international consequences. And I care re whether your country continues to kill wantonly, or uses its power wisely.
So...evidence of Pelosi supportinfg child abuse, or shut up.
You're all over the map.
How does tossing repeated personal attacks on another poster help to prove your point or help to further the good of political discourse, as you have protested about?
FYI, I didn't slime you, just drew you out to find out what gives.
The ACLU gives a 90% rating to Nancy Pelosi and has contributed to Pelosi's campaign and this is the same association that condones the NAMBLA (National American Man/Boy Love Association).
WIth thanks to LittleBitty for this link and quote:
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10450
Quote:Which makes one curious about the presence of marcher number 34 in the 2001 Pride Parade. Marching a mere three spots away from the famous Harry Hay, no doubt waving and smiling to the crowd, was, as the Chronicle logged her in the Official Guide and Program Parade Lineup: "U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi."
This is the same Nancy Pelosi who publishes on her website the following:
Quote:"Republican leaders admitted to knowing about Mr. Foley's abhorrent behavior for six months to a year and failed to protect the children in their trust. Republican Leaders must be investigated by the Ethics Committee and immediately questioned under oath."
So Pelosi marched right next to the poster boy for the Man/Boy Love Association who claims to chair "the most ethical Congress in history" caught redhanded being a hypocrite.
I suspect your high-running emotions and personal feelings will blind you to the sober truth about the charlaitans and bullshitters that run in the democratic party.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/LAW/01/08/NAMBLA.suit.crim/
Quote:Robert and Barbara Curley have filed a $200 million wrongful death lawsuit against the North American Man Boy Love Association -- an organization that defends what it calls 'intergenerational sex'. Critics call them pedophiles.
The Curleys' lawsuit claims that NAMBLA and seven of the group's leaders encouraged the "illegal rape of young male children," which ultimately led to the 1997 murder of their 10-year-old son Jeffrey Curley.
By the way, see my post about people lying on the internet. You state that you work protecting children, yet you fail to correctly spell the word
pedophile. I seriously question the legitamacy of your claim given that someone who is employed protecting children's rights must certainly write letters and anyone who couldn't even correctly spell the word "pedophile" immediately raises a red flag in the credibility department. Sorry.
Your feeble attempts to shift the argument to war politics is easily dismissable. We are not talking about republicans, or George W. Bush, we are discussing Nancy Pelosi.
You people have been really good at bashing Bush for the past six years, and have gotten so steeped in Bush Derangement Syndrome that you freak out at the slightest criticism of one of your people. This is a classic example of being able to dish it out, but not being able to take it.
This is another example of the progressive liberal attempt to condone and encourage abhorent and deviant social behavior and hiding behind the First Amendment and the right to privacy.
