Didn't you say in another post that your wife thinks you have a cute butt? Which one of the two was she talking about? Or was it both upper and lower?
Uh, wmd's? Were you trying to change the topic again, so I could correct you on this again? I'm flattered that you bash Bush all the time, but on one thing you believe him. That says a lot about you! Even more so, that Bush has said we didn't find the WMD we were looking for. That doesn't discount that some were found, nor why you refuse to address the issue other than with denial. If your ego is so low tonight, that you need the support of your fellow RP supporters to give you a slap on the ass for being dishonest, then let's get it on!
I'm flattered that you are interested in my butt. I don't swing that way. Have you consider PMing ping pong instead?
Sorry about that but bush clearly stated that no wmd's were found. If you can read you will see that clearly in the quoted area. The quoted area is the place where they directly quote what the president says. Anything else you need explained? Bush says no wmd's found. God bless our honest president
Let's go, pingy! I don't have all day for your emotions/ego! If you want to change the entire topic for your own selfish purposes, because you have a low self-esteem, then let's get it on! Clock's tickin' big man
Bush is right, that we didn't find the ones your friends had. That doesn't discount that some were found. I dare you to counter them, ping http://newsbusters.org/node/8668 All, complete with links. It seems that about once per week, you get lonely and need a boost of self esteem from your fellow delusionalists, so you hijack a thread for your personal pleasure, only to be countered each time. Poor pingy! Just not getting enough attention at home?
Whatever pics the two of you share with each other in private message, is no business of mine. I won't ask, I won't tell.
Ping, speed it up son! I don't have all night. This is too easy. Denial is your only defense. Now get to denying, so I can make my next move. Deja vu?
Ping, try not to give GTech too much attention. Every single day he comes here, hijacks a 1/2 dozen threads with the same anti-Ron Paul, anti-DP member rants, drawing the convos away from the thread topic, in a self-indulgent pursuit of the center of attention.
Dishonesty, coupled with a pass, from guerilla! I'm flattered. Ping hijacks another thread for his own selfish reasons, and guerilla gives me credit for it. Kind of like giving terrorist's credit in Iraq to our soldiers and country.
Motion Lotion! WTF GT??? I find it hillarious that you misquote pingpong by adding a link to some dodgy website. Kind of sums you up don't it? I bet you have all 12 flavours.
That was pretty AGS of me, wasn't it? Hey, you know me...don't ask, don't tell! Oh, you might want to be careful, or guerilla will give you credit for hijacking a thread. Wait...no he won't! Last place always makes people emotional!
Your right guerilla. I guess proving someone wrong and making them switch the subject a million times is enough. Now that the twisting of words have been exposed lets talk about the important issues.
McCain Vs. Hillary Vs. Paul would be an interesting situation as I think Paul could really highlight the fact that he's the only true anti Iraq war candidate. This is a war that nearly 70% of Americans do not support. Hmm... If the Dem. is Obama I don't think Paul should run as an independent but if it's Clinton... Maybe he'd have a bit of a shot. A lot conservative Republicans don't like McCain so I think Paul could draw support from both financial conservatives (and pro-lifers) along with anti-war, pro civil liberties folks. Oh yes, It's not time to think about this just yet, BUT if McCain & Clinton do win Feb. 5 in a landslide it may be time to start thinking about it.
The original thread was about Ross Perot. I don't think Ron Paul could muster more than 2.5% as a third party candidate and I think he would hurt the Republican much more than the democrat. He wouldn't be as strong as the previous RP, maybe more like Ralph Nader in his vote affect. He also wouldn't do well with those of us that would do something to stop evil. I wouldn't wait for the Swiss to stop the next Hitler.
I want us to do something to stop evil, I want us to stop electing war mongers as presidents. That'd be a great start.
Ross Perot appealed to far more Republicans than Ron Paul. I would guess that Paul pulls just as many Dems as he does Republicans. The fact is, young people tend to be very confused about their political views. One minute they think they're liberal, and then they read Ayn Rand and they are militant libertarians. Ron Paul has appealed to many people who are getting their first taste of a Libertarian presidential candidate, regardless or their original political affiliation. Mark my words: Ron Paul will not be putting Hillary Clinton in the White House. Now get back to the hijacked discussion regarding George W. Bush and whether or not he was a decent president. I like where this thread is going, especially the "which candidate will stop 'evil'" fear mongering side discussion.
Actually he would do great to stop evil. Example one is going to war over a lie of wmd's and terrorism in iraq, but i guess you can chose to ignore this fact. Its ok gtech, debunked, and bogart are ignoring it also, even if our president said we found no WMD's. The newbies are reading this thread , im sure of that and they now can have an informed opinion. The more you guys keep talking about the more informed they will be. Keep up the good work guys.