|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: BretCahillBretCahill Date: May 6, 2008 12:33
It wouldn't be a bad thing if, after the rightard party implodes, for
the Democratic Party to split into two branches, the old country club
GOP under Obama and the old Democratic Party under the Clintons.
I could live with that "duopoly."
Bret Cahill
|
| |
|
| | 17 Comments |
|
|
Author: Patriot GamesPatriot Games Date: May 6, 2008 14:20
On Tue, 6 May 2008 12:33:36 -0700 (PDT), BretCahill@ peoplepc.com
wrote: >It wouldn't be a bad thing if, after the rightard party implodes, for
>the Democratic Party to split into two branches, the old country club
>GOP under Obama and the old Democratic Party under the Clintons.
>I could live with that "duopoly."
Its called a fantasy. It'll pass.
Yesterday I met a 70's couple at the marina. Lifelong Democrats,
never voted for a Republican in over 50 years, from a suburb of
Chicago.
They're voting for McCain this year.
|
| |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: lorad474lorad474 Date: May 6, 2008 14:33
> It wouldn't be a bad thing if, after the rightard party implodes, for
> the Democratic Party to split into two branches, the old country club
> GOP under Obama and the old Democratic Party under the Clintons.
>
> I could live with that "duopoly."
>
> Bret Cahill
That would be an logical organic evolution.. if outside manipulators
would allow it... but they won't.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: BretCahillBretCahill Date: May 6, 2008 15:38
> Yesterday I met a 70's couple at the marina. �Lifelong Democrats,
> never voted for a Republican in over 50 years, from a suburb of
> Chicago.
> They're voting for McCain this year.
That hardly saves the GOP. Except for some delusional eternal
jihaders like Joe Lieberman, rightards like McCain about as much as
Hillary or Obama.
And if McCain loses the rightards will claim it was because the GOP
didn't run a right wing wacko.
So either way the GOP is finished.
That explains why so many rightards are trying to get involved in the
Democratic Party race.
Rightards have no candidate. They just haven't gotten around to
admitting to themselves that they have no party.
Well the late Bill Buckley did before he signed off.
Bret Cahill
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: ShrikebackShrikeback Date: May 6, 2008 20:43
> It wouldn't be a bad thing if, after the rightard party implodes, for
> the Democratic Party to split into two branches, the old country club
> GOP under Obama and the old Democratic Party under the Clintons.
Wait. The true leftards are going with Obama too.
Who else would they vote for? Hitlery? I don't
think so. W with a human face. That sucks 20
percent of the left end of the bell curve off anyways,
meaning, of course, that Hitlery would have to be
even more centrist than she already is. The defeat
of Obama is the final destruction of the Left by
Hitlery. Now she will be free to be an eternal
jihadist. As if you ever cared that the Clinton
corporation was indeed jihandist, as you call it.
> I could live with that "duopoly."
Unfortunately, that's a duopoly designed by the
cross-eyed. Don't put too much stock in that
guys depth perception.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: BretCahillBretCahill Date: May 6, 2008 20:57
So who is the rightard candidate? Chuck Heston?
Bret Cahill
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: turtoniturtoni Date: May 6, 2008 21:09
> Bret Cahill
> So who is the rightard candidate? Chuck Heston?
that was funny.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Norris
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlton_Heston
"In 2004, Late Night with Conan O'Brien began a recurring sketch in which
O'Brien would pull a Walker, Texas Ranger Lever next to his desk, which
would cause a brief, out-of-context clip from Walker: Texas Ranger to play.
This became one of the more popular segments on O'Brien's show and led to a
guest appearance by Norris himself, who pulled his own "Conan O'Brien Lever"
to play a clip of Norris beating up O'Brien. This segment has been credited
as jump-starting the Norris craze and leading to enough interest to produce
a Walker, Texas Ranger TV movie."
|
| Show full article (1.38Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: ShrikebackShrikeback Date: May 6, 2008 21:16
> So who is the rightard candidate? Chuck Heston?
No. Obviously, the rightist candidate is Hitlery.
You know her, she's the one with the big ass who
intends to stay in Iraq for a good long time. The
one who is Tweedlebush?
It shouldn't come as a shock to the true leftards that
Hitlery is not _their_ candidate. I expect them to
be smart enough to figure that out. But I often over-
estimate people.
Eight more years! Eight more years!
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: BretCahillBretCahill Date: May 6, 2008 21:28
>> So who is the rightard candidate? �Chuck Heston?
> No. �
Why not? After all he led the NRA to victory against them gun
grabbers.
. . .
> Eight more years! �Eight more years!
Of quagmire?
Bret Cahill
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: BretCahillBretCahill Date: May 6, 2008 21:31
>> So who is the rightard candidate? �Chuck Heston?
> that was funny.
Thanks.
. . .
> "The Constitution was handed down to guide us by a bunch of wise old dead
> white guys who invented our country! Now some flinch when I say that. Why!
> Its true-they were white guys! So were most of the guys that died in Lincoln's
> name opposing slavery in the 1860s. So why should I be ashamed of white
> guys? Why is "Hispanic Pride" or "Black Pride" a good thing, while "White
> Pride" conjures shaven heads and white hoods? Why was the Million Man March
> on Washington celebrated by many as progress, while the Promise Keepers
> March on Washington was greeted with suspicion and ridicule? I'll tell you
> why, Cultural warfare!" -- Charlton Heston
Rightards must have lapped that up.
Bret Cahill
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
