Aren't you a little old to be wearing that goofy hat?
Don't forget this thread.
nutswinger?dusred wrote:I shall sleep better tonight thanks to NutSwinger. Thanks!
Read the threads posted.heliochrome85 wrote:nutswinger?dusred wrote:I shall sleep better tonight thanks to NutSwinger. Thanks!
Not necessarily jumping to her defense her BUT a slumber party wigi board or seanse hardly makes you a witch (yes i spelled both of those wrong, no clue how to spell them properly)heliochrome85 wrote: also, lets remember that o'donnell was a witch.
IBCoupe wrote:It's not the ouija board slumber parties that are the heart of her "dabbling in witchcraft" - one of her first dates was at a Satanic altar, with some kind of animal (probably) blood, though she maintained that she didn't know what was going on at the time.
dusred wrote:It's called the "lesser of the two evils". Obviously she's not the ideal candidate but in my opinion she is better than the alternative.
Maybe they're evolving?heliochrome85 wrote:i personally dont care if she is a witch, but i dont understand how the deeply religious, deeply conservative, Tea Party, can get behind someone who has dabbled in witchcraft?
I guess sacrificing animals isnt as bad as being a sekret muslin.
Meh...political experience in todays political climate is no selling point, in fact, no experience is probably a better indication of no corruption. Not to say that its definite proof, but if your already a politician today, theres a much better chance your a corrupt one.heliochrome85 wrote:which would be?
oh thats right, an experienced non-witch.
so are we saying that the tea party now is Pro-Witchcraft?
Wait wait wait ... "pro-immigration"? What exactly does that mean? Please expound.heliochrome85 wrote:i dont see any tea party candidates upsetting democratic primaries...
or doing any pro-gay rallies, pro-immigration rallies, pro-obama speeches.
just sayin'
O'Donnell is literally dumber than a box of Palins.
What revisionism is that?IBCoupe wrote:Honestly, its her historical revisionism that bugs me the most.
Well, of course. Just like the revisioist view of who opposed the Civil Rights act and who abolished slavery.stebo0728 wrote:Personally i see the liberal school of thought to harbor more revisionist tactics, both in denying our religious heritage, and in denouncing our capitalist roots.
AZhitman wrote:Ah - Found it.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKyxxurx ... r_embedded[/youtube]
The Constitution's already in place, Homey. No need to sell us on it again. We got this.