tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post5752232631664796331..comments2023-10-24T09:06:30.200-04:00Comments on No More Mister Nice Blog: Steve M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11963290427258439242noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-11858651836416930902012-05-08T12:27:45.693-04:002012-05-08T12:27:45.693-04:00Wow, Steve, now the Paulbots are appearing in your...Wow, Steve, now the Paulbots are appearing in your comments. <br /><br />I just want to say a loud "amen" to your & Victor's views. I'm plumb worn OUT by the ostensible-left demands for empty spectacle and posturing. Let 'em watch TV wrestling. <br /><br />I expect that kind of looniness from our opponents, but damn, I'd hope for better from those supposedly on more or less the same side as the Prez.BHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12991272246814476124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-58752724920936863932012-05-08T10:39:30.584-04:002012-05-08T10:39:30.584-04:00Chairman Reince Priebus violated RNC Rule 11 when...Chairman Reince Priebus violated RNC Rule 11 when he declared Romney the "presumptive nominee" and shattered it entirely when he said, "It's beyond an endorsement. It is a complete merger wherein the RNC is putting all of its resources and energy behind Mitt Romney to be the next president of the United States."<br /><br />If the RNC does not abide by ITS OWN RULES regarding nominee selection, in what way is this election not a complete farce? We've all seen the anti-Paul bias first hand, but now to disobey their own rules? By the CHAIRMAN? If Paul "has no chance", what do they fear? If Romney IS "presumptive" why hasn't HE spoken up about this disgraceful breach of rules, which at best will hand him a nomination that is completely dishonest and subject him to ridicule by the Democrats?<br /><br />Register YOUR protest using the Change.org petition at http://tinyurl.com/RNCRule11Louis Nardozihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09682358523313353174noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-70872166592621602322012-05-08T08:05:08.248-04:002012-05-08T08:05:08.248-04:00I think Obama's been very clear on the issue o...I think Obama's been very clear on the issue of unicorn sex. <br /><br />It doesn't matter to him one way or the other. That's a privacy issue, and not one of interstate commerce.<br /><br />It's what he thinks about banning unicorn marriage - which is naturally, the next step for two unicorns (unicorni? unicorney?) after they've had their sex, that counts:<br />He's FOR civil unicorn marriage.<br /><br />Basically, he says - it's up to the states.<br /><br />But if Congress passes a law banning unicorn marriage, he'll veto it.<br />And if Congress overrides his veto, he won't enforce it.<br /><br />Whassamatta hew?<br />Took a week off, and didn't look at the TV news, or read a newspaper?<br /><br />Did you at least know that Joe Biden said this past weekend, that he's ok with unicorn marriage?<br /><br />You're a well-known blogger who's quoted on other blogs. Even the great Charles Pierce gave you a shout-out.<br />Such stunning ignorance doesn't speak well of you or your readers and commente...<br />Hey, wait, that's ME!<br />I'm one of 'em!!!<br /><br />Brush-up on the issue of unicorn marriage, lest you make us, your readers and commenters, look like fools. Ok, Steve?<br />Thanks.<br />;-)Victorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06609452382111686086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-90389319858117510332012-05-08T06:48:58.677-04:002012-05-08T06:48:58.677-04:00But what is Obama's position on unicorn sex? ...But what <i>is</i> Obama's position on unicorn sex? We don't know! That's because the LIE-beral media won't tell you! OBAMA HASN'T BEEN VETTED ON UNICORN SEX!!1!!1!Steve M.https://www.blogger.com/profile/11963290427258439242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-78755250472422111382012-05-08T05:55:27.971-04:002012-05-08T05:55:27.971-04:00But... but... GITMO!
That's another pet peeve...But... but... GITMO!<br /><br />That's another pet peeve of the Obama's not a real Liberal git's.<br /><br />Never mind that it was the craven cowards in Congress, Democrats included, who were SOOOOO afraid of the Moooooslim super-powers of the incarcerated drivers, delivery boys, goat-herders, and, then teenage sons of other tribes, amongst some possible read terrorists, and their supernatural powers to go through steel-reinforced concrete walls, that denied these accused people of having free and open trials on the mainland, like every other suspected terrorists for over 30 years, that we still have this stain on our nation operational.<br /><br />I can't take the (frequntly single-issue) 'Purity Police' Liberals and Progressives who can't see the big picture, and say they'll sit-out the November elections.<br /><br />Does it occur to many of them that the reason Obama couldn't, or didn't, do more, was because they either didn't vote in 2010, or didn't work to try to GOTV, in House and Senate races.<br /><br />Let's see where their and our, precious gay and civil rights end up if Mitt's the President, with a Republican Congress.<br />My guess is somewhere before Stonewall on gay rights, and somewhere before the Civil Rights Acts of '64 and '65.<br />And you think they're spying on everyone now? Just wait!<br /><br />I, too, wish Obama was "purer." <br /><br />Give him a Democratic Congress with less Red Dog D's, and let's see what he can do.<br />'Til then - stfu!<br /><br />Feckin' idjit's!Victorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06609452382111686086noreply@blogger.com