Bush is a hero

Judged:

2

2

1

Catcher1 wrote:

<quoted text>
Not the wise, sensitive, thoughtful Lyndi I remember.
What happened?

Judged:

1

1

1

lisw wrote:

<quoted text>Gee, and she asked you to dinner and everything.

Lyndi wrote:

<quoted text>
Ha!
Noooooooo, there's nothing embarrassing about the POTUS filmng a youtube entitled:
"THE 2012 LAUNCH OF AFRICAN AMERICANS FOR BARACK OBAMA."
What do you suppose the reaction would be if Mitt Romney lowered himself to grovel for white votes and filmed a youtube entitled:
"The 2012 LAUNCH OF CAUCASION AMERICANS FOR MITT ROMNEY"
Nevermind, it doesn't matter. You're in such denial about President Obama you are incapable of an honest answer. If I were you though I wouldn't leap up out of my chair every time someone exposes the Presidents questionable campaign tactics. It make you look desperate.
But better you than me. I wouldn't want to defend him.

Judged:

1

1

1

WildWeirdWillie wrote:

<quoted text>No, Lyndi, I don't think there's anything embarrassing about the video or African Americans for Obama, any more than I think "Juntos Con Romney" or "Evangelicals for Mitt" or "JEWS FOR ROMNEY 2012" are embarrassing.

WildWeirdWillie wrote:

<quoted text>No, Lyndi, I don't think there's anything embarrassing about the video or African Americans for Obama, any more than I think "Juntos Con Romney" or "Evangelicals for Mitt" or "JEWS FOR ROMNEY 2012" are embarrassing.
Maybe you're new to politics or something, but all that's pretty standard stuff.
And really ... denial? Is that the best you can do to try and put me on the defensive or change the subject?

BobinTX wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm just not that interested in having pedophile bigots in the forum, and you don't seem to be upset about it. To each his own... but why did you feel the need to invite him and all these trolls in here? It may not bother you to discuss topics with the pedophile bigot, but all the trolls too... really?

Judged:

1

1

1

BobinTX wrote:

<quoted text>
He attacked Romney's religion almost immediately... what do you call that?

BobinTX wrote:

<quoted text>
He attacked Romney's religion almost immediately... what do you call that?

Judged:

1

1

1

Ds Higgins1 wrote:

<quoted text>
Heh heh heh......
Sir, you are mixing the grapes with the bananas.... Yer either blind, or yer deliberately attempting a sleight of hand, heavy handedly at that.... I am almost sure that if Romney had a specific message addressing only white people, you would at least, be saying its unseemly, or at most, it's downright racist!

Lyndi wrote:

<quoted text>
Mitt Romney PERSONALLY did 3 youtubes entitled "Juntos Con Romney, Evangelicals for Romney" and "Jews for Romney?" lol- I don't think so.
But youtube.......... really? <shrug> Maybe he thinks youtube is where the majority of African Americans get their news and that all by iteslf is both embarrassing and disturbing.
IMO of course.

Judged:

1

1

1

Ds Higgins1 wrote:

<quoted text>
I think you are certainly not alone in this. That's what I believe is going on with countless "undecideds" as well. That's also why I think Romney will win by a landslide.......

Judged:

1

1

1

Ds Higgins1 wrote:

<quoted text>
Even if there was a video, it's not equivalent, since Evangelicals come in all racial stripes.......

Ds Higgins1 wrote:

<quoted text>
I agree, Willie is desperate to make it look as though are the radical, and Obama is just a decent law abiding citizen.....

Judged:

1

1

1

WildWeirdWillie wrote:

<quoted text>Desperate?
You mean like pretending a standard political tact is some kind of 'embarrassing' radical action - that kind of desperate?
Or are you referring to the rapidity with which some people start hurling accusations?

Lyndi wrote:

<quoted text>
Mitt Romney PERSONALLY did 3 youtubes entitled "Juntos Con Romney, Evangelicals for Romney" and "Jews for Romney?" lol- I don't think so.
But youtube.......... really? <shrug> Maybe he thinks youtube is where the majority of African Americans get their news and that all by iteslf is both embarrassing and disturbing.
IMO of course.

Ds Higgins1 wrote:

<quoted text>
Heh heh heh......
Sir, you are mixing the grapes with the bananas.... Yer either blind, or yer deliberately attempting a sleight of hand, heavy handedly at that.... I am almost sure that if Romney had a specific message addressing only white people, you would at least, be saying its unseemly, or at most, it's downright racist!

Judged:

1

1

1

WildWeirdWillie wrote:

<quoted text>Damn, they're coming quick here.
denial, desperate, blind ... which one comes next?

Lyndi wrote:

<quoted text>
Hi Catcher- What happened? Hmm.
Maybe I shelved some of my sensitivity when I watched a commercial of Mitt Rpmney being accused of killing some mans wife and no one on the left spoke out against it including my President. I think I stopped reaching for wisdom when I realized wisdom was considered a weakness by the left and I put my thoughtfulness on hold once I found out I was debating people who are intolerant of thoughfulness but will instead do anything and say anything to win an election.
You're an attorney. In your profession playing dirty is sometimes necessary to win a case. This election is not unlike a courtroom and when the oposition when asked to choose their weapon and unveiled an arsenal of dirty bombs and WMD's, showing up with a squirt gun seemed silly.
I hope you're well.

Judged:

1

1

1

WildWeirdWillie wrote:

<quoted text>I don't think it makes a difference if Romney does it himself or he delegates it to someone else.

Lyndi wrote:

<quoted text>
Solemn?
You don't laugh much, do you?
In all the elections I have ever participated in, I don't ever remember being OUTRAGED because someone else didn't like my choice.
What's that about?
Why do you and soooooooo many others seem so put out because some of us {alot of us} don't like this president or the direction he wants to take this country?