I think part of it is the medias fault for not being more aggressive and persistent and nastySheesh--what election did he watch?
and I think its the peoples fault for not paying attention.
For those of you in Rio Linda, Newman just called us stupid.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-44 next last
To: silent_jonny
"I wish I felt a little more comfortable about the direction that were going," Newman said carefully. "It does not seem to be of the people, by the people and for the people. It seems to be about something else completely different.The 'ol geezer must have alzheimers. We DID just have an election November, did we not?
2 posted on
03/11/2005 1:10:37 PM PST by
RushCrush
(I like America to some extent. -Michael Moore)
To: silent_jonny
Boy, Newman and Clint Eastwood sure got old-looking fast.
That, or I'm just getting older a whole lot faster.
3 posted on
03/11/2005 1:11:09 PM PST by
sinkspur
("Preach the gospel. If necessary, use words.")
To: silent_jonny
Newman's been announcing he's only going to do "one more movie" for about 15 years now.
I like him as an actor but he seems to have let his newspaper subscription lapse.
4 posted on
03/11/2005 1:11:12 PM PST by
Darkwolf377
(This space for rent)
To: silent_jonny
Hey Paul- your salad dressing SUCKS!
5 posted on
03/11/2005 1:11:15 PM PST by
RushCrush
(I like America to some extent. -Michael Moore)
To: silent_jonny
>>"It does not seem to be of the people, by the people and for the people.<<
Yo Paul, short term memory loss kickin' in pal? Apparently you've forgotten NOVEMBER 2, 2004?????????
6 posted on
03/11/2005 1:13:04 PM PST by
rockabyebaby
(What goes around, comes around!)
To: silent_jonny
Paul Newman's quite elderly, and with that comes confusion, we should be compassionate when dealing with our seniors and their dementia!^}
7 posted on
03/11/2005 1:13:25 PM PST by
wrathof59
("to the Everlasting Glory of the Infantry".........Robert A Heinlein)
To: silent_jonny
The real question is, has Newman been paying attention? Does he realize that America is under attack? Does he have any idea at all what will happen if we lose this war? For one thing, his "Hollywood Days" would be very much over!
To: silent_jonny
Another Hollywood has-been heard from. This is getting real old.
To: silent_jonny
He is of the school that says "If you don't agree with him, you are wrong AND stupid."
To: silent_jonny
For those of you in Rio Linda, Newman just called us stupid. LOL Don't you just feel sorry for the (few as they may be) conservative Republicans in Rio Linda?
To: silent_jonny
Newman ate too many hard-boiled eggs once.........and it hard-boiled his brain.
Takin' em off here, Boss..!!
13 posted on
03/11/2005 1:15:54 PM PST by
Osage Orange
(What's duct tape called in Arkansas?.........................................................Chrome)
To: silent_jonny
"It does not seem to be of the people, by the people and for the people." You just keep thinkin' there, Butch.
That's what you're good at.
To: silent_jonny
16 posted on
03/11/2005 1:18:27 PM PST by
steveo
(Member: Fathers Against Rude Television)
To: silent_jonny
Dear Paul:
DILLIGAF?
That is all.
CD
18 posted on
03/11/2005 1:18:30 PM PST by
Constitution Day
("Marsa Stert is a britch and and I sit on the exhange")
To: silent_jonny
For what it's worth. A friend was told by a bartender at a very famous Broadway watering hole, that the nicest star he ever served was Jack Lemmon and the most arrogant was Newman. Sounds about right.
19 posted on
03/11/2005 1:19:08 PM PST by
CaptainK
To: silent_jonny
"It does not seem to be of the people, by the people and for the people. It seems to be about something else completely different. His is a fairly general statement, but I agree to the extent that the government has grown too large, and that the "new tone in Washington" has everything to do with it.
20 posted on
03/11/2005 1:19:18 PM PST by
Moonman62
(Federal creed: If it moves tax it. If it keeps moving regulate it. If it stops moving subsidize it)
To: silent_jonny
"It does not seem to be of the people, by the people and for the people."
And of course things were much better when the Democrats were in power, trying to subvert the Second Amendment at every turn. No worries then. </sarcasm>
21 posted on
03/11/2005 1:20:47 PM PST by
holymoly
("A lot" is TWO words.)
To: All
"I wish I felt a little more comfortable about the direction that were going," Newman said carefully. "It does not seem to be of the people, by the people and for the people. It seems to be about something else completely different.
So what exactly is it about Paul? This type of rhetoric is is fodder for democrats and shows hows a talented actor knows nothing about politics, save his own liberal opinion.
26 posted on
03/11/2005 1:36:04 PM PST by
msjhall
To: silent_jonny
Paul, Paul, Paul, I loved seeing you in Technicolor back in the '50s and '60s, but...
All those 6-packs you imbibed over the years have finally caught up with you.
You want nasty media? You donated $1,000,000 to "The Nation", that old pinko rag, to keep it going since no one's buying copies of it anymore.
And you and your daughter Nell's foods? I heard her on a radio interview a few years ago saying that she donates the proceeds to litigation. So when I buy your stuff, I'm really paying for radical lawyers.
So Paul, retire to your upscale town (Westport, CT), and leave the rest of us alone.
27 posted on
03/11/2005 1:38:34 PM PST by
LibFreeOrDie
(How do you spell dynasty? P-A-T-R-I-O-T-S!)
To: silent_jonny
Huh. Only thing I can find wrong with the direction is that it's too much in libbers like Newmans direction. Guess that makes W a moderate and me a right wingerr.
34 posted on
03/11/2005 1:51:38 PM PST by
johnb838
("You Have Ruled, Now Let Us See You Enforce" Need some wood?)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-44 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson