And I should agree with you and shut up, or even, I should agree with you and trust her?
Good example of number 4 in my previous post. Attribute statements to others that they never made. I wrote that it was coming soon, and sure enough, here it is.
A reasonable person would know that the proper response is to give honest consideration to the position I offered. You, though, chose to impose a ridiculously extreme interpretation on it, and pretend thats what I said. Thats one way that libs sidestep arguments on the merits, and you sure continue to argue like a lib.
Sorry, dsc, sorry Sarah, my trust has to be earned.
Utter nonsense. She has done so many things to justify trust that a person has to be willfully ignoring them to make a statement like that.
Sarahs established a bit of a precedent of not over-preparing (going in like to Couric/Gibson interviews expecting to be lobbed the same sort of softballs Obama got)
If you had been paying any attention to threads here, youd understand that she was hobbled and gagged by McLames campaign boys. Any blame for the interviews goes to them, not to her.
Id like to see her put in some hard work (no ghost writer) toward trying to swing her movements advance back around to the first direction a few times.
No, you wouldnt. If you had any interest in that, you could have taken any of dozens of opportunities to satisfy it.
Like I done told Blue Collar Christian, maybe Im once bitten, thrice shy, but I dont trust any politician much. Maybe Id do well in Missouri.
Just pick a blue state. Those are your kind of people. Its nonsense to think youve been bitten even once, and the only way a person could labor under that misconception would be if he were relying solely upon leftard propaganda to feed his opinions. Which would account for your coming in here citing one leftist source after another, as though people here are dim enough to be taken in by that.
and this to dsc, too - were you starting to get New Year’s Eve drunk when you wrote that you didn’t trust my sourcing on Palin’s John Wooden/John Wooden Legs gaffe? Palins Book Confuses Legendary UCLA Coach Wooden with Native American Activist25 yr old writer http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2398662/posts;
You should read your own sources. One representative reply is at post 50:
If you had read the posting at the link, you would see that the author actually cites and links to a book that quotes the original essay that John Wooden Legs wrote. 12/02/2009 11:33:07 AM PST · by GreaterSwiss · 160 replies · 4,168+ views
Guess none of those 4,168+ views was yours, or you would have known that this issue had already been discussed and dealt with.
This is a front page article in SportingNews.com
Do you suppose that because it has the word sporting in the name, its not contaminated by libtard filth? They think they are laughing at the books factual errors, but if this one is representative, they are laughing at their own delusions. Classic libtard behavior.
The reality is that she does not quote legendary basketball coach John Wooden, and her citation quotes the original essay that John Wooden Legs wrote.
So why does SportingNews.com say what they say? Because they are leftists, and all leftists lie all the time. And there you are, not only believing them, but trying to spread their lie.
Hmmm.
A reasonable person would know that the proper response is to give honest consideration to the position you offered?
Reasonable person? Proper response? Shove it. Shove ‘em both, way up.
The position you offer me is not unlike the position the Islamists offer me. Either submit, and agree, or shut up. You Palin-amentalists are so, so sure, and so, so angry at those of us who ain’t so sure. Shove it.