To: All
f
k you, LA Times!
3 posted on
10/07/2003 5:41:59 PM PDT by
ambrose
To: ambrose
51% SCHWARZENEGGER!
4 posted on
10/07/2003 5:42:17 PM PDT by
VU4G10
(Have You Forgotten?)
To: ambrose
lol! Settle down bud. The Times' liberal bias has always been known. Look for them to start trying to elect the least uneletable of the nine dwarves soon.
6 posted on
10/07/2003 5:44:26 PM PDT by
South40
(Vote for Mcclintock, elect cruz)
To: ambrose
You guys out there did it!!
Domping Davis was job 1....!
10 posted on
10/07/2003 5:45:19 PM PDT by
Dog
To: ambrose
Wooohoooo!!! I need a drink!!!!!!
85 posted on
10/07/2003 6:04:50 PM PDT by
Tempest
(9th inning of a winning game and you guys are still whining to trade pitchers?!)
To: ambrose
Don't be so hard on the Leftists, my friend. By such an outrageous move, they probably helped Arnold gain 3%. And, as a fringe benefit, many more people now understand the hypocrisy and Leftist bias of the media. I, for one, plan to send them a thank you letter. LOL!!!
To: ambrose
How sweet it is! Thanks, ambrose!
Does anyone have a sense yet of how Prop 54 is going?
To: ambrose
Well, I would have prefered McClintock, but Arnold was choice #2.
Davis would have been choice #3, and Cruz "For our race everythying, for your race nothing" Bustamante just scared me. He would have been my 135th choice right after the porn star and Gary Coleman.
I guess it worked out okay for me.
P.S. I still think Arnold is a RINO, but at least he isn't Davis.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson