Palin's website had several districts "in crosshairs"

[houndawg]

Yes, and I'm being fair and balanced with coincidence.

Chill BDK. And that comes directly from headquarters.



http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/fox-news ... d=12590679" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good for him. The left has quite the congregation of **** retards that are trying to turn this into something outside of what it is...a tragedy perpetuated by a moron on whatever quest he is on to be this generations Charles Manson. I am damn sure if the roles were reversed and Palin had been shot then a ton of **** retards on the right would have made the same leaps of logic.

It's good to see guys like TTBF and yourself (I think) and several others not having to resort to those kind of cheap shots. It's also good to see that the Fox News guy has a level enough head to ratchet it down in the face of the attacks from some lefties and just call it the "bullshit" that it is.

There's the whole problem in a nutshell - they keep shooting the wrong ones.

[kalm]

Full disclosure: Salon.com's website has page called the "war room". If civil war breaks out, I'm blaming the libs.

[YoUDeeMan]

This **** is quickly driving me to become a hardcore, radical, fringe element centrist.

kalm, you are smart enough to know that third party candidates don't stand a chance in America...especially third party radicals from the center. Your vote will be canceled out by some softcore central centrist who spends her time watching C-Span despite the fact that she is far too passive to make up her mind about which side to support because she doesn’t want to offend anyone in any debate about anything.

[Baldy]

This **** is quickly driving me to become a hardcore, radical, fringe element centrist.

kalm, you are smart enough to know that third party candidates don't stand a chance in America...especially third party radicals from the center. Your vote will be canceled out by some softcore central centrist who spends her time watching C-Span despite the fact that she is far too passive to make up her mind about which side to support because she doesn’t want to offend anyone in any debate about anything.

Methinks kalm has been drinking the "Progressive" lefts Kool-Aid too long to move to the center.

[kalm]

kalm, you are smart enough to know that third party candidates don't stand a chance in America...especially third party radicals from the center. Your vote will be canceled out by some softcore central centrist who spends her time watching C-Span despite the fact that she is far too passive to make up her mind about which side to support because she doesn’t want to offend anyone in any debate about anything.

Methinks kalm has been drinking the "Progressive" lefts Kool-Aid too long to move to the center.

Here's the problem fellas. I'll be 40 soon, and right about the time I'm supposed to don the wool slippers and smoking jacket, fire up the pipe, and read the evening post while sipping on some single malt and slipping comfortably into conkdom the entire Republican Party is absolutely bat shit crazy. Eisenhower, Nixon, Teddy Roosevelt, and Goldwater in the latter years would be considered socialist/progressives by today's standards.

[GannonFan]

Methinks kalm has been drinking the "Progressive" lefts Kool-Aid too long to move to the center.

Here's the problem fellas. I'll be 40 soon, and right about the time I'm supposed to don the wool slippers and smoking jacket, fire up the pipe, and read the evening post while sipping on some single malt and slipping comfortably into conkdom the entire Republican Party is absolutely bat **** crazy. Eisenhower, Nixon, Teddy Roosevelt, and Goldwater in the latter years would be considered socialist/progressives by today's standards.

Centrism baby, it's where it's at. Right now both parties are done gone loco. That's why we're bouncing so quickly between each party being in power - we're hoping that if the transfer of power from one crazy party to the other crazy party will be fast enough that we'll balance out the craziness from both and we'll end up in some happy medium where something productive can result.

[death dealer]

Methinks kalm has been drinking the "Progressive" lefts Kool-Aid too long to move to the center.

Here's the problem fellas. I'll be 40 soon, and right about the time I'm supposed to don the wool slippers and smoking jacket, fire up the pipe, and read the evening post while sipping on some single malt and slipping comfortably into conkdom the entire Republican Party is absolutely bat shit crazy. Eisenhower, Nixon, Teddy Roosevelt, and Goldwater in the latter years would be considered socialist/progressives by today's standards.

Your not 40 yet?

Well shit, ignore everything this youngin' has to say. Damn, there should be some kind of regulation of children posting unsupervised around here!!

[Pwns]

Methinks kalm has been drinking the "Progressive" lefts Kool-Aid too long to move to the center.

Here's the problem fellas. I'll be 40 soon, and right about the time I'm supposed to don the wool slippers and smoking jacket, fire up the pipe, and read the evening post while sipping on some single malt and slipping comfortably into conkdom the entire Republican Party is absolutely bat **** crazy. Eisenhower, Nixon, Teddy Roosevelt, and Goldwater in the latter years would be considered socialist/progressives by today's standards.

Here's the difference. The more socially and economically conservative repubs have no power and haven't had any. The hardcore leftists like Nanci Pelosi ran congress for two years and generally outrank the latter. Now tell me who is really more dangerous?

[kalm]

Here's the problem fellas. I'll be 40 soon, and right about the time I'm supposed to don the wool slippers and smoking jacket, fire up the pipe, and read the evening post while sipping on some single malt and slipping comfortably into conkdom the entire Republican Party is absolutely bat **** crazy. Eisenhower, Nixon, Teddy Roosevelt, and Goldwater in the latter years would be considered socialist/progressives by today's standards.

Here's the difference. The more socially and economically conservative repubs have no power and haven't had any. The hardcore leftists like Nanci Pelosi ran congress for two years and generally outrank the latter. Now tell me who is really more dangerous?

Well I've never been a Pelosi fan either so I don't know. Both sides gave us financial deregulation and both sides condoned the war in Iraq. Both sides are dangerous.

Where's the economically conservative, semi-isolationist, socially liberal party that recognizes a certain degree of regulation is neccessary?

[YoUDeeMan]

Here's the problem fellas. I'll be 40 soon, and right about the time I'm supposed to don the wool slippers and smoking jacket, fire up the pipe, and read the evening post while sipping on some single malt and slipping comfortably into conkdom the entire Republican Party is absolutely bat **** crazy.

Yup, it is a shame that the lunatics have taken over the asylum for both sides. Vote them ALL out and bring in a bunch of unknowns.

Oh, and I blame the migration to the lunatic fringe by both sides squarely on MTV and their switch from thoughtful, boring videos that made you question what the hell the song meant (you actually had to work hard to figure out the message) to gyrating flesh videos where you don't care what the message is.

I'll be applying for some grant money to support my thesis...any help from fellow CS.com folks would be greatly appreciated and those that contribute can drink some of the beer purchased with the grant money because it is needed to replicate the mental state of some of our younger and/or more unstable voters.

As for single malts, there is a whole other thread on that subject...and not once has Schlitz been mentioned. Damned elitists.

[Rob Iola]

Here's the difference. The more socially and economically conservative repubs have no power and haven't had any. The hardcore leftists like Nanci Pelosi ran congress for two years and generally outrank the latter. Now tell me who is really more dangerous?

Well I've never been a Pelosi fan either so I don't know. Both sides gave us financial deregulation and both sides condoned the war in Iraq. Both sides are dangerous.

Where's the economically conservative, semi-isolationist, socially liberal party that recognizes a certain degree of regulation is neccessary?

I dunno, North Korea?

[Grizalltheway]

Well I've never been a Pelosi fan either so I don't know. Both sides gave us financial deregulation and both sides condoned the war in Iraq. Both sides are dangerous.

Where's the economically conservative, semi-isolationist, socially liberal party that recognizes a certain degree of regulation is neccessary?

I dunno, North Korea?

Semi-isolationist?

[Rob Iola]

I dunno, North Korea?

Semi-isolationist?

Well, they have reached out to South Korea.



With threats, torpedos, artillery, and commandos...

[Grizalltheway]

Good point.

[BDKJMU]

Just another example of the hypocrisy of the left who went after Palin over her "crosshairs" map. Never heard these same folks going after CNN...

Before banning 'crosshairs,' CNN used it to refer to Palin, Bachmann

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/bel ... z1BVYlonDU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"....................But if Palin is to blame for using crosshairs in her much-discussed map, then CNN, by its own use of the allegedly inflammatory term "crosshairs," might also share some blame for creating the atmosphere that led to the violence in Arizona. A look at transcripts of CNN programs in the month leading up to the shootings shows that the network was filled with references to "crosshairs" -- and once even used the term to suggest the targeting of Palin herself. Some examples:

"Palin's moose-hunting episode on her reality show enraged People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, and now, she's square in the crosshairs of big time Hollywood producer, Aaron Sorkin," reported A.J. Hammer of CNN's Headline News on December 8.

"Companies like MasterCard are in the crosshairs for cutting ties with WikiLeaks," said CNN Kiran Chetry in a December 9 report.

"Thousands of people living in areas that are in the crosshairs have been told to evacuate," Chetry said in a December 21 report on flooding in California.

"He's in their crosshairs," said a guest in a December 21 CNN discussion of suspects in a missing-person case.

"This will be the first time your food will be actually in the crosshairs of the FDA," business reporter Christine Romans said on December 22.

"The U.S. commander in the East has Haqqani in his crosshairs," CNN's Barbara Starr reported on December 28, referring to an Afghan warlord.

"We know that health care reform is in the crosshairs again," CNN's Joe Johns reported on January 3.

Seven uses of "crosshairs" in just the month before the Tucson attacks, and just one of them referring to an actual wartime situation. And one reference to Sarah Palin herself as being in "crosshairs."

And not just Palin. On September 14, Mark Preston, CNN's senior political editor, referred to another controversial politician, Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann, as being "in the crosshairs." "Michelle Bachmann is raising lots of money, raising her national profile," Preston said on September 14. "She is in the crosshairs of Democrats as well."........."

http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/bel ... z1BVVkGpBh" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;