Johnny Coli

I can tell you've learned and honed your debate technique at a top-notch University. I'm sure we can all learn a thing or two from your mad skills.

Yes, the commie reference surfaces.

He'd have to come out from under the rock he's been hiding under for the past decade, first. Keep looking to the past, Republicans.

So I should hate Pelosi because catholics are terrorists? That's an interesting way of looking at catholicism, but one I must confess I have thought of as well. Maybe calling someone "gay" is thought of as an insult where you come from, but it really doesn't carry the invective weight you think it does. At least as far as I'm concerned. Now, if you called me an Alaskan or an Oklahoman....

I could've cared less.

The Dems did pretty well for themselves in the past two elections. If I was in your party I'd be worrying about hanging on to the few seats you've got left and wondering why your party was absolutely rejected in the past two elections.

Yup, no substance at all. Just voting like a lemming. Must be a liberal tard. And on-and-on. I'm sure a review of posts over the years will reveal you to be the enlightened representative of the mainstream with positions well-thought-out and well defended, and I'll be revealed as the fringe nut with a limited vocabulary barely able to tie his shoes.

So I should vote and support legislators according to your views, and not my own? I happen to agree with Pelosi on quite a few issues. Apparently I'm not alone. As for calling me a partisan hack? Meh.

I'll be the third, then, as I think she is an excellent legislator and closely represents my views on more issues than not. And the catholics absolutely hate her. That's a big plus in her column as far as I'm concerned.

Great Op-Ed in the NYT today by Harvard Psych prof and Heritage Dictionary usage panel Chair, Steven Pinker, regarding Justice Roberts' flub and his predilection to split verbs.

The question was whether human activity was a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures. The climatologists were nearly unanimous, not so much for the petroleum geologists. This is one of those "debates" akin to evolution vs. creationism. Actual scientists can put out study after study saying global warming has an anthropogenic cause, and if you go to ScienceDaily or do a literature search, a set of studies supporting that view comes out just about every month. But the naysayers will always say the models aren't good or the scientists are all corrupt. Kind of like debating the creationist nuts who claim evolution is just a non-proven theory. Evolution is real. A manmade cause of global warming is real. The good science suggesting both are real still marches on no matter how loudly the few anti-evolution nuts or the few pro-oil nuts shout.

Not Iraq. Hence "foreign."

Is that supposed to be some sort of eye-opening insult? Personally, I go to DailyKos several times a day, as do millions of others, as I find it to be a valuable current events resource. You know, your side has been getting clobbered because of technology and the internet, you'd think you clowns would catch on at some point. Thankfully, I doubt you will.

The era of Bush-Speak ended yesterday at noon. They are two seperate wars, and only one had anything to do with terrorism. Britain gave up using the term "war on terror" two years ago, and even many in the Bush Admin stopped using it. The Bush Doctrine, also thankfully getting smaller in the rear view mirror, has been debated endlessly (and with futility on this board) with regards to international legality and effectiveness and it would be pointless to continue that debate now as it is no longer relevent going forward as far as US foreign policy goes.

His regime, his failed policies, his party.

Because Bush is the de-facto head of the GOP party, and has been for the past eight years. The American people could have voted to stick with his failed policies and elect McCain, but they overwhelmingly rejected those policies, for two election cycles now. That's why.

No wonder your party continues its slide. It was 9.5 million. The CNN numbers aren't generated from the state-by-state final vote tallies.

Tell me, how does what percentage of the vote Clinton received twelve and sixteen years ago have anything to do with this election?

It was an electoral college landslide, Sparky, and he won by over 9.5 million votes. You can continue with your "we won the time of possession"-like arguments and rationalizations if that's what gets you to sleep at night, but the rest of America and the world is looking at the scoreboard and it was a landslide. It was also a mandate, something Bush never had. You also conveniently ignore the bloodbath the GOP suffered in the past two elections, losing control of both houses of Congress, multiple state legislatures, and several governorships. I'd say that's a pretty strong rejection of the GOP's ideas. But you've always got your little majority on the PPP.

You people keep telling yourselves the overwhelming majority of Americans were brainwashed and didn't just reject your party, its ideas and its values, if it will make you feel better. But you don't lose seats at every single level of government in almost every state in the union because the media brainwashed the masses. Keep telling yourselves that you aren't out on some extreme end and that the country will wake up in a couple years and put your party and it's abrasive views back in power. 365-173, President Barack Obama. Hey, you can always come to the PPP and get a virtual high-five from the handful of people still clinging to your views. The rest of us, along with pretty much everyone else in the world, are going to celebrate today and get behind President Obama for the next eight years.

Pretty sure the overwhelming majority of Americans wouldn't call what has transpired today a waste of money at all.

They'll always have the PPP board and Oklahoma.

bump

There isn't a single person on the Bills I'd rather have than Boldin. Not a single one. The guy played with heart on a team that sucked for ages, and it finally comes down to possibly a single drive for the chance to go to the Superbowl, and some of you people think its selfish that he wanted to be on the field and in the game-plan for that drive. Seriously, why else play the damn game? I say good for him getting in the coach's face. Had they lost people would have been questioning why he wasn't in the mix on that drive. Really, man, has it been so long since the Bills have been competitive that some of you are actually ripping a guy for being competitive?