Wait…you mean this is excellent news for the Hillary campaign?
Wow - after 815 posts, I finally learned something in this thread.
Then nothing I could spoon-feed you with would get through the same filters you still have up. Ergo, I have no reason to bother with your phony “request”.
I didn’t say she didn’t. Ann Coulter backs up her claims with cites as well. But that isn’t the problem with either one of them. As I said, and as you have pointedly ignored.
Vinyl Turnip, Letterman is something of an asshole, sure, but mainly he’s just not funny or even inventive. You want an asshole on that show, let me point you to Paul Shaffer instead. All he does is guffaw slightly at each non-joke, repeat a few of Letterman’s words, and try to sound as cool as he thinks he looks with that shaved head and those indoor sunglasses. Pathetic little weasel.
And yet Al Franken will go through Coulter’s cites and debunk them point by point, rather than just saying “Well, she called liberals traitors, therefore anything she has to say isn’t worth listening to.” That’s the main reason I respect his intelligence.
The same filters which have forced me to side with the anti-Obama crowd in this thread? Funny, that.
Tell me, then: what is the problem? Other than vague and inexplicably misspelled references to Kool-Aid, you haven’t actually made a point, other than that you dislike Shayna.
You have a very self-serving concept of “substance”, then. All you’ve quoted yourself posting there is simple Pythonesque denial.
You don’t have to research each of Ann Coulter’s “cites” for your own, or explore each of her statements and its “reasoning”, before deciding that nothing else she writes is worth your time reading either, do you? The same principle applies to Shayna.
Or at [del]Willow[/del] Bristol Palin’s bedroom…
My god, an actual response! Now we’re getting somewhere.
In fact, it is research into those very cites and exploration of those very statements that lead one to conclude whether or not a person is worth listening to, otherwise it’s simple prejudice. Coulter’s have been shown repeatedly to be bullshit. Shayna’s, not so much. I followed those election-time threads too, and nobody was able to show that Shayna was full of shit, they could only say it.
My point about Washington was made specifically in response to an attempt to restrict acceptance of political qualifaction to include elected office and nothing else. I think you might have missed that context.
If you want to argue that prior elected experience is not the only qualification that should be considered for higher elected office, then you’re only supporting my point (while, ironically, simultaneously missing it). My enitire point was that political qualifications should not be limited to elected experience.
Where the fuck have *you *been?
She was very often shown to be filtered and off-topic, and unable to respond to inquiries with anything more than invective. That was pointed out to her, and to the rest of that contingent, many times, only to be replied to with even more invective. And, amazingly it’s continuing today.
But I’ve said that before. Maybe you should just scroll up and reread, hmm?
Got it fine - but making points with bad data doesn’t sit well with me - especially when you can’t be bothered to look things up beforehand or back down afterward.
But hey, your credibility. Make of it what you will.
Well, since you seem to have a better memory than I, perhaps you can link to the threads in question? There were so many election threads that I can’t look through them all, and the ones I did glance through don’t show Shayna being refuted in any real way, only ignored. You’d think this whole discussion about Obama’s accomplishments and her linking to them would have been hashed out already.
Very nice. You also managed to find the thread I was trying to recall and couldn’t.
Honestly, I’m quite sure you need to be living in a different reality than our own to look at that thread and say Shayna could only respond to other posters with invective. I see tons of dismissive invective by our good friend, though. Perhaps he’s confusing himself with Shayna?
It wasn’t bad data. Washington had [del]no[/del] next to no elected experience before he was President. The whole point was that qualifications should include more than elected experience. The fact that you keep trying to harp on this same point under the misapprehension that you’re somehow contradicting me only makes it appear like you don’t understand my point at all.
I decided a long time ago that there was no constructive way to pay the slightest bit of attention to ElvisL1ves.
The disturbing thing here is that Dio doesn’t… know… what the House of Burgesses is, and how its dissolution led directly to the American Revolution. (Look up the Raleigh Tavern some time.)
Nor does he know it was the first representative government in what became the USA. (The House of Assembly, the senior house, was held in Bermuda, which was part of Virginia Colony at one point.)
Nor does he know that Jefferson and Patrick Henry were members, it being more or less the highest self-government in the state.
It’s really hard to overstate the importance of that body for the creation of the Revolution.
Briefly, between 1759 and 1774, he did nothing but politics. In the crucible that essentially created the backbone of the United States. Well enough that the other colonists chose him as a delegate to the Continental Congress. Right up there with General Lee’s grandfather and Patrick Henry.
I am so totally stealing this line. 
How the hell did we get from A Rod shagging a Palin daughter to whether or not Dio ever heard of the House of Burgesses?
The Straight Dope moves in mysterious ways.