I've noticed that you do this alot. Whenever you get caught red handed being dead *** wrong, you never acknowledge it. You immediately say "WHAT ABOUT THE DEMOCRATS!" That's your answer to everything. Problem is, I'm am not, nor do I support, the Democratic party or it's politicians.
You say I "nut hug" Clinton. Find me one post, anywhere on this forum, where I extol the virtues of Bill Clinton. Go ahead. Take your time.
In the meantime, when are you going to acknowledge that the cat who's nuts your are MOST CERTAINLY riding, Nugent, is indeed a cowardly draft dodging chicken hawk?
This is cute. A friend of mine once told me (wisely), "we hate in others that which we subconsciously hate in ourselves." This is a habit of yours, I see.
I wasn't caught "being dead *** wrong." That's your first error. Before your angry, over-the-top, "I've been drinking a little too much" (post #19), do explain what I was "Dead *** Wrong" about?
This ought to be a joy. Once again, in Steel Vagina style, you can't remember who says **** here, you attribute comments made by one poster to another, then insist you're right after twisting words. You've been outed for these practices a half dozen times in the past 2 weeks, and have started it here again.
Was I wrong to post Ted's quotes from Facebook about pork? You may not have liked it, but sharing his opinion doesn't make me "wrong."
Was I wrong to post pictures of Liberals caught red-handed as despicable human beings? You may not have liked it, but sharing photos doesn't make me "wrong."
Was I wrong to point out that Bill Clinton slept with women outside his marriage and that they weren't attractive? If you found them attractive, that doesn't make me wrong - we just have a difference of opinion.
Can you do me a favor Steel, and point to where I was "dead *** wrong" here - i.e., not being correct or true (differences of opinions don't count)
You showed up and, like the Liberal you are (yes, you are - more on that in a moment), and attacked his character. Very Alinsky of you. Not one of you clear Left wingers that have jumped into this thread have commented on the original post. Not one. Not one of you have looked at the merits (or lack thereof) of his original message and discussed them. Not one of you. Not a mention of pork, nor a debate about the merits of his claim. Nope. In predictable, typical Liberal fashion, taught by Alinsky and practiced by the White House and through MSNBC and on down, every one of you have simply taken to attacking Ted Nugent, the person, as if that somehow mitigates what he's said.
As for you not being a Liberal, stop. I'm embarrassed for you. You've been outed in other threads. You like to claim yourself a Libertarian, but as many of the posters have pointed out, there's nothing Libertarian about your views, in the least. What you write shows you're Liberal. You may fancy yourself a Libertarian. I fancy myself an NFL running back.
I'll give you credit at the end for saying "most certainly" because you gave yourself an out. I can't tell you the name of one of Ted Nugent's songs. I didn't grow up listening to that genre (back in the day, I was a Morris Day & the Time hip-hop kid, and that evolved into Rap & R&B & Hip-hop - still, believe it or not, my genre. Hip-hop and Ted, I hear, don't mesh). I didn't realize till yesterday Ted Nugent was a draft dodger. I had to go look it up. I do some hunting, and therefore have come across Nugent many times and know he's a former rocker, and have read about 3 or 4 of his articles/opinion pieces on hunting and the 2nd Amendment. That is my extent of involvement with the man. I know quite little about him. I started this thread to share his opinions on Muslims and pork, which I found funny and interesting, not to put Nugent on some pedestal and claim him to be something - or anything. Just to discuss a writing of his.
So Steel, do you have any thoughts on his opinions on pork, or ya just gonna keep being the Liberal you are and attack the writer?
