See Rush as President!

This Sunday night on Fox, Rush will be President and Ann Coulter will be Vice-President. I believe the show is called the Fox News Hour, or some such name.

Should be a most enjoyable watch!

Great fireside chat by the way!

I imagine all those Hollywood liberals who promised to leave the country if Bush was elected might give us the courtesy of actually fucking LEAVING this time. (if this were reality).

And you know that the N.O.W. girls would just try to tear Coulter apart instead of saluting the first female Vice President. Just like the left bashes Condi even though no black woman has ever risen as high as she has under Bush.

I also imagine the next few posts to be filled with ad hominem attacks on both Rush and Ann.

You just know it!

Thank God it’s only a TV show, I don’t know what I would do if two dipshits actually ran the countr-

…wait a second…

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Thank God it’s only a TV show, I don’t know what I would do if two dipshits actually ran the countr-

…wait a second…[/quote]

LOL

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Thank God it’s only a TV show, I don’t know what I would do if two dipshits actually ran the countr-

…wait a second…[/quote]

Sounds a little like you’re trying to say that Rush and Coulter run the country. Shit, our current administration is far too liberal for you to actually believe that, right?

See the “dipshits” comment?
Instead of taking the easy way out this time, try to tell everyone point-by-point what they’ve actually said or written that you disagree with. You can even quote them!

If you’re moderately intellegent, it should be easy.

I’ll wait right here and see what you come up with.

Oh it’s on FOX, must be a load of slanted, partisan hack bullshit. Liberal? I think not. Realist; yeah, that sounds better.

[quote]derek wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Thank God it’s only a TV show, I don’t know what I would do if two dipshits actually ran the countr-

…wait a second…

Sounds a little like you’re trying to say that Rush and Coulter run the country. Shit, our current administration is far too liberal for you to actually believe that, right?

See the “dipshits” comment?
Instead of taking the easy way out this time, try to tell everyone point-by-point what they’ve actually said or written that you disagree with. You can even quote them!

If you’re moderately intellegent, it should be easy.

I’ll wait right here and see what you come up with.

[/quote]

No, I was trying to say that two dipshits already run the country.

And if you want me to go line for line with either our presidential dipshits or the fake media disphits, I’ll make it easy for you- aside from their stances on gun control, I disagree with everything else.

Easy enough?

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

No, I was trying to say that two dipshits already run the country.

And if you want me to go line for line with either our presidential dipshits or the fake media disphits, I’ll make it easy for you- aside from their stances on gun control, I disagree with everything else.

Easy enough?[/quote]

Clearly, I already asked you to discuss the fake media dipshits.

Was that not apparent in my post?

Let’s have it.

Quote and respond, quote and respond.

I’m sure you read AnnCoulter.com and listen to Rush enough to be sure exactly what you disagree with.

Another question would be; could you refute thier stances on given subjects without “cheating” (Googling thier names and searching for ideas).

If so, let’s see it. If not please stop calling people dipshits that you do not listen to or read on a daily/weekly basis.

[quote]derek wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:

No, I was trying to say that two dipshits already run the country.

And if you want me to go line for line with either our presidential dipshits or the fake media disphits, I’ll make it easy for you- aside from their stances on gun control, I disagree with everything else.

Easy enough?

Clearly, I already asked you to discuss the fake media dipshits.

Was that not apparent in my post?

Let’s have it.

Quote and respond, quote and respond.

I’m sure you read AnnCoulter.com and listen to Rush enough to be sure exactly what you disagree with.

Another question would be; could you refute thier stances on given subjects without “cheating” (Googling thier names and searching for ideas).

If so, let’s see it. If not please stop calling people dipshits that you do not listen to or read on a daily/weekly basis.
[/quote]

Yeah, I listen to people I define as dipshits on a daily basis, I mean, why wouldn’t I?

[quote]derek wrote:
If so, let’s see it. If not please stop calling people dipshits that you do not listen to or read on a daily/weekly basis.
[/quote]

That’s bullshit. Rush is a dipshit, and Coulter is an ignorant cunt. I don’t have to read or listen to either one of them every day to know that, it only took once.

You’re a douchebag, and I don’t have to read everything you post to know that. It’s pretty obvious.

[quote]tme wrote:
That’s bullshit. Rush is a dipshit, and Coulter is an ignorant cunt. I don’t have to read or listen to either one of them every day to know that, it only took once.

You’re a douchebag, and I don’t have to read everything you post to know that. It’s pretty obvious.

[/quote]

You wouldn’t last long starting a face to face argument using that language. So why use it now?

If you can judge someone by listening to them once, you must be a fool. Oh, I guess you answered that one already.

And as far as me being a douchebag why don’t we debate with our intelect rather than name calling?

It must be because you’ve probably lost every debate you’ve ever entered into.

[quote]MisterAmazing wrote:
Yeah, I listen to people I define as dipshits on a daily basis, I mean, why wouldn’t I?
[/quote]

Oh I don’t know. Maybe in order to put a little substance behind your argument?

You disagree with them? Fine. I ask; what exactly it is you disagree with and how do you know you disagree?

It’s pretty easy to call someone you disagree with a dipshit compared to having to argue your opposing viewpoint, isn’t it?

[quote]derek wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:

No, I was trying to say that two dipshits already run the country.

And if you want me to go line for line with either our presidential dipshits or the fake media disphits, I’ll make it easy for you- aside from their stances on gun control, I disagree with everything else.

Easy enough?

Clearly, I already asked you to discuss the fake media dipshits.

Was that not apparent in my post?

Let’s have it.

Quote and respond, quote and respond.

I’m sure you read AnnCoulter.com and listen to Rush enough to be sure exactly what you disagree with.

Another question would be; could you refute thier stances on given subjects without “cheating” (Googling thier names and searching for ideas).

If so, let’s see it. If not please stop calling people dipshits that you do not listen to or read on a daily/weekly basis.
[/quote]

And what would be the point of that, besides me wasting a whole lot of time to try and impress some fuck on the internet?

I listen to Rush Limbaugh frequently, and whatever decent points he has are concealed by all of his overblown bullshit.

Coulter is a cunt, and I don’t listen to her nor care what she says any longer, although I have read through one of her…“books”, if you want to call it that.

I O’Reilly interests me once in a while, but those two are oxygen thiefs.

Do you know all of Bill Maher’s or Al Franken’s stances on every issue off the top of your head, so that you could go line for line through them?

Yea, that’s what I thought.

They’re still dipshits.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

Do you know all of Bill Maher’s or Al Franken’s stances on every issue off the top of your head, so that you could go line for line through them?

Yea, that’s what I thought.

They’re still dipshits. [/quote]

Yea, that’s what you thought. If you remember, I did not call either Bill Maher or Al Franken dipshits. Why would I need to support viewpoints I never gave?

That was a very weak point considering I wasn’t calling anyone “cunts”. Which is perahps a bit sophmoric.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

And what would be the point of that, besides me wasting a whole lot of time to try and impress some fuck on the internet?

[/quote]

I guess the point would be to back up your stance in order to sound somewhat intellegent. Without an intellegent argument, you sound like a simpleton.

Obviously that’s asking too much.

“Some fuck on the internet” indeed!

[quote]derek wrote:
Great fireside chat by the way!

I imagine all those Hollywood liberals who promised to leave the country if Bush was elected might give us the courtesy of actually fucking LEAVING this time. (if this were reality).

And you know that the N.O.W. girls would just try to tear Coulter apart instead of saluting the first female Vice President. Just like the left bashes Condi even though no black woman has ever risen as high as she has under Bush.

I also imagine the next few posts to be filled with ad hominem attacks on both Rush and Ann.

You just know it![/quote]

A fucking incompetent is a fucking incompetent, black, white, female, male or otherwise.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
derek wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:

No, I was trying to say that two dipshits already run the country.

And if you want me to go line for line with either our presidential dipshits or the fake media disphits, I’ll make it easy for you- aside from their stances on gun control, I disagree with everything else.

Easy enough?

Clearly, I already asked you to discuss the fake media dipshits.

Was that not apparent in my post?

Let’s have it.

Quote and respond, quote and respond.

I’m sure you read AnnCoulter.com and listen to Rush enough to be sure exactly what you disagree with.

Another question would be; could you refute thier stances on given subjects without “cheating” (Googling thier names and searching for ideas).

If so, let’s see it. If not please stop calling people dipshits that you do not listen to or read on a daily/weekly basis.

And what would be the point of that, besides me wasting a whole lot of time to try and impress some fuck on the internet?

I listen to Rush Limbaugh frequently, and whatever decent points he has are concealed by all of his overblown bullshit.

Coulter is a cunt, and I don’t listen to her nor care what she says any longer, although I have read through one of her…“books”, if you want to call it that.

I O’Reilly interests me once in a while, but those two are oxygen thiefs.

Do you know all of Bill Maher’s or Al Franken’s stances on every issue off the top of your head, so that you could go line for line through them?

Yea, that’s what I thought.

They’re still dipshits. [/quote]

Well said.

I think I’m seeing a pattern, somebody overuses the words liberal and left way too much, seems like a dumb ass that aligns himself with a party based on nothing above that…

[quote]MisterAmazing wrote:
I think I’m seeing a pattern, somebody overuses the words liberal and left way too much, seems like a dumb ass that aligns himself with a party based on nothing above that…[/quote]

But when you realize that I’m Libertarian, you turn out to be the dumbass.

And since when is asking for someone to back up thier statements with facts so hard grasp?

The pattern I see is you typing things about people you know nothing about.

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
A fucking incompetent is a fucking incompetent, black, white, female, male or otherwise.
[/quote]

This is getting old but…

  1. Who are you referring to as incompetent?

  2. What exactly about the incompetents makes you say that.

  3. If you have facts, great! I am open to reading about it, thinking it over and comparing it to what I know.
    If you just go around slamming people deserved or not, you sound like every other loud mouth out there.

  4. Do not assume that asking for facts makes me automatically disagree with you. That’s been done here already and it’s also getting old.