stercus tauri

Yes, I think I do. That is only my opinion and is subject to change but it is what I have determined after reading your posts on here for a while now. May be wrong, but I don't think so. Could be, though.

Who are trying to kid? You would vote for anybody that had the ® after the name no matter who it was.

I sure hope the people of Paulding have some good common sense and can see past the (D) after Will Avery's name. The last thing we need is Braddock in the state house. Paulding has bad enough reputation as it is.

I think a few have made the point for me.

Exactly why I don't like going in that place. There are only two that I would say are on the left (one of those is a nut case) and the vast majority are on the extreme fringe of the right, so much so that carrying on a discussion is impossible. That really is a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy that dominates that forum. A few of the extreme right have stopped posting in there but it is still a den of vipers, IMHO. Those people are not very nice.

I'll be canceling you vote. My husband will make 1 vote against Cochran.

I'm not normally a conspiracy theorist, but by Jove I think you're right on this one.

While I disagree with you on the rightness of the organization, we do agree on the blatant partisianship and "The Beast" named Mrs. Galloway.

Virginia Galloway? Wasn't she on Ralph Reed's campaign staff and didn't he get in all sorts of trouble for a lobbying and money scandal? My God. No wonder I have an uneasy feeling about that group!

Tea Party. That's reason enough to not support them, in my book.

I just want my phone call.

I did already.

I'm guessing you don't understand what "tongue in cheek" is, since that was an extrapolation of what I stated previously. Sorry you don't understand the expressive technique.

She will have to check with Sarah Palin to see what the Tea Party talking point is on that issue but she will get back with you.

Who was it that posted a satirical article as a news-information piece about Snopes! I'm hoping you just didn't pay attention to what you were posting and really didn't believe that comedy bit.

No. Snopes didn't create information to support Obama over anyone else, but I can tell you really do believe that. I can also see that you support government confiscation of prime New York real estate without due process. As for the rest, I honestly don't think you understand the issue at all. So with that, I'll just let you have the last word because I don't think any sentence construct is not going to be twisted to say something that I never said. Have at it. The last word is something I anxiously anticipate will be real nuggets of eternal wisdom, like a brief axiom from a box of Cracker Jac

The site is not a national park. It is privately owned or do you not support the right of the private groups to do what they want with their own money? It wasn't a religion that did that but a group of crazy people just like it was the crazy Christians that have done horrible things over the centuries too. Are you saying you support people defacing a religious groups building? Please take your bigotry elsewhere.

A state rep being for the Fair Tax is like a state rep discussing what our national policy with the Russians should be. It doesn't mean a thing because the state rep has zero influence on that. Talking about the Fair Tax is grandstanding and is used to get people who don't know any different to vote for them. Sure, a few may know the states can't do anything about the Fair Tax but most people confuse national issues with state issues and I don't like a candidate who manipulates. I want a candidate who will discuss what they can do and not talk about issues that get people emotionally worked up

And that means what? Snopes only does the leg work to confirm or deny what is urban legend and what is fact. That is neither a liberal nor conservative position. Truth is not politically aligned. I can just as easily point out the Klan supported Reagan, but that doesn't mean Reagan was a Neo Nazi. Now if you can point out where Snopes has intentionall lied, then you would have a point. The only one I know of was a joke they played once on something that was so outlandish they wanted to see how far that rumor could go, just to show how gullible people are. Why exactly did you give a link to

Just like churches or any charity can't be forced to disclose who the donor is, neither should a Muslim group. People are allowed to make donations to charities and religious groups and the group is not required to disclose that information. How many churches are built near Civil War sites? There are several Mickie D's within a few blocks of Ground Zero. BK's too. A lot of sub shops and about a 100 other eateries within a few blocks of the new Tower Center. I've eaten at several of them.

OMG! This is one of the saddest posts I've ever read on paulding.com. That "source" you're using to discredit Snopes is a satire site, just like The Onion is in the United States. In other words, you got punked and can't tell the difference between a joke and real news.

People who sit there and chomp on ice while everybody is trying to listen to the speaker/presentation.

Isn't this news? If it were an Atlanta cop, would you have made this same comment?

That's a pity because that means someone is not following the presidential order at those post offices.

I'm sure it is in this thread somewhere but I couldn't find it. Would you be so kind as to show me where anybody said anything about banning guns?