Obama buddy and Democrat terrorist gets owned!

[AUisAll 2]

When have the liberals on this board ever used proof for their assertions?

PT already posted a link. Since you are too lazy. I will give you a quote from it:

"Investigations by CNN, The New York Times and other news organizations concluded that Obama did not have a close relationship with Ayers."

Yet another stupid post.

Surely, you can find more sources like Media matters, MSNBC, Moveon, etc. LOL

[icanthearyou 4,462]

When have the liberals on this board ever used proof for their assertions?

PT already posted a link. Since you are too lazy. I will give you a quote from it:

"Investigations by CNN, The New York Times and other news organizations concluded that Obama did not have a close relationship with Ayers."

Yet another stupid post.

Surely, you can find more sources like Media matters, MSNBC, Moveon, etc. LOL

Do you have ANY sources? Any at all?

[AUisAll 2]

When have the liberals on this board ever used proof for their assertions?

PT already posted a link. Since you are too lazy. I will give you a quote from it:

"Investigations by CNN, The New York Times and other news organizations concluded that Obama did not have a close relationship with Ayers."

Yet another stupid post.

Surely, you can find more sources like Media matters, MSNBC, Moveon, etc. LOL

Do you have ANY sources? Any at all?

How many is enough? Just kidding, I realize that no amount will be enough. But here's one: http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB122212856075765367

[AUisAll 2]

When have the liberals on this board ever used proof for their assertions?

PT already posted a link. Since you are too lazy. I will give you a quote from it:

"Investigations by CNN, The New York Times and other news organizations concluded that Obama did not have a close relationship with Ayers."

Yet another stupid post.

Surely, you can find more sources like Media matters, MSNBC, Moveon, etc. LOL

Do you have ANY sources? Any at all?

How many is enough? Just kidding, I realize that no amount will be enough. But here's one: http://online.wsj.co...212856075765367

Here's another and it gets worse! http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/11652-obama-belonged-to-radical-socialist-new-party-in-1996

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

What would you expect from CNN and the NYT? How many other investigations by liberals and lib media have turned up the truth? Have they found Lois Lerner's e-mails yet?

[icanthearyou 4,462]

When have the liberals on this board ever used proof for their assertions?

PT already posted a link. Since you are too lazy. I will give you a quote from it:

"Investigations by CNN, The New York Times and other news organizations concluded that Obama did not have a close relationship with Ayers."

Yet another stupid post.

Surely, you can find more sources like Media matters, MSNBC, Moveon, etc. LOL

Do you have ANY sources? Any at all?

How many is enough? Just kidding, I realize that no amount will be enough. But here's one: http://online.wsj.co...212856075765367

Here's another and it gets worse! http://www.thenewame...w-party-in-1996

These are BOTH opinion pieces, NOT news. Yet another stupid post!

[TheBlueVue 177]

When have the liberals on this board ever used proof for their assertions?

PT already posted a link. Since you are too lazy. I will give you a quote from it:

"Investigations by CNN, The New York Times and other news organizations concluded that Obama did not have a close relationship with Ayers."

Yet another stupid post.

Surely, you can find more sources like Media matters, MSNBC, Moveon, etc. LOL

Do you have ANY sources? Any at all?

How many is enough? Just kidding, I realize that no amount will be enough. But here's one: http://online.wsj.co...212856075765367

Here's another and it gets worse! http://www.thenewame...w-party-in-1996

These are BOTH opinion pieces, NOT news. Yet another stupid post!

Why don't you refute the facts presented in those pieces, there are many, instead of calling everyone who disagrees with you stupid?

[icanthearyou 4,462]

When have the liberals on this board ever used proof for their assertions?

PT already posted a link. Since you are too lazy. I will give you a quote from it:

"Investigations by CNN, The New York Times and other news organizations concluded that Obama did not have a close relationship with Ayers."

Yet another stupid post.

Surely, you can find more sources like Media matters, MSNBC, Moveon, etc. LOL

Do you have ANY sources? Any at all?

How many is enough? Just kidding, I realize that no amount will be enough. But here's one: http://online.wsj.co...212856075765367

Here's another and it gets worse! http://www.thenewame...w-party-in-1996

These are BOTH opinion pieces, NOT news. Yet another stupid post!

Why don't you refute the facts presented in those pieces, there are many, instead of calling everyone who disagrees with you stupid?

Refuting opinion is a waste of time. I did not call anyone stupid only their posts. Your post is ignorant.

[homersapien 11,373]

When have the liberals on this board ever used proof for their assertions?

PT already posted a link. Since you are too lazy. I will give you a quote from it:

"Investigations by CNN, The New York Times and other news organizations concluded that Obama did not have a close relationship with Ayers."

Yet another stupid post.

Surely, you can find more sources like Media matters, MSNBC, Moveon, etc. LOL

Do you have ANY sources? Any at all?

How many is enough? Just kidding, I realize that no amount will be enough. But here's one: http://online.wsj.co...212856075765367

Here's another and it gets worse! http://www.thenewame...w-party-in-1996

These are BOTH opinion pieces, NOT news. Yet another stupid post!

They seriously don't know the difference.

[TheBlueVue 177]

When have the liberals on this board ever used proof for their assertions?

PT already posted a link. Since you are too lazy. I will give you a quote from it:

"Investigations by CNN, The New York Times and other news organizations concluded that Obama did not have a close relationship with Ayers."

Yet another stupid post.

Surely, you can find more sources like Media matters, MSNBC, Moveon, etc. LOL

Do you have ANY sources? Any at all?

How many is enough? Just kidding, I realize that no amount will be enough. But here's one: http://online.wsj.co...212856075765367

Here's another and it gets worse! http://www.thenewame...w-party-in-1996

These are BOTH opinion pieces, NOT news. Yet another stupid post!

Why don't you refute the facts presented in those pieces, there are many, instead of calling everyone who disagrees with you stupid?

Refuting opinion is a waste of time. I did not call anyone stupid only their posts. Your post is ignorant.

The opinions in those pieces are supported by substantial facts. Of course, its much easier for you to simply ignore them and call people stupid who think you're an idiot.

[TheBlueVue 177]

When have the liberals on this board ever used proof for their assertions?

PT already posted a link. Since you are too lazy. I will give you a quote from it:

"Investigations by CNN, The New York Times and other news organizations concluded that Obama did not have a close relationship with Ayers."

Yet another stupid post.

Surely, you can find more sources like Media matters, MSNBC, Moveon, etc. LOL

Do you have ANY sources? Any at all?

How many is enough? Just kidding, I realize that no amount will be enough. But here's one: http://online.wsj.co...212856075765367

Here's another and it gets worse! http://www.thenewame...w-party-in-1996

These are BOTH opinion pieces, NOT news. Yet another stupid post!

They seriously don't know the difference.

It is terribly revealing how you so grossly underestimate people at your convenience.

[homersapien 11,373]

When have the liberals on this board ever used proof for their assertions?

PT already posted a link. Since you are too lazy. I will give you a quote from it:

"Investigations by CNN, The New York Times and other news organizations concluded that Obama did not have a close relationship with Ayers."

Yet another stupid post.

Surely, you can find more sources like Media matters, MSNBC, Moveon, etc. LOL

Do you have ANY sources? Any at all?

How many is enough? Just kidding, I realize that no amount will be enough. But here's one: http://online.wsj.co...212856075765367

Here's another and it gets worse! http://www.thenewame...w-party-in-1996

These are BOTH opinion pieces, NOT news. Yet another stupid post!

They seriously don't know the difference.

It is terribly revealing how you so grossly underestimate people at your convenience.

You betcha'. It reveals the company I keep.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

When have the liberals on this board ever used proof for their assertions?

PT already posted a link. Since you are too lazy. I will give you a quote from it:

"Investigations by CNN, The New York Times and other news organizations concluded that Obama did not have a close relationship with Ayers."

Yet another stupid post.

Surely, you can find more sources like Media matters, MSNBC, Moveon, etc. LOL

Do you have ANY sources? Any at all?

How many is enough? Just kidding, I realize that no amount will be enough. But here's one: http://online.wsj.co...212856075765367

Here's another and it gets worse! http://www.thenewame...w-party-in-1996

These are BOTH opinion pieces, NOT news. Yet another stupid post!

Why don't you refute the facts presented in those pieces, there are many, instead of calling everyone who disagrees with you stupid?

Refuting opinion is a waste of time. I did not call anyone stupid only their posts. Your post is ignorant.

The opinions in those pieces are supported by substantial facts. Of course, its much easier for you to simply ignore them and call people stupid who think you're an idiot.

No, they are Not. They are supported by supposition and innuendo. If they weren't, it would be news, not opinion. Just because I state a fact, it does not magically make everything I speculate beyond that, related to that fact, factual. You are reading, what you want to read. Not surprising. Your mind is closed, absolutely closed.

[WarTim 3,456]

Lib truth denial=Fun to watch.

[homersapien 11,373]

Lib truth denial=Fun to watch.

War Tim = Bumper sticker intellect

[AUisAll 2]

Lib truth denial=Fun to watch.

LOL. It is humorous. The truth is the Liberal/Democrats Kryptonite.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

Lib truth denial=Fun to watch.

LOL. It is humorous. The truth is the Liberal/Democrats Kryptonite.

And yet, you cannot produce ANY evidence to support your claim. NONE. Nothing. You have no integrity.

[TheBlueVue 177]

When have the liberals on this board ever used proof for their assertions?

PT already posted a link. Since you are too lazy. I will give you a quote from it:

"Investigations by CNN, The New York Times and other news organizations concluded that Obama did not have a close relationship with Ayers."

Yet another stupid post.

Surely, you can find more sources like Media matters, MSNBC, Moveon, etc. LOL

Do you have ANY sources? Any at all?

How many is enough? Just kidding, I realize that no amount will be enough. But here's one: http://online.wsj.co...212856075765367

Here's another and it gets worse! http://www.thenewame...w-party-in-1996

These are BOTH opinion pieces, NOT news. Yet another stupid post!

Why don't you refute the facts presented in those pieces, there are many, instead of calling everyone who disagrees with you stupid?

Refuting opinion is a waste of time. I did not call anyone stupid only their posts. Your post is ignorant.

The opinions in those pieces are supported by substantial facts. Of course, its much easier for you to simply ignore them and call people stupid who think you're an idiot.

No, they are Not. They are supported by supposition and innuendo. If they weren't, it would be news, not opinion. Just because I state a fact, it does not magically make everything I speculate beyond that, related to that fact, factual. You are reading, what you want to read. Not surprising. Your mind is closed, absolutely closed.

I can tell you didn't read them. What a surprise! :-\

[cooltigger21 0]

One does not hang out at this Bill Ayers' house if he doesn't agree with his thinking. One does not sit in the church of a man like Jeremiah Wright for 20 years unless he agrees with what he is saying.

[homersapien 11,373]

Well. Obama may have shared a dais with a terrorist, but Bush was clearly in cahoots with the Saudi Islamists:

That's all the proof I need.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

When have the liberals on this board ever used proof for their assertions?

PT already posted a link. Since you are too lazy. I will give you a quote from it:

"Investigations by CNN, The New York Times and other news organizations concluded that Obama did not have a close relationship with Ayers."

Yet another stupid post.

Surely, you can find more sources like Media matters, MSNBC, Moveon, etc. LOL

Do you have ANY sources? Any at all?

How many is enough? Just kidding, I realize that no amount will be enough. But here's one: http://online.wsj.co...212856075765367

Here's another and it gets worse! http://www.thenewame...w-party-in-1996

These are BOTH opinion pieces, NOT news. Yet another stupid post!

Why don't you refute the facts presented in those pieces, there are many, instead of calling everyone who disagrees with you stupid?

Refuting opinion is a waste of time. I did not call anyone stupid only their posts. Your post is ignorant.

The opinions in those pieces are supported by substantial facts. Of course, its much easier for you to simply ignore them and call people stupid who think you're an idiot.

No, they are Not. They are supported by supposition and innuendo. If they weren't, it would be news, not opinion. Just because I state a fact, it does not magically make everything I speculate beyond that, related to that fact, factual. You are reading, what you want to read. Not surprising. Your mind is closed, absolutely closed.

I can tell you didn't read them. What a surprise! :-\

Hey, Blue is wrong again! And, another idiotic, meaningless post. Nice! Amazing streak you are on.

[AUisAll 2]

When have the liberals on this board ever used proof for their assertions?

PT already posted a link. Since you are too lazy. I will give you a quote from it:

"Investigations by CNN, The New York Times and other news organizations concluded that Obama did not have a close relationship with Ayers."

Yet another stupid post.

Surely, you can find more sources like Media matters, MSNBC, Moveon, etc. LOL

Do you have ANY sources? Any at all?

How many is enough? Just kidding, I realize that no amount will be enough. But here's one: http://online.wsj.co...212856075765367

Here's another and it gets worse! http://www.thenewame...w-party-in-1996

These are BOTH opinion pieces, NOT news. Yet another stupid post!

Why don't you refute the facts presented in those pieces, there are many, instead of calling everyone who disagrees with you stupid?

Refuting opinion is a waste of time. I did not call anyone stupid only their posts. Your post is ignorant.

The opinions in those pieces are supported by substantial facts. Of course, its much easier for you to simply ignore them and call people stupid who think you're an idiot.

No, they are Not. They are supported by supposition and innuendo. If they weren't, it would be news, not opinion. Just because I state a fact, it does not magically make everything I speculate beyond that, related to that fact, factual. You are reading, what you want to read. Not surprising. Your mind is closed, absolutely closed.

I can tell you didn't read them. What a surprise! :-\

:-\