one absolutely nauseating post from another board

[ButterflyBlood]

see if you can read it and keep your dinner down :puke: : http://www.uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?board=5;action=display;threadid=964

*edit* remove the space and copy and paste the whole thing.

[liberalhistorian]

1. Which post are you referring to?

I honestly don't have the stomach to wade through each one, I get enough of that bullshit everyday from everyone else.

[ButterflyBlood]

4. the original

although some later ones are bad too

[LoneStarLiberal]

2. Well, He Never Says Great -What-

That's a nice one.

"History will remember Bush as one of the greats." I'd agree with that assessment if it pertains to one of the following: Great fuck-ups, great criminals, great morons, great assholes or great failures as a POTUS.

How someone could be that ignorant and blind and still grasp the fundamentals of using a computer to post a message to a web board is beyond me.

Bad chimp! No pretzel!

[drthais]

3. I read maybe four or five posts

and was nauseated

what is the matter with these people?

Bush going down as 'one of the greats'??
liberals have 'little black hearts'????

barf

:puke:

[FizzFuzz]

5. I read a few pages

There were a few posts by democrats there, which was interesting to see...

God its bizarre to me that they always accuse Dems of avoiding the facts; seems the liberal writers I read are all outstanding scholars who have a command of facts that I can only wish for.

Doesn't it seem that the wingies that ARE capable of saying something deeper than "you liburls hate amer-ca" accuse US of not knowing the facts; a statement they make without backing themselves up with facts? They never mention the results of the administrations policies, and they never have any reports of Bush actually keeping a promise. (Uhhhh except his promise to wage war on women's and children's lives worldwide with his gag-rule on women's health centers---THAT promise he kept)

I wish I owned a copy of Al Franken's book. Then I could post there with some facts to explain why I hate Bish and his minions, in response to Mr "You liberals never back up your statements with facts"...Maybe I'd pretend to be a disillusioned wingie, so that they would actually bother to read what I'm saying...then I'd ask innocently for his fans to explain why he promised to do xxx but did yyy.

but I've been indulging my computer addiction way too much today and my butt is sore from sitting for too long

[gristy]

6. I don't know which thread you read...

but of the first page of replies to this one:

The real reason Dems hate Bush
I've been wondering why the libs hate George W. so much. Way more than Reagan, or even Nixon. It's a mystery to many Republicans. I think I have found the answer. The reason is because deep down in thier shriveled black hearts, they know that however the economy goes, whatever he does in Iraq, that Bush will go down as one of the greats. History will look upon him favorably, even if he doesn't get re-elected. They are bitter about not getting anything done with Clinton. That they had thier chance, and thier wonderboy was just average. When people think about Clinton 20 years from now, they will remember Monica Lewinsky. When people remember Bush, regardless of this upcoming elections results, they will remember his leadership after 9/11. They know that they cant destroy that legacy, and they hate him for it. They hate that he has one up on them. Your thoughts?

the majority disagree. For example:

The reason I hate Bush is that he is so inarticulate, so texan, so republican, so manipulated, and so much like his father.

My biggest problem with Bush is that he is not a leader at all. Besides Reagan, he is the most manipulated president we have ever had (although Carter might be added in third place). He has bad policies (excluding AIDS, Immigration and NCLB) especially when it comes to foreign affairs.

I also really hate his overwhelming Texan-ism. I HATE Texas

and here's a good response in support of Clinton:

We'll let history be the judge of that. I think history will judge Clinton as it judges Eisenhower, as a good post-war consolidator.

In 1992, America was going to be bought by Japan, crime rates and other social problems were at record levels and rising, pre-1973 prosperity seemed permanently out of reach, and nowhere in their wildest dreams did economists believe that GDP growth could exceed 2.5% without debilitating inflation. The most-quoted economic statement was that "America is now the world's largest debtor nation." I was only 9 years old but I still remember how there was a sense of general malaise and fatalism back then. America was seen as a country in long-term decline, and this view was shared especially by conservatives. Clinton was the man who gave America it's confidence back.

[ButterflyBlood]

7. yes the majority disagree

but the original post is enough. not to mention a blatant troll.