wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 09:26 PM
Original message |
As Nasty as they Want To Be |
|
When I was in college, I set out to own a months old album by rap group 2 Live Crew because I started seeing news reports of how offensive it was. But others had the same idea. The record stores were sold out. Suddenly, the bootlegs appeared. The collection was passed from person to person. Soon, nearly everyone had a copy of what would have been a flop had a few conservatives not discovered their teenage daughters were listening to it. They made 2 Live Crew a household name!
There's another piece of media causing a similar uproar. Funny thing is, its been available for over two months -sitting all pretty on the DCCC website. Of course, I'm talking about the controversial commercial. Now, everyone has seen it. It's had over 28,000 downloads from Youtube alone.
So you're pissed that two Democrats in HEAVY Republican districts asked to have it removed and the DCCC obliged? How do you know that wasn't the plan from the get-go?
Sounds like a brilliant piece of strategy to me.
So while DUers whine that it MUST have been the evil DLC that killed the ad (only one of the House members was DLC. But the head of the DCCC that created it was DLC, too), just remember: The ad has been seen. Where it was once languishing in obscurity, it is now being shown on TV news shows, emailed, posted on websites, etc., ALL FOR FUCKING FREE.
I had not even heard about it until last week. Had you?
|
pooja
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 09:28 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Great publicity... true... but what is the outcome.. how will people feel? |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. I think the GOP Whine Machine has lost a lot of traction lately |
|
...the effectiveness of the commercial will overshadow their blubbering.
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
4. Tell that to Dick Durbin. |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 09:36 PM
Response to Original message |
3. 28,000 views is really something. |
|
Too bad 280,000,000 Americans saw Dems fold once again under pressure.
I knew it wouldn't take long for new talking points to spin this episode, what I didn't know was how devoid of reason they would be.
|
The Velveteen Ocelot
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 09:38 PM
Response to Original message |
5. You have a point. The GOP's whining did get attention for the ad. |
|
On the other hand, the fact that the DCCC pulled it in apparent response to the whining arguably makes them look weak. That, I think is what is bothering people.
|
AtomicKitten
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 09:45 PM
Response to Original message |
6. I remain nonplussed with regard to whining |
|
Edited on Sat Jul-15-06 09:45 PM by AtomicKitten
... here or on the other side of the aisle. That's progress from being annoyed by it and then tired of it.
The only thing I care about is making the bad Republicans go away. If this stupid dance ends up as a plus for our side, I'm down with it.
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 09:47 PM
Response to Original message |
7. Tell us about your knowledge of Texas and the 17th District |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
|
Edited on Sat Jul-15-06 09:50 PM by wyldwolf
Bush defeated Sen. John Kerry 70 percent to 30 percent in the 2004. Chet Edwards won re-election in '04 by a 51 percent to 47 percent margin.
In two minutes and without Google. HOT DAMN!
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
9. And how old is the district? |
|
Edited on Sat Jul-15-06 09:50 PM by LincolnMcGrath
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. 5 or 6 years old, huh? No, 3 years old. how many gas stations are there? |
|
Edited on Sat Jul-15-06 09:55 PM by wyldwolf
Created in 2003 by TX Legislature
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
|
Just wondering how much faith DUers were putting in your claim of HEAVY Rep. Districts. As an 8 term congressman re-elected to a newly drawn district map, the district can not be HEAVY Rep. or he wouldn't be there.
Also I find it curious that your OP completely left out all the GOPers who are involved in this.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
14. why wouldn't DUers "put faith" in the FACT that is is heavy Republican? |
|
It was redrawn to favor Republicans. Bush whipped Kerry there in '04, and Edwards only won his seat by 8,000 votes.
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
18. Democrats don't win in HEAVY GOP areas. Least of all, not 8 times. |
|
They win in moderate or true center areas.
Get real.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
20. LOL! Didn't we just establish this district is 3 years old? Do the math |
|
NO ONE can be elected 8 times to House seat in a three year old district. LOL! Get real.
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:22 PM
Response to Reply #20 |
23. LOL NO ONE can declare a district HEAVY REP after one election. |
|
Nice try though. (not really)
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:26 PM
Response to Reply #23 |
25. they can when it is purposely redistricted as such. But according to you. |
|
Edited on Sat Jul-15-06 10:26 PM by wyldwolf
Edwards has won 8 times in a 3 year old district. He has served 16 in TX17 and it's only 3 years old. :rofl:
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #25 |
28. I referred to Chet in post 11 as follows |
|
As an 8 term congressman re-elected to a newly drawn district map.
In post 18 I wrote the following Democrats don't win in HEAVY GOP areas. Least of all, not 8 times. They win in moderate or true center areas
Seriously, is this the best you have to offer this fine evening?
Who is spinning now?
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #28 |
29. In post 18, you referred to Chet as follows: |
|
Democrats don't win in HEAVY GOP areas. Least of all, not 8 times.
Hint: The district was drawn in 2003 to favor the GOP. Chet hasn't won their 8 times.
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #29 |
|
DISTRICTS
2 differnet words. look em up.
Chet most certainly has won their (lol) many times in a row.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-16-06 07:29 AM
Response to Reply #31 |
36. AREAS were redistricted. They're no longer the same AREAS in it |
|
Edited on Sun Jul-16-06 07:52 AM by wyldwolf
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-16-06 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #36 |
43. You are just being ridiculous. |
|
Are you claiming CHET has ZERO constituents now, that he had before?
Of course you won't go on record stating that, because it is false.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-16-06 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #43 |
|
I'm claiming he has LESS than he did. That is what redistricting does.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
12. Are we through playing Jeopardy with Texas and the 17th District? |
|
I'm going to bed now. LOL!
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
13. Saved by google again? |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
15. no, the edit was to ask you how many gas stations were there... |
|
Edited on Sat Jul-15-06 10:07 PM by wyldwolf
...since we're playing 20 questions. LOL!
Of course, facts are facts anyway, no matter when they are learned.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:08 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
16. C'mon, Lincoln, bring it! |
|
Edited on Sat Jul-15-06 10:11 PM by wyldwolf
You really want to challenge me on how Republican Chet Edward's district is, bring it on. It will be fun to see you squirm and spin and parse once more time.
Eh, nevermind. You'll just divert, change the subject, whine about the DLC, hurl a few personal insults.
I'll check your (ahem) well reasoned responses from la la land tommorrow.
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #16 |
22. True to form you accuse then attack |
|
YOU : Eh, nevermind. You'll just divert, change the subject, whine about the DLC, hurl a few personal insults.
YOU, very next sentence : I'll check your (ahem) well reasoned responses from la la land tommorrow.
You were saying?
The only one squirming here is as you as usual.
The subjects at hand are:
Your attempted spin on how HEAVY Republican the voters in TX17 are.
Your oops in failing to mention any Rep.s had a hand in this.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #22 |
24. True to form you spin, dodge and parse |
|
Edited on Sat Jul-15-06 10:25 PM by wyldwolf
Your attempted spin on how HEAVY Republican the voters in TX17
You mean the one created to favor Republicans? The one Bush won by 70%? The one Chet Edwards only won by 8000 votes? THAT district? yeah, heavy Republican?
Your oops in failing to mention any Rep.s had a hand in this.
I didn't mention what I had for breakfast either. Another irrelevant point from you.
So tell me again how Edwards won 8 times in a 3 year old district?
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #24 |
26. It's like shooting fish in a rain barrel anymore |
|
HEAVY Republican Districts have Republican Congress critters.
And you left out the platoon of GOPers because it didn't fit in to well with your theory of a long ago planned strategy. :rofl: The more you run from it, the louder it beckons the readers.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:30 PM
Response to Reply #26 |
27. How can someone serve 8 times in a 3 year old district? |
|
Edited on Sat Jul-15-06 10:32 PM by wyldwolf
LOL! Didn't we just establish this district is 3 years old? Do the math
NO ONE can be elected 8 times to House seat in a three year old district. LOL! Get real.
wink wink nudge nudge
The more you run from it, the louder it beckons the readers. :rofl::rofl::rofl:
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:36 PM
Response to Reply #27 |
30. Since I never stated that, I cannot answer your question. |
|
This is really about the weakest argument you have ever brought to the table, and we've had some good discussions before.
Screen capture the post where I supposedly said whatever, or post a link if you want to draw more attention to you line of attack here, it's your choice.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-16-06 07:28 AM
Response to Reply #30 |
35. How can someone serve 8 times in the same district? |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-16-06 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #35 |
40. Since nobody said that, why keep bleeting on about it? |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-16-06 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #40 |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-16-06 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #45 |
49. Judging by the mail I am getting here, lets lets DU decide. |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 05:45 AM
Response to Reply #49 |
55. one of your famous screen shots? |
|
Or e-mail from unknowns entities? LOL!
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #55 |
|
Screen shots are more infamous if you are the one caught lying in one, wouldn't you say?
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #56 |
|
Edited on Mon Jul-17-06 09:09 AM by wyldwolf
let's see the fake e-mails. Pull the (lol) trigger.
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #59 |
61. I don't think so Tim. |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #61 |
|
Edited on Mon Jul-17-06 09:20 AM by wyldwolf
Remember? Pull the trigger!
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #64 |
67. Of course, were you involved? No |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #67 |
70. Sure I was. Who else were you talking to both times? |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #70 |
74. The DUer who challenged (inre; a post of hers ) me in a thread |
|
asked me not to post the screen shot.
You only involvement in that affair was one of unwanted affection. Like the dog next door who barks all day for attention, in hopes someone will throw him a bone.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #74 |
77. LOL! Post 49: "Judging by the mail I am getting here..." |
|
So now there is one piece of mail, the writer doesn't want you to post a screenshot, but it had nothing to do with this discussion anyway. LOL!
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #77 |
81. Where is there a threat there. |
|
Could you be anymore confused?
There is no screen shot involved in this thread. Every thing in this reply of yours concerns an episode from last fall?
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:41 AM
Response to Reply #81 |
85. but you just said the DUer asked you not to post the screenshot... |
|
now you're saying there isn't one?
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #85 |
87. Last Fall, try to keep up. |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #87 |
89. we weren't having this discussion last fall. Try to keep up. |
|
Post #49, you said you were getting e-mail concerning whether you said Edwards could serve 8 terms in a three year old district.
Let's see them. PULL THE TRIGGER!
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #89 |
|
lol
Post the numbers for the District
Where in post #49 above are any of the words you ascribe to it here? Did I type them in invisible font only you can see?
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #94 |
|
1. You claim Texas 17 isn't a strong or heavy GOP district despite sources to the contrary. 2. You claim Edwards served 8 times in a 3 year old district. 3. You claim to have an e-mail that agrees with you. 4. Then you claim "she" has asked you not to show it. 5. Then you claim the e-mail was from last fall before this conversation took place.
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #98 |
102. See you couldn't be more lost. |
|
1. You claim Texas 17 isn't a strong or heavy GOP district despite sources to the contrary. You refuse to post the numbers because they are not friendly to your theory here. 2. You claim Edwards served 8 times in a 3 year old district. You are the only person to claim that 3. You claim to have an e-mail that agrees with you. Actually the email is more about you than me. 4. Then you claim "she" has asked you not to show it. Again for the 6th time, this was last fall, the trigger incident. 5. Then you claim the e-mail was from last fall before this conversation took place. For the 7th time, no screen shots here. The email has to do with this OP and a related thread about the the ad in question.
I'm trying to work with you here.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #102 |
107. See you couldn't be more lost. |
|
1. you refuse to accept the facts about the 17th district. 2. You make a odd and mathmatically impossible claim, then say you didn't 3. You say you have e-mail from DUers to back you up, then say you don't. 4. You refuse to PULL THE TRIGGER! Like you did before.
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #107 |
|
1. you refuse to accept the facts about the 17th district. Please post them, or I will 2. You make a odd and mathmatically impossible claim, then say you didn't Please post a link to that claim 3. You say you have e-mail from DUers to back you up, then say you don't. I have never said I didn't have the emails 4. You refuse to PULL THE TRIGGER! Like you did before. I have posted dozens of screen shots (for the 9th time, none are involvewd here, yet)
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #110 |
|
Please post them, or I will
Please do.
Please post a link to that claim
Look at the posts above.
I have never said I didn't have the emails
Yes you did. You said they weren't applicable to this conversation after you said they were.
I have posted dozens of screen shots (for the 9th time, none are involvewd here, yet)
Well get them involved!
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #116 |
125. Why do you refuse to discuss the content of the OP? |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #125 |
127. why do you insist on changing the subject? |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #127 |
132. I've been on point all thread. You said "HEAVY" |
|
I say Show us the TX 17 #s
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #132 |
|
I say show us the TX 17 #s, the made-up emails, and the logic behind your fuzzy math.
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #134 |
139. The HEAVY Claim is yours. I say show us the TX 17 #s that back it. |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #139 |
145. The e-mail and "8 terms in a 3 year old district" is yours. I say back it |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #145 |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #150 |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:14 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
21. LOL! Didn't we just establish this district is 3 years old? Do the math |
|
Edited on Sat Jul-15-06 10:16 PM by wyldwolf
LOL! Didn't we just establish this district is 3 years old? Do the math
NO ONE can be elected 8 times to House seat in a three year old district. LOL! Get real.
wink wink nudge nudge
C'mon. Think REAL hard for a brilliant comeback.
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #21 |
|
but not totally unexpected
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-16-06 07:30 AM
Response to Reply #32 |
37. dodge, spin, parse, but completely expected and predicted. |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-16-06 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #37 |
41. Are you looking in a mirror? |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-16-06 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #41 |
44. nope, holding it up to you |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-16-06 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #44 |
50. It's called failure. You tried to bluff your fellow DUers, and lost. |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 05:39 AM
Response to Reply #50 |
53. It's called failure. You tried to bluff your fellow DUers, and lost. |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:04 AM
Response to Reply #53 |
|
Far out and HEAVY! :rofl:
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:07 AM
Response to Reply #57 |
|
Far out and parsed, but in the same area that isn't really the same because of redistricting.
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #58 |
63. Put the numbers on the table |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #63 |
66. put the e-mails and screenshots on the table... scared? |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #66 |
68. They have nothing to do with you. Stop running from YOUR words. |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #68 |
72. LOL! If they have nothing to do with me, why did you threaten to ... |
|
...pull them out.
Stop running from YOUR words.
C'mon. Pull the trigger!
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:29 AM
Response to Reply #72 |
75. I never threatened to do anything with them. sorry |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #66 |
69. BTW screenshots of what? |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #69 |
73. Don't you remember? Pull the trigger! |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #73 |
76. I've posted screen shots at least 20 times in the last 5 years. |
|
Ask your hero what happens when caught in a lie.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:32 AM
Response to Reply #76 |
78. well, pull the trigger! Let's see them |
|
Edited on Mon Jul-17-06 09:33 AM by wyldwolf
I remember the incident you're referring to. Several people asked for the screenshot, but you disappeared...
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #78 |
79. Find a new stall tactic. Post the HEAVY numbers. |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #79 |
86. Find a new stall tactic. Post the e-mail, the screenshots and the math |
|
Edited on Mon Jul-17-06 09:43 AM by wyldwolf
Pull the trigger! LOL!
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #86 |
88. Can't find numbers for the district yet? |
|
For at least the third time, there is no screen shot involved here. Stop clogging the drain with fluff, post the district numbers.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #88 |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #90 |
95. No, Still no luck with the numbers? |
|
Must not back your argument, or you would have posted them repeatedly. :shrug:
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #95 |
96. still no luck with that fuzzy math and the e-mail! Ya just had it, right? |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #96 |
99. No Numbers for District TX 17 yet? |
|
You ain't HEAVY, your my DU brother baby! :hug:
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #99 |
101. no luck with that fuzzy math and the e-mail yet? |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #101 |
128. Why do you refuse to discuss the content of the OP? |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #128 |
133. why do you insist on changing the subject? |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #133 |
140. The HEAVY Claim is yours. I say show us the TX 17 #s that back it. |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #140 |
146. The e-mail and "8 terms in a 3 year old district" is yours. I say back it |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #146 |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #151 |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
33. This is not a HEAVY GOP District. |
|
"Maybe it's civic pride, but they want their congressman to have Waco after his name, Republican or Democrat," Myers said.
Thomas Myers, a political science professor at Baylor University, said most voters in the Waco area, which is the largest population center in the district, have grown accustomed to siding with Edwards even though they'll pick the Republican in races for governor, U.S. senator and president.
more;
But Edwards, who spent nine years in the Texas Senate before going to Congress after the 1990 elections, is considered the Democrat most likely to survive last year's congressional redistricting effort designed to bring as many as seven new Texas Republicans to Washington.
Even though almost two-thirds of the district contains areas that were not part of Edwards' old domain, the Democrat did manage to hold on to his power base in McLennan County.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-16-06 07:51 AM
Response to Reply #33 |
|
Privately, Democrats acknowledge that Spratt and Edwards must condemn the video because they represent Republican districts. http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/07/14/mg.fri/index.html
But, McGrath, if you know more than the DNC and CNN, I guess we can expect you on the national scene real soon. LOL!
DeLay's map has left some of the Lone Star State's most senior Democratic members fighting difficult odds... Rep. Chet Edwards, a Democrat from Waco, may have the best chance to survive among the threatened Texas Democrats. The Legislature redrew his district to favor Republican challenger Arlene Wohlgemuth.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/state/texas/2004-10-17-texas-dems_x.htm
In Edwards Waco-based district, Bush soundly defeated Sen. John Kerry (D-Massachusetts) 70 percent to 30 percent in the 2004 presidential contest
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/07/14/mg.fri/index.html
This district is strongly Republican, but Edwards managed to eke out a win in 2004 even as President Bush was carrying the district with 70 percent of the vote.
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/elections/keyraces/47/
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-16-06 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #38 |
42. No it is not. Your post here proves your original claim of HEAVY is wrong |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-16-06 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #42 |
|
You're going to pretend there is a difference between HEAVY Republican and STRONGLY Republican.
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-16-06 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #47 |
48. No parsing, that is what you do when you are getting behind. |
|
It's not even a Strongly republican district, period, regardless of what someone fro the lib'rull media says.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 05:38 AM
Response to Reply #48 |
52. Yeah, but the Democrats say it, too. |
|
I'm sure the 17th is the one district Delay goofed in when he was redistricting. LOL!
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #52 |
65. It was considered the safest of all of those that were re-drawn. |
|
Among the media punditry you are so fond of quoting when it suits your needs.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #65 |
80. which means it had less republicans than the rest of them |
|
..but still enough to give Bush a 70% -30% win.
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #80 |
82. Still need more time to look up the numbers? |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #82 |
83. ready to post that e-mail and explain how someone can serve 8 terms |
|
in a three year old district? We're waiting!
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #83 |
91. Reverting back to failed argument from yesterday? How sad. |
|
The only DUer who said someone can serve 8 terms in a three year old district? has been you.
Post the numbers to the District
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #91 |
93. Reverting back to failed argument from yesterday? How sad. |
|
The only DUer who said someone can serve 8 terms in a three year old district? has been you.
Now about that fuzzy math and mythical e-mails...
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #93 |
106. Can I get a refresher on this fuzzy math you speak of? |
|
What math am I supposed to support? You flat out refuse to post facts about the party registration numbers of the districts for either of the Dems involved in your theory here.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #106 |
109. sure. Your claim that Edwards has served 8 terms in a three year old |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #109 |
112. I never said that. You did |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #112 |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #117 |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #120 |
122. Look in the posts above... and show us the TX 17 #s... and the e-mails |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #122 |
129. Why do you refuse to discuss the content of the OP? |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #129 |
135. why do you insist on changing the subject? |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #135 |
141. The HEAVY Claim is yours. I say show us the TX 17 #s that back it. |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #141 |
147. The e-mail and "8 terms in a 3 year old district" is yours. I say back it |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #147 |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #152 |
Crunchy Frog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-15-06 10:08 PM
Response to Original message |
17. It makes Democrats look weak |
|
and it makes it look like they're acknowledging the correctness of the Republican criticisms. Those messages are far more powerful than any impact of more people seeing the video, unfortunately.
|
Cosmocat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #17 |
|
Jesus, H, Christmas ...
How spineless can they be ...
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #92 |
104. Oh NO! This was a super secret long range plan to fool the masses. |
JNelson6563
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-16-06 07:28 AM
Response to Original message |
|
You just can't buy this kind of publicity.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-16-06 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #34 |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-16-06 09:46 PM
Response to Original message |
51. It's the words, silly. |
|
So you're pissed that two Democrats in HEAVY Republican districts asked to have it removed and the DCCC obliged? How do you know that wasn't the plan from the get-go?
1. Everyone saw through the fact that you conveniently forgot to mention any GOP members.
2. Everyone can see by your overreaction at the thought of a challenge to your spin (HEAVY) that you clearly coughed it up to fluff up a puff piece.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 05:45 AM
Response to Reply #51 |
54. It's the words, silly. So, got that fuzzy math for us yet? |
|
1. Everyone saw through the fact that you conveniently forgot to mention any GOP members.
I conveniently forgot to mention what I had for breakfast that morning, too. But since one of the controversies on DU is the two Democrats, any GOP involvement is irrelevant.
2. Everyone can see by your overreaction at the thought of a challenge to your spin (HEAVY) that you clearly coughed it up to fluff up a puff piece.
Ahh. But there is no spin. I'm sure most (with the exception of you) would agree that a "strong republican district" and a "heavy republican district" are one in the same. But to make some odd point you're trying to make, you have to discredit the sources (and you do a crappy job of that, too.)
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:15 AM
Response to Reply #54 |
60. An MSNBC quote is a source? Lets ask HRC about MSM quotes. lol |
|
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: Myself, and I am sure many other activists have worked in counties and districts where the registration numbers are split by double digits. Some as high as 3-1 Rep- Dem. Thats HEAVY Show us the numbers for both districts, or keep spinning, its up to you.
You didn't mention the GOPers involved because they didn't fit your story line, anyone can see that. I would say nice try, but I would be lying.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #60 |
|
Parsing again. LOL!
Got that fuzzy math for us?
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #62 |
71. sorry cnn Got the numbers for the district yet? |
|
Edited on Mon Jul-17-06 09:23 AM by LincolnMcGrath
Didn't think so.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #71 |
84. got the e-mail, screenshots, and solution to you fuzzy math problem? |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #84 |
97. For at least the 4th time |
|
There are no screen shots involved here Yet!
No luck with the District numbers?
Perhaps a new thread about what constitutes a HEAVY registration advantage?
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #97 |
100. For at least the 4th time |
|
in post 74, you said you were asked not to post the screenshot. Now it doesn't exist?
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #100 |
103. For the 8th time The screen shot in question was from the Trigger |
|
episode last fall. (So, logic dictates that the request not to display it would be from last fall, also) Were would a screen shot even come into play in this thread? What would a screen shot reveal?
Stop Stalling, post the numbers from the District
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #103 |
113. then why did you say it was from now? |
|
Stop Stalling, post the fuzzy math and e-mail.
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #113 |
115. I didn't. Post the numbers to back your claim in the OP |
|
Show us the TX 17 party registration numbers.
There has been no math to debate as yet. Give us some.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #115 |
118. yes you did. Post the DUer email |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #118 |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #121 |
123. Look in the posts above... and show us the TX 17 #s... and the e-mails |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #123 |
130. Why do you refuse to discuss the content of the OP? |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #130 |
136. why do you insist on changing the subject? |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #136 |
142. The HEAVY Claim is yours. I say show us the TX 17 #s that back it. |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #142 |
148. The e-mail and "8 terms in a 3 year old district" is yours. I say back it |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #148 |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #153 |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #97 |
105. but you SAID there was. Can we not trust you? LOL! |
|
No luck with that fuzzy math, email, screenshot?
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #105 |
108. No, I did not not. sorry! No luck with the numbers yet? |
|
I think you may have found them, and refuse to post them. :shrug:
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #108 |
111. yes you did. No luck with the e-mail and fuzzy math? |
|
I think you might have been mistaken about having the e-mail and won't admit it.
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #111 |
|
Edited on Mon Jul-17-06 10:29 AM by LincolnMcGrath
Still running scared from the TX17 registration numbers?
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #114 |
119. Look in the posts above. |
|
Now, when are you going to:
1. Post those phantom DUer emails and associated screenshots? 2. Explain how someone can serve 8 terms in a 3 year old district 3. Post the TX 17 numbers you threatened to post above?
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #119 |
124. I have looked above. |
|
Edited on Mon Jul-17-06 11:09 AM by LincolnMcGrath
Show us the TX 17 #s
1. Post those phantom DUer emails and associated screen shots? For the 10th time, there are no screen shots(see above where you said "Get them involved") Pick an outrage and stick with it. lol
2. Explain how someone can serve 8 terms in a 3 year old district You said it, you explain it
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #124 |
126. then why do you want me to tell you to do it again? Show us the TX #s |
|
..and the e-mails and the logic behind your fuzzy math.
|
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #126 |
131. Why do you refuse to discuss the content of the OP? |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #131 |
137. why do you insist on changing the subject? |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #137 |
143. The HEAVY Claim is yours. I say show us the TX 17 #s that back it. |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #143 |
149. The e-mail and "8 terms in a 3 year old district" is yours. I say back it |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #149 |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #154 |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:22 AM
Response to Original message |
138. OMG I found some fuzzy math! Check it out! |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #138 |
144. doesn't explain how one person can serve 8 terms in a 3 year old district |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #144 |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #155 |
LincolnMcGrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 12:21 PM
Response to Original message |
156. LOL Why drop the term HEAVY in your new thread? |
|
Why cut and run at all?
:rofl:
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-17-06 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #156 |
163. we were speaking of districts in general and not any specifically |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 19th 2024, 06:03 PM
Response to Original message |