Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
@jonerton15 Actually I'm a supper feminine lesbian, not even close to a dykey woman and I think she is damn sexy. Not because she is supper pretty or has a killer body, its her sense of Humor and her mind that makes her sexy to other women. When will you guys figure out the women for the most part are looking at more then looks in a partner, good thing for you men too, if women just went on looks only 10% of men would be able to land a woman.
@petiteAlicious She is out and open gay person, her life partner looks like a grown up version of Cindy Brady. They have been together for about 12years.
i am a staunch advocate of the right to keep and bear arms, my friend. i don't know if i could get a permit for those two incidences, though. they weren't threats on my life.
the last time i paid attention before giving up believing in the integrity and efficacy of law enforcement and the so-called justice system,the police department used to advise women threatened with rape to submit so as not to be hurt. so i don't know if they'd give me a permit for concealed based on that.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You do not need to show any type of cause or reason to buy or carry (if it is legal in your state) a firearm. It is you constitutional guaranteed right, even if you've never been threatened. You just need to be 21, no felonies or violent crimes, and pass a course if you want to concealed carry.
a coworker of mine is having a hard time trying to get a permit to carry concealed, and he's an iraq vet! maybe it's because he's a vet, they think he might go ptsd or something? he has to have a "compelling reason." he already has a regular permit and weapons. i live in MA.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
MA is a very liberal state and there is a great deal of resistance to any sort of right involving firearms (unless you're a politician--they write themselves into the legislation as exemptions). Sometimes there are issued if a soldier has been treated for post traumatic stress, but if that were the case, they'd likely take his regular permit. I hate to say it, but you may just be a victim of liberalism.
every town in MA can have its own requirements to get a class A permit, it's ultimately up to the police chief...more and more are requiring multiple letters of reference and other BS, like charging more than the actual fee.
yep. only they in government should have guns, because they know better.
it's like how the guy breaking into your house has more rights than the homeowner! if you shoot him, you could end up going to jail over it, or his family can sue you if you kill him.
i personally think if someone breaks into my house, they forfeit any rights they may have had. except the right to be carried out in a body bag.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
There was a gig uproar several years back when the media found out that Diane Feinstein, the biggest supporter of a complete ban on all firearms, had a concealed carry permit and a gun of her own. Talk about a hypocrite.
exactly. there's "the masses" who need to be controlled and told what to do, and then there's her, who should be immune and knows better than everyone else. lol.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Because you're cool, I'll let you slide on Maddow. You still have to explain Keith Olbermann on your favorites list though. That guy undeniably hates conservatives.
keith can be a "bit" bombastic for my tastes, and i hope rachel never gets like that, but his special comment on gay marriage made me sob when i first heard it. it still gets to me. so he has a place in my heart. and he does make me laugh when he goes off on his fox counterparts. they could make it interesting if they had his wit, but...they do not.
in MA, they call it "no party affiliation" when i go to vote as an independent.
radar, did you watch the show today? she did that purr/growl thing she does and i almost fell off my chair. i think my heart may have stopped, too. SO HOT!
You know you love her, that's why you persist here.
I'm sorry, I missed the purr/growl thing. You know, of course, that if Rachel ever experienced the "Vermin difference," she'd be instantly transformed into a straight conservative.
radar, um, i doubt your vermin/rat dick would turn rachel into anything but traumatized. sorry.
actually, it's comments like that and the recent gang rape of a lesbian in CA that continue to blow my mind about aggressive straight guys. why are you guys so threatened by lesbians? being a lesbian is not about rejecting men, it's preferring women. your little rat dick has nothing to do with it.
no, i do not have a "hostile, unwarranted attitude" towards straight men. i have had hostile straight men twice threaten to rape me because i "didn't know what I was missing." One was a drunk asshole, but the other one scared the hell out of me because I knew him and think he really meant it. but who the fuck walks around threatening to rape somebody anyway?
As if raping me would make me want, what?...more of that experience?
oh, is "rape" too big a word or something? you said i had a "hostile and unwarranted attitude" towards straight men after I took exception to your typical straight guy comment about turning lesbian, so I gave you an example of how that is not true.
You amp every innocent comment through your preconceived notions about the hostility of straight men. Decent guys should have to endure your irrational attitude just because you hang out at the wrong bars.
radar, what was innocent about what you said? I realize you're just talking shit on YT, but it's the same sexually aggressive shit I've heard a million times before, or any woman really.
i don't hang out at bars, actually, either.
what is "irrational" about my "attitude" of calling attention to your comment? if anything, it was an irrational comment that i as a decent woman shouldn't have to endure.
Nope, you have a hostile attitude. Like Maddow, you are delusional. She see's only evil republicans, and you see only straight male rapists. You'd probably die of freight if you ran into a straight republican male in an alley.
i never said you wanted to rape me either. ?? i was drawing a parallel between the comment you made about turning maddow with your bat dick, and the recent rape of a lesbian. it always seems to come down to converting a gay woman with straight men.
i know you are aware, you're the one who wanted to use yours to convert rachel. you brought it up, and now want to drop it because it was indeed an irrational comment. *gasp* lol.
lol. yes, clearly you and rachel have so much in common. i'm sure she would drop her gf of a decade to run off with you. it's that sexy echolocation thing you do. (but, alas, not as sexy as her doing infrastructure purrs)
hey, btw, mr. objectivity, you haven't uttered a single word on here that HASN'T been spun distorted, biased or an outright lie. and you haven't had the courage to defend anything that you have said other than by throwing out another lie. are you a republican by any chance?
omg, if i'm not at least a little intelligent, what does that make you for running and hiding from me? and while pretending to be all rational and objective, because it clearly is an act, you must have lost your sense of humor along the way. and discernment. though i do think maddow is good looking, i said her FANS were good looking in that statement, so you're analytical abilities aren't nearly what you profess.
Why would I provide you with ammunition by revealing my (factually accurate) news sources? You're having enough trouble focusing on the issue at hand, which is Maddow's misrepresentations and partisan distortions. You're little mind is already buckling under the pressure, as evidenced by your deteriorating writing. I do not think placing another intellectual burden upon you at this juncture would be wise (or medically ethical).
the reason you would "provide me ammunition" is because it would demonstrate an honesty and willingness to stand up for whatever it is you believe in that, frankly, eludes you on here. it makes you look cowardly and weak, like you're afraid and running away from being confronted and challneged on specifics. but at least you're consistent, because every single accusation you have made on here is vague and nonspecific.
she didn't purloin it from oxford, she brought it with her because she was born with it. you don't get into oxford in the first place without being the best of the best.
It would be irrational to think that a rational person could come to the rational conclusion that Maddow provides rational analysis of current events.
radar, how would it be irrational to think that a rational person could come to the rational conclusion that Maddow provides rational analysis of current events, specifically?
isn't it irrational to repeat the same vague, non-specific commentary over and over again?
oh, man. now i know you're completely full of shit. you must be pulling my leg. maddow "lacks the three-dimensionality necessary to fully grasp the subtle nuances of today's multifaceted issues?" ROTFLMAO! She's the one who's bringing brains back to TV, single-handedly, with her devastating breakdowns of the MOST multifaceted and nuanced issues, and she does it on a daily basis! LOL.
She's embarrassing to watch; as if shes having a private moment and I should not have witnessed it. Some things are best left behind closed doors. Her conniptions definitely should not be a daily TV spectacle!
radar, AGAIN, specifics please on how she is embarrassing to watch or is acting as if she is having a private moment? and what conniptions? what are you referring to?
how so? i think you're the only one spewing vitriol with your lame, unfounded comments that you consistently refuse to qualify, only proving that you can't qualify your commentary and are merely being irrational and annoying because all you can do, really, is throw rocks at the towering analytical abilities of Maddow, and not actually engage.
um, if rachel would give me the time of day, i would swear off youtube FOREVER. but, alas, she has a gf. and if you're a guy, it never started between us. sorry lover.
no. your analysis is not correct, as evidenced by your inability to prove a single point. i am enamored with Rachel for several reasons, one of which is yes, she's adorable, but also that she is an amazing role model for smart women in general, and gay women, too.
you're trying to disqualify me from challenging the crap you post on here base don a celeb crush, but the reality is you can't because you haven't disproven anything i have said, nor proven anything you have asserted.
Sure I can. They're both off-the-chart liberal. They're both irrational. They both "fudge" the facts. They both bitch and whine that America doesn't fit their image of the perfect Marxist state.
radar, i'm begging you, give an example of something factually wrong. i will give you that maddow certainly has her opinions that not everyone would be expected to agree with, but give me an example of her being factually incorrect.
Doubtful, you can't even put a complete sentence together, and you're living an unrealistic romantic fantasy. The most compelling evidence against the false assertion of you being intelligent is your taking everything this verbose partisan fibber says at face value.
radar, you have yet to shed any light on anything that rachel has gotten wrong and continue to be unable to give specific examples of anything at all that you assert on here.
you're the one living in a fantasy, one you make up with each lame, disparaging, utterly baseless remark.
i'm beginning to think you might be mentally ill for repeating the same empty commentary. why are you even still here?
You need to stop throwing your life away on a love that will never come to fruition. How many hours a day do you waste swooning over videos featuring Maddow pretending to have integrity?
i'm throwing my life away on unrequited love, dear. i just enjoy holding people's feet to the fire when they're full of shit (the people, not their feet).
the only one lacking in integrity is you. i think even you know by now you're wrong, but are too stubborn or too deep in denial to admit it.
how much of your time do you waste following videos of maddow online, posting your bullshit lies? what do you get out if it?
i'm off my game tonight. i think i am getting sick of this, actually. but i'm too stubborn to let you have the last word, especially because YOU'RE WRONG!!
None, I'm maneuvered here only to respond to your misguided comments. Maddow is insignificant. Her tabloid entertainment program doesn't interest me because it is devoid of factual information.
i posted a response but it seems to have not made it. anywho, you say maddow is insignificant but, i dunno, she seems to be pretty important to you if you keep coming here to make baseless assertions that you can't defend.
also, i've recently realized that though you pretend to be criticizing her based on "factual inaccuraries" that you just can't seem to provide a single example of, really, your problem with her is just personal. that's why you can't make a decent argument...you just don't like her and use ideological or political differences as an excuse.
obviously, you don't have to like her. not everybody likes everybody and people are certainly free to disagree. but to insist on lying like you do, is sad.
I'm trying to move on to more important issues, but you keep trying to pull me back. You need to get over your obsession with this insignificant tabloid show host.
radar, believe me, i'm not trying to pull you back. i'm just challenging all the lies you post on here, and your cowardice in refusing to prove them. oh, that's right, you can't prove them..
The fact that I have no interest in sleeping with this spin doctor makes me a little more objective than you. You see "sexy," the rest of the world sees "liar."
i have a celeb crush on her, i'm not head over heels in love with someone i've never met. get a rip. you'd had crushes on people before, right?
"the rest of the world" sees soemthing you don't see, I guees,(which doesn't surprise me)
you're the liar radar. and a coward who keeps running. run little liar, run. try to change the subject. you have no objectivity whatsoever...you just lob vague accusations and lies. none of your commentary is based in fact..none of it.
Actually what I said was "these simple facts." It would seem that you've adopted Rachel Maddow's philosophy of inaccurately reporting the quotes of others.
radar, pathetically clinging to a typo i made is hardly making a point. indeed, you have yet to make a point, except that you're full of shit, have nothing better to do than post lies on a YT video, and make vague false accusations that you consistently are unable to substantiate.
radar, i don't care if "i" and "radar" are capitalized, dear. i'm typing comments on youtube, not writing a thesis. grasping at anything just to pretend you have a point, any point? you don't. more like trying to change the subject of me calling you on your bullshit lies and complete inability to back them up.
You will find that if you cannot write correctly, people will not take you seriously. Fact of life, deal with it. So far, with your limited abilities, you've shown only that you are a fringe left-winger who can't write.
radar, i do write correctly, dear, and people do take me seriously when i write and speak.
my limited abilities, as you put it, seem to be too much for you, as you consistently prove on here. you just try to change the subject and hide behind this bullshit facade that you seem to cling to...that of someone who is rational. but your refusal to back up any of your lies reveals the truth. you're a hack and a liar who apparently is afraid to get into a debate with me on anything substantive.
radar, your bullshit doesn't fool me, dear. still dodging the actual issue and afraid to debate on any of your lies, i see, even with someone who can't write? lol. how much of a giant coward does that make you?
you're just a turd, clearly not to be taken seriously yourself. you can't even make a point.
I have been quite clear on the point, Maddow is a far-left tabloid show host who spins to the degree where the substance of her show is no longer factual.
radar, dear, i'm beginning to think you suffer some form of dementia. you repeat the same lies over and over again, and i am forced to ask the same question of you, over and over again: what has maddow been factually incorrect about?
there is nothing tabloid about her show, either, not that you watch it. what is so tabloid about talking to governors, senators, congressmen/women, former and current government officials, special prosecutors, authors, professors, journalists and activists?
You're joking right? Maddow leans so far right she can hardly stand on her own two feet. Do you really think your gal provides a balanced perspective? If you do, then you're naive.
radar, in your state of dementia, you said maddow leans right. i think you meant "leans left?" i'm not sure what you mean at this point.
maddow pretty clearly provides a progressive perspective, and i do believe she brings integrity and balance to her analysis. despite your dozens of posts to the contrary, you have yet to prove she doesn't. so grow a pair and do so, or shut up.
Maddow is beyond "progressive." She is regressive. I guess I wouldn't have a problem with her tabloid show if MSNBC was up front about it and named it the "Rachel Maddow I Hate Republicans Show." MSNBC's current attempt to pass off Maddow's left-wing vitriol as "reasoned analysis" is just dishonest journalism.
like what radar? maddow is no clinton fan, and she CLEARLY doesn't just harp on Bush. i really don't think you listen to or watch her shows, which would make you dishonest for acting like you know wtf you're talking about here. you don't.
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 4 months ago
Rachel Maddow is damn sexy. Just sayin'.
OnceMoreWithNoir 2 years ago 14
@OnceMoreWithNoir yeah, for other dykey women
jonerton15 1 year ago
@jonerton15 Actually I'm a supper feminine lesbian, not even close to a dykey woman and I think she is damn sexy. Not because she is supper pretty or has a killer body, its her sense of Humor and her mind that makes her sexy to other women. When will you guys figure out the women for the most part are looking at more then looks in a partner, good thing for you men too, if women just went on looks only 10% of men would be able to land a woman.
Fireflygamer 4 months ago
who hoooo she is gay!!!!
petiteAlicious 3 years ago 11
@petiteAlicious She is out and open gay person, her life partner looks like a grown up version of Cindy Brady. They have been together for about 12years.
nogod65 2 years ago
yah duh!!! I already knew she was gay 11months ago (my last comment post date)...that's why i said "she is gay!!!!" lol So i don't get ur comment??
petiteAlicious 2 years ago
I thought they were gonna talk about Prop 8 The Musical...
fWo 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I don't want to conjure up images of Jack and the Beanstalk in your mind.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
If you are really scared of threats on your life, have you considered concealed carry? Oh wait, they'd revoke your liberal card for that.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
i am a staunch advocate of the right to keep and bear arms, my friend. i don't know if i could get a permit for those two incidences, though. they weren't threats on my life.
the last time i paid attention before giving up believing in the integrity and efficacy of law enforcement and the so-called justice system,the police department used to advise women threatened with rape to submit so as not to be hurt. so i don't know if they'd give me a permit for concealed based on that.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You do not need to show any type of cause or reason to buy or carry (if it is legal in your state) a firearm. It is you constitutional guaranteed right, even if you've never been threatened. You just need to be 21, no felonies or violent crimes, and pass a course if you want to concealed carry.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
a coworker of mine is having a hard time trying to get a permit to carry concealed, and he's an iraq vet! maybe it's because he's a vet, they think he might go ptsd or something? he has to have a "compelling reason." he already has a regular permit and weapons. i live in MA.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
MA is a very liberal state and there is a great deal of resistance to any sort of right involving firearms (unless you're a politician--they write themselves into the legislation as exemptions). Sometimes there are issued if a soldier has been treated for post traumatic stress, but if that were the case, they'd likely take his regular permit. I hate to say it, but you may just be a victim of liberalism.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
issues
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
issues?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
every town in MA can have its own requirements to get a class A permit, it's ultimately up to the police chief...more and more are requiring multiple letters of reference and other BS, like charging more than the actual fee.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
It's all a rouse to strip you of a fundamental right liberal elitists don't think you should have.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I meant "ruse."
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
yep. only they in government should have guns, because they know better.
it's like how the guy breaking into your house has more rights than the homeowner! if you shoot him, you could end up going to jail over it, or his family can sue you if you kill him.
i personally think if someone breaks into my house, they forfeit any rights they may have had. except the right to be carried out in a body bag.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
There was a gig uproar several years back when the media found out that Diane Feinstein, the biggest supporter of a complete ban on all firearms, had a concealed carry permit and a gun of her own. Talk about a hypocrite.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
exactly. there's "the masses" who need to be controlled and told what to do, and then there's her, who should be immune and knows better than everyone else. lol.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Because you're cool, I'll let you slide on Maddow. You still have to explain Keith Olbermann on your favorites list though. That guy undeniably hates conservatives.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
keith can be a "bit" bombastic for my tastes, and i hope rachel never gets like that, but his special comment on gay marriage made me sob when i first heard it. it still gets to me. so he has a place in my heart. and he does make me laugh when he goes off on his fox counterparts. they could make it interesting if they had his wit, but...they do not.
in MA, they call it "no party affiliation" when i go to vote as an independent.
the two party system sucks.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Keith makes me cry too, albeit for different reasons.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
lol. i'll bet he does.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
That's why I hate liberal politicians. Soon we'll have to ask Ted Kennedy's permission to go to the bathroom, and likely be taxed for his blessing.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
i have to agree. my personal favorite is pelosi. she has no clue, and actually frightens me as speaker of the house. useless.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Wow! We found common ground. We should probably stop there. It's getting late anyway. I need my beauty sleep.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
i meant to add to my previous comment re: permit to carry: as if rape isn't a hurtful experience? sexism and misogyny are so insidious...
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
radar, did you watch the show today? she did that purr/growl thing she does and i almost fell off my chair. i think my heart may have stopped, too. SO HOT!
You know you love her, that's why you persist here.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
I'm sorry, I missed the purr/growl thing. You know, of course, that if Rachel ever experienced the "Vermin difference," she'd be instantly transformed into a straight conservative.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, um, i doubt your vermin/rat dick would turn rachel into anything but traumatized. sorry.
actually, it's comments like that and the recent gang rape of a lesbian in CA that continue to blow my mind about aggressive straight guys. why are you guys so threatened by lesbians? being a lesbian is not about rejecting men, it's preferring women. your little rat dick has nothing to do with it.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
How to you make the transition from "RadarGuidedVermin" to "rat"? Are you trying to be funny, or are you really clueless?
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
bat, rat, whatever. is a bat's dick terribly much larger or interesting than a rat's?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
A rat does not use echolocation.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
and is echolocation the "vermin difference" you were referring to that would turn rachel straight and conservative? i don't think so.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
"it's comments like that and the recent gang rape of a lesbian in CA that continue to blow my mind about aggressive straight guys"
You have a hostile, unwarranted attitude toward straight men.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
no, i do not have a "hostile, unwarranted attitude" towards straight men. i have had hostile straight men twice threaten to rape me because i "didn't know what I was missing." One was a drunk asshole, but the other one scared the hell out of me because I knew him and think he really meant it. but who the fuck walks around threatening to rape somebody anyway?
As if raping me would make me want, what?...more of that experience?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
What's with the "rape" and "dick"? Get a grip. From the language you use, I have no doubt you could have easily handled one drunk guy.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
oh, is "rape" too big a word or something? you said i had a "hostile and unwarranted attitude" towards straight men after I took exception to your typical straight guy comment about turning lesbian, so I gave you an example of how that is not true.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
You amp every innocent comment through your preconceived notions about the hostility of straight men. Decent guys should have to endure your irrational attitude just because you hang out at the wrong bars.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, what was innocent about what you said? I realize you're just talking shit on YT, but it's the same sexually aggressive shit I've heard a million times before, or any woman really.
i don't hang out at bars, actually, either.
what is "irrational" about my "attitude" of calling attention to your comment? if anything, it was an irrational comment that i as a decent woman shouldn't have to endure.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Nope, you have a hostile attitude. Like Maddow, you are delusional. She see's only evil republicans, and you see only straight male rapists. You'd probably die of freight if you ran into a straight republican male in an alley.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
and i'm trying to show you that you have a hostile attitude towards lesbians, or maddow in particular, with your sexuallly aggressive comment.
i know not all straight guys are tools. and i have republican friends. and i wouldn't want to run itot anyone in an alley, lest i die of "freight."
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Maybe try meditation.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
meditation for what? what are you referring to?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Anger management.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
I never said I wanted to rape you. How about taking it down a notch?
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
i never said you wanted to rape me either. ?? i was drawing a parallel between the comment you made about turning maddow with your bat dick, and the recent rape of a lesbian. it always seems to come down to converting a gay woman with straight men.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
What is your obsession with "dick"?
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
i'm not obsessed with dick. what is YOUR obsession with dick? you're the one who brought it up.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Enough with the "dick." I am aware of them.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
i know you are aware, you're the one who wanted to use yours to convert rachel. you brought it up, and now want to drop it because it was indeed an irrational comment. *gasp* lol.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
I get it now, you're in love with her and are threatened by my potential ability to take her from you.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
lol. yes, clearly you and rachel have so much in common. i'm sure she would drop her gf of a decade to run off with you. it's that sexy echolocation thing you do. (but, alas, not as sexy as her doing infrastructure purrs)
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Her reasons might be procreational, being motivated by a desire for superior offspring.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
and your reasons? brainy bat babies?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Brainy, well-endowed bat babies.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
Brainy, well-endowed, republican bat babies; the democrat gene being recessive.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
is it genetic? so there IS potentially a cure for republicanism??
that explains bush's resistance to stem cell research....yes, it's all starting to make sense now....
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Unfortunately, I've noticed Keith Olbermann videos under your favorites. I'm going to have to deduct two points from your total.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
well, you still have that japanese boy band...fig leaves and all...
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
The "boy band" was strictly for humor. Those guys make Britney Spears look like Celene Dion.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
It is the only rational explanation for your irrational hostility toward my charming and witty jibe.
P.S. I know you love the word "rational," so I try to incorporate it frequently.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
Radar, you straight republican male, Merry Christmas (note the capitalization. it almost killed me).
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
thanks, bluegrrl70, i really appreciate the gesture.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
If you watch close, you can actually see Maddow's nose grow as she does her show.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
your nose must be on the floor, liar. what show are you referring to? you don't even watch it. liar.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
test
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
hey, btw, mr. objectivity, you haven't uttered a single word on here that HASN'T been spun distorted, biased or an outright lie. and you haven't had the courage to defend anything that you have said other than by throwing out another lie. are you a republican by any chance?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Your friend, the political zealot, exemplifies irrational thinking.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, irrational posterboy, how do i exemplify irrational thinking?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
I'm not sure Maddow viewers think at all!
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
maddow viewers are, by definition, thinkers. and good looking. i can see how that would be hard for you to grasp, it's so subtle and mulitfaceted.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago 2
"maddow viewers are, by definition, thinkers. and good looking"
And there we have it! Your attraction is sexual, not intellectual.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
omg, if i'm not at least a little intelligent, what does that make you for running and hiding from me? and while pretending to be all rational and objective, because it clearly is an act, you must have lost your sense of humor along the way. and discernment. though i do think maddow is good looking, i said her FANS were good looking in that statement, so you're analytical abilities aren't nearly what you profess.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago 3
If you removed all the partisan rancor from Maddow's show, it would only be three minutes long.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
what partisan rancor? please elaborate while avoiding partisan rancor.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Maddow can no more accurately interpret current events than a turtle can whistle Dixie.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, you can no more offer proof of anything you say than that same turtle would win the indy 500.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Careful, remember the story of the tortoise and the hare.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
in your dreams. like i said, you can't even make a point on YT, let alone go toe to toe with Maddow.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Why would I provide you with ammunition by revealing my (factually accurate) news sources? You're having enough trouble focusing on the issue at hand, which is Maddow's misrepresentations and partisan distortions. You're little mind is already buckling under the pressure, as evidenced by your deteriorating writing. I do not think placing another intellectual burden upon you at this juncture would be wise (or medically ethical).
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
"Your little mind"
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
the reason you would "provide me ammunition" is because it would demonstrate an honesty and willingness to stand up for whatever it is you believe in that, frankly, eludes you on here. it makes you look cowardly and weak, like you're afraid and running away from being confronted and challneged on specifics. but at least you're consistent, because every single accusation you have made on here is vague and nonspecific.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
I just don't see what cerebral ability you think Maddow purloined from Oxford.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
she didn't purloin it from oxford, she brought it with her because she was born with it. you don't get into oxford in the first place without being the best of the best.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
It's always sad seeing a mind destroyed by irrational Marxist beliefs.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
destroyed by marxist beliefs?? um, what are you talking about? and how so?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
you throw around the word rational alot, and yet you have yet to demonstrate an ounce of rationality.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
It would be irrational to think that a rational person could come to the rational conclusion that Maddow provides rational analysis of current events.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, how would it be irrational to think that a rational person could come to the rational conclusion that Maddow provides rational analysis of current events, specifically?
isn't it irrational to repeat the same vague, non-specific commentary over and over again?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Lol! All it takes to get into that diploma mill is a nice tie and "donor affiliation."
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
is that how you got your rhodes scholarship?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
and the reason you may be unable to discern maddow's obvious intellect is the lack of your own.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Maddow's thinking is flat, it lacks the three-dimensionality necessary to fully grasp the subtle nuances and today's multifaceted issues.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
"of today's"
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
oh, man. now i know you're completely full of shit. you must be pulling my leg. maddow "lacks the three-dimensionality necessary to fully grasp the subtle nuances of today's multifaceted issues?" ROTFLMAO! She's the one who's bringing brains back to TV, single-handedly, with her devastating breakdowns of the MOST multifaceted and nuanced issues, and she does it on a daily basis! LOL.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
She's embarrassing to watch; as if shes having a private moment and I should not have witnessed it. Some things are best left behind closed doors. Her conniptions definitely should not be a daily TV spectacle!
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, AGAIN, specifics please on how she is embarrassing to watch or is acting as if she is having a private moment? and what conniptions? what are you referring to?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago 2
This woman spits vitriol like a Bitis arietans Puff Addar.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
how so? i think you're the only one spewing vitriol with your lame, unfounded comments that you consistently refuse to qualify, only proving that you can't qualify your commentary and are merely being irrational and annoying because all you can do, really, is throw rocks at the towering analytical abilities of Maddow, and not actually engage.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago 2
"towering analytical abilities of Maddow"
Her brain cells lack a eukaryotic membrane.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
aww. that's all you got left? you can't discuss or debate or refute, so you resort to lame-o little insults? name calling? really? lol.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago 3
If you're in love with Rachel, does that mean it's over between us?
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
um, if rachel would give me the time of day, i would swear off youtube FOREVER. but, alas, she has a gf. and if you're a guy, it never started between us. sorry lover.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago 3
My analysis is correct. You are enamored with Rachel for reasons other than her apocryphal political analysis.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
no. your analysis is not correct, as evidenced by your inability to prove a single point. i am enamored with Rachel for several reasons, one of which is yes, she's adorable, but also that she is an amazing role model for smart women in general, and gay women, too.
you're trying to disqualify me from challenging the crap you post on here base don a celeb crush, but the reality is you can't because you haven't disproven anything i have said, nor proven anything you have asserted.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago 3
Bitchy gay women, like Rachel Madcow and Rosie O'Donnel, make horrible role models.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, you can't compare rachel to rosie. two very different people. but i guess you think all gay people or all gay women are alike.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Sure I can. They're both off-the-chart liberal. They're both irrational. They both "fudge" the facts. They both bitch and whine that America doesn't fit their image of the perfect Marxist state.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
yeah, see, that doesn't describe rachel. i don't follow rosie so can't vouch for her.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Then allow me to fill you in. Rosie is just like Maddow, only fatter.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
i actually don't think they're alike at all.
do you just not like gay women?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
I don't like partisan, lying, bitchy women.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
give an example of a woman you do like or admire.
you do "like women," right?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
As opposed to factually wrong women? Yes.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, i'm begging you, give an example of something factually wrong. i will give you that maddow certainly has her opinions that not everyone would be expected to agree with, but give me an example of her being factually incorrect.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
You pine to experience the Radar difference.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
yeah, that'd be a huge negative on the radar experience.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago 3
oh, the intellectual radar difference? what, praytell, is that? i'm smarter than you, so why would i want to dumb myself down?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago 3
Doubtful, you can't even put a complete sentence together, and you're living an unrealistic romantic fantasy. The most compelling evidence against the false assertion of you being intelligent is your taking everything this verbose partisan fibber says at face value.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, you have yet to shed any light on anything that rachel has gotten wrong and continue to be unable to give specific examples of anything at all that you assert on here.
you're the one living in a fantasy, one you make up with each lame, disparaging, utterly baseless remark.
i'm beginning to think you might be mentally ill for repeating the same empty commentary. why are you even still here?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Rachel gets virtually everything wrong. Pick an episode, and watch for the mistakes.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
um, i don't think rachel makes all these mistakes, you are. so you would have to grow a pair and point them out for me.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
oops, meant "you do" not you are.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
ew. double oops. don't grow a pair and point THEM out for me, but grow a pair and point out all these errors you believe maddow makes.
good grief. i need some caffeine.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
It's not my job to hold your hand and walk you through life. Get an education and deliver yourself from ignorance.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, you have shown me nothing. you're taking the cowards way out. you make all these accusations, but cannot come up with a single example.
oh, and i have an education, master logician who can't prove a single thing he says.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Every issue of her show serves as an example of her spin, falsehoods, and distortions. Pick one.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
I meant episode.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
ok then radar, today's msnbc show. what about today's show was spin, falsehood or distorted?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
You need to stop throwing your life away on a love that will never come to fruition. How many hours a day do you waste swooning over videos featuring Maddow pretending to have integrity?
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
i'm throwing my life away on unrequited love, dear. i just enjoy holding people's feet to the fire when they're full of shit (the people, not their feet).
the only one lacking in integrity is you. i think even you know by now you're wrong, but are too stubborn or too deep in denial to admit it.
how much of your time do you waste following videos of maddow online, posting your bullshit lies? what do you get out if it?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
oh crap. i meant "not throwing my life away."
i'm off my game tonight. i think i am getting sick of this, actually. but i'm too stubborn to let you have the last word, especially because YOU'RE WRONG!!
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
None, I'm maneuvered here only to respond to your misguided comments. Maddow is insignificant. Her tabloid entertainment program doesn't interest me because it is devoid of factual information.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
i posted a response but it seems to have not made it. anywho, you say maddow is insignificant but, i dunno, she seems to be pretty important to you if you keep coming here to make baseless assertions that you can't defend.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
also, i've recently realized that though you pretend to be criticizing her based on "factual inaccuraries" that you just can't seem to provide a single example of, really, your problem with her is just personal. that's why you can't make a decent argument...you just don't like her and use ideological or political differences as an excuse.
obviously, you don't have to like her. not everybody likes everybody and people are certainly free to disagree. but to insist on lying like you do, is sad.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
I'm trying to move on to more important issues, but you keep trying to pull me back. You need to get over your obsession with this insignificant tabloid show host.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, believe me, i'm not trying to pull you back. i'm just challenging all the lies you post on here, and your cowardice in refusing to prove them. oh, that's right, you can't prove them..
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Attacking me will not restore the integrity of your love interest. Don't you have better things to do?
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
i'm not attacking you radar. i'm pointing out your factual inaccuracies, which are considerable.
you have no integrity. run and hide. liar. don't you have better things to do?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
The only misrepresentations made have been by this Air America hack. I hate to break it to ya kid but Rachel can't walk on water.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
i am aware rachel doesn't walk on water.
i also realize you are consistently unable to back up any of your claims about her show.
the only hack here is you, btw.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
The fact that I have no interest in sleeping with this spin doctor makes me a little more objective than you. You see "sexy," the rest of the world sees "liar."
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
i have a celeb crush on her, i'm not head over heels in love with someone i've never met. get a rip. you'd had crushes on people before, right?
"the rest of the world" sees soemthing you don't see, I guees,(which doesn't surprise me)
you're the liar radar. and a coward who keeps running. run little liar, run. try to change the subject. you have no objectivity whatsoever...you just lob vague accusations and lies. none of your commentary is based in fact..none of it.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
oops, that's get a "grip"
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
It's time to turn you focus to Dr. Phil, because you need help.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, i think it's you that needs professional help. mostly with the pathological lying thing, but not only that.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Rachel is the only one lying, and you're the only one in denial.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
for the 1000th time, radar, prove me wrong...what has maddow lied about that i'm so in denial about??
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
the fact that you refuse to prove anything you assert on here means you're full of shit and the only one spinning anything.
you are soooo incredibly lame at this point.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
It seems these simple facts are beyond you.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
what simple facts radar, lame-o? you refuse to provide any. because you're lying, which is what liars do.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
you say "these simple fact" but where? what?
lol. you're soooo pathetic. thank you thank you thank you for demonstrating over and over again just how full of shit you are.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Actually what I said was "these simple facts." It would seem that you've adopted Rachel Maddow's philosophy of inaccurately reporting the quotes of others.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, pathetically clinging to a typo i made is hardly making a point. indeed, you have yet to make a point, except that you're full of shit, have nothing better to do than post lies on a YT video, and make vague false accusations that you consistently are unable to substantiate.
come on now, this is getting boring. go away.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
They're not "typos." You can't write. "I" and "Radar," for example, are capitalized.
You keep right on believing that Maddow is providing you with "balanced" coverage, and that she's not a liberal spin doctor.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, i don't care if "i" and "radar" are capitalized, dear. i'm typing comments on youtube, not writing a thesis. grasping at anything just to pretend you have a point, any point? you don't. more like trying to change the subject of me calling you on your bullshit lies and complete inability to back them up.
still a liar and a coward, radar. yep.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
You will find that if you cannot write correctly, people will not take you seriously. Fact of life, deal with it. So far, with your limited abilities, you've shown only that you are a fringe left-winger who can't write.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, i do write correctly, dear, and people do take me seriously when i write and speak.
my limited abilities, as you put it, seem to be too much for you, as you consistently prove on here. you just try to change the subject and hide behind this bullshit facade that you seem to cling to...that of someone who is rational. but your refusal to back up any of your lies reveals the truth. you're a hack and a liar who apparently is afraid to get into a debate with me on anything substantive.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Your writing cannot be taken seriously. You do not write correctly.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, you can no longer be taken seriously. it's clear you have nothing better to do than stay on here with weak attempts to antagonize.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
When, or if, you want to be taken seriously, you need only write correctly. I suggest a writing course that will teach you proper capitalization.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, your bullshit doesn't fool me, dear. still dodging the actual issue and afraid to debate on any of your lies, i see, even with someone who can't write? lol. how much of a giant coward does that make you?
you're just a turd, clearly not to be taken seriously yourself. you can't even make a point.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
I have been quite clear on the point, Maddow is a far-left tabloid show host who spins to the degree where the substance of her show is no longer factual.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, dear, i'm beginning to think you suffer some form of dementia. you repeat the same lies over and over again, and i am forced to ask the same question of you, over and over again: what has maddow been factually incorrect about?
there is nothing tabloid about her show, either, not that you watch it. what is so tabloid about talking to governors, senators, congressmen/women, former and current government officials, special prosecutors, authors, professors, journalists and activists?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
You're joking right? Maddow leans so far right she can hardly stand on her own two feet. Do you really think your gal provides a balanced perspective? If you do, then you're naive.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, in your state of dementia, you said maddow leans right. i think you meant "leans left?" i'm not sure what you mean at this point.
maddow pretty clearly provides a progressive perspective, and i do believe she brings integrity and balance to her analysis. despite your dozens of posts to the contrary, you have yet to prove she doesn't. so grow a pair and do so, or shut up.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Maddow is beyond "progressive." She is regressive. I guess I wouldn't have a problem with her tabloid show if MSNBC was up front about it and named it the "Rachel Maddow I Hate Republicans Show." MSNBC's current attempt to pass off Maddow's left-wing vitriol as "reasoned analysis" is just dishonest journalism.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
radar, once again, put up or shut up with your accusations. you are so weak, man. just prove something you say! give an example.
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Are you kidding!?! The woman blames Bush for EVERYTHING. If her toilet didn't flush, it would be Bush's fault.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
so do you think bush and his policies are blameless for the shape of the country right now?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
Balanced, honest reporting is putting the blame where it belongs; not anything bad was Bush, anything good was Clinton. Maddow is simply not honest.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago
like what radar? maddow is no clinton fan, and she CLEARLY doesn't just harp on Bush. i really don't think you listen to or watch her shows, which would make you dishonest for acting like you know wtf you're talking about here. you don't.
so where does the blame belong radar?
bluegrrl70 3 years ago
For what, the economy? How about Barney Franks, Chriss Dodd, and Bill Clinton, for starters. You wouldn't know that from Rachel's show.
RadarGuidedVermin 3 years ago