For the first time ever the New York Times is not endorsing a single Republican

Very nice.
The quick and easy recipe for not having a democracy any more.

 

Whatever "the libs" are doing, at least they're not jerking off in memory of Ted Haggard.

 

Well, I see that the libs' anger mode is on the upward swing. Imagine what it will be like at 7 p.m. Oh wait, that's when the projections of victory come from the media that three hours later, will be studio floor mats because they didn't get it right.

 

Lee, what you think you know, or others know, is trumped by "you don't quite get it" pn the b-head theory. I could prove that with an "out" of someone, but I won't do that. But "I" am not "he". But it definitely got a chuckle out of me.

 

Ted Haggard deserves to be crucified. And so do the hypocrites closest to him that knew about this beforehand.

 

Yawn, I believe you're the first poster whose handle qualifies as onomatopoeia. For that, but for nothing else you've done here, you should be proud.

 

Oh, we're cool, here, zzzzzzzz . . . our expectations have been realistic for six weeks. A House
takeover, by five seats or so, and a 3-4 seat Senate pickup. Worse than that . . . yeah,
I'll be disappointed. But I'm not living in fantasyland with those numbers, unlike some others.

 

Yawn, you ain't gonna be chuckling in eight hours.

 

Are you the guy Borat talks to in the movie before he takes the mic at the rodeo? Just curious.

 

Quite the sphynxian riddle there, Sleepyhead.

If you are not "he" does that make you a she?

 

I am him as he is me as we are she as we are all together...