BO doesn't need no stinkin' Congress.....

In other words you have no real basis for what you have said. This does not surprise me for some odd reason.

It seems that you see, read or hear something and interpret it how you want it to work in your mind and BINGO! It's fact.
Then you use the "imaginary information" as basis for a "debate".
In reality that doesn't cut it David.

Didja ever think of this angle David? The Republican party backed Mitt Romney. If he was the best they could come up with it was only logical to back President Barack Obama to a lot of people. It showed at the polls.
For the umpteenth time I will vote Republican if/when they come up with someone worth backing.They haven't but I sincerely wish they would.

For what it's worth I think it's kind of creepy how you will still take any "fact" and run with it to bash President Barack Obama. Then when called upon it you outdo Chubby Checker.

Finally.

For sure. About two packs of smokes per week. I can deal with it and smoking's not good for me anyway.
Perhaps I'll live longer because of it.
Thank you Mr. President!

 

English please! I have to insist. Let's leave the word-salad to Sarah Palin.

 

Sorry, but I missed an I. Try this;
Actually, what I said was the "Righties" are not part of the "we" who you say "missed it". We can understand facts.

 

Thank you, that makes it more readable. But then I have to ask, how do you know what others understand? Aren't you just speaking for people that you really don't know and trying to lend your opinion more weight by using "we"?

 

Hum? That was my original question about our use of hte term "we".

Besides, I believe I understand better what "we" righties understand than you do.

 

View attachment 1200

 

View attachment 1201

 

Oh I get it, it's like pig Latin?

Oyu're erally !msart pselling si !ufn