karen, for someone who 'prides themself' on ALWAYS being right
It's hard to tell from that grammar but it seems you are suggesting that you think that applies to me. If that's the case, you don't have a clue about me.
I live for the day when you are able to demonstrate flaws in my arguments. <g>
Of course, I don't hate Dems.
Of course you do. You're a pretty prolific poster and your favorite, or at least most populous, hobby horse seems to be "damn dirty dems." It shows up day in and day out, your pat response to all things. If that doesn't demonstrate hatred...
Any more than you hate Repubs.
Odd thing to say. Why not "any more than you do"?
I will state my thought again. You can ignore it if you wish. The next time that a (in the public eye) Repub OR a Dem spouts 'hate language' regarding someone of the opposing party, then we could, and now I will take the article apart, and insert the opposite party, so that we can see how it seems to others. I see it as there will be AMPLE opportunity to do this.
I haven't ignored it, I don't think. Dale addressed it directly when he illustrated via Google that there were plenty of Reps-charge-Dems as well as Dems-charge-Reps out there. Pots and kettles. That you see only the pots, not the kettles, is the feedback I, too, am trying to give you. You don't need to go to the trouble of substituting the other party in any article for my benefit or for Dale's. We are well aware of both pots and kettles. If doing so helps you see that there are both, though, then I think it would be a useful exercise. |
