Democrats SUCK!!

[Palehorse]

Stop feeding the trolls or I will report you to the American Zoological Society! 

[me]

Just more proof that you're bat-shit crazy.

BTW, Bush wasn't the only repug they invited.

He was the only one mentioned in that article which is the only one I had seen at that point.  Give it a rest for cryin' out loud. 

[Locutus]

He was the only one mentioned in that article which is the only one I had seen at that point.  Give it a rest for cryin' out loud. 

Why don't you post something else from your Inbox and we'll get this thread going again today! 

[me]

Why don't you post something else from your Inbox and we'll get this thread going again today! 

I did not get that from my inbox.  Sheesh 

[Bo D]

He was the only one mentioned in that article which is the only one I had seen at that point.  Give it a rest for cryin' out loud.

No he wasn't.

"The event organizers didn't completely exclude Republicans from the event — former President George W. Bush, for instance, received an invitation, but he couldn't attend as he is recovering from surgery"

[Exterminator]

Why don't you post something else from your Inbox and we'll get this thread going again today! 

LMAO!   

[Locutus]

Let's go back to Senator Scott for a moment.  It now looks like that entire article was either a gross misrepresentation or just a flat out lie.

A spokesman for Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), who is the only black senator in Congress, claimed Wednesday that Scott had not been invited to speak at the event. That sparked accusations in conservative corners that organizers had deliberately barred Republicans from attending.

As it turns out, organizers did invite Scott, but the senator declined, citing a prior engagement. A source from the event told Roll Call that the speaker list "was created based on those who were able to confirm availability to attend the event." Since Scott said he was unable to even attend, they assumed he would be unable to speak either.



http://news.yahoo.com/why-were-no-republicans-march-washington-rally-175300783.html

[me]

Ya know, I've heard nothing but good about today's speech, with 2 or 3 exceptions directed at speakers who were pot stirrers, but why were Republicans omitted from the list of speakers.  Yes, Bush was sent an invite but they knew he was recovering from surgery and wouldn't be able to make it.  I think this particular person should have been invited if no other Republican was and if you bother to read the article to the end you will see why.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/sen.-tim-scott-wasnt-invited-to-event-commemorating-mlk-march-on-washington/article/2534830

I do believe I addressed that in my original post.

No he wasn't.

"The event organizers didn't completely exclude Republicans from the event — former President George W. Bush, for instance, received an invitation, but he couldn't attend as he is recovering from surgery"

[Bo D]

Let's go back to Senator Scott for a moment.  It now looks like that entire article was either a gross misrepresentation or just a flat out lie.

A spokesman for Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), who is the only black senator in Congress, claimed Wednesday that Scott had not been invited to speak at the event. That sparked accusations in conservative corners that organizers had deliberately barred Republicans from attending.

As it turns out, organizers did invite Scott, but the senator declined, citing a prior engagement. A source from the event told Roll Call that the speaker list "was created based on those who were able to confirm availability to attend the event." Since Scott said he was unable to even attend, they assumed he would be unable to speak either.



http://news.yahoo.com/why-were-no-republicans-march-washington-rally-175300783.html

Yet 'me' keeps digging her hole deeper and deeper .... 

[Exterminator]

Oopsie!

[Bo D]

This is the perfect of the lack of critical analysis skills so typical of our conservative friends.

With a lead-in comment of "no Republicans were invited" she posts an article lamenting that ONE black Senator wasn't invited.

Yet even in that very same article it mentions that Bush was invited. Last I heard, Bush was still a Republican.

Then she tries to claim that Scott was the only one mentioned in the article.

And she still fails to realize that the cause of this whole commotion is her comment  "no Republicans were invited"

She read that piece of trash, Washington Examiner, a well-known muck raker site, and immediately took it as gospel truth without question. Whereas a simple google search would have quickly exposed the lie in her assumption "no Republicans were invited"

[Bo D]

Oopsie!

Oh hell! She isn't smart enough to follow that link. Let's put it in her face ...


Bill O'Reilly

    "Last night during my discussion with James Carville about the Martin Luther King commemoration I said there were no Republican speakers invited. Wrong. Was wrong. Some Republicans were asked to speak. They declined. And that was a mistake. They should have spoken.

    "Now, the mistake, entirely on me. I simply assumed that since all the speakers were liberal Democrats, Republicans were excluded. So, here's the 'Tip of the Day' -- Always check out the facts before you make a definitive statement. And, when you make a mistake, admit it."

[me]

Oopsie!

Aw how sweet, the Madcow blog..... 

[Exterminator]

Oh hell! She isn't smart enough to follow that link. Let's put it in her face ...

Apparently, his admission isn't valid because of one of the places it appears.  At least he has the integrity to admit he was wrong.  She continues to attempt to spin and flail...

[Bo D]

Aw how sweet, the Madcow blog..... 

Maybe you would rather hear it from the horse's ass? 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVx0B_KM7uY