The Republicans are at it again...

[james_bond_3rd]

Quote from hapaboy:


Condemning Foley: OK.

Condeming Foley and calling me and others pedophiles because we don't agree with your moonbat ideologies: Not OK.

Get it? Probably not...

I had never considered the possibility that you just simply didn't get it. Now it's clear that you didn't

The other poster was condemning Foley, and suggesting that the defenders of Foley (at that point, included all the usual neocons on this board) might have skeletons of their own in their closet.

It never occured to hapaboy that all he had to do was to condemn Foley, which he never did. Never. "Anyone regardless of political affinity should get whats coming to them under the law" does not pass for a condemnation of Foley. It was politician's talk to leave you wiggle room just in case you need to flip-flop (Hmmm, wonder where hapaboy learned that).

Instead, hapaboy started to call people's names, went on a wild dog attack on everyone in sight.

He has not condemned Foley, nor Haggard, nor Vitter, nor this new guy. But he has called everyone and his brother names for bringing this up.

Man, you're really sick.

 

[james_bond_3rd]

Quote from Haroki:

james_bond_3rd


Registered: Aug 2005
Posts: 1582


09-19-07 12:42 PM



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from hapaboy:

Show me one single post where I have attacked people in response to their condemnation of Foley as you have described. Come on, "Professor."

And oh, although there is a Democratic Party, and a Republican Party, there is no "Pedophile Party" as much as you wished there were.

Clueless moonbat teaching at a university....pity the students who do not subscibe to his lunatic leanings.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


WTF?

I read through that entire thread 2x and I don't see that quote.

Please tell me that you're such a wanker that you'd make up that quote.

Or if not, please link to the correct thread.

hapaboy is probably too embarrassed to tell you that he indeed posted that post. FYI, there is a nice function on ET called "search." It's a little button on the top right corner of your screen. Click it and you'll get to the search page. Search for "condemnation," and "Foley," and author "hapaboy," you'll easily find the post.

 

[Haroki]

And here is the discussion following that post: [/B]

WTF again?

So in other words, when you say "here is the discussion following that post", it means that it won't necessarily be found in the same thread.

Instead, I get a non-answer about using the search function.

Conclusion:

You're a wanker....

And really, it just proves the dude's post - he's not giving you shit for condemning pedos, rather he's giving you shit about being a lying sheep...

 

[hapaboy]

Quote from james_bond_3rd:

I had never considered the possibility that you just simply didn't get it. Now it's clear that you didn't

The other poster was condemning Foley, and suggesting that the defenders of Foley (at that point, included all the usual neocons on this board) might have skeletons of their own in their closet.

It never occured to hapaboy that all he had to do was to condemn Foley, which he never did. Never. "Anyone regardless of political affinity should get whats coming to them under the law" does not pass for a condemnation of Foley. It was politician's talk to leave you wiggle room just in case you need to flip-flop (Hmmm, wonder where hapaboy learned that).

Instead, hapaboy started to call people's names, went on a wild dog attack on everyone in sight.

He has not condemned Foley, nor Haggard, nor Vitter, nor this new guy. But he has called everyone and his brother names for bringing this up.

Man, you're really sick.

Quote from james_bond_3rd:

hapaboy is probably too embarrassed to tell you that he indeed posted that post. FYI, there is a nice function on ET called "search." It's a little button on the top right corner of your screen. Click it and you'll get to the search page. Search for "condemnation," and "Foley," and author "hapaboy," you'll easily find the post.

Good grief. With each post of yours on this subject, you stick your head up your ass further and further.

I regret absolutely nothing about telling moonbats who accuse me of pedophilia to fuck off.

You need to take your own advice, do a search of your own, and you'll see that I have started threads advocating harsh punishment for pedophiles. Be it a politician or a janitor, doesn't matter to me.

If me saying "Anyone regardless of political affinity should get whats coming to them under the law" isn't clear enough to you, you have severe learning disabilities. But we all knew that about you all ready...

As I've said before: Fuck off, do some research, and then come back and apologize if you have the integrity to do so, which I doubt.

 

[james_bond_3rd]

Quote from hapaboy:

Good grief. With each post of yours on this subject, you stick your head up your ass further and further.

I regret absolutely nothing about telling moonbats who accuse me of pedophilia to fuck off.

You need to take your own advice, do a search of your own, and you'll see that I have started threads advocating harsh punishment for pedophiles. Be it a politician or a janitor, doesn't matter to me.

If me saying "Anyone regardless of political affinity should get whats coming to them under the law" isn't clear enough to you, you have severe learning disabilities. But we all knew that about you all ready...

As I've said before: Fuck off, do some research, and then come back and apologize if you have the integrity to do so, which I doubt.

Did you or did you not condemn Foley's actions? What did you think was "coming to them under the law" in the case of Foley? Foley was never charged with a crime. According to your statement, then, that he is off the hook. So you are not condemning his actions because nothing was coming to Foley "under the law."

And yet you are again attacking people who point out the obvious to you. You have nothing but hatred. With supporters like this, no wonder the Republican party is a damaged brand.

 

[james_bond_3rd]

Quote from Haroki:


Please tell me that you're such a wanker that you'd make up that quote.

Or if not, please link to the correct thread.

Quote from Haroki:

WTF again?

So in other words, when you say "here is the discussion following that post", it means that it won't necessarily be found in the same thread.

Instead, I get a non-answer about using the search function.

Conclusion:

You're a wanker....

And really, it just proves the dude's post - he's not giving you shit for condemning pedos, rather he's giving you shit about being a lying sheep...

So you found the post but too embarrassed to admit it. Your first reaction (that the post must have been faked otherwise hapaboy was lying) was correct. But you're too chicken to stick to it.

 

[Haroki]

Quote from james_bond_3rd:

So you found the post but too embarrassed to admit it. Your first reaction (that the post must have been faked otherwise hapaboy was lying) was correct. But you're too chicken to stick to it.

Wrong moonbat, I never look for posts. I don't care enough.

My first reaction was that you're a lying wanker.

And yes, I'm correct...

 

[hapaboy]

Quote from james_bond_3rd:

Did you or did you not condemn Foley's actions? What did you think was "coming to them under the law" in the case of Foley? Foley was never charged with a crime. According to your statement, then, that he is off the hook. So you are not condemning his actions because nothing was coming to Foley "under the law."

And yet you are again attacking people who point out the obvious to you. You have nothing but hatred. With supporters like this, no wonder the Republican party is a damaged brand.

Again, dolt, if you would do a search you would see for yourself how I feel about pedophiles. I am hardly letting him "off the hook." Good grief but you're a lazy bastard.

As Foley was never charged with a crime, what would you like to do? Tell us what should be done?

Finally, I think this sequence is very telling:

Quote from Doubter:

There is one major and striking difference here. Foley resigned as he certainly should. No excuses, no attacks on the page (Willey, Jones, Broderick) no finger pointing just resignation. Now look at Clinton, Franks, Kennedy, Studds, William Jefferson. Did they resign? Did they attack their accusers? Biiiig difference.

Quote from james_bond_3rd:

The one major and striking difference here, is that Foley may have broken the law. All others on your list, with the exception of William Jefferson, did not.

I don't believe any liberals would defend William Jefferson. Hey, Hastert was mad when the FBI raided Jefferson's office. Now it makes you wonder why he was so upset?

Quote from Doubter:

Can't agree. Clinton lied under oath (lost his law license) about his moral problem, Studds actualy had sex with a minor in the capitol, Kennedy was probably drunk driving when he probably committed at least manslaughter, Franks plead no knowledge of the prostitution ring and then fixed 33 parking tickets for the perp. All much heavier charges that email and IM contacts, but not one resignation. What a pattern. Oh! I forgot Rep. Kennedy drunk driving and hitting the road barriers this year. Did he resign? I forget.

Quote from Arnie:

What?

*Clinton lied to a grand jury
*Franks knew about his boyfriend running a prostitiution ring out of Franks apartment and had tickets "fixed".
*Kennedy left the scene of a fatal accident.
*Studds had sex with an underage (17 yo) page. He skirted the law by taking the boy to Morocco.

And here's the icing on the cake. Your response to Arnie and Doubter pointing out the actions of Clinton, Franks, Kennedy, and Studds:

Quote from james_bond_3rd:

Which one of them was convicted in a court of law?

What a fucking hypocrite you are!

You accuse me of letting Foley "off the hook" because he wasn't convicted, yet when the actions of some moonbat Dems are brought to your attention, you flash the but-they-weren't-convicted card.

Inspector Clouseau of the Moonbat Nation. Yep, that's what you prove over and over again on ET on a daily basis.

 

[james_bond_3rd]

Quote from hapaboy:

Again, dolt, if you would do a search you would see for yourself how I feel about pedophiles. I am hardly letting him "off the hook." Good grief but you're a lazy bastard.

As Foley was never charged with a crime, what would you like to do? Tell us what should be done?

Finally, I think this sequence is very telling:









And here's the icing on the cake. Your response to Arnie and Doubter pointing out the actions of Clinton, Franks, Kennedy, and Studds:



What a fucking hypocrite you are!

You accuse me of letting Foley "off the hook" because he wasn't convicted, yet when the actions of some moonbat Dems are brought to your attention, you flash the but-they-weren't-convicted card.

Inspector Clouseau of the Moonbat Nation. Yep, that's what you prove over and over again on ET on a daily basis.

You know what? I would Foley off the hook, if the law cannot find anything wrong with what he did, and if he had not been so hypocritical about the "family values." It is you who insisted that you had condemned Foley when in fact you had not.

Give us a straight answer. Have you or have you not condemned Foley? Have you or have you not condemned Atchison?

 

[arealpissedgoy]

Quote from chuck.ells:

Actually, I've been learning a new way of reaching conclusions by reading hapaboy and dodo post.

The evidence.
The guy is from Florida. = Republican
The guy is a prosecutor = Republican
The guy is a family man = Republican
The guy is a sexual deviant = Republican

Walks like a duck - quacks like a duck.....

Apparently he was protecting our freedoms. Why does everyone hate our freedoms?