sotomayor fans will be dissapointed

[justashooter 430]

Do you want Sotomayor to be confirmed? Results

Q. In a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey released just before the start of the Supreme Court nominee's confirmation hearings, 47 percent of people questioned would like to see the Senate vote in favor, with 40 percent opposed and 13 percent unsure.

Where do you stand? Do you want Sotomayor to be confirmed?

Yes. Sotomayor would be a strong addition to the court. 28%

No. Sotomayor would be a detrimental addition to the court. 70%

Not sure/No opinion. 2%

66,534 votes

http://js.polls.yahoo.com/quiz/quiziframe.php?poll_id=46856

note that the poll is headed with the suggestion that people wanted this racist at the beginning of the hearings. funny how the libtards continue to ignore the truth. they prolly buy grenades by the case at gunshows and sell them to mexicans, too.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Do you want Sotomayor to be confirmed? Results

Q. In a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey released just before the start of the Supreme Court nominee's confirmation hearings, 47 percent of people questioned would like to see the Senate vote in favor, with 40 percent opposed and 13 percent unsure.

Where do you stand? Do you want Sotomayor to be confirmed?

Yes. Sotomayor would be a strong addition to the court. 28%

No. Sotomayor would be a detrimental addition to the court. 70%

Not sure/No opinion. 2%

66,534 votes

http://js.polls.yahoo.com/quiz/quiziframe.php?poll_id=46856

note that the poll is headed with the suggestion that people wanted this racist at the beginning of the hearings. funny how the libtards continue to ignore the truth. they prolly buy grenades by the case at gunshows and sell them to mexicans, too.

What truth? That an online yahoo poll produces more accurate results than a properly conducted poll using a valid sample? You're hillarious, you know.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Oh I thought this was going to be some bad news for gays.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

I thought this was the results of a VJ poll

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I thought this was the results of a VJ poll

Are you a fan of sodomy or do you just like gay people as friends?

[Krikit 1,163]

The title of this thread has been changed due to derogatory content. Please refrain from this type of inflammatory speech. Thank you.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

it's a pretty strange nickname for a woman, you gotta admit

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

oops, justashooter did it again.

The title of this thread has been changed due to derogatory content. Please refrain from this type of inflammatory speech. Thank you.

could you spell it right? its sotomayor.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

could you spell it right? its sotomayor.

This is America...we say it differently here!

[Ban Hammer 12,836]

The title of this thread has been changed due to derogatory content. Please refrain from this type of inflammatory speech. Thank you.

i'm still offended by the title "dissapointed" is misspelled!

Edited July 10, 2009 by charles!

[Krikit 1,163]

The title of this thread has been changed due to derogatory content. Please refrain from this type of inflammatory speech. Thank you.

i'm still offended by the title "dissapointed" is misspelled!

Haha. Fixed Sotomayor but left dissapointed. Don't want to remove too much of his personality.

BTW.... nice name change, AJ. It'll be interesting to see how long you have it.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

The title of this thread has been changed due to derogatory content. Please refrain from this type of inflammatory speech. Thank you.

i'm still offended by the title "dissapointed" is misspelled!

Haha. Fixed Sotomayor but left dissapointed. Don't want to remove too much of his personality.

BTW.... nice name change, AJ. It'll be interesting to see how long you have it.

uh uh....

[Wei&Shu(Joe) 2]

Do you want Sotomayor to be confirmed? Results

Q. In a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey released just before the start of the Supreme Court nominee's confirmation hearings, 47 percent of people questioned would like to see the Senate vote in favor, with 40 percent opposed and 13 percent unsure.

Where do you stand? Do you want Sotomayor to be confirmed?

Yes. Sotomayor would be a strong addition to the court. 28%

No. Sotomayor would be a detrimental addition to the court. 70%

Not sure/No opinion. 2%

66,534 votes

http://js.polls.yahoo.com/quiz/quiziframe.php?poll_id=46856

note that the poll is headed with the suggestion that people wanted this racist at the beginning of the hearings. funny how the libtards continue to ignore the truth. they prolly buy grenades by the case at gunshows and sell them to mexicans, too.

You have many interesting posts that are heavy on the name-calling and light on facts. Like any religion, the conservative religion tends to run this way. It's important for all of us to remember that these fantasies are your religious beliefs and to try to be as respectful as possible but your lack of respect makes it difficult. You are entitled to non-reality based beliefs but that doesn't make those of us based in reality stupid. If it did then we'd all be stupid for not believing we could get a bevy of virgins if we blew ourselves up, right?

So try to keep in mind that you can really only get 2 kinds of responses to these posts. Other members of your religion will affirm that they share the same non-reality based beliefs and cheer you on. You may have an emotional need for that recognition but there may be more appropriate places for you to get that buzz.

Some reality based people will attempt to check your claims against reality, not realizing that your belief system renders the reality we share meaningless, and will wonder how your perceptions can be so far off from reality. We all have to remember there are people out there whose religion allows them to perceive the reality of those 72 virgins or disembodied souls wandering aimlessly around volcanos waiting for Lord Xeno. Those claims are no more or less fanciful than yours and we're able to just chuckle and move on but those people don't come to an immigration based web site to proselytize for their religions and I suspect if they did, they might get banned. It seems the fantasies of conservatism hold a special place in America, even above the other religions.

So some might point out (as someone has) how utterly insane it is to hold up a yahoo poll as somehow more valid than a scientifically executed survey but they'd miss the point; That your ideology is much more important than any facts or sane logic.

Some might point out to you that 3 judges, not all liberal, unanimously supported the ruling on which the claim of racism is so carelessly lobbed at Judge Sotomayor. Existing law and previous case rulings left no other choice. But to the religious mind, it is still possible for the conservative judges who made that ruling to have been bound to upholding the law, while Judge Sotomayor alone was racist for concurring with that decision. Reality based people would have to see them all as racist or none as racist. Not being bound by reality leaves you more options.

Some might note that conservatives call judges who disregard law and instead rule on the basis of their ideology "activist judges". Yet, to prove she wasn't a racist, she would have had to have been an "activist" judge and made new law from the bench. So not being bound by reality really gives you a lot of leeway in making your preconceived prejudice stick. Either way, you've got her! Reality based folks can't think that way.

Some might point out the little bit of an issue that Mr. Ricci who brought the suit in New Haven has but it doesn't seem to bother the conservative brethren. Mr Ricci got his job after not qualifying on the same test and suing under the Americans with Disabilities Act due to having dyslexia. He was actually hired in the same "unfair" way that he objected to in this suit. I hope that his testimony will shed some light on the differences between dyslexia and race that qualifies one for special treatment and not the other.

That brings up one of the most important points. I hope you can grasp it. reality based folks just can't understand the hypocrisy because they have this attachment to truth and reality. We can see from this post that you have no such connection. Ideology trumps all and if it takes lies to support it, so be it. Ideology trumps all, so if it takes refuting good evidence with a yahoo poll, so be it. I must tell you that you did brighten my day because it took me quite some time to stop laughing when I read that you were suggesting that an uncontrolled Yahoo Poll was proof that a scientifically conducted poll was wrong. (How many times did you vote? 63,000? LOL) But without any connection to reality such things are possible. So I hope that everyone can see that "truth" is a very different animal for reality based and ideologically based people. For the former "truth" means "conforming to reality" and for ideologically based people it means "supports the ideology, even if it must invoke supernatural forces, lies or faulty logic" Understanding this we can see how the OP believes what he wrote is true, despite the fact that it doesn't conform to reality. We can also rest assured that, like any true believer, references to reality will have no effect on the OP's perception of reality.

The saddest hypocrisy is that OP, not having the resources of reality checking to call on, will never understand that his religious thinking is no different than that of religious fanatics of any faith who demonize and depersonalize those who disagree with them, with hateful speech that incites the "faithful" to eventually take action against those who would put reality above faith.

So to the OP, the hateful religious speech directed against the non-believers in the fantasy that you're selling is neither respectful nor productive. It is speech best saved for gatherings of the "faithful", where you can commiserate with other true believers and denigrate the non-believers for the stupid reality seekers that they are. You would be so much better received among the "faithful" at Red State or StormFront. If you do insist on proselytizing and calling those who aren't members of your cult names like "**" and accusing them without evidence of actions like selling grenades, I for one would be inclined to report that as a violation of TOS and ask that you be removed or placed on read only status. As much as grenade tossing Mexicans may be a reality in your life, we haven't seen much of it out here in the actual reality, in case you're interested. As far as I can tell from a quick google search no "libtards" have yet to be charged with grenade selling to any of them thar foreigners who is trying to steal up our country.

So why are you trying to sell your religion here? Did they kick you off Red State?

[Ban Hammer 12,836]

BTW.... nice name change, AJ. It'll be interesting to see how long you have it.

ooo aj, you better run. ewok is hot on your trail!

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

BTW.... nice name change, AJ. It'll be interesting to see how long you have it.

ooo aj, you better run. ewok is hot on your trail!

Yeap. I have a PM asking me to change it. I intend to comply.