There are some people that I simply won't respond to because I find their behavior to be generally unacceptable, immature or otherwise beneath me. If you choose to respond instead of blowing someone off, don't blame the other person.

The onus is on YOU.

>>>>>>>>>>>

In other words, if KoS can't think of a plausible answer to support her own posts then she runs and hides behind a transparent veil of outrageous indignation!

It's the last refuge of a scoundrel!

What unbelievable b.s.

He put you on ignore, and you STILL post-humped the hell out of him.

And now he is finally responding to your continual barrage, and now HE is the one stalking YOU???

Unbe-fricken-lievable.

What unbelievable b.s.

He put you on ignore, and you STILL post-humped the hell out of him.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Why would anyone bother to register on a debate forum and then put someone else on ignore? if they welcome an open debate?

And what is "post-humping"? Does it have anything to do with being a "post-humpswab"?

You know, I don't understand the mind of the raging Homosexual who demands special rights either.

Let us see, a more well-known person, a freshman Senator or a two-term governor.

Yeah I can see how a Senator who has served less than half of his first term has more name recongition than a former two-term governor. Great reasoning, but the fact remains that every poll taken by the Pew Center has shown that clearly over 80% of reporters at all levels vote what? DEMOCRAT.

dmk

so that was your response to the observation that actually you have stalked ME, instead of the other way around, as you stated?

what an odd response.

oh, well.

as long as you're aware that your tactics are transparent and easily read by all - even those who agree with you and prefer not to point out your dishonesty.

I didn't reason it on that basis. Obama is a rising star. It doesn't matter if he's relatively new in the Senate...he's much more well known. Mostly due to the 2004 Democratic Presidential Convention.

And even still, that poll would be irrelevant to the topic. The issue at hand is whether or not the reporting is biased, and if such views emerge in the reporting. It's very debatable when it comes to most mainstream news, and they usually appear to just be centrist. However it is undebatable that conservative views effect the reporting in Fox News and AM radio. But in the end it's almost irrelevant, as any small politically biased voice is squashed by the yells of the bias toward making profit, big-business, and power.

EXACTLY.

That's why I keep saying, and the liberals here keep trying to deny.


I do find it VERY amusing how infatuated the Media is with Senator Obama. He's the Hollywood & Media Darling - which, in a weird way, almost guarantees that he'll crash & burn.

But don't you think that Obama's 2008 run is just a warm-up for his REAL bid for the White House, which will come in either 4 or 8 years?

Talk about drawing a strange conclusion. Obama is WAY more known than Romney.

I have been talking about him here for a long time.

No, this is just further evidence that the media is obsessed with King Making.