No one's paying me. I come here for sheer entertainment value. Personally, I would find it condescending if a presidential campaign had to have a stated policy of pandering to my hurt feelings because I wasn't mature enough to accept the simple fact that my candidate was on the wrong side of history (AUMF, Kyl-Lieberman, 'obliterate') and ran a lousy campaign because she placed loyalty over competence (sound like anyone we know?), and lost. And it is over, and she did lose.
But I'm curious: Why do you regard posting TexasDarlin's own words as a hostile act? She's one of the most prominent and active Clinton supporters on one of the most prominent pro-Clinton blogs.
If you find her words offensive (and I'm glad you do), shouldn't you be talking to her? Or maybe the admins here who allow her to come here and to make the rest of you look bad?
Just a thought.
I regard stalking as creepy behavior. Certainly something an operative would do.
That's all.
And the ratings abuse continues.
Lovely.
Stalking? Perhaps a bit over the top...?
I'm just giving the readers of this diary, who may not know of SoCalDarlin's history of racism and invective.
Dude, you need to go for a run or a swim or something and stop stalking the diarist. You'll get thrown off this site for directing angry comments at other users. Don't you have anything more constructive to do.
Man, maybe they really do pay you guys.
just sayin
again with the "stalking" nonsense? You guys really do thrive on this pose of victimhood.
As for "angry comments", I just think people should see SoCalDarlin for who she really is. Don't you find the context interesting? Why dodes the truth make you uncomfortable?
As for getting thrown off the site, if Armstrong were consistent, you'd be bounced for abusing the ratings system. Good thing you're on the 'right' side, eh?
Tolstoy: You gotta check out the guidlines, dood. Facts you don't like aren't troll postings.
Sorry reality hasn't gone your way.
