Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Beat the RNC backed candidate to face Democratic incumbent Walt Minneck

Meet Raul Labrador
http://www.labrador4idaho.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Gonna need to see this guy's vault birth certificate. Doesn't look very American to me.

Hes probably legit so he would have no trouble showing it to everyone.

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:Hes probably legit so he would have no trouble showing it to everyone.

How do you know that he is legit?.......he DOES have dark skin.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

Gonna need to see this guy's vault birth certificate. Doesn't look very American to me.

Why? He's not running for president.

dbackjon wrote:Beat the RNC backed candidate to face Democratic incumbent Walt Minneck

Meet Raul Labrador
http://www.labrador4idaho.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No way...that has to be a fake photo. We have been told by the libs on here that all Tea Party supporters are old, white racists.

dbackjon wrote:Beat the RNC backed candidate to face Democratic incumbent Walt Minneck

Meet Raul Labrador
http://www.labrador4idaho.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I love it! Can you imagine the scene at RNC HQ?


I'd wager that a great many teeth are being gnashed, garments rent, and hair torn.

houndawg wrote:

dbackjon wrote:Beat the RNC backed candidate to face Democratic incumbent Walt Minneck

Meet Raul Labrador
http://www.labrador4idaho.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I love it! Can you imagine the scene at RNC HQ?


I'd wager that a great many teeth are being gnashed, garments rent, and hair torn.

Now all we need is the same scene at the DNC.

Throw all the bums out.

Cluck U wrote:

houndawg wrote:

I love it! Can you imagine the scene at RNC HQ?


I'd wager that a great many teeth are being gnashed, garments rent, and hair torn.

Now all we need is the same scene at the DNC.

Throw all the bums out.

Love the thought, that would be wonderful if it would make a dime's worth of difference, but it won't - the game's over even though most of us don't realize it yet.

mainejeff wrote:

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:Hes probably legit so he would have no trouble showing it to everyone.

How do you know that he is legit?.......he DOES have dark skin.

No see...he actually looks white and American. That's the only reason the racist teaparty even voted for him!

houndawg wrote:

Cluck U wrote:
Now all we need is the same scene at the DNC.

Throw all the bums out.

Love the thought, that would be wonderful if it would make a dime's worth of difference, but it won't - the game's over even though most of us don't realize it yet.

C'mon, dawg...don't give up yet. I know you were let down by Barry and his lies, but maybe that was just what the country needed. Next election, get out and vote early and often for the candidate with the least experience.

Cluck U wrote:

houndawg wrote:
Love the thought, that would be wonderful if it would make a dime's worth of difference, but it won't - the game's over even though most of us don't realize it yet.

C'mon, dawg...don't give up yet. I know you were let down by Barry and his lies, but maybe that was just what the country needed. Next election, get out and vote early and often for the candidate with the least experience.

Nothing to do with Barry, everything to do with SCOTUS. I've voted third party with one exception since '72, I doubt I'll go out of my way to vote in the future.

dbackjon wrote:Beat the RNC backed candidate to face Democratic incumbent Walt Minneck

Meet Raul Labrador
http://www.labrador4idaho.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thank you for using the term "Tea Partier" in your thread title, jon!

houndawg wrote:

Cluck U wrote:
C'mon, dawg...don't give up yet. I know you were let down by Barry and his lies, but maybe that was just what the country needed. Next election, get out and vote early and often for the candidate with the least experience.

Nothing to do with Barry, everything to do with SCOTUS. I've voted third party with one exception since '72, I doubt I'll go out of my way to vote in the future.

Yup, from now on there'll be lots of *gulp* money *gasp* changing hands come election time. Now that *gulp* money *gasp* is going to be a factor in elections, goodbye the civil and simple elections of yore. 200+ years of relative election peace and tranquility shattered now that *gulp* money *gasp* is going to be involved in election politics. Oh Jefferson Smith, where are you????

GannonFan wrote:

houndawg wrote:
Nothing to do with Barry, everything to do with SCOTUS. I've voted third party with one exception since '72, I doubt I'll go out of my way to vote in the future.

Yup, from now on there'll be lots of *gulp* money *gasp* changing hands come election time. Now that *gulp* money *gasp* is going to be a factor in elections, goodbye the civil and simple elections of yore. 200+ years of relative election peace and tranquility shattered now that *gulp* money *gasp* is going to be involved in election politics. Oh Jefferson Smith, where are you????

You DO have a sense of humor, after all, GF!

Cluck U wrote:

dbackjon wrote:Beat the RNC backed candidate to face Democratic incumbent Walt Minneck

Meet Raul Labrador
http://www.labrador4idaho.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No way...that has to be a fake photo. We have been told by the libs on here that all Tea Party supporters are old, white racists.

I hear that there are actually gays in the Republican Party.

Pwns wrote:

mainejeff wrote:
How do you know that he is legit?.......he DOES have dark skin.

No see...he actually looks white and American. That's the only reason the racist teaparty even voted for him!

It was the suit.

native wrote:

dbackjon wrote:Beat the RNC backed candidate to face Democratic incumbent Walt Minneck

Meet Raul Labrador
http://www.labrador4idaho.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thank you for using the term "Tea Partier" in your thread title, jon!

You are welcome.

On my Arizona Sports website, we had quite the debate on this.

My personal decision - use Tea Party for serious candidates.

I will however, reserve the right to call people like this guy here, a teabagger

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100524/ap_ ... _tea_party" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

GOP tries to upend NC campaign backed by tea party
Tim D'Annunzio, a congressional candidate in North Carolina's most competitive district, has run an anti-establishment campaign with vows to dismantle entire branches of the federal government. His ideas have drawn support from tea party activists, and he has raised more money from individuals than his GOP rival while also contributing more than $1 million to his own campaign.


n Hoke County divorce records, his wife said in 1995 that D'Annunzio had claimed to be the Messiah, had traveled to New Jersey to raise his stepfather from the dead, believed God would drop a 1,000-mile high pyramid as the New Jerusalem on Greenland and found the Ark of the Covenant in Arizona. A doctor's evaluation the following month said D'Annunzio used marijuana almost daily, had been living with another woman for several months, had once been in drug treatment for heroin dependence and was jailed a couple times as a teenager.
The doctor concluded that his religious beliefs were not delusional. A judge wrote in a child support ruling a few years later that D'Annunzio was a self-described "religious zealot" who believed the government was the "Antichrist." The judge said he was willfully failing to make child support payments.

Naw, you have to use tea partier or something similar.

Tea Partier implies there is an actual poltical party... which there is not. Dude won a Republican primary.

dbackjon wrote:

native wrote:
Thank you for using the term "Tea Partier" in your thread title, jon!

You are welcome.

On my Arizona Sports website, we had quite the debate on this.

My personal decision - use Tea Party for serious candidates.

I will however, reserve the right to call people like this guy here, a teabagger

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100524/ap_ ... _tea_party" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

GOP tries to upend NC campaign backed by tea party
Tim D'Annunzio, a congressional candidate in North Carolina's most competitive district, has run an anti-establishment campaign with vows to dismantle entire branches of the federal government. His ideas have drawn support from tea party activists, and he has raised more money from individuals than his GOP rival while also contributing more than $1 million to his own campaign.


n Hoke County divorce records, his wife said in 1995 that D'Annunzio had claimed to be the Messiah, had traveled to New Jersey to raise his stepfather from the dead, believed God would drop a 1,000-mile high pyramid as the New Jerusalem on Greenland and found the Ark of the Covenant in Arizona. A doctor's evaluation the following month said D'Annunzio used marijuana almost daily, had been living with another woman for several months, had once been in drug treatment for heroin dependence and was jailed a couple times as a teenager.
The doctor concluded that his religious beliefs were not delusional. A judge wrote in a child support ruling a few years later that D'Annunzio was a self-described "religious zealot" who believed the government was the "Antichrist." The judge said he was willfully failing to make child support payments.

He sounds like a natural to be on a ticket with Sarah Palin.

GannonFan wrote:

houndawg wrote:
Nothing to do with Barry, everything to do with SCOTUS. I've voted third party with one exception since '72, I doubt I'll go out of my way to vote in the future.

Yup, from now on there'll be lots of *gulp* money *gasp* changing hands come election time. Now that *gulp* money *gasp* is going to be a factor in elections, goodbye the civil and simple elections of yore. 200+ years of relative election peace and tranquility shattered now that *gulp* money *gasp* is going to be involved in election politics. Oh Jefferson Smith, where are you????

Misssssed the point entirely and in nativesque fashion to boot.

houndawg wrote:

GannonFan wrote:
Yup, from now on there'll be lots of *gulp* money *gasp* changing hands come election time. Now that *gulp* money *gasp* is going to be a factor in elections, goodbye the civil and simple elections of yore. 200+ years of relative election peace and tranquility shattered now that *gulp* money *gasp* is going to be involved in election politics. Oh Jefferson Smith, where are you????

Misssssed the point entirely and in nativesque fashion to boot.

Hey, by all means, if your point was something other than "oh woe, the recent SCOTUS ruling that gives corporations and unions the ability to put as much money as they'd like into elections has forever and ever ruined American politics" then let me know what your point was. You've repeated this line of thinking over and over, so I just assumed you were going to the well one more time. If you have something new in mind, do tell.

GannonFan wrote:

houndawg wrote:
Misssssed the point entirely and in nativesque fashion to boot.

Hey, by all means, if your point was something other than "oh woe, the recent SCOTUS ruling that gives corporations and unions the ability to put as much money as they'd like into elections has forever and ever ruined American politics" then let me know what your point was. You've repeated this line of thinking over and over, so I just assumed you were going to the well one more time. If you have something new in mind, do tell.

No, Jeff. My point was that the ruling makes your vote and mine irrelevant officially. Yes, we all know that our votes haven't meant anything for some time now, but there was always the pretense that we were a government of, by, and for the people. Kept a lot of people from giving up on the country.

houndawg wrote:

GannonFan wrote:
Hey, by all means, if your point was something other than "oh woe, the recent SCOTUS ruling that gives corporations and unions the ability to put as much money as they'd like into elections has forever and ever ruined American politics" then let me know what your point was. You've repeated this line of thinking over and over, so I just assumed you were going to the well one more time. If you have something new in mind, do tell.

No, Jeff. My point was that the ruling makes your vote and mine irrelevant officially. Yes, we all know that our votes haven't meant anything for some time now, but there was always the pretense that we were a government of, by, and for the people. Kept a lot of people from giving up on the country.

Well, there I actually disagree with you. Votes have mattered, do matter, and will continue to matter. Money does not equal votes - never has, never will. Politicians have been in the pockets of financiers of their campaigns forever, and it's been quite public, so the only way people didn't know that was if they weren't paying attention. And I'd argue if they weren't paying attention for the past 200 years then why would they know anything about a SCOTUS ruling. Especially one that doesn't really change anything that's been going on anyway. Money has always been there in abundance.

GannonFan wrote:

houndawg wrote:
No, Jeff. My point was that the ruling makes your vote and mine irrelevant officially. Yes, we all know that our votes haven't meant anything for some time now, but there was always the pretense that we were a government of, by, and for the people. Kept a lot of people from giving up on the country.

Well, there I actually disagree with you. Votes have mattered, do matter, and will continue to matter. Money does not equal votes - never has, never will. Politicians have been in the pockets of financiers of their campaigns forever, and it's been quite public, so the only way people didn't know that was if they weren't paying attention. And I'd argue if they weren't paying attention for the past 200 years then why would they know anything about a SCOTUS ruling. Especially one that doesn't really change anything that's been going on anyway. Money has always been there in abundance.

Things have changed, the only thing that matters about votes anymore is who programmed the voting machines.

Nobody is suggesting that money hasn't always been what politics is all about. But there were always limits and rules, polite fictions though they may have been, that suggested that somebody was looking out for the little guy.