Agreed. Most special needs kids do have the capacity to learn and grow. 'asso must be the exception that proves the rule.
Depending on how the question is understood he DID have advanced knowledge of 9/11. Was he told on 9/10 that the next day it was about to go down? I highly, highly doubt it but he was warned in the months before 9/11 and as recently as August of 2001 about Bin Laden planning to hijack American planes. I don't think a vague question like that is comparable to asking point blank "Do you think Barack Obama is the Anti-Christ?"
I'm sorry I just can't help myself. This is the most ridiculously sad thing I have yet read about these lunatic r****ds on the far-far right. That Obama is the DEVIL!
I hope they adopt this as a campaign slogan in 2012. "Palin/Limbaugh -- Because the Antichrist is Bad!"
More likely some voters noticed that Anti-Christ was an option for what they thought of Obama and thought it would be funny to respond with it. After all any poll with this option on it could not be taken seriously, and would only give people on message boards something to argue about.
... when used as a verb. As a noun it has an acceptable and polite specialized automotive meaning but otherwise as a noun it is a disparaging and derisive word that regards people of limited mental capacity. I think I'll forward a link to this thread to the American Association for the Disabled so they can beam with pride at their liberal friends watching their backs.
So when someone is displaying below average reasoning skills and mental capacity, we can't call them a r****d? I mean if a r****ded person displays those things and someone who is not handicapped legally shows similar characteristics I don't see the problem. Soon calling someone "crazy" or "insane" when acting irrational will be un-pc, probably as soon as some jackass r****d on the Internet has a family member in an insane asylum and throws an e-hissy.
I found their campaign theme song: <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7_IKcMl_a9A&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7_IKcMl_a9A&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> (replies to self are full of win)
Of course...the left is immune to this "r****ded" level of thinking btw...r****d, "I’m not convinced the numbers are this high. The PPP, a Democratic Party firm, only polled 500 people" http://blogs.standard.net/2009/09/16/who-said-obama-was-the-anti-christ/
re⋅tard /rɪˈtɑrd, for 1–3, 5; ˈritɑrd for 4/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ri-tahrd, for 1–3, 5; ree-tahrd for 4] Show IPA –noun 3. a slowing down, diminution, or hindrance, as in a machine. 4. Slang: Disparaging. a. a mentally r****ded person. b. a person who is stupid, obtuse, or ineffective in some way: a hopeless social r****d. Related Words for : r****d changeling, cretin, half-wit, idiot, imbecile
I haven't read through this thread so pardon me if this has been addressed. Do you believe that it is possible for people to be Republicans not because they are racists or crazy r****ds but that they actually have political and philosophical differences based on issues of limited government? To put it more plainly do you believe there are rational Republicans?
Conservatives? Sure. Republicans? No. Not anymore. I addressed this at length in another thread but it comes down to this: The Republican party relies on willful dishonesty to make its case now and it has for some time. Anyone who is still a Republican either lies for a living or believes lies that have been thoroughly debunked. So the ones left are either liars or suckers. Neither is rational.
