Campfield’s Calling Me Lazy?!

Not too lazy to run spell-check on my posts, though, unlike some folks.

Ha, no, that’s not true.  I fail to remember to run spellcheck all the time.

You can read the whole post, decide if you like whether it’s about me specifically.  I’m pretty sure it is.  Note the talk of google, the refutation of my numbers, the talk of foul language (compare to Huddleston’s reportingof Campfield being present and participating in a conversation about my “foul language.”)

He says, “The lesser minds who like to make up numbers out of thin air, Who like to yell scream and use foul language to try to prove their point.”

“To prove their point.”

Is that Republican for “to have an orgasm?” or is Stacey Campfield trying to insinuate that I’m shrill?

I hope he’s insinuating that I’m shrill.  I’ve never been called a shrill feminist before and to be called so by a man who never met a barrier to women’s equality that he didn’t want to erect, well, this is a proud day for me, America.  A proud day indeed.

I wonder if I should get t-shirts made.

4 thoughts on “Campfield’s Calling Me Lazy?!

  1. ::sigh::

    WHAT THE HELL?!?

    10,000 dogs killed a year in dog fighting.
    1,379,125 people killed a year by illegals and abortions.

    At that rate if dog fighting continued but abortion stopped and all illegals left the US immediately then the numbers killed would equal out in only 137 years!

    Once again I will say both are important but I will ask what do you think is the bigger problem? what do you value more, Children or dogs? Does the left respect the life of a dog more then they respect the life of a human? where are your energies, outrage and interest focused?

    How is this a logical approach to the problem of dogfighting?

    I like ice cream.
    I love asparagus.
    I really love chicken wings.

    So why do I sometimes eat ice cream or asparagus? Why don’t I eat chicken wings every single time I consume food? After all, if I love them so much, surely I should only ever eat them. Because, after all, this is a one-choice-per-person society. You can only care about one thing, ever, in any category.

    Pick the one food you like and eat only that.
    Pick the one tv show you enjoy the most and watch only that.
    Pick the one political issue you value most highly and write, speak about and ponder only that.

    After all, the “one issue voter” has been the hallmark of the American campaign for the last 25 years. Let’s continue to appeal to that faulty logic.

    Let’s completely ignore the fact that while dogfighting may seem like a lessbad little crimelet because “ain’t nobody gettin’ kilt ‘sept some dawgs”, many of the participants in dogfighting rings are ALSO participants in drug rings and violent gangs. [1] . A dogfight’s sort of got the same drawbacks that speakeasies had during prohibition. The “gateway” crime may seem minor to some (drinking bathtub gin or letting a couple of dogs tear each other to bits), but they are entrances into the worlds of organised crime and often serve to finance crimes which involve the killing of people.

    We won’t even go into the fact that dogfighting conditions spectators of all ages to be desensitised to ruthlessness and bloodthirsty behaviour.

    Speaking of desensitisation to ruthlessness, how often are we going to portray illegal immigrants as “illegals” bent only on the death and destruction of good and innocent people? And where are the links to the data referenced by Rep. Campfield?

    I’d like to know where the statistics on the deaths at the hands of “illegals” come from. I have a difficult time accepting any number presented without its reference data.

  2. So, if a back alley abortionist who snuck over here from Juarez with his pit bull ring feeds the unborn fetuses to the dogs, how would one look that up in Google?

    I kept looking for the paragraph that stated that the illegals are also all practicing Catholics so they’re also out breeding us.

    We’re losing 3,700 a day in the War on Mexicans!

Comments are closed.