Pure Football
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by HolyMoses

  1. 1 hour ago, Billy Ocean said:

    Let's take a fun trip down memory lane. Here's what Jeb had to say back in 2015 after Trump said that McCain is only considered a hero because he was captured:

    In 2004, a group called the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth spent millions of dollars attacking the military service of Vietnam veteran John Kerry.  The group claimed that Kerry lied about his service and was awarded military honors he didn’t deserve. The basis for these claims were definitively proven false, but the group carried on with their campaign anyway. (The claims were first published in a book by Jerome Corsi)

     In January 2005, the day before his brother’s second inaugural, Jeb wrote a letter to the leader of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, expressing his appreciation for the smear campaign. Celebrating the “Swifties,” as he called them, Jeb wrote to retired Col. Bud Day, “Please let them know that I am personally appreciative of their service to our nation. As someone who truly understands the risk of standing up for something, I simply cannot express in words how much I value their willingness to stand up against John Kerry.”

    Day had said that Kerry, a recipient of the Silver Star and three Purple Hearts, would “go down in history sometime as the Benedict Arnold of 1971.”

    George W. Bush had called the charges made by the Swift Boat Veterans "compelling."

    When questioned as to why Jeb felt comfortable with ugly attacks that smeared one decorated veteran but not another, Bush’s campaign spokesperson told CNN:

    “We reject the entire premise. A thank you letter to Col. Bud Day, Medal of Honor winner and Air Force Cross recipient, twice captured as a POW, is not in any way analogous to condemning Donald Trump’s slanderous attack on John McCain.”

    When his brother was on the ballot, Jeb thought the smearing of a war hero was worthy of recognition and admiration. But when it was Trump doing the smearing, while leading Jeb in the polls, Jeb was outraged.


    Guess what Republican had the integrity and decency to condemn the swift boat attacks?

    McCain deplores anti-Kerry ad

    The Associated Press

    WASHINGTON — Republican Sen. John McCain, a former prisoner of war in Vietnam, called an ad criticizing John Kerry’s military service “dishonest and dishonorable” and urged the White House on Thursday to condemn it as well.



  2. 10 hours ago, Jpowers said:

    That's not what I asked you though. 


    Do you include the dude who enlisted 3 years before it popped off as choosing to be there? 



    **** I feel more sorry for the dude who got drafted because he was just doing his **** and then.... 




    But you still haven't answered the question. 



    Because the way you worded it to begin with was you didn't really feel pity towards the Pow's who chose to be there and I was just wondering if that was for the McCains who fought to be there or the dudes who enlisted. It's a pretty wide net you were casting there. 

    Let's remember that this started with "He's a hero because he got captured. I like people who don't get captured."

    This is not about who you feel sorry for or not.  It is about who is a hero.  Who merits respect.

    And John McCain, or anyone else who volunteers to defend America is a hero exactly because they KNOW the risks and volunteer anyway.  

    We make bad decisions about what we ask these men do to as a country.  But it is a disgrace to belittle them for signing up.

    I am becoming more inclined to not directly respond to B.O.'s crap with each post I read.


  3. 23 minutes ago, Jpowers said:

    I'm not sure I understand this part. 


    The Pow's who were in Vietnam by choice as far as having enlisted previously don't deserve the same respect? 



    Or did McCain fight to be there? 



    BO  thinks that it’s OK to mock McCain for being captured because he knew what he was getting into (by volunteering.)? But it’s not ok to mock POWs who were drafted.   

     It  isn’t so much twisted inside out logic as it is further evidence that BO is just an *******. 

    Sn4tteRBoxXeR likes this

  4. Why, in the name of Lilly Pullitzer, does the first gay presidential candidate have to be named Buttigieg?

    FFS, could he have at least used only one “t”?

    If he ran with W’s VP, the ticket would appear on this board as “Pete ****igueg, ****Cheney”

    It sounds like a German fetish club. 

    OK, I looked it up:  The German translation is, in fact, butt guy”. (No. I didn’t. Because I’m afraid.  But it might.)

    Sn4tteRBoxXeR likes this

  5. 22 minutes ago, AF89 said:

    I seriously want some Nashville Hot chicken now

    Yeah . . . I blame half of the 20 pounds I have gained since I quite bike racing on the weekly commute to Nashville and not being disciplined enough to train while commuting.  The other half is developing a taste for their hot chicken.  I get a craving way too often . . . and there is a Chik-fil-a downstairs in my building.

    AF89 likes this

  6. 55 minutes ago, lostone said:


    look I will be voting for whatever the dem candidate is.  I will not go in a primary and vote for someone I don’t like though.  Like some people

    FFS!  I am not even SUGGESTING who anyone should vote for!  I am encouraging folks to support their candidates and policies and extol the virtues of them!

    But do that withOUT dumping on the other Democrats.  "Biden showed up at an event honoring **** Cheney and did not assault his political record and instead said decent things about him as a person!  FLUSH!!!"  

    At some point, there will be a nominee.  And people need to do WHATEVER they can to get that nominee elected.  Damaging the goods makes it that much more difficult later.

    MAD597 likes this

  7. 1 minute ago, Psychic Gibbon said:


    Because ICE is the only time there will be Supreme Court decisions that are, or should be abhorrent to Progressives/Liberals/Leftists/Purists . . . . 

    Are you posting that to disagree with me?

    IF purists policies are sufficiently popular, then sure, we don't need the Supreme Court.

    So advocate FOR those positions and candidates.

    But don't destroy your safety net.

  8. 1 hour ago, mdrake34 said:



    59 minutes ago, lostone said:

    Amazing, simply breathtaking.  The USA has no soul


    57 minutes ago, mdrake34 said:

    It's a good thing we let McConnell block Garland and push through Brett "I Like Beer" Kavanaugh. 

    Reminder to everyone who "flushes" any Democrat who isn't pure.  

    Look at how the Justices voted.. 

    You might want to consider pointing out the good stuff about your people and STFU about ****ting on anyone you perceive is not pure.


    MAD597 likes this

  9. 5 minutes ago, MAD597 said:

    He's right which is why I wonder why he is worried at all? Mueller report could prove 100% treason and nothing will happen.

    I think Trump should be getting to the point of not caring what dirt comes up cause it never impacts him and he just gets to do what he wants. This is how Facism is born.

    A weeks worth of his scandals would have gotten any other President impeached. Even with the Dem house majority as long as people still want to "think" a president can't be indicted nothing will happen.

    I think a President can be indicted as if he can't it creates a loop hole the Found Father certainly would have closed. A Presidential nominee break the laws to win the election and because they won are now shielded from prosecution? That doesn't makes sense, the no indictment crap is just a vague guideline and not anything binding.

    Someone needs to step up and challenge that non binding guideline.

    If we let a President break the law before and during their presidency then we are seen the birth of a Fascist nation here.


    Or maybe he's lying.

    Or he knows that it will never see the light of day.

    Or, of course, he knows that he will be completely exonerated and has nothing to worry about whatsoever which is why he has gone more twitter crazy this week, fired the AG, fired the head of the FBI, forced out others, and ridicules Mueller.


  10. 9 hours ago, JayOzOne said:


    John Mulaney had it right:





    6 hours ago, JayOzOne said:


     Ninety. One. Million. Dollars. That could have gone toward the wall.

    How many grifts has Trump been running as President?  

    The answer to that is "more than we can keep track of."

    The more important question is "WHY is Trump running so many grifts?"

    Greed?  Character?

    What is the Ocman's Razor answer?

    TRUMP IS BROKE and he HAS to grift to avoid defaulting on loans and/or cover expenses.

    As absurd as it seems ("He filed his financials!") There is a lot of evidence to support this conclusion.  The Deutche Bank thing is just one piece.  His tax returns is the other.  And his "red line" at Mueller going into his financials is still another.  And, of course, the man lies about everything and cooks numbers to suit his agenda (Taxes v. loan apps).  

    So he makes a big show of foregoing his salary while grifting the folks for everything from the inauguration, to golf, to Saudis booking his hotel, Trump University . . . . The income to his closely held golf business alone is 227 times his Presidential salary.

    Why doesn’t he give the government a break (instead of apparently high grossing us) and make a show of THAT?

    Sure, it sounds crazy, but there has been a ton of crazy with this guy.

    Ezekiel 25:17 likes this

  11. Just now, mdrake34 said:

    Again, a senior advisor to the president went on cable news and encouraged the entire country to read a white nationalist terrorist's entire manifesto.

    What in the actual ****?

    According to Donald Trump, Jr. and others, we were supposed to ignore the attacker?

    I guess someone didn't get the memo?

    mdrake34 likes this

  12. 2 hours ago, T-Falcon said:

    I didn't say it was a fair comparison at all. The Jewish people of today dont follow the Law of Moses. The temple being destroyed, the genealogies being lost makes it an impossibility to practice Judaism from that perspective..theres modern Judaism which is only a shadow of what was because the Law which was ended at the Cross and the practing of Judaism was destroyed by Titus in AD 70 when he destroyed the temple and the false high priest and the genealogies. 

    Mods, please change T-Falcon’s avatar to


    Edit for T-Falcon, who apparently is an expert on all things religion but doesn’t realize this is a goose with a Wreath.  A Chriistmas wreath.  That makes it a Christmas Goose.  

    And we know what Christmas geese are full of.  

    falconsd56 and mdrake34 like this

  13. 1 hour ago, GEORGIAfan said:

    I don't remember much either, but from what I remember, she was somewhat critical of Omar's all about the bens tweet and then thanked her when she apologized and walked it back. I don't think she commented on the situation after that. 

    Agreed. Claiming she is responsible for the NZ terrorist attack is beyond ****** up. 

    Hey now, don’t rain on the “**** on “centrism” at  any opportunity even if it involves someone who has never been elected” parade.  

  14. 4 hours ago, Gritzblitz 2.0 said:

    And you talk about the Quran and Hadith. Have you read the bible? There are plenty of violent passages there that can be taken out of context as well.


    4 hours ago, T-Falcon said:

    Did I state all people who hold the Islamic faith are radical? No they are just not faithful practitioners of their religion.  If you do not understand the difference in traditional Judaism and Christianity I don't know what to say. If you think Christians are practitioners of Judaism then you should probably read the Bible again while you are at it.


    4 hours ago, T-Falcon said:

    Bigot? Would you kindly show me anything I have said that has been bigoted? 

     Let me get this straight:

    1) you’re saying that it is fair to compare the violence of the Quran with the Old Testament.

    2) But it isn’t fair to compare Christians with violent Muslims because they follow the New Testament whereas the Jews follow the Old Testament.

    3)  only violent Muslims are true Muslims. 

    4)  it’s OK to compare violent Muslims with Jews. 

     To Summarize: Muslims who are not violent are not Muslims. The old testament supports violence the same way that the Quoron does.