search results matching tag: clear n clean
» channel: learn
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds
- 1
Videos (2) | Sift Talk (0) | Blogs (1) | Comments (5) |
- 1
Videos (2) | Sift Talk (0) | Blogs (1) | Comments (5) |
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
ant (Member Profile)
Congratulations! Your video, Stargate Macgyver Gag-Clear & Clean, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.
This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 37 Badge!
ant (Member Profile)
Your video, Stargate Macgyver Gag-Clear & Clean, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.
TYT - 5 Shot at "Gun Appreciation Day" Celebrations
Harlequinn kicking some debate ass, IMO.
And as previous poster said, but in other words:
I see no place for killing devices such as gun in the Society that we currently have.
They can be cleared and cleaned all you fucking want, that dosn't change the fact that the only reason to have them is... yes?.. fun.
And that fun you all need so much kills alot of people.
BOO! GAAAH! (Blog Entry by youdiejoe)
Okay. First, I'll point out that you still don't have any sources that repeat your own claim that the Democratic-Republican party simply disappeared into thin air, and that there was a clear and clean break between that party and the Democratic Party.
So, one party, that changed its name.Second, you either didn't understand my explanation of why the Republican party would be different, or well, I guess there is no other real explanation, because you laid out a straw man instead of responding to what I actually said.
Third, your fixation with the logo is unhealthy. Seriously, if we change the logo now to a Fox to mock Fox News, does that mean Bill O'Reilly founded the Democratic party? I'm not being entirely facetious -- if the Democratic-Republican party didn't have a logo before, but during the Jackson presidency they adopted it to spite the people calling him Jackass, does that make him the founder of the Democratic-Republican party? I think it makes him a Jackass, but that's not what we're talking about.
But really, this all comes down to #1. You said the answers.com page was accurate. Here's some of what you deemed accurate:
Encyclopedia Britannica:
US History Encylcopedia:
The Law Encyclopedia entry starts with:
They don't all agree about the exact timing of the change, but they say it was a change in name, not a newly founded party.
In the course of searching again today, I found a couple original-source documents:
Thomas Jefferson Randolph (Thomas Jefferson's grandson) said at the 1872 Democratic convention that he'd spent 80 years of his life in the Democratic-Republican party (source), and Inquiry Into the Origin and Course of Political Parties in the United States By Martin Van Buren, where he discusses the topic at excruciating length, but frequently talks about the roots of the Democratic party beginning with Jefferson.
Look, you're just wrong. You can disagree with the history as it's written, but that makes you, not me, the revisionist.
It's okay. I don't blame you for being mad. You don't like the thought that Thomas Jefferson and William Jefferson Clinton were both from the same party. Here's a thought, maybe we should change the logo to a brunette sucking cock, to commemorate the founding of
Limbaugh'sClinton's Democrat (as opposed to Democratic) party. The logo change, that's really all it takes to found a new party.Someone call Hillary and let her know she won the nomination at the Democrat National Convention, where only Michigan and Florida count. Best not show her the new logo though.
The Self-linking Thread (Sift Talk Post)
My sifts are there for any administrative action to be taken down (I discarded them all). Obviously no one has. And this claim that it's hypocritical of me to discard what are clearly self promotional virals? Maybe I should leave it now and not help out.
I don't see how exactly it's hypocritical to provide good content for this community and then come clean if I broke a rule doing so. Maybe I should just stop and that will be better for all of you. Nothing that I have self linked has been promotional and was simply the provision of good content to make this website content better then the fodder one finds at MetaCafe and others.
I see what Theo means now by witch hunt. Sort it amongst yourselves clearly coming clean and pitching in what is and will be a community wide decision has repercussions.