fvicarel3
8/10/2008 7:45:00 PM
On Aug 10, 11:05 am, "Bevch...@gmail.com" <Bevch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 10, 10:38 am, SMBalloon <smball...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 00:10:09 -0700 (PDT), fvicar...@aol.com wrote:
> > >He'd still be a
> > >better leader than most of the alternatives.
>
> > The guy was and is a phony. Some had the wool pulled over their eyes
> > due to their agreeing with the rhetoric. Those who disagreed with the
> > rhetoric could more easily see he was a phony. But plenty of
> > liberals/Democrats who were also sympathetic to the rhetoric could
> > also see beyond that to see he was just too much of a phony. It's
> > harder to realize that when it's one of your own. And they deserve
> > credit for that.
>
> Ditto. Like what politician gets a $400 haircut? I know too much was
> made of it, but it doesn't do much toward characterizing him as "one
> of the people" he was trying to cast himself in.
>
> Bev
> Amateur videos, IL
<< Like what politician gets a $400 haircut?>>
Probably quite a few come election time if their running TV ads. Your
post has all the relevance of Bruce-haters saying "how can he sing
about the working man when he's a millionaire." Thee' a huge gap in
comprehension for people who htink such ways.