Waterford Politics MEGATHREAD

0rt · 09-07-2013 12:20pm

http://www.youthdefence.ie/index.html

A bit of truth from youth defence? :P

fuzzy dunlop · 09-07-2013 12:52pm

old hippy wrote: »

Define "moral conviction". It sounds like something the Taliban (Irish chapter) would trot out.

As in standing up for what you believe is right despite being unpopular.If you've never heard of the concept then you are just advertising your ignorance. But keep it as up its fun to watch someone like yourself compare what is a virtue of a free society to the Taliban:D But then moral conviction never was a strong Irish characteristic it has to be said. At least not among sneerers like yourself. And btw where will I find this Irish Chapter of the Taliban? I suspect they only live in your head but I'm just asking on the minuscule chance that this bizarre and unoriginal notion of yours actually exists. It's hilarious to see pro abortion people like yourself criticize and smear pro life for being "over the top" and then come out with pseudo science and "Taliban" soundbites. If you had any worthwhile knowledge on the subject you would know that that there is plenty of Humanist, Secular and Feminist groups that are pro-life including none other than Christopher Hitchens and they hold this view for good reason. If you had any cop you would realize your attitude is only going to entrench moderates who are pro life but who vote for liberalizing the law slightly.

sparkling sea · 09-07-2013 8:21pm

I have never heard of anyone who isn't pro life, but that doesn't mean they aren't pro choice, spinning facts to suit your argument maybe?
I would imagine just by looking at the very ethos of humanism, it is the antithesis to say they are anti choice. I would also wager that the majority of feminist groups would also be pro choice and pro the life of women, and a feotus with a developed nervous system. This as opposed to anti choice for and pro life of women and a fertilised egg, which isn't a conscious living being, but more like a fly.

The whole anti choice, pro life argument has and is based on a false premise, this being, the life of a fertilized egg is equal to the life of a viable human being, well it isn't - they should start telling the truth on their posters or they shouldn't be allowed have them up.

Specifically a fertilized egg hasn't a nervous system and so it has no consciousness; the nervous system and consciousness develops over months; significant brain development is needed, until then there isn't a life equivalent to that of a woman's to be destroyed. 15 weeks is the earliest time frame any valid scientific inquiry has reported enough development of the nervous system and consiousness needed to qualify.

Religious mumbo jumbo is of course different and doesn't care for actual fact, that doesn't mean that people who spout absolute rubbish should be allowed push it in everyones faces, just like any cult I would be very wary of them.

I was at the beach today and I had to pass one of these anti choice stands, they were stating utter rubbish as fact, they were trying to give young children lollies to attract over parents. I am sure many women on the beach have had abortions, I don't think that any group has the right to judge these women, they most definitely do not have the right to ruin the very few sunny days at the beach, these women and the rest of us are likely to see this year or perhaps in our life.
As I passed my arm was literally pulled and I was asked to sign something, I politely but adamantly refused, then I was harassed to sign a petition - so I called the gardai.
It was the only sensible thing to do, use the law to protect your right to walk along a prom in peace, it worked for me. Of course these misogynistic groups will never understand the crimes they commit, they will always use a God as their excuse and plead ignorance or completely ignore what science can definitively answer - nervous system and consciouness and human development; a fertilised egg = a fertilised egg, its nothing more (although it can mean alot more if it is really wanted or unwated) and thats why women don't receive pre natal care until they are at least 12 weeks pregnant.

fuzzy dunlop · 09-07-2013 11:28pm

I am sure there was some mothers on the beach who resent the implication that there children started with something that equated with the life of a fly. I am sure there are a few women who have grieved after having miscarriages who will appreciate that their sense of loss was over something that was essentially equal to a fly and maybe they need to snap out of it. Or that their grief is only due to a chemical imbalance in their brain because of the pregnancy and they didn’t lose a baby at all. The fact is it isn’t a fly. It has the potential to develop into a human being that will potentially grow into an adult and make their own “choices”. A fly doesn’t. I also know there are plenty of women who have had abortions and regret having had them with no influence by religious institutions or any religious background at all. This is one of the inconvenient truths that the “pro choice” groups don’t want to acknowledge.Others being that over 95% of abortions that are carried out have nothing to dowith suicidal mothers, the life of the mother being at risk, fetal abnormalities or rape. Also whether or not a fertilized egg has a nervou ssystem or has developed consciousness before 15 weeks is only one way of looking at the issue. That is from a neurological viewpoint. From a biological viewpoint it is a human life from conception which immediately raise the relevant ethical questions that are a concern of the religious but also the ethical, non-religious including some humanists and some feminists. And it is also proof of nothing other than the fact that human technology is unable to determine empirically if a nervous system forms before this time. In twenty years’ time it might say something else. Is the term pro-life a spin of the facts? No it isn’t it is an accurate description based on scientific specifically biological fact. And if it was it is hardly different in that regard to the term pro-choice or nonsense about misogynistic groups. Because the other great lie about abortion is that it is an issue of freedom or women’srights. When the fact is that the number of women getting abortions for the reason of social taboo is a multiple of the combined numbers who get abortions because they are victims of rape, threat to the life of the mother, fetal abnormality and all the other “good reasons”for abortion therefore abortion is in fact a facilitator for the oppression ofwomen in a huge number of cases. Abortions because of pressure from parents is greater than those for rape or incest. The same for pressure from Boyfriends/Husbands.Or “career pressure” Then there are the so called economic reasons which are so varied but are in the vast majority of cases temporary economic woes like a partner being out of work. But here is the thing the vast majority of abortions are carried out because of fear. Which essentially means that given the right support there could be potentially 75% less if the correct counseling and support structures were in place. Maybe “pro choice”would not like us to mention the growing number of abortions that are occurring because of “gender choosing” in Western countries which predominantly affect unborn females. Not to mention China where this phenomena is astronomical innumber and creating a demographic time bomb. Or where abortion predominantly affects minorities in countries like the US. Also pre-natal care is given as soon as a woman is pregnant. It might intensify after 12 weeks but again all this means is that the implications of something going wrong are greater after this time. It has nothing at all to do with any ethical issues and in no way whatsoever supports any assertion that a fetus is essentially a non-human entity devoid of consciousness or life.

Cabaal · 10-07-2013 7:37am

I fail to see how this is Waterford specific at this stage.
If you want to carry on this discussion I suggest that you take it to the politics forum,

0rt · 10-07-2013 12:14pm

well...
1. because there is still an ould wan outside of SHAWS with her pro life stand..
2. this is the politics thread.

fuzzy dunlop · 10-07-2013 12:54pm

1.But the problem is nobody is talking just about a stand outside Shaws. The person who started the thread immediately used it to get on their "pro abortion" soapbox which was guaranteed to open up a can of worms i.e. a debate about abortion which is national political issue and not just a Waterford one. And it was a bit galling when you consider every local issue that may cast our politicians in a negative light has so far been quarantined in the Megathread but not this one until it was reported that is.

So here is the solution if your bothered about the stand outside Shaws. Report it to the Guards if you think they are doing something wrong and the council if you think they are ignoring the local by-laws. They might tell you if they have a legitimate permit and a right to be there. If they do there is nothing you can do about it outside of setting up your own stand with your opposing views on show (don't forget your permit).If they don't then make an official complaint. That is the simple solution to it. If you are really really frustrated about it lobby your local political reps to change the law or get onto Billy McCarthy or Joe Duffy and see if they are interested.

old hippy · 10-07-2013 2:09pm

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

As in standing up for what you believe is right despite being unpopular.If you've never heard of the concept then you are just advertising your ignorance. But keep it as up its fun to watch someone like yourself compare what is a virtue of a free society to the Taliban:D But then moral conviction never was a strong Irish characteristic it has to be said. At least not among sneerers like yourself. And btw where will I find this Irish Chapter of the Taliban? I suspect they only live in your head but I'm just asking on the minuscule chance that this bizarre and unoriginal notion of yours actually exists. It's hilarious to see pro abortion people like yourself criticize and smear pro life for being "over the top" and then come out with pseudo science and "Taliban" soundbites. If you had any worthwhile knowledge on the subject you would know that that there is plenty of Humanist, Secular and Feminist groups that are pro-life including none other than Christopher Hitchens and they hold this view for good reason. If you had any cop you would realize your attitude is only going to entrench moderates who are pro life but who vote for liberalizing the law slightly.

To sum up, moral conviction is just your personal beliefs and wagging your finger at those you disagree with. Thought as much.

fuzzy dunlop · 10-07-2013 2:28pm

old hippy wrote: »

To sum up, moral conviction is just your personal beliefs and wagging your finger at those you disagree with. Thought as much.

No that's your personal belief or your personal distortion rather. I gave you the standard definition of what moral conviction means. Try reading some reference book/website and you will see that. Then you might see that without moral conviction things like institutional abuse, government corruption and organized crime flourish in the world. You seem to live in some alternative universe where there are no consequences and hence no need for personal responsibility.You pillory people and sling mud at people who do believe in what is right. So you are actually guilty of the things you are accusing others of. The only difference being is you have to do it via the internet. So no moral courage is actually your problem. If you believe abortion is right that's your prerogative. As is your right to oppose anyone you want. But don't pretend your on some superior moral ground. You're not.

old hippy · 10-07-2013 2:44pm

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

No that's your personal belief or your personal distortion rather. I gave you the standard definition of what moral conviction means. Try reading some reference book/website and you will see that. Then you might see that without moral conviction things like institutional abuse, government corruption and organized crime flourish in the world. You seem to live in some alternative universe where there are no consequences and hence no need for personal responsibility.You pillory people and sling mud at people who do believe in what is right. So you are actually guilty of the things you are accusing others of. The only difference being is you have to do it via the internet. So no moral courage is actually your problem. If you believe abortion is right that's your prerogative. As is your right to oppose anyone you want. But don't pretend your on some superior moral ground. You're not.

Define "superior moral ground".

I don't live in an alternative universe, I live in the real world, where women are often denied the right to chose what to do with their bodies.

As for the hilighted bobbins, you have no idea what I do in the real world. Or what my experiences are with protest and abortion are either.

fuzzy dunlop · 10-07-2013 2:56pm

old hippy wrote: »

Define "superior moral ground".

I don't live in an alternative universe, I live in the real world, where women are often denied the right to chose what to do with their bodies.

As for the hilighted bobbins, you have no idea what I do in the real world. Or what my experiences are with protest and abortion are either.

As if you're worried about women s rights! If you're also living in the real world where thousands of women are in England alone are forced to have abortions they don't want to have by family members and male partners. Not to mention the tens of thousands who are forced by social and peer pressure. There is no pro choice there. Again you can try and define in narrow terms if you like but it won't wash. It isn't just about women s bodies and even if it was it still doesn't support your stance because the testimonies show that through various forms of social and familial coercion most abortions are not made by choice.

I frankly don't care what you do but your definitely not standing up for your beliefs on the streets of Waterford regarding abortion. Hence the underhanded attacks towards those who have the courage to do so.

old hippy · 10-07-2013 3:01pm

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

As if you're worried about women s rights! If you're also living in the real world where thousands of women are in England alone are forced to have abortions they don't want to have by family members and male partners. Not to mention the tens of thousands who are forced by social and peer pressure. There is no pro choice there. Again you can try and define in narrow terms if you like but it won't wash. It isn't just about women s bodies and even if it was it still doesn't support your stance because the testimonies show that throw various forms of social and familial coercion most abortions are not made by choice.

Why do you find it incredible that I'm concerned with women's rights? I've been fighting for them all my life. My friend aborted because she and her partner couldn't have the kid with their workloand and travel. It wouldn't have worked. Sad but there you go. There was no person actually forcing them to do so.

What testimonies are these you mention?

Trotter · 10-07-2013 3:08pm

If we all got half as worked up about 30+ Billion euro being handed away, and Waterford taking kick after kick after kick, maybe we wouldnt be saying goodbye to people going up the M9 to the airport every week.

What did FF give Waterford? A road to Dublin airport and nothin else.
What did FG/Lab give Waterford? A million reasons to use it.

Or we could all get sucked into the national debate which involves two far ends of opinion spectrum, where the quiet 80% ish just get on with wondering quietly where it all went wrong.

fuzzy dunlop · 10-07-2013 3:10pm

old hippy wrote: »

Why do you find it incredible that I'm concerned with women's rights? I've been fighting for them all my life. My friend aborted because she and her partner couldn't have the kid with their workloand and travel. It wouldn't have worked. Sad but there you go. There was no person actually forcing them to do so.

What testimonies are these you mention?

Because I don't believe you are concerned with women s rights. Being too busy in work is not a reason for an abortion. If you were concerned with women s rights you would see the injustice of a woman having to have an abortion because of "workload". This is gender based slavery FFS. There are social protections for pregnant women. A pregnant woman cannot be forced out of her job. And if the social protections are insufficient then they need to be changed and reinforced. Your friend was effectively forced to have an abortion.

old hippy · 10-07-2013 3:13pm

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

Because I don't believe you are concerned with women s rights. Being too busy in work is not a reason for an abortion. If you were concerned with women s rights you would see the injustice of a woman having to have an abortion because of "workload". This is gender based slavery FFS. There are social protections for pregnant women. A pregnant woman cannot be forced out of her job. And if the social protections are insufficient then they need to be changed and reinforced.

She didn't want the baby. The pregnancy was an accident. Why should she be forced to have it just to satisfy you?

fuzzy dunlop · 10-07-2013 3:20pm

old hippy wrote: »

She didn't want the baby. The pregnancy was an accident. Why should she be forced to have it just to satisfy you?

The reason you said was because of work not because she didn't want it. So if this actually happened which it probably didn't then that is a completely different reason. She is not satisfying me by having a child. This is more of your spin. Why should she be allowed extinguish a life to satisfy her employer? Or satisfy you more like.

old hippy · 10-07-2013 3:37pm

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

The reason you said was because of work not because she didn't want it. So if this actually happened which it probably didn't then that is a completely different reason. She is not satisfying me by having a child. This is more of your spin. Why should she be allowed extinguish a life to satisfy her employer? Or satisfy you more like.

She didn't want the baby for a number of personal and work related reasons which I'm not going to go into here. It's all out there in boards but I don't wish to dwell on it, too much.

It actually did happen, unlike some anti-choice folks, I don't spout untruths.

And she didn't extinguish a life, she had a surgical procedure to remove a random clump of cells.

And why would it satisfy me?

fuzzy dunlop · 10-07-2013 3:54pm

old hippy wrote: »

She didn't want the baby for a number of personal and work related reasons which I'm not going to go into here. It's all out there in boards but I don't wish to dwell on it, too much.

It actually did happen, unlike some anti-choice folks, I don't spout untruths.

And she didn't extinguish a life, she had a surgical procedure to remove a random clump of cells.

And why would it satisfy me?

Being a random clump of cells is your opinion which you are entitled too but it is not a fact.It is a glib statement and nothing more. The Science doesn't back it up nor the ethics. And if it is a human life which many people legitimately believe then surgical or not it equates to murder ethically speaking. You may have another opinion that differs but it is just that, opinion it is no more valid. Your problem is that the anti abortion lobby uses Scientific evidence that is equally as strong as yours if not stronger.We have to take your word that this abortion happened. I don't take your word because you have changed your story. And judging by your introductory posts and abuse on this issue I would say you would do anything push your view on others. Including using women who have had abortions and who for all you know may regret the decision.But this just another tactic to play on the sensitivities of people who despite being anti abortion are not in the business of condemning people who have had them.They are about protecting innocent life and prevent what they believe is an intrinsically evil act. And what untruths are pro life propagating?

old hippy · 10-07-2013 4:07pm

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

Being a random clump of cells is your opinion which you are entitled too but it is not a fact.It is a glib statement and nothing more. The Science doesn't back it up nor the ethics. And if it is a human life which many people legitimately believe then surgical or not it equates to murder ethically speaking. You may have another opinion that differs but it is just that, opinion it is no more valid. Your problem is that the anti abortion lobby uses Scientific evidence that is equally as strong as yours if not stronger.We have to take your word that this abortion happened. I don't take your word because you have changed your story. And judging by your introductory posts and abuse on this issue I would say you would do anything push your view on others. Including using women who have had abortions and who for all you know may regret the decision.But this just another tactic to play on the sensitivities of people who despite being anti abortion are not in the business of condemning people who have had them.They are about protecting innocent life and prevent what they believe is an intrinsically evil act. And what untruths are pro life propagating?

When a poster resorts to using the word "evil", you know they're slipping.

If you think I'm making this incident up, there's not much point in continuing.

We will win, you know. You and your candle burning kin will be consigned to the wilderness with all the other misogynists that Ireland was burdened with.

Not one woman I know regrets their termination. Not one. Now, I'm sure there are those that do but because you claim there is, doesn't mean it's true. See?

No, the women I know who went through these minor surgical procedures to get rid of a few cells had a problem with the pious patriarchal revenants who still wish to exert their selfish stranglehold on Ireland's women.

fuzzy dunlop · 10-07-2013 4:11pm

old hippy wrote: »

When a poster resorts to using the word "evil", you know they're slipping.

If you think I'm making this incident up, there's not much point in continuing.

We will win, you know. You and your candle burning kin will be consigned to the wilderness with all the other misogynists that Ireland was burdened with.

Not one woman I know regrets their termination. Not one. Now, I'm sure there are those that do but because you claim there is, doesn't mean it's true. See?

No, the women I know who went through these minor surgical procedures to get rid of a few cells had a problem with the pious patriarchal revenants who still wish to exert their selfish stranglehold on Ireland's women.

Ahhhh candle burning kin like Christopher Hitchens! You're starting to sound like a cartoon super villain now

MitchKoobski · 10-07-2013 4:11pm

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

And what untruths are pro life propagating?

*Anti-Choice/Anti-Abortion. You'll be very hard done by to find someone who is Anti-Life.

Below piece was recently removed from the Youth Defence website. Exact same as that asshole US Senator who said women can't get pregnant from a 'legitimate rape' because apparently the body's defences will somehow magically kick in to prevent pregnancy from rape.

For the record, I'm on the fence for the most part. I believe women should have the full choice but I can understand why people are against abortion. That being said, nothing the Pro-Choice side has said has offended me whereas 50% of the stuff the Anti-Abortion side come out with is way over the top and insulting.

old hippy · 10-07-2013 4:16pm

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

Ahhhh candle burning kin like Christopher Hitchens! You're starting to sound like a cartoon super villain now

Well, to be fair - you brought up the "evil" concept. Of which there is, of course, no such thing.

Try harder.

fuzzy dunlop · 10-07-2013 4:40pm

old hippy wrote: »

When a poster resorts to using the word "evil", you know they're slipping.

If you think I'm making this incident up, there's not much point in continuing.

We will win, you know. You and your candle burning kin will be consigned to the wilderness with all the other misogynists that Ireland was burdened with.

Not one woman I know regrets their termination. Not one. Now, I'm sure there are those that do but because you claim there is, doesn't mean it's true. See?

No, the women I know who went through these minor surgical procedures to get rid of a few cells had a problem with the pious patriarchal revenants who still wish to exert their selfish stranglehold on Ireland's women.

You're starting to sound like a cartoon super villain now (We will win). I just don't believe any right thinking woman would confide in a a bitter person like you.How many women do you know who have had abortions. Dozens? Thousands? None probably. You can't win the argument so you default to abuse.But good effort you tried and failed. Misogynist? You're the apologist for an industry that is facilitating at least 2000 coerced abortions in England alone per year.Maybe as much as 75000. If you think that's a victory for women than good for you. But here is the truth if you took the religious out of the equation there is still the inconvenient scientific truth. And that is human life is beginning at conception is an academic stance that still has yet to be unproven.Your so obsessed with the religious don't seem to realize that the issue of ethics and what is "evil" is not just the field of the religious. Atheists and Humanist have been arguing this for years. Not once have I mentioned religion as a case for or against. My only defense of them has been their right to freedom of speech and assembly.Same as everybody else. Because I believe if it was left to people like you, you would gag anyone who disagreed with you through abuse or any other way possible. You just have to look at your posts.Freedom of expression is something else you have a problem with. Oh an BTW I personally know women who have had abortions too. Some regret and one says they don't but not very convincingly. But that is my opinion. I could be wrong which I am prepared to admit unlike you. What I am not prepared to do is use their plight to further a cause. I will leave that to you. Oh and don't count your chickens yet

fuzzy dunlop · 10-07-2013 4:47pm

old hippy wrote: »

Well, to be fair - you brought up the "evil" concept. Of which there is, of course, no such thing.

Try harder.

No need. Your semantics speak for themselves. Once again your confusing theory and personal beliefs with facts.

old hippy · 10-07-2013 5:00pm

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

You're starting to sound like a cartoon super villain now (We will win). I just don't believe any right thinking woman would confide in a a bitter person like you.How many women do you know who have had abortions. Dozens? Thousands? None probably. You can't win the argument so you default to abuse.But good effort you tried and failed. Misogynist? You're the apologist for an industry that is facilitating at least 2000 coerced abortions in England alone per year.Maybe as much as 75000. If you think that's a victory for women than good for you. But here is the truth if you took the religious out of the equation there is still the inconvenient scientific truth. And that is human life is beginning at conception is an academic stance that still has yet to be unproven.Your so obsessed with the religious don't seem to realize that the issue of ethics and what is "evil" is not just the field of the religious. Atheists and Humanist have been arguing this for years. Not once have I mentioned religion as a case for or against. My only defense of them has been their right to freedom of speech and assembly.Same as everybody else. Because I believe if it was left to people like you, you would gag anyone who disagreed with you through abuse or any other way possible. You just have to look at your posts.Freedom of expression is something else you have a problem with. Oh an BTW I personally know women who have had abortions too. Some regret and one says they don't but not very convincingly. But that is my opinion. I could be wrong which I am prepared to admit unlike you. What I am not prepared to do is use their plight to further a cause. I will leave that to you. Oh and don't count your chickens yet

Bitterness? The only bitterness I see is in your increasingly outlandish and desperate posts so typical of the anti-choice who blight our society and seek to keep us enslaved just to satisfy your agenda. Your semantics speak for themselves. Once again you're confusing theory and personal beliefs with facts.

Try harder.

It's views like yours that contribute to the misery of thousands of Irish women every year under the guise of concern.

Shame on you.

fuzzy dunlop · 10-07-2013 5:11pm

old hippy wrote: »

Bitterness? The only bitterness I see is in your increasingly outlandish and desperate posts so typical of the anti-choice who blight our society and seek to keep us enslaved just to satisfy your agenda. Your semantics speak for themselves. Once again you're confusing theory and personal beliefs with facts.

Try harder.

It's views like yours that contribute to the misery of thousands of Irish women every year under the guise of concern.

Shame on you.

More sanctimonious waffle from old hippie. I don't need to try harder. A couple of facts is all that is needed and you start shouting about rosary beads or something. I am contributing to the misery of nobody. You on the other hand have produced nothing that stands up to scrutiny. So keeping bringing up the thousands of women who "need abortions" that you know nothing about. And bury your head in the sand and pretend that there is many many thousands more who do not regret having there children despite the same fears. Children I am sure you will see enjoying the sunshine today if you go outside and who might not be here if you had your way. If that is misery and I am contributing to it then long may it last. You can continue learning new words from me:P

Chiparus · 10-07-2013 6:48pm

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

More sanctimonious waffle from old hippie. I don't need to try harder. A couple of facts is all that is needed and you start shouting about rosary beads or something. I am contributing to the misery of nobody. You on the other hand have produced nothing that stands up to scrutiny. So keeping bringing up the thousands of women who "need abortions" that you know nothing about. And bury your head in the sand and pretend that there is many many thousands more who do not regret having there children despite the same fears. Children I am sure you will see enjoying the sunshine today if you go outside and who might not be here if you had your way. If that is misery and I am contributing to it then long may it last. You can continue learning new words from me:P

Would not be so sure about that.

fuzzy dunlop · 10-07-2013 7:00pm

Chiparus wrote: »

Would not be so sure about that.

Well if Meatwad was thanking my posts I would not be sure about anything at all:D

Not The Real Scarecrow · 10-07-2013 7:06pm

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

Well if Meatwad was thanking my posts I would not be sure about anything at all:D

Wow, I get a mention from you, I'm thrilled. Love the way you pay attention to me thanking posts.

fuzzy dunlop · 10-07-2013 7:20pm

Meatwad wrote: »

Wow, I get a mention from you, I'm thrilled. Love the way you pay attention to me thanking posts.

Well Its hard not to notice when you have the habit of thanking posters who I am usually debating with.Especially when their playing the man and not the ball. Chiparus post being just the latest.I wonder why that is? The last time you actually came out and responded in person was when you were trying to derail a topic with your muppet baby posts. You remember being called on that? Its like you never got over it. So as far as me noticing you goes I'm flattered you find it so thrilling but trust me it is mere amusement .

Waterford Politics MEGATHREAD

Comments