Info
Hahahaha! You not knowing the meaning of "infer" is NOT splitting hairs. What it amounted to was YOU bearing false witness against Elizabeth Dole, Mr. or Ms. Holier-than-thou! Dole simply stated the facts. She IMPLIED nothing. YOU concluded that the Hag was godless, then accused Dole of wrongdoing because she dared tell you the truth... ...but I LOVE the way you change your tack after your little faux pas and now it's, "shouldn't she represent non-believers too?" You are obviously much more of a die-hard Democrat than a theologian. If evidence came out that Hagan engaged in canabalism, you'd defend her.... ...and no, I'm not IMPLYING that Hagan is a canibal, so don't INFER that. I could personally care less if Hagan was a witch who bathed in blood. My opposition to her is that she is part of the planned Socialist destruction of America, as we know it.
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
CAPTCHA
Please re-enter the code shown in the image below.

Reply