Dave Burris Is Back… And He’s Not Happy
November 3rd, 2009 • Related • Filed Under
By pandora
Dave Burris has returned to blogging. Check out his new site here. Like I said at his new place… you don’t know what you had ’til it’s gone. And while I rarely agreed with Dave, he made me think. Delaware Politics has become wingnut central – Be honest, Dave, how irritated are you that you gave them that name?
I wish you good luck, and plan on visiting often. You never know when you just might need a liberal’s help!
Welcome back.
Comment by RSmitty on 3 November 2009 at 4:55 pm:
Be honest, Dave, how irritated are you that you gave them that name?
He owned it, but the intellect behind the name was someone else’s! Whatever, that baby left home and has a life of its own now.
Comment by Unstable Isotope on 3 November 2009 at 6:14 pm:
I’m not sure why we should read the website of a commie lib.
Comment by El Somnambulo on 3 November 2009 at 6:50 pm:
Well, we know he respects Gerald Hocker and he respects Monsignor Lavelle.
He called me a liar for pointing out that Hocker had signed on as a sponsor to a bill that would’ve given grocery stores (Hocker owns two) the right to sell liquor. He called me a liar for pointing out that Lavelle conspired with the Catholic Diocese to delay and ultimately deny justice for victims of institutional pedophilia.
So, when the Brett Favre of the Blogosphere comes out of retirement for the umpteenth time and proclaims that he’s ‘through with labels’, does that mean that he will no longer label someone a liar for providing fact-based narratives?
If not, El Burrito Junior is the same phony he’s always been. Let’s just see how long it takes for him to prove it.
Comment by RSmitty on 3 November 2009 at 6:53 pm:
Wee! El Som missed him, too! I can feel it…FEEL that love tonight!
Comment by Brooke on 3 November 2009 at 7:21 pm:
Well, I went over there. Also to the other place. And I saw y’all had all peed on the gate.
Don’t any of you have annoying relatives? Why talk to crazies you’re not assigned?
Comment by jason330 on 3 November 2009 at 7:47 pm:
I like Dave a lot. He is smart and funny and sane for a Republican. When he called into the radio show that I was on with Tyler Nixon – it was like somebody suddenly threw open a window.
But I’m a little pessimistic about him being able to live up to the high aspirations of his new blog. He still can’t admit that voting for Bush was a mistake and that sort of putting the part above the country is the very essence of rank partisanship.
Comment by John Manifold on 3 November 2009 at 8:58 pm:
I’m too busy to watch the wacko blogs, but someone sent me this:
http://www.redstate.com/mbecker908/2009/10/31/obama-goes-to-dover/
Can we expect the same froth from Burris?
Comment by FSP on 3 November 2009 at 9:12 pm:
Not that I’m taking requests, but I did write this the other day.
Comment by Brooke on 3 November 2009 at 9:42 pm:
Who are those people?
Comment by RSmitty on 3 November 2009 at 9:57 pm:
Boogeymen, Brooke, all boogeymen.
Comment by Rebecca on 4 November 2009 at 7:56 am:
Brooke, ever watch a cat play with a mouse? I think we’re seeing a little of that here. Except both sides think they are the cat. ;o)
Comment by capesdelaware on 4 November 2009 at 8:19 am:
There are NO “good” republicans .They do not beleive that everyone is equal. Have you ever met a republican that did ANYTHING for anyone other than a blood relative or friend ? They beleive in “survival of the fitest”. Ive got mine screw the rest of you.If you dont have health insurance its your own dam fault. Dont expect me to pay for it.
Comment by JustTheFacts on 4 November 2009 at 10:22 am:
Who is Dave Burris?
Comment by AncoraImparo on 4 November 2009 at 5:23 pm:
capesdelaware – that’s about as small minded as the people you condone.
Comment by Brooke on 4 November 2009 at 8:20 pm:
You do know the word “condone” means “silently approve” don’t you?
Really, I’m trying to keep up, but between posts that are about a slew of people I hope never to meet, and language that was all written on the other side of the looking glass, I sometimes find it difficult to identify a thought.
See, I’m new here. I’m assuming thought might be involved.
Comment by pandora on 4 November 2009 at 8:47 pm:
Hang in there, Brooke. It becomes easier.
Comment by Brooke on 4 November 2009 at 9:03 pm:
I don’t know under what conditions it would become easier to understand words used with the opposite of both their connotative and denotative meanings. My vocabulary has a head-start in accuracy.
Comment by pandora on 4 November 2009 at 9:15 pm:
Actually, that doesn’t get easier. I can’t condone poor language skills.
Learning who’s who in the DE blogosphere will come in time.
Comment by anon on 4 November 2009 at 9:16 pm:
Brooke I think you will find our vocabulary is perfectly cromulent.
Comment by Geezer on 4 November 2009 at 9:55 pm:
“Have you ever met a republican that did ANYTHING for anyone other than a blood relative or friend ?”
Yes, many. Next question?
Comment by Geezer on 4 November 2009 at 9:56 pm:
“Don’t any of you have annoying relatives? Why talk to crazies you’re not assigned?”
Because they’re not as annoying as the relatives.
Comment by Unstable Isotope on 4 November 2009 at 10:04 pm:
A lot of us are the crazy relative.
Comment by Brooke on 4 November 2009 at 10:09 pm:
“A lot of us are the crazy relative.”
LOL THAT part, I suspected.