On Voting Republicans Out Of Office

@coldjoint,

The Pink Prevaricator wrote:

I told you I hate what he is doing. I do not respect him. I don't think a political hack deserves respect. And the strain is not on me. The strain is on all his supporters watching him **** up almost everyday.

Except you don't hate what he is doing. You hate what you fantasize he is doing. Name one thing that there is actual evidence of that you think he is doing that you can show is actually damaging the country. You won't be able to name one with evidence. You will only show you have **** for brains as you spout your opinion and pretend it is fact.

0 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

How many times have we heard you spouting stuff that when examined only shows you have **** for brains.

How many times have we heard you say you know more about someones health insurance than they do? How many times have we heard you pound salt up Obamas ass because he is able to hide the hard evidence everyone knows is there on Fast and Furious.

Circumstantial evidence is not enough for a conviction, but in Obamas case it is overwhelming. Deny that all you want, it will not change it.

1 Reply

Speaking of convictions. Now that the DOJ has built a case against Grimm maybe they could investigate Harry Reid. He seems to be up to his turkey neck in corruption. From giving campaign funds to his granddaughter to taking bribes. And the possible connection to the BLM land grabs for fun and profit.

0 Replies

Quote:

Illinois Democrat Faces Child Porn Charges

You guys are on a roll.

Quote:

Former state Rep. Keith Farnham traded child pornography online — and even boasted that he’d molested a 6-year-old girl — according to federal prosecutors.

The Elgin Democrat, 66, emailed to what he believed was a fellow pedophile videos of children who appeared to be as young as six months old being molested, according to a criminal complaint filed Monday.

http://www.jammiewf.com/2014/illinois-democrat-faces-child-porn-charges/

0 Replies

@coldjoint,

The Pink Prevaricator wrote:

How many times have we heard you say you know more about someones health insurance than they do?

I would guess none. I have asked what is in the policy and then said that the majority of policies have networks. But I have never said I know specifically what is in someone else's policy. Why did you feel the need to lie about what I said?

The Pink Prevaricator wrote:

How many times have we heard you pound salt up Obamas ass because he is able to hide the hard evidence everyone knows is there on Fast and Furious.

I have never been near Obama's ass with salt. Since everyone "knows" the hard evidence why don't you tell us what everyone knows. Then give us a source for it. I suspect this is another case of you claiming lack of evidence is evidence.

The Pink Prevaricator wrote:

Circumstantial evidence is not enough for a conviction, but in Obamas case it is overwhelming. Deny that all you want, it will not change it.

Circumstantial evidence requires that it actually be evidence and circumstantial evidence is often enough for a conviction. Once again you are showing us the complete disrespect you have for the US Constitution and it's standards. You do have **** for brains, that's clear.

2 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

complete disrespect you have for the US Constitution and it's standards.

More irony. it is Obama and politicians that have no respect for the Constitution. In fact,I am beginning to wonder how you could possibly have any respect for yourself.

1 Reply

@parados,

Quote:

I would guess none. I have asked what is in the policy and then said that the majority of policies have networks. But I have never said I know specifically what is in someone else's policy. Why did you feel the need to lie about what I said?

Ask Baldimo.

1 Reply

As I remember, you guys spent four years claiming the ACA was unconstitutional. then the Supreme Court said it IS constitutional. Turns out Obama was right all along, and you guys weren't. Obamas got a clearer grasp of the Constitution than you or your comrades in crime do, joint.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

As I remember, you guys spent four years claiming the ACA was unconstitutional.

It very well could have been. Considering it a tax is the only thing that saved it. And we were talking about pulling Baldimos chain with bullshit and denial of things only he would know.

2 Replies

Quote:

Obama Forcing the Closure of Fast Food Outlets on Military Bases

Quote:

According the MT, several other contractors who operate restaurants and other small businesses on military bases “have asked to be released from their Army and Air Force Exchange Service contracts to operate fast food restaurants at two other installations.”

So, what is going on, here? Why are all these small outlets closing? Well, it is thanks to Obama’s Executive Order that all minimum wage workers be given a raise to $10.10 per hour (up from $7.25). That on top of Obama’s decree that such businesses pay more for healthcare and that they pay a $3.81 per hour “health and welfare” benefit is also making these businesses close their doors

.
The military already hates Obama, what does this matter.

http://www.publiusforum.com/2014/04/29/obama-forcing-closure-fast-food-outlets-military-bases/

0 Replies

@coldjoint,

coldjoint wrote:

Quote:
As I remember, you guys spent four years claiming the ACA was unconstitutional.

It very well could have been. Considering it a tax is the only thing that saved it. And we were talking about pulling Baldimos chain with bullshit and denial of things only he would know.

So...ahhh...how does that differ from it being constitutional...rather than unconstitutional as you asserted?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

..how does that differ from it being constitutional.

I didn't say it wasn't unconstitutional. I said it was saved by calling it a tax. Taxes are Constitutional. Pay attention.

1 Reply

@coldjoint,

coldjoint wrote:

Quote:
..how does that differ from it being constitutional.

I didn't say it wasn't unconstitutional. I said it was saved by calling it a tax. Taxes are Constitutional. Pay attention.

Jack was calling attention to the fact that your side (probably you, personally) was making a career out of calling it unconstitutional.

He then called your attention to the fact that the SCOTUS says that it was constitutional...not unconstitutional.

Rather than say that your side was wrong...you are trying to end run it.

I was just calling that to your attention.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Rather than say that your side was wrong...you are trying to end run it.

And it is going so well for Obamacare, right? Look at Oregon. They did not sign up one person.

Quote:

Cover Oregon’s failure is spectacular, even when considering the glitch-filled rollout of Healthcare.gov, the federal exchange. Cover Oregon, once touted as one of the best state marketplaces, never managed to sign up a single Oregonian through its system.

Not a single one.

http://watchdog.org/141365/7-epic-failures-didnt-bomb-bad-oregons-obamacare-exchange/

2 Replies

@coldjoint,

coldjoint wrote:

Quote:
Rather than say that your side was wrong...you are trying to end run it.

And it is going so well for Obamacare, right? Look at Oregon. They did not sign up one person.

I think it is going pretty good for Obamacare. It is still here...and almost certainly will for the foundation for true affordable health care in this country. It is a start...not the strongest start, I will acknowledge. But considering the kind and extent of opposition your side put into hurting it, it ain't bad.

Fact is, its success seems to be bothering you and your comrades.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Fact is, its success seems to be bothering you and your comrades.

Just until November.

1 Reply

@coldjoint,

coldjoint wrote:

Quote:

Fact is, its success seems to be bothering you and your comrades.

Just until November.

Seems to me I heard something like that about a November not too far back!

Keep the words "count", "chickens" and "hatched" in mind.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Keep the words "count", "chickens" and "hatched" in min

Well in Obamas pastors words...Obamas chickens are coming home to roost.

0 Replies

http://moonbattery.com/graphics/sharpton-crimea.jpg

0 Replies

@coldjoint,

I can pretty clearly show where you have supported a criminal when you supported Cliven Bundy who a court has ruled on 4 occasions is acting in a criminal fashion and yet Mr Bundy has persisted in his criminal action.
That shows your disregard for the Constitution because you clearly don't think a court ruling is correct in the US under the Constitution.

There we have it **** for brains. If you want to argue you didn't support Cliven Bundy, I will be happy to provide links to your posts.

So, **** for brains, If you think Obama is acting in a criminal fashion than present us with the court rulings he is violating.

0 Replies

On Voting Republicans Out Of Office

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know