MLD Woody Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 1 hour ago, FY56 said: Round up all the demonrats and ship them off to Canada and I'll bet the Reps could solve all our woes. A hypothetical....if you had the choice of only one party taking on the responsibility of putting this country back on the right track, with no interference, which party do you feel be better suited..., the Reps or the Demons? That should really be a no brainer. Imagine a country strictly run by liberal demonrats...after unanimously voting to pay reparations to blacks they'd start fighting amongst each other on who should be paying .lol Imagine unironically using the term "demonrats" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canton Dawg Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 2 minutes ago, MLD Woody said: Imagine unironically using the term "demonrats" Kinda of rhymes with “Cheetos” 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FY56 Posted March 27 Author Report Share Posted March 27 1 hour ago, Neo said: I'd like to see you try it, I really would. Hard to believe what I had just read, even if it was from you.. You must be one obtuse individual to even think that it would be something I would try let alone consider doing. What I would consider doing is sending all you democrats/liberals on a boat to the Bermuda Triangle hoping you all disappear. You'd like to see me try that too, right Neo? LOL What a putz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickers Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 1 hour ago, MLD Woody said: Imagine unironically using the term "demonrats" Imagine being you and dying as an ignorant mother fucker... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAFBF Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 On 3/22/2024 at 10:12 AM, FY56 said: Running as an Independant says all the right things....talks about the border, divisiveness, American ingenuity... Viewer discretion advised to liberals. Some content may be perceived as "nationalistic". No F'n way . . . : What Pelosi did to her District, this one does just the same or worse. There's a better clip on this but I can't find it right now. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAFBF Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 1 hour ago, JAFBF said: No F'n way . . . : What Pelosi did to her District, this one does just the same or worse. There's a better clip on this but I can't find it right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 2 hours ago, FY56 said: You must be one obtuse individual to even think that it would be something I would try let alone consider doing. I know you wouldn't, because you maga twats are nothing but a bunch of non-threatening loudmouths. A disease that even fire isn't a horrible enough of a way to rid this planet of. Bet this is you with a safe full of hundreds of guns when you hear a noise in the middle of the night. Cruz this is 'Merica🤣 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 4 hours ago, Canton Dawg said: Kinda of rhymes with “Cheetos” LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 6 hours ago, Bob806 said: It should be a no brainier, but it isn't. Yes, the Dems have truly shifted far from the center. They've lost me on many issues. Their nominee (Biden) shouldn't be the nominee. I simply cannot trust the Rs. Senate Bill 5 in Ohio. Nationally they held all the cards from 2016-2018 & didn't fix Obamacare. Republicans lead the charge on the Citizens United Supreme Court decision, a D_I_S_A_S_T_E_R for our country. They need to admit their mistake there and run on campaign reform before I take their party seriously. If Trump hadn't already served a term as President, yeah I'd consider voting for him. I'm having trouble understanding the problem with "Citizens United" Supreme Court ruling. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-explained " What was Citizens United about? A conservative nonprofit group called Citizens United challenged campaign finance rules after the FEC stopped it from promoting and airing a film criticizing presidential candidate Hillary Clinton too close to the presidential primaries." ***************************** So, THAT part of it - is excellent. They had no right to tell Citizens United that they were not allowed to do a video on higgardly clinton for whatever reason they had. "too close to the election" ???? baloney. However, Bob, the unlimited expenditures by the wealthy funding the giant PACs and Super PACS - that is very bad. The basis seems to be a "First Amendment" issue - but giving the rich (either side) unlimited control - compared to the common folks - broaching "election interference" maybe. That part of it needs to go. The first and primary reason - needs to stay. **************************** "That’s because leading up to Citizens United, transparency in U.S. elections had started to erode, thanks to a disclosure loophole opened by the Supreme Court’s 2007 ruling in FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, along with inaction by the IRS and controversial rulemaking by the FEC." *************************** SO, before the half? wrong decision of Citizens United, transparency was already eroding. Again, the FEC sued "Wisonsin Right to Life over poltiically targeted "rule making" by the FEC. So, it isn't valid to blame republicans for "Citzens United" and "Wisconsin Right to Life" - you should blame the corrupt dems/deep state actors for screwing with those groups, forcing the courts to get involved to stop the unfair political targeting. Again - the decision to open unlimited spending to PACS and Super Pacs - was an asinine result? that I don't get why they would have gone there. If the corrupt FEC hadn't tried to provide cover for higgardly, it would never have gone to court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FY56 Posted March 27 Author Report Share Posted March 27 4 hours ago, Neo said: I know you wouldn't, because you maga twats are nothing but a bunch of non-threatening loudmouths. A disease that even fire isn't a horrible enough of a way to rid this planet of. Bet this is you with a safe full of hundreds of guns when you hear a noise in the middle of the night. Cruz this is 'Merica🤣 I've never read this much failure in one post. Have you ever considered reviewing what you typed before hitting "Submit Reply"? You really should. For starters, I don't own a gun and don't particularly care for them. Here you blather about being a bunch of "non-threatening loudmouths" then in the very next paragraph you describe MAGA as being threatening gun owners. Reaching for a gun at every little noise sounds threatening to me. And now becoming "non-threatening" suddenly becomes a bad thing. Your post is another fine example of how liberals jump from one inane point to another so you can never nail them. Except that I just did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FY56 Posted March 27 Author Report Share Posted March 27 6 hours ago, JAFBF said: No F'n way . . . : What Pelosi did to her District, this one does just the same or worse. There's a better clip on this but I can't find it right now. Yes, I know. I've been enlightened.👍 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FY56 Posted March 27 Author Report Share Posted March 27 8 hours ago, MLD Woody said: Imagine unironically using the term "demonrats" My oh my, you're still hung up on that, and you people act as though your feelings never get hurt. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob806 Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 6 hours ago, calfoxwc said: I'm having trouble understanding the problem with "Citizens United" Supreme Court ruling. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-explained " What was Citizens United about? A conservative nonprofit group called Citizens United challenged campaign finance rules after the FEC stopped it from promoting and airing a film criticizing presidential candidate Hillary Clinton too close to the presidential primaries." ***************************** So, THAT part of it - is excellent. They had no right to tell Citizens United that they were not allowed to do a video on higgardly clinton for whatever reason they had. "too close to the election" ???? baloney. However, Bob, the unlimited expenditures by the wealthy funding the giant PACs and Super PACS - that is very bad. The basis seems to be a "First Amendment" issue - but giving the rich (either side) unlimited control - compared to the common folks - broaching "election interference" maybe. That part of it needs to go. The first and primary reason - needs to stay. **************************** "That’s because leading up to Citizens United, transparency in U.S. elections had started to erode, thanks to a disclosure loophole opened by the Supreme Court’s 2007 ruling in FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, along with inaction by the IRS and controversial rulemaking by the FEC." *************************** SO, before the half? wrong decision of Citizens United, transparency was already eroding. Again, the FEC sued "Wisonsin Right to Life over poltiically targeted "rule making" by the FEC. So, it isn't valid to blame republicans for "Citzens United" and "Wisconsin Right to Life" - you should blame the corrupt dems/deep state actors for screwing with those groups, forcing the courts to get involved to stop the unfair political targeting. Again - the decision to open unlimited spending to PACS and Super Pacs - was an asinine result? that I don't get why they would have gone there. If the corrupt FEC hadn't tried to provide cover for higgardly, it would never have gone to court. Good stuff Cal, but yeah, why did the ruling go that far? It's seriously altered campaign donations and created even more bipartisan Congressional behavior- the reps, whether D or R are now cow-towing to the donors and not the people. The Koch Bros. pushed hard for this (the right wing equivalent of Soros). I'm wondering if any politician is going to go out on a limb and basically cut their own throat to change this. Let's face it, this dark money is how people like AOC, McConnell, etc. get to be multi-millionaires on a $150K salary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 One of the problems is, bob, is that the party bosses will often overrule whoever the candidate might be and that probably goes both ways but especially with the democrats. Remember Biden got on the ticket because the knock on him was he was a racist. And today he just can't get enough BLM dick into his mouth. WSS 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 3 hours ago, FY56 said: My oh my, you're still hung up on that, and you people act as though your feelings never get hurt. lol I'm laughing at you, chief Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 10 hours ago, nickers said: Imagine being you and dying as an ignorant mother fucker... Hey man, I know you're near the end of your life, but no need to project. You still have time left! You can make that time count! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickers Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 20 minutes ago, MLD Woody said: Hey man, I know you're near the end of your life, but no need to project. You still have time left! You can make that time count! Dude... I'm no where near the end of my life you stupid fuck... I've paid my dues in life... You are nothing but a brain washed Demonrat worthless POS! ,,,I'm doing plenty of living you ass!... I'll be traveling all over the globe this year while TDS continues to rot your feeble brain... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 7 minutes ago, nickers said: Dude... I'm no where near the end of my life you stupid fuck... I've paid my dues in life... You are nothing but a brain washed Demonrat worthless POS! ,,,I'm doing plenty of living you ass!... I'll be traveling all over the globe this year while TDS continues to rot your feeble brain... Happy to hear you're getting to your bucket list while you can man. Good for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickers Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 10 minutes ago, MLD Woody said: Happy to hear you're getting to your bucket list while you can man. Good for you. Don't patronize me you liar! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 2 hours ago, Bob806 said: Good stuff Cal, but yeah, why did the ruling go that far? It's seriously altered campaign donations and created even more bipartisan Congressional behavior- the reps, whether D or R are now cow-towing to the donors and not the people. The Koch Bros. pushed hard for this (the right wing equivalent of Soros). I'm wondering if any politician is going to go out on a limb and basically cut their own throat to change this. Let's face it, this dark money is how people like AOC, McConnell, etc. get to be multi-millionaires on a $150K salary. yep. even money from china - dark money now favors the dems dramatically, I think. But it should NEVER have been a thing. But it has for many, many years - ("We the People of the United States") lose control of our elections with the dark money. https://www.nbcnews.com › politics › 2020-election › democrats-used-rail-against-dark-money-now-they-re-better-n1239830 Democrats used to rail against 'dark money.' Now they're better at it ... But the limited picture that has emerged so far in 2020 shows $14.2 million in dark money has been spent supporting Democrats or against Republicans versus $9.8 million to support Republicans or ... *************************************** https://www.nytimes.com › 1998 › 05 › 18 › us › clinton-says-chinese-money-did-not-influence-us-policy.html Clinton Says Chinese Money Did Not Influence U.S. Policy May 18, 1998Pres Clinton says reported political campaign contributions from China to Democrats did not influence his foreign policy, and welcomes further investigation into decisions that made it easier for ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jax Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 11 hours ago, Neo said: I know you wouldn't, because you maga twats are nothing but a bunch of non-threatening loudmouths. A disease that even fire isn't a horrible enough of a way to rid this planet of. Bet this is you with a safe full of hundreds of guns when you hear a noise in the middle of the night. Cruz this is 'Merica🤣 3 hours ago, MLD Woody said: Hey man, I know you're near the end of your life, but no need to project. You still have time left! You can make that time count! You and woody need therapy and probably some prozac. Being Browns fans I don't want to see you guys miserable your entire life, get help, it's ok. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.