coolm
New member
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2008
- Messages
- 8,694
- Reaction score
- 0
1. False. That is a common mis quote from worthless liberals. What he said is we cut Obama by 5% and voter ID laws probably helped. That does not mean he wants to suppress legitimate votes. It means he thinks Obama has illegitimate votes. Why lie?
2. Blatantly false. I have an LL.M ? In taxation. I trust you know what that means. I know the tax law better than anyone you know. There have been no proposals or changes in the tax code to give tax breaks to Billionaires. This is such anoutrageous lie it is unbelievable. As to political contributions, both parties want wealthy donors. Finally I have never once had a piece of sh!t liberal hire me to help him pay his fair share. You democrats make me sick on tax issues. You literally lie about this more than any other issue
3. Opposing a bad deal with Iran is not advocating war. This is another lie. Democrats controlled the House, Senate and Whitehouse for two years and did not pass any additional benefits for vets. Democrats controlled Congress for four years and sent no bills to the White House. I do not believe Reid's Senate sent anything to the House in the last four years on increased benefits as a straight up or down vote.
4. Do the conservative women and minorities hate the selves. This is the second biggest political lie of the left topped only by taxes. You have no real arguments so you resort to this nonsense. Sol Alinsky rules of engagement.
Finally fox was never banned in Cannada. Google it you worthless POS
1. No. What he said was "Voter ID. Which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania. Done." Given that "voter fraud" is an issue in .00000005% of cases he was NOT indicating that changing 2 votes was going to sway Pennsylvania. Please. This is disingenuous bull**** on your part. Every poli sci major knows that less votes = a greater percentage of conservative votes. It's akin to gerrymandering .. except by taking voting rights away.
2. So when PP and meals for wheels and Kaleidoscope and a litany of other programs are cut while Tax breaks for aholes is approved then we're just inept for saying that poor, starving people need the program more? Trickle down is absolute BS. I dont care if you have an LL.M. or not. It's apparent I know more about starving seniors and students and youths who need cancer screens than you care to know. Gee, I wonder why?
3. Opposing a bad deal with Iran? So what ... Cotton and the rest were psychic? How do they know the deal is bad before it is even formulated? Don't even try to claim that crap. They are war hawks. Their kids won't be serving - it will be my kids. And my clients' kids. And the millionaire war hawks in Congress don't care because they don't have a personal stake in it ... which is especially insulting in Cotton case given his status.
Democrats didnt send any more bills? Really? Did you completely forget about the republican filibusters? Fights on cloture motions to deny debate and vote on bills? Leveraging Military industrial complex spending to prevent discharge from committees? You guys always lay out a blanket "well they didnt do it either" like it's a valid argument and like both actors behaved in the same manner - which they didnt. For instance Democrats didn't halt and slow a billion dollar relief package to earthquake-stricken Haiti over a $5 million question leading to many deaths as a result of cholera. And, of course, Coburn's office didnt like answering my questions about his dick move later. Conservatives don't care. Thats the point.
4. If you really think the right is diverse and non-bigoted then you're insane. Show me. Show me they aren't. Show me that the percentages of support on minorities and women issues are the same in the republican party as they are in the general public much less the democratic party. You show me they are the same and I will never mention it again. Problem is you can't, because they're not. Why is that not ever the response? Isn't that the easiest way to clear this complaint up? Because they CAN'T show that. And your little supposition there is akin to "I know you are but what am i?".
Not banned in Canada? CRTC failure to approve Murdoch's application for a "Faux News Canada" and forced reclassification of "Faux news" as an entertainment vice news channel seems rather damning. Banned, not allowed to operate ... sounds pretty much same same to me. But I guess if you're defending that load of crap you need to make a distinction.
Last edited: