Liberal Forum

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:09 pm » wrote:
Our first fight

I'm just untrusting of the Emperor AND the serfs.
So, in questioning a guy who claims to know EVERYTHING about money, I hope for insight/perspective.

I can't seem to figure out who Warren and George are using as soks here. Otherwise, I'd ask them too.

Being told the same thing repeatedly "dishonest money", "you're stoooopid", "radiohead is not cool", etc. gets old.
THEN getting the "go ahead: copy/paste" crap from someone that copy/pastes... Wear me out.

If you are pretending ignorance, that's gay.

If the ignorance is real, more gay. Either way, a perfect match is soros' *** and your face.

I gave a cite: Art. 1, Sec. 10, US Constitution. Your ignorance is due to laziness, not lack of information.

Now, hurry - chirp class warfare and declare victory, buffet boy.

Cannonpointer » 19 Jan 2018 3:02 pm » wrote:

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:01 pm » wrote:
**** that. He's gotta have you come in for him too now?

So if I just read an amendment to the constitution, I have won.
Why didn't I think of that before?
The next twat that says "guns make me sad" should be all set when I say "#2."

We're on pins and needles, Soros boy.

Tell us when Article One Section Ten was amended.

Was it before 1943? That's when a book was published that I just recently read (at peepee's recommendation).
To paraphrase Harold Ramis in "Stripes", I'm willing to learn...

That's why I don't get the animosity about this. I really don't.
I have to assume his "delicate condition" forces his actions and responses.
OCD manifests itself to individual weaknesses and proclivities. He is OCD about green things, I think.


btw
Guns are good tools. People are just tools.

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:18 pm » wrote: That's why I don't get the animosity about this. I really don't.

The reason he's more pissed at weak water repukes and wilting wussy repukes is that they are masquerading as the folks who support the Constitution.

You keep whining about the second like a trained bitch while remaining purposefully ignorant of the document the second amended in the first place.

Cannonpointer » 19 Jan 2018 3:17 pm » wrote:

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:09 pm » wrote:
Our first fight

I'm just untrusting of the Emperor AND the serfs.
So, in questioning a guy who claims to know EVERYTHING about money, I hope for insight/perspective.

I can't seem to figure out who Warren and George are using as soks here. Otherwise, I'd ask them too.

Being told the same thing repeatedly "dishonest money", "you're stoooopid", "radiohead is not cool", etc. gets old.
THEN getting the "go ahead: copy/paste" crap from someone that copy/pastes... Wear me out.

If you are pretending ignorance, that's gay.

If the ignorance is real, more gay. Either way, a perfect match is soros' *** and your face.

I gave a cite: Art. 1, Sec. 10, US Constitution. Your ignorance is due to laziness, not lack of information.

Now, hurry - chirp class warfare and declare victory, buffet boy.

So Utah and Maine can't print money. What's this got to do with the US dollar? And the private banking overlords?
It specifically refers to "states". How's this help peepee's OCD?

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:25 pm » wrote:
So Utah and Maine can't print money. What's this got to do with the US dollar? And the private banking overlords?
It specifically refers to "states". How's this help peepee's OCD?

"No state shall make anything but silver and gold coin a tender in payment of debt." That is a direct quote - and it means that state's lack the authority to compel payment of taxes or other debts in hay, marbles, oats, crayons or fed notes.

You can read like a big boy - right?

Cannonpointer » 19 Jan 2018 3:20 pm » wrote:

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:18 pm » wrote: That's why I don't get the animosity about this. I really don't.

The reason he's more pissed at weak water repukes and wilting wussy repukes is that they are masquerading as the folks who support the Constitution.

You keep whining about the second like a trained bitch while remaining purposefully ignorant of the document the second amended in the first place.

The US Constitution wasn't perfect so the brainiacs didn't toss the whole thing in the chamber pot.
They tweaked it where it needed tweaking. That's what makes it a tough document to dispute.

Don't pull that cherry-picking **** here, dad.

There plenty of non-constitutional shenanigans going on all the **** time. Pet peeves galore.
Mine is constantly hearing people attack modern weaponry.
Peepee has the modern money thing.

Sick ****. The lot of us...

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:37 pm » wrote: The US Constitution wasn't perfect so the brainiacs didn't toss the whole thing in the chamber pot.
They tweaked it where it needed tweaking. That's what makes it a tough document to dispute.

Is the same homosexual who was already challenged for the amendment he's referring to putting in another ballerina performance?

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:37 pm » wrote: Don't pull that cherry-picking **** here, dad.

Like when you screech about the second amendment and ignore the body of text it amended, little lady?

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:37 pm » wrote: There plenty of non-constitutional shenanigans going on all the **** time. Pet peeves galore.

Agitating for honest money is a "pet peeve" - and the proper response is to accuse honest folks of class warfare.

Thanks - got it.

Cannonpointer » 19 Jan 2018 3:30 pm » wrote:

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:25 pm » wrote:
So Utah and Maine can't print money. What's this got to do with the US dollar? And the private banking overlords?
It specifically refers to "states". How's this help peepee's OCD?

"No state shall make anything but silver and gold coin a tender in payment of debt." That is a direct quote - and it means that state's lack the authority to compel payment of taxes or other debts in hay, marbles, oats, crayons or fed notes.

You can read like a big boy - right?

Since you "know" taxes are unconstitutional, you also know that people are in jail for thinking and acting on that as well.
How can this be? There must be another shoe you haven't dropped yet.

Btw, is the word "state" referring to the federal government here?

Cannonpointer » 19 Jan 2018 3:40 pm » wrote:

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:37 pm » wrote: The US Constitution wasn't perfect so the brainiacs didn't toss the whole thing in the chamber pot.
They tweaked it where it needed tweaking. That's what makes it a tough document to dispute.

Is the same homosexual who was already challenged for the amendment he's referring to putting in another ballerina performance?

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:37 pm » wrote: Don't pull that cherry-picking **** here, dad.

Like when you screech about the second amendment and ignore the body of text it amended, little lady?

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:37 pm » wrote: There plenty of non-constitutional shenanigans going on all the **** time. Pet peeves galore.

Agitating for honest money is a "pet peeve" - and the proper response is to accuse honest folks of class warfare.

Thanks - got it.

This is a conversation whereby I ask questions, I learn, I evolve.
I can't stress that enough here.
To be stuck in one place for the sake of "appearing to win" does me no good.
Some might say "strident in their beliefs" or whatever; a thing I call assholism much of the time.

I wouldn't say that in a post, mind you. That could be taken as rude.

Class warfare is for protesting ****.
There's nothing like peeing in front of a multimillion dollar structure that has 38 bathrooms.
That'll show 'em.

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:41 pm » wrote:
Since you "know" taxes are unconstitutional, you also know that people are in jail for thinking and acting on that as well.
How can this be? There must be another shoe you haven't dropped yet.

Btw, is the word "state" referring to the federal government here?

How does "people are in jail" argue for or against the proposition at stake, bathroom dancer?

CG on money.

I got it.

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:49 pm » wrote: This is a conversation whereby I ask questions, I learn, I evolve.
I can't stress that enough here.

Tell that to the asshole who snuck in while you were taking a pee, and accused peepee of war on the rich.

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:49 pm » wrote: To be stuck in one place for the sake of "appearing to win" does me no good.
Some might say "strident in their beliefs" or whatever; a thing I call assholism much of the time.

I agree implicitely, explicitely and whole heartedly.

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:49 pm » wrote: Class warfare is for protesting ****.
There's nothing like peeing in front of a multimillion dollar structure that has 38 bathrooms.
That'll show 'em.

Class warfare is something only the rich have the money to prosecute - and their dingleberry servants chirp whatever they're told to chirp. Class warfare - squawk! I'm a pretty bird!

The last thing on earth working class folks are likely to get up to is class **** warfare - they're busy trying to get a boat, or a bigger house, or new golf clubs. The only class they war against is their own, trying to climb out of it, work out of it, scratch lottery tickets out of it.

The notion that they sped their time scheming against the rich is something only those who've already sucked more than two dicks could ever embrace.

That the rich plot and plan against the interests of workers, OTOH, is hardly in dispute - except by underwear riders.

Cannonpointer » 19 Jan 2018 3:50 pm » wrote:

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:41 pm » wrote:
Since you "know" taxes are unconstitutional, you also know that people are in jail for thinking and acting on that as well.
How can this be? There must be another shoe you haven't dropped yet.

Btw, is the word "state" referring to the federal government here?

How does "people are in jail" argue for or against the proposition at stake, bathroom dancer?

Well, I expected you would cite precedence at the Supreme Court and their validation of the use of taxation.
Something better than a critique of the location of where I like to jig.


Supreme court said Bammycare was okie dokie. That's the keystone holding that entire charade together.
Certainly they must have mentioned taxes somewhere along the line...
I believe the concept has been around for a couple years.

So why is taxation okie dokie? And people that said "**** off" shower with their backs to the wall?

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:59 pm » wrote:
Well, I expected you would cite precedence at the Supreme Court and their validation of the use of taxation.
Something better than a critique of the location of where I like to jig.

Supreme court said Bammycare was okie dokie. That's the keystone holding that entire charade together.
Certainly they must have mentioned taxes somewhere along the line...
I believe the concept has been around for a couple years.

So why is taxation okie dokie? And people that said "**** off" shower with their backs to the wall?

The scotus has never ruled on states' authority to compel payment in fed notes - no case on that issue has ever been heard.

But your conveyance of your opinion to nine men in dresses is duly noted.

Let's not lose focus on the fact the the supreme court never lied that peepee hates the rich - that was your shameful sellout.

Cannonpointer » 19 Jan 2018 3:57 pm » wrote:

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:49 pm » wrote: This is a conversation whereby I ask questions, I learn, I evolve.
I can't stress that enough here.

Tell that to the asshole who snuck in while you were taking a pee, and accused peepee of war on the rich.

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:49 pm » wrote: To be stuck in one place for the sake of "appearing to win" does me no good.
Some might say "strident in their beliefs" or whatever; a thing I call assholism much of the time.

I agree implicitely, explicitely and whole heartedly.

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:49 pm » wrote: Class warfare is for protesting ****.
There's nothing like peeing in front of a multimillion dollar structure that has 38 bathrooms.
That'll show 'em.

Class warfare is something only the rich have the money to prosecute - and their dingleberry servants chirp whatever they're told to chirp. Class warfare - squawk! I'm a pretty bird!

The last thing on earth working class folks are likely to get up to is class **** warfare - they're busy trying to get a boat, or a bigger house, or new golf clubs. The only class they war against is their own, trying to climb out of it, work out of it, scratch lottery tickets out of it.

The notion that they sped their time scheming against the rich is something only those who've already sucked more than two dicks could ever embrace.

That the rich plot and plan against the interests of workers, OTOH, is hardly in dispute - except by underwear riders.

Well, maybe I did what I've accused you of doing to me once in a while. I think from fatigue...
We both are guilty of grouping some notions and some people. I got caught in your big net once or twice.
You doing battle against a "concept" and the individuals start to get crossed by accident.

So maybe he, by constantly calling me names he calls others he frequently fights with, blurred the line.
I don't know... He even complimented me once simply because a read a book he mentioned.
That is a **** rarity needless to say.


btw
The book he recommended had a scary phrase that government should use "fearless taxation" to manage debt.

Cannonpointer » 19 Jan 2018 4:03 pm » wrote:

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:59 pm » wrote:
Well, I expected you would cite precedence at the Supreme Court and their validation of the use of taxation.
Something better than a critique of the location of where I like to jig.

Supreme court said Bammycare was okie dokie. That's the keystone holding that entire charade together.
Certainly they must have mentioned taxes somewhere along the line...
I believe the concept has been around for a couple years.

So why is taxation okie dokie? And people that said "**** off" shower with their backs to the wall?

The scotus has never ruled on states' authority to compel payment in fed notes - no case on that issue has ever been heard.

But your conveyance of your opinion to nine men in dresses is duly noted.

Let's not lose focus on the fact the the supreme court never lied that peepee hates the rich - that was your shameful sellout.

Don't defend your assumptions...

https://llstuler.wordpress.com/2009/10/ ... amendment/

Taxes are legal...

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 4:11 pm » wrote:
Well, maybe I did what I've accused you of doing to me once in a while. I think from fatigue...
We both are guilty of grouping some notions and some people. I got caught in your big net once or twice.
You doing battle against a "concept" and the individuals start to get crossed by accident.

So maybe he, by constantly calling me names he calls others he frequently fights with, blurred the line.
I don't know... He even complimented me once simply because a read a book he mentioned.
That is a **** rarity needless to say.

btw
The book he recommended had a scary phrase that government should use "fearless taxation" to manage debt.

Gubmint just needs to own currency issuance - then they won't need to tax.

Cannonpointer » 19 Jan 2018 4:13 pm » wrote:

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 4:11 pm » wrote:
Well, maybe I did what I've accused you of doing to me once in a while. I think from fatigue...
We both are guilty of grouping some notions and some people. I got caught in your big net once or twice.
You doing battle against a "concept" and the individuals start to get crossed by accident.

So maybe he, by constantly calling me names he calls others he frequently fights with, blurred the line.
I don't know... He even complimented me once simply because a read a book he mentioned.
That is a **** rarity needless to say.

btw
The book he recommended had a scary phrase that government should use "fearless taxation" to manage debt.

Gubmint just needs to own currency issuance - then they won't need to tax.

Just doesn't have to be this way...

I knew that wall was coming.

peepee » 05 Nov 2017 11:57 pm » wrote:...btw, as private dildo has reminded us, there will be a whole lot of stoooooooooooopid **** monetary ignoramus radio republicans with NOTHING of value to add to thi$ $ubject who will try to derail this thread...monetary realists will know these stooooooooooooooopid ****---like private dildo, et al--- by their vapid, know-nothing posts like post #2!...

The simple fact about economics is that Obama, peepee's hero, had the worst GDP of any president since WWII and most previously. Progressive economics at work. Poor peepee just keeps pissing all over himself!!!

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:59 pm » wrote:

Cannonpointer » 19 Jan 2018 3:50 pm » wrote:

deezer shoove » 19 Jan 2018 3:41 pm » wrote:
Since you "know" taxes are unconstitutional, you also know that people are in jail for thinking and acting on that as well.
How can this be? There must be another shoe you haven't dropped yet.

Btw, is the word "state" referring to the federal government here?

How does "people are in jail" argue for or against the proposition at stake, bathroom dancer?

Well, I expected you would cite precedence at the Supreme Court and their validation of the use of taxation.
Something better than a critique of the location of where I like to jig.

Supreme court said Bammycare was okie dokie. That's the keystone holding that entire charade together.
Certainly they must have mentioned taxes somewhere along the line...
I believe the concept has been around for a couple years.

So why is taxation okie dokie? And people that said "**** off" shower with their backs to the wall?

In order for SCOTUS to rule the way they did they choose to ignore the language of the law. It stated it is a tax imposing government mandated health care on the population which is illegal.