Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Political Chat Rooms
‹
No Holds Barred Political Forum
‹
Who remembers when Conservatives supported environmental conservation?
Who remembers when Conservatives supported environmental conservation?
By Jes' Fuchinwitcha
1 Mar 2023 6:18 am in No Holds Barred Political Forum
Post the contribution of which you are most proud.RedheadedStranger » 01 Mar 2023, 8:47 am » wrote: ↑ It's the truth.
You have not made a single reply on this thread that is even remotely related to the topic.
Not one.
Blackvegetable » 01 Mar 2023, 8:57 am » wrote: ↑ No...
You wanna run your mouth, do the math.
Assuming you're functionally numerate.
I gave you a **** answer and you **** ran away bitch
Take your pick.
They all are in relation to the topic... unlike your drivel.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people
The subject is conservatives support of environmental conservation. Are you actually saying the ONLY way that can be measured in in payroll? Is that the position you are taking? Just want to make sure I understand your point. Surely you don't want to look that stupid.Blackvegetable » 01 Mar 2023, 8:57 am » wrote: ↑ No...
You wanna run your mouth, do the math.
Assuming you're functionally numerate.
If you don't like the taste of your words, don't post them.ConsRule » 01 Mar 2023, 9:03 am » wrote: ↑ The subject is conservatives support of environmental conservation. Are you actually say the ONLY way that can be measured in in payroll? Is that the position you are taking? Just want to make sure I understand your point. Surely you don't want to look that stupid.
Man the **** up, sis.RedheadedStranger » 01 Mar 2023, 9:03 am » wrote: ↑ Take your pick.
They all are in relation to the topic... unlike your drivel.
For decades,the Rethugs have been ALL-IN for the awful KOCH agenda! FACT!Jes'Fuchinwitcha » 01 Mar 2023, 7:49 am » wrote: ↑ Are you deliberately trying to be pointlessly obscure?
The fact that no “Conservative” here can post a single thing about supporting environmental conservation is persuasive evidence that you all don’t support it.
The last Enviro President was Richard Nixon!
Settle down Rico.
You're getting all worked up again.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people
Right..RedheadedStranger » 01 Mar 2023, 9:10 am » wrote: ↑ Settle down Rico.
You're getting all worked up again.
Shall we replay your whine?
I checked your posts.
Worthless.
Question, followed by assertion and question.
0 informational value.
When you decide to make an on-topic contribution, I may respond. Until then, you're just taking up useful time with your trolling.Blackvegetable » 01 Mar 2023, 9:05 am » wrote: ↑ If you don't like the taste of your words, don't post them.
There was a time when conservatives sought "market based" solutions to environmental problems. Many proved effective..Jes'Fuchinwitcha » 01 Mar 2023, 7:18 am » wrote: ↑ I do. In fact I was lucky enough to be in the pilot year of the Youth Conservation Corps, a Nixon Administration program. I was a great summer, I was inspired, and I learned a lot. Hard work, too.
But shifting costs from society to consumer created easy yahoo bumper sticker bait. This caused a schism between the Principled and **** wings of the GOP.
To the extent that conservatives "conserve" they do so at the federal level through support of Conservation Easements, and at the state level through pragmatic governors.
How long can one track mantras stay static ideas misleading ancestires every generation gap present inception to extinction?Jes' Fuchinwitcha » 01 Mar 2023, 8:55 am » wrote: ↑ Wow... 3 pages in, not a single example of Conservatives supporting environmental conservation, and now it's completely off the rails.
This, my friends, is what today's Conservatism is - no substance, all chaos.
till it ends one way or another. Population only continues as long as great great grandchildren are born already alive here now 5th since original 16 great great grandparents came into existence.
Evolving cycle not intellectually torn apart by relative time statistics factually corrupting every added generation forward by this species here, within itself.
The bulk of your "contributions" have been pissing yourself in fear for my amusement, again.ConsRule » 01 Mar 2023, 9:15 am » wrote: ↑ When you decide to make an on-topic contribution, I may respond. Until then, you're just taking up useful time with your trolling.
Post the comment to which I responded.ConsRule » 01 Mar 2023, 9:03 am » wrote: ↑ The subject is conservatives support of environmental conservation. Are you actually saying the ONLY way that can be measured in in payroll? Is that the position you are taking? Just want to make sure I understand your point. Surely you don't want to look that stupid.
**** YOUR DEMANDS
**** YOUR REQUESTS
More drivel...Blackvegetable » 01 Mar 2023, 9:23 am » wrote: ↑ The bulk of your "contributions" have been pissing yourself in fear for my amusement, again.
At least you're consistent.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people
What's wrong? Aren't you smart enough to find it for yourself? I'll help you, but if you want to read it you'll need you'll need to do the work yourself. It was post #8 (quoting and responding to post #3) in this thread. I'm done with you until you make on on-topic post.
He has to get the last word so...ConsRule » 01 Mar 2023, 9:38 am » wrote: ↑ What's wrong? Aren't you smart enough to find it for yourself? I'll help you, but if you want to read it you'll need you'll need to do the work yourself. It was post #8 (quoting and responding to post #3) in this thread. I'm done with you until you make on on-topic post.
In 3...2...1...
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people
b'bye!ConsRule » 01 Mar 2023, 9:38 am » wrote: ↑ What's wrong? Aren't you smart enough to find it for yourself? I'll help you, but if you want to read it you'll need you'll need to do the work yourself. It was post #8 (quoting and responding to post #3) in this thread. I'm done with you until you make on on-topic post.
Who is online
In total there are 3163 users online :: 8 registered, 16 bots, and 3139 guests
Registered users: Johnny You, Blackvegetable, ROG62, RebelGator, Beekeeper, LowIQTrash, SouthernFried, nefarious101
Bots: Mediatoolkitbot, NING, Bolt, LieBaoFast, okhttp, YandexBot, ADmantX, Applebot, facebookexternalhit, Googlebot, CriteoBot, curl/7, Baiduspider, proximic, bingbot, Mediapartners-Google