Liberal Forum

golfboy » 11 May 2023, 7:05 pm » wrote: ↑

11 May 2023, 7:05 pm

Poor mainbitch, still touting his revised statement after getting embarrassed by his lack of knowlege about the Senate.

All liberals, democrats and progressives are an embarrassment to actual Americans.

golfboy » 11 May 2023, 7:05 pm » wrote: ↑

11 May 2023, 7:05 pm

Poor mainbitch, still touting his revised statement after getting embarrassed by his lack of knowlege about the Senate.

I DIDN'T REVISE ANYTHING.  I SIMPLY CLARIFIED MY POSITION.

I assumed we had always been discussing a full chamber.  Clearly... I have always known all about cloture and how the Senate can pass bills with small numbers of senators present.  Interestingly enough, the Vice President is very rarely, if ever, present in the chamber when bills with such lack of importance that they can pass with 26 votes come up for a vote.  The VP is only present when his or her party's senate leader, tells him or her to clear their calendar and be prepared to cast a tie-breaking vote.  I clarified that position and, after I did so, and asked you to clarify yours, you replied, "YES, *******...FIFTY VOTES ARE ALL THAT IS NEEDED TO PASS A BILL IN THE SENATE WHEN ALL SENATORS ARE PRESENT AND VOTING."  That was dead wrong when you said it, and it remains dead wrong today.  You meant to use the word "senators", which would be correct only if the VP wanted the 50-50 tie-vote bill to pass, but you used the word "votes" instead, and there is NEVER a situation where a bill passes the Senate if all senators are present and voting where fifty VOTES are enough.  The final tally can either be 51-49 or 51-50 but the winning number has always gotta be 51.  Did you read this far without drowning in word soup?    

DeplorablePatriot » 11 May 2023, 7:40 pm » wrote: ↑

11 May 2023, 7:40 pm

All liberals, democrats and progressives are an embarrassment to actual Americans.

Seriously, how quickly can you mise en place a dozen potatoes?    

maineman » 11 May 2023, 8:04 pm » wrote: ↑

11 May 2023, 8:04 pm

I DIDN'T REVISE ANYTHING.  I SIMPLY CLARIFIED MY POSITION.

Of course you didn't.  You just changed your statement after being proven wrong. 

 

maineman » 11 May 2023, 8:08 pm » wrote: ↑

11 May 2023, 8:08 pm

Seriously, how quickly can you mise en place a dozen potatoes?  

Quicker than I can assess the number of B amyloid plaques in your gray matter. Oh! Ouch, Hmmm?

no no no ..... give all little children guns, to protect them from the police perverts.

DeplorablePatriot » 11 May 2023, 8:34 pm » wrote: ↑

11 May 2023, 8:34 pm

Quicker than I can assess the number of B amyloid plaques in your gray matter. Oh! Ouch, Hmmm?

^^^^a lowly mess cook talking trash.

yawn. 

golfboy » 11 May 2023, 8:30 pm » wrote: ↑

11 May 2023, 8:30 pm

Of course you didn't.  You just changed your statement after being proven wrong.

FALSE.  Your words:  "YES *******, FIFTY VOTES ARE ALL THAT IS NEEDED TO PASS A BILL IN THE SENATE WHEN ALL SENATORS ARE PRESENT AND VOTING".  

wrong then... wrong today.

maineman » 11 May 2023, 8:57 pm » wrote: ↑

11 May 2023, 8:57 pm

FALSE.  Your words:  "YES *******, FIFTY VOTES ARE ALL THAT IS NEEDED TO PASS A BILL IN THE SENATE WHEN ALL SENATORS ARE PRESENT AND VOTING".  

wrong then... wrong today.

Just as wrong as your words saying a bill couldn't pass the Senate without 51 votes. 
Wrong then, wrong today.  Bitch.
 

golfboy » 11 May 2023, 10:20 pm » wrote: ↑

11 May 2023, 10:20 pm

Just as wrong as your words saying a bill couldn't pass the Senate without 51 votes. 
Wrong then, wrong today.  Bitch.

I never said that.  The only situation that requires 51 votes is if all senators are present and voting.  Then, it's gotta be 51-49 or 51-50.

 

Punch » 08 May 2023, 3:01 pm » wrote: ↑

08 May 2023, 3:01 pm

A victory for those who care more about human life than about their guns.

‘Raise the age’ gun bill passes Texas committee after months of advocacy by Uvalde families (msn.com)

In a shocking and last-minute turn of events in Texas, a bill that would raise the minimum age to purchase AR-15 style semiautomatic rifles from 18 to 21 passed.Several Uvalde victims' relatives burst into sobs and cheers in the Capitol hearing room when two Republicans joined all the Democrats on the committee to advance the bill by an 8-5 vote.The families of the 19 children and two teachers killed at Robb Elementary in Uvalde last year have been advocating for lawmakers to pass House Bill 2744 for months.

I see you are still under the impression that guns kill people...they don't....people kill people....not guns.  Guns are just an inanimate object which means you must also afraid of all inanimate objects.....OR......you are only reacting to guns the way you have been trained to react due to the word "GUN" being one of your "imprinted" trigger words.  Then the whole thing gets comical and stupid that anyone would react toward inanimate objects like you do....I suppose you've been trained to be terrified of SUV's too....can you utter the words "carbon or Trump" without soiling yourself?

maineman » 11 May 2023, 8:55 pm » wrote: ↑

11 May 2023, 8:55 pm

^^^^a lowly mess cook talking trash.

yawn.

Trash=Subjects beyond your knowledge? 

DeplorablePatriot » 13 May 2023, 10:30 am » wrote: ↑

13 May 2023, 10:30 am

Trash=Subjects beyond your knowledge?

My old girlfriend from back in high school is now in memory care.  I am well aware of the subject of the trash you were talking

maineman » 13 May 2023, 11:37 am » wrote: ↑

13 May 2023, 11:37 am

My old girlfriend from back in high school is now in memory care.  I am well aware of the subject of the trash you were talking

You infected her? I didn't know that proteins were infectious. 

DeplorablePatriot » 13 May 2023, 12:11 pm » wrote: ↑

13 May 2023, 12:11 pm

You infected her? I didn't know that proteins were infectious.

are all your gags this sophomoric?

asking for a friend.

maineman » 13 May 2023, 2:31 pm » wrote: ↑

13 May 2023, 2:31 pm

are all your gags this sophomoric?

asking for a friend.

Most are, yes. Does that trigger your tender sensitivities? Do you overuse word "sophomoric" because you believe it's a great new word for you and enhances the perception of a higher IQ by strangers? It's a common word. Elementary level. Try harder, Clarence.

maineman » 12 May 2023, 7:12 am » wrote: ↑

12 May 2023, 7:12 am

I never said that.  The only situation that requires 51 votes is if all senators are present and voting.  Then, it's gotta be 51-49 or 51-50.

It's exactly what you said.   "51 votes are needed"
And you repeated that claim, over and over, until I showed you bills that passed with fewer votes. 

But it's okay, we all know you have no honor and never tell the truth.
 
 

DeplorablePatriot » 13 May 2023, 2:49 pm » wrote: ↑

13 May 2023, 2:49 pm

Most are, yes. Does that trigger your tender sensitivities? Do you overuse word "sophomoric" because you believe it's a great new word for you and enhances the perception of a higher IQ by strangers? It's a common word. Elementary level. Try harder, Clarence.

He does this every time he learns a new word. 
Thankfully with his room temperature IQ, he doesn't expand his vocabulary often.
 

golfboy » 15 May 2023, 6:17 pm » wrote: ↑

15 May 2023, 6:17 pm

It's exactly what you said.   "51 votes are needed"
And you repeated that claim, over and over, until I showed you bills that passed with fewer votes. 

But it's okay, we all know you have no honor and never tell the truth.

As I have said over and over and over again... I was operating under the ASSUMPTION that we were always talking about a full chamber. I should not have made that assumption, but I cannot go back and change that.  I made the assumption and then, realized that you did not share it. 

So then, when I explicitly stated that I was talking about a full chamber and I asked you to tell me how many votes were needed in THAT situation, you replied with the, now infamous reply, "YES *******, FIFTY VOTES ARE ALL THAT ARE NEEDED TO PASS A BILL IN THE SENATE WHEN ALL SENATORS ARE PRESENT AND VOTING"

And you have NEVER retracted that statement even though we BOTH know it is incorrect.  If all senators are present and voting, 51 votes are required.  EVERY SINGLE TIME.  

maineman » 15 May 2023, 6:28 pm » wrote: ↑

15 May 2023, 6:28 pm

As I have said over and over and over again... I was operating under the ASSUMPTION that we were always talking about a full chamber. I should not have made that assumption, but I cannot go back and change that.  I made the assumption and then, realized that you did not share it. 

So then, when I explicitly stated that I was talking about a full chamber and I asked you to tell me how many votes were needed in THAT situation, you replied with the, now infamous reply, "YES *******, FIFTY VOTES ARE ALL THAT ARE NEEDED TO PASS A BILL IN THE SENATE WHEN ALL SENATORS ARE PRESENT AND VOTING"

And you have NEVER retracted that statement even though we BOTH know it is incorrect.  If all senators are present and voting, 51 votes are required.  EVERY SINGLE TIME.

No one is responsible for your statements but you. 
You repeatedly said a bill couldn't pass the Senate with fewer than 51 votes. 

And why would I retract my correct statement?   We were talking about the Senate, not the Vice President's vote.