Liberal Forum

Huey » 26 May 2017 11:47 am » wrote:Lmao!
If this is starting with you there is no hope.

If I respond to you at all, no matter what I say, you say that I am starting in with you.
I guess you have a double standard.

Huey » 26 May 2017 11:47 am » wrote:That opinion is shared by a few here Misty. My point is made. Run from it and put it in peanut gallery.

Opinions are like assholes.
Everyone has one.

Misty » 26 May 2017 11:40 am » wrote:Thank you for proving my point.
One wonders what a Republican candidate would have to do to be unacceptable to you if committing a violent assault was not enough.

Thanks for making my point. That elected Senator obviously has flaws, but I doubt he'll repeatedly violate the Constitution like Obama has.

To which you won't even respond, let alone criticize.

Apparently violating the Constitution and federal law is perfectly acceptable to Democrat Talking Point Liars.

Misty: You messed up the quote because you were missing a bracket.
I fixed it.

Misty » 26 May 2017 11:17 am » wrote:So apparently violently assaulting a reporter who is just doing his job, is perfectly acceptable to Republicans now.

Look, a squirrel!

Never mind the lie she's telling, she's once again trying to distract from a massive scandal.

Pretending she doesn't see my source.

James Rosen: New Evidence Obama Administration's NSA Spied On Americans
FOX News chief Washington correspondent James Rosen reports documents show NSA systematically violated rights of countless Americans.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... rches.html

Termin8tor » 26 May 2017 1:09 pm » wrote: Thanks for making my point. That elected Senator obviously has flaws, but I doubt he'll repeatedly violate the Constitution like Obama has.

To which you won't even respond, let alone criticize.

Apparently violating the Constitution and federal law is perfectly acceptable to Democrat Talking Point Liars.

He's not a Senator, he's a Congressman.

Flaws? ROFL
He committed a violent assault.
That's a little more than a flaw.

You can't defend that, so you drag Obama into it.
So **** typical.

You don't even have the character to admit that what Gianforte did was wrong.
You have to resort to a whataboutism.

You can call me a partisan hack all day long, but I can assure you that if any Democrat did what Gianforte did, I would not defend it by pointing to someone else's behavior.

He might violently assault people, but he won't violate the Constitution.


Where in the Constitution does it say that it's okay to beat up a member of the press?

Termin8tor » 26 May 2017 1:29 pm » wrote:Look, a squirrel!
Never mind the lie she's telling, she's once again trying to distract from a massive scandal.
Pretending she doesn't see my source.

The only one pointing to squirrels is you.
Obama has NOTHING to do with the violent assault of a reporter.

And what lie am I telling?

Misty » 26 May 2017 1:35 pm » wrote:Flaws? ROFL
He committed a violent assault.
That's a little more than a flaw.

You can't defend that, so you drag Obama into it.
So **** typical.

Who is a bigger threat to the country, that Senator elect or a president allows repeated violations of federal law and the Constitution, psycho?

What are you babbling and bleating about? Not the massive scandal; not the felonies.

That's my point.

You don't even have the character to admit that what Gianforte did was wrong.
You have to resort to a whataboutism.

Of course it's wrong, duh.

You can call me a partisan hack all day long, but I can assure you that if any Democrat did what Gianforte did, I would not defend it by pointing to someone else's behavior.

If a Republican president had done what Obama his officials have, I wouldn't pay the slightest attention to the former.

I'd be seeking to impeach that president.

Because I'm not a hopeless hack like you.

Misty » 26 May 2017 1:41 pm » wrote:
The only one pointing to squirrels is you.
Obama has NOTHING to do with the violent assault of a reporter.

And what lie am I telling?

You lied that,"perfectly acceptable to Republicans
."

****.

It's a choice between a leftist moonbat whose philosophy would destroy the country as we know it and someone with obvious anger problems.


The choice is clear to anyone with common sense.

If Repubs ran a neo-Nazi who sang nice songs and had a pleasant temperament vs. an otherwise acceptable Democrat who lost his temper, I'd expect you to vote for the latter.

I wouldn't be bleating and shrieking and lying about you.

Misty » 26 May 2017 12:19 pm » wrote: If I respond to you at all, no matter what I say, you say that I am starting in with you.
I guess you have a double standard.
Opinions are like assholes.
Everyone has one.

lol! Sorry, but contrary to what you said on my thread you locked peanut gallery so no one can respond.

Rotflmao!

Huey » 26 May 2017 2:12 pm » wrote:lol! Sorry, but contrary to what you said on my thread you locked peanut gallery so no one can respond.
Rotflmao!

Once again you take no accountability for the fact that you were spamming my thread.

Termin8tor » 26 May 2017 1:55 pm » wrote:You lied that,"perfectly acceptable to Republicans."

And then you proved my point with that 'but Obama' ****.

Termin8tor » 26 May 2017 1:55 pm » wrote:If Repubs ran a neo-Nazi who sang nice songs and had a pleasant temperament vs. an otherwise acceptable Democrat who lost his temper, I'd expect you to vote for the latter.

He didn't just 'lose his temper.'
He committed a violent assault, which is a crime.

The more you try and play it down, the more you prove my point.
Thank you.

Misty » 26 May 2017 3:25 pm » wrote: Once again you take no accountability for the fact that you were spamming my thread.

Unless you consider your own post where you spammed other threads as spam.

Another indicator that you can't take what you dish out.

Huey » 26 May 2017 3:29 pm » wrote: Unless you consider your own post where you spammed other threads as spam.
Another indicator that you can't take what you dish out.

Sorry Huey.
That's not going to work any more.

It has been explained to you several times why what you did is considered spamming.
So you are either dishonestly pretending that you don't understand it, or you are just plain stupid.
I will let you decide which one of those options you wanna choose.

Please give me an example of where and how I 'spammed' other threads.
This should be funny, since like I said, you are either too stupid to know what spamming is, or you're dishonestly pretending not to know.

Put up or shut up tough guy.

Misty » 26 May 2017 3:27 pm » wrote:
And then you proved my point with that 'but Obama' ****.

Which is yet another lie, because the fact that Obama committed far worse doesn't in the slightest mean that violent behavior is "perfectly acceptable to Repubs."

And as usual, you stonewalled my question.

Who is a bigger threat to the country, that Senator elect or a president allows repeated violations of federal law and the Constitution, psycho?

What are you babbling and bleating about? Not the massive scandal; not the felonies.

That's my point.

He didn't just 'lose his temper.'
He committed a violent assault, which is a crime.

The more you try and play it down, the more you prove my point.
Thank you.

Look, a squirrel!

Who is a bigger threat to the country, that Senator elect or a president allows repeated violations of federal law and the Constitution, psycho?

What are you babbling and bleating about? Not the massive scandal; not the felonies.

Termin8tor » 26 May 2017 3:35 pm » wrote:Which is yet another lie, because the fact that Obama committed far worse doesn't in the slightest mean that violent behavior is "perfectly acceptable to Repubs."
And as usual, you stonewalled my question.
Who is a bigger threat to the country, that Senator elect or a president allows repeated violations of federal law and the Constitution, psycho?
What are you babbling and bleating about? Not the massive scandal; not the felonies.
That's my point. Look, a squirrel!
Who is a bigger threat to the country, that Senator elect or a president allows repeated violations of federal law and the Constitution, psycho?
What are you babbling and bleating about? Not the massive scandal; not the felonies.

Good boy, Puss.
Keep proving my point.

You can't just admit that what Gianforte did was reprehensible without dragging Obama into it.

Misty » 26 May 2017 3:35 pm » wrote: Sorry Huey.
That's not going to work any more.

It has been explained to you several times why what you did is considered spamming.
So you are either dishonestly pretending that you don't understand it, or you are just plain stupid.
I will let you decide which one of those options you wanna choose.

Please give me an example of where and how I 'spammed' other threads.
This should be funny, since like I said, you are either too stupid to know what spamming is, or you're dishonestly pretending not to know.

Put up or shut up tough guy.

Sorry, not going to play in this playground. You abuse your mod rights way to much. Did you not lock the peanut gallery? Umm? Do you not lock this thread when things get to hot for your sensitive nature?

Nope, I will do what you lied about me doing. I will take this to my thread and post it. And respond there. And you can change the name of that thread anytime now.

Huey » 24 May 2017 5:37 pm » wrote: The goal is not to impeach him. The goal is political chaos to stop his policy. If they impeached him they would have to deal with Pence who is more of a conservative than trump ever was.

Different way of saying the same thing. I was pointing out the way it is being done!!

PS :impeachment just sends the issue to the Senate for a trial. That's where it has failed each time. Johnson after Lincoln and Clinton.

Misty » 26 May 2017 3:37 pm » wrote:Good boy, Puss.
Keep proving my point.

You can't just admit that what Gianforte did was reprehensible without dragging Obama into it.

I swear, you are utterly demented.

I can't hear you, la, la, la, lah, she babbles.

Who is a bigger threat to the country, that Senator elect or a president allows repeated violations of federal law and the Constitution, psycho?

What are you babbling and bleating about? Not the massive scandal; not the felonies.

Okay so according to Huey 4 or 5 people have now accused me of 'abusing' my Mod powers.
I only saw three, but that's besides the point.

Because of what happened at the old forum, where I was falsely accused of deleting thousands of threads, this is a particularly sensitive subject for me.

Even though I was exonerated by the owner of that forum, Huey recently said that I probably did what I was accused of.

That was an extremely vicious thing to say to me, because I have made no secret about how sensitive I am about this subject.

And now it seems that he has succeeded in forming a pack of followers who are only too eager to promote the same filthy lie.

Although none of them seem to be able to show exactly how it is that I have abused my powers.

I guess it's okay to just throw out accusations without any proof, especially if the person you are accusing is a Liberal.

I really have to do some serious thinking about why I would want to keep exposing myself to this kind of ****.

Misty » 26 May 2017 4:20 pm » wrote:Okay so according to Huey 4 or 5 people have now accused me of 'abusing' my Mod powers.
I only saw three, but that's besides the point.

Because of what happened at the old forum, where I was falsely accused of deleting thousands of threads, this is a particularly sensitive subject for me.

Even though I was exonerated by the owner of that forum, Huey recently said that I probably did what I was accused of.

That was an extremely vicious thing to say to me, because I have made no secret about how sensitive I am about this subject.

And now it seems that he has succeeded in forming a pack of followers who are only too eager to promote the same filthy lie.

Although none of them seem to be able to show exactly how it is that I have abused my powers.

I guess it's okay to just throw out accusations without any proof, especially if the person you are accusing is a Liberal.

I really have to do some serious thinking about why I would want to keep exposing myself to this kind of ****.

I guess it is ok to throw out accusations, remove rebuttals to peanut gallery, and then ABUSE moderator powers to lock both threads so the accused can't rebut your accusations.

That is ****. If you do not have the integrity to face those you attack you should not be here.

Misty » 26 May 2017 4:20 pm » wrote:Okay so according to Huey 4 or 5 people have now accused me of 'abusing' my Mod powers.
I only saw three, but that's besides the point.

Because of what happened at the old forum, where I was falsely accused of deleting thousands of threads, this is a particularly sensitive subject for me.

Even though I was exonerated by the owner of that forum, Huey recently said that I probably did what I was accused of.

That was an extremely vicious thing to say to me, because I have made no secret about how sensitive I am about this subject.

And now it seems that he has succeeded in forming a pack of followers who are only too eager to promote the same filthy lie.

Although none of them seem to be able to show exactly how it is that I have abused my powers.

I guess it's okay to just throw out accusations without any proof, especially if the person you are accusing is a Liberal.

I really have to do some serious thinking about why I would want to keep exposing myself to this kind of ****.

Don't worry. No one wants you to expose yourself. Having said that, you can stop bawling your head off now, snowflake.