Liberal Forum

Misty » 16 Dec 2013 2:37 pm » wrote:[As usual, mischaracterizing what happened.
You quoted me as saying, "Republicans are launching a class war with racial undertones—and hurting the poor whites they'll need to win in 2014."

Okay, I incorrectly assumed you'd also directed at me. Maybe you did, but I'm not going to waste my time.

Great job at ignoring how the Democrat Party has badly hurt minorities.

I seem to have hit a nerve with this, huh Puss?
You might want to do a bit of self-examination.

You're still full of s***.

I'm not the one who used the phrase 'a private expression of racism', as if that were somehow acceptable, that was you.

I never claimed it was "acceptable," troll, just noted that we shouldn't drive someone out of public life for it.

But you have higher standards. You tell years of lies on behalf of serial felons/ serial rapists.

RichClem » 16 Dec 2013 2:42 pm » wrote: I never claimed it was "acceptable," troll, just noted that we shouldn't drive someone out of public life for it.

So, IOW, it's acceptable.

Do you even read your own crap anymore?
More often than not you make other people's points for them.

Another RichClem lie uncovered:

RichClem » 09 Nov 2011 9:59 am » wrote:The federal government for decades pumped money into the Post Office to keep it afloat.

Of course if I ask you to prove that statement, you'll say that:
A. you have proven it many times in the past, or
B. you don't have time to chase down links.
Even though you obviously spend a major part of your day on the internet.

From my own research I have found that the only money the federal gov't gives to the USPS is to compensate them for postage-free mailing for all legally blind persons, for mail-in election ballots sent from US citizens living overseas, and for providing address information to state and local child support enforcement agencies.

The USPS actually turned a profit for four consecutive years, from 2003-2006, until the 2006 Postal Act was enacted, and they were forced to fund 75 years worth of retiree benefits within 10 years, something no other entity is forced to do.
If not for that mandate it could have turned a $100 million profit this year.

This is why you hate me so much Puss.
Because you are not free to lie with impunity.
You think you can just make a blanket statement like that, not have to prove it, and we should all just believe you, because you said so.

I'm sure your only reply will be to call me a liar and a moonbat who has defended a serial felon/serial rapist for years, so don't bother.

Misty » 16 Dec 2013 3:45 pm » wrote:This is why you hate me so much Puss.
Because you are not free to lie with impunity.

The USPS actually turned a profit for four consecutive years, from 2003-2006, until the 2006 Postal Act was enacted, and they were forced to fund 75 years worth of retiree benefits within 10 years, something no other entity is forced to do.

That "profit" didn't include the massive unfunded liabilities for employee retirement benefits the Post Office was going to have to pay.

Imbecile.

RichClem » 16 Dec 2013 4:10 pm » wrote:
That "profit" didn't include the massive unfunded liabilities for employee retirement benefits the Post Office was going to have to pay.

Imbecile.

You just compound one lie with another.
As of October of last year their retirement fund was overfunded by $11.4 billion, Jackhole.

RichClem » 16 Dec 2013 2:42 pm » wrote:
Okay, I incorrectly assumed you'd also directed at me. Maybe you did, but I'm not going to waste my time.

Great job at ignoring how the Democrat Party has badly hurt minorities.





You're still full of s***.



I never claimed it was "acceptable," troll, just noted that we shouldn't drive someone out of public life for it.

But you have higher standards. You tell years of lies on behalf of serial felons/ serial rapists.

this stupid subhuman scum actually thinks he is fooling someone.... YOU ARE CLEARLY THE TROLL SCUMBOY!!! are you getting more than $2.00 per post yet?

Brattle Street » 16 Dec 2013 5:44 pm » wrote: this stupid subhuman scum actually thinks he is fooling someone.... YOU ARE CLEARLY THE TROLL SCUMBOY!!! are you getting more than $2.00 per post yet?

He's in negative income now. The person who hired him has been shipped off to the Ukraine.

RichClem » 16 Dec 2013 2:26 pm » wrote:
Bulls***. I mentioned welfare fraud, and the first thing that popped into your head was minorities.

Yes, that is absolutely racism on your part.

Most welfare fraud is committed by poor whites who make up the majority of welfare recipients. Are you saying Misty is racist against whites?

Which party destroys minority kids lives with rotten schools?
Democrats.

Both parties and Repubs haven't introduced a single bill towards the improvement of the public school system. Except for Jesus preaching and 'no child left behind' - the expensive initiative with no budget to support it.

Which party destroys people's lives, especially minorities, with Welfare?
Democrats.

Both parties and Repubs haven't introduced a single bill to address it. With the exception of the Welfare reform bill that only works when there are jobs to be had.

Which party condemns the poor to live in run-down, dangerous neighborhoods?
Democrats.

Both parties and Repubs have gone out of their way to ensure that HUD stays underfunded.

Which party
raised black unemployment to around 18% with no improvement in sight?
Democrats.

Republicans - the party of financial deregulation and corresponding collapses. The party of trickle down economics which has NEVER managed to trickle down to the lower end of the employment scale.

And why?
BECAUSE REPUBLICANS ARE EVIL RACIST POOR BASHING ****.

If you think that republicans ever did anything that supported welfare in any way, you might be a moonbat.

Now, now, children.

Clem is a misunderstood, comedy genius.

It's the only explanation that makes sense.

Now, be kind.

Brattle Street » 16 Dec 2013 6:14 pm » wrote:If you think that republicans ever did anything that supported welfare in any way, you might be a moonbat.

****** = profitable jailbait or low wage labor. Either is preferable to the Republican agenda.

Silverfox » 16 Dec 2013 6:17 pm » wrote:Now, now, children.

Clem is a misunderstood, comedy genius.

It's the only explanation that makes sense.

Now, be kind.

He'll parrot all night long for a few tossed saltines.

AAWWKK!

greatnpowerfuloz » 16 Dec 2013 5:46 pm » wrote: He's in negative income now. The person who hired him has been shipped off to the Ukraine.

There's certainly a consensus among imbeciles.

Misty » 16 Dec 2013 4:29 pm » wrote: You just compound one lie with another.
As of October of last year their retirement fund was overfunded by $11.4 billion, Jackhole.

I cited a credible source to back up all my claims.

Nor will I re-visit the issue for a lying troll who ignored every word I cited.

RichClem » 17 Dec 2013 9:12 am » wrote: I cited a credible source to back up all my claims.

Nor will I re-visit the issue for a lying troll who ignored every word I cited.

That's exactly what I said you would say. ROFL
Do you really think you are fooling anyone?

Misty » 16 Dec 2013 3:45 pm » wrote: Of course if I ask you to prove that statement, you'll say that:
A. you have proven it many times in the past, or
B. you don't have time to chase down links.
Even though you obviously spend a major part of your day on the internet.

Misty » 17 Dec 2013 1:29 pm » wrote: That's exactly what I said you would say. ROFL
Do you really think you are fooling anyone?

Why should I waste my time for someone who refuses to read most of my posts,

refuses to acknowledge the soundness of my excellent sources,

refuses to answer my questions,

refuses to respond to my strongest points

and lies through her teeth about everything?

Duuuuh!

RichClem » 17 Dec 2013 1:42 pm » wrote:
Why should I waste my time for someone who refuses to read most of my posts,

and yet, you continue to do so regardless of the erosion your credibility has suffered. so the question of WHY is valid.

the answer is, you get paid to post here by the propaganda wing of the lobbyists whose bank accounts you grovel before

RichClem » 17 Dec 2013 1:42 pm » wrote: Why should I waste my time for someone who refuses to read most of my posts,

refuses to acknowledge the soundness of my excellent sources,

refuses to answer my questions,

refuses to respond to my strongest points

and lies through her teeth about everything?

Duuuuh!

You're the one who keeps whining about how you want real debate Puss, not me.
Real debate is not making statements that you can't or won't back up.
You can't just make a blanket statement and say it's true because you said so.
Also in real debate you don't call people childish names.
You debate like a 5 year old, and I will treat you as such.


Duuuuh!

Brattle Street » 16 Dec 2013 12:55 pm » wrote:I received a surprise visit from Jeff Foxworthy the other day. He wanted to run an idea by me to test market viability. In effort to extend his familar vehicle, and establish a new wing to his franchise, he suggested a new take on, "you might be a red neck". He calls it, "The View from Clemmy's World".

He made several suggestions to illustrate how this would manifest.


If you don't think that Clinton should be tried for murder, you might be a moonbat.


If you don't support women being raped by dogs, you might be a moonbat.


If you think that humans have more rights than corporations, you might be a moonbat.


If you don't wish you could sniff Reagan's underwear, you might be a moonbat.


I told Jeff that I was not sure if this approach really had legs. I thought it prudent to run it by our expert in receiving stalk-assault and moonbattery, Misty

If you think clemmytroll feels compelled in any way to support his assertions, you might be a moonbat.

Brattle Street » 17 Dec 2013 2:03 pm » wrote: If you think clemmytroll feels compelled in any way to support his assertions, you might be a moonbat.

He has many times cited sources to prove everything he says.
You just didn't read them.