Liberal Forum

Cannonpointer » 02 Jan 2014 5:07 pm » wrote:
Good observation - they left plausible deniability in their puppet show - unlike the ******* dems, who voted for the patriot act and fo war funding and lost their nominee over it.

But the real proof of their culpability is their institution of a new entitlement as their ONLY foray into fixing a broke system.

1. They had absoulte hegemony for six years,
2. and had a clear duty to act on an existential thrreat to our sovereignty.
3. They did nothing, and set the stage for what followed.

Under our current criminal system aand under our current tort system, they are culpable unless one of those 3 points can be refuted.

Actually, they had the outlines of a plan prior to Obama. Tax incentives and more market based. I have posted it before. But they caved to the dems.

Huey » 02 Jan 2014 5:09 pm » wrote:
Actually, they had the outlines of a plan prior to Obama. Tax incentives and more market based. I have posted it before. But they caved to the dems.

I have the outlines of a carrot shaped vagina in my trousers.

For six years, they NEEDED NO DEMS. Fir six years, they had NO ONE TO CAVE TO.

"They chose to wait for false opposition before addressing an existenctial threat." - That statement right there would not pass a jury's sniff test. If it was intended as a refuatation to any of my three pemises, I would call it a ludicrous fail, personally.

Cannonpointer » 02 Jan 2014 5:13 pm » wrote:
I have the outlines of a carrot shaped vagina in my trousers.

For six years, they NEEDED NO DEMS. Fir six years, they had NO ONE TO CAVE TO.

"They chose to wait for false opposition before addressing an existenctial threat." - That statement right there would not pass a jury's sniff test. If it was intended as a refuatation to any of my three pemises, I would call it a ludicrous fail, personally.

Actually they did. They never had anything close to a super majority in the senate and without 60 votes you know what happens. That is why it is so **** hilarious watching both McConnell and Reid switch their positions on the filibuster.

Huey » 02 Jan 2014 5:17 pm » wrote:
Actually they did. They never had anything close to a super majority in the senate and without 60 votes you know what happens. That is why it is so **** hilarious watching both McConnell and Reid switch their positions on the filibuster.

You have the outlines of a defense. Don't stop now. Your clients are about to walk, under the terms I laid out.

In what year and through what piece of proposed legislation did the repub majority attempt to reform health care (please don't pretend the trillions in new entitlements = reform), and when did dems threaten to filibuster that reform?

I'll wait over here.

Cannonpointer » 02 Jan 2014 5:24 pm » wrote:
You have the outlines of a defense. Don't stop now. Your clients are about to walk, under the terms I laid out.

In what year did the repub majority attempt to reform health care (please don't pretend the trillions in new entitlements = reform), and when did dems threaten to filibuster that reform?

I'll wait over here.

I didn't say they attempted to reform it did I? I said they had the outlines of a plan and they caved to the dems before it got off the ground.

If that is not good enough I hope you brought a good book while you are waiting over there.

Huey » 02 Jan 2014 5:26 pm » wrote:
I didn't say they attempted to reform it did I? I said they had the outlines of a plan and they caved to the dems before it got off the ground.

If that is not good enough I hope you brought a good book while you are waiting over there.

I was bluffing. I left and returned.

You were bluffing. My prosecution stands.

I provided you with three elements that demonstrate UNDER OUR LEGAL SYSTEM that the repukes are co-conspirators in current oucomes - that they had the power to act, had a duty to act, and did not act. They own the results.

You have denied neither any of the elements, nor the correctness of the assertion of guilt itself.

Cannonpointer » 02 Jan 2014 5:31 pm » wrote:
I was bluffing. I left and returned.

You were bluffing. My prosecution stands.

I provided you with three elements that demonstrate UNDER OUR LEGAL SYSTEM that the repukes are co-conspirators in current oucomes - that they had the power to act, had a duty to act, and did not act. They own the results.

You have denied neither any of the elements, nor the correctness of the assertion of guilt itself.

I am not disagreeing with you.

Huey » 02 Jan 2014 5:34 pm » wrote:
I am not disagreeing with you.

Alright then.

You better be lucky And whatnot.

Huey » 02 Jan 2014 5:06 pm » wrote: Why are you afraid to quote Simeon's entire post misty? Easier to pretend you didn't see it?

Who the **** is Simeon?
There's no member here by that name.

Cannonpointer » 02 Jan 2014 5:13 pm » wrote: I have the outlines of a carrot shaped vagina in my trousers.

A carrot shaped vagina? The mind reels thinking about what kind of an image I could create around that.

Cannonpointer » 02 Jan 2014 5:24 pm » wrote: In what year and through what piece of proposed legislation did the repub majority attempt to reform health care (please don't pretend the trillions in new entitlements = reform), and when did dems threaten to filibuster that reform?

I'll wait over here.

Took the words right out of my mouth, or off my fingers as the case may be.
I'll wait with you.

Not only is Huey pretending that the Republicans ever even thought about proposing any health care reforms, he's also pretending that the Dems abused the filibuster in the same fashion as the Republicans do now.

Huey » 02 Jan 2014 5:26 pm » wrote: I didn't say they attempted to reform it did I? I said they had the outlines of a plan and they caved to the dems before it got off the ground.

What kind of pussies would do that?

Misty » 02 Jan 2014 6:10 pm » wrote: Took the words right out of my mouth, or off my fingers as the case may be.
I'll wait with you.

Not only is Huey pretending that the Republicans ever even thought about proposing any health care reforms, he's also pretending that the Dems abused the filibuster in the same fashion as the Republicans do now.

Oh god she is really irritating sometime.

1. I suggest you re read my post. All I said was they had an outline misty.

2. Do you post in this manner to try and piss people off? I said I laugh at both McConnell AND REID for switching their stance on
The fillibust.

3. This is why misty refuse to quote entire posts.

Huey » 02 Jan 2014 5:17 pm » wrote:
Actually they did. They never had anything close to a super majority in the senate and without 60 votes you know what happens. That is why it is so **** hilarious watching both McConnell and Reid switch their positions on the filibuster.

Repost for misty


I wonder is she has the integrity to admit she was mistaken.

Misty » 02 Jan 2014 6:12 pm » wrote: What kind of pussies would do that?

Republican pussies.

This is a repub plan based on the bush plan from 2009:

http://usconservatives.about.com/gi/o.h ... Dh111-3218

Now for a preemptive comment before misty shows up again. I don't know if I would support it. But that is not the argument. The argument is whether they had one or not.

And this discusses the plan misty claims does not exist:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapotheca ... obamacare/

Now we are done with this maybe cannon pointer can return to our discussion.

She makes it too easy,

Huey » 02 Jan 2014 6:23 pm » wrote:Oh god she is really irritating sometime.

Look who's talking.
If I'm so **** irritating then why do you keep parking your *** here in my thread?
Just yesterday you accused me of stalking you.
Did I roofie you and drag your sorry *** in here?

This is why misty refuse to quote entire posts.

I don't quote crap.

Huey » 02 Jan 2014 6:23 pm » wrote: This is why misty refuse to quote entire posts.

Huey » 02 Jan 2014 6:25 pm » wrote: Repost for misty

Huey » 02 Jan 2014 6:33 pm » wrote: Now for a preemptive comment before misty shows up again.

Huey » 02 Jan 2014 6:35 pm » wrote:And this discusses the plan misty claims does not exist:

That's four posts in a row that you mentioned my name.
Obsessed much?

Misty » 02 Jan 2014 6:43 pm » wrote: Look who's talking.
If I'm so **** irritating then why do you keep parking your *** here in my thread?
Just yesterday you accused me of stalking you.
Did I roofie you and drag your sorry *** in here?


I don't quote crap.

The bitch, the bitch, the bitch is back.
Elton John 1974

I have no problem misty, I just repost what was said to correct your comprehension errors and a few facts to support what I wrote. All is good. If you like just keep prattling on with gutter talk.

Or you can do the honest thing and say yes, you made a mistake. I am not interested about your whining, lying rants this evening. I will just repost what you do not have the integrity to post. And we know you don't quote crap. It is easier for you to make it up that way, but I have no issue reporting and reporting. Can we get a multi quote function?

Your call, as usual.