Liberal Forum

I pray that a Democrat will win the W.H. and Dems will take back control of the Senate, just so that I can see some of these Republican Jackholes lose their ****.

Well, the right-wing hate machine has sure done its job -- made Americans hate a US president out beyond the finges of the Twilight Zone. Add "did away with a Supreme Court Jusitice" to your long list of gems like "he bows to Muslim leaders" "he's a communist" "he's gay" "he's not an American" "he was not fairly elected."

I used to think the people of this nation could not be duped like this. I forgot that when you repeat something long enough, people will believe it no matter if they are smart or stupid.

On the other hand, 50% of Americans haven't fallen for it. That's interesting.

Isis is JV ring a bell?

crimsongulf » 14 Feb 2016 4:53 pm » wrote:Isis is JV ring a bell?

Why wouldn't it, except for people who don't keep up with current events?

But underestimating the strength of a foe is not in the same league as saying "God sent Hitler to hunt the Jews."

JoeLib » 14 Feb 2016 5:36 pm » wrote:
Why wouldn't it, except for people who don't keep up with current events?

But underestimating the strength of a foe is not in the same league as saying "God sent Hitler to hunt the Jews."

ya know, lisa, for a long time I thought you had a troll streak in ya, but now you have proven that you are simply a **** drug addicted scab on society.

crimsongulf » 14 Feb 2016 4:53 pm » wrote:Isis is JV ring a bell?

This is ****. You'd be more pissed if he praised isis, obviously. So as of now your complaint is disingenuous at best.

Misty » 14 Feb 2016 4:05 pm » wrote: I wish.

3, 2…1…Here Come the Cries That Obama Had Scalia Killed

Not unless Obama supplied the food Scalia ate. Fat, old men are prone to heart attacks and Scalia was obese by anyone's calculation. Surprised he lived as long as he did. It always amazes me how much the right hates the President. Now they're making unsupported claims that he murdered a Supreme Court Justice. People are **** nuts. At least they can wait until an autopsy has been done or there's even a shred of evidence to grab onto. No reason, no motive, Instead, just a knee jerk response generated by their blind hatred.

Someone needs to stick a dick in Carol's mouth.

Speaking of liars and the lying liars who tell them.......The Donald recently said that the 4.9 unemployment rate is wrong and that the real unemployment rate may be as high as (hold on to your hats) 42%. That's right. He said it. 42%.

I wonder if the Carnival Barker has any idea what this country would look like with an unemployment rate of 42%?
And his rabid followers eat this **** up with a spoon.

Donald Trump says the unemployment rate may be 42 percent.

crimsongulf » 14 Feb 2016 5:43 pm » wrote:
ya know, lisa, for a long time I thought you had a troll streak in ya, but now you have proven that you are simply a **** drug addicted scab on society.

It was a reasonable question. Is someone who says God sent Hitler to hunt Jews mainstream? Is that in the same league with being wrong about an enemy's strength? If it is, then Eisenhower, Clausewitz, Sun Tzu, and every other military leader was as crazy as this guy, because all of them underestimated enemy strength at one time or another, probably many times.

To respond to that question with "you are simply a **** drug addicted scab on society" doesn't make an ounce of sense.

JoeLib » 14 Feb 2016 5:57 pm » wrote:
It was a reasonable question. Is someone who says God sent Hitler to hunt Jews mainstream? Is that in the same league with being wrong about an enemy's strength? If it is, then Eisenhower, Clausewitz, Sun Tzu, and every other military leader was as crazy as this guy, because all of them underestimated enemy strength at one time or another, probably many times.

To respond to that question with "you are simply a **** drug addicted scab on society" doesn't make an ounce of sense.

No, it is not a legit question. it is a question that a drug addled **** crazy wombat imagined.

Couple of good Tweets.

Uh, excuse me Senator, but what about the American people who voted for THIS President for a second 4 year term?
Don't they get a voice?

Misty » 15 Feb 2016 9:35 pm » wrote:

Uh, excuse me Senator, but what about the American people who voted for THIS President for a second 4 year term?
Don't they get a voice?

Why do you continue to criticize McConnell for doing exactly what Democrats have done in the past?
1960: Democrats passed a resolution saying the Republican President couldn't nominate a Supreme Court justice in his final year.
2007: Democrats said that Bush, with 18 months left in his Presidency, would not be allowed to appoint a Supreme Court justice.

Why is it that liberals get upset when their own tactics are used against them?

Misty » 14 Feb 2016 5:53 pm » wrote:Speaking of liars and the lying liars who tell them.......The Donald recently said that the 4.9 unemployment rate is wrong and that the real unemployment rate may be as high as (hold on to your hats) 42%. That's right. He said it. 42%.

I wonder if the Carnival Barker has any idea what this country would look like with an unemployment rate of 42%?
And his rabid followers eat this **** up with a spoon.

Donald Trump says the unemployment rate may be 42 percent.

So let's look at the numbers, shall we?
BLS says that labor participation rate is 62.7%
That means 37.3% are not participating in the job market.
And that market excludes anyone under 16.

So yea, I'd say that Trump's number is really close.

JoeLib » 14 Feb 2016 5:36 pm » wrote:
Why wouldn't it, except for people who don't keep up with current events?

But underestimating the strength of a foe is not in the same league as saying "God sent Hitler to hunt the Jews."

Out of CONTEXT - again - proven so. Closed mind - again. And don't ya know it? Cruz accepted that endorsement, the SOB. Cruz likes ISIS hunting down Jews because that's God's doing. Boy, you've got him pegged, too - right Joseph?

JoeLib » 14 Feb 2016 4:50 pm » wrote:Well, the right-wing hate machine has sure done its job -- made Americans hate a US president out beyond the finges of the Twilight Zone. Add "did away with a Supreme Court Jusitice" to your long list of gems like "he bows to Muslim leaders" "he's a communist" "he's gay" "he's not an American" "he was not fairly elected."

No mention of GWB and Algore I see.

I used to think the people of this nation could not be duped like this. I forgot that when you repeat something long enough, people will believe it no matter if they are smart or stupid.

On the other hand, 50% of Americans haven't fallen for it. That's interesting.

Yep, it is. 50% haven't fallen for the "Bush instigated 9/11", "Bush lied us into war", "Bush caused the recession", "Bush caused the failures of Obama".... interesting indeed.

golfboy » 16 Feb 2016 8:29 am » wrote:
So let's look at the numbers, shall we?
BLS says that labor participation rate is 62.7%
That means 37.3% are not participating in the job market.
And that market excludes anyone under 16.

So yea, I'd say that Trump's number is really close.

Labor participation is not the same as unemployment.
Stay at home parents, retirees, students etc are not unemployed.
You know this.

onlyaladd » 16 Feb 2016 8:53 am » wrote: Labor participation is not the same as unemployment.
Stay at home parents, retirees, students etc are not unemployed.
You know this.

They aren't working, so they are unemployed. I was just explaining where he got his number, and it's not wrong.

golfboy » 16 Feb 2016 9:57 am » wrote: They aren't working, so they are unemployed. I was just explaining where he got his number, and it's not wrong.

Unemployed people are trying to work. It's totally unsignificant to count a housewife with a rich husband, an 80yo retiree, or a college student not needing to work as "unemployed"
That's why they count them differently. Apperently you and trump don't get that.
You could say the labor participation in the 50s was much less because more women stayed home. That doesn't mean the economy sucked then, quite the opposite. They didn't need to have two incomes. If Trump was around then would he stupidly make that statement?

onlyaladd » 16 Feb 2016 12:23 pm » wrote: Unemployed people are trying to work. It's totally unsignificant to count a housewife with a rich husband, an 80yo retiree, or a college student not needing to work as "unemployed"
That's why they count them differently. Apperently you and trump don't get that.
You could say the labor participation in the 50s was much less because more women stayed home. That doesn't mean the economy sucked then, quite the opposite. They didn't need to have two incomes. If Trump was around then would he stupidly make that statement?

Unemployed is not just a government term, it also can clearly include ANYONE not working, and Trump is right at about 45% of the country doesn't work.