Liberal Forum

How is making and distributing a documentary movie "bribing the cops?" How is publishing a book "bribing the cops?" How is buying political advertising criticizing Beltway politicians of either party "bribing the cops?" If you couldn't tell blatant lies, would you even exist? Get some professional help, moonbat. We were talking about Citizen's United moonbat. So was I, and in the process of challenging Citizens United, Obama's Injustice Dept lawyers argued that they had the Constitutional authority to ban certain types of books and movies. And Citizens United prohibits certain types of advertising for a period before any federal election. Typical moonbat, bleat in ignorance, then blame me. Money is speech, was the phrase to come out of the Supreme Court. Misty asked you repeatedly to defend that phrase, but like a kid, you keep changing the subject or answering around the issue. How is corporation's ability to practically buy themselves a president at whatever rate in billions of dollars any different from bribing a cop? Hey, you're doing a great job officer, here's a twenty! I haven't expressed any opinion on that, so why should I defend it? And if you really think money was kept out of the system, you're a sap. Citizens United infringed on ordinary Americans ability to participate in the democratic process, but the usual Special Interests were barely effected at all.

Well gosh, if I change the subject to something more timely like the roaring Obama Economy, I'm absolutely sure you'll respond. Here's the thing you obviously don't understand Puss. You don't get to set the subject in this thread or any other thread that you don't start. So.....if you want to talk about Clinton or the 'roaring' Obama economy, either start your own damn thread, or drag up one of your many old ones on those subjects. This is my thread. I decide what the subject is, not you. You don't get to dismiss my posts as unimportant or non issues and change the subject. Especially since you seem to have such a limited amount of subjects you wish to discuss. I started this thread so I could post the stuff I am interested in. I'm rarely start any other threads anymore, and that is specifically because you derail every single one of them. If you don't want to be called a Nazi, then stop acting like a **** dictator. Thanks for affirming what I've always written about you. You avoid topics and facts that undermine your wackjob left philosophy. You spread Propaganda, Disinformation, Democrat Talking Point Lies and ugly smears. You'd rather bleat about micro issues that effect almost no one rather than touch the obvious failure of Obama's economic policies. Oh my, some Republican said something about militias, perhaps after drinking. Wow, immense issue. But the possible collapse of the entire US economy doesn't rate a word from you. Troll.

Money is speech, was the phrase to come out of the Supreme Court.Misty asked you repeatedly to defend that phrase, but like a kid, you keep changing the subject or answering around the issue.I haven't expressed any opinion on that, so why should I defend it?You hear that bingster? He hasn't expressed an opinion on whether money=speech.That's why when I asked him:Where in the Constitution does it say that money equals speech?He said:And what is it you don't understand about the following crystal clear words?Congress shall make no law.....abridging the freedom of speech.What a **** assclown.

You hear that bingster? He hasn't expressed an opinion on whether money=speech. That's why when I asked him: He said: And what is it you don't understand about the following crystal clear words? Quote Congress shall make no law.....abridging the freedom of speech. What a **** assclown. For what, accurately quoting and understanding the 1st Amendment? Hey, why did you ignore how Obama officials argued that they could ban certain books and movies? That Citizens United prohibited some political speech criticizing Beltway politicians for months before an election? Mmmmmmf! she responded.

What a **** assclown. Yeah, the Constitution sucks, doesn't it. Meanwhile, even a former Obama adviser admits the Obama Economy stinks. Austan Goolsbee: "We all overshot it. This is a punch to the gut. This is not a good number." http://www.realclear...to_the_gut.html "We all overshot it?" What a blatant lie. No, Goolie, Arthur Laffer and other Free Market economists predicted things would get really bad this year,.

Yeah, the Constitution sucks, doesn't it. Meanwhile, even a former Obama adviser admits the Obama Economy stinks."We all overshot it?" What a blatant lie.No, Goolie, Arthur Laffer and other Free Market economists predicted things would get really bad this year,.Which way are you going to go? You guys first blame Obama for the sequester, even though it wouldn't have been necessary had the Republicans not held the country hostage. Then both sides say the sequester is bad and that it should never happen. Then the Republicans say that it's not so bad and that Obama is exagerating how bad it is. Now, it happened, and it's hurting us. What your take?

What a **** assclown.For what, accurately quoting and understanding the 1st Amendment? Hey numbnuts, you quoted the First Amendment in response to my question about where in the Constitution it says that money equals speech.Then you told bingster that you haven't expressed an opinion on that.Jackhole.Yeah, the Constitution sucks, doesn't it. Meanwhile, even a former Obama adviser admits the Obama Economy stinks.Austan Goolsbee: "We all overshot it. This is a punch to the gut. This is not a good number."http://www.realclear...to_the_gut.html"We all overshot it?" What a blatant lie.No, Goolie, Arthur Laffer and other Free Market economists predicted things would get really bad this year,.What part of you don't get to decide the subject of this thread did you not understand, ****?

For what, accurately quoting and understanding the 1st Amendment? Hey numbnuts, you quoted the First Amendment in response to my question about where in the Constitution it says that money equals speech. Then you told bingster that you haven't expressed an opinion on that. Jackhole. I'm the bad guy because you lack reading comprehension? Imbecile. What part of you don't get to decide the subject of this thread did you not understand, ****? Wow, you get really touchy when I bring up the roaring Obama Economy. Gosh, even the Obama-fawning NYTimes is catching on. The Shrinking Ranks of the Working By FLOYD NORRIS Just when you thought it might be safe for the Fed to begin to think about taking its foot off the accelerator, along comes a jobs report that makes the employment picture look much less rosy than we had thought. The most distressing part of the report came from the household survey. It found that 206,000 fewer people were working in March than during the previous month. That would make it the worst month in more than a year. (The more widely followed establishment survey found employment rose by a disappointing 88,000.) The household survey also found the labor force participation rate – the proportion of people at least 16 years of age who were working or looking for work – fell to 63.3 percent, the lowest rate since 1979. That fuels the narrative that the unemployment rate is coming down not because the economy is getting better, but because people are giving up looking for jobs. http://economix.blog...g/?ref=business

I'm the bad guy because you lack reading comprehension?Imbecile.One more time for the mentally challenged......I asked you:Where in the Constitution does it say that money equals speech?And you said:And what is it you don't understand about the following crystal clear words?Congress shall make no law.....abridging the freedom of speech.Meaning it was in the First Amendment.Then bingster said:Money is speech, was the phrase to come out of the Supreme Court. Misty asked you repeatedly to defend that phrase, but like a kid, you keep changing the subject or answering around the issue.And you replied:I haven't expressed any opinion on that, so why should I defend it?So you told me that the First Amendment says that money=speech, but when bingster asked you, you said you had not expressed an opinion on that.So which is it, Puss?

One more time for the mentally challenged...... Hi Misty. Still trying to reason with the stooge, eh?

BRIDEGROOM - An American Love Story, will tell the emotional journey of Shane Bitney Crone and Tom Bridegroom, two young men in a loving and committed relationship a relationship that was cut tragically short by a misstep off the side of a roof. The story of what happened after this accidental death of how people without the legal protections of marriage can find themselves completely shut out and ostracized-- is poignant, enraging and opens a window onto the issue of marriage equality like no speech or lecture ever will.The movie is based on this YouTube video that shows what can happen when two people who love each other and make a life together are unable to marry.

Hi Misty. Still trying to reason with the stooge, eh?I should have my head examined.

I should have my head examined. Rather, he should. But a vacuum doesn't yield much for any therapist.

I should have my head examined. I know, what's up? I thought it was cool when you threatened to shun him. I was thinking of doing the same thing.

One more time for the mentally challenged...... I asked you: Where in the Constitution does it say that money equals speech? And you said: RichClem, on 04 Apr 2013 - 13:24, said: And what is it you don't understand about the following crystal clear words?Congress shall make no law.....abridging the freedom of speech. Meaning it was in the First Amendment. Then bingster said: And you replied: So you told me that the First Amendment says that money=speech, but when bingster asked you, you said you had not expressed an opinion on that. So which is it, Puss? I have been over this issue with you many, many, many times, and I have always focused on the very clear English of the 1st Amendment; Congress shall make no law.....abridging the freedom of speech. I have many, many, many times noted that Barry's lawyers argued that they had the right to ban books and movies. I have many, many, many times noted that McCain-Feingold prohibited certain political advertising criticizing Beltway politicians, i.e. SPEECH, for months before an election. And you have ALWAYS ignored all of that and bleated about "speech being money." So either respond to the points I make, or get stuffed. I should have my head examined. You really should, seriously. What kind of wackjob would spread years of lies on behalf of a serial felon/ rapist?

Jackhole. Hey, here's great news about Obama-care. Maybe no one will be able to apply for it. It’s easier to apply for green card than Obamacare Application for new health exchanges includes 61 pages of instructions http://www.marketwat...care-2013-04-04

I have been over this issue with you many, many, many times, and I have always focused on the very clear English of the 1st Amendment; Congress shall make no law.....abridging the freedom of speech.I have many, many, many times noted that Barry's lawyers argued that they had the right to ban books and movies.I have many, many, many times noted that McCain-Feingold prohibited certain political advertising criticizing Beltway politicians, i.e. SPEECH, for months before an election.And you have ALWAYS ignored all of that and bleated about "speech being money."So either respond to the points I make, or get stuffed.I think I'd rather get stuffed.You're lucky the search function is not working.I would pull the quotes where you argued that speech is money in regards to Citizens United.Now you wanna sidetrack the issue by spewing some **** about books and movies.Hey, here's great news about Obama-care.Maybe no one will be able to apply for it. You wanna discuss that subject?Go start your own thread.

I have been over this issue with you many, many, many times, and I have always focused on the very clear English of the 1st Amendment; Congress shall make no law.....abridging the freedom of speech. I have many, many, many times noted that Barry's lawyers argued that they had the right to ban books and movies. I have many, many, many times noted that McCain-Feingold prohibited certain political advertising criticizing Beltway politicians, i.e. SPEECH, for months before an election. And you have ALWAYS ignored all of that and bleated about "speech being money." So either respond to the points I make, or get stuffed. I think I'd rather get stuffed. You're lucky the search function is not working. I would pull the quotes where you argued that speech is money in regards to Citizens United. Now you wanna sidetrack the issue by spewing some **** about books and movies. "Bulls***?" I've quoted Obama's own lawyers arguing for exactly that. Yeah, sure, reality as argued before the Supreme Court and reported in the conservative media are "bulls***." I love moonbat humor. You wanna discuss that subject? Go start your own thread. Oh my, so now you won't discuss Obama's wonderful health care plan? On top of refusing to discuss his great economy? Is there some new pressing micro-issue that's about to break?

Jackhole. What part of you don't get to decide the subject of this thread did you not understand, ****? She always gets touchy when I bring up the glorious, roaring Obama Economy. Gosh, even the liberal Washington Post realizes things suck. Today’s jobs report is a disaster. But why? Posted by Neil Irwin on April 5, 2013 at 9:24 amThis is a terrible, horrible, no-good, very bad jobs report. The 88,000 net jobs added in March, if that or a similar figure holds up through revisions, is a tragedy: Nearly four years into the economic recovery, with the unemployment rate still close to 8 percent, the nation recorded a month in which too few jobs were added to keep up with the growing American workforce (that number is more like 125,000). The headline read that the unemployment rate fell to 7.6 percent from 7.7 percent, but it was almost entirely for bad reasons. A whopping 496,000 people dropped out of the labor force, and 206,000 fewer people reported having a job, meaning that the proportion of Americans currently working actually ticked down, not up. http://www.washingto...pm_business_pop

She always gets touchy when I bring up the glorious, roaring Obama Economy. No, I get touchy when people like you ask me questions based on a false premise.How many times have you asked me "How's that roaring Obama economy going?"That question would presuppose the fact that I ever said that the economy was 'roaring', which of course I have not.(I readily admit that the recovery has been slow, and your party shares much of the blame for that. They have made it perfectly clear, that they have no interest in seeing the economy recover, or in seeing this president succeed. You root for Obama's failure as well, nevermind that people may suffer for it.)This of course is why you will never get an answer to that question, as many times as you demand it.Ironic that you call my one time question about John Fund a lie, when you yourself have repeatedly demanded that I answer a question that is based on a lie.Do you think that if you post a stupid smiley face after your snide remarks it makes you more likable?It doesn't.