Liberal Forum

Cannonpointer » 10 Jan 2017 9:09 am » wrote:You don't have bill admitting on tape, hypocrite - and if bill were YOUR hero, you would screech for his innocence and belittle his detractors

Ummm....wrong, and I'm not now, nor have I ever defended **** behavior by Trump. Treating women with total disregard is plain ****. I'm just calling out Misty's hypocrisy. And, btw, ol' Billy never admitted anything and never will. That doesn't exonerate him, fyi.

as your kind (and i will wager, YOU) did for cosby until the evidence mounted too high to ignore.

Wage away - you'll lose. Never once did I take up for him.

I happen to agree with your side regarding bubba - but I still see through you like used Nutragena, fraudboy. Clinton is not on TAPE talking about walking up to people and grabbing their pussies.

Which means NOTHING.

Not that I don't admire and respect tRump for just walking up and grabbing them by the ******. It's no worse than my technique for getting laid. I whack a broad with the back of my hand, then tell her that's foreplay, and then ask if she's ready to ****, or wants more foreplay.

Yeah, right.

Termin8tor » 10 Jan 2017 9:21 am » wrote:
The stupid legalistic BS the left always babbles in defense of criminals.

He wasn't convicted of a single one of his felonies or impeachable acts, just like few mob figures are or countless other criminals get away with their crimes.
So freaking what?

There was enough evidence for a slam dunk case, psycho.


Wackjob.

Psst.

Hey, penis idolator.

I happen to agree that there's more than enough evidence to convince ME that bubba is a rape-o.

I just don't agree than everyone has to see it my way, you pecker-hound. And I know damned well if the same copious evidence existed against someone you LIKED, you would refuse to accept it, jockey snorkeler.

Cannonpointer » 10 Jan 2017 9:19 am » wrote: No, I do not.

But I DO know that there's a broad who is either lying, or whom he judged wrongly when he presumed to grope her on an airplane.

Who was refuted by a Brit witness/ non Trump supporter who said the woman aggressively came onto Trump, who was uninterested.

And I FURTHER know that if the complaint were against clinton, your response to it would be far more positive than is your response to it as it stands, against tRump.

You are no better than misty - and sadly, in this instance, no worse. You're both hypocrites and you're both partisan.

Liar. If all Clinton did was be aggressively forward, I'd be no more critical of him than I am of Trump.

If you think I'm as bad as little Miss Marxist, you truly are psychotic.


Or lying through your teeth, like you do so often.

Cannonpointer » 10 Jan 2017 9:24 am » wrote:Psst.

Hey, penis idolator.

I happen to agree that there's more than enough evidence to convince ME that bubba is a rape-o.

I just don't agree than everyone has to see it my way, you pecker-hound.

then your point about Clinton never being convicted is irrelevant, duuuh.

And I know damned well if the same copious evidence existed against someone you LIKED, you would refuse to accept it, jockey snorkeler.

Liar.

Cite a single time I've denied strong evidence put before me.

Termin8tor » 10 Jan 2017 9:14 am » wrote: Do you really think Trump walked up to women at random and did that?

Let's see how psychotic you really are, as if we don't know already.

Why did you leave out the bulk of my post, you dishonest psycho?

Termin8tor » 10 Jan 2017 9:27 am » wrote: Cite a single time I've denied strong evidence put before me.

http://liberalforum.net/viewtopic.php?f ... on+economy

Cannonpointer » 10 Jan 2017 9:31 am » wrote:

http://liberalforum.net/viewtopic.php?f ... on+economy

Evidence, Dim.

Not psychosis and lies. Evidence.

Do you have a mainstream source for your utterly stupid claim that Carter was better on the economy than Reagan?

Go ahead, do your obscene rant again.

Termin8tor » 10 Jan 2017 9:46 am » wrote:
Evidence, Dim.

Not psychosis and lies. Evidence.

Do you have a mainstream source for your utterly stupid claim that Carter was better on the economy than Reagan?

Go ahead, do your obscene rant again.

Forbes is mainstream, queer. Peer reviewed historians are mainstream, queer.

They agree the founders favored socialized health care - and you dismiss them.

You do not accept evidence.

Termin8tor » 10 Jan 2017 9:27 am » wrote: Cite a single time I've denied strong evidence put before me.

Cannonpointer » 10 Jan 2017 9:22 am » wrote: That socialized care is lawful would be pretty hard to argue against, since the guys who wrote the Constitution implemented it. It just makes no sense to pretend you know more about a document you've never personally read (and only even had quoted to you a few times by rush limbaugh), than did the folks who wrote it.

I have already linked the well-sourced Forbes article.

Here is the ACTUAL LAW, jackass: https://www.scribd.com/document/2909980 ... -July-1798

And here is the New American - an offshoot of the "leftist" John Birch Society, acknowledging that both Hamilton and Jefferson agreed the U.S. Government had the authority to institute single payer, socialized health care, you obnoxious spewbot:

http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/h ... -obamacare

Keep spewing, clown.

Cannonpointer » 10 Jan 2017 9:48 am » wrote:Forbes is mainstream, queer.

Why do you keep lying that an admitted leftist never carried in the actual magazine is "Forbes," psycho?

Cannonpointer » 10 Jan 2017 9:56 am » wrote:
Here is the ACTUAL LAW, jackass: https://www.scribd.com/document/2909980 ... -July-1798

That's what you call Single Payer, psycho?

Gosh, I never realized that every single American at that time was a disabled seaman.

You are utterly psychotic.

Cannonpointer » 10 Jan 2017 9:56 am » wrote: And here is the New American - an offshoot of the "leftist" John Birch Society......

Oh well gosh, then it must be true!

John Birch Society.

Keep spewing, clown.

Dim.

Termin8tor » 10 Jan 2017 1:15 pm » wrote:
Oh well gosh, then it must be true!

John Birch Society.


Dim.

That's it, bitch?

I give you the name of the Act, the TEXT of the Act, a link to conservative Forbes and a Link to the right wing New American, and you just spew?

Do you see what you really are, clem?

Trust me - the rest of us do.

You're a two faced blowhard who will not accept information which goes against what he WANTS to believe - no matter how valid the source.

Termin8tor » 10 Jan 2017 9:27 am » wrote:
Liar.

Cite a single time I've denied strong evidence put before me.

That's pretty funny from a sack of **** who refuses to accept Forbes and the New American as sources, if they do not reinforce his prejudices, pinhead.

Cannonpointer » 10 Jan 2017 9:56 am » wrote:
I have already linked the well-sourced Forbes article.

Here is the ACTUAL LAW, jackass: https://www.scribd.com/document/2909980 ... -July-1798

And here is the New American - an offshoot of the "leftist" John Birch Society, acknowledging that both Hamilton and Jefferson agreed the U.S. Government had the authority to institute single payer, socialized health care, you obnoxious spewbot:

http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/h ... -obamacare

Keep spewing, clown.

Clemtard refuses to accept two right wing sources plus the actual name and text of the act, with a link to that text.

If it does not agree with clemjob, the retard will pretend that Forbes and an offshoot of the john birch society are left wing and untrustworthy.

Termin8tor » 10 Jan 2017 10:01 am » wrote:
That's what you call Single Payer, psycho?

Gosh, I never realized that every single American at that time was a disabled seaman.

You are utterly psychotic.

Let's list the payers, retard.

1. The federal government.
2. ____________________

Go ahead, cretin.

Termin8tor » 10 Jan 2017 9:58 am » wrote:
Why do you keep lying that an admitted leftist never carried in the actual magazine is "Forbes," psycho?

Link?

Who are you babbling about, jackass? When I quote a source, you ***, I link the source - meaning the ACTUAL FORBES ARTICLE, moron.

Termin8tor » 10 Jan 2017 7:34 am » wrote: I'll bet almost every guy on the planet has done what I described, Dim.

Sorry Puss. Not every guy has walked up to a woman and grabbed her by the ******.

Termin8tor » 10 Jan 2017 7:34 am » wrote:It's sure as heck common among young people, although guys usually touch a girl's breasts or butt first.
What, you demand that every guy who tried to seduce you produce a written form for you to sign before things advanced?
Did he have to ask you,"May I" every step of the way?

Imbecile.

I'm not surprised that you think that grabbing a woman's genitals is part of seduction.
And we all know what you think about consent or the lack thereof.




The dozen or so women who accused Trump of touching them inappropriately were not seeking a relationship with Trump.
Most of them did not know him, or only knew him casually or as a business acquaintance.

Termin8tor » 10 Jan 2017 7:36 am » wrote:Really ironic given your years and years and years of telling lies in defense of an actual real-life rapist, psycho.

What LIES have a told you stupid jackass?
You've been repeating that **** for years but yet to name one of those many lies.

Termin8tor » 10 Jan 2017 8:17 am » wrote: Is there anything Obama hasn't badly bungled, Dim?

Yeah.
He failed to shut you up.