Liberal Forum

Cannonpointer » 23 Jan 2024, 8:12 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 8:12 pm

We read your words, ***. You're asking us not to trust them, but rather to trust your "instincts."

We don't, for cause, you **** moron. You have, YOURSELF, assured us that you cannot distinguish between a man and a woman. You have gone even FURTHER, and derided us for insisting that we can tell the difference between a man and a woman. 

So, no, fruitcake. We do NOT trust your "instincts" in the matter. We trust your words: You cannot distinguish a male from a female. You have to take their word for it.

We read your words, ***. You're asking us not to trust them, but rather to trust your "instincts."

I have good reason to trust my instinct..

As you have good reason to condemn your own
 

R.Suave » 23 Jan 2024, 9:01 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 9:01 pm

And you **** the family pet...

That's none of your business chomo.
 

RedheadedStranger » 23 Jan 2024, 9:07 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 9:07 pm

That's none of your business chomo.

 

R.Suave » 23 Jan 2024, 9:04 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 9:04 pm

That's a mohel

No thats you - cuz you cut the sack off too. 
Simply for politics.  Deranged ****.
Murica is dying.
 

R.Suave » 23 Jan 2024, 9:03 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 9:03 pm

Stand in front of a mirror..

Slip your mumu off your shoulders.

Keep my body and my raiment out of your mind, sick ****. 

I don't need another fat girl making me part of her fantasy life, Little Feet. 
 
 

R.Suave » 23 Jan 2024, 9:06 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 9:06 pm

I have good reason to trust my instinct..

Oh, I will NOT confute you there, cultist. 

Your admitted incapacity to trust your eyes and your intellect in determining the gender of the unfortunate objects of your leering rather leaves you without any choice in the matter, ya **** freak show.    

My God, if not for your instincts, you'd be forced to flip a **** coin!  

Heads, you GET head. Tails - oh, no, not TAILS again...      
 
 

RedheadedStranger » 23 Jan 2024, 8:17 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 8:17 pm

 
Based on the defensive nature of your reply, I'm gonna stick with my original assessment.

You paid to have sex with a chick with a dick... but only once.

It **** him in the *** hard?   
 
 

RedheadedStranger » 23 Jan 2024, 6:49 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 6:49 pm

Did Rico just admit to paying for sex with a tranny?

It sure sounds like that's what he did.

I knew something was off about that guy but I didn't think it was that bad.

*No laughing emoji on this post because that **** isn't funny.

Did Rico just admit to paying for sex with a tranny?

That’s what it sounded like to me.

@R. Suave  

BuckNaked » 23 Jan 2024, 8:52 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 8:52 pm

What’s extreme bout it?

Absolutely nothing, unless you're an ultra-progressive numbskull. Not my headline.
 

Huey » 24 Jan 2024, 5:51 am » wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2024, 5:51 am

That’s what it sounded like to me.

@R. Suave

To you.

To you, Grifty the Rapist "sounds" sane.

You're morons.
 

R.Suave » 24 Jan 2024, 7:17 am » wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2024, 7:17 am

To you.

To you, Grifty the Rapist "sounds" sane.

You're morons.

Hey, if paying for tranny is your bag that's your business.

As far as Trump (who has never been convicted of rape in a criminal trial) you have not been paying attention to my posts or you are just being dishonest.  Trump may be in the early stages of whatever is afflicting your guy, Joe Biden.  Which I posted after Haley/Pelosi confusion.

Remember this post.  But then again, lately, you have been acting like YOU are in those early stages.  

 
 

Huey » 24 Jan 2024, 7:31 am » wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2024, 7:31 am

Hey, if paying for tranny is your bag that's your business.

As far as Trump (who has never been convicted of rape in a criminal trial) you have not been paying attention to my post or you are just being dishonest.  Trump may be in the early stages of whatever is afflicting your guy, Joe Biden.  Which I posted after Haley/Pelosi confusion.

Remember this post.  But then again, lately, you have been acting like YOU are in those early stages.

Bad open, Moron.

Try again.

R.Suave » 24 Jan 2024, 7:32 am » wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2024, 7:32 am

Bad open, Moron.

Try again.

 

Nope.  But the next time you post the same BS I you will be lying.  If you live by strike thru you die by strike thru.  No more reposting without being paid greenies. 

Huey » 24 Jan 2024, 7:36 am » wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2024, 7:36 am

Nope.  But the next time you post the same BS I you will be lying.  If you live by strike thru you die by strike thru.  No more reposting without being paid greenies.

Another bad open, Tiny...

R.Suave » 24 Jan 2024, 7:37 am » wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2024, 7:37 am

Another bad open, Tiny...

 

Ok, you are a liar.  

Unless I see 500 greenies no repost for you and this portion of the discussion is over.  

Huey » 24 Jan 2024, 7:44 am » wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2024, 7:44 am

Ok, you are a liar.  

Unless I see 500 greenies no repost for you and this portion of the discussion is over.

not wasting my time, ******.
 

R.Suave » 24 Jan 2024, 7:47 am » wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2024, 7:47 am

not wasting my time, ******.
 

 

^^^^^^^^^
And the meltdown continues.      
 

Huey » 24 Jan 2024, 7:48 am » wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2024, 7:48 am

^^^^^^^^^
And the meltdown continues.    

Your Issue has been flaring up again.

R.Suave » 23 Jan 2024, 6:17 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 6:17 pm

No...it isn't.

please don't presume...

Much obliged.

then I guess you're owed a response...

It's cold in the Yukon at this time of year.

Acknowledge that I answered your question.

let's consider the "principle"

On that basis all Church income and real estate should be taxed, and anyone yapping that **** in the public sphere should expect no further "courtesies"
 

It's not a presumption...it is a scientific fact.  Google is your friend.

Churches are 501c3 entities.  Unless you want to tax the income and real estate holding of ALL 501c3 entities you will run afoul of US discrimination law.  Additionally, the overwhelming majority of money coming into a 501c3 is the result of gifts (in the case of a church...tithes and offerings).  Under US tax law, gifts...regardless of the size of the gift...is never taxable to the recipient.  It may be taxable to the person/entity giving the gift.  Apparently you are too **** stupid to know that

Oh...you did answer the question.  It was (in my opinion) an utterly inane answer that had absolutely no relation to the basis of the question...but it was an answer.
 

ConsRule » 24 Jan 2024, 8:05 am » wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2024, 8:05 am

It's not a presumption...it is a scientific fact.  Google is your friend.

Churches are 501c3 entities.  Unless you want to tax the income and real estate holding of ALL 501c3 entities you will run afoul of US discrimination law.  Additionally, the overwhelming majority of money coming into a 501c3 is the result of gifts (in the case of a church...tithes and offerings).  Under US tax law, gifts...regardless of the size of the gift...is never taxable to the recipient.  It may be taxable to the person/entity giving the gift.  Apparently you are too **** stupid to know that

Oh...you did answer the question.  It was (in my opinion) an utterly inane answer that had absolutely no relation to the basis of the question...but it was an answer.

Google is your friend.

You're a **** idiot, coward.

Churches are 501c3 entities

This is "circular reasoning",, idiot.

They are so classified to accommodate "fantasy".

  It was (in my opinion) an utterly inane answer that had absolutely no relation to the basis of the question...but it was an answer.

Now you can empathize.