Kudos for tRump again?

User avatar
By Mrkelly
16 May 2025 2:17 pm in No Holds Barred Political Forum
1 3 4 5 6 7 11
User avatar
murdock
20 May 2025 4:47 pm
User avatar
FLAGRANT HOMOSEXUAL, CHILD DANGER
6,681 posts
Cannonpointer » 20 May 2025, 4:28 pm » wrote: Wait, wait. You queerly WHAT?

LOL! Typos are deadly! I was trying to type Mr queerly!
User avatar
jerra b
20 May 2025 4:57 pm
User avatar
      
14,654 posts
Cannonpointer » 20 May 2025, 4:27 pm » wrote: I never denied there were repuke billionaires, child. You're in a different argument.

I was just surprised when you informed the board that Soros and Gates and Buffet and Turner and Hoffman and Hastings and Sandberg et al are repukes.

I am always delighted to learn new things from people who think before they speak pout.
I never mentioned them. congress is protecting billionaires at the expense of non millionaires, the poorer one is the more affected they will be by tax cuts for the super wealthy.

 non republicans getting tax cuts is not why congress is cutting taxes for the rich, it is for rich republicans who donate to republicans. billionaire democats might get tax breaks but that is not the objective.-----------------------------------///////////////////////////////////////

The richest 1 percent have more wealth than the bottom 95 percent of the world’s population put together, new Oxfam analysis of UBS data reveals today ahead of the annual UN High-Level General Debate.Billionaires are exerting new levels of control over economies, with a billionaire either running or the principal shareholder of more than a third of the world’s top 50 corporations. The combined market capitalization of these corporations is $13.3 trillion.-================//////

so 95 per cent of money will be taxed at lower rates, that would be billions of untaxed money that could have gone into the revenue. so when they cry the country is broke don't come running to me.

 
 
User avatar
jerra b
20 May 2025 5:02 pm
User avatar
      
14,654 posts
Cannonpointer » 20 May 2025, 4:27 pm » wrote: I never denied there were repuke billionaires, child. You're in a different argument.

I was just surprised when you informed the board that Soros and Gates and Buffet and Turner and Hoffman and Hastings and Sandberg et al are repukes.

I am always delighted to learn new things from people who think before they speak pout.

why would congress protect billionaire democrats?
User avatar
jerra b
20 May 2025 5:08 pm
User avatar
      
14,654 posts
Cannonpointer » 20 May 2025, 4:19 pm » wrote: Has Oprah encountered any unfairness? Are you projecting racism onto congress?

maybe are you a democrat? will be a question on next years tax form.
User avatar
Cannonpointer
20 May 2025 5:51 pm
User avatar
98% Macho Man
98% Macho Man
46,762 posts
murdock » 20 May 2025, 4:47 pm » wrote: LOL! Typos are deadly! I was trying to type Mr queerly!
Image   Image   Image  


I knew that. I'm just an arsehole. :LOL:
When you complain, ur friends roll their eyes and ur enemies rejoice

"Because I SAY I am" is a todler's tantrum, not "science"

You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.

Who cuts off your dick is not a friend

An opinion you won't defend is not your own

Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe

When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge

If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
User avatar
Cannonpointer
20 May 2025 5:57 pm
User avatar
98% Macho Man
98% Macho Man
46,762 posts
jerrab » 20 May 2025, 4:57 pm » wrote: I never mentioned them. congress is protecting billionaires at the expense of non millionaires, the poorer one is the more affected they will be by tax cuts for the super wealthy.
Well no ****, and also gosh. That sounds downright bipartisan when ya talk about it in adult terms.

And yes, you DID mention them, each and every one of them - categorically. If you ponder the meaning of that word, you will see the truth of my observation.
jerrab » 20 May 2025, 4:57 pm » wrote:  non republicans getting tax cuts is not why congress is cutting taxes for the rich, it is for rich republicans who donate to republicans. billionaire democats might get tax breaks but that is not the objective.-----------------------------------///////////////////////////////////////
Damn - and you were doing so well for half a minute there. You don't think Soros has any influence with repukes? Do you have any idea who Scott Bessent is?
jerrab » 20 May 2025, 4:57 pm » wrote: The richest 1 percent have more wealth than the bottom 95 percent of the world’s population put together, new Oxfam analysis of UBS data reveals today ahead of the annual UN High-Level General Debate.Billionaires are exerting new levels of control over economies, with a billionaire either running or the principal shareholder of more than a third of the world’s top 50 corporations. The combined market capitalization of these corporations is $13.3 trillion.-================//////
Gosh. That sounds like an oligarchy.Bet fellas THAT rich transcend party politics. They probably laugh at people who think democ rats are less susceptible to influence than repukes.

Here's a query for ya to study on. How come that statistic you just shared wasn't altered when the dems were in charge? Take your time. Break it down. Help me to understand.
jerrab » 20 May 2025, 4:57 pm » wrote: so 95 per cent of money will be taxed at lower rates, that would be billions of untaxed money that could have gone into the revenue. so when they cry the country is broke don't come running to me.
That wasn't on my to do list, son. :)
When you complain, ur friends roll their eyes and ur enemies rejoice

"Because I SAY I am" is a todler's tantrum, not "science"

You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.

Who cuts off your dick is not a friend

An opinion you won't defend is not your own

Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe

When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge

If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
User avatar
Cannonpointer
20 May 2025 5:59 pm
User avatar
98% Macho Man
98% Macho Man
46,762 posts
jerrab » 20 May 2025, 5:08 pm » wrote: maybe are you a democrat? will be a question on next years tax form.
I axed if Oprah had been mistreated, based on some silliness you posted, and your response is "maybe"?

:rofl:   :rofl:   :rofl:   :rofl:   :rofl:  
When you complain, ur friends roll their eyes and ur enemies rejoice

"Because I SAY I am" is a todler's tantrum, not "science"

You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.

Who cuts off your dick is not a friend

An opinion you won't defend is not your own

Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe

When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge

If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
User avatar
Cannonpointer
20 May 2025 6:02 pm
User avatar
98% Macho Man
98% Macho Man
46,762 posts
jerrab » 20 May 2025, 5:02 pm » wrote: why would congress protect billionaire democrats?
The answer is embedded in the question - English being a word-order language and all.

Because they are - look at the question - billionaires, THEN democ rats. They might also be right handed and red headed. But they are not being protected for being right handed, red headed, or democ rats.

What does that leave us with?

A) a sequestration bill pertaining to federal highway funds
B) the square root of pi
C) billionaires
D) 31 flavors of ice cream
 
When you complain, ur friends roll their eyes and ur enemies rejoice

"Because I SAY I am" is a todler's tantrum, not "science"

You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.

Who cuts off your dick is not a friend

An opinion you won't defend is not your own

Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe

When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge

If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
User avatar
murdock
20 May 2025 6:06 pm
User avatar
FLAGRANT HOMOSEXUAL, CHILD DANGER
6,681 posts
Cannonpointer » 20 May 2025, 5:51 pm » wrote: Image   Image   Image  

I knew that. I'm just an arsehole. Image
It's ok guys, he's one of us!
User avatar
murdock
20 May 2025 6:07 pm
User avatar
FLAGRANT HOMOSEXUAL, CHILD DANGER
6,681 posts
jerrab » 20 May 2025, 4:57 pm » wrote: I never mentioned them. congress is protecting billionaires at the expense of non millionaires, the poorer one is the more affected they will be by tax cuts for the super wealthy.

 non republicans getting tax cuts is not why congress is cutting taxes for the rich, it is for rich republicans who donate to republicans. billionaire democats might get tax breaks but that is not the objective.-----------------------------------///////////////////////////////////////

The richest 1 percent have more wealth than the bottom 95 percent of the world’s population put together, new Oxfam analysis of UBS data reveals today ahead of the annual UN High-Level General Debate.Billionaires are exerting new levels of control over economies, with a billionaire either running or the principal shareholder of more than a third of the world’s top 50 corporations. The combined market capitalization of these corporations is $13.3 trillion.-================//////

so 95 per cent of money will be taxed at lower rates, that would be billions of untaxed money that could have gone into the revenue. so when they cry the country is broke don't come running to me.
Was that in your latest daily media enema?
User avatar
murdock
20 May 2025 6:09 pm
User avatar
FLAGRANT HOMOSEXUAL, CHILD DANGER
6,681 posts
Mrkelly » 20 May 2025, 4:23 pm » wrote: Image  you do realize that you just said about yourself 

“But me queerly has always been a juvenile little bitch.”  Image  

poor stretch … can’t help doing a confession now and then  Image
Oh my, mr queerly is at it again, failing upwards like always...
Perhaps, and it's a big perhaps, you could pull the trump dick out of your *** and look up and learn (lol) what a "typo" is. Mr queerly, stop being such a demo *** just for one day!
 
User avatar
jerra b
20 May 2025 6:13 pm
User avatar
      
14,654 posts
Cannonpointer » 20 May 2025, 5:59 pm » wrote: I axed if Oprah had been mistreated, based on some silliness you posted, and your response is "maybe"?

Image   Image   Image   Image   Image

maybe next years tax form will have the question is your name oprah winfrey?
User avatar
jerra b
20 May 2025 6:15 pm
User avatar
      
14,654 posts
Cannonpointer » 20 May 2025, 6:02 pm » wrote: The answer is embedded in the question - English being a word-order language and all.

Because they are - look at the question - billionaires, THEN democ rats. They might also be right handed and red headed. But they are not being protected for being right handed, red headed, or democ rats.

What does that leave us with?

A) a sequestration bill pertaining to federal highway funds
B) the square root of pi
C) billionaires
D) 31 flavors of ice cream
why does congress want to protect billionaires?
 
User avatar
Cannonpointer
20 May 2025 6:16 pm
User avatar
98% Macho Man
98% Macho Man
46,762 posts
jerrab » 20 May 2025, 6:13 pm » wrote: maybe next years tax form will have the question is your name oprah winfrey?
That makes as much sense as your last couple of posts where her name came up.

Here's some info, and some advice:

Oprah is gonna be okay; She doesn't need your protection.
Take a Xanax. 
 
 
When you complain, ur friends roll their eyes and ur enemies rejoice

"Because I SAY I am" is a todler's tantrum, not "science"

You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.

Who cuts off your dick is not a friend

An opinion you won't defend is not your own

Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe

When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge

If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
User avatar
murdock
20 May 2025 6:17 pm
User avatar
FLAGRANT HOMOSEXUAL, CHILD DANGER
6,681 posts
jerrab » 20 May 2025, 6:13 pm » wrote: maybe next years tax form will have the question is your name oprah winfrey?

Perhaps, even more likely, it will have the question, "Are you a girlie man and is your name jerrab?" Hey, by the way, what could that b in your name stand for? Let's see, could it be, uhm, could it perhaps be, "BITCH"?
User avatar
Cannonpointer
20 May 2025 6:20 pm
User avatar
98% Macho Man
98% Macho Man
46,762 posts
jerrab » 20 May 2025, 6:15 pm » wrote: why does congress want to protect billionaires?
I have to admit, I have no idea why billionaires have more influence than working class people. It's a question that puzzled me whenI was 11 years old, and it puzzles me to this day. 

Anybody have any ideas on this? I'm happy hear them - I've scratched grooves in my noggin over this one. 
 
When you complain, ur friends roll their eyes and ur enemies rejoice

"Because I SAY I am" is a todler's tantrum, not "science"

You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.

Who cuts off your dick is not a friend

An opinion you won't defend is not your own

Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe

When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge

If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
User avatar
Mrkelly
20 May 2025 6:26 pm
User avatar
      
9,421 posts
murdock » 20 May 2025, 6:09 pm » wrote: Oh my, mr queerly is at it again, failing upwards like always...
Perhaps, and it's a big perhaps, you could pull the trump dick out of your *** and look up and learn (lol) what a "typo" is. Mr queerly, stop being such a demo *** just for one day!
:LOL:  Is that not what you said stretch?
Image
User avatar
murdock
20 May 2025 6:29 pm
User avatar
FLAGRANT HOMOSEXUAL, CHILD DANGER
6,681 posts
jerrab » 20 May 2025, 6:15 pm » wrote: why does congress want to protect billionaires?
Perhaps because they are leaders of industry, creating untold thousands of jobs and other opportunities for Americans everywhere? Ask yourself, "How many people does Microsoft employ?"  Well as of 2024 the answer was (according to the internet) was 228,000. That's a lot of tax revenue, money pouring into the economy, buying needed things, homes, vehicles, children's needs, etc. etc. etc. etc. That's a hell of an incentive right there. Unless of course like most leftist stains, you want this country to fail, you should support them as well. 
User avatar
murdock
20 May 2025 6:30 pm
User avatar
FLAGRANT HOMOSEXUAL, CHILD DANGER
6,681 posts
Mrkelly » 20 May 2025, 6:26 pm » wrote: Image  Is that not what you said stretch?
Good **** stain, good! When called out start spraying **** like everyone of you lying child molesting pieces of **** do!
User avatar
jerra b
20 May 2025 6:40 pm
User avatar
      
14,654 posts
Cannonpointer » 20 May 2025, 5:57 pm » wrote: Well no ****, and also gosh. That sounds downright bipartisan when ya talk about it in adult terms.

And yes, you DID mention them, each and every one of them - categorically. If you ponder the meaning of that word, you will see the truth of my observation.

Damn - and you were doing so well for half a minute there. You don't think Soros has any influence with repukes? Do you have any idea who Scott Bessent is?

Gosh. That sounds like an oligarchy.Bet fellas THAT rich transcend party politics. They probably laugh at people who think democ rats are less susceptible to influence than repukes.

Here's a query for ya to study on. How come that statistic you just shared wasn't altered when the dems were in charge? Take your time. Break it down. Help me to understand.

That wasn't on my to do list, son. Image
it has been that way for a long time, never changes. the only that changes are the tax  breaks for millionaires.
1 3 4 5 6 7 11

Who is online

In total there are 2830 users online :: 9 registered, 13 bots, and 2808 guests
Bots: NING, Disco, proximic, ADmantX, MQQBrowser, CriteoBot, curl/7, YandexBot, Mediapartners-Google, facebookexternalhit, Applebot, bingbot, Googlebot
Updated 4 minutes ago
© 2012-2026 Liberal Forum

Search