Liberal Forum

BuckNaked » 23 Oct 2025, 11:40 am » wrote: ↑

23 Oct 2025, 11:40 am

That’s not whining its not complaining it’s fact da truth can you handle it?   

What does bleat mean in slang?
whiningly complain
verb. talk whiningly. complain, kick, kvetch, plain, quetch, sound off. express complaints, discontent, displeasure, or unhappiness.

Blackvegetable » 23 Oct 2025, 3:48 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Oct 2025, 3:48 pm

Your opinion diverges materially from that of people who read.

And you can't even tell me what informs it

BuckNaked » 23 Oct 2025, 3:53 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Oct 2025, 3:53 pm

by it do you mean my opinion?   Well cnn, msnbc, npr, i take it all in

Blackvegetable » Today, 9:31 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:31 am

MAGA is sold as a Virility Counterpoint to Decadent Non-Binary Enabling Demonrat Filth. Is this in spite, or because, of the fact that its leader spends more time on his hair and makeup than Jeanine Pirro?

We have investigated this contradiction in the groundbreaking study The Tom of Finlandization of MAGA...available here..

https://liberalforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=91975

In this volume we intend to move from the abstract to a more granual approach by taking a look at the actual Men of MAGA - a gallery of those who lead its battles on the ground....

In anticipation of potential complaints, this will not include provocative images of Scott Bessent.

Blackvegetable » 23 Oct 2025, 5:51 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Oct 2025, 5:51 pm

So why do you post like a FOX sock puppet?

BuckNaked » 23 Oct 2025, 7:30 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Oct 2025, 7:30 pm

to get under snowflakes skin

Blackvegetable » 23 Oct 2025, 9:31 am » wrote: ↑

23 Oct 2025, 9:31 am

MAGA is sold as a Virility Counterpoint to Decadent Non-Binary Enabling Demonrat Filth. Is this in spite, or because, of the fact that its leader spends more time on his hair and makeup than Jeanine Pirro?

We have investigated this contradiction in the groundbreaking study The Tom of Finlandization of MAGA...available here..

https://liberalforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=91975

In this volume we intend to move from the abstract to a more granual approach by taking a look at the actual Men of MAGA - a gallery of those who lead its battles on the ground....

In anticipation of potential complaints, this will not include provocative images of Scott Bessent.

RebelGator » 24 Oct 2025, 6:57 am » wrote: ↑

24 Oct 2025, 6:57 am

Who do you have for November on your Men of Maga Calendar, Fruitcake?

Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 9:31 am » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 9:31 am

MAGA is sold as a Virility Counterpoint to Decadent Non-Binary Enabling Demonrat Filth. Is this in spite, or because, of the fact that its leader spends more time on his hair and makeup than Jeanine Pirro?

We have investigated this contradiction in the groundbreaking study The Tom of Finlandization of MAGA...available here..

https://liberalforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=91975

In this volume we intend to move from the abstract to a more granual approach by taking a look at the actual Men of MAGA - a gallery of those who lead its battles on the ground....

In anticipation of potential complaints, this will not include provocative images of Scott Bessent.

Let me prove how predictable you narcissists are. Watch this:

1. Phase 1: You will say that you answered it.
Phase 2: I will remind you of :"are these your words?" from yesterday and if "will" is future tense. 
Phase 3: You will deny that I showed you, because of your meltdown with my link provided...and then you will say "I didn't ask for a link."
Repeat

2. Your next move will be to claim that you answered it by giving your definition, to which I replied that isn't the question...etc...etc...blah...blah...blah..

3. You will also say that you answered through your non-answers. 

Moron.

Deal: If Veghead can prove that he answered the survivorship multiple choice question, as the question is written and asked, along with his defense of his answer, then I will agree to never come back for as long as I live. If he cannot, then he is out of here for a month. Additionally, his defense cannot be "Because it fits my definition." That is a claim, not a defense. He is to defend why. 

Exception: I will allow for an exception. If he loses, then I will allow him to stay if he answers it the way it is asked, along with his defense. However, he must do it immediately after the deal has been decided. Not 100 posts later. The very next post of his must be his answer/defense.

Blackvegetable » 24 Oct 2025, 6:49 am » wrote: ↑

24 Oct 2025, 6:49 am

By looking like an idiot?

Isn't that why you resent them in the first place?

BuckNaked » 24 Oct 2025, 10:35 am » wrote: ↑

24 Oct 2025, 10:35 am

I resent no one

Blackvegetable » 1 minute ago » wrote: ↑

1 minute ago

Then why play Idiot to "get under their skin"?

Let me prove how predictable you narcissists are. Watch this:

1. Phase 1: You will say that you answered it.
Phase 2: I will remind you of :"are these your words?" from yesterday and if "will" is future tense. 
Phase 3: You will deny that I showed you, because of your meltdown with my link provided...and then you will say "I didn't ask for a link."
Repeat

2. Your next move will be to claim that you answered it by giving your definition, to which I replied that isn't the question...etc...etc...blah...blah...blah..

3. You will also say that you answered through your non-answers. 

Moron.

Deal: If Veghead can prove that he answered the survivorship multiple choice question, as the question is written and asked, along with his defense of his answer, then I will agree to never come back for as long as I live. If he cannot, then he is out of here for a month. Additionally, his defense cannot be "Because it fits my definition." That is a claim, not a defense. He is to defend why. 

Exception: I will allow for an exception. If he loses, then I will allow him to stay if he answers it the way it is asked, along with his defense. However, he must do it immediately after the deal has been decided. Not 100 posts later. The very next post of his must be his answer/defense.

Blackvegetable » 23 Oct 2025, 9:31 am » wrote: ↑

23 Oct 2025, 9:31 am

MAGA is sold as a Virility Counterpoint to Decadent Non-Binary Enabling Demonrat Filth. Is this in spite, or because, of the fact that its leader spends more time on his hair and makeup than Jeanine Pirro?

We have investigated this contradiction in the groundbreaking study The Tom of Finlandization of MAGA...available here..

https://liberalforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=91975

In this volume we intend to move from the abstract to a more granual approach by taking a look at the actual Men of MAGA - a gallery of those who lead its battles on the ground....

In anticipation of potential complaints, this will not include provocative images of Scott Bessent.

TwoIfByTea » 24 Oct 2025, 11:49 am » wrote: ↑

24 Oct 2025, 11:49 am

Wow forget squirting coffee out my nose..

Im about 2 have an "Anyuerism" after reading all that

TwoIfByTea » 24 Oct 2025, 11:51 am » wrote: ↑

24 Oct 2025, 11:51 am

Here Im gonna throw ya one extra..

Heres Rudy Juiliani a press conference sweating off his own hair dye..

https://youtu.be/9drmVDt9Ef8?si=1eoSUr-dDAxLIlAa

Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 9:42 am » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 9:42 am

Hendrix made a similar remark in July: “Bro is at a chicken restaurant ordering his food. Would he like some watermelon and kool aid with that?” Hendrix was a communications assistant for Kansas’ Republican Attorney General Kris Kobach until Thursday.

He also said in the chat that, despite political differences, he’s drawn to Missouri’s Young Republican organization because “Missouri doesn’t like f--s.”
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/10/1 ... s-00592146


 
LADIES, PLEASE!
THE LINE STARTS BEHIND  @RebelGator

Let me prove how predictable you narcissists are. Watch this:

1. Phase 1: You will say that you answered it.
Phase 2: I will remind you of :"are these your words?" from yesterday and if "will" is future tense. 
Phase 3: You will deny that I showed you, because of your meltdown with my link provided...and then you will say "I didn't ask for a link."
Repeat

2. Your next move will be to claim that you answered it by giving your definition, to which I replied that isn't the question...etc...etc...blah...blah...blah..

3. You will also say that you answered through your non-answers. 

Moron.

Deal: If Veghead can prove that he answered the survivorship multiple choice question, as the question is written and asked, along with his defense of his answer, then I will agree to never come back for as long as I live. If he cannot, then he is out of here for a month. Additionally, his defense cannot be "Because it fits my definition." That is a claim, not a defense. He is to defend why. 

Exception: I will allow for an exception. If he loses, then I will allow him to stay if he answers it the way it is asked, along with his defense. However, he must do it immediately after the deal has been decided. Not 100 posts later. The very next post of his must be his answer/defense.