Eva Longoria Gets Smacked Down - What a shame :lol:

[Oldstyle]

yes, that's what it's ALL about.

Ignorant tool.

Is it any part of what it's about? Be specific and tell us, do you expect that others should be forced to pay for you? Yes or no?

I promise that I personally would not receive a single dime. It's not about paying for birth control (although I support it. It's dumbfuckery not to realize that the overall cost of medical care would drop signifigantly.) It's about woman determing for themselves. Not letting a stuffed suit do it.

Talking about strawman!

Tony Campallo (whoever the heck he is) could have used the single and non-offensive word CARE instead of the offensive three words he did use. But why be simple and normal when low-brow and low-IQ do-gooders (who probably have never done a day of volunteer work in their lives) prefer the profane?


BTW, I am an equal opportunity opponent of profanity. I dislike it just as much when used by conservative posters.

He's a Christian speaker. And you just proved his point.

Let me see if I've got this straight...

The people who want to reelect someone who has no plan to fix the economy and a record of abject failure are the smart ones...

...and the people who want to vote for the guy who not only has a plan to fix the economy but also has an incredibly successful track record at fixing broken things are the dummies?

Well all right then!!!

I'm laughing at the following: Has a plan. Successful track record. Fixing things.

Mitt Romney has his five point plan to fix the economy. Barack Obama's only "plan" is raising taxes on rich people which gets his base all fired up but isn't going to do diddly to make the economy grow.

Even Bill Clinton admitted that Mitt's "record" was impressive. Now let's contrast that with the Presidents. What impressive thing has Barry done since leaving Harvard Law School all those years ago?

Mitt Romney was the guy the US turned to in order to save the Salt Lake Olympics. Why? Because he's good at fixing things that are broken. Barry's good at making excuses for why he CAN'T fix things.

 

[Cheddarmelon]

Is it any part of what it's about? Be specific and tell us, do you expect that others should be forced to pay for you? Yes or no?

I promise that I personally would not receive a single dime. It's not about paying for birth control (although I support it. It's dumbfuckery not to realize that the overall cost of medical care would drop signifigantly.) It's about woman determing for themselves. Not letting a stuffed suit do it.



He's a Christian speaker. And you just proved his point.

Let me see if I've got this straight...

The people who want to reelect someone who has no plan to fix the economy and a record of abject failure are the smart ones...

...and the people who want to vote for the guy who not only has a plan to fix the economy but also has an incredibly successful track record at fixing broken things are the dummies?

Well all right then!!!

I'm laughing at the following: Has a plan. Successful track record. Fixing things.

Mitt Romney has his five point plan to fix the economy. Barack Obama's only "plan" is raising taxes on rich people which gets his base all fired up but isn't going to do diddly to make the economy grow.

Even Bill Clinton admitted that Mitt's "record" was impressive. Now let's contrast that with the Presidents. What impressive thing has Barry done since leaving Harvard Law School all those years ago?

Mitt Romney was the guy the US turned to in order to save the Salt Lake Olympics. Why? Because he's good at fixing things that are broken. Barry's good at making excuses for why he CAN'T fix things.

stilll laughing.

 

[eflatminor]

"No, you can't have an abortion.

Who can't have an abortion? Who is being denied one? No one, that's who.



Show me two people who perform EXACTLY the same at their jobs, work exactly the same hours, produce exactly the same output, have exactly the same attendance, and interact with colleagues and customers in exactly the same manner...but are paid differently because one is a female.

And back it up with a link please.



Ah, so you do believe in stealing money from other people to pay for you. So when you stated "I promise that I personally would not receive a single dime", you were saying you would never avail yourself of the services provided under a publically funded medical plan? I call bullshit.



Stealing from productive citizens because you think it might mean less may be stolen from them at some point in the future...got it.

don't fuck around, you know what your chosen party stands for.

My party is the Libertarian party. We stand against the idea of forcing some men to labor on the behalf of others. We stand against slavery. Pretty much the antithesis of the history and current platform of your party.

you're insane. Simply insane. Pretending that the alternative isn't restriction of womens rights?

you're out of you're fucking gourd.

And yet you cannot point to a specific "restriction of womens" rights. Speak volumes.

Well, since you're not able to identify a specific example, why don't you tell us what rights women have that men don't? What are these "women's rights"? List them please.

 

[Cheddarmelon]

Who can't have an abortion? Who is being denied one? No one, that's who.



Show me two people who perform EXACTLY the same at their jobs, work exactly the same hours, produce exactly the same output, have exactly the same attendance, and interact with colleagues and customers in exactly the same manner...but are paid differently because one is a female.

And back it up with a link please.



Ah, so you do believe in stealing money from other people to pay for you. So when you stated "I promise that I personally would not receive a single dime", you were saying you would never avail yourself of the services provided under a publically funded medical plan? I call bullshit.



Stealing from productive citizens because you think it might mean less may be stolen from them at some point in the future...got it.



My party is the Libertarian party. We stand against the idea of forcing some men to labor on the behalf of others. We stand against slavery. Pretty much the antithesis of the history and current platform of your party.

you're insane. Simply insane. Pretending that the alternative isn't restriction of womens rights?

you're out of you're fucking gourd.

And yet you cannot point to a specific "restriction of womens" rights. Speak volumes.

Well, since you're not able to identify a specific example, why don't you tell us what rights women have that men don't? What are these "women's rights"? List them please.

I think we'd probably save time if we just get to the point of the conversation where it denigrates to name calling. No matter what we say between here and then, we will NOT agree on anything.

 

[eflatminor]

you're insane. Simply insane. Pretending that the alternative isn't restriction of womens rights?

you're out of you're fucking gourd.

And yet you cannot point to a specific "restriction of womens" rights. Speak volumes.

Well, since you're not able to identify a specific example, why don't you tell us what rights women have that men don't? What are these "women's rights"? List them please.

I think we'd probably save time if we just get to the point of the conversation where it denigrates to name calling. No matter what we say between here and then, we will NOT agree on anything.

So you can't name a single "woman's right" either? Damn! You sure do a lot of bitching about a subject in which you cannot site a single specific egregiousness example nor identify a single right you claim is being violated.

This somewhat weakens the case you're attempting to make. Good luck with all that.

 

[Cheddarmelon]

And yet you cannot point to a specific "restriction of womens" rights. Speak volumes.

Well, since you're not able to identify a specific example, why don't you tell us what rights women have that men don't? What are these "women's rights"? List them please.

I think we'd probably save time if we just get to the point of the conversation where it denigrates to name calling. No matter what we say between here and then, we will NOT agree on anything.

So you can't name a single "woman's right" either? Damn! You sure do a lot of bitching about a subject in which you cannot site a single specific egregiousness example nor identify a single right you claim is being violated.

This somewhat weakens the case you're attempting to make. Good luck with all that.

Braindead hicks can't understand it anyway. It would be like presenting you with Newtonian physics. Or personal hygeine. Stuff like that.

 

[Conservative]

I think we'd probably save time if we just get to the point of the conversation where it denigrates to name calling. No matter what we say between here and then, we will NOT agree on anything.

So you can't name a single "woman's right" either? Damn! You sure do a lot of bitching about a subject in which you cannot site a single specific egregiousness example nor identify a single right you claim is being violated.

This somewhat weakens the case you're attempting to make. Good luck with all that.

Braindead hicks can't understand it anyway. It would be like presenting you with Newtonian physics. Or personal hygeine. Stuff like that.

translation: You cannot name a single woman's right that has been restricted.

 

[eflatminor]

I think we'd probably save time if we just get to the point of the conversation where it denigrates to name calling. No matter what we say between here and then, we will NOT agree on anything.

So you can't name a single "woman's right" either? Damn! You sure do a lot of bitching about a subject in which you cannot site a single specific egregiousness example nor identify a single right you claim is being violated.

This somewhat weakens the case you're attempting to make. Good luck with all that.

Braindead hicks can't understand it anyway. It would be like presenting you with Newtonian physics. Or personal hygeine. Stuff like that.

Well, you always have ad hominem attacks, the go-to retort from just about every Lefty on this board. Well done!

 

[eflatminor]

So you can't name a single "woman's right" either? Damn! You sure do a lot of bitching about a subject in which you cannot site a single specific egregiousness example nor identify a single right you claim is being violated.

This somewhat weakens the case you're attempting to make. Good luck with all that.

Braindead hicks can't understand it anyway. It would be like presenting you with Newtonian physics. Or personal hygeine. Stuff like that.

translation: You cannot name a single woman's right that has been restricted.

 

[Cheddarmelon]

So you can't name a single "woman's right" either? Damn! You sure do a lot of bitching about a subject in which you cannot site a single specific egregiousness example nor identify a single right you claim is being violated.

This somewhat weakens the case you're attempting to make. Good luck with all that.

Braindead hicks can't understand it anyway. It would be like presenting you with Newtonian physics. Or personal hygeine. Stuff like that.

translation: You cannot name a single woman's right that has been restricted.

that WILL be, you dumb fuck.

 

[Conservative]

Braindead hicks can't understand it anyway. It would be like presenting you with Newtonian physics. Or personal hygeine. Stuff like that.

translation: You cannot name a single woman's right that has been restricted.

that WILL be, you dumb fuck.

name them, dip shit.

Or would you rather just run around in circles, screaming 'BINDERS... BINDERS!!!!!!!!!!"

 

[eflatminor]

Braindead hicks can't understand it anyway. It would be like presenting you with Newtonian physics. Or personal hygeine. Stuff like that.

translation: You cannot name a single woman's right that has been restricted.

that WILL be, you dumb fuck.

Okay, name some of those women's rights that you believe will be restricted.

Also, can you post a photo of the crystal ball through which you can predict the future and see into the hearts and minds of other men? That would be so cool!

 

[Cheddarmelon]

So you can't name a single "woman's right" either? Damn! You sure do a lot of bitching about a subject in which you cannot site a single specific egregiousness example nor identify a single right you claim is being violated.

This somewhat weakens the case you're attempting to make. Good luck with all that.

Braindead hicks can't understand it anyway. It would be like presenting you with Newtonian physics. Or personal hygeine. Stuff like that.

Well, you always have ad hominem attacks, the go-to retort from just about every Lefty on this board. Well done!

Pay equity. Focus: America's gender wage gap | The Economist
abortion. Romney Reiterates: 'I'm A Pro-Life Candidate' (and he's vacilated between hard line and more moderate. A bunch of rethuglicans even include incest and rape as unacceptable reasons.)


But please go ahead and do your usual right wing thing of deny deny deny. I don't give a flying fuck if you agree with me.

 

[Cheddarmelon]

translation: You cannot name a single woman's right that has been restricted.

that WILL be, you dumb fuck.

Okay, name some of those women's rights that you believe will be restricted.

Also, can you post a photo of the crystal ball through which you can predict the future and see into the hearts and minds of other men? That would be so cool!

Oh, for God's sake. When you support mysoginistic redneck policies, you're a redneck.

 

[Conservative]

I would definitely smack this down

 

[eflatminor]

Braindead hicks can't understand it anyway. It would be like presenting you with Newtonian physics. Or personal hygeine. Stuff like that.

Well, you always have ad hominem attacks, the go-to retort from just about every Lefty on this board. Well done!

Pay equity. Focus: America's gender wage gap | The Economist
abortion. Romney Reiterates: 'I'm A Pro-Life Candidate' (and he's vacilated between hard line and more moderate. A bunch of rethuglicans even include incest and rape as unacceptable reasons.)


But please go ahead and do your usual right wing thing of deny deny deny. I don't give a flying fuck if you agree with me.

You can post a link, wonderful. Doesn't support your argument in any way and it's a far cry from listing the denied rights you're bitching about, but hey, it's a start.

Now tell us exactly how you would have the government determine how much an employer pays his people. But first, show us two people that perform their jobs EXACTLY the same. While you ponder, consider this: If women by and large performed exactly as their male counterparts but worked for less, why would any employer every hire a man?

Now let's turn to Romney. He's pro life. Okay. And? Use that crystal ball of yours and tell us exactly what rights a Romney presidency is going to deny.

 

[eflatminor]

that WILL be, you dumb fuck.

Okay, name some of those women's rights that you believe will be restricted.

Also, can you post a photo of the crystal ball through which you can predict the future and see into the hearts and minds of other men? That would be so cool!

Oh, for God's sake. When you support mysoginistic redneck policies, you're a redneck.

When the first ad hominem attack fails miserably, double down! Wonderful debating skills you posses...

 

[Cheddarmelon]

Well, you always have ad hominem attacks, the go-to retort from just about every Lefty on this board. Well done!

Pay equity. Focus: America's gender wage gap | The Economist
abortion. Romney Reiterates: 'I'm A Pro-Life Candidate' (and he's vacilated between hard line and more moderate. A bunch of rethuglicans even include incest and rape as unacceptable reasons.)


But please go ahead and do your usual right wing thing of deny deny deny. I don't give a flying fuck if you agree with me.

You can post a link, wonderful. Doesn't support your argument in any way and it's a far cry from listing the denied rights you're bitching about, but hey, it's a start.

Now tell us exactly how you would have the government determine how much an employer pays his people. But first, show us two people that perform their jobs EXACTLY the same. While you ponder, consider this: If women by and large performed exactly as their male counterparts but worked for less, why would any employer every hire a man?

Now let's turn to Romney. He's pro life. Okay. And? Use that crystal ball of yours and tell us exactly what rights a Romney presidency is going to deny.

This is my point. It doesn't matter if it's in front of you, you'll deny, deny deny.

I am NOT going to waste my time trying to help you get past your stupidity. It is a waste.

 

[eflatminor]

Pay equity. Focus: America's gender wage gap | The Economist
abortion. Romney Reiterates: 'I'm A Pro-Life Candidate' (and he's vacilated between hard line and more moderate. A bunch of rethuglicans even include incest and rape as unacceptable reasons.)


But please go ahead and do your usual right wing thing of deny deny deny. I don't give a flying fuck if you agree with me.

You can post a link, wonderful. Doesn't support your argument in any way and it's a far cry from listing the denied rights you're bitching about, but hey, it's a start.

Now tell us exactly how you would have the government determine how much an employer pays his people. But first, show us two people that perform their jobs EXACTLY the same. While you ponder, consider this: If women by and large performed exactly as their male counterparts but worked for less, why would any employer every hire a man?

Now let's turn to Romney. He's pro life. Okay. And? Use that crystal ball of yours and tell us exactly what rights a Romney presidency is going to deny.

This is my point. It doesn't matter if it's in front of you, you'll deny, deny deny.

I am NOT going to waste my time trying to help you get past your stupidity. It is a waste.

I deny nothing. I'm still waiting for you to list a specific denied right and to tell us exactly why it's a problem. You have not stepped up there pal.

Geez, for as much bitching as you're doing, one would think you could articulate your complaints. You whine that rights are or somehow will be denied, but you can't provide a single example or even list these so called "women's rights".

It's as though you're just looking for something to bitch about but don't want anyone to actually question the specifics. That's just sad for you but frankly, entertaining for the rest of us. Again, good luck with all that.

p.s. Way to get in that last ad hominem. Third time's a charm!

 

[Cheddarmelon]

You can post a link, wonderful. Doesn't support your argument in any way and it's a far cry from listing the denied rights you're bitching about, but hey, it's a start.

Now tell us exactly how you would have the government determine how much an employer pays his people. But first, show us two people that perform their jobs EXACTLY the same. While you ponder, consider this: If women by and large performed exactly as their male counterparts but worked for less, why would any employer every hire a man?

Now let's turn to Romney. He's pro life. Okay. And? Use that crystal ball of yours and tell us exactly what rights a Romney presidency is going to deny.

This is my point. It doesn't matter if it's in front of you, you'll deny, deny deny.

I am NOT going to waste my time trying to help you get past your stupidity. It is a waste.

I deny nothing. I'm still waiting for you to list a specific denied right and to tell us exactly why it's a problem. You have not stepped up there pal.

Geez, for as much bitching as you're doing, one would think you could articulate your complaints. You whine that rights are or somehow will be denied, but you can't provide a single example or even list these so called "women's rights".

It's as though you're just looking for something to bitch about but don't want anyone to actually question the specifics. That's just sad for you but frankly, entertaining for the rest of us. Again, good luck with all that.

I think your mindless misogyny speaks for itself. I have nothing further to add.