Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
LOL. Bigot Joe at it again. Arent you tired of repeating lies? The health insurance bit was shown to be a lie. Only idiots continue to repeat it. Oh, wait.
I think it's a matter of HOW they got Rich.
The Mormon got rich by screwing over working people, liquidating companies and cheating people out of their health coverage. (Poor Mrs. Soptic). And he capped off his cluelessness by saying shit like like "I like to be able to fire people" "corporations are people" and the wonderful "47% of you don't pay taxes, so fuck 'em."
Mrs. Clinton got rich because she and her husband did what every other ex-president does, monetized their service.
LOL. Bigot Joe at it again. Arent you tired of repeating lies? The health insurance bit was shown to be a lie. Only idiots continue to repeat it. Oh, wait.
The Clintons got rich through the usual Democratic channels: cronyism and crime.
Joe, it was a lie. She had insurance. ANd it wasnt a working stiff there.LOL. Bigot Joe at it again. Arent you tired of repeating lies? The health insurance bit was shown to be a lie. Only idiots continue to repeat it. Oh, wait.
The Clintons got rich through the usual Democratic channels: cronyism and crime.
How was it shown to be a lie. Romney's company looted GS Steel. Mrs. Soptic lost her insurance, and didn't get regular treatment. This is what Romney did. He got rich off the suffering of working people.
And then he was dumb enough to show his contempt for them when he was talking to his fellow rich douchebags. Fortunately, a working stiff was there to record it.
Joe, it was a lie. She had insurance. ANd it wasnt a working stiff there.
No wonder you hate Republicans. You are a low information scumbag.
OK so you admit you lied. That's something.Joe, it was a lie. She had insurance. ANd it wasnt a working stiff there.
No wonder you hate Republicans. You are a low information scumbag.
She didn't have GOOD insurance. she had crappy insurance and she didn't have it continuously.
I hate Republicans beause they were in charge when the economy crashed into the wall. You got everything you wanted, and it failed spectacularly.
OK so you admit you lied. That's something.
The truth is libs have gotten everything they wanted. And then whine when the economy crashes. We've had over 8 years of Democrat policies and gotten the worst recovery on record.
You lied. First you claimed she didnt have insurance. Then you claimed she did but it was crappy. Nowhere is there any proof that she died because of it. And Romney didnt have anything to do with it to begin with. Romney probably had never heard of her until some schmuck went trolling for the story.OK so you admit you lied. That's something.
No, bad insurance is just as bad as no insurance.
The Soptics had GOOD insurance through his union. Then Romney looted those jobs.
Romney killed Mrs. Soptic, but he probably didnt' care. She wasn't a Mormon.
The truth is libs have gotten everything they wanted. And then whine when the economy crashes. We've had over 8 years of Democrat policies and gotten the worst recovery on record.
Uh, no, they didn't. We'd have a $15.00 minimum wage, universal health coverage and strong labor laws if Democrats had their way. And the rich would pay through the nose in taxes. We don't.
Instead we got the Free Trade, bank deregulation, lax enforcement that Republicans alway said would bring prosperity.
Bush crashed the economy, and bankrupted the country fighting a war. Obama fixed some of it, not enough. Maybe it can't ever be fixed.
Compared to Obama's fuck ups, Bush is a God.Obama won because he was black, that's all.
Obama won because Bush fucked up the war, the economy, Katrina, 9/11, and just about everything else he touched.
That is all.
But go run his brother.
You lied. First you claimed she didnt have insurance. Then you claimed she did but it was crappy. Nowhere is there any proof that she died because of it. And Romney didnt have anything to do with it to begin with. Romney probably had never heard of her until some schmuck went trolling for the story.OK so you admit you lied. That's something.
No, bad insurance is just as bad as no insurance.
The Soptics had GOOD insurance through his union. Then Romney looted those jobs.
Romney killed Mrs. Soptic, but he probably didnt' care. She wasn't a Mormon.
The truth is libs have gotten everything they wanted. And then whine when the economy crashes. We've had over 8 years of Democrat policies and gotten the worst recovery on record.
Uh, no, they didn't. We'd have a $15.00 minimum wage, universal health coverage and strong labor laws if Democrats had their way. And the rich would pay through the nose in taxes. We don't.
Instead we got the Free Trade, bank deregulation, lax enforcement that Republicans alway said would bring prosperity.
Bush crashed the economy, and bankrupted the country fighting a war. Obama fixed some of it, not enough. Maybe it can't ever be fixed.
Democrats were among the strongest opponents of Obamacare. They could have passed 15/hr min wage, universal health care, etc in the first 2 years of Obama's reign. They didnt. What does that tell you?
I didnt use a logical fallacy, dipshit. I mocked you. Because your rhetoric is stupid. It is something picked up on the whackier libertarian websites and the darker sillier corners of the Internet. It isnt even debatable. It is merely name-calling,not an argument.ZOMG! The global-internationalists have taken over! Run!!Ahhhh the Presidential elections, the illusion of choice. Will it be the plutocracys' puppet A from the Pandercrats or will it be the plutocracys' puppet B from the Repandercans? The Globalists' agenda for America marches forward.
ZOG!! ZOG!! ZOG!!
Black Helicopters!! Black Helicopters!!
Ahhh a sophomoric retarded rebuttal. I can see I'm going to get a lot of childish logical fallacies from you, such as this sophomoric appeal to ridicule. You deny that American politicians in both major political parties are admitted globalists-internationalists? You deny that there's a plutocracy running America?
Yet another sophomoric response from a person that is only able to debate or argue using logical fallacies, such as appeals to ridicule, hasty generalizations, from Ignorance: because something is not known to be true, it is assumed to be false and then ridiculed.
Now get back under your rock.
You appear to be new here.I didnt use a logical fallacy, dipshit. I mocked you. Because your rhetoric is stupid. It is something picked up on the whackier libertarian websites and the darker sillier corners of the Internet. It isnt even debatable. It is merely name-calling,not an argument.ZOMG! The global-internationalists have taken over! Run!!
ZOG!! ZOG!! ZOG!!
Black Helicopters!! Black Helicopters!!
Ahhh a sophomoric retarded rebuttal. I can see I'm going to get a lot of childish logical fallacies from you, such as this sophomoric appeal to ridicule. You deny that American politicians in both major political parties are admitted globalists-internationalists? You deny that there's a plutocracy running America?
Yet another sophomoric response from a person that is only able to debate or argue using logical fallacies, such as appeals to ridicule, hasty generalizations, from Ignorance: because something is not known to be true, it is assumed to be false and then ridiculed.
Now get back under your rock.
You are apparently ignorant of what logical fallacies are. Mocking someone and calling them names is a logical fallacy ace. You need to look up what logical fallacies are and learn something, if that's possible. You failed to refute with any scholarly credibility whatsoever what I posted. What I posted is not unsubstantiated "rhetoric". What I stated can be substantiated with facts. You are unable to argue on the merits of the argument so you resort to juvenile name calling and mocking.
Personal Attack (Argumentum Ad Hominem, literally, "argument toward the man." Also called "Poisoning the Well"): Attacking or praising the people who make an argument, rather than discussing the argument itself. This practice is fallacious because the personal character of an individual is logically irrelevant to the truth or falseness of the argument itself.
“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.” -Mark Twain
So that's why the GOP refuses to nominate one?Obama won because he was black, that's all.Translation: Soros and Al Aweed got their candidate the nomination in 2008 and it will be no different in 2016
uh, no, not really.
But I don't think if i explain it to you again you'd understand.
Simply put. Obama won because he was where the majority of his party and the country was at in 2008.
Period.
Obama was the guy who took the stand the Iraq War was a terrible idea in 2003, when that wasn't a popular position.
By 2008, everyone knew it was a bad idea, and he looked visionary for saying it first.
I'll probably just ignore most of the juvenile low IQ taunts which lack any valid argument that usually come from ignoramuses with an attitude.You appear to be new here.I didnt use a logical fallacy, dipshit. I mocked you. Because your rhetoric is stupid. It is something picked up on the whackier libertarian websites and the darker sillier corners of the Internet. It isnt even debatable. It is merely name-calling,not an argument.ZOMG! The global-internationalists have taken over! Run!!Ahhh a sophomoric retarded rebuttal. I can see I'm going to get a lot of childish logical fallacies from you, such as this sophomoric appeal to ridicule. You deny that American politicians in both major political parties are admitted globalists-internationalists? You deny that there's a plutocracy running America?
Yet another sophomoric response from a person that is only able to debate or argue using logical fallacies, such as appeals to ridicule, hasty generalizations, from Ignorance: because something is not known to be true, it is assumed to be false and then ridiculed.
Now get back under your rock.
You are apparently ignorant of what logical fallacies are. Mocking someone and calling them names is a logical fallacy ace. You need to look up what logical fallacies are and learn something, if that's possible. You failed to refute with any scholarly credibility whatsoever what I posted. What I posted is not unsubstantiated "rhetoric". What I stated can be substantiated with facts. You are unable to argue on the merits of the argument so you resort to juvenile name calling and mocking.
Personal Attack (Argumentum Ad Hominem, literally, "argument toward the man." Also called "Poisoning the Well"): Attacking or praising the people who make an argument, rather than discussing the argument itself. This practice is fallacious because the personal character of an individual is logically irrelevant to the truth or falseness of the argument itself.
“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.” -Mark Twain
Sadly, you're going to learn quickly that such behavior is the norm here and practiced regularly by those on both ends of the spectrum.
You'll be able to find some decent, reasonable conversation here now and then, but you will definitely have to wade through the muck.
.
Oh, I see you've met the fake Rabbit...I didnt use a logical fallacy, dipshit. I mocked you. Because your rhetoric is stupid. It is something picked up on the whackier libertarian websites and the darker sillier corners of the Internet. It isnt even debatable. It is merely name-calling,not an argument.ZOMG! The global-internationalists have taken over! Run!!
ZOG!! ZOG!! ZOG!!
Black Helicopters!! Black Helicopters!!
Ahhh a sophomoric retarded rebuttal. I can see I'm going to get a lot of childish logical fallacies from you, such as this sophomoric appeal to ridicule. You deny that American politicians in both major political parties are admitted globalists-internationalists? You deny that there's a plutocracy running America?
Yet another sophomoric response from a person that is only able to debate or argue using logical fallacies, such as appeals to ridicule, hasty generalizations, from Ignorance: because something is not known to be true, it is assumed to be false and then ridiculed.
Now get back under your rock.
You are apparently ignorant of what logical fallacies are. Mocking someone and calling them names is a logical fallacy ace. You need to look up what logical fallacies are and learn something, if that's possible. You failed to refute with any scholarly credibility whatsoever what I posted. What I posted is not unsubstantiated "rhetoric". What I stated can be substantiated with facts. You are unable to argue on the merits of the argument so you resort to juvenile name calling and mocking.
Personal Attack (Argumentum Ad Hominem, literally, "argument toward the man." Also called "Poisoning the Well"): Attacking or praising the people who make an argument, rather than discussing the argument itself. This practice is fallacious because the personal character of an individual is logically irrelevant to the truth or falseness of the argument itself.
“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.” -Mark Twain
I see I am dealing with a college sophomore. A little knowledge is a ridiculous thing.I didnt use a logical fallacy, dipshit. I mocked you. Because your rhetoric is stupid. It is something picked up on the whackier libertarian websites and the darker sillier corners of the Internet. It isnt even debatable. It is merely name-calling,not an argument.ZOMG! The global-internationalists have taken over! Run!!
ZOG!! ZOG!! ZOG!!
Black Helicopters!! Black Helicopters!!
Ahhh a sophomoric retarded rebuttal. I can see I'm going to get a lot of childish logical fallacies from you, such as this sophomoric appeal to ridicule. You deny that American politicians in both major political parties are admitted globalists-internationalists? You deny that there's a plutocracy running America?
Yet another sophomoric response from a person that is only able to debate or argue using logical fallacies, such as appeals to ridicule, hasty generalizations, from Ignorance: because something is not known to be true, it is assumed to be false and then ridiculed.
Now get back under your rock.
You are apparently ignorant of what logical fallacies are. Mocking someone and calling them names is a logical fallacy ace. You need to look up what logical fallacies are and learn something, if that's possible. You failed to refute with any scholarly credibility whatsoever what I posted. What I posted is not unsubstantiated "rhetoric". What I stated can be substantiated with facts. You are unable to argue on the merits of the argument so you resort to juvenile name calling and mocking.
Personal Attack (Argumentum Ad Hominem, literally, "argument toward the man." Also called "Poisoning the Well"): Attacking or praising the people who make an argument, rather than discussing the argument itself. This practice is fallacious because the personal character of an individual is logically irrelevant to the truth or falseness of the argument itself.
“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.” -Mark Twain
How many Hispanics are running on the Democrat ticket?So that's why the GOP refuses to nominate one?Obama won because he was black, that's all.Translation: Soros and Al Aweed got their candidate the nomination in 2008 and it will be no different in 2016
uh, no, not really.
But I don't think if i explain it to you again you'd understand.
Simply put. Obama won because he was where the majority of his party and the country was at in 2008.
Period.
Obama was the guy who took the stand the Iraq War was a terrible idea in 2003, when that wasn't a popular position.
By 2008, everyone knew it was a bad idea, and he looked visionary for saying it first.
What a liar you are!!
The last black we had running for president was accused of sexual harassment. He dropped out to end the constant accusations. The only woman we had that even came close was called a **** by the left and her family attacked.
Democrats can't afford to allow Republicans to have a black, a woman, or a Hispanic running, because to them that sets a dangerous precedent.....to their lies about diversity and lack of inclusiveness in the GOP. They rely on these groups to remain firmly inside their circle of influence.
Ironic post is moronic.I'll probably just ignore most of the juvenile low IQ taunts which lack any valid argument that usually come from ignoramuses with an attitude.You appear to be new here.I didnt use a logical fallacy, dipshit. I mocked you. Because your rhetoric is stupid. It is something picked up on the whackier libertarian websites and the darker sillier corners of the Internet. It isnt even debatable. It is merely name-calling,not an argument.ZOMG! The global-internationalists have taken over! Run!!
Yet another sophomoric response from a person that is only able to debate or argue using logical fallacies, such as appeals to ridicule, hasty generalizations, from Ignorance: because something is not known to be true, it is assumed to be false and then ridiculed.
Now get back under your rock.
You are apparently ignorant of what logical fallacies are. Mocking someone and calling them names is a logical fallacy ace. You need to look up what logical fallacies are and learn something, if that's possible. You failed to refute with any scholarly credibility whatsoever what I posted. What I posted is not unsubstantiated "rhetoric". What I stated can be substantiated with facts. You are unable to argue on the merits of the argument so you resort to juvenile name calling and mocking.
Personal Attack (Argumentum Ad Hominem, literally, "argument toward the man." Also called "Poisoning the Well"): Attacking or praising the people who make an argument, rather than discussing the argument itself. This practice is fallacious because the personal character of an individual is logically irrelevant to the truth or falseness of the argument itself.
“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.” -Mark Twain
Sadly, you're going to learn quickly that such behavior is the norm here and practiced regularly by those on both ends of the spectrum.
You'll be able to find some decent, reasonable conversation here now and then, but you will definitely have to wade through the muck.
.
How many Hispanics are running on the Democrat ticket?So that's why the GOP refuses to nominate one?Obama won because he was black, that's all.Translation: Soros and Al Aweed got their candidate the nomination in 2008 and it will be no different in 2016
uh, no, not really.
But I don't think if i explain it to you again you'd understand.
Simply put. Obama won because he was where the majority of his party and the country was at in 2008.
Period.
Obama was the guy who took the stand the Iraq War was a terrible idea in 2003, when that wasn't a popular position.
By 2008, everyone knew it was a bad idea, and he looked visionary for saying it first.
What a liar you are!!
The last black we had running for president was accused of sexual harassment. He dropped out to end the constant accusations. The only woman we had that even came close was called a **** by the left and her family attacked.
Democrats can't afford to allow Republicans to have a black, a woman, or a Hispanic running, because to them that sets a dangerous precedent.....to their lies about diversity and lack of inclusiveness in the GOP. They rely on these groups to remain firmly inside their circle of influence.
Using ridicule instead of addressing the argument itself is a logical fallacy ace because you're not arguing with any logic or reason just replying with ridicule (ad hominem) and hence the fallacy, the quality of being false or wrong. Appealing to ridicule is a logical fallacy and it's quite apparent you're ignorant as to the variety of logical fallacies taught in a liberal arts education. Appealing to ridicule is one of the logical fallacies listed in college level liberal arts text books of which you're apparently not familiar with.I see I am dealing with a college sophomore. A little knowledge is a ridiculous thing.I didnt use a logical fallacy, dipshit. I mocked you. Because your rhetoric is stupid. It is something picked up on the whackier libertarian websites and the darker sillier corners of the Internet. It isnt even debatable. It is merely name-calling,not an argument.ZOMG! The global-internationalists have taken over! Run!!Ahhh a sophomoric retarded rebuttal. I can see I'm going to get a lot of childish logical fallacies from you, such as this sophomoric appeal to ridicule. You deny that American politicians in both major political parties are admitted globalists-internationalists? You deny that there's a plutocracy running America?
Yet another sophomoric response from a person that is only able to debate or argue using logical fallacies, such as appeals to ridicule, hasty generalizations, from Ignorance: because something is not known to be true, it is assumed to be false and then ridiculed.
Now get back under your rock.
You are apparently ignorant of what logical fallacies are. Mocking someone and calling them names is a logical fallacy ace. You need to look up what logical fallacies are and learn something, if that's possible. You failed to refute with any scholarly credibility whatsoever what I posted. What I posted is not unsubstantiated "rhetoric". What I stated can be substantiated with facts. You are unable to argue on the merits of the argument so you resort to juvenile name calling and mocking.
Personal Attack (Argumentum Ad Hominem, literally, "argument toward the man." Also called "Poisoning the Well"): Attacking or praising the people who make an argument, rather than discussing the argument itself. This practice is fallacious because the personal character of an individual is logically irrelevant to the truth or falseness of the argument itself.
“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.” -Mark Twain
Ridicule is not a logical fallacy. It isnt logical at all. Except in your case. Your posts are so filled with name calling and jargon the only proper response is ridicule until you go away.
