Nauseating Liberal Women

[orogenicman]

And yet you apparently enjoy a large wall of water being shoved up yer ass from time to time.Tell me.Is that a great way to be fcked. Never mind.I don't actually want to know.You Republicans have such silly fears, and yet don't quite comprehend that you aren't supposed to stick your finger in the light socket.

You're creepy and ignorant, orgyman. I never said I was a Republican. I have MAJOR disdain for most of them, too. I fear nothing. Absolutely nothing.

You didn't have to. It was written all over your wave-slapping backside. Okay, maybe it wasn't but I know of no democrats who call Obama "Hussein" and the head of DHS as "Uncle Janet". Okay, so you are not a Republican. What are you, a fascist? An Anarchist? A neo Nazi? Someone with brain damage from being hit too many times in the head with a surf board? What? Are? You?

 

[mudwhistle]

And yet you apparently enjoy a large wall of water being shoved up yer ass from time to time.Tell me.Is that a great way to be fcked. Never mind.I don't actually want to know.You Republicans have such silly fears, and yet don't quite comprehend that you aren't supposed to stick your finger in the light socket.

You're creepy and ignorant, orgyman. I never said I was a Republican. I have MAJOR disdain for most of them, too. I fear nothing. Absolutely nothing.

You didn't have to. It was written all over your wave-slapping backside. Okay, maybe it wasn't but I know of no democrats who call Obama "Hussein" and the head of DHS as "Uncle Janet". Okay, so you are not a Republican. What are you, a fascist? An Anarchist? A neo Nazi? Someone with brain damage from being hit too many times in the head with a surf board? What? Are? You?

I see you've found a new target.

You must be an extremely hateful little cuss.

 

[orogenicman]

I'm, actually a very cheerful fellow. I simply have no respect for people who disrespect women. Which pretty much means I have no respect for most Republican party members today, or their Teabagging minions.

 

[mudwhistle]

If you want to continue to defend this administration, I cannot think of any better spokesperson for the left than Jon Stewart, in this video, telling us why nothing these guys say or do can be trusted, or just be discounted as an innocent mistake. The worst case scenario has been realized and we cannot just dismiss all of this off hand like it's the ravings of a nut-case.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kxnw0ePhDp8]Jon Stewart On IRS Targeting Patriots - Gun Control and AP's Seized Phone Records - YouTube[/ame]

 

[orogenicman]

If you want to continue to defend this administration, I cannot think of any better spokesperson for the left than Jon Stewart, in this video, telling us why nothing these guys say or do can be trusted, or just be discounted as an innocent mistake. The worst case scenario has been realized and we cannot just dismiss all of this off hand like it's the ravings of a nut-case.

Jon Stewart On IRS Targeting Patriots - Gun Control and AP's Seized Phone Records - YouTube

So what you are telling me is that the only defense of the OP you can fabricate is misdirection? Oh my.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

A quick survey indicates that that flac and flanders are nauseating liberal women, hence the thread title is ironically correct.

(They nauseate more than just the women, of course. The thread could have been titled "Nauseating decent and intelligent people")

Exactly.

Likely the first and last time a conservative will post an accurate, truthful thread title, however inadvertent.

 

[flacaltenn]

And yet you apparently enjoy a large wall of water being shoved up yer ass from time to time.Tell me.Is that a great way to be fcked. Never mind.I don't actually want to know.You Republicans have such silly fears, and yet don't quite comprehend that you aren't supposed to stick your finger in the light socket.

You're creepy and ignorant, orgyman. I never said I was a Republican. I have MAJOR disdain for most of them, too. I fear nothing. Absolutely nothing.

You didn't have to. It was written all over your wave-slapping backside. Okay, maybe it wasn't but I know of no democrats who call Obama "Hussein" and the head of DHS as "Uncle Janet". Okay, so you are not a Republican. What are you, a fascist? An Anarchist? A neo Nazi? Someone with brain damage from being hit too many times in the head with a surf board? What? Are? You?

I show reverence.. I call Obama the "Dear Leader".. It's safer that way..
The large majority of the rest of the "revolution" to fundamentally change America --- are just useful idiots..

Surfing related injuries are more likely to be abrasions, jellyfish stings and sun damage to your skin.. Thank GOD its the one sport that Liberals haven't forced Helmet wearing on...

 

[mudwhistle]

If you want to continue to defend this administration, I cannot think of any better spokesperson for the left than Jon Stewart, in this video, telling us why nothing these guys say or do can be trusted, or just be discounted as an innocent mistake. The worst case scenario has been realized and we cannot just dismiss all of this off hand like it's the ravings of a nut-case.

Jon Stewart On IRS Targeting Patriots - Gun Control and AP's Seized Phone Records - YouTube

So what you are telling me is that the only defense of the OP you can fabricate is misdirection? Oh my.

I didn't fabricate anything. Even Jon Stewart agrees that Obama has been caught red-handed yet Obama continues to claim these acts are just phony scandals in a total reversal. He already admitted they were caught. He figures that he can use the media to fabricate good news or other news and use misdirection to remove the focus from himself. It's strange how no matter what Obama gets caught doing you can count on another story surfacing to take our minds off of it.

Nobody pays attention to any story that the media doesn't focus on first.

 

[flacaltenn]

Let’s get back on track with Gina McCarthy.

The EPA “enforces” the Clean Air Act. As far as I know that was the first time a bureaucracy told Americans what to do. The Affordable Care Act is following in the EPA’s footsteps.

Prior to the EPA/Clean Air Act a suspected lawbreaker was arrested and given a day in court. The EPA circumvented the system. The EPA can fine, tax, shutdown, control an individual’s private property and so on. Former EPA administrator, Lisa Jackson, actually claimed taxing authority.

Back in early April 2010, EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson announced that she would tax industries to enforce the Clean Air Act. The question is: Where did a bureaucrat get the authority to tax anyone? Certainly not from the Constitution. No police chief in this country can go to a local business, or an individual, suspected of breaking a law and impose a tax. Yet Jackson is doing just that. No arrests for breaking the law, no day in court for the accused, just the EPA —— in the person of Lisa P. Jackson —— ordering a private business to pay a tax. I will not be surprised if some of those tax dollars find their way to the United Nations in a backdoor approach to giving the UN taxing authority over the American people.

Here’s the core problem:

Once the EPA was given the authority to bypass traditional law enforcement, the courts, and the Constitution, in order to enforce the Clean Air Act it was only a matter of time before people like Lisa Jackson, and now Gina McCarthy, gained control of the machinery. Jackson was bad enough, but one look at McCarthy should tell you that she is an angry little freak who finally has the authority to tell Americans what to do.

In a society of free people EMPLOYERS pay people to do their bidding. Not so with the EPA. They are all parasites living on tax dollars telling their EMPLOYERS what to do. It’s like the janitor telling the CEO of a large company what to do. Basically, it’s slavery when you can order anyone about without paying them.

Finally, liberals hated J. Edger Hoover with a passion even though he never did anything against this country or the American people. On the other hand liberals love garbage like Gina McCarthy even though she harms private sector Americans every chance she gets while betraying the country in order to implement the UN’s agenda.

My emphasis in the second paragraph:

The agenda to be discussed at the upcoming UN Conference on “Sustainable Development” is outlined in its published report entitled, “Working Towards a Balanced and Inclusive Green Economy: A United Nations System-wide Perspective.”

The report states, “Transitioning to a green economy requires a fundamental shift in the way we think and act.” It calls for increased “education,” information, and “awareness” efforts to help “change individual and collective behavior” in lifestyles as well as consumption and production patterns. The agenda will necessitate “a serious rethinking of lifestyles in developed countries."

Thursday, 31 May 2012 09:42
UN Plans to Expand Its Environmental Agency
Written by Raven Clabough

UN Plans to Expand Its Environmental Agency

You be sure to tell me when EPA actually starts taxing industries. I'll march right with you..

OR when they start fining (or taxing CO2).. The day MIGHT come -- if the revolution has legs. Right now -- the implosion of ObamaCare is gonna take care of ending their little party...

 

[orogenicman]

If you want to continue to defend this administration, I cannot think of any better spokesperson for the left than Jon Stewart, in this video, telling us why nothing these guys say or do can be trusted, or just be discounted as an innocent mistake. The worst case scenario has been realized and we cannot just dismiss all of this off hand like it's the ravings of a nut-case.

Jon Stewart On IRS Targeting Patriots - Gun Control and AP's Seized Phone Records - YouTube

So what you are telling me is that the only defense of the OP you can fabricate is misdirection? Oh my.

I didn't fabricate anything. Even Jon Stewart agrees that Obama has been caught red-handed yet Obama continues to claim these acts are just phony scandals in a total reversal. He already admitted they were caught. He figures that he can use the media to fabricate good news or other news and use misdirection to remove the focus from himself. It's strange how no matter what Obama gets caught doing you can count on another story surfacing to take our minds off of it.

Nobody pays attention to any story that the media doesn't focus on first.

So you are going to continue with your efforts at misdirection and not address the elephant in the room (discrimination and verbal abuse against women, which is what this thread represents)? Do you need a recap of what has been said in this thread?

 

[orogenicman]

Let’s get back on track with Gina McCarthy.

The EPA “enforces” the Clean Air Act. As far as I know that was the first time a bureaucracy told Americans what to do. The Affordable Care Act is following in the EPA’s footsteps.

Prior to the EPA/Clean Air Act a suspected lawbreaker was arrested and given a day in court. The EPA circumvented the system. The EPA can fine, tax, shutdown, control an individual’s private property and so on. Former EPA administrator, Lisa Jackson, actually claimed taxing authority.

Back in early April 2010, EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson announced that she would tax industries to enforce the Clean Air Act. The question is: Where did a bureaucrat get the authority to tax anyone? Certainly not from the Constitution. No police chief in this country can go to a local business, or an individual, suspected of breaking a law and impose a tax. Yet Jackson is doing just that. No arrests for breaking the law, no day in court for the accused, just the EPA —— in the person of Lisa P. Jackson —— ordering a private business to pay a tax. I will not be surprised if some of those tax dollars find their way to the United Nations in a backdoor approach to giving the UN taxing authority over the American people.

Here’s the core problem:

Once the EPA was given the authority to bypass traditional law enforcement, the courts, and the Constitution, in order to enforce the Clean Air Act it was only a matter of time before people like Lisa Jackson, and now Gina McCarthy, gained control of the machinery. Jackson was bad enough, but one look at McCarthy should tell you that she is an angry little freak who finally has the authority to tell Americans what to do.

In a society of free people EMPLOYERS pay people to do their bidding. Not so with the EPA. They are all parasites living on tax dollars telling their EMPLOYERS what to do. It’s like the janitor telling the CEO of a large company what to do. Basically, it’s slavery when you can order anyone about without paying them.

Finally, liberals hated J. Edger Hoover with a passion even though he never did anything against this country or the American people. On the other hand liberals love garbage like Gina McCarthy even though she harms private sector Americans every chance she gets while betraying the country in order to implement the UN’s agenda.

My emphasis in the second paragraph:

The agenda to be discussed at the upcoming UN Conference on “Sustainable Development” is outlined in its published report entitled, “Working Towards a Balanced and Inclusive Green Economy: A United Nations System-wide Perspective.”

The report states, “Transitioning to a green economy requires a fundamental shift in the way we think and act.” It calls for increased “education,” information, and “awareness” efforts to help “change individual and collective behavior” in lifestyles as well as consumption and production patterns. The agenda will necessitate “a serious rethinking of lifestyles in developed countries."

Thursday, 31 May 2012 09:42
UN Plans to Expand Its Environmental Agency
Written by Raven Clabough

UN Plans to Expand Its Environmental Agency

You be sure to tell me when EPA actually starts taxing industries. I'll march right with you..

OR when they start fining (or taxing CO2).. The day MIGHT come -- if the revolution has legs. Right now -- the implosion of ObamaCare is gonna take care of ending their little party...

Gee, more misdirection. How quaint.

 

[mudwhistle]

So what you are telling me is that the only defense of the OP you can fabricate is misdirection? Oh my.

I didn't fabricate anything. Even Jon Stewart agrees that Obama has been caught red-handed yet Obama continues to claim these acts are just phony scandals in a total reversal. He already admitted they were caught. He figures that he can use the media to fabricate good news or other news and use misdirection to remove the focus from himself. It's strange how no matter what Obama gets caught doing you can count on another story surfacing to take our minds off of it.

Nobody pays attention to any story that the media doesn't focus on first.

So you are going to continue with your efforts at misdirection and not address the elephant in the room (discrimination and verbal abuse against women, which is what this thread represents)? Do you need a recap of what has been said in this thread?

What is really going on is Obama selects people for his government for a reason, and if anyone criticizes them they're accused of conducting a war against women or are accused of being homophobes or racists. Obama uses race and gender to bully his opponents. We cannot discuss our differences with this administration because it always degenerates into low-brow discussions of discrimination and harassment. Their ideas are shit. They know it. They also know that what they're doing is destructive. That's why the charade.

 

[orogenicman]

I didn't fabricate anything. Even Jon Stewart agrees that Obama has been caught red-handed yet Obama continues to claim these acts are just phony scandals in a total reversal. He already admitted they were caught. He figures that he can use the media to fabricate good news or other news and use misdirection to remove the focus from himself. It's strange how no matter what Obama gets caught doing you can count on another story surfacing to take our minds off of it.

Nobody pays attention to any story that the media doesn't focus on first.

So you are going to continue with your efforts at misdirection and not address the elephant in the room (discrimination and verbal abuse against women, which is what this thread represents)? Do you need a recap of what has been said in this thread?

What is really going on is Obama selects people for his government and if anyone criticizes them they're accused of conducting a war against women or are accused of being homophobes or racists. Obama uses race and gender to bully his opponents. We cannot discuss our differences with this administration because it always degenerates into low-brow discussions of discrimination and harassment.

When someone says 'that woman looks gay' despite the fact that she widely known to be married with three children, it is difficult not to come away with any opinion other than that that person doesn't like women or gays. Now, if that person had simply said 'I don't like that person because of her politics', or because she isn't qualified for the job (and actually had tangible evidence to support their claim), that would be a different argument. But that isn't the argument that is being made here.

 

[mudwhistle]

So you are going to continue with your efforts at misdirection and not address the elephant in the room (discrimination and verbal abuse against women, which is what this thread represents)? Do you need a recap of what has been said in this thread?

What is really going on is Obama selects people for his government and if anyone criticizes them they're accused of conducting a war against women or are accused of being homophobes or racists. Obama uses race and gender to bully his opponents. We cannot discuss our differences with this administration because it always degenerates into low-brow discussions of discrimination and harassment.

When someone says 'that woman looks gay' despite the fact that she widely known to be married with three children, it is difficult not to come away with any opinion other than that that person doesn't like women or gays. Now, if that person had simply said 'I don't like that person because of her politics', or because she isn't qualified for the job (and actually had tangible evidence to support their claim), that would be a different argument. But that isn't the argument that is being made here.

All she has to do is open her mouth and you can tell she isn't qualified.

The reason she looks gay is because of the way she cuts her hair and the way she dresses. In some circles that's how they identify each other.

If you're assuming that my Gaydar is pinging when I see her is in any way hatred you're assuming way too much.

 

[orogenicman]

What is really going on is Obama selects people for his government and if anyone criticizes them they're accused of conducting a war against women or are accused of being homophobes or racists. Obama uses race and gender to bully his opponents. We cannot discuss our differences with this administration because it always degenerates into low-brow discussions of discrimination and harassment.

When someone says 'that woman looks gay' despite the fact that she widely known to be married with three children, it is difficult not to come away with any opinion other than that that person doesn't like women or gays. Now, if that person had simply said 'I don't like that person because of her politics', or because she isn't qualified for the job (and actually had tangible evidence to support their claim), that would be a different argument. But that isn't the argument that is being made here.

All she has to do is open her mouth and you can tell she isn't qualified.

As someone who was an environmental consultant for many years, I can say without hesitation that you don't know what you are talking about.

The reason she looks gay is because of the way she cuts her hair and the way she dresses. In some circles that's how they identify each other.

Yes, I know. There are a lot of gay bashers and other people who simply don't like women. Thanks for that outstounding report, Mr. Obvious.

 

[mudwhistle]

My sister wears her hair like this too.

 

[mudwhistle]

When someone says 'that woman looks gay' despite the fact that she widely known to be married with three children, it is difficult not to come away with any opinion other than that that person doesn't like women or gays. Now, if that person had simply said 'I don't like that person because of her politics', or because she isn't qualified for the job (and actually had tangible evidence to support their claim), that would be a different argument. But that isn't the argument that is being made here.

All she has to do is open her mouth and you can tell she isn't qualified.

As someone who was an environmental consultant for many years, I can say without hesitation that you don't know what you are talking about.

The reason she looks gay is because of the way she cuts her hair and the way she dresses. In some circles that's how they identify each other.

Yes, I know. There are a lot of gay bashers and other people who simply don't like women. Thanks for that outstounding report, Mr. Obvious.

Sorry, but you acting like a Drama Queen isn't getting us anywhere.

I just think you like acting like you give a fuck about the discussion. What you really want is to claim that everyone who doesn't agree with you it a Neanderthal. You can't win when it comes to the details so your arguments degenerate into an attempt at martyrdom and false claims of discrimination.

 

[orogenicman]

All she has to do is open her mouth and you can tell she isn't qualified.

As someone who was an environmental consultant for many years, I can say without hesitation that you don't know what you are talking about.

The reason she looks gay is because of the way she cuts her hair and the way she dresses. In some circles that's how they identify each other.

Yes, I know. There are a lot of gay bashers and other people who simply don't like women. Thanks for that outstounding report, Mr. Obvious.

Sorry, but you acting like a Drama Queen isn't getting us anywhere.

I just think you like acting like you give a fuck about the discussion. What you really want is to claim that everyone who doesn't agree with you it a Neanderthal. You can't win when it comes to the details so your arguments degenerate into an attempt at martyrdom and false claims of discrimination.

I don't think that anyone who disagrees with me is a Neanderthal. Having said that, I'm a pretty smart guy. And the Neanderthals were not a stupid as your statement assumes.

 

[mudwhistle]

As someone who was an environmental consultant for many years, I can say without hesitation that you don't know what you are talking about.



Yes, I know. There are a lot of gay bashers and other people who simply don't like women. Thanks for that outstounding report, Mr. Obvious.

Sorry, but you acting like a Drama Queen isn't getting us anywhere.

I just think you like acting like you give a fuck about the discussion. What you really want is to claim that everyone who doesn't agree with you it a Neanderthal. You can't win when it comes to the details so your arguments degenerate into an attempt at martyrdom and false claims of discrimination.

I don't think that anyone who disagrees with me is a Neanderthal. Having said that, I'm a pretty smart guy. And the Neanderthals were not a stupid as your statement assumes.

Oh, I see.

You just like arguing for arguing's sake.

 

[orogenicman]

Sorry, but you acting like a Drama Queen isn't getting us anywhere.

I just think you like acting like you give a fuck about the discussion. What you really want is to claim that everyone who doesn't agree with you it a Neanderthal. You can't win when it comes to the details so your arguments degenerate into an attempt at martyrdom and false claims of discrimination.

I don't think that anyone who disagrees with me is a Neanderthal. Having said that, I'm a pretty smart guy. And the Neanderthals were not a stupid as your statement assumes.

Oh, I see.

You just like arguing for arguing's sake.

I don't consider defending women against moronic women bashers to be "arguing for arguing's sake". The fact that you do says much more about you than it does about me.