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.
Welcome to USMB Rumpole. Hope you enjoy the best discussion board on the internet. Love, beautressHello.
Allow me to introduce myself: I am Rumpole, but not of the Bailey, just a fan.
Who am I?
I'm an old man, left of center, and not 'woke', whatever that means.
I am not new to debate forums, I've been on many going back to the days of Usenet in the 90s.
Looking forward to thoughtful debates.
Cheers,
Rumpole
I dunno, BackAgain. Most liberals are very thoughtful about presenting and supporting their lieaminute leaders' false narratives. Love, beautressYou won’t get thoughtful debates from most liberals here.
Welcome anyway. Rumpole of the Bailey is good stuff.
I have since seen his posting style. Including the false advertising in his intro, I would rate him as zero stars. Is it too late to withdraw my warm welcome?
Hello.
Allow me to introduce myself: I am Rumpole, but not of the Bailey, just a fan
Who am I?
I'm an old man, left of center, and not 'woke', whatever that means.
I am not new to debate forums, I've been on many going back to the days of Usenet in the 90s.
Looking forward to thoughtful debates.
Cheers,
Rumpole
I have since seen his posting style. Including the false advertising in his intro, I would rate him as zero stars. Is it too late to withdraw my warm welcome?
www.usmessageboard.com
If leftists would stop lying every few minutes it wouldn't be that way.
Dear Mr. Rumpole, I think you've been hazed by our dear welcome party. Don't take it too seriously. They naughty.
Idiot, all you have to do is read the leftists lies here to prove it. Of course you being a leftist will ignore that like you all do.You appear to make many vacuous allegations, especially the kind which are impossible to corroborate.
Now, you are entitled to an opinion which is essentially a hackneyed assortment of thought-terminating clichés, cheap shots, weasel words, etc,, but that doesn't change the fact that they are a hackneyed assortment of thought-terminating clichés, cheap shots, and weasel words......etc.
How so?
Tl:drThe intro was neither false, nor 'advertising'. You, apparently, give an unreasonable amount of weight to an intro and seem to be holding it to some imaginary standard. But, human nature tends to reflect others. So, if someone isn't nice to you, perhaps they are holding up a mirror to you. There is no wake in a lake without something to cause it. But, of course, that concept hasn't appeared to have occurred to you. Your first comment from my intro was warm, but let's take a look at your very next comment to a post I made, where you wrote:
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg funded by anti-American extremist Soros
The fact is that the Democrats are on the side of the criminals. Insofar as criminality in the White House, the opposite is true, and these stats are not up to date, to wit; They defunded the police, and they elected far left extremist DAs. That's a meme, no evidence for it. The high...
That’s not a chart of criminal activities. It is a chart of alleged criminal activities. If an Administration has a ton of actual criminal activity but no charges criminal activities, the “chart” will report a zero.
That doesn’t mean much since a corrupted liberal Democrat infested DOJ isn’t likely to go after Democrap Administrarions.
Now, your reaction was to a chart I posted which revealed the factual court record of criminal activity being disproportionately represented by Republican Administrations. I essentially stated 'when it comes to crime in the WH, Republicans win that pissing contest.' I chose that tone because I was rebutting a comment made by TroglocratsRdumb, whose moniker I find offensive, rightfully so, and so he set the tone by virtue of his avatar, which invites fighting words by democrats. You had every opportunity to be sanguine, because, at that juncture, nothing was directed to you, personally, you just jumped into the conversation with disparaging words against my liberal brethen, and so, BackAgain, you know the old saying, 'you reap what you sew'. I find it odd you appear to be critical of my response to you, when you are pretty much in the same sandbox, yourself. My intro was completely not cognizant of what it is really like, around here, which I found out very quickly, and for some curious reason, you drew some silly inference about 'false advertising'.
So, with due respect, BackAgain, I merely reflect the tone and tenor you established between us. You threw the first arrow with your sophomoric cheap shots which ignore the fact Democrats do not shy from squashing our own who violate ethical standards. Not in every case, mind you, but we've done it often enough (Blagojevich, Edwards, Franken, to name a few) so even the point you made, ignoring the unnecessary disparaging fashion in which you characterized it, isn't accurate. Moreover, I've been perusing the comments made around this forum, and, I swear, this isn't a forum which enforces the rules it sets for itself. This is a rather mean place. I'm okay with that, and, in fact, it's rather liberating (compared to the strict standards of politicsforum.com, for example) but don't complain if someone isn't nice to you, and, especially, on this forum.
What is being inserted, who is inserting it, where is it being inserted,
Well, If I were frothing at the mouth and given to hysterics, I could easily make the same charge against you, which is why your premise is utterly meaningless and is precisely why I'm not stupid enough to traffic in such weasel words. If you can't prove it, which you can't, I'll file your reply in the assorted wingnut delusions file.Idiot, all you have to do is read the leftists lies here to prove it. Of course you being a leftist will ignore that like you all do.
