Why No Standards For Democrats???

[PaintMyHouse]

You thought that you won, but as usual, you were dead wrong then and now.

You are ruining my fandom of Peter Sellers.

Please change your avatar.

Some of his best work.....

Please change your brain, nearly any around would be an improvement.

And I block all avatars and signatures. You can do the same. Now you know.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The requirements for some of us having our threads moved there by a Liberal is simply a conservative winning the argument.
The same definition usually goes with the claim of 'racist.' as well.

I've never seen you win an argument but you always say that you do, and you're the only one.

Oh....and I recall whipping you when you bet that I couldn't find any reference to Jesus Christ in the Constitution

Don't try that old play. You got spanked on that one hard enough last time.

Ohhhh.....look what I found:

Let's demonstrate that for all:

1. You made the claim "For a Christian nation, it's odd how how they never mentioned God?" In your post #303

2. My response: "Jesus Christ is referred to in the Constitution.." Post #313

3. You took the bait, in your post #316: "No little one, He isn't."

4. I set the hook: "Shall we wager?" Post #319

5. You: "Anything you got..." Post #320

6. And I reeled you in, post #324: "Second paragraph of Article VII.
Post it, please.
And never make that mistake again."




7. You were forced to post this: "...done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independance of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,..." Post #327.

That was your post.
Nor did you try to deny the reference 'in the Year of our Lord.'

It is in every copy of the Constitution.

But you did try to spin it as having no meaning.



8. You wrote"You are rightabout the date that they signed it, and what was thencommon usagefor designating the year." In post #335.




9. Establishing your distinctions as a liar and a cur, you attempted to backtrack, here: "...right, and I am in this case just like I was when you tried to say Jesus was in the Constitution because you can't tell the difference between the Articles and where people sign the damn document." Post #348.

One can sense your frustration at being pilloried. Good.

But you have no way to denythat the reference is included in the Constitution, and that it refers to Jesus Christ.




10. And you wrote this: "When I post I post to everyone." In # 269
And so you are hoist by your own petard.

All will see and note that you are a lying cur.



All of your posts should, and will, be judged in that light.

So, ....there is a Heaven.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/newreply.php?do=postreply&t=345269

Multiculturalism and Sharia US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Yep, you're a total loon, but your attempt to put Jesus into the Constitution was cute, the same as saying the 17th of September is in the Constitution.

That was soooo much fun!

Great the way I ripped one who is one a new one!

 

[PoliticalChic]

The requirements for some of us having our threads moved there by a Liberal is simply a conservative winning the argument.
The same definition usually goes with the claim of 'racist.' as well.

I've never seen you win an argument but you always say that you do, and you're the only one.

Oh....and I recall whipping you when you bet that I couldn't find any reference to Jesus Christ in the Constitution

Don't try that old play. You got spanked on that one hard enough last time.

Ohhhh.....look what I found:

Let's demonstrate that for all:

1. You made the claim "For a Christian nation, it's odd how how they never mentioned God?" In your post #303

2. My response: "Jesus Christ is referred to in the Constitution.." Post #313

3. You took the bait, in your post #316: "No little one, He isn't."

4. I set the hook: "Shall we wager?" Post #319

5. You: "Anything you got..." Post #320

6. And I reeled you in, post #324: "Second paragraph of Article VII.
Post it, please.
And never make that mistake again."




7. You were forced to post this: "...done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independance of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,..." Post #327.

That was your post.
Nor did you try to deny the reference 'in the Year of our Lord.'

It is in every copy of the Constitution.

But you did try to spin it as having no meaning.



8. You wrote"You are rightabout the date that they signed it, and what was thencommon usagefor designating the year." In post #335.




9. Establishing your distinctions as a liar and a cur, you attempted to backtrack, here: "...right, and I am in this case just like I was when you tried to say Jesus was in the Constitution because you can't tell the difference between the Articles and where people sign the damn document." Post #348.

One can sense your frustration at being pilloried. Good.

But you have no way to denythat the reference is included in the Constitution, and that it refers to Jesus Christ.




10. And you wrote this: "When I post I post to everyone." In # 269
And so you are hoist by your own petard.

All will see and note that you are a lying cur.



All of your posts should, and will, be judged in that light.

So, ....there is a Heaven.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/newreply.php?do=postreply&t=345269

Multiculturalism and Sharia US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Yep, you're a total loon, but your attempt to put Jesus into the Constitution was cute, the same as saying the 17th of September is in the Constitution.

I was just chuckling over the way you tried to twist your way out with this:
. You wrote"You are rightabout the date that they signed it, and what was thencommon usagefor designating the year." In post #335.

Did they use the same designation/ common usage in the Ottoman Empire?

No?

Why not?

 

[boedicca]

Why no standards for Democrats?

Easy peasy. Standards entail ACCOUNTABILITY.

The Dems just want to do what they want, regardless of the consequences. Just like naughty children.

I often wonder if our side would behave in the same way if we were the owners of the media and the school system.

Let's hope not.

There are people who do the right thing even when no one else is watching or when they have excessive power. That's what distinguishes people who have character from those who lack it.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Did they use the same designation/ common usage in the Ottoman Empire?

No?

Why not?

I would imagine, since they also have a Year of The Prophet, blessings be upon him.

"The first year was the Islamic year beginning in AD 622 during which the emigration of Muhammad from Mecca to Medina, known as the Hijra, occurred. Each numbered year is designated either "H" for Hijra or "AH" for the Latin anno Hegirae ("in the year of the Hijra");[3] hence, Muslims typically call their calendar the Hijri calendar.

The current Islamic year is 1436 AH. In the Gregorian calendar, 1436 AH runs from approximately 24 October 2014 (evening) to 13 October 2015 (evening).[4]"
Islamic calendar - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[PoliticalChic]

Why no standards for Democrats?

Easy peasy. Standards entail ACCOUNTABILITY.

The Dems just want to do what they want, regardless of the consequences. Just like naughty children.

I often wonder if our side would behave in the same way if we were the owners of the media and the school system.

Let's hope not.

There are people who do the right thing even when no one else is watching or when they have excessive power. That's what distinguishes people who have character from those who lack it.

Methinks I can see the names of two political perspectives in your post.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Did they use the same designation/ common usage in the Ottoman Empire?

No?

Why not?

I would imagine, since they also have a Year of The Prophet, blessings be upon him.

"The first year was the Islamic year beginning in AD 622 during which the emigration of Muhammad from Mecca to Medina, known as the Hijra, occurred. Each numbered year is designated either "H" for Hijra or "AH" for the Latin anno Hegirae ("in the year of the Hijra");[3] hence, Muslims typically call their calendar the Hijri calendar.

The current Islamic year is 1436 AH. In the Gregorian calendar, 1436 AH runs from approximately 24 October 2014 (evening) to 13 October 2015 (evening).[4]"
Islamic calendar - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

. More twists and turns in that post than in Nadia Comaneci's floor routine!

No 'Year of our Lord'????

Oh....because they aren't Christian nations.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Did they use the same designation/ common usage in the Ottoman Empire?

No?

Why not?

I would imagine, since they also have a Year of The Prophet, blessings be upon him.

"The first year was the Islamic year beginning in AD 622 during which the emigration of Muhammad from Mecca to Medina, known as the Hijra, occurred. Each numbered year is designated either "H" for Hijra or "AH" for the Latin anno Hegirae ("in the year of the Hijra");[3] hence, Muslims typically call their calendar the Hijri calendar.

The current Islamic year is 1436 AH. In the Gregorian calendar, 1436 AH runs from approximately 24 October 2014 (evening) to 13 October 2015 (evening).[4]"
Islamic calendar - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

. More twists and turns in that post than in Nadia Comaneci's floor routine!

No 'Year of our Lord'????

Oh....because they aren't Christian nations.

Neither are we. It's outlawed, in the Constitution.

 

[PoliticalChic]

7. You were forced to post this: "...done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independance of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,..." Post #327.

That was your post.
Nor did you try to deny the reference 'in the Year of our Lord.'

It is in every copy of the Constitution.

But you did try to spin it as having no meaning.



8. You wrote"You are rightabout the date that they signed it, and what was thencommon usagefor designating the year." In post #335.



You can run, but you can't hide.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

8. You wrote"You are rightabout the date that they signed it, and what was thencommon usagefor designating the year." In post #335.
You can run, but you can't hide.

News for ya, the signing statement doesn't matter a damn, and has absolutely no legal standing. Jesus is no more in the Constitution than September or this:

 

[Nosmo King]

RWs need to look in their own back yard cuz they're pros at the Double Standard.

There's never a Larry Craig when you need him.

 

[PoliticalChic]

8. You wrote"You are rightabout the date that they signed it, and what was thencommon usagefor designating the year." In post #335.
You can run, but you can't hide.

News for ya, the signing statement doesn't matter a damn, and has absolutely no legal standing. Jesus is no more in the Constitution than September or this:

I was just having fun making you do tricks.

Doggie treat?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

8. You wrote"You are rightabout the date that they signed it, and what was thencommon usagefor designating the year." In post #335.
You can run, but you can't hide.

News for ya, the signing statement doesn't matter a damn, and has absolutely no legal standing. Jesus is no more in the Constitution than September or this:

I was just having fun making you do tricks.

Doggie treat?

I never have an issue showing the world how wrong you are, when it's required that is since you usually do that for us right in the OP.

 

[PoliticalChic]

8. You wrote"You are rightabout the date that they signed it, and what was thencommon usagefor designating the year." In post #335.
You can run, but you can't hide.

News for ya, the signing statement doesn't matter a damn, and has absolutely no legal standing. Jesus is no more in the Constitution than September or this:

I was just having fun making you do tricks.

Doggie treat?

I never have an issue showing the world how wrong you, when it's required that is since you usually do that for us right in the OP.

"I never have an issue showing the world how wrong you (sic)..."


....except that I posted two examples earlier that buried you.

Seems you're accumulated quite the résumé.: liar, sore loser, cry baby.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

8. You wrote"You are rightabout the date that they signed it, and what was thencommon usagefor designating the year." In post #335.
You can run, but you can't hide.

News for ya, the signing statement doesn't matter a damn, and has absolutely no legal standing. Jesus is no more in the Constitution than September or this:

I was just having fun making you do tricks.

Doggie treat?

I never have an issue showing the world how wrong you, when it's required that is since you usually do that for us right in the OP.

"I never have an issue showing the world how wrong you (sic)..."
....except that I posted two examples earlier that buried you.
Seems you're accumulated quite the résumé.: liar, sore loser, cry baby.

Being childish doesn't help you but it certainly fits you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

8. You wrote"You are rightabout the date that they signed it, and what was thencommon usagefor designating the year." In post #335.
You can run, but you can't hide.

News for ya, the signing statement doesn't matter a damn, and has absolutely no legal standing. Jesus is no more in the Constitution than September or this:

I was just having fun making you do tricks.

Doggie treat?

I never have an issue showing the world how wrong you, when it's required that is since you usually do that for us right in the OP.

"I never have an issue showing the world how wrong you (sic)..."
....except that I posted two examples earlier that buried you.
Seems you're accumulated quite the résumé.: liar, sore loser, cry baby.

Being childish doesn't help you but it certainly fits you.

I know I'm not perfect....but so close it's scary.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

News for ya, the signing statement doesn't matter a damn, and has absolutely no legal standing. Jesus is no more in the Constitution than September or this:

I was just having fun making you do tricks.

Doggie treat?

I never have an issue showing the world how wrong you, when it's required that is since you usually do that for us right in the OP.

"I never have an issue showing the world how wrong you (sic)..."
....except that I posted two examples earlier that buried you.
Seems you're accumulated quite the résumé.: liar, sore loser, cry baby.

Being childish doesn't help you but it certainly fits you.

I know I'm not perfect....but so close it's scary.

Same answer, childish.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I was just having fun making you do tricks.

Doggie treat?

I never have an issue showing the world how wrong you, when it's required that is since you usually do that for us right in the OP.

"I never have an issue showing the world how wrong you (sic)..."
....except that I posted two examples earlier that buried you.
Seems you're accumulated quite the résumé.: liar, sore loser, cry baby.

Being childish doesn't help you but it certainly fits you.

I know I'm not perfect....but so close it's scary.

Same answer, childish.

Now you understand "Little Miss-Can't-Behave."


Ain't it telling that someone 'childish' can run circles around you?

 

[hadit]

These are the sorts of folks that Liberals/Progressives/Democrats love seeing in the White House:

4. "She hasn’t even announced, but the question has already resurfaced: Will Bill Clinton’s baggage derail Hillary Clinton’s presidential hopes?


Just a few weeks ago, reports broke that Bill Clinton had flown at least 11 times on “The Lolita Express” — a private plane owned by the mysterious financier and convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. According to Virginia Roberts, who claims to have been one of Epstein’s many teenage sex slaves, Clinton also visited Epstein’s private Caribbean retreat, known as “Orgy Island.”


Clinton also spent years traveling and partying with Ron Burkle, a billionaire bachelor with a penchant for very young girls. Clinton spent so much time on Burkle’s private plane that it came to be known in Burkle’s circle as “Air F—k One.




Hillary took another hit when Claire McCaskill, the prominent Democratic senator from Missouri, weighed in on Bill’s reputation on “Meet the Press.”

“I think he’s been a great leader,” McCaskill said, “but I don’t want my daughter near him.”

“F—k her,” Hillary said.

McCaskill endorsed Obama.

It was Bill’s close relationships with Burkle and Epstein, however, that were Hillary’s true threat.In an exposé published in Vanity Fair’s July 2008 issue,Todd Purdum — husband of Bill’s former White House press secretary Dee Dee Myers — wrote of the former president’s depraved, “motley crew” of wealthy hangers-on and enablers."
Bill s libido threatens to derail Hillary again New York Post



Of course, the same phrase, "the former president’s depraved, “motley crew” of wealthy hangers-on and enablers" applies to all the reliable Democrat voters.

I predict we'll hear something along the lines of:

"I can never disown Bill Clinton. He's almost like a husband to me".

followed by

"Although I was married to him for decades, I never was influenced by anything he ever did. In fact, I never saw anything he did or heard anything about them. In sum, I reject outright the activities by former President Clinton that are at issue, but to reject him is like rejecting all white liberal men".

followed by

"Bill Clinton is a stranger to me. I don't know him, and as of today, I am instructing my sycophants in the media and in parents' basements around the country to deny that I ever had anything to do with him".

She might try....
In"Blood Sport," by James Stewart, it was made clear that Mrs. Clinton both knew what was going on, and facilitated same.

But....I still think the odds are that she won't run.

I hope, if she does, that her primary opponents force her into the spotlight. The more visible she is, the less popular she becomes. I mean, who wants to hear that shrill, whiny, demanding voice? She sounds like every man's ex wife.

 

[PoliticalChic]

3. ‘I only ever met Bill twice but Jeffrey had told me that they were good friends.

'I asked, “How come?” and he laughed and said, “He owes me some favours.” Maybe he was just joking but it constantly surprised me that people with as much to lose as Bill and [Prince] Andrew weren’t more careful.

‘Bill must have known about Jeffrey’s girls. There were three desks in the living area of the villa on the island.

‘Bill must have known about Jeffrey’s girls. There were three desks in the living area of the villa on the island... covered with photos of naked girls'
Bill Clinton and the 15-year-old masseuse I met him twice claims Epstein s girl Daily Mail Online



You won't consider your work finished until the rapist is back in the White House.

lol, once again I induce a meltdown from the Political C.

Another fabrication from the NYLiar.

Your post has nothing to do either with my post or with reality.

Good to see you followed my orders to never change.

Remember the hearsay 'evidence' that you people used to convict Robert Menendez?

Gee...you're really trying hard to change the subject.

I must have lit quite the fire with this OP.

Great.

More coming.

I guess you've forgotten when you made a fool of yourself convicting Menendez before the FBI determined that the charges were unsubstantiated.

Funny, you claiming anyone else being a fool:

"First on CNN: Feds prepare criminal corruption charges against Senator Bob Menendez
By Evan Perez and Shimon Prokupecz, CNN

Updated 3:53 PM ET, Fri March 6, 2015
Other lines of inquiry against Menendez had included allegations he solicited prostitutes in the Dominican Republic, and that he violated the law helping win permanent U.S. residency for two Ecuadorian banking magnates, the Isaias brothers. The prostitution allegations collapsed after the purported prostitutes recanted their story, and the FBI didn't find evidence of wrongdoing in the Isaias matter, according to people briefed on the probe."
First on CNN Feds prepare criminal corruption charges against Senator Bob Menendez - CNN.com