I thought posting something like that was against your rules
ONLY if we do it jojo - APPARENTLY
I thought posting something like that was against your rules
I thought you didn’t care about dislikes?I'm not saying I know anything...because i don't......but you look at any thread on here....might be 5 dislikes...........we have 3 times that on one page.......and some use it as their only form of communication......throw in the fact very little political discussion any more....all the hate and discourse...........something has to break
jojo brought his troubles on himself....i told him he was bringing attention to himself.........when he started in on a pic thread....others let him have it....and it was soon spotted.......like you said ...you reap what you sow.........you don't want a reasonable political discussion.....things have to change before things self destruct..........it is always a few rotten apples that ruin the buschel
provide examples of your rules that I brokeyou might find out alot sooner than that.....thanks for todays posts...
I can not for the life of me understand how you think your posts hurt me in anyway.....i think they are stupid and take up a full page saying nothing
Nope just showing what you think is reasonable political discussion. Typical Liberal, you think you can say and do whatever you want to people.3 times in 19 pages......not a good use of any brain waves......nor anything political
More people died under joenot sure I even want to have a discussion with you.......
but i will....first....and you will want to deny.....but the trump virus had alot of people out of work and some biz closings....things were in the tank....throw in Trumps tarriffs....which all they did was raise the price to the consumer....it goes quite a bit......but even some of your republican senators will admit the economy is on trump
VERY well said!Nope just showing what you think is reasonable political discussion. Typical Liberal, you think you can say and do whatever you want to people.
But when they do it back you run and tell on them. Very manly,
Mods are aware of your posts also now, they had to shutdown dislikes so they didn’t have put up with you whining about it
You read my post from last night, so you understand this site is not my life. Unlike you, who spends 16 hours a day posting here. Not to mention all the research you have to do to posts hundreds of porn pics a day.
And you call us weird
I like coming here, I’m glad I met FunnyBunny, we had a great conversation. thank you by the way.
But if I get banned today, my life won’t change one bit. On the other hand you would be devastated
I even stuck up for you when talking to FB, because I didn’t want anyone to get suspended.
like I said yesterday I’m a grown man who can dish it out and take it.
I insulted you and called you names, you did the same. Because we both did it to each other I was fine with it.
Tit for tat. You know
But you couldn’t just be a man and dish out insults and take them just as well.
So you tried to get me banned because I made fun of you, better than you made fun of me
I tried talking reasonably with you yesterday, was hoping you would’ve responded like a man. And we could quit doing this. I should of known better
You even harassed Tnc in a private message by gloating about getting me suspended for a day
Which the mods are aware of.
There is no Supreme Court ruling that will "ban" abortion.Evidence that Supreme Court leak came from the right laid out by New York magazine columnist
Republicans have blamed the left for leaking a draft opinion that would overturn Roe v. Wade, but a New Yorker columnist says the evidence points toward an abortion opponent on the right.
Jonathan Chait appeared Friday on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" to discuss his latest column, which theorizes that someone who wants the 5-4 decision banning abortion to stand, based on another leak a few days prior to Politico's bombshell report on Justice Samuel Alito's draft opinion.
"I want to be clear that I have no idea who leaked this and it definitely could have come from the left," Chait said, "but I wrote this because so much of the commentary from the right simply assumed that the leaks that come from the left and ignored the fact that we have a smaller leak three days before from the Wall Street Journal that had the same effect they're decrying, which is to put public pressure on the justices to rule in a certain way. That is the reason why they say this leak is so dangerous, because it subjects the justices to this kind of lobbying and that is exactly why the Wall Street Journal was leaked this early version, and they really had the inside scoop on the breakdown inside of the court."
The statement was "overturn Roe vs. Wade". Obviously the reference to the 5-4 decision could only be the decision to uphold abortion rights.There is no Supreme Court ruling that will "ban" abortion.
His post contains the term "ban abortion"The statement was "overturn Roe vs. Wade". Obviously the reference to the 5-4 decision could only be the decision to uphold abortion rights.
like always.....you are in the dark.....show me where my statement was.......it was an article........but that's ok show me where it said it there...........your comprehension just a little shortHis post contains the term "ban abortion"
The article in which you posted... YOUR POST...like always.....you are in the dark.....show me where my statement was.......it was an article........but that's ok show me where it said it there...........your comprehension just a little short