Money for #ShePersisted


User avatar
Posted by #ShePersisted
15 Jan 2014, 9:23 pm

#ShePersisted Senior Moderator
User avatar
Senior Moderator

Posts: 16776
RichClem » 15 Jan 2014 4:01 pm wrote:
Oh gosh, how horrible that I posted facts, logic and sound opinion!

You posted the opinion of two neoclassical economists.
You call it 'sound' only because you like it.
1

User avatar
Posted by #ShePersisted
15 Jan 2014, 9:54 pm

#ShePersisted Senior Moderator
User avatar
Senior Moderator

Posts: 16776
TheAmerican » 15 Jan 2014 8:28 pm wrote:
...you should be ashamed of yourself, scumbag!
Telling everyone YOU did the 'coding' for the new forum? You DID NOT!


Image
1

User avatar
Posted by #ShePersisted
16 Jan 2014, 7:58 pm

#ShePersisted Senior Moderator
User avatar
Senior Moderator

Posts: 16776
PoliticalPopUp » 16 Jan 2014 6:58 pm wrote:
Misty » 16 Jan 2014 6:55 pm wrote:
I will never vote for her.
I had a chance to do that when I lived in NY and she was running for the Senate.
Didn't do it.
Whaddaya want? A medal?

No. What I want is for you not to make assumptions.
1

User avatar
Posted by #ShePersisted
02 Dec 2013, 1:54 pm

Post 02 Dec 2013, 1:54 pm
#ShePersisted Senior Moderator
User avatar
Senior Moderator

Posts: 16776
Cannonpointer » 30 Nov 2013 18:39 wrote:

Here is my complaint in brief against david: He violated our contract (I provide witty content, he provides a fundtioning platform) several times. He kept a poopy forum, he lost my precious content, he threatened to charge for membership, and he insisted that we give him personal info and buy profucts from him in order to not be a "waste of his time" - a not subtle threat to shut her down or charge admission, both being violations of our deal. ENOUGH. Fuck that guy.

Now, you bought - so you are presumably not a waste of his time. I did not and will not. So I am, so I moved on.


Yes, I bought and I'm apparently still a waste of his time as he never even bothered to respond to my message on Facebook.

If you wish to be of service, counsel Chuck on how to do the walk of shame with relative dignity. I haven't any doubt at all that you are well schooled in THAT discipline, young lady. :wub:


I never did the walk of shame, but I am well schooled in the art of getting guys to leave after I've had my way with them. :rolleyes:
1

User avatar
Posted by #ShePersisted
17 Jan 2014, 6:51 pm

#ShePersisted Senior Moderator
User avatar
Senior Moderator

Posts: 16776
RichClem » 17 Jan 2014 9:15 am wrote:
Liberal public figures are even worse than the complaints you make against these conservatives, so why don't journalists target liberal Democrats?
Because the MSM are hopelessly biased to the liberal-left, and against conservatives.

Yeah that whole Anthony Weiner story got no coverage in the 'Liberal' media, and what about that crazy Mayor of San Diego?
They ignored that whole thing too, didn't they?
Jackhole.

And it's not the job of journalists to 'target' people Kitten.
We leave that to FOX News.

When the bridge story exploded last week with the release of the e-mails, this is how FOX covered the story.

Shepard Smith summarizes the story in a one minute and fifteen second segment, telling viewers that "newly published e-mails and text messages suggest that an aide to Christie knew about an apparent revenge plot against the mayor of Fort Lee, who refused to endorse the governor for re-election," and advised them that the emails "are available out there, if you want to Google them, you can."

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/how-fox-news ... dnesday/#6


Now that's how Clem likes his news reported.
Go Google it. :rofl:
1

User avatar
Posted by #ShePersisted
17 Jan 2014, 6:58 pm

#ShePersisted Senior Moderator
User avatar
Senior Moderator

Posts: 16776
Cannonpointer » 17 Jan 2014 5:56 pm wrote:
By the way, google "Monica Lewinsky" and you'll see that even Clinton caught a tiny amount of flak from the librul meedja.

Wall to wall coverage for months. I guess Clem missed it. LOL
1

User avatar
Posted by #ShePersisted
19 Jan 2014, 2:27 pm

#ShePersisted Senior Moderator
User avatar
Senior Moderator

Posts: 16776
When it comes to attacking blacks, Conservative FOX News has the market cornered.
Eric Holder, Shirely Sherrod, Susan Rice and Van Jones to name a few.

But I guess it's okay to smear them, because they're Liberals.
1

User avatar
Posted by #ShePersisted
19 Jan 2014, 6:43 pm

#ShePersisted Senior Moderator
User avatar
Senior Moderator

Posts: 16776
Kobia2 » 19 Jan 2014 5:03 pm wrote:
The GOP did zero to obstruct Obama's Job creation schemes when the Dems controlled all for Barry's first 2 years in office...

They did not have a filibuster proof majority in the Senate for two years.
Al Franken was sworn in on July 7, the Democratic caucus in the Senate stood at 59. After that it was technically up to 60, but Ted Kennedy hadn't cast a vote in months and was housebound due to illness. He died a few weeks later and was replaced by Paul Kirk on September 24, finally bringing the Democratic majority up to 60 in practice as well as theory. After that the Senate was in session for 11 weeks before taking its winter recess, followed by three weeks until Scott Brown won Kennedy's seat in the Massachusetts special election.

So Democrats had an effective filibuster-proof majority for about 14 weeks.
1

User avatar
Posted by #ShePersisted
20 Jan 2014, 10:17 pm

#ShePersisted Senior Moderator
User avatar
Senior Moderator

Posts: 16776
RichClem » 20 Jan 2014 4:37 pm wrote:
Misty » 18 Jan 2014 6:26 pm wrote:
Normally I might actually agree with you about that Puss.
This kind of thing happens all the time, but this is different.
There is something very unseemly about withholding Sandy relief funds from a city that was 80% under water after the storm.
They are entitled to that money and there should be no strings attached.

This is exactly why I prefer the private sector to handle almost everything, rather than politicians.
However, Democrats play this game as well, not that you'll ever bleat about that.

Both sides play politics, but like I said, this is different.
When has a Democratic Governor ever withheld disaster relief funds from a city to get a project that they wanted approved?
If you know of any cases, cite them here.

Finally, it turns out this mayor is full of crap and has lied about the issue. She did get most of the funding she asked for.

That's not true.
The Christie administration is being misleading when they say she got $70 million.
The $70 million given to Hoboken was through flood insurance and other mechanisms that did not need approval from the state.
She only received $300,000 in Christie-approved funds.

A majority of this amount, $43 million, consists of National Flood Insurance Program claims that have been paid out to flood insurance policyholders in Hoboken. Flood insurance is, well, insurance; it's supposed to pay out when you get flooded.

The $70 million figure also includes $8.5 million in Small Business Administration loans, $6.3 million in FEMA Individual Assistance payments, and $2 million in Federal Transit Administration funding.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/small-sandy-grants-to-hoboken-not-so-suspicious-2014-1#ixzz2r00FZQ00


He can't take credit for any of that money.
1

User avatar
Posted by #ShePersisted
21 Jan 2014, 8:10 pm

#ShePersisted Senior Moderator
User avatar
Senior Moderator

Posts: 16776
TheNightStalker » 21 Jan 2014 5:06 pm wrote:
A 30 year study has confirmed that liberal men have small penises.

You've been studying Liberal men's penises for 30 years?

Image


Image
1

User avatar
Posted by #ShePersisted
21 Jan 2014, 8:27 pm

#ShePersisted Senior Moderator
User avatar
Senior Moderator

Posts: 16776
TheNightStalker » 21 Jan 2014 7:19 pm wrote:
Misty » 21 Jan 2014 7:10 pm wrote:
TheNightStalker » 21 Jan 2014 5:06 pm wrote:
A 30 year study has confirmed that liberal men have small penises.

You've been studying Liberal men's penises for 30 years?

Image

Image


Damn it


Image
-1

User avatar
Posted by #ShePersisted
22 Jan 2014, 3:32 pm

Post 22 Jan 2014, 3:32 pm
#ShePersisted Senior Moderator
User avatar
Senior Moderator

Posts: 16776
golfboy » 22 Jan 2014 9:03 am wrote:
GailyBee » 22 Jan 2014 8:58 am wrote:
Read the indictments against McDonnell and get back to me.
Thanks.

I love these kinds of responses, which mean of course, "I haven't read it, so I can't tell you, but this guy is guilty because he's a Republican".

I didn't get that from GailyBee's post at all.
Troll.
1

User avatar
Posted by #ShePersisted
24 Jan 2014, 9:10 pm

#ShePersisted Senior Moderator
User avatar
Senior Moderator

Posts: 16776
larryc12 » 24 Jan 2014 7:37 pm wrote:
The problem, as I see it, lies in the fact that taxpayers are required to finance a behavior. Should we finance drunks, drug users, child molesters?

I have a real problem with you categorizing sex as a 'behavior' akin to drinking, drug use and child molestation.
That sounds very much like slut shaming to me.
Sex is a normal natural part of life, and contraception should be a routine part of women's health care.
I don't even understand why this is controversial.

larry: I know you think that providing free-of-charge BC pills will stymie births out of wedlock, but will it? How expensive are BC pills and why aren't they already stymying these births?

Why do you right wingers go right to free?
The issue is whether they should be covered under health insurance, just like any other part of a woman's health care.
The ACA mandates that contraception be covered under the policies that people are paying for.
How is that free?

You can't just go to the drugstore and buy BC pills.
You need to have regular checkups every six months or so to get your prescription renewed.
If you don't have insurance, that costs more than many women can afford.

Myself, I don't have a problem with giving poor women free BC.
It's a lot more cost effective than what it will cost us later on if they have children that they cannot afford to take care of.
One way or another we pay, so I'd opt for the cheaper option.
18