Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Pelosi on Cramer just now
Comments
-
Now ask yourself why he's been the top GOP in the Senate all this tim.
-
This guys gets mePitchfork51 said:
You love nancy pelosi and crave the admiration of fellow democratsdnc said:
Hi there.DuckHHunterisafag said:
He can't and is always playing both sides. At some point in your life, you need to fucking take a stand. I don't give a fuck what some RAT thinks of me. I have enough friends and plenty of success in my life without having to care what some dipshit liberal thinks.SFGbob said:
Always love the pox on both their houses responses. People think this makes them look wise and non-partisan.dnc said:Yeah, I don't have any doubts that the GOP tried to slide some dirty shit in.
But don't try and take the moral high ground while simultaneously sliding more dirty shit into your version.
Both sides need to DIAFF.
You're free to cite the "dirty shit" the GOP put into the bill. The bullshit about the "slush fund" is no longer operative.
I enjoy pissing off people on both sides.
The idea this is some attempt at being more liked is retarded.
Hope that helps. -
-
Needs more Solar Industry Subsidies. And Trannies on Corporate Boreds. That about evens it out, in a Lib's mind.MelloDawg said:
Do you think all of the inclusions in Pelosi’s bill will make it to the final draft? I certainly don’t. My opinion was this was an initial foray for her and then they meet in the middle because yes, many of the provisions are a little sillyDuckHHunterisafag said:
This is almost always the reality dnc and the msm media refuses to report this. Just accepting it and saying both sides need to diaff doesn't do anything to shed light on the real issues.dnc said:
I said what Nancy did was worse. I'm not arguing the GOP had anything that comes close to approximating it.SFGbob said:
What I think is that you've got a talking point but no evidence in support of it. I'll wait here while you look for something the GOP put into this bill that comes close to even approximating requiring racial and gender diversity on corporate boards.dnc said:
I never said shit about a slush fund.SFGbob said:
Always love the pox on both their houses responses. People think this makes them look wise and non-partisan.dnc said:Yeah, I don't have any doubts that the GOP tried to slide some dirty shit in.
But don't try and take the moral high ground while simultaneously sliding more dirty shit into your version.
Both sides need to DIAFF.
You're free to cite the "dirty shit" the GOP put into the bill. The bullshit about the "slush fund" is no longer operative.
If you don't think the GOP tried to slide something in there that isn't applicable you're pretty gullible. Of course they did.
And Nancy went above and beyond over the top in response. What she did was worse, I'm not arguing otherwise.
Both sides suck. That has shit to do with looking wise and non partisan. That's called having common sense. -
The GOP is worthless. They wasted Trump's two years where something could have got done. That's all a president gets. Then the opposition takes over a house and you run for re election and as soon as you are re elected you are a lame duck and everyone is running for 2024dnc said:
We agree McConnell is worthless.RaceBannon said:The reason the left is still crying about Garland is because it is the one time in Mitch's life that he did something worthwhile that his base wanted.
It stands out
Obama got Obamacare his first two years and that was about it
The problem with adding more parties is that they just bring their own shopping list to the party and want their share. The graft involved to put together a government in a multi party system is impressive
There is no such thing as a two party system in America which has amused me for decades because most people think its the law -
I forgot about the trannies provision. Cease negotiations!TurdBomber said:
Needs more Solar Industry Subsidies. And Trannies on Corporate Boreds. That about evens it out, in a Lib's mind.MelloDawg said:
Do you think all of the inclusions in Pelosi’s bill will make it to the final draft? I certainly don’t. My opinion was this was an initial foray for her and then they meet in the middle because yes, many of the provisions are a little sillyDuckHHunterisafag said:
This is almost always the reality dnc and the msm media refuses to report this. Just accepting it and saying both sides need to diaff doesn't do anything to shed light on the real issues.dnc said:
I said what Nancy did was worse. I'm not arguing the GOP had anything that comes close to approximating it.SFGbob said:
What I think is that you've got a talking point but no evidence in support of it. I'll wait here while you look for something the GOP put into this bill that comes close to even approximating requiring racial and gender diversity on corporate boards.dnc said:
I never said shit about a slush fund.SFGbob said:
Always love the pox on both their houses responses. People think this makes them look wise and non-partisan.dnc said:Yeah, I don't have any doubts that the GOP tried to slide some dirty shit in.
But don't try and take the moral high ground while simultaneously sliding more dirty shit into your version.
Both sides need to DIAFF.
You're free to cite the "dirty shit" the GOP put into the bill. The bullshit about the "slush fund" is no longer operative.
If you don't think the GOP tried to slide something in there that isn't applicable you're pretty gullible. Of course they did.
And Nancy went above and beyond over the top in response. What she did was worse, I'm not arguing otherwise.
Both sides suck. That has shit to do with looking wise and non partisan. That's called having common sense. -
Yeah, I don't need no stinking facts, I have very, very strong feelings.dnc said:
I don't need to look it up. I know how Mitch McConnell operates.SFGbob said:
Okay, cite for me something the GOP put into the bill that even goes a little way to coming close to it. I'll wait here while you look.dnc said:
I said what Nancy did was worse. I'm not arguing the GOP had anything that comes close to approximating it.SFGbob said:
What I think is that you've got a talking point but no evidence in support of it. I'll wait here while you look for something the GOP put into this bill that comes close to even approximating requiring racial and gender diversity on corporate boards.dnc said:
I never said shit about a slush fund.SFGbob said:
Always love the pox on both their houses responses. People think this makes them look wise and non-partisan.dnc said:Yeah, I don't have any doubts that the GOP tried to slide some dirty shit in.
But don't try and take the moral high ground while simultaneously sliding more dirty shit into your version.
Both sides need to DIAFF.
You're free to cite the "dirty shit" the GOP put into the bill. The bullshit about the "slush fund" is no longer operative.
If you don't think the GOP tried to slide something in there that isn't applicable you're pretty gullible. Of course they did.
And Nancy went above and beyond over the top in response. What she did was worse, I'm not arguing otherwise.
Both sides suck. That has shit to do with looking wise and non partisan. That's called having common sense. -
History is feelings in your world?SFGbob said:
Yeah, I don't need no stinking facts, I have very, very strong feelings.dnc said:
I don't need to look it up. I know how Mitch McConnell operates.SFGbob said:
Okay, cite for me something the GOP put into the bill that even goes a little way to coming close to it. I'll wait here while you look.dnc said:
I said what Nancy did was worse. I'm not arguing the GOP had anything that comes close to approximating it.SFGbob said:
What I think is that you've got a talking point but no evidence in support of it. I'll wait here while you look for something the GOP put into this bill that comes close to even approximating requiring racial and gender diversity on corporate boards.dnc said:
I never said shit about a slush fund.SFGbob said:
Always love the pox on both their houses responses. People think this makes them look wise and non-partisan.dnc said:Yeah, I don't have any doubts that the GOP tried to slide some dirty shit in.
But don't try and take the moral high ground while simultaneously sliding more dirty shit into your version.
Both sides need to DIAFF.
You're free to cite the "dirty shit" the GOP put into the bill. The bullshit about the "slush fund" is no longer operative.
If you don't think the GOP tried to slide something in there that isn't applicable you're pretty gullible. Of course they did.
And Nancy went above and beyond over the top in response. What she did was worse, I'm not arguing otherwise.
Both sides suck. That has shit to do with looking wise and non partisan. That's called having common sense.
K. -
-
You feel that McConnell put something bad in this bill. You have no evidence that he did and you can't cite anything bad he put into the bill. But, but Merick Garland!!!! Great fucking argument.dnc said:
History is feelings in your world?SFGbob said:
Yeah, I don't need no stinking facts, I have very, very strong feelings.dnc said:
I don't need to look it up. I know how Mitch McConnell operates.SFGbob said:
Okay, cite for me something the GOP put into the bill that even goes a little way to coming close to it. I'll wait here while you look.dnc said:
I said what Nancy did was worse. I'm not arguing the GOP had anything that comes close to approximating it.SFGbob said:
What I think is that you've got a talking point but no evidence in support of it. I'll wait here while you look for something the GOP put into this bill that comes close to even approximating requiring racial and gender diversity on corporate boards.dnc said:
I never said shit about a slush fund.SFGbob said:
Always love the pox on both their houses responses. People think this makes them look wise and non-partisan.dnc said:Yeah, I don't have any doubts that the GOP tried to slide some dirty shit in.
But don't try and take the moral high ground while simultaneously sliding more dirty shit into your version.
Both sides need to DIAFF.
You're free to cite the "dirty shit" the GOP put into the bill. The bullshit about the "slush fund" is no longer operative.
If you don't think the GOP tried to slide something in there that isn't applicable you're pretty gullible. Of course they did.
And Nancy went above and beyond over the top in response. What she did was worse, I'm not arguing otherwise.
Both sides suck. That has shit to do with looking wise and non partisan. That's called having common sense.
K. -
in the final draft - no, easily added into the final version after those bastards approve the draft. Then it gets it final tweaks (meaning add stuff back in) then gets entered into the record.MelloDawg said:
Do you think all of the inclusions in Pelosi’s bill will make it to the final draft? I certainly don’t. My opinion was this was an initial foray for her and then they meet in the middle because yes, many of the provisions are a little sillyDuckHHunterisafag said:
This is almost always the reality dnc and the msm media refuses to report this. Just accepting it and saying both sides need to diaff doesn't do anything to shed light on the real issues.dnc said:
I said what Nancy did was worse. I'm not arguing the GOP had anything that comes close to approximating it.SFGbob said:
What I think is that you've got a talking point but no evidence in support of it. I'll wait here while you look for something the GOP put into this bill that comes close to even approximating requiring racial and gender diversity on corporate boards.dnc said:
I never said shit about a slush fund.SFGbob said:
Always love the pox on both their houses responses. People think this makes them look wise and non-partisan.dnc said:Yeah, I don't have any doubts that the GOP tried to slide some dirty shit in.
But don't try and take the moral high ground while simultaneously sliding more dirty shit into your version.
Both sides need to DIAFF.
You're free to cite the "dirty shit" the GOP put into the bill. The bullshit about the "slush fund" is no longer operative.
If you don't think the GOP tried to slide something in there that isn't applicable you're pretty gullible. Of course they did.
And Nancy went above and beyond over the top in response. What she did was worse, I'm not arguing otherwise.
Both sides suck. That has shit to do with looking wise and non partisan. That's called having common sense.
Final tweaks is the technical term for final edits. -
The issue is while they're haggling all this out people are losing jobs.
It's not the time for politics as usual. It's the time for Congress to do their jobs and prioritize the nation above their party.
Clearly they have no idea how to do that. -
Actually, they did have an idea on how to do that. They had a bill that was negotiated by both parties in the Senate that was ready for passage Sunday night. Pelosi and the Rats blew up that deal in order push a raft of left-wing bullshit like more tax credits for wind and solar. Instead of focusing your blame and anger at the people who are causing this delay you've decided that taking a "both sides do it" approach makes you appear thoughtful and above it all.dnc said:The issue is while they're haggling all this out people are losing jobs.
It's not the time for politics as usual. It's the time for Congress to do their jobs and prioritize the nation above their party.
Clearly they have no idea how to do that. -
-
Lotta statists in this thread.
On both sides. -
"Her breasts .... What about her breasts"salemcoog said: -
Here's where I would say Mellodawg's analysis fits. Was it dirty? Yes but people's lives were not literally on the line as is the case right now. Elections in normal times have consequesnces and the Senate belonged to the GOP when we had a shitty progressive president trying to remake the country in his image.dnc said:
The McConnell GOP has played very dirty on a number of occasions. The SCOTUS seat is the most notable example. I'm thrilled there's another pro life judge because of it but you don't pull something that dirty without the other side screwing you over in return. Retribution is coming. The GOP's dirtiness absolutely part of the problem.DuckHHunterisafag said:
This is almost always the reality dnc and the msm media refuses to report this. Just accepting it and saying both sides need to diaff doesn't do anything to shed light on the real issues.dnc said:
I said what Nancy did was worse. I'm not arguing the GOP had anything that comes close to approximating it.SFGbob said:
What I think is that you've got a talking point but no evidence in support of it. I'll wait here while you look for something the GOP put into this bill that comes close to even approximating requiring racial and gender diversity on corporate boards.dnc said:
I never said shit about a slush fund.SFGbob said:
Always love the pox on both their houses responses. People think this makes them look wise and non-partisan.dnc said:Yeah, I don't have any doubts that the GOP tried to slide some dirty shit in.
But don't try and take the moral high ground while simultaneously sliding more dirty shit into your version.
Both sides need to DIAFF.
You're free to cite the "dirty shit" the GOP put into the bill. The bullshit about the "slush fund" is no longer operative.
If you don't think the GOP tried to slide something in there that isn't applicable you're pretty gullible. Of course they did.
And Nancy went above and beyond over the top in response. What she did was worse, I'm not arguing otherwise.
Both sides suck. That has shit to do with looking wise and non partisan. That's called having common sense.
It's not just a democratic issue.
Both sides suck and we need a viable third (and hopefully fourth) party in this nation yesterday. -
Dems made sure our native Americans were included
-
