Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Pelosi on Cramer just now
Comments
-
Did you just wake up man? This isn't a standard, run-of-the-mill bill. RATs are screaming like stuck pigs about how not enough is being done in an incredibly tough and challenging time. Wasting our time with this RAT BS is literally killing people but you're analysis is it's brilliant political strategy??? GTFO and stop pulling our legs. I'm not buying your shtick.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. -
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. -
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. -
Garland was dirty?
Disagree -
What a coward.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. -
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. -
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 -
They had a bill that could have been passed Sunday night it was a bipartisan bill. The Rats blew it up for purely political reasons and these asswholes are trying to pull a "both sides do it" dodge.DuckHHunterisafag said:
Did you just wake up man? This isn't a standard, run-of-the-mill bill. RATs are screaming like stuck pigs about how not enough is being done in an incredibly tough and challenging time. Wasting our time with this RAT BS is literally killing people but you're analysis is it's brilliant political strategy??? GTFO and stop pulling our legs. I'm not buying your shtick.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. -
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
-
Chinned just for bluntness. I have no opinion on it's accuracy, but it's a solid jab to the face.Pitchfork51 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.
