I'll say the same thing I'm saying to Anon de Plume. We'll see.

 

One thing I do like about the United States Constitution is that it protects the right of the American Communist Party to exist and to propagate its opinions.

I am confident that President Obama and Senator Sanders are in favor of protecting the right of the American Communist Party to exist. I am in favor of that right too. I am also confident that, like me, the President and the Senator oppose the American Communist Party on specific issues.

 

Funny how the left finds months of scandal in Dick Cheney's bad aim at the duck pond and finds nothing whatsoever of interest when Hillary Clinton takes a seven figure bribe to help Russia acquire North America's largest uranium mine.

 

Yet they have no qualms with nationalizing the healthcare system on a procedural vote.

 

What is even less impressive than this comment by you than the attitude, is the semi literate way it is expressed.

 

No, not so much, the GOP is very concerned about NATIONAL SECURITY.

What is real concerning here, is that you leftist' are thinking that way, ''it's just democrat e-mail servers''.

 

Is the snotrag going to outlaw guns with that pen in his paw? Yes or no?

 

OH,, SO UNLIKE YOU. Attacking character, rather than the substance of princess clarise's comment, shame on you.








Fucking hypocrite.

 

I love how he throws it out there in the hopes we'll take the bait.

It's hilarious to me how, over the summer, about a zillion stories came out magically about all the Republicans who have "done the same thing," as though "two wrongs make a right." It's like the scenes with all the "invented crises" and "invented fads" in that movie, Wag the Dog.

But if you read between the lines, in virtually every case, on both the Democrat and the Republican sides, the emails in question are either genuinely private accounts that carry over into public life, or they are campaign accounts run, hosted and funded by the parties' respective national committee organizations. Yes, the accounts continue to be used for a time, and yes, mistakes are made in their shutdown. But it happens to both sides for understandable reasons.

Contrast that with Hillary Clinton's conduct. As Secretary of State, she sets up a private server through a personal contract, pays for it personally, and uses it in lieu of the official systems afforded to her.

Even that, I suppose we could brush off, if the alleged conduct of her foundation were not so outrageous.

Well, as I said, we'll see.

 

Hillary is as dirty and nasty as a week old worn pair of panties.

She is a full blown corrupted state-ist, she's above the law, and quick witted, she's the typical leftist avoiding the questions.

Her bridge is burnt.

 

The Affordable Care Act was on December 24, 2009 approved in the Senate by a 60 to 39 vote.

In March 21, 2010 it was approved in the House of Representatives by a 219 to 212 vote.

In March 21, 2010 it was signed by President Obama.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr3590

How does any of this resemble the way it would have been done under a Communist dictatorship?

 

"It's a part of the tax code", is not an answer, it is an excuse.

When a corporation take advantage of the tax code, it's "corporate welfare", every good progressive knows that.

But when it is individuals doing it, it isn't welfare, "it's part of the tax code".

Give me a fucking break.


One source:http://www.libertyunderfire.org/201...get-tax-refunds-when-they-have-paid-no-taxes/
Another source is even more damning:http://taxfoundation.org/blog/60-percent-households-now-receive-more-transfer-income-they-pay-taxes

 

That sure looks and appears to be cut and dry.

How much money was dedicated to ''certain states'' to get the votes?

Lets ask dingy Harry.

 

They rammed it through on a procedural budget continuance vote, to prevent Scott Brown from participating. As you know damned well, jerk. Ted Kennedy's proxy was in there holding up the works, preventing Brown from taking the seat he'd won in a fair election, but the gig was up and Brown was on his way into Washington, so they rammed it through.

 

Don't get use to it

 

It's a good thing this liberal has no plans on voting for Hillary...

Also, no one on the right has been under an investigation like Hillary, so bringing Cheney into this means nothing. He's never been the target of an official investigation.

So, it's an excuse to obey the law?
Also, you said millions, your article only mentions hundreds of thousands... That is almost an order of magnitude.

 

If you insist...

 

Where do you get your majority of voters claim? Who won both houses of Congress in a landslide in the last election? Furthermore, the Constitution backs me claim! See my post on the "general welfare" clause.

 

The right tends to cull out its bad actors. Minor transgressions like sexual impropriety are harshly punished when exposed. Newt Gingrich could and should have gone a lot higher than he did, but he couldn't keep his own house in order, and his wings were clipped from within. Personally I think the Republican Party is needlessly Puritanical in this regard and could benefit from a bit more pragmatism. But they are a God-fearing lot, aren't they?

The Democrats don't punish social impropriety. They circle the wagons around it. Look at Bill Clinton. Jesus H. Christ. Rumor has it he's done junkets at Epstein's Fantasy Island, boffing underaged whores. Bill Clinton invited Epstein's madame to Chelsea's wedding! But none of this goes any farther than tabloid news. If he were a republican, we'd be seeing PEDOPHILE!!!!! headlines night and day until he was hung on a lamppost. But he's Bill Clinton. So, nothing to see here, folks, move along.

That's only the minor stuff. Sexual impropriety is small potatoes.

Help me out here. I'm trying to think of a Republican who's been credibly accused of one tenth of the stuff Hillary Clinton's currently being investigated for-- from her private email servers, to Benghazi, to the CIA/Libya/Turkey gun running coverup, to her role in the formation of ISIS, to her coddling of her Iranian mistress, and all of the bribery and extortion associated with her "foundation."

I'm wracking my brain, and I can't think of anyone at all, more deserving of investigation than she.

 

You know, DL was online earlier today when you and I both tag-teamed the slippery bastard on how Obamacare was approved.

And what did he do? Patented DL: he hid under a rock.

Every fucking time he loses an argument he disappears. Then he materializes a day later and claims to be the Master of Facts. What a pathetic fraud.