• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republicans scold Liz Cheney

Catz Part Deux said:
I have to agree with this one. Starting out with personal attacks probably isn't going to encourage people to tango with you, either.
Click to expand...

I'd much rather tango with you than Ockham. ;)
 
Catz Part Deux said:
That's because we make a hot couple. :mrgreen: But the fact that we're stacked and packed might get in the way of dancing. :)
Click to expand...

One of us will wear platform shoes so that our stacks are not knocking together. ;)

Wait a second, you make it seem as though their getting in the way is a bad thing. lol
 
Catz Part Deux said:
I have to agree with this one. Starting out with personal attacks probably isn't going to encourage people to tango with you, either.
Click to expand...

Are you having reading comprehension problems?

aps' opening response to him:

It's not helpful or constructive to whom? You? OMG, I'm devastated.
Click to expand...

Next time check to see who started what before taking a side.
 
texmaster said:
Are you having reading comprehension problems?
Click to expand...

Her opening response didn't attack him. It was a reasonable question in a debate. Ockham's personal (subjective) opinion is not more valid than that of Aps, particularly without supportive evidence.
 
aps said:
LOL We have gone from Ockham and I having an immature fight to you and I coming on to each other. It's beautiful! :rofl
Click to expand...

Ain't nothing wrong with a little love between women. And Texmaster has shown us clearly where he stands, since all he cares about is Ockham.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Ain't nothing wrong with a little love between women. And Texmaster has shown us clearly where he stands, since all he cares about is Ockham.
Click to expand...

Texmaster does not approve of same sex couplings...
 
OMG, I am literally laughing out loud! Catz and Redress, thanks for the laughs! :rofl :rofl
 
Moderator's Warning:
Enough with the personal attacks. Stick to the topic at hand.
 
Can the woman love continue? Or will it get the thread moved downstairs? :mrgreen:
 
Get a room and invite Liz Cheney. She needs some love. Hell, I'd dress up as a chick for a little love - lace bra and thong, high heels, the works!
 
Redress said:
Texmaster does not approve of same sex couplings...
Click to expand...

I would appreciate it if you were not dishonest about my political positions.

I have never once said I am against same sex couplings.

The point many of us are making is that not all defendants and the methods used to defend those Islamic terrorists are equal to American civilian trials. The very fact Holder tried to force civilian trials despite the cost and law not requiring it shows these lawyers have not changed their positions they had while they were defending these Islamic terrorists.
 
Last edited:
texmaster said:
I would appreciate it if you were not dishonest about my political positions.

I have never once said I am against same sex couplings.

The point many of us are making is that not all defendants and the methods used to defend those Islamic terrorists are equal to American civilian trials. The very fact Holder tried to force civilian trials despite the cost and law not requiring it shows these lawyers have not changed their positions they had while they were defending these Islamic terrorists.
Click to expand...

To be honest, Tex, the idea that we can hold a certain category of (political) prisoner without access to legal counsel or a trial, and that conservatives are defending this dangerous undermining of constitutional rights, is horrifying to me.

Why do some conservatives hate the constitution?
 
aps said:
Have I missed this subject matter elsewhere on this message board? When both the right and the left attack the former Vice President's daughter, I am surprised that no one here has posted about this. …
Click to expand...

I posted this thread last Friday to this very forum, for which I was reprimanded for using a thread title that did not precisely match the article's title despite having taken the time to craft an opening post with four separate sources, Power Line, The New York Times, The American Prospect and The Huffington Post. My thread was summarily moved to the “US Partisan Politics and Political Platforms” forum. Such is the nature of hard and fast rules. Not that I am complaining. Just sayin'. :cry:
 
Last edited:
Catz Part Deux said:
To be honest, Tex, the idea that we can hold a certain category of (political) prisoner without access to legal counsel or a trial, and that conservatives are defending this dangerous undermining of constitutional rights, is horrifying to me.
Click to expand...

Actually that is a lie. They are in the process of being tried in military tribunals which is what the law allows.

Your lack of understanding how foreign born terorists do not deserve the rights of American civilians is horrifying to me.

Why do some conservatives hate the constitution?
Click to expand...

Please explain how conservatives hate the Constitution?

You can start with explaining where in the Constitution it allows for foreign caught terrorists to be tried with American civilian rights.
 
Sounds like you would prefer to talk about that instead of what an un-American bitch Liz Cheney is.
 
So when's the discussion of the topic at hand going to continue and the forum fellatio between Catz and aps going to stop? I'd like to continue... or will it be another OMG circle jerk? Lemme know when the adults can talk again... otherwise, I'll let the peanut gallery continue...
 
Chappy said:
I posted this thread last Friday to this very forum, for which I was reprimanded for using a thread title that did not precisely match the article's title despite having taken the time to craft an opening post with four separate sources, Power Line, The New York Times, The American Prospect and The Huffington Post. My thread was summarily moved to the “US Partisan Politics and Political Platforms” forum. Such is the nature of hard and fast rules. Not that I am complaining. Just sayin'. :cry:
Click to expand...

I saw your thread this morning and felt badly, Chappy. I'm sorry.
 
Ockham said:
So when's the discussion of the topic at hand going to continue and the forum fellatio between Catz and aps going to stop? I'd like to continue... or will it be another OMG circle jerk? Lemme know when the adults can talk again... otherwise, I'll let the peanut gallery continue...
Click to expand...

Fellatio between two women? Wow. Who would have thought?

This subject matter was discussed to the hills yesterday. You missed it.
 
texmaster said:
Actually that is a lie. They are in the process of being tried in military tribunals which is what the law allows.
Click to expand...

How long were they held before given access to military tribunals and legal counsel?

Your lack of understanding how foreign born terorists do not deserve the rights of American civilians is horrifying to me.
Click to expand...

Your horror doesn't move me.

Please explain how conservatives hate the Constitution?
Click to expand...

Well, clearly, they aren't in favor of innate human rights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom