Englebert

Liberals are fighting hard to make sure pre-existing conditions are covered because they know that Liberalism will soon be classified as a mental disorder. They don't want to pay higher premiums for having a pre-existing condition. Liberals don't care about people, they are only looking out for themselves. (Whew, it's hard work to twist reality into a preconceived notion. I don't know how Liberals do it consistently...and without shame.)

You make a statement that "I will admit to it and you won't". I asked to you explain what I won't admit to, and you reply with this. You are beyond childish. Third graders are laughing at you. But you do keep up the entertainment on this board.

So what do your Republican white friends think about you when you tell them the government is corrupt but we need more of it? I bet they laugh in your face instead of behind your back.

What will you admit that I won't. That has to be one of the stupidest statements I've ever seen. You will never admit and or find fault with anything Obama does. I have no problem calling out anyone, including Trump. And what does your link have to do with the topic? Are you trying to deflect or is it you are just not bright enough to realize your link has nothing to do with the topic? Bring Big Girl back, you are starting to get worse than her.

What does this have to do with my post? Why did you quote me then put this link? My response was about over regulation. Your link is saying that more regulation is needed. And your link shows your ignorance on this subject. The politicians are doing this (in their minds) to help the people. And I've already written the rationale for why politicians are doing this. The ISP's are claiming they need more revenue. The rationale is that they can sell the user's data to advertisers, thus pass the new revenue stream onto them, or alternatively they can raise their prices on consumers. The politicians have agreed on passing the revenue onto the advertisers because the consumers have shown over and over and over that they are willing to endure more advertisements and loss of privacy for cheaper prices.

And look how we ended up. Government telling us what we can eat and not eat, government spying on us, recording every phone call and email message, tracking every website we visit, government taking half of our incomes to redistribute, government running up a 20 trillion dollar debt, government telling our schools what they can teach and what they can't teach, government stifling and even strangling small business with unnecessary regulations, government picking and choosing what business receive government benefits and tax breaks, government blatantly lying to public to push an unproven theory which will cost trillions of dollars, etc. I have no doubt if the South would have won our government would be less elitist and resemble more closely the will of the people.

So when Brady skipped the White House visit during Obama's reign was it because he didn't want to shake hands with a crook?

What make's you think this? What privileged knowledge of my life to you think you know about? You're analytical and assessment skills are severely lacking, so you just attempt basic and mundane stereotypes. That is just childish and boorish, and incredibly embarrassing.

How's that blinding hate working out for you? I expected a response at minimum of a 6th grade level. Hate can have a severe detrimental effect on the brain.

Sorry, I misread your statement to attribute the "honest" part to Pelosi. And that has nothing to do with ebonics, but it's revealing that you feel the need to throw race into the conversation. When it's all you got...

So it that an admission you are not qualified? On another thread you accused and admonished many of us for liking someone based solely on if they agreed with how we think. Then you turn around less than five minutes later and do the same thing. Your hypocrisy based on hate is obvious to practically everyone on this board, but stunningly not to you. That's why I asked if you think your qualified to make an assessment. Your answer is very telling.

Again, do you really feel qualified to assess the intelligence level of...well, anyone. Hate can be so blinding.

You messed that sentence up completely. It should read "We like people that think." Period.

Did you really just say "at least she is honest"? Do you not remember Pelosi accusing Tea Party members of shouting racial slurs at her...a blatant lie. Breitbart offered $100,000.00 to anyone that could provide proof. With thousands of cells phones rolling, no one could claim the prize, but Pelosi continued to spout that lie. And let's not forget the billions of dollars her husband made on government contracts. Of course you don't remember...the hate you harbor tends to be blinding to the transgressions of your heroes.

Are you sure you are qualified to assess the intelligence level of Palin?

What does this mean?

Do these tunnels have the capability of thwarting ground penetrating radar? Are they stealth tunnels?

Maybe so. But you can't give a total pass to someone and deride another for doing the same thing or even less. You either believe infidelity (or any value) is wrong or you don't. If new tobie thinks a value is okay that is contrary to what one runs on, he should attack him as a hypocrite. But he attacks those on the Right for simply engaging in an act while ignoring worse acts by those on the Left.

Just do a Bing or Google search. You can read for days. It's a pretty simple task. I'm not going to bother reading your link because I've read enough of these links from Huffington Post to know if have nothing to gain, and would probably lose some I.Q. points just by clicking on it.

When it comes to infidelity, there is a plethora of examples from both sides. I know that. You know that. But you ignore the transgressions of your heroes while at the same time try to criticize others on the Right for the same (or even less) actions. How about being consistent if you want credibility.

Blah Blah Blah. You've spouted this crap before, got called on it, and ran and hid when challenged to support your arguments. I fully expect the same result this time. So predictable and laughable. Expand your horizons to some real news sites and you will quickly realize which side is full of hate. Obama didn't receive a 100th of the vile that Bush received. And he fell way behind Trump after Trump's first day in office. But you keep believing what you want to believe. You might not see it, but the rest of us do.

So what did he say that was crazy? Are you running and hiding from a simple question. Please answer so we can compare his statements with yours for all of the board to analyze who is the crazy one. I have a feeling you won't like the results.

I'm just pointing out the fallacy in your post. The topic was about who had received more disrespect, not who dished it out. How about trying to stick to a topic every once in a while.

And yet you will criticize FoxNews but adorn your love and admiration on the King of Sleaze...good old Bill Clinton. And you have the nerve to suggest what Ben Carson says is crazy. Now that is funny.

Spoken from a man that has posted some of the craziest stuff on this site. Do you really think you are qualified to analyze the normalcy of anyone?