by playing a Latino song he never heard of. Do these liberals ever stop pandering? Why do they talk one way at Goldman Sachs, another way in Harlem, and another way in Miami? I'm surprised he didn't come out on a burro wearing a sombrero.

Mira, mira...I want chooooo, to vote for meeee, so I can be your jefe. A churro in every pot!

You see what Biden did here, and before when he told blacks that Romney "wants to put y'all back in chains", and Hilary talking ebonics to a roomful of blacks.

One does not do this, in front of an audience one has any respect for.

You do realize Biden had just been introduced by Luis Fonsi right? I'll help you out here, Luis Fonsi sings Despacito. It's the beginning of Hispanic Heritage month.

Is it going to be 4 years of tan suit posts Jim?

Just think what vets think when Tweety with 5 deferments, son of a millionaire walks in to Fortunate Son

Some folks are born, made to wave the flag
Ooh, their red, white and blue
And when the band plays "Hail to the Chief"
Ooh, they point the cannon at you, Lord
It ain't me
It ain't me
I ain't no senator's son, son
It ain't me
It ain't me
I ain't no fortunate one, no
Some folks are born, silver spoon in hand
Lord, don't they help themselves, y'all
But when the taxman comes to the door
Lord, the house looks like a rummage sale, yeah
It ain't me
It ain't me
I ain't no millionaire's son, no, no
It ain't me
It ain't me
I ain't no fortunate one, no
Yeah, yeah
Some folks inherit star spangled eyes
Ooh, they send you down to war, Lord
And when you ask 'em, "How much should we give?"
Ooh, they only answer "More! More! More!", Y'all
It ain't me
It ain't me
I ain't no military son, son
It ain't me
It ain't me
I ain't no fortunate one, one
It ain't me
It ain't me
I ain't no fortunate one, no, no, no
It ain't me
It ain't me
I ain't no fortunate son, no, no, no
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I wonder if he keeps hot sauce in his purse
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And the lyrics to the song ABout breathing on a woman's neck, and entering her danger zones until she forgets her last name? Imagine if any Republican used that song.

You do realize Biden had just been introduced by Luis Fonsi right? I'll help you out here, Luis Fonsi sings Despacito. It's the beginning of Hispanic Heritage month.

Is it going to be 4 years of tan suit posts Jim?

"You do realize Biden had just been introduced by Luis Fonsi right?"

Si, si, yo comprendo...

Some "artist", singing a song so grossly sexist. Something about wanting the woman to feel the mans hot breath on her neck? I guess we all know why Biden liked the song.

Does anybody keep track of how many women have credibly accused Donald Trump of rape and sexual assault?
As far as I know Bill Barr is the first AG whose father wrote sci-fi novels about teenage sex slaves and then Jeffrey Epstein built a replica of the ‘sex castle’ from those novels on his private island where he trafficked underage girls. But I could be wrong.

And some wonder why The Justice Department says defaming women is part of Trump’s job.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Just think what vets think when Tweety with 5 deferments, son of a millionaire walks in to Fortunate Son

Some folks are born, made to wave the flag
Ooh, their red, white and blue
And when the band plays "Hail to the Chief"
Ooh, they point the cannon at you, Lord
It ain't me
It ain't me
I ain't no senator's son, son
It ain't me
It ain't me
I ain't no fortunate one, no
Some folks are born, silver spoon in hand
Lord, don't they help themselves, y'all
But when the taxman comes to the door
Lord, the house looks like a rummage sale, yeah
It ain't me
It ain't me
I ain't no millionaire's son, no, no
It ain't me
It ain't me
I ain't no fortunate one, no
Yeah, yeah
Some folks inherit star spangled eyes
Ooh, they send you down to war, Lord
And when you ask 'em, "How much should we give?"
Ooh, they only answer "More! More! More!", Y'all
It ain't me
It ain't me
I ain't no military son, son
It ain't me
It ain't me
I ain't no fortunate one, one
It ain't me
It ain't me
I ain't no fortunate one, no, no, no
It ain't me
It ain't me
I ain't no fortunate son, no, no, no
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sounds like your life is very unfortunate--thanks for letting us know from your iPhone/Mobile device. The vast majority of us who aren't born with a silver spoon feel fortunate to be alive. We do OK. But there are charities to help you out. No one has to go hungry. Even the government will help you out for a while. At least until you can get rich off of writing more songs about how unfortunate you are.

Does anybody keep track of how many women have credibly accused Donald Trump of rape and sexual assault?

Actually, yes, several are keeping track. No doubt you have . . . and will tell us . . . it's coming soon . . .

As far as I know Bill Barr is the first AG whose father wrote sci-fi novels about teenage sex slaves and then Jeffrey Epstein built a replica of the ‘sex castle’ from those novels on his private island where he trafficked underage girls. But I could be wrong.

Barr had a creative father. A lot of folks have stupid fathers, and that is passed on down the line.

And some wonder why The Justice Department says defaming women is part of Trump’s job.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's in the Constitution.

Sounds like your life is very unfortunate--thanks for letting us know from your iPhone/Mobile device. The vast majority of us who aren't born with a silver spoon feel fortunate to be alive. We do OK. But there are charities to help you out. No one has to go hungry. Even the government will help you out for a while. At least until you can get rich off of writing more songs about how unfortunate you are.

I guess you’ve been in the basement a long time.
Fortunate Son was written in the late 60s and was a hit for CCR.
It’s message was rich kids born with a silver spoon in their mouth had Daddy buy them out of the draft.
Quite the appropriate song for Bonespurs walkon
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Some "artist", singing a song so grossly sexist.
It's not sexist, just racy. #1 latin song for over a year. I'd say quite a few people found it to be pretty good art.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/09/16/fact-check-biden-received-multiple-draft-deferments-vietnam/5809482002/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/09/16/fact-check-biden-received-multiple-draft-deferments-vietnam/5809482002/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Did Biden's rich father pay a doctor to write up a fake diagnosis?

Did Biden's rich father pay a doctor to write up a fake diagnosis?

I don't know, did he?

You're a piece of work, Spence, you really are
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I guess you’ve been in the basement a long time.
Fortunate Son was written in the late 60s and was a hit for CCR.
It’s message was rich kids born with a silver spoon in their mouth had Daddy buy them out of the draft.
Quite the appropriate song for Bonespurs walkon
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I know about the song. I played off of it for all those victims that think they lead an unfortunate life because of the silver spooners, and for folks like you who want more stuff given to and done for us to make our lives fortunate, and for the popular songsters who get rich off of their various protest songs.

It's not sexist, just racy. #1 latin song for over a year. I'd say quite a few people found it to be pretty good art.

sure, sure, because as we ALL know, popular=good.

"I'd say quite a few people found it to be pretty good art"

defending Biden? Get outta here...

Someone help! He’s Biden my ear!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's not sexist, just racy. #1 latin song for over a year. I'd say quite a few people found it to be pretty good art.

Spence, since you couldn't post a single issue where you think liberals are wrong, and you can never criticize democrats, how are you any different than a trained seal like Sean Hannity?

I don't know, did he?
I've never heard anyone accuse him, his dad was a used car salesmen so unless his doctor was a good friend it's not likely. My father had deferments throughout the war, doesn't mean they're always unfair.

his dad was a used car salesmen
.
.

this explains so much...

Well it is scranton vs. park avenue
Or didn’t you know Bonespurs mommy drove a Rolls
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

this explains so much...

explains how he'd think it's OK to promise a cure for cancer if he gets elected.

It's not sexist, just racy. #1 latin song for over a year. I'd say quite a few people found it to be pretty good art.

I seem to remember liberals losing their #^&#^&#^&#^& over another racy song, that my grandparents generation was very fond of...

Baby it's cold outside...

I seem to remember liberals losing their #^&#^&#^&#^& over another racy song, that my grandparents generation was very fond of...

Baby it's cold outside...

Funny how that works, huh
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's not vandalism, just expression. I'd say quite a few people found it to be pretty good art.



:jester:

:jester:

Feel free to stop by Spence’s house and tag his garage, with a little luck they’ll already have defunded his police department, or at the very least they know enough to not pickup the phone when they see it’s his number.

Maybe a nice “Leisure Suit Jesus” on the wall will help with his property values
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Feel free to stop by Spence’s house and tag his garage, with a little luck they’ll already have defunded his police department, or at the very least they know enough to not pickup the phone when they see it’s his number.

Maybe a nice “Leisure Suit Jesus” on the wall will help with his property values
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

:kewl::rotf3:

The guy who carries his son's rosary and goes to church on Sunday will eliminate God.

Meanwhile, the 3x married, serial adulterer who golfs on Sunday & holds the Bible upside down is your salvation, Evangelicals.

If you believe this, I am selling a bridge with a free My Pillow.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Meanwhile, the 3x married, serial adulterer who golfs on Sunday & holds the Bible upside down is your salvation, Evangelicals.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm curious, genuinely curious, to know if this is a dishonest statement, or just a stupid statement.

No Christian will hold Trump up as an example of what a Christian should be. That's not why Christians like him. Christians like him, because they know he will fight for them, he won't (unlike Obama) pass a bill forcing them to pay for other people's birth control or abortions, which the SCOTUS struck down. He will defend their rights.

Is that going too fast for you?

And if being a serial adulterer is bad, can you share your opinion of Bill Clinton speaking at the DNC, and of all things, bashing Trump for personal behavior? Any irony there?

The guy who carries his son's rosary and goes to church on Sunday will eliminate God.

.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That guy is rabidly pro abortion, and worse, advocated for bills which trampled the rights of Christians, to the point that the SCOTUS struck them down.

That guy is a liberal first, with a demonstrable, irrefutable track record of violating the civil rights of Christians. He and Obama were successfully sued by Hobby Lobby and the Little Sisters of The Poor for violating their rights.


You forgot to mention that. Shocking.

There is no healthcare plan. There is no infrastructure plan. There is no plan to deal with the pandemic. There is no plan to deal with the climate crisis. There is no plan to deal with structural racism. There is no plan to deal with economic injustice. There is only an idiot and 200K dead.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There is no healthcare plan. There is no infrastructure plan. There is no plan to deal with the pandemic. There is no plan to deal with the climate crisis. There is no plan to deal with structural racism. There is no plan to deal with economic injustice. There is only an idiot and 200K dead.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You asked about Trump and Christians. You were falsely saying that Christians think Trump is a good example of what a Christian should be. I pointed out how absurd that is. That's not hwy we like him. We like him because he's a far better ally than Biden has shown to be. Try. Making. That. Wrong.

Have Little Sisters of the Poor had to sue Trump to get their civil rights back? Or Hobby Lobby? No. Because Trump looks out for them.

I'm on your side that the GOP needs a better healthcare vision. No argument here.

"There is no plan to deal with economic injustice"

That's horsebleep. There is a plan, it it's a superior plan to the Obama/Biden plan. The proof is in the data and results, look no further.

There is no healthcare plan. There is no infrastructure plan. There is no plan to deal with the pandemic. There is no plan to deal with the climate crisis. There is no plan to deal with structural racism. There is no plan to deal with economic injustice. There is only an idiot and 200K dead.


There is no power in the Constitution given to the President to create plans for the nation. The President executes the plans of Congress.

There is no power in the Constitution given to Congress to cure all the ills of the nation.

There is an ongoing plan to deal with the pandemic.

There are various health care plans, but no constitutional power given to Congress to initiate nor enforce a national health care plan.

The Constitution is a plan to deal with racism and justice.

Congress is responsible for planning any federal environmental regulation. From the Environmental and Energy Study Institute:

"In the United States, federal action on climate change has stagnated in Congress, and the Clean Air Act has become the central national vehicle for developing emissions reduction regulations.

"The EPA is likely to give states flexibility in pursuing compliance of its emission reduction regulations, which may spur innovative methods of compliance. For example, RGGI, a cap and trade program in ten northeast states, and California’s emerging trading program, may serve as these states’ implementation plans.

"Given the traditional and Constitutional allocations of governmental power in the United States, much greater attention should be given to how any national program can provide incentives to and preserve the autonomy of state and local governments.

"While Congress has stalled in passing comprehensive climate change legislation, many states and localities have taken their own steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions."



Your notion that the President has such sweeping powers is very Progressive--but not constitutional.

Tweety bankrupting us and moving on is a bad plan.
Trickledown didn’t work when Reagan did it and worked the same this time.
Lower taxes for some, more debt for all.
Lost the presidency in the next term for Republicans.

Besides from ushering in Bolshevism, the Obama-Biden administration presided over the longest economic expansion on record and falling violent crime.

This year, by contrast, Trump admin has seen the worst recession since the 1930s and a rising murder rate.

Make that wrong or is it just “I take no responsibility at all”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There is no power in the Constitution given to the President to create plans for the nation. The President executes the plans of Congress.

There is no power in the Constitution given to Congress to cure all the ills of the nation.

There is an ongoing plan to deal with the pandemic.

There are various health care plans, but no constitutional power given to Congress to initiate nor enforce a national health care plan.

The Constitution is a plan to deal with racism and justice.

Congress is responsible for planning any federal environmental regulation. From the Environmental and Energy Study Institute:

"In the United States, federal action on climate change has stagnated in Congress, and the Clean Air Act has become the central national vehicle for developing emissions reduction regulations.

"The EPA is likely to give states flexibility in pursuing compliance of its emission reduction regulations, which may spur innovative methods of compliance. For example, RGGI, a cap and trade program in ten northeast states, and California’s emerging trading program, may serve as these states’ implementation plans.

"Given the traditional and Constitutional allocations of governmental power in the United States, much greater attention should be given to how any national program can provide incentives to and preserve the autonomy of state and local governments.

"While Congress has stalled in passing comprehensive climate change legislation, many states and localities have taken their own steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions."



Your notion that the President has such sweeping powers is very Progressive--but not constitutional.

So who’s building the wall and where did the funding come from?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So who’s building the wall and where did the funding come from?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Building? I think you meant "built" and Mexico paid for it.

Tweety bankrupting us and moving on is a bad plan.

The Congress, not the President, has bankrupted us.

Trickledown didn’t work when Reagan did it and worked the same this time.

There was no such thing advocated as trickle down." And the tax reductions did work as planned.

The Reagan Administration did not advocate "trickle down." Thomas Sowell explains it well:

"There have been many economic theories over the centuries, accompanied by controversies among different schools of economists. But one of the most politically prominent economic theories today is one that has never existed among economists — the “trickle down” theory. Yet this non-existent theory has been attacked from the New York Times to a writer in India. President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s speech writer Samuel Rosenman referred to “the philosophy that had prevailed in Washington since 1921, that the object of government was to provide prosperity for those who lived and worked at the top of the economic pyramid, in the belief that prosperity would trickle down to the bottom of the heap and benefit all.” The same theme was repeated in the election campaign of 2008, when candidate Barack Obama attacked what he called “the economic philosophy” which “says we should give more and more to those with the most and hope that prosperity trickles down to everyone else.”

"Whether in the United States or in India, and whether in the past or in the present, “trickle down” has been a characterization and rejection of what somebody else supposedly believed. Moreover, it has been considered unnecessary to cite any given person who had ever actually advocated any such thing.

"The phrase “trickle down” often comes up in discussions of tax policies . . . tax revenues have in a number of instances gone up when tax rates have been reduced. But any proposal by economists or others to cut tax rates, including reducing the tax rates on higher incomes or on capital gains, can lead to accusations that those making such proposals must believe that benefits should be given to the wealthy in general or to business in particular, in order that these benefits will eventually “trickle down” to the masses of ordinary people. But no recognized economist of any school of thought has ever had any such theory or made any such proposal. It is a straw man. It cannot be found in even the most voluminous and learned histories of economic theories.

"What is sought by those who advocate lower rates of taxation or other reductions of government’s role in the economy is not the transfer of existing wealth to higher income earners or businesses but the creation of additional wealth when businesses are less hampered by government controls or by increasing government appropriation of that additional wealth under steeply progressive taxation laws. Whatever the merits or demerits of this view, this is the argument that is made — and which is not confronted, but evaded, by talk of a non-existent “trickle-down” theory.

"More fundamentally, economic processes work in the directly opposite way from that depicted by those who imagine that profits first benefit business owners and that benefits only belatedly trickle down to workers.

"When an investment is made, whether to build a railroad or to open a new restaurant, the first money is spent hiring people to do the work. Without that, nothing happens. Even when one person decides to operate a store or hamburger stand without employees, that person must first pay somebody to deliver the goods that are going to be sold. Money goes out first to pay expenses and then comes back as profits later — if at all. The high rate of failure of new businesses makes painfully clear that there is nothing inevitable about the money coming back.

"Even with successful and well-established businesses, years may elapse between the initial investment and the return of earnings. From the time when an oil company begins spending money to explore for petroleum to the time when the first gasoline resulting from that exploration comes out of a pump at a filling station, a decade may have passed. In the meantime, all sorts of employees have been paid — geologists, engineers, refinery workers, and truck drivers, for example. It is only afterwards that profits begin coming in. Only then are there any capital gains to tax. The real effect of a reduction in the capital gains tax is that it opens the prospect of greater future net profits and thereby provides incentives to make current investments that create current employment.

"Nor is the oil industry unique. No one who begins publishing a newspaper expects to make a profit — or even break even — during the first year or two. But reporters and other members of the newspaper staff expect to be paid every payday, even while the paper shows only red ink on the bottom line. Similarly, Amazon.com began operating in 1995 but its first profits did not appear until the last quarter of 2001, after the company had lost a total of $2.8 billion over the years. Even a phenomenally successful enterprise like the McDonald’s restaurant chain ran up millions of dollars in debts for years before it saw the first dollar of profit. Indeed, it teetered on the brink of bankruptcy more than once in its early years. But the people behind the counter selling hamburgers were paid regularly all that time.

"In short, the sequence of payments is directly the opposite of what is assumed by those who talk about a “trickle-down” theory. The workers must be paid first and then the profits flow upward later — if at all.

Lower taxes for some, more debt for all.
Lost the presidency in the next term for Republicans.

Besides from ushering in Bolshevism, the Obama-Biden administration presided over the longest economic expansion on record and falling violent crime.

One of the longest things about it was how long it took to recover. It was the most anemic recoveries in 50 years.

And the Republican tax cuts and regulation cuts changed the nature of the federal "economy." An essentially different economy was created. It was not an extension of the Obama recovery.

This year, by contrast, Trump admin has seen the worst recession since the 1930s and a rising murder rate.

The recession is not a result of the Republican tax and regulatory cuts, but the economic shutdown enforced by government. The rising murder rate is a result partially of that but mostly because criminals have been given more of a pass by various local administrations.

Make that wrong or is it just “I take no responsibility at all”


What you said was either wrong or deceptive. It was just the repetition of Dem talking points, as is your "I take no responsibility" quote which has become a weaponized string of words that have no longer any relation to what was meant by it. Pure propaganda.

So who’s building the wall and where did the funding come from?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The money came from Congress. Building a wall is a congressional wish. Trump is executing it.

The money came from Congress. Building a wall is a congressional wish. Trump is executing it.

Arguably wrong, that’s why it’s in court
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Arguably wrong, that’s why it’s in court
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If it's arguably wrong, then argue it. Don't just say it.

What you said was either wrong or deceptive. It was just the repetition of Dem talking points, as is your "I take no responsibility" quote which has become a weaponized string of words that have no longer any relation to what was meant by it. Pure propaganda.

The GDP, employment, deficit and trade imbalance all make your blue arguments losers.

Remember Hillary Clinton called some of Tweety’s supporters deplorables, they went nuts. Tweety says COVID is a good thing because they're disgusting people and he no longer has to shake hands with them, and you lick his balls. Brilliant, are they blue and did that influence your font color?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The GDP, employment, deficit and trade imbalance all make your blue arguments losers.

The reasons for those things matter. They are the real substance.

Remember Hillary Clinton called some of Tweety’s supporters deplorables, they went nuts. Tweety says COVID is a good thing because they're disgusting people and he no longer has to shake hands with them, and you lick his balls. Brilliant, are they blue and did that influence your font color?


This nasty verbal bilge suits you very well.

This nasty verbal bilge suits you very well.

Is that a considered opinion from the losers and suckers viewpoint?

Will Tweety nominate one of his porn stars for Supreme Court?

Or do we have to ask his personal lawyer: Barr?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

.

Remember Hillary Clinton called some of Tweety’s supporters deplorables, they went nuts voiced their displeasure by clobberng her in an election no one thought she could lose, relegating her to wandering around alone, mumbling to anyone who will listen that it was everyone's fault except her own.

. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Fixed it for you. Did we "go nuts" by today's standard? How many cities were sacked like the Cossacks rode through? How many Hilary-free autonomous zones were set up in Texas and Kansas? How many people were murdered?

Is that a considered opinion from the losers and suckers viewpoint?

Will Tweety nominate one of his porn stars for Supreme Court?

Or do we have to ask his personal lawyer: Barr?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Amy Barrett has a law degree from Notre Dame, and she and her husband adopted two orphans from Haiti. What does that tell you about her character?

And when the Dems give her the Kavanaugh gauntlet, how will that play with moderates in North Carolina and Ohio?

This nasty verbal bilge suits you very well.

He's seeing Amy Barrett replace Ginsburg, and his brain can't process it.

What kind of president calls the grieving granddaughter of RBG a liar on national TV?
How will that play with suburban housewives?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What kind of president calls the grieving granddaughter of RBG a liar on national TV?
How will that play with suburban housewives?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The same guy who, appallingly, made fun of Carly Fiorina's appearance. I don't defend his personality, I don't even try.

But again, if your party gave a convention speech to Bill Clinton, you lose a little bit of moral authority.

What kind of president calls the grieving granddaughter of RBG a liar on national TV?
How will that play with suburban housewives?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Who cares if RBG didn't want to be replaced by Trump? She chose not to retire during the Obama years. That was very risky.

Senate Republicans’ professed devotion to carrying out their constitutional duties is commendable—but would have been rather more convincing had they not blocked the admission of evidence at the trial the Constitution required them to hold earlier this year.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Who cares if RBG didn't want to be replaced by Trump? She chose not to retire during the Obama years. That was very risky.

yup