Name that liberal sin

Page 4 of 11 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9, 10, 11  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Rusty Houser on Wed Apr 22, 2015 12:41 pm

Jammer wrote:democrats have ALWAYS been racists and murderers and probably always will be.  In fact, 87.9% of the murders in this country are committed by democrats.

At first I thought you just pulled that little factoid out of your anal region but a little research shows that you got it from queers4christ.com, the very same far leftist group pushing soybeans to make kids gay. Sadly their campaign has been very effective, they claim to turned 42.1% of men and 97.33 of women into homosexuals. These figures seem to be backed up by the latest census figures.

Their "87.9% claim is the result of some creative cherry picking, that figure is only for the ultra liberal, Owsley County, Kentucky. If you look at the national figures you'll see a very different story, liberal democrats are responsible for 78.398% of all murders, progressive democrats commit 39.01% and the remaining 15.875% are attributed to moderate republicans.

You may not have pulled that factoid out of your own ass but is pulling it out of someone else's ass really a good idea? You never know where it's been.

Rusty Houser

Posts : 600
Join date : 2014-03-03
Location : Right Behind You.

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Jammer on Wed Apr 22, 2015 2:35 pm

Paquette wrote:
Jammer wrote:democrats have ALWAYS been racists and murderers and probably always will be.  In fact, 87.9% of the murders in this country are committed by democrats.

At first I thought you just pulled that little factoid out of your anal region but a little research shows that you got it from queers4christ.com, the very same far leftist group pushing soybeans to make kids gay. Sadly their campaign has been very effective, they claim to turned 42.1% of men and 97.33 of women into homosexuals. These figures seem to be backed up by the latest census figures.

Their "87.9% claim is the result of some creative cherry picking, that figure is only for the ultra liberal, Owsley County, Kentucky. If you look at the national figures you'll see a very different story, liberal democrats are responsible for 78.398% of all murders, progressive democrats commit 39.01% and the remaining 15.875% are attributed to moderate republicans.

You may not have pulled that factoid out of your own ass but is pulling it out of someone else's ass really a good idea? You never know where it's been.

Thanks for confirming what we all knew, the more liberal you are the more likely you are a murderer.  Murder is EVIL - Liberals commit murder at an alarming rate - Therefore liberals by definition are EVIL people

I remain resolute, the world would be a much better place without liberals
avatar
Jammer

Posts : 2251
Join date : 2013-05-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Skeptical on Wed Apr 22, 2015 2:47 pm

The resident "trust science" person will no doubt also mock the Scientific American article about recent findings of excessive soy intake.
avatar
Skeptical

Posts : 2653
Join date : 2012-12-26
Location : Right here

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Rusty Houser on Wed Apr 22, 2015 3:53 pm

Skeptical wrote:The resident  "trust science" person will no doubt also mock the Scientific American article about recent findings of excessive soy intake.

You mean this article?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/soybean-fertility-hormone-isoflavones-genistein/

Did you actually read that article and think that it supports that idiotic claim that soy will turn you gay?



.

Rusty Houser

Posts : 600
Join date : 2014-03-03
Location : Right Behind You.

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Rusty Houser on Wed Apr 22, 2015 4:05 pm

Skeptical wrote:The resident  "trust science" person will no doubt also mock the Scientific American article about recent findings of excessive soy intake.

Seriously though, I know what you did. You searched desperately for anything that might have something/anything negative to say about excessive soy intake but didn't actually bother to read the article. You couldn't find anything even remotely scientific to back up the moronic Rutz article so you just picked something at random and hoped no one would notice that it had absolutely nothing to do with the pablum you're desperately trying to defend.

Rusty Houser

Posts : 600
Join date : 2014-03-03
Location : Right Behind You.

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Jammer on Wed Apr 22, 2015 4:09 pm

Paquette wrote:
Skeptical wrote:The resident  "trust science" person will no doubt also mock the Scientific American article about recent findings of excessive soy intake.



Did you actually read that article and think that it supports that idiotic claim that soy will turn you gay?


But being liberal turns you EVIL.  How can you justify the crime rates of these liberals, unless you are one of the criminals?  Why are you not demanding for an end to liberalism in this country?   It is clear from the data that you presented, liberals are the root cause of murder in this country.  Let' make it a safer country and demand an end to liberalism.
avatar
Jammer

Posts : 2251
Join date : 2013-05-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Rusty Houser on Wed Apr 22, 2015 4:22 pm

Jammer wrote:But being liberal turns you EVIL.  How can you justify the crime rates of these liberals, unless you are one of the criminals?  Why are you not demanding for an end to liberalism in this country?   It is clear from the data that you presented, liberals are the root cause of murder in this country.  Let' make it a safer country and demand an end to liberalism.

I knew it, you are putting on an act. Even the most moronic liberal couldn't build a more outrageous strawman than the dog and pony show that you put on.

That is unless you are so completely brain dead as to think that the "data" shows that 133.283% of the murders in this country are committed by democrats and moderate republicans. But that's impossible, no one could be so freaking unbelievably stupid to look at the "data" I presented and actually think it's data.

But then again, some people are stupid enough to think that eating soy will make you gay and that's pretty freaking stupid.

Rusty Houser

Posts : 600
Join date : 2014-03-03
Location : Right Behind You.

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Rusty Houser on Wed Apr 22, 2015 5:12 pm

Skeptical wrote:The resident  "trust science" person will no doubt also mock the Scientific American article about recent findings of excessive soy intake.

It looks like I found a kindred spirit for you. Not only has Rabbi Silberberg banned his students from eating any soy out of fear of catching the gay, he's also banned shaking hands out of that very same batshit crazy paranoia.

See, you're not alone.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4447271,00.html

Rusty Houser

Posts : 600
Join date : 2014-03-03
Location : Right Behind You.

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Jammer on Wed Apr 22, 2015 5:38 pm

Paquette wrote:
Jammer wrote:But being liberal turns you EVIL.  How can you justify the crime rates of these liberals, unless you are one of the criminals?  Why are you not demanding for an end to liberalism in this country?   It is clear from the data that you presented, liberals are the root cause of murder in this country.  Let' make it a safer country and demand an end to liberalism.

I knew it, you are putting on an act. Even the most moronic liberal couldn't build a more outrageous strawman than the dog and pony show that you put on.

That is unless you are so completely brain dead as to think that the "data" shows that 133.283% of the murders in this country are committed by democrats and moderate republicans. But that's impossible, no one could be so freaking unbelievably stupid to look at the "data" I presented and actually think it's data.

But then again, some people are stupid enough to think that eating soy will make you gay and that's pretty freaking stupid.

HA HA, your own data has hung you and being a moron for not being able to interpret your own data doesn't let you get by.  

Liberals =       78.398%
Progressives= 39.01%
---------------------------------
Subtracting the progressive liberals from the total liberals gives you the percentage of traditional liberals = 39.388%   So traditional liberals commit murder at about the same rate as progressive liberals.  That is just a little surprising as I thought progressive liberals were much worse.  But YOUR DATA shows all liberals are equally EVIL

Moderate Republicans is just another name for liberal hiding as an "R", so that 15.875% needs to be added to the "Liberal" score of 78.398% giving a total of 94.273 % of all murders committed by liberals of some flavor.

But that isn't the whole story as the remaining 5.727% of murders are committed by illegal aliens and since they are waiting to be registered as democrats, they need to also be designated as liberals.

So there you have it, your own data shows that liberals are responsible for 100% of the murders in this country.  YOUR OWN data, wow how bad is that.  Now in typical liberal fashion you will try to flip flop out of the noose, but you are screwed you evil jerkoff.
avatar
Jammer

Posts : 2251
Join date : 2013-05-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Rusty Houser on Wed Apr 22, 2015 5:52 pm

Jammer wrote:HA HA, your own data has hung you and being a moron for not being able to interpret your own data doesn't let you get by.  

Liberals =       78.398%
Progressives= 39.01%
---------------------------------
Subtracting the progressive liberals from the total liberals gives you the percentage of traditional liberals = 39.388%   So traditional liberals commit murder at about the same rate as progressive liberals.  That is just a little surprising as I thought progressive liberals were much worse.  But YOUR DATA shows all liberals are equally EVIL

Moderate Republicans is just another name for liberal hiding as an "R", so that 15.875% needs to be added to the "Liberal" score of 78.398% giving a total of 94.273 % of all murders committed by liberals of some flavor.

But that isn't the whole story as the remaining 5.727% of murders are committed by illegal aliens and since they are waiting to be registered as democrats, they need to also be designated as liberals.

So there you have it, your own data shows that liberals are responsible for 100% of the murders in this country.  YOUR OWN data, wow how bad is that.  Now in typical liberal fashion you will try to flip flop out of the noose, but you are screwed you evil jerkoff.

I have to admit, you're very talented. Do you write satire professionally or is it just a hobby? It must be tough keeping in character this long and this consistently, even Colbert slipped up once in a while.

You're a little (ok, a lot) over the top for the Onion or National Report but you'd fit right in with Free Wood Post. Do you mind if I submit a few of your more creative works to them?

Rusty Houser

Posts : 600
Join date : 2014-03-03
Location : Right Behind You.

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Jammer on Wed Apr 22, 2015 6:10 pm

Paquette wrote:
Jammer wrote:HA HA, your own data has hung you and being a moron for not being able to interpret your own data doesn't let you get by.  

Liberals =       78.398%
Progressives= 39.01%
---------------------------------
Subtracting the progressive liberals from the total liberals gives you the percentage of traditional liberals = 39.388%   So traditional liberals commit murder at about the same rate as progressive liberals.  That is just a little surprising as I thought progressive liberals were much worse.  But YOUR DATA shows all liberals are equally EVIL

Moderate Republicans is just another name for liberal hiding as an "R", so that 15.875% needs to be added to the "Liberal" score of 78.398% giving a total of 94.273 % of all murders committed by liberals of some flavor.

But that isn't the whole story as the remaining 5.727% of murders are committed by illegal aliens and since they are waiting to be registered as democrats, they need to also be designated as liberals.

So there you have it, your own data shows that liberals are responsible for 100% of the murders in this country.  YOUR OWN data, wow how bad is that.  Now in typical liberal fashion you will try to flip flop out of the noose, but you are screwed you evil jerkoff.

I have to admit, you're very talented. Do you write satire professionally or is it just a hobby? It must be tough keeping in character this long and this consistently, even Colbert slipped up once in a while.

You're a little (ok, a lot) over the top for the Onion or National Report but you'd fit right in with Free Wood Post. Do you mind if I submit a few of your more creative works to them?

I must warn you that all of my work is protected by the US Copyright laws and therefore subject to stringent requirements.  One of these is that I only authorize conservatives to use my creative efforts which means you might be just about the last person on earth right after Shortie that would be allowed to use my material.

Fine print:  And this does apply to YOU
avatar
Jammer

Posts : 2251
Join date : 2013-05-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Skeptical on Wed Apr 22, 2015 6:50 pm

Paquette wrote:
Skeptical wrote:The resident  "trust science" person will no doubt also mock the Scientific American article about recent findings of excessive soy intake.

You mean this article?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/soybean-fertility-hormone-isoflavones-genistein/

Did you actually read that article and think that it supports that idiotic claim that soy will turn you gay?



.

Did you??


 Hell, isn't that just like a liberal .. can't even spell !
avatar
Skeptical

Posts : 2653
Join date : 2012-12-26
Location : Right here

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Rusty Houser on Wed Apr 22, 2015 8:04 pm

Skeptical wrote:Did you??


 Hell, isn't that just like a liberal .. can't even spell !

You are a special kind of special.


Rusty Houser

Posts : 600
Join date : 2014-03-03
Location : Right Behind You.

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Darth Cheney on Wed Apr 22, 2015 8:14 pm

Paquette wrote:
Skeptical wrote:The resident  "trust science" person will no doubt also mock the Scientific American article about recent findings of excessive soy intake.

You mean this article?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/soybean-fertility-hormone-isoflavones-genistein/

Did you actually read that article and think that it supports that idiotic claim that soy will turn you gay?



.

Being Q U E E R is a choice.
avatar
Darth Cheney

Posts : 3313
Join date : 2012-12-26
Location : SE SD

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Rusty Houser on Thu Apr 23, 2015 6:38 am

Darth Cheney wrote:Being Q U E E R is a choice.

It's good to see that you agree that Rutz, WND, Silberberg and skeptical are complete morons for believing that idiotic soy fantasy. If they used the brains for half a second they'd realize that if soy makes you gay most all of southeast Asia would face a serious under population problem.

It's hard to believe that anyone dense enough to believe that crap could still function.

Rusty Houser

Posts : 600
Join date : 2014-03-03
Location : Right Behind You.

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Skeptical on Thu Apr 23, 2015 9:10 am

Paquette wrote:
Darth Cheney wrote:Being Q U E E R is a choice.

It's good to see that you agree that Rutz, WND, Silberberg and skeptical are complete morons for believing that idiotic soy fantasy. If they used the brains for half a second they'd realize that if soy makes you gay most all of southeast Asia would face a serious under population problem.

It's hard to believe that anyone dense enough to believe that crap could still function.

Why do you queers always try to push the notion nature prefers homosexuality for continuing the human species?

BTW, it is obvious you never read all parts of the article you so triumphantly rejected or else you wouldn't have made this asinine comment, "if soy makes you gay most all of southeast Asia would face a serious under population problem."  It is also obvious you failed to comprehend the context of the Scientific American article.

Another poster has it correct,  you are nothing but a lying through your ass progressive scumbag who pats themselves on the back for twisting others words and attributing your thought and words to others.


Last edited by Skeptical on Thu Apr 23, 2015 9:23 am; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Skeptical

Posts : 2653
Join date : 2012-12-26
Location : Right here

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  nightlight88 on Thu Apr 23, 2015 9:18 am

Skeptical wrote:
Paquette wrote:
Darth Cheney wrote:Being Q U E E R is a choice.

It's good to see that you agree that Rutz, WND, Silberberg and skeptical are complete morons for believing that idiotic soy fantasy. If they used the brains for half a second they'd realize that if soy makes you gay most all of southeast Asia would face a serious under population problem.

It's hard to believe that anyone dense enough to believe that crap could still function.

Why do you queers always try to push the notion nature prefers homosexuality for continuing the human species?

Wasnt nicci the big advocate of nature preferring homo?
avatar
nightlight88

Posts : 1680
Join date : 2012-12-25

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Skeptical on Thu Apr 23, 2015 10:06 am

nightlight88 wrote: Wasnt nicci the big advocate of nature preferring homo?

There have been quite a few comments claiming nature prefers homosexuality for continuance of the human species by various homo posters.
avatar
Skeptical

Posts : 2653
Join date : 2012-12-26
Location : Right here

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Rusty Houser on Thu Apr 23, 2015 10:14 am

Skeptical wrote:Why do you queers always try to push the notion nature prefers homosexuality for continuing the human species?

Can you show me where I have said anything like that or do you want to admit that you're bearing false witness?

Skeptical wrote:BTW, it is obvious you never read all parts of the article you so triumphantly rejected or else you wouldn't have made this asinine comment, "if soy makes you gay most all of southeast Asia would face a serious under population problem." It is also obvious you failed to comprehend the context of the Scientific American article.

Another poster has it correct, you are nothing but a lying through your ass progressive scumbag who pats themselves on the back for twisting others words and attributing your thought and words to others.

Please feel free to show me where the article says that soy makes people gay.

Rusty Houser

Posts : 600
Join date : 2014-03-03
Location : Right Behind You.

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Skeptical on Thu Apr 23, 2015 10:32 am

Paquette wrote:Can you show me where I have said anything like that or do you want to admit that you're bearing false witness?

LOL, LOL so quickly you conveniently forgot you made this accusation, " complete morons for believing that idiotic soy fantasy"

Be my guest and be first gator mouth!


Last edited by Skeptical on Thu Apr 23, 2015 11:09 am; edited 3 times in total
avatar
Skeptical

Posts : 2653
Join date : 2012-12-26
Location : Right here

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Skeptical on Thu Apr 23, 2015 10:49 am

Paquette wrote:
Skeptical wrote:Why do you queers always try to push the notion nature prefers homosexuality for continuing the human species?

Can you show me where I have said anything like that or do you want to admit that you're bearing false witness?

Skeptical wrote:BTW, it is obvious you never read all parts of the article you so triumphantly rejected or else you wouldn't have made this asinine comment, "if soy makes you gay most all of southeast Asia would face a serious under population problem."  It is also obvious you failed to comprehend the context of the Scientific American article.

Another poster has it correct,  you are nothing but a lying through your ass progressive scumbag who pats themselves on the back for twisting others words and attributing your thought and words to others.

Please feel free to show me where the article says that soy makes people gay.

You were just turned off by the title of the article and failed to read let alone comprehend

P.S.: Soy sauce is fine. Unlike soy milk, it’s perfectly safe because it’s fermented, which changes its molecular structure. Miso, natto and tempeh are also OK, but avoid tofu.

OR this

But the worst victims of soy are babies. Per kilogram of body weight, the average Japanese in 2000 ate 0.47 milligrams of soy isoflavones daily, while the average U.S. baby drinking soy formula got 6.25 milligrams.

or you wouldn't have made this idiotic claim, "if soy makes you gay most all of southeast Asia would face a serious under population problem."
avatar
Skeptical

Posts : 2653
Join date : 2012-12-26
Location : Right here

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  BladeRunner on Thu Apr 23, 2015 11:39 am

Remember...Paquette once said he could be wrong.
avatar
BladeRunner

Posts : 1917
Join date : 2012-12-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Skeptical on Thu Apr 23, 2015 12:17 pm

BladeRunner wrote:Remember...Paquette once said he could be wrong.

Well  "the trust science advocate" doesn't allow for anyone else but Paquette to form opinions from science!

Case in point is his/her downright rejection of Jim Rutz (deceased) article he so vehemently proclaimed as wrong.

If he/she had only read all the parts of the article and the entire Scientific American article he/she would, well ... could have understood how Mr Rutz expressed the opinion he did, rational people would have.

Paquette was too offended by, Soy is making kids 'gay' that there was no way it could be read objectively and the point being made was similar to another source of info that Paquette just may dismiss as wrong.
Phytoestrogens or isoflavones represent the most serious problem with soy infant formula. These estrogen-like compounds have the potential to disrupt baby’s hormonal system for life.

According to the Weston A. Price Foundation:


Toxicologists estimate that an infant exclusively fed soy formula receives the estrogenic equivalent of at least five birth control pills per day. By contrast, almost no phytoestrogens have been detected in dairy-based infant formula or in human milk, even when the mother consumes soy products. A recent study found that babies fed soy-based formula had 13,000 to 22,0000 times more isoflavones in their blood than babies fed milk-based formula.

Flooding of an infant boy’s bloodstream with female like hormones has the potential to cause serious developmental problems at puberty.  During the first few months of life, a baby boy has testosterone levels that could be as high as that of an adult male.   This “testosterone surge” readies the baby boy’s hormonal system for puberty both for normal development of the sexual organs and also patterns of male behavior

Could soy infant formula be responsible for the increasing problem of boys where physical maturation is delayed or even completely absent with retarded development of the sexual organs?

http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/why-soy-formula-even-organic-is-so-dangerous-for-babies/
avatar
Skeptical

Posts : 2653
Join date : 2012-12-26
Location : Right here

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Jammer on Thu Apr 23, 2015 12:29 pm

BladeRunner wrote:Remember...Paquette once said he could be wrong.

??????

Paquette = John Thornton ????

"Say it ain't so, Joe"
avatar
Jammer

Posts : 2251
Join date : 2013-05-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Rusty Houser on Fri Apr 24, 2015 7:48 am

Skeptical wrote:
BladeRunner wrote:Remember...Paquette once said he could be wrong.

Well  "the trust science advocate" doesn't allow for anyone else but Paquette to form opinions from science!

Case in point is his/her downright rejection of Jim Rutz (deceased) article he so vehemently proclaimed as wrong.

If he/she had only read all the parts of the article and the entire Scientific American article he/she would, well ... could have understood how Mr Rutz expressed the opinion he did, rational people would have.

Paquette was too offended by, Soy is making kids 'gay' that there was no way it could be read objectively and the point being made was similar to another source of info that Paquette just may dismiss as wrong.
Phytoestrogens or isoflavones represent the most serious problem with soy infant formula. These estrogen-like compounds have the potential to disrupt baby’s hormonal system for life.

According to the Weston A. Price Foundation:


Toxicologists estimate that an infant exclusively fed soy formula receives the estrogenic equivalent of at least five birth control pills per day. By contrast, almost no phytoestrogens have been detected in dairy-based infant formula or in human milk, even when the mother consumes soy products. A recent study found that babies fed soy-based formula had 13,000 to 22,0000 times more isoflavones in their blood than babies fed milk-based formula.

Flooding of an infant boy’s bloodstream with female like hormones has the potential to cause serious developmental problems at puberty.  During the first few months of life, a baby boy has testosterone levels that could be as high as that of an adult male.   This “testosterone surge” readies the baby boy’s hormonal system for puberty both for normal development of the sexual organs and also patterns of male behavior

Could soy infant formula be responsible for the increasing problem of boys where physical maturation is delayed or even completely absent with retarded development of the sexual organs?

http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/why-soy-formula-even-organic-is-so-dangerous-for-babies/

Do you really think that says that eating soy will make people gay?

Do you think that eating soy will make people gay?

Rusty Houser

Posts : 600
Join date : 2014-03-03
Location : Right Behind You.

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Name that liberal sin

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 4 of 11 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9, 10, 11  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum