- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 10/2/22 at 7:17 pm to L.A.
quote:
Yes, sitting justices. Never an investiture
A distinction without a difference.
Don't keep swinging your arms when you're in quicksand, dimwit.
Posted on 10/2/22 at 7:19 pm to L.A.
Another box checking bullshite affair...
Posted on 10/2/22 at 7:25 pm to texridder
quote:That's the second time you've called me a name in this thread, completely unprovoked. I'm treating you respectfully. I ask you to do the same with me
Don't keep swinging your arms when you're in quicksand, dimwit.
Posted on 10/2/22 at 7:26 pm to texridder
quote:
but if it is it makes her look even more entitled and self-important.
She is a Supreme Court justice. She is important.
You can always tell when one of you hayseeds forces making a comment because you think it's something you should comment on. Can't help yourself. But invariably you end up looking the fool-- like here.
Here’s what’s important and historical with regards to KJB…..she will be the first justice on the Supreme Court who was unable to give a simple biological definition of what a woman is…….allow that Groomer madness to marinate.
Posted on 10/2/22 at 7:32 pm to Bass Tiger
quote:I saw that. She's a political pick, chosen to further an agenda. I am not hopeful about her
Here’s what’s important and historical with regards to KJB…..she will be the first justice on the Supreme Court who was unable to give a simple biological definition of what a woman is…….allow that Groomer madness to marinate.
Posted on 10/2/22 at 7:33 pm to L.A.
Serving grape drank?
Posted on 10/2/22 at 7:35 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Bill Ryan, a spokesperson for the Library of Congress, told Fox News Digital it has been their "pleasure to host a variety of public and private events with the Supreme Court in connection with many different justices over the years (Justices Roberts, Ginsburg, Gorsuch and Sotomayor among the more recent).
Thanks. for the backup.
Them boys was ganging up on me while my back was turned.
Posted on 10/2/22 at 7:40 pm to AggieHank86
quote:quote:
I'll probably post a link anywayquote:
No you won’t. Because you can’t find one.
AggieHank86
oops
Are you offering up texdiddler or AggieHank86 as your sock account?
Oops.
Posted on 10/2/22 at 7:49 pm to L.A.
quote:
That's the second time you've called me a name in this thread, completely unprovoked. I'm treating you respectfully. I ask you to do the same with me
To be fair, the names I called you are not even a blip on the radar compared to what I have been called in this thread.
But your comment is legit. I'll take it to heart.
Posted on 10/2/22 at 7:58 pm to texridder
quote:You are correct, and if you want to RA the comments I will be happy to take a look at each and every one. it saves me the trouble of searching for them by scrolling through the thread
To be fair, the names I called you are not even a blip on the radar compared to what I have been called in this thread.
But to my point, none of those comments have come from me. We can disagree without being disagreeable
Posted on 10/2/22 at 8:21 pm to texridder
quote:
To be fair, the names I called you are not even a blip on the radar compared to what I have been called in this thread.
I apologize for calling you a liar in this thread. But you have to understand, our interactions in the past haven’t been great. You must understand my skepticism. I will take responsibility for my part in that. I hope you will do the same.
That being said, L.A is one of the best admins on this site. You have to admit, your demeanor invites the vitriol.
I would like nothing more than a debate based upon facts. However, anytime I respond to you I’m called a jackal or some other nonsensical adjective. You say you’re a lawyer. I have my doubts. However you seem to know enough that you may be. Hank and I disagree about as much as you and I do, but we have been able to be civil. I’m not above civil discourse. Are you?
Posted on 10/2/22 at 8:23 pm to L.A.
but she's a queen.
Posted on 10/2/22 at 8:26 pm to texridder
so, no link?
Posted on 10/2/22 at 8:45 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
I apologize for calling you a liar in this thread. But you have to understand, our interactions in the past haven’t been great...I would like nothing more than a debate based upon facts.
It would be way easier for you to count the number of threads in which you haven't called me a liar than ones you have.
I asked you in this thread to document my having lied and you didn't respond. That's not the first time that I have asked you to do that, and not the first time and that you have gone blank.
I look stuff up before I post. You might like what I find, but that doesn't change anything.
You want to debate facts. Let's have at it. That gives me a decided advantage.
Posted on 10/2/22 at 8:58 pm to texridder
quote:
I asked you in this thread to document my having lied and you didn't respond. That's not the first time that I have asked you to do that, and not the first time and that you have gone blank.
Dude. It has been proven that Hillary paid for the dossier. The dossier has been summarily dismissed. Yet you still hang on to the dossier being fact. If you’re ready to admit the dossier was a bought and paid for smear. I’m ready to have a dignified debate with you. You ready to admit that?
This post was edited on 10/2/22 at 8:59 pm
Posted on 10/2/22 at 10:46 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Yet you still hang on to the dossier being fact.
Typical bullshite.
Does that mean I think that everything in the dossier was fact? That's a completely stupid blanket assertion.
Why don't you lay out what you think in the dossier was a lie and why?
Posted on 10/3/22 at 12:28 am to texridder
quote:
Why don't you lay out what you think in the dossier was a lie and why?
I think the entire dossier was a lie because it had been proven to be paid for by Clinton and fabricated by Steele.
The better question is what parts of the dossier do you still claim are accurate?
Posted on 10/3/22 at 12:38 am to Bass Tiger
quote:
she will be the first justice on the Supreme Court who was unable to give a simple biological definition of what a woman is…….allow that Groomer madness to marinate.
She is being interviewed as a SC nominee and is asked to give a definition of woman without any context.
She responded that she does not provide definitions as a judge - that the respective parties propose definitions to relevant terms and arguments in favor and she then decides which definition she deems appropriate and applies it to the law of the case.
Do you think she was lying about how definitions of relevant terms are determined by judges during litigation?
Posted on 10/3/22 at 12:48 am to BBONDS25
quote:
Does that mean I think that everything in the dossier was fact? That's a completely stupid blanket assertion. Why don't you lay out what you think in the dossier was a lie and why?
quote:
The better question is what parts of the dossier do you still claim are accurate?
You are a waste of time.
Page 3 of 4
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News