Liz Cheney “History is watching us.” (1 Viewer)

[AAABatteries]

"You/Liz Cheney just hate Trump".....

I do hate what he's done to people I know and to this country - he's a cancer. Hating what Trump does and what he stands for is a good thing in my world.

 

[The Commish]

I see we've lost complete sight of the oath our politicians profess when taking office. Now, of course, one can argue how many actually keep said oath consistently, but what's bizarre is the admonishment/punishment of those when they actually do.

I, ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

Cheney's oath is to defend the Constitution...not Trump. Many here and apparently the people of Wyoming would be wise to remember that. The oath is NOT to constituents. It's not to Trump. It's not to party.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Some incredible tap dancing going in here. Fred Astaire would be jealous.

Yes, by the side that's fallen for every single hoax the past 6 years. Some realize it was a GOP primary and Cheney got rolled because she put her personal hatred for Trump in front of representing her constituents.

Please be specific how she didn't represent her constituents.

It's really not that difficult. Most of them are Trump supporters and feel the J6 committee is a BS witch hunt that's not intended to get to the bottom of the Capitol protests on J6 but rather to prevent Trump from running again. She's admitted this. If it helps, try to imagine a Democrat defending Trump and then losing their primary and everyone going my god how could this have happened?

Now what you need to realize is why she wants to keep Trump out of the Oval office....it's not because she hates him ( although she would have to be a Saint not to) It’s because she wants to keep a corrupt crook out of there.

Yes yes corrupt crook, egomaniac, white supremacist, worse than Hitler blah blah blah. It's still nothing more than institutional TDS.
Liz: "I admit I'm doing the wrong thing, but I have a REALLY good reason: orange man bad!"
WY:

You sure love putting words in her mouth. When did she ever admit to doing the wrong thing?

This has gotta be shtick. The state of Wyoming didn't form itself into a giant smiley and wave. You got me.

 

[lazyike]

Some incredible tap dancing going in here. Fred Astaire would be jealous.

Yes, by the side that's fallen for every single hoax the past 6 years. Some realize it was a GOP primary and Cheney got rolled because she put her personal hatred for Trump in front of representing her constituents.

Please be specific how she didn't represent her constituents.

It's really not that difficult. Most of them are Trump supporters and feel the J6 committee is a BS witch hunt that's not intended to get to the bottom of the Capitol protests on J6 but rather to prevent Trump from running again. She's admitted this. If it helps, try to imagine a Democrat defending Trump and then losing their primary and everyone going my god how could this have happened?

Now what you need to realize is why she wants to keep Trump out of the Oval office....it's not because she hates him ( although she would have to be a Saint not to) It’s because she wants to keep a corrupt crook out of there.

Yes yes corrupt crook, egomaniac, white supremacist, worse than Hitler blah blah blah. It's still nothing more than institutional TDS.
Liz: "I admit I'm doing the wrong thing, but I have a REALLY good reason: orange man bad!"
WY:

I am shocked that you don't think orange man bad, just shocked.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

No way she runs 3rd party, that would help Trump.

She’ll run as a Republican without any expectation of winning, just to hurt Trump’s chances in the general.

Agreed. She's been very clear and very consistent about her personal hatred for Trump. It's the only reason she's on the J6 committee.

Link to when she has ever stated a personal hatred for Trump? Link to when she stated that it’s her reason for being on the committee? She has stated again and again that she believes Trump committed serious crimes and that he is a threat to our freedom and democratic system, and that is why she is on the committee. She’s never expressed a personal hatred. Again, why do you keep making **** up?

This just silly. I'm not "making **** up" I'm expressing my opinion based on what I've observed and what she's admitted to.

 

[moleculo]

Yes yes corrupt crook, egomaniac, white supremacist, worse than Hitler blah blah blah. It's still nothing more than institutional TDS.
Liz: "I admit I'm doing the wrong thing, but I have a REALLY good reason: orange man bad!"
WY:

I don't believe that Liz admitted to doing the wrong thing, or ever said "orange man bad."

This quote, NB, reminds me of Adam Schiff paraphrasing Trump during the first impeachment. He has been called a liar on these boards ever since then. Are you placing yourself in the same category as Adam Schiff by paraphrasing something that was never said to make a point?

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Yes yes corrupt crook, egomaniac, white supremacist, worse than Hitler blah blah blah. It's still nothing more than institutional TDS.
Liz: "I admit I'm doing the wrong thing, but I have a REALLY good reason: orange man bad!"
WY:

I don't believe that Liz admitted to doing the wrong thing, or ever said "orange man bad."

She's admitted her purpose was to do anything to stop Trump. This shouldn't be the least bit controversial even with paraphrasing.

 

[Dickies]

Yes yes corrupt crook, egomaniac, white supremacist, worse than Hitler blah blah blah. It's still nothing more than institutional TDS.
Liz: "I admit I'm doing the wrong thing, but I have a REALLY good reason: orange man bad!"
WY:

I don't believe that Liz admitted to doing the wrong thing, or ever said "orange man bad."

She's admitted her purpose was to do anything to stop Trump. This shouldn't be the least bit controversial even with paraphrasing.

Is this what she said during the entirety of his presidency as she voted in favor of his agenda, or was there a certain moment in time when she changed?

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Prediction: providing this link will absolutely not be a waste of time and people here will thank me and admit they were wrong.

"I have said since January 6th that I will do whatever it takes to prevent Donald Trump from ever again getting anywhere near the Oval Office - and I mean it." LINK

 

[Rich Conway]

Prediction: providing this link will absolutely not be a waste of time and people here will thank me and admit they were wrong.

"I have said since January 6th that I will do whatever it takes to prevent Donald Trump from ever again getting anywhere near the Oval Office - and I mean it." LINK

Why? Is it because she hates him unduly or because she believes he's wildly unfit for office (which should be obvious to everyone)?

 

[Dickies]

Prediction: providing this link will absolutely not be a waste of time and people here will thank me and admit they were wrong.

"I have said since January 6th that I will do whatever it takes to prevent Donald Trump from ever again getting anywhere near the Oval Office - and I mean it." LINK

Got it. So Jan 6th is really the only thing that doesn't "represent her constituents".

 

[The Commish]

This will go unaddressed, but here it goes....

Cheney made crystal clear that she is going to do everything in her power to keep Trump from the Presidency. This is based on the oath she took when she was sworn into office to defend the Constitution against all threats foreign and domestic. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with her representation of her constituents. Her voting record reflects how she represents her constituents and it's rather clear that she checks all the boxes in that category except for one, and that one goes directly against the oath she swore to. There will always be these sorts of attempts at conflation but they are two completely different things.

The reality is, when she was presented with the choice of either upholding her oath or going along with the party, she chose to uphold her oath. That doesn't happen very consistently in Congress, so I find it pretty gross that when it does happen, the first instinct is to try and spin it into something it isn't and discourage the behavior. We should be doing the opposite of that, but that requires putting the country over our personal desires.

 

[moleculo]

Yes yes corrupt crook, egomaniac, white supremacist, worse than Hitler blah blah blah. It's still nothing more than institutional TDS.
Liz: "I admit I'm doing the wrong thing, but I have a REALLY good reason: orange man bad!"
WY:

I don't believe that Liz admitted to doing the wrong thing, or ever said "orange man bad."

She's admitted her purpose was to do anything to stop Trump. This shouldn't be the least bit controversial even with paraphrasing.

That is WAY different than doing the wrong thing.

 

[moleculo]

Prediction: providing this link will absolutely not be a waste of time and people here will thank me and admit they were wrong.

"I have said since January 6th that I will do whatever it takes to prevent Donald Trump from ever again getting anywhere near the Oval Office - and I mean it." LINK

You are not going to convince many here that is admitting to doing the wrong thing.

Prediction: providing this link will absolutely not be a waste of time and people here will thank me and admit they were wrong.

"I have said since January 6th that I will do whatever it takes to prevent Donald Trump from ever again getting anywhere near the Oval Office - and I mean it." LINK

That is the RIGHT thing to do for anyone who takes their oath seriously.

Edit: and tying it to J6 means this had nothing to do with policy, twitter, OMB, TDS, etc...ots purely about the events leading up to and including January 6.

 

[Rich Conway]

Prediction: providing this link will absolutely not be a waste of time and people here will thank me and admit they were wrong.

"I have said since January 6th that I will do whatever it takes to prevent Donald Trump from ever again getting anywhere near the Oval Office - and I mean it." LINK

Curious...

Was it OK when McConnell said "my number one priority is making sure president Obama’s a one-term president."?

 

[djmich]

This will go unaddressed, but here it goes....

Cheney made crystal clear that she is going to do everything in her power to keep Trump from the Presidency. This is based on the oath she took when she was sworn into office to defend the Constitution against all threats foreign and domestic. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with her representation of her constituents. Her voting record reflects how she represents her constituents and it's rather clear that she checks all the boxes in that category except for one, and that one goes directly against the oath she swore to. There will always be these sorts of attempts at conflation but they are two completely different things.

The reality is, when she was presented with the choice of either upholding her oath or going along with the party, she chose to uphold her oath. That doesn't happen very consistently in Congress, so I find it pretty gross that when it does happen, the first instinct is to try and spin it into something it isn't and discourage the behavior. We should be doing the opposite of that, but that requires putting the country over our personal desires.

I haven't seen any of what she said and all so can't comment on everything but I think this is right.

 

[Warblenager]

This will go unaddressed, but here it goes....

Cheney made crystal clear that she is going to do everything in her power to keep Trump from the Presidency. This is based on the oath she took when she was sworn into office to defend the Constitution against all threats foreign and domestic. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with her representation of her constituents. Her voting record reflects how she represents her constituents and it's rather clear that she checks all the boxes in that category except for one, and that one goes directly against the oath she swore to. There will always be these sorts of attempts at conflation but they are two completely different things.

The reality is, when she was presented with the choice of either upholding her oath or going along with the party, she chose to uphold her oath. That doesn't happen very consistently in Congress, so I find it pretty gross that when it does happen, the first instinct is to try and spin it into something it isn't and discourage the behavior. We should be doing the opposite of that, but that requires putting the country over our personal desires.

Well framed and absolutely correct.

 

[whoknew]

Prediction: providing this link will absolutely not be a waste of time and people here will thank me and admit they were wrong.

"I have said since January 6th that I will do whatever it takes to prevent Donald Trump from ever again getting anywhere near the Oval Office - and I mean it." LINK

Sounds like a good American.

 

[lazyike]

Prediction: providing this link will absolutely not be a waste of time and people here will thank me and admit they were wrong.

"I have said since January 6th that I will do whatever it takes to prevent Donald Trump from ever again getting anywhere near the Oval Office - and I mean it." LINK

Why? Is it because she hates him unduly or because she believes he's wildly unfit for office (which should be obvious to everyone)?

The majority of Americans think Trump is unfit for the office of President, but shame on Liz Cheney for thinking the same.

 

[Miss Piggy]

Based on her voting record, I think I disagree with Liz Cheney about 70-80% of the time. She is a strict conservative. I do not like her views on immigration, the economy, the environment, or cultural issues. I believe she would nominate judges whom I would very much disapprove of.


And yet I would vote for her. Because she strikes me as that rare public servant who has both the courage of her convictions and great integrity. She’s about to lose her leadership position among the Republicans. After that she’s about to lose her seat in Congress. All because she was brave enough to speak the truth, not on a political issue, but on the more serious question of honor and who we should be as a nation. I really really admire her.

Thank you Timothy, sweetie.
That election was so unfair and mean.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Prediction: providing this link will absolutely not be a waste of time and people here will thank me and admit they were wrong.

"I have said since January 6th that I will do whatever it takes to prevent Donald Trump from ever again getting anywhere near the Oval Office - and I mean it." LINK

Curious...

Was it OK when McConnell said "my number one priority is making sure president Obama’s a one-term president."?

No it was not OK. It was awesome.
You're really not getting the concept of representation?

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Prediction: providing this link will absolutely not be a waste of time and people here will thank me and admit they were wrong.

"I have said since January 6th that I will do whatever it takes to prevent Donald Trump from ever again getting anywhere near the Oval Office - and I mean it." LINK

Why? Is it because she hates him unduly or because she believes he's wildly unfit for office (which should be obvious to everyone)?

The majority of Americans think Trump is unfit for the office of President, but shame on Liz Cheney for thinking the same.

Well the good news is she's considering running for President and representing all Americans.

 

[FairWarning]

Prediction: providing this link will absolutely not be a waste of time and people here will thank me and admit they were wrong.

"I have said since January 6th that I will do whatever it takes to prevent Donald Trump from ever again getting anywhere near the Oval Office - and I mean it." LINK

Why? Is it because she hates him unduly or because she believes he's wildly unfit for office (which should be obvious to everyone)?

The majority of Americans think Trump is unfit for the office of President, but shame on Liz Cheney for thinking the same.

Well the good news is she's considering running for President and representing all Americans.

She has next to no chance. D’s are going to D, and MAGA are going to MAGA. She will get crumbs.

 

[Rich Conway]

You're really not getting the concept of representation?

The one where representatives swear to uphold the Constitution and serve the country, or is there one I missed where they swear to uphold their political party?

 

[FairWarning]

You're really not getting the concept of representation?

The one where representatives swear to uphold the Constitution and serve the country, or is there one I missed where they swear to uphold their political party?

Unfortunately too many do the latter.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

You're really not getting the concept of representation?

The one where representatives swear to uphold the Constitution and serve the country, or is there one I missed where they swear to uphold their political party?

A simple No would have sufficed. Going after Trump in a show trial is absolutely NOT "upholding the Constitution". But I am glad to see so many lefties suddenly interested in the Constitution.

 

[GoBirds]

You're really not getting the concept of representation?

The one where representatives swear to uphold the Constitution and serve the country, or is there one I missed where they swear to uphold their political party?

A simple No would have sufficed. Going after Trump in a show trial is absolutely NOT "upholding the Constitution". But I am glad to see so many lefties suddenly interested in the Constitution.

Man, you nailed it again .

 

[JIslander]

You're really not getting the concept of representation?

The one where representatives swear to uphold the Constitution and serve the country, or is there one I missed where they swear to uphold their political party?

A simple No would have sufficed. Going after Trump in a show trial is absolutely NOT "upholding the Constitution". But I am glad to see so many lefties suddenly interested in the Constitution.

Man, you nailed it again .

Yes, nailed it that he's an enabler for a traitor for sure.

 

[GoBirds]

You're really not getting the concept of representation?

The one where representatives swear to uphold the Constitution and serve the country, or is there one I missed where they swear to uphold their political party?

A simple No would have sufficed. Going after Trump in a show trial is absolutely NOT "upholding the Constitution". But I am glad to see so many lefties suddenly interested in the Constitution.

Man, you nailed it again .

Yes, nailed it that he's an enabler for a traitor for sure.

No one expects you to face reality at this point.

 

[JIslander]

You're really not getting the concept of representation?

The one where representatives swear to uphold the Constitution and serve the country, or is there one I missed where they swear to uphold their political party?

A simple No would have sufficed. Going after Trump in a show trial is absolutely NOT "upholding the Constitution". But I am glad to see so many lefties suddenly interested in the Constitution.

Man, you nailed it again .

Yes, nailed it that he's an enabler for a traitor for sure.

No one expects you to face reality at this point.

Yeah, too far around the bend for you for sure--

 

[Sunshine6854]

You're really not getting the concept of representation?

The one where representatives swear to uphold the Constitution and serve the country, or is there one I missed where they swear to uphold their political party?

A simple No would have sufficed. Going after Trump in a show trial is absolutely NOT "upholding the Constitution". But I am glad to see so many lefties suddenly interested in the Constitution.

Man, you nailed it again .

Yes, nailed it that he's an enabler for a traitor for sure.

No one expects you to face reality at this point.

You're really not getting the concept of representation?

The one where representatives swear to uphold the Constitution and serve the country, or is there one I missed where they swear to uphold their political party?

A simple No would have sufficed. Going after Trump in a show trial is absolutely NOT "upholding the Constitution". But I am glad to see so many lefties suddenly interested in the Constitution.

Man, you nailed it again .

Yes, nailed it that he's an enabler for a traitor for sure.

No one expects you to face reality at this point.

Yeah, too far around the bend for you for sure--

Imagine aligning yourself with a political party...I mean one man. A conman who stole from a childrens charity and his fans through a fake university. He paid off a porn star and was a democrat not that long ago.

You are beholden to him 100%, any deviation from his will and out you go...

 

[GoBirds]

You're really not getting the concept of representation?

The one where representatives swear to uphold the Constitution and serve the country, or is there one I missed where they swear to uphold their political party?

A simple No would have sufficed. Going after Trump in a show trial is absolutely NOT "upholding the Constitution". But I am glad to see so many lefties suddenly interested in the Constitution.

Man, you nailed it again .

Yes, nailed it that he's an enabler for a traitor for sure.

No one expects you to face reality at this point.

Yeah, too far around the bend for you for sure--

….from the guy that has to hide in a one sided echo chant. Sorry you can’t handle it, NB nailed it with his post above.

 

[GoBirds]

You're really not getting the concept of representation?

The one where representatives swear to uphold the Constitution and serve the country, or is there one I missed where they swear to uphold their political party?

A simple No would have sufficed. Going after Trump in a show trial is absolutely NOT "upholding the Constitution". But I am glad to see so many lefties suddenly interested in the Constitution.

Man, you nailed it again .

Yes, nailed it that he's an enabler for a traitor for sure.

No one expects you to face reality at this point.

You're really not getting the concept of representation?

The one where representatives swear to uphold the Constitution and serve the country, or is there one I missed where they swear to uphold their political party?

A simple No would have sufficed. Going after Trump in a show trial is absolutely NOT "upholding the Constitution". But I am glad to see so many lefties suddenly interested in the Constitution.

Man, you nailed it again .

Yes, nailed it that he's an enabler for a traitor for sure.

No one expects you to face reality at this point.

Yeah, too far around the bend for you for sure--

Imagine aligning yourself with a political party...I mean one man. A conman who stole from a childrens charity and his fans through a fake university. He paid off a porn star and was a democrat not that long ago.

You are beholden to him 100%, any deviation from his will and out you go...

Dalton I’m just amazed they allow you to come back so many times with so many aliases, well done?

 

[Rubiobot]

You're really not getting the concept of representation?

The one where representatives swear to uphold the Constitution and serve the country, or is there one I missed where they swear to uphold their political party?

A simple No would have sufficed. Going after Trump in a show trial is absolutely NOT "upholding the Constitution". But I am glad to see so many lefties suddenly interested in the Constitution.

Say what???

 

[sho nuff]

You're really not getting the concept of representation?

The one where representatives swear to uphold the Constitution and serve the country, or is there one I missed where they swear to uphold their political party?

A simple No would have sufficed. Going after Trump in a show trial is absolutely NOT "upholding the Constitution". But I am glad to see so many lefties suddenly interested in the Constitution.

Man, you nailed it again .

In what way? Can you expand on that?

 

[GoBirds]

You're really not getting the concept of representation?

The one where representatives swear to uphold the Constitution and serve the country, or is there one I missed where they swear to uphold their political party?

A simple No would have sufficed. Going after Trump in a show trial is absolutely NOT "upholding the Constitution". But I am glad to see so many lefties suddenly interested in the Constitution.

Man, you nailed it again .

In what way? Can you expand on that?

@GoBirds are you here to actually engage in discussion…or just hit and run and then laugh? You seem to only be here to take ****s at people and when asked for your thoughts…your response is an emoji.

I don’t engage with trolls. You been asked many times, please put me on ignore.

 

[sho nuff]

You're really not getting the concept of representation?

The one where representatives swear to uphold the Constitution and serve the country, or is there one I missed where they swear to uphold their political party?

A simple No would have sufficed. Going after Trump in a show trial is absolutely NOT "upholding the Constitution". But I am glad to see so many lefties suddenly interested in the Constitution.

Man, you nailed it again .

In what way? Can you expand on that?

@GoBirds are you here to actually engage in discussion…or just hit and run and then laugh? You seem to only be here to take ****s at people and when asked for your thoughts…your response is an emoji.

I don’t engage with trolls. You been asked many times, please put me on ignore.

So namecalling when someone asks you to actually give a thought on a topic…asking you your actual opinion = trolling. Got it.

 

[GoBirds]

You're really not getting the concept of representation?

The one where representatives swear to uphold the Constitution and serve the country, or is there one I missed where they swear to uphold their political party?

A simple No would have sufficed. Going after Trump in a show trial is absolutely NOT "upholding the Constitution". But I am glad to see so many lefties suddenly interested in the Constitution.

Man, you nailed it again .

In what way? Can you expand on that?

@GoBirds are you here to actually engage in discussion…or just hit and run and then laugh? You seem to only be here to take ****s at people and when asked for your thoughts…your response is an emoji.

I don’t engage with trolls. You been asked many times, please put me on ignore.

So namecalling when someone asks you to actually give a thought on a topic…asking you your actual opinion = trolling. Got it.

When you’ve been asked multiple times and you keep doing it …..your behavior is the definition of trolling. Your schtick isn’t interesting to me, sorry.

 

[Rubiobot]

You're really not getting the concept of representation?

The one where representatives swear to uphold the Constitution and serve the country, or is there one I missed where they swear to uphold their political party?

A simple No would have sufficed. Going after Trump in a show trial is absolutely NOT "upholding the Constitution". But I am glad to see so many lefties suddenly interested in the Constitution.

Man, you nailed it again .

In what way? Can you expand on that?

@GoBirds are you here to actually engage in discussion…or just hit and run and then laugh? You seem to only be here to take ****s at people and when asked for your thoughts…your response is an emoji.

I don’t engage with trolls. You been asked many times, please put me on ignore.

So namecalling when someone asks you to actually give a thought on a topic…asking you your actual opinion = trolling. Got it.

When you’ve been asked multiple times and you keep doing it …..your behavior is the definition of trolling. Your schtick isn’t interesting to me, sorry.

Then why are you responding to him?

 

[sho nuff]

Then why are you responding to him?

Indeed...see below

When you’ve been asked multiple times and you keep doing it …..your behavior is the definition of trolling. Your schtick isn’t interesting to me, sorry.

And I have stated multiple times that I would...if you too would stop replying to my posts at all or with emojis and not talk about me. And you continue to do so. You continue to reply to posts I make, you continue to troll with emojis...and you continue to talk about me in other posts.
So, instead, I reply to your posts in good faith and ask for your actual opinion. Your responses have been more emojis, calling me a troll, and generally just making things personal rather than about the topic or posts. Why is that?

 

[GoBirds]

Dude, give the board schtick a rest.

Let’s get back on track and not take away from the great posts above by NB.

 

[sho nuff]

Dude, give the board schtick a rest.

Let’s get back on track and not take away from the great posts above by NB.

The one where he made incorrect claims about the committee and Liz Cheney?

 

[waiver wire]

seriously you 2 , just put each other on ignore
it seems like every thread is you 2 just going back and forth with each knowing it comes to nothing

 

[The Commish]

seriously you 2 , just put each other on ignore
it seems like every thread is you 2 just going back and forth with each knowing it comes to nothing

Board cop battle is kinda funny to watch sometimes.

 

[waiver wire]

seriously you 2 , just put each other on ignore
it seems like every thread is you 2 just going back and forth with each knowing it comes to nothing

Board cop battle is kinda funny to watch sometimes.

it is so frustrating , its been going on for years
I just lurk and use the forum to catch up news and views from both sides in the US
As there are smart people from each side and I have learned alot over the years but damn there are a few that ruin it but not using the ignore function

 

[The Commish]

seriously you 2 , just put each other on ignore
it seems like every thread is you 2 just going back and forth with each knowing it comes to nothing

Board cop battle is kinda funny to watch sometimes.

it is so frustrating , its been going on for years
I just lurk and use the forum to catch up news and views from both sides in the US
As there are smart people from each side and I have learned alot over the years but damn there are a few that ruin it but not using the ignore function

Two sides of the same coin trying desperately to avoid that reality. My favs are the ones that know they are on ignore and still insist on replying.

 

[waiver wire]

so many good posters have left over these stupid back and forth's which lead no where
The ignore function is much better so hoping more people will use it

 

[sho nuff]

seriously you 2 , just put each other on ignore
it seems like every thread is you 2 just going back and forth with each knowing it comes to nothing

Board cop battle is kinda funny to watch sometimes.

it is so frustrating , its been going on for years
I just lurk and use the forum to catch up news and views from both sides in the US
As there are smart people from each side and I have learned alot over the years but damn there are a few that ruin it but not using the ignore function

Two sides of the same coin trying desperately to avoid that reality. My favs are the ones that know they are on ignore and still insist on replying.

I will highly disagree with the same coin stuff. If you ever see me just emoji laugh and really not discuss topics…let me know.

 

[Rubiobot]

seriously you 2 , just put each other on ignore
it seems like every thread is you 2 just going back and forth with each knowing it comes to nothing

Board cop battle is kinda funny to watch sometimes.

it is so frustrating , its been going on for years
I just lurk and use the forum to catch up news and views from both sides in the US
As there are smart people from each side and I have learned alot over the years but damn there are a few that ruin it but not using the ignore function

Two sides of the same coin trying desperately to avoid that reality. My favs are the ones that know they are on ignore and still insist on replying.

I will highly disagree with the same coin stuff. If you ever see me just emoji laugh and really not discuss topics…let me know.

You're just as much to blame so quit acting all innocent. You pollute threads with this back and forth BS with way too many people.

 

[waiver wire]

@sho nuff my point to you is he does it to you to get a rise out of you then its pages of back and forth that goes nowhere
either put him on ignore or dont respond to any emoji he uses on your post and dont reply ever to him cuz he wont answer
If you havent figured it out it a waste of time for you and ruins the board for the rest of us , then there is nothing else to tell you