Liberal response to gun control

here is what zappa thinks about hyperbole:

LOL..."without flying off the handle..."

Oh the HYPERBOLE!

A pity SF can't discuss anything without a heaping helping of good old fashioned hyperbole.

OH the HYPERBOLE OF IT ALL!!

Poor, POOR Dixie!!

using hyperbole means you're not honest:

I don't understand why you continue to think you can have an honest debate with idiots like SF who can't discuss the issue without the ridiculous hyperbole.

His continued use of hyperbolic hot-button words like "kid" and "child", when as anyone with any semblance of honesty KNOWS there are no "children" being killed proves he's not interested in factual debate, but just more unchecked partisan hyperbole.

"women should be able to kill children if they want..."

Oh the hyperbole!!

Decided that honest debate just isn't your thing any more?

What the hell happened to you?

so, according to zappa the author is not honest about gun control discussion
 
Ohhhh...so it was civil...AMONG THE POSTERS.

Odd that you didn't make that distinction before.

But we understand...you gotta move those goalposts so you won't have to admit you are full of it.

And the YurTard STILL has the nerve to tell me to quit being dishonest...freakin unbelievable.

i didn't realize i needed the obvious stated. i forgot to lower my self to your level of intellect. you have made a huge stink all over the forum about civility among the posters. yet, you show up here and are completely uncivil to other posters immediately off the back. you insult me and i had not posted one uncivil comment.

why are you incapable of being civil?
 
btw....the author has not recanted anything he said, nor stated that it was hyperbole. given the comments to the editor about his disgusting comments, one would think he would back peddle or explain it was hyperbole.
 
btw....the author has not recanted anything he said, nor stated that it was hyperbole. given the comments to the editor about his disgusting comments, one would think he would back peddle or explain it was hyperbole.


Rational folk understand his comments were outrageous hyperbole and therefore didn't need an explanation.
 
your opinion of his seriousness is not a fact. you can whine and insult till the cows come home, but it is merely your opinion that is not substantiated by anything he said. i showed how his words clearly indicate he was serious.

but do continue to just be derisive and petty
 
your opinion of his seriousness is not a fact. you can whine and insult till the cows come home, but it is merely your opinion that is not substantiated by anything he said. i showed how his words clearly indicate he was serious.

but do continue to just be derisive and petty


So, you show how the author's words clearly indicate he was serious?

Do point us to that particular post.
 
The fact that the fascist hasn't stated it was all hyperbole means that it is NOT FUCKING HYPERBOLE YOU TRANSYLVANIA TRANSVESTITE!!
 
you obviously are not intelligent enough to understand the difference between "indicate" and proof.

get a dictionary then get back to me.
 
57wqu.png
 
• Repeal the Second Amendment, the part about guns anyway. It’s badly written, confusing and more trouble than it’s worth. It offers an absolute right to gun ownership, but it puts it in the context of the need for a “well-regulated militia.” We don’t make our militia bring their own guns to battles. And surely the Founders couldn’t have envisioned weapons like those used in the Newtown shooting when they guaranteed gun rights. Owning a gun should be a privilege, not a right.

• Declare the NRA a terrorist organization and make membership illegal. Hey! We did it to the Communist Party, and the NRA has led to the deaths of more of us than American Commies ever did. (I would also raze the organization’s headquarters, clear the rubble and salt the earth, but that’s optional.) Make ownership of unlicensed assault rifles a felony. If some people refused to give up their guns, that “prying the guns from their cold, dead hands” thing works for me.

• Then I would tie Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, our esteemed Republican leaders, to the back of a Chevy pickup truck and drag them around a parking lot until they saw the light on gun control.

And if that didn’t work, I’d adopt radical measures. None of that is going to happen, of course. But I’ll bet gun sales will rise.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012312300033&nclick_check=1

You are so wrong. This is a response to the shooting not gun control. Admit you were wrong troll! :)

Btw, its obviously hyperbole. The closing line. If that's not enough then why would he need Boehner and McConnell's support after repealing the second amendment? Get a grip.
 
The fact that the fascist hasn't stated it was all hyperbole means that it is NOT FUCKING HYPERBOLE YOU TRANSYLVANIA TRANSVESTITE!!


Oh...so the criteria that a comment must meet in order to qualify as hyperbole is that the author has to state as much up front?

Total horseshit and frankly it is really beneath you to stick up for one of YurTiva's bullshit notions.
 
You are so wrong. This is a response to the shooting not gun control. Admit you were wrong troll! :)

Btw, its obviously hyperbole. The closing line. If that's not enough then why would he need Boehner and McConnell's support after repealing the second amendment? Get a grip.


Well now that someone other than myself has pointed out the YurTiva that it is indeed hyperbole, maybe he will agree.

I've claimed over and over that the author was OBVIOUSLY resorting to hyperbole, unfortunately YurTiva's hatred for me runs so deep it renders him incapable of rational discourse.
 
you obviously are not intelligent enough to understand the difference between "indicate" and proof.

get a dictionary then get back to me.


Ahhh yes, the standard YurTard word parsing tap dancing begins yet again.

Fine...all you posted was a couple excerpts from the article, followed by your baseless claim that he indicates he was serious.

NOWHERE does the author do any such thing and you still haven't provided any evidence that indicates the author is being serious.
 
Ahhh yes, the standard YurTard word parsing tap dancing begins yet again.

Fine...all you posted was a couple excerpts from the article, followed by your baseless claim that he indicates he was serious.

NOWHERE does the author do any such thing and you still haven't provided any evidence that indicates the author is being serious.

yes i did. i used his words to show you that he was serious. he never said he was joking, in fact, he said quite the opposite, he was very upset and wanted change, no more talk (he referenced his dozens of other articles as being ineffectual etc).

if you really think 'indicate' and 'proof' are similar, such that it is word games to explain to you that they are different, you are far dumber than i thought. words have meaning zappa, just because you are not intelligent enough to know that, does not mean people are playing word games with you.
 
Back
Top