cawacko
Well-known member
Pretty much to be expected from wacko. Not much there there.
Thank you Legion or Dune. You can change your screen name but you can't being an idiot.
Pretty much to be expected from wacko. Not much there there.
Thank you Legion or Dune. You can change your screen name but you can't being an idiot.
You continue to misread and misquote. If you continue to do so I will simply stop communicating with you and I think that would be a shame as I think we share in many ways.
Jeez, you really don't want to participate in a discussion, do you? And I am far from being a "snot nose".
I have tried to engage you in a conversation or a discussion. But you got your panties in a wad and keep ranting on and on about being misquoted and that we are misreading what you said. But the funny thing is, you don't actually state what I misquoted or what anyone is misreading. Which tells me you are either clueless or a troll.
Now, if my badgering you for clarification is getting under your skin, just wait till you meet the others on this board. I am one of the polite ones. But I don't suffer fools lightly and I do request that people clarify what they mean.
You are all for wanting someone to answer the questions about their posts in the thread about 21 Indulgences, but now you don't want to do it yourself.
Wouldn't clarifying what you meant or discussing the things said be easier than this continued ranting and dancing around the topic?
Look, I'm old. So my time is more valuable to me. So either get busy participating (as you said this was about) or I'll leave you to your own devices and the more hostile members of the forum.
From the get go I was willing to discuss with you. You misread my post and misquoted my post giving it a tremendously different meaning that I ever intended. I asked you to reconsider your analogy. You just repeat the bullshit and I, too, am old as previously inferred and I don't intend to spend much time in a tit for tat bullshit session with someone so obstinate as to simply overlook my continued explanations to simply cast it aside as some feeble attempt by me to hide something. Do I really need to repost that now damned well worn out single paragraph in order for you to give it a word by word? It's not my writing, my friend. It is your reading and I defy you to prove otherwise. I'll be standing by for your misquoting if that is to be your continued strategy. It's a shame for you but I never attacked the 2nd amendment like you claim.
We got along without you before and will continue to do so......be civil or be gone.
I don't think we've met, bravo, but I mean no incivilities here. I was accused of saying something I did not say. Rather than continue this diatribe with you would you consider a pm to me?
Then why not answer the simple question I asked after all your rants?
"Ok, lets try again. You say you are an old member of the NRA, and that your dig was at those who hide behind the 2nd amendment or purposely confuse the definition of a well regulated militia.
The AK and the semi-auto pistol aside, what examples can you give to help me understand who you are digging at? Is it those who wanted the "assault rifle" ban removed? Those who believe in open carry? Conservatives in general? Who exactly was your dig aimed at? "
Four different posters read and understand your post as it written.......and you insist we can't read.....
Say what you have say right here for everyone to see...no need to pm......
After you clarify your rant about the 2nd Amendment, maybe we can explain its meaning to you...a meaning that has not changed for over 200 years....
And as some seek justification for their fears, anger, self loathing and paranoia in the Republican Party and the 2nd amendment their intolerance and racial prejudices become very plain for anyone paying attention to see. Sad. Just sad. I long for the days of a Dwight D. Eisenhower Republican Party. I fear there will never be another one like that or even approaching that. The pukes have alienated themselves far too many times and too deep this time. This will show for years if not decades.
And 146 engineers thought the Challenger launch was gonna be 100% safe while a very small minority of 9 said not so fast. Group think overruled good sense and education.
I don't think I'll be entertaining any explanations by you or anyone else as to the meaning of the 2nd amendment particularly considering that you say that meaning has not changed in over 200 years. Just who do you sell that smoke to? Not me and that's for certain.
i was not old enough to vote for ike, but if i had been, i would have
Challenger launch ?.....cute but not clever....also irrelevant.........we've seen the strawman nonsense before ......(Its April, how about something on the Titanic ?)
and as with all the rights of the people, none are absolute and without some limits.....THE PEOPLE can still keep and bear arms since the Bill of Rights was
written over 200 years ago, just as we have a right to free speech. etc......and we're well aware that they are not without limits......
D.D. Eisenhower wasn't the last great American but I haven't seen anything to match him, Don.
he was a good man, but he had his faults too, like nixon for his vp
oth, nixon had his plus side, but mostly negative
kennedy had his good side too, but at least he liked women a lot, maybe too much...must be a dem thing
Actually, I voted for Nixon. Twice. I didn't realize he was lying to us about getting out of viet nam. That was in my early days of exposure to the rightwing military/industrial complex that Ike warned us so vociferously about. But I did love Kennedy, his brothers, LBJ, even Jimmy Carter and for damned sure Bill Clinton. If you can't run with the big Dog just stay the hell on the porch!!!!!!!!
i like obama, but the right wing hates that man with a passion beyond political or reason
while i did not like shrub, i did not hate him, hate sucks and distorts ones mind
i like obama, but the right wing hates that man with a passion beyond political or reason
while i did not like shrub, i did not hate him, hate sucks and distorts ones mind
I don't recall what dehumanizing pet name the right has for Obama which compares to "shrub" ...can you help me out?
In fact, when I think about it, the level of vitriolic hate-filled contempt for presidents, reached an all-time high under Bush. Prior to that, even under the sleazy Clinton admin, people on the right held enough respect for the office not to denigrate Clinton as they could have, post Monica. I guess you missed your side burning effigies of Bush, and depicting him as Hitler? Yes... hate DOES distort the mind.
For the record, I don't "hate" Obama, and I don't think most people do... at least, according to polls... he is a popular personal president, he has appeal as a person, people tend to like him in general. He has a handsomeness about him, he has an attractive family, he is the first president in my lifetime who is younger than myself, so he also has youthfulness... Obama is great guy, I don't have any "hatred" for him whatsoever. He is a great speaker, outstanding role model, especially for minority youth... plenty of wonderful attributes. I just disagree with his Marxist Socialist political agenda and policies. I think his Keynesian economic plan has been a demonstrable abject failure, his debt and spending unprecedented and unacceptable even in the best of times. I think he is in way over his head on foreign affairs, and it's remarkable how this hasn't cause more trouble thus far, miraculous, actually.
Do you know what "shrub" means or where it came from, dicksie? It means 'lil Bush. You can do your own research as to where it came from. It did not come from any liberal source and it isn't considered offensive by the "shrub himself. Now, turdblossum, shrub's pet name for his foremost political and campaign advisor Karl K.K. Rove, is for damned sure an insult and demeaning and all that other shit you don't seem to know anything about. Any implication by you that the awful names and things said about President Barack Hussein Obama are in any way at least no worse than shrub shows an incredible ignorance, insolence, denial and projection by you, dicksie, and anyone else that might share your thoughts in that direction.
So, you don't think impeachment of Bill Clinton was sleazy on the part of the repukes or that they spent their time creaming their britches at every single testimony from the young Monica about every ounce of semen she had ever swallowed in her life was admirable of your conservative kindred? Maybe if it had been you on that strand.
You say you like him, the Prez, but then you condemn him in whatever ridiculous ways you can. President Barack Hussein Obama does not have Marxist/Socialist political agendas or policies and it's very clear you don't know the meaning of either. And he is no more committed to Keynesian economic theory than Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush or Bill Clinton or gwb. You need to stop listening to Rush and FauxNooz, dicksie. Way in over his head in foreign affairs? According to who or what, dicksie? I don't think you know what the fuck you're talking about. Prove me wrong.