be prepared to defend your home against my very best

Watermark said:
I have no idea what his political views are. I jumped in when I saw darla going in that general direction, and continued once he started flipping out.
Click to expand...

you prove me right when i said your nose is up darla's ass....

the point of this thread is...does anyone take the OP as a threat?
 
Solitary said:
I stand corrected. It is not the republican party. It is a minority of people who are so upset that the democrats won the election that they are threatening war.
Click to expand...
black and white thinking again? really sol, it doesn't become you. If you'd open your eyes and ears to actually see and hear, you'd realize that it isn't 'republicans' threatening war. It's the politicos in power, republican OR democrat. It's people of all shapes, sizes, and ideas that are threatening violent responses to said war.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
black and white thinking again? really sol, it doesn't become you. If you'd open your eyes and ears to actually see and hear, you'd realize that it isn't 'republicans' threatening war. It's the politicos in power, republican OR democrat. It's people of all shapes, sizes, and ideas that are threatening violent responses to said war.
Click to expand...

I notice that there were no threats of war when the republicans had the whitehouse. I notice there were no threats of violent revolt when the Patriot Act was pushed thru and then expanded. I notice that there was no threat like this when Bush's administration was shutting down co-ops.

And the thread in which Dixie threatened war was aimed directly at liberals for their vitriolic attacks on conservatives.

My eyes are wide open.

I have said several times that the differences between republicans and democrats was trivial, and that neither party gave a damn about the people.
 
looks like he plans to attack from his kayak. LOL
That's superfreak trolling after darla shoved is redneck head up his fat ass yet AGAIN.
 
Solitary said:
I notice that there were no threats of war when the republicans had the whitehouse. I notice there were no threats of violent revolt when the Patriot Act was pushed thru and then expanded. I notice that there was no threat like this when Bush's administration was shutting down co-ops.
Click to expand...
of course not. Right this moment, the only ones actually threatening war are the ones who are blustering over politics. But don't think for one minute that those who are deadly serious weren't discussing it over the patriot act, the john warner defense act, and other constitutional violations. What's bringing some of it to the forefront is the overhanging possibility of yet more restrictions and prohibitions on the peoples right to certain weapons, namely so called assault weapons. Just because there weren't media reports over possible violence over certain things occurring during the Bush regime does not mean they weren't being discussed.

Solitary said:
And the thread in which Dixie threatened war was aimed directly at liberals for their vitriolic attacks on conservatives.
Click to expand...
this is mere bluster.....simple hatred and anger disguised as patriotism.

Solitary said:
My eyes are wide open.
Click to expand...
Truly? I don't think so, cause if they were, you wouldn't be casting the 3%ers as remnants of the turner diaries.

Solitary said:
I have said several times that the differences between republicans and democrats was trivial, and that neither party gave a damn about the people.
Click to expand...
then why do you include conservatives with the republicans?
 
Is there to be a revolution? I thought it was just a matter of Dixie getting into the mushrooms again?

I will need a hat! It must be the exact right hat for the occassion. I picture myself as the Diane Keaten character in "Reds".

Oh what an exciting way to start the week!
 
SmarterThanYou said:
of course not. Right this moment, the only ones actually threatening war are the ones who are blustering over politics. But don't think for one minute that those who are deadly serious weren't discussing it over the patriot act, the john warner defense act, and other constitutional violations. What's bringing some of it to the forefront is the overhanging possibility of yet more restrictions and prohibitions on the peoples right to certain weapons, namely so called assault weapons. Just because there weren't media reports over possible violence over certain things occurring during the Bush regime does not mean they weren't being discussed.

this is mere bluster.....simple hatred and anger disguised as patriotism.

Truly? I don't think so, cause if they were, you wouldn't be casting the 3%ers as remnants of the turner diaries.

then why do you include conservatives with the republicans?
Click to expand...

And the main place this has been discussed on this forum was in the thread Dixie started.

I include conservatives with the republicans because that is where far too many of them reside.

In the last few years, there have been numerous conservatives who blasted liberals and predicted that Obama would bring in a socialist nation. These are the self-professed conservatives.

I voted libertarian in several presidential elections, and was often blasted for taking votes away from the republicans.

I am not calling ALL conservatives republicans. And I am not saying all republicans are conservatives. But the most common place for conservatives has been the republican party. And it has been that way for decades.
 
Damocles said:
They were the words used by Maineman against him on another board.

I just wish they'd leave that particular conversation on that board.
Click to expand...

No I think that part was me. You know me though, I accuse almost all men of jerking off to violent pornography. It's one of the endearing things about me. Little did I know it would precipitate a two-day hissy fit.
 
Darla said:
No I think that part was me. You know me though, I accuse almost all men of jerking off to violent pornography. It's one of the endearing things about me. Little did I know it would precipitate a two-day hissy fit.
Click to expand...
:D

Sorry, if you didn't mean it to be funny. It was anyway.
 
Solitary said:
I agree, that was pretty funny.

Almost as funny as the threats of revolution by the party that lost the elections.
Click to expand...

We The People of The United States of America do need to revolt peacably. We need to take our country back from the politicians who have abscounded our country. We need term limits and we need to reduce the power of the political parties. If we don't we will lose our freedoms.

Immie
 
Immanuel said:
We The People of The United States of America do need to revolt peacably. We need to take our country back from the politicians who have abscounded our country. We need term limits and we need to reduce the power of the political parties. If we don't we will lose our freedoms.

Immie
Click to expand...

A third party president would do much of that. When Ross Perot made a showing in the election, both parties became more focused on the people.
 
Immanuel said:
We The People of The United States of America do need to revolt peacably. We need to take our country back from the politicians who have abscounded our country. We need term limits and we need to reduce the power of the political parties. If we don't we will lose our freedoms.

Immie
Click to expand...

Yes and also banning of paid lobbyists.
 
Solitary said:
A third party president would do much of that. When Ross Perot made a showing in the election, both parties became more focused on the people.
Click to expand...

Until they eliminated the Perot threat. :cof1: Once that happened it was back to the usual.

uscitizen said:
Yes and also banning of paid lobbyists.
Click to expand...

Yes, that would go a long way to helping us take America back... unfortunately, the chances of achieving such a goal are astronomical.

Immie
 
Solitary said:
A third party president would do much of that. When Ross Perot made a showing in the election, both parties became more focused on the people.
Click to expand...

what a crock of shit. They paid no more attention to the people AFTER perot than they did before. The ONLY thing both parties did was ensure even more difficulties of a 3rd party being a factor.
 
Immanuel said:
Until they eliminated the Perot threat. :cof1: Once that happened it was back to the usual.



Yes, that would go a long way to helping us take America back... unfortunately, the chances of achieving such a goal are astronomical.

Immie
Click to expand...

Yeah, becuase congress must make the laws to regulate itself. Fox guarding the henhouse syndrome.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
what a crock of shit. They paid no more attention to the people AFTER perot than they did before. The ONLY thing both parties did was ensure even more difficulties of a 3rd party being a factor.
Click to expand...

It was never any easier to have a 3rd party candidate. The fact that Perot was willing to spend millions of his own money was they only reason he did better than the current batch of 3rd parties.

And yes, there was an effort (whether for publicity or not) to reach the people again. Those townhall meetings showed up much more often.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top