On February 12 2012 06:32 Roe wrote: Romney is a socialist, you heard it here folks.
Just look at his record as governor of Massachusetts and his policies. He's more in-line with Obama the socialist than with any true conservative or libertarian. Romney is the one who created the blueprint for Obamacare.
On February 12 2012 04:28 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Remember say 200 pages ago when Romney touted his endorsement of Ann Coulter, yeah....
How does Satan's cock taste, Ann?
I don't even know who this lady is, but wow. Just... just wow.
She's a popular political pundit/commentator here in the states. She claims to be a conservative, but she supported Romney in both of his presidential campaigns and Romney is a socialist, so that in it's own right should beg the question of just how conservative she is.
On February 12 2012 06:19 Yongwang wrote: @Skilledblob Where Ron Paul screws up he mistakes having foreign military bases around the world in ALLIED COUNTRIES WITH THEIR PERMISSION as us "invading" them.
show me one time where he said that and I might believe you. Until then I will assume that he was not talking about countries who asked for help.
That's what he was implying with the "armed Chinese troops in Texas" video. From the get-go he opposed power projection and military bases abroad.
On February 12 2012 06:20 darthfoley wrote:
On February 12 2012 06:19 Yongwang wrote: @Skilledblob Where Ron Paul screws up he mistakes having foreign military bases around the world in ALLIED COUNTRIES WITH THEIR PERMISSION as us "invading" them.
On February 12 2012 06:17 darthfoley wrote:
On February 12 2012 06:01 Yongwang wrote:
On February 12 2012 05:43 drcatellino wrote: You know there is something wrong when gun ownership is more important than human rights.
Gun rights are more important than sending aid to Africa.
I hope you're trolling.
If anything you'd be a troll to think charity is more important than civil rights. Also:
Lol civil rights? I don't really believe owning a gun is something everyone should have. Especially with all the smart kids who learn how to load a gun and accidentally kill themselves.
Be honest, are you trolling or joking right now? Owning a gun is definitely right we should and do have. At the end of the day, no matter how much the socialists hate it, there is no legitimate reason for the government to implement gun control.
...besides the amount of crazy people living in this country who would probably shoot eachother over a snide comment or something.
An armed society is a polite society. Please tell me, how many gun owners do you actually know in real life?
an armed society is a society with many people shot for nothing.
Why don't you take a look at the history of what you are attempting to defend:
On February 12 2012 06:19 Yongwang wrote: @Skilledblob Where Ron Paul screws up he mistakes having foreign military bases around the world in ALLIED COUNTRIES WITH THEIR PERMISSION as us "invading" them.
show me one time where he said that and I might believe you. Until then I will assume that he was not talking about countries who asked for help.
That's what he was implying with the "armed Chinese troops in Texas" video. From the get-go he opposed power projection and military bases abroad.
On February 12 2012 06:20 darthfoley wrote:
On February 12 2012 06:19 Yongwang wrote: @Skilledblob Where Ron Paul screws up he mistakes having foreign military bases around the world in ALLIED COUNTRIES WITH THEIR PERMISSION as us "invading" them.
On February 12 2012 06:17 darthfoley wrote:
On February 12 2012 06:01 Yongwang wrote:
On February 12 2012 05:43 drcatellino wrote: You know there is something wrong when gun ownership is more important than human rights.
Gun rights are more important than sending aid to Africa.
Lol civil rights? I don't really believe owning a gun is something everyone should have. Especially with all the smart kids who learn how to load a gun and accidentally kill themselves.
Be honest, are you trolling or joking right now? Owning a gun is definitely right we should and do have. At the end of the day, no matter how much the socialists hate it, there is no legitimate reason for the government to implement gun control.
...besides the amount of crazy people living in this country who would probably shoot eachother over a snide comment or something.
An armed society is a polite society. Please tell me, how many gun owners do you actually know in real life?
An armed society is far more dangerous than an unarmed one. And I actually know quite a few gun owners, considering my state just passed a law allowing people to carry guns in public places.
Aren't the stories we get every week of a father/mother shooting up their kids/family than shooting themselves not enough to at least warrant limitations/background checks in purchasing of guns?
On February 12 2012 06:32 Roe wrote: Romney is a socialist, you heard it here folks.
Just look at his record as governor of Massachusetts and his policies. He's more in-line with Obama the socialist than with any true conservative or libertarian. Romney is the one who created the blueprint for Obamacare.
On February 12 2012 06:32 Roe wrote: Romney is a socialist, you heard it here folks.
Just look at his record as governor of Massachusetts and his policies. He's more in-line with Obama the socialist than with any true conservative or libertarian. Romney is the one who created the blueprint for Obamacare.
Did you just say Obama is a socialist? Do you listen to Alex Jones or Rush Limbaugh by any chance?
On February 12 2012 06:19 Yongwang wrote: @Skilledblob Where Ron Paul screws up he mistakes having foreign military bases around the world in ALLIED COUNTRIES WITH THEIR PERMISSION as us "invading" them.
show me one time where he said that and I might believe you. Until then I will assume that he was not talking about countries who asked for help.
That's what he was implying with the "armed Chinese troops in Texas" video. From the get-go he opposed power projection and military bases abroad.
On February 12 2012 06:19 Yongwang wrote: @Skilledblob Where Ron Paul screws up he mistakes having foreign military bases around the world in ALLIED COUNTRIES WITH THEIR PERMISSION as us "invading" them.
On February 12 2012 06:17 darthfoley wrote:
On February 12 2012 06:01 Yongwang wrote:
On February 12 2012 05:43 drcatellino wrote: You know there is something wrong when gun ownership is more important than human rights.
Gun rights are more important than sending aid to Africa.
Lol civil rights? I don't really believe owning a gun is something everyone should have. Especially with all the smart kids who learn how to load a gun and accidentally kill themselves.
Be honest, are you trolling or joking right now? Owning a gun is definitely right we should and do have. At the end of the day, no matter how much the socialists hate it, there is no legitimate reason for the government to implement gun control.
So Gabrielle Gifford doesn't get shot? So crazy people/pissed off people take their anger out through the trigger?
On February 12 2012 06:32 Roe wrote: Romney is a socialist, you heard it here folks.
Just look at his record as governor of Massachusetts and his policies. He's more in-line with Obama the socialist than with any true conservative or libertarian. Romney is the one who created the blueprint for Obamacare.
It still doesn't make him a socialist.
The vast, vast majority of the people in the U.S. that throw around the term "socialist" have absolutely no idea what socialism actually is.
On February 12 2012 06:19 Yongwang wrote: @Skilledblob Where Ron Paul screws up he mistakes having foreign military bases around the world in ALLIED COUNTRIES WITH THEIR PERMISSION as us "invading" them.
show me one time where he said that and I might believe you. Until then I will assume that he was not talking about countries who asked for help.
That's what he was implying with the "armed Chinese troops in Texas" video. From the get-go he opposed power projection and military bases abroad.
On February 12 2012 06:20 darthfoley wrote:
On February 12 2012 06:19 Yongwang wrote: @Skilledblob Where Ron Paul screws up he mistakes having foreign military bases around the world in ALLIED COUNTRIES WITH THEIR PERMISSION as us "invading" them.
On February 12 2012 06:17 darthfoley wrote:
On February 12 2012 06:01 Yongwang wrote:
On February 12 2012 05:43 drcatellino wrote: You know there is something wrong when gun ownership is more important than human rights.
Gun rights are more important than sending aid to Africa.
Lol civil rights? I don't really believe owning a gun is something everyone should have. Especially with all the smart kids who learn how to load a gun and accidentally kill themselves.
Be honest, are you trolling or joking right now? Owning a gun is definitely right we should and do have. At the end of the day, no matter how much the socialists hate it, there is no legitimate reason for the government to implement gun control.
...besides the amount of crazy people living in this country who would probably shoot eachother over a snide comment or something.
An armed society is a polite society. Please tell me, how many gun owners do you actually know in real life?
an armed society is a society with many people shot for nothing.
do you really want to impress me with telling me that every genocide in the 20th century took place because the people didnt have guns? Are you really that naive? But you also think that some people in the republican party are socialists so I guess everybody in Europe must be a communist then by your standards, though I guess that you are not able to make a distinction between the two anyway.
On February 12 2012 06:32 Roe wrote: Romney is a socialist, you heard it here folks.
Just look at his record as governor of Massachusetts and his policies. He's more in-line with Obama the socialist than with any true conservative or libertarian. Romney is the one who created the blueprint for Obamacare.
Did you just say Obama is a socialist? Do you listen to Alex Jones or Rush Limbaugh by any chance?
Yes, I called Obama a socialist.
And no I don't listen to either of them regularly no, though I have listened to both of their programs a few times however. Rush Limbaugh is pretty awesome from what I've heard of him, he's dead on and he says it like it is. Alex Jones on the other hand has some interesting alternative opinions, but some of his conspiracies are a bit out there. Why do you ask?
If we are to call Obama a socialist, then we might as well start saying that Thatcher was also a socialist as she did not dismantle public healthcare. Some of you Americans are essentially solipsistic. It's like the rest of the world simply does not exist except as figments of your imagination. It is so common to hear and read those fairy tales about the decay of Europe when Europe is an incredibly large and diverse part of the world, with many European nations having much healthier economies and far more social successful than America for many years now.
On February 12 2012 06:32 Roe wrote: Romney is a socialist, you heard it here folks.
Just look at his record as governor of Massachusetts and his policies. He's more in-line with Obama the socialist than with any true conservative or libertarian. Romney is the one who created the blueprint for Obamacare.
It still doesn't make him a socialist.
The vast, vast majority of the people in the U.S. that throw around the term "socialist" have absolutely no idea what socialism actually is.
Why is there such a fear of progressive social policies in the US? First off, having some social benefits hardly makes you a socialist nation. The US is FAR from being socialist, yes even under Obama (shocking I know). How have people been fearmongered so badly into thinking that any social benefits make the people proposing them socialist, or communist (which I get a kick out of)? It seems like the repubplicans just throw out catch words that dumb people eat up, even though they make no sense whatsoever.
Its amazing how a party that has close to 0 policies that would benefit anyone middle class or below can get the votes of those people, just by coercion and catchy rhetoric.
On February 12 2012 06:32 Roe wrote: Romney is a socialist, you heard it here folks.
Just look at his record as governor of Massachusetts and his policies. He's more in-line with Obama the socialist than with any true conservative or libertarian. Romney is the one who created the blueprint for Obamacare.
Did you just say Obama is a socialist? Do you listen to Alex Jones or Rush Limbaugh by any chance?
Yes, I called Obama a socialist.
And no I don't listen to either of them regularly no, though I have listened to both of their programs a few times however. Rush Limbaugh is pretty awesome from what I've heard of him, he's dead on and he says it like it is. Alex Jones on the other hand has some interesting alternative opinions, but some of his conspiracies are a bit out there. Why do you ask?
A perfect example of what im confused about. In Canada, Rush Limbaugh would be considered a satirist, and if he tried to say he wasnt, people would just think he was insane. How do people use him as a valid news source, and believe they arent being fead ridiculous information?
On February 12 2012 06:19 Yongwang wrote: @Skilledblob Where Ron Paul screws up he mistakes having foreign military bases around the world in ALLIED COUNTRIES WITH THEIR PERMISSION as us "invading" them.
show me one time where he said that and I might believe you. Until then I will assume that he was not talking about countries who asked for help.
That's what he was implying with the "armed Chinese troops in Texas" video. From the get-go he opposed power projection and military bases abroad.
On February 12 2012 06:20 darthfoley wrote:
On February 12 2012 06:19 Yongwang wrote: @Skilledblob Where Ron Paul screws up he mistakes having foreign military bases around the world in ALLIED COUNTRIES WITH THEIR PERMISSION as us "invading" them.
On February 12 2012 06:17 darthfoley wrote:
On February 12 2012 06:01 Yongwang wrote:
On February 12 2012 05:43 drcatellino wrote: You know there is something wrong when gun ownership is more important than human rights.
Gun rights are more important than sending aid to Africa.
Lol civil rights? I don't really believe owning a gun is something everyone should have. Especially with all the smart kids who learn how to load a gun and accidentally kill themselves.
Be honest, are you trolling or joking right now? Owning a gun is definitely right we should and do have. At the end of the day, no matter how much the socialists hate it, there is no legitimate reason for the government to implement gun control.
...besides the amount of crazy people living in this country who would probably shoot eachother over a snide comment or something.
An armed society is a polite society. Please tell me, how many gun owners do you actually know in real life?
An armed society is far more dangerous than an unarmed one. And I actually know quite a few gun owners, considering my state just passed a law allowing people to carry guns in public places.
Aren't the stories we get every week of a father/mother shooting up their kids/family than shooting themselves not enough to at least warrant limitations/background checks in purchasing of guns?
Wrong, an unarmed society is vastly more dangerous, because only criminals and the authoritarian government would have guns. It's like those idiots who put up signs saying "my business is unarmed" and expect criminals will see that sign and think "oh we can't rob this guy, he has a sign up." And crime happens everywhere and it's not going to magically disappear if guns are banned. If you want to live in a free society, you have to accept the fact that sometimes things are going to happen. Fear is not a legitimate reason to take away freedom.
On February 12 2012 06:32 Roe wrote: Romney is a socialist, you heard it here folks.
Just look at his record as governor of Massachusetts and his policies. He's more in-line with Obama the socialist than with any true conservative or libertarian. Romney is the one who created the blueprint for Obamacare.
Did you just say Obama is a socialist? Do you listen to Alex Jones or Rush Limbaugh by any chance?
Yes, I called Obama a socialist.
And no I don't listen to either of them regularly no, though I have listened to both of their programs a few times however. Rush Limbaugh is pretty awesome from what I've heard of him, he's dead on and he says it like it is. Alex Jones on the other hand has some interesting alternative opinions, but some of his conspiracies are a bit out there. Why do you ask?
A perfect example of what im confused about. In Canada, Rush Limbaugh would be considered a satirist, and if he tried to say he wasnt, people would just think he was insane. How do people use him as a valid news source, and believe they arent being fead ridiculous information?
He has the most listened to syndicated talk show in all of North America, so he must be doing something right. Also, I think you confuse the NEWS with PUNDITS. There is a big difference, or at least there is supposed to be.
On February 12 2012 06:19 Yongwang wrote: @Skilledblob Where Ron Paul screws up he mistakes having foreign military bases around the world in ALLIED COUNTRIES WITH THEIR PERMISSION as us "invading" them.
show me one time where he said that and I might believe you. Until then I will assume that he was not talking about countries who asked for help.
That's what he was implying with the "armed Chinese troops in Texas" video. From the get-go he opposed power projection and military bases abroad.
On February 12 2012 06:20 darthfoley wrote:
On February 12 2012 06:19 Yongwang wrote: @Skilledblob Where Ron Paul screws up he mistakes having foreign military bases around the world in ALLIED COUNTRIES WITH THEIR PERMISSION as us "invading" them.
On February 12 2012 06:17 darthfoley wrote:
On February 12 2012 06:01 Yongwang wrote:
On February 12 2012 05:43 drcatellino wrote: You know there is something wrong when gun ownership is more important than human rights.
Gun rights are more important than sending aid to Africa.
Lol civil rights? I don't really believe owning a gun is something everyone should have. Especially with all the smart kids who learn how to load a gun and accidentally kill themselves.
Be honest, are you trolling or joking right now? Owning a gun is definitely right we should and do have. At the end of the day, no matter how much the socialists hate it, there is no legitimate reason for the government to implement gun control.
...besides the amount of crazy people living in this country who would probably shoot eachother over a snide comment or something.
An armed society is a polite society. Please tell me, how many gun owners do you actually know in real life?
An armed society is far more dangerous than an unarmed one. And I actually know quite a few gun owners, considering my state just passed a law allowing people to carry guns in public places.
Aren't the stories we get every week of a father/mother shooting up their kids/family than shooting themselves not enough to at least warrant limitations/background checks in purchasing of guns?
Wrong, an unarmed society is vastly more dangerous, because only criminals and the authoritarian government would have guns. It's like those idiots who put up signs saying "my business is unarmed" and expect criminals will see that sign and think "oh we can't rob this guy, he has a sign up." And crime happens everywhere and it's not going to magically disappear if guns are banned. If you want to live in a free society, you have to accept the fact that sometimes things are going to happen. Fear is not a legitimate reason to take away freedom.
If you'd like to keep the slippery slope going, we'll never be "truly" free with laws of any kind!
On February 12 2012 06:32 Roe wrote: Romney is a socialist, you heard it here folks.
Just look at his record as governor of Massachusetts and his policies. He's more in-line with Obama the socialist than with any true conservative or libertarian. Romney is the one who created the blueprint for Obamacare.
Did you just say Obama is a socialist? Do you listen to Alex Jones or Rush Limbaugh by any chance?
Yes, I called Obama a socialist.
And no I don't listen to either of them regularly no, though I have listened to both of their programs a few times however. Rush Limbaugh is pretty awesome from what I've heard of him, he's dead on and he says it like it is. Alex Jones on the other hand has some interesting alternative opinions, but some of his conspiracies are a bit out there. Why do you ask?
A perfect example of what im confused about. In Canada, Rush Limbaugh would be considered a satirist, and if he tried to say he wasnt, people would just think he was insane. How do people use him as a valid news source, and believe they arent being fead ridiculous information?
He has the most listened to syndicated talk show in all of North America, so he must be doing something right. Also, I think you confuse the NEWS with PUNDITS. There is a big difference, or at least there is supposed to be.
On February 12 2012 06:32 Roe wrote: Romney is a socialist, you heard it here folks.
Just look at his record as governor of Massachusetts and his policies. He's more in-line with Obama the socialist than with any true conservative or libertarian. Romney is the one who created the blueprint for Obamacare.
Did you just say Obama is a socialist? Do you listen to Alex Jones or Rush Limbaugh by any chance?
Yes, I called Obama a socialist.
And no I don't listen to either of them regularly no, though I have listened to both of their programs a few times however. Rush Limbaugh is pretty awesome from what I've heard of him, he's dead on and he says it like it is. Alex Jones on the other hand has some interesting alternative opinions, but some of his conspiracies are a bit out there. Why do you ask?
A perfect example of what im confused about. In Canada, Rush Limbaugh would be considered a satirist, and if he tried to say he wasnt, people would just think he was insane. How do people use him as a valid news source, and believe they arent being fead ridiculous information?
He has the most listened to syndicated talk show in all of North America, so he must be doing something right. Also, I think you confuse the NEWS with PUNDITS. There is a big difference, or at least there is supposed to be.
That "something right" is lying and sensationalizing.
On February 12 2012 06:19 Yongwang wrote: @Skilledblob Where Ron Paul screws up he mistakes having foreign military bases around the world in ALLIED COUNTRIES WITH THEIR PERMISSION as us "invading" them.
show me one time where he said that and I might believe you. Until then I will assume that he was not talking about countries who asked for help.
That's what he was implying with the "armed Chinese troops in Texas" video. From the get-go he opposed power projection and military bases abroad.
On February 12 2012 06:20 darthfoley wrote:
On February 12 2012 06:19 Yongwang wrote: @Skilledblob Where Ron Paul screws up he mistakes having foreign military bases around the world in ALLIED COUNTRIES WITH THEIR PERMISSION as us "invading" them.
On February 12 2012 06:17 darthfoley wrote:
On February 12 2012 06:01 Yongwang wrote:
On February 12 2012 05:43 drcatellino wrote: You know there is something wrong when gun ownership is more important than human rights.
Gun rights are more important than sending aid to Africa.
Lol civil rights? I don't really believe owning a gun is something everyone should have. Especially with all the smart kids who learn how to load a gun and accidentally kill themselves.
Be honest, are you trolling or joking right now? Owning a gun is definitely right we should and do have. At the end of the day, no matter how much the socialists hate it, there is no legitimate reason for the government to implement gun control.
...besides the amount of crazy people living in this country who would probably shoot eachother over a snide comment or something.
An armed society is a polite society. Please tell me, how many gun owners do you actually know in real life?
An armed society is far more dangerous than an unarmed one. And I actually know quite a few gun owners, considering my state just passed a law allowing people to carry guns in public places.
Aren't the stories we get every week of a father/mother shooting up their kids/family than shooting themselves not enough to at least warrant limitations/background checks in purchasing of guns?
Wrong, an unarmed society is vastly more dangerous, because only criminals and the authoritarian government would have guns. It's like those idiots who put up signs saying "my business is unarmed" and expect criminals will see that sign and think "oh we can't rob this guy, he has a sign up." And crime happens everywhere and it's not going to magically disappear if guns are banned. If you want to live in a free society, you have to accept the fact that sometimes things are going to happen. Fear is not a legitimate reason to take away freedom.
Factually that is false, as every western first world country that is unarmed ranks better than the US in crime rate, in murder rate, in incidents involving firearms, in deaths due to firearms, etc... Believe that if you please, but factually it is false. You are many time more likely to be shot, and to be killed in the US than even the second highest ranking first world western country. So clearly being armed isnt necessarily the answer to being safe.
EPT
