Are Republicans "trying" to lose the 2016 presidential race?

[JakeStarkey]

now you're resorting to cutting off my post in order to lie...

A post may be cut and the poster's name deleted to make sure the post is remaining true to the point.

The point is that your sociopathy is on display.

but they were not my words...they were YOUR words

But the bolded are your words. One of the characteristics of a sociopath is to blatantly deny your behavior.

 

[Yurt]

Because your chickenshit nonsense is just . . . that.

what chickenshit nonsense? why is it you refuse to explain how i'm a far right reactionary?

Yurt, Yurt, Yurt, sigh. I have many times, but you act as a recalcitrant school boy redeyed in the corner where you have been punished, still denying the behavior. Your sociopathy here is legendary.

and once again...jake can't explain why i'm a far right reactionary....and now i'm a sociopath

too funny

keep trolling jake....you only prove my point about you

jake...seriously...just quit lying

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/304146-i-m-a-far-right-reactionary-because.html

 

[JakeStarkey]

you act as a recalcitrant school boy redeyed in the corner where you have been punished, still denying the behavior. Your sociopathy here is legendary

and now i'm a sociopath too funny

 

[Spoonman]

I never said the admin was playing the race card, you did. Holder has to investigate for civil rights violations, but he won't find them, because race wasn't part of it. But he still has to look.

The right wing race baiters are playing the media game hard, just like here on the Board.

The other side has every right to demonstrate and yell just as loudly. As do you.

The context is that both extremes play the middle and the justice system.

No, the extreme gun right is playing stupidly also.

any links to articles where the right is race baiting? can't say I've seen any

its funny the left has failed on two issues with this one. First they tried to make it a gun issue, but that didn't work. they failed to exploit dead kindergarteners they were sure to fail on the Zimmerman case as a gun issue. So they turned it into a race issue. but it couldn't be a Hispanic against a black. they needed it to be a white on black. So they came up with the term "white Hispanic" WTF is a white Hispanic? lol that's like calling Obama a white African American. Zimmerman is as white as Obama, yet you don't hear people refer to Obama as a white president.

To the right, this never was a gun issue. Owning a gun is a right. nothing illegal done there. Zimmerman acted in self defense. He's lucky he had a gun to protect himself. was he overzealous in his actions? probably. but that did not give martin the right to attack him. if martin was concerned, he should have called 911. he had a phone.

They've already looked at whether martins civil rights were violated and found nothing. Why do they need to do it again? Because this administration needs to keep this issues front and center. They don't want it to die. they need to race bait to keep the voters stirred up for the upcoming mid term elections. this has nothing to do with justice for trayvon. its all for political gain

 

[kaz]

Kaz thinks he is a libertarian but can't define it

Actually I think you can't.

You have already shown your own confusion on the issue. All so-called libertarians are confused about it.

Ah, so no one who thinks they are a libertarian knows what a libertarian is. So if that's true and I think I am a libertarian and I don't know what a libertarian is, doesn't that show that I am a libertarian?

 

[kaz]

Example?

How are Democrats different than Republicans on social issues other than abortion and cursing on television? Then Democrats force everyone to pay for an immoral welfare State which fosters dependency. A tort system which punishes the innocent and rewards the guilty. And in intolerance in the the name of "tolerance," Democrats restrict the freedom to worship for Christians and Jews.

There is no morality in liberalism. Then again, there's no liberal in liberalism either. You're a totalitarian State ideology.

Doesn't answer the question...

Where have Democrats called for a vote on moral beliefs? It is your claim

It clearly answered the question if you wanted to know the answer. It doesn't answer the question if you wanted to evade and deflect. Since you chose the latter, if I answer the question again, it's clear what you'll do again. At some point, RW, you need to move past fifth grade arguments.

 

[rightwinger]

How are Democrats different than Republicans on social issues other than abortion and cursing on television? Then Democrats force everyone to pay for an immoral welfare State which fosters dependency. A tort system which punishes the innocent and rewards the guilty. And in intolerance in the the name of "tolerance," Democrats restrict the freedom to worship for Christians and Jews.

There is no morality in liberalism. Then again, there's no liberal in liberalism either. You're a totalitarian State ideology.

Doesn't answer the question...

Where have Democrats called for a vote on moral beliefs? It is your claim

It clearly answered the question if you wanted to know the answer. It doesn't answer the question if you wanted to evade and deflect. Since you chose the latter, if I answer the question again, it's clear what you'll do again. At some point, RW, you need to move past fifth grade arguments.

You moved the goalposts and answered a different question

You made the assertion that Democrats routinely call for a vote on moral beliefs. you obviously can't support what you said

 

[kaz]

Doesn't answer the question...

Where have Democrats called for a vote on moral beliefs? It is your claim

It clearly answered the question if you wanted to know the answer. It doesn't answer the question if you wanted to evade and deflect. Since you chose the latter, if I answer the question again, it's clear what you'll do again. At some point, RW, you need to move past fifth grade arguments.

You moved the goalposts and answered a different question

You made the assertion that Democrats routinely call for a vote on moral beliefs. you obviously can't support what you said

Actually no one said that until you did just now. And this is why I said I'm not answering the question again. You're bickering and word parsing and creating a strawman by changing words and meanings. What you're not interested in doing is discussing the issue.

 

[JakeStarkey]

It clearly answered the question if you wanted to know the answer. It doesn't answer the question if you wanted to evade and deflect. Since you chose the latter, if I answer the question again, it's clear what you'll do again. At some point, RW, you need to move past fifth grade arguments.

You could not answer the question.

So many of you claim you are small government conservatives or libertarians or whatever until you want government to enforce your moral or other pet beliefs.

That philosophy is statist rightwing progressive conservatism, a big government approach.

 

[rightwinger]

It clearly answered the question if you wanted to know the answer. It doesn't answer the question if you wanted to evade and deflect. Since you chose the latter, if I answer the question again, it's clear what you'll do again. At some point, RW, you need to move past fifth grade arguments.

You moved the goalposts and answered a different question

You made the assertion that Democrats routinely call for a vote on moral beliefs. you obviously can't support what you said

Actually no one said that until you did just now. And this is why I said I'm not answering the question again. You're bickering and word parsing and creating a strawman by changing words and meanings. What you're not interested in doing is discussing the issue.

Here is what you posted in #593

If you're a Democrat, you don't bat an eye to vote on moral beliefs.However, libertarians believe that people should be free to do what they want, as long as they infringe on each other's rights. Obviously slavery infringes on other people's rights. I mean duh.

You have failed miserably to provide an example. If you were exaggerating....just say so

 

[Seawytch]

You moved the goalposts and answered a different question

You made the assertion that Democrats routinely call for a vote on moral beliefs. you obviously can't support what you said

Actually no one said that until you did just now. And this is why I said I'm not answering the question again. You're bickering and word parsing and creating a strawman by changing words and meanings. What you're not interested in doing is discussing the issue.

Here is what you posted in #593

If you're a Democrat, you don't bat an eye to vote on moral beliefs.However, libertarians believe that people should be free to do what they want, as long as they infringe on each other's rights. Obviously slavery infringes on other people's rights. I mean duh.

You have failed miserably to provide an example. If you were exaggerating....just say so

There you go...If you're a Democrat you don't bat an eye because obviously you're not voting on morals.

 

[kaz]

You moved the goalposts and answered a different question

You made the assertion that Democrats routinely call for a vote on moral beliefs. you obviously can't support what you said

Actually no one said that until you did just now. And this is why I said I'm not answering the question again. You're bickering and word parsing and creating a strawman by changing words and meanings. What you're not interested in doing is discussing the issue.

Here is what you posted in #593

If you're a Democrat, you don't bat an eye to vote on moral beliefs.However, libertarians believe that people should be free to do what they want, as long as they infringe on each other's rights. Obviously slavery infringes on other people's rights. I mean duh.

You have failed miserably to provide an example. If you were exaggerating....just say so

Thank you for falling on a sword and proving my point that you created a strawman.

 

[kaz]

It clearly answered the question if you wanted to know the answer. It doesn't answer the question if you wanted to evade and deflect. Since you chose the latter, if I answer the question again, it's clear what you'll do again. At some point, RW, you need to move past fifth grade arguments.

You could not answer the question.

So many of you claim you are small government conservatives or libertarians or whatever until you want government to enforce your moral or other pet beliefs.

That philosophy is statist rightwing progressive conservatism, a big government approach.

You don't like libertarians because we keep shushing you and charging you late fees

 

[Seawytch]

Actually no one said that until you did just now. And this is why I said I'm not answering the question again. You're bickering and word parsing and creating a strawman by changing words and meanings. What you're not interested in doing is discussing the issue.

Here is what you posted in #593

If you're a Democrat, you don't bat an eye to vote on moral beliefs.However, libertarians believe that people should be free to do what they want, as long as they infringe on each other's rights. Obviously slavery infringes on other people's rights. I mean duh.

You have failed miserably to provide an example. If you were exaggerating....just say so

Thank you for falling on a sword and proving my point that you created a strawman.

What strawman? Did you not make the claim that Democrats don't bat an eye when voting on morals? That implies they have. Since your claim is Demoracts vote so frequently on morals that they don't "bat an eye" when doing it, you should be able to provide at least three or four examples, yes?

 

[rightwinger]

Actually no one said that until you did just now. And this is why I said I'm not answering the question again. You're bickering and word parsing and creating a strawman by changing words and meanings. What you're not interested in doing is discussing the issue.

Here is what you posted in #593

If you're a Democrat, you don't bat an eye to vote on moral beliefs.However, libertarians believe that people should be free to do what they want, as long as they infringe on each other's rights. Obviously slavery infringes on other people's rights. I mean duh.

You have failed miserably to provide an example. If you were exaggerating....just say so

Thank you for falling on a sword and proving my point that you created a strawman.

How is posting what YOU wrote a straw man?

Do you even know what a straw man is?

 

[JakeStarkey]

kaz, just shut up. You have dug yourself in so deep you can never get out.

 

[kaz]

Here is what you posted in #593



You have failed miserably to provide an example. If you were exaggerating....just say so

Thank you for falling on a sword and proving my point that you created a strawman.

What strawman? Did you not make the claim that Democrats don't bat an eye when voting on morals? That implies they have. Since your claim is Demoracts vote so frequently on morals that they don't "bat an eye" when doing it, you should be able to provide at least three or four examples, yes?

He said I said they "routinely call" for morality votes, that isn't what "don't bat an eye" means. I did provide an answer before. If he wants me to expand on my answer, he has to accurately address what I said and not change to something I didn't say and still expect a serious answer. If he goes back and does that, I'm in.

 

[kaz]

Here is what you posted in #593



You have failed miserably to provide an example. If you were exaggerating....just say so

Thank you for falling on a sword and proving my point that you created a strawman.

How is posting what YOU wrote a straw man?

You changed what I said, that is why it's a strawman. If you don't understand the difference between the two quotes in red, you are a moron.

Do you even know what a straw man is?

I do, you don't. We've had that discussion as long as I've known you when I pointed that out.

 

[kaz]

kaz, just shut up. You have dug yourself in so deep you can never get out.

The power of three!

Actually a liberal cluster of three is equivalent to three morons. You don't get any amplification from that.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If you are asking for big government to intervene on behalf of social Christian nationalism and virtue, then yea you are calling for "morality votes." You are a big government right wing statist progressive.