Eric Cantor lost his seat

[thanatos144]

WTF? That's moronic. We want very little from government. And we'll gladly pay for that which we want. Your sweeping statements are ridiculous.

Who are you trying to fool? Pot hookers and open borders have to have some oversight and that isn't decreasing government it Is growing it.

tapatalk post

You would want oversight. If a guy wants to blow smoke or pay a chick to have sex, I don't see why government needs to be involved in that. That's what you would want, not me.

Explain how if the Federal government was reduced to it's constitutional role that would cost more. You said I want government and I don't want to pay for it. Back it up with what I want that I don't want to pay for.

How the fuck isn't it? Do you think Hookers will all be std free? Do you think all dope is going to be free of poison? What do we do with the mass expansion of junkies and aids victims ? Like democrats you libertarians never pay attention to the consequences of your actions.

 

[JakeStarkey]

HBH and Thanatos and the other sillies will have no place in GOP decision making after 2014.

Jason Chaffetz will be a perfect example of that.

 

[HenryBHough]

HBH and Thanatos and the other sillies will have no place in GOP decision making after 2014.

Jason Chaffetz will be a perfect example of that.

Gee, I wonder how the chairperson (interterminate gender) of the local Democrat committee might influence GOP anything!

 

[holston]

Cantor, amnesty for illegals, and the Jewish multiculturalist agenda.

Cantor: Jews Struggled Like Immigrants of Today

Cantor compared the current immigration debate in the United States to the experience Jews have had for thousands of years.

“When I say ‘our people’ I mean our people do. And it is also testament to what the country is testament to but the way I look at it, as an American Jew, and it is different. And I say that, because first of all, as a people for thousands and thousands of years didn’t belong anywhere. We didn’t have a homeland. A couple of thousands of years exiled from the land of the Israel,” Cantor said.

Notice the use of the word "our" in the context in which Cantor is using it.

When he calls on the name of Washington to say that Jews are "equal" citizens, the Talmudic interpretation of this should be taken to mean, the Jews now own the country and therefore have the "G-d given right" to run it how they damned well please.

Gutierrez, however, did talk to the press explaining that comprehensive immigration reform cannot pass without bipartisan support.

This means roughly that the Jews must have BOTH the Demwits AND the Rugrats in their pocket, which they practically do. They just need to find a way to pass this through THEIR Congress without causing a full scale riot by all the "right wing, angry white men Christian conservative TERRORISTS"!

Because you see, they still haven't managed to part them of their guns. And the Jewish men do not really desire to use THEIR Department of HOMELAND Security to run their blood in the streets.
If they did, all the Shicksa Hoes and their trophy wives might get mad and refuse to lie down with them.
Because as you see, all of those kind of women still have a good many Anglo Protestant type relatives and even their Fathers are still "angry old white men".

Therefore the Jewish intelligencia have to find a bloodless way to push their agenda.



I heard the Zionist sycophant, Glen Beck, say the other day that he had a discussion with an honorable and revered Rabbi who commented that he was afraid things were approaching the point in this country to where "we might be killing each other".

I'll leave it to you to guess who the different "we" parties are who might be "killing each other".

Anyway, Pastor Beck went on from there to urge his listening flock to "be more 'Christian'",
which is to say, it is "unChristian" to offer any kind of physical resistance to any sort of incursion into their private zones and as a "Christian", we are all obliged to "turn the other cheek" any and every time the Jewish Progressives feel the need to give us a slap in the face.

What's puzzling about this definition of what it means to be a 'Christian' as proffered by the Jews, is ....
how can they require 'Christians' to be completely docile and passive in obedience to the Zionists at home while at the same being expected to go and KILL the evil Muslims ( or anyone else for that matter).

If I accept the definition of "Christian" according to all those who would otherwise call me a "hypocrite", then I guess I would have to refuse to kill Israel's enemies if I am going to obey the Jewish masters at home.

Sorry but republicans don't need Jew hating asshole. Go to the democrats or libertarians. We are the party of equal rights for everyone

tapatalk post

Republicans don't need white Anglo hating NEO-CONS. As it is, that's about all that's left of the Republican party. They are the ones who are running the show. The rest are called "paleo-conservatives".


Show me where I said I hated Jews......Asshole!

Better yet, just show me where I made a false statement.

You'd be much more convincing if you could disprove a single point I've made.

I don't think you can. That's why you and the rest of the Hasbarat pack always have to resort to name calling instead. If anyone is venomous here it's you people.

 

[Seawytch]

this boiled down to amnesty. The tea party didn't fund this guy because even they didn't think he could win. Cantor pushed amnesty stupididly thinking like a democrat and lost because NO REPUBLICAN VOTER wants it.

Really? A years long wait list and repaying back taxes is "amnesty"? No...when you go to kiss your Reagan love doll tonight, think about what St Ronnie did...THAT was amnesty.

Look at the ignorant progressive trying to twist history.... The bill Regan signed into law was to clamp down on illegal immigration....It was DEMOCRATS that ignored said bill and refused to fund it after amnesty..,..What it proved historically is that democrats cant be trusted.

I noticed you didn't provide any links to back up your assertions. That's because you're lying. I understand the knee jerk reaction ya'll have when St. Ronnie is mentioned, but Ronnie is responsible for the Amnesty. Reagan during Mondale debate:

"I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally,"

That was Ronald Reagan that said that. Gonna pop your Reagan fuck doll now?

This was also Ronnie:

Robinson says Reagan's own diaries show the president found the idea of a militantly staffed border fence difficult to take. In a private meeting with then-President Jose Lopez Portillo of Mexico in 1979, Reagan wrote that he hoped to discuss how the United States and Mexico could make the border "something other than the location for a fence."

A Reagan Legacy: Amnesty For Illegal Immigrants

Oops, well, there he goes again.

 

[kaz]

Who are you trying to fool? Pot hookers and open borders have to have some oversight and that isn't decreasing government it Is growing it.

tapatalk post

You would want oversight. If a guy wants to blow smoke or pay a chick to have sex, I don't see why government needs to be involved in that. That's what you would want, not me.

Explain how if the Federal government was reduced to it's constitutional role that would cost more. You said I want government and I don't want to pay for it. Back it up with what I want that I don't want to pay for.

How the fuck isn't it? Do you think Hookers will all be std free? Do you think all dope is going to be free of poison? What do we do with the mass expansion of junkies and aids victims ? Like democrats you libertarians never pay attention to the consequences of your actions.

Let's say as you believe for the sake of argument that it's government's job to regulate the marketplace to protect all the little consumers because they aren't bright enough to do it for themselves. I don't agree with you on that, but let's say we're going to do that anyway.

Compare the cost of STD testing and licensing to the cost of the war on drugs as well as the military costs of fighting the overseas cartels we create from Columbia to Afghanistan. And throw in the incredible Unconstitutional warrantless privacy violations the government commits in the pursuit of tracking money.

Government's going to get "bigger." Right...

 

[JakeStarkey]

It is the business of the government to regulate business to ensure competition and innovation.

All win that way.

The neo-corporatists' desire only to make more money: screw em.

 

[thanatos144]

Cantor, amnesty for illegals, and the Jewish multiculturalist agenda.

Cantor: Jews Struggled Like Immigrants of Today





Notice the use of the word "our" in the context in which Cantor is using it.

When he calls on the name of Washington to say that Jews are "equal" citizens, the Talmudic interpretation of this should be taken to mean, the Jews now own the country and therefore have the "G-d given right" to run it how they damned well please.




This means roughly that the Jews must have BOTH the Demwits AND the Rugrats in their pocket, which they practically do. They just need to find a way to pass this through THEIR Congress without causing a full scale riot by all the "right wing, angry white men Christian conservative TERRORISTS"!

Because you see, they still haven't managed to part them of their guns. And the Jewish men do not really desire to use THEIR Department of HOMELAND Security to run their blood in the streets.
If they did, all the Shicksa Hoes and their trophy wives might get mad and refuse to lie down with them.
Because as you see, all of those kind of women still have a good many Anglo Protestant type relatives and even their Fathers are still "angry old white men".

Therefore the Jewish intelligencia have to find a bloodless way to push their agenda.



I heard the Zionist sycophant, Glen Beck, say the other day that he had a discussion with an honorable and revered Rabbi who commented that he was afraid things were approaching the point in this country to where "we might be killing each other".

I'll leave it to you to guess who the different "we" parties are who might be "killing each other".

Anyway, Pastor Beck went on from there to urge his listening flock to "be more 'Christian'",
which is to say, it is "unChristian" to offer any kind of physical resistance to any sort of incursion into their private zones and as a "Christian", we are all obliged to "turn the other cheek" any and every time the Jewish Progressives feel the need to give us a slap in the face.

What's puzzling about this definition of what it means to be a 'Christian' as proffered by the Jews, is ....
how can they require 'Christians' to be completely docile and passive in obedience to the Zionists at home while at the same being expected to go and KILL the evil Muslims ( or anyone else for that matter).

If I accept the definition of "Christian" according to all those who would otherwise call me a "hypocrite", then I guess I would have to refuse to kill Israel's enemies if I am going to obey the Jewish masters at home.

Sorry but republicans don't need Jew hating asshole. Go to the democrats or libertarians. We are the party of equal rights for everyone

tapatalk post

Republicans don't need white Anglo hating NEO-CONS. As it is, that's about all that's left of the Republican party. They are the ones who are running the show. The rest are called "paleo-conservatives".


Show me where I said I hated Jews......Asshole!

Better yet, just show me where I made a false statement.

You'd be much more convincing if you could disprove a single point I've made.

I don't think you can. That's why you and the rest of the Hasbarat pack always have to resort to name calling instead. If anyone is venomous here it's you people.

LMAO The whole post was you blaming the Jews for everything. You didn't need to say you hated them because we all understood your did from your bigoted post

 

[thanatos144]

Really? A years long wait list and repaying back taxes is "amnesty"? No...when you go to kiss your Reagan love doll tonight, think about what St Ronnie did...THAT was amnesty.

Look at the ignorant progressive trying to twist history.... The bill Regan signed into law was to clamp down on illegal immigration....It was DEMOCRATS that ignored said bill and refused to fund it after amnesty..,..What it proved historically is that democrats cant be trusted.

I noticed you didn't provide any links to back up your assertions. That's because you're lying. I understand the knee jerk reaction ya'll have when St. Ronnie is mentioned, but Ronnie is responsible for the Amnesty. Reagan during Mondale debate:

"I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally,"

That was Ronald Reagan that said that. Gonna pop your Reagan fuck doll now?

This was also Ronnie:

Robinson says Reagan's own diaries show the president found the idea of a militantly staffed border fence difficult to take. In a private meeting with then-President Jose Lopez Portillo of Mexico in 1979, Reagan wrote that he hoped to discuss how the United States and Mexico could make the border "something other than the location for a fence."

A Reagan Legacy: Amnesty For Illegal Immigrants

Oops, well, there he goes again.

Still did NOT disprove my post . Go back to your little bubble now liberal since you refuse to learn the truth.

 

[thanatos144]

You would want oversight. If a guy wants to blow smoke or pay a chick to have sex, I don't see why government needs to be involved in that. That's what you would want, not me.

Explain how if the Federal government was reduced to it's constitutional role that would cost more. You said I want government and I don't want to pay for it. Back it up with what I want that I don't want to pay for.

How the fuck isn't it? Do you think Hookers will all be std free? Do you think all dope is going to be free of poison? What do we do with the mass expansion of junkies and aids victims ? Like democrats you libertarians never pay attention to the consequences of your actions.

Let's say as you believe for the sake of argument that it's government's job to regulate the marketplace to protect all the little consumers because they aren't bright enough to do it for themselves. I don't agree with you on that, but let's say we're going to do that anyway.

Compare the cost of STD testing and licensing to the cost of the war on drugs as well as the military costs of fighting the overseas cartels we create from Columbia to Afghanistan. And throw in the incredible Unconstitutional warrantless privacy violations the government commits in the pursuit of tracking money.

Government's going to get "bigger." Right...

It amazes me that you stupidly think these things will shrink government. By the way using your paranoia isnt proving a point.

 

[kaz]

How the fuck isn't it? Do you think Hookers will all be std free? Do you think all dope is going to be free of poison? What do we do with the mass expansion of junkies and aids victims ? Like democrats you libertarians never pay attention to the consequences of your actions.

Let's say as you believe for the sake of argument that it's government's job to regulate the marketplace to protect all the little consumers because they aren't bright enough to do it for themselves. I don't agree with you on that, but let's say we're going to do that anyway.

Compare the cost of STD testing and licensing to the cost of the war on drugs as well as the military costs of fighting the overseas cartels we create from Columbia to Afghanistan. And throw in the incredible Unconstitutional warrantless privacy violations the government commits in the pursuit of tracking money.

Government's going to get "bigger." Right...

It amazes me that you stupidly think these things will shrink government. By the way using your paranoia isnt proving a point.

Do some research on the cost of the war on drugs, the effects it has on countries from Columbia to Afghanistan and what that costs us, and government policies that invade our privacy without warrants and get back to me.

That you support those things makes you no conservative. You're a big government authoritarian just like the left. That's fine, but what's funny is you believe your authoritarian government is cheaper than my free one.

LOL.

 

[thanatos144]

Let's say as you believe for the sake of argument that it's government's job to regulate the marketplace to protect all the little consumers because they aren't bright enough to do it for themselves. I don't agree with you on that, but let's say we're going to do that anyway.

Compare the cost of STD testing and licensing to the cost of the war on drugs as well as the military costs of fighting the overseas cartels we create from Columbia to Afghanistan. And throw in the incredible Unconstitutional warrantless privacy violations the government commits in the pursuit of tracking money.

Government's going to get "bigger." Right...

It amazes me that you stupidly think these things will shrink government. By the way using your paranoia isnt proving a point.

Do some research on the cost of the war on drugs, the effects it has on countries from Columbia to Afghanistan and what that costs us, and government policies that invade our privacy without warrants and get back to me.

That you support those things makes you no conservative. You're a big government authoritarian just like the left. That's fine, but what's funny is you believe your authoritarian government is cheaper than my free one.

LOL.

WTF would you know about being a conservative? all you worry about is fundamentally changing the country so you can have pot and hookers ... You stupidly think making drugs legal will magically make crime and junkies disappear and make everything cost less. Libertarians are not conservative. They say they are because they want less taxes yet really they dont care about conserving the Constitution.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Libertarians are like children like democrats. They want everything yet refuse to pay for it and call it liberty

tapatalk post

WTF? That's moronic. We want very little from government. And we'll gladly pay for that which we want. Your sweeping statements are ridiculous.

Who are you trying to fool? Pot hookers and open borders have to have some oversight and that isn't decreasing government it Is growing it.

tapatalk post

Are you stoned again?

 

[thanatos144]

WTF? That's moronic. We want very little from government. And we'll gladly pay for that which we want. Your sweeping statements are ridiculous.

Who are you trying to fool? Pot hookers and open borders have to have some oversight and that isn't decreasing government it Is growing it.

tapatalk post

Are you stoned again?

not since 1987

 

[JakeStarkey]

Look at the ignorant progressive trying to twist history.... The bill Regan signed into law was to clamp down on illegal immigration....It was DEMOCRATS that ignored said bill and refused to fund it after amnesty..,..What it proved historically is that democrats cant be trusted.

I noticed you didn't provide any links to back up your assertions. That's because you're lying. I understand the knee jerk reaction ya'll have when St. Ronnie is mentioned, but Ronnie is responsible for the Amnesty. Reagan during Mondale debate:

"I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally,"

That was Ronald Reagan that said that. Gonna pop your Reagan fuck doll now?

This was also Ronnie:

Robinson says Reagan's own diaries show the president found the idea of a militantly staffed border fence difficult to take. In a private meeting with then-President Jose Lopez Portillo of Mexico in 1979, Reagan wrote that he hoped to discuss how the United States and Mexico could make the border "something other than the location for a fence."

A Reagan Legacy: Amnesty For Illegal Immigrants

Oops, well, there he goes again.

Still did NOT disprove my post . Go back to your little bubble now liberal since you refuse to learn the truth.

Yeah, your post was exploded.

You really need to do your homework before mixing with the heavyweights.

 

[JWBooth]

Y'all stop picking on thanatroll. Its bad manners to take advantage of the retarded.

 

[kaz]

It amazes me that you stupidly think these things will shrink government. By the way using your paranoia isnt proving a point.

Do some research on the cost of the war on drugs, the effects it has on countries from Columbia to Afghanistan and what that costs us, and government policies that invade our privacy without warrants and get back to me.

That you support those things makes you no conservative. You're a big government authoritarian just like the left. That's fine, but what's funny is you believe your authoritarian government is cheaper than my free one.

LOL.

WTF would you know about being a conservative? all you worry about is fundamentally changing the country so you can have pot and hookers ... You stupidly think making drugs legal will magically make crime and junkies disappear and make everything cost less.

What the Whiskey Tango Foxtrot are you talking about? I said we stop the war on drugs, I said nothing about the junkies. Dude, we already have those. How is removing the cost of the war on drugs and not removing the cost of junkies an INCREASE in cost? Even for an authoritarian rightist like you, that doesn't make sense.

Libertarians are not conservative.

Um...no...we're libertarian...

They say they are because they want less taxes yet really they dont care about conserving the Constitution.

And which part of the Constitution do I not support?

We know you don't support the 10th amendment as you want government to do a war on drugs it has no authority for, the 9th amendment since lack of authority does not mean a right is less important or the fourth Amendment since you are supporting warrantless searches under the War on Drugs.

 

[Jarlaxle]

I noticed you didn't provide any links to back up your assertions. That's because you're lying. I understand the knee jerk reaction ya'll have when St. Ronnie is mentioned, but Ronnie is responsible for the Amnesty. Reagan during Mondale debate:

"I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally,"

That was Ronald Reagan that said that. Gonna pop your Reagan fuck doll now?

This was also Ronnie:

Robinson says Reagan's own diaries show the president found the idea of a militantly staffed border fence difficult to take. In a private meeting with then-President Jose Lopez Portillo of Mexico in 1979, Reagan wrote that he hoped to discuss how the United States and Mexico could make the border "something other than the location for a fence."

A Reagan Legacy: Amnesty For Illegal Immigrants

Oops, well, there he goes again.

Still did NOT disprove my post . Go back to your little bubble now liberal since you refuse to learn the truth.

Yeah, your post was exploded.

You really need to do your homework before mixing with the heavyweights.

Dude, you're about as "heavyweight" as 100 cubic feet of hydrogen!

 

[Luddly Neddite]

But, it looks like the yoyo who won is just as bad.

 

[holston]

LMAO The whole post was you blaming the Jews for everything. You didn't need to say you hated them because we all understood your did from your bigoted post

I don't blame the Jews for everything by any means. I only blame them for those things which they are responsible.
I have shown some of those things which they are responsible for.

This should not be taken to mean that there are no white Anglo Saxons involved with them or doing the same things on their own. Indeed I have said so clearly many times.

It is very prohibitively time consuming to attempt to state all possible exceptions to the general rule for every instance in which it occurs.

I notice that you are guilty of this omission yourself when you speak of people in terms of whether they are Democrats or Republicans.
You speak of them as though they were all identical and are in lock step agreement on every issue down to the last detail. Common sense tells you this isn't so. But that doesn't stop one or the other party from making blanket condemnations of the other.

What are these political parties if they are not mental constructions? For they are supposed to be people who all share the same ideals and have philosophies which are supposed to serve as the basis for making political and social decisions.

The fact that you have no roster with specific names listed and cannot provide one, you still speak of them as though you know and understand the ideals, opinions, and viewpoints of each and everyone.

You as much as admitted this when you said to me that "Republicans don't need no Jew hating assholes" or something to that effect.

You made a pretense of speaking for all of them as a group. You made a pronouncement about their shared ideology which you cannot demonstrate holds for the entire collection of people who call themselves by that LABEL.

I pointed out to you that the predominant decision and policy makers for the "Republican Party" are now NEO-CONs. You and others like yourself want to ignore this fact, probably because it is well known that the originators of this NEO-Republican party are comprised mostly of Jews. Those who aren't Jewish, like John McCain serve as their lap dogs.

So why do you HATE Democrats?
The insignia you present for yourself says "Socialism is a cancer."

I assume that this means that you HATE SOCIALISTS.

Is this hatred you have for "Democrats" and Socialists based upon some reason which justifies your hatred or is it merely pathological?

Don't tell me that you don't hate them because your scathing criticisms of them clearly indicates that you do.

It is also apparent by your tone in speaking to others on this forum that you hate them as well.

Is this because you know that they all happen to be Democrats and Socialists and are therefore worthy of your hatred........asshole?


If criticism of Democrats, Socialist, or Republicans either for that matter, is no sure sign of hatred for all of them or any one in particular, then neither is criticism of JudaISM and/or Zionism or any of the myriad of politically active Jewish organizations or their social engineers.

For decades, "white men" and everything associated with them including their culture, their heritage, the predominant religion among them, and their race as well, has been wide open to all kinds of criticisms and even hateful defamation.
When have you ever heard any one in the Jewish media censor those critics as being motivated by hatred for those objects?

You never do! The reason why is because the Jews themselves have done so and continue to do so.
For them to condemn criticism of "WASP" America as being politically incorrect, they would have to condemn themselves for it because they are as much and probably more engaged in it as anyone else, including the blacks!


In the interest of political and academic fairness I'm declaring an open season on Jews, their culture, their activism, and their Supremacist religion in particular.

Let the bashing begin.