GOP sides with Syria, Iran and North Korea. I couldn't believe it either.

[JakeStarkey]

No, bucs90, not Republicans but some reactionaries and gun nuts and militia who have tried to take over certain Republican institutions and committees.

 

[Yurt]

i see jake is still running from actual discussions and still whining about pm's

lmoa

what a fool

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yurt is clearly, very clearly, one of those fools who thinks he is a responsible, mainstream Republican.

 

[Yurt]

and once again, jake fails to address the facts and points i raised on topic and instead whines like the little bitch tattle tale he is.

i even reposted two of the posts for him, but of course he is too chickenshit to actually debate me and instead can only whine like a little sissy

and i'm not a republican you dishonest tard.

 

[buckeye45_73]

There are two groups who support a free flow of all weapons into almost anyone's hands:

- Terrorists and rogue nations
- Republicans

Its about that simple really. See, without terrorists and rogue nations, who would Republicans have to go to war with? And without anyone to go to war with, how would defense lobbyists get money to their private defense contractors?

yep bucs is a police officer, and he wants us to be unarmend so he can scrape our dead bodies off the crime scene.....

In Denver an assembly woman said we're good because the police could respon in 14 minutes.....14 minutes...and you're dead......not cool

 

[buckeye45_73]

bad link....try again.

https://www.google.com/search?q=pol...UJczoiALvgoGQDA&ved=0CDAQsAQ&biw=1505&bih=801[/QUOTE]


Chowan River Patriot: Where Do People Really Stand?

That's what I'm talking about....exactally on both charts

 

[JakeStarkey]

and once again, jake fails to address the facts and points i raised on topic and instead whines like the little bitch tattle tale he is.

i even reposted two of the posts for him, but of course he is too chickenshit to actually debate me and instead can only whine like a little sissy and i'm not a republican you dishonest tard.

Good, I am glad you fessed up you are not Republican: the party has hope!

You fail is the only reason for your failings: you are not very bright and can't reason clearly.

So you emote. Tis what tis.

 

[buckeye45_73]

and once again, jake fails to address the facts and points i raised on topic and instead whines like the little bitch tattle tale he is.

i even reposted two of the posts for him, but of course he is too chickenshit to actually debate me and instead can only whine like a little sissy and i'm not a republican you dishonest tard.

Good, I am glad you fessed up you are not Republican: the party has hope!

You fail is the only reason for your failings: you are not very bright and can't reason clearly.

So you emote. Tis what tis.

now that's funny....can I get an AMEN

I dont recall the Stalin wing of the republican party

 

[Yurt]

and once again, jake fails to address the facts and points i raised on topic and instead whines like the little bitch tattle tale he is.

i even reposted two of the posts for him, but of course he is too chickenshit to actually debate me and instead can only whine like a little sissy and i'm not a republican you dishonest tard.

Good, I am glad you fessed up you are not Republican: the party has hope!

You fail is the only reason for your failings: you are not very bright and can't reason clearly.

So you emote. Tis what tis.

right...i present facts and logic to you and all you do is get crazy and insult me. you completely ignore the thread topic.

a sure sign of someone who has completely lost the debate. btw...you should really fess up that you are not a republican. you're a democrat jake and a tattle tale.

 

[JakeStarkey]

bad link....try again.

https://www.google.com/search?q=pol...UJczoiALvgoGQDA&ved=0CDAQsAQ&biw=1505&bih=801

Chowan River Patriot: Where Do People Really Stand?

That's what I'm talking about....exactally on both charts

OK, but you end up with authoritarian (less freedom) in many smaller governments.

The seven families that govern San Augustine, Texas are an example: completely gut the electoral process in city, government, church, and school elections through acquisition of individuals and boards.

Another example would be the Apache small bands that were led by band chiefs and warriors that made all the decisions. No women ever had anything like the influence of the leading warriors.

Another is the small government of Virginia colony then state, as Patrick Henry, T. Jefferson, G. Washington, the Masons, the Lees, and other propertied white men (almost all slave owners) who told everybody else what to do, from the parish to the state legislature.

Another would be Massachusetts where only white religious-approved property owners made decisions, guided by the preachers.

Another would be Utah Territory, governed by proxy in the Legislature, which did not have anything but unanimous votes until 1867 or 1868. Brigham Young and the leading authorities made all the decisions before.

Libertarianism and anarchism have the same failing as communism: human nature. These philosophies end in a selected cadre governing the masses.

And that is just small government authoritarianism.

 

[Yurt]

It is the height of partisan treason to align with these evil nations' votes against the treaty and the US support of it.

this is truly ignorance at its finest.

one does not have to support something simply because its 'enemies' do not support it. further, one is not aligned with someone merely for not supporting a measure they do not support.

only small minded partisan hacks could believe that.

Democratic Sen. Max Baucus, of Montana, also said he could not support the treaty, claiming it doesn't do enough to "uphold the rights of Americans."

Read more: Senators vow to oppose UN arms trade treaty | Fox News

ha ha

no surprise jake and rdean don't mention baucus...oh wait, he is a member of their party

. . . these are all countries liberals have loved,

Did liberal senators and reps support Iraq I, Iraq II, and Afghanistan?

Check the votes.

You are a fuck wit.

you're the fuck with short on facts

CNN.com - Senate approves Iraq war resolution - Oct. 11, 2002

DISSENTING JUSTICE: Hold Them Accountable Too: Many Democrats Supported Policies of the "Worst President" (Part I)

will jake actually address the thread or will he continue to cower behind his whiny comments?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Once again, whiner, answer the question.

Did liberal senators and reps support Iraq I, Iraq II, and Afghanistan?

Check the votes.

 

[Yurt]

hilarious, i directly answered your question and you have yet to answer any of mine. post 65 addresses your question and gives links (i posted it three times now). they did support iraq I, II and afghanistan. not all, but either most did in one case or many did in another. you lose again.

now, are you going address my points and facts or are you just going to be a petulant tattle tale?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yurt, you have no points to address. You simply whine, you get kicked, you whine more, your worries were addressed by others, and you whine some more.

You continue to PM after I told you "no" and others told you "no".

This point is this. You simply don't like others know that you are a fool and that you have been made a fool.

It is what it is.

 

[Yurt]

1. stop talking about PM's and you are the one who keeps sending them to me.

2. one does not have to support something simply because its 'enemies' do not support it. further, one is not aligned with someone merely for not supporting a measure they do not support. <-- that is not whining, that is a direct response to your claim and no one has addressed it. another jake lie caught in action.

3. you refuse to address points to you because you know what a fool you are, so you simply ad hom. i specifically answered your question and of course you don't respond at all to facts, you solely ad hom.

you have nothing. you're whiny tattle tale loser.

 

[JakeStarkey]

1. You sent the last two after you were told to stop. I am telling you again to stop.

2. You are aligned with our enemies on the UN treaty, no way around it.

3. You have no points to address, only your whines.

 

[Yurt]

and once again all jake does is lie and ad hom. does not address my comment, nor my facts about democrats who supported the 'wars'. you are the one who keeps PM'ing me jake. stop derailing the thread with your PM obsession and stick to the topic.

four times now jake has IGNORED this comment and run away from it because he knows it is true, but is too cowardly to admit it:

one does not have to support something simply because its 'enemies' do not support it. further, one is not aligned with someone merely for not supporting a measure they do not support.

yawn...what a boring troll

 

[JakeStarkey]

Sigh. Blah blah and blah. Yurt is worthless and untrustworthy.

The point is that only three nations voted against the Treaty (all nations are sworn enemy), and our own Americans support our enemies.

Enough is a enough.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

obama funnels guns to Syrian rebels al Qaeda

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/09/w...aeda-play-key-role-in-war.html?pagewanted=all

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There are two groups who support a free flow of all weapons into almost anyone's hands:

- Terrorists and rogue nations
- Republicans

Its about that simple really. See, without terrorists and rogue nations, who would Republicans have to go to war with? And without anyone to go to war with, how would defense lobbyists get money to their private defense contractors?

There are two groups who oppose the right of individuals to defend themselves;

• Tyrants who kill anyone who runs against them in elections.
• Democrats.

See how simple it is? Or did you miss the part where Mugabe is one of the people that have been pushing for this treaty?