Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Rahm is part of the establishment--and a good deal of American establishment wealth is supported by the activities the gangs engage in. If you eliminate gangs, the drug and sex trades would collapse.
Rahm is part of the liberal establishment that is corrupt.
If you looked carefully, you would see that these so-called "liberal" aristocrats attend the same social functions and conferences that the so-called "conservative" aristocrats attend. You are simply a useful partisan idiot.
Both were already fucked up when they took over. And no doubt; there's much you do not understand.
I understand perfectly. You're the one defending corruption, not me.
Then don't preface your drivel with "I don't understand..." Folks might get the wrong idea about you and start thinking you're a headgear-wearing severly retarded near vegetable, as I do.
That help?
I understand perfectly. You're the one defending corruption, not me.
Then don't preface your drivel with "I don't understand..." Folks might get the wrong idea about you and start thinking you're a headgear-wearing severly retarded near vegetable, as I do.
That help?
Why don't you tell the kind folks exactly how much I care about what you and your miscreant pissant pals think about me.
Then don't preface your drivel with "I don't understand..." Folks might get the wrong idea about you and start thinking you're a headgear-wearing severly retarded near vegetable, as I do.
That help?
Why don't you tell the kind folks exactly how much I care about what you and your miscreant pissant pals think about me.
Okie doke:
Listen up folks: that abject fucking idiot, AsheedMidrarwz, has his panties in a twist and really cares about what ya'll think, but is too fucking stupid to squirm out of it.
Anything esle I can do for you?
Rahm is part of the liberal establishment that is corrupt.
If you looked carefully, you would see that these so-called "liberal" aristocrats attend the same social functions and conferences that the so-called "conservative" aristocrats attend. You are simply a useful partisan idiot.
I don't know the so-called "conservative" aristocrats you're speaking of. I'm talking about Rahm Emanuel, Obama, Daley, and other liberal miscreants of that order. Can you give me some names? Pissant.
If you looked carefully, you would see that these so-called "liberal" aristocrats attend the same social functions and conferences that the so-called "conservative" aristocrats attend. You are simply a useful partisan idiot.
I don't know the so-called "conservative" aristocrats you're speaking of. I'm talking about Rahm Emanuel, Obama, Daley, and other liberal miscreants of that order. Can you give me some names? Pissant.
Take a look at who attends the Bilderberg Group conferences, that may answer your question.
Also, the Bohemian Grove.
Why don't you tell the kind folks exactly how much I care about what you and your miscreant pissant pals think about me.
Okie doke:
Listen up folks: that abject fucking idiot, AsheedMidrarwz, has his panties in a twist and really cares about what ya'll think, but is too fucking stupid to squirm out of it.
Anything esle I can do for you?
You forgot one thing. You support Rahmm Emanuel and Obama. YOU and those you support are directly responsible for the violence. Not gun owners who obey the laws. You make excuses for gangs and lawbreakers, then you erect straw men from your sick indoctrinated mind that demonize good decent people who work hard and obey the laws. You're a coward and a twit.
Okie doke:
Listen up folks: that abject fucking idiot, AsheedMidrarwz, has his panties in a twist and really cares about what ya'll think, but is too fucking stupid to squirm out of it.
Anything esle I can do for you?
You forgot one thing. You support Rahmm Emanuel and Obama. YOU and those you support are directly responsible for the violence. Not gun owners who obey the laws. You make excuses for gangs and lawbreakers, then you erect straw men from your sick indoctrinated mind that demonize good decent people who work hard and obey the laws. You're a coward and a twit.
Coward; yes. (not in a gang). Twit. (pray not; I slapped your bitch ass.)
Okie doke:
Listen up folks: that abject fucking idiot, AsheedMidrarwz, has his panties in a twist and really cares about what ya'll think, but is too fucking stupid to squirm out of it.
Anything esle I can do for you?
You forgot one thing. You support Rahmm Emanuel and Obama. YOU and those you support are directly responsible for the violence. Not gun owners who obey the laws. You make excuses for gangs and lawbreakers, then you erect straw men from your sick indoctrinated mind that demonize good decent people who work hard and obey the laws. You're a coward and a twit.
Coward; yes. (not in a gang). Twit. (pray not; I slapped your bitch ass.)
You forgot one thing. You support Rahmm Emanuel and Obama. YOU and those you support are directly responsible for the violence. Not gun owners who obey the laws. You make excuses for gangs and lawbreakers, then you erect straw men from your sick indoctrinated mind that demonize good decent people who work hard and obey the laws. You're a coward and a twit.
Coward; yes. (not in a gang). Twit. (pray not; I slapped your bitch ass.)
Tipping the scales in favor of the criminals seems less than intelligent. That is what these unconstitutional laws have done.
Coward; yes. (not in a gang). Twit. (pray not; I slapped your bitch ass.)
Tipping the scales in favor of the criminals seems less than intelligent. That is what these unconstitutional laws have done.
Sticking to an agenda that is clearly not working to solve the problem seems to me kinda ignnorant. Indoctrinated minds are a detriment to Liberty.
Tipping the scales in favor of the criminals seems less than intelligent. That is what these unconstitutional laws have done.
Sticking to an agenda that is clearly not working to solve the problem seems to me kinda ignnorant. Indoctrinated minds are a detriment to Liberty.
What agenda is being stuck to past the point of effectiveness and reason?
Cocaine, heroin, meth, and LSD are banned nationwide.Gangs. Higher rates of poverty. And myriad places outside of Chicago where guns are easily purchased.
Surely that's not a complicated thing to grasp, is it?
So you admit law breakers ignore gun control laws. Okay. Now tell us how to stop all the murders by guns in Chicago.
Not really something one would admit. If you ignore a law to an extent that you'll break it, you're a law-breaker by default. Surely that's not lost on you; yeah?
And big cities, with big city problems, and rising gang violence, will enact laws in hope of mitigating gun use. Most have, and it works quite well (sever sentencing when a gun is used or even on the person committing the crime.) Some, as Chicago has, might go another step further, to make certain types of weapons more difficult to get. But local laws have a very limited mitigating effect, since travel to where they can get them is realtively easy for any with the money to buy them; they probably own a car too, or know someone who does.
Ergo, why I support national bans of certain weapons, especially survival/assualt weapons.
Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to vote Democrat.The reality is that the rich don't have enough money to support this government if the government took all of it. They will have to tax the not so rich too, and that won't be enough.
That is very true so long as we have a government intent on buying/bribing the hearts and minds of the people so as to increase its own power, prestige, influence, and personal fortunes.
A government big and powerful enough to address every problem of humankind from condoms to heart transplants, and that presumes the ability to pay for it, is big and powerful enough to do anything to anybody that it wants to do.
Unfortunately history suggests that once government assumes the power to do anything to anybody that it wants to do, the people are never quite happy with the end results of that. And they are never as well off as they could have been under a capitalist system.
Every state that has enacted concealed-carry laws has seen crime go down.Not really something one would admit. If you ignore a law to an extent that you'll break it, you're a law-breaker by default. Surely that's not lost on you; yeah?
And big cities, with big city problems, and rising gang violence, will enact laws in hope of mitigating gun use. Most have, and it works quite well (sever sentencing when a gun is used or even on the person committing the crime.) Some, as Chicago has, might go another step further, to make certain types of weapons more difficult to get. But local laws have a very limited mitigating effect, since travel to where they can get them is realtively easy for any with the money to buy them; they probably own a car too, or know someone who does.
Ergo, why I support national bans of certain weapons, especially survival/assualt weapons.
You still haven't told us how to fix Chicago's gun murder disaster. You admit gun laws aren't working in Chicago. Don't you have a solution? You keep telling us how smart you are. Why can't you tell us how to fix Chicago where your dear leader is from? Looks to me like ridicule and mockery is about all you have. Now I see why you support Obama.
Existing Chicago gun laws DID NOT create the homicide rate. The homicide rate resulted in the gun laws. Racial/economic segregation explains almost all criminal violence in Chicago.
What's on your resume that justifies that level of arrogance? NOTE: "Being a liberal" is not an accomplishment worthy of respect. It doesn't give your opinions greater import than those of others.Both were already fucked up when they took over. And no doubt; there's much you do not understand.
I understand perfectly. You're the one defending corruption, not me.
Then don't preface your drivel with "I don't understand..." Folks might get the wrong idea about you and start thinking you're a headgear-wearing severly retarded near vegetable, as I do.
That help?
What's on your resume that justifies that level of arrogance? NOTE: "Being a liberal" is not an accomplishment worthy of respect. It doesn't give your opinions greater import than those of others.I understand perfectly. You're the one defending corruption, not me.
Then don't preface your drivel with "I don't understand..." Folks might get the wrong idea about you and start thinking you're a headgear-wearing severly retarded near vegetable, as I do.
That help?
Sorry to be the one to break this to you.
Cocaine, heroin, meth, and LSD are banned nationwide.So you admit law breakers ignore gun control laws. Okay. Now tell us how to stop all the murders by guns in Chicago.
Not really something one would admit. If you ignore a law to an extent that you'll break it, you're a law-breaker by default. Surely that's not lost on you; yeah?
And big cities, with big city problems, and rising gang violence, will enact laws in hope of mitigating gun use. Most have, and it works quite well (sever sentencing when a gun is used or even on the person committing the crime.) Some, as Chicago has, might go another step further, to make certain types of weapons more difficult to get. But local laws have a very limited mitigating effect, since travel to where they can get them is realtively easy for any with the money to buy them; they probably own a car too, or know someone who does.
Ergo, why I support national bans of certain weapons, especially survival/assualt weapons.
But you can still get them, fairly easily.
What makes you think your ban on certain weapons would be effective?
Cocaine, heroin, meth, and LSD are banned nationwide.Not really something one would admit. If you ignore a law to an extent that you'll break it, you're a law-breaker by default. Surely that's not lost on you; yeah?
And big cities, with big city problems, and rising gang violence, will enact laws in hope of mitigating gun use. Most have, and it works quite well (sever sentencing when a gun is used or even on the person committing the crime.) Some, as Chicago has, might go another step further, to make certain types of weapons more difficult to get. But local laws have a very limited mitigating effect, since travel to where they can get them is realtively easy for any with the money to buy them; they probably own a car too, or know someone who does.
Ergo, why I support national bans of certain weapons, especially survival/assualt weapons.
But you can still get them, fairly easily.
What makes you think your ban on certain weapons would be effective?
That bans on elicit drugs mitigate its use, insofar as most people abide by our laws. The same should be true of certain types of survival / assault weapons.
Sticking to an agenda that is clearly not working to solve the problem seems to me kinda ignnorant. Indoctrinated minds are a detriment to Liberty.
What agenda is being stuck to past the point of effectiveness and reason?
Oh my God, man. Gun control isn't working in Chicago. 500 homicides this year. Yeah, pass more gun control laws.
