W.TN.Orange Blood
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2012
- Messages
- 131,409
- Likes
- 342,291
I'm not angry or vitriolic. I'm just not going to concede the point. If Ras thinks the Capitol riots are bad, he can say it without bringing up some other issue. Ask me about the 2020 riots, I'll denounce them without bringing up something else.@Rasputin_Vol DID say it was wrong. Wipe the vitriol from your eyes.
You said we give money to countries we occupy. I'm asking if that's a true qualifier. Ecosystems you don't like your post so you want to move it somewhere. Go ahead but this is a nothing burger as long as we distribute trillions around the globe already.Was that stated?
Do you need to be handheld thru the next issue?
You said we give money to countries we occupy. I'm asking if that's a true qualifier. Ecosystems you don't like your post so you want to move it somewhere. Go ahead but this is a nothing burger as long as we distribute trillions around the globe already.
The claim the Taliban did 9/11 was funny as well
Damn ….You said we give money to countries we occupy. I'm asking if that's a true qualifier. Ecosystems you don't like your post so you want to move it somewhere. Go ahead but this is a nothing burger as long as we distribute trillions around the globe already.
The claim the Taliban did 9/11 was funny as well
Ehhh... your loonies are no better than my loonies. I mean, they do think Hillary eats babies.
de facto
adjective
Definition of de facto (Entry 2 of 2)
1: ACTUAL especially : being such in effect though not formally recognized
//a de facto state of war
//Whatever it says on the calendar, Florida has de facto summer.— E. L. Konigsburg
//has become the movement's de facto spokesperson
2: exercising power as if legally constituted
//a de facto government
//the de facto head of state
3: resulting from economic or social factors rather than from laws or actions of the state
//de facto segregation
Just say the Capitol riots were bad without bringing up something else. You can do it. Ask me separately about summer 2020. I'll say it was awful without bringing up something else. We don't have to have **** measuring contest for who's worst.Still doesn't have anything to do with comparing fringes and actions. If one side sets a de facto standard, the other side should be able to follow suit without recrimination. Libs were allowed to riot, loot, and burn all summer long.
Again, both were wrong. Let me say it one more time. They both were wrong.
But the summer of rioting was far worse.
Just say the Capitol riots were bad without bringing up something else. You can do it. Ask me separately about summer 2020. I'll say it was awful without bringing up something else. We don't have to have **** measuring contest for who's worst.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
... you're better than claiming January 6 was "peaceable" and you know it.Define "peaceably" in the current climate - which has been my point all along - the same one you keep trying to ignore. Also when grievances are ignored, people naturally get louder. My comment would actually be that congress should have been listening better, and ignoring less.
... you're better than claiming January 6 was "peaceable" and you know it.
Edit: I'm not mad, I'm disappointed.
Convention is bound by what seems to exist. For example, since we don't stop and turn around border jumpers, we essentially have an open border. Anarchy is the standard when anarchy is allowed.