The DPST crowd thinks there the smartest in the room -- just like Mao - stalin,toe jam, hitler -- they all wanted the same thing CONTROL ,,,, Originally Posted by rexdutchman
- Yssup Rider
- 09-05-2019, 09:45 AM
- winn dixie
- 09-05-2019, 10:08 AM
Everyones thinking it! Will yssup and mole cum out today? 
- eccielover
- 09-05-2019, 10:11 AM
- I B Hankering
- 09-05-2019, 11:36 AM
- Levianon17
- 09-05-2019, 06:44 PM
It is not for you or me to define "well regulated". What did the founders mean when they enacted the Bill of Rights? There was no standing army. Each state contributed to a national cause. But there was no state run national guard like today. A militia was considered to be every able bodied man between 16 and 46. They were expected to provide their own weapon, ammunition, and basic requirements of survival. Did they drill together? That was up to the town or village from whence they came. Originally Posted by the_real_BarleycornThat is correct. Good post.
- themystic
- 09-05-2019, 09:10 PM
- Levianon17
- 09-05-2019, 09:25 PM
- themystic
- 09-05-2019, 09:28 PM
- Levianon17
- 09-05-2019, 09:34 PM
- rexdutchman
- 09-06-2019, 08:43 AM
Name one time in history that disarming the pubic worked out, ,,,? for anyone.
- Levianon17
- 09-06-2019, 08:51 AM
- lustylad
- 09-06-2019, 11:29 AM
And a redneck from the industrial rusty North who can't understand the definitions of seek and free will.Yeah, keep advocating for "freedom" and "free will" for the likes of Jerry Sandusky and Jeffrey Epstein. You wouldn't want to take away their freedoms, would you? And every teenager is free to say yes or no when Jerry invites them into the shower, right Mr. Far Left NAMBLA defender?
The quest for one person's true freedom escapes those two Neanderthals. Originally Posted by eccieuser9500
- oeb11
- 09-06-2019, 11:33 AM
- eccieuser9500
- 09-06-2019, 02:47 PM
Huh? NAMBLA defendin'? Who does that? Do you even know what it is? Wtf! Originally Posted by lustyladWho defends Nazis? The lazy lady. Do I need proof? No. Other than her support for the POTUS. Did I know what NAMBLA was? I know a lot more than her. English comprehension for one. Do I need proof? Read the following.
Reread the sentence. Why would I bring that up if I didn't know what it was? Originally Posted by eccieuser9500
Now I have to ask her to reread what she posted. She's talking out of both sides of her cunt.
I did reread it.Making the far fetched mental leap that I represent a whole political party. Based on an assumption of what one person wrote on an underground discussion board, she asks if the 2020 Democratic Convention will add a platform defending NAMBLA? She doesn't have the reputation of being absursly humorous. So this means she's just stupid.
So you're saying most of your far-left buddies share a proclivity for (forbidden topic). You want us to know that although you are far left, you don't indulge in the same perverted, predatory and illegal activities that your "NAMBLA defending" ideological brethren do.
Got it!
Hmmmm.... ya thinks the dems will add a plank to their 2020 Convention platform defending NAMBLA? Maybe Bill Clinton can also deliver a nice eulogy for Jeffrey Epstein!Originally Posted by lustylad
Oh dear! Looks like somebody needs a valium - quick! Your attempt at analogy fails. Are you serving the soup at the next NAMBLA convention? You've lost me and every other poster in this forum. Your comments are always slightly off, but this time you're completely off the rails.
No. Just her, who doesn't understand plain English.
I asked you to explain something you wrote. You directed me to reread it. Now you're bitching that I read something into it you never intended? Maybe you should have taken the opportunity to spell it out the first time. You're the one getting "riled up", not me.
Ok, let's start over again.... here's the original post. Explain your use of the words "NAMBLA defending". Originally Posted by lustylad
All she has to do is read the lines. If she wants to read between the lines, that's up to her. This is what it means to understand something that wasn't in the text. She keeps jumping to her own conclusions. She's making herself sick.
Still being coy, 9500? I asked you to explain something you posted. You said re-read it. I did. You blew up and said I mis-read it. I said let's start over again. I asked you to explain it a second time. You said it's self-explanatory. How long do you want to keep playing stupid games like this?
Here's what you wrote:
Your plain English tells us the following:
1. Your politics are on the far left.
2. Many people on the far left defend NAMBLA.
3. However, you are not one of them.
No problem so far? Just reading the plain English of what you wrote. Now let's take it all logically a step further, shall we?
1. Most far left people are dim-retards.
2. They shape the official platform of the dim-retard party.
3. It's reasonable to expect they will attempt to communicate their views (that NAMBLA is a respectable group of citizens who advocate a defensible life style) into the official 2020 dim-retard party platform.
Still with me, 9500? Good! No far-fetched conclusion there. Just elaborating on the logical implications of your post.
So - thank you for alerting everyone to what the far left is up to these days! Most of us already knew they were in favor of socialism, open borders, and post-birth abortions. But we had no idea they've also taken up the cause of coddling and defending (forbidden topic)!
(Of course, we're talking about your buddies on the far left and not you personally, 9500.)
I can't wait to see what further surprises lie in store for us when the dim-retards hold their Convention next summer!Originally Posted by lustylad
It was plain English.
I hope she is surprised when the Democratic Convention selects an Independent candidate. (I'm afraid I'll have to explain THAT to her too.
Who the fuck refers to pedophiles as "free will seekers"?
You're a sick freak!
How much did Jeffrey Epstein pay you to help him exercise his "free will"? Originally Posted by lustylad
WHO THE FUCK REFERS TO NAZIS AS GOOD PEOPLE? Any guesses? Answer: the POTUS.
I think it started to sink in a little.
Ok, we got your number, 9500.
You spew gibberish, decline to clarify yourself (because your thoughts are too incoherent and you are too inarticulate to explain them), throw a hissy fit if someone tries to ascribe "plain" meaning to your spewings, then turn around and blame the reader for not grasping the "plain" meaning which you are utterly incapable of verbalizing.
I would say the only thing "plain as day" is you are an attention whore who prefers to jerk others around and waste everyone's time rather than engage in anything resembling useful dialogue.
Better run along now...
aren't you late for tonight's NAMBLA meeting? Originally Posted by lustylad
Oops. Spoke to soon. It started to seep out as soon as it started to sink in. Who is we? She keeps ignoring it.
Yeah, keep advocating for "freedom" and "free will" for the likes of Jerry Sandusky and Jeffrey Epstein. You wouldn't want to take away their freedoms, would you? And every teenager is free to say yes or no when Jerry invites them into the shower, right Mr. Far Left NAMBLA defender? Originally Posted by lustylad
Aaand it's all out. Back to being stupid. NAME ONE INSTANCE WHERE I FOUGHT FOR THE FREE WILL AND FREEDOM OF JERRY SANDUSKY (who preyed in your neck of the backwoods, no less) AND JEFF EPSTEIN. LET ALONE KEEP ADVOCATING FOR IT. SHE CAN'T.
Illogical extrapolation.
- I B Hankering
- 09-06-2019, 02:53 PM