Odds on Trump's Impeachment

We still have that now, and we recognize the difference now and always have. Originally Posted by Look-at-Stupid

Really?
Transgender freshman sprinter, born a male, wins two girls state championships

“It’s frustrating,” Hall of Stonington High School told the Courant. “But that’s just the way it is now.” http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/06...championships/

At least she could shave off her mustache, https://youtu.be/76hdVE4zfaE

It must suck to go thru life scared of the unknown. Me? They don't scare me, but I am a big, strong guy who respects others and knows not everyone is alike, and some folks are born in the wrong skin.

Here is hoping you get a trans grandchild one day. And want to reconsider when u said America was great in light of FACTS?

Are you SERIOUSLY going to make that argument after Democrats excused Bill Clintons F*cking the intern?!, LYING UNDER OATH?!

SERIOUSLY? You must be f*cking joking. Originally Posted by texassapper

My oh my....oh, Pro, did you really go there? Damn, dude....bad comparison.

We all know anything that Trump is reportedly guilty of (by the biased, agenda-driven media & dimturds) pales in comparison to the reality that is one, Slick Willy.

Slick & Spouse have done "real things" to this country...actual tangible, maybe irreparable harm that manifested from underhanded (and very likely, illegal) dealings. Way too many to document here...doesn't matter; they're well chronicled, as we all know.

The same can hardly be said for current POTUS, Donald Trump. The most he's done is "hurt the feelings" of Cryin' Chuck and a buncha other libturds that think letting certain cities...certain states....make their own rules is a good idea. That allowing illegals stay in our country is okay. That permitting people (Muslims or not) to come into the US from countries that have "questionable govenments" in place makes us a "safer country". That "The Constitution" doesn't apply to them (when it does not serve their narrative and agenda)....

I do not understand the mindset, let alone the "Message to America", of today's Democratic Party. It is no where even remotely close to what I thought it stood for some 40 - 50 + years ago. It's a party that is a ruderless ship, filled with leaders with no substance, no message (other than to "get re-elected")....led by people who want nothing to do with making the United States a better country to live in today and for future generations of AMERICANS.

Trump's not perfect by a long shot. But, for the time being, he's what we've got. And throwing slings and arrows at him daily isn't gonna make the Democratic Party any better than what it currently is...by a long shot.

Not judging, but I am amused. The Trump lemmings in general take hypocracy to an insane level. But, specifically those on THIS website who feign disgust at the Clinton/Lewinski affair.

I would say it's more accurate to say that the "Clintons" are used in these conversations to point out the extreme hypocrisy of the Liberal left. As I recall Hillary was not very fond of telling the truth, and while Trump was caught on tape "talking smack", as I recall it was Bill Clinton that was impeached for obstruction of justice and , perjury. Remember when Bill paid Paula Jones $850,000 to drop her sexual harassment lawsuit for exposing his penis and asking her to suck it. Originally Posted by goodolboy

Yes, Clinton was also a liar and a sexual predator. Too bad, because I thought he was a decent president.

So are you Lemmings gonna admit the same thing about Trump? C'mon...don't be hypocrites! Post away!

Are you SERIOUSLY implying Clinton's sex with Lewinski and the aftermath is as bad as Trump's past transgressions? Originally Posted by Prolongus

Yes. The Bills zipper issues nearly caused a Constitutional crisis. And when did liberals suddenly decide that a little grab ass was a moral failing because if that's true, then I don't know how you supported Bubba.

And that is somehow worse than grabbing a woman's crotch, forcing a kiss, cornering a beauty pageant contestant or looking at a child and commenting about dating her in ten years?!?! Originally Posted by Prolongus

Getting a BJ from an intern in the Oval office then lying under oath about it vs. grab ass? Yeah, I'd say that was more serious than Trumps alleged acts.

I don't give a shit about the Clintons, they're history. But they're always a convenient comeback for Trumpie Lemmings who can't defend Trump's pathological lying, paranoid schizophrenic, bigoted, racist, mysogenistic, sexual predator personality. Originally Posted by Prolongus

Of course you don't care NOW. But when Conservatives were making the same argument against Bubba, you ignored us. It's not a convenient comeback it's a I don't give a shit about your arguments retort since you didn't care about ours over Bubba. The shoe is on the other foot now... so you can just SUCK IT, BITCHES!

It must suck to go thru life scared of the unknown. Me? They don't scare me, but I am a big, strong guy who respects others and knows not everyone is alike, and some folks are born in the wrong skin.

Here is hoping you get a trans grandchild one day. And want to reconsider when u said America was great in light of FACTS? Originally Posted by Look-at-Stupid

No one cares if you want to cut your nuts off and pretend you're a woman. What I and most others object to is the govt. forcing us to pretend along with that mentally unbalanced person that they are now a female.

You can pretend all you like, that's your choice. But when you FORCE the community to PRETEND with you because you don't want your feelings hurt, tough shit, bucko.

Trump's not perfect by a long shot. But, for the time being, he's what we've got. And throwing slings and arrows at him daily isn't gonna make the Democratic Party any better than what it currently is...by a long shot. Originally Posted by Chateau Becot

Trump doesn't need help receiving slings and arrows. He does it to himself via speeches and tweets.

Let me see your post on how despicable it is for Trump to agree with Howard Stern that his own voluptuous daughter (Trumps words) is a " piece of ass"...

Trump racism: Mexicans are rapists. Don't want black guys handling my money. Removing black employees from the floor of casinos when he came. Housing discrimination suit. Central Park Five. Supporting Republican voter suppression tactics. Racists on White House Staff. Refusal to denounce David Duke and the Klan. Judge can't be fair "because he's a Mexican." ". . . Laziness is a trait in blacks." Being a proponent of fake and racist Obama birth certificate controversy. I could go 0n. That's justboff the top of my head. Originally Posted by TexTushHog

Is any of that in Trumps policies? And why are you making up Republican voter suppression? I can just as easily call that Democrat Vote Theft. Guess who started the Obama fake birther issue -yep, your favorite Grandma on zanax Hillary.

You can scream Racism all you like. None of it is substantiated by fact, just the ravings of a biased press that has a trust index lower than Congress... yeah, LOWER than Congress. You keep on lying too, somone may believe you.

The pathetic thing is the Democrats have gone so far off the rails that JFK would be called a Right Wing Nazi today for the policies he advocated... it's is to laugh.

Let me see your post on how despicable it is for Trump to agree with Howard Stern that his own voluptuous daughter (Trumps words) is a " piece of ass"... Originally Posted by Prolongus

Well he might think she's a nice piece of ass, but then he's not drilling the interns either is he? I guess for you, words are worse than deeds.

Using the Clintons to defend and pull focus from Trump communicates approval with the latter. And if you're OK with the latter, you can't really condemn the former and not be a hypocrite.

The outrage against Trump is not political for a lot of folks all over the spectrum. I don't personally know anyone who is against immigration reform, helping our vets, reducing the deficit, a strong military, for example. It's a character issue. Racism, xenophobia, corruption, sexual assault, etc, are character issues. And you all know that. If you're OK with what's happening out there, nut up and say so. You don't owe anyone any explanations, really, but you do get to own it. If you have to deflect, obfuscate, lie and distort to defend your position, you might want to re-examine it.

Using the Clintons to defend and pull focus from Trump communicates approval with the latter. And if you're OK with the latter, you can't really condemn the former and not be a hypocrite. Originally Posted by Vivienne Rey

Mentioning Bubba is not a defense of Trump and is not approval of Trump. It is merely pointing out the hypocrisy of a group that has historically swept character issues aside until it was politically convenient to raise them. I would be apt to listen to those complaining about Trumps character had they lined up against a guy that lied UNDER oath about shtupping the hired help. For Liberals, character doesn't matter... that's why the whole complaints about Trump ring hollow and fall on deaf ears.

You can't spend decades saying one thing and suddenly expect everyone to care when you change your mind.

Mentioning Bubba is not a defense of Trump and is not approval of Trump. It is merely pointing out the hypocrisy of a group that has historically swept character issues aside until it was politically convenient to raise them. I would be apt to listen to those complaining about Trumps character had they lined up against s guy that lied UNDER oath about shtupping the hired help. For Liberals, character doesn't matter... that's why the whole complaints about Trump ring hollow and fall on deaf ears.

You can't spend decades saying one thing and suddenly expect everyone to care when you change your mind. Originally Posted by texassapper

I don't know any liberals who are OK with what Bill did. Not one. And I've come across plenty of others who have condemned it. It's safe to say there are plenty more. So, your claim is simply not true. And Bill is no longer an issue. Trump is. Regardless of what is historically convenient for you, their concerns NOW are valid. Are you OK with what's going on NOW? If not, why are you not addressing that? If so, why are you lambasting anyone, if you're comfortable with it?

I don't know any liberals who are OK with what Bill did. Not one. And I've come across plenty of others who have condemned it. It's safe to say there are plenty more. So, your claim is simply not true. And Bill is no longer an issue. Trump is. Regardless of what is historically convenient for you, their concerns NOW are valid. Are you OK with what's going on NOW? If not, why are you not addressing that? If so, why are you lambasting anyone, if you're comfortable with it? Originally Posted by Vivienne Rey

Actually they are not valid. If they had adhered to any integrity regarding the Clinton's HC would have never made the nomination. They even enlisted Bill's help, so they kept the page open.

Is Muslim a race? Unless we've changed the definition of racism to mean whatever the fuck you want at the moment... a policy banning a RELIGIOUS group is not racism. And the actual policy as put forth banned them from 7 nations... not even the most populous Islamic nations, just the 7 that have the most issues with fundamentalism.

So I'm gonna have to say. Not Racist. Thanks for playing. Originally Posted by texassapper

Ok. So the policy may not be racist. However, it's an "ist" or "ism" of some kind.


If a president signed an executive order banning light weight, high capacity, semi automatic rifles, you would say that the president overreached his authority and powers.

The president would say he did so for the safety of the citizens.


You would say that it is a slippery slope; take one gun away, and next they'll try to take them all.


You've read my comparison of 1A vs. 2A in the other threads.

2A begins with a passive phrase and yet 2A is considered unouchable. It does not start out with "Congress shall make no law" it just says at the end of the phrase ,that any english would mark up as poor writing, shall not be infringed.


1A is very straight forward with absolute meaning. "Congress shall make no law"

He puts an executive order in place and uses essentially the same case for violating the 1st amendment that libtard lefty use to argue violating the 2nd amendment.

Let me concede to you the stone in which 2A is written.


How then is 1A not written in the very same stone? Why are you not as offended by an infringement of it, even when the infringement is intended to help "secure a free state"?

What's good for the goose....