• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Fred's out.

mkl

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
387
Location
arlington,va, ,
imported post

ama-gi wrote:
I'm still waiting for an answer from Tarzan for my last post.

ama-gi, Tarzan doesn't have time to give straight answers. He is too busy campaigning for Fred Thompson. Didn't you hear? In his perspective Fred is still in the running, heck, in his perspective, Fred won every state so far!
Yay for perspective! :)
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

cloudcroft wrote:
SNIP Don't waste your time and effort arguing with the godless/pagan Ron Paul idol-worshippers.

Ow! Ow! Owwwwwwwch! Hey! Watch it there! Or I'll throw one of my idols at you. :)
 

Tomahawk

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
5,117
Location
4 hours south of HankT, ,
imported post

cloudcroft wrote:
Tarzan,

Don't waste your time and effort arguing with the godless/pagan Ron Paul idol-worshippers.

As I have said, Libertarians are only anarchists in sheeps's clothing, and consequently they're not worth any attention at all.

-- John D.

Wow, I didn't know I was a godless pagan idol-worshipper, cloudcroft. Thanks for insulting me in such a constructive manner. Are you satisfied that you've won the argument now, or do you think another round of verbal abuse is in order? I'm not sure your insult has really sunk in, why don't you pile on some more? I'll check back later, I have to go clean my sheep's skin. I got it dirty yesterday down in Richmond rallying for my godless pagan rights. And as for not being worthy of any attention at all, that's what the MMM told me, too. Maybe you and them should compare insults.

As for Fred Thompson, I was hoping he would at least make a better showing. He acted as if he didn't really want to be there and was talked into it. And aside from his movie star personality I'm not sure quite what was different about him.
 

sjhipple

Regular Member
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
1,491
Location
Concord, New Hampshire, USA
imported post

cloudcroft wrote:
Don't waste your time and effort arguing with the godless/pagan Ron Paul idol-worshippers.
What idol do you worship that gives you the power to read minds and look into souls of people you've never met (on a)cloudcroft?
 

sjhipple

Regular Member
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
1,491
Location
Concord, New Hampshire, USA
imported post

tarzan1888 wrote:
ama-gi wrote:
I'm still waiting for an answer from Tarzan for my last post.

You already got your answer. It may not be the answer you want, but that you will just have to deal with.

I have my views and you have yours, that they are far apart is obvious, but last I checked there were no view police and differing views were still allowed.
First, you never answered my post, although you did argue alot with someone else.

You seem to have a very poor grasp of the English language as you understand the word "anarchist" as well as you understand the word "prospective" (the word you were looking for was perspective :quirky)

Regardless of your views, words can't mean whatever you wish them to mean, and they aren't subject to your opinions. You knew your lie was indefensible which is why you didn't answer my requests for a citation. No wonder you like Romney :D

Now, while you claim to have answered my post, I know you didn't even read my post. How do I know this? Because I told you the word was "perspective" in that post and you continued to misuse the word "prospective" after that.

The difference between an ignorant person and a fool: the ignorant person doesn't know, the fool won't hear.

Here's the post you didn't read below:

ama-gi wrote:
tarzan1888 wrote:
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, copyright 1973, "c. a utopian society made up of individuals who have no government and who enjoy complete freedom."


Oh, so he believes in having no government? Wow, shocking...please cite!!

All things political are a matter of prospective.
Did Webster's not have a listing for the word "perspective?"

And further, are you saying that words don't have meanings and there's no objective truth? So "infringed" in the Second Amendment could mean something other than..."infringed" in your world?
 

longwatch

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
May 14, 2006
Messages
4,327
Location
Virginia, USA
imported post

Hate to see a pro gun guy leave the race, but he never seemed like he was trying to win.
 

Weak 9mm

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2008
Messages
806
Location
USA
imported post

Oddly enough the guy is right, even if it's due to his own error... "Propective" isn't a word.

lol
 

worrbaron

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2007
Messages
91
Location
, ,
imported post

"propective"

copied from the original post of the angry Ron Paul hater, I was simply making the point that he was angrily typing and not paying attention to what he was saying
 

Weak 9mm

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2008
Messages
806
Location
USA
imported post

lol, I see that now, I was just throwing a little humor into this otherwise highly stressful situation.
 

expvideo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
1,487
Location
Lynnwood, WA, ,
imported post

I say the gun lobby should line up behind Ron Paul. Why are we compromising with this chicken little, "the sky is falling" attitude? We have this "anyone but Hillary" mantra, that ends up meaning "take whatever you want, just don't ban guns all together". WTF people!? Why are we surrendering to the anti-gun candidates, and just voting for the guy that hates guns the least, instead of voting for the guy that wants to repeal nearly all of the gun laws? Some of you deserve what's coming. Jefferson would be ashamed.
 

expvideo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
1,487
Location
Lynnwood, WA, ,
imported post

Heartless_Conservative wrote:
Doomed...we're doomed...

I guess I couldget behind a McCain/Thompson ticket, but I don't think that's gonna happen...

So we're willing to just negotiate away our rights? Why do you support McCain? Because he only supports:

[*]Ban cheap guns; require safety locks; for gun show checks. (Aug 1999)
[*]Supports ban on certain assault weapons. (Aug 1999)
[*]Youth Violence Prevention Act restricts guns for kids. (May 1999)

This is not a pro-gun candidate. He is just not as anti-gun as Hillary. If you really want to support the constitution, vote for Ron Paul. If you have given up on Paul, because the corporate media told you to, then vote for Huckabee. Elections aren't about damage control. What happens when you have a "anyone but them" attitude? You end up voting for the lesser of two evils. This country is full of cowards that don't deserve the liberties that our forefathers died to give us. Pardon my language, but what a bunch of pussies.
 

.40 Cal

State Researcher
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
1,379
Location
COTEP FOREVER!, North Carolina, USA
imported post

expvideo wrote:
If you have given up on Paul, because the corporate media told you to, then vote for Huckabee.
A vote for Huckabee ends up being a vote for McCain. Besides, Huckabee is a better candidate for guns than the other front runners; however, it would be hard to buy ammo to shoot when we get taxed into the poor house to pay for illegal immigrant education and welfare.

Romney is a businessman. He knows that more stringent gun control laws will lead to loss of support and power, two things a President needs to make it a second term. McCain Doesn't care about a second term as he probably won't survive a first term.
 

sjhipple

Regular Member
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
1,491
Location
Concord, New Hampshire, USA
imported post

.40 Cal wrote:
Romney is a businessman. He knows that more stringent gun control laws will lead to loss of support and power, two things a President needs to make it a second term. McCain Doesn't care about a second term as he probably won't survive a first term.
Romney promised to signa gun banas president. This is different than Giuliani who supported one as mayor and then said he would NOT sign one as president.

You people claiming to somehow "know" that Romney "wouldn't be that dumb" are being willfully ignorant (to put it kindly). He supports a gun ban, he signed a gun ban, he refuses to deny that he'll sign a gun ban as president and he's promised to sign a gun ban as president.

What more do you people need to know? :banghead:Does he need to sign a promise in blood?

No wonder people like Romney win races, with simpletons like this...."Romney is a businessman." So what? Uncle Ernie is a computer tech, what does that have to do with anything? These kinds of simple statements are ridiculous.

McCain has never, even in his wanderings, supported a federal gun ban. He voted against it in 1994 before he was running for president. He'd make a bad president, but he wouldn't sign a gun ban...Romney would.

"I'm surrounded by Idiots" -- Scar, The Lion King
 
Top