What Sarah Palin meant

Jan 28, 2013 Full story: The Washington Post 736

The news that Fox News Channel has decided against renewing Sarah Palin's contract means that the former Alaska governor's time in the national spotlight is, at least for the moment, over.

Full Story

“Forever Is Promised To No One”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#145 Jan 31, 2013
Smokin Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
I was wondering if you ever got your licker license?
It's good you got your license in both states again. Those matresses come in handy for curb service.
Doggy Style

Fort Washington, MD

#146 Jan 31, 2013
au contraire wrote:
<quoted text>It's good you got your license in both states again. Those matresses come in handy for curb service.
Curb service? Is that extra "au". What do tranny's make?

Woof Woof

Since: Feb 08

Hypoluxo Fl

#147 Jan 31, 2013
au contraire wrote:
<quoted text>Since you are the teabaggers and we are the tea party, I concure....especially when we retained the house. The people knew enough to not give up the purse for a little candy and a free phone.
You concur you're a moron. You idiots hung that teabag moniker on yourselves. Read it and weep, DUMBOSPAMBOT...

The first big day for this movement was Tax Day, April 15.2009 And organizers had a gimmick. They asked people to send a tea bag to the Oval Office. One of the exhortations was “Tea Bag the Fools in D.C.” A protester was spotted with a sign saying,“Tea Bag the Liberal Dems Before They Tea Bag You.” So, conservatives started it: started with this terminology.

Not only are you a teabagger, you're a stupid teabagger.

“Forever Is Promised To No One”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#148 Jan 31, 2013
Mykro wrote:
<quoted text>You concur you're a moron. You idiots hung that teabag moniker on yourselves. Read it and weep, DUMBOSPAMBOT...
The first big day for this movement was Tax Day, April 15.2009 And organizers had a gimmick. They asked people to send a tea bag to the Oval Office. One of the exhortations was “Tea Bag the Fools in D.C.” A protester was spotted with a sign saying,“Tea Bag the Liberal Dems Before They Tea Bag You.” So, conservatives started it: started with this terminology.
Not only are you a teabagger, you're a stupid teabagger.
6-Year-Old Expelled for Bringing Toy Gun to School... So can we expell Obama and Holder for bringing guns into Mexico illegally.

“Forever Is Promised To No One”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#149 Jan 31, 2013
Doggy Style wrote:
<quoted text>
Curb service? Is that extra "au". What do tranny's make?
Woof Woof
Oh my wolfy, you still trying to fill your void with online sex. Try a sock puppet. You'll have everything well in hand.
Smokin Joe

Westbury, NY

#150 Jan 31, 2013
Fox News ratings hit 12-year low

“Forever Is Promised To No One”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#151 Jan 31, 2013
Smokin Joe wrote:
Fox News ratings hit 12-year low
'Paycheck Fairness Act' Would Require Employees To Share Workers' Salaries... proposed by two liberals in congress.
6 posts removed
Eric Gustafson

Newport News, VA

#158 Jan 31, 2013
au contraire wrote:
<quoted text>6-Year-Old Expelled for Bringing Toy Gun to School... So can we expell Obama and Holder for bringing guns into Mexico illegally.
This is a loosing argument, Fast and Furious is bunk of the highest degree, considering Ronald Reagan supplied 1500 Missiles to Iran, during the Arms Embargo in 1985 in exchange for Hostages held by Iranian Terrorist.

The only people who could attempt to make some issue of Fast and Furious Arms to Mexico are those of you with no knowledge of American Politics and past practices of the Ronald Reagan Administration in that area.

“Forever Is Promised To No One”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#159 Jan 31, 2013
Eric Gustafson wrote:
<quoted text>
This is a loosing argument, Fast and Furious is bunk of the highest degree, considering Ronald Reagan supplied 1500 Missiles to Iran, during the Arms Embargo in 1985 in exchange for Hostages held by Iranian Terrorist.
The only people who could attempt to make some issue of Fast and Furious Arms to Mexico are those of you with no knowledge of American Politics and past practices of the Ronald Reagan Administration in that area.
All of these gun threads are trying to make it about guns, instead of the constitution, which is the jest of the argument.

“have seen the years,”

Since: Mar 10

and the slow parade of fears"

#160 Jan 31, 2013
au contraire wrote:
<quoted text>All of these gun threads are trying to make it about guns, instead of the constitution, which is the jest of the argument.
LOL! You are so-o-o right! It is the jest of your argument! The fact that you don't realize how much of an idiot you come off as is the gist of mine.
Way to go, genius! Your biggest problem is how much of a legend you are in your own mind when in reality you are way, way out of your league. You seem to prove that over and over and over again.
ROFLMFAO!!! What a fool!!
1 post removed
Doggy Style

Fort Washington, MD

#162 Jan 31, 2013
discordian wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you prefer Frank Or Obama? To "pitch" to?
I prefer Tea Baggers. Doggy loves to hear them squeal.

Woof Woof
4 posts removed
Eric Gustafson

Newport News, VA

#167 Jan 31, 2013
au contraire wrote:
<quoted text>All of these gun threads are trying to make it about guns, instead of the constitution, which is the jest of the argument.
The gun debate isn't about the Constitution, because the Constitution makes absolutely no reference to a particular weapon. It guarantees citizens rights to bear arms, but not what type of arms.

As far as I can tell, from reading these post, the problem is literacy.

If you need more than 7 shots to protect yourself, you're a danger to society.

Since: Feb 08

Hypoluxo Fl

#168 Jan 31, 2013
au contraire wrote:
<quoted text>6-Year-Old Expelled for Bringing Toy Gun to School... So can we expell Obama and Holder for bringing guns into Mexico illegally.
DUMBOSPAM

Since: Feb 08

Hypoluxo Fl

#169 Jan 31, 2013
discordian wrote:
<quoted text>
better a teabagger than a welfare mooching, dikless fleabagger, like you.
Just keep my scrotum balanced on your upper lip where it belongs. You can move a little higher if you want to be another one of my frightwingnut penis pumps.

Since: Feb 08

Hypoluxo Fl

#170 Jan 31, 2013
Eric Gustafson wrote:
<quoted text>
The gun debate isn't about the Constitution, because the Constitution makes absolutely no reference to a particular weapon. It guarantees citizens rights to bear arms, but not what type of arms.
As far as I can tell, from reading these post, the problem is literacy.
If you need more than 7 shots to protect yourself, you're a danger to society.
The Dumbospambot is a mental defective. They can't have any shot except the next shot of Thorazine.
Teaman

Mount Holly, NJ

#171 Jan 31, 2013
Eric Gustafson wrote:
<quoted text>
The gun debate isn't about the Constitution, because the Constitution makes absolutely no reference to a particular weapon. It guarantees citizens rights to bear arms, but not what type of arms.
As far as I can tell, from reading these post, the problem is literacy.
If you need more than 7 shots to protect yourself, you're a danger to society.
It is about the constitution and protecting oneself doesn't have limits.

Eric Gustafson

Newport News, VA

#172 Jan 31, 2013
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
It is about the constitution and protecting oneself doesn't have limits.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =nzkBGQx3HAcXX
It does in Jersey if you are caught with a weapon in your possession.
Teaman

Mount Holly, NJ

#173 Jan 31, 2013
Eric Gustafson wrote:
<quoted text>
It does in Jersey if you are caught with a weapon in your possession.
That is certainly true. That's where it belongs, the states or their people. Not a power grabbing federal government in which the people have no control.

What was most effective here was mandatory sentencing, extended sentences when a gun is used, and three strikes you're out legislation, and a mental records check.

Outlawing so called assault weapons doesn't really do anything as many hunting rifles are far more lethal. Many of them are magazine loaded and semiautomatic.
Eric Gustafson

Newport News, VA

#174 Jan 31, 2013
The States have shown throughout America's History they can not be entrusted with the final say over American Citizens. It's not yet 50 years since America's armed forces have had to ensure some State tyranny over American citizens ended.

State Legislators routinely implement restrictive legislation that erodes the guarantees of American citizens that the Supreme Court has to disband.
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
That is certainly true. That's where it belongs, the states or their people. Not a power grabbing federal government in which the people have no control.
What was most effective here was mandatory sentencing, extended sentences when a gun is used, and three strikes you're out legislation, and a mental records check.
Outlawing so called assault weapons doesn't really do anything as many hunting rifles are far more lethal. Many of them are magazine loaded and semiautomatic.
Teaman

Mount Holly, NJ

#175 Jan 31, 2013
Eric Gustafson wrote:
The States have shown throughout America's History they can not be entrusted with the final say over American Citizens. It's not yet 50 years since America's armed forces have had to ensure some State tyranny over American citizens ended.
State Legislators routinely implement restrictive legislation that erodes the guarantees of American citizens that the Supreme Court has to disband.
<quoted text>
This is also true. That would be a function of the federal government, however the state doesn't have a final say over its citizens due to a direct vote by the people. The federal government rightfully stepped in to ensure that right to vote was equally protected. Now all of the people have a direct vote in their state governments. Not so much with their federal government being the people have little to no say when they are governed by federal bureaucracies.

When you say the supreme court has to disband legislation that erodes a guarantee, are you saying the federal government should disband state laws hat restrict the citizen's right to keep and bear arms? The state has every right to regulate the use of firearms, but should it be able to restrict possession, a guaranteed right? The citizen's firearms were superior to military arms when that guarantee was written.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 3 min Uncle Tab 154,185
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min shinningelectr0n 1,110,926
The President has failed us (Jun '12) 4 min Valerie 263,339
'Largest-ever' climate change march rolls throu... 4 min litesong 3
Michele Bachmann: Obama Won Because He's Black ... (Feb '14) 4 min emperorjohn 338
Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) 6 min RiccardoFire 200,982
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 8 min gcaveman1 46,839
Obama thanks Congress for vote to aid Syrian re... 58 min Captain Yesterday 132
Hillary Clinton Faces Skeptical Iowa Voters 1 hr barefoot2626 401
•••

US Politics People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••