RE: Rally Question (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

mnottertail -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 5:39:14 PM)

Thats fuckin stupid Bama, they are one and the same, try to use better similes. Nutsuckers are dangerous to the world because they back the NRA and dont back PP.



Aylee -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 5:41:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

They are guilty of it now, the trump camp including the campaign manager has incited violence on several occasions.



What happened to innocent until convicted in a court of law?



It works that way in court. Not in the court of public opinion. There you can have your livelihood taken from you and receive death and rape threats for yourself and your family.



BamaD -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 5:44:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Thats fuckin stupid Bama, they are one and the same, try to use better similes. Nutsuckers are dangerous to the world because they back the NRA and dont back PP.

So anyone who doesn't agree with you is dangerous and don't desreve the same rights as the people you agree with.
Personally I think that people who back PP and not the NRA are a danger to the world.
Unlike you, however, I am able to talk to them civilly, something which you with your blatant insecurity can't do.



KenDckey -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 5:46:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

I gave you the statute which one would you prefer?

No, you gave the wrong statute

OK but you didn't state the ARS section that I should have quoted. Which one would you prefer?



ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 5:50:05 PM)

Because I can't be bothered combing through the Arizona laws, if any, looking for which law prohibits blocking a road. But the one you quoted is not it.



KenDckey -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 6:00:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

Because I can't be bothered combing through the Arizona laws, if any, looking for which law prohibits blocking a road. But the one you quoted is not it.



Are you talking about this one? http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/13/02906.htm It only took like 10 seconds more or less to find



ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 6:05:40 PM)

That seems like the one.
quote:

It only took like 10 seconds more or less to find

Well good for you, have a cookie or two.



KenDckey -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 6:25:19 PM)

http://www.cbs5az.com/story/31522990/protesters-blocking-road-to-trump-rally-speak-out?autostart=true

quote:

"To be able to send a really strong message that an interracial group of people are willing to do everything it takes to make sure this doesn't permeate in our community," Gonzalez said.


Ever wonder if that includes termination of the problem by extereme prejudice?



BamaD -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 6:33:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

They are guilty of it now, the trump camp including the campaign manager has incited violence on several occasions.



What happened to innocent until convicted in a court of law?



It works that way in court. Not in the court of public opinion. There you can have your livelihood taken from you and receive death and rape threats for yourself and your family.

I am well aware of that.

However I have been told repeatedly when pointing out the crimes of left-wingers that I have to act like they are innocent till they are convicted by the same people who declare right-wingers guilty of anything they are accused of no matter how flimsy the evidence.

I was just asking for the same standards for everyone.



KenDckey -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 6:43:52 PM)

Bama you know our more progressive friends of tollerance won't allow that



dcnovice -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 6:55:58 PM)

[sm=boohoo.gif]

Good God, conservatives are such whiners.



thompsonx -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 7:07:07 PM)


ORIGINAL: BamaD

If the Trump people let people determined to cause trouble into their rallies they would be guilty of neglegence by knowingly allowing a potentially violent situation to exist.

By your definition anyone who questions the donald should be banned. Have you thought of moving to singapore...they do not allow political dissent there. If you do not like my country where political dissent is not only legal but encouraged why don't you get the phoque out.



thompsonx -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 7:09:44 PM)

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Are you really that obtuse? Because the GOP doesn't want to change the balance on the court for gun owning rights.


Only a nazi would seek to crush the first ammendment to preserve the second.



thompsonx -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 7:14:41 PM)


ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

FR. If you are blocking the road, you are breaking the law. Your politics are immaterial.

That is pretty much what they said about the civil rights marchers and the suffragetts.



thompsonx -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 7:17:37 PM)


ORIGINAL: BamaD

First you sad this

If the Trump people let people determined to cause trouble into their rallies they would be guilty of neglegence by knowingly allowing a potentially violent situation to exist.

Then you said this

So anyone who doesn't agree with you is dangerous and don't desreve the same rights as the people you agree with.


Doesn't it hurt your mouth to talk out of both sides at the same time?



BamaD -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 7:23:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

Bama you know our more progressive friends of tollerance won't allow that

Of course I do, but that doesn't mean I can't show them up for the hypocrites they are.



BamaD -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 7:27:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

[sm=boohoo.gif]

Good God, conservatives are such whiners.

Pointing out a blatant double standard is not whining.
You can state your belief that any accused conservative is automatically guilty but don't turn around and say I can't express my belief about a lib till they have been convicted in court.

If I did that every lib on here would call me on it and you would call that whining now would you?



thompsonx -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 7:31:53 PM)


ORIGINAL: BamaD
]
Pointing out a blatant double standard is not whining.
You can state your belief that any accused conservative is automatically guilty but don't turn around and say I can't express my belief about a lib till they have been convicted in court.

If I did that every lib on here would call me on it and you would call that whining now would you?


Shall we post up what you have said about bowie bergdahl? How many times have you convicted him with your hateful assurances that he is guilty?
Your two faced nature is quite well known on this forum



dcnovice -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 7:32:26 PM)

You made my point even better than I could. [:)]



Wayward5oul -> RE: Rally Question (3/21/2016 7:58:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

http://www.cbs5az.com/story/31522990/protesters-blocking-road-to-trump-rally-speak-out?autostart=true

quote:

"To be able to send a really strong message that an interracial group of people are willing to do everything it takes to make sure this doesn't permeate in our community," Gonzalez said.


Ever wonder if that includes termination of the problem by extereme prejudice?

The article mentions three people arrested for their actions, including the Gonzalez person in your quote. She and two white protesters were arrested. All three are US citizens. The two white students were allowed to go home from the police station.

But Gonzalez, and only Gonzalez, was questioned by ICE and later transferred to an immigration detention center.
http://news.yahoo.com/trump-protester-transferred-immigration-authorities-132800753.html



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875