Hi, my name is Deno and I love Trump....

[Hossfly]

Perfect for this site then, another right winger who thinks they know it all, won't back up a single argument with evidence, believe, believe, believe and then use a variety of tactics to stop yourself looking like you don't actually know anything about the topic.

Great, just what this forum needs, I already have 100 people like you on ignore.

I know I don't know it all and neither do you....

I think the reason you put us on ignore is you

can't defend your position and you can't refute ours.

Lets see if we can't prove my point....

Why are liberals against voter id's ?

There is only one reason, it's to cheat just like

hillary did. Answer that question and feel free

to ask me one. Lets do a tit for tat debate.

Are you for following the Constitution?

Of course I am....

You're not obligated to answer stupid questions, Deno.

But asking whether you follow the Constitution is not a stupid question.

Okay.

 

[Boss]

Why would the founding fathers protect something that has nothing to do with the militia in an Amendment that has everything to do with the militia?

Read the Federalist Papers and find out! Everything in the Constitution is explained in specific detail by the very people who wrote it. But apparently, that's too difficult or inconvenient for twerps like you... you'd rather parse out the text and find new interpretations or meanings to suit your agenda.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Why would the founding fathers protect something that has nothing to do with the militia in an Amendment that has everything to do with the militia?

Read the Federalist Papers and find out! Everything in the Constitution is explained in specific detail by the very people who wrote it. But apparently, that's too difficult or inconvenient for twerps like you... you'd rather parse out the text and find new interpretations or meanings to suit your agenda.

Here's a perfect example for you Deno, of someone on my ignore list. Can't get through a single paragraph without insulting. Doesn't use any evidence. Just says "all the answers are here" and that's it. No point in debating such a person, because they'll just annoy you. You'll never learn anything, never have a good debate.

 

[Boss]

If a person doesn't drive... and they don't want to be "in the system" should they lose their right to vote?

Yep. If you cannot prove who you are and that you legitimately have a right to vote, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Personally I think you should have to prove who you are... but fact is, voter ID laws is against poor people that don't drive, or have a use to go out and get an ID.

You can get a non-driver state ID. You need an ID to cash your Social Security check or buy cold medicine. There is no excuse for not having one to vote.

 

[Boss]

Why would the founding fathers protect something that has nothing to do with the militia in an Amendment that has everything to do with the militia?

Read the Federalist Papers and find out! Everything in the Constitution is explained in specific detail by the very people who wrote it. But apparently, that's too difficult or inconvenient for twerps like you... you'd rather parse out the text and find new interpretations or meanings to suit your agenda.

Here's a perfect example for you Deno, of someone on my ignore list. Can't get through a single paragraph without insulting. Doesn't use any evidence. Just says "all the answers are here" and that's it. No point in debating such a person, because they'll just annoy you. You'll never learn anything, never have a good debate.

Yep... I'm on his ignore list... which is why he responded to me so quickly!

 

[Lewdog]

If a person doesn't drive... and they don't want to be "in the system" should they lose their right to vote?

Yep. If you cannot prove who you are and that you legitimately have a right to vote, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Personally I think you should have to prove who you are... but fact is, voter ID laws is against poor people that don't drive, or have a use to go out and get an ID.

You can get a non-driver state ID. You need an ID to cash your Social Security check or buy cold medicine. There is no excuse for not having one to vote.

And if you are poor, and you don't have a way to get to the state office to get one? And if you don't cash a SS check? And if you don't buy cold medicine?

 

[Boss]

Just says "all the answers are here" and that's it.

I'll help you out.... Federalist 46

 

[Zander]

If a person doesn't drive... and they don't want to be "in the system" should they lose their right to vote?

Yep. If you cannot prove who you are and that you legitimately have a right to vote, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Personally I think you should have to prove who you are... but fact is, voter ID laws is against poor people that don't drive, or have a use to go out and get an ID.

You can get a non-driver state ID. You need an ID to cash your Social Security check or buy cold medicine. There is no excuse for not having one to vote.

And if you are poor, and you don't have a way to get to the state office to get one? And if you don't cash a SS check? And if you don't buy cold medicine?

You don't exist.....

 

[Boss]

And if you are poor, and you don't have a way to get to the state office to get one? And if you don't cash a SS check? And if you don't buy cold medicine?

Maybe good hearted liberals can hire buses like they do at election time?

 

[Deno]

I am almost 62 years old with the outlook of an 25 year old...

I was raised rough and I have made it to the top of the mountain...

My hobbies include metal detecting very old sites, fishing,

shooting guns, playing pool and making fools of liberals ....

I have been married for 39 years...with one grown daughter who

is 24 years old and just had a house built last year.

My wife and I both still work........

We have two big bad black German Sheperds

and a cat.... Life is good

Perfect for this site then, another right winger who thinks they know it all, won't back up a single argument with evidence, believe, believe, believe and then use a variety of tactics to stop yourself looking like you don't actually know anything about the topic.

Great, just what this forum needs, I already have 100 people like you on ignore.

I know I don't know it all and neither do you....

I think the reason you put us on ignore is you

can't defend your position and you can't refute ours.

Lets see if we can't prove my point....

Why are liberals against voter id's ?

There is only one reason, it's to cheat just like

hillary did. Answer that question and feel free

to ask me one. Lets do a tit for tat debate.

No, I don't know it all, and you don't know it all.

It's funny how you think you know why I put people on ignore after one post. That's the typical reaction on forums like this.

I actually put people who ignore who primarily insult others. Then I put people on ignore who are wasting time and not debating if I feel it's necessary.

I can defend my positions and I do. I really don't have a problem defending my position.

Maybe some liberals are against voter IDs because they want to cheat.

However you say Hillary cheated, did you back up your argument? No. Did you make a case for your argument? No. You merely said that she did something that hasn't been proven.

Okay, I'll ask you one.

In the Second Amendment there is a right to bear arm.

Amendment II: House of Representatives, Amendments to the Constitution

In this document, among others, they use the term "bear arms" synonymously with "render military service" and "militia duty".

The 2A is about the militia, the first part says "A well regulated militia..."

They protect two things, the right of individuals to own weapons and the right of individuals to be in the militia so the militia has a ready supply of arms and personnel, the two things it needs.

However many people on the right claim the right to bear arms is the right to "carry arms" around with them in the streets.

Why would the founding fathers protect something that has nothing to do with the militia in an Amendment that has everything to do with the militia?

You seem to honest to be a liberal...

We all know hillary cheated bernie.

The deck was stacked from the get go...

donna brazile gave her debate questions...

This is all common knowledge..

Why do you deny it?

OK now on to your question about the second

amendment..

It's very simple.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the

security of a free State, the right of the people to

keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

It means just what it says..

We have the right to a well regulated Militia.

We have the right to keep and bear arms,

and yes that does mean packing heat.

And these rights shall not be infringed.

 

[Deno]

Why would the founding fathers protect something that has nothing to do with the militia in an Amendment that has everything to do with the militia?

Read the Federalist Papers and find out! Everything in the Constitution is explained in specific detail by the very people who wrote it. But apparently, that's too difficult or inconvenient for twerps like you... you'd rather parse out the text and find new interpretations or meanings to suit your agenda.

Here's a perfect example for you Deno, of someone on my ignore list. Can't get through a single paragraph without insulting. Doesn't use any evidence. Just says "all the answers are here" and that's it. No point in debating such a person, because they'll just annoy you. You'll never learn anything, never have a good debate.

That sounds like Chicken Shit.

 

[Deno]

Is it a special love? A forbidden love? A BFF love?

A ghey love.....Past the bro section...

I love how you liberals use the gay thing for a slur

and you call us homophobes...

 

[Moonglow]

Is it a special love? A forbidden love? A BFF love?

A ghey love.....Past the bro section...

I love how you liberals use the gay thing for a slur

and you call us homophobes...

ghey it less than stereotypical gay..so you're meandering..

 

[Deno]

I am almost 62 years old with the outlook of an 25 year old...

I was raised rough and I have made it to the top of the mountain...

My hobbies include metal detecting very old sites, fishing,

shooting guns, playing pool and making fools of liberals ....

I have been married for 39 years...with one grown daughter who

is 24 years old and just had a house built last year.

My wife and I both still work........

We have two big bad black German Sheperds

and a cat.... Life is good

Perfect for this site then, another right winger who thinks they know it all, won't back up a single argument with evidence, believe, believe, believe and then use a variety of tactics to stop yourself looking like you don't actually know anything about the topic.

Great, just what this forum needs, I already have 100 people like you on ignore.

I know I don't know it all and neither do you....

I think the reason you put us on ignore is you

can't defend your position and you can't refute ours.

Lets see if we can't prove my point....

Why are liberals against voter id's ?

There is only one reason, it's to cheat just like

hillary did. Answer that question and feel free

to ask me one. Lets do a tit for tat debate.

Are you for following the Constitution?

Of course I am....

Can you point out where in the Constitution it says in order to vote you have to have an ID? If a person doesn't drive... and they don't want to be "in the system" should they lose their right to vote?

Personally I think you should have to prove who you are... but fact is, voter ID laws is against poor people that don't drive, or have a use to go out and get an ID.

We all see through your bull shit..

You just want to cheat...

Is there anything in the Constitution about

credit card theft?

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

Is it a special love? A forbidden love? A BFF love?

A ghey love.....Past the bro section...

I love how you liberals use the gay thing for a slur

and you call us homophobes...

ghey it less than stereotypical gay..so you're meandering..

Yes but ghey and/or gay is....not as good as faggot

 

[Lewdog]

Perfect for this site then, another right winger who thinks they know it all, won't back up a single argument with evidence, believe, believe, believe and then use a variety of tactics to stop yourself looking like you don't actually know anything about the topic.

Great, just what this forum needs, I already have 100 people like you on ignore.

I know I don't know it all and neither do you....

I think the reason you put us on ignore is you

can't defend your position and you can't refute ours.

Lets see if we can't prove my point....

Why are liberals against voter id's ?

There is only one reason, it's to cheat just like

hillary did. Answer that question and feel free

to ask me one. Lets do a tit for tat debate.

Are you for following the Constitution?

Of course I am....

Can you point out where in the Constitution it says in order to vote you have to have an ID? If a person doesn't drive... and they don't want to be "in the system" should they lose their right to vote?

Personally I think you should have to prove who you are... but fact is, voter ID laws is against poor people that don't drive, or have a use to go out and get an ID.

We all see through your bull shit..

You just want to cheat...

Is there anything in the Constitution about

credit card theft?

Where did I say I wanted to cheat? You didn't answer the question... where in the Constitution that it talks about voting, does it say you have to have a government ID in order to vote?

 

[Moonglow]

Is it a special love? A forbidden love? A BFF love?

A ghey love.....Past the bro section...

I love how you liberals use the gay thing for a slur

and you call us homophobes...

ghey it less than stereotypical gay..so you're meandering..

Yes but ghey and/or gay is....not as good as faggot

I suppose I prefer maricón myself...sounds more exotic...

 

[Pete7469]

Hi, Deno. You'll hate me. I would love metal detecting though. It's one of the things I thought of as the hurricane was about to hit Florida--doubloons!

Why do you always say that? Everyone likes you, at least everyone who matters. You're a little bit looney lib but you don't post useless bullshit. You speak your mind and even if I don't agree most of the time you've never posted something that was just utterly stupid. I think Deno will like you.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I am almost 62 years old with the outlook of an 25 year old...

I was raised rough and I have made it to the top of the mountain...

My hobbies include metal detecting very old sites, fishing,

shooting guns, playing pool and making fools of liberals ....

I have been married for 39 years...with one grown daughter who

is 24 years old and just had a house built last year.

My wife and I both still work........

We have two big bad black German Sheperds

and a cat.... Life is good

Perfect for this site then, another right winger who thinks they know it all, won't back up a single argument with evidence, believe, believe, believe and then use a variety of tactics to stop yourself looking like you don't actually know anything about the topic.

Great, just what this forum needs, I already have 100 people like you on ignore.

I know I don't know it all and neither do you....

I think the reason you put us on ignore is you

can't defend your position and you can't refute ours.

Lets see if we can't prove my point....

Why are liberals against voter id's ?

There is only one reason, it's to cheat just like

hillary did. Answer that question and feel free

to ask me one. Lets do a tit for tat debate.

No, I don't know it all, and you don't know it all.

It's funny how you think you know why I put people on ignore after one post. That's the typical reaction on forums like this.

I actually put people who ignore who primarily insult others. Then I put people on ignore who are wasting time and not debating if I feel it's necessary.

I can defend my positions and I do. I really don't have a problem defending my position.

Maybe some liberals are against voter IDs because they want to cheat.

However you say Hillary cheated, did you back up your argument? No. Did you make a case for your argument? No. You merely said that she did something that hasn't been proven.

Okay, I'll ask you one.

In the Second Amendment there is a right to bear arm.

Amendment II: House of Representatives, Amendments to the Constitution

In this document, among others, they use the term "bear arms" synonymously with "render military service" and "militia duty".

The 2A is about the militia, the first part says "A well regulated militia..."

They protect two things, the right of individuals to own weapons and the right of individuals to be in the militia so the militia has a ready supply of arms and personnel, the two things it needs.

However many people on the right claim the right to bear arms is the right to "carry arms" around with them in the streets.

Why would the founding fathers protect something that has nothing to do with the militia in an Amendment that has everything to do with the militia?

You seem to honest to be a liberal...

We all know hillary cheated bernie.

The deck was stacked from the get go...

donna brazile gave her debate questions...

This is all common knowledge..

Why do you deny it?

OK now on to your question about the second

amendment..

It's very simple.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the

security of a free State, the right of the people to

keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

It means just what it says..

We have the right to a well regulated Militia.

We have the right to keep and bear arms,

and yes that does mean packing heat.

And these rights shall not be infringed.

Yes, I'm a liberal.

I don't care whether Hillary cheated or not.

I support a system of REAL CHOICE. Proportional Representation would not have Sanders or Hillary in the same party. It would have multiple parties that could choose their candidates however they choose, then on election day people can make their choice.

I really don't know why conservatives are talking about whether Hillary cheated Sanders in an election that has nothing to do with the Republicans at all. Their party, their choice.

Whether questions were given to the candidate or not beforehand is neither here not there too. What's the point of the debate? Is it to trip up candidates or is it to find out what candidates think? Give them the questions, who cares?

The real issue is that there aren't enough viable candidates.

All these points your brought up are there to keep people occupied so they don't ask the really important questions, like "why don't I have a real choice on election day?"

In Germany they vote FPTP (like the US) and PR on the same day. In September 8% of people changed their vote from FPTP to PR. With FPTP they voted for the larger parties, negative voting because they fear another party might get in if they don't vote for the big party, with PR they voted for the smaller parties. Much fairer.

But people don't talk about it because the rich money men who control govt, control advertising of politicians etc, they don't want change, therefore you don't want change either.



On to the Second Amendment. It's not that simple and you're wrong.

A) You don't have a right to a well regulated militia at all. The Amendment doesn't afford a right to a militia.

B) The right to keep arms is the right to own a weapon. The right to bear arms is the right to be in the militia. Now, you provided no evidence for your claims at all. This is the problem.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Why would the founding fathers protect something that has nothing to do with the militia in an Amendment that has everything to do with the militia?

Read the Federalist Papers and find out! Everything in the Constitution is explained in specific detail by the very people who wrote it. But apparently, that's too difficult or inconvenient for twerps like you... you'd rather parse out the text and find new interpretations or meanings to suit your agenda.

Here's a perfect example for you Deno, of someone on my ignore list. Can't get through a single paragraph without insulting. Doesn't use any evidence. Just says "all the answers are here" and that's it. No point in debating such a person, because they'll just annoy you. You'll never learn anything, never have a good debate.

That sounds like Chicken Shit.

Good for you. You go be all macho. I'll stick to using my head.

Basically, you want to force me into a position where you're comfortable, so what you'll do is pull out the tactic of trying to make me feel like I should do things you way. But I can see it coming a long way off. I won't be forced to lower my standards, thank you very much.

Let me guy, you hate people who are "patriots" and "patriots" are people who follow YOUR definition of patriots.

People who wave Confederate flags, patriots or not patriots?

People who kneel during the national anthem, patriots or not patriots.

I'll give you some random statistics.

The Confederates were responsible for the deaths of 140,000 US military personnel.
The kneelers were responsible for the deaths of zero US military personnel.

Which one is more patriotic?